Where is the close-up video of Fleischmann and Pons boiling cell?

    Quote from Alan Smith

    That's a pretty uniformed comment. If a film of water gas isolates thermally and presumably electrically the cathode then less current flows and less heating of the electrolyte occurs. If there is only a single spot of the cathode left conducting then the bulk electrolyte won't reach the temperature where it would readily boil. If you had any experience of electrolysers and plating tanks you would know that,

    The phenomenon is progressive. For a long time the vapor bubbles don't completely isolate the cathode, so that current is allowed to reach the palladium, but contemporarily heat is partially hindered to leave it.


    In any case the electric energy dissipated in Joule heating is known, because it is shown by the diagrams of the experiments: Figs.6A-D in http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Fleischmancalorimetra.pdf

    for the F&P experiment, and Figs.3a-b in http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LonchamptGreproducti.pdf for Lonchampt's.


    All these diagrams show an extraordinary increase in the absorbed power or voltage, which are proportional each other because current is kept constant. As the electrolyte temperature approaches the boiling point, the absorbed voltage(or power) becomes ten times greater than the initial values. It means that up to 90% of the final electric power can be dissipated as Joule effect in the cathode. This only fact, documented in F&P and Lonchampt diagrams, is sufficient to explain the overheating of cathodes.

    Quote from Alan Smith

    A cathode with higher electrical resistance than the electrolyte would be a water heater.

    Yes. That was the point I was making.


    Quote from Alan Smith

    As for 'manufacturing defects' you won't find many pieces of Pd with that particular problem. It would be resistance wire

    Yes. That is the same point. The one I was making. Not that I am terribly tied to it as the explanation of al this. The real resolution lies in reproducing the effect in an open way on demand.



    Quote from Alan Smith

    But for now, the P&F technology has worked thousands of times in many laboratories.

    Can you point to any device in your laboratory, in everyday use, which uses the technique? How about in anyone else's lab? On the other hand, think about walking into your lab and pointing at a piece of equipment, or identifying some process, in everyday use. Think about the original observations or discoveries that led to this device or process (there are probably many involved for each). Those original discoveries have a dense series of adaptations and improvements that led to their abundant, almost unthinking present day uses. And that is because they are founded on real insights into the natural world. I am struggling to see anything like that here.

    Our notorious childish brabblers always forget that the cathode at the end did produce heat without any contact to water the long time before evaporated. Current was off.

    It took up to 2 days until the cathode finally did cool down because fusion did stop.


    I urge the two folks to switch to a kitchen forum where people talk about optimal rice cooking...

    Quote from Ascoli65

    It means that up to 90% of the final electric power can be dissipated as Joule effect in the cathode. This only fact, documented in F&P and Lonchampt diagrams, is sufficient to explain the overheating of cathodes.

    This would not indicate any excess heat. Heating the cathode does not fool the calorimeter into indicating there is excess heat. It makes no difference how hot the cathode gets, or whether it boils. The calorimeter will show an energy balance of zero if there is no excess heat.


    Again, you are confusing temperature with power.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    It was not secret at all. It was broadcast on a major TV channel as I recall. It is lost.

    Quote

    It was made by F&P and a TV reporter. I don't recall who.


    Let me understand. You are saying, that a TV reporter visited Fleischmann and Pons in a laboratory and the same reporter filmed an ongoing experiment in which one of their cells reached the boiling point? And then F&P turned off the current, and the cathode continued to generate vapor bubbles for a while?


    Anyway, a video like this broadcasted by a major TV channel is not lost. For sure it is kept in the archive of the TV company.This video could be a milestone for proving the reality of the F&P effect. Did you try to retrieve it?


    Quote

    Make a video showing an incandescent nail boiling water for 20 minutes with no input power. You will win the Nobel Prize.


    Are you implying that in the experiment filmed by the TV operator the water boils for 20 minutes after the turning off of electrolysis? Well, In this case it would be extraordinary indeed, and should have won a Nobel prize as you said, or at least convince anyone, including the major companies, that CF was real. How is it possible that F&P and friends have lost such a video? It's hard to believe.


