Update from me356 on LENR Testing (Update: Some Pictures Posted)

LENR researcher going by the name of me356 has been posting periodic updates on the LENR-Forum about his LENR work. Here’s the latest comment at this thread: https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/3225-me356-Reactor-parameters-part-2/

I have tested plasma based reactor for longer period of time.. Results are clear. Unfortunately the power that is under the lid is so strong I will probably not continue in this area. Reactor is emmiting neutrons a few days after the test!

With lithium COP might be exceptionally higher. Very rough estimate is COP of 10-50.
But I am not skilled enough to be absolutely sure about safety which is reason why I will continue with reactors that are more safe. Emmissions (RF, electrons and UV) during the test were so strong that my control circuit was absolutely crazy even that it was 3 meters away – it is unusable.

Now I am playing with dangerous things that are clearly working.

I am afraid, but LENR is not safe as it looked initially. You can make a nuclear reactor with all the things you really don’t want.
Fortunately it can’t get out of control so easily. If power output is limited, you are safe.
But there will be probably always some kind of potentionally harmfull radiation. Fuel and fuel chamber must be very clean from impurities to not get unwanted products.

Now I understand perfectly why Rossi is working on the e-cat so long. You have something that is working, you have a prototypes and you are nearly ready for mass production. Then you will find something amazing, that can increase the excess heat significantly so that previous work is not important anymore. But there are again many difficulties and unknown things that it can take a few years to get a fully working prototype based on the new discoveries, but it is surely worth. You can continue endlessly, because LENR is opening doors of something completely unknown and much more. not just energy conversion. It is possible that in 10 years, everything will be completely different.

His references to Andrea Rossi’s work are interesting because Rossi reported that it was possible to get very active results, but it was important to keep them under control to ensure safe operation. It’s interesting that me356 is reporting the generation of neutrons, which Bob Greenyer also reported in the latest Glowstick test. Mats Lewan reported in his An Impossible Invention book that in one early highly active experiment, neutrons were detected in the neutron detector. See more on that here: http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/10/17/neutron-detection-and-the-e-cat/

UPDATE: Me356 has posted some pictures of one of his reactors here: https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/3225-me356-Reactor-parameters-part-2/?postID=18702#post18702

  • Alex Fenrick

    Hopefully those who have been arguing on here as of late that LENR is 100% safe will at very least take this as more valid information when talking about LENR safety. I am quite sure that if LENR proves to be viable, that safety measures can absolutely be achieved especially when compared to the risks of nuclear plant radiation risk as well as environmental impact of fossil fuels. Like Engineer said….What part of “low energy NUCLEAR REACTION” is not understood?!

  • Lux Terrea

    If me356 will give up the recipe for creating such a near out of control beast so that others can replicate then this would be wonderful news indeed. Otherwise it’s business as usual around here.

  • Hhiram

    me356 has produced a lot of technical talk, but no evidence. No images of equipment, no results data, no video of the reactor in operation, nothing.

    Until some evidence is produced (especially video of a working reactor), I don’t think we need to waste time taking a random anonymous Internet person seriously.

    • Frank Acland
      • Anon2012_2014

        The video only shows a tube furnace at the end of a pipe fitting that is hot.

        Where are the spectacular failure videos?

        Where is there a schematic of what he has set up?

    • LuFong

      me356 earlier had a number of open, live videod experiments that ended up as spectacular failures. If you had followed me356 then you would know he is quite capable and these results are not unexpected. He at this time is not trying to convince anybody. There will be a time (most likley) when he will release specifics but not now.

      The problem I see is that there are too many people trying to tell him what to do. We are fortunate that he still gives out his status.

      • passerby

        This. Many confuse the difference between an update and a press release.

        Goes right along with the attitude of “I have been following this story for years so I am entitled to privileged information”. I see this statement WAY too much here.

  • I would be very sad if me356 does not immediately share his know-how regarding the easily verifiable but dangerous reactors with MFMP or Universities.

    If he continues to talk about amazing advances while sharing none of it (even the paths he abandons), well then he’s just another Rossi, and we already have enough of those.

    People vouching for him leading up to these moments makes him seem legit. But we don’t really know. For almost all of us he’s just a dude on the Internet posting teasers and showing videos of hot stuff. I hope he decides to prove LENR+ to the world in short order.

    • Frank Acland

      Bob Greenyer knows him and has conducted testing with him, so that makes him a bit more than an anonymous tester. I guess he doesn’t want his identity revealed, however.

      • Yes, that’s why I said “almost all.” I remembered BG vouching for him.

  • Stephen Taylor

    Extraordinary claims……..

    • Ged

      Hopefully all his data and methods are released soon. There comes a point one must pause and share, before continuing the chase…

  • LuFong

    “Reactor is emmiting neutrons a few days after the test!”

    “If power output is limited, you are safe. But there will be probably always some kind of potentionally harmfull radiation. ”

    Most interesting comments to me.

    • Stephen

      Delayed high energy Neutron emission is interesting, I wonder what can cause that unless some delayed nucleon capture is occurring in the nuclei? Didn’t MFMP see a delayed high energy proton emission from the ash of a test with Piantelli sometime ago?

      I hope it isn’t high intensity or in a burst.

      Hopefully MFMP can get in touch with Me356 and compare notes some day soon.

      I’m very glad Me356 is sharing this information with other replicators.

      • LuFong

        MFMP hasn’t done a test with Piantelli. They have gotten some suggestions of emissions but nothing, outside of a nearby radio station, near the level me356 is reporting.

        • Stephen

          You maybe right regarding MFMP and Piantelli I may have got confused with their meeting where Piantelli presented some data, I was actually rearing to the test where Piantelli put used nickel from one of his reactors in a cloud chamber and saw high energy protons I think about 6 MeV if memory serves me right. I originally saw it in a posting and discussion from Bob following the GS5.2 experiment but I think Piantelli’s test was performed much earlier some years ago.

          • Bob Greenyer

            I have spoken with me356 and tentatively arranged a visit in the week beginning 16th.

            He is pretty exhausted from recent rapid testing and needs a chill-out period. He wants to make a reactor, with a swap in flow heat extractor that will run for a reasonable amount of time before I visit.

          • georgehants

            Bob, are you aware if he is willing to share any knowledge he has gained with MFMP?

