Posts by LeBob

Zephir_AWT wrote:

Except that Searle has built it, Americans have built it, Russians have built it and now YouTubers are starting to build it too. You're flooding this forum with your tirade about LENR - but how much your "argumentation" differs from usual ignorant "argumentation" against LENR? Only subject changes, but ignorance remains the very same.

Sorry but this is the disinfo and counterscientific mindset that sneaks into legitimate cutting edge alternative energy. This also holds us back just as much as stagnant illogically skeptical authorities do! I hope you learn to see that the energy source that will be real doesn't require extremely farfetched psuedoscience. The proof is in the pudding! It's all love though.

Dr Richard wrote:

.........because the rate of UDH synthesis is very slow and is in equilibrium with the reverse reaction perhaps? Need to discover better catalysts to increase the concentration of UDH to increase the probability of subsequent fusion reactions. Which is why Norront Fusion are screening for other catalysts.

And that's where exothermically formed stable pico-hydrides may bloom. When you all say the reactions are slow, where is this coming from? How many reactions are needed in order to have a productive power source using these steps, assuming both *H*-H*/Hydrino" and metal pico hydrides are majority fractions of the output in reaction in the same reactor? This with 0.5-10% of resulting energy coming from nuclear reactions, and lets say a system with 500W consistent output at an average of 2.7keV per reaction as general perameters. Concidering that dense hydrogen pares form while releasing ~500eV and nickel and iron pico-hydrides average around 5keV according to liturature.

Can wrote:

From the tables of the document linked in the quoted comment they could release roughly ("in the order of magnitude of") 67 and 24 keV per reaction respectively, although I imagine tungsten would also be easier to experiment with in larger quantities at higher temperatures.

Clearer excerpt on the energy of formation of pico-hydrides, from Pico-chemistry: The possibility of new phases in some Hydrogen-Metal systems linked in comment #14 :

A second bit of relavant info could bring up the cumulative average energy per reaction calculated if using Tungsten or Palladium respectively. Have a restful weekend.

I don't think excess heat can come from a system without a downwards slip in total mass. Magnetism isn't a source of energy in and of itself.

Director wrote:

The exact source of the excess energy doesn't matter since we know it's there! Brilliant Light Power, The SAFIRE Project, and Andrea Rossi are all using this phenomenon in their devices. Moreover, previous inventors have utilized the negative resistance regime such as Alexander Chernetsky and Paulo Correa. Then if you understand what the negative resistance regime is and how every electrical discharge has to go through it for at least a very short period of time, you realize that a ton of other individuals who also utilizing the phenomena. What matters is that this regime has WORKED again and again. Currently, there are three major plays using this phenomena to produce massive excess power and they ALL have different ideas on what's happening. But the excess energy is still there regardless of the fact that we don't all agree yet on the theory!

Most of mankind's technological advancement came from inventions that they did not fully understand! But it didn't matter because they worked. Producing practical devices is what really matters. Once we have them, the scientific community can spend the next hundred years working out the theory.

Sure, just how the ancient iron age pre-industrial civilizations didn't understand oxidation and chemical reactions completely, but they still made amazingly productive use of fire. A note, it does matter how we generally believe the energy is being released. Consumption or changes in matter allow a exothermic product to unfold. So sure if it works and is managebly safe, I see no reason to stop or slow it's use unnessasarily, let it flow. Could allow much blessings for humanity, if used as generally as fire/combustion has throught recent history. And those similar elements and features between all the higher performance claims also fall in well with pico-chemical and nuclear theories. while possibly being explained entirely or mostly by the former subnuclear approach. There is no need for this energy to be an esoteric quantum mystery unless it is!

The high energy but sub nuclear power results are expected to, not a suprise at all! Quite a good confirmation of certain trends and overlaps in various researchers and theoreticians data. Lovely the pico-chemistry thing has been given some sort of positive progress amidst it's arguments!

Wyttenbach wrote:

There is some solid indication that all LENR below a COP of 1.3 or is just H*-H* condensation and thus not yet LENR.

Interesting cool, since H*-H* is a very exothermic proccess why wouldn't it reach to higher than a COP of 5 in your estimation? Quite low estimate to me, but makes sense it would at least amount to 1.3.

Drgenek wrote:

The magnecule bonding is evidence of energy added to the nucleus to cause charge separation in the nucleus. If H* and Fe* bond magnetically then both elements have energy in the nucleus above their nuclear ground state. The chemical reaction above the metal creates H*. H* causes a fusion reaction which creates more H*. H* as a fuel penetrate to K shell and transfer energy to Fe to create Fe* which then magnetically bonds as Fe*H*.

