Posts by Been there Seen it

Quote from Hank Mills

Was there a certain level of cleanliness, surface features, or hydrogen pressure that seemed to spark the runaways?
I am now at the point where I believe the number one issue we are missing is the characterization of the nickel powder.

The runaways occurred as per random (some weeks none at all, others 2 or 3 times) - that's why I reckon the trigger was perhaps a cosmic ray going through! As Ecco says above, nickel surface features do NOT seem to be absolutely critical - but macro-porosity AND cleanliness do appear to help achieve high COP. Latest Chinese experiments with reactor lagging also yield higher COP, predictably...

OTOH, the combination of pressure, temperature and EM stimulation required to reliably trigger the nickel "catalyzed" reaction of 1Hydrogen with 7Lithium to produce Alphas plus Gamma seems to still be a mystery (except to Piantelli, Rossi of course, and perhaps the Chinese team, and maybe @me356 as well)...

Quote from Alan Smith

...it is my opinion that Ni/Li/H LENR is aneutronic. Time will tell.

I also think the reaction of high-energy protons with 7Lithium is aneutronic. However, the problem is that not all of the high-energy protons encounter 7Lithium. The MFMP seem to have experienced nuclear reaction(s) with the alumina (which includes 16Oxygen) in their Glow Stick reactor vessels and in the LiAlH4 fuel.

Alternatively, stainless steel reactor surfaces may also perhaps emit neutrons when bombarded with high-energy protons. There is also the question of what happens to the small amount (~1.5%) of 61Nickel (and other Ni isotopes) present in naturally sourced nickel powder when exposed to high-energy protons. Rossi seems to have been at pains to protect himself and his team from (a small yield of) neutrons - as well as all the radiation that he converts to heat.

Quote from Alan Smith

Rossi definitely did not use Raney Nickel. He has said so several times, and there is independent confirmation.

Rossi's patent: https://www.ecat.tech/sites/de…276050651-25-aug-2015.pdf says: group 10 element, for example nickel. And also goes on to say: porosity-enhanced nickel powder plus lithium powder plus lithium aluminium hydride powder.

However, there may perhaps also be some Oxygen, Oxide, H2O (or similar species) in there to help dissociate Hydrogen into H+ and H2O.H- Who knows?

>>Hank, So many questions!...

Chemists know that if you want interesting reactions to occur with nickel then the oxide needs to be reduced to pure nickel metal. Pure nickel metal absorbs hydrogen on to (or into?) its surface, creating highly reactive sites that can catalyze a variety of chemical reactions. Rossi says he's using nickel. I am assuming he means nickel metal.

Deoxidizing (i.e. reducing) nickel oxide is a pretty routine chemical process. However, it's best done under positive H2 pressure (15-25 Bar) and by starting at low temperature (~180C) and raising that temperature up by about 20C per hour until you reach ~380C and then soak there for a further 8 hours (approx). With flushing of course to remove the H2O produced (& condensed and measured) and provision of more pure Hydrogen as required. Electrolytic grade hydrogen required (with zero ppm CO+CO2) or else the active nickel sites will be contaminated with carbonyl ligands.

OTOH, what little knowledge I have concerning Lithium and LiAlH4 is all derived from a variety of Wikipedia articles and the references. Very interesting.

My first-hand experience was of very rapid temperature runaways (to >>1,000 degrees C) leading to damaged thermo-couples and clumps of fused nickel metal. Nickel melts at 1445C. These temperature "excursions" (once or twice a week) in the laboratory I was supervising in 1972/73 were a damn nuisance!

The temperature required for LENR to happen seems to vary enormously depending upon the experimental set-up circumstances! My own particular experience with nickel and hydrogen inclines me towards believing a Rossi-type reactor (as per the photograph included in Mat Lewan's book) will actually work.

The nuclear reaction of high-energy protons with lithium is well known to science (since 1932). It produces high-energy alpha particles. What seems to be NOT so well known to science is what happens to Hydrogen inside Nickel. How does nickel "catalyze" conversion of hydrogen atoms into high-energy protons?

