Posts by NEPS*NewEnergy

A recent post by Curbina referenced the draft of a paper on muon-catalyzed fusion by Leif Holmlid. Cold fusion might also be made to occur as described in “A Theoretical Model for Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions,” by K.P. Sinha, Infinite Energy, vol. 29, pages 54-57, January/February 2000. An electron or electron pair located on a proton or deuteron and interacting with phonons (atomic vibrations) in the cathode can acquire an effective heavy mass, and the corresponding atom or ion squeezed to a much smaller size. A resulting negatively charged deuterium or hydrogen ion can strongly attract its complementary positive deuterium ion in a molecule that for a small instant of time, has no electrons. The electrons can negate the positive coulomb barrier between the ions, enabling the ions to fuse (a comparison can be drawn to muon-catalyzed fusion).

In a recent post, Robert Bryant showed interest in the discussion about magnetic fields in Sections 31-1 and 31-2 of Sears, Zemansky and Young, but incorrectly referenced Chapter 43 on fusion instead (i.e., from his fourteenth edition published in 2016). It should be possible to locate an earlier section of this textbook for the discussion about magnetic fields. The seventh edition published in 1987 contains Figure 31-1 depicting “Magnetic field vectors due to a moving positive point charge ‘q’ “. The text above the figure says: “The directions of these lines are given by the right-hand rule: Grasp the velocity vector ‘v’ with your right hand, so that your right thumb points in the direction of ‘v’; your fingers then curl around the line of ‘v’ in the same sense as the magnetic-field lines.”

A recent post seems to advocate hot fusion somewhat with the words "by a hot fusion system, which has nothing to counteract the random magnetic effects". This is only a reminder that work has been supported by the federal government on hot plasma fusion (i.e., hot fusion) in government laboratories, academia, and private industry since the mid-1950s. Hot fusion, however, has the following drawbacks mentioned in "Fusion Energy Sciences Roundtable on Quantum Information Science, May 1-2, 2018: the machines are expensive to build and operate; their plasmas are unstable and turbulent; the plasma is heated with waves propagating through inhomogeneous media; performance is strongly affected by plasma interactions with internal material surfaces; the shape of the magnetic field is critical to operation but determined by competing factors; the plasma erodes the internal wall, and plasma becomes contaminated; the internal wall suffers radiation damage; and thermonuclear energy has to be confined for seconds to maintain nuclear burn. In addition, tritium used in the reactors is radioactive, presenting a serious health hazard. Hot fusion, therefore, is not expected to become practical for many more decades. Cold fusion may have a better chance of being industrialized.

A recent post mentions the work of "scientists at NASA Glenn as they accelerate Unconventional Nuclear Reactions in Erbium Deuterides". Please note that photodisintegration of deuterons by gamma radiation was discussed as early as 1935 by J. Chadwick and M. Goldhaber in "A Nuclear Photo-Effect: Disintegration of the Diplong by Gamma-Rays," Nature, vol. 134, pages 237-238, and in more detail in "The Nuclear Photoelectric Effect," Proceedings of the Royal Society, vol. A151, pages 479-493. A theoretical discussion is given in "Quantum Theory of the Diplong," by H. Bethe and R. Peierls, Proceedings of the Royal Society, vol. A148, no. 863, pages 146-156, 1935. Gamma radiation with an energy greater than 2.22 MeV can cause deuterons to disintegrate. The protons and neutrons produced will each have about 240 keV of kinetic energy. Thus, a total of about 0.5 MeV output can be produced as particle kinetic energy from 2.22 MeV input as gamma rays. NASA Glen has also experimented with other hydrogen-absorbing materials in addition to erbium, such as titanium, reported in "Investigation of Deuterium Loaded Materials Subject to x-Ray Exposure," NASA/TM-2015-21849, April 2017.

The concerns expressed above by Robert Bryant and Wyttenback are examples that demonstrate the technical complexity that will be involved in a serious cold fusion system industrialization program. Scale up from liquid electrolysis experiments will probably not work out. Designs for gas or gaseous cold fusion generators also have their own set of issues. For example, the anode and cathode must be sufficiently spaced apart to prevent high voltage breakdown. All possible means should be implemented to load the cathode, such as high gas pressure, thermal diffusion and strong electric fields. The volume of cathode reaction material must be sized to contain enough reaction sites for the desired amount of power, taking into account many sites where reactions will not occur. In addition, the cathode must be able to be installed with ease and later replaced.