          • Bob Greenyer

            First and foremost, me356 has shared most of what he has done to date, this is impressive since he is not a native English speaker. He hosted and ran with me the Padua cell for an extended run that work has given the MFMP confidence to run our cells for longer and push them harder (for instance, GS 5.2 & 5.3) – this has led to significant discoveries.

            I have put a lot of ideas out there and me356 is a fast cycler and has ran with several and read widely to add his own interpretations / additions and modifications to his experiments. He is a very intelligent guy with a broad skill set. Following the re-heat of the Padua cell, he made the very best use of MFMP equipment that he had on loan from us that would have laid idle otherwise.

            It is my understanding that he will share what he has done, When I have been with him in the past, there has been a free exchange of ideas and I have reported to the best of my ability as much information as possible complete with high quality visuals.

            He is a private individual that wishes, for now, to remain unidentified and we must respect that – he is not a member of the MFMP and so has no moral obligation to act in the spirit of the MFMP – that he has done so to date, and says he intends to, is something I am happy about. As an individual it is a big challenge to run so many experiments alone and run them Live.

            At this time of limbo, I understand the frustration felt by many, but active, productive and open (to any degree) researchers are few and far between, so we need to respect them and not drive them underground. He is very aware, as we all are, of the significance of the body of research being undertaken.

            About his equipment, he has

            1. SI-14B GM tube,
            2. a gamma spectacular like Mathieu in France
            http://www.gammaspectacular.com/gs-1102-pro
            Coupled to a NaI detector and
            3. some Bubbletech Neutron detectors similar to those that we used in GS5.3.

            From a radiation monitoring point of view, he is well placed to observe emissions.

          • georgehants

            Bob, Wonderful to be able to observe genuine science being performed for the good of all, unlike some people, that our sad society has led to them feeling justified in only working for their own benefit.

          • Mike Henderson

            Can / will the Padua cell be tested again with the stimulus?

          • Bob Greenyer

            The Padua cell was tested to failure over weeks. Some of the ash is with a university in Denmark for analysis and the rest will possibly go in a round of double blind tests.

          • Sanjeev

            That’s a good news Bob.
            How does that go with your FDA (full disclosure policy)? I think if the inventor is not willing to reveal all the info, then also you should accept any offer to test the device as a black box.

            Desperate times demand desperate actions.

          • Bob Greenyer

            I don’t think it will come to that

          • Jarea

            I don’t want to be rude but i must say that if he has what he says, then he has in his hands the prove of the LENR+. There is no time to rest, but to ask for help (technical and scientific). I would like to appeal for his good spirit so that he does what Rossi hasn’t done, that is, to share a receipt to reproduce the LENR+ effect.

          • Bob Greenyer

            He has a day job (his business) and it is very demanding. He does New Fire research in his free time when he should be resting! As I can attest to from personal experience, experimentation can be exhausting even when it is the only thing you are doing.

          • Alain Samoun

            “He has a day job (his business) and it is very demanding”
            Good reason to get some help from the community

          • Bob Greenyer

            Some people just like to do things their way on their own time schedule. It may seem like not accepting help but it is more to do with personal ownership of achievement and respect in one’s capability. It can work up to a point very effectively, but unless something is purely software, at some point help has to be sought.

          • Pekka Janhunen

            I wish “Parkhomovian” persistence to 356 and Bob to bring the case home.

          • we-cat

            Bob,

            Great news. Let me know where i can send the bottle of champagne. You’ll be thirsty after a successful replication!

            Godspeed,

            JB

          • Karl Venter

            Ho Bob
            Please covey our heartfelt congratulations to Mr Me356 for his incredible effort and I believe I speak for most of us here

          • Bob Greenyer

            For sure.

        • Ged

          They got plenty of neutrons though.

          • LuFong

            I thought just a few bubbles? Not enough to be sure of the source?

          • Ged

            5 or 6 countable (i.e. not in the bottom well or top near label; there were some in those regions but they are not allowed to be counted per manufacturer specs) -thermal- neutrons, while 0 for a week during all the calibrations nor since. Thermal is only fusion and fission, not cosmic rays or any other source. There is no doubt about the source, and that many neutrons is quite impressive given the small value of the excess heat.

          • Sanjeev

            Note that the detector subtends a tiny solid angle at the reactor, and so can intercept only a tiny fraction of neutrons emitted by the reactor (assuming that the reactor spits them out in all directions).

            So if you consider the whole volume around the reactor the count will be much more. As a home work, imagine the reactor surrounded by detectors so that there are no gaps between them, the total number of neutrons would be (possibly) 5x the number of detectors you can put there.

            Now the real question is are they significant or just background noise. For example if some U ore is present deep below Alan’s house or one of his fire alarms etc etc.

          • Ged

            Thing is, they weren’t seen before (for a week of control) or after (so far), and only during specific temperature ranges.

            Also, the detectors are behind lead and other shielding.

            So, there is a small area arc being seen by the detectors compared to the omni directional nature of release. There is the 1/r^2 law for attenuation by distance. There is attenuation by reaction with nitrogen in the air. There is attenuation by the alumina reactor body and then again by the lead and other plate shielding. And finally, there is attenuation by the probability of hitting the super critical droplets to be detected compared to the rate of passing through (and this will be affected by the angle at which the neutron encounters the detector). Put all that together, and you can estimate actual neutron production.

      • US_Citizen71

        More likely due to the breakdown of an unstable isotope created by transmutation.

        • Stephen

          Maybe if it was near the neutron drip line. If so I suppose there would be an exponential decay in intensity associated with the half life. I wonder if there are any isotopes with suitable half life for neutron emission that can explain emission over several days?

        • Ged

          Yep. Fission is the other maker of thermal neutrons besides fusion, and spontaneous fissioning isotopes like Californium-252 (half life 2.6 years) are used as a source of thermal neutrons. If the fusion is making thermal neutrons, those could create unstable isotopes out of the surrounding material, which is what could be being observed here.

          But there are other ways to see neutrons post run. If there is a strong alpha emitted in the ash, blasting away light isotopes like beryllium, oxygen, or even carbon, that resulting nuclear reaction could do it. Or a very high energy gamma ejecting neutrons from very light isotopes like beryllium or diets room in nuclear reactions could also do it. The latter two methods have very variable rates and half lives due to whatever the half life of the source emitter causing the secondary reactions is. So, plenty of hour half life lasting isotopes that may fit that bill.

