Posts by backyardfusion

Quote from Tarun

Yes, I agree with you. There are so many more variables to try out. Probably this will simply confuse our young replicator here. So lets keep all this in mind and go ahead with something simple at first.
(Of course, this is only my suggestion, he can start with something complex if he likes. )

Edit: looks like you edited your post when I was typing, but the point has been made.

Actually, one of the main goals of my reactor (reusability) is so I can do just that. Specifically I feel that the main failure on behalf of the LENR community is researchers not replicating their results, as well as not testing the same reactor design with a variety of calorimetry and heating methods. My reactor ideally (using the bolt system, although I am considering other reusable methods as well) should be able to have the inner reactor chamber switched for various materials, and tested with various fuel combinations. If the furnace/industrial oven method does not produce excess heat, I will then text it using the same heating method as Parkhomov. If I can get it so the reactor doesn't screw itself over after a single test as is common with these reactors apparently, I could use the same reactor to test a variety of heating/inner tube/fuel methods. Probably wishful thinking, but it's a nice goal to have I suppose.

Quote from Tarun

In any case, I suggest follow these steps (if you are patient, you = backyardfusion)
1- pure Ni in Alumina tube
2- pure Ni in SS container
3- Ni + alumina in SS container
Of course LAH added to it in all cases. Actually there is no harm in trying the 3rd option if you are impatient.

Thanks, that sounds like a really good idea. I think I might work backwards, starting with 3 and then moving up. I can then perform the 3 'fuel' combinations using both the oven heating method and direct electrical heating.
I'm not the most patient usually, but good quality of experimental data is not something you can, and should, rush.

Once again, thanks everyone for all the help! I do have one more question however: All of these 'hot' reactors seem to have 2 tubes, an outer 'sleeve' and an inner reactor tube (Mine included). Is there any particular reason for that beyond handling?

Quote from Ecco the Dolphin

Why use an inner stainless steel tube? This has been already tried recently by Denis Vasilenko (FiraxTech) with it containing only Ni+LiAlH4 like you're planning, and his water flow calorimeter didn't show measurable excess heat.

When Parkhomov did that with one of his recent attempts he also apparently mixed some alumina powder with the fuel. Generally speaking, there are hints that catalytic reactions could be occurring inside these reactors, but a stable metal-oxide ceramic support (such as alumina, silica, mullite etc) for the "fuel" is needed for them to possibly occur. Confining the powder in a stainless steel container will inhibit any related effect.

If you really have to invent something, try building a water flow calorimeter and test with it a 100% faithful Parkhomov reactor replication.
Besides, if one starts changing things around, that can't be really called a replication anymore.

Ahh, I was not aware of that. Thanks, I'll change the design then. I was not trying to 'invent' anything, although I must admit reusability was a goal of the reactor. On that note, I will go for a 100% faithful reactor replication and save any fancy ideas for later!

Quote from Majorana

Welcome to the LENR community. It is great and relieving to see that there are young people like you with new ideas who want to forward LENR!

Heating the Ni-LiAlH4 in an industrial oven is a good idea, because it could help to rule out (or confirm) the theory, that besides a critical temperature and pressure also an external electromagnetic stimulation is necessary for LENR to occur.

Yes I have read in multiple places that many believe that electromagnetic stimulation is a LENR requirement. I don't see how this could be, but then again I'm not really in a position to judge the theories of others without having one myself!

"But please: Do not try to work with LiAlH4 on your own or together with your grandfather. It is poisonous, it can chemically burn your skin, and it is highly inflammable."

I was planning on trying to get my extension teacher to help handle the chemicals and such in the school lab: I've handle plenty of flammable substances before (I make my own rocket motors) but chemical skin burns would be new.... If I was to undergo these experiments I can assure you it will be with the upmost safety in mind.

"The LENR community has a big problem as you certainly know. The scientific community laughs at us and considers LENR to be fringe science. Right now scientists and the public laugh at us and think we are wackos - but they ignore us because we are not causing damage to anyone or anything. If you die, because of an accident with LiAlH4 this could kill LENR as a whole. If you are killed or injured, this forum and probably a lot of independent LENR projects will be killed too."

As I stated, I will be handling all chemicals with incredibly strict safety rules and the chances are will only be carried about by one of the teachers at my school. However if you really feel that the potential for mishandling could end in the majority of LENR research being destroyed I will consider alternatives to LiAlH4. Also if mishandling was to happen you should not worry, I would not let any sort of press attention come out of it, nor would I inform any members of the LENR community in order to prevent any bad rep being a result as a mistake on my behalf.
I am however determined to conduct my own experiments so I will not be giving up if that is what you wish of me.

