Which ICCF24 presentation is most likely to sway a skeptic?

  • If one publishes first on RG probably forget publishing that paper again elsewhere, but the other way around is OK.

    I think Celani and Takahashi have gone RG first then published in the CMNS Journal. -but that hardly counts of course.


    Clean Planet is leading the globe in LENR R&D and at ICCF24 presented their strategy for both developing a technology and nailing down the science of the reaction itself.


    Iwamura is coming to the IWAHLM workshop. I think I should ask him for an interview. Mrs Iwamura speaks very good English, which would help.

  • Perhaps you meant a paper that describes a positive cold fusion result. Such papers cannot be published anywhere, in any journal. It is best to submit them to the Journal of Universal Rejection. It saves time

    Jed, I referenced an academic who has a long record of publishing many positive CF papers in reputable Journals.


    Just one:


    Production of ultra-dense hydrogen H(0): A novel nuclear fuel
    Condensation of hydrogen Rydberg atoms (highly electronically excited) into the lowest energy state of condensed hydrogen i.e. the ultra-dense hydroge…
    www.sciencedirect.com


    Now, personally, I do not think these are strong papers. But, they are well enough written, they get published.


    THH

  • Hydrogen-fuelled boilers emitting no CO2 are not LENR!!!


    The second paragraph must be read as a hope for the future - not anything that now exists. Note the use of future tense.


    I think there is a strange misreading of Clean Planet here. They are not claiming working LENR. At least nowhere have I read such a claim. They have a measured an apparent +30C temperature rise on a 700C plate which they think represents Watts of excess energy but that could have many mundane explanations, given they have published (that I have been able to find) no details, and this is a system that absorbs hydrogen, and we do not know the measurement method. Many such could be contaminated by hydrogen (TCs, IR thermography).


    (Not LENR)

    In 2017 MIURA began selling hydrogen-fueled once-through boilers that emit no CO2 while in operation, and in May 2021 received certification for its hydrogen-fueled steam boilers as Tokyo Metropolitan Government low NOx/low CO2 small-scale combustion equipment, the first such certification by a local government body in Japan. Following MIURA's investment in Clean Planet in May 2019, the two companies have been working in concert to make clean energy a practical reality.


    (Hoped-for future LENR)

    The conclusion of this joint development agreement allows both companies to leverage their knowledge and technologies to push forward with full-scale development of boilers that use Quantum Hydrogen Energy, a groundbreaking source of clean energy. The development of boilers that use the enormous amounts of heat energy offered by Quantum Hydrogen Energy will, for many industries, play a key role in the realization of a decarbonized society.

  • Re LEC


    I find this interesting scientifically, as a curiosity, but in no way providing evidence for LENR.


    https://www.lenr-forum.com/attachment/20136-jcmns-vol-35-lec-i-gordon-002-1-pdf/


    As I understand it, we have a cell that contains H2, various metals, and that outputs up to 1uW of power and at a voltage of 10mV or so.


    It has output voltage that varies with temperature, and specifically with changes in temperature


    Figure 12 is included as an example of a self-initiating and self-sustaining LEC cell that changed polarity three times over a 4-day period. The LEC voltage was initially negative and it became positive as the temperature was increased. When the temperature decreased, the LEC voltage went back negative and then it gradually increased to positive even though the temperature remained relatively constant. Load tests conducted when the voltage was negative and when it was positive are similar to load tests for cells that maintain a relatively steady voltage. Similar behavior has been observed in multiple LEC cells. The cause is not knownalthoughonepossibilitymightbeachangeinwork function of the materials as hydrogen loading changes and as the electrode surfaces are subjected to ionizing radiation. This behavior is another example of the complex nature of whatappearstobeasimpledevice.


    There seems lots of scope for such micropower generation from two effects:


    (1) differing work function between two metals, and ion exchange through gas


    (2) thermoelectric effect where two junctions have different temperatures during temperature cycling


    Therefore I don't see this cell as in any way showing unusual energy conversion. What is unusual is the ionisation of the gas.


    I say it is scientifically interesting because there are no doubt many details which baffle Alan (and would even more so baffle me). But then materials are complex, at these low levels there are many possible effects that would normally not be considered that could come into play. The ability to deliver this sort of power and voltage comes naturally from the two above effects.


    Alan, I guess, can't see how that gas could be ionised without high energy particles, indicating some nuclear activity. If so this would be type 2 LENR (the one I favour) where Coulomb barrier must still be dealt with, but there is a reduced requirement to also eliminate high energy products!


