21January1958 My most important date... I was born. Ha!
Gregory Byron Goble
Verified User
- Male
- Member since Mar 3rd 2014
- Last Activity:
Posts by Gregory Byron Goble
-
-
This interview touches on an area where Fleischmann feels a wrong turn was made wherein atomic or nuclear energy from an electrochemical cell... Defied Orthodoxy.
Fleischmann
...replacement of Quantum Mechanics by Quantum Field Theory is still very demanding.
Earlier I posted how in 1960 Fleischmann began with the Q.E.D. paradox. This led him to Raman Scattering in 1974 and the birth of plasmonics. If only I knew more than a layman... I do know this.
Since 1960 Condensed Matter Physics, QED, Quantum Mechanics, Quantum Field Theory, Plasmonics and Laser Coherence has changed our depth of understanding of multi body nano and femto scale energy systems.
I wish I could better comprehend what Martin discusses here... I do get the gist of it though...
An Interview with Professor Martin
Fleischmann
By Christopher P. Tinsley
Reprinted courtesy of and originally published in Infinite Energy Magazine Issue #11
An Interview with Professor Martin Fleischmann
November 1996
Page One
Fleischmann
Historically we went through various phases in the work and eventually worked on large sheets--very large sheets--of palladium.
Page Four
F: Maybe it will come back. I think that at some time we will want to talk about the general malaise of science.
T: John Bockris has suggested that science had become very rigidified in around 1972. Do you have any comment on that at all?
F: I think there was a very unfortunate development in the 70's, a sort of "anti-Francis Bacon development." People developed a view that a subject is not respectable unless it is dressed up
with a suitable overload of theory, and consequently we have had this "top dressing" of theory put on the subject which has tended to make the approach very rigid. Also, the theories are of
course written in terms of rather old-fashioned ideas.
T: But we have been seeing a shift in general public attitudes.
F: To science?
T: No. Specifically towards things like towards cold fusion. This may be a kind of pre-millennial tension or something of that kind, but we are finding that companies and individuals are taking the whole field of cold fusion very much more seriously and positively than they were doing even months ago.
A Wrong Turn? Page 5 and 6
T: Do you think that physics and chemistry took something of a wrong turning at some point in the last 150 years or so and started to perhaps head into something of a blind alley? That what we now are seeing -- perhaps with cold fusion, and so forth -- is that mistakes have been made? We have something that doesn't appear to fit comfortably.
F: I don't think so. You see, I am a very conventional scientist, really. Extremely. I always explain that -- I'm really very conventional. We arrived at this topic from various inputs to the subject and, in the end, we could pose a very simple question, namely: would the fusion cross-
section of deuterons compressed in a palladium lattice be different to the cross-section which you see in the vacuum? Now, I think that was a very simple question -- either yes or no.
The answer turned out to be different...
I should explain that what we said was, "Yes, it would be different, but we would still see nothing."
That was the starting point in 1983 or whatever, yes 1982-83. Of course, it would be different, but we will see nothing.
But it turned out to be radically different than that. Now, of course, you have to say,
"What do we do with such an observation?" Many people--as was shown subsequently and even though they were told what had happened--couldn't believe this and ignored their own experimental evidence. But that is not for us.
As for taking a wrong turning -- well it has in an organizational way.
I always say that if you recall Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo holding a painting competition in the Town Hall in
Florence during the Renaissance then you cannot conceive of that happening in the present age.
The early development of science was really a dilettante type of aristocratic preoccupation...
T: Lavoisier and company?
F: Yes. You cannot imagine that somebody would now give a latter-day Faraday carte blanche to investigate the interaction of forces.
T: Mind you, for what he cost at the time, we could really afford it. It wasn't that expensive.
F: Nor is cold fusion expensive. One of my theme songs is that if you can't do it in a test tube, don't do it. It is not necessarily true that expensive experiments are not worthwhile doing but there are plenty of rather cheap experiments which are certainly worth doing. So if you haven't got the resources, do think a bit and try the cheap experiments.
So has science taken a wrong turning? Well, this is one instance where it has taken a wrong turning,
but, of course, there is also this whole overlay of Copenhagen-style quantum mechanics which we have not been able to shake off.
T: You feel that was a wrong turning?
F: Oh, that was a massive wrong turning.
Massive wrong-turning, although we have to give credit to Niels Bohr and the Copenhagen school, for a great deal of valuable development of theory. However, that approach should have been abandoned a long time ago.
The problem is that replacement of Quantum Mechanics by Quantum Field Theory is still very demanding.
