The Design of Low Energy Nuclear Battery

  • I plotted the GW data from the first several observations though I am not sure if they consist, but here,

    As mentioned. The EM radiation from a B-B merger is about 10E40 more powerful than the fantasy GR radiation could be. What LIGO measures are toroidal EM waves as these are the only one that can influence the steel tube/mirror system.


    The LIGO formula used for mirror bending by GR forces is nonsense as these folks have forgotten to add the steel compression constant. Such things happen when clueless mathematicians do physics.

  • Young modulus ?

    YAs mentioned. The EM radiation from a B-B merger is about 10E40 more powerful than the fantasy GR radiation could be. What LIGO measures are toroidal EM waves as these are the only one that can influence the steel tube/mirror system.


    The LIGO formula used for mirror bending by GR forces is nonsense as these folks have forgotten to add the steel compression constant. Such things happen when clueless mathematicians do physics.

  • The EM radiation from a B-B merger is about 10E40 more powerful than the fantasy GR radiation could be.

    On the contrary, I found the article telling the merging of a black hole with a neutron star had no EM emission. This is the large-scale mass defect without gamma ray ?


    LIGO and Virgo detect rare mergers of black holes with neutron stars for the first time
    Using LIGO and Virgo, astronomers have detected neutron star-black hole mergers for the first time. Gravitational-wave signals suggest black holes completely…
    news.mit.edu

  • I found the article telling the merging of a black hole with a neutron star had no EM emission.

    To many idiots do physics! LIGO measures just that (EM). The problem is that the classic EM emission angle (pulsar) is very narrow and the chance to see anything is virtually = 0 for a B-B merger. Only the toroidal wave of the black hole torus structure can resonate.

    Do you know that the phase speed of black hole mass is up to 72c? (measured!)


    When nuclear mass joins - any dense star = nuclear mass - then this will cause a total electron stripping of all not yet dense nuclear mass - for a B-B merger this will leave over a jet. Further nuclear mass during B-b merger get denser and emits EM radiation that follows the classic rules.

  • To many idiots


    no EM emission

    Jennifer Chu MIT speaking for the many (2000 or so) authors

    did mention a few uncertainty's ..but no nuclear battery


    "However, it is also possible that light was, in fact, emitted but was not detected by the telescopes that followed-up these systems. This is because their position in the sky — based on the gravitational-wave data — was rather uncertain, which implies telescopes might not have had a chance to find the electromagnetic counterpart before it faded away."

  • Jennifer Chu MIT speaking for the many (2000 or so) authors

    did mention a few uncertainty's

    Yes, the detection of GW using laser interferometers is still ongoing, and estimates of where the merger occurred are wide-ranging and uncertain. Given these uncertainties, it may be worthwhile to consider conducting experiments investigating LENR, to determine whether such a non-γ nuclear reaction is possible.


    And what do you think about the claim that GW detection is actually EM?

  • a non-γ nuclear reaction

    IMHO the experiments with nickelbased nanoalloys with low pressure hydrogen

    from Iwamura and Takahashi which are the result of decades of experimentation

    in properly set up labs

    yielding something greater than 1 Kev/Hatom

    already indicate something much more than chemical

    but without much gamma


    these experiments are conducted with significant capital expense beyond the reach of the hobbyist


    just proper gamma detection is something like $3000..

    and setting up a lowpressure hydrogen setup with Temp monitoring calorimetry etc is +++$


    best of luck with graphene + THz +heating

  • IMHO the experiments with nickelbased nanoalloys with low pressure hydrogen

    from Iwamura and Takahashi which are the result of decades of experimentation

    in properly set up labs

    Next month, I plan to attend JCF-24 in Japan, which will be my first opportunity to meet with cold fusion experts. I am looking forward to discussing experimental methods with them.


    My hope is that we can observe the fusion site on the graphene surface exposed in the chamber. By utilizing techniques like synchrotron radiation detection or other methods to monitor LENRs, we may gain additional insights into the process.

  • Given these uncertainties, it may be worthwhile to consider conducting experiments investigating LENR, to determine whether such a non-γ nuclear reaction is possible

    The fusion of D*-D* is and must be a no gamma radiation process. 4-He has no gamma spectrum only disintegration gammas are known. CF happens with atoms at rest and the result is a totally symmetric nucleus, what also excludes gammas.

  • @Wyttenbach,


    I haven’t drawn the pp chain with the electron capture yet, but here I try,


    1) p + e -> n + ν

    2) p + n -> d + v, n + n -> d + e + ν^-

    3) d + n -> 3-h + e + ν^-

    4) 3-h + n -> 4-h + ν


    p: proton, n: neutron, e: electron ,ν: neutrino, ν^-: antineutrino, d: deuterium, h: helium


    I think this avoids gamma radiation, as well as positron emission.

    If there is the best condition for the pp chain in the surface plasmon on graphene. It should be one of the ideal LENR, I think.

    The basic parameters of the condition are gas pressure, chamber temperature and THz frequency.