The model which fits the data is fusion not exothermic pico-chemistry. The fusion happens, then the pico-chemistry. The weak force is why only one isotope of iron reacts. Magnecule fusion is the weak force lowering the coulomb barrier. Elements which can receive energy into their nucleus by way of the weak force will fuse at a lower temperature. The more energy that gets into the nucleus this way, the lower the coulomb barrier between magnecules. Oxygen is likely the element most capable of receiving energy via the weak force from H*. Magnecule fusion between H* and O* is a proven reaction per my pending patent. Don't just reject my statement, because if you want to know for yourself you can read it and do the math and prove it to yourself.

If the above explanation works to explain energy from Fe pico-hydrides, it may work to explain BLP experiments which are water dependent and probably a host of others LENR experiments where oxygen and hydrogen are present.

There are indeed plenty of labels. The labels need to mean something specific. Magnetronite as defined above become that specific term. Specific terms help us compare models via experimental data.

Display More

Appologies, I wasn't intending to shut you down or anything. You have more experience and practical knowledge in this field then me. I'm just sharing my observations and educated guesses cause you seem willing to engage and this forum seems to be one of the few places I can discuss this productively. I don't even have a masters yet and I'm talking to a doctorate. But what I have posited maybe still possible, speaking in absolutes without a working prototype and/or extensive math is unwise! You make some sense though.

Wyttenbach wrote:

If a company is ruled by a genius that is infected by the all mighty syndrome, then we most likely will see the same outcome as with Steven Jobs "next computer" company. Mills is obviously unwilling to learn and understand anything else that has not been invented by himself.

Getting energy out of Hydrogen and producing H* only is bare nonsense. H* is the most precious ingredient to induce LENR and the step to get LENR if you have H* is tiny. As said already 10 times: Nobody will allow a process that produces H* as dangerous waste and thus this will end his business if he cannot present a technology to neutralize it again. E.g. a super fridge!

H* has been first produced by Santilli. USPTO has denied patent status. Mills has no evidence for an other (Hydrino) state of matter as a simplistic formula with no physical foundation that is ridiculous. Mills idea that charge would increase is weird as charge according physics decreases with the radius. Thus a patent based on fantasy will end in the waste basket.

A quick word, as said before I believe Mill might be seeing both H2* pico-chemical reactions and deep hydrogen bonds with available metals in the same system. It may be opposite what a few people here think, that one super chemical reaction is mistaken LENR reactions. Maybe a lot of LENR is due to a massive selection of super and/or pico-chemical reactions with slightly above trace amounts of true nuclear reactions. It makes more intuitive sense than nuclear energy disappearing and dark energy coming from the void! So maybe the "chemical" people are kinda right but have an incomplete working hypotheses that limits the effectiveness of their reactors. With H2*, larger H* clusters and many metal pico-hydrides all possibly requiring similar catalysed electron dense forming conditions to their power release... We have an amazing potencial situation.

Ahlfors wrote:

Private companies affiliated:

Ross Koningstein, Google Inc, USA

Ned Allen, Lockheed Martin, USA (to be confirmed)

Thank you for your finds!

Drgenek wrote:

What can we know it true without hypothesis and further experimental data?

Could you explain what is UDH? How do you understand H*?

As proposed and per theory magnetronite states of Hydrogen are dense hydrogen but there are a lot of these states of various density. As proposed above we could have Fe*. So it is easier to use a mineral name like magnetronite to refer to minerals where one or more atoms have magnetic fields above the ground state of those atoms.

I was thinking earlier that any background fusion rates might be enhanced. But my current opinion is that a movement of the H proton down to the lower orbit bond with metal is most of the energy release we see in hydrogen metal systems. And I actually think that simplifies things and solidifies the relative safety of use anywhere if verified. That Wikipedia factoid is extremely interesting though!

Well H* is a state of more stable hydrogen with a lower electron orbit most likely di-hydrogen and larger clusters. It's reduction supposedly releases quite a bit of energy 400 and something eV. Is magnetronite something you are coining? Maybe, but I prefer pico-hydride. I think that would work because it is a hydride bonded at a picoscale orbit. It only has the features it has or produces the energy it does because of the exothermic reaction that bonds Fe closely to a hydrogen atom. At least according to Dofours. Sure the special metal hydride is an atom sized dipole magnet, the term makes sense but there are more than enough labels for the same phenomina already tbh.

Bruce__H wrote:

Are you referring to peer review (of scientific papers) or particularly to anonymous peer review? Surely peer review itself was in place before the 1930's in the shape of journal editors. I think the editor-as-king system was more open to abuse than the modern system of having editors seek expert opinions on manuscripts which they must then pay attention to.