-
Robert Laughlin, a CMP scientist at Stanford, is pretty staunchly critical of CF. Why?
I'm been reviewing what led Fleischmann to perform the research in the first place.
Quote
Question;
“can we find illustrations in Chemistry (especially Electrochemistry) of the need to invoke the Q.E.D. paradigm to explain the results obtained?
Martin Fleischmann summed up the Orthodoxy as this belief.
"We note that it is commonly believed that there is absolutely no way of influencing
Nuclear Processes by Chemical means"
The 1989 paper says otherwise.
Fleischmann, Martin (2003).
Cambridge, MA: World Scientific Publishing. ISBN 978-9812565648
This paper was presented at the 10th International Conference on Cold Fusion. It may be different from the version published by World Scientific, Inc (2003) in the official Proceedings of the conference.
ABSTRACT
Some of the background work which led to the decision to investigate the behaviour of D+ electrochemically compressed into Pd host lattices is outlined.The key features of such “Cold Fusion” systems are described.
1. BACKGROUND TO THE RESEARCH ON COLD FUSION
It appears to me that most scientists have the impression that my colleague Stanley Pons and I decided one day in late 1983 to go into the laboratory and to carry out the experiment best described by the statement,
“Gee-whiz, let’s go in the lab and charge some Pd cathodes with D+ and see what happens”.
It is, of course, perfectly true that this is what happened. However, the conclusion that this was an isolated example is incorrect as has been realised by a relatively small number of research workers (among whom I would number pre-eminently the late Giuliano Preparata and his colleague Emilio Del Giudice).
In fact, the decision to investigate the Pd/D system was preceded by a long period during which I asked the question:
“is it possible to develop electrochemical experiments which demonstrate the need to interpret the behaviour of condensed matter in terms of the Q.E.D.paradigm?”
"Background to Cold Fusion: the Genesis of a Concept" M. Fleischmann
Bury Lodge, Duck Street, Tisbury, Salisbury, Wilts., SP3 6LJ, U.K.
Source LENR CAN
https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Fleischmanbackground.pdf
Quote
The scheme of research which led to the start-up of the project now known as “Cold Fusion” is illustrated by Fig. 1.
We note that it is commonly believed that there is absolutely no way of influencing
Nuclear Processes by Chemical means:
therefore, any results that demonstrate
that this might be possible must be due to faulty experimentation, delusion, fraud etc.
However, any enquiry as to the experimental foundation of the first statement in Fig. 1 is normally met by
the response:
“because quantum mechanics, Q.M., shows that this is so”.
We are driven to the conclusion that this first statement is just part of the belief-system of Natural Scientists and we naturally also have to ask the question;
“what conclusion would we draw if we subject the statement to the dictates of Field Theory?”
In the 1960’s we started a series of research projects aimed at answering the
Question;
“can we find illustrations in Chemistry (especially Electrochemistry) of the need to invoke the Q.E.D. paradigm to explain the results obtained?” -endquotes
-
LENR FAQ for Studious Skeptics
Check this out!
From LENR Circa 2022
Quote
New technologies or experimental results do not always work the way people imagine, being better or worse for intended effects or even bringing comletely unforeseen effects.
Results point the following designs could be successful, in descending order of potential: aneutronic nuclear reactions using lattice confinement, aneutronic nuclear reactions using inertial along magnetic confinement, hybrid fission lattice confinement fusion, and fission reactions. -endquote j
Yet Ascoli65 and even perhaps THHuxley or even THHuxleynew think that their arguments concerning the 'Simplicity Paper' invalidates subsequent claims such as these.
-
Novel Technological Developments with Impacts on Perspectives for Mobile Nuclear Power Plants
Luciano Ondir Freire, Delvonei Alves de Andrade Nuclear Engineering Center, Instituto de Pesquisas Energéticas e Nucleares (IPEN-CNEN/SP), São Paulo, Brazil
Abstract
New research developments suggest that nuclear reactors using fusion may enter the market sooner than imagined even for mobile applications, like merchant ship propulsion and remote power generation. This article aims at pointing such developments and how they could affect nuclear fusion. The method is enumerating the main nuclear reactors concepts, identifying new technological or theoretical developments useful to nuclear field, and analys-ing how new recombination could affect feasibility of nuclear fusion.
New technologies or experimental results do not always work the way people imagine, being better or worse for intended effects or even bringing com-pletely unforeseen effects. Results point the following designs could be suc-cessful, in descending order of potential: aneutronic nuclear reactions using lattice confinement, aneutronic nuclear reactions using inertial along mag-netic confinement, hybrid fission-lattice confinement fusion, and fission reactions.