    From the paper above:


    (a) a necessary but not sufficient condition for sustained LECoperationisthattheworkingelectrodemustbecomprised in part of hydrogen-occluded hydrogen host material that is in fluidic contact with a gas containing hydrogen;

    (b) hydrogen host material lattice vacancies, superabundant vacancies, and other defects such as those produced during co-deposition of Pd or Fe from an aqueous solution havebeenshowntoproduceionizingradiationfroman active working electrode;

    (c) a necessary condition is that the gas be comprised in part of hydrogen, or its non-radioactive isotope deuterium, although sustained conduction at a low level has been observed in air indicating that the amount of hydrogen may not need to be large;

    (d) reconnecting the electrodes from that shown in Figure 2 toreversethepolarityoftheelectricalpotential, e.g.highvol yconnecte dtotheworkingele ctro deandload resistance connected to the counter electrode, causes a temporary increase in conductivity but does not appreciably change the long term steady state conductivity;

    (e) voltage induced conduction experiments using deuteriumgasatT 55 Cshowthationsinthegasdueto relative humidity are not causing the conduction since at this temperature the number of water (D2O) ions is completely negligible;

    (f) corona discharge cannot be responsible for the conduction since both the electric field due to the spontaneous voltage is too low to produce corona discharge [Peek 1929] andthegaspressures,typically500 Torr to 3baristoo great for a discharge;

    (g) thermal ionization of the gas is not responsible for the LEC conduction since both reported data [34] and Saha’s equation [35] shows that temperatures greater that approximately 2000 K would be needed; (h) natural ionizing radiation from cosmic rays, the environment, or from the small amount of radioactive isotopes in the hydrogen host material or from tritium in the hydrogen gas cannot be the source of the ionization of the gas since an experiment where the working electrode was bare but contained approximately 6 µCi (90 % and 10 % )of radiation did not produce measurable conduction from the ions produced by the-particles or from the photoelectric effect due to the-radiation produced by the WE; (i) after extensive testing, Rout, et al. [36] were unable to identify the specific ionization that was fogging the f ilm and ultimately, “proposed that some new, unknown agency emitted from the loaded palladium is responsible for fogging.”


    Possible physical mechanisms that might produce the initialionizingradiationattheworkingelectrodeinclude:

    (a) thermally induced vibration of the hydrogen host material’s lattice enhanced by nonlinear wave-wave mixing in conjunction with the presence of hydrogen occluded in lattice vacancies near the surface of the hydrogen host material;

    (b) thermally induced interaction between multiple occluded hydrogen atoms contained within a vacancy particularly when different nuclear spin orientations are present or between an occluded hydrogen atom in the vacancy and a hydrogen host material’s atom.


    Comment


    The references given used to disallow corona radiation and thermal ionisation can't possibly do this in an unusual system here where highly catalytic Pd vacancies can do weird things. In any case local electric field on a surface can be very difficult to predict and for these unusual surfaces could be exceptional. Can i prove this? No. But those 1930 etc references did not consider Pd vacancies nor surface effects.


    There is a mystery here -one worthy of study - and connected to some LENR effects due to the behaviour of Pd vacancies. However there is no indication of nuclear activity. I applaud anyone trying to understand the behaviour of Pd hydrides in systems like this one where there is no claim of nuclear activity nor beyond expe3cted power generation.


    THH

  • So:


    Tritium results - must be characterised, replicated. If true then they need explanation, would be relatively easy to eliminate false positives and end with nuclear. Against this the fact that this effect is not sensitive to H vs D substitution is a minus.


    Clean Energy - delivers clean energy through H2 burning. Hopes to enhance this via LENR. No credible evidence they have this.


    LEC - fascinating system showing ionisation where ionisation is not expected. No-one except an LENR advocate would leap onto LENR as mechanism. If characterisation of this system matches LENR very well - and other measurements of ionising radiation agree - then that written up would support LENR. the phenomena itself does not, and the mystery does not look a particularly tough one.


    I would not rule out LENR, especially since it would be type 2. Against that it is only marginally type 2 since the higher energy products from typical H + nucleus or H + H nuclear reactions are not observed (or if so I've not seen this). they would need to be observed at levels suitable for number of ions generated for this to be proper type 2. So I don't think LENR here looks a particularly good fit.