"As to the black spray paint, it will probably degrade at the temperatures the reactor reaches."
Haha I know that, but I've been told that the 'Nuclear Active Environment' is incredibly delicate and I was just covering all my bases. The spray paint is just so it looks cool going into the oven

Quote from Majorana

Ecco the Dolphin wrote:
Majorana wrote:
Heating the Ni-LiAlH4 in an industrial oven is a good idea, because it could help to rule out (or confirm) the theory, that besides a critical temperature and pressure also an external electromagnetic stimulation is necessary for LENR to occur.

Brian Ahern tried heating his reactors in an oven and that and it didn't seem to work. Try checking out his "replication" thread here: Brian Ahern: Parkhomov replication

Maybe so, but due to the lack of documentation of Brian Aherns work... I feel forced to ignore his claims.

Display More

I read through that experiment thread: I have to say his lack of updates and information on the tests is rather odd. I can understand one would be annoyed at a negative test result, but that is just as important if not more then a positive test result.

Thanks guys for the responses, they're very helpful!

Quote from ogfusionist

If you have heated laboratory grade pyrex tubing in a burner flame, it softens slowly. As 830 C was approached on the reactor, the run away quickly melted the tube housing the reactor fuel. Thermocouple tracing shot above 1000 C. If I were to try a repeat, a mixer on the hydrogen supply to dilute helium into the reactor is what I'd use. Again when the fusion triggers all hell breaks loose; something like having captured the sun in a bottle. Very similar basic fusion process.

If you try a repeat spend some time assuring that the hydrogen gas, nickelous oxide and FiberFrax are sulfur free. A silver getter immediately before the catalyst but with its temperature kept near 500 C is an absolute requirement. My lab supply was hydrogen boil off from liquid hydrogen but the pipes leading to the lab introduced enough H2S to poison the catalyst unless a getter was used just before the catalyst. Also, use an alumina (silica free) tube to house the reactor charge. Its translucent properties are very revealing, the area opposite the reactor charge will glow very bright when fusion initiates. The idea of having a light pipe in the reactor to measure brightness temperature is also interesting

Warning at my age reality and dreams get confused although I recall this experiment as one of the big surprises in my life.

Woah, that is a serious increase in temperature. While I currently can't begin work on your reactor, I would certainly like to build a replication in the coming months. Unfortunately I'm only in Year 8 so a lot of the equipment you guys have access to is far out of my reach so it might be difficult for me to produce the reactor.

Hey, guys. I'm new around here and to LENR as a whole (Only discovered it what, 3-4 days ago now?) and I was just wondering if anyone could find any obvious flaws in my plan to replicate the Parkhomov experiment? I'm using a double fuel load, but considering reducing it down to 1g for simplicity and consistency compared to Parkhomov's reactor.
FUSE1 Reactor Manual

I'm currently over in America for a few months and my parents won't let me build the reactor over here without my granddad (I'm 14) so I won't be able to start construction for another 8 or so weeks (That's when I get back to Australia). I'm planning to learn as much as I can about LENR and chemistry as a whole in that time.

If anyone could point out the flaws in the reactor design (I'm assuming there are probably a few, I know there are several grammatical errors I must fix for a fact) that would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks guys!

P.S Does anyone think that adding black spray paint to the outer ceramic tube be avoided (messing with the experiment)? I just like my experiments/stuff in black

So let's say I repeated the experiment. Fusionist would you be able to tell me the sort of levels of excess heat you think you experienced?

Quote from ogfusionist

Wow, 14 years old. Thanks for your well thought out responses. Renews my hope that we may survive a bit longer, although Yellowstone may cause a fresh start. Forgive my jaded outlook, I'm very near 90 years old.

I'll pass on the secret of a working fusion reactor. Sulfur is the principal catalyst poison and can be effectively controlled with a silver getter. The catalyst is sub micron particle size nickelous oxide deposited onto an alumina FiberFrax substrate. The catalyst array is positioned into an alumina tube that is heated to 830 C with a wire wound resistance heater. Hydrogen gas passing through this reactor will fuse to produce helium with the production of heat. Water at high pressure is used as the heat exchange medium to drive a turbine while controlling the heat to stop runaway meltdown. It works, I've had a working prototype in my lab. Now you have the secret, good luck with it. I'll leave you to consider the method for utilization. I've publicized this to minimize any threat to your safety.

