"The E-Cat is neither CHEMICAL, FISSION nor FUSION. It is a MACHINE!" (Chapman)

The following is a comment made by Chapman on the previous thread.

As I said back in MAY!

———————

Chapman
May 4, 2016 at 7:16 PM
Dear Mr. Rossi,

Folks seem to be having a hard time visualizing what is actually happening in an E-Cat. Please allow me to put forth this visual model in order to clarify the “inner workings” and “deep mysteries” within.

Consider a standard kitchen blender with a glass carafe, like you make margaritas in during warm summer afternoons.

Like most blenders, the lid has a small plug which can be removed for adding ingredients during operation. Around the hole for the plug there is a small flat lip.

Now, imagine this:

1. Remove the plug, and balance a few steel ball bearings on the lip around the hole.

2. Turn on the blender, just on low to start with, but SLOWLY increase the blender until it is up to “High”.

Take a moment to look at it. The blades are whirling around at high RPM and the ball bearings are jiggling around from the vibration, teetering around the edge of the lip.

3. Now, WHACK the blender with a rolling pin!

What happens?

The ball bearings fall from the lip and into the fast spinning blades below, and are sent smashing through the glass of the carafe, shattering it into pieces!

In this visual aid, the blender blades are Nickel atoms, the ball bearings are Hydrogen Ions liberated from the Lithium-Aluminum-Hydride and the glass carafe is the web of Lithium Atoms mixed throughout.

Heating the mixture to just short of the melting point of the nickel, and pumping up the electron shells about the nickel nuclei is represented by the power of the high speed blades.

Whacking the blender with a rolling pin is identical to sending an Electromagnetic Pulse through the energized e-cat reactor vessel. Deformation of the electron shells causes the capture and eventual disassembly of hydrogen ions within the maelstrom of the electron shell energy fields resulting in the energetic expulsion of suddenly solitary protons.

These ejected protons then collide with lithium atoms and transmutate Lithium 7 to Beryllium 8, which promptly decay to two Alpha – which consequently gain electrons to become Helium atoms.

The process of the forced decay of Lithium to Helium – resulting in a large energy release – is well documented, and was the first nuclear fission process ever demonstrated. [see Cockcroft-Walton; 1932]

The genius of the e-cat is in its application of the primary LENR process (proton liberation from an energized nickel-hydride) to effectively utilize individual Nickel atoms as sub-Nano scale proton accelerators.

Indeed, this invention should be rightly considered a breakthrough in Nano-Tech Engineering, as the apparatus is, in fact, mechanical in nature rather than chemical or nuclear, just as a Scanning Electron Microscope is a MACHINE, not a “reaction”.

Consider: This process does not involve molecular interactions and formations (other than the Hydride fuel supplement), so this exhibit can not be called “chemical” in nature. And, while we see Helium being produced while Hydrogen is consumed, this clearly is not “Fusion”, as it is a sequence going through Lithium and then DOWN to Helium. Now, in modern terms, the breakdown of Beryllium is a “decay” into Alpha particles as radiation, so this clearly does not qualify as fission under current models.

So I repeat, the E-Cat is neither CHEMICAL, FISSION nor FUSION. It is a MACHINE! A beautiful, badass, Nano-Tech, Energy Liberating Machine!

GOD BLESS YOU, Mr. Rossi. May he continue to bless your endeavours with success, while you continue to work to bring this to the masses!

– Chapman –

——————————–

I have repeatedly gone on and on about the fact that the reaction chain is aneutronic, and the only neutron troubles arise as the result of misguided individuals insisting on FOULING their experiments with deuterium, thinking they were chasing a classic “Hot-Fusion” model of fusing hydrogen into helium.

Again, I say to all, this has been out there for years, and anyone can read up and understand what the process is and how it works.

But I would point out one thing I think you need to look closer at. Piantelli writes about the proton energy at expulsion – after the disassociation of the hydrogen – as being around 6.7MEV. Unfortunately, that is derived from the coulomb barrier potential resulting from the total charged nucleons involved. But if you think it through you will realize that the hydrogen dissociates at the point where the external forces equal the attractive force of its own structure – a little over 1 MEV. The hydrogen ION cannot penetrate to the deepest reaches of the electron cloud because it is ripped apart only part way down.

You still get protons with enough energy for the lowest probability lithium penetrations, but a reduced total count. So where does the additional energy come from to pump the protons up not only to the point of totally dominating the lithium, but even absorption by the nickel?

That is where the Plasmons come in. As “superstructures” they affect colliding protons by dramatically increasing the proton energy, enabling direct nickel absorption. And the same mechanism also facilitates supercharging alpha particles from the lithium decay to the point where they also can penetrate the nickel.

For all those people arguing about collision statistics based upon accelerator models, I would remind you that the protons in question are not fired from an external source, to be deflected and lost, but rather are internally released. The proper comparison would be photon migration from the center of the sun to the surface. 20,000 to 100,000 years.

Read about “Drunkard’s walk” and you will understand that even the LOWEST PROBABILITY collision results become guaranteed certainties after no more than SECONDS of the internal pinball-like environment. And, speaking of pinball, consider that while a proton may bounce off a nickel atom like a pinball bounces off a passive bumper, when the pinball bounces off a plasmon it is like hitting an ACTIVE bumper that kicks the ball away harder than it approached.

Anyway, this plasmon action explains why the reaction is heat-dependant. Plasmon energy levels are the product of the size of the plasmon, and the heat of the individual participating members.

Pumping up protons to the point that they can only penetrate partway through the electron cloud of target atoms will result in radiation emissions as the proton disrupts the deep shells. As temperature increases and proton energy passes the absorption threshold these emissions will cease. What this means is that there are several discrete “emission windows” as the reactor is brought up to operational temperatures. These emissions can be mitigated, or even capitalized on, by careful material selection and a strict initiation protocol.

Finally – any nickel will do. As long as it is powdered form and heat treated for embrittlement. I suggest heat under vacuum, then flush with hydrogen to quench. Repeat. This will achieve the molecular beta phase, the microfractures for porosity, elimination of contaminant gases, AND hydrogen saturation for pre-loading. Catalytic Nickel sponges are overkill. They are formed for molecular scale filtration, and we are talking about hydrogen atoms! They leak through on their own. You just want to fracture the grains by flash quenching so that under a microscope they look like dandelion puffs = maximum surface area.

In the end, this ain’t rocket science. All it takes is a little reading and a few days of staring at a blank wall while you let your brain fit it all together. The physics are simple. It is the Engineering that is tricky! Materials have limitations that do not show up in equations!!!

  • Chapman wrote that? really?

  • Axil Axil

    Chapman states:

    “In the end, this ain’t rocket science. All it takes is a little reading and a few days of staring at a blank wall while you let your brain fit it all together. The physics are simple. It is the Engineering that is tricky! Materials have limitations that do not show up in equations!!!”

    Ed Storms states:
    “I know of only one way to reduce chaos, which is to apply what is known about what is real. That is, use what is observed in the lab to guide the imagination. I attempted to provide this information in several books and in many review papers. Chaos reigns because people in the field ignore most of this information.”

  • Axil Axil

    Chapman states:

    “In the end, this ain’t rocket science. All it takes is a little reading and a few days of staring at a blank wall while you let your brain fit it all together. The physics are simple. It is the Engineering that is tricky! Materials have limitations that do not show up in equations!!!”

    Ed Storms states:
    “I know of only one way to reduce chaos, which is to apply what is known about what is real. That is, use what is observed in the lab to guide the imagination. I attempted to provide this information in several books and in many review papers. Chaos reigns because people in the field ignore most of this information.”

  • wizkid

    Wow! Reads real smooth. Thank you, can’t wait to finetooth it. 🙂

    • Axil Axil

      Chapman has emerged from the shadows of obscurity, to the limelight of esteemed righteousness. He is now shown to be a proper mix of the technical plowest of Albert Einstein and the punchy algonquin repartee of Ernest Hemingway…what a guy.

      • GiveADogABone

        https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
        Example: After Sally presents an eloquent and compelling case for a more equitable taxation system, Sam asks the audience whether we should believe anything from a woman who isn’t married, was once arrested, and smells a bit weird.

        Is it just protons or isn’t it?

  • Nixter

    It takes 20,000 to 100,000 years for a photon to reach the surface of the sun? I had never heard that, absolutely amazing!

    • Brokeeper

      Many stop lights. (sorry)

    • Axil Axil

      What causes the 11 year solar cycle where the Sun flickers between a minimum and a maximum?

      • Nixter

        Magnetic field?

      • Zephir

        The barycenter of solar system driven with Jupiter planet. Once the barycenter emerges beneath the surface of Sun, the solar activity will get interrupted because of lack of stirring Coriolis force. Although there are another climatic cycles, like the Gleissberg one, where another planets are involved. Even our tiny Earth planet has its imprint on sunspot number statistics: it’s indeed much lighter but also much closer than the Jupiter.

        https://i.imgur.com/yef0UZI.gif https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/3g7v25/corrected_sunspot_history_suggests_climate_change/?ref=search_posts https://i.imgur.com/LdeEV5P.gif

        But the number of sunspots reacts to neutrino flux from the Sun much faster than with 20,000 to 100,000 years, so there is apparently some dark matter/scalar wave mechanism, which transfers the energy from solar core (and also heats up the solar corona).

  • Andy Kumar

    //The proper comparison would be photon migration from the center of the sun to the surface. 20,000 to 100,000 years. //
    .
    You learn amazing things here every day. Likes of Axil, “Engineer” and Chapman provide clear, plain English theories of complex natural processes without the need to hide behind mathematical mumbo jumbo.
    .
    Ivory tower types have long been hiding behind obtuse mathematics to keep the truth from the masses. They had too much faith in their obscure dialect (The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences).
    https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html
    .
    They did not anticipate what a little verbal gymnastics and collective wisdom of the masses can do to explain NATURE in the internet age.

  • georgehants

    Would be most interesting to read what all you technical guys think you could achieve, if you had the basic knowledge to produce on demand a clear COP above 1, that Mr. Rossi refuses to share.
    Do you think it is the way science should be, that you spend countless hours trying to find knowledge that is already (if genuine) known.
    Do you think your efforts could be more productively used by working to improve or advance that known knowledge?

  • georgehants

    Would be most interesting to read what all you technical guys think you could achieve, if you had the basic knowledge to produce on demand a clear COP above 1, that Mr. Rossi refuses to share.
    Do you think it is the way science should be, that you spend countless hours trying to find knowledge that is already (if genuine) known?
    Do you think your efforts could be more productively used by working to improve or advance that known knowledge?

    • Chapman

      I really do feel your pain George. I know how frustrating it is knowing something this big is supposedly sitting right around the corner, and yet never brought out to the market. But the one thing I think you miss is that what Rossi is doing is NOT science! It is engineering.

      Rossi is not driven, or even concerned, with scientific discovery and the publication of papers on the theory of operation. He is working on a physical design – an engineering problem. He takes the reaction sequence to be a given and is focussing on building a machine capable of initiating, containing, and controlling that reaction productively. You keep demanding he behave as a proper scientist, but he is working hard trying to be a good engineer. The two are worlds apart.

      You might as well demand a Politician be a Humanitarian, or a Policeman be a Pacifist. You are getting ROLES mixed up. Rossi is doing exactly what Rossi SHOULD be doing, which is working on design and not obsessing about the academic physics community.

      How many peer reviewed papers did Edison publish? Tesla? Ford?

      • Agree completely. Rossi is a very hands-on engineer (yes, I know he lacks the title) and not so much a scientist. And his goal is that of an engineer.

        • georgehants

          Mats, he is I think still a member of the human race and some feel that involves responsibilities beyond ones self.
          I certainly look forward to your next book if we eventually find Mr. Rossi is genuine and how you cover the millions that have possibly died and suffered due to the delayed release of his discoveries.

        • Bernoulli

          Lots of farmers don’t have the title of engineer either… but they are some of the best. 🙂

        • Zephir

          I beg to disagree. Rossi is well aware, that the optimization of his process would require the better scientific understanding of it.

          https://arxiv.org/abs/1504.01261

          • Of course he is aware of that. But Rossi IS no scientist by nature. Scientists who have been in contact with him confirm this. By nature he is an engineer, and this is also how he has made all his progress so far.

          • Zephir

            When the Uppsala University published its isotopic analysis, then Andrea Rossi got very excited and asked Wizkid from Uppsala to repost his email to his JoNP. The Uppsala isotopic analysis appeared to very relevant to his request, because of his theory of cold fusion.

            http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/07/08/document-isotopic-composition-of-rossi-fuel-sample-unverified/

            From this event I can deduce, that A. Rossi actually is a scientist in his heart – but now he simply has no time to engage in slow and tedious basic research. After all, if any of you would have his know-how and his age, you wouldn’t act very differently. Now A. Rossi is dancing on pile of money – but he can get it only if he will work faster than others. Otherwise he will suffer a big lost instead.

          • In his heart, I would agree. But not by nature. Do you see the difference?
            Or let me quote Prof. Sven Kullander, who Rossi admired (from my book):

            “He never gave the impression of understanding physics at the expected depth. But I saw him as a talented engineer and inventor, an ingenious person. His strength is to be a Gyro Gearloose, or what I should call him,” Kullander said.

