MFMP Prepares for Glowstick 5.4 and 5.5 Tests (Testing now Streaming Live)

UPDATE: (Feb 5, 2017) The MFMP test is now streaming live and below are the links they have provided to follow the testing:

MFMP Live Links
Find links to our most recent streams here

GS5.4Experiment overview

LIVE Hydrogen treatment / leak testing 10 bar


Bakeout3 – Low temperature bake-out / de-gas P3
Bakeout2 – Low temperature bake-out / de-gas
Bakeout – Low temperature bake-out / de-gas


GS 5.4 Closeup Layout explanation

Spherical image
NaI Calibration – Calibration of Sodium Iodide detector
Calibration data

Calibration curves courtesy of crowd analyst ‘Goodrice’

Stream 02 – Calibration of core temperature to outer temperature P2
Stream 01 – Calibration of core temperature to outer temperature

 

The Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project has been working recently to get ready for some new tests that they plan to begin sometime this week. The tests are called Glowstick 5.4 and 5.5 and the MFMP has published this document:

Here are the aims of each test as described in the document:

Glowstick 5.4

To to test Piantelli (P) theory and possibly Godes (G) theory by way of 18Oxygen isotopic tracer. (P) Claimed 0-6.7MeV proton over 4Mev this would (p,n) 18O producing 18F, this decays back to 18O, half-life is 109.771 minutes producing a 633.023keV positron that annihilates an e- leading to the production of two 511keV photons we can see outside the cell with scintillators and gamma detectors. (G) Claimed ultra slow neutrons are formed, these may convert 18O to 19O which decays with β- at 4822.26keV with a half-life of 26.464s. Absence of thermal neutrons detectable in the bubble detectors would lend support to Sarg (S) theory since there is no 7Li present.

Glowstick 5.5

To test Sarg (S) theory and Holmlid (H) theory by way of addition of Nano Lithium and LiAlD4 and HTED-04 Dehydrogenation Catalyst. (S) Claimed that according to his structural theory of elements, 7Li will arrange itself on prepared Nickel with the 4He end attached to the Nickel and the 3H (tritium) end free – Incident Rydberg state hydrogen would knock off the extra neutron from the 3H leaving 6Li – this is perhaps one explination for the presence of thermal neutrons before the melting of LiH in GS 5.3 and could explain the isotopic shift of 7Li to 6Li in Lugano. The neutron could participate in transmutations of Nickel to higher nucleon numbers. In this experiment, these neutrons, if present may be more likely produce 19O from the 18O and we would be able to observe the signature of the β- at 4822.26keV. (H) Claimed that there is production of Mesons/Muons when Ultra Dense deuterium ( D(0) ) is exposed to high energy photons the muons can additionally lead to Deuterium fusion. We hope to have some muon detection in place.

Below is a video giving a short introduction to some of the work that has been done in preparation for the testing. It looks like great efforts have been made to ensure that people following the tests will have a have a clear picture of the key data. Thanks to all involved in this project for your efforts to share your work with us! I look forward to the tests.

  • Zephir

    Adding the particle detectors is OK, but the testing of LENR theories would have some meaning, once we can achieve some LENR. But so far I didn’t notice any reliable sign of surplus of heat output in MFMP experiments.

    • Gerard McEk

      By their search for LENR and the little success they had till now, they now turned to the most promissing approach: using theories as opposed to the Edisonial way. You know the latter may take very long. I very much welcome their way of doing this. Good luck MFMP!

      • Zephir

        Theories of what? You must have working phenomena first for being able to apply theory to it.

        • Gerard McEk

          Well, I agree I do not come further than ‘assumed working phenomena witnessed by quite a few researchers’, but that should be enough. Additionally there are theories like those of Piantelli and Sarg. Following their theory and recommendations it should lead to these phenomena, otherwise the theory is wrong. I do not see anything wrong with that approach. It’s in fact testing a theory.

          • Zephir

            Well, Piantelli or Sarg just have working phenomena, so that they can afford to test theories with them.

  • georgehants

    Bob, as always best wishes to you and your team with your open-science approach that will hopefully become the norm when the World grows up.

    • Bruce Williams

      Bob, I echo George’s comments : good luck to you and your team, Maazel Tov !

  • Tobben

    You are doing a great job Frank! And i think this forum is important for gathering information regarding new energy sources. But i think it’s time to change the name, for example to “NEW ENERGY WORLD” Ecat World don’t seem current for the time being.

  • Stephen

    Wow these look like really intelligent designed experiments. What ever the results they show could tell us a lot. I’m really intrigued.

    I’m really looking forward to these tests good luck MFMP.

  • Stephen

    Wow these look like really intelligently designed experiments. What ever the results they show should tell us a lot. I’m really intrigued.

    I’m really looking forward to these tests good luck MFMP.

  • georgehants

    Via Vortex with thanks
    ———-
    [Vo]:An argument against intellectual property rights
    H LV
    Sun, 29 Jan 2017 18:10:51 -0800
    Article in the Economist arguing against intellectual property rights.
    http://www.economist.com/news/business-and-finance/21660753-our-leader-patents-1851-right-property-inventions
    Feb 1st, 1851
    The right of property in inventions
    WE ARE challenged by some observations in the Morning Chronicle of
    Wednesday to resume the consideration of the claims of inventors. We have
    as strong a desire as our contemporary, or as the Committee of the Society
    of Arts, whose views he expounds, that genius should meet its appropriate
    rewards—that invention should be encouraged—that discoverers of useful
    things should be honoured—that no thought permanently beneficially should
    be lost; but we cannot, therefore, conclude that inventors should have a
    monopoly for a limited period of certain published thoughts and plans,
    which they may have been the first to conceive.
    continues here
    http://www.economist.com/news/business-and-finance/21660753-our-leader-patents-1851-right-property-inventions

    • Warthog

      The alternative is for every inventor to keep ideas secret and chance that they will be lost. Society has already made the experiment, and the results were worse than the current situation. The current situation with Rossi (and some other successful LENR inventors…Clair Patterson is one example) is entirely the result of a loss of faith in the existing patent system. And an article from more than a hundred years ago is hardly an argument in counter.

  • georgehants

    Via Vortex with thanks
    ———-
    [Vo]:An argument against intellectual property rights
    H LV
    Sun, 29 Jan 2017 18:10:51 -0800
    Article in the Economist arguing against intellectual property rights.
    http://www.economist.com/news/business-and-finance/21660753-our-leader-patents-1851-right-property-inventions
    Feb 1st, 1851
    The right of property in inventions
    WE ARE challenged by some observations in the Morning Chronicle of
    Wednesday to resume the consideration of the claims of inventors. We have
    as strong a desire as our contemporary, or as the Committee of the Society
    of Arts, whose views he expounds, that genius should meet its appropriate
    rewards—that invention should be encouraged—that discoverers of useful
    things should be honoured—that no thought permanently beneficially should
    be lost; but we cannot, therefore, conclude that inventors should have a
    monopoly for a limited period of certain published thoughts and plans,
    which they may have been the first to conceive.
    continues here
    http://www.economist.com/news/business-and-finance/21660753-our-leader-patents-1851-right-property-inventions

    • Warthog

      The alternative is for every inventor to keep ideas secret and chance that they will be lost. Society has already made the experiment, and the results were worse than the current situation. The current situation with Rossi (and some other successful LENR inventors…Clair Patterson is one example) is entirely the result of a loss of faith in the existing patent system. And an article from more than a hundred years ago is hardly an argument in counter.

  • artefact

    I love the dashboard. Can’t wait to see it in action. Good work.

  • artefact

    I love the dashboard. Can’t wait to see it in action. Good work.

  • Stephen Taylor

    I need some help understanding these protocols. Where are our physics experts? Please help unpackage these confusing experimental attempts to illucidate the increasingly opaque field of study.
    In other words saywhaat? Where’s the beef?

    • Bob Greenyer

      GS 5.4 and 5.5 are attempts to play whack a mole with some of the leading theories. At some point an attempt to test theories has to be made and it is unlikely that we will get data from claimants that may dismiss their theory any time soon.

      I will try and add meat to the bone in the coming days whilst we finalise the instrumentation – however, key to these experiments is 18 Oxygen / 18 Flourine, because of its use in Positron Emission Tomography, it is one of the most widely used and heavily studied radioactive decays. Just google it a little and you will see thousands of papers.

      In the form of Al2 18O3 (heavy alumina) we will be adding no more elements to our cells than we normally have – but there is a potential to see into claimed processes if those claimed processes transmute 18Oxygen into either 18Flourine or 19Oxygen.

      • Axil Axil

        Because we are dealing with LENR, any radioactive isotopes that are produced could stabilize so fast that we will not be able to see any positron based gamma emissions.

        If we are lucky we might only see some XUV in the 10 mm wavelength range as is usual in LENR.

        • Bob Greenyer

          We shall see.

          I have a video for you… look for it above

      • Axil Axil

        To get it on the record, I like the use of enriched lithium 7 (99% or more) as a way to effect sucessful LENR experimentation.

      • Stephen Taylor

        Thanks Bob, I’ll try to get up to speed. PayPal donation at quantumheat is very convenient now. Good luck to all of you and thanks for your dedication.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Thankyou Stephen for your donation, that has paid for the main ceramic tube for the 5.4 reactor that just arrived from McMaster Carr.

