Posts by Curbina

Quote from Rob Woudenberg

It's probably a loose thought but when I compare the hollow electrode of their patent application from Montgomery William Childs regarding a hollow electrode pointing at applying gas flow through the metal layer of such electrode I see some resemblance with the current concept of this Clean Planet patent application where a gas flow through a (multi-layer) metal membrane is claimed to generate excess heat.

Aureon:

Clean Planet:

Both parties have nickel and palladium in mentioned in their claims regarding such ´membrane´ construction.

In Aureon´s case the hollow electrode is part of the plasma generation and thus may receive charged plasma particles which may act as a trigger to activate a heat generating process at or in the membrane of that electrode.

In the case of Clean Planet the activation seems to be related to a certain temperature level (which may generate IR radiation that could trigger the heat generating process.

Display More

In a way yes, but you have to take in account that in the SAFIRE reaction there’s a voltage and self organizing plasma where all the “magic” happens.

MFMP posted a video today that is a translation and also a commentary of a recent presentation by Russian researcher Chizhov, about the detection and shielding of “strange radiation”. A better interpretation of the word that is normally translated as “strange” is offered as “incomprehensible”.

I liked specially the experiments with the Wilson chamber that show clearly there’s some kind of particles being detected, and video of it is presented by Chizhov.

The possibility of shielding the radiation was also studied. In particular these experiments show that the idea proposed to dismiss the existence of “SR” explaining that all the marks are simply dust damage, is very low.

It is a long presentation, but I enjoyed it and it contains a lot of data and experiments to ponder about.

Quote from Stevenson

By carefully reading the Rout and Srinivasan paper(s), you can notice very small details that however can provide some valuable hints on how to detect the unknown radiation:

1. this radiation has a magnetic moment, since it is affected by a magnetic field (they say that in presence of a crossing magnetic field the film is not fogged: this is most probably because radiation particles are deviated laterally). So a magnetic field could be used to focus the radiation. We also know that a number scientists (Urutskoev, just to cite one) described the magnetic properties of Strange Radiation.
2. the radiation has a charge, since it is "intensified" by an electric field. However the charge and kinetc energy are probably quite low, so it cannot detected by proportional counters (ionization chambers). So why the LEC is able to generate a voltage? The reason is that the radiation (and so the charge) is emitted by one of the electrodes and the other is receiving it, this create a potential difference.
3. from what Rout and Srinivasan says, it is quite clear that the radiation has a very low energy, in the order of few eVs. This is the reason why it is not detected by scintillators or other devices designed for high energetic particles/radiations. However if the energy range is in the eV area and it is detected by thermoluminescent detectors and photographic emulsion, it should be also detected by certain type of semiconductor devices and by phoshor screens. The authors actually tested a ZnS screen, but they used a photographic film to record the output: this is not adequately sensitive! A phosphor screen coupled with a photomultiplier should provide some output instead (probably also a silicon PIN or avalanche photodiode would be sufficient).

That paper from Rout is really fascinating, ain’t it? Thanks for bringing those interesting points to attention, Stevenson , this is why I think the LEC is not only a very important device for LENR research but also because it can help shed more light in the “strange radiation” controversy.

Quote from Alan Smith

I just came across this -apologies if it has been posted before- it dates back to 2010.

Inertial Confinement Fusion Propulsion for Deep Space Missions Revisited

George H. Miley and Xiaoling Yang

Department of Nuclear, Plasma, and Radiological Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, 61801

Kirk A. Flippo

P24 Plasma Physics, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, 87545

Laser-driven Inertial Confinement Fusion (ICF) is extremely attractive for deep space propulsion and has been the subject of several conceptual design studies. However, these studies were based on older ICF technology using either “direct “or “in-direct x-ray driven” type target irradiation. This leads to rather low energy gains. Plus, traditional DT fusion was selected, requiring tritium breeding and delivering 80% of the fusion energy in neutrons that cannot be directed thorough an exhaust nozzle. However, important new directions have developed for laser ICF in recent years following the development of “chirped” lasers capable of ultra-short pulses with powers of TW up to a few PW. This has led to the exciting concept of “fast ignition (FI)” where the peta-watt laser beam strikes a pre-compressed target, creating a hot spot in the interior of the target burn that propagates outward into the surrounding fuel. This then gives a much higher energy gain, since part of the input energy required is replaced by the propagating burn.

In the present study, we employ a new type of FI, termed "block ignition". In this approach, a non-laser interaction causes a plasma block to be accelerated into the target to ignite the hot spot. This is very efficient in giving very high gains while maintaining a low electron temperature, allowing ignition of more demanding fusion fuels like p-11B. The p-11B reaction is employed here and releases energy by energetic alphas particles that can be very effectively guided through a magnetic nozzle to produce thrust while avoiding tritium involvement or neutron induced radioactivity. These advances are considered here and are shown to meet and exceed the requirements anticipated (but not then available) for optimum ICF fusion propulsion ship design.