            (An Impossible Invention, chapter 8).

          • Zephir

            For me it’s rather difficult to judge, who is more “actual” scientist: Rossi who is driven with scientific inquisitiveness from his very beginning – or mainstream physicists, who ignore many findings (not just cold fusion) as a single man. Regarding you book, it may get obsolete, as the A. Rossi is learning quickly – so now he may understand many aspects of nuclear physics better than many established theorists – just at the qualitative basis instead of quantitative one. Note that he also maintains a “scientific Journal”, despite just online one – it’s not quite typical thing for common inventors.

            It just seems for me, that the exploitation of the breakthrough findings (antigravity, cold fusion, overunity, superconductivity) requires more qualities, than just abstract scientific approach – and what we are calling the science by now is often just an poorly masked organized ignorance. Maybe A.Rossi is not a “typical” scientist of his era – but what we need today is more “actual”, i.e. inquisitive scientists.

      • georgehants

        Chapman, many thanks for a well thought our reply with feeling.
        I have to be annoying and say that you like many point out the errors of the past in defense of the present, it is like saying, that is the way things are so we have to except it.
        Once it becomes clear that the system is at fault then, I believe, it is for every concerned person to speak-up and demand that the system be improved, or clearly no progress is made in any area beyond the snails-pace or even backward movement we achieve in most areas.
        Many people are seemingly brain-washed to “accept” rather than to react.
        Not all politicians or policemen are non-caring, I think, so no roles mixed up, just a desire for the majority to be caring rather then assume that not caring is an acceptable norm.
        With a better system where would Cold Fusion be now, if Mr. Rossi felt it perfectly normal in our society to share his discoveries immediately for others to work on and was correctly rewarded by that same society that will benefit, as should every person who has or will contribute to Cold Fusions advance without them needing to be part of any biased economic system.
        Best

        • Chapman

          I am more sympathetic to your view than my postings betray. That is why I am never confused about WHAT you are saying. I get it. I have many of the same thoughts.

          The difference between us – and I point it out as an intellectual observation ONLY, not a judgement as to who has a more valid position – is that you see the stupidity and stop dead in your tracks out of indignation and outrage, while I see the same, but then go on to reconcile what can be done given that such stupidities are an unavoidable fact of life.

          In short, you focus on the flaw, while I acknowledge it and try to figure how best to get on with life despite the flaw.

          Morally, your position is superior, because you refuse to quietly tolerate wrongs. Pragmatically, my method leads to fewer ulcers, but does nothing to fix the problem. So, I can respect you, but we come to different conclusions.

          You are like that lone protester standing before the tank in Tiananmen Square. I am the guy that stayed in the country and said “Screw it, I will just raise my pigs”. Yes, I know, being pragmatic is also cowardly. You got me there…

          • georgehants

            Chapman, I do not know how to answer your True understanding and even your correct observation of my faults that always seem to lead me into trouble.
            Your reply is like a breath of clean fresh air to me.
            I will sleep well tonight.
            Many thanks

          • Zephir

            Cold fusion is merely a micropiston machine than the random blender machine. https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/3437-The-general-cold-fusion-theory-aka-the-broad-view-of-LENR/?pageNo=1 Otherwise the basic idea of two kinds of atoms: these ones which serve for fusion and another heavier ones, which serve as an anvil for their mutual collisions is correct one.

          • Chapman

            An EXCELLENT analysis. Do not worry, your thoughts came through the translation process perfectly clear!

            I really like your suggestion that part of LENR involves a “gentle” re-assignment of mingled subatomic components during the low-dimensional collision events. The idea that this allows the new structures to separate with little lost energy and no messy leftover bits blown out into space is very insightful.

            For anyone who has not followed Zephirs key idea regarding “low-dimension collisions” I would humbly explain that he is talking about a form of plasmon structure. He proposes that the atoms trapped in the metal lattice corner spaces, and sometimes those clinging to the metal surface in a skin-effect, do not need any kind of “entanglement” to act jointly, but rather the simple fact that the underlying structure lines the atoms up in a perfect line means that when they are all vibrating forward and back and another particle collides with the leading face of this atom-train – well, you have all seen videos of a car that stalls on the train tracks. The car becomes the involuntary recipient of a spontaneous donation of large quantities of kinetic energy from the Engine, plus every boxcar that is behind the engine! No magic required. No hyperphysics. Just basic mechanical principles seen on the atomic level. F=MA and P=MV. It is the metal material which lines the atoms up, then you apply heat and EMF to get them vibrating in a line like a conga line, then let some innocent proton/hydrogen/muon etc. wander into their path. BAM!

            What he further was proposing above was that the compression in LENR might be more of a gentle squeezing of two atomic structures such that their parts mingle and lose identity as to which atom they belonged to, then the two structures ease back apart with all the little bits clinging to one or the other new structure. You do not get any high energy emissions because you are not SMASHING crap together chaotically like you do in an accelerator, but more like kneading two lumps of dough together, mixing them up, and then pulling the lump apart to roll into two lumps again. Same energy – less violence. This can only be done with extreme pressure, but low velocity. It is an interesting thought.

            OK, Zephir? Did I represent that correctly? You worry too much about your language difference. As I have pointed out before, once it is KNOWN that you are translating it becomes easy to follow your thoughts.

            That is, if I did follow you correctly! It would be a major embarrassment if I just expounded on how easy it is to follow you if I just totally misunderstood!!! 🙂 Tell me I got it right! PLEASE!!!

            (and before anyone goes and accuses me of being even MORE of a pompous ass than usual by deigning to repeat his points as if no one else understood – please recognize that I repeated his thoughts in order to demonstrate to HIM that his description was understandable. He is self conscious about that and I was being polite and supportive – not an ass…)

          • Zephir

            /* I would humbly explain that he is talking about a form of plasmon structure */

            Actually it’s polariton wave, plasmons are surface waves. The train analogy is otherwise correct – the railway cars can collide quite slowly, nevertheless due to their high number and inertia, their mutual compression at some place can get significant. The long line of atoms serves as a piston or impactor there.

          • Chapman

            Got it. Subtle point, but an important difference!

            I have to tell you, I am really intrigued with your entire premise based on low velocity forces. It is easy to fall into the trap of visualizing high speed particles when the issue of High Energy is the topic, but nature LOVES slow, but overwhelming forces. Look at how stone and concrete are shattered by moisture freezing in cracks and expanding. Seemingly solid stone can turn to gravel. This is equivalent to GiveADogABone talking about hydrogen embrittlement. Trapped hydrogen has a tendency to recombine to H2 in microcavities and cause severe fracturing and material degradation. Again, it is nature creating small, non-violent forces that have massive local energy.

            It brings to mind trying to replace bushings in an automotive suspension system. You can buy the bushings at an auto parts store and try to pound them in with a sledge hammer, but the proper way to install them is with a hydraulic press. The slow, but un-resistable force achieves what the chaotic hammering seldom does neatly…

          • Chapman

            ZEPHIR!!!

            I was just enjoying browsing through the other posts you made at the above linked site. Several entries later you posted an observation that started:

            “Another significant factor contributing to success of cold fusion is the shielding effect of electrons. Which is something which has been neglected by mainstream physics completely, because this physics remains focused of brute force approach to fusion, consisting of merging of nuclei inside the deuterium or tritium plasma.”

            I would not take the liberty of copying your post here, and I would also not step on your toes and link to it like it was my discovery – so I am asking… Will you please cut and paste that observation here? You made a keen point that answers the problem I had with Piantelli’s reported 6.7 MEV! I had a suspicion that if it were true there had to be some sort of shielding being provided by the electrons in order to allow the Hydrogen to survive longer during a “nickel re-entry” so to speak. It is a problem sort of like the long life of muons reaching the Earth’s surface when they should decay in the upper atmosphere. GiveADogABone gave me some good ideas, but I still could not work it out. This post of yours, from months ago, hit on exactly such a mechanism, and I think it is a wonderful insight.

            Please bring it here and share it, so that I do not have to go all “Jack Sparrow” on you and pirate it! 🙂

          • Zephir

            Hi Chapman, thank You for your support. Regarding the copy&paste, I’m also doing it often – just link the source as it’s common netiquette and you don’t have to feel like the Jack, Sparrow the less.

            Regarding the 6.7 MEV of Piantelli, I just pointed, that the newly revealed Hungarian X-boson have the mass in similar range. https://www.quantamagazine.org/20160607-new-boson-claim-faces-scrutiny/

            The formation of such particles should be preferred just during low-dimensional collisions, because their formation is the low-distance analogy of Allais effect, dark matter filaments and another scalar wave shielding effects at the cosmic scale. The X-boson has been observed during decay of beryllium nuclei just because these nuclei are also elongated – they’ve character of dumbbell rather than sphere. It’s not therefore the result of electron shielding (electrons are very lightweight for 6.7 MeV, after all), but atom nuclei shielding.

  • John Littlemist

    Thank you Chapman. A picture would be nice. Many pictures. LENR visualization for dummies, anyone?

  • John Littlemist

    Thank you Chapman. A picture would be nice. Many pictures. LENR visualization for dummies, anyone?

  • Mats002

    Thanks Chapman, your story fits my understanding of this also but do not include PdD wet system. Do think the famous FP effect is due to same machine workings?

    Furthermore, what about plasma reactors, like me356 worked with and what about nickel wire experiments?

    All the same mechanism?

    Then add Holmlids work with lasers and also other laser initiated LENR. Same mechanism again, or are we looking at several different phenomena?

    • Good questions Mats. One thing to remember is that Piantelli insists that any transition metal would work, not just nickel. Also note what Engineer48 pointed out on ECW recently, that all transition metals apparently have the capacity to dissociate H2 into atomic H or possibly H+/H- at the surface, letting the atomic or ionic H pass into the bulk of the metal.

      • gameover

        Rossi thinks his reaction happens in the pores (“microcaves”) of the metal. In “Fluid Heater” he reccommends treating the nickel powder for porosity.
        https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/docservicepdf_pct/id00000032278621/PDOC/WO2016018851.pdf

        Holmlid users porous catalysts (Rossi lingo: “catalyzers”, from “catalizzatori”) for his reaction.

        Piantelli also optionally uses laser initiation.

      • Axil Axil

        Transition metals are shinny, meaning they have a negative index of refraction. These metals expel photons and electrons. Nanocavities in metal act as a leak proof bottle that confines electrons and photons. Nano holes in the metal also produce extremely high energy because of the heisenberg uncertainty principle, this high energy comes from the vacuum. When photons and electrons are tightly confined, they become very energetic.

        Hydrogen inside nanocavities become highly compressed and become metalized and superconducting. This is the start of the LENR reaction.

        • gameover

          http://refractiveindex.info/

          I have not managed to find transition metals with a negative IOR, but several (not all) have an IOR of less than 1. Did you mean something different?

          • Axil Axil

            http://www.northeastern.edu/liulab/publications/39_2014_Nanotechnology%20Rev_plasmonic%20metamaterials.pdf

            See sections titled “Plasmonic metamaterials to
            implement negative refraction
            and negative refractive index”

            I should has said

            Transition metals are shinny, meaning they have a negative index of refraction when their surfaces are prepared with nanostructures. Sorry, please forgive me.

          • gameover

            Negative index materials do not exist in nature, they have to be fabricated. What you wrote implied that the reason for shininess of transition metals is a natural negative IOR.

          • Axil Axil

            I made a mistake of forgetfulness by leasing out the nano-structures required for nanoplasmonic activation. I repeat with even more sorrow and guilt, please forgive me.

  • Mats002

    Thanks Chapman, your story fits my understanding of this also but do not include PdD wet system. Do think the famous FP effect is due to same machine workings?

    Furthermore, what about plasma reactors, like me356 worked with and what about nickel wire experiments?

    All the same mechanism?

    Then add Holmlids work with lasers and also other laser initiated LENR. Same mechanism again, or are we looking at several different phenomena?

    • Chapman

      You are talking about the “Cat and Mouse” issue. Mouse = PF, while CAT = Rossi

      All these configurations can trigger the mouse – the low end reaction. It has a low energy gain factor on its own, but various designs utilize that reaction to stimulate an equally varied assortment of secondary reactions that harness that small initial product for further work.

      Wet cell experiments, like the original PF demos, are able to stimulate the “hydrogen disassembly via transitional metal” function, but very inefficiently. The environment itself is limited by the boiling point of the liquid medium and can only play around at the lowest end of the real reaction range. What they observed as anomalous overheating after boiling away – and the famous “melting through the table” story, was just the mouse really waking up and getting started! They were forever just dancing around on the very edge of the reaction window of the phenomena they were trying to observe. Switching to a dry cell eliminates the thermal ceiling and allows operation up in what is the more active temperature range for the reaction. But Plasma reactions are a totally different animal. It is hard to maintain a compact lattice form when you have been disintegrated into a plasma! The two concepts are not mutually compatible.