How does the anonymity of a peer reviewer enforce conformity, enable plagiarism, etc.? You have lost me there. I agree that these are problems in science I just don't understand how they are produced by the anonymity of reviewers in the publishing process as you seem to be saying

"Hubble Wars" is a wonderful book that I have on my shelves. I don't recall anything in it about the subjects you mention though. I do recall that secrecy and the desire of managers to avoid embarrassment caused lots of problems. Avoiding secrecy and promoting transparency and frankness is a reason for anonymous review.

I think you are wrong in your views here and it seems to me that some of your mistaken views arise from unfamiliarity with the process. I know it from all sides (author, editor, reviewer) and so believe I have a more informed opinion. I would be interested, however, if you know of a more scholarly treatment of this whole question that would get us beyond mere competing personal views.

P.S. I wonder if there is a more suitable thread for this conversation

Display More

Thanks for your explanation. The one part i agree with from the previous comment that was elaborated further by yours is the seeking of expert opinion that they must pay attention to. If your research is in a field that combines aspects of others, is relatively new and fringe to the mainstream experts, their opinion of your paper will be heavily skewed against open-minded consideration of facts irregardless of apparent contradictions with their own professional cornerstones.

I am a skeptic of vacuum energy tbh.

Drgenek wrote:

So iron maybe a co-fuel to release the energy from magnecule fusion stored in H*. Various efforts by BLP and host of other could have data to discover other co-fuels from heat yield experiments.

Here is another though that is likely relevant to a magnetic field as compared to magnetic field boosted by w-waves. The source is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…bility_(electromagnetism) . The relative magnetic permeability of iron (99.8% pure) and iron (99.95% pure Fe annealed in H) are 5000 and 200,000 respectively.

Wouldn't it be nice to use experiments that measure permeability of materials solidified in hydrogen to select for elements (isotopes of elements) that would react like Fe-54?

No that's not what am saying and IDK if that is true.

I think he may have a point and instead of getting on his case, and making accusations people in a lab should try it out along with further optimizing powder based systems!

Rob Woudenberg wrote:

Regarding UDH/UDD as a dedicated form of pico-hydride: Jacques Dufour mentioned that once created these new atoms form an irreversable pico-hydride form.

UDD/UDH does not seem to be an irreversable pico-hydride form, it's only relative stable at certain conditions according to my interpretations of Holmlid's papers.

Also UDH or H* is not an atom sized dipole like a metal hydrogen pico-scale bond is, would be bad to get them confused. Both are pico-hydrides but one is just hydrogen with itself, so no charge asymmetry and with simpler lower energy reactions.

Drgenek wrote:

Proposal of a "purely electromagnetic compound of picometer size" doesn't account for why only Fe-54 reacts. How do the neutrons cause this selection, unless the forces involved in pico-chemistry interact with neutrons. As I proposed an electron could be ejected to allow electronic bonding but there is another possibility that could account for selection of Fe 54. I proposed that the H* has a superpositioned weak-interacting quantum state. Some of energy of a particular state of H* could pass to the nucleus of iron 54 via the w-waves (the proposed exchange boson in H* states as magnetronite). The selection then likely follow some reverse of the phat condensation that creates H*. The other isotopes don't react because the possible quantum states in their nuclei can not accept some of the energy from any one of many H* states. The specificity is due to a necessary matching of energy division to a quantum relationship. Remember possible magnetronite states of H* are proposed to be related as E= n*n*(~13.6 eV). Activation of a weak interacting state in iron 54 would then cause H* and Fe* to bond as magnecules. That bonding would not require the lost of an electron, so the energy produced could be less than the expected 7 keV required to eject a K shell electron from Fe. As explained before magnet to magnet bonding also creates an electric dipole which may account for the change in the charge to mass ratio which lead to the confusion of H*Fe* with Co55.

You seem to be right on it in this particular comment! Fit's perfectly with the observation that these pico-states with H/metal would appear like transmutations at low energy, just with some strange magnetic features in the new "element".

can wrote:

From the tables of the document linked in the quoted comment they could release roughly ("in the order of magnitude of") 67 and 24 keV per reaction respectively, although I imagine tungsten would also be easier to experiment with in larger quantities at higher temperatures.

