Hakop Jack Aganyan informed me of that article of Sterling, who is now reporting more positive news. However if I understand well, it is simply claim by SHT that a big corp did a thrid party test... The claim is huge, but nothing is verifiable. It is visibly not the numerously reproduced Hydride LENR, so it seems urgent to wait and see.
If it works well, they will find an Elforsk or a Cherokee. Or else it can last long.
Quote
New 3rd-party test results on SHT show over 1000x overunity ... Hakop Aganyan (Jack) of Solar Hydrogen Trends, Inc (SHT) in Pasadena, California, USA told me they had another third party test done of their hydrogen-generating technology by one of the top 20 or 30 engineering firms in the world, who does testing for billion-dollar corporations. That firm has more than 100 engineers just in their gas-flow measurement division, he said. "They build power plants and bridges."
After the findings of David, I get intrigued and I gained contact with David Daggett on Linked-In.
He is retired from Boeing, and there he is proud to have invented the aircraft fuel cell APU technology (patented). He knows well fuell cell, and their measurement practices, and worked as consultant on that subject.
He feels LENR is disruptive, and as it happens for his ideas, that after harsh critics today, it will appear self evident tomorrow when demonstrated. He started his project as a non-profit to avoid critics about chasing research funding. If things get good, maybe he will launch a commercial spin off.
He started to be skeptical after discussion with Dennis Bushnell of NASA Langley, 8 years ago. The Demo of defkalion at ICCF18 triggered desire to know more and he visited them in Athens, and witnessed a test. He have good gut feeling, quite skeptic of Gamberale position. He got contact with Jet Energy, Lenuco, but he feels Defkalion is ahead. No answer from Cherokee group. He have informat contact with NASA folks, some in Chinese universities, and one business contact.
His project is first to fund a well instrumented boiler to prove the technology. It seems a rational first step, not so different from the test of E-cat by Elforsk. No reference to any license fee.
If Defkalion have nothing to show, then I imagine the losses will be painful but limited.
If Defkalion provide a working reactor it will be a third-party test, and the beginning of a story.
It is really more questionable for Defkalion after their recent fiasco. Anyway if they behave as a system integrator, even if DGT cannot deliver, they will find someone to deliver... Cherokee, Brillouin, or why not one of those unknown players that McKubre and Rossi cite (remember the Finish).
Phonon-Energy say it is non-profit, target prototype with DGT hyperion... Seems update 23/June 2014...
It is hard to connect the Defkalion Europe fiasco with that kind of startup fund without some fear... David Dagget is retired from Boeing, still working as expert ins aerospace advanced tech... He started his business in april 2014, before the outing of Luca Gamberale.
This video is recent, after the Luca Gamberale report, so I cannot imagine it was not considered.
I've heard of KCO3 and CaCO3 as possible catalyst, but the link with sun is weak... it seems that LENr is much more intense than sun hot fusion. the energy density of LENR, especially if you only count the active part is absolutely huge, bigger than fission, and much much than sun.
The book of Ed Storms, the science of LENR, explains that in the first chapter...
I asked, but they want to prepare their communication...
My 2cent feeling is that the 3rd party test final report will be only one of the atomic bomb that will explode in next months. I feel that business are still waiting to jump into LENR adventure, not because they doubt on it, but because they are afraid to disintegrate their safe business model and disorganize all the world economy. I expect T-rex to be led by squirrels into that new land.
LENUCO LLC has been founded by Prof. Emeritus George Miley to provide a platform for the development and commercialization of LENR technology. The company is based in Champaign, Illinois, USA on the campus of the University of Illinois, with which it has a strategic partnership. In addition to the significant achievements in LENR cells using NI alloy nano-particles, LENUCO holds several highly valuable patents related to the LENR core technology.
George Miley the founder, a pioneer of NiH and gas permeation in powder, is known for proposing two applications of his technology :
Am. Nuclear Soc. - 2014 Intl Conf on Isotopes and Expo: Preliminary Program August 24-28, 2014 / Hyatt Regency-Chicago / Chicago, IL Monday, August 25, 2014, 3:30 P.M.-6:00 P.M. Progress in Development of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction(LENR) Power Cells for Space Applications, George H. Miley,Kyu-Jung Kim, Tapan Patel, Bert Stunkard (Univ of Illinois), invited
No information on their plans, and the maturity of his technology. Recent information (2013) I had was that it worked but with endurance problems... Getting funded may help him to solve those problems, if they are still present.