      But all these designs – that is, those that are actually extensions of PF work – are applications of the same LENR primary. Insofar as this whole field was founded on the further investigation into the PF experiments, and LENR was coined to avoid the ColdFusion stigma, I think it is fair to say that any of these other processes that are NOT based upon this same primary are NOT LENR, and some other categorical name should be established for them. Holmid may or may not be LENR, but that does not affect its validity. All these experiments may work, and we may find that some are LENR while others are new discoveries entirely.

    • Good questions Mats. One thing to remember is that Piantelli insists that any transition metal would work, not just nickel. Also note what Engineer48 pointed out on ECW recently, that all transition metals apparently have the capacity to dissociate H2 into atomic H or possibly H+/H- at the surface, letting the atomic or ionic H pass into the bulk of the metal.

      • gameover

        Rossi thinks that his reaction happens in the pores (“microcaves”) of the metal. In “Fluid Heater” he reccommends treating the nickel powder for porosity.
        https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/docservicepdf_pct/id00000032278621/PDOC/WO2016018851.pdf

        Holmlid users porous catalysts (Rossi lingo: “catalyzers”, from “catalizzatori”) for his reaction.

        Piantelli also optionally uses laser initiation. Search “laser”:
        https://www.google.com/patents/EP2754156A2?cl=en

      • Axil Axil

        Transition metals are shinny, meaning they have a negative index of refraction. These metals expel photons and electrons. Nanocavities in metal act as a leak proof bottle that confines electrons and photons. Nano holes in the metal also produce extremely high energy because of the heisenberg uncertainty principle, this high energy comes from the vacuum. When photons and electrons are tightly confined, they become very energetic.

        Hydrogen inside nanocavities become highly compressed and become metalized and superconducting. This is the start of the LENR reaction.

        • gameover

          http://refractiveindex.info/

          I have not managed to find transition metals with a negative IOR, but several (not all) have an IOR of less than 1. Did you mean something different?

          • Axil Axil

            http://www.northeastern.edu/liulab/publications/39_2014_Nanotechnology%20Rev_plasmonic%20metamaterials.pdf

            See sections titled “Plasmonic metamaterials to
            implement negative refraction
            and negative refractive index”

            I should has said

            Transition metals are shinny, meaning they have a negative index of refraction when their surfaces are prepared with nanostructures as both Piantelli and Rossi do. Sorry, please forgive me.

          • gameover

            Negative index materials do not exist in nature, they have to be fabricated. What you wrote implied that the reason for shininess of transition metals is a natural negative IOR.

          • Axil Axil

            I made a mistake of forgetfulness by leasing out the nano-structures required for nanoplasmonic activation. I repeat with even more sorrow and guilt, please forgive me.

  • Hi all

    A Beautiful Theoretical model that fits the facts. It also removes my key fear that we a have bomb source 🙂

    Kind Regards walker

    • Zephir

      How the above model fits the facts, and how it removes the fear of bomb? Why the blender model cannot be applied tohot tokamak plasma or let say interior of Sun as well?

      • cashmemorz

        Zephir is highly knowledgeable about such things because he takes such things apart at a very detailed level. For us “dummies” the coarse level of the “machine” is already satisfactory towards a low level understanding. As for the “machine” not being applicable towards a “bomb” for us dummies, that works because dummies couldn’t make a bomb out of a LENR device even if we were given fully detailed blueprints. On the other hand those capable of making a bomb out of a LENR device could make a bomb out of two sticks and a pile of sulfur (so to speak). Those kinds of people are rare and therefore not to be feared as much as the possibility might at first seem. Successful researchers at this time have a hard time making the basic machine work. To make a bomb takes the understanding up another level and that will take more time. So maybe eventually, who knows. Anything is possible.

    • Engineer48

      Here Focardi reveals something that many replicators may not be doing.

      Operating the reactor below atmospheric pressure (400-800mbar). Piantelli also mentions this.

      http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/FocardiSlargeexces.pdf

  • Hi all

    A Beautiful Theoretical Model that fits the facts. It also removes my key fear that we have a bomb source 🙂

    Kind Regards walker

    • Zephir

      How the above model fits the facts, and how it removes the fear of bomb? Why the blender model cannot be applied to hot tokamak plasma or let say interior of Sun as well?

      • cashmemorz

        Zephir is highly knowledgeable about such things because he takes such things apart at a very detailed level. For us “dummies” the coarse level of the “machine” is already satisfactory towards a low level understanding. As for the “machine” not being applicable towards a “bomb” for us dummies, that works because dummies couldn’t make a bomb out of a LENR device even if we were given fully detailed blueprints. On the other hand those capable of making a bomb out of a LENR device could make a bomb out of two sticks and a pile of sulfur (so to speak). Those kinds of people are rare and therefore not to be feared as much as the possibility might at first seem. Successful researchers at this time have a hard time making the basic machine work. To make a bomb takes the understanding up another level and that will take more time. So maybe eventually, who knows. Anything is possible.

        • Zephir

          /* As for the “machine” not being applicable towards a “bomb” for us dummies, that works because dummies couldn’t make a bomb out of a LENR device */

          Isn’t this what the circular reasoning is called? BTW you should never underestimate the capability of human stupidity. Especially when we have explosive arrangements for cold fusion described already

          http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/10/17/neutron-detection-and-the-e-cat/ http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/08/09/paper-a-technique-for-making-nuclear-fusion-in-solids-richard-wayte/

          • cashmemorz

            OK,OK, this dummies is already looking up those plans, so watch out.(Just joking.) I suppose anyone no matter their sophistication could do something like that if motivated and got help from others like minded, sophisticated or not.

          • Chapman

            Not to fan the flames of Nuclear Holocaust Paranoia ( in general, not a slight about your observation ), but I am currently interested in Neptunium239. I started to have a discussion about it previously, but thought better to leave it alone, but it is an interesting topic if one were so inclined as to pursue it…

  • f sedei

    Can any chemical, fission or fusion reaction also be labeled a machine ?

    • cashmemorz

      Isn’t this why quantum “mechanics” is so named because of the machine-like activity at its heart? Its not named something like quantum-spirit aspirations or deep dimensional complex action.

      • Gerard McEk

        Hi Chapman, a very interesting view on LENR you have put down here. I hope it is as simple as you have suggested. Do you intend to engineer and test a reactor based on your theory? Did you ask Andra Rossi to comment on your theory in the JONP?

      • f sedei

        Yes.

  • f sedei

    Can any chemical, fission or fusion reaction also be labeled a machine ?

    • Chapman

      An internal Combustion Engine is a machine, even though chemical reactions take place within.

      An MRI unit is a machine. An X-Ray unit is a machine. A reverse-osmosis desalination plant is a machine. An AK-47 is a machine.

      LENR is a reaction, and scientific publications can be released on the physics. The E-CAT is a machine, engineered to harness the energy released from the reaction and convert it to a useful form for external use.

      LENR itself is nothing but a woodchipper destroying hydrogen and spewing out the chips. And as I said, you can’t really call transmutation by a single proton absorption to be FUSSION as we all think of it. And Alpha decay is a radiation emission event. I fully understand that you can argue that they ARE technically Fission and Fusion, but names mean things, and under the common use of such terms they are not.

      • f sedei

        I am talking science, not common names. ( ps: I don’t mean to be rude, but I wish to be clear and exacting. Best to you.)

        • Chapman

          No offense taken. I follow where you are coming from and what you mean.

    • cashmemorz

      Isn’t this why quantum “mechanics” is so named because of the machine-like activity at its heart? Its not named something like quantum-spirit aspirations or deep dimensional complex action.

      • f sedei

        Yes.

  • BillH

    Just one question. Why aren’t you the one making pot-loads of money and leading the field?

  • BillH

    Just one question. Why aren’t you the one making pot-loads of money and leading the field?

    • Chapman

      Alas, I am but a lowly Monk – sworn to poverty. But the endless meditation does provide for hours of scientific contemplation.

      • MorganMck

        A clever cop-out but a cop-out nontheless. His question deserves a serious response.

        • Chapman

          You want the TRUTH?

          I am too old… Building reactors in the garage and blacking out the neighborhood is a young man’s pursuit – like someone only in their 50’s.

          I am past all that, and spend more time napping AFTER I mow the lawn, then it actually takes to DO the mowing.

          My background is in Semiconductor Physics, and I pass my spare time going over science journals and tracking the latest developments in the Physics world, but I am no longer an active participant in the community, and do not have the patience to deal with the frustrations.

          In short – I am just a grouchy old man with an addiction to Physics. Some guys my age build birdhouses, some get into model trains. Some wander down to the park to play chess with other old codgers. Me? I reclaim my glory days by staying current in the sciences and being the only one among my peers who plays Halo. 🙂 But I am also the only one who does not pee himself or misplace his dentures! I am convinced there is a connection…

          • MorganMck

            Thanks for your candor. Being a retiree myself, I get it. I hope you are willing to consult or even collaborate with some of the young bucks who are willing and able to put your theories into hardware/systems. Just being active here seems to have spurred a lot of thought and ideas among the troops. Thanks for your contributions.

  • Well described Chapman. I tried to sort out this hypothesis based on Bob Greenyer’s analysis of Piantelli’s and Rossi’s work here (with some of Bob’s videos too):
    https://animpossibleinvention.com/2016/03/07/finally-this-is-possibly-how-the-e-cat-works/

    • Chapman

      Thanks. I hope I was clear that none of this is any discovery on my part. I have only been preaching that the answer is established physics, and trying to get folks to focus on assimilating the known facts rather than pursuing Fantastic Sci-Fi daydreams.

      There is so much noise about Rossi publishing his discovery in a peer review form, but they miss the obvious answer – Rossi has nothing to publish! Rossi is well aware that the reaction is established science. There is no new fundamental discovery TO publish. His race is to finalize a patentable DESIGN that harnesses and controls known reactions in a unique way. That is the only IP that is his and his alone. He is solving Engineering problems, not discovering new physics.

      • Mats002

        He gave away the latter to Norman Cook and Uppsala University.

  • georgehants

    Chapman, many thanks for a well thought our reply with feeling.
    I have to be annoying and say that you like many point out the errors of the past in defense of the present, it is like saying, that is the way things are so we have to except it.
    Once it becomes clear that the system is at fault then, I believe, it is for every concerned person to speak-up and demand that the system be improved, or clearly no progress is made in any area beyond the snails-pace or even backward movement we achieve in most areas.
    People are seemingly brain-washed to “accept” rather than to react.
    Not all politicians or policemen are non-caring, I think, so no roles mixed up, just a desire for the majority to be caring rather then assume that not caring is an acceptable norm.
    With a better system where would Cold Fusion be now, if Mr. Rossi felt it perfectly normal in our society to share his discoveries immediately for others to work on and was correctly rewarded by that same society that will benefit.
    Best

  • Zephir

    /* the E-Cat is neither CHEMICAL, FISSION nor FUSION. It is a MACHINE! */

    Which testable predictions or at least conclusions could we deduce from the above article? If none, why not to learn about more insightful explanations?

    • cashmemorz

      I would like to do that, but my background in physics is limited or I simply am not that smart or imaginative. See my earlier comment why Chapmans description gives a starting point to build on.

    • f sedei

      I am talking science, not common names. ( ps: I don’t mean to be rude, but I wish to be clear and exacting. Best to you.)

  • Zephir

    /* the E-Cat is neither CHEMICAL, FISSION nor FUSION. It is a MACHINE! */

    Which testable predictions or at least conclusions could we deduce from the above article? If none, why not to learn about more insightful explanations?

    • Chapman

      Zephir! My friend,

      My point leads to no predictions, because I am not presenting any discovery. That is kind of the point. This is Old Physics but New Application and Design.

      I am pointing out 2 things:

      1. All the physics going on IN an E-Cat are known physics, well documented, and happily exist within the Standard Model and our current understanding of how the universe works.

      2. Rossi is building a mechanical device for commercial distribution, not an experimental platform for the demonstration and investigation of physics principles. He is not engaged in science, but rather Manufacturing.

    • cashmemorz

      I would like to do that, but my background in physics is limited or I simply am not that smart or imaginative. See my earlier comment why Chapmans description gives a starting point to build on.

  • sam

    Peter Gluck has said on his blog that the Ecat will be Known as a feat of Engineering above everything else.

    • Gerard McEk

      Can’t be different, can it? AR hasn’t got a commonly accepted theory yet, but already a working device for years due to long experimenting and engineering toward a working process.

  • Stephen

    Thanks Chapman for this. I really liked this viualisation of the process. I missed it when you raised it in May.

    It explains very well your ideas.

    I can just imagine in a few years someone opening a Reith lecture or some equivalent on LENR with such a demonstration 😉. Just to be sure it’s probably best avoid sitting in the front row😉.

    I think you are right about the whole process being a machine. Maybe one of the first real necessarily nano scale machines with atomic and particle scale components.

    I think a big part of this machine is to enable the proton to be close to the nuclei as you suggest to allow quantum tunneling interactions. But I think this could also be enhanced if the proton has low enough energy but is also able to be close to the nucleus for as long as possible for the tunneling half life to be significant.

    Note that if we are able to shield the effect of the Coulomb barrier the nucleon capture cross-sections are much higher at Lower energies.