-
OVERVIEW OF PATENT CASES FOR THE FAMILY OF US9115913(B1)
Fluid Heater
2016-04-05
First worldwide family litigation filed
-
US NAVAL DIVISION TO LEAD HYPERSONIC WEAPONS DEVELOPMENT USING 3D PRINTING TECHNOLOGY
KUBI SERTOGLU OCTOBER 27TH 2021 - 6:31PM 0 0
Dahlgren at the forefront
The NSWCDD is well-suited to leading the US’ hypersonic technology advancement efforts as it already has an extensive history of supporting similar projects. After WWII, Dahlgren oversaw a feasibility study concerning hypervelocity guns to defend against supersonic aircraft and missiles, which were futuristic at the time. Over the decades since then, the NSWCDD has also developed software to launch the Navy’s submarine-based high-speed ballistic missiles, as well as engineered a ramjet capable of flying at Mach 4.
“NSWCDD has over six decades of expertise in developing, testing, and evaluating advanced materials for systems that operate in extreme thermal and ablative environments, as is the case with hypersonic and reentry vehicles—it is in our DNA,” added
Dr. Pearl Rayms-Keller, chief scientist of the NSWCDD strategic and computing systems department.
Recently, the division received over $4M in internal investments to fund 22 Naval Innovative Science Engineering (NISE) hypersonic projects, which include the development of new hypersonic materials and advanced hypersonics simulations. Partnering with the University of Miami’s 3D Printing Center, the division’s research teams will now have additive manufacturing systems at their disposal, meaning they’ll be able to leverage improved cycle times, design flexibility, and tool-free production to expedite their hypersonic development efforts.
-
Your scholarly critique of.
Calorimetry of the Pd-D20 system:
from simplicity via complications to simplicity,
should be submitted to Physics Letters A for much valued peer review.
Or
Submit it for presentation at ICCF-25.
Physics Letters A 176 (1993) 118-129
North-Holland PHYSICS LETTERS A
Calorimetry of the Pd-D20 system:
from simplicity via complications to simplicity
Martin Fleischmann
Department of Chemistry, University of Southampton, Southampton, lJK
and Stanley Pons
IMRA EUROPE, Sophia Antipolis, 06560 Valbonne, France
Received 21 December 1992; revised manuscript received 4 March 1993; accepted for publication 8 March 1993
Communicated by J.P. Vigier
We present here one aspect of our recent research on the calorimetry of the Pd-D20 system which has been concerned with high rates of specific excess enthalpy generation ( > 1 kW cme3) at temperatures close to (or at) the boiling point of the electrolyte solution.
This has led to a particularly simple method of deriving the rate of excess enthalpy production based on measuring the times required to boil the cells to dryness, this process being followed by using time-lapse video recordings. Our use of this simple method as well as our investigations of the results of other research groups prompts us to present also other simple methods of data analysis which we have used in the preliminary evaluations of these systems.
1. Introduction
One of our major objectives in developing the calorimetry of Pd and Pd-alloy cathodes polarised in DzO solutions [ l-7 ] has been to find simple illustrations of the fact that there is excess enthalpy generation in these electrodes whereas there is no such effect for Pd-based cathodes polarised in HZ0 (nor for that matter, for Pt cathodes polarised in D20 solutions). The simplest illustrations are purely qualitative: we have already drawn
attention to the fact that, after prolonged polarisation, one can sometimes observe regions in which there is an increase of temperature accompanied by a decrease of cell potential with time for Pd-based cathodes such as that shown in fig. 1. The design of the Dewar-type calorimeters used in these experiments is illustrated in fig. 2. In the versions in current use the silvering of the top portion ensures that the heat transfer is controlled by radiation across the lower unsilvered part. The heat transfer coefficient controlling heat transfer to the surrounding water bath is then nearly independent of time provided the level of the electrolyte remains in the upper, silvered, zone. One can therefore pose the question:
“How can it be that the temperature of the cell contents increases whereas the enthalpy input decreases with time.9”
Our answer to this dilemma naturally has been:
“There is a source of enthalpy in the cells whose strength increases with time.”
At a more quantitative level one sees that the magnitudes of these sources are such that explanations in terms of chemical changes must be excluded [ 7 1.
Indeed, information of this kind was already included in our first major publication [ 11. As the Dewar calorimeters used in that study were not silvered in the top region, the heat transfer coefficients decreased with
time following each refilling of the cells (to make up for losses of DzO due to electrolysis and evaporation).
