Merged Cold Fusion Claims

[marplots]

Also see: Michael, McKubre; Nagel, David; Chubb, Talbot; Hekman, Randall (2004) (PDF), New Physical Effects in Metal Deuterides
These authors are supporters of LENR who accept the excess heat results as valid evidence and state

Bonus points for using "fugacity" !!

 

[pteridine]

Your statement “For LENR, the temperature is low and and the required partial pressure within the metal is high. The Pons-Fleischmann experiment results were incompatible with the known laws of physics because the rate of fusion to produce the results was orders of magnitude too low…” follows Huizenga’s argument. At that time , he really wanted the reaction to go away, as U Rochester was in the hot fusion business in a big way.
He assumed that, because the possibility of fusion was claimed, that D+D fusion was occurring. He also assumed that there was only one reaction occurring, suprising for someone with his experience. This system is not the same as the Piantelli/Focardi/Rossi system. Consider that this is not necessarily a reaction between two hydrogen atoms. Because of this, all arguments about the hydrogen concentration in the metal being too low for H + H fusion is moot. This has the additional complication in that it would require a complex series of reactions to produce helium, unless one wishes to claim unstable ²He is being produced, an energetically unfavorable product. With the concentrations of intermediates vanishingly low, the chances of reaction also become small.
It is interesting that Tandberg’s patent was denied because he could not explain the physical process. Was that the only reason it was denied?

 

[ben m]

Your statement “For LENR, the temperature is low and and the required partial pressure within the metal is high. The Pons-Fleischmann experiment results were incompatible with the known laws of physics because the rate of fusion to produce the results was orders of magnitude too low…” follows Huizenga’s argument. At that time , he really wanted the reaction to go away, as U Rochester was in the hot fusion business in a big way.
He assumed that, because the possibility of fusion was claimed, that D+D fusion was occurring. He also assumed that there was only one reaction occurring, suprising for someone with his experience. This system is not the same as the Piantelli/Focardi/Rossi system. Consider that this is not necessarily a reaction between two hydrogen atoms. Because of this, all arguments about the hydrogen concentration in the metal being too low for H + H fusion is moot. This has the additional complication in that it would require a complex series of reactions to produce helium, unless one wishes to claim unstable ²He is being produced, an energetically unfavorable product. With the concentrations of intermediates vanishingly low, the chances of reaction also become small.
It is interesting that Tandberg’s patent was denied because he could not explain the physical process. Was that the only reason it was denied?

Yep, that's what "cold fusion violates the known laws of physics" looks like. The laws of physics predict zero (i.e., unmeasurably small and incompatible with claims) rates for D+D in Pd. They predict zero p+p in Ni. They predict zero p+Ni --> Cu in Ni. They predict zero p+p--> 2He anywhere. They predict zero p+e + Ni --> n + Ni---> Cu. They predict zero "p + Ni just sits there and energy comes out anyway". They predict zero p+e+Ni --> p + Zn. They predict zero "magical neutral particle releases energy from Ni nucleus near p nucleus".

These predictions are based on well-established quantum, nuclear, and thermal physics. When we say "cold fusion violates known laws of physics", we mean it. Just because you can daydream about a subtle-mechanism-everyone-forgot-about doesn't mean that there is one. There aren't *that* many physical principles involved, and the existing predictions---the ones that disagree with the experiments---are pretty simple and pretty exhaustive.

What's wrong with that statement? Why can't you say "I think Rossi has done an experiment that invalidates a presently-known law of physics"? That's what a good experiment is supposed to be able to do. That's what other anti-mainstream experimentalists (Podkletnov, for example) say about their results.

Perhaps it's that you think Rossi's results are *good enough* to suggest a boring theory, like a previously-overlooked way of evaluating fusion probabilities, but not good enough to prove Heisenberg (or whatever) was wrong? That's because they're not very good results. They're not even as good as you think they are.

 

[Dancing David]

Perhaps you can explain why you think LENR violates the known laws of physics and is impossible. To do so, you would have to know the mechanism of reaction and certainly all on this thread would find it interesting if you would show it in detail so that we may be enlightened.

Maybe you should show some LENR and then we can all talk about it.

 

[Dancing David]

The system would have to be modified to run on the batteries and the batteries would somehow have to be 'certified.' It is easier to measure power from an outlet.

Huh?

What?

One also has to run the system long enough to ensure that a chemical reaction could not be responsible.
Testing by a disinterested third party at a location selected by the third party should suffice.

 

[Dancing David]

Your statement “For LENR, the temperature is low and and the required partial pressure within the metal is high. The Pons-Fleischmann experiment results were incompatible with the known laws of physics because the rate of fusion to produce the results was orders of magnitude too low…” follows Huizenga’s argument. At that time , he really wanted the reaction to go away, as U Rochester was in the hot fusion business in a big way.
He assumed that, because the possibility of fusion was claimed, that D+D fusion was occurring. He also assumed that there was only one reaction occurring, suprising for someone with his experience. This system is not the same as the Piantelli/Focardi/Rossi system. Consider that this is not necessarily a reaction between two hydrogen atoms. Because of this, all arguments about the hydrogen concentration in the metal being too low for H + H fusion is moot. This has the additional complication in that it would require a complex series of reactions to produce helium, unless one wishes to claim unstable ²He is being produced, an energetically unfavorable product. With the concentrations of intermediates vanishingly low, the chances of reaction also become small.
It is interesting that Tandberg’s patent was denied because he could not explain the physical process. Was that the only reason it was denied?

