lenrisnotreal Member
  • Member since Aug 20th 2016
  • Last Activity:

Posts by lenrisnotreal

  • Measurement Error and LENR: Why scaling up small Cold Fusion claims never works

    I'm looking at the pdf as presented. I do not see a line at 100W. The line at 50W is clearly darker than the other horizontal lines. As an end user, it is not my job to correct graphs or determine what was actually meant by presented data. There are some other questions I have with this paper such as the pre-heating of reactants.

  • Measurement Error and LENR: Why scaling up small Cold Fusion claims never works

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    lenrisnotreal : Before the next piss please read the text:


    Figure 25 shows three position of temperature changes for outside body of reactor center and reverse side of the center, and 100 mm from the center of the reactor at 100 W of input power during excess heat generation treatment.

    The text clearly states that Fig. 24 should show 100W while the actual Fig. 24 shows 50W. Therefore, there are possibly errors in this paper. This possibly invalidates it. I'm not focused on Fig 25. Only Fig. 24.

  • Measurement Error and LENR: Why scaling up small Cold Fusion claims never works

    Also, there might be an error in figure 24 of this document. According to the text, this figure should show an input power of 100W. Figure 24 appears to show an input power of 50W. If this is indeed an error, this entire paper, and all prior research by this organization, is , in my opinion only, possibly invalid due to errors in record keeping, measurements, and presentation. I'll finish my review of this document for more errors when I have more time.

  • Measurement Error and LENR: Why scaling up small Cold Fusion claims never works

    Have any of these results been replicated by an independent body not actively involved in CF/LENR research? If not, I would question them.

  • Wendelstein 7-X generates and contains 25 seconds of High Temperature plasma using only passive cooling

    I'd be way more concerned about the compression and containment part than the plasma injector part. Creating a plasma is relatively simple. Confining it and maintaining it at high T is the hard part.

  • Measurement Error and LENR: Why scaling up small Cold Fusion claims never works

    Well, at least you have managed to break away from believing in so called "high power" LENR. A lot of people are still clinging to that despite the long list of well documented failures.


    The reason these low power results fail to be reproduced outside of "LENR friendly" laboratories is that many of the errors and artifacts which produce these effects are actually known in the scientific community. That's why these low power results you believe in disappear when companies make their first attempt to characterize them at a high accuracy level: they already have an idea what the error might be. High accuracy characterization measurements are a precondition for commercialization. I hate to break it to everybody but LENR fails at this step 100% of the time.


    Also, does anyone know why MFMP has gone silent?

  • Measurement Error and LENR: Why scaling up small Cold Fusion claims never works

    I still cannot receive an answer to my question: with all of these claimed positive results, why has every effort to every effort to scale this up and verify these claims outside of the sphere of the claimant lead to failure? From what I can tell, 100% of the times companies have spent millions of dollars to scale these claims up and verify them, they have not been able to. There is really only one explanation for this disconnect.

  • Wendelstein 7-X generates and contains 25 seconds of High Temperature plasma using only passive cooling

    Quote from JedRothwell

    The first Storms book includes a list of 180 national laboratories, university and corporate laboratories that published peer reviewed papers in mainstream journals with positive cold fusion results. None have retracted. There is no better way for them to "put their name on the line." This is how it is done in experimental science. So, what you are asking for was published 30 years ago. You refuse to look at it, but that does not make it go away.


    No skeptic has ever shown an error in any of these papers. You have not even read them, so obviously you cannot point to an error. The only way to disprove a widely replicated experimental finding is to show an error in all of the replications.

    Sir, you keep mentioning these 180 or so experiments (some of which were done over 10 years ago) without addressing the most important issue: where is the followup? If these were so successful, why isn't this the main effort at all top universities and major research companies? Why weren't these efforts scaled up? Why has every company that has attempted to followup on these claims with expensive test equipment met with failure as far as I can tell? There is a huge disconnect between lab results and real world practical results here.

  • Wendelstein 7-X generates and contains 25 seconds of High Temperature plasma using only passive cooling

    Quote from maryyugo

    (Wikipedia)

    Can someone explain why this won't work? It's pretty obvious that nobody "bothered" to figure out radioactive waste disposal for fission reactors when they were popular and constructed in numbers. And now we are awash in the extremely dangerous stuff that nobody wants to deal with Is something similar going on with hot fusion?

    Yes, this is an interesting topic. It seems tailor made for fusion energy. I'll look it up once there is some free time.

  • Wendelstein 7-X generates and contains 25 seconds of High Temperature plasma using only passive cooling

    Quote from Zephir_AWT

    Once someone named "LENR Is Not Real" posts that Wendelstein generates 25 second of plasma using "only passive cooling", then one doesn't need to be a lone genius for to realize, we are facing the troll of hot fusion lobby. The Wendelstein is optimized to sustainable plasma design - but the sad truth is, it cannot achieve even ten times lower plasma temperatures than the tokamaks, which are working in pulse regimes (and which are still not able to ignite the hot fusion reaction).