Sorry for being so venomous, I have a short temper, sorry. Yellowstone I must admit is a constant source of worry for me, although I am rational enough to realise it is only one of several hundred thousand pretty ways for humanity to go bang. Which of course only makes me worry more

Noted your method, although haven't searched through it technically yet just mindlessly jotted it down. You have one in your lab working? Wow, that is incredible if true. Would you be able to tell what it's COP is? You mentioned driving a turbine so I'm assuming it's higher then 5.

Quote from ogfusionist

"The topic is making it work reliably, with high COP and change the world's perspective on it. After that, it's getting it to market and into the hands of every person on the globe."

Let's see how well you have thought this out. You've received the formula for constructing a fusion reactor that produces unlimited power from recirculating hydrogen with practically no consumption of the hydrogen. Very cheap to construct and would power every household. Now tell me what your next move would be. Careful, you might want to research the fate of previous inventors that jumped the gun. Real threats are terminated one way or another.

What would you get into the hands of every person on the globe? The chance for no more electric and gas bills? Then what?

I like these questions. They make you think about the economical side of LENR.

First I spend half a year building several prototypes. I then secretly distributing the invention amongst several trusted, smart individuals. I then back up everything I know about it across multiple servers on 3 continents. So, if I get killed or whatever the invention is now in the hands of many. I then go online and simultaneously release the information across hundreds of websites and forums across the internet. I do a major publicity stunt where I power an entire town with it, or something to that effect. I send out prototypes to universities for review.

If I get killed or whatever, there are now hundreds of thousands of people across the globe that know about this new invention, thousands that have seen it in work and dozens of people examining already made ones. I have several trusted individuals also launching to market alongside me in separate companies.
Ideally, that's what I would do. That's because I'm not concerned with making a shit-ton of money, a view I think plenty of people on this forum share.

You see, the difference between then and now is that you can distribute the knowledge amongst millions and millions of people with the click of a button. You might be able to kill me easily, but you would be hard pressed to destroy my work entirely.

"What would you get into the hands of every person on the globe? The chance for no more electric and gas bills? Then what?"
I think you misunderstand me. I would be offering to build power stations or individual home units that give you electricity at a very small fraction of the cost. Not free, just very cheap to run. After that however you have to think broad. One that comes to mind immediately is aerospace applications. Such an incredible source of energy could be of tremendous use. One could even argue that it could revolutionise space travel. Alongside that, you would be doing this little thing called running a company. Nothing is finished however and improvements would constantly be worked on. Besides, what's stopping me from using the money I make to create even more products?

The point I am trying to make is that the world is not what you think, its much more free spirited. And there seem to be very significant holes in your arguments that I think you should reconsider. It is true that whoever succeeds in LENR fully might well find themselves in a car 'accident' organised by a big oil company. Yet the idea and their successes will not be contained within them if they have a good heart. It would be on the internet.

Maybe I am naive. I'm only 14 after all, I haven't experienced the world that you folks might have. But I know that if I was in that position, I know exactly what I would do.

"Fusion must wait its turn."

What, like someone in line to get into a concert?
"Oh sorry, we can't let you change the world for another-" Checks Watch "200 or so years. Sorry about that, the Great Overlords Of The World Economy said so." You said got back to the topic on hand, that is not what the topic is. The topic is making it work reliably, with high COP and change the world's perspective on it. After that, it's getting it to market and into the hands of every person on the globe.
Not how many years we will have to wait before 'the overseers' say we can.

Quote from ogfusionist

"Stating that "Volcanic activity in one large scale eruption overwhelms many years of our contribution of CO2, SO2 and H2S" reveals a reliance on very poor sources, which suggests you are happy to follow someone else's agenda."

No, I watched and read the reports from the Mt. St. Helens volcanic eruption. I'm relying on good sources. Do you have someone else's agenda that you're following?

In 2013, we pumped 39.8 BILLION tons of CO2 into the Earth's atmosphere. A decent sized puff from a volcano would only consist of a fraction of that. Not to mention that the amount we pump into the Earths atmosphere is increasing every year.
It is true that it is natural for the Earth to heat up like it is but to say that a SINGLE eruption could overwhelm YEARS of our CONTRIBUTIONS of C02 is ridiculous. That would mean roughly 100 billion tons of CO2.

Quote from ogfusionist

"A CENTURY LONG? Screw that. If I get a reactor that has a COP of over 6, I'm releasing it commercially and the construction open source ASAP."

Fortunately there's the overseers of the World Economy that you would have to contend with. Your release and open source construction would have to wait until the effect would be considered beneficial.

Your kidding. Overseers of the 'World Economy' will stop me? That is ridiculous. Please, let's be a little more modern and realistic here.