Item “a” in the list of system concepts/parameters makes the point that scaling-up from liquid electrolysis experiments to industrial systems would be difficult. Most cold fusion and LENR experiments have involved liquid electrolysis where an anode and cathode are immersed in a liquid electrolyte (heavy water, or D2O). Some experiments have investigated cold fusion of deuterium gas in a metal matrix, without using a liquid electrolyte. Liquids produce problems, such as boiling and evaporation of the liquid, build-up of contaminants, and limited operating temperature. Scale-up from liquid electrolyte experiments to industrial systems would be difficult-to-impossible due to these types of problems.

Scale-up and industrialization of deuterium gas-based cold fusion systems will also be difficult. This is a complex, though not impossible, undertaking from the standpoint of applying advanced physics and engineering principles, and also in view of the complexity of the subsystems to be built, integrated and tested. Some have said that a “Manhattan Project” approach will be needed in terms of development complexity, required expertise, urgency, and time constraints. Many areas of expertise will need to be involved. It requires scientists and engineers with advanced knowledge and understanding of physics and engineering, and individuals that are highly-experienced, team-oriented, and committed to further innovation. Industrial Partners, as team members, will need to be technically-advanced research and development companies, highly interested in solving the climate crisis, and committed to advancing scientific discovery and technical innovation. Most companies and institutions today, by comparison, are specialized and limited in the required areas of expertise. A joint development program will be required to integrate work of the advanced development companies.

The discussion in Sections 31-1 and 31-2 of Sears, Zemansky and Young indicates that a point charge (e.g., one of the deuterium ions) moving with velocity (v) produces magnetic field lines that are circles with centers along the line of the velocity. Due to symmetry of the circular magnetic field lines, a point charge (e.g., a second deuterium ion) lying on the line of the velocity should not be deflected. In addition, the cross product of electric and magnetic fields EXB should keep the ions centered along the line of the velocity. Collision can, therefore, be expected.

WRT comment that the vector sum of both the magnetic and electric forces

will not be directly towards each other, what about the direction of just the magnetic force in the near field?

A recent comment referenced patent application US2014014046A1 (i.e., not a patent). The application contained only one claim and was abandoned.

A reader recently indicated that there is no such thing as a "direct attraction by two distant opposite charges". Actually, however, if the charges are not moving, the force between them is on the same line as the electric field between them. The interaction of charges in motion is described in many textbooks, and is particularly of interest to those involved in hot fusion, high voltage accelerators, transformer design, etc. Reference Chapter 30 in "University Physics" by Sears, Zemansky and Young, Addison-Westley Publishing Company, 1987. While in motion, the ions are still attracted directly towards each other at each increment of time due to their electric field(s). When the electric field and magnetic field both exert forces, the total force is the vector sum of both forces.

The two ions are attracted directly towards each other since one has a negative charge and one is positive. Recommend paper by Sinha.

In a recent post, a reader indicated he is or would like to be part of the basic, fully understood, experiment to identify parameters for a working system. The list of system concepts and parameters given above is derived from the many previous experiments in this field and can possibly be considered as a baseline for the basic experiment in which the reader is interested. The reader's interest in contributing should be passed on to the DoD's chief program manager. Note that when "keV" was used to indicate accelerator voltage for neutron generators, this needs to be considered somewhat different from use of "keV" to describe plasma temperature in fusion cross section and reaction parameter graphs. Also, in cold fusion, the two ions are attracted directly towards each other. The cross section could, therefore, be expected to be about one barn or 10^-24 cm² and the reaction parameter (velocity times cross section) about 0.5 x 10^-19 cm³/sec.

The above post for item “c” in the list of system concepts/parameters indicates that it might be possible for a single deuteron with a velocity of 0.5 x 10⁵ cm/sec to overcome the Coulomb barrier so that fusion is possible. Theoretical graphs of d-d plasma fusion cross section and reaction parameter (i.e., cross section x velocity) might be able to give some insight into deuteron velocities needed for cold fusion compared with neutron generators. These graphs indicate that d-d plasma fusion cross section at 100 keV is about 0.05 x 10^-24 cm² (0.05 barn) and the reaction parameter (cross section times velocity) is 5 x 10^-17 cm³/second. This indicates that many deuterons in a plasma would need to have velocities of 10⁹ cm/sec for fusion. At 20 keV, the fusion cross section is about 0.001 x 10^-24 cm² (0.001 barn) and the reaction parameter (cross section times velocity) is 1 x 10^-19 cm³/second. This indicates that (many) deuterons would need to have velocity of 10⁸ cm/sec for fusion. These values are “close” to the above estimate of 1400 x 10⁵ cm/sec for neutron generators. But, additional information is needed to explain fusion in small linear channels and microscopic cracks of a cold fusion system’s cathode reaction material. The needed insight is believed to be provided in "A Theoretical Model for Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions," by K.P. Sinha, Infinite Energy Magazine, January-February 2000.