    I think an additional problem with fast encounters is they are more energetic and can lead to neutrons and gamma. Although it is possible that these are shielded or thermalised somehow.

    So may be part of the machine also enables slow proton encounters. At least in the first reactions. The ideas about electron screening, Hyds, Hydrinos are interesting attempts to explain this, I’m also curious if an interaction between ground state Hydrogen or H- with an excited or hollow atom with inner electrons stripped by my X-rays or something similar could lead to slow close proton nucleus encounters.

    If so perhaps there are other important components to the machine. An environment to strip inner electrons such as X-rays and an environment where atomic Hydrogen or hydrogen anions can coexist with the hollow atoms.

    Alternatively an environment that can produce the Hyds, Hydrinos, or electron screening effects mentioned elsewhere.

    I think this is NAE similar to that mentioned by Storms and others and requires particular surfaces or cracks to form with particular materials an compositions. I think that SPP production on these features maybe part of the machine that makes this environment. If SPP have very dense electon density their plasma frequency may be high and also interact in some way with the EM radiation.

    Could the line of site requirement between the Ni and Li component be due to X-Rays as well as Protons and alpha I wonder?

    I suppose kinetic reactions with other heavier nuclei would lead to neutrons

    It’s interesting the idea of the Li + p fusion component being Kinetic though.

    Probably this is all complicating things a bit though your simple visual analogy of the basic principle is just perfect to help understand LENR.

    • cashmemorz

      I like the approach of the basic machine as described because it provides a simple base on which one can build a more detailed picture bit by bit. As each new feature is fitted and seen to work, then one has a system to eventually build up the whole picture of what works. A simple approach that many can share in the understanding of which theoretical model of LENR works or doesn’t work.

    • Stephen

      It intersting though Andrea Rossi sometimes mentioned pinball in some of his joking replies to some comments. I wonder if he was infact giving a big hint.

      Often I look back and what he says suddenly makes more sense in context.

      • GiveADogABone

        In playing pinball you get sparkling lights in random places. Is that true?

  • Stephen

    Thanks Chapman for this. I really liked this viualisation of the process. I missed it when you raised it in May.

    It explains very well your ideas.

    I can just imagine in a few years someone opening a Reith lecture or some equivalent on LENR with such a demonstration 😉. Just to be sure it’s probably best avoid sitting in the front row😉.

    I think you are right about the whole process being a machine. Maybe one of the first real necessarily nano scale machines with atomic and particle scale components.

    I think a big part of this machine is to enable the proton to be close to the nuclei as you suggest to allow quantum tunneling interactions. But I think this could also be enhanced if the proton has low enough energy but is also able to be close to the nucleus for as long as possible for the tunneling half life to be significant.

    Note that if we are able to shield the effect of the Coulomb barrier the nucleon capture cross-sections are much higher at Lower energies.

    I think an additional problem with fast encounters is they are more energetic and can lead to neutrons and gamma. Although it is possible that these are shielded or thermalised somehow.

    So may be part of the machine also enables slow proton encounters. At least in the first reactions. The ideas about electron screening, Hyds, Hydrinos are interesting attempts to explain this, I’m also curious if an interaction between ground state Hydrogen or H- with an excited or hollow atom with inner electrons stripped by my X-rays or something similar could lead to slow close proton nucleus encounters.

    If so perhaps there are other important components to the machine. An environment to strip inner electrons such as X-rays and an environment where atomic Hydrogen or hydrogen anions can coexist with the hollow atoms.

    Alternatively an environment that can produce the Hyds, Hydrinos, or electron screening effects mentioned elsewhere.

    I think this is NAE similar to that mentioned by Storms and others and requires particular surfaces or cracks to form with particular materials an compositions. I think that SPP production on these features maybe part of the machine that makes this environment. If SPP have very dense electon density their plasma frequency may be high and also interact in some way with the EM radiation.

    Could the line of site requirement between the Ni and Li component be due to X-Rays as well as Protons and alpha I wonder?

    I suppose kinetic reactions with other heavier nuclei would lead to neutrons

    It’s interesting the idea of the Li + p fusion component being Kinetic though.

    Probably this is all complicating things a bit though your simple visual analogy of the basic principle is just perfect to help understand LENR.

    • Chapman

      I have always been fascinated by the mechanical underpinnings of phenomena. The entire family of proteins and enzymes are a perfect example. They are not chemical! They are molecular machines that initiate reactions due to their physical shape and actually bend, rotate, and grapple with other molecules to facilitate chemical reactions in other molecules. They are entirely mechanical in function. It is amazing…

      • Gerard McEk

        Yes, using a simple mechanical approach that many people can understand works fine to explain the mechanism. I would not have said it is neither Fission nor Fusion, I think it is both from a nuclear perspective.

        • Chapman

          But we use these terms to categorize concepts and devices. Technically a conventional reactor undergoes THREE Fusions for every ONE fission, yet we call it a Fission reactor, because we dismiss the single nucleon absorption as being an act of Fusion… It is not a matter of technical fact, but of common nomenclature.

          • Gerard McEk

            I Do not think that you can say that anhilation of a neutron is a fusion, I believe you only talk about fusion if the proton number increases. After the absorbsion of the neutron uranium splits: that’s fission. I still think we have to do with both fission and fusion as GiveADigABone says above. The decay mechanism due to the weak force may also play a role in the transmutations. I still give Widom-Larson’s theory where, very slow neutrons initiate these transmutation chains, may play a role in LENR.

        • GiveADogABone

          I see -1H + 58Ni-> 59Cu + 3.417 MeV as a fusion reaction of 1 atom of Hydrogen with one atom of Nickel to form one atom of Copper.

          Also I see p+Li7->Be->2He4 as a fusion reaction of Lithium and p to form Beryllium with almost immediate fission to two Helium nucleii.

      • Stephen

        Your right I think. Nature has been working in the nano realm from the very beginning making all kinds of machines and factories that we are only just beginning to understand.

        I often wonder what happens when we combine the the new technologies exploring the nano plasmonics and often very special nano surface EM environments with certain materials, nano structures, photonics and molecular mechanical and protien technologies with LENR.

        LENR technology itself I think is just the beginning.

        It is fascinating and I think maybe the future tech of a new generation.

    • cashmemorz

      I like the approach of the basic machine as described because it provides a simple base on which one can build a more detailed picture bit by bit. As each new feature is fitted and seen to work, then one has a system to eventually build up the whole picture of what works. A simple approach that many can share in the understanding of which theoretical model of LENR works or doesn’t work.

    • Stephen

      It intersting though Andrea Rossi sometimes mentioned pinball in some of his joking replies to some comments. I wonder if he was infact giving a big hint.

      Often I look back and what he says suddenly makes more sense in context.

      • Chapman

        The guy has done everything he could short of writing it a blackboard. You can read his frustration when someone continues with a wrong assumption even though he feels he has already given all the necessary clues.

        Remember, he is trying to commercialize his design and can not openly disclose it to public domain, but he can’t resist talking to like-minded individuals and giving guidance and advice. Look at WizKid. Rossi has never balked at engaging with him, hearing his status reports, and even offering advice on productive steps forward. But you can’t really expect him to publish a cookbook like MFMP is wanting to do. Let him get on the market, and have full patent protections, and I am sure Rossi will show up at every science convention and happily engage in HOURS of discussion regarding every detail.

        • Engineer48

          Hi Chapman, who wrote:
          ” Piantelli writes about the proton energy at expulsion – after the disassociation of the hydrogen – as being around 6.7MEV. Unfortunately, that is derived from the coulomb barrier potential resulting from the total charged nucleons involved. ”

          Your statement is not correct.

          What Piantelli did was to measured the proton energy of the expelled protons using a Cloud Chamber, a magnetic field and their observed radius of curvature.
          .

          • gameover

            Where can I read the details on the measurements that Piantelli performed with a cloud chamber?

          • Chapman

            https://www.google.com/patents/EP2754156A2?cl=en

            Here is Piantelli’s statement from his patent paper:

            ***
            “More in detail, during the process of orbital capture, H- ions can lose its own couple of electrons and form protons 1H+. A first fraction of the protons 1H+ is subjected to direct nuclear capture reactions by the nuclei of the same atoms of the clusters in which the orbital capture has occurred, while a second fraction of the protons 1H+ can be expelled by Coulomb repulsion from the nucleus of the metal atom where the orbital capture has taken place. The expelled protons have an energy that can be determined and characterised. For instance, in the case of Nickel, this energy is about 6.7 MeV, as detected by a Wilson chamber, on the basis of Bethe’s equation. A part of the protons of the second portion, which does not react with other nuclei of the primary material, can leave the latter and interact with a material adapted to give rise to proton- dependent reactions, if this is present.”
            ***

            As you can see, he does not appear to state that HE measured the energy of such protons to be 6.7MEV in a LENR experiment, but rather that the energy of protons ejected from the nucleus of Nickel atoms has been verified by equation AND experimentation to be 6.7MEV in classic physics experiments.

            As it appears he was not referring to a test of a LENR device specifically, and was just citing well documented facts, I was pointing out that LENR protons are not emitted from the Nickel nucleus, but from some mid point in the nickels electron cloud, which manifests a much lower repulsion force ejecting the protons thusly liberated. And the way the field drops off, it only takes a small distance from the nucleus to dramatically reduce that force.

            Why would this be important? Because if the hydrogen breaks down based on its own binding energy, then it will be the same ejection force for any transitional metal used as a core. But if the Hydrogen IS somehow shielded, and the ejection force of the proton is dependant on the coulomb potential, then using Platinum results in protons with energy levels many times higher, and such differences mean HUGE things for what you can achieve as secondary reactions.

            Make sense? That is the point of the observation. If Piantelli is right, and it is 6.7MEV with nickel, then using Palladium will generate Protons at 12MEV, and Platinum creates accelerated protons at 20MEV!!! That would be extremely useful info considering other possible secondary reactions aside from the Lithium solution…

            But I doubt this is true. It was just a slight oversight by Piantelli that I thought was worth clarifying for a prospective experimenter. As you can see, even Engineer read the statement as a LENR tested fact. Thats a problem.

          • FRC

            Chapman–
            Do the 6.7 Mev protoms create any x-rays or other EM radiation in slowing down in the Ni lattice?

          • Chapman

            I am sure the protons themselves do create some emissions during the descent and slowing, but the real potential for EM emissions are from the disturbed low electrons that the proton screws with while it is mucking around where it does not belong.

            I would not want to speculate on the frequency ranges – I will leave that to the physicists. I only concern myself with the intuitive understanding of the cause-and-effect relationships. I just try to understand the mechanics. The math involved in quantifying the exact emission spectrum is a pain in the ass, and not really a concern to me.

            I am sorry to disappoint if you were looking for exact values, but as I said – my interest lies in mechanical relationships rather than formula-exact values. I only study these things to a “1st approximation” level, which focuses on sequential causality and overall system interaction. I am only interested in what happens, for informative purposes, and because I find it interesting – but I am not trying to master the underlying maths needed in order to design and build one myself. I know where the formulas are in my reference books, but I am too lazy to bother with going that deep purely for entertainment purposes! Nuclear physics is just a hobby topic for me, just like genetics, cellular biology and cosmology. So do not think I am a trained physicist with any letters after my name – I am just another avid science fan. But my formal education was quite broad in scope, and I do have enough cross-doctrine training and experience to understand what I read…

          • Engineer48

            Hi Chapman,

            You are playing with words.

            Piantelli is too careful a scientists to not have measured the proton energy. Has has the cloud chamber as he has shown in images. So what you think that it was too hard for him to add a magnetic field and calc the proton radius by the curvature?

            You think he was not interested to see what was coming out of his reactor and never bothered to use his cloud chamber plus a mag field to identify and measure the energies of the various particles?

            This is standard science when dealing with this sort of stuff.

            In fact I VERY HIGHLY recommend for EVERY LENR DIYer to build and operate a cloud chamber as close to their reactor as possible.
            .

          • Chapman

            Mr. Engineer,

            First off, I would be happy to explain my observation regarding his statement, but I am not looking to get into a pissing match over the issue. Why? Because, frankly I like you – always have. You always bring great info and insights to the forum and you are always a much nicer guy then I am. I do not know what trigger I tapped into by mentioning the 6.7 MEV problem, but you obviously feel deeply about it. As I said, I refuse to prod you into an agitated state by pointing out the syntax he used, or the underlying problem with 6.7MEV in this context, out of respect. Your reaction seems uncharacteristic of you, and I intend to dismiss it and keep you in my warm regards. Whatever it is that is troubling you, be it personal, professional, or some of the disrespect that you have received from others here, I hope tomorrow brings you a brighter day and a happier disposition.

            No harm – no foul. I have days where I would be likely to cuss out the Queen of England. We have all been there. So – I still like you, and respect what you do around here. If you would like to discuss it later when you are in a better mood then just holler out. I am always around.

            Be happy, my friend…

          • Engineer48

            Hi Chapman,

            My focus is figuring out Focardi and Piantelli hydrogenated their Ni.

            The process to do this is very cloudy and until it is sorted there will be no reliable reactor DIYs happening.

            In that goal Hank Mills is in agreement and we are discussing and exchanging papers talking about the alpha and beta phase of Nickel Hydride creation and what may stop either phase happening.