The purely qualitative conclusion “there is a source of excess enthalpy in the cells” was therefore confined to
the rather extreme illustrations of the “bursts” in the rates of excess enthalpy production such as that shown in fig. 3 (for a complete analysis of these “enthalpy bursts” see figs. 8, 9 and 10 of ref. [ 11).
At the next level of the quantitative analysis of the experimental data, we naturally require models of the
calorimeters and the calibration of the heat transfer to the surrounding water baths. We have shown [ l-6 ] that the behaviour is determined at a close level of approximation by the differential equation
Here kk (W Kw4) is the heat transfer coefficient which is assumed to be purely radiative: we have shown elsewhere that the neglect of the conductive contribution leads to a small underestimate of Qf( t). It will be noted
that one of our preferred methods of calibration uses a “square heating pulse” AQH( t- t, ) -AQH( t- t2) applied using the resistive heater (fig. 2) (the remaining symbols are defined in table 1).
References
[ 11 M. Fleischmann, S. Potts, M.W. Anderson, L.J. Li and M. Hawkins, J. Electroanal. Chem. 287 (1990) 293.
[ 21 M. Fleischmann and S. Pons, Fusion Technol. I7 ( 1990) 669.
[ 31 S. Pons and M. Fleischmann, in: Proc. First Annual Conf. on Cold Fusion, Salt Lake City, UT, 28-31 March 1990.
[ 41 S. Pons and M. Fleischmann, in: The science of cold fusion: Proc. Second Annual Conf. on Cold Fusion, Como, Italy, 29 June-4
July 199 1, eds. T. Bressani, E. de1 Guidice and G. Preparata, Vol. 33 of the Conference Proceedings of The Italian Physical Society
(Bologna, 1992) p. 349.
[ 51 M. Fleischmann and S. Pons, J. Electroanal. Chem. 332 (1992) 33.
[ 61 M. Fleischmann and S. Pons, Proc. Third Annual Conf. on Cold Fusion, ICCF3, Nagoya, Japan, 2 l-25 October 1992, submitted.
[ 71 M. Fleischmann, in: The science of cold fusion: Proc. Second Annual Conf. on Cold Fusion, Como, Italy, 29 June-4 July 1991, eds.
T. Bressani, E. de1 Guidice and G. Preparata, Vol. 33 of the Conference Proceedings of The Italian Physical Society (Bologna,
1992) p. 475.
[ 8 ] W. Hansen, Report to the Utah State Fusion Energy Council on the Analysis of Selected Pons-Fleischmann Calorimetric Data, in:
The science of cold fusion: Proc. Second Annual Conf. on Cold Fusion, Como, Italy, 29 June-4 July 1991, eds. T. Bressani, E. de1
Guidice and G. Preparata, Vol. 33 of the Conference Proceedings of The Italian Physical Society (Bologna, 1992) p. 49 1.
[ 91 S. Pons and M. Fleischmann, to be published.
[lo] R.H. Wilson, J.W. Bray, P.G. Kosky, H.B. Vakil and F.G. Will, J. Electroanal. Chem. 332 (1992) 1.
-
How about ascoli writes this stuff up and published in ICCF25?
You should both do that. I guarantee it will be accepted for publication and critique. You do understand that, what you simply call the 'Simplicity Paper' does not base it's claims only on the video you and Ascolie65 argue about?
Citations within that paper are supportive, exemplary and conclusive.
-
Clearly you never present evidence that the claims that some unknown nuclear process are releasing energies well beyond those of known chemical origin within hydrated palladium as found within the electrochemical cells of Pons and Fleischmann might actually be correct as present by them.
Rather you obfuscate, misdirect, pontify and generalise that Pons and Fleischmann were wrong. Hence we have something brand new. A new buzzword on LENR FAQ for Skeptics...
FOAMGATE
Introduced and Promoted at LENR Forum
By THHuxley and Ascolie65
I do not like to generalise when things are not understood fully (undoubtedly the case for LENR anomalies).
Generalise
Generalize edit correction.
Simple Semantics I'm sure
I'd rather discuss the lesser of two evils rather than you two FoamGate delusionists.
How about Rossi eh? Just 😃 joking.
Journal of Nuclear Physics
https://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com › ...
Generalized Theory of Bose-Einstein Condensation ...
Generalized theory of Bose-Einstein condensation nuclear fusion (BECNF) is used to carry out theoretical analyses of recent experimental results
Semantic Scholar
https://www.semanticscholar.org › ...
