Posts by axil

Quote from stephenrenzz

Such utter nonsense. The vast majority of technologies are proven WELL before massive production, and this one is no exception. As mentioned a million times, (disclaimer for FrankWTF) all Rossi needs to do is perform an independent demonstration among trusted peers with Rossi's hands OFF the demo. Even the skeptics would accept this...and please do not mention the faulty Lugano test. There is one reason and one reason only that Rossi refuses to do an independent demo...because the "Rossi Effect" is not real. Plain and simple.

Rossi is not the only one who needs to do an independent demo. IH and their backers must also setup up a system where a flow meter can be setup to reduce a COP of 50 to a COP under 1. What is the critical factor, the lack of a back flow valve? Well, set up the test. An electric water heater might be used and a flowmeter without back flow check valve should produce a COP of less than 2%.

I will await that demo on YouTube. Put your data where your mouths are.

Quote from Mary Yugo

Axil:

I must be getting behind in my studies of Rossisays and Rossispeak. Are you sure he said that? He has a tiny needle like reactor which performs nuclear fusion with no power input? Then why does he not show it to the appropriate people and collect his billions of dollars and his Nobel prize? Why, Axil? Why, IH Fan? Why Sifferkol? Etc. etc.

First, Rossi has to prove people like you wrong though massive production. Once the LENR concept is proven to the common man, then it will be accepted as science, no nobel prize until then and no big money either. It is you mary, Rossi must discredit you. It's you and him like a mongoose and a cobra in deadly combat. But in the end when the battle is over, you will look back on a wasted life. So Sad.

Quote from Peter Ekstrom

For once I agree completely with Wyttenbach! .

This Fantasy-tendency is too common with LENR-believers. We have a few more examples in the forum, no names but you know who...

There are experiments and data that are so disturbing and unworldly, that the conservative mind cannot handle them. This data is so unreal that people are afraid to do the experiments and replicate because of the mind blowing implications of that data but in that data there lies the path to the truth.

Quote from Alan Smith

So they have - but in most cases this has been put down to the allergenic properties of Nickel itself. BTW, in over 50 experiments I have only ever had one reactor breach. I must be doing something wrong.

John Fisher's CR39 experiments have shown that the nuclear active sites (NAS) are mobile and can float in the air like dust. Those NAS produce far more alpha particles than does radon. The LENR experiment must be airtight for safety sake.

Letts and Cravens found a number of LENR active resonances by using two lasers that produced beats through interference. They found there was a number of LENR stimulation frequencies in the terahertz region. In THz, 8.4, 14.5, 14.75, 15.3 and a broad resonance peak at 20 and 21.4. By using a square wave pulsed EMF stimulation, those high frequencies could be produced by wave interference. That is why many successful replications are produced by triacs and pulsed power stimulators like Brillouin Energy Corp.

SPP are powered by dipole oscillations of an electron and a hole(positive ion), a way to get energy into the dipole will feed power into the SPP which is essentially a ball of photons in a cavity. A external stimulative waveform that resonates with the dipole will feed energy into the SPP which will convert that energy into focused magnetic flux lines. Once a sufficient LENR magnetic power level is reached, the LENR reaction will produce a positive feedback loop by absorbing nuclear energy and converting it to continued magnetic field lines, heat, and light(blue).

Quote from Alan Smith

BTW, I like the Neutron capture idea very much.

There are not neutron reactions in LENR, that concept is a destructive fantasy.

Quote from Timar

From an engineering standpoint, the QuarkX is a radical but highly plausible advancement: the very purpose of the miniaturization was to decrease the thermal inertia of the reactor as much as possible, thus enabling much more precise control with greatly reduced response time, which allowed Rossi to raise the COP by two orders of magnitude.

I beleive that you have hit on a gem of truth there. Heat is both a reaction stimulator and a energy output of the reaction. If Rossi minimized the stimulation by heat in his design then the EMF stimulation could provide positive control without interference from an output product provided by heat. A Reactor run away is caused when the output of heat also becomes a stimulator of the reaction.