The above post regarding item “c” in the list of system concepts indicates that deuterium ions (i.e., with opposite charges) accelerated towards each other through a distance of one-micron might have a velocity of 0.5 x 10⁵ cm/sec when they collide. In order to verify if this velocity is sufficient to overcome the Coulomb barrier so that fusion is possible, it may be a little useful to consider operation of a typical industrial neutron generator. Some of these generators use an electric potential of about 100 kV to accelerate deuterium ions through a 0.5 meter-long evacuated tube. Currents of 0.06 to 10 milliamperes are reported to produce 10⁸ to 10⁹ neutrons per second, for example. An ampere is defined as the movement of one Coulomb of charge per second. If each ion carries a charge of 1.6 x 10^-19 Coulomb, then the ion current would be about 0.04 to 6.0 x 10¹⁶ ions/second. Many of the ions would not reach the target, and many would not fuse to produce neutrons. But, the force (F in newtons) from the electric field on an ion that moves from its source to the target can be determined by multiplying its charge (1.6 x 10^-19 Coulomb) by the electric field (10⁵ volts across 0.5 meter, or 2 x 10⁵ volts/meter). The ion’s velocity can be estimated again by applying Newton's law, F = ma, and the equation for velocity under constant acceleration, v² = 2ad, with initial velocity assumed to be zero. This results in an estimated velocity of 1400 x 10⁵ cm/sec. Although this velocity is many times greater than that calculated for a one-micron-long channel, it is conceivable that the velocity of 0.5 x 10⁵ cm/sec is in the ballpark to be great enough to overcome the Coulomb barrier so that fusion is possible.

With regard to item c in the above list of system concepts/parameters, "the role of microscopic crevices and channels of the system’s cathode reaction material," consider small, one-micron long, linear channels or microscopic cracks in the system’s cathode reaction material that are sparsely populated with several hundred hydrogen and deuterium atoms/ions, and each of these attempting to move with kinetic energy related to temperature of the surrounding material. The linear channels could be manufactured, for example, with carbon nanotubes or layers of hydrogen-absorbing metals. At some point a type of two-component cold fusion reaction (produced by phonons) is believed to occur where one of the atoms gains an electron from the reaction material or local environment while one loses an electron. At this instant, velocity of the two ions attracted by their Coulomb forces can be estimated by applying Coulomb's equation, along with Newton's law, F = ma, and the equation for velocity under constant acceleration, v² = 2ad, with initial velocity assumed to be zero. F is in units of newtons. This results in an estimated velocity of 0.5 x 10⁵ cm/sec. From the standpoint of these equations, fusion is possible due to an ability to accelerate very small masses of ions in the channel to a sufficiently high velocity.