Quote from Hank Mills

If this experiment was to be repeated, I hope it would be tested multiple times with a wide array of different nickel powder types, particle sizes, different levels of cleaning, and hydrogenation. My thinking is that very good cleaning of carbonyl…

When you buy what's called "carbonyl" nickel powder, it's actually >99.5% pure nickel with a surface layer of nickel oxide that you are buying, made using the carbonyl process (developed by Mond in 1890's for extraction & purification of nickel metal). Hydrogenation (at ~10 Bar and up to ~350C) is then able to reduce the oxide layer: NiO + H2 > Ni + H2O. The water released can be collected and measured to determine the degree of nickel porosity.

This was the kind of macro-porous nickel that experienced temperature runaways from 200C to well over 1000C in <20 seconds, once or twice a week.

N.B. Nickel carbonyl is actually an extremely toxic vapor, but it reacts quickly at ambient conditions with air and moisture to form the oxide.

Quote from Longview

If one really needs preformed LiH, then I would suggest making it directly oneself from electrolytic hydrogen and pure lithium.

That's what happens inside the reactor after the (nano-shell) Lithium has had its coating removed and its surface cleaned (by hydrogenation), then been diffused throughout the pores of the nickel (by vaporization at low pressure) and finally heated with the pure Lithium in a pure Hydrogen environment.
If it was preformed, how would you transfer it safely to the reactor (under positive H2 pressure) and spread it throughout all the pores of the nickel so-called "catalyst" for LENR?

Quote from Zephir_AWT

IMO we already understand the principle of cold fusion well, we just should follow some key experiments of it.

I don't think many on this forum will agree with that statement. I realize you have your own personal theory, and...

I do agree with you suggesting: "the hydrogen atoms are arranged in lattice in form of hydride clusters and they're compressed here between nickel nuclei - so that what collides there are whole chains of protons, which are embedded inside the orbitals of nickel atoms." However the rest of your LENR theory is I think: Conjecture. If you can prove it, then: "Great, congrats!"

I also agree with your (withering) comments re CERN - that's the home of conventional particle physics.

Quote from Zephir_AWT

For what? In cold fusion research everyone who is actually doing an experiments is a king and all others bystanders - just face it.

OTOH, I believe the reason that Replicators (even CERN!) have had such great difficulty reproducing experimental observations is the absence of a realistic, even if at this stage hypothetical, explanation of LENR which could guide them. Einstein was a young bystander when he hypothesized special/general relativity...

Quote from bjt2

What is the purpose of the use of LiALH4, with the Al that hinder the reaction? Why not use LiH? I read that is produced in intermediate state of the reactor... Is it dangerous? Unstable? Difficult to product/extract?

Lithium hydride is not something you buy over the counter! YES is the answer to all three of your questions. LiAlH4 provides the H required in a Parkhomov type experiment. External source of ultra-pure H2 would be far better because it's far more controllable.

>>Hank Mills: Please stop harassing me356. He is VERY concerned about long-term health of you and other replicators.
Please invest your efforts at present in researching how to shield yourself from free neutrons (as well as radiation).
If you want to know more about triggering the reaction, then study Piantelli's European Patent...
P.S. Your points 1) thru 7) above are all >=99% correct IMHO.

Quote from Hank Mills

Was the reactor vessel in this test spherical? I've long wondered if that might be the best way to guarantee results if there are secondary emission products that might be wasted if they hit the walls of the reactor. Instead of a long and skinny reactor,…

Read Rossi's patent, which says to spread the fuel out as thinly as possible between big heat sinks (so as to AVOID thermal runaways).

I suggest you read Piantelli & Focardi paper September 1999 that reported 360 neutrons counted per minute as measured by 3He neutron detectors and also indirectly by 197Au foil being activated. The main danger is invisible radiation.

Given my experience with Nickel and Hydrogen, I believe this report. All you guys have to do NOW, is explain it...
Replication is a dangerous (foolish) pursuit until after this has been explained and can be understood.
Suggestion = Hydrinos!