Inertial_Confinement_Fusion_Propulsion_f.pdf

Display More

Thanks Alan Smith , I had not seen this in particular but other very similar to this one, only focused in the hot fusion “inertial confinement” method of fusing those pesky atoms over the Coulomb barrier. But This is still quite “good old fashioned” high temperature/ high pressure fusion.

We know that Miley, Lawrence and Holmlid cooperated and jointly published back around 2009 up to 2011, give or take, and from that interaction they picked up Holmlid’s idea of hydrogen reaching high densities (1x10²⁴ hydrogen atoms per cubic centimeter), only with the difference that this happens within a lattice, and which is still being talked around now in the context of “lattice confinement fusion”.

As NASA has always researched this with a space application focus (in order to justify the research within the Space Agency), finding a way to justify the research as a way to create a system for to space propulsion was a must. We all must remember that the Tokamak reactors were originally conceived as space propulsion devices by Sakharov.

Quote from Rob Woudenberg

nkodama This thread is not meant to promote (your) proposals based on Clean Planet IP but to post information on CP.

Can you please post them in a dedicated thread? Thanks.

Off topic posts moved to Nkodama’s aggregated thread.

Quote from Daniel_G

No Mizuno is not affiliated with IH. The patent quoted was illegal.

I’d say it’s more accurate to mention that the validity of the ownership of the application and/or the authorization to file the application is in dispute. Illegal patents are a completely different think.

Edit to add this link where it explains what would be illegal to patent (or not). Plenty of examples.

https://www.spruson.com/patents/illegal-inventions/

Quote from Navid

What would be the economics of the current tech - I mean do you see this as viable without magic

I am curious about you asking about this, have you lost hope in the Hydrinos?

And, Duh! Y. Iwamura wrote the entire chapters 9 (Heat generation experiments using nano-sized metal composite and hydrogen gas) and 11 (Review of permeation-induced nuclear transmutation reactions)
of the "Cold Fusion" book edited by Biberian, in the last 2020 edition (one can look the abstracts of each chapter at elsevier's site).

https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780128159446/cold-fusion

I bet some members already have the book, you could ask if they can share those chapters.

Quote from Rob Woudenberg

Focussing on the technology again, the big question is what is producing the excess heat in this method?

The only cause I can think of is that excess heat is produced by transmutations occurring in within the mulitlayer metal stack.

Just maybe the inventors carefully kept that information out of the publications and patent applications for good reasons.

They were carefull in wording the application, indeed, to avoid anything to be questioned by the reviewers. However, they have reported transmutations as in this paper with Iwamura as main author from the ICCF 10 (2006):

https://newenergytimes.com/v2/…/2005IwamuraXMT-Ba-Sm.pdf

Thanks Rob Woudenberg , I was thinking that in more than one way this is related to the anomalous heat release observed during permeation of D (and H some times) through PdAg known since 1989 and repeated in 2020 by Fralick at NASA’s Glenn Space research center (some others at Japan replicated this in 2006 and 2011 if I recall correctly). What we don’t really know is how high is the COP that can be achieved on this kind of systems.

Quote from Rob Woudenberg

Atomic Hydrogen is also formed with atomic hydrogen welding.

Atomic hydrogen welding (AHW) is an arc welding process that uses an arc between two tungsten electrodes in a shielding atmosphere of hydrogen.

Different metals or alloys can be welded with this method, e.g. Nickel.

One may wonder whether this allows for forming UDH during AHW and if so, why aren't there any unexpected effects reported.

I think there are, Energetic anomalies have been reported in very simple experiments. Not long ago I started this thread about it:

Production of fuel with COP above 1 (electric energy input/heat energy output) patent about to expire in 2021

Quote from Bruce__H

Thank you for your answers, but I'm afraid that I have not grasped the overall configuration of the equipment used in the experiment.

There is a heating circuit for the oven as designed by its manufacturer. Are you saying that, separate from this, there is another heating wire applied to the reactor that is used to heat it up?

Let us call the power used to drive the heating coils installed in the oven by its manufacturer the "oven input power". And let's call any power used to drive a wire applied directly to the reactor itself the "reactor heater input power". Which of these are you calling the "heater power"?

I don’t know why you ask this, in this case it’s clear there’s no heater power into the reactor, it is heated externally by the oven heater, otherwise it makes no sense whatsoever.

This is an Article I just found about, must have been uploaded recently:

Neutron Flux and Soft X-Radiation Created by Heterogeneous Plasmoid

A I Klimov et al 2020 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.1698 012034

Abstract:

Experimental results on registration of different radiations from a heterogeneous plasmoid(HP) created by pulsed-repetitive discharge in the experimental set up PVR are considered in this work. Intensive cold neutron flux, optical radiation and soft X-radiation (E<10 KeV) were measuredin the HP. It was revealed that there is a high voltage threshold Ud>3.8 kVin the electric dischargefor stable generation of intensive cold neutron flux.

https://iopscience.iop.org/art…42-6596/1698/1/012034/pdf

This other article was published a bit later but I had already mentioned in the other thread, might as well post it here as it also shows evidence for SR.