    • Axil Axil

      The collection plate is a critical part of the UDH excitation process. Holmlid has tested a number of metals. I know he has used iridium in a sucessful test. IMHO, the metal produces polaritons on the surface of the UDH. Without these SPPs, energy cannot be accumulated enough to generate the mesons seen in Holmlid;s experiments.

  • Stephen Taylor

    I need some help understanding these protocols. Where are our physics experts? Please help unpackage these confusing experimental attempts to elucidate the increasingly opaque field of study.
    In other words saywhaat? Where’s the beef?
    Such hope as I have for the future of cold fusion is mostly based on the existence of ultra dense hydrogen. Are mfmp proposing to verify its existence?
    If Holmlid can create metallic hydrogen and if it is meta stable then why have we not illuminated it with the moderate green laser within Atlas?
    If metallic hydrogen can be created in the diamond anvil and if it is meta stable then why have LLNL not gone over unity with their mega laser?
    Whaassssuuuup? Show me the BEEF. Dam tired of waiting to see the brilliant light…… ooooomg!
    I suppose the worst possible answer could be that we can, simply, with an iron oxide catalyst, create an ultra dense form of the most common element in the universe and that it can then be fused with a simple moderate power green laser. Adiuva nos Deus.

    • Bob Greenyer

      GS 5.4 and 5.5 are attempts to play whack a mole with some of the leading theories. At some point an attempt to test theories has to be made and it is unlikely that we will get data from claimants that may dismiss their theory any time soon.

      I will try and add meat to the bone in the coming days whilst we finalise the instrumentation – however, key to these experiments is 18 Oxygen / 18 Flourine, because of its use in Positron Emission Tomography, it is one of the most widely used and heavily studied radioactive decays. Just google it a little and you will see thousands of papers.

      In the form of Al2 18O3 (heavy alumina) we will be adding no more elements to our cells than we normally have – but there is a potential to see into claimed processes if those claimed processes transmute 18Oxygen into either 18Flourine or 19Oxygen.

      • Axil Axil

        Because we are dealing with LENR, any radioactive isotopes that are produced could stabilize so fast that we will not be able to see any positron based gamma emissions.

        If we are lucky we might only see some XUV in the 10 mm wavelength range as is usual in LENR.

        • Bob Greenyer

          We shall see.

          I have a video for you… look for it above

      • Axil Axil

        To get it on the record, I like the use of enriched lithium 7 (99% or more) as a way to effect sucessful LENR experimentation.

      • Stephen Taylor

        Thanks Bob, I’ll try to get up to speed. PayPal donation at quantumheat is very convenient now. Good luck to all of you and thanks for your dedication.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Thankyou Stephen for your donation, that has paid for the main ceramic tube for the 5.4 reactor that just arrived from McMaster Carr.

    • Axil Axil

      The collection plate is a critical part of the UDH excitation process. Holmlid has tested a number of metals. I know he has used iridium in a sucessful test. IMHO, the metal produces polaritons on the surface of the UDH. Without these SPPs, energy cannot be accumulated enough to generate the mesons seen in Holmlid;s experiments.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Cosmic Ray Finder – A muon spotter?

    https://goo.gl/ZjIi7K

    Today I tested a tool that is designed to look for cosmic rays. Established background signal (3 in 17 hours), and then tested it with several radioactive isotopes because we have them and can do that on behalf of the community. I recorded all data and have shared all captures and the application so others can give it a go. Please consider contributing to the author of the application.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Cosmic Ray Finder – A muon spotter?

    https://goo.gl/ZjIi7K

    Today I tested a tool that is designed to look for cosmic rays. Established background signal (3 in 17 hours), and then tested it with several radioactive isotopes because we have them and can do that on behalf of the community. I recorded all data and have shared all captures and the application so others can give it a go. Please consider contributing to the author of the application.

  • LION
    • Bob Greenyer

      Just like Hot Fushionistas – trying to explain things with untestable scenarios

      HF – “ITER is recreating what happens in the sun…”… er, no it isn’t, we don’t have the gravity

      This article likewise claiming that gold is formed in neutron stars – well, it may be, but

      1. is it the only place
      2. we can never know

  • LION
    • Bob Greenyer

      Just like Hot Fushionistas – trying to explain things with untestable scenarios

      HF – “ITER is recreating what happens in the sun…”… er, no it isn’t, we don’t have the gravity

      This article likewise claiming that gold is formed in neutron stars – well, it may be, but

      1. is it the only place
      2. we can never know

  • Dr. Mike

    Bob,
    Good to see some experiments directed toward verification of LENR theories.
    Dr. Mike

    • Bob Greenyer

      Thanks, Someone had too! Frankly there are too many!

      I cannot thank Brian Albiston enough for helping us get the kind of live data streaming I’ve wished for, for so long on this one. Also for building a Higgins neutron detector.

      Alan Goldwater has been an absolute legend – leveraging all of his decades of expertise with signals and oscilloscopes to get the various detectors hooked in. Also for building a Higgins neutron detector.

      Must also thank Mark Jurich for supplying all the old Ortec nuclear monitoring equipment – without which we would never have got the 6Lithium Iodide neutron detector operational.

      Also, Bob Higgins – for spending the best part of his free time last year designing, building and open sourcing a neutron detector system.

      Must also thank me356 who, when Bubbletech said they could not get the bubble detector to us in time for the coming run – FedEXed his detector to us at his own expense.

  • Dr. Mike

    Bob,
    Good to see some experiments directed toward verification of LENR theories.
    Dr. Mike

    • Bob Greenyer

      Thanks, Someone had too! Frankly there are too many!

      I cannot thank Brian Albiston enough for helping us get the kind of live data streaming I’ve wished for, for so long on this one. Also for building a Higgins neutron detector.

      Alan Goldwater has been an absolute legend – leveraging all of his decades of expertise with signals and oscilloscopes to get the various detectors hooked in. Also for building a Higgins neutron detector.

      Must also thank Mark Jurich for supplying all the old Ortec nuclear monitoring equipment – without which we would never have got the 6Lithium Iodide neutron detector operational.

      Also, Bob Higgins – for spending the best part of his free time last year designing, building and open sourcing a neutron detector system.

      Must also thank me356 who, when Bubbletech said they could not get the bubble detector to us in time for the coming run – FedEXed his detector to us at his own expense.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Visualisation of cosmic ray

    https://youtu.be/AscyT2keBws

    This video is an attempt to make the event observed in the calibration of our “cosmic ray finder” clearer to visualise.

    A FHD version of the actual visualisation used to create the above video can be downloaded from here:

    https://goo.gl/c00ctA

    • Bob Greenyer

      How about this… As I see it, this is the exciting event path through the image sensor.

      Different visualisation of “Cosmic Ray Finder” event

      https://youtu.be/gucG4eXhz9E

  • Bob Greenyer

    Visualisation of cosmic ray

    https://youtu.be/AscyT2keBws

    This video is an attempt to make the event observed in the calibration of our “cosmic ray finder” clearer to visualise.

    A FHD version of the actual visualisation used to create the above video can be downloaded from here:

    https://goo.gl/c00ctA

    • Bob Greenyer

      How about this… As I see it, this is the exciting event path through the image sensor.

      Different visualisation of “Cosmic Ray Finder” event

      https://youtu.be/gucG4eXhz9E

  • Bob Greenyer

    *How to engage with *GlowStick* 5.4 and 5.5*

    Uploading an overview now of how to interact with GS 5.4 and 5.5 (will be up in a few hours)

    https://youtu.be/BncL7FLFpW8

    *Experiment streamed data on these 3 links*
    https://freeboard.io/board/CADyCD
    https://plot.ly/~QuantumHeat/8/gs54-temperature-power-pressure/
    https://plot.ly/~QuantumHeat/6/gs54-neutron-geiger-and-gamma-counters/

    *To learn more about ‘Steem’ – Go here:*
    http://morelibertynow.com/steem/

    *To sign up and get ready for GS 5.4 and 5.5 – go here:*
    https://steemit.com/enter_email

  • Bob Greenyer

    *How to engage with *GlowStick* 5.4 and 5.5*

    Uploading an overview now of how to interact with GS 5.4 and 5.5 (will be up in a few hours)

    https://youtu.be/BncL7FLFpW8

    *Experiment streamed data on these 3 links*
    https://freeboard.io/board/CADyCD
    https://plot.ly/~QuantumHeat/8/gs54-temperature-power-pressure/
    https://plot.ly/~QuantumHeat/6/gs54-neutron-geiger-and-gamma-counters/

    *To learn more about ‘Steem’ – Go here:*
    http://morelibertynow.com/steem/

    *To sign up and get ready for GS 5.4 and 5.5 – go here:*
    https://steemit.com/enter_email

  • Bob Greenyer

    How to use live data graphing for GS 5.3 and 5.4

    https://youtu.be/4e8NVg6lsoM

    This video walks the user through use of the plot.ly graphs we will be using in experiments starting this week…

  • Bob Greenyer

    How to use live data graphing for GS 5.3 and 5.4

    https://youtu.be/4e8NVg6lsoM

    This video walks the user through use of the plot.ly graphs we will be using in experiments starting this week…

  • Bob Greenyer

    How to determine what is a MUON track…

    https://youtu.be/qgSAsa7frEE

    Key important aspects of Muon detection theory relevant to our experiments are highlighted in this overview of a presentation by Don Groom of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

    Presentation here:

    http://snap.lbl.gov/ccdweb/ccdrad_talk_spie02.pdf

    Paper here:

    http://snap.lbl.gov/ccdweb/groom.pdf

    Santa Cruz lab were main investigation conducted

    http://loen.ucolick.org/CCD/lick/lick.html

    • Does it apply to Holmlid candidates muon ?
      Their analysis is adapted to cosmic muons of few GeV energy ?