          • Mike Henderson

            me356’s plasma reactor uses tungsten wires, not nickel. Tungsten has a lengthy list of nasty fission products. He modeled this after a commercial neutron generator and got his wish … for better or worse. He has announce this is the end of this line of research.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Abundant neutrons from a cold reactor after such a long time appear to be a new observation. If replicable, this would be an undeniable proof for the existence of LENR.

      • Omega Z

        So this particular version of LENR would not be available to the general population.

        • Stephen

          Hopefully the emissions are still low rate and close to background, but he did seem concerned about it so I guess we will need to wait to see what he says later.

          • US_Citizen71

            Neutron emissions should always be a worry.

          • Axil Axil

            How can we tell the difference between a neutron and a neutral particle.

          • US_Citizen71

            I would assume ideally with a hadronic calorimeter.

          • Warthog

            Why?? See my comment to OmegaZ above.

        • Warthog

          Whyever not?? With properly designed shielding, there should be no danger. Even a double-walled tank with some borate-doped water would be sufficient to shield any types of nuclear radiation that might be present.

          • Omega Z

            I would assume the Nuclear Regulatory Commission would require technicians 24/7. In residential it is usually install and forget until something goes wrong.
            With Neutron emissions, things could go wrong in a really bad way.

          • Warthog

            Why?? Shielding would be designed to protect against the “worst case scenario”. There is nothing “magic” about neutrons, and they are not particularly difficult to shield against. (Note: I did a nuclear science minor when getting my doctorate in chemistry and among my courses was one in shielding design taught by a nuke engineer who had worked on NERVA).

        • Andreas Moraitis

          Not recommendable for inexperienced experimenters, at least.

        • Roland

          More specifically perhaps this particular design should only reside within the mind of its author until the ramifications are very clearly understood.

  • Rossi commits to a public E-Cat QX demo. Will he backtrack or put off indefinitely?

    ———
    Gerard McEk

    May 5, 2016 at 12:48 PM

    Dear Andrea,
    Recently you said the QuarkX will be demonstrated when it is ‘ready’, which you hope is within months.
    It will underpin the details of the ‘Tremendous Surprise’ that will be revealed then.

    Some questions if I may:

    1. To whom will it be demonstrated? (I hope it will be open to public or us, you followers).
    2. Where will it be demonstrated? (I assume Europe, Sweden?)
    3. Is it right to assume that ‘ready’ means ready for sales, so the QuarkX factory is ready and fully equipped, and test runs were successfull?

    Thanks for answering our questions.

    Kind regards, Gerard

    Andrea Rossi

    May 5, 2016 at 2:29 PM

    Gerard McEk:

    1- to our partners in a first stage, to the public in a second
    2- Europe
    3- yes

    Warm Regards,

    A.R.

    • Ged

      Unfortunately, a “second stage” could mean any time frame, no pinning down. One could say that is in regards to the commercial product unveil in x(x) years time. Hopefully someone will get a more specific answer later.

      • It’s been a pattern of Rossi’s to over-promise with respect to access.

        I see him as ever-optimistic that real products are just around the corner. He’s definitely in that mode again.

    • Alex Fenrick

      I must say…I am impressed by how Rossi is able to keep his hydrogen nickel so shiny…….ohh that was a TERRIBLE joke…but it had to be done!

      • Roland

        You must be mortified to be so driven by inner comedic demons. Do allow us to share your burdens as our august company should serve to lessen your obvious grief.

    • LuFong

      Rossi changed 3 to: “3- not yet, but close”.

  • malkom700

    If these things are confirmed competition arises instantly between the states and the US to be fall behind as it did in the field of space travel again.

  • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

    Sounds like this is a very dangerous reactor. However, since this thing can potentially go to a COP of 50 with Lithium, I would love to see it tested, especially with Lithium. With that kind of output we can easily once and for all prove that LENR is viable.

    Though such a test really ought to be done with full safety precautions in effect. As I understand it, neutrons are deadly. Maybe it’s time to join resources and do a test in collaboration with MFMP?

    On a different note: LENR seem all about the specific fuel mixture and a number of control parameters to create a reaction that is both powerful and the least dangerous in terms of radiation. Rossi seems far ahead of everyone in that respect.

  • Stephen
  • Anon2012_2014

    Anyone have a diagram of this reactor rig of me356.

    What I see is a glass/neon like plasma tube in the center, running something that emits violet colored light, and what appears to be a Rossi style tube furnace.

    I am unsure what I am looking at — we only have me356’s words. It could be a neon sign tube lit by a transformer next to a tube furnace lit by an electric heater. Could be a working LENR device that produces neutrons. Could be a fusor of some kind that produces neutrons surrounds by a lithium blanket (no idea what the reactions and cross sections would be.)

    No way to know what I am looking at.

    Can someone point me to a diagram of what this is?

  • Ophelia Rump

    That will put a crimp in the garage LENR industry unless someone comes up with a safety methodology which can be relied upon. The need for expensive radiation sensors would make the low cost energy prohibitively expensive. If it must come down to trust then the name brands will win the day but the price and distribution may be considerably dampened, then again most of the world would gladly take the risk to gain the benefits which will be so abundant.

    • US_Citizen71

      A cheap gamma detector could be enough for safety (ie time to turn off the power and leave the vicinity), but a lead shield or similar around the project would be needed to turn neutrons in to gamma rays. If I was going to experiment I would insure that my experiment had some shielding around it be it concrete block and lead roofing rolls or something more sophisticated. The hot reactors like the GlowSticks can give off UV as well as IR so watching them like a lab top campfire is not likely the best thing anyway.

      • Ophelia Rump

        That makes your cell phone considerably more difficult to carry?

        Really you just need to validate the safety of a device which you are purchasing.

        Cheap knockoffs could be deadly, while well made units are perfectly fine.

        Impurities!

      • Warthog

        Actually, a Geiger-Mueller tube with boron trifluoride-doped fill gas and a mylar window will detect all types of nuclear emissions, including neutrons. GM tubes and electronics are relatively inexpensive.

      • A large fish tank full of sodium borate solution will absorb neutrons (and also UV/gamma) more cheaply than lead and would allow experiments to be observed in safely. I think concrete blocks would be fine to complete an enclosure. A GM detector with remote probe is obviously essential, even when neutron emission isn’t expected.

