Posts by Oleg

Quote from Stevenson

Oleg, some times ago I replicated the circuit described in their patent, using the same vacuum tube: zero increase in capacitance. They later explained that the actual tube required for obtaining the effect is very different from the one cited in the patent, but at this point I'm very skeptical. BTW, if I remember correctly, J.P. Biberian has done some investigation on that and he reported some preliminary (non-negative) results. But I heve no detailed information or updates.

Care to share what tube exactly is needed? Patenting different tube seems sketchy.

Quote from Stevenson

Oleg, some times ago I replicated the circuit described in their patent, using the same vacuum tube: zero increase in capacitance. They later explained that the actual tube required for obtaining the effect is very different from the one cited in the patent, but at this point I'm very skeptical. BTW, if I remember correctly, J.P. Biberian has done some investigation on that and he reported some preliminary (non-negative) results. But I heve no detailed information or updates.

I've been a little skeptical because of large promises about commercial use (none delivered and generally a scam red flag) and really poor quality of their website. As far as it seems there was nothing after 2022, but website is maintained and updated at least in IP (they site year 2024. There's no videos or articles on tests, bugs me out a bit.

Came around interesting technology - Vaccum Capacitor storing energy in form of Charge Clusters. There already was a thread on it, but it died out. I think people don't quite understand possible importance of this. This is not pseudoscience as far as I understand. I viewed patent and didn't find anything much shady. The most important though, is of course characteristics – citing the patent they achieved over 5 (!!!) Farad of capacitance in a single cm³, while operating Voltage is quoted to be "Several tens of Kilovolts", which I suspect is only limited by breakdown voltage. The energy stored in a capacitor formula is well known. If we use conservative values of 20 Kilovolts and 5 Farads, the energy density comes to 1 BILLION joules per cm³, or whole 277 kWh.

I tried viewing news about it on website, but last activity was in 2022. Many promises, but no real commercialization. Prototypes with good energy density of over 1 MJ/cm³ were made as far as I can see.

Anyone has any replication attempts? More fresh news?

This is interesting, however little to none practical work nowadays, no fresh results. Seems kinda pointless, although I'm really interested.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

The physical feasibility, or not, of handling the amount of total heat and temperatures claimed for a device is a useful tool to sort out some of the more fantastic (literally) designs offered by inventors.

I spent some time a few years ago testing some designs and adding sudden extra heat (secondary heat coil, etc) and most designs failed almost instantly by cracking or melting down.

I have built test devices that were up to 1800 W and 1500 C that handled a fair bit of heat abuse, so it is more of a design plan problem rather than a materials problem. It can be done.

Most real LENR experiments, however, are simply not made for such high power levels.

Can you describe your method of achieving LENR?

Quote from Paradigmnoia

Controversially, I’m gonna say the answer to the OP question is “no”.

Feel free to posit otherwise.
Most LENR experiments would fail catastrophically with 500 W of excess heat for more than a moment (ie: flames in under a minute!).

That is rather sad.

Quote from Curbina

If you mean instantaneous bursts of power of that magnitude, perhaps there's none that was ever deemed to be independently reproducible (from the top of my head Mizuno's Pd rubbed on Ni mesh so called R20 reactor that is claimed to have produced 3 KW heat), but cumulative excess heats of Mega Joules has been recorded in some experiments.

You didn't understood me right. I specifically asked NOT about bursts. But a continuous output of at least 1 kj/second, which is 1 kW.

I just have a simple question, was there ever a single LENR device that generated at least 1 kW of energy outside of Mills' hydrino stuff? Not just a sudden burst or unreproducible devices.

Quote from bayak

Oleg, I appreciate your suggestion, but you need to have a device to experiment with fuel. Here (the State Committee for Science and Technology of Belarus) offers me to first issue a patent for an invention, and then try to implement the device at a suitable enterprise. Of course, it would be easier not to bother with patents, but to organize R&D within the framework of a suitable institute, but this is not in my power.

It would be really awful if you patent it and then it doesn't work, so just to prove that it can work you should perhaps build a very small sized version, just as a proof of concept. It doesn't necessarily needs to be practical or useful, it should just show that your invention and principle works. And for that deuterium gas is the best you can do. I also have a question, what is your estimates on the size of the device? How small can it be made to work?

bayak I suggest using deuterium gas as a fuel. If it really lowers the barrier so much, reaction rates with deuterium would be high and easily detectable.