      • Bob Greenyer

        If you look at the paper and presentation I shared last night, the average energy of cosmic derived Muons are 4GeV. So it is a valid approach for looking at muons in this range. Ideally we would have a very thick CCD to capture longer track lengths.

        We saw photon tracks from compton scattering in calibration from gammas derived from 60Co and 22Na – and the approach is considered valid by the various smart phone distributed app research programs.

    • Ged

      Really awesome to see you guys are testing theories so thoroughly now! The plan seems to cover the gambler quite well. My only concern is if the beta radiation necessary to test the 19O pathway will be able to make it out of the reactor and be detected.

      Good luck guys! Looking forward to it!

      • Bob Greenyer

        Thanks and yes there are several aspects being looked for – here is just a few.

        – thermal neutrons (Higgins and bubbletech)
        – fast neutrons 18O (p,n) 18F (Higgins, 6LiI, Bubbletch)
        – 4.8 MeV beta [18O + n > 19O > 19F] (NaI and maybe some other detectors since may result in spectra of photons)
        – Muons
        – 511keV (this might be a weak signal at best, but has a multi-hour tail so could move detector close after power off)

        • Ged

          I think it is fair to assume that if this thing so much as sneezes we’ll know.

  • Bob Greenyer

    How to determine what is a MUON track…

    https://youtu.be/qgSAsa7frEE

    Key important aspects of Muon detection theory relevant to our experiments are highlighted in this overview of a presentation by Don Groom of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

    Presentation here:

    http://snap.lbl.gov/ccdweb/ccdrad_talk_spie02.pdf

    Paper here:

    http://snap.lbl.gov/ccdweb/groom.pdf

    Santa Cruz lab were main investigation conducted

    http://loen.ucolick.org/CCD/lick/lick.html

    • Does it apply to Holmlid candidates muon ?
      Their analysis is adapted to cosmic muons of few GeV energy ?

      • Bob Greenyer

        If you look at the paper and presentation I shared last night, the average energy of cosmic derived Muons are 4GeV. So it is a valid approach for looking at muons in this range. Ideally we would have a very thick CCD to capture longer track lengths.

        We saw photon tracks from compton scattering in calibration from gammas derived from 60Co and 22Na – and the approach is considered valid by the various smart phone distributed app research programs.

        We may shield the WebCam with 1cm of lead so that only Muons show up.

        • Goodrice

          The energy of the muons emitted by the Holmlid apparatus is in the order of 10-100 MeV, so while your efforts in trying to set up a Cosmic muon detection system in place are commendable I’m not sure that they are going in the right direction.

          Since the muons produced by Holmlid are relatively low energy compared to cosmic muons he uses a different method where the muons are instead stopped and captured into a dense material (a layer of glass or metal a few mm thick), causing standard muon capture reactions in the material itself. These reactions cause in turn beta decay reactions that can be easily detected by common scintillation detectors and perhaps less sensitive devices as others have reported.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Given the size of our detector is 0.1176 cm^2 and not thick, the likelyhood of observation is low. In over 80 hours we only had 14 events with no shielding and only 2 of those look straight enough to be considered muons originating from cosmic particles.

            You can see in this link

            http://snap.lbl.gov/ccdweb/ccdrad_talk_spie02.pdf

            That the average energy of cosmic muons is 4GeV.

            I will attempt to contact the lab here in Santa Cruz today to see if we can get access to their muon detection CCDs.

            We had just 1 detection in 9 hours since putting the lead shield in place. Good news is – it was a ‘Spot’ which cannot be definitively called a Muon, but, given the shielding of 1cm lead, is more likely to be a muon than a compton scattered electron.

          • Goodrice

            I’m not sure how to relate your reply to my comment.

            To put it differently, I’m saying that the Holmlid reaction isn’t emitting multi-GeV muons, so you’re probably not going to see anything from the reactor with the detection method you’ve set up (or any other commonly used muon detection methods) even if muons were emitted.

          • Bob Greenyer

            We never expected to have ‘signal’ in our NaI with no characteristic rays in 5.2

            We never expected to see thermal neutrons in 5.3

            We don’t expect to see muons in 5.5, however we are putting the instrument in *just in case* the unexpected happens. We are using research that established we will not see environmental ‘worms’ if we have 1cm of lead and so far this is the case.

            We must conduct research without fear or prejudice and having a tool in place that costs about $100 is a no brainer.

          • Goodrice

            I sort of see your argument, but I believe it would be wise to first establish that there is an effect by doing what the original work suggests, then testing the theory with different methods.

            Anyway, again just in case, it might be a good idea to try putting one of your spare Geiger detectors – perhaps the one you think isn’t good for your experiments – behind the lead shielding, close to the CCD muon detector and with the Geiger tube window facing the reactor. This roughly approximates how Holmlid detects muons in his case and may enhance the possibility of seeing something that the camera will not see.

            An associate of Alan Smith of LENR-Forum and Russ George have reported the observation of an increase in radiation counts by placing a Geiger counter behind a metallic shielding, suggesting induced beta decay reactions in the shielding material. It’s better if it’s thicker than a foil, though.

            Below is an excerpt from a blogpost by Russ George; you might want to contact Alan Smith for details on his associate’s work.

            http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2016/11/14/cold-fusion-time-travel-does-not-proceed-in-a-straight-line/

            Once while running an experiment I happened upon a distinct highly reproducible radiation measurement. My Geiger Counter signaled the first hint of it and upon fiddling about with my “hey that’s strange” reaction to the enhance rate of Geiger clicks I managed to make the Geiger record vastly more counts, even saturating the detector. I did that by placing various different elementary foils between the source and the detector. Normally when one puts something in between a radiation source and a Geiger Counter the count rate inevitably goes down, not up. In my work a thin Silver foil sent the Geiger over the moon.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Hi Goodrice,

            We are in regular contact with Russ George and Alan Smith.

            Here is my answer… a perfect fit, thick, pure silver coin… and I think you will agree, quite appropriate!

            https://youtu.be/tlA-r19oS0w

            Live data is here:
            GEIGER COUNTER: GMC-320 PLUS / LN7317

            https://freeboard.io/board/CADyCD

          • Goodrice

            That should do it. Thanks for trying!

          • Bob Greenyer

            Thanks for the suggestion – this is LOS!

            Can I ask you to note down the averages for this period of ‘no reactor’

          • Goodrice

            GEIGER COUNTER: GMC-320 PLUS / LN7317

            CPM Test Average
            39.32
            CPM (Rolling average)
            45.4/48.4 (min/max)

            After I sampled these values the rolling average decreased by about 10-12.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Thanks for putting that on the record

          • Axil Axil

            Goodrice, your dialog with MFMP was spot on and very knowledgeable. But IMHO, MFMP should build a drift tube that can detect charged particles such as the muon and their decay product, electrons and positrons.

            Here is one design that looks good and might be built by an Amateur Scientist . Unlike the MFMP approach, It looks very sensitive.

            A digital counter might might be added to the design to count the high voltage discharges. A MFMP volunteer who is handy with their hands might build this for MFMP so that all types of charged particles can be detected in MFMP experiments. A cheaply build variable voltage DC high voltage power supply could make the spacing of the wires easy to do through adjusting the voltage to be just below discharge value.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8GlzUjYazs%5B/media%5D

          • Bob Greenyer

            Hi Axil,

            This is a great contribution. The cosmic ray spark chamber is more appropriate and discriminating for what we are actually looking for,

            Can you find out more on designs and specifics for that?

          • Axil Axil

            The wire array is straightforward but the distances between the wires must be set to a space that just far enough apart to be under spontaneous spark generation distance.

            It seems to me to make the wire array designed easy is to adjust the DC voltage rather than the wire spacing. A variable voltage DC power supply can be used here so that the DC voltage is set to be just under the instantaneous spark discharge level. At that voltage setting, cosmic muons should produce sparking.

            How to build a variable high voltage power supply as follows:

            A number of ways are possible. As a disclaimer, I do systems engineering, I don’t do experimentation. I leave that to the brave.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xa1ISwDiwyk

          • Bob Greenyer

            Hi Axil,

            Alan is very capable of building the PSU.

            The challenge here is time.

            The Cosmic Ray layer cake is far better since it shows that the particles could be muons (alpha would not get through top plate!) but this is more involved.

            the 3 events we had since putting the camera in the lead box 39 hours ago are here:

            https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bz7lTfqkED9WOFN4eVNudHhPQm8

            you can see that 1 of them looks like the one I visualised.

          • Axil Axil

            http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~hughes/capstone/docs/CosmicDetector2-0-1_berkley.pdf

            This looks like a top of the line unit that will do what you want.