Something that Rossi did in the design of the Hot Cat made that type of reactor less reactive to the heat that it produced and more dependent of EMF stimulation. It might be the very high temperatures that the Hot Cat and Quark operate at. That high temperature may be out of the reactor's heat stimulation zone.

Someone should ask Rossi if he turns off the EMF stimulation, if the Quark would turn off with no heat after death. He has said that the Quark is always in SSM mode, and that is already telling.

Quote from magicsound

@axil It doesn't need to be magnetic. See 10.1038/nature08318 for an experimental demonstration of visible light SPASER emission at ~530 nm (blue-green) from prepared nano particles.

Some background at https://www.technologyreview.c…smallest-laser-ever-made/

Thanks Wyttenbach for the pointer to Stockman's work!

@magicsound

Researchers has just discovered a high-energy side-peak emission whose frequency increases in proportion with the power content of the SPP.

http://phys.org/news/2016-06-s…einstein-condensates.html

The SPP produces light as well as monopole magnetic flux lines. The blue light produced by Rossi's reactor might well come from the side peak emission. SPP light is also where the blue-black light from sonoluminescence comes from. And I also suspect that the black light from SPPs is what R. Mills sees, and that hydrinos are distortions of electron orbits produced by SPP magnetism. Hydrinos are an effect of SPPs and not a cause of LENR.

Referenced below, G. Egely explains how SPPs have produced LENR systems for the last 100 years since Tesla. If you have the time, it is worth the read.

http://www.egely.hu/letoltes/F…seudo-Particles-Part1.pdf
http://www.egely.hu/letoltes/F…seudo-Particles-Part2.pdf
http://www.egely.hu/letoltes/F…seudo-Particles-Part3.pdf

When you complete this read you will discover that I am not orginal. Others speak the same word salad as I do. If lack of originality is a comfort to you then be happy and glad. GroupThink is easy on the brain.

An inherent characteristic of the Surface Plasmon Polariton (SPP) is that it is a BEC. If a SPP can form, the SPP will form a BEC no matter how high the temperature is. A dusty plasma will produce SPPs among the dust particles.

One last thing, SPPs are superconducting. This is why the resistance goes down on those Calanti wires when the LENR reaction takes hold.

This just sounds like what Holmlid is doing. He uses graphite doped with potassium to generate Rydberg matter, but maybe nitrogen will also work. Nitrogen was claimed to be a Rydberg element. Also, Graphene is a hexagonal catalyst like graphite.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rydberg_matter

Quote

Rydberg matter is a phase of matter formed by Rydberg atoms; it was predicted around 1980 by É. A. Manykin, M. I. Ozhovan and P. P. Poluéktov.[1][2] It has been formed from various elements like caesium,[3] potassium,[4] hydrogen[5][6] and nitrogen;[7] studies have been conducted on theoretical possibilities like sodium, beryllium,magnesium and calcium.[8]

S. Badiei & L. Holmlid (2002). "Rydberg Matter of K and N2: Angular dependence of the time-of-flight for neutral and ionized clusters formed in Coulomb explosions".International Journal of Mass Spectrometry 220 (2): 127.Bibcode:2002IJMSp.220..127B. doi:10.1016/S1387-3806(02)00689-9.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Do You think of this as a trigger? For e.g. induce/start an instabilty/resonance oscillation of the nucleus?

I wonder...

If LENR increases the rate of radioactive decay in isotopes to an instantaneous speed, that must mean that the mass of the W boson is greatly reduced and its range of action is greatly increased.

Does that not mean in LENR, that the electrons around the nucleus even at large distances must interact with protons and neutrons in beta reactions at great rates? Even the orbital electrons will get in on the LENR reactions. What a free for all such reactions must be?

Quote from Wyttenbach

Axil: May be You should once calculate the 'density' of the events: Thousands of craters means 1 crater per second or, if the experiment lasted more than one day, even 1 per minute!