    THH

  • THHuxleynew


    Thank you for your comments. You will, I am sure have noticed that Pd is far from essential in this system, and that I have demonstrated the LEC effect using electrolysed working electrode materials as diverse as mild steel, nickel, nickel mesh, ferrocerium and terbium. Anode materials used include mild steel, nickel, nickel mesh, tin and carbon, and that prolonged activity is seen in air, hydrogen, acetone vapour, and probably im some gases yet to be tested.


    I can only repeat my suggestion that if you can find a day to visit you can attempt (with my help) to unravel some of the mystery. Or why not try iy yourself?, There's enough info here for you to replicate an experiment for just a few pounds.and a few hours of your time.

  • Miura's hydrogen fuelled boiler offering is entirely seperate to their partnership with Clean Planet. Nobody is talking about that. It's just mentioned in the press release. You're conflating two seperate, unrelated things.


    Clean Planet is absolutely 'claiming working LENR', they're just not calling it that.


    Iwamura et al. have published extensively.

    Clean Energy - delivers clean energy through H2 burning. Hopes to enhance this via LENR. No credible evidence they have this.

    This is incorrect. Clean Planet has nothing to do with Miura's hydrogen boiler offering.


    The point I was making was simple. You said that if validated, LENR would not have trouble attracting money.


    I pointed you to Iwamura et al. partnering with a very large Japanese industrial company to commercialise their research as an example of exactly that happening.

  • (1) differing work function between two metals, and ion exchange through gas


    (2) thermoelectric effect where two junctions have different temperatures during temperature cycling

    Re (1) above, I have successfully run a cell with nickel mesh working and passive electrodes. According to the literature hydryding nickel only affects the WF marginally.


    Re (2) This is absolutely ruled out - there is no junction between metals, just gas, and Gordon/Whitehouse have demonstrated continuous LEC output in an isothermal environment at temperatures between (from memory) -70 and +200C.

  • orsova:


    I think you are misunderstanding me.


    I am fully aware the two paras are unrelated.


    My point is that there is nothing other than hope in the 2nd paragraph. No evidence, anywhere, that they know how to do this. And the "agreement" does not add evidence.


    Partnering with a large company to try to do something (when you have known expertise in a related area that would in any case be useful without the magic extra thing) is not the same as being able to do it.

  • Re (1) above, I have successfully run a cell with nickel mesh working and passive electrodes. According to the literature hydryding nickel only affects the WF marginally.


    Re (2) This is absolutely ruled out - there is no junction between metals, just gas, and Gordon/Whitehouse have demonstrated continuous LEC output in an isothermal environment at temperatures between (from memory) -70 and +200C.

    (1) If the metals have any sort of chemical change close to surface that corresponds to a possible TEG junction. They clearly do have that

    (2) I do not suppose that TEG effects are the only issue here, juts that at these tiny voltages you have to consider them as well as other issues


    I'd be more interested in how the resistance is parametrised (and hence what determines charge transport in gas and/or insulating spacer) than this small voltage.


    PS - how pure is the H inside? outgassing or ingress of other gasses would allow other interesting mechanisms


    THH

  • My point is that there is nothing other than hope in the 2nd paragraph. No evidence, anywhere, that they know how to do this.

    Well, they said they are testing 1 kW prototypes. I don't recall any details, but if true that is evidence they have near-practical prototypes. Also, Miura announced they will have cold fusion reactors by 2025, which is soon. There is not technical evidence, but that is what Clean Planet and Miura are saying. Here is the Clean Planet slide:


  • I should have known you were just looking for another opportunity to smear the community. Mission accomplished, now no more of your poison on this thread.

    Ascoli's post is well-written, logical, polite, and relevant to the ongoing conversation on this thread. It is not a smear and it is not poison. It appears to me to be a person's sincere opinion.


    I am sad but unsurprised when I see that people have upvoted your nasty mischaracterization.

  • Ascoli's post is well-written, logical, polite, and relevant to the ongoing conversation on this thread. It is not a smear and it is not poison. It appears to me to be a person's sincere opinion.


    I am sad but unsurprised when I see that people have upvoted your nasty mischaracterization.

    I just re-read his post, and I stand by what I said. There is an expectation that members, especially skeptics, commenting on this thread be open, and unbiased in viewing the new material from ICCF24. His opinions IMO were not in that spirit, and instead I got the distinct impression he was simply looking for another opportunity to trash the field.


    We were open enough, and comfortable enough in our convictions, to not only tolerate his pessimism all these years, but give him his own thread so he can spout his rhetoric as he desires. That thread is still open.