          • Bob Greenyer

            We have contacted Don Groom that heads the department nearby here that made this device – perhaps we will get a response.

            Why don’t you come up to santa cruz and help run the experiment!

            Contact on info@quantumheat.org

          • Axil Axil

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpW08xV3RI8

            You can see how sensitive that a drift tube design is compared to the charged particle detection method that you are using. See my post below to how to build one.

      • Goodrice

        Holmlid’s (et al.) analysis is suited for muons of much lower energy (10-100 MeV) that are emitted by his experiments.

        Cosmic muon detectors usually detect the ionization caused by the muons themselves as they pass through them, while Holmlid’s detects the beta decay reactions caused by their capture.

    • Ged

      Really awesome to see you guys are testing theories so thoroughly now! The plan seems to cover the gambit quite well. My only concern is if the beta radiation necessary to test the 19O pathway will be able to make it out of the reactor and be detected.

      Good luck guys! Looking forward to it!

      • Bob Greenyer

        Thanks and yes there are several aspects being looked for – here is just a few.

        – thermal neutrons (Higgins and bubbletech)
        – fast neutrons 18O (p,n) 18F (Higgins, 6LiI, Bubbletch)
        – 4.8 MeV beta [18O + n > 19O > 19F] (NaI and maybe some other detectors since may result in spectra of photons)
        – Muons
        – 511keV (this might be a weak signal at best, but has a multi-hour tail so could move detector close after power off)

        • Ged

          I think it is fair to assume that if this thing so much as sneezes we’ll know.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Hi All,

    So for maximum engagement with GS5.4 and 5.5 etc. we need you to get a steemit account

    https://steemit.com/enter_email

    and then follow the project blog by going to the below link and clicking follow.

    https://steemit.com/@mfmp

    We will make an introductory post and then a post about the GS5.4 run.

    Here is an overview of some of the apparatus.

    https://youtu.be/vzJ_AB5n4ec

    • Ged

      Awesome, Bob! Really pushing the bar up in experimental design quality. Exciting!

  • Bob Greenyer

    Hi All,

    So for maximum engagement with GS5.4 and 5.5 etc. we need you to get a steemit account

    https://steemit.com/enter_email

    and then follow the project blog by going to the below link and clicking follow.

    https://steemit.com/@mfmp

    We will make an introductory post and then a post about the GS5.4 run.

    Here is an overview of some of the apparatus.

    https://youtu.be/vzJ_AB5n4ec

    • Ged

      Awesome, Bob! Really pushing the bar up in experimental design quality. Exciting!

  • Bob Greenyer

    GS5.3 Takedown

    Extracting the fuel from the 5.3 reactor core.

    https://youtu.be/mFjcKvPrSxc

    Winding the heater coil for GS 5.4 / 5.5

    https://youtu.be/VpBXqjEG1bg

  • Bob Greenyer

    GS5.3 Takedown

    Extracting the fuel from the 5.3 reactor core.

    https://youtu.be/mFjcKvPrSxc

    Winding the heater coil for GS 5.4 / 5.5

    https://youtu.be/VpBXqjEG1bg

  • Bob Greenyer

    More effective visualisation of ‘cosmic ray finder’ events…

    In preparation for GS 5.5, where we will be attempting to create ultra dense hydrogen, we are building a lead housing for our ‘muon’ detector to cut ‘worms’ caused by compton scattering, the idea being that only muon will remain and if we see any, we have a visualisation ready to help us understand the dynamics of the events.

    In this visualisation a perspective camera has been used with a mesh that is double sided so we can see form and structure of the displacement.

    https://youtu.be/cjTdz7Xr4lc

  • Bob Greenyer

    More effective visualisation of ‘cosmic ray finder’ events…

    In preparation for GS 5.5, where we will be attempting to create ultra dense hydrogen, we are building a lead housing for our ‘muon’ detector to cut ‘worms’ caused by compton scattering, the idea being that only muon will remain and if we see any, we have a visualisation ready to help us understand the dynamics of the events.

    In this visualisation a perspective camera has been used with a mesh that is double sided so we can see form and structure of the displacement.

    https://youtu.be/cjTdz7Xr4lc

  • Bob Greenyer

    Passivating GS 5 4 heater coil

    https://youtu.be/gRKzct099u0

  • Bob Greenyer

    Passivating GS 5 4 heater coil

    https://youtu.be/gRKzct099u0

  • Bob Greenyer

    Heater passivation for 5.4

    https://youtu.be/Q8Ed1Dh20AM

  • Bob Greenyer

    Heater passivation for 5.4

    https://youtu.be/Q8Ed1Dh20AM

  • Bob Greenyer

    5.4 Reactor – thermocouples mounted, curing

    https://youtu.be/tlkv7AVpT04

  • Bob Greenyer

    5.4 Reactor – thermocouples mounted, curing

    https://youtu.be/tlkv7AVpT04

  • Bob Greenyer

    Muon detector lead shielding…

    As per the findings of Don Groom, we have positioned the muon detector (blinded Logitech webcam) into a 1cm lead lined box – which means, if we ever see something, it will most likely be a cosmogenic muon or something from our reactor!

    https://youtu.be/Rr3A6W-RdMw

    Calibration started… expect to see nothing!

    • Ged

      Still the most exciting moment of the past experiments for me was watching the thermal neutron bubbles appear live in front of our eyes. Looking forward to potentially experiencing something similar with this ;).

      • Bob Greenyer

        Yes – for me too, especially the one I saw with my own eyes when my head was just a few feet from the reactor!

        Well – we have 3 bubble detectors on this run – assuming the webcam arrives today we’ll have them in the stream. They are a little old, we did try to get new ones but after weeks of waiting (normally 2 week delivery) we phoned them and they said that they could deliver a week after the run so we had to cancel.

        Very fortunately, me356 had a suitable detector and immediately shipped it here at his own expense and so we are all good.

        • artefact

          thanks me356.

    • LION

      Hi Bob I was just re- watching:

      http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/02/27/implications-of-signal-seeing-into-the-cat-with-x-rays-mfmp-video-on-latest-findings/

      where you mention NASA and Defkalion and the 300Kev signal and wondered if it might be connected to this:

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38841577

      Harmonic Resonances perhaps.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Intersting – thanks for sharing

  • Bob Greenyer

    Muon detector lead shielding…

    As per the findings of Don Groom, we have positioned the muon detector (blinded Logitech webcam) into a 1cm lead lined box – which means, if we ever see something, it will most likely be a cosmogenic muon or something from our reactor!

    https://youtu.be/Rr3A6W-RdMw

    Calibration started… expect to see nothing!

    • Ged

      Still the most exciting moment of the past experiments for me was watching the thermal neutron bubbles appear live in front of our eyes. Looking forward to potentially experiencing something similar with this ;).

      • Bob Greenyer

        Yes – for me too, especially the one I saw with my own eyes when my head was just a few feet from the reactor!

        Well – we have 3 bubble detectors on this run – assuming the webcam arrives today we’ll have them in the stream. They are a little old, we did try to get new ones but after weeks of waiting (normally 2 week delivery) we phoned them and they said that they could deliver a week after the run so we had to cancel.

        Very fortunately, me356 had a suitable detector and immediately shipped it here at his own expense and so we are all good.

        • artefact

          thanks me356.

    • LION

      Hi Bob I was just re- watching:

      http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/02/27/implications-of-signal-seeing-into-the-cat-with-x-rays-mfmp-video-on-latest-findings/

      where you mention NASA and Defkalion and the 300Kev signal and wondered if it might be connected to this:

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38841577

      Harmonic Resonances perhaps.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Intersting – thanks for sharing

  • Bob Greenyer

    Given the size of our detector is 0.1176 cm^2 and not thick, the likelyhood of observation is low. In over 80 hours we only had 14 events with no shielding and only 2 of those look straight enough to be considered muons originating from cosmic particles.

    You can see in this link

    http://snap.lbl.gov/ccdweb/ccdrad_talk_spie02.pdf

    That the average energy of cosmic muons is 4GeV.

    I will attempt to contact the lab here in Santa Cruz today to see if we can get access to their muon detection CCDs.

  • Bob Greenyer

    We never expected to have ‘signal’ in our NaI with no characteristic rays in 5.2

    We never expected to see thermal neutrons in 5.3

    We don’t expect to see muons in 5.5, however we are putting the instrument in *just in case* the unexpected happens. We are using research that established we will not see environmental ‘worms’ if we have 1cm of lead and so far this is the case.

    We must conduct research without fear or prejudice and having a tool in place that costs about $100 is a no brainer.

    • Goodrice

      I sort of see your argument, but I believe it would be wise to first establish that there is an effect by doing what the original work suggests, then testing the theory with different methods.

      Anyway, again just in case, it might be a good idea to try putting one of your spare Geiger detectors – perhaps the one you think isn’t good for your experiments – behind the lead shielding, close to the CCD muon detector and with the Geiger tube window facing the reactor. This roughly approximates how Holmlid detects muons in his case and may enhance the possibility of seeing something that the camera will not see.

      An associate of Alan Smith of LENR-Forum and Russ George have reported the observation of an increase in radiation counts by placing a Geiger counter behind a metallic shielding, suggesting induced beta decay reactions in the shielding material. It’s better if it’s thicker than a foil, though.