https://sci-hub.se/https://www…abs/pii/S1364682620303242

“Strange” particles and micro-sized ball lightning in some electric discharges (Anatoly I. Nikitin, Vadim A. Nikitin, Alexander M. Velichko, Tamara F. Nikitina)

And finally the also recently published paper on the biological effects of SR.

https://sci-hub.se/https://lin…10.3103/S1062873820110222

Biological Detection of Physical Factors Related to the High-Current Electric Explosion of Conductors in a Vacuum (E. A. Priakhin, *, L. I. Urutskoev, E. V. Stiazhkina, c, G. A. Tryapitsyna, c, A. E. Aldibekova ,A. A. Peretykin, E. E. Priakhin, K. A. Alabin, N. D. Pilia, N. Z. Chikovani,D. A. Voitenko, and R. M. Arshba)

Quote from jkaas

Maybe time to find a 'mine canary'.

Possibly some small animal that is relatively active would show a change in activity.

We do not need a repeat of Madame Curie.

A Russian team already published a series of biological tests on widely used biological models for damage, paper was in December 2020, will post the link here ASAP.

Quote from Daniel_G

I already stated that more robust calibrations are being done with sufficient replication to be able to calculate error bars. I also stated that this was an early report.

Please Daniel_G , don’t feel like you are being attacked, People is just eager to know more, I hope you can share more data and context with us. Thanks for your comments, we really appreciate them.

Quote from Wyttenbach

120 year old battery technique from Edison revived?

https://www.bbc.com/future/art…vented-120-years-too-soon

The “battolyzer”, and with Nickel and hydrogen is probably prone to have some kind of LENR phenomena in it (Don’t tell Dr. Galushkin, he will start yelling thermal runaway!). Thanks for sharing this Wyttenbach .

Quote from Lou Pagnucco

A new preprint which also claims the existence of a collapsed hydrogen atom --

Anomalous electron states

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2008.05887.pdf

Excerpt - "The true ground state of hydrogen atom is approximately of −50 keV , but this state is empty without special attempts to populate it. That object is referred to as anomalous boson, which is ten times larger than the nuclear radius. In principle, the binding energy of the anomalous state can be in the MeV region that is unusual for atoms. For comparison, the electron binding energy

in polaron in solids [18–23] is approximately 0.1 eV"

Display More

Interesting read, and by a Mexican researcher with a research grant, no less. He doesn’t propose any experimental conditions to observe this “anomalous state” but by saying it needs electromagnetic interactions, is basically opening the door to what was observed by the legendary Carlo Borghi and all those inspired by him.

Back when I was working in a project for characterization of so called “biochar” made out of several locally available materials, we used a similar oven to make the Biochar in a very air restricted atmosphere to cause the pyrolysis. We set the oven to 250 +-3 degrees and It stayed there spending energy until you put a sample inside or turned it off.

Some materials produced a great heat during the pyrolysis (and many volatiles that ended clogging the oven’s exhaust) and at those instances the oven switched off all heaters and started a fan to cool down the chamber, so we learnt quickly we had to restrict the amount of material put into the oven in each batch to avoid the samples to burn entirely by overwhelming the capacity of temperature control of the oven.

This is just an anecdote to illustrate that I have used these kind of ovens and if I had to use it for testing a Mizuno reactor a would go The way already described, by measuring the heat input compared to a control / inactive reactor.

This is a rather recent thread where some “SR” literature has been discussed.

Strong evidence for a new kind of radiation.

The latest paper of the effects of biological systems was really interesting for me.

Paradigmnoia has been focused on explaining away the “tire tracks” as mere scratches, but an effect on a biological system is completely different to a “mere scratch”.

Keith Fredericks has compiled many observations that go way beyond the “tire tracks”.

The so called “birdies” are also very interesting, And the fact that they are produced in inverted pairs, Something that already had been observed by Matsumoto.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

Does the reactor require any added heat to activate it when placed in an oven?

I mean, the average temperature of the reactor at 300 W was shown to be about 50 C, with hot spots as high as 180 C or thereabouts. So if the oven were set to 175 C, should not the reactor fire up without the external or internal heater and start making excess heat of over 100 W?

I understand you are talking about the R22? Please correct me if not. If you are talking about the R22, then The situation is not directly aplicable, as that reactor was heated internally. (Edit to add, probably I meant R20, the Mizuno reactor of which the data was presented by Jed at ICCF 22, R22 is a refrigeration gas, LOL).

I see these late “in oven”experiments as completely different, the oven is designed to reach an maintain temperature within it. Regardless of the losses, anything inert placed in the oven should reach the temperature of the oven and stay there.

If you put a stick in there, it of course will burn and release chemical energy and reduce the power input for a while and when the chemical energy is spent, it will get back to the set temperature.

A control reactor will simply get heated and stay heated while the oven is working.

A working reactor will start getting heated by the oven, and when the reaction is activated by the temperature, it will start producing heat, and it should start to be sensed by the oven controls and it would throttle down the energy consumption to maintain the temperature within the set point. The excess heat can be deduced from the power consumption to achieve a temperature, not very precise but good enough for practical purposes.