Quote from ogfusionist

Nanoscale reactors seem to tap into a mysterious energy source that has been referred to as "free". That's what I was referring to. Transmutation is responsible either at low amu or relativily high amu. Now it appears that it's not a free energy source. I'll have to revise my definition.

What devastating effects fossil fuel usage on the world? Carbon dioxide is the product and is quickly dissolved in the ocean or lakes and accounts for mineral growth. I measured the CO2 level in the atmosphere 50 years ago and see the same level now. Of course, the vast quantity of water will establish the level and maintain it constant. We like to overemphasize our piddling effect on the global situation. Volcanic activity in one large scale eruption overwhelms many years of our contribution of CO2, SO2 and H2S. It will probably be more than a 2-decade long transition to ease the economic effect, probably at least a century or more.

A CENTURY LONG? Screw that. If I get a reactor that has a COP of over 6, I'm releasing it commercially and the construction open source ASAP. I was not just referring tot he CO2 levels. Although if you do some basic ecology, there is more gaseous carbon dioxide in the ecosystem then ever before. Before you argue with me, go on the internet and search what I mean.
I'm referring to habitat destruction and atmospheric pollution mainly. Also, fossil fuel's have maybe 25-50 year of fuel yet. Sure, if you want to wait to then to switch to another energy source go ahead. Let's watch anarchy unfold while eating popcorn and pointing at all the people killing each other.
If I had the chance to flood the world with the cleanest, cheapest, most powerful energy source ever discovered by man I wouldn't hesitate.

So the consensus at the moment is that no excess heat was observed?

Quote from FrankCensor

I was a member of the local sceptics meetup group. I removed myself from the group. Why? It's a religion/cult that I would prefer to stay away from. They preach atheism. Look at this link this guy just posted. Yet another diatribe about the atheism religion. A true atheist would not go to such great lengths to preach and push his viewpoints onto others. A true atheist would just declare there is no such thing as god/religion, stick the matter deep up his behind, and go on with his life content. That's not enough for this organization. They form coalitions and recruit new members. Here they are bugging their way into the LENR controversy.

Scientific skepticism has nothing whatsoever to do with religion. And whenever you see LENR being bashed and then the bait/switch topic of religion comes up then beware and watch out. You are dealing with the organization. No doubt the old adage applies: if you don't know what it's about it's about money. It won't be long before they're passing the hat around and asking you to donate your children's inheritance to their cause.

indeed. I'm an aethist myself but this guy and the group of guys like him are far from aethism- they are downright insane!

Quote from ogfusionist

"Imagine what could of happened if he let the world know about what was happening inside of the ECAT that makes it tick so well. We would of had hundreds of people working around the globe on getting cold fusion to market, and the whole thing could of happened a lot faster."

Yeah I can imagine the impact on the World Economy that "Free Energy" would have. Without a great deal of planning the switch from burning oil for heat to hydrogen fusion would be devastating. Fortunately we have very intelligent planners in control that will ease introduction of this transition. Many people depend on their survival related to jobs in oil production. I like your reference to the ECAT ticking so well, sort of like a time bomb.

You raise a good point there that I hadn't thought about. It could definitely have a devastating effect. As for those people who depend on oil production for a job: No amount of easing will help that problem, unless you're talking about a 2-decade long transition. If it wasn't for the devastating effects fossil fuel production and usage was having on the world, I would be fine with that. But action will have to be more drastic then that and it probably will be.

Also, there is nothing "Free" about LENR reactors. They cost less for energy production that's for sure, but everything has a price.

If I was in his shoes, I would probably be a lot more open about how the E-CAT works. I say this because it appears to be the most advanced and refined LENR reactor around. If he had of been able to deliver the ECAT in a reasonable timeframe I would say that the privatisation of his work is 100% perfectly acceptable and encouraged. However, the huge delays and subsequent secrecy shrouding the ECAT have robbed the world of what could be the most promising energy source known to mankind for several years now.
I respect the man greatly, but I think that not making the ECAT even slightly more open-source then it is currently doesn't play nicely with the open-science trend in LENR research that has proven to be of great use. Alas, his reactors are starting to be (crudely)replicated anyway and it could only be a matter of months before someone develops a reactor on par with his.

Imagine what could of happened if he let the world know about what was happening inside of the ECAT that makes it tick so well. We would of had hundreds of people working around the globe on getting cold fusion to market, and the whole thing could of happened a lot faster.

In saying that, I really hope he gets to market soon, he deserves the success that would accompany. I think he should make the US Patent open-source though: That would help the cause of LENR dramatically.