May be not every LENR lab has a CERN level detector which snoops every photon... But mfp did see some low energy gamma - what's up then ??

The great thing about Holmlid experiments is that he counts particles per laser shot. Holmlid sees up to 1×10^^13 ions per laser shot. Why is Holmlid still alive?

From
Direct observation of particles with energy >10 MeV/u from laser-induced fusion in ultra-dense deuterium

Quote

A discussion of the absolute signal observed must include a discussion about the secondary electron emission coefficient for the impact of MeV protons on a metal collector surface like Al used here. Such data exist in the literature (Park & Jang 2007; Borovsky et al. 1988;
Thornton & Anno 1977). The coefficient is smaller than unity for this energy range and thus signal, which is similar to the signal found with the collector at ground potential. The total charge observed at the collector is thus up to 3×10-10 As or 2×10^^9 ions per laser shot. The exposed collector area corresponds to 2×10^^-4 of the full sphere, which gives a total charge ejected of 1.5×10^^-6 As or 1×10^^13 ions per laser shot assuming isotropic formation of the protons. That this value is considerably higher than the previous value given in Holmlid (2012a) may be due to the actual small viewing factor in these earlier PMT based measurements, which was difficult to estimate correctly. If this charge is due to an average particle energy of 3 MeV, the total energy in the ejected protons is 4.5 J per laser shot.

Assuming that the ions detected are not protons but that they are heavier than protons means that the energy observed is correspondingly larger. Thus, the most conservative (lowest) estimate is that all the ions are protons. The observed peak ion current is 8 mA, which corresponds to 16 A in the peak, assuming isotropic formation.

Regarding: "But mfp did see some low energy gamma - what's up then ??"

I explain that here
A simplified theory of LENR

Quote from Wyttenbach

In the papers below you can find that SPP waves, usually occurring behind surface disturbance, can build up huge potentials. We see over 600x increase of the E-field. This is enough to 'strongly' weaken the coulumb shielding.
For me its not clear if their nature is a standing wave and how they devellop in time.

This leaves an other point open: Are the nano cavities in LENR fuel important to generate the disturbance or to be a NAE! I would opt for the first.

In fact Axils paper was a repost, with now hopefully some bigger audiance.

The following pages could also be interesting:
- http://physics.gsu.edu/stockman/
- http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1405/1405.1657.pdf

You must search
(Light: Science & Applications (2016) 5, e16017; doi:10.1038/lsa.2016.17)
(Nanoplasmonics: Stockman_Phys_Today_2011_Physics_behind_Applications.pdf - stockman)

axil: The SPAWAR patent explicitly claims (without details) other particles, I saw disclosed in an other publication! May be you can find this again!

Display More

In the early days of my LENR research, when I surveyed the nanoplasmonic literature to determine how much EMF amplification I could find that had been seen in the polariton research. I saw that value of this power amplification level was detected using chemical dyes (SERS) and how these compounds reacted to the power level of the EMF produced by the particles. In some test runs, the chemicals were destroyed and that run was discarded. So only power levels where mentioned where the chemical compounds survived. These power level amplification factors were usually 10^^9 but some were in the order of 10^^12 maximum. The most I ever saw in the research was 10^^15 amplification level. That is not counting test runs where the chemical compounds were destroyed. These EMF amplifiaction factors were a function of nano and micro particle grouping affects; that is, how the particles were arranged. A particle clump with very big particles mixed with very small particles with particles sized in between the two extremes produced the most EMF power amplification.

This process is all explained in the references above.

Quote from Hermes

What evidence is there of muon decay being involved? Why don't we see Bremstrahlung?

In LENR, there seems to be an energy dampening field in place. From CR39 experiments where the particle detectors is seeing 10s of thousands of high speed particles created and then impacting matter of all kinds at all distances from the particle creation source and yet no gammas are detected. Where does all that energy that these particles were carrying go? When the [articles impact, the holes are formed in the plastic detectors, but the production of those holes are without any gamma afterglow. Any theory of LENR must explain this lack of high energy broadcasting sometimes at extreme distances from the source of the particles. LENR theory must explain this wonder without sounding like word salad.

