Posts by RobertBryant

    It's reasonable to conclude that at the end of the boil-off, when voltage is 50 V and the liquid water is only a few millimeters, the cathode can easily reach the melting temperature of the plastic support.

    Please Ascoli65 explain with physics rather than words

    that it is reasonable

    and that the cathode can easily reach...175C

    Without numbers, formulas and equations,

    Physics is only foamy philosophy.

    You said it could be explained easily ? Correct?

    The only absolute value which has remained is truth"

    Do both: LENR and Ceramic Artistry.

    Perhaps I could open an online shop for miniature ceramic LENR curios..

    Cliffordian nuclei and Hannukah meshuggenons

    ** At a recent meeting on Solid State Fusion [26], Edward Teller proposed that a neutral Schlepton takes part in such nuclear processes. Our own discussions on this point led us to name such a particle as Meschuggenon, a name more in keeping with the nature of this field of research. 1990 Fleischman and Pons et al…Vaw31wux2Mw4Gf1F3GQ4A0OrQ

    As for the effect of the molten plastic, it doesn’t affect the foam. As already said, this melting can be easily explained with the high temperature reached at the lowest tip of the cathode,

    BTW Ascoli65... apropos your philosophical Szpak DNA

    could you show the forum

    with physics rather than philosophy

    how the lowest tip of the the cathode

    can melt PCFTE with an MP of >175C

    when the LiOD electrolyte it contacts is <105C???

    and when the current thru the cathode/anode ceases

    after the electrolyte level falls below the cathode???

    you said "easily" ...correct?

    I am fundamentally curios to see your physics in writing

    rather than your foam.

    "The only absolute value which has remained is truth"

    a fascinating intellectual puzzle, a harsh mistress and part of our duty

    Has it got easier without the wet electrochemical cell used by F&P..?

    Certainly D.D. Dominguez, D.A. Kidwell, G.K. Hubler, S-F Cheng, M.A. Imam, K.S. Grabowski and D.L. Knies U

    at the Navy Laboratory found LENR a harsh mistress..with two years of negative expts..its lucky the US govt was paying..

    So the boiling point of a 50/50 Li/H2O solution is about 175 C ?

    You mean LiOH/H2O...

    Depends on your calculation...also initial solution volume and final solution volume need

    to be realistic... if you have 0.1 ml water final.....this may be splattered away instantly

    lets say 20 ml reduces to 0.5 mls D20 .... still pretty splatterable

    this means 0.05g LiOD per 0,5 mls D2O..LiOD MW 25

    moles/kg = 4

    2x0.51x4= 4C rise in BP

    Check my figures.. mental arith.. need to catch a plane early tomorrow am..

    Some L-F members, even if skeptic toward this hypothesis, are interested in clarifying this foam issue and posed a series of alternative explanation that have helped to improve the interpretation of the F&P experiment. Others seem to have entered directly in the fogging operative mode, trying to boycott the discussion by shifting attention to marginal aspects and asking specious questions

    Please don't fog with some and other..

    Be specific Ascoli65.. Graci

    very few are interested in shedding light on this foam issue.

    WRONG.. I am extremely interested... have you done your due diligence and evaporated 0.1M NaOH in H20 by boiling yet , Ascoli65.???

    Tell me how many km of foam form..

    Maybe tomorrow after your dreams... Buona notte..sogni d'oro

    Buona notte from NZ[email protected]@@[email protected]@@[email protected]@@[email protected]@@portrait=0

    Even at this very moment, almost 30 years later the reports keep coming in

    The work at Technova continues. Akito Takahashi is the first to admit his and his researchers' debt to Fleischmann and Pons.

    December 9 from Kobe.".. right on cue


    After the heat burst event, small (2-3 W) excess power level sustained for a day. Then we increased the H-gas pressure of SC (storage chamber) to ca. 1.0MPa to feed to RC with [120, 80] W heaters condition; we then started to observe rather slow H-absorption with significant endothermic condition. After saturation of H/Ni ratio, we increased RC temperature to have observed weeks-sustaining excess thermal power (ca. 12-14W in earlier weeks).…Sample_and_H-Gas/download

    So, we should believe that the NHE program - which did cost dozens of M$ and involved the major companies and several important universities in Japan - has failed

    the reasons for the cessation of the NHE program in1998 are a lot more complicated than Ascoli65 might suggest

    in his hundreds of million dollar foam thesis

    "Official Japanese New Hydrogen Energy (Cold Fusion) Program to End— Missed Opportunities and Botched Management…Vaw3MZrmnfvMgnbQk2sBtD7i3

    Infinite Energy reported on the astonishing weaknesses of the NHE program in Vol. 2, No. 10, published after the Sixth International Conference on Cold fusion (ICCF6), which was held in October 1996 in Hokkaido, Japan. Contributing Editor Jed Rothwell pointed out several major technical problems with the research in his ICCF6 review and in An Open Letter to Japan's NHE Lab Directorate, written in Japanese and English, on page 28 of Issue #10. The letter includes 17 references to the literature, and it lists concrete problems with the protocols and materials used at the NHE lab, including low cell temperatures, improper cell and cathode materials, inadequate preparation and pre-testing of cathodes, and so on. These technical criticisms did not originate with Infinite Energy.

    They were suggested by Drs. Stanley Pons, Martin Fleischmann, John Bockris, Edmund Storms, T. Mizuno, Hideo Ikegami and the others cited in the footnotes. We pointed out that the French Atomic Energy Commission has successfully replicated the Pons-Fleischmann IMRA boil-off experiments (originally reported in Physics Letters A, 176 (1993) 118-129), because they were more careful about replicating every detail of the experiment, without making any changes.