    Quote

    Watch the video and you will see that in few seconds, the boiling in the transparent vessel has nearly stopped.


    No, absolutely not. In the video with sword blacksmiths at work, the sequence with the transparent vessel lasts only 2 seconds (from 0:36 to 0:38) and ends showing a lot of small bubbles which are still continuing to be produced on the hot sword and slowly rising in the water.


    If you are not able to describe what happens in a today's video that you can watch many times, I wonder how you can be sure of the details of a video watched just once many years ago. Anyway, you are continuing to confuse a mass of cool water, with the water at boiling point contained in the F&P cell. It seems that you have a tendency to misinterpret situations and durations.


    Quote from JedRothwell

    This whole discussion is irrelevant to video I described, because there was no input power. Electrolysis was stopped. There were no bubbles on the anode. So, the cell would only cool down. If the cathode was hot enough to boil for any reason, the boiling would stop after a few seconds.

    In any case it boils, even after electrolysis was stopped. But we don't know how long the video has lasted after that moment, so we don't know for how long it boils.


    Quote

    Drop the incandescent metal into the water. The water around the metal boils for a second or two and then stops. The steam carries off the energy, because the top of the pot is open, as is the F&P cell. The water does not boil for 20 minutes.


    You are mentioning again the 20 minutes period. Does the "close-up video" lasts for 20 minutes after the electrolysis was stopped? Or which other F&P experiment are you referring to?


    Quote from JedRothwell

    This would not indicate any excess heat. Heating the cathode does not fool the calorimeter into indicating there is excess heat. It makes no difference how hot the cathode gets, or whether it boils. The calorimeter will show an energy balance of zero if there is no excess heat.

    In this discussion, we are talking about the vapor bubbles that you reported having saw in the "close-up video" after electrolysis was stopped, not about the excess heat claimed by F&P.


    Do you want to talk instead about this alleged excess heat?

    Quote from Ascoli65

    Let me understand. You are saying, that a TV reporter visited Fleischmann and Pons in a laboratory and the same reporter filmed an ongoing experiment in which one of their cells reached the boiling point? And then F&P turned off the current, and the cathode continued to generate vapor bubbles for a while?

    Correct. That's what I said.

    Quote from Ascoli65

    Anyway, a video like this broadcasted by a major TV channel is not lost.

    It is lost to me. I have no idea where to find it. I don't even recall where it was broadcast.

    Quote from Ascoli65

    Are you implying that in the experiment filmed by the TV operator the water boils for 20 minutes after the turning off of electrolysis? Well, In this case it would be extraordinary indeed, and should have won a Nobel prize as you said,

    No argument. Cold fusion deserves a dozen Nobel prizes. I deserve one for putting up with people like you.

    Quote from Ascoli65

    No, absolutely not. In the video with sword blacksmiths at work, the sequence with the transparent vessel lasts only 2 seconds (from 0:36 to 0:38) and ends showing a lot of small bubbles which are still continuing to be produced on the hot sword and slowly rising in the water.

    The boiling nearly stopped after a few seconds. I have often watched blacksmiths, and that is what happens. If you don't believe that video, go find another, or do the test I described above. Do it yourself and see for yourself. But of course you will never do that. You will not lift a finger or read an elementary school physics textbook to challenge your own nonsense.

    Quote from Ascoli65

    In any case it boils, even after electrolysis was stopped. But we don't know how long the video has lasted after that moment, so we don't know for how long it boils.

    It lasted several minutes while they talked. As I recall, they told me it was about 20 minutes before the cell boiled dry. It remained hot after that, in heat after death, but you can't see that visually from boiling.

    Quote from Ascoli65

    You are mentioning again the 20 minutes period. Does the "close-up video" lasts for 20 minutes after the electrolysis was stopped?

    No, it wasn't that long. But anything longer than 2 seconds is enough. Which you can easily confirm by dropping a hot nail into water. Which you will not do.

