they will be sent likely on tuesday.
me356
Verified
- Member since Mar 13th 2015
- Last Activity:
Posts by me356
-
-
LENR can be achieved in a many different ways. One type of LENR is linked with extremely high loading ratios while other is linked to a reactions at the surface.
This is completely dependent on used material.
If reaction should happen in a bulk then transition metal must occupy so much hydrogen to allow fusion. In these materials any lattice stress can initiate reaction.
While in a material such as Nickel this can't be achieved easily. However with a nanoscale structures it is possible, yet at a low rate. You can increase such rate dramatically with other transition metal that will already dissociate Hydrogen molecules.
In this way you can replace such material for a very different. It is enough to know which one has good properties.
If loading ratio for Nickel is high then nothing will happen near surface, because Nickel will not attract Hydrogen anymore.
Each material has very different abilities and behavior in hydrogen, different pressure, temperature and stress.
The only strange thing is that so many scientists are overlooking such wide cases of reactions. There is no magic and all these experiments are perfectly repeatable. Yet there are good tools to study them for over 40 years.
I believe that in 15 years there will be at least few supercoductors working reliably at a room temperature. This world opens many possibilities including batteries that can work for years without charging.
-
MFMP will receive two packages with 4 prepared meshes total, possibly more later if needed, completely for free.
Plus some unprepared for calibration or other purposes.
Shipping will be likely on friday next week. Not longer than 2 weeks. Shipping, including customs to the USA will take 3 days or so.
-
Hello,
meshes will work, if not then they will with my help.
Mizuno prepared very nice experiment with very strong and usable results that one can do at home basically. It is already covered by IP, is safe and very easy in comparison to other.
In our laboratory we are working on a very different kind of reactors with very different fuel and LENR mechanism for many years. This technology was working already in 2015 and is same that was tested in AURA by MFMP.
It seems that even years after there is big misunderstanding what AURA was, while I was waiting for details that will be published.
It was very well conducted experiment with a proper equipment, the only issue was that MFMP arrived to me without asking if everything is prepared and finished from me. Right before the crew started their jorney I was strongly insisting the reactor was not ready and it will require at least days until it will be prepared for testing. I even dont know if all members were clearly informed ahead, because I was talking mainly with Bob. But flights were already prepared and I was just amazed. And so the result was very uncertain from the beginning. However we spent nice time and all was very professional. From then I had no need or intention to continue in a public testing. And all was and is perfect
Now I really dont care about if you believe or not. If you are interested, I recommend to continue with Mizuno replication.
I really dont need your money. So it is up to you.
We can ship you also over 1000 clear (in-stock), unprepared meshes if needed for replication purposes. Parameters are exactly as per Mizuno protocol. But with our prepared meshes it should be plug and play.
I recommend to stick with this experiment. I have to send many thanks again for such gift from Mizuno.
I am sure that Alan will make it work. I really appreciate people that are skilled in the art. I mean not by talking about it, but if you really know how to hold stuff and do the experiments in reality. I really appreciate how carefully he is doing the experiments.
-
So you are the first man on the planet that can measure alphas through a mica window...
Very interesting...
What is wrong with alpha detector at the outlet of vacuum pump?
I recommend to ask first before judging.
-
Radiation peaks capable of being measured outside the thick SS?
Yes, that is perfectly correct. Anyway it is not happening in a normal operation mode.
Excess radiation readings are mostly result of a gas impurities. During a proper run no elevated readings outside the reactor cell are measured.
I am already in contact with MFMP to ship them meshes within around one week.
-
We never measured radiation inside the cell. It was always monitored through thick SS walls for all reactors. For some we implemented thin mica window which will not absorb low energies. The hole for mica window was milled in the SS lid and sealed with a rubber o-ring.
However the radiation spikes that you can obtain even through the thick SS can be measured with anything low cost such as GMC-600.
The most equipment here is Ludlum brand. We measure Alpha, Beta & Gamma, Gamma, Neutrons, each has its own counter and/or scintilator.
For IR Camera we developed own software to sense all regions of interest. We can see the lowest temperature, average, highest and at any point of the reactor. From left, right and front.
We are using Optris IR cameras.
For experiments where reactor is fully closed we have also thermocouple hub for 12 sensors that can send data in 50Hz rate.
Very important finding when not using a calorimetry - you need other heat source around the reactor, as well as inside. Reactor walls will cool down the meshes significantly. Or you need at least good insulation. Lower temperature = lower COP.
-
We can offer free samples to MFMP or other known groups if they are interested. With provided meshes it is possible to achieve significant COP. There is nothing else needed than vacuum the cell, introduce Deuterium and start the heater.
We are not a scientific group that have time to present any rigorous results, so I hope that other can do so.
-
I have to ask Daniel_G if he and mizunotadahiko agree with shipping the meshes or there is something why we can't do that.
The meshes were tested at 3 different places, unfortunately I can't share any particulars about our labs, companies that we are working with.
