LENR based on the lithium fission

Related work? 2017

Calorimetric Investigation of Anomalous Heat Production in Ni–H Systems

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BiberianJPjcondensedv.pdf#page=90

Let's go to your laboratory then we will discuss the result.

Quote from Valeriy Tarasov

I would like to to discuss the scheme of LENR based on the lithium fission, the scheme is below.

In this scheme the lithium fission is the result of electric discharge. The produced fission electrons going through the open meshed anode are collected at collector electrode for direct electricity production. This means that after the discharge the anode should be charged enough to direct high energy electrons to the collector electrode and not enough to generate next discharge. After, electric energy is stored the cycle is repeated.

Valeriy: The lithium proton fusion really works, it was one of first fusions tested experimentally after all. Except it uses a pure lithium, lithium hydride is a poison of reaction.

Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 fusion device, particle spectrum

The Lipiski Patents. Best Lithium LERN so far!

First patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20090274256A1/en

Last: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20160118144/da

Quote

Second way when we have lattice of lithium and hydrogen as lithium hydride

Do we? Lipinski just said that once lithium gets covered by hydride, then fusion with protons stops. But Lipinski also did these experiments, not just speculations.

About Rossi and his lithium use, in some case, yes, H proton is involved, in other cases we rather have to talk about spallation ( neutrons involvement).

Quote from Valeriy Tarasov

External bombardment of pure lithium by protons is one way of lithium fusion/fission. Second way when we have lattice of lithium and hydrogen as lithium hydride (or lithium aluminium hydride), where for fusion/fission of lithium nuclei less energy needs to be applied to the hydrogen (actually to hydrogen nuclei/protons).

As we can judge from Rossi (on my view zero point energy explanation is for market, security reason) and others, for lithium fission in lattice the stability is a problem (to avoid run away), so the lithium aluminium hydride (lithium aluminium hydride) can be beneficial for stability, especially when you collect electrons and positrons for net electricity generation. On my view the induced fission of lithium resulting from interaction with protons in lattice can end into positrons and electrons generation, so lithium stably decomposed completely in gas discharged lamp scheme. In the case of lithium fission in lattice by heating the alpha particles likely play the role in heat generation and LENR can run away.

By the way, several years ago, when it became clear that lithium is used in Rossi devices, I speculate that similar interaction of potassium with protons results in alpha particles production. One guy had indeed found in database this kind of reaction. In contrast to lithium for potassium not only alpha particles are produced.

Quote

As I see his patents about proton bombardment, proton beam interaction. LENR in lattice is different.

You didn't read it thoroughly enough - which is a common problem of many rogue inventors. They simply don't study what others did before them. Lipinsky brothers actually DID LENR in lattice and we discussed it here extensively. All other replication attempts must account to it, or they're doomed into a failed Cargo cult replications.

Quote from Zephir_AWT

Lipinsky brothers actually DID LENR in lattice and we discussed it here extensively.

I did exchange some e-mail with Lipinski's and sent them the description of the exact physical process that happens. I ask them do change some parameters to get a deeper understanding...

Then arrogance played in, as they developed a silly physics model based on gravity....

I should run my own experiments ... was the answer...

Final result of story: Lipinski's had no clue of what they did, started new completely useless experiments of course with zero success, did run out of money, did sell their patents, that now are abandoned!!

It would be very easy to build tiny - high COP - reactors on the Lipinsky basis if one would follow my proposals....

Quote

Final result of story: Lipinski's had no clue of what they did, started new completely useless experiments of course with zero success, did run out of money, did sell their patents, that now are abandoned!

This is quite bad as Lipinski's patents were on spot: these guys exactly knew what they were about. Which proposals would you recommend for them?

Quote from Zephir_AWT

Which proposals would you recommend for them?

To late... They gave up. If somebody would repeat it I could go back to this quite old communication. Its about resonances...

Quote

They gave up. If somebody would repeat it I could go back to this quit old communication. Its about resonances...