Quote from stephenrenzz

Even if the motion has been dismissed, you and your fellow inhabitants of Planet Rossi seem to misunderstand that this means nothing at all to the case. This is all part of the process, I actually assumed the motion would get dismissed as this case is far too complex for a judge to make a kneejerk dismissal anyways. You and your fellow Rossians can sleep well tonight...dreaming of the wondrous magnificent QuarkX producing magical light and color while it powers your home, makes you dinner and tells you a sweet bedtime story..all at a COP of 50!! We wont see the real magic until a panel of experts tears the good doctors E-Cat into cat scraps in court. I would give anything to see him squirm in court as they try their best to hold back laughter when questioned about his invention of magnificence even before talking about things such as meter serial numbers, cooked data, fake customers, radiators. This is gonna be a blast!

all at a COP of 50

should read

all at a COP of 200

Quote from magicsound

@axil thanks for finding that really Cool paper by Hivet et.al. - in fact 10 degrees Kelvin cool. It certainly supports your focus on the weird behavior possible with quantum polaritons, even if they turn out not to be relevant to LENR.

One tantalizing hint is the importance of lattice defects in the semiconductor cavity for the asymmetric generation of monopole-like soliitons. See "Methods" on page 8.
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1204/1204.3564.pdf
It immediately made me think of Storms' NAE, though I suspect he would scoff at the connection.

It might turn out to be a foundation for a magnetic laser that connects, converts, and organizes the spin of photons and projects all those spins as a thin laser like magnetic flux line beam.

This behavior is seen in the collapse of the cavitation bubble that can drill a hole in a diamond. Yes the polariton is produced by cavitation bubbles too.

I will shortly write a post on the blue light that connects all this stuff together, and that goody is really weird.

Quote from Wyttenbach

As many already pointed out: Holmlids experiment is far away from being LENR. The reaction is caused by high ignition, focused LASER energy. The same, as others use for the B-H Fusion reaction.

The Holmlid reaction has already be patented by SPAWAR because it's an interesting (small, cheap) tool to generate various particles.

Nevertheless: Holmlids (SPAWAR's) "reaction" is interesting, because no public known physics can fully describe it. So, it's open if the same (SPP breakup) mechanisms also cause LENR.

LENR, as most of us understand it, should be ignited at chemical energy-levels, and should not produce any harmful uncontainable particles.

Display More

I read through the SPAWAR patent until I got to the particle discription as follows:

Quote

Examples of the types of particles generated and detected may include, but are not limited to: alpha particles, beta particles, gamma rays, energetic protons, deuterons, tritons, and neutrons.

Holmlid particles are different, they are mesons. Holmlid's process is not described by the SPAWAR patent.

Quote from Longview

Conflating a lot of concepts here, Axil. Superradiance is not dependent on a "magnetic beam" whatever that might be. An electromagnetic field associated with a triggering photon(s) can recruit an unlimited number of other excited entities into a coordinated spontaneous decay to yield a quasi coherent and well directed beam of photons in nearly the same axis as the original triggering photon(s). Perhaps you are suggesting something akin to the Hagelstein inverted Karabut idea, that is an inversion of the usual superradiant phenomenon, wherein a large level of electromagnetic energy is somehow distributed back down to a bunch of distributed electronic excitations. But the difficulty there is that the high energy source in the inverted Karabut case would be one or a few very high energy photons somehow distributed down to many low energy photons, NOT a direct shift of high energy photons to a similar number of low energy electronic excitations.

Your model looks like glorified ferromagnetism, and sounds something like it too. The "impossibly thin beam" is just that--- impossible. Magnetic beams.... that is a new one for us to contemplate.

But, clarification of your points will be welcomed by many here, I am sure.

I have posted pictures produced by experiments with SPP monopole beam production. For your convenience I will recapitulate here.