To make it clear, we are manufacturing a very different reactors for profit, basically from 2017, yet my experiments started somewhere near 2015. And work continue until now.
However I can share all particulars what you need to buy to make Mizuno style reactor work, at least when time will allow.
No expensive equipment is needed. Those that already tried to replicate will likely need nothing else.
The most errors are from my point of view caused during preparation steps and even more during first active run. Likely some already achieved excess heat, but were unable to measure it.
For those that dont believe in LENR in general I can share steps which will render significantly elevated radiation readings with the same mesh - in range of several MeV. But these steps are destructive for the mesh itself.
Fully prepared mesh cost is 210 USD/pc + shipping cost worldwide. For a bigger quantities such as 100pcs or more the price can be lowered.
Price is mainly dependent on Palladium cost which increased significantly.
Manufacturing time is around 10 days at the moment.
Please note shipping already used mesh is not good idea if you need it for obtaining excess heat. As soon as you introduce hydrogen once it is better to not change anything in the reactor.
I also have to confirm there is nothing wrong in the preparation steps of shared Mizuno recipe, however results can vary significantly and many factors will play a role.
-
First from all thanks to mizunotadahiko and Daniel_G for all the details.
We were able to replicate the effect with 100% reproducibility and for nearly 3 years produced reactors that are giving very good results.
Because of simplicity and current energy crisis we developed methods that - I believe - will yield good results for acceptable amount of money.
In the attachment I want to share key findings that are responsible for the most failures of replication. I hope this will once for all help with successful replications.
We can also offer shipping fully prepared meshes worldwide for your own evaluation in quantity 1 - 1000 (per package) for your own reactor. If you will proceed according attached instructions it should just work.
The mesh production is semi-automatic with a homogenous surface to obtain as identical results as possible. Of course no more hand work is used there, instead various machines are used to modify the surface. Unfortunately description of the process can't be revealed now, but you can examine our meshes freely.
-
@Zephir_AWT that is very interesting. Certainly during the transmutation similar compounds such as ammonium can be easily produced.
Note, that the sample was handled in high purity Argon while the process of sample preparation does not involve washing out at all. Actually this is unwanted and unnecessary for SEM.
Certainly ammonium does not include 1/3 of the elements from periodic table. But the pattern is very similar.
Similar patterns are forming again, elsewhere even that old disappeared.
-
Hello,
as promised I am sharing at least some data from the sample from which I have posted SEM photos.
At the moment I can share just EDX from the single area - from area of the photo T3/T4.
This is good example of how reaction is happening relatively far out of fuel/ash particles and even in ordinary air for approximately 2 months.
The analysis just confirms what was said earlier - protons are being released in that flux that nearly any element in vicinity can undergo a transmutation.
Mainly transmutations that are starting from Carbon element can be seen. These transmutations can be so focused to a certain areas that we are obtaining all the elements from periodic table up to the transition metal and even with higher proton numbers. This all can happen in ordinary air, in room temperature, if the fuel was strongly activated.
We can obtain elements with even lower proton number than starting elements.
Fractal-like traces are ending very likely due to transmutation to a gas at the end. This is also reason why they are disappearing over time.
At the particular ash there are spots rich for undetectable, very exotic elements. Since the EDX software was not able to detect these elements, although the peaks were very strong, we can only guess what it really is.
The closest element appear to be Francium. As you know, Fr is second the least abundant element. All the closest elements were unstable too. Since this is remarkable discovery we will investigate it more.
Regarding nano wires that are seen for example at T6/T7 photos - elemental composition is very similar, a lot of elements from across periodic table, especially C, O, Cl, P, K, Na, Ca, Mg, Al, Si.
What does it mean? It is possible to synthesize possibly any element with LENR and in very short periods ranging from a few minutes.
We have found that in a certain configuration of the SEM we can produce new elements that were not present, in real time. This mean that even after that long time, the fuel is very active on the sample holder.
It is possible that even mentioned Francium was produced in this way, but it is not possible to check it. the most stable isotope has half-life of 22 minutes only.
Very likely view on the LENR will change dramatically soon.
-
JedRothwell I hope that one day, you will start to read and understand my posts.
What you are writing here is absolutely nonsense made from your wrong assumptions and lack of an overview of the situation. Basically each third word you are saying is false. What I was allegedly saying is also very wrongly interpreted by you.
If you will ever discuss about what I was saying, please cite me directly (this mean copy and paste what you were reading - not how you understand it). Because you have real problems with understanding. This is nothing to attack you, but to say you are really not getting it. Please find FACTs. Maybe you will be badly surprised.
Jack Cole It is nice you are afraid. Unfortunately you are looking from wrong point of view. I have no reason to do what you are saying. Do you really believe there is nobody else that can make a proper measurements? How you can assume that nobody did such measurements? Do you consider certification company and affiliated groups as incompetent?
Unfortunately it looks like a children party here.
I wish you a good luck!