The Explanation of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction: An Examination of the Relationship between Observation and Explanation by Dr. Edmund Storms attempts to bridge the gap between what is thought to be true and possible by conventional scientists and what is claimed by people advocating the reality of the cold fusion phenomenon. In addition, a new explanation is proposed that is consistent with accepted natural law and with all behavior attributed to cold fusion.
In the book’s Foreword, Dr. Michael McKubre (SRI) writes: “The opportunity to learn directly from the most knowledgeable person in arguably the most important emerging field, and to share his concise and well considered condensation of a difficult and scattered literature, are not the only or primary reasons to comprehend The Explanation of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction. Laid out clearly and gently in Chapter 5, ‘Description of an Explanation,’ is the first physical science based description of a potential explanation for cold fusion.”
In his Preface, Storms lays out the prime purpose of the new book. He writes: “This book provides many answers to the rational questions posed by skeptics about the reality, shows how an explanation is best structured, and describes some basic features commercial application must take into account. Cold fusion is not a mystery because it can actually be understood using the concepts applied to normal science.” Experimentalist McKubre appreciates Storms’ continued critique of existing LENR theory: “Dr. Storms is an active experimentalist and his (sometimes ruthless) evaluation of the huge diversity of models so far proposed to account for LENR is particularly well adapted to the needs of experimental science.”
Storms does not spend much time in the book rehashing the mistreatment of cold fusion science (this has been covered extensively before), but in the Preface he does briefly refer to the long road behind and ahead for the field. He writes: “We can forgive skepticism and rejection when a new discovery is first announced. This is the way of modern physics — reject until proven true. Nevertheless, publication of false information about the claims, refusal by peer reviewers to allow publication of information describing well documented behavior, and personal attack have no business being used to stifle research. Science is not embarrassed or diminished by incorrect claims, but it is damaged by arrogant attack. Rather than providing protection from what is considered by some to be bad science, these attempts to keep science ‘pure’ will now be remembered as the true examples of bad science. Treatment of cold fusion has become a diagnostic tool for revealing how science is actually practiced by some people in contrast to how they are expected to behave.”
...
the interview is very interesting. It explain the key of the theory, his conservative theory:
Quote
Can you provide a brief description of the model you’ve been working on recently? I make several basic assumptions that I then justify. These are:
The LENR process does not take place in a chemical lattice.
The LENR process takes place only in cracks of a critically small gap size.
All isotopes of hydrogen can fuse by the same basic process, with only the nuclear products being different.
The basic process removes energy over a period of time as photon emission. Most of this emission does not leave the apparatus.
The fusion process causes the transmutation reactions.
The overall process is consistent with all natural law and requires introduction of only one new process.
Cold fusion and hot fusion are not related in any way.
How is this model an improvement over other theories that exist? Unlike other models, I can explain the observed behavior without using ad hoc assumptions, show what aspect of the process needs to be explored next, and predict what will be discovered. In addition, the model is consistent with accepted natural law.
He explain a great problem in LENR science, that scientist don't know well what others have done
Quote
Over the years, you’ve conducted several surveys of the field. Jed Rothwell has noted in numerous forums that you are perhaps the only person who has “read everything” in the LENR field. How did reviewing all that data shape your idea of the nuclear active environment (NAE)?
Most people have a very poor knowledge of what other people have done. This knowledge is essential for the patterns and the consistent behaviors to be seen. My access to the overall knowledge is unique and essential to my work. However, reading all the papers is not for the faint of heart, requiring the study of about 2000 papers.
If anyone can read the book and make a critic, it will be very interesting...
This article describe shortly the controversy, the questioning evidences, the theoretical argument against, and finally ask whether the energy sector may change soon...