      • Warthog

        Lead is NOT a good material for shielding neutrons. Lead is good for shielding gamma (and of course beta and alpha). To shield neutrons, you need a material with a LOW density and a high concentration of protons (i.e. water or polyolefins). Hign-energy neutrons “hit” the protons and lose energy by collision (think billiard balls) until they are thermalised. Once thermalized, you need a material to “capture” the neutrons (i.e. have a high neutron capture cross section). Boron is one of the best at that.

        • US_Citizen71

          The idea of the lead shielding was not to protect from neutrons but to cause them to create gamma that could be detected by a cheap gamma detector and thus let you know things are beginning to become unsafe.

          • Stephen

            Interesting idea. Do you know if we would also get gamma from Boron?

          • US_Citizen71

            I would say from Agarius’ reply below probably not.

          • Warthog

            No, you get charged particles inside the GM tube, which is a far more sensitive detection than gamma.

          • Stephen

            Thanks very much for the link
            I was talking about the prompt gamma produced in reply to US-Citizen71, but I think the process you describe is a better sensor.

            The process you described is interesting since when B11 in ground state is stable and is infact 80% abundant but has a much smaller cross section for neutron capture than the 20% abundant B10. B10 cross section for neutron capture on the other hand is only beaten by H3 I think. So the process above with B10 (n,alpha) Li7 is really a stimulated fission. It’s interesting this occurs rather than a gamma decay to ground state.

            I also found an interesting link on slow neutron capture that you or others might find interesting if slow neutrons are present in LENR.

            http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Pub1263_web.pdf

            And I find this one quite useful too.

            https://www-nds.iaea.org/relnsd/vcharthtml/VChartHTML.html

          • Stephen

            Your link does make me wonder if it would be useful to include B10F19 in the mix in (or in near contact with) the fuel/catalyst mix. If any slow neutrons are present perhaps they could usefully generate Li7 from the B10 using the process you described. I suppose the F19 would go to Ne 20 if it captures a proton or I indirectly via F20 and beta decay if it captures a neutron.

            On the other hand we would need to be careful of the chemical effects from any free Flourine or Boron.

          • Warthog

            A Geiger counter is about as cheap as it gets, and with BF3 fill gas, detects neutrons directly.

        • Rene

          Go to a party store and buy a bunch of boxes of Halloween or household paraffin wax. Stack them up in a few layers such that all gaps are covered by another box. Neutron shielding. Worked nicely at a University lab.

          • Warthog

            Yup, paraffin also works.

    • Rene

      Bombard a tungsten target with electrons and you get tons of x-rays. It is quite easy to get radioactive effects. Bombard D or T and you get tons of neutrons. All it means is that some side reactions are occuring. Rossi mentioned this many times and worked to eliminate them. Me356 has to do the same.

      • Sanjeev

        I guess by bombardment you mean very very high energies. Me is using few hundred watts as far as I know. Its still possible to accelerate the e- to some good speeds, but given the tiny length of the reactor and H2 atmosphere in it, I think its improbable.

        • Rene

          It is fairly esy to generate 200Kev in crystal lattices. Much of this LENR speculation is based on these energies achievable in the lattice. Also Rossi mention these neutron side reactions here: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=733&cpage=4 My point is that he said he found those rections were not part of the main LENR effect and that he worked to eliminate them. This is why I said earlier that discovering some neutrons are produced in one experiment is not a prioi a given for LENR in general.

          • Zephir

            /* My point is that he said he found those rections were not part of the main LENR effect and that he worked to eliminate them */

            Probably yes, but me356 also relates the escapement of neutrons with high COP of reaction.

        • Zephir

          The number of watts is not relevant here – the voltage used is. You can generate few neutrons with statical electricity only.

    • Alain Samoun

      And anyway,it looks like that it will be safer than fission…

  • Ged

    Really? I don’t think you have worked with radiation then, or know why ALARA works, or why those bubble detectors even exist or how they work, or rates of detection and mechanisms driving them compared with competitive rates, or rates of other heat generating mechanisms and their proportionality to neutron generating mechanisms.

    Bubble detectors wouldn’t be very useful if a trillion bubbles showed up in a second, eh? Throwing out a number based on nothing like “trillion per second” (utterly wrong) is meaningless.

  • Mike Henderson

    Calm down. The plasma reactor used mostly tungsten, which is known to have nasty fission products, and only a trace of the more benign nickel.

  • Sanjeev

    Sorry to interrupt, but I guess you are assuming that all of the heat produced in the Ecat comes from neutrons (in some way), but there can be other causes for heat, like fusion/hydrino/proton capture or gamma etc and neutrons can simply be a by product from impurities etc, that happen to lie in the way. Thats why we see so few of them and some experiments don’t detect any of them.

  • Sanjeev

    Me356:If your house will be radioactive or contaminated in any way because of
    inexperienced experiments, you and your family will not be happy. You
    would wish it never happened.

    Many people are asking him for the recipe but from this statement it looks like he is not sure if it can be made public, probably he thinks its too dangerous to replicate at this time.

    • Jarea

      God. Let the university or MFMP replicate and stop with excuses.

  • Karl Venter

    Go Me356 go — Well done

    • lifeswhatyoumakeit

      Karl, are you in South Africa? I know Venter is a South African surname. I live in Cape Town and it would be great to be in touch with other LENR followers in the country.

      • Karl Venter

        Yip good old African
        pretoria
        post a few months ago by prof at Univ of Pretoria about fusion in crystal lattice give good insight how to overcome coulomb barrier – but he is sceptical
        sms oh seven one double 4 5 three zero three zero – send you email adress

  • Bob Greenyer

    The MFMP had called for an IGBT driver early on as it was the only one that could create the kind of waveform that you see in Rossi’s pencil sketch from his lab photo. Gerrard McEk also suggested it. For me it is the only way to create the highest dI/dt (fast and high current pulse) over the full range of powers for the reactors control and create multiple high dI/dt. The challenge is an inductor will resist high dI/dt so you need to think about your heater design carefully to maximise the effect.

    See image

    The problem with our SCR control is that there are only 2 times that power is turned on and for low and high powers the dI peak is low and then there is just slow rate of change. only at the middle of the power range, do we see highest dI/dt – also, with GS experiments in US the V is half.

    With IGBT and appropriately designed heater, you could create 10s or 100s of high current pulses per cycle.

    me356 uses an IGBT controller.