            Alpha phase is about populating the Ni surface with dissociated H atoms or ions.

            Beta phase is about using non adsorbed H2 molecules to POUND the H whatever into the lattice. As there are many theories about what is needed to be pounded into the Ni lattice, my focus is to gather existing industry knowledge about how to achieve 1st alpha phase and then beta phase to achieve a well hydrogenated Ni with lots of H or H ions inside the lattice.

            Until we understand how to achieve the beta phase hydrogenation of Ni, as Focardi and Piantelli did, talking about things that may or may not happen later is maybe just a bit premature.

            To illustrate alpha phase is after the H2 dissociates and is adsorbed (held) by the Ni surface. Beta phase is when those Ni surface adsorbed H atoms or H ions are pounded into the lattice.

            As far as I understand the process, no beta phase H atoms or H ions inside the Ni lattice = NO LENR REACTION.

            So lets pool our brain power and work out how to achieve a high degree of beta phase in the Ni on our reactors?
            . https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c6f525d3ffe0a76610e410561a768dde365fea533566743123081497920a0c78.jpg
            .
            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f921ec5ef95b0b9cb51c045c1c63638f994dbf79edd113329b0e7e03e40f8488.jpg

          • Chapman

            I totally agree. The reactor should be doable given the details you extracted from published images and from a lot of deduction. That was a nice bit of reverse engineering – but a reactor is unuseable until we have the recipe for what to put in it.

            On that point… Building a reactor and doing the full scale replications are obviously beyond the average DIY physics fan, but there should be some basic experimental setup we can design that would allow “second string” experimenters to contribute by working on just the hydrogenation issue. Experiments focused solely on hydrogen absorption into transitional metals should be doable, and if the results are pooled and the experimental parameters coordinated, we should be able to parallel process a large selection of materials and methods. It would be a fun “Group Activity” if someone ( hint – FRANK ) were to take steps to organize the attempt.

            But we would need you and the other engineer and physicist types to establish a base protocol.

            Once a reliable hydrogen saturating procedure is nailed down the rest should be fairly straightforward.

          • Chapman

            By the way Engineer,

            I think Zephir gave me a plausible mechanism for a natural shielding effect that may logically explain how hydrogen can penetrate all the way down to the point when it breaches the lowest electron shell. And you know what? It would result in the proton being ejected at somewhere around 90% or so of the total coulomb potential, which would put Piantelli’s numbers right in the right neighborhood.

            I do not know if it is a correct answer, but just as with the claim that the operation of the 1-year test plant was impossible in the allotted space, it only takes a single PLAUSIBLE solution to prove it IS POSSIBLE.

            I am taking the idea apart to see if I can find a flaw, but the bottom line is that if those numbers are real, then there is a BIG advantage to working our way back up to Platinum, and other transitional metals higher up the periodic table.

            But I know what you are going to say… Carts before horses, right? The hydrogen saturation issue needs to be solved before anyone can even THINK about alternatives and enhancements.

            So our roadmap right now is:

            1. Solve the hydrogen loading problem
            2. Exactly replicate the existing e-cat model to prove the theory and establish a duplication friendly experimenter platform.
            3. Play around tweaking individual parameters ONE AT A TIME!!!

          • Engineer48

            Hi Chapman,

            Yup.

            Keep it KISS baby and only play with one parameter at a time to start building a solid base to build higher from.

          • Zephir
          • Axil Axil

            Piantelli has made an assumption, the ionization track in the Wilson cloud chamber must have been caused by a charged particle and it could not have been produced by an electron. Therefore, the observed particle must have been a proton. Piantelli does not believe that the charged particle could have been a highly penetrating particle such as a muon because such particle reactions in LENR are plainly impossible. The length of the ionization trail determines the energy of the “particle”.

            If muons are not produced in LENR, than the assumption that Piantelli made was valid. If muons are produced in LENR that Piantelli’s assumption are invalid and a more in depth magnetic detection method is called for.

            Piantell’s technology of proton reactions in LENR is based on the assumption that muons cannot be produced by the LENR reaction. Such an assumption should be tested as being applicable.

            Does the generation of muons in LENR invalidate Piantelli’s patent? Time will tell.

          • Engineer48

            Hi GameOver,

            Read Piantelli’s latest patent.
            .

          • gameover

            Do you think that I have not also read all the patents of Piantelli?

            I do not like when people appeal to authority built on past efforts. If Piantelli observed proton emission he should have wrote papers detailing the phenomenon. But here we have instead only anecdotal reports and brief mentions in patent documentation.

          • Engineer48

            Hi GameOver,

            A patent is not a paper but as I read the patent, Piantelli did try to write the patent as if it were a paper.

            Also Piantelli has shown cloud chamber images of energetic particles leaving his reactor.

            So the mention in the patent is not the only time he mentioned cloud chamber studies.
            .

          • Zephir

            Whole the LENR has started with anecdotal reports with lack of replication. Try to learn to live with it: the mainstream science will never attempt to replicate the findings, which threat its profit in this way or another.

          • Chapman

            Mr. Engineer Sir, I assure you that if I am wrong and there is some other contributing principal that works to shield the hydrogen and keep it coherent all the way to nucleus surface then I will be overjoyed at discovering some new aspect of the physics involved. I am not publishing a theory or trying to sell anything – I am enjoying the physics.

            PLEASE do not think I am discounting Piantelli. I am celebrating him. Yes, I HAVE read his papers. They are a joy to read. I only made the one observation regarding the escape energy cited. I do not see how the escape energy of a proton escaping from 1 Fermi can be the same as one that exits from several Fermi higher, given that the electromagnetic repulsion drops off to one quarter at 2 Fermi and one sixteenth at only 4 fermi.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Chapman,

            In his latest patent.
            .

      • GiveADogABone

        In playing pinball you get sparkling lights in random places. Is that true?

  • Gerard McEk

    Hi Chapman, a very interesting view on LENR you have put down here. I hope it is as simple as you have suggested. Do you intend to engineer and test a reactor based on your theory? Did you ask Andra Rossi to comment on your theory in the JONP?

    • Chapman

      Rossi just published it with a nice “Thank you for your insights” and a thanks for the moral support. Of course, he did NOT reply with one of his classic “No, No, No, you are confusing pigs with sheep” replies he reserves for someone who is way off-base!

      Keep this in mind – and I will only say this once more, as I do not wish to beat a dead horse with endless repetition: This is not my idea. Read Mr. Lewan’s book, watch Mr. Greenyer’s videos ( “Heavy!”), read Piantelli’s patents, heck – go back and read exhibit 1 from the IH dump. I just have a habit of actually READING all those papers other people cite – like the russian analysis of Titanium in a lithium environment! – and when you get done you find all the facts have been laid out and lots of people already understand this perfectly well. I have discovered nothing, and I have made no intuitive leaps. I was merely explaining in a plain format what it is that the REAL thinkers are talking about and proposing. All I have been asking for months was why everyone continues to postulate about fifth forces and muons when those OTHER folks, the ones actually doing the work, have already laid out what is going on?

      The real magic involved is what Engineer is pursuing. The physical design attributes that promote the reaction, and the external Stimulus and Control systems. These are the challenge.

      Kennedy made his challenge to go to the moon. With physics we understood all the details regarding propulsion energy and escape velocity, the realities of a capsule in a vacuum sustaining human life, radiation shielding, telemetry and communications, life support, etc. But it was the Engineers who had to come up with physical devices and machines to put that knowledge to use. It was a huge endeavour. But turning theory into a practical device is ALWAYS the hardest part, and it is the point where the engineers have to push the theoretical physicists out of the room so they can actually get some work done.

      Engineer48 is the real hero for reverse engineering the REASON Rossi went with the particular physical choices he uses. That was pure intellect and deductive reasoning, just the same as GiveADogABone spent actual brain cell resources in deducing a potential, but entirely POSSIBLE customer process which blows up IH’s claim that there was NO possible process that could have been active in the space available. These are actual working minds.

      I was only parroting what I was able to gleen from the writings of my betters, and passing it on in conversational language. That is all. So do not ask ME to provide “Proofs” of the theory, or defend the physics. But if it rings true to you, and you have a little more insight now – then GREAT! I am happy I was able to help, but now you need to go and READ Lewan, Piantelli, Rossi, and a healthy chunk of Wikipedias “Periodic Table” and “Isotopes of xxx” sections. I assure you, it really is very easy to follow if you ditch the Sci-Fi nonsense and clear your head.

      This last part was just an open declaration to the general reader – not a reply to YOU Gerard! I would not want you thinking I went off on you like you were an imbecile! Your comments were perfectly reasonable… I just wanted to state those facts one last time for the public record! 🙂

      • Steve Savage

        I wonder if it would be at all useful to compare this theory with the theory of Dr. Mills and / or Dr. Cook. With respect to Dr. Cook, does the theory square with what would be predicted from his perspective? I am sorry to ask, and would do it myself, unfortunately I am but a pathetic layman and rely on smart people, such as yourself, to track down the truth.

  • Gerard McEk

    Yes, using a simple mechanical approach that many people can understand works fine to explain the mechanism. I would not have said it is neither Fission nor Fusion, I think it is both from a nuclear perspective.

    • GiveADogABone

      I see -1H + 58Ni-> 59Cu + 3.417 MeV as a fusion reaction of 1 atom of Hydrogen with one atom of Nickel to form one atom of Copper.

      Also I see p+Li7->Be->2He4 as a fusion reaction of Lithium and p to form Beryllium with almost immediate fission to two Helium nucleii.

  • Engineer48

    A few points:

    There is no need of Li or of LiAlH4 to obtain a Ni+H excess energy release.

    Piantelli measured the proton energy of the expelled protons using a Cloud Chamber, a magnetic field and their observed radius of curvature. If you read his patent he makes that very clear.

    Your belief that hydrogenation is simple is not correct. It is probably the hardest thing to do. Pressure and temperature are critical at the various steps to achieve successful cleaning and hydrogenation.

    I suggest you go and read Piantelli, Focardi and others paper about the plain and simple Ni+H reaction.
    .

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Yes, but from this video (7:40 min.) I get the impression that Focardi thought that Rossi was getting significantly more energy out of the E-Cat than he and Piantelli were getting out of their nickel reactor.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRry6a3U0Cw

      • Alan DeAngelis
        • Alan DeAngelis

          PS
          I was wondering if the covalently bonded hydride could tunnel into the aluminum.
          http://disq.us/p/13zg602

        • GiveADogABone

          That does make another point about the cavities. The metal surface of the cavities is essentially at yield tensile stress. Hydrogen migrates towards those regions and the regions with the highest tensile stress of all are the crack tips, so the metal in those regions will be the first to become saturated.

          Then what happens if you try some induction heating around the cavities? The current concentrates at the crack tips as well. High currents equals high heating. Where does LENR initiate? High tensile stress, high H2 loading, high induction heating near the surface could be a clue? Also note that when an interatomic bond in the metal fails a shock wave propagates but it does not relieve the stress because the hydrogen takes the metal back to yield.

          • Steve Savage

            Is there any way to effectively image a reaction site / particle to see how this effect might manifest?

          • GiveADogABone

            I think the answer is yes to some degree. In fact it is what started me off on researching cracks/cavities/nanopores. It is the H to H2 business that made me far more interested in sealed pores that could hold high pressure and the hydrogen embrittlement people have done loads of research because this process causes dangerous engineering failures.

            The LENR process is far from uniform and happens at isolated sites, so what makes the whole thing stable? The sites do not last very long as energy producers, so new sites must be continuously created. That process was made visible by pointing a thermal imaging camera at a flat plate electrode in a Platinum/D2O system (I think) experiment and I think it was done at somewhere like SPARWAR but I cannot find it again. The thing sparkled as new sites started and old sites died. The sparkling might have come from sealed pores just below the surface. When a reacting pore reaches the surface it probably dies almost instantly as its gases exit and D2O enters.

          • GiveADogABone

            Not as good as the movie but it conforms to me that SPARWAR is the source :-

            http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MosierBossthermaland.pdf
            THERMAL AND NUCLEAR ASPECTS OF THE Pd/D2O SYSTEM
            page 9
            3.2 Temperature distribution.
            The electrode surface temperature distribution can be monitored by infrared imaging. Using this technique, the presence of discrete reaction sites randomly distributed in time and space, Fig.3a and steep temperature gradients, Fig.3b, are observed. These features are characteristic of the co-deposition process. The steep temperature gradients, seen in the images, indicate that the heat sources are located in the immediate vicinity of the electrode/electrolyte contact surface[3,4]. The average surface temperatures are ca 6oC above that of the solution.

            it is concluded that the nuclear activities occur within the 1μm layer adjacent to the electrode/electrolyte contact surface.

            page 13
            Surface temperature image

          • GiveADogABone
          • gameover

            On a related note Edmund Storms is convinced that the reactions happen in the crack tips and that something akin to metallic hydrogen is created there.

        • Bob Greenyer

          These are the images I wanted to share during the presentation

      • Mats002

        He gave away the latter to Norman Cook and Uppsala University.

