Posts by can

Yes, you need to do the foam test with electrolysis in alkaline electrolyte solution; even steel electrodes should be fine.

Just boiling the water with a heater is probably not going to produce foam to any significant extent.

Wyttenbach

Why liquid? Several of the catalytic industrial processes also listed in the paper linked above use gaseous reactants.

Quote from Wyttenbach

UDH (H*-H*/D*-D*) only forms under high vacuum condition. Spins must be able to align in para state.

The paper on the catalysts for UDH production by Holmlid et al. suggests that it is formed even at many bar of pressure, since it is possibly directly involved in catalytic processes in ordinary industrial reactors.

Production of ultra-dense hydrogen H(0): A novel nuclear fuel

Condensation of hydrogen Rydberg atoms (highly electronically excited) into the lowest energy state of condensed hydrogen i.e. the ultra-dense hydroge…

doi.org

[...]

Quote from Stevenson

This configuration has been described in a number of presentation by Frank. You can find a schematic and picture also in his recent presentation at IWAHLM conference (see the sprecific thread here on the forum, you will find the Youtube video).

I guess it's this one at 2:07:00?

Quote from Stevenson

[...] I would suggest the opposite: testing the voltage between the Celani wires and a counter electrode inside or outside the coil (if inside, the supporting material should be permeable). [...]

Perhaps a sort of coaxial wire configuration could be conceived for that. In recent configurations, Celani already uses a porous/permeable fiberglass 'sheath' for his active wire, although it's coated by alkali salts of various sorts that can decompose under heating (emitting alkali elements) and make the sheath at least partially conductive.

Quote from Stevenson

I would like to remind that Frank and Harper also tested the voltage generation between a copper and zinc electrodes when an active WE was set in close proximity. In this case you don't even involve the WE in the voltage measurement, but it still does its "magic". This is in my opinion the best demonstration that the LEC effect is not an artifact and is not a chemical effect.

If in this case it purely shows a proximity effect then it would indeed rule out common chemical effects. Has this been already described somewhere? I probably missed it.

For what it's worth, sometimes in past hobby experiments with electrolysis I have driven electrodes to high current and voltages (e.g. 30V 10A or something around this), and after a while the electrolyte would start boiling. Typically I would use KOH in varying concentrations, often around 1M. Foaming also perhaps due to KOH saponifying organic residues in the vessel easily occurs under those conditions and can be kind of dangerous due to the trapped H2-O2 gases. I never filmed that nor tried LiOH, however.

Frogfall

Alan Smith and others have always measured zero voltage by doing so, as for example reported earlier. This should rule out the LEC being an electrophorus.

However, that the voltage is zero in this test does not rule out conventional effects, since man-made or chemical floating voltage sources can also behave the same. With a floating source, if you try to measure its voltage with a multimeter across earth, displayed voltage will start at maximum, then quickly (or not) drop to zero/earth depending on the impedance of the multimeter and that of the connection to earth.

I'm not saying here that the LEC does not work, only that this one test does not seem particularly useful for demonstrating that the voltage observed when using a counter-electrode is anomalous. Unless I'm missing something like for example what should the characteristics of a decent earth connection be.

EDIT: to clarify, with the above I mean measuring the voltage of the electrodes with Earth separately (one electrode at a time).

Quote from Alan Smith

It might depend on the earth. I am using an instrument earth - a large copper plate buried in wet ground with a heavy cable running to the work table. If you use the earth point supplied by the grid wiring in your house you might get a different effect. Not all earths are equal.

ETA don't try putting one finger into the live terminal and the other into the earth. You will detect a voltage then.

What I'm saying is that to me it seems expected that measuring the LEC WE to Earth will show zero voltage, even assuming the presence of chemically-caused voltages: the same happens with other floating voltage sources like for example most low-power AC-DC wall adapters (it might not necessarily be the case with laptop power supplies).

If instead I try to measure the voltage across a ground-referenced voltage source (e.g. the 12V DC outputs of a desktop PC power supply) and Earth, I will see the voltage of that power supply.

What about this test?

Charge two separate pieces of metal at the cathode in the same electrolytic cell, trying to keep current density even. Then, after a predetermined period of electrolysis get them out of the cell and measure the LEC voltage between them. In other words, one of the cathodes will now act as the counterelectrode in the voltage measurements, instead of using a non-electrolyzed material.