    • Mats002

      Half joke half serious I have pointed out that the 110V in US vs 220 in Europe is why US don’t score high XH, nor SSM. Rossi use 3 phase in US. Wonder why..?

      I don’t know what juice they have in China, more than 110?

      • Bob Greenyer

        Russia is 220.

        • Mats002

          IGBT used to be MOSFET transistors back when I pulsed LED video displays in the 80:s. 20 mA continous gave same light intensity as 1/32 pulse at several Amps. It was the heat that killed the LEDs but they could withstand the high temporary current because heat averages out over time. At the time that was considered a bad design by many electronic engineers. LED displays is all around us today and they are pulsed.

          • Mats002

            I guess I’m saying high temporary current make high local heat. Very high.
            That might make the difference.

          • Mats002

            And that LED display produced high frequency RF but wasn’t disturbing analogue TV electronics and not Z80 type microprocessors at below 100 MHz (we joked that soon enough Swedish P3 channel will be heard from the PC main CPU board, so at that time internal clock was below 99.3 MHz). RF produced was probably much higher.

          • Axil Axil

            Gods said about his q pulse that if the pulse was fast enough, the pulse would produce high EMF fields without the production of destructive heating.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Sometimes it is painful to be way ahead of you time, no one cares, then when every one is doing it – no one cares that you did it long ago… it is a cruel world. You kept on innovating though Mats002 – and that is a credit to you!

          • Mats002

            Thanks Bob – My thoughts goes to the 89:ers of Cold Fusion. I pray that they soon will see how their discovery enlightens our world. Also those who are in heaven.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Nice sentiment. Agreed

      • Argon

        Europe has harmonized to 230V. I think big peak powers are not a problem. You just need to study inverters or switching power supplies. Industrial inverters can deliver hundreds of kW:s of constant power. So getting high energy high spikes is matter of rectfying AC, storing energy to (super)capacitors and releasing it via mosfets. If high voltage pulse is needed, add coil. That would not require high average power from the grid.

      • Alan Smith

        Rossi used 3-phase in Lugano, as described in the report.

      • Thomas Kaminski

        Actually, the US also has 240 VAC available for the home primarily for heavy poser appliances like electric stoves and air conditioners. Most commercial buildings have 208VAC 3-phase.

    • LT

      Why not separate the heating from the stimulation by using a separate antenna or hf coil connected to a RF transmitter for the stimulation. (tunable ham radio transmitter ?) In that way it is also possible to determine which are the important frequencies needed for stimulation.

      • Bob Greenyer

        We are building a dedicated team to work on stimulation electronics.

    • Andre Blum

      Bob,
      I just donated another $200 to help cover costs for your trip or for equipment. I encourage others to do the same. Interesting times!

      • Bob Greenyer

        Thanks Andre that will help. Let’s hope that me356 gets the down time he needs and can get things ready.

        • Steve Savage

          Maybe it is time for ME365 to go full time on this? How cold that happen, how could we facilitate? Kickstarter?

          • Bob Greenyer

            As I said before – he has another business and he cares for that deeply. He is not going to go full time on this. Having said that, me356 is probably capable of achieving part time what several full time researchers could achieve.

      • Axil Axil

        I would contribute if and only if Bob would use the money for a muon detector.

    • Axil Axil

      em356 told me as follows:

      “axil: I have did few tests with pulsed control driven by IGBT circuit with programmable PWM and it works well.”

      Does this statement say that a PWM was the controller?

      SEE

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulse-width_modulation

      • Bob Greenyer

        He has and does use an IGBT with PWM. this gives very flexible control over the input power shape – it is very noisy though, which may be a good thing.

        • Alan Smith

          At Lookingforheat we are through the design phase and currently awaiting boards for a batch of H-Bridges. These are fast-switching full polarity reversal systems that breadboarding suggests will be good for up to 2kHz at 50V 10A. The board uses ‘through hole’ (not SMD) components for ease of assembly and will be available as a low-cost complete kit next month. This uses power-mosfets switched by optocouplers – controlled by Arduino Mega. Software and hardwatre for the control system will also be offered.

          The problem we found with SSR switching of AC is the ‘zero-crossing’ thing. They only switch when the line voltage hits this point. There are ‘random’ SSR’s available but for a variety of complex reasons not much better for our purposes. That is why our H-Bridges will switch DC.

          A study of the photos from Miami shows Rossi uses phase controllers in his system, driven by opto-couplers connected to (presumably) a computer/software system devised by him and Fabiani. There is a good view of this in the infamous ‘stethoscope’ picture.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Good and yes.

        • psi2u2

          Do you think this is the most probable origin of his comparative success at generating higher reaction rates?

          • Argon

            I can’t say how probable, but possible at least. When you drive heater with square wave impulses, you apply many frequencies (harmonics of base frequency actually). If we think that there is some resonance frequency (of hydrogen?) needed, then with proper adjustment of base frequency could hit resonance with one of the harmonics.

            Problem with low base frequency is that amplitude of next harmonics gets very low very guickly. That’s why I like the idea of separating heater coil from triggering coil (could that be cat/mouse in Rossis terminology?)

            You may like to revisit how square wave cosists of higher harmonics of sine waves combined. Especially chapter ‘Examining the square wave’ with good animation in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_wave

    • US_Citizen71

      I was talking with a friend who is big into flying quad rotor drones about LENR and the replications that are being done. He suggested a brushless DC speed controller might be useful to produce the power waveforms that have been suggested lately. I thought I would throw this out there for those with a EE background to comment on.

      An informative product review including oscilloscope data : http://multirotorforums.com/threads/product-review-jeti-hicopter-30a-opto-esc.18559/

      Links to data sheets from one of the manufacturers: http://www.jetimodel.com/en/katalog/Speed-Controllers/@od/20/

      Pricing: https://www.electricwingman.com/jeti-multicopter-esc.aspx

    • DrD

      Have you considered avalanche transistors, eg FMMT415 series. They’re more suited to nsec pulse widths but do have extremely high dI/dt and high currents (100A or more). No good for usec or msec pulse widths though.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Yes, we have considered them when we were looking at potential triggering circuits. Back then we did not have a reliable rector design and monitoring approach, with an Optris and GS 5.x + we thing we have have that covered now – so it becomes easier to focus resources.