    • gameover

      I have all the papers of Piantelli and Focardi that can be found on the internet. They do not describe in detail the treatments that they did to the surface of their bars. It was one of their “secrets” and it still was not enough for substantial excess heat.

      http://www.nichenergy.com/download/WO1995020816A1.pdf

      1) Charging- step
      Among the known techniques for charging hydrogen in the active core so that the hydrogen isotopes become chemically adsorbed in the crystal lattice, there are the following:
      – electrolytic adsorption
      – immersion of the core in a gaseous environment containing hydrogen at a pre-established temperature and pressure;
      – immersion of the core in solutions of HCl, HNO3 , H2SO4;
      – immersion of the core in galvanic baths containing, for example, NH3 when the metal constituting the core is deposited on a support composed of a material such as Cu or ceramic.

  • Engineer48

    A few points:

    There is no need of Li or of LiAlH4 to obtain a Ni+H excess energy release.

    Piantelli measured the proton energy of the expelled protons using a Cloud Chamber, a magnetic field and their observed radius of curvature. If you read his patent he makes that very clear.

    Your belief that hydrogenation is simple is not correct. It is probably the hardest thing to do. Pressure and temperature are critical at the various steps to achieve successful cleaning and hydrogenation.

    I suggest you go and read Piantelli, Focardi and others paper about the plain and simple Ni+H reaction.
    .

    • Andy Kumar

      “Engineer”, Chapman has usurped your position here as the resident guru. Personally, I don’t have taste for non-mathematical explanations — I think of them as content free verbosity. A theory without math is like macaroni without cheese!
      .
      It would be good for the more scientific minded readers here if you could provide a detailed critique of Chapman with your excellent engineering knowledge.

      • Chapman

        Macaroni without cheese is useless!

        Hey, wait a minute!!!

        🙂

      • Engineer48

        Hi Andy,

        I pointed out a few statements Chapman that were not supported by the literature. One such was his statement about how Piantelli established the 6.7MeV of the ejected proton.
        Chapman suggested Piantelli has assumed the value. I stated Piantelli had measured the value as attached.
        .

    • Chapman

      1. I think you will see that I have repeated endlessly that the LENR reaction is strictly the Ni+H primary reaction and does not involve Li or any other substance. The Lithium is the basis of the secondary reaction that Rossi utilizes to achieve an energy product grossly beyond the output of the primary reaction.

      2. I do not believe that the hydrogenation IS simple. It is one of the most elusive steps involved. It is another example of a scientific principle being an engineering nightmare. All those early PF replication failures were likely due to the difficulty of achieving the 90% loading required before the experimenter is going to see ANY reaction.

      3. I specifically refer to nickel preprocessing by vacuum, heat, quenching, pressure, and cycling in order to achieve cleaning and hydrogenation, so I do not understand your correction! My observation on the nickel was that no exotic composition was required, and that the trick is in the proper preprocessing in order to achieve the hydrogenation levels required..

      4. Piantelli referenced the energy levels of the ejected protons and cited the work establishing what that energy level would be. But at 6.7MEV the Hydrogen would have had to descend to less than 2 femtometers, effectively underneath the lowest electron shell. I see no way the Hydrogen can maintain coherency when external forces are pulling it apart with 6 times the force of the internal attraction of its component parts. A proton ejected from a Nickel nucleus will have an energy of 6.7MEV, that is basic QM, but a hydrogen atom plunging into the nickels electron shells will come apart, like skylab on re-entry, long before it descends below 2 femtometers above the nucleus.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Yes, but from this video (7:40 min.) I get the impression that Focardi thought that Rossi was getting significantly more energy out of the E-Cat than he and Piantelli were getting out of their nickel reactor.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRry6a3U0Cw

    • wizkid

      Hey E! You promised to build something, not chew our ears off. You are pianelling all over the floor! Please build something before you shite all over too…
      (I’ve tried to be kind, but please quit the drivel, All you do is repeat yourself over and over and over again. The same post. Now here. Zip it and do something if you can. I don’t think you are a doer, though, just a talker.)

      Posted by your favorite replicator: WIZKID!

      • Engineer48

        Hi WizKid,

        And your success to date has been?

        I’m doing research and sharing what I find. When that process has completed I’ll build.
        .

        • wizkid

          You “research” and “share” and “aspire”. Way to go!

          Like many others, I am retired now, and really haven’t achieved anything significant in my lifetime, but there is love in my life.

          In order of importance:
          Personal relationship with God.
          Ordained minister. Preacher.
          Husband of loving wife for 42 years.
          Five grandchildren.

          Other trivia:
          Conversion of a 1969 Fiat sport coupe to electric plug in that achieved 42 mph in 1978. Designed and built an electromagnetic “dark energy” system with 1.6 COP (videotaped … circa 2010) Defeated a large restaurant franchise that tried to steal my software IP. (2011) Built ageothermal HVAC home (2002)

          I also tinker with experiments in cold fusion, because it is fun to do. I do not claim behind a pseudo name to be an “engineer” or anything other than a cranky old grandpa that tries to enjoy life and is interested in alternative energy sources.

          Cheers

    • gameover

      I have all the papers of Piantelli and Focardi that can be found on the internet. They do not describe in detail the treatments that they did to the surface of their bars. It was one of their “secrets” and still it was not enough for substantial excess heat.

      http://www.nichenergy.com/download/WO1995020816A1.pdf

      1) Charging- step
      Among the known techniques for charging hydrogen in the active core so that the hydrogen isotopes become chemically adsorbed in the crystal lattice, there are the following:
      – electrolytic adsorption
      – immersion of the core in a gaseous environment containing hydrogen at a pre-established temperature and pressure;
      – immersion of the core in solutions of HCl, HNO3 , H2SO4;
      – immersion of the core in galvanic baths containing, for example, NH3 when the metal constituting the core is deposited on a support composed of a material such as Cu or ceramic.

  • GiveADogABone

    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=338
    Hydrogen/Nickel cold fusion probable mechanism

    • Chapman

      Very interesting breakdown of a few of the principles involved. Thanks.

      It also brings to mind the idea of coulomb shielding through compression. If the hydrogen is somehow compressed – almost like going down the hydrino path – than the internal forces keeping the hydrogen together would last much further in the descent before it disintegrates, resulting in a higher escape velocity for the proton… Hmmmm… I will have to think on that. It is outside of the normal models, and purely conjecture.

      • GiveADogABone

        A thing that somewhat bugs me is Hydrogen Embrittlement. There is lots of research because of the obvious dangers to engineering metals, including Nickel which is vulnerable. H2E is based on dislocation theory and the accumulation of H2 in microcavities. Enormous H2 pressures are achieved.

        It seems that disassociated H can enter the cavity and turn into H2 molecules that cannot escape, so the cavity pressure is pumped upwards. If you want very high pressure Hydrogen, then look in the microcavities in the Nickel lattice that are not connected to the surface.

        • Chapman

          Absolutely! The single topic of Hydrogen loading is an amazing and curious adventure all by itself.

          I also love the way basic metallurgy techniques like Tempering can have dramatic effects by causing high compression regions when the metal is reheated and the expanded state collapses and crushes the trapped gases.

          Like I said, when these devices are as ubiquitous as PC’s, there will be a whole class of engineers just dedicated to techniques for optimizing the loading conditions.

          • GiveADogABone

            That does make another point about the cavities. The metal surface of the cavities is essentially at yield tensile stress. Hydrogen migrates towards those regions and the regions with the highest tensile stress of all are the crack tips, so the metal in those regions will be the first to become saturated.

            Then what happens if you try some induction heating around the cavities? The current concentrates at the crack tips as well. High currents equals high heating. Where does LENR initiate? High tensile stress, high H2 loading, high induction heating near the surface could be a clue? Also note that when an interatomic bond in the metal fails a shock wave propagates but it does not relieve the stress because the hydrogen pressure takes the metal back to yield.

          • Steve Savage

            Is there any way to effectively image a reaction site / particle to see how this effect might manifest?

          • GiveADogABone

            I think the answer is yes to some degree. In fact it is what started me off on researching cracks/cavities/nanopores. It is the H to H2 business that made me far more interested in sealed pores that could hold high pressure and the hydrogen embrittlement people have done loads of research because this process causes dangerous engineering failures.

            The LENR process is far from uniform and happens at isolated sites, so what makes the whole thing stable? The sites do not last very long as energy producers, so new sites must be continuously created. That process was made visible by pointing a thermal imaging camera at a flat plate electrode in a Platinum/D2O system (I think) experiment and I think it was done at somewhere like SPARWAR but I cannot find it again. The thing sparkled as new sites started and old sites died. The sparkling might have come from sealed pores just below the surface. When a reacting pore reaches the surface it probably dies almost instantly as its gases exit and D2O enters.

          • GiveADogABone

            Not as good as the movie but it confirms to me that SPARWAR is the source :-

            http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MosierBossthermaland.pdf
            THERMAL AND NUCLEAR ASPECTS OF THE Pd/D2O SYSTEM
            page 9
            3.2 Temperature distribution.
            The electrode surface temperature distribution can be monitored by infrared imaging. Using this technique, the presence of discrete reaction sites randomly distributed in time and space, Fig.3a and steep temperature gradients, Fig.3b, are observed. These features are characteristic of the co-deposition process. The steep temperature gradients, seen in the images, indicate that the heat sources are located in the immediate vicinity of the electrode/electrolyte contact surface[3,4]. The average surface temperatures are ca 6oC above that of the solution.

            it is concluded that the nuclear activities occur within the 1μm layer adjacent to the electrode/electrolyte contact surface.

            page 13
            Surface temperature image

          • GiveADogABone
          • gameover

            Incidentally Edmund Storms is convinced that the reactions happen in the crack tips and that something akin to metallic hydrogen is created there.

        • gameover

          High pressure hydrogen… how high? What about nanocavities?

          • GiveADogABone

            Monster big. You have to find some research papers which might quote indicative numbers. The actual limit comes from the yield stress of the metals, bearing in mind they are already embrittled and that means the real limits would be set by fracture mechanics.

            The point I make is that the H continues to enter the cavity, even using quantuum tunnelling to do it and the H2 is contained within it. The H2 literally inflates the cavity by yielding the metal or rips cracks apart. That is what makes hydrogen embrittlement so dangerous; it don’t stop until total failure.

          • gameover

            Is it not then a natural intuition that maybe it is this what a LENR scientist would want to do? Maximize the number of closed nanopores in the material and then try to pump hydrogen through them as quickly and as much as possible using pressure pulses and temperature variations and possibly other kinds of stresses.

            This is also what Rossi likely did in the beginnings, btw.

          • GiveADogABone

            ‘Is it not then a natural intuition that maybe it is this what a LENR scientist would want to do? ‘
            Yes.

            ‘Maximize the number of closed nanopores in the material and then try to
            pump hydrogen through them as quickly and as much as possible.’
            Yes. ‘Pump’ is the normal diffusion of atomic Hydrogen through the crystal lattice. The atomic Hydrogen enters the nanopore where it converts to H2 and is trapped, so the Nickel lattice on the surface of the nanopore acts like a one-way valve. H in but no H2 out. I do not see pressure pulses (applied where) affecting the diffusion rate. More a case of steady high, H2 pressures in the gases outside the Nickel powder and short diffusion paths to the nanopore.

            ‘temperature variations’
            Yes. You could see how temperature cycling would vary the pressure in the nanopore and fatigue crack growth could be a mechanism. That could be caused by intermittent heating by induction currents. If you thought that one second intervals of induction heating and subsequent cooling would thermally cycle the crack tips, then you would expect crack growth to occur (Sound familiar?)

            ‘other kinds of stresses’
            Yes. The growth of cracks in metals if controlled by fracture mechanics, rather than stresses alone. Of course applied stresses are part of the story but things like crack shape and overall geometry feed into fracture mechanics calculations. Crack growth works from shear stresses as well as tensile stresses. Compressive stresses don’t count because the crack faces close. Residual stresses in the metal matter and often exist where parts of the metal are yielding.

            Fracture mechanics is controlled by the stress intensity factor
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress_intensity_factor

          • gameover

            My wording was not too clear but obviously I meant pressure pulses of the incoming H2 gas. The first Rossi patent application also mantioned this and nobody seems to remember or have noticed it.

            http://i.imgur.com/Xlvp6Hc.png

          • GiveADogABone

            Must have been a reason but I do not know what it is. As a total speculation how about venting the powder?

          • gameover

            Recently posted high quality photos of pre-2011 E-Cat prototypes show quite well an electrovalve at the H2 gas inlet to the reactor and a manually controlled valve on the outlet for venting that either was done manually occasionally or was left very slightly open for continuous H2 discharge. The outlet had a standard fuel filter (in white) to prevent airborn particles.

            http://imgur.com/a/zNUJs
            Credit: Alan Smith

          • GiveADogABone

            One way of getting rid of the Helium which Piantelli states is a reactor poison. I guess the pre-2011 reactor core had access to the H2 and dumped its Helium there. Helium would not be a problem if it was just an NI/H reactor, so the p+Li->2He4 must be the source? Piantelli still has this problem.