Cold Fusion (LENR) as a scientific problem In 1989, there was next to the revolutions in Eastern Europe, an observation of Pones and Fleischmann that could extend far beyond the date. Excess heat at a palladium cathode was created and interpreted as a sign of the energy release resulting from the fusion of deuterium. This observation was announced on March 23, 1989 in a press conference. ... The occurrence of material ejection in palladium, which is loaded with deuterium, is another strange observation
... ... Being a very skeptical scientist, I read some papers on the subject available to me and I am now convinced that the phenomenon of low temperature nuclear reaction (LTNR) exists. However, this means that the global power supply can potentially take a completely different direction in the near future, as we all have previously believed. I want to take this opportunity deliberately not to spread too much euphoria, since many aspects are unclear:
Is it possible to build inexpensive palladium reactors?
If the catalyst is so rapidly destroyed (cratering) that a deployment is ultimately uneconomical?
Are there companies aware of the development and try to slow down the cold fusion developement?
Obviously there is a massive need for research, as many questions remain unanswered and the potential benefit in the success would be almost immeasurable. ...
Display More
The position is interesting as it is neither based on enthusiasm and a mass of evidence accumulated since years of research, nor is it based on theoretical dogmatism, ignorance of most evidence, and upfront rejections of the few others ...
It is simply someone challenged by evidence, by theory, by their disagreement, and trying to consider the possible impact of that possible reality.
As an old watcher of that domain, on one side I see that he miss a ton of additional data on the LENR landscape, on the scientific and business side. On the other side I'm positively surprised by the few interesting data that are already present ins that article, already enough to challenge theory arguments.
Maybe is it an example of "innocent" facing LENR landscape, open, interested, challenged by the evidence vs theory disagreement, considering alternate realities without being sure. Some refreshing wind in our domain, with convinced people entrenched shouting at each others.
It is true, comment on shouting Jean-Pierre Vigier and Jacques Dufour, the attitude of major research organizations is incomprehensible. Why are they so reluctant while manipulations are not very expensive?" As if cold fusion smelled scorched and they were afraid to burn the wings of their reputation. An example: Jacques Dufour, funded entirely by Shell, has long sought a laboratory better equipped than his own - located in Grand-Couronne, near Rouen - to continue his experiments. He struggled to be welcome. It is ultimately the Pr Jacques Floss , Director of the Laboratory for Nuclear Science at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers (CNAM), which opened its doors. "I just installed, he says, already chemists, heating engineers, nuclear physicists CNAM are willing to lend a hand. Critiques, intrigued, but very open."
Elforsk is careful to emphasize that we do not currently have sufficient material in order to determine whether the phenomenon LENR exists or not. However, Elforsk determined the state state to briefly follow developments and to some extent help to increase insight and clarity on these issues. It is in Elforsk instructed to monitor ongoing research and development in order to prepare the companies in the energy sector on potential breakthroughs and build the knowledge necessary to challenge or affirm further development. For this reason Elforsk continue to monitor developments in the LENR field. Magnus Olofsson, CEO, Elforsk
Eine saubere und billige Energiequelle wird allgemein gesucht. Die "kalte Fusion" ist das offenbar nicht. Vor 25 Jahren, am 23. März 1989, behaupteten zwei Chemiker, einen Weg gefunden zu haben, ohne großen Aufwand Wasserstoffkerne zu Helium fusioniert und dabei Energie freigesetzt zu haben. Das Experiment stellte sich bald als eine Mischung aus Schlamperei und Fälschung heraus und wurde zu einem der größten Wissenschaftsskandale der Geschichte. ..
Il y a beaucoup de mythe autour de la fusion froide.
La fusion froide est un terme impropre comme rayon X, qui est née de l'observation par un calorimétricien de renom international, Martin Fleischmann d'une anomalie de chaleur de taille très largement supérieure à tout ce qui est chimiquement possible. Certain de son fait en électrochimie, et a ce jours jamais remis en cause (si si, jamais remis en cause, 4 papiers critiques, tous pitoyablement réfutés montrant mauvaise fois et l'incompétence de leurs auteurs )
Pour le renom de Fleischmann sa carrière est fascinante et ses apports importants:
elle a été répliqué par Longchampt, un ingénieur de recherche très compétent et pointilleux qui en a confirmé et expliqué la précision, avec des instruments plus modernes
en explique en terme plus compréhensible la supériorité, tout comme d'ailleurs les différences et les avantages des autres méthodes de mesures (calorimétrie à flux en cellule fermée par McKubre, calorimétrie Seebeck et séparation des gas par Oriani).