      Below is an excerpt from a blogpost by Russ George; you might want to contact Alan Smith for details on his associate’s work.

      http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2016/11/14/cold-fusion-time-travel-does-not-proceed-in-a-straight-line/

      Once while running an experiment I happened upon a distinct highly reproducible radiation measurement. My Geiger Counter signaled the first hint of it and upon fiddling about with my “hey that’s strange” reaction to the enhance rate of Geiger clicks I managed to make the Geiger record vastly more counts, even saturating the detector. I did that by placing various different elementary foils between the source and the detector. Normally when one puts something in between a radiation source and a Geiger Counter the count rate inevitably goes down, not up. In my work a thin Silver foil sent the Geiger over the moon.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Hi Goodrice,

        We are in regular contact with Russ George and Alan Smith.

        Here is my answer… a perfect fit, thick, pure silver coin… and I think you will agree, quite appropriate!

        https://youtu.be/tlA-r19oS0w

        • Goodrice

          That should do it. Thanks for trying!

          • Bob Greenyer

            Thanks for the suggestion – this is LOS!

            Can I ask you to note down the averages for this period of ‘no reactor’

          • Goodrice

            GEIGER COUNTER: GMC-320 PLUS / LN7317

            CPM Test Average
            39.32
            CPM (Rolling average)
            45.4/48.4 (min/max)

            After I sampled these values the rolling average decreased by about 10-12.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Thanks for putting that on the record

          • Axil Axil

            Goodrice, your dialog with MFMP was spot on and very knowledgeable. But IMHO, MFMP should build a drift tube that can detect charged particles such as the muon and their decay product, electrons and positrons.

            Here is one design that looks good and might be built by an Amateur Scientist . Unlike the MFMP approach, It looks very sensitive.

            A digital counter might might be added to the design to count the high voltage discharges. A MFMP volunteer who is handy with their hands might build this for MFMP so that all types of charged particles can be detected in MFMP experiments. A cheaply build variable voltage DC high voltage power supply could make the spacing of the wires easy to do through adjusting the voltage to be just below discharge value.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8GlzUjYazs%5B/media%5D

          • Bob Greenyer

            Hi Axil,

            This is a great contribution. The cosmic ray spark chamber is more appropriate and discriminating for what we are actually looking for,

            Can you find out more on designs and specifics for that?

          • Axil Axil

            The wire array is straightforward but the distances between the wires must be set to a space that just far enough apart to be under spontaneous spark generation distance.

            It seems to me to make the wire array designed easy is to adjust the DC voltage rather than the wire spacing. A variable voltage DC power supply can be used here so that the DC voltage is set to be just under the instantaneous spark discharge level. At that voltage setting, cosmic muons should produce sparking.

            How to build a variable high voltage power supply as follows:

            A number of ways are possible

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xa1ISwDiwyk

          • Bob Greenyer

            Hi Axil,

            Alan is very capable of building the PSU.

            The challenge here is time.

            The Cosmic Ray layer cake is far better since it shows that the particles could be muons (alpha would not get through top plate!) but this is more involved.

            the 3 events we had since putting the camera in the lead box 39 hours ago are here:

            https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bz7lTfqkED9WOFN4eVNudHhPQm8

            you can see that 1 of them looks like the one I visualised.

          • Axil Axil

            http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~hughes/capstone/docs/CosmicDetector2-0-1_berkley.pdf

            This looks like a top of the line unit that will do what you want.

          • Bob Greenyer

            We have contacted Don Groom that heads the department nearby here that made this device – perhaps we will get a response.

            Why don’t you come up to santa cruz and help run the experiment!

            Contact on info@quantumheat.org

          • Axil Axil

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpW08xV3RI8

            You can see how sensitive that a drift tube design is compared to the charged particle detection method that you are using. See my post below to how to build one.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Making a pill press for use in a glove box

    https://youtu.be/jFNMZdY-pIU

  • Bob Greenyer

    Making a pill press for use in a glove box

    https://youtu.be/jFNMZdY-pIU

  • Bob Greenyer

    GS5.4 – Calibration of core temperature to outer temperature

    http://youtu.be/B1AE4aAZNvE

    LIVE NOW!

    Dashboard (Temperatures are correctly named here and it is on the stream)
    https://goo.gl/y1VW1X

    Power and Temperatures
    https://goo.gl/CDlQjN

    Toptris is the average of the ‘AR’ Optris area on the external of the outer sheath on the stream. That is to say it is the area right of the thermocouple shield on the active side.

    TNaI is the core temperature

  • Bob Greenyer

    GS5.4 – Calibration of core temperature to outer temperature

    http://youtu.be/B1AE4aAZNvE

    LIVE NOW!

    Dashboard (Temperatures are correctly named here and it is on the stream)
    https://goo.gl/y1VW1X

    Power and Temperatures
    https://goo.gl/CDlQjN

    Toptris is the average of the ‘AR’ Optris area on the external of the outer sheath on the stream. That is to say it is the area right of the thermocouple shield on the active side.

    TNaI is the core temperature

  • Bob Greenyer

    Calibrating the GS5.4 core thermocouple

    https://youtu.be/dar11i44DvQ

    • artefact

      🙂

  • Bob Greenyer

    Calibrating the GS5.4 core thermocouple

    https://youtu.be/dar11i44DvQ

    • artefact

      🙂

  • Bob Greenyer

    Part 2 of core calibration… can be found here:

    MFMP Live Links


    https://goo.gl/AifKz6

  • Bob Greenyer

    Part 2 of core calibration… can be found here:

    MFMP Live Links


    https://goo.gl/AifKz6

  • Bob Greenyer
    • Ged

      I love the large amounts of different data streams, and especially the live power. The calibration is looking good; the optris readings are nice and tight between the two sides.

      One thing that may help is to put a thorough definition of the different detector names seen on the freeboard in the “MFMP Live Links” live document. For example, I am not intuitively clear on what the difference is between neutron detector He3 A (fast?) versus He3 B (thermo?) or versus the 6LII; so an explanation in the live doc would do me wonders for following along. Unless I missed it all elsewhere, which is very possible!

  • Bob Greenyer
    • Ged

      I love the large amounts of different data streams, and especially the live power. The calibration is looking good; the optris readings are nice and tight between the two sides.

      One thing that may help is to put a thorough definition of the different detector names seen on the freeboard in the “MFMP Live Links” live document. For example, I am not intuitively clear on what the difference is between neutron detector He3 A (fast?) versus He3 B (thermo?) or versus the 6LII; so an explanation in the live doc would do me wonders for following along. Unless I missed it all elsewhere, which is very possible!

  • LION

    it is good to remember that SOLAR events can have consequences for experiments on EARTH, especially if we are experiencing local difficulties. Anomalous experimental results are not just spurious, sometimes they SCREAM important TRUTHS we have yet to learn, and wondrous Science we have yet to discover. I have learned to Value and Respect all DATA gathered during my experiments, Revelation often times comes slowly, that is a part of the beauty of SCIENCE, Respectful reflection.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38849147

  • Bob Greenyer

    GS 5.4 fuelling presents challenges

    Filling a small 1/8th inch hole in a reactor with fine powder is hard – especially if you want to do it in a glove bag or horizontally.

    Our attempts to date to create a pill press have been thwarted because the mixture of alumina and Nickel lodges itself into the hole and we don’t have time to build a clamshell, or even know if that would work.

    https://youtu.be/5s4mjx3e5xQ

    We did consider making a paste with a solvent but are worried about residue – we are defaulting back to Padua cell style for GS 5.4, that is a funnel and tap. This is more possible as no LAH or Li in 5.4 – we simply cannot afford to loose fuel that is costing over $1000 for the gram and took a lot of effort and time to acquire. Other problem is we may break/dislodge the thermocouples which are now calibrated. Having said that – we have the Optris as backup and, really whilst excess heat is being looked for (new nickel treatment and 3 x 62Ni) we are really hoping to see some neutrons or 511keV photons.

    • Ged

      That is a bummer. With any luck the funnel method will go without a hitch–with super gentle care. Plenty of time to perfect the pill press for next time at least.

      What made this fuel so pricy this round?

  • Goodrice

    I don’t know if this was planned, but both the live video feed and the calibration process seem to be down.

    • Bob Greenyer

      We finished thermal calibration core to external.

      The data is here https://goo.gl/LHhiRr

      We are positioning the Neutron detectors for maximum solid angle and as you can see below, having problems with making fuel pellets.

      • Goodrice

        So this experiment is staying within 500°C core; that was unexpected.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Well – we do not want the $1000 (and hard to acquire) fuel to sinter, since it is going into GS 5.5 – but it is more than that

          1. we saw out thermal neutrons at around 304ºC in GS 5.3
          2. In Brillouin’s Jan 25th 2017 report at Stanford Uni – they saw their biggest excess at 300ºC and almost nothing at 600ºC

      • Goodrice

        This was made from the data I got while it was calibrating. Have you already got the silver coin already in place? Muon capture reactions especially in heavier elements do produce neutrons as well.

        • Goodrice
        • Bob Greenyer

          Silver coins has been in place since you requested it.

          • Goodrice

            Nice, so I take it is a permanent feature like the webcam CCD detector.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Well – we need to take a view on that. We will not be attempting to create Ultra Dense Deuterium in 5.4, that comes with 5.5. In 5.4 we are focussed on the small chance of enhanced 18O (p,n) 18F > 18O producing 511keV photons with 109m half life.