IMO it isn't - but about tight temperature control. Once the lithium gets overheated, then its surface layer stops being crystalline and cold fusion running within arranged lattice changes into a hot fusion within random plasma. Which requires much higher excess of energy to run. After all, what do you recommend/provide as an evidence of your resonance hypothesis instead? For instance on the above picture there is clear and broad dependence of yield of reaction on proton acceleration voltage used. There are visible no resonances and peaks. BTW These graphs were made by other researchers, not Lipinski, who thus were not able to replicate not only their own experiments, but also the experiments of others.

As a very dated kind of experimenter I find these discussions remind me of discussing the structure of a bookshelf conducted by carpenters who have never seen a wall, a book, or a toolkit. No disrespect is meant to those whose imagination and mathematics is obviously better than mine, but I do wonder what - if devoid of experiment- is the point of it? The anecdote below, ascribed with no evidence to support the claim, to the pen of Francis Bacon.

In the year of our Lord 1432, there arose a grievous quarrel among the brethren over the number of teeth in the mouth of a horse. For thirteen days the disputation raged without ceasing. All the ancient books and chronicles were fetched out, and wonderful and ponderous erudition such as was never before heard of in this region was made manifest. At the beginning of the fourteenth day, a youthful friar of goodly bearing asked his learned superiors for permission to add a word, and straightway, to the wonderment of the disputants, whose deep wisdom he sore vexed, he beseeched them to unbend in a manner coarse and unheard-of and to look in the open mouth of a horse and find answer to their questionings. At this, their dignity being grievously hurt, they waxed exceeding wroth; and, joining in a mighty uproar, they flew upon him and smote him, hip and thigh, and cast him out forthwith. For, said they, surely Satan hath tempted this bold neophyte to declare unholy and unheard-of ways of finding truth, contrary to all the teachings of the fathers. After many days more of grievous strife, the dove of peace sat on the assembly, and they as one man declaring the problem to be an everlasting mystery because of a grievous dearth of historical and theological evidence thereof, so ordered the same writ down.

Quote from Zephir_AWT

IMO it isn't - but about tight temperature control. Once the lithium gets overheated, then its surface layer stops being crystalline

You didn't get it! 100eV tears of all electrons and produces a coherent spin coupling surface state. But Lipinsky never understood how the surface does look like and that one should use resonant voltages not just making simple steps like 100.200,400.

The Li disk did overheat due to extensive energy release they also didn't get correctly.

Quote

100eV tears of all electrons and produces a coherent spin coupling surface state.

Lipinski did use more like 5000 - 7000 V and he applied it to protons, which are heavier than electrons, so that the impacting energy got even higher than 5000 eV. This is an energy higher than quantization steps possibly existing there. It's already a classical energy level under which there are no discernible quantization's in energy levels of free electrons, their coherent spin coupling the less. At second, this energy isn't introduced homogeneously across all surface of electrode constantly - but by impacting protons at single point of surface, where it gets unequivocally distributed. It means there are places which get 2000 eV from 5000 eV impactor, just a bit further the electrons get 200 eV and so on. There is not enough of time for coherence during impact, as after few nanoseconds it's all over. At third, there is no published experimental evidence of such coherent spin coupling. Lipinski themselves reported efficiency of their fusion over 60% over all voltage range they used.

For the record, Lipinski attempted to avoid overheating by replacing stationary lithium droplet by rotating cone, along surface of which molten lithium was spread. X-ray tubes utilize similar arrangement, but given the fact, how nasty stuff the molten lithium is and how electrode geometry affects the electric field distribution, I wouldn't get surprised if this arrangement wouldn't work as intended. It may be also possible that the flow of lithium along surface disrupts the fragile ordered character of surface layer.

Quote from Alan Smith

I do wonder what - if devoid of experiment- is the point of it?

In physics experiment goes first, but Lipinski bros did experiments and when they later failed, then the possible causes may be subject of public discussions in similar way, like failed replications of cold fusion at MIT (insufficient hydrogen saturation) and so on. It could help the later replicators, who would dare to go in this direction again. If we wouldn't learn from failed experiments, then we are predestined to repeat them for ever.

Quote from Zephir_AWT

Lipinski did use more like 5000 - 7000 V and he applied it to protons,

No! Best result have been 100eV! Read the patents!