    Quote from Ascoli65

    In this discussion, we are talking about the vapor bubbles that you reported having saw in the "close-up video" after electrolysis was stopped, not about the excess heat claimed by F&P.

    The excess heat claimed by F&P is the only possible cause of the vapor bubbles. There was no electric power input, and no electrochemical reaction with these materials could have caused it. There was no chemical fuel in the cell.


    The effect has been observed hundreds of times in various experiments, with different calorimeter types and power levels, so there is no question it exists. This happened to be a particularly easy to understand demonstration, but scientifically it is no more credible than, say, McKubre's flow calorimetry results. Which you refuse to look at or discuss, except to say that your own nonsense notions such as "steam expands and therefore there is no heat" magically cancels out McKubre.

    Quote from orsova

    That seems dangerous. I seem to recall Mallove saying it was imminent in the 90s.

    He disagreed with Harvard's stance on any sort of LENR, cold fusion research or even potential.

    Mallove was genuinely upset as rigorous testing, in his view, of P&F experiments was never accomplished.


    He, Mallove, was very vocal about Harvard's lack of interest and they were upset with him for being so public about it.

    Year later he was found murdered in one of his rentals properties.


    Interesting guy.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    It is lost to me. I have no idea where to find it. I don't even recall where it was broadcast.

    Let's see if I can help you.


    In 1998, a documentary titled "Cold Fusion: Fire from Water" was produced. You should know it, because you were one of the three authors.


    The documentary is available on Youtube:

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.


    At 5:29, a hand is shown keeping a cell. Was it the same image, you were referring to, when you wrote "A hand was seen close to the cell" a few days ago (1)?


    The same video contains many footages showing various cells of the F&P type. There are many close-up images. For instance, the cells shown at 5:14 and 10:38 corresponds to your description: "Like most F&P cells, the cathode was a rod and the anode a spiral around it, so you could clearly see both of them." But they are not moving images, just zoomed in photographs. All is still, and no bubble are shown.


    A better image of the same kind of cell, showing some raising bubbles, appears at 39:19 and remains until 39.22, that is for only 3 seconds at most, not minutes! Moreover these bubbles are numerous and fine just like you described in your comment (1): "Electrolysis produces bubbles on both the anode and cathode. This phase was shown in the video. The bubbles from electrolysis are numerous and fine, similar to CO2 bubbles in a soft drink. They are all about the same size."


    The above bubbles are completely different from the boiling bubbles that you described immediately after: "When the cathode heated up, it began boiling the electrolyte. Bubbles from boiling look very different from electrolysis bubbles. They are much larger, and they vary in size."


    These last kind of boiling bubbles can be seen in a later footage, from 39:28 to 39:34. However this a different kind of F&P cell, used before 1992, featuring a larger cathode and a longer anode. And, in any case, no one can say that what it shows is happening after electrolysis was turned off, because the turbulence is so high that is impossible to distinguish the fine gaseous bubbles produced by electrolysis.


    I wonder why you, or F&P, or anyone else, never mentioned this so called "close-up video". It popped up suddenly on August 2020, when you published your report on "Review of the calorimetry of Fleischmann and Pons" (2), where, at page 17, you wrote:

    "We know that the heat from the boil off comes from the cathode. Another close-up video of a boiling cell shows that there are no boiling bubbles forming on the anode, only electrolysis bubbles.

    (Unfortunately, this video is not available, but that is what it showed.) "


    So, unless you find and publish it, it looks that this mysterious "close-up video" is nothing else than a "movie salad" created by your wishful thinking.


    (1) RE: MIZUNO REPLICATION AND MATERIALS ONLY

    (2) https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJreviewofth.pdf

    Quote from Ascoli65

    At 5:29, a hand is shown keeping a cell. Was it the same image, you were referring to, when you wrote "A hand was seen close to the cell" a few days ago (1)?

    Nope, that wasn't it. I sure would have remembered that!