  • Mats002

    +1 (not logged in)

  • James Andrew Rovnak

    Glad to see possible link between ME356 & MFMP Robert! Always thought high Frequency content from step in current was Rossi’s secret & Godes modus operandi! Rossi’s PC 830 picture of pulse width with reversed current thru his coils always seemed to provide signal to control SPP process & SSM mode of operation! IMHO As an extremely interested observer glad to see ME356 successes & co-operation with MFPM planned! Just as in major Nuclear Plant Control, Monty Shultz author of first Nuclear Reactor Control text always mentioned nuclear reactions were a major control problem it took years of intense development to solve – circa 1960s. Is there still a problem fo Rossi requiring his seemingly constant attention in the MW plant? Fascinated to see final control solution develop! Love to watch ME 356 & his unique techniques develop!

    • Mats002

      Maybe IH realized exactly this back in fall 2015 and that is the reason they turned to Brillouin? IH refused to pay the third downpayment of 89 M$ because Rossi is violating Brilloiun’s IP?

      • psi2u2

        Very interesting thought. I predict a difficult birth. ; )

      • deleo77

        I think Brillouin could really be a factor in IH’s decision not to pay. They had a validation paper published in December. I imagine that Tom Darden read it closely. Yes, the paper was written by another Brillouin investor, so it is by no means independent, but it still might have meant something to Darden. Controlling the reaction is almost as big of a deal as the reaction itself. Brillouin has consistently made claims that their tech can do this and have filed IP related to it.

    • JeffC

      Brillouin controls the reaction by driving the underlying physics through it’s proprietary Q pulse. Mike McKubre verified in the Norway presentation reaction stops immediately when the Q pulse stops. I believe current COP is over 4 and verified at SRI.

      • Alan Smith

        Sure- bound to be a certain amount of ‘ringing’ – a voltage spike as the magnetic field in the heater coils collapses – but as you say, not necessarily a biad thing. I have pondered adding to it by increasing the very small inductance of the coils. Problem is that also changes the shape of the ‘on ramp’ (Delta/V) when you switch the heater circuit on.

  • Zephir

    /* Emmissions (RF, electrons and UV) during the test were so strong that my
    control circuit was absolutely crazy even that it was 3 meters away –
    it is unusable */

    These emissions aren’t actually dangerous. The neutrons are more difficult to detect – yet they’re much more dangerous.

    • Zephir

      There is also interesting pin-point character of cold fusion initiated heating, as visible at multiple Me356’s pictures. I can’t imagine the physical process which could heat the thick alumina tube in this way other than some kind of particle jet, escaping from reaction site:

      http://i.imgur.com/CyLqId5.gif

      • Ecco

        I think that’s the laser light of the IR thermometer he uses.

        • Mats002

          Yes that is the Pyrometer he use for the Power control as I understand it.

          • Bob Greenyer

            It is the Voltcraft IR 2200 which has two lasers that should converge for accurate temperature measurement at the spot of convergence.

        • Zephir

          Possibly, but IR has violet color in most cameras? But I saw this effect at another photos of Me356 too http://i.imgur.com/43G1iRW.gif

          • Anon2012_2014

            (me356 photos)

            But what are we looking at?

            A glass tube with what gas in it being excited by a neon sign transformer?

            A tube furnace at one end of the black tube?

            Two hotspots on one of the tube furnace photos in the center, perhaps where a set of wires breaks the otherwise uniform insulation?

            No diagram, no explanation other than read all 50 pages of random posts on lenr-forum.

            These photos are not helpful, just confusing.

            Can someone wake me up when we get a definitive write-up/diagram.

  • Mats002

    Arduino have 16MHz clock (might be different versions with higher frequency, I don’t know from memory) and I think it is sufficient. The problem is in the power amplifier part as Bob picture above. This is Brillioun solution: http://www.google.com/patents/US20070268045?dq=20070268045&ei=5HuQT9CvJOegiQLompD3Ag
    and
    http://www.google.com/patents/US20070206715?dq=20070206715&ei=jaSQT9KmIaWjiQLW7dyQAw

    If this is what makes me356 reactor successful, I don’t know, he might do several things. Can’t wait to be informed 🙂 !

    • Mats002

      From Brillioun patent:

      “Currently due to hardware/software in use, events are being run at 1518.8 Hz or 658 μS. This represents a 16-bit PWM with a 99.5328 MHz clock.”

      • Mats002

        Note about this: The clock frequency is not important for PWM as long as it is fast enough to produce the modulation and that is even below KHz. The steep change from 0 to 1 (0 – 5 V if that is what is driving the digital curcuits) and equals fast OFF 1 to 0 is the driver. That steepness must be conserved in the power feed to the load (coil) and that is what counts here. (I make an Axil and sound like I know without doubt).

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Me356 “If power output is limited, you are safe.” I don’t get it, if both Rossi and me356 can safely get heat at 100C, why not get that reactor into the market place as fast as possible.

    • LarryJ

      It’s a long and winding road from the lab to the showroom floor.

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        They are not even trying for the market, it seems they are trying to hit home runs when a single will prove concept.

    • Steve Swatman

      because having a working reactor that can be pushed by the press of a button or a little hack to emit neutron bursts is never going to be allowed out in the wild, control and security is paramount.

      • Rene

        Just like jiggering with the latch safeties on a microwave oven then turning it on can cook your eyeballs in a few seconds, maybe even ill you. Those kinds of arguments are without merit because safety protocols in designs is what makes for safe (to some high percentage) products.

        • Rene

          Disagree, examples cited. Feel free to look through the body of product literature.

  • Alan Smith

    Hi LT. The opto-couplers are only there to switch the mosfets, so we are with you there- and yes, we do want to produce pulses of opposite polarity. You got it nailed.

  • pelgrim108
  • Rene

    Same can be said for dismantling a NiCad battery – death. Slightly different by similar end-state issues dismantling a lithium battery. There are problems dismantling a home fire sensor and ingesting the Americium in it. In other words, there are many common home products that are seriously unsafe when dismantled resulting in cancer or death. You cannot stop people from earning Darwin awards.

  • Private Citizen

    Seems to be some confusion about radiation danger.

    Me356 claims to have made TWO reactors: one an apparent tube furnace that melted right away without dangerous radiation, but a possible runaway SSM; and a second, plasma reactor, said responsible for neutron radiation even after switched off.

