Ed Storms Pre-print on Cold Fusion, Materials and Gaps. Comments Please!

  • Good questions! You cite other LENR-like behavior. Please describe this in more detail. Remember, LENR is unique in causing a nuclear reaction that results in He-4 gas as the final product. Other kinds of nuclear reaction have been produced in solids but these are not the result of LENR because they do not produce He-4 gas. As far as I know, the LENR reaction has only been detected when a solid material is used.


    The EVO is an unusual collection of ions and many electrons. This much is known. It's unlikely they are present in material as an inert structure until activated. Like ball lightning, they are unstable after leaving the source of their creation. I suggest we have many other examples of electrons having the ability to interact in unexpected ways. The behavior of high-temperature superconductors is an example. I believe the theory conventionally applied to the electrons in chemical structures has largely failed because electron interaction was not considered. This is where the Mills theory shows promise.

    Thanks for your answer! Well, by LENR-like I meant evidence for excess heat and / or nuclear transmutations, often seen as new elements apparently appearing in the surface of solid materials. This doesn’t mean gaseous elements aren’t produced, just that no one reporting these results has had the gear in place to detect gases.


    I used the “LENR like” expression intuitively, to include phenomena that can only be explained involving a nuclear reaction, no matter how impossible current understanding says it may be. Thus, I am happily surprised to learn that you have a much more constrained definition for LENR as reactions that produce He-4. Is good to know that, I wasn’t aware of that.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • Thanks for your answer! Well, by LENR-like I meant evidence for excess heat and / or nuclear transmutations, often seen as new elements apparently appearing in the surface of solid materials. This doesn’t mean gaseous elements aren’t produced, just that no one reporting these results has had the gear in place to detect gases.


    I used the “LENR like” expression intuitively, to include phenomena that can only be explained involving a nuclear reaction, no matter how impossible current understanding says it may be. Thus, I am happily surprised to learn that you have a much more constrained definition for LENR as reactions that produce He-4. Is good to know that, I wasn’t aware of that.

    I'm aware that other kinds of reactions, such as transmutation, are produced. That is why the name was changed to LENR. In this discussion, I'm limiting my comments to fusion to avoid the added complexity the transmutation reaction introduces. However, I believe transmutation is not possible unless fusion occurs first. Transmutation is a secondary reaction that is only possible because the fusion reaction supplies the required energy and the nuclear product that reacts with the large nucleus. Can we focus on the fusion reaction?

  • I'm pretty sure that Ed was as always a pioneer in putting together the LENR jigsaw, the fact that there are others working in the field with similar thoughts only makes the case for listening to what he has to say stronger.

    Eventually, we will all have the same thought because it is the truth. Meanwhile, everyone has different thoughts because each person chooses different behaviors to explain and different scientific "rules" to apply. We need a way to separate nonsense and ignorance from facts. I'm trying to encourage such an evaluation by starting with the basic requirements and behaviors. However, I have discovered this to be an impossible goal. Apparently, it's impossible in this field for people to focus on a goal and on a logical path to that goal. Obviously, people in other fields of science have this ability, but not here.


    If anyone would like me to evaluate their model privately, I would be happy to do this. However, I have discovered this is a thankless task, rather like evaluating a person's wife.

  • Could you please provide a link?

    I have seen some of the experimental results from Clean Planet based on using various metals in ZrO2 with H2. I could not detect the depth of understanding required to create a useful source of energy. Like all efforts these days, the ability to make energy must be greatly exaggerated in order to get financial support. This worked for Rossi. Before Rossi, the hot fusion program was the grandfather of this approach. As best as I can tell, money is not very smart these days

  • I have seen some of the experimental results from Clean Planet based on using various metals in ZrO2 with H2. I could not detect the depth of understanding required to create a useful source of energy. Like all efforts these days, the ability to make energy must be greatly exaggerated in order to get financial support. This worked for Rossi. Before Rossi, the hot fusion program was the grandfather of this approach. As best as I can tell, money is not very smart these days

    Ed the only public data I ever saw from CP showed a COP of 20 but was only like 6mW of power. They focused on the COP 😂. Their website claims they had a 100W version in 2022 and plan a 1kW version in 2023. So I guess we don’t know what goes on behind closed doors. Evidently it was enough to convince Mitsubishi Corp to invest more at unicorn valuation.