Les expériences négatives, notamment les plus influentes au MIT, au Caltech et à harwell ont été réalisé trop rapidement, par des physiciens moins expérimentés que les chimistes, sans bébéficier de l'expérience ou du soin (du temps) requis, sans oublier quelques petits "ajustements" honteux
classique dans une ambiance de haine profonde contre la remise en cause de ce que certains croyaient comme étant une règle (en fait c'est juste une limite de calcul, celle de la physique à N corps). dès 1991 les expériences sérieuses commençaient à être publiés, mais un couvercle d'insultes et de peur du qu'en-dira-t'on était tombé sur le sujet... Beaudette l'explique bien... Les livres critiques refusent de parler des résultats massifs d'après 1989.
Jed Rothwell recense sur son site 153 papiers publiés dans une revue à comité de lecture, qui présentent un résulta positif quand a la production de chaleur, et pas mal de revues comme Naturwissenschaften, Journal of Electroanalythical Chemistry, JJAP, Physics Letters... Le pire c'est que les meilleurs papiers sont visiblement pas ceux la (produit plus tot quand le mur de Berlin contre la fusion froide ne s'était pas encore refermé). On peut donc y ajouter des papiers meilleurs, et des papiers montrant des effets nucléaires, très différents de la fusion chaude.
Ce papier publié dans Naturwissenschaften en 2010 fait une rapide revue des connaissances et des papiers de références
Face à cela Beaudette présente les arguments des 4 papiers critiques contre la calorimétrie de Fleischmann&Pons : Lewis, Hansen, Morrisson, Wilson.
Lewis a projeté ses erreurs de conception posant des problèmes de mélange sur la cellule de F&P qui n'y est pas sensible.
Hansen a fait pareil avec ses problèmes de recombinaison, en oubliant que F&P la mesurait et qu'ils savaient comment la réduit sous les 1% (les anomalies de chaleurs vont de 15 à plus de 100% rarement plus)
Wilson est le seul compétent, et d'ailleurs il a commencé par réfuter les critiques de Hansen et Lewis, pour proposer des corrections que Fleischmann et la communauté ont intégré. Le seul problème c'est que les corrections qu'il proposait ne pouvaient expliquer les anomalies les plus importantes observées régulièrement.
Voilà donc coté calorimétrie ou l'histoire est claire. Ca chauffe, et plusieurs ordres de grandeurs au dessus de toute réaction chimique. Quand ça marche c'est reproductible, mais comme les premiers transistors ou les diodes à galène, ca marche quand ca veut... L'ENEA avec le SRi et le NRL travaillent à identifier les derniers paramètres mystérieux, liés à la métallurgie du palladium :
Mais en fait le débat comme souvent s'est focalisé sur la théorie. La chaleur était claire, mais pas pour un physicien peu expert en calorimétrie. Or la fusion chaude, basée sur des impacts dans un plasma, aboutit a des émissions massive de neutron, de gamma et de tritium... après des erreurs de débutant des chimistes en physique des particules, comparables a celle des physiciens en calorimétrie, il est apparu clair qu'il y avait 7 ordres de grandeurs de fois moins de neutron, gamma énergétique et tritium que prévu dans le vide... (invoquer la conservation de l'énergie est une absurdité... ici on est juste dans un défi explicatif, pas une loi thermodynamique).
La seule explication possible n'était visiblement pas à la porté des physiciens nucléaires, et invoquait des mécanismes collectifs quantiques, qui restent toujours à la fois introuvables, et irréfutables, sauf comme les physiciens à imaginer que la physique est à deux corps dans le vide, et jamais comme la supraconduction ou les semi-conducteurs ou les nanotech, ou le graphène , dans une surprise permanente d'effet collectifs et de pseudo-particules nouvelles.