Half-solitons in a polariton quantum fluid behave like magnetic monopoles

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1204/1204.3564.pdf

See page 4

Quote from Argon

Another example of problem of word against word and in this case as mats002 says oppositions of extreme.

If ERV is paid liar here then Rossi does not technically lie much on instrument part, but puts all sins on Penon to bear. Instead if Rossi speaks absolute truth here, many postings in this site are pure lies.

Only time will tell.

It is not lying, it is legal posturing. Lying is a lawyer's stock and trade.

You might ask: "I don't see how introduction of proton decay with GeV-scale photons could help with explaining lack of MeV-scale photons?"

Word Salad warning, you might not understand this.

One of the formative mechanisms that drive LENR is Bose Condensation. The energy produced by nucleon decay is broken up by super-absorption. The gamma photon generated by the LENR reaction is partitioned into Square Root(N-1) where N is the number of Bose condinsate members. Bose condensation is a inherent component of the Surface Plasmon Polariton mechanism. In plain talking, every SPP forms a Bose condensate.

http://phys.org/news/2016-06-s…einstein-condensates.html

The Bose condinsate is the mechanism that supports super radiation. This is a major EMF amplification mechanism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superradiance

In quantum optics, when a magnetic beam interacts with a nucleus, all of the energy stored in the SPP Bose condinsate is directed into an impossibly thin beam. If there are a billion SPPs, then the magnetic power of the square root (of a billion SPPs) is directed at the nucleus. All energy transfer is done through entanglement. Even an an alpha particle produced by the LENR reaction trave; meters away before it hits something, that energy that is produced by the impact is redirected to the Bose condinsate via entanglement.

In the Holmlid experiment, all the millions of high energy alpha particles impacting reactor structure or room walls are all sent back to the SPP Bose condensate. After all, Holmlid is still alive and going strong.

Frank Acland
July 3, 2016 at 12:42 PM
Dear Andrea Rossi:

There are some accusations apparently coming from the IH group regarding the 1 MW plant test.

a) The flow meter used in the test was not fit for purpose
b) 1 MW plant did not have the required legal authorizations to work
c) JM Products did not have any employees
d) IH had proposed another customer to you, but you refused them
e) JM did not use the heat you produced in any manufacturing process, and the only heat supplied by your plant was 20kW, not 1MW

Can you respond to any of these points?

Thank you,

Frank Acland

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Andrea Rossi
July 3, 2016 at 2:03 PM
Frank Acland:
Independently from who is the imbecile that wrote such things, please find hereunder my answers, confined within the limits allowed not to touch issues that have to be discussed exclusively in Court, with due evidence.
a) The flowmeter used in the test is property of the ERV. The ERV has chosen that instrument based on his experience. It is, by the way, a very common flowmeter, that everybody can buy, even if it is quite expensive. The flowmeter has been certified and after the test the ERV has retrieved it and sent it to make a certification of its margin of error after the test of 1 year, specifically with a flow of water with the same temperature and the same flows of water that we had during the test, minimum, maximum, average. So the ERV told us he was going to do when he retrieved his flowmeter after the shut down of the plant at the end of the test.
b) Obviously it is false, otherwise the plant would have been closed after the inspections
c) False
d) Tragicomic: Leonardo Corporation delivered, as per contract, the plant on August 2013, and we were ready to start immediately the test, as a continuation of the preliminar test made in Ferrara two months before with IH. IH had 1 year of time to start the 1 year test, but they always delayed with the excuse that they did not have the authorization from the Healthcare Office of North Carolina, due to the fact that there was the “nuclear reactions” issue. I have been able to get such permission in Florida and therefore I proposed the Customer, that has been accepted by IH. Evidence of it is the contract that IH made with JM. Since the plant was property of IH and it was in the factory of IH, obviously they could choose the Customer they wanted, if they had one.
e) When you have not the burden to give evidence of what you say, you can say every stupidity. This is exactly the case. Anyway, what counts related to the contract is the energy produced by the 1 MW E-Cat, and such energy gets evidence from the report of the ERV.
Warm Regards,
A.R.