            With the silver in place, our most sensitive detector – the LN7317 – will be shielded.

            For 5.4 it will likely not be in place.

          • Goodrice

            According to Leif Holmlid muon emission may be inherent in all LENR systems, implying in other words that the mechanism behind all LENR anomalies ‘generally speaking’ is the formation of ultra-dense hydrogen. In his studies, including the latest one (open access) recently published on PLOS ONE, he’s shown that protium too is capable of producing meson and muon emission from its ultra-dense version, so there’s no specific need for deuterium. There’s actually not even a specific restriction of its production from the iron oxide-potassium catalysts he commonly employs, although he’s based most of his observations, studies and theory on them.

            That’s a bummer for the silver not in place on the most sensitive detector, but if you recall in my original request I suggested that you placed a shielding on the one that you deemed insensitive, i.e. the GMC-320. So, it would be cool if you could use that somewhere near the reactor in its line of sight, if you don’t have better uses for it during this part of the experiment.

          • Bob Greenyer

            I discussed this with Alan and he wants to have the second GM 320+ in the office as a dosimeter.

            I have no problem will placing the Silver in front for periods of the 5.4 run – we need to see if we see anything at all first.

            With regard to Holmlid – if you have time to establish at what temperature he heats his catalyst, that would be really helpful. After I have been to the shop, I will make a short video to add clarity about the ‘passive’ core of 5.5

          • Goodrice

            After some thought, perhaps doing spot checks with the silver when you think that you’re obtaining elevated radiation should be fine too, after all. It would be even better if these checks could be done with the NaI scintillator once that happens, but it looks hard to reach.

            Regarding Holmlid there’s more than simply being careful about temperature but I can say that he’s never reported using higher temperatures than 750°C. This is the upper limit; 650-700°C is probably a safer maximum range. Overheating damages the catalyst, rendering it unable to produce ultra-dense hydrogen.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Hi Goodrice, ok – we have discussed it and agree this is the best approach.

            You can see the various detector positions for 5.4 in the latest video.

            That is really good info on Holmlid and will feed into the protocol it also gives us seperation between claimants.

          • Goodrice

            Do note that one thing is the maximum temperature supported by the breeding catalyst, another that of the Rydberg matter and ultra-dense hydrogen produced. Holmlid suggests (for example in this paper) that both RM and UDH can exist at higher temperatures.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Thankyou for your kind words… It is not easy doing this, it can be exhausting but it can also be fun.

            The data is the data – sometimes it may be exciting – like the other night, but that does not mean it is real! Checking and correcting artefacts are one of the key disciplines and this was demonstrated amply in the prep for the main run when we identified a problem with the 511keV sensor – only because we had so much other instrumentation and historical understanding.

  • Bob Greenyer

    GS 5.4 fuelling presents challenges

    Filling a small 1/8th inch hole in a reactor with fine powder is hard – especially if you want to do it in a glove bag or horizontally.

    Our attempts to date to create a pill press have been thwarted because the mixture of alumina and Nickel lodges itself into the hole and we don’t have time to build a clamshell, or even know if that would work.

    https://youtu.be/5s4mjx3e5xQ

    We did consider making a paste with a solvent but are worried about residue – we are defaulting back to Padua cell style for GS 5.4, that is a funnel and tap. This is more possible as no LAH or Li in 5.4 – we simply cannot afford to loose fuel that is costing over $1000 for the gram and took a lot of effort and time to acquire. Other problem is we may break/dislodge the thermocouples which are now calibrated. Having said that – we have the Optris as backup and, really whilst excess heat is being looked for (new nickel treatment and 3 x 62Ni) we are really hoping to see some neutrons or 511keV photons.

    • Ged

      That is a bummer. With any luck the funnel method will go without a hitch–with super gentle care. Plenty of time to perfect the pill press for next time at least.

      What made this fuel so pricy this round?

  • Goodrice

    I don’t know if this was planned, but both the live video feed and the calibration process seem to be down.

    • Bob Greenyer

      We finished thermal calibration core to external.

      The data is here https://goo.gl/LHhiRr

      We are positioning the Neutron detectors for maximum solid angle and as you can see below, having problems with making fuel pellets.

      • Goodrice

        So this experiment is staying within 500°C core; that was unexpected.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Well – we do not want the $1000 (and hard to acquire) fuel to sinter, since it is going into GS 5.5 – but it is more than that

          1. we saw out thermal neutrons at around 304ºC in GS 5.3
          2. In Brillouin’s Jan 25th 2017 report at Stanford Uni – they saw their biggest excess at 300ºC and almost nothing at 600ºC

      • Goodrice

        This was made from the data I got while it was calibrating. Have you already got the silver coin already in place? Muon capture reactions especially in heavier elements do produce neutrons as well.

        • Goodrice
          • Bob Greenyer

            Thanks – this is a nice clean chart.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Alan and I like this so much, we’d like to use it as the official calibration if that is fine with you?

          • Goodrice

            I’m fine with that but please do double check the data.

          • Bob Greenyer

            sure. thanks

        • Bob Greenyer

          Silver coins has been in place since you requested it.

          • Goodrice

            Nice, so I take it is a permanent feature like the webcam CCD detector.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Well – we need to take a view on that. We will not be attempting to create Ultra Dense Deuterium in 5.4, that comes with 5.5. In 5.4 we are focussed on the small chance of enhanced 18O (p,n) 18F > 18O producing 511keV photons with 109m half life.

            With the silver in place, our most sensitive detector – the LN7317 – will be shielded.

            For 5.4 it will likely not be in place.

          • Goodrice

            According to Leif Holmlid muon emission may be inherent in all LENR systems, implying in other words that the mechanism behind all LENR anomalies ‘generally speaking’ is the formation of ultra-dense hydrogen. In his studies, including the latest one (open access) recently published on PLOS ONE, he’s shown that protium too is capable of producing meson and muon emission from its ultra-dense version, so there’s no specific need for deuterium. There’s actually not even a specific restriction of its production from the iron oxide-potassium catalysts he commonly employs, although he’s based most of his observations, studies and theory on them.

            That’s a bummer for the silver not in place on the most sensitive detector, but if you recall in my original request I suggested that you placed a shielding on the one that you deemed insensitive, i.e. the GMC-320. So, it would be cool if you could use that somewhere near the reactor in its line of sight, if you don’t have better uses for it during this part of the experiment.

          • Bob Greenyer

            I discussed this with Alan and he wants to have the second GM 320+ in the office as a dosimeter.

            I have no problem will placing the Silver in front for periods of the 5.4 run – we need to see if we see anything at all first.

            With regard to Holmlid – if you have time to establish at what temperature he heats his catalyst, that would be really helpful. After I have been to the shop, I will make a short video to add clarity about the ‘passive’ core of 5.5

          • Goodrice

            After some thought, perhaps doing spot checks with the silver when you think that you’re obtaining elevated radiation should be fine too, after all. It would be even better if these checks could be done with the NaI scintillator once that happens, but it looks hard to reach.

            Regarding Holmlid there’s more than simply being careful about temperature but I can say that he’s never reported using higher temperatures than 1000K (727°C) as far as I recall. 650°C is probably a safer maximum range. Overheating damages the catalyst, rendering it unable to produce ultra-dense hydrogen.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Hi Goodrice, ok – we have discussed it and agree this is the best approach.

            You can see the various detector positions for 5.4 in the latest video.

            That is really good info on Holmlid and will feed into the protocol it also gives us seperation between claimants.

          • Goodrice

            Do note that one thing is the maximum temperature supported by the breeding catalyst, another that of the Rydberg matter and ultra-dense hydrogen produced. Holmlid suggests (for example in this paper) that both RM and UDH can exist at higher temperatures.

            […] it is shown that higher excitation levels of hydrogen Rydberg matter exist unchanged at high temperature, thus with large concentrations of hydrogen bound on the surface. These forms of hydrogen have much smaller bond energy than the ultra-dense hydrogen, as can be concluded from the different bond distances. It is known that H(1) has a bond distance of 153 pm, while H(0) in its most common spin state s = 2 has 2.3 pm. Thus, the bond energy is approximately 60 times smaller in H(1) than in H(0). It is highly unlikely that H(1) can exist on the metal surface while the long chain-clusters in H(0) are desorbed, with their typical bond energies of several hundred eV. It is concluded that the vanishing of the H2N(0) clusters is due to a real phase change in the superfluid H(0) surface layer on the metal.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Thanks

    GS 5.4 detector positions

    The rig was rearranged to get the detectors into positions where they have the maximum solid angle we can reasonably achieve.

    https://youtu.be/eYz4VvDIYHo

  • Bob Greenyer

    Thanks

    GS 5.4 detector positions

    The rig was rearranged to get the detectors into positions where they have the maximum solid angle we can reasonably achieve.

    https://youtu.be/eYz4VvDIYHo

  • Bob Greenyer

    GS 5.4 Closeup Layout explanation

    https://youtu.be/Qu3vgeYbVbk

    Spherical image

    https://theta360.com/s/4GPERzPtjYZG7tcxnCPYUYSeG

  • Bob Greenyer

    GS 5.4 Closeup Layout explanation

    https://youtu.be/Qu3vgeYbVbk

    Spherical image

    https://theta360.com/s/4GPERzPtjYZG7tcxnCPYUYSeG

  • Bob Greenyer
  • Bob Greenyer
    • Andreas Moraitis

      Was that with or without the lead shield?