Edmund Storms propose une vision simple de ce que devrait être une théorie, conservatrice, respectant la physique quantique, la thermodynamique, la chimie, et les preuves accumulées autour de la fusion froide. Ensuite il propose une théorie que je conseille de prendre comme les autres avec des pincettes :
Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
)
Le problème avec les physiciens dogmatiques est que la certitude que tout les animaux sont des vaches, les a empêché d'admettre que des vaches volent dans le ciel, enfin les oiseaux . Ne voyant pas assez de neutrons , de tritium, de gamma (yen avait mais pas assez), et n'arrivant pas eux-même a bien mesurer la chaleur confortablement avec une expérience facile et prévisible comme dans leurs accélérateur ou réacteurs , ils en ont conclu que forcément les chimiste étaient des fraudeurs, des incompétents.
Dans son papier sur les mythes du Titanic et de la Fusion froide, Jed Rothwell explique comment cela a mené toute une élite scientifique à soutenir sans les lire des critiques indigentes et anti-scientifiques, massacrant la méthode scientifique et l'éthique.
et qui est implémenté par une illusion collective mutuellement assurée, un groupthink, tel que Roland Benabou les a bien modélisée dans les organisation où la pression vers la conformité est assez forte pour décourager la dissidence réelle.
Maintenant il faut parler des applications. Entre conformisme académique même des chercheurs LENR, baisse des budgets, vieillissement , le domaine n'a avancé que au niveau de la qualité du travail de laboratoire, avec peu d'innovations fondamentales (electrolyse sous plasma par Mizuno, co-déposition par le Navy Spawar, imprégnation de films fins par Iwamura...). Au final c'est quelques entrepreneurs, dont le controversé Andrea Rossi, qui ont repensé le problème en utilisant des résultats ignorés sur les poudres, et le nickel...
Si les électrolyses ne produisaient qu'une chaleurs peu utilisable vers les 100C, l'imprégnation à haute température de poudres offrait la possibilité de bonnes performance thermodynamiques à plus de 300C. En plus avec la température le gain de chaleur par rapport a l'excitation est bien plus important... mais le contrôle de cette réaction chaotique et auto-catalytique est visiblement un cauchemar.
Actuellement il y a deux entrepreneurs qui semblent sérieux et ont produit un rapport, c'est Brillouin porté par le SRI (et financé à plusieurs dizaines de millions), et Andrea Rossi racheté pour 13 million par le fond Cherokee de Tom Darnen.
La technologie de Rossi, l'E-cat a intéressé le consortium de recherche des énergéticiens suédois, Elforsk, qui a financé une série de tests (250kE/an, budget public).
Des scientifiques indépendants, dans leur labo, ont réalisés des test durant plus de 6 mois, et on attend leur rapport, qui visiblement devrait contenir des analyses isitopiques, et répondre a un nombre infini de théories du complot imaginées à ce jour... certains avancent à l'automne, mais on en sais rien... Il est probable que le rapport fera très mal, sinon il serait sorti, et donc que cela marche trop bien pour qu'il n'y ait pas de têtes à couper.
comme le test le montre, si c'est confirmé, la densité énergétique est au dessus de celle d'un réacteur à fission, sans le blindage, plusieurs ordre de grandeurs au dessus de la chimie, genre produire des kW avec quelque grammes pendant 6 mois...
La société LENr-cars se propose de concevoir une voiture hybride LENR-électrique... LENR-Cities prépare un écosystème d'entreprises Divers chercheurs comme Miley/lenuco, Hagelstein/nanortech, Piantelli/Nichenergy, tentent de lancer un business...
Un journaliste Suédois a suivi la saga Rossi et fait un livre
Evidemment comme il s'agit de business, c'est bien moins solide que les preuves calorimétriques... ca peut partir en vrilles financière, en folie des grandeurs, en tragédie d'ingénieur... C'est la vraie vie quoi.
L'article mérite certainement une amélioration et des corrections , mais c'est déjà une base de discussion.