    Quote from Ascoli65

    So, unless you find and publish it, it looks that this mysterious "close-up video" is nothing else than a "movie salad" created by your wishful thinking.

    How the hell would I find a video at someplace like ABC? Do you think they will let me look through their archives from the 1990s? This is not my wishful thinking. I discussed it with Mallove, McKubre and others who saw it.


    You are out of line saying that. You, of all people, who invent impossible physics at the drop of hat. You claim that the expansion of steam that leaves a cell somehow add heat to the cell. You confuse temperature with power. You know nothing about how blacksmiths work, or how metals cool in water, and you refuse to find out, even though it would take you ten minutes. Wishful thinking indeed! You suffer from delusion, and grotesque ignorance of everyday physics that people have know for thousands of year.


    I suggest you test some hot nails in water, or shut up. You make yourself look like an idiot disputing such things.

    Has anyone actually enquired at the major news networks for such historical footage?
    I have always been amazed at the things that are available simply by politely asking.

    The worst thing that might happen is that they won’t help, or don’t have it. And then you have your answer. But they might have similar things, or leads to where such footage might be found.

    Are you thinking of the BBC documentary that visited F&P in France?

    Quote from Ascoli65

    Therefore the water gas film has the effect to isolate the main source of heat (the cathode, in this case) from the coolant, so that the temperature of the cathode rises even more quickly. A behavior called "positive feedback" by F&P and that the two electrochemists connected to the onset of imaginary nuclear reaction, but that in reality is driven by much more mundane phenomena.

    The usual nonsense. If the electrode is isolated from the electrolyte by a film of gas then no current flows, and if no current flows there is no heating -unless there is LENR.

    Quote from Alan Smith

    The usual nonsense. If the electrode is isolated from the electrolyte by a film of gas then no current flows, and if no current flows there is no heating -unless there is LENR.

    During the final boil-off period, the cathode is mostly thermally isolated from the coolant, but not fully electrically isolated.


    At the bottom of the cathode, the boiling film is not completely evolved, so the current flows and heats the electrode until the liquid has completely vaporized. No need to invoke any LENR.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    How the hell would I find a video at someplace like ABC? Do you think they will let me look through their archives from the 1990s?

    [...]

    You make yourself look like an idiot disputing such things.

    Not at someplace like ABC, but at someplace like Infinite Energy or the like.


    Your documentary "Cold Fusion: Fire from Water" was released in 1998. It contains a lot of footages taken from all the TV reports and programs broadcasted up to then on the CF subject. The sources of these footages are listed at the end of documentary (at 1:07:20). All the major TV channel are mentioned: ABC, BBC, CBC, CBS, CNN.


    You said (1): "It [the close-up video] was broadcast on a major TV channel", therefore this video was for sure among those included in the Footage Stock of your documentary.


    Who does own this Footage Stock?


    In any case, you and the other authors of the documentary "Cold Fusion: Fire from Water" have collected and reviewed all the TV videos broadcasted until then by the major TV channels on the CF subject. It's not believable that you and your friends lost a video which, as you wrote, "was a perfect demonstration" (2) and the "definitive proof of anomalous excess heat" (3). It's not believable, and, let me say, it would have been extremely idiotic. You are not an idiot (you just say the others are), therefore if you don't find and show it, it can only mean that the "close-up video" exists only in your fervid fantasy.


    (1) RE: MIZUNO REPLICATION AND MATERIALS ONLY

    (2) RE: MIZUNO REPLICATION AND MATERIALS ONLY

    (3) RE: MIZUNO REPLICATION AND MATERIALS ONLY

    Quote from Ascoli65

    At the bottom of the cathode, the boiling film is not completely evolved, so the current flows and heats the electrode until the liquid has completely vaporized. No need to invoke any LENR.

    No, it does not flow. Current and voltage are measured. When the boil off begins electric power drops. When the electrolyte falls below the cathode, all power stops, yet boiling continues. All of the remaining electrolyte evaporates from the cell, and the plastic electrode holder melts. The cell remains hot for hours or days after that. Whereas, when you do a blank boil-off with electrolysis power, as soon as the electrolyte falls below the cathode, boiling stops abruptly, and some electrolyte remains at the bottom of the cell. The plastic holder does not melt.