It is more interesting that no one has demonstrated LENR.

 

[Craig B]

There is a tachyon scam.

http://www.luisprada.com/Protected/tachyon_energy.htm

http://www.tachyonau.com/page8.php?view=W03&IDpartner=mirtech

Thanks for this dafydd! It seems to be linked to the field of free energy scams too, according to its justificatory "scientific" manifesto (my bold)

All these forces are subjected to the law of entropy which is the basic force of resistance against the will of the Absolute. The opposite of law of entropy is law of centropy which originates from Absolute and liberates consciousness and matter from the grip of basic physical forces. Centropy is a force that harmonizes chaotic energy fields into a unified whole and enables transcendence of limitations of time and space as they are defined with the basic physical constants of entropic universe: speed of light, Planck constant, fine structure constant, etc.

The Energy of Oneness originates from the Absolute and densifies through various dimensions of the universe. When the Energy of Oneness reaches the Soul dimension, it creates a field of harmonic energy that physicists call zero point energy. This energy then densifies through energy fields of mental, astral and etheric plane and can be harnessed on the physical plane with special devices, so called free energy chambers. Physicists know that the vacuum in reality is not empty but is full of potential energy states from which particles are born. The energy hidden in the vacuum is almost infinite and can be used without great expense. Therefore it is expected it will become the main source of energy for mankind in the future.

By the way, only a literary genius could have concocted such material. It's the best scam gibberish I have ever seen! I love the definition of the "law of entropy" in the first line.

 

[McFate]

I've told you before, he has very good reason not to reveal any more than he absolutely has to right now. The skeptics on this forum are just not going to get the kind of data they seek at this point in time, just as Edison was not willing to divulge his light bulb data.

Are you the same "attaboy" who said some time ago:

No, Rossi may not come across in October since projects like this have a way of getting delayed. But I read where he has already built 170 of the 300 units needed to start his new plant site. What I predict will happen is that when Rossi does prove E-Cat to the world, you skeptics will either quietly withdraw to some more comfortable thread, or despite huge evidence to the contrary will continue to attack the validity of the E-Cat.

Here we are, a half-year after the promised coup-de-grace delivery date -- the 1MW plant was allegedly delivered months ago, and I've even seen claims of multiple deliveries. And you're reduced to moving the goalposts, from "you guys are going to have to eat crow soon" to "he can't release those details now."

I guess that's the advantage of being a True Believer. One doesn't have to look for "more comfortable threads." One can just stay put, throwing up increasingly weak excuses for failure of one's predictions.

 

[phunk]

Amazing that he had built 170 of them back then, and to this day still hasn't properly demonstrated one of them.

 

[RobDegraves]

The system would have to be modified to run on the batteries and the batteries would somehow have to be 'certified.' It is easier to measure power from an outlet.

Completely wrong.

Batteries have a finite supply of energy, based on their chemical reaction. An outlet does not have that limitation (in practice). Batteries in an empty field could only supply a certain amount of energy and no more.

There would be no possibility of cheating.

All the ecat has to do is supply more energy than batteries could possibly supply.

Do that and no one could claim you cheated.


Why has Rossi not done any version of this... instead of limited, easily misinterpreted or falsified demonstrations?

 

[Craig B]

Amazing that he had built 170 of them back then, and to this day still hasn't properly demonstrated one of them.

Even many of Rossi's infatuated fans don't seem to believe this. The impression was given that the factory was in Florida or New Hampshire, but when the Florida inspectors came calling he denied that any devices were being produced in the USA. Or that they generate gamma rays in any form, though previously he had insisted on this, to support his assertion that fusion was occurring somewhere in the bowels of these contraptions. The Florida inspectors do not report that they as much as saw even one of these e-cats.

So he's lying either to the public, or to the Florida nuclear inspectors. It is overwhelmingly probable that there is nothing to demonstrate except what amounts to an elaborate electric kettle.

 

[Aepervius]

Completely wrong.

Batteries have a finite supply of energy, based on their chemical reaction. An outlet does not have that limitation (in practice). Batteries in an empty field could only supply a certain amount of energy and no more.

There would be no possibility of cheating.

All the ecat has to do is supply more energy than batteries could possibly supply.

Do that and no one could claim you cheated.


Why has Rossi not done any version of this... instead of limited, easily misinterpreted or falsified demonstrations?

And it is even quantifiable, most battery tech have a maximum limit of joule per kilogram, heck even those based on nuclear reaction/beta decay.