    The NHE is staffed mostly by scientists and engineers new to the cold fusion field... They are on 6 to 12 month assignments to the NHE lab.

    Introduction to Alfven modes

    Introduction to the interaction between energetic particles and Alfven eigenmodes in toroidal plasmas..Y. Todo Dec,2018


    but then so is Wyttenbach's hypothesis of the rotator collapse mechanism

    in lithium/nickel/hydrogen LENR

    "" The occurrence of an Alfven sheer wave condition, that helps to stabilize the toroidally distorted Li electron orbits is highly likely""…context=ProjectUpdatesLog

    But I think I can see the foam in the videos available on internet (2-3),

    Ascoli65 has developed his foam thesis from humble beginnings

    in September as 'a sort of fóam"

    to an incredibly differentiated mutant..

    persistent... brasserie... rising ...residual ... stationary... hundreds of million dollar! foam

    all on the basis of a low resolution Krivit video.

    As already said, this melting can be easily explained with the high temperature reached at the lowest tip of the cathode, which cooled very

    So Ascoli65 can EASILY explain how the huge cathode can melt the Teflon support with heating equations or is this a verbal 'waving of the hands''?

    Perhaps that burden does belong to Ascoli,

    The burden of proof belongs to Ascol65i and only Ascoli65.. who alleges that LiOD foams.

    In reality ,unless there is detergent or surfactant added to the D2O, 0.1M LiOD doesn't foam..

    which is why F&P made specific reference to this fact..

    from their own their learning curve..and advised the Japanese replicators

    to avoid surfactant treated D20 from the manufacturer.

    However Ascoli, because of his contrary bias, interprets this very cautionary advice about surfactants,

    to the Japanese , as certain proof that F&P had foam in their 1992 experiment.

    He has only to ask M.Staker if he had foam problems.. and how he overcame ~~2014

    when Staker replicatedthe F&P..method AND result.. M.Staker is only an email away... and very much alive

    [email protected] and Phone: 410 617 5188 USA

    but that is one email too far for Ascoli65... who will milk Krivit's 1993? ?? low resolution video for all its worth

    ... knowing full well that Fleischmann is dead 6 years... and cannot respond.

    I appreciate your offer, Paradigmoia, to verify this but even if you come up

    with videod evidence that D2O /0.1M LiOD do not foam

    Ascoli will find some way to discredit or discount your proof..

    such as M&F didn't know about detergent

       or added detergent on purpose to enchant or deceive..

    ..or you have different testtubes from F&P etc etc

    I expect Ascoli to be here in 12 months time ..with the same Krivit video... and the same allegations.

    because of his (or her or its) obsessive confirmation bias ..... with no attempt to verify, by communication or experiment ,his foamy allegations and an instant exclusion of any replication by anyone anywhere on the basis of the Original SIN   FOAM in 1992 of the enchanting and deceitful Fleischmann....

    I expected a better quality response from the number one LENR website than insults,

    Ascoli has not responded to

    1. The fact that LiOD solutions do not generate foam when boiled

    2. The fact that when 0.24% LiOD solution evaporates it leaves a thin coat on the bottom of the testtube which is opaque to light

    3. The fact that LiOD is hygroscopic so that such coats several hours later exposed to moist air will disappear to the bottom of the tt.

    4. The fact that he is entirely reliant on to a poor resolution video to misrepresent this thin coating as foam

    5.The fact that the electrodes were at least at a temperature of 175C at the end. There is no way that the electrodes could remain conducting

    electricity to achieve this temperature if the LiOD solution had evaporated at 101.5 C.

    The heat generated was not coming from current but from some reaction inside the electrode.

    6. In addition Ascoli has never responded to my point that the inflection point that he refers to has at least a +/- 3 hour error either side

    of his indicated time point because of the extent to which he has falsely blurred the data by photoshopping the graph...

    where will you see such photoshopping done in any scientific paper???

    Ascoli sits at his armchair generating beer foam pictures and alleging fraud/enchantment/ineptness, but expects others such as me verify LiOD 0.24% do not generate foam... when it is self-evident from known chemical family properties

    2. to contact others such as Krivit to verify that Krivits video was untampered with... when that is the lynchpin of Ascoli's evidence

    3. to contact other researchers about the Ascolifoam issue when it is his anomalous issue

    It is Ascoli who should be offering proof

    1. that 0.25% LiOD does foam

    2. that LiOD is not hygroscopic

    3.that current can still flow and heat an electrode to >175C when there is no electrolyte solution

    Does Johnny- come lately Paradigmoia have a better response...."then just saying á better response..??????

    the cathode is more than a few tens of degrees warmer that the water, just for the joule effect;

    c - in the very last phase of the boil-off, all current is forced to pass through the lowest and very thin portion of the cathode in contact with the support.

    If all the water boils off at 101.5 C

    this must mean that "" all current is forced to pass through the lowest and very thin portion of the cathode through the support"" heating it to about 175-300C

    which means that PCTFE is a conductor!!!!!!

    Ascoli65 reveals more and more undiscovered chemical properties

    ...LiOH foams,

    LiOH is nonhygroscopic

    and PTFCE conducts electricity.

    What is he trying to accomplish

    Ascoli65 asserts that he is trying to save the world .. from Fleischmann deception.... in 1992...27 years ago

    which is convenient since Fleischmann died in 2012?

    This is evidently due to the fact that, at the end of the drying period, a thick layer of residual and persistent foam remained at the bottom of the cells. This interpretation

    1. Is this a fact or an interpretation?

    2. how thick is this layer of ''fo(a)m'?..0.1 mm, 0.5 mm, 1 mm, 5 mm 10 cm?