The case for Most Likely Success: The technical literature indicates that, in a cold fusion setting, hydrogen-deuterium, or proton-deuteron (p-d) reactions could or would have greater probability of occurrence than deuteron-deuteron (d-d) and other types of fusion reactions. Reactions between protons and deuterons are discussed in the literature to be an important step with high probability in nucleogenesis of the early universe. And, p-d fusion has been shown to have a high reaction probability compared with d-d fusion in high-density stellar environments. The importance of proton-deuteron (p-d) reactions can be understood by focusing on a type of high-density reaction called "pycnonuclear". This term is derived from the Greek word "pyknos", meaning "compact, dense". This is where positive ions (e.g., the proton and deuteron nuclei) in a material, due to high pressure at relatively low temperature, are able to form a Coulomb lattice structure surrounded by electrons. The electrons act to weaken/screen the Coulomb repulsion between the ions. As a result, nuclear reaction rates can increase considerably. "Metallic hydrogen" is an example where electrons act to weaken/screen the Coulomb repulsion between its proton (p) nuclei. In an October 2001 paper, "Radiative Proton-Capture Nuclear Processes in Metallic Hydrogen,” (Physics of Plasmas, Vol 8 (#10), 4284-4291), Setsuo Ichimaru has indicated that "For a possible laboratory detection of, and for the ultimate goal of power production by pycnonuclear reactions, the p-d reactions may (thus) be looked upon as the most promising process. The fusion yields of stable helium-3 and gamma rays (at 5.494 MeV) would not produce dangerous radioactive byproducts." Theory of p-d pycnonuclear reactions and related cold fusion calculations are further discussed by Ichimaru in "Nuclear Fusion in Dense Plasmas," Reviews of Modern Physics, vol 65 (#2), 255-299, April 1993. The importance of these references on nucleogenesis to cold fusion system development is simply that fusion of hydrogen and deuterium in a cold fusion environment should occur more easily than d-d fusion using all deuterium. Also, as Ichimaru indicated, the energy from any gamma ray would be less than about 20 MeV which could induce dangerous radioactive by-products into the system. Another benefit of p-d reactions is that energy from the gamma rays is low enough to be absorbed by, and produce heat in, construction materials used for the systems’ cathode, reaction chamber and heat exchanger/boiler.

The above list of system concepts and parameters is type of thing that could be included in funding proposals, for example. Of course, a few words of explanation would also be needed for each one.

Some system concepts and parameters suggested for consideration include the following.:

- a. scaling-up from liquid electrolysis experiments to industrial systems would be difficult.

- b. deuterium gas loading in gaseous systems can be just as operative as electrolytic loading for liquid systems.

- c. the role of microscopic crevices and channels of the system’s cathode reaction material.

- d. reasons for consolidated metal powder as cathode reaction material.

- e. the role of deuterium diffusion rate.

- f. the role of reaction material (cathode) temperature (e.g., from a built-in electric heater).

- g. the requirement to remove the additional heat produced by cold fusion.

- h. the need to remove helium produced by cold fusion.

- i. the need (desire) to use pressure (i.e., density of gas), electric fields and thermal diffusion to load the cathode reaction material.

- j. Need for sufficient number of reaction sites in cathode.

- k. Need to be physically robust when subjected to related nuclear reactions and internal temperatures.

- l. Need the cathode to be replaceable.

- m. Need for gas manifold(s).

- n. Need to supply heat to downstream generators.

- o. Need to monitor gamma radiation.

- p. Need to handle any radioactive tritium (safely).

Isaac Asimov has stated that “Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world.” Albert Einstein said, “Scientists investigate that which already is; engineers create that which has never been.” Freeman Dyson has said, “A good scientist is a person with original ideas. A good engineer is a person who makes a design that works with as few ideas as possible. There are no prima donnas in engineering.” Yuan-Cheng Fung stated: “Engineering is quite different from science. Scientists try to understand nature. Engineers try to make things that do not exist in nature. Engineers stress invention.” And, Theodore von Karman said, “Scientists study the world as it is; engineers create the world that never has been.”

Some engineering concepts suggested for consideration include, e.g.:

- Need for sufficient number of reaction sites in cathode.

- Need to be physically robust when subjected to related nuclear reactions and internal temperatures.

- Need the cathode to be replaceable.

- Need for gas manifold(s).

- Need to supply heat to downstream generators.

- Need to monitor gamma radiation.

- Need to handle any radioactive tritium.

Perhaps readers of this post could also suggest their own "one liner" engineering concepts and parameters of most interest to them. After a good list is composed, it would then be possible to add explanatory comments to each one.

As indicated above, the program can begin with previously discussed system concepts and parameters, e.g.:

- scaling-up from liquid electrolysis experiments to industrial systems would be difficult.

- deuterium gas loading in gaseous systems can be just as operative as electrolytic loading for liquid systems.

- the role of microscopic crevices and channels of the system’s cathode reaction material.

- reasons for consolidated metal powder as cathode reaction material.

- the role of deuterium diffusion rate.

- the role of reaction material (cathode) temperature (e.g., from a built-in electric heater).

- the requirement to remove the additional heat produced by cold fusion.

- the need to remove helium produced by cold fusion.

- (added) the need (desire) to use pressure (i.e., density of gas), electric fields and thermal diffusion to load the cathode reaction material.

Perhaps readers of this post could add their own "one liner" concepts and parameters of most interest to them. After a good list is composed, it would then be possible to add explanatory comments to each one.