Just have your battery in an isolated field, assume best available power per Kg, then require that much to be produced and some more.

Et voila.

Not at all like having a 500 KW generator running to pretend to have a 1MW plant for a few hours. So. many. Way. To. Cheat.

 

[Aepervius]

Even many of Rossi's infatuated fans don't seem to believe this. The impression was given that the factory was in Florida or New Hampshire, but when the Florida inspectors came calling he denied that any devices were being produced in the USA. Or that they generate gamma rays in any form, though previously he had insisted on this, to support his assertion that fusion was occurring somewhere in the bowels of these contraptions. The Florida inspectors do not report that they as much as saw even one of these e-cats.

So he's lying either to the public, or to the Florida nuclear inspectors. It is overwhelmingly probable that there is nothing to demonstrate except what amounts to an elaborate electric kettle.

And the funniest thing is , IIRC, he came back afterward waffling about his gamma were not gamma since they did not leave the device (to the general public).

I mean I understand some people are hopeful, but this go beyond hopefulness in the realm of fairy tale.

 

[Cuddles]

Batteries have a finite supply of energy, based on their chemical reaction. An outlet does not have that limitation (in practice). Batteries in an empty field could only supply a certain amount of energy and no more.

There would be no possibility of cheating.

All the ecat has to do is supply more energy than batteries could possibly supply.

Do that and no one could claim you cheated.

Actually, we could. One of the ways of cheating we've considered in the past was simply hiding some fuel, a camping butane cannister for example, inside the apparatus. It seems unlikely this has actually been done in past tests since it doesn't appear to have been necessary, with simple measurement errors being enough to explain the results. However, it could easily be set up for a test such as you describe. You'd have to make sure that you didn't just get more out than the batteries could provide, but more than any possible fuel or batteries hidden inside could as well. Or actually look inside to check of course.

 

[Yevgen Barsukov]

It's the US Navy who've been interested in cold fusion, not NASA.

This is over now, Navy commander shut it down:
http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2012/03/01/navy-commander-halts-spawar-lenr-research/

Regarding your point on fusion that it just need two particles smashing together with enough energy (possible but has very low probability), this is not entirely correct because you have to consider not just plain Boltzman's mechanistic distribution of velocities, but also quantum mechanical
and relativistic effects if you come close to such velocities. For example particle would radiate if it would be moving at the velocities we are talking about close to other charged particles, and lose energy. Basically for a particle with such energy, surrounding matter (atoms and vacuum in between) turns into something like a viscous goo instead of being a free medium where you bullets can randomly smash. And because of that, it will never be able to get to the right velocity.

Regards,
Yevgen

 

[RobDegraves]

Actually, we could. One of the ways of cheating we've considered in the past was simply hiding some fuel, a camping butane cannister for example, inside the apparatus. It seems unlikely this has actually been done in past tests since it doesn't appear to have been necessary, with simple measurement errors being enough to explain the results. However, it could easily be set up for a test such as you describe. You'd have to make sure that you didn't just get more out than the batteries could provide, but more than any possible fuel or batteries hidden inside could as well. Or actually look inside to check of course.

According to the claims, this thing is supposed to be able to run for months.

How long could a butane canister possibly last? Run the test for a few days, that should do it and provide enough energy to answer any doubts.

 

[attaboy]

Are you the same "attaboy" who said some time ago:




Here we are, a half-year after the promised coup-de-grace delivery date -- the 1MW plant was allegedly delivered months ago, and I've even seen claims of multiple deliveries. And you're reduced to moving the goalposts, from "you guys are going to have to eat crow soon" to "he can't release those details now."

I guess that's the advantage of being a True Believer. One doesn't have to look for "more comfortable threads." One can just stay put, throwing up increasingly weak excuses for failure of one's predictions.

So now I'm a true believer - ha ha. That's news to me. You'd better realize there is probably a much bigger picture in all this than we are given to know.

 

[Craig B]

So now I'm a true believer - ha ha. That's news to me. You'd better realize there is probably a much bigger picture in all this than we are given to know.

What in the name of Heaven does that mean?

 

[pteridine]

Well, Ben, all those predictions and calculations don't give LENR much of a chance. All those calculations had to be based on something. Even ab initio computations have a basis in reality.
Fortunately, there are still a few that do experiments and that is what is needed. Until there is a third-party evaluation, all the calculations, estimations, prognostications, and SWAGs are just something to keep people busy.

 

[Yevgen Barsukov]

scamers are dangerous not only to your money

Rossi's electric kettle might have entertained us long enough, but the guys in Florida who brought in an inspector have some good points behind trying to stop this for good. I am surprised the same thing never happened at the location where demonstrations are taking place. After all, large groups of people where put into a small room with large amount of high pressured water vapour and powerful electric heaters.
I find it instructive what happened with a previous famous energy scam - Papp engine. Hint - it blew up and killed one bystander. See curious account of Feinman on it (who happened to be a witness!), with a lot of interesting parallels to Rossi:
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/comments/papparticle2.html

Regards,
Yevgen