Quote from bayak

Wyttenbach, I don't walk the beaten path.

Really good mindset to be honest.

Quote from bayak

Have you read the text on the link or Rus_link? There are some approximate calculations there.

Ok, so I see the approximate value of only... 0,3 eV? Extremely low I must say. Impressive! But what would be the rates? I suggest trying to calculate, or at least approximate, the rate of fusion in such system with moderate, practically attainable conditions.

Quote from bayak

Of course, there are a lot of questions, but full answers can be obtained only in experiments. Purely theoretically, it is assumed that LENR occurs in a compressed double layer of plasma, in which the mechanism of collective acceleration (interaction) is activated due to a decrease in the dimension of this plasma layer 3->2->1. In the plasma ring, the Coulomb barrier decreases by several orders of magnitude. For example, water vapor injected into a vessel can be used as LENR fuel.

Several orders of magnitude are not even nearly enough for HH fusion (proton-proton). Won't work with just water. You can't just throw random stuff in it and expect fusion.

this is quite an interesting concept. However I don't really understand how it would relate to LENR. I have thoughts that it is more suitable for just regular hot fusion, like a fusor. But what's the LENR part? Where is it? How would it stimulate LENR, what exactly is the type of expected LENR and what is the "LENR fuel"? Many questions.

I knew it can be produced in good enough amounts, and finally there is evidence.

Holmlid published a new paper

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374854063_Spontaneous_creation_of_muons_and_destruction_of_protons_in_ultra-_dense_hydrogen_H0

It is estimated by Holmlid that 8×10²³ hydrogen atoms in form H(0) was produced. Given that 6×10²³ atoms of hydrogen is 1 gram, presumably 1,33±0,01 grams of H(0) were produced. The lifetime of H(0) was estimated to be 10¹¹ years. The activity for this amount was roughly 40000 spontaneous reactions/second, so activity per gram is roughly 30000 reactions/second. Given that 1 reaction corresponds to consumption of 2 atoms of protium with rest mass of 939 MeV, we can estimate that 30000×939×2=56340000 MeV of energy per gram is constantly released. Assuming standard density of H(0) to be around 130000 g/cm³, we can estimate that 1 cm³ of H(0) would have an activity of roughly 3900000000 reactions per second, or 3,9 GBq (gigabecquerel). So 1 cm³ of H(0) would constantly release 3900000000×939×2=7324200000000 MeV of energy. Assuming that only 46% of that energy can be converted to heat by any means, we can calculate that 3369132000000 MeV of usable energy would be released, which corresponds to 0,54±0,01 joules/second, or 0,54±0,01 watts of heat. That is not negligible amount of heat just from "decay"!

Quote from fabrice DAVID

In this old-fashioned industrial hall, with an old cyclotron from the Cold War era, Professor Oganessian's team in Dubna managed to discover 6 new elements. One of them bears his name, an honor to which neither Kepler, nor Newton, nor Lavoisier never been entitled.

But they only managed to synthesize a few atoms! It turns out that in deep space we will need the superheavy elements from 115 to 118 and even beyond, for corect conversion purposes.

It is time to use a more efficient method for the synthesis of these elements.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VaY9N7Alq0

Display More

They don't even last a millisecond. Radioactive decay. It isn't possible to get any meaningful amounts.

This is the end here. The idea would not be proven nor disproven without a simple tests. We can speculate for weeks with no result. I highly suggest anyone capable to try it out, in milligram quantities.

I researched for a bit more and came up with the conclusion that fuel should also contain TiFeD2

Quote from stefan

New version of my paper is now out. I have been working hard on this and I like the result now so much that I submitted it to vixra. Anyway it looks like it should be possible to verify the theory as it assumes the mass is different for particles and anti particles. But they are close and the difference is smaller than 0.2%. Currently we measure masses of antiparticles to the precision of 1% so we can't verify it currently but I do not thing 0.2% is out of reach. I have now a pretty good grasp of a theory why about the fine structure constant and why we have 137. It turns out that we have a formula that was just made by trial and error indicate that if we assume that there is a corresponding \alpha to each number of pitches per loop, we will will have r/R = constant * \alpha. This leads to in the end to a unique choice for $N$ in order to match the energy density limit. Of cause I may be wrong, but I did my best to get the theory into a reasonable shape.

amazing job, though conclusions are a bit controversial.