    In comparison, you, although your style grates on Alan's nerves, and THH are doing this thread a service by putting the time into digesting the info, and giving your honest assessment. If Ascoli changes course he is more than welcome to participate.

  • Well, they said they are testing 1 kW prototypes. I don't recall any details

    If this is as it seems you are right. And I like you have no details.


    Because however they also have these hydrogen only boilers I would take such statements with a pinch of salt. I think if they really had a device which for low power in delivered 1kW power out they would be saying a lot more!


    I am happy to agree that if these 1kW prototypes are what they might appear to be that is a big deal. I am not however holding my breath in this case because of the lack of info.

  • I just re-read his post, and I stand by what I said. There is an expectation that members, especially skeptics, commenting on this thread be open, and unbiased in viewing the new material from ICCF24. His opinions IMO were not in that spirit, and instead I got the distinct impression he was simply looking for another opportunity to trash the field.


    We were open enough, and comfortable enough in our convictions, to not only tolerate his pessimism all these years, but give him his own thread so he can spout his rhetoric as he desires. That thread is still open.


    In comparison, you, although your style grates on Alan's nerves, and THH are doing this thread a service by putting the time into digesting the info, and giving your honest assessment. If Ascoli changes course he is more than welcome to participate.

    Ascoli has the merit of being polite, logical, and clear.


    He has two demerits:

    (1) he is strongly anti F&P - and by extension all LENR. A demerit for many here

    (2) He is very single-minded. He has one point to make which we have all heard.


    Ascoli keeps making this point because no-one except for me and perhaps Bruce acknowledges its validity (it is mostly valid). He keeps on pointing it out because he correctly sees the LENR community's response to this one point as confused and logically fallacious. So whetehr he is right or wrong, his logic is not properly considered here.


    Personally, I know when I am kicking against a brick wall (as in COVID and the antivaxxer thread) and when I get tired of this I stop.


    THH

  • He keeps on pointing it out because he correctly sees the LENR community's response to this one point as confused and logically fallacious. So whetehr he is right or wrong, his logic is not properly considered here.

    I thoight I had refuted every objection he made 'clearly and logically'. This is sometomes difficult, because he makes dogmatic assertions based on flimsy evidence (grainy old video for example). He also overlooks the many exemplary replications of F&P's work because they are 'inconvenient'.


    ETA -all that nonsense about red-hot electrodes for example, plus his refusal to re-create the experiment 'in some reasonable way' to show the effect he claimed. The proffered anecdote by a member was in terms of proof entirely irrelevant.

  • Because however they also have these hydrogen only boilers I would take such statements with a pinch of salt. I think if they really had a device which for low power in delivered 1kW power out they would be saying a lot more!

    I do not recall the details, but there is no question we are talking about Miura Co. making cold fusion boilers. This has nothing to do with hydrogen boilers. Clean Planet has reported this collaboration for some time, not just at ICCF24.


    I do not think Miura would be saying more. Saying anything would trigger a storm of controversy and bad publicity, even for the largest boiler manufacturer in Japan. They would be attacked by the mass media, the physics establishment, Wikipedia, and others. And by you, of course -- so I am sure you know how this would work. Even if Miura had irrefutable proof, you would find an excuse to refute it. So would all the big name physicists. The only way we can persuade the physics establishment is to put hundreds of "lab rat" devices into their hands. Something like a LEC. You, of course, refuse to even take a train to look at a LEC. If we showed up at your door with one, you would refuse to look, or you would come up with a ridiculous excuse to dismiss it, along the lines of 'light water and heavy water are different even when you measure heat outside the cell.' That's a classic! Worthy of Douglas "Cigarette Lighter" Morrison. Many physicists will refuse to look at a LEC or a Miura commercial product, the way they refused to look at masers and lasers after Townes began demonstrating them. But we don't need all the physicists. A few hundred would be enough, as it was for the maser.


    If I were Miura, I would keep it secret until the day the reactors are in the showroom, ready for sale. I am a little surprised they let Clean Planet reveal it. I would be astounded if Miura issued a press release at this stage. The physics establishment and mass media would vilify them and put pressure on the government to blackball them, investigate them for fraud, and so on. Miura would lose millions of dollars in business.

  • If I were Miura, I would keep it secret until the day the reactors are in the showroom, ready for sale. I am a little surprised they let Clean Planet reveal it. I would be astounded if Miura issued a press release at this stage.

    I was surprised too, especially as Cold Fusion is now considered to be national security matter in Japan.