If the LEC effect works as expected, voltage will increase because now even more ions (twice as much?) will be produced. If it's something else, it might instead decrease.

Alan Smith

If I try to connect the ends of my multimeter respectively to an earth connection and a metal piece which might show that chemical effect mentioned above (after adding slight amounts of tap water on the surface), I get around 0 mV. If instead I connect the multimeter across the metal piece through the water on the surface, I get a couple hundred mV. Again, I think in my case this just is a galvanic effect; without water, I get 0 mV in either case.

I think measuring voltage between Earth and a floating voltage source may always end up showing around 0V. I tried also with the positive pole of an AA battery and my DC power supply (with floating outputs) turned on at around 20V.

It might very well be that I'm not understanding correctly something here, however.

Quote from THHuxleynew

I would not expect any voltage across the WE - but you can measure it directly with no resistor - it would be a low impedance circuit an insensitive to whatever load impedance you presented.

In tests performed last year, after charging with electrolysis, a WE in my case would typically show a voltage in the hundreds of mV range if I applied a thin layer (of non-negligible resistance) of diluted electrolyte solution or even just impure water between it and one of the multimeter probes. I assumed this was some chemical effect, not a LEC effect.

Of course, there would be zero voltage by touching directly the WE with both multimeter probes.

Then, by replacing the electrolyte/water with a resistor (making sure the surfaces are clean and dry), would a voltage appear? And if yes, what would that imply?

Celani's treated constantan wires would spontaneously show a voltage like this, unpowered, after cycles of heat and hydrogen, and this effect has been compared to that of the LEC. As far as I recall his wires generally have a resistance end-to-end in the tens of Ohms range.

Curbina

Normally in LEC replications the voltage is measured between the Working Electrode (WE) and an inert counterelectrode across a gap via spacers, and the multimeter has an internal impedance of usually 1 or 10 MOhm, as per this diagram:

What I proposed in the previous comment was instead observing if a voltage could be shown across the WE as it is across the wire in Celani's case.

Since the WE will most likely have a negligible resistance due to its geometry (cylinders, bars, plates, etc), a resistor would be needed here for that.

From another thread:

Quote from Curbina

Alan Smith , just finished watching what the future generations will remember as Alan Smith's LEC Marathon. Very well presented both your outstanding work and on behalf of Frank/Harper and Alan Goldwater.

I really like the ensuing discussion, and the exchange of ideas. Also that Francesco Celani has also independently observed the same phenomena in his gas loading reactor, but it takes longer to manifest.

Francesco Celani measured a spontaneous voltage along the ends of his constantan active wires, which are also resistors:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282646657_Observation_of_macroscopic_current_and_thermal_anomalies_at_high_temperature_by_hetero-structures_on_thin_and_long_Constantan_wires_under_H_2_gas

Would attempting to measure a voltage across a LEC working electrode and a resistor of some sort in series show anything meaningful? I think it would be something akin to how Celani observed the voltage in his case. Probably it would have to be in the MOhm range here.

EUV/soft x-ray photodiodes perhaps could be used in a dark environment for real-time measurements.

Curbina

Holmlid did a calorimetric experiment back in 2015 apparently showing greater heating than the laser energy into the chamber (the efficiency of the entire system was still below 1 due to the laser used, I believe) but it was never reproduced by others, and Engvild 's idea from the ICCF24 poster would be in principle similar to that.

Then, it would be probably best trying to at least partially follow Holmlid's experimental methods/protocols, which at this point I believe have been fully described, albeit in a rather scattered manner. These don't really require to accept UDH as a concept.

Just found out that this poster by Kjeld C. Engvild was submitted as an ICCF24 poster:

Is the Holmlid Effect Real? Any Independent Replications? Laser Pulses Focused on D2 inside a TiD2 Pinhole Might Form a Holmlid Effect Heating Device.

Attached to this post, but originally available here: https://drive.google.com/file/…vdUVu6Ja2GLVPeb66phu/view

However, I don't think that the proposed experiment might work well as a heating device based on Holmlid's findings, for a couple reasons.

