Posts by Arnaud

    On my new rack of 8 ineffable furnaces my dutiful control reactor keeps watch while all of the rest, The Magnificent Seven Atom-Ecology reactors with different fuels are all slike faithful steeds are riding hard burning deuterium hay and emitting definitive gammas many times background... some make heat, some make gammas, some without any input power what-so-ever... Yippee Ki Yay

    . Jurg and I have decided to sleep over in the lab tonight so as to not miss catching a single falling star.

    Jürg, Russ, have a good night with the 7 magnificences . Don't miss a single photon.

    axil : If you try to add energy to a proton (inside deuterium it works best) , then the magnetic moment tries to balance it by releasing a certain quantum of energy, what lets the proton fall into a "deep" magnetic state. A chain of protons in such a deep state can mediate (accumulate) the energy hole what finally leads to D-D fusion.

    The interesting point is how e.g. iron oxide is promoting such deep magnetic states.

    Could you give us the source of infomation regarding Iron oxide (Fe2O3 or Fe3O4 ?) promoting the deep magnetic states ?

    Not all would agree.

    “The inertia of the human mind and its resistance to innovation are most clearly demonstrated not, as one might expect, by the ignorant mass — which is easily swayed once its imagination is caught — but by professionals with a vested interest in tradition and in the monopoly of learning. Innovation is a twofold threat to academic mediocrities: it endangers their oracular authority, and it evokes the deeper fear that their whole, laboriously constructed intellectual edifice might collapse. The academic backwoodsmen have been the curse of genius from Aristarchus to Darwin and Freud; they stretch, a solid and hostile phalanx of pedantic mediocrities, across the centuries.” (Arthur Koestler, The Sleepwalkers [New York, 1959], p. 427.)

    I love this ! This is what exactly I'm trying to express for years

    All replicators have to test first alone LIH to know how fast its breathes then ONLY adding powders .

    As well as you should know if this behavior remains in relation with standard LIH breathing .. or not.

    Initially in the mix, there was metal Li ready to react with H.

    But you are right, firstly, the understanding of basic chemistry and physics occurring inside the reactor is the first step to go.

    Dear Arnaud,

    If you increase temperature, yes, Lithium hydride decomposes LiH -> Li+ + H-. Therefore by this way, you should INCREASE pressure by H- releasing then it's the opposite that what has been observed BTE Dan.

    My bad ... you are right this time ;-) He found firstly a decrease of pressure not an increase. But we don't know how the Li was ... I mean alone or with H. From wikipedia : I quote "

    LiH is produced by treating lithium metal with hydrogen gas:

    2 Li + H2 → 2 LiH

    This reaction is especially rapid at temperatures above 600 °C. Addition of 0.001–0.003% carbon, or/and increasing temperature or/and pressure, increases the yield up to 98% at 2-hour residence time"

    The reactor was at 580°C, so if it crossed the 600°C threshold, a lot of LiH is formed from Li and H. Afterwards when the temperature increase further then LIH decomposes

    Yes Can,

    probably the best explanation remains Hydride breathing therefore what saw BTE Dan remains strange too because it was a reverse hydride behavior.

    Hello David,

    If you increase the temperature at the edge of equilibrium (and for the same pressure) Lithium hydride decomposes LiH -> Li+ + H-. The description given by BTE Dan is going in the direction of a decomposition of LiH.

    The LiAlh4 decomposes slowly into Li3AlH6 : 3LiAlH4 -> Li3AlH6 + 2Al + 3H2 (Cfr T.N. Dymova, D.P. Aleksandrov, V.N. Konoplev, T.A. Silina, and
    A.S. Sizareva, Russ. J. Coord. Chem. 20, 279 (1994.)

    Half of the H2 content is gone with this first step of decomposition.

    This decomposition starts at room temperature and the yield increases with the temperature. It is better to store the LiAlH4 in the fridge.

    @Alan Smith You raised the exact point of weakness of OS (Open Science). You put the finger where it hurts.

    I think, OS is the best way to conduct science to discover what mother nature has not revealed. Especially when it comes to real new discoveries where all the titbits are not mastered yet. With OS gives opportunity to people to propose crazy ideas that might giant steps in the path of discovering mother nature.

    Unfortunately for OS, if a dreadful weapon could be done from discoveries who will share it ? How to share it ?

    When it is sunshine, OS might be marvellous. But when the storm comes, OS is not the answer anymore, even more it is the worse way to work.

    Quote from Arnaud: “ I try to find a description of your setup but I can't find any. Where can I find it? Thank you

    It is not availabe because quite sure dangerous thing. And have some things very diffrent as other replications so it is unlikely…

    I can understand why you are very cautious about telling what you have made. Me356 had same behavior before dissapearing.

    Salut David,

    Merci pour ce complément d'informations. Ce que je n'arrive toujours pas à saisir est la reproductibilité de l'incident:
    1. La manip était faite régulièrement et un beau jour l'incident arriva.
    2. La manip a été faite une seule fois et l'incident reporté se produisit. 'Ils' décidèrent à la suite de l'incident de ne plus utiliser le protocol de la manip.

    Si 1. alors on est pas très avancé si on a pas plus de détails sur la manip ayant engendré l'incident par rapport aux manips traditionnelles.
    Si 2. alors on a une voie royale pour reproduire l'incident.

    Je ne remets pas en cause l'incident. Je veux pouvoir cerner les conditions nécessaires pour que l'incident se produise. On pourra refaire 1000 fois la manip et ne jamais avoir d'incident. On a besoin d'avoir un élément de variable à modifier.


    Soory Arnaud, no link exists. It has never been seen online before. It is from private correspondence. Focardi was certainly a great original thinker, and one of the real pioneers of Ni/H LENR, along of course with Piantelli. But since Piantelli outlives…

    Ok I understand why I don't have this. I've studied the work of Focardi and was unaware of it.

    This comment on proton decay -or rather transformation - comes from a previously unpublished note from Professor Sergio Focardi. Translated from Italian of course -fairly badly by me, but the meaning is -I hope- clear.

    .....N = P + e^- + av,where e ^-is a negative electron and av is an antineutrino; radiation persists for a few minutes in the system, then they annihilate into thermal energy, no radioactivity. To determine the transformation of (elements), transforming the Proton, with emission of energy corresponding to the loss of matter is the particle that Enrico Fermi called W, which was later identified by Carlo Rubbia, work that earned him the Nobel Prize. On this system the W particle is triggered by the excitement of hydrogen atoms..... The energy provided is sufficient, taking into account that the interaction of the W particle, an intermediate boson which respects the Bose-Einstein statistics, for weak nuclear interactions....

    Hello Alan, do you have a link to the original paper from Prof Focardi?