Bei der Durchsicht der Rohstoffpreise ist mir aufgefallen, dass der Palladiumpreis seit einiger Zeit unabhängig vom Gold- und Platinpreis ansteigt. Als Erklärung war ich auf die Kalte Kernfusion gestoßen.Siehe Blogbeitrag. Als sehr skeptischer Wissenschaftler habe ich dann einige mir zugängliche Papers zum Thema gelesen und bin inzwischen überzeugt, das das Phänomen der Low Temperatur Nuklear Reaction(LTNR) existiert. Dies bedeutet aber, dass die Energieversorgung möglicherweise in Kürze eine völlig andere Richtung nehmen kann, als alle bisher geglaubt haben. Ich will an dieser Stelle bewusst keine zu große Euphorie streuen, da viele Aspekte unklar sind: Kann man preiswerte Palladiumreaktoren bauen? Wird der Katalysator so rasch zerstört, Kraterbildung, dass ein Einsatz letztendlich unwirtschaftlich ist? Gibt es Unternehmen, die bewusst die Entwicklung der Kalten Fusion bremsen?
Je mehr man weis, um so mehr hat man das Gefühl, dass man nichts weis.
la conclusion me semble bien correspondre à l'esprit de ce projet. A vérifier après des intéressés.
Quote
La démarche entrepreneuriale consiste donc non pas à résoudre un puzzle conçu par d’autres, mais à assembler un patchwork avec des parties prenantes qui se sélectionnent elles-mêmes, sans que l’on puisse dire à l’avance avec qui le patchwork sera crée, et donc quelles pièces seront apportées, ni quelle forme le patchwork prendra. Le patchwork est « fou » au sens où il n’y a pas de logique explicite (ou objective) à son développement, mais seulement une logique sociale (subjective) de parties prenantes qui s’engagent à participer à son développement en apportant leurs pièces et en les cousant. Dès lors, la qualité principale d’un entrepreneur devient sa capacité à susciter l’engagement d’un nombre croissant de parties prenantes dans son projet.
Un écosystème comme LENR-Cities serait donc une sorte d'environnement qui "suscite" son propre développement dans un but commun que les parties prenantes partagent. Un être vivant, social, doué d'un libre arbitre, pas une machine ni une armée.
Cela me fait raisonner un échange fructueux avec un expert en histoire et stratégies militaires, rodé aux stratégies managériale (car les stratégies militaires sont une des sources essentielles d'innovation managériale). Il m'avait expliqué que pas mal de réussites militaires, loin d'être basée sur des courages exceptionnels, du matériel supérieur, ou une hiérarchie respectées, étaien basée sur la désobéissance éclairée d'unités militaires gérée selon un management "par intention".
Ce management est a l'opposé du management par objectif. Ici on partage avec des unités d'action extrèmement compétentes en tactique et en stratégie, les enjeux généraux de la guerre, de la bataille, de la paix à venir même. On échange et on définit un but d'opération initial partagé par l'unité, qui lance l'opération. et après, c'est l'unité qui décide, et adapte sa stratégie, change d'objectif, réorganise l'opération, selon ce qu'elle observe et analyse de sa situation et de ce qu'elle échange .
Cette liberté, éclairée par une haute compétence, contrainte non par une obéissance mais par un partage de valeurs et d'intention générale, soutenue par une confiance de la hiérarchie et un partage des informations stratégiques, est le secret de bonnes prises de décisions.
Cette stratégie a été a l'origine de quelques succès clés de la Blitzkrieg, de la guerre du Kipour, mais c'est simplement la base du modèle micro-entrepreneurial, et peut être de l'écosystème ... Des enjeux partagés, des décisions indépendentes et synchrone , non pas comme soumis à un chef, mais suivant la même musique, le même désir de proposer une expérience au public.
ca doit pas être simple d'éviter la débandade ou le manque de confiance, mais comme dans les stratégies militaires il doit y avoir des clés organisationelles... bien loin de la simple obéissance hiérarchique ou du contrat commercial.
the conference on istotopes with Miley invited is interesting... Is LENr research a new market for isotopes professional, or new opportunities of innovation... He seems to talk of his proposal to replace Pu238 RTG he proposed in 2011-2012 http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/…ng-presentation-game.html
The D2/H2 exchange as a source of heat is actually fairly well known, and has been reported several times in various ICCF talks. The amount of heat, however, is insufficient to account for many of the truly intense CF incidents that have occurred (Pons/Fleischmann's reactor meltdown, Arata's "boiloff" excursions, and some others.