    To my memory, there was no claim of excess heat with the plasma reactor. Could be wrong here.

    There currently is [well accepted LENR technology](http://phys.org/news/2006-02-tabletop-nuclear-fusion-device.html) that makes neutrons, but not excess heat.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      You can also take the Farnsworth-Hirsch fusor as an example:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9DXecl-OX8

      Maybe me356’s plasma reactor is an optimized version of this device?

      • Andreas Moraitis

        I’ve just noticed that the link does not work. You may Google “homemade fusor (nuclear fusion reactor) – neutron and x-ray radiation, silver activation”.

        • US_Citizen71

          goo.gl/uFXVZQ

    • Argon

      Yes, there seems to be ‘campaign’ ongoing. Look at amount of new accounts suddenly appearing here purposely misunderstanding what Me356 said.
      Be prepared on many postings concerned just on ‘dangerous radiation of LENR’.

  • US_Citizen71

    A light bulb generates ‘radiation’. It is all about at what frequency and energy level.

  • US_Citizen71

    Bigger question, what happens when a kid builds a nuclear reactor? The world doesn’t seem to end as it has been done multiple times before.

    TEEN BUILDS BASEMENT NUCLEAR REACTOR – http://www.popsci.com/diy/article/2007-03/popsci-videoteen-builds-basement-nuclear-reactor

    Why This 14-Year-Old Kid Built a Nuclear Reactor – http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/07/150726-nuclear-reactor-fusion-science-kid-ngbooktalk/

    13-year-old builds working nuclear fusion reactor – http://www.cnet.com/news/13-year-old-builds-working-nuclear-fusion-reactor/

    • Mats002

      Worst case: the kid is lost from radiation and possibly some people close to the reactor. Any other suggestions?

      • US_Citizen71

        My point was, the whole what if a kid takes it apart angle is a bit like talking about locking the barn after the horses have run away.

    • Rene
  • US_Citizen71

    Deadly radiations are generated all around us. A fluorescent light bulb or metal halide lamp produces deadly UV-C at their core for example. You can even buy UV-C light bulbs and LEDs without restriction so far no deaths. Your first post is FUD as the materials are not inherently radioactive so dismantling them would only entail the inherent dangers the ingredients pose chemically. If you are going to post FUD I am going to make fun of it, deal with it!

  • US_Citizen71

    Are you seriously expecting to be taken seriously with a just created Discus account? Seriously?

    “Are you seriously comparing the radiation from a nuclear reaction to that of a light bulb?” – Sure why not? Anything can be compared, it is the basis of this thing called science.

  • Rene

    Wasn’t talking about exploding. The cadmium will kill you with virulent cancer. The lithium will kill a person if they swallow it. The point is that things that are intrinsically unsafe can be made into safe. It doesn’t matter how something will kill you or cause you great harm. What matters is how can those attributes be isolated or controlled to make a safe product. That process is called engineering.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    I smell the “safety” card being played by the propagandists!

    • Bob Greenyer

      Then they would have to admit LENR is real.

      • Zephir

        Gotcha!

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        I am hearing amateurs should not experiment, “even if it does work, and it doesn’t, experimenting might release life threatening neutrons, so amateurs should not experiment.” and “Do not experiment any where near your family” And then we have Rossi on the subject today, “We made permanent monitoring on the matter and never detected any neutron emission outside the E-Cat beyond the background, above the margin of error of the instrumentation.”

        • Dave Lawton

          I have to agree with Rossi.It is just background.The only thing to fear is fear.I spent my youth crawling on my belly underneath beamlines of a proton synchrotron to fix our particle detectors while the machine was running.I`m still alive today.And there was a lot of radiation about.

  • Axil Axil

    If LENR removes ionizing radiation from every interaction between a particle or clusters of particles and the environment, what does that imply for our understanding of nuclear physics and allied fields?

    I wonder what the interaction between neutrons and living tissue is when gamma radiation is removed from that interaction? If the isotope of carbon changes in a cell from 12 to 13, is that harmful. If the neutron count of iron in the blood is increased by one, if that harmful?

    Without ionizing radiation, does isotopic change adversely affect an organism?

    If test equipment that is designed to detect ionization from neutrons does not see that ionization, does that failure to detect that radiation mean that no neutrons were produced?

    Without ionizing radiation, it might be that particle vaporization tracks in a supersaturated medium are the only detection method that can see neutrons produced by LENR.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Neutron capture leads to radioactive decay in case that the resulting nucleus is unstable. If the neutron is not captured but inelastically scattered the target nucleus gets excited and emits gammas when it returns to its ground state.

      In addition, not all isotopes (even stable ones) are biologically compatible. For example, organisms do not work with heavy water due its slightly different chemical properties.

      • Axil Axil

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyK6kPi8k78

        They say that it take 50% saturation of D2O to kill,

        • Bernie Koppenhofer

          What! Who is “pooh – poohing” safety, I am simply quoting Rossi from two days ago:

          Andrea Rossi

          May 9, 2016 at 3:33 PM

          LookMoo:

          This is why we need to gain a safety certification.

          We already got the safety certification for the industrial plants and we are close to obtain the safety certification for the domestic, I think.

          The reason is that all the measurements made on out e-Cats during their operation have never detected ionizing radiations outside the E-Cats.

          The measurements of the ionizing radiations around our E-Cats have been also made by professional experts of the matter.

          Warm Regards,

          A.R.

          And:

          Andrea Rossi

          May 9, 2016 at 9:50 AM

          James Rovnak:

          We made permanent monitoring on the matter and never detected any neutron emission outside the E-Cat beyond the background, above the margin of error of the instrumentation.

          Warm Regards,

          A.R.

  • Rene

    That is an interesting conspiracy theory.

    • Steve Swatman

      If you think of that as a conspiracy theory you should take off the tin foil hat you are wearing, business is a tough world, big business is even harder, when a large corporation invests 10’s of billions of dollars in the future, spending another couple of billion to stop a rival is “just standard practice”.

  • me356’s most recent posts on LENR Forum help explain his approach. He sincerely wants to get this technology out to the world but fears the personal destruction that comes along with it (he references Parkhomov as an example of jumping too soon).

    So he wants bulletproof/repeatable and he wants to remain anonymous to protect his quality of life.