          • Steve H

            Nickel is magneto-strictive.
            On – Off pulses of a magnetic field through the Nickel will also cause a pumping action due to the expansion and contraction of the Nickel lattice, me-thinks.

          • Steve H

            Courtesy of Wikipedia:-

            “Nickel is a naturally magnetostrictive material, meaning that, in the presence of a magnetic field, the material undergoes a small change in length.[64][65] The magnetostriction of nickel is on the order of 50 ppm and is negative, indicating that it contracts.

            Nickel is used as a binder in the cemented tungsten carbide or hardmetal industry and used in proportions of 6% to 12% by weight. Nickel makes the tungsten carbide magnetic and adds corrosion-resistance to the cemented parts, although the hardness is less than those with a cobalt binder.[66]”

          • GiveADogABone

            A single dislocation that is big enough to allow a H2 molecule to form. Hydrogen Embrittlement works on the grain boundaries in the metal. Why? Because they are stuffed full of dislocations by definition. That makes it easy to form a linear crack which makes matters worse again.

          • Axil Axil

            https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0801/0801.0772.pdf
            Nanocavity hardening: impact of broken bonds at the negatively curved surfaces

            A nanocavity can increase the bond strength of a metal by an order of magnitude through bond shortening.

            Short bonds are stronger that long bonds.

          • gameover

            Very interesting, thanks.

  • Bob Matulis

    The energy has to be coming from somewhere.

  • Bob Matulis

    The energy has to be coming from somewhere.

  • Chapman

    You want the TRUTH?

    I am too old… Building reactors in the garage and blacking out the neighborhood is a young man’s pursuit – like someone only in their 50’s.

    I am past all that, and spend more time napping AFTER I mow the lawn, then it actually takes to DO the mowing.

    My background is in Semiconductor Physics, and I pass my spare time going over science journals and tracking the latest developments in the Physics world, but I am no longer an active participant in the community, and do not have the patience to deal with the frustrations.

    In short – I am just a grouchy old man with an addiction to Physics. Some guys my age build birdhouses, some get into model trains. Some wander down to the park to play chess with other old codgers. Me? I reclaim my glory days by staying current in the sciences and being the only one among my peers who plays Halo. 🙂 But I am also the only one who does not pee himself or misplace his dentures! I am convinced there is a connection…

    • MorganMck

      Thanks for your candor. Being a retiree myself, I get it. I hope you are willing to consult or even collaborate with some of the young bucks who are willing and able to put your theories into hardware/systems. Just being active here seems to have spurred a lot of thought and ideas among the troops. Thanks for your contributions.

  • Ophelia Rump

    If theory was as universally advantageous as some people wish to think, we would already have LENR in wide distribution, the fact is that theory has been of little use in bringing LENR to the world.

    Theory after the fact is little more than pseudo religious dogma. A witch-doctors dance to cover up the fact that he had no idea this was going to happen.

    If theory does not contribute to bringing enlightenment by predicting outcomes, and providing guidance then it is nothing more than cosmetics on the corpse of a failed scientific method, where individual perseverance was more valuable than dogma and method.

    There will be a hundred theories of how LENR works once it is proven. Where is the one good theory which ushers in the new age? That one good theory by definition cannot be delivered after the fact.

    Anything after the fact, is only of some potential marginal future value. Until theory crafting is useful for opening new avenues of human endeavor, it is a tool of marginal value compared to the value of rogue science.

  • Ophelia Rump

    If theory was as universally advantageous as some people wish to think, we would already have LENR in wide distribution, the fact is that theory has been of little use in bringing LENR to the world.

    Theory after the fact is little more than pseudo religious dogma. A witch-doctors dance to cover up the fact that he had no idea this was going to happen.

    If theory does not contribute to bringing enlightenment by predicting outcomes, and providing guidance then it is nothing more than cosmetics on the corpse of a failed scientific method, where individual perseverance was more valuable than dogma and method.

    There will be a hundred theories of how LENR works once it is proven. Where is the one good theory which ushers in the new age? That one good theory by definition cannot be delivered after the fact.

    Anything after the fact, is only of some potential marginal future value. Until theory crafting is useful for opening new avenues of human endeavor, it is a tool of marginal value compared to the value of rogue science.

  • John Littlemist

    Is it the absorbed H (the hydrogen in the lattice) that gets captured by the nickel?
    Or is it the unabsorbed H (free hydrogen) that gets captured by the nickel?

    • Chapman

      Absorbed. That is the difficulty. The metal needs to be totally saturated, and that is hard to achieve.

      • John Littlemist

        Ok, thanks!

    • Engineer48

      Hi John,

      Have a look at the attached.

      4 steps

      1) H2 is attracted to and approaches the Ni surface.

      2) H2 hits the H2 surface and is drawn out parallel to the surface.

      3) H2 is pulled apart (dissociated) by forces on the surface of the Ni. Each H atom is adsorbed (held) to the Ni surface. Called Alpha Phase. This phase can be reversed by heating the Ni above a critical temperature or reducing H2 pressure. H2 pressure hammers the surface H atoms to stay there or be pushed into the lattice. Note the H2 can be mixed with other gasses to increase the hammering action on the surface H atoms.

      4) Dissociated H atoms or H ions are hammered into the Ni lattice by gas molecules pounding on the surface H atoms. Called Beta Phase.
      .

      • Engineer48

        I added a H2 hammering stage to help to understand what drives the change from alpha stage to beta stage in the creation of Nickel Hydride.
        .

  • Chapman

    Macaroni without cheese is useless!

    Hey, wait a minute!!!

    🙂

  • Mats002

    Although I do agree in the descriptions made here so far, I miss the ‘electron density’ part.

    It is well established that electron density at the cathode gives a LENR effect. I think it is part of the story here, the compression of the electron cloud will press onto the coloumb barrier as part of the pinball bumper analogy.

    In an CRT (old fat TV:s) there are acceleration of electrons over a distance of many centimeters and vaccum is needed to make them go. LENR is not in need of vaccum because the distances for the pinball game is very tiny (nanometers to micrometers), that small world is not easy to comprehend. A lot of fources going on at the same time, very fast. It is the world of quantum (wave) mechanics.

  • Mats002

    Although I do agree in the descriptions made here so far, I miss the ‘electron density’ part.

    It is well established that electron density at the cathode gives a LENR effect. I think it is part of the story here, the compression of the electron cloud will press onto the coloumb barrier as part of the pinball bumper analogy.

    In an CRT (old fat TV:s) there are acceleration of electrons over a distance of many centimeters and vaccum is needed to make them go. LENR is not in need of vaccum because the distances for the pinball game is very tiny (nanometers to micrometers), that small world is not easy to comprehend. A lot of fources going on at the same time, very fast. It is the world of quantum (wave) mechanics.

  • Gerard McEk

    I Do not think that you can say that anhilation of a neutron is a fusion, I believe you only talk about fusion if the proton number increases. After the absorbsion of the neutron uranium splits: that’s fission. I still think we have to do with both fission and fusion as GiveADigABone says above. The decay mechanism due to the weak force may also play a role in the transmutations. I still give Widom-Larson’s theory where, very slow neutrons initiate these transmutation chains, may play a role in LENR.

  • Engineer48

    Hi Andy,

    I pointed out a few statements Chapman that were not supported by the literature. One such was his statement about how Piantelli established the 6.7MeV of the ejected proton.
    Chapman suggested Piantelli has assumed the value. I stated Piantelli had measured the value as attached.
    .

  • Engineer48

    Thanks to Hank Mills this is a very good paper to understand the processes involved in H atoms ending up inside the Ni lattice:

    http://cdn.intechweb.org/pdfs/21876.pdf

    The paper has a very clear image of the 4 steps involved as attached.
    .

    • Note that the H2 molecule splits into individual H1 atoms, which Focardi said was the main contribution that Rossi brought to the table.

      • Engineer48

        Hi Kevmo,

        That Ni dissociates H2 on the surface and the 2 x dissociated H atoms are adsorbed to the surface of the NI is known a LONG time ago.

        It is called alpha phase of the creation of NIckel Hydride.
        .

        • And catalyzing that reaction is what Rossi initially brought to the table.

  • Engineer48

    Hi WizKid,

    And your success to date has been?

    I’m doing research and sharing what I find. When that process has completed I’ll build.
    .

    • wizkid

      You “research” and “share” and “aspire”. Way to go!

      Like many others, I am retired now, and really haven’t achieved anything significant in my lifetime, but there is love in my life.

      In order of importance:
      Personal relationship with God.
      Ordained minister. Preacher.
      Husband of loving wife for 42 years.
      Five grandchildren.

      Other trivia:
      Conversion of a 1969 Fiat sport coupe to electric plug in that achieved 42 mph in 1978. Designed and built an electromagnetic “dark energy” system with 1.6 COP (videotaped … circa 2010) Defeated a large restaurant franchise that tried to steal my software IP. (2011) Built ageothermal HVAC home (2002)

      I also tinker with experiments in cold fusion, because it is fun to do. I do not claim behind a pseudo name to be an “engineer” or anything other than a cranky old grandpa that tries to enjoy life and is interested in alternative energy sources.

      Cheers

  • Engineer48

    Here Focardi reveals something that many replicators may not be doing.

    Operating the reactor below atmospheric pressure (400-800mbar). Piantelli also mentions this.

    http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/FocardiSlargeexces.pdf

  • Bob Greenyer

    Anyone about for a Live Google hangout in 30 mins?

    • georgehants

      Morning Bob, that sounds a little to risque for me.

      • Bob Greenyer

        You can just watch!

    • Engineer48

      Hi Bob,

      Never done one. How to do?
      .

  • Frank Acland

    Live video presentation by Bob Greenyer now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XxZkmpuJao&feature=youtu.be

    • Ciaranjay

      Wow, a door opens. Very interesting. Thanks for sharing Bob.

      • Bob Greenyer

        A pleasure – I said that if I could not get Part 2 of the video out before Aarhus, then I would do a Live hangout to make the information public.

      • Fedir Mykhaylov

        Even without the blender to me really like the micro accelerator hypothesis LENR

    • Thomas Kaminski

      Interesting presentation — I look forward to the edited video for part 2.

      This stimulates a lot of possibilities. The semiconductor industry has used wafer-thin sapphire for processing various high-speed devices and sensors. What if you could build up a microstructure of layers of materials using the same or similar processes that the semidconductor industry uses? Perhaps the H2 loading could be done with ion inplantations (h+ ions, for example). If the structure is important for the LENR reaction, this might be a way to build nano-layered devices that enhance LENR.

  • Frank Acland

    Live video presentation by Bob Greenyer now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XxZkmpuJao&feature=youtu.be

    • Ciaranjay

      Wow, a door opens. Very interesting. Thanks for sharing Bob.

      • Bob Greenyer

        A pleasure – I said that if I could not get Part 2 of the video out before Aarhus, then I would do a Live hangout to make the information public.

        The research on muonium production via HV discharge through sapphire (Al2O3) was done in Canada.

        I suggested shortly after the first picture of the ECatX that it was HV discharge through Sapphire… this is why

    • Thomas Kaminski

      Interesting presentation — I look forward to the edited video for part 2.

      This stimulates a lot of possibilities. The semiconductor industry has used wafer-thin sapphire for processing various high-speed devices and sensors. What if you could build up a microstructure of layers of materials using the same or similar processes that the semidconductor industry uses? Perhaps the H2 loading could be done with ion inplantations (h+ ions, for example). If the structure is important for the LENR reaction, this might be a way to build nano-layered devices that enhance LENR.

  • Bob Greenyer

    specifically, using 18O which via proton neutron knockout reaction results in 18F that decays via positron emission in 109minutes to 18O (gets recycled) we have it in the form of Al2 18O3.

    If there are slow neutrons – and they interact, we get 19O which decays with a much shorter half life and much higher energy photon (gamma) to stable 19F

  • Bob Greenyer

    specifically, using 18O which via proton neutron knockout reaction results in 18F that decays via positron emission in 109minutes to 18O (gets recycled) we have it in the form of Al2 18O3.

    If there are slow neutrons – and they interact, we get 19O which decays with a much shorter half life and much higher energy photon (gamma) to stable 19F

  • Bob Greenyer

    These are the images I wanted to share during the presentation

  • Bob Greenyer

    I just wanted to get the 3 main things out before going to Aarhus

    1. That we have a shot at showing if a particular theory is correct

    2. That practically all successful tech seams to have LWFM in play – and that it has been known to be critical for many years with Celani, Iraj and Iwamura being leaders. Holmlid has recently observed Muons but attributes them to nuclear spallation – despite using the LWFM and transition metal (K and Fe in this case)

    3. My speculation that Muons, Muonium, Muonium- and muonic atoms may be at play (in a similar way to Piantelli’s H- but more accepted as a MO to make fusion)

    4. That the e-Cat X is a HV discharge through sapphire.

    5. That HV Sapphire makes muonium and potentially muonium- as shown by canadian research

    6. That that is why I suggested 3 phases may play a role in Hot Cat and my previous informed speculation HV discharge in E-Cat X and that Rossi may not know how it works

    7. That recent patent by Clean planet says effectively “heavy electron’ every few paragraphs, saying that the nano structures help it… but does not say muon

    8. That subsequent to ALL this and with a priority date before E-CatX was mentioned by Rossi, the German patent is doing a Dielectric Barrier Discharge DBD through Al2O3 (what sapphire and hotcats are made from) without giving a reason and there is no indication that they know how it may enhance the effect.