The skeptics re-discover it every few years, because they don't bother to actually read the CF research papers at Jed Rothwell's LENR/CANR.org site.
In fact many pretended "explaining" artifacts, like for historical critical papers of Hansen, Lewis and Morrison (Wilson got real points and he was integrated ins the corpus of things to adjust, he simply exaggerated the importance of his finding ), were simply known artifact accounted by experienced electrochemist. As Beaudette report, LENR scientist are not so tender between themselves, and provided it stay honest, evidence based, it is a very good thing. There is sure many false positive in LENr science, spotted an retracted, especially when an expert in a domain (calorimetry, tritium, particles detection) try to make measurement out of his competence (like F&P in particles, Srinivasan in calorimetry, lewis in calorimetry, Hansen in calorimetry, Morrison in .... science).
I've read it after a remark on the italian skeptic blog fusionnefredda.
you should check with real scientists (too bad Edmund storms is no more on vortex).
Her job is 3 part:
first she found that the mild heat generated by some experiments with powders was due to Hydrogen/Deuterium echange. She then show that baking the palladium solve the problem, but that letting the electrode in open air in the lab, let water=hydrogen get into again.
Second for higher temperature experiments of gas loading in powdersn she found that hotspot on the reactor, despite a good instrument, was fooling the calorimeter.This problems may happen in gas loading experiment where the heat transfer is not as good as in fluid.
Third she tries to apply those findings to an experiment protocol by John dash.Shhe finally see that it cannot explain the result, and that the D/H exchange heat account for few of the measured power.
She finally say that better measurement should be done by classic (flow) calorimetry and not by thermometry.
what we see is classical skeptic scientific work, trying to identify artifact and solve false positive.
by comparison it shows not only her ethic, different from the wikipravda myth, but it show that some practice of Fleischamnn&Pons (baking, string natural stirring of the water, measurement of recombination) were very good decision, fruit of experience. It also support the work of McKubre, done in pressurized cells, with long experiments, and flow calorimetry.
this paper is more an evidence of the self criticism of LENr community.
She presented papers at ICCF18 (on thermal modeling) and work for Coolescence, a LENr company.
Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
all but a denial paper, but just a "be careful of false positive" paper. good science!
see how MFMp suffered and how Edmund Storms bashed them at the beginning. calorimetry is tricky and the physicist who failed to do it properly at the beginning, concluded that it was calorimetry the problem, not their competence.
About critical work, it is quite classic in science, and cold fusion among it. Charles Beaudette in the preface of Excess heat tell how he decided to follow that topic :
Quote
It was on a lark that I attended the fifth international conference on cold fusion in April 1995. As a retired electrical engineer, MIT 1952, I was looking for something new to hold my interest. At the conference, I saw that those in attendance were competent scientists doing serious research. I reached that conclusion simply by noting the quality of their technical presentations, by participating in discussions with them, and by watching them extend sharply pointed criticisms to one another’s work. At the very least, the best half of them were so. Many had been honored by their associated institutions. Professional meetings often have their Saturday morning sessions for topics irreverently referred to as nuts and fruits. The cold fusion conferences were no exception to this rule.
Where much of the investigation involved the technical literature, I was pleasantly surprised to find that its best technical papers were up to the standard that I was accustomed to from my days in engineering. The talk of lax peer-review proved to be rumor-mongering. I could find no commentary or analysis of such a lack in the literature. That condition allowed at least a preliminary conclusion that they would provide useful insights into the field.
Inside there is an article from Toyota/Technova team with Kitamura. NiH LENR with nanocomposite
Quote from "A.Kitamura A.Takahashi R.Seto Y.Fujita A.Taniike Y.Furuyama"
A new mass-flow calorimetry system has been installed to investigate the excess-power phenomena at elevated temperatures up to several hundred degrees C with an increased amount of the Nibased nano-composite sample. The first trial runs with a silica-included Cu⋅Ni nano-composite sample (CNS) containing 4.1 gram of Ni showed an implication of a few-days-lasting excess power of 5 W/g-Ni. Next, a Cu⋅Ni⋅Zr oxide nano-composite sample (CNZ4) containing 61 gram of Ni has been examined to show excess power of 15 W lasting for 3 days and that gradually increasing at a rate of 10 W per 3 weeks. Each corresponds to 30 eV/atom-Ni and 100 eV/atom-Ni, which implies a nuclear origin of the excess energy.
