Update from the MFMP

I received the following update from Bob Greenyer of the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project

We’ll be running a series of blog posts from our team members old and new over the next few weeks on practical research methods for LENR and making of reaction matrix. This will be reporting on recent works by team members old and new.

On the live front, Mathieu has started the improved differential cells calibration in France and it is going very nicely and we hope to finally have the Steel and Glass cells up and running in the next week or two – we will be posting updated photos on those very soon.

Here is the first of the blogs.
____________

MFMP powder team member Bob Higgins, writes a how-to blog on production of his reaction matrix. Made from nano-micrometric catalytic clusters of Nickel and Fe2O3, this material aims to be robust, easy to handle and not exhibit the many difficulties seen with nano powders on their own, such as lofting, ease of toxic exposure, rapid damage to vacuum equipment, etc.

http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/follow/powder-test-cells/372-adding-nano-scale-features-to-macro-scale-metals-for-lenr-applications

  • Freethinker

    I agree,

    that expectations has not been met the way one would like them to be be. However, I rather see the glass as half-full than half-empty, and maybe we should manage our expectations a bit when it comes to MFMP.

    They have put in a lot of effort (regardless if one argues that it has been misguided or not), and they have tried hard to communicate results even in real time. There is a limit however, on what can be done will limited means regardless of how much you adapt to those limitations. Fixing the limitations would mean finding money. That is not easy either.

    I for one is happy to see some signs of life from MFMP and there is nothing wrong with communicating the status.

    Naturally, it would be great if the status was “SUCCESS!!”. 😉

    Speaking about status reports, anybody knows anything about progress on Alan Smith’s HHO experiment?

  • Gerard McEk

    It would have been great when MFMP would have proven the claims of researchers by now, but things do not move so fast with little money and even if a lot of cash would have been thrown at it, results may have lingered because of all kinds of little things. like parameters, settings, procedures, power interruptions, change of shifts and what have you.
    People watching the birth of a paradigm change should practice a heron’s patience.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    There is a hydrogen-based steelmaking process.
    Fe2O3 + 3 H2 > 3 H2O + Fe (metal).
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/11/27/posco-carbon-idUSSEO205120091127
    So, the iron oxide might be degraded by hydrogen and form iron.

  • Allan Shura

    There is a lot of time for the search for the ultimate catalyst. However we have had nano Pd-deuterium systems for quite a while and that should be very cost effective. The technical difficulty
    that evidently seems to stall a product release (besides NDA proprietary systems) is the reaction control mechanism employed.