      • Bob Greenyer

        This is the NaI, we calibrated it earlier and then set a region of interest between 500 and 520 keV to catch any potential 511keV photons – nothing for 2 and a half hours then this.

        It should not be happening at such low temperatures and I am scared to increase temperature tomorro.

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/32223d3e1da39dbb5d7aae30824839d52e5a81b0282a65f019fb847e03ec8bd5.png

        • Goodrice

          What is the spectrum?

          • Bob Greenyer

            We are trying to calculate the thickness of lead to shield the NaI first

            I can put the silver on the 7317… but I need to sleep – this was not meant to happen now

          • Goodrice

            Just putting the silver coin on the top of the detector and checking out what happens for a few minutes will do, no need to get fancy.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Ok – will do that after lead shield – we are live on YT – will add 5.4mm of lead – should attenuate 61.6% of 511keV

            http://web-docs.gsi.de/~stoe_exp/web_programs/x_ray_absorption/index.php

          • Goodrice

            Thanks for trying. No significant change either way… perhaps a little tad lower when the silver was on due to attenuated background radiation (the density of sterling silver is almost that of lead and the coin should be 2.3-2.4 mm thick).

            It might be worth checking out the spectrum from the NaI. Is it showing specific lines or does it show an overall signal increase?

          • Bob Greenyer

            np

  • Bob Greenyer
    • Andreas Moraitis

      Was that with or without the lead shield?

      • Bob Greenyer

        This is the NaI, we calibrated it earlier and then set a region of interest between 500 and 520 keV to catch any potential 511keV photons – nothing for 2 and a half hours then this.

        It should not be happening at such low temperatures and I am scared to increase temperature tomorro.

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/32223d3e1da39dbb5d7aae30824839d52e5a81b0282a65f019fb847e03ec8bd5.png

        • Goodrice

          What is the spectrum?
          Since the LN7317 isn’t detecting anything, could you try adding the silver sheet to it?

          • Bob Greenyer

            We are trying to calculate the thickness of lead to shield the NaI first

            I can put the silver on the 7317… but I need to sleep – this was not meant to happen now

          • Goodrice

            Just putting the silver coin on the top of the detector and checking out what happens for a few minutes will do, no need to get fancy.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Ok – will do that after lead shield – we are live on YT – will add 5.4mm of lead – should attenuate 61.6% of 511keV

            http://web-docs.gsi.de/~stoe_exp/web_programs/x_ray_absorption/index.php

          • Goodrice

            Thanks for trying. No significant change either way… perhaps a little tad lower when the silver was on due to attenuated background radiation (the density of sterling silver is almost that of lead and the coin should be 2.3-2.4 mm thick).

            It might be worth checking out the spectrum from the NaI. Is it showing specific lines or does it show an overall signal increase?

          • Bob Greenyer

            np

  • Bob Greenyer

    we are live on YT – will add 5.4mm of lead – should attenuate 61.6% of 511keV

    http://web-docs.gsi.de/~stoe_exp/web_programs/x_ray_absorption/index.php

    http://youtu.be/b0dq8qdAI1E

    • Justa Guy

      Mark here, Bob. I’m planning on being there, later today … Will be there, Sunday, overnight.

      It could be just electrical interference. If more than one detector starts to become abnormal in counts, then I would be way more concerned.

  • Bob Greenyer

    we are live on YT – will add 5.4mm of lead – should attenuate 61.6% of 511keV

    http://web-docs.gsi.de/~stoe_exp/web_programs/x_ray_absorption/index.php

    http://youtu.be/b0dq8qdAI1E

    • Justa Guy

      Mark here, Bob. I’m planning on being there, later today … Will be there, Sunday, overnight.

      It could be just electrical interference. If more than one detector starts to become abnormal in counts, then I would be way more concerned.

  • Bob Greenyer

    GS 5.4 Loading Fuel

    https://youtu.be/oghZJ1ZDakc

    • Axil Axil

      There is a rule in nanoplasmonics that the most power is produced by a wide size distribution in the size of the nickel particles. In other words, a mixture of a very small particle and a very large particle will produce the most EMF power.

      If MFMP sees good results from this 10nm and 10 micron nickel particle mix, it might not be due to Ni62 usage alone, but solely to the very wide particle size distribution in the fuel mix.

      For background, see

      http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1405/1405.1657.pdf

      Plasmonics with a twist: taming optical tornadoes on the nanoscale

      page 15

      12.5. Molding the river of light in vortex nanogear transmissions

      • Bob Greenyer

        Thanks Axil

  • Bob Greenyer

    GS 5.4 Loading Fuel

    https://youtu.be/oghZJ1ZDakc

    • Axil Axil

      There is a rule in nanoplasmonics that the most power is produced by a wide size distribution in the size of the nickel particles. In other words, a mixture of a very small particle and a very large particle will produce the most EMF power.

      If MFMP sees good results from this 10nm and 10 micron nickel particle mix, it might not be due to Ni62 usage alone, but solely to the very wide particle size distribution in the fuel mix.

      For background, see

      http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1405/1405.1657.pdf

      Plasmonics with a twist: taming optical tornadoes on the nanoscale

      page 15

      12.5. Molding the river of light in vortex nanogear transmissions

      • Bob Greenyer

        Thanks Axil

  • Bob Greenyer
    • Goodrice

      This almost looks like the track of a particle decaying to other particles. I’d say it could be a muon decaying to an electron and a neutrino, but it would be unusual for cosmogenic muons to decay here, and I’m not sure if the camera would be capable of recording such event as if it were a cloud chamber.

      • Goodrice

        See http://njsas.org/projects/atoms/cloud_chamber/cache/cloud.html

        http://njsas.org/projects/atoms/cloud_chamber/cache/cloud_files/mu_decay.jpg

        A track which goes straight, then “kinks” off to the
        left or right sharply. This is a “muon decay”. The two neutrinos
        (the dashed lines) are not detected in the chamber.

        • Bob Greenyer

          This is a potential – certainly the trace is unlike any other in the 2 days since putting the camera in the lead box or any since we first turned it on without radioactive exposure and those when tested with check sources.

          It is longer by far than any previous trace under any condition and has two seemingly straight sections with a defined ‘kink’

      • Bob Greenyer

        Yes and don’t know

      • Bob Greenyer

        I think don groom reported something similar.

    • Ged

      So, the fuel is in there, but currently undergoing bake-out before hydrogen is added? Or is there hydrogen present at the moment being degassed (which could cause an LENR event)? 100 C is very low for this indeed, but this is a very new type of fuel. No telling a priori how it will act or where its active zones will be. Those were a lot of events though on the detectors…

      I agree with Goodrice too–that does look like a particle decay track, and that kink does look muon like.

      • Goodrice

        Holmlid calculated that 10^7–10^10 muons per second can be generated when using laser triggering. Muon emission without laser triggering is also reported at a lower rate, but I don’t think that one single possible muon candidate from the camera set up by MFMP would be an indication yet of actual emission from the reactor.

        Either way, whether cosmogenic or artificial if that’s actually a muon track it’s been an extremely lucky coincidence to catch its decay there. It would have had to pass with just the right energy through the lead shielding to come out of it with just the right energy remaining to decay inside the thin CCD sensor.

        • Axil Axil

          If I remember correctly from the latest Holmlid paper, the muons have an exit desorption speed of about .75C which is close to cosmic ray energy levels. That means that the muons will be very highly penetrating. These high energy muons will go a very long way before they would interact with matter. High energy muons are safe because of this. A large amount of lead shielding will slow the muons down to the point where they will more readily interact with matter. Slow muons are dangerous. Therefore, heavy shielding is dangerous when it comes to muons.

          Light material does not slow down muons very much, and heavy elements slow muons down to the point where they interact with matter. That interaction is where the muon catalyzed fusion and fission comes from. Muons behave just the opposite of neutrons.

          By the way, I beleive that Rossi discarded heavy lead shielding in his earlier reactors when he found that heavy shielding produced more radiation than less shielding produced. He now uses only light elements in his Quark.

          • Goodrice

            I’m not able to do the calculation effortlessly but the speed of cosmic muons is much closer to that of light. Many resources on the web report about 0.995c

            In the same paper that you cited, Holmlid writes that muons of 50 MeV or more are possible. In previous papers he’s suggested that they are probably of energy greater than 20 MeV (they would have to, in order to pass through the steel walls of the apparatus and the of the detector). Since they are captured efficiently by adding a few mm of metal they probably don’t have much more energy than this, although it should be probably expected for them to have a relatively wide array of energies.

          • Axil Axil

            From the abstract as follows:

            Relativistic charged particles with velocity up to 500 MeV u-1 thus 0.75 c are observed. Characteristic decay time constants for meson decay are observed, for charged and neutral kaons and also for charged pions.

            also

            From the six quarks in the two protons, three kaons can be formed in the interaction. Two protons correspond to a mass of 1.88 GeV while three kaons correspond to 1.49 GeV. Thus, the transition 2 p → 3 K is downhill in internal energy and releases 390 MeV.