Clearer excerpt on the energy of formation of pico-hydrides, from Pico-chemistry: The possibility of new phases in some Hydrogen-Metal systems linked in comment #14 :

Tungsten is that much higher than iron at 7keV??? Well pretty sure a simple look at the periodic table would show me the gap.

can wrote:

LeBob

Perhaps this could be helpful: https://xdb.lbl.gov/Section1/Table_1-2.pdf

If the principle is the same, the formation of a Nickel pico-hydride would release slightly more energy than what is proposed for iron although I haven't read the theory in enough detail to confidently state this. (EDIT: this would be considering the excerpt below)

Potassium would evaporate at lower temperatures and take less energy to ionize, which should be an advantage compared to sodium. I think a major factor is that hydrogen will readily take the molecular form under pressures close to atmospheric, which would hamper the proposed reaction that needs protons. So possibly lower pressures, higher temperatures, high-surface area catalytic surfaces (where hydrogen would be adsorbed as separate atoms) or a combination of these might help as well.

Display More

How about Tungsten and Palladium?

Drgenek wrote:

Do you have a link for (Dufour in Asti)? I am curious about the data. What would suggest cobalt 57 rather than iron 57 as the dominate result from iron 56?

I think he's talking about a change in electron structure due to the presense of H* in the atom not a literal nuclear reaction but a rebalancing of subatomic particles. Considering this is a pico-chemical reaction, am I right Wyttenbach ?

Drgenek wrote:

I present some notes from Pico-Chemistry The possibility of new phases in some hydrogen-metal systems. Pdf. (see post #14). Dufour postulates “an electrical dipole, formed between an electron and a proton”, … could “penetrate into the inner electronic shells of the metal.” He discusses reaction conditions then proposed the result “A dipole … with a sizeable charge separation is thus formed between the proton and the electron and is attracted by the positive nucleus…” He proposes chemical state (a chemical bond) with an enthalpy of formation (680MJ/mole) Fe.

I can understand part of this from the point of view of magnecules. Magnecules are formed due to reaction conditions at the metal surface involving electromotive force and hydrogen. The weak interacting states which cause magnecules have an electrical dipole. The electrical dipole become a strong magnetic field when the w-wave penetrates the nuclear region. These magnetronite states are of such small size they may penetrate to inner electronic shells. The more energy in the state, the smaller it gets. Normal size exclusion prevents penetration of hydrogen but not necessarily these smaller states. But bonding is not expected because the K shell of Iron is filled. Bond theory requires and overlap of the hydrogen and iron orbitals but also that both orbitals have no more than two electrons. It seems an electron would need to be ejected from the k shell of iron to accommodate the electron of any magnetronite to allow bonding. I am using magnetronite to refer any mineral having hydrogen which has weak interacting quantum states.

From post #18 we get a k shell x-ray at 7057.98 eV. (Did I get this right?). The formula for the energy of various n levels for weak interacting quantum states of hydrogen is n*n*(13.5878925) eV. The closest match is n= 23 at 7188 eV. As with the photoelectron effect, the energy to eject an electron just needs to be above the energy that binds the k shell electron. If the x-ray above is the energy emitted when the electron is knocked out of it’s place and reabsorbed, then we have an approximate match to explain inner shell bonding of hydrogen to iron.

Yea I read/skimmed all of the papers by Dofours. Was pretty sure an electron would have to get kicked out or something. Magnecules or magnetronite are both just different personal labels for pico-hydrides. I am cautiously hopeful that the formation of these matter states could replace fossil fuel combustion as a compact, environmental and versatile power source. While producing valuable materials that get extracted when pico-chemical reactors get refueled. Probably also could encourage a modular molten salt fission reactor to safely produce power anywhere. Integration of pico-chemistry into waste processing, allows cleaning up after them carefully. With something like this replacing fossil fuels, fuel cells/generators directly and with radioactive waste dampener assisted MSRs replacing all current fission reactors while adding some capacity, I don't think we would leave unfilled gaps.

Yes, this is speculative and conceptual, but that is what I love about many forums. Productively exercised creativity along with logic, with access to information can open doors.

People are worried about releasing these substances into the environment and I am arguing that's the last thing you want to do even if they are inert. The theoretical characteristics of pico hydrides would almost guarantee a company would collect and make good use of them. Dense hydrogen may decays completely into mesons, would be useful for extreme energy situations! Metal dipole constructs could make RT superconductors, and awesome ultracapacitors. Open to the possibilities, this is without even considering potencial fusion applications which may be redundant considering energy levels and lack of neutron/gamma energy.

Director wrote:

I want to puke at the idea of getting any respect from you. Being anything less than an ant under your boot is an insult. If I were on fire in the street and you had a fire extinguisher, I'd rather burn to death or live the rest of my life in a burn ward than allow you to help me. If the world was about to come to an end and your space craft was the only way to get off the planet, I'd wait here until the end.

Very professional... but i don't think all your comments are off the mark, in relation to maximizing reaction rate/output, Those of us that don't have labs can't be speaking in absolutes yet.. Appreciate your input though keep connecting dots. Peace.