    Edited 6 times, last by Ryoji Furui: Modified pp chain process. ().

  • Some papers here inside could interest you.

    https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BiberianJPjcondensedzj.pdf

  • Some papers here inside could interest you.

    RyojiSan its too easy to draw p-p fusion on paper

    Maybe you can discuss at December's JCF meeting with KasagiSensei

    He has examined thoroughly the explanations for LENR energy production from the limited POV of conventional nuclear physics...


    External Content youtu.be
    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.

  • Next month, I plan to attend JCF-24 in Japan, which will be my first opportunity to meet with cold fusion experts. I am looking forward to discussing experimental methods with them.


    My hope is that we can observe the fusion site on the graphene surface exposed in the chamber. By utilizing techniques like synchrotron radiation detection or other methods to monitor LENRs, we may gain additional insights into the process.

    Can I inquire what methods are you exploring for your graphene production and what type of atomic size are you interested in?
    I have some experience in this field and may be able to direct you in some promising methods for producing single layer graphene.
    Large single or near single layer atomic sheets are still quite challenging to manufacture though from what I can gather from my own research.
    Have a great time at the conference.
    I hope to make it to Japan for ICCF25 if possible, perhaps one day we can meet in person to discuss hypothesis's and experiments.

    As RobertBryant suggested, Kasagi has developed an excellent approach to broad band thermal emission spectra detection now that may align with your proposition. They certainly have the equipment to do thorough testing but it depends on how strong your theoretical case is I would assume.
    It might be worthwhile to purpose your hypothesis to the Clean Planet Company?

    It's wonderful to see openness and productive dialogue for us to collectively design something that can help us all with our energy needs. I hope this open discourse continues and please keep us all posted on your progress.

  • That is right, large graphene layers are still very difficult to do, i have a close friend involved in that , it was what he confirmed me.

    Now, to producte strong EM graphene emitters you don't need of these sizes at all..

  • There is no p-p fusion possible! For this you need a strong force environment.

    Quote
    As far as i know, a proton turns into a neutron by emitting a positron

    This is forbidden at ordinary temperature. You are correct, proton plus proton cannot fuse at ordinary temperatures, this can happen only in the high energy plasma available in star formations and is complicated with a number of interactions. The energy is provided by the high kinetic energy of the hydrogen atoms due to the gravitational collapse into a star.

    Quote
    If you start with a mass of hydrogen gas and bring it together under its own gravity, it will eventually contract once it radiates enough heat away. Bring a few million (or more) Earth masses' worth of hydrogen together, and your molecular cloud will eventually contract so severely that you'll begin to form stars inside. When you pass the critical threshold of about 8% our Sun's mass, you'll ignite nuclear fusion, and form the seeds of a new star. While it's true that stars convert hydrogen into helium, that's neither the greatest number of reactions nor the cause of the greatest energy release from stars


    Quote
    [Over large amounts of time, hydrogen fuel gets burned through a series of reactions, producing, in the end, large amounts of helium-4.


    Quote
    This occurs because the product of the reaction, helium-4, is lower in mass, by about 0.7%, than the reactants (four hydrogen nuclei) that went into creating it.



    I will give a more descriptive answer, two protium nuclei are able to fuse into a Helium-2 nucleus due to the fact that 1.25 MeV of energy is added. If you find the difference between the mass of the Helium-2 nucleus (2.015894 amu), and the mass of the two protium nuclei (2.01455294 amu) you will get 0.00134106 amu. If you plug this value into Einstein's Mass-Energy equivalence formula you will get approximately 1.25 MeV of energy, which is what we said was needed to create the additional mass required to turn these protium nuclei into a Helium-2 nucleus.


    Now that we have a Helium-2 nucleus, one of the protons can undergo beta decay (Beta decay is caused by the weak force)


    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRHHklx-AwizjB1ks4iPQe4kC_f7p5KdpSt0Jp5r55RXWZeL7pR


    which is characterized by relatively lengthy decay times. The probability of a nuclide decaying due to beta decay is determined by its nuclear binding energy

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR8mxmlfzIjT-_0Cqi0w50F8CWPb7xcHa30DfBzbLz8jtlT-Qv6


    Decay time for PP fusion is high at 9 Billion years). This happens when an up quark emits a W+ boson, turning it into a down quark. This W+ boson will decay into a positron, and electron neutrino, as shown in the picture below.


    enter image description here

    We now have a nucleus consisting of one proton, and one neutron, making this a deuteron (deuterium nucleus). You will also notice that the mass of a Helium-2 nucleus (2.015894 amu) is greater than that of a deuteron (2.013553212745 amu) meaning that during beta decay the difference in the mass of our Helium-2 nucleus and the mass of the deuteron will be converted into approximately 1.67 MeV of energy, as shown below.




    For the math involved see this reference


    https://physics.stackexchange.…ollapse%20into%20a%20star.


    How does protium-protium fusion work?


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.