  • Evidently it was enough to convince Mitsubishi Corp to invest more at unicorn valuation.

    I do not understand investment jargon. As you say, it says Mitsubishi invested, and it lists 2022 Series C for 145.7 billion yen. But does that mean someone actually bought that much stock? Or does it just mean they are hoping to sell that much? I have no idea.


    If it is millions of dollars -- or a billion dollars -- then I am sure you are right and the people at Mitsubishi know something we don't know. They would not invest without some level of technical proof. Big companies sometimes do stupid things, but not that stupid! Big companies sometimes invest in poorly designed technology or dead end technology, such as IBM's OS2 operating system. But I have never heard of one that invested in nonexistent technology.

  • Ed the only public data I ever saw from CP showed a COP of 20 but was only like 6mW of power. They focused on the COP 😂. Their website claims they had a 100W version in 2022 and plan a 1kW version in 2023. So I guess we don’t know what goes on behind closed doors. Evidently it was enough to convince Mitsubishi Corp to invest more at unicorn valuation.

    They explain the behavior by assuming that diffusion through the deposited layer is the controlling variable, with the small particle size being important. The behavior can be equally well explained by a gap size change caused by mismatched expansion when the H content is changed. Their successful application would depend on which explanation is correct. I see no effort being made to resolve this question. Apparently, they plan to work at higher temperatures while using bigger samples, which is a typical engineering approach. I predict the approach will fail because the amount of power will slowly decrease as the material is cycled, especially when high temperatures are used. Of course, my prediction means nothing because it will be forgotten when the prediction comes true.

  • To remain only at US side, what do you think about the laser stimulation done by Letts/Cravens ?


    They explain the behavior by assuming that diffusion through the deposited layer is the controlling variable, with the small particle size being important. The behavior can be equally well explained by a gap size change caused by mismatched expansion when the H content is changed. Their successful application would depend on which explanation is correct. I see no effort being made to resolve this question. Apparently, they plan to work at higher temperatures while using bigger samples, which is a typical engineering approach. I predict the approach will fail because the amount of power will slowly decrease as the material is cycled, especially when high temperatures are used. Of course, my prediction means nothing because it will be forgotten when the prediction comes true.

  • To remain only at US side, what do you think about the laser stimulation done by Letts/Cravens ?


    Lots of evidence demonstrates that the application of laser light can stimulate a fusion reaction when the conditions are suitable. How the radiation interacts with the fusion process is still unknown.

  • Quite simple, light in the Thz range, phonons in the Thz range too, that means coupling.

    Lots of evidence demonstrates that the application of laser light can stimulate a fusion reaction when the conditions are suitable. How the radiation interacts with the fusion process is still unknown.

  • Quite simple, light in the Thz range, phonons in the Thz range too, that means coupling.

    That is what Hagelstein claims. That does not mean the idea is true. Hagelstein has distorted the entire concept of the phonon. The phonon is a local physical vibration equilivant to temperature. The energy in each laser-generated photon is trivial compared to the energy needed to influence a nuclear process. The idea that the energy of many photons can keep adding to the local vibration makes no sense. This addition would first cause local melting long before a nuclear reaction would be initiated. Instead, Hagelstein simply makes an arbitrary assumption without any justification. Once again, another "theory" is created having no relationship to accepted understanding. But, this is too much to justify here and is off-topic.