-
Jack Cole This is exactly condition I want to stay in until device is ready for market. Sadly you have not read what was written earlier.
As I have written many times. I have no reason nor I want to convince anybody. Only people with faith can overcome this.
This shouldn't be a reason to have a meaningless discussion.
-
Eric Walker This confirms the words I am saying. There will be always doubts until a person will use it and see the practical results.
All the words about conviction are meaningless since it only depends on knowledge you have or what you can understand.
Other issue is people are close minded, thay can't just work with faith to develop it later into a reality. This is reason it takes so long.
It was not too far when people considered earth as a plane surface. If you would tell them earth is different, they will burn you. You can't be right. There were just few that used their brains and ignored what rest is saying. Very same thing is repeating for decades with all inventions. Interestingly the people can't recognize they are doing harm for themselves and some even think they are smarter...
You are saying that evidence can be radiation. I can produce few kinds of strong radiation with no excess heat or measurable transmutation. You can produce X-rays pretty easily.
It is also relatively easy to put a radioactive source shielded by moving absorber to fake that something is happening inside.
There are many people with similar attitude like yours. They can't be convinced by a papers, since there will be always some kind of a "flaw".
axil I have tried many kinds of technologies including dusty plasma. Radiation can escape also there. It depends on many different variables including fuel processing as you have said.
It is possible to get probably all kinds of radiation from LENR. With LENR you can also obtain fast neutrons as with conventional fission reactor. Possibilities are very wide.
The only difficulty is to open "valve".
-
Thank you for the messages!
I am also convinced that there is so many LENR materials available that it can't be denied. You are served with undeniable facts. But as you can see, even this is not enough for normal people. You need a real product to be convinced. Even after independent tests there will be doubts. But if you can buy and use it, there will be no doubt anymore.
If time will allow, I can share also results from EDX of the SEM pictures. Transmutations are something you can't fake.
MFMP did analysis of few fuel samples from Mr. Suhas, Parkhomov and also also few of us (yet there are still more of them to publish). There you can find structures made of elements that can't be impurities. Confirmed transmutations are probably of the highest value since it is immediately clear the process is nuclear.
-
Eric Walker Negative or poor result is also beneficial.
If competition thinks we have nothing, it could be reason for them to slow down, respectively to not be in hurry.
If you are working in business with strong competition you know how the things are going.
This is clearly advantage for us.
Yes, I can reveal that it took two months for me to return testing room to the previous condition - so quite big delay.
But with both positive or negative result it is beneficial for us in some sense.
-
Shane D. doing the test as soon as possible will make a sense just in case we will need money from investors. This is not the case. Otherwise there were many tests or Rossi-like demos already.
I hope that those that are investigating LENR field could add something valuable. Talking about disbelief is pointless. In that case please do not join in the discussion.
-
Thank you for the comments.
Regarding previous test with MFMP I have explained the situation quite precisely on the forum. But it is uneasy for everybody to find it.
I have agreed to make the test as occured situation allowed just two options:
a) do the test in very experimental and unverified conditions.
b) waste all the money for the trips that MFMP already spent (everything booked).
MFMP were well aware about serious problems that were not possible to fix in given time right before they flew from the USA and that there was basically 50:50 chance it will work and in any way the result will be not on par with achieved performance.
There was no other sufficient option. In conditions given by me I would not agree with the test as my vision of how it should look like was very different.
The time that I revealed to MFMP as good for testing (when I am really ready) months before the last test happened still did not come.
In very simplified words - the last test happened because it was good timing for MFMP, sadly very bad for me, but I had nothing to loose.
Although MFMP was very well prepared, I was not prepared. Yes, it would be possible to use other reactors but with extremely good chance to reveal proprietary stuff.
Let's suppose the test was positive or will be in the future. What will actually change? For us, we will get higher confidence from customers.
But for you? You will get higher confidence in LENR. But that is all.
Our aim is to bring LENR for people but unfortunately independent testing even with extremely positive results will not change anything about it. Would you like to see a nice plots or rather make some heat in your house? I wish for both.
For us testing unfinished reactor or product is not good idea just because it may not perform as good as it really will. Doing tests repeatedly in unprepared condition is in my opinion wasting of time. Since the final testing will tell the absolute values that can be achieved for production models, in reality and for everybody.
If you study LENR you will know already very well that it is so real as stars in the sky. All companies that have capabilities to develop their devices are already doing this.
-
Something for thinking...
t1 - traces on the adhesive carbon tape
t2 - trace that extends out of the adhesive tape to the aluminium sample holder
t3 - trace on the aluminium
t4 - closeup of the trace with a particle formation
t5 - metal particle shot by a nano wire (from adhesive tape)
t6 - same as t5
t7 - same as t6
t8 - picture taken few days later for comparison (see picture from previous page), visible half-life of a fractal particles and formation of a new while sample is untouched.
t9 - closeup of t8
t10 - new particle formation after few days out of reactor