Posts by magicsound

Quote from Eric Walker

Weren't the characteristic x-rays missing, which one would guess would have been overlaid on top of the possible bremsstrahlung curve as narrow peaks? And also the fact that no coincidence measurements were made at the time, because the GM counter wasn't working

Any narrow x-ray peaks would have come from, and could have identified specific nuclear reaction paths. But if such peaks were there (and we did look), they were hidden in the broad-band emission, not overlaid on top of it. So the only conclusion we might reach is that any such peaks were of substantially lower amplitude than the braking radiation, which was broad band and free of detectable peaks.

Regarding the absence of correlated GMC signal, here's an excerpt from our formal paper (currently under peer review):

No radiation signal above background was detected by the GMC320+ Geiger-Muller counter during this time. It should be noted that this is an inexpensive instrument with poor sensitivity, especially to low-energy (<100 keV) gamma radiation. Post experiment testing of the GMC320+ and modeling with the spectrum detected by the scintillator suggested the GMC320+ should only have seen a small number of counts above background. Depending upon the unknown time spread of the scintillator detected signal (up to 4 hours), this may not have been discernible above the background counts in the GMC320+.

Further details of the analysis can be found at http://goo.gl/DOiXYe

Quote from Eric Walker

that particular run was suggestive at best, and possibly artifact. Do you disagree with this assessment? Note that the announcement that was made at the time sounded very different than this summary.

BobG is sometimes overly enthusiastic, as befits his role of "chief facilitator". After the post-investigations I described, I now think the data is more than suggestive. No plausible mechanism for a measurement error or artifact has been found, though it's still possible. That is why I encourage ongoing informed questions, and will add suggested tests as time and facilities allow.

Quote from THHuxley

(1) The x-ray results are very regular, and do not show any of the peaks normally found in x-ray spectra. That is both positive and negative in its implications.
(2) The (not definitive) excess heat data does not correlate with the x-ray data in any helpful way - they are displaced by 24 hours. Thus the two data sets must be considered independently and do not provide any cross-validation.

So now as for the interpretation of the unusual x-ray results - I'd welcome the considered MFMP analysis.

1) We believe the spectral curve suggests inner Bremsstrahlung, though we have not reached consensus on its origin.

2) The 4-hour integration interval to which the spectrum corresponds was also the beginning of the power cycling that we proposed as the initiator of excess heat.

We have been careful to not claim unequivocal evidence of excess heat in this experiment. Known sources of possible measurement error include thermocouple drift and physical asymmetry of the apparatus. Nevertheless, in several experiments, the fueled side has always moved toward higher temperature than the null side, never the reverse. In our most recent run (GS 5.3) the thermocouple data was confirmed by simultaneous differential temperature measurement using our Optris camera.

@THH, your constructive criticism will be welcome. But please review the experiment and its data for context before raising substantive objections. The main document is available with further links to the data, at http://goo.gl/z5aoBY

Thanks for your expression of trust Eric. However, it's important to emphasize that what counts is data and procedure, not faith and trust. In the case of the broad-band gamma spectrum we detected, our data was intensely scrutinized and discussed here and on QuantumHeat. We tested every proposed artifact mechanism and found no correlation that would explain our data.

For example, we looked at available solar event (cosmic ray) data from nearby observatories, and found nothing above the usual background during the time when the gamma spectrum was seen. We also looked at the possibility of Radon release from the environment, and published a comparison of Radon daughter gamma spectra compared to our data, again with no correlation. Then we ran an extended test of the spectrometer with a spark plug mounted directly in front of the scintillator and connected to a Ford Model T spark coil. The resulting 15 kV spark discharge at ~100 Hz produced enough RF to completely saturate a nearby radio receiver, but no trace of interference was seen in the simultaneous gamma spectrometer data.

The results of those investigations were posted here, in reply to objections raised specifically by Thomas Clarke. Instead of acknowledging our replies, he simply left the discussion. There were no further suggestions of plausible artifact, though we haven't stopped trying to think of any. Unfortunately our first try at self-replication didn't yield convincing results, and further replications will continue to watch for a similar signal.

AlanG

At the risk of being accused of doxxing, I will point out that Randombit0's avatar image appears to be Yulia Efimik, from Yekaterinberg (photographed by Andrei Aleshyn) I have emailed her to ask if she is Rossi.

AVG detected a trojan payload and blocked the download for me. I agree, this kind of hazard is all too common on the web, so odds are it was not directed, just coincidental.

One other thought though - whoever collected the image to use on the business card was probably exposed to the trojan payload. Maybe the card is infected....or has hidden data. Is there a steganographer in the house?