    Ed

  • That is what Hagelstein claims. That does not mean the idea is true. Hagelstein has distorted the entire concept of the phonon. The phonon is a local physical vibration equilivant to temperature. The energy in each laser-generated photon is trivial compared to the energy needed to influence a nuclear process. The idea that the energy of many photons can keep adding to the local vibration makes no sense. This addition would first cause local melting long before a nuclear reaction would be initiated. Instead, Hagelstein simply makes an arbitrary assumption without any justification. Once again, another "theory" is created having no relationship to accepted understanding. But, this is too much to justify here and is off-topic.


    Ed

    Approaching this from a completely different point of view I have understood phonons (for my own practical visualization of the concept) as a virtual particle that transmits energy within the material, one might say is a measure of “point vibrational energy” and travels in waves. When one has multiple “phonon waves” interacting, resonances will probably arise. Wouldn’t these resonances affect the material, and any gap in it, in a manner that could induce transient favorable conditions (NAE) to appear and dissapear? I know this is very unorthodox but I like to visualize things in motion and this is the way I see the theoretical phonons having a role in LENR.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • Approaching this from a completely different point of view I have understood phonons (for my own practical visualization of the concept) as a virtual particle that transmits energy within the material, one might say is a measure of “point vibrational energy” and travels in waves. When one has multiple “phonon waves” interacting, resonances will probably arise. Wouldn’t these resonances affect the material, and any gap in it, in a manner that could induce transient favorable conditions (NAE) to appear and dissapear? I know this is very unorthodox but I like to visualize things in motion and this is the way I see the theoretical phonons having a role in LENR.

    We all try to form models in our heads that make the ideas easier to visualize. However, you need to make sure your mental model matches the concept correctly. The phonon is not a particle like a photon, electron, or proton. The phonon can not exist as a separate physical entity outside of a material like all other particles.


    In fact, the energy in a material is transmitted through the force that exists between each atom, which causes its physical vibration to move from one atom to the next. The energy contained in this vibration is measured as the heat capacity. The claim for a virtual particle is used only to justify the application of the math to the phonon that is normally applied to particles. This only allows physicists to pretend that this math has meaning.


    You are asking a photon that does not have a physical vibration to add a physical vibration to a local region without increasing its temperature. Remember, resonance requires the energy to be coupled through a vibration, which a photon does not have. Normally, the photon adds its energy as an increase in temperature. Simply increasing the local temperature to the melting point does not cause LENR to occur.


    In addition, the phonon idea has no ability to show how to make LENR occur. In fact, LENR does not need laser light to occur. Therefore, laser light is not an important variable, Why introduce a concept that is not an important variable?


    Nevertheless, increased temperature can cause otherwise active material to produce more power. Perhaps the laser photon only adds to the local temperature without a phonon being involved.

  • Ah yes, the challenges of the money game in our modern society. Doesn't most organizational endeavors require money since that is the representation of humans doing work over time? This seems like it is the product of our engineering socio-economic design and a game most of us in the western world must play. Perhaps the utilization of LENR will bring about a new age of energy abundance where this won't be as much of an issue?

    That is what Hagelstein claims. That does not mean the idea is true. Hagelstein has distorted the entire concept of the phonon. The phonon is a local physical vibration equilivant to temperature. The energy in each laser-generated photon is trivial compared to the energy needed to influence a nuclear process. The idea that the energy of many photons can keep adding to the local vibration makes no sense. This addition would first cause local melting long before a nuclear reaction would be initiated. Instead, Hagelstein simply makes an arbitrary assumption without any justification. Once again, another "theory" is created having no relationship to accepted understanding. But, this is too much to justify here and is off-topic.


    Ed

    It may make no sense to you, but does this mean it is wrong or off topic? I think a good question to ask ones self is, am I trying to prove myself right about LENR, or are we working together to learn the truth of the LENR phenomenon?


    You are suggesting we are dealing with nanostructured wave guides in the (NAS gaps) of a crystalline lattice which I think everyone on this thread agrees with. Phonon vibrations are a term we use to describe particles moving in wave in molecular matrices as Curbina stated. It seems unclear to me how this would have no contribution to the LENR phenomenon? Here is one article out of many on how photons and phonons being quanta of electromagnetic energy have inter-relationships.