Do they have a variant of E-cat? Much less power density, but who knows... Another paper with Wang/Mizuno/Arata talk of synthesizing nano particle.
There is continuation of Iwamura work.
Quote from "S. Tsuruga T. Itoh Y. Iwamura"
Low energy nuclear transmutations have been observed in the nano-sized Pd complexes, which are composed of Pd and CaO thin film and Pd substrate, induced by D2 gas permeation. In order to increase the transmutation products, an electrochemical method was applied to increase deuterium density near the surface of the nano-structured Pd multilayer film. Transmutation products were successfully increased by this approach. These recent experimental methods gave us increased transmutation products, gamma-ray emissions, and new implications on Deuterium Permeation Induced Transmutation.
and the tentative of replication by Takahashi :
Quote from "T. Takahashi R. Omi S. Narita"
We performed a deuterium permeation experiment using a multi-layered Pd/Ni sample on which 133Cs was deposited, and we investigated the occurrence of selective nuclear transmutation reactions from 133Cs to nuclides with masses of 137, 141, and 145. Transmutation products from 133Cs were not confirmed thus far. Improving deuterium permeation efficiency may be necessary for effectively inducing the reaction. In addition, we searched for newly produced elements from nuclear reactions over a wide mass range result.
An interesting experiment based on CR39 detector, shows interesting evidence or radiation for light and heavy water electrolysis, with a Ni film electrode near the CR39... Lithium seems required.
Quote from "H. Yamada K. Mita H. Aizawa and Y. Shida"
The primary purpose of this study is to establish a simple technique producing new convincing evidence that a nuclear reaction as low energy nuclear reaction (LENR) could accompany both heavy and light water electrolysis. Electrolysis of D2O and H2O solutions is carried out using a Ni film cathode under 20 DC current patterns. A small chip of the plastic track detector CR-39 is positioned just under the thin Ni film cathode to limit energy decrease of an energetic charged particle from the cathode. The present technique is simple but capable of detecting energetic charged particles produced on the cathode during electrolysis with higher efficiency. An impressive increase in number of etch pit is occasionally observed for both D2O and H2O solutions.
some theory and modeling papers... Three from Kozima among, which review many experimental results to support his theoretical proposals. The last one seems to be a synthesis of his phenomenological model, based on chaos theory.
I agree with most of what you say. Western is collapsing under conservative interest of all kind, big and small, from docker to finance industry. I just consider that Russia is not an emerged country like China, Brasil, India, but a petronarchy.
Yes, LENR industry is at infancy, and most of the energy have still be wasted in breaking the wall of denial. Thing advance slowly. Few years ago, E-cat was visibly lunatic and unstable... Today it seems at least stable and reliable if we interpret the length of the test as an evidence of interesting result and long lasting measurement.
If Western industry want to survive it have first to "assassinate the father", old habits and governmental helps, and exploit the corpse of big business (huge capital, huge competences, huge infrastructure, huge networks) while not obeying them as usual. Small companies should collaborate without being submissive. Pilot fish and dumb shark...
This is the deep meaning of the soon to develop LENR ecosystem. One is in inception in EU with LENR-Cities. Something more naive is prepared visibly around DoD/SRI, but we are far from an ecosystem.
China should not be feared as the Devil, and we should use it as the "rabbit" in a dog race. I suspect that Tom Darden have this vision. However we should realize that we cannot treat China as a weak market or a weak industry... They will win their share of the world, and will battle for the rest.
This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.More DetailsClose
for Defkalion after their recent fiasco.
.
... Des enjeux partagés, des décisions indépendentes et synchrone , non pas comme soumis à un chef, mais suivant la même musique, le même désir de proposer une expérience au public.