    With a blank boil off, with electrolysis or a resistance heater, boiling stops immediately for the same reason we discussed above: the specific heat of metal is low. A little steam released from the cell will carry off nearly all enthalpy in a few seconds. As I said, and said, anyone can put a hot nail in water and see this happen. Even when the nail is incandescent, the water around the nail boils for a second or two and then stops. In room temperature water, you can touch the nail after a minute. There is no way it could remain hot, and boiling, for 20 minutes, or days, or months -- as has been observed.


    Ascoli could easily do this test, and see for himself that he is not only wrong, he is talking nonsense. But he will not do it. He prefers to go on talking and believing nonsense for years, rather than face reality and admit he is wrong.

    Quote from Ascoli65

    You said (1): "It [the close-up video] was broadcast on a major TV channel", therefore this video was for sure among those included in the Footage Stock of your documentary.

    No it is not. I have seen all the footage for the video. Give me a little credit here. Gene & I wrote the voiceover for the video, so I know what went into it, and what was left on the cutting room floor.


    In any case, hundreds of published experiments from many different kinds of calorimeters tell you that the effect cannot possibly be caused by input power. There is no input power with many experiments, and some of the electrolysis ones had the power turned off for days, yet the cell continued to produce up to 20 W. If you will not accept these facts as proof of excess anomalous heat you are either extremely stupid or as nutty as a Flat-earth Society member. You are completely removed from ordinary reality and everyday physics that people have known for thousands of years. You might as well tell us that when a person drops a stone, it sometimes falls to the ground, but other times it flies up into space and lands on the moon. Your claim that a cell can boil for 20 minutes without any input power is every bit as lunatic as that!

    Quote from Ascoli65

    During the final boil-off period, the cathode is mostly thermally isolated from the coolant, but not fully electrically isolated.

    You can't have that both ways. The conductive area and the current flow are proportionate as is the heat transfer.


    'mostly' and 'fully' are weasel words.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    No it is not. I have seen all the footage for the video. Give me a little credit here. Gene & I wrote the voiceover for the video, so I know what went into it, and what was left on the cutting room floor.

    Given my question, your answer ("no it is not") means that the "close-up video" was not included in the Footage Stock of your documentary "Cold Fusion: Fire from Water":

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
    .


    So, I have no problem to give you credit, in just this case. It means that the "close-up" video, you are talking about since 2020, did never exist, otherwise you and the other authors of the documentary should have seen it in the ponderous material that was collected to produce your documentary. This material included every program on CF transmitted by all the major TV channels until then. It would have been extremely stupid not to include such a phenomenal video in your documentary. You are not a stupid, so the "close-up video" does not exist.


    You also said (1): "I discussed it with Mallove, McKubre and others who saw it." The only video of a complete F&P experiment that you all could have seen and discussed about is the time-lapse video of the "1992 boil-off experiment". A footage of this last video appears in your documentary. It lasts 5 seconds (from 24:39, to 24:44), which corresponds to 10 minutes of experiment (from 21:25:58 to 21:35:58).


    Another footage of the same time-lapse video was included in the program "Good Morning America" aired by ABC on May 31, 1994 (2). It lasts 7 seconds (from 2:17 to 2:24), corresponding to 15 minutes of experiment (from 22:13:58 to 22:28:58).


    The two footages doesn't overlap. It means that you and the other documentary's makers had at your disposition the original and complete "time-lapse video", probably provided directly from Fleischmann.


    Therefore, only the "time-laps video" of the "1992 boil-off experiment" does exist, and this video shows that F&P were wrong. The "close-up video", you are talking about in the last 2 years, is only a potpourri of sparse images assembled by your wishful fantasy.


    (1) RE: MIZUNO REPLICATION AND MATERIALS ONLY

    (2)

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.