In reply to the several comments above on MFMP's work, here's a document summarizing our recent experiments and ongoing plans. The content is based on a talk I just gave at the Anthropocene Institute in Menlo Park (Silicon Valley). Please post or quote this document ONLY by reference to the link below, so that ongoing revisions and additions will propagate to all online copies.

http://goo.gl/Zo0Yr9

Alan Goldwater
MFMP

I think the explanation is more mundane. A Faraday cage (grounded enclosure) can act as a resonant cavity for microwaves. Any conductive pipe or wire leading away from a spot opposite the grounding point will then act as a ground-plane antenna. Even the outer shield of a coax wire can behave this way. Or a metal gas/vacuum manifold tube.

Such resonant structures will likely have a series of sharp peaks and nulls, related to the physical dimensions of the enclosure. But if the stimulus is broad-band RF noise from some process in the reactor, all the peaks will be stimulated to some extent. This hypothesis can be tested by spectrum analysis of the external RF noise while making changes to the apparatus (grounding point etc).

Alan Smith reported some success solving a similar problem in this way - eliminating heater waveform noise in cell instrumentation.

@ Peter Ekstrom
Sorry, that reference was in a previous post by AlainCo. Here's the link again:

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1510/1510.06081.pdf

I wonder if Peter could offer his impression of Dubinko's paper cited above. It seems rigorous in development and clear in presentation.
For me it was the high point of the ICCF19 program (other than Padua itself).

AlanG

I think Axil is unclear on the real-world physical limits of engineering. THz signals are not even remotely possible from affordable electronics. Here's the kind of system that would be needed, based on interference of two GaAs laser diodes. It produces 0.1 mW average power at 1.5 THz, and costs $165K.
http://www.mtinstruments.com/downloads/Terahertz Parametric Oscillator TPO-1500 v4.pdf
Superwave-like signals are possible and affordable though. I'm using a $300 class D (PWM) audio amplifier to drive up to 600 watts at 4 ohms, with a waveform like this:

Here's an audio file with the superwave fundamental swept from 50 Hz to 5 kHz. I loop the file for continuous output
https://goo.gl/4iF2up

@axil It doesn't need to be magnetic. See 10.1038/nature08318 for an experimental demonstration of visible light SPASER emission at ~530 nm (blue-green) from prepared nano particles.

Some background at https://www.technologyreview.c…smallest-laser-ever-made/

Thanks Wyttenbach for the pointer to Stockman's work!

@axil thanks for finding that really Cool paper by Hivet et.al. - in fact 10 degrees Kelvin cool. It certainly supports your focus on the weird behavior possible with quantum polaritons, even if they turn out not to be relevant to LENR.

One tantalizing hint is the importance of lattice defects in the semiconductor cavity for the asymmetric generation of monopole-like soliitons. See "Methods" on page 8.
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1204/1204.3564.pdf
It immediately made me think of Storms' NAE, though I suspect he would scoff at the connection.

@AlanS

I think that if the coupling was purely inductive, some phase shift would be visible. I saw none in my testing.

@AlanS

It may be helpful to contemplate whether the signal seen on the TC is inductively-coupled, purely resistive leakage, or a combination of both.

Your finding suggests the last option, and this can be further investigated by comparing the signal on a TC with separated leads to that on a TC with the leads twisted on the portion leading away from (or along side) the heater coil. You might also measure the signal on a TC arranged close to the reactor but not touching it, thus breaking the conduction path.

AlanG

Here's my paper with experiment results, from about a year ago:

https://goo.gl/Ydhft6

It is an interesting paper. However, the bold conclusions are based primarily on the output of the "Rudra" detector, which is not described in any detail. The pulsed arc power supply is likely to cause substantial RF emission and sensitive detectors of all kinds are potentially subject to data corruption by such an environment.

The metal reactor chamber will shield such emission if properly grounded, but the wiring that feeds the arc will radiate strongly. The photos and description of the reactor don't show enough detail to determine if, for example, properly shielded wire was used.

Are you volunteering Abd? We would love to have your clear thinking and experience contribute to the organization and analysis of our work.

Just running a Glowstick experiment takes me about 2 weeks to set up and a month (or hopefully more) to calibrate and run a single protocol. Post-experiment analysis can be equally labor-intensive, and would be a daunting burden without our group of skilled volunteers, including Ecco and Sanjeev.

GS5-3 was a close replication of the prior run (GS5-2) and still took that time, generating nearly 1 TB of data and video. All the data is streamed in near-real-time and available in one or more public archives.

So dig in, pick a specific time or parameter space and tell the world what you find. We need all the help we can get!

AlanG

@axil & Andrea

If you follow the link at the end of my last post, you will see the remarkable resemblance of the "blue light" image to a Fusor operating with Nitrogen plasma. I think this resemblance is more than coincidental, and would like to consider possible physical configurations of a tubular form-factor reactor that could support Fusor-like electrostatic confinement. This might include nano scale quantum effects such as SPPs.