1. Alkali-promoted catalysts together with carbon or metal-oxide surfaces appear to be necessary. The subject of catalysts was described in detail here by Holmlid et al.: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.02.221

2. The particles emitted are apparently very penetrating and not very well converted to heat unless a thick shielding is adopted. One consisting of a copper cylinder with 2-cm thick walls was used here for that: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4928572

In the review published in 2019 (https://doi.org/10.1088/1402-4896/ab1276) it was suggested that pulsed laser application for a prolonged period directly onto Fe-K catalyst pellets under a hydrogen atmosphere in the mbar range would produce a "Rydberg matter mist". Therefore the continuous laser ablation of catalyst material apparently is conducive to the eventual formation of UDH; I think mainly thanks to the very fine (nanometric?) active particulate produced as a result.

Worth also pointing out that carbon is always present in some form in the experiments by Holmlid (either by deliberate manual application of graphite close to the laser target/catalysts before closing the vacuum chamber, or by decomposition of vacuum pump oils in the vacuum atmosphere on the catalytically-active surfaces formed):

Quote

[...] Under the conditions of interest, the vacuum chamber is filled with a visible mist, probably of H(l) RM. Such a mist is formed after an hour or so of direct laser impact on catalyst pieces with the hydrogen gas pressure in the mbar range.

There's a schematic buried in the Tarasenko thread. I'm not entirely sure how it works. As far as I am aware of, high-voltage capacitor discharges are applied across electrodes in a closed chamber (using other gaps in series outside the chamber as a switch?) surrounded by windings, and I think the electricity induced back from the discharge is supposed to prove that under certain conditions there's ball lightning being created.

Post

RE: Generator Tarasenko based on the model of the planet Earth

Кто поможет купить оборудование для регистрации на компьютере давление, температуру, ток, напряжение, частота и другие характеристики для этой схемы как у Пархомова, но к моей схеме A.G. Parkhomov—Study of processes using a pulsed plasma electrolysis unit Посмотрите схему и на фото, как лучше подобрать оборудование для регистрации, срочно надо, ректор обещал купить оборудование для…

Gennadiy Tarassenko

Dec 28th 2019

Post

RE: Generator Tarasenko based on the model of the planet Earth

Ferromanganese nodules, maybe they remained from oceanic times, there were large oceanic ridges or something else.

Железомарганцевые конкреции, может они остались с океанических времен, здесь проходили большие океанические хребты или еще что нибудь другое.

youtube.com/watch?v=vOriPrHmAaQ

Gennadiy Tarassenko

Nov 6th 2021

zenner

As I mentioned earlier (although it probably got buried in the discussion) it might be possible under certain conditions to produce oxygen at the cathode in limited amounts from water decomposition. This could happen for instance if your operating conditions are not too far from being capable of producing a plasma (high electrolyte concentration, generous voltages, vigorous bubbling, high electrolyte temperature, etc...).

So, more information on cathode geometry, electrolyte concentration, applied voltage could be useful here.

For what it's worth, with a sufficiently large DC overvoltage, current will start pulsating also without a visible plasma (with the plasma having the characteristics of high-frequency micro-arcing). It is possible to indirectly see that from the RF emissions generated. This will usually begin from a threshold after which current will not increase anymore with increasing voltage, but decreases instead. However, even using KOH solution at high concentration and thin cathodes this will be at unusually high voltages (>15V), so it's unclear if it applies to zenner.

EDIT: perhaps more importantly, as the unstable electrolysis approaches the region where it fully turns into plasma electrolysis, it is plausible that some of its products start getting generated as well. Dissociation of water is also possible, or in other words oxygen may start getting generated from the cathode. This was studied by Mizuno et al. several years ago, for example in https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoThydrogenev.pdf

For this to possibly occur at relatively low voltages however it requires a high electrolyte concentration.

Quote from Drgenek

[...] Does the production of the new states also produce energy? The hydrino theory says yes and the energy produced is chemical. But UDH and supermagnetic clusters says no. Rather, subsequent reaction of UDH or supermagnetic clusters result in nuclear reactions.

Energy output is expected from the formation of ultra-dense hydrogen states: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.02.221

Quote

[...] It is possible to have an energy output by forming H(0) from hydrogen gas. This condensation energy will easily be believed to be non-chemical thus nuclear due to its size (of the order of hundred times larger than normal chemical energy output). It may be a large part of the energy which is considered to be caused by so-called cold fusion, as suggested previously by Winterberg [6,7]. Other nuclear reactions in H(0) may be the main processes considered to be cold fusion, with very little of normal fusion products like 4He and neutrons out.

This hasn't been directly demonstrated yet in Holmlid's studies, however.