    IF the ECat-X is functioning like this, there is no indication Rossi knows that. It would allow for pulsed HV DBD through sapphire capillary – a muonic (even muonium- with the LWFM increasing production of H- and u-) based accelerated effect could result in light,back emf and direct electricity.

  • Bob Greenyer

    I just wanted to get a number of things out before going to Aarhus

    1. That we have a shot at showing if a particular theory is correct

    2. That practically all successful tech seams to have LWFM in play – and that it has been known to be critical for many years with Celani, Iraj and Iwamura being leaders. Holmlid has recently observed Muons but attributes them to nuclear spallation – despite using the LWFM and transition metal (K and Fe in this case)

    3. My speculation that Muons, Muonium, Muonium- and muonic atoms may be at play (in a similar way to Piantelli’s H- but more accepted as a MO to make fusion)

    4. That the e-Cat X is a HV discharge through sapphire.

    5. That HV Sapphire makes muonium and potentially muonium- as shown by canadian research

    6. That that is why I suggested 3 phases may play a role in Hot Cat and my previous informed speculation HV discharge in E-Cat X and that Rossi may not know how it works

    7. That recent patent by Clean planet says effectively “heavy electron’ every few paragraphs, saying that the nano structures help it… but does not say muon

    8. That subsequent to ALL this and with a priority date before E-CatX was mentioned by Rossi, the German patent is doing a Dielectric Barrier Discharge DBD through Al2O3 (what sapphire and hotcats are made from) without giving a reason and there is no indication that they know how it may enhance the effect.

    IF the ECat-X is functioning like this, there is no indication Rossi knows that. It would allow for pulsed HV DBD through sapphire capillary – a muonic (even muonium- with the LWFM increasing production of H- and u-) based accelerated effect could result in light,back emf and direct electricity.

    • INVENTOR INVENTED

      #5 is bull!
      There’s no proof that real muons are involved in the LENR process.

  • Fedir Mykhaylov

    Even without the blender to me really like the micro accelerator hypothesis LENR

  • GiveADogABone

    Transferred

  • sam

    A.R studying C.F. etc and looking at a jail house wall for many years.
    Then studying.Engineering,and testing the Ecat and looking at lab walls for years.
    And people think he did all that to try and commit a fraud.
    Seems more impossible than the
    impossible invention.

    • Chapman

      Too True…

      Aside from any understanding, and faith in, the physics involved, it is the fact that Rossi DID spend those years in prison which convinces me that he is legit.

      I simply do not believe he would risk going back. Some white-collar twit might get caught up in a fraud case that slowly evolves from a minor indiscretion to a major theft, because he does not know the reality of the HELL that will be awaiting him upon discovery. Rossi has first hand experience. There is no way he has spent the last five years working on a “Big Payoff Con”. He is an intelligent man, and there are other, better ways to make money for a guy with brains. Plus – the 10mil would have secured retirement! He could have stopped right there, given them all the IP and laughed as he walked away to board a plane to the Bahamas. IH validated the tech and built their own units and bragged about their operation, so they would have had no legal standing to come back on him for it being a dud. But he did not. He went forward to try to get to marketing and distribution.

      I think it was IH foot dragging and delaying the roll out or further action that led Rossi to force the 1 year test in the first place. IH could have probably helped him start a factory and begin building units and the 89 million 1 year test would have just been put off indefinitely, but since Darden was making NO movement to manufacture and develop, Rossi pushed for the test in order to get things moving…

      • Mats002

        Sounds plausible.

  • Zephir

    Hi Chapman, thank You for your support. Regarding the copy&paste, I’m also doing it often – just link the source as it’s common netiquette and you don’t have to feel like the Jack Sparrow.

  • georgehants

    Who or what is stopping the ERV report from being published, now?
    This report is clearly unchangeable by anybody, so it’s publication can effect nothing regarding the arguments of it’s accuracy.

  • Engineer48

    Hi Chapman,

    My focus is figuring out Focardi and Piantelli hydrogenated their Ni.

    The process to do this is very cloudy and until it is sorted there will be no reliable reactor DIYs happening.

    In that goal Hank Mills is in agreement and we are discussing and exchanging papers talking about the alpha and beta phase of Nickel Hydride creation and what may stop either phase happening.

    Alpha phase is about populating the Ni surface with dissociated H atoms or ions.

    Beta phase is about using non adsorbed H2 molecules to POUND the H whatever into the lattice. As there are many theories about what is needed to be pounded into the Ni lattice, my focus is to gather existing industry knowledge about how to achieve 1st alpha phase and then beta phase to achieve a well hydrogenated Ni with lots of H or H ions inside the lattice.

    Until we understand how to achieve the beta phase hydrogenation of Ni, as Focardi and Piantelli did, talking about things that may or may not happen later is maybe just a bit premature.

    To illustrate alpha phase is after the H2 dissociates and is adsorbed (held) by the Ni surface. Beta phase is when those Ni surface adsorbed H atoms or H ions are pounded into the lattice.

    As far as I understand the process, no beta phase H atoms or H ions inside the Ni lattice = NO LENR REACTION.

    So lets pool our brain power and work out how to achieve a high degree of beta phase in the Ni on our reactors?
    . https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c6f525d3ffe0a76610e410561a768dde365fea533566743123081497920a0c78.jpg
    .
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f921ec5ef95b0b9cb51c045c1c63638f994dbf79edd113329b0e7e03e40f8488.jpg

    • Chapman

      By the way Engineer,

      I think Zephir gave me a plausible mechanism for a natural shielding effect that may logically explain how hydrogen can penetrate all the way down to the point when it breaches the lowest electron shell. And you know what? It would result in the proton being ejected at somewhere around 90% or so of the total coulomb potential, which would put Piantelli’s numbers right in the right neighborhood.

      I do not know if it is a correct answer, but just as with the claim that the operation of the 1-year test plant was impossible in the allotted space, it only takes a single PLAUSIBLE solution to prove it IS POSSIBLE.

      I am taking the idea apart to see if I can find a flaw, but the bottom line is that if those numbers are real, then there is a BIG advantage to working our way back up to Platinum, and other transitional metals higher up the periodic table.

      But I know what you are going to say… Carts before horses, right? The hydrogen saturation issue needs to be solved before anyone can even THINK about alternatives and enhancements.

      So our roadmap right now is:

      1. Solve the hydrogen loading problem
      2. Exactly replicate the existing e-cat model to prove the theory and establish a duplication friendly experimenter platform.
      3. Play around tweaking individual parameters ONE AT A TIME!!!

      • Engineer48

        Hi Chapman,

        Yup.

        Keep it KISS baby and only play with one parameter at a time to start building a solid base to build higher from.

  • Engineer48

    To help to understand the different stages of Ni hydrogenation or the creation of beta stage Nickel Hydride I have modified this diagram to add state c1 that shows the H2 hammering the alpha stage surface H atoms into the Ni lattice to create beta stage Nickel Hydride that we need to create hydrogenated Ni.
    .

    • gameover

      I have not seen replicators taking advantage of this hammer.

      • Engineer48

        Hi GameOver,

        No hammer, no H inside the lattice.

        Plus there are “things” that can be done on the surface adsorbed H atoms to make them H+ and H- pairs BEFORE the hammer into the lattice happens.
        .

    • GiveADogABone

      Having read this on Wikipedia, I am not convinced that the beta Nickel Hydride hypothesis is viable :-

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel_hydride
      A true crystallographically distinct phase of nickel hydride can be produced with high pressure hydrogen gas at 600 MPa.

      I have also read somewhere that protons (without the electron) do not have a problem penetrating the surface. I guess they are simply smaller.

      • gameover

        A very well known problem. Bulk nickel does not absorb very much hydrogen at atmospheric pressure. An apparentely high loading may be fictitious and actually caused by hydrogen filling new cavities forming in the metal for example due to embrittlement or pre-existing ones caused by specific treatments.

        • GiveADogABone

          I reckon Johnson Matthey know the answer to this one. They sell hydrogenated Nickel catalysts. They have to be stored in water to stop them undergoing spontaneous combustion in air. The more interesting point is that after use in a process they contain enough Hydrogen to still be combustible. That means the cavities would have been charging Hydrogen for at least the duration of the process use and they cannot leak.

          I would be really curious about whether used Nickel catalyst would perform well as E-cat fuel.

          • gameover

            Probably yes. From what I understand Holmlid also has better results with used (not spent) K:Fe2O3 catalysts. Something similar may happen there too.

        • Engineer48

          Hi GameOver,

          I agree but it seems there needs to be H atoms/ions absorbed inside the Ni lattice for the reaction to trigger.

          IE as per Piantelli nice diagram:
          .

          • GiveADogABone

            Not so much in the lattice as in the cavities would be my view. It would take a fair amount of time to pressurize the cavities.

      • Engineer48

        Hi GiveADogABone,

        From my currently limited understanding there are more phases than the 1st 2 alpha and beta stage.

        From Focardi’s data, it is clear the H is going somewhere as the H2 pressure drops during successful loading. While Focardi discloses the pressure, he doesn’t quote the temperature, which also applies to Piantelli.
        .

        • gameover

          Focardi&Piantelli also used electrodeposition (galvanic bath) and acid etching to alter the surface of their bars.

          • Engineer48

            Hi GameOver,

            As per their paper:

            In order to compare samples having the same surface but different bulks, the metal rods used in the experiments described here (stainless steel for cell A and nickel for cell B) were coated with a thick (0.1 mm) nickel layer by the usual nickel-plating bath [7] containing the following components: Nickel Ammonium Sulphate, Citric Acid, Ammonium Hydroxide, Sodium Disulfite (purity RPE-ACS).

            After introduction in the cells, the rods were annealed under vacuum (p < 10-4 mbar) at temperatures up to about 900 K in order to clean their surfaces [8, 9].

            Successive thermal cycles were also performed in a hydrogen atmosphere below 1 bar.

          • gameover

            1996
            “Evidence for Nuclear Reactions in Ni-H Systems I: Heat Excess Measurements”

            http://i.imgur.com/x6qJozS.png

            1998
            “Large excess heat production in Ni-H systems”

            http://i.imgur.com/Aalp2Yd.png

    • GiveADogABone

      http://mragheb.com/NPRE%20498ES%20Energy%20Storage%20Systems/Metal%20Hydrides%20Alloys%20for%20Hydrogen%20Storage.pdf
      Well worth a look. The effective Nickel storage systems for Hydrogen seem to be based on alloys and complex hydrides, rather than pure Nickel. The pure Nickel seems to have low Hydrogen absorption. Raney Nickel seems to be able to pack the Hydrogen in, so what is the difference?

      • Engineer48

        Hi GiveADogABone,

        As the Raney Ni has a NI surface area of over 100m^2/g, that is a lot of alpha phase adsorbed H atoms/ions on the surface ready to engage in chemical reactions.

        It may not be processed to have a lot of beta phase absorbed H atoms/ions as required for LENR.
        .

        • GiveADogABone

          If forming beta phase needs 600bar H2 pressure, I cannot see how any forms.

          • Mats002

            Very local in some scattered places maybe? What is the probability for that?

  • Zephir

    /* I would humbly explain that he is talking about a form of plasmon structure */

    Actually it’s polariton wave, plasmons are surface waves. The train analogy is otherwise correct – the railway cars can collide quite slowly, nevertheless due to their high number and inertia, their mutual compression at some place can get significant. The long line of atoms serves as a piston or impactor there.

    • Chapman

      Got it. Subtle point, but an important difference!

      I have to tell you, I am really intrigued with your entire premise based on low velocity forces. It is easy to fall into the trap of visualizing high speed particles when the issue of High Energy is the topic, but nature LOVES slow, but overwhelming forces. Look at how stone and concrete are shattered by moisture freezing in cracks and expanding. Seemingly solid stone can turn to gravel. This is equivalent to GiveADogABone talking about hydrogen embrittlement. Trapped hydrogen has a tendency to recombine to H2 in microcavities and cause severe fracturing and material degradation. Again, it is nature creating small, non-violent forces that have massive local energy.

      It brings to mind trying to replace bushings in an automotive suspension system. You can buy the bushings at an auto parts store and try to pound them in with a sledge hammer, but the proper way to install them is with a hydraulic press. The slow, but un-resistable force achieves what the chaotic hammering seldom does neatly…

    • Thomas Kaminski

      Thanks for the link Steve. I completely missed (or forgot) the original material. I almost missed your response here, too.

      So, now that Rossi has gone from planar disks to tubular in the ecat-X, I wonder how it will be automated? It is hard to diffuse, etc. down a thin tube.

  • Steve D

    Confucius say
    Beware con of fusion,
    He who follow hot lead
    wind up on cold trail

  • ScienceFan

    Given that you seem to understand the field so well, you aught to try some experiments to see what kind of results you can achieve.

  • ScienceFan

    Given that you seem to understand the field so well, you aught to try some experiments to see what kind of results you can achieve.