Quote from Sangreg

<span style="text-decoration: underline"><b>Size matters when reducing NiO nanoparticles</b></span> :

<a href="http://phys.org/news/2012-11-size-nio-nanoparticles.html" class="externalURL" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">phys.org/news/2012-11-size-nio-nanoparticles.html</a>

To get maximum of highly active nickel sites, it needs to be macro-porous "Carbonyl" nickel powder (recovered and deposited by the Mond process, as used since 1890's) - see: http://www.hunterchem.com/nick…ess-hydrogen-reduced.html

And then reduced again in-situ (by >=24 hour slow ramp to ~380C at >20 Bar H2) after being exposed to air (during mixing/grinding with nano-shell Lithium plus solid LiAlH4) to create highly-reactive nickel hydride sites ready for whatever it is you want to achieve.

Quote from magicsound

No explanation yet for the lack of replication of the gamma spectrum event. Look closely at the chart comparing 5.2 and 5.3. You will see some differences in the pressure during long dwell time before the power cycling started. We're discussing whether that could be a critical difference, but there are other possibilities too.The pressure inversions you mentioned have been seen before and are indeed very interesting. We think that is due to the complex behavior of the LiH reversible reaction. It is repeatable and is possibly a good clue to the conditions needed for LENR.

The chart comparing 5.2 and 5.3 (see GS 5.3 comment #272 by EccoEcco) is exceedingly difficult to read on my lap-top! I also suspect the conditions during the dwell time are critical for Hydrogen absorption by the Nickel, especially if the Hydrogen is converting into Hydrinos (please refer my comment plus link above).

Could it be that the initiation/triggering/radiation "Signal" requires rapid release of high-energy Hydrinos from a super-saturated Nickel amalgam? If so, then it's cooling (to achieve supersaturation) followed by a physical shock (me356 says hit it with a hammer!) that sets off an auto-catalytic release of energy...

Quote from magicsound

My foils from the meeting are available here: <a href="https://goo.gl/tkohNK" class="externalURL" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">goo.gl/tkohNK</a>You'll need to download the file to view the full contents, because Google doesn't have an app to support Powerpoint slide shows.

Thanks for sharing your slides. The Glow Stick 5.2 radiation is remarkable, but not apparently reproduced in the Glow Stick 5.3 experiment. Is there any explanation for this as yet?
Please correct me if I am wrong, but the Glow Stick 5.3 calibration runs seem to show Pressure is dropping some of the time dramatically as the Temperature is increased inside (what I presume to be) a closed system. That seems odd, very odd...

Quote from H-G Branzell

Yes, the Hydrino is relevant to LENR. And Goldilocks is relevant to a fairy tale.

Goldilocks is common knowledge but probably a myth. Hydrinos are NOT common knowledge but MAY be more fact than myth - PERHAPS. We shall see...

Please may I give you guys this link to a simple explanation concerning Hydrinos, which I believe may be relevant to LENR...
http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Hydrinos_explained.html

Quote from Papa Moi

guys,

after 25 pages of posts,do we know how to replicate this?

Don't forget there was Part 1 of this thread as well. I believe the answer is: "No, we don't yet KNOW HOW to replicate this for sure. But hopefully, me356, the MFMP team & some others are getting there. It seems to be a SLOW process- because it's complicated, unexpected and requires a multi-disciplined approach.

Quote from oldbekc84

I understand that the topic of this forum is not human behaviour so if the moderator retain to delete this comment is fine. New Wars? Wow. Those are seriously the concerns that you think about while considering the possibilty of share informations?…

I share his concern. I consulted others about it. The answer I got back was that kitchen knives are dangerous, so too are guns, so too are LOTS of other modern inventions, including nuclear weapons. However, an even bigger danger is CLIMATE CHANGE because of the ever-increasing CO2 concentration in the earth's atmosphere. It has risen from ~330 ppm when I was at school to ~400 ppm now, and the rate of increase is accelerating, not stabilizing.

We, the human race, MUST therefore employ LENR (instead of burning so much coal & gas) but do it in secure, carefully controlled locations, e.g. power stations.
LENR technology is already here - some of it has already been patented. EPO is satisfied proof of principle exists, although not yet fully disclosed. We must learn to live with it and use it to generate the electricity needed for our modern style of life in a far more environmentally friendly manner.