    Photon-phonon breakthrough
    New research has uncovered a novel way to combine two different states of matter. For one of the first times, topological photons -- light -- has been combined…
    www.sciencedaily.com


    I have stated "my" hypothesis on how to reliably create hydrogen fusion. It is however, not "my" hypothesis alone as many people have helped contribute to the emergent understanding of the operation of stars, which is what we are talking about here when we are talking about fusion isn't it?

    Can it be possible for several theories to be partially true without having a complete understanding? After all, isn't that what science is, the exploration of finding more truth in the beautifully immense patterns of nature?

    Out of curiosity as it pertain to LENR, what are your thoughts on Arthur Eddington's 1920 hypothesis of stellar nucleosynthesis?

  • I do not understand investment jargon. As you say, it says Mitsubishi invested, and it lists 2022 Series C for 145.7 billion yen. But does that mean someone actually bought that much stock? Or does it just mean they are hoping to sell that much? I have no idea.


    If it is millions of dollars -- or a billion dollars -- then I am sure you are right and the people at Mitsubishi know something we don't know. They would not invest without some level of technical proof. Big companies sometimes do stupid things, but not that stupid! Big companies sometimes invest in poorly designed technology or dead end technology, such as IBM's OS2 operating system. But I have never heard of one that invested in nonexistent technology.

    Jed the information provided doesn’t specify the investment amount but the price per share x the total number of shares gives the valuation of the company. So if they invested $50m for 5% of the company then they would be valued at $1b. One would logically think that Mitsubishi did their DD. Despite Yoshino’s dispute with Mizuno in this small and nascent industry we must cheer our competitors as well. Good that they were able to raise money from credible investors.


    This is a long game though. Still many steps we have to go through to commercialization. May the best company win and Godspeed to all.

  • Storms , I went back to your preprint in post #1 of this thread and re read the “deposit of impurities in the surface” section. I think this is probably one of the “relatively easier” things to do in order to create different gap sizes, and also gap stabilities, in the search for increased active material.


    (BTW, the first time I read it I only skimmed that part without realizing that you had not mentioned the use of boron as an impurity, I just assumed you had to have included it, do you consider that research not succesful?)


    Anyway, I wonder if you consider the approach of impurity of materials to have been sufficiently explored in other metals than Pd. I think it has not.


    We know Celani works with Constantan because he says that the material needs to be affordable. He also is using pulses to estimulate gas flow, which he considers absolutely required to see excess heat. Flow is also something that happens in the excess heat experiment done within the PdAg tubing by NASA in 1989 and replicated several times with the most recent results published at ICCF 24 by Theresa Benyo. How do you think that this flow would help the process, if it does it at all as Celani and NASA (and I think also Iwamura) claim?


    Another think comes to memory about Nickel impurities: At one point early in his development, BrLP used to say that “Rainey Nickel” (probably not correctly spelled) was the most suitable material to cause the reaction of excess heat with hydrogen.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • It seems interesting to me one would disregard the virtual particle as a convenient mathematical construct to help us visualize the particle/wave complexity of sub-atomic fields. Than use the same physical construct to state that photons don't have vibrations as a matter of fact. Yet the photon is just a convenient construct of quanta in electromagnetic waves of radiation.

    Maybe I am incorrect in my understanding of the standard model of physics, but aren't photons are our best interpretation of packets of electromagnetic waves traveling through relativistic perceived spatial fields?
    Have you ever witnessed a wave with no mode of vibration? Perhaps our theoretical interpretation on these things is incorrect? This is has been a major source of concern with all of this theoretical pontification that does very little to advance the field of fusion.


    Perhaps photons do not carry "vibrational" energy in a neutral medium, but can photons carry information they transfer to other EM fields? There are spin resonances in angular momentum aren't there? How else would you be able to read this statement on the screen?

    This is a topic that is so deeply theoretical still that one should be careful to state things as facts considering we have not been able to reconcile the particle wave duality.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

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