[PDF] Generalized Theory of Bose-Einstein Condensation Nuclear ...
Generalized theory of Bose-Einstein condensation nuclear fusion (BECNF) is used to carry out theoretical analyses of recent experimental results
Pennsylvania State University
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu › d...PDF
Theory of Bose–Einstein condensation mechanism for ...
by YE Kim · 2009 · Cited by 71 — Theory of Bose–Einstein condensation mechanism for deuteron-induced nuclear reactions in micro/nano-scale metal
-
estimate has been shown wrong.
NO
-
Erik Ziehm received his Doctoral Degree on this lineage. Write up your critiques, coauthor your observations of the 'Simplicity Paper' and submit them to Nature, or Physical Review for publication, not here please. 🥺
-
-
only later discuss the implications of our conclusion on the LENR field.
-
-
But, I think it would be better for the moment
-
-
Relevant to study of fusion...
Not CMNS energy tech Circa 2022
Not 'Cold Fusion' skepticism 1989
Unconventional approaches to fusionBrunelli, B.; Leotta, G.G.1982
Here is a free Google Book link
Unconventional Approaches to Fusionbooks.google.comRead the book in it's entirety.
I have. At least read the introduction, the Contents lists, the Chapter introduction's, and Bibliography before commenting on this book.
Australia University Curriculum Synopsis
From as early as 1974 they were discussing unconventional approaches to fusion. Every two years these leading fusion scientists and their students got together with open minds in order to think about, and categorize, our understanding of fusion...
In their years of discourse low energy approaches to fusion was not unconsidered or ill-considered...
They compared the difficulties of fusion to the relative ease of understanding of fission, i.e. the defense and energy industry ease-of-use of fission energetics and the profitable capitalization of its utilization.
Of course they discussed hybrid fission and fusion concepts... Some of those predilections are found in the GEC/SPAWAR patent.
-
LENR FAQ for Studious Skeptics
LENR is real. People insisting it isn't real because of errors and fraudulent data in Pons and Fleischmann's experiments have no place here. To engage in arguments with them gives SKEPTICS undue weight and distracts from useful study of LENR FAQ Circa 2022
Nuclear reactions occur in condensed matter systems of LENR, in both the 'wet cell' experiments of 1989 and the contemporary 'dry cell' solid state systems found in the Google/DOE/LLNL patent, NASA LCF, the Fusion Diode... Etc.
Transmutations are unequivocal evidence of nuclear reactions as reported by US Army, NASA, USN, Mizuno, etc etc
Students likely understand that the LENR Energy and Spectroscopy Lab at Washington University today or the CMNS research facilities at LLNL are well equipped modern laboratories. Yet the following article, while old, is a good introduction. Consider that in 2002 the Electrochemical Society became 'believers' and the American Physical Society recognizes and accepts contemporary CMNS research.
We have a wealth of great LENR FAQ for Students also a slew of crap from Skeptics.
A Look at Experiments
gbgoblenote Not Circa 2022
Have you ever wondered what a physics laboratory looks like? They are seldom spacious or organized the way they are shown in movies.
Most LENR researchers work at universities or home laboratories, with tight budgets in a crowded space. They keep old, broken equipment on shelves to scavenge parts for new experiments. In this section we present some photographs of equipment provided by researchers, and close up pictures of equipment.
The actual cells, cathodes and other equipment used in electrolysis experiments often have an ad-hoc, homemade appearance, because they are made by hand.
They have to be; they are unique, one-of-a kind prototypes. Nothing quite like them has ever been made before.
-
This is perhaps off topic here where
Skeptics seem to direct the conversation.
Relevant to study of fusion...
Not CMNS energy tech Circa 2022
Not 'Cold Fusion' skepticism 1989
Unconventional approaches to fusion
Brunelli, B.; Leotta, G.G.1982
1982
Abstract
[en] This volume is dedicated to unconventional approaches to fusion those thermonuclear reactors that, in comparison with Tokamak and other main lines, have received little attention in the worldwide scientific community. Many of the approaches considered are still in the embryonic stages. The authors - An international group of active nuclear scientists and engineers- focus on the parameters achieved in the use of these reactors and on the meaning of the most recent physical studies and their implications for the future. They also compare these approaches with conventional ones, the Tokamak in particular, stressing the non-plasma-physics requirements of fusion reactors. Unconventional compact toroids, linear systems, and multipoles are considered, as are the ''almost conventional'' fusion machines: stellarators, mirrors, reversed-field pinches, and EBT.
Link