    In light of this it is likely he will choose MFMP as the mechanism of sharing his knowledge. There is already a connection and MFMP is perfectly positioned to help him reach his goals. If he can teach Greenyer next week what works and what doesn’t, MFMP will start seeing significant, verifiable excess heat and possibly particles within weeks. Then there will be a cycle of triple-checking and refinement.

    And then it’ll be out.

    • Private Citizen

      Too late, me357 already claimed to have a surefire way to trigger LENR at will, thus pulling a Parkamov.

      He could just openly say, here is exactly what I’m doing and it seems to be producing a lot of excess energy: you try it–AND BE CAREFUL!.

      Instead he is acting more like Rossi than Parkamov (which is his choice if his aim is other than open science). Hopefully if he connects with MFMP, we will see some actual data and details of the mechanism.

      Haven’t read his latest posts, so perhaps he already is revealing all, in which case, that’s all one can ask.

      • He is already diverging from Rossi’s behavior by ostensibly agreeing to meet with Bob Greenyer of MFMP.

        However if that amounts to nothing, we get no paper or disclosure and the posts claiming wild success continue for weeks bleeding into months then I think it’d be safe to say we would be approaching Rossi behavior. Let’s let this play out and see what happens before condemning the guy.

        People vouch for him and he’s been relatively open about his experiments going back for quite awhile. If he’s another scammer ( ? ) then his set up has been elaborate and well planned. I think he’s obviously legit and will eventually disperse his knowledge on his terms. He is right to be cautious, I think.

    • Private Citizen

      “And we should from now on also stop using barbecues. ”

      Or garage mechanics dealing with gas tanks containing 15 times the energy density of TNT, or folks wiring home electric systems capable of frying one dead in seconds.

      Safety card is a bit bogus. Assume, anticipate the risks and take precautions if you venture into tinkering.

    • psi2u2

      Good thinking all around.

  • In me356’s words:
    “And the very simple reason (but not just this) why I don’t intend to reveal any data IMMEDIATELY, that I don’t want to be a next Parkhomov. He written detailed reports, but still it was not enough for mass replication. Then he was discredited as all others for being fraud, etc. He is receiving endlessly messages with many questions. So it was a big mistake for him and I doubt he will ever do this again.”

    https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/3225-me356-Reactor-parameters-part-2/?postID=19411#post19411

  • Ged

    So then, your assumption there is that -all- of the energy is being released as detectable neutrons? Of course that means there would be no detected excess heat in that case.

    Neutrons, if they escape out of the reactor so as to be detectable, would be an unrecoverable energy loss from our point of view as they would not be heating the reactor–and obviously the dynamics of the system show that isn’t so. Worst yet for that previous assumption base is that many fusion pathways do not necessarily make neutrons, such as those involving D-D (neutrons can occasionally occur as one of three possible outcomes of the high energy 4He attempting to stabilize) or 6Li, though reactions involving 7Li can make neutrons which could cause further events with 6Li (using up the released neutron), as can deuterium with tritium. So, one has to determine approximately what fusion mechanisms you want to discuss and model for LENR to decide what a reasonable neutron production rate would be per Watt.

    But, let us use some facts and make some comparisons.

    The count rate of neutrons we get from the largest nearby and complexly heterogeneous fusion reaction, the sun, is about 0.22 counts/sec on average as detected by instruments on the ISS ( http://www.hindawi.com/journals/aa/2012/379304/ ), or during a solar flare around 30-148 neutrons per meter^2 per second based on in atmosphere measurements. However, most of the neutrons made by the sun, more than 90% even, are produced due magnetic field accelerated ions interacting with coronal ions through knock-on or charge-exchange nuclear events ( http://www8.nationalacademies.org/SSBSurvey/DetailFileDisplay.aspx?id=732&parm_type=HDS ). Those are high energy neutrons, as that process does not make the thermal neutrons as detected here; but, we’ll count all neutrons to keep matters simple.

    So, if we use the results from the sun as a bench mark, the amount of neutrons per W reaching the ISS is 0.00112-0.00160 neutrons per Watt per second (given the ISS has 14% efficient solar panels that generate 84-120 kW of power). If we use this to extrapolate to the 1 Watt you used to calculate, you would expect 1 detectable neutron event per two hours or so. That is, of course, not considering the shielding the detectors were behind, nor that the proper calculation would have to use the watts reaching the detector from the reactor to compare against rather than the surface output of the reactor, as the inverse square law will scale both–unless you want to assume 1 W was reaching the bubble detector rather 1 W was generated in the reactor.

    This agrees pretty well with what was seen by MFMP when in the temperature range of 180-250 C, requiring the LENR reaction was making more neutrons than the ISS receives from the sun per Watt within that reaction range.

    Also, fusors take so much energy as they have to greatly heat up to accelerate deuterium ions, but suffer enormous conduction losses through the electrodes which saps that heat away from the deuterium gas. The losses are upwards of five orders of magnitude larger than what they can gain per collision, and is not a problem with fusion itself or the energy released by the fusion, but with the engineering of the method attempting to achieve the conditions that particular mechanism needs to initiate fusion. You unfortunately oversimplified the matter and seemed to forget the basic principle of how fusors work. Of course, the polywell fusor variant may actually be able to make net positive energy–we’ll have to see as that technology develops and tries to overcome the conduction issue. Moreover, fusors intentionally are designed to drive neutron production through clever engineering, particularly so they can be used in hybrid systems (driving fission reactors from with the neutrons), but still never remotely approach your calculations -per watt- by many orders of magnitude (at least by 6 and that is raw theoretical production and not useable/detectable production).

    Overall, the picture is way more complicated than your calculations (impossible ones at that, as most fusion energy is NOT released as neutrons) suggest, and at least when compared with the sun, the MFMP neutron results are pretty similar on a per watt basis. That can help us to determine what mechanisms could possibly be in play (7Li?) and allow further experiments to disprove or not those hypotheses.

    Finally, the rate of neutron production will depend directly on the percentage of reactions that are done by pathways that make neutrons and what share of the energy release those neutrons carry away, how quickly the neutron escapes (it has 14 minutes before it beta decays), avoidance of further reactions such as with 14N in the air or with any other element in the reactor fuel and reactor body, how well it gets through the lead and other shielding MFMP had up, and then of course having to deal with the inverse square law for the distance of the detector compared to the area of the detector and probability to interact with a supercritical fluid droplet. Fun stuff.