    The Wendelstein constructors must try their stuffs much harder. One just must ask, how much the German governement is willing to spend into hot fusion research while ignoring the replications of thousands-time cheaper cold fusion experiments. Which invisible power drives this apparent controversy?

    Here's the link where they say W7x is up to around 40Million C ion temperature:


    https://translate.google.com/t…e20111394.html&edit-text=

  • Wendelstein 7-X generates and contains 25 seconds of High Temperature plasma using only passive cooling

    Quote from Zephir_AWT

    I'd have no problem with cost of hot fusion research, if only the validation of cold fusion research wouldn't take a fraction of this cost. Once we aren't still doing it, then one question arises: who is responsible for it? We shouldn't keep quiet about how research grant money is really spent. Why a Lot of Important Research Is Not Being Done. Research perversions are spreading. What we witness here is a failure of science to self-correct. Science is broken, at least by any useful definition of the word. Self-correction doesn’t always happen, and science journalists mustn’t be afraid to spell that out.


    This article therefore concludes:


    "Don’t let scientists decide for themselves what research is interesting, but force them to solve problems defined by others. In the future, the most valuable science institutions […] will link research agendas to the quest for improved solutions — often technological ones — rather than to understanding for its own sake. The science they produce will be of higher quality, because it will have to be.”


    $100's of millions of current dollars have been spent to verify CF/LENR over the past 29 years. As soon as these claims move out from under the people who started them, and into an environment where the most expensive and accurate measurement equipment is used, they fall apart. Do you seriously think, given the problems we have with climate change, that CF/LENR would not be used if it could be proven to work in a rigorous test environment?

  • Wendelstein 7-X generates and contains 25 seconds of High Temperature plasma using only passive cooling

    The results you quoted are from Feb 2016 during the previous test phase and not the latest phase, by the way.

  • Wendelstein 7-X generates and contains 25 seconds of High Temperature plasma using only passive cooling

    W7x had a goal of 100M C for ion temperature for this phase, I believe. I earlier posted an article where they said they were up to around 40million C. I'll repost it when I find it.

  • Wendelstein 7-X generates and contains 25 seconds of High Temperature plasma using only passive cooling

    IH and Coolescense spent millions of dollars attempting replications of what were deemed the top LENR experiments. So far, to my knowledge, those two companies only reported failure in replication attempts. Once established commercial companies and reputable universities start to put their name on the line to report and stand by CF results, then I might change my tune.

  • Wendelstein 7-X generates and contains 25 seconds of High Temperature plasma using only passive cooling

    Quote from Zephir_AWT

    Once someone named "LENR Is Not Real" posts that Wendelstein generates 25 second of plasma using "only passive cooling", then one doesn't need to be a lone genius for to realize, we are facing the troll of hot fusion lobby. The Wendelstein is optimized to sustainable plasma design - but the sad truth is, it cannot achieve even ten times lower plasma temperatures than the tokamaks, which are working in pulse regimes (and which are still not able to ignite the hot fusion reaction).


    The Wendelstein constructors must try their stuffs much harder. One just must ask, how much the German governement is willing to spend into hot fusion research while ignoring the replications of thousands-time cheaper cold fusion experiments. Which invisible power drives this apparent controversy?

    ? W7x has recently achieved plasma temperatures of ~40 to 50 million C +. These temperatures are fairly close to the temperatures of recent tokamaks and not a factor of 10 lower.

  • Measurement Error and LENR: Why scaling up small Cold Fusion claims never works

    Research funds are generally tight. So, you can't expect them to be invested in an area that has had at least two and possibly three independent boards of expert scientists conclude the claims in that field are questionable.


    I'm presenting my opinion as to why claims of low power/ energy LENR can't be scaled up: the low level measurement error does not scale up. Also, when more accurate measurement is done, these low level measurement errors decrease along with the magnitude of the claimed COP. This is pure speculation on my part and not to be considered fact: perhaps certain CF/LENR techs are scaling down to lower powers and not up to higher powers because they are making more accurate measurements and have to go lower to find positive COP.


    If anyone has their own opinion as to why these claims never scale up, feel free to post them.

  • Measurement Error and LENR: Why scaling up small Cold Fusion claims never works

    There is no reputation trap. When company's decide to try to replicate these experiments with the goal of taking them to market what happens? They spend millions if not tens of millions to acquire the best talent and the best equipment to perform detailed experiments. And then what happens? These companies either announce failure or they silently go under. One of the best cases I've seen so far is SRI's announcement that they have seen a few watts but, if what I recall is correct, they say they need to improve the measurement process. Conclusion: as the measurement techniques improve and the accuracy of the equipment increases the actual excess energy disappears or becomes very small.

  • Measurement Error and LENR: Why scaling up small Cold Fusion claims never works

    I've read dozens upon dozens of CF/LENR papers. I've come to the same verdict that probably 97%+ of scientists have come to that these claims are inconclusive at best. Just because each time someone claims a positive result and it goes unchallenged doesn't mean that those who don't challenge it believe it is correct. To the contrary, they likely feel it is not worth the resources to disprove since they know nothing will come of it.


    The lack of replications by those outside of the CF/LENR field can't be explained away by saying only those who obtain positive results are competently running the experiments.