Acronym which is the good one ?

  • As the LF activity seems to be too lazy,

    Alan Smith gave me this good idea to start a new thread:

    He replied:


    Anthropocene Institute have invented yet another acronym for cold fusion...


    The case for Solid-State Atomic & Fusion Energy (S-SAFE)

    Richard Feynman was right. There is plenty room at the bottom and the quantum revolution has only begun. From transistors to superconducting materials, scientists have only begun to understand the behavior of matter at the nanometer level where quantum effects dominate. Can these properties be used to enable Solid-State Atomic & Fusion Energy (S-SAFE), a phenomena that is also referred to as cold fusion or low energy nuclear reactions (LENR)?

    Scientists from the US, EU, Japan, India, and China have independently observed the production of excess heat when nano-materials, made of metallic composites, react with hydrogen isotopes and controlled heat. While a consistent theory to explain this phenomenon has yet to be proposed, the coherent or collective effects at the quantum level are thought enable reaction pathways that are not explained with classical mechanics.


    S-SAFE - Anthropocene Institute


    Well, at the beginning the founder's fathers proposed " Cold Fusion" because probably they used the electrolysis way to trigger some nuclear reactions.

    Next as all have seen some transmutation products were currently seen.

    In this way, talking about MeV events should not be linked with a "cold " way , anymore.


    Biberian proposed "Cryofusion" however when i asked him , he wasn't capable to give me an explanation only that Cryo will be colder than" Cold".

    One more mean to stay on head, again, probably.


    If i remember correctly, the LENR acronym appeared during Widom Larsen time.

    It meant low energy nuclear reaction, we well know.

    However low energy of what ? Low energy as xsh or to trigger the reaction ?

    As some successful experiments were initiated only by heat, we could consider that ignition energy should be low.

    Now is it really right ?

    If we consider the Hagelstein hypothesis, a lot eV fractions could be added together to reach a KeV threshold point.

    In this way this behavior could be called "low" ?

    This hypothesis way is talking finally about simply a classic nuclear way triggered by a kind of resonance, as expected Hagelstein.

    At other side, Jacques Ruer expect a real quantum involvement, so an acronym with "quantum "could be relevant according to himandin relation with this post shared by Alan Smith


    This topic interested me since a while, so i ready to read another comments.

    For example to close these lines the Wyttenbach 4D donuts should they be considered as cold or not ?

  • Well in this way, does that mean we talking about a cristal lattice with perfectly aligned atoms or it (lattice enabled nuclear reactions) could be used also for amorphous states for example if liquid lithium is involved ?

    I like the other LENR meaning : lattice enabled nuclear reactions, but on the downside that misses out on whatever interesting reactions are occurring in plasma.

  • Well in this way, does that mean we talking about a cristal lattice with perfectly aligned atoms or it (lattice enabled nuclear reactions) could be used also for amorphous states for example if liquid lithium is involved ?

    Lattice is vague enough that it can include defects in the lattice where many think LENR happens. Plasma can be very dynamic and non uniform, which could lead to far-from-equilibrium conditions for LENR to occur. Liquid lithium maybe, if there is somehow conditions to disrupt homogeneity.

  • I like N-YUKON (Not Your Usual Kind Of Nuke)

    no matter what you call it..... the expressions Nuclear or Atomic should be avoided for political reasons.

    I.e. in German speaking countries (probably not Switzerland) we will shy off a few people.

    Additionally the authorities will not be very happy, because they will loose control over a highly energy dense energy source.

    They will try to find a way to control it!


    I would just call it, i.e. LE = lattice energy

  • Cydonia


    Papp's engine stands your no Mev criteria on its head. Even when producing 100 horsepower the engines required no cooling system other than normal radiation and lubricant cooling due to circulation. Yet the presumed helium transmutation is a Mev process. Where did the energy go? Presumably to prepare the gas mixture for the next bang. The engines involved complex physical processes that need to be explained.

  • MHE is what Japan's Takahashi et al use..


    as in"New MHE Experiments by D-System"


    stands for nano METAL HYDROGEN ENERGY with a silent "n".

    no "fusion" or "nuclear"


    Perhaps there can be a link to Europa's kneejerk "Russian Escape" REPowerEU


    "Accelerating hydrogen

    Renewable hydrogen will be key to replace natural gas, coal and oil in hard-to-decarbonise industries and transport. REPowerEU sets a target of 10 million tonnes of domestic renewable hydrogen production and 10 million tonnes of renewable hydrogen imports by 2030." ..


    Communication REPowerEU Plan COM(2022)230
    Communication REPowerEU Plan COM(2022)230
    energy.ec.europa.eu

  • There are fusion and fission reactions going on in many experiments and then the normally accepted "chance based" decay of radioactive isotopes. All that is happening is just that, nuclear reactions, OR....... (here it comes) Transmutation! GASP!

    The word is shunned, avoided and ridiculed constantly, and yet still the only real word that applies here, Transmutation, or more specifically, fusion, fission, spallation, alpha particle release and Beta decay.

    Any term referring to some phenomenon that implies it can not be according to main stream thinking (the cold in the Cold Fusion) only gives rise to discourse while we do not even accept the naked truth that it is transmutations.

    But then we hear " how?!", "explain it to me!!!!" Well.... first we need to accept that elements are not eternal and forever, nor are they only created (and destroyed) in neutron stars or exploding black holes or all that other speculation,. Elements are created more than we like to think in-situ and can be fused and broken into pieces with the help of electric forces, quite easily it seems.

    Until we accept that, any debate about names or explanations, or technologies is quite futile I would argue.

  • During LENR history most of experiments proven maintly or only transmutations.

    We could understand that some reactions occur especially by external energy added.

    According to the binding energy chart, we know that exothermic fission occur from the heavier atoms to the lighters (NI62)

    About lighter elements under nickel 62, in most of cases adding energy should trigger some transmutations.

    This is what i expect for example onto meteorites, where complex molecules are done probably helped by strong space rays.

    Now doing xsh by Lenr should need some other tricks, maybe simply favourable combination of elements ?

  • Cydonia


    You just described Papp's engine. Magnetic fields, RF fields, mixture of elements, singly ionizing the gasses, clustering of ions, electron shielding, alpha emitters, and a spark causing secondary ionization and transmutation. It's all there. You just couldn't see it.