            The muon comes from .5GeV kaon decay and 390 MeV kinetic energy which is enough to produce a very fast muon.

            Furthermore, It is the ultra dense hydrogen that is captured by a few mm of metal foil, not the sub atomic particles produced by the UDH.

          • Goodrice

            500 MeV u^-1 means 500 MeV/u. u is the symbol for the unified atomic mass unit, and muons have a mass of about 0.1u, so that means 50 MeV in the case of muons.

            Holmlid wrote that too. This is straight from the paper:

            […] The mass of the particles is definitely below unity, and the particles are thus mesons. Both kaons and pions are possible. Also muons are possible, at >500 MeV u -1 or >50 MeV.

            Once these muons are produced and emitted away from the apparatus they have to be slowed down in order to be captured. This is performed for example with layers of metals, which was described in this paper: http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/rsi/86/8/10.1063/1.4928109

            I’m not referring the the collection foil for the UDH.

          • Axil Axil

            Be as it may, so you don’t dispute that RELATIVISTIC muons(.75c) are produced by UDH subatomic reactions.

          • Goodrice

            50 MeV muons should already be relativistic. If you try to calculate their speed using the equation K.E. = 1/2 mv^2 (which doesn’t take into account relativity) they end up having a speed greater than light, which cannot happen.

          • Warthog

            “He now uses only light elements in his Quark.”

            And you know this how?? The last discussion I have seen regarding shielding was that he had switched from lead to tungsten. I have seen nothing to indicate that he is working “shielding free”.

          • Axil Axil

            I know because Rossi has said that the Quark is covered under his lone patent. The patent does not mention heavy element shielding. If I missed this point in the patent, please reference it for me.

          • Warthog

            I think the omission from the patent is deliberate, and falls under the category of “trade secret”. And I think that omission is why ALL the replication attempts have gotten much lower COP’s than Rossi claims. Inclusion of the tungsten is necessary for maximum performance.

          • Axil Axil

            I thought that omission of an important part of Rossi’s process would invalidate the patent. Do you think that Rossi would patent an incomplete process?

          • Warthog

            Not at all. The process in the patent is “complete” as written. Anyone who replicates the patent will get positive results (and all replication attempts have thus far done so), just not as large as Rossi ultimately can. This is the perfect way to obtain a patent and still retain an element of proprietariness, and delay and/or mislead competitors. That is what “trade secrets” do.

          • This does not invalidate his patent, this is just stupid if true.
            You now can just patent tungsten improvement, and Rossi will be prevented to do it himself unless he pays you a license.

            if.

          • Warthog

            If my supposition about tungsten is correct, I am sure that Rossi already has that “improvement patent” all ready to go, and may even have filed it. No way for us to know the status of any such until the Patent Department publishes something.

      • Bob Greenyer

        If you look at the fuelling video – you will see we have about 550mg of AH50 Hunter nickel which Alan had processed in H2 at 300psi, 175ºC for 200 hours. So there is very likely H2 ‘breathing’ from that Nickel.

    • Justa Guy

      If you guys have some Photographic Emulsion (Polaroid Film), place it near/around the CCD and cooler places, and then occasionally develop the film to look for tracks.

      … I’ll try to bring some, today/tonight… Mark

      • Axil Axil

        This test should also be done AFTER then reactor run by placing the ash on a paper covering the film. The ash should be left on the film for at least 24 hours.

        Leonid Urutskoev has performed this test on the ash from his exploding foil experiments and got “strange radiation”.

        http://condensed-plasmoids.com/images/urutskoev_track.jpg

        The energy of the particles can be found by measuring the length of the path.

        I beleive that these strange particles are excited Ultra Dense Hydrogen in the 2 GeV energy range.

        These particle have been identified by Keith Fredericks as “monopole tachyons”.

        See Keith Fredericks blog site:

        restframe.com

        These particles also show coherent behavior (swarming).

        IMHO, these particles are UDH based quasiparticles generating “monopole tachyons” reactions.

        For background and more particle tracks from other experiments, see

        http://condensed-plasmoids.com/history.html

      • Bob Greenyer

        Thanks Mark – looking forward to working with you again!

        • Stephen

          Hi Bob, all the best with this its already interesting! Are there also events later in the day or are these just artifacts from the testing in progress?

          Will there be an ongoing test commentary somewhere where we can see what is happening in the experiment to compare with the data?

          • Bob Greenyer

            Yes…

            Don’t know if artefact, possible – I did not expect to see anything at this temperature – what we appear to have is one of the neutron detectors seeing elevated counts around the time of the 511keV

            Nearly at the start of the first occurrence we appear to have the most significant event on the ‘muon’ detector, moreover, the trace is the longest and has a shape not seen in nearly a week of sampling in a range of conditions.

  • Bob Greenyer
    • Goodrice

      This almost looks like the track of a particle decaying to other particles. I’d say it could be a muon decaying to an electron and neutrinos, but it would be unusual for cosmogenic muons to decay here, and I’m not sure if the camera would be capable of recording such event as if it were a cloud chamber.

      • Goodrice

        See http://njsas.org/projects/atoms/cloud_chamber/cache/cloud.html

        http://njsas.org/projects/atoms/cloud_chamber/cache/cloud_files/mu_decay.jpg

        A track which goes straight, then “kinks” off to the
        left or right sharply. This is a “muon decay”. The two neutrinos
        (the dashed lines) are not detected in the chamber.

        • Bob Greenyer

          This is a potential – certainly the trace is unlike any other in the 2 days since putting the camera in the lead box or any since we first turned it on without radioactive exposure and those when tested with check sources.

          It is longer by far than any previous trace under any condition and has two seemingly straight sections with a defined ‘kink’

      • Bob Greenyer

        Yes and don’t know

      • Bob Greenyer

        I think don groom reported something similar.

    • Ged

      So, the fuel is in there, but currently undergoing bake-out before hydrogen is added? Or is there hydrogen present at the moment being degassed (which could cause an LENR event)? 100 C is very low for this indeed, but this is a very new type of fuel. No telling a priori how it will act or where its active zones will be. Those were a lot of events though on the detectors…

      I agree with Goodrice too–that does look like a particle decay track, and that kink does look muon like. Have to verify this was coming from the reactor and not some other passing source (can’t think of any given the set up, but double checking is important for maximum confidence).

      Edit: Doesn’t look like the levels are anywhere near dangerous though (those counts per minute should come out to around 0.01 uSv/hr dosage rate), so I think it’s safe to proceed as normal, with some more shielding perhaps as you were mentioning earlier.

      Edit2: For comparison, a banana is typically 0.098 uSv, so your current counts are around 1/9th a banana per hour. 50 mSv is the maximum annual occupational dose limit for non-radiation workers under US law; so keep a running tally per hour and if you get to that accumulative level I suggest to shut down everything–but currently you are at 6 orders of magnitude per hour lower than that limit, so no where near going to meet it; if current rates stay as they are.

      • Goodrice

        Holmlid calculated that 10^7–10^10 muons per second can be generated when using laser triggering. Muon emission without laser triggering is also reported at a lower rate, but I don’t think that one single possible muon candidate from the camera set up by MFMP would be an indication yet of actual emission from the reactor.

        Either way, whether cosmogenic or artificial if that’s actually a muon track it’s been an extremely lucky coincidence to catch its decay there. It would have had to pass with just the right energy through the lead shielding to come out of it with just the right energy remaining to decay inside the thin CCD sensor.

        • Axil Axil

          If I remember correctly from the latest Holmlid paper, the muons have an exit desorption speed of about .75C which is close to cosmic ray energy levels. That means that the muons will be very highly penetrating. These high energy muons will go a very long way before they would interact with matter. High energy muons are safe because of this. A large amount of lead shielding will slow the muons down to the point where they will more readily interact with matter. Slow muons are dangerous. Therefore, heavy shielding is dangerous when it comes to muons.

          Light material does not slow down muons very much, and heavy elements slow muons down to the point where they interact with matter. That interaction is where the muon catalyzed fusion and fission comes from. Muons behave just the opposite of neutrons.

          By the way, I beleive that Rossi discarded heavy lead shielding in his earlier reactors when he found that heavy shielding produced more radiation than less shielding produced. He now uses only light elements in his Quark.

          • Goodrice

            I’m not able to do the calculation effortlessly but the speed of cosmic muons is much closer to that of light. Many resources on the web report about 0.995c

            In the same paper that you cited, Holmlid writes that muons of 50 MeV or more are possible. In previous papers he’s suggested that they are probably of energy greater than 20 MeV (they would have to, in order to pass through the steel walls of the apparatus and the of the detector). Since they are captured efficiently by adding a few mm of metal they probably don’t have much more energy than this, although it should be probably expected for them to have a relatively wide array of energies.

          • Axil Axil

            From the abstract as follows:

            Relativistic charged particles with velocity up to 500 MeV u-1 thus 0.75 c are observed. Characteristic decay time constants for meson decay are observed, for charged and neutral kaons and also for charged pions.

            also

            From the six quarks in the two protons, three kaons can be formed in the interaction. Two protons correspond to a mass of 1.88 GeV while three kaons correspond to 1.49 GeV. Thus, the transition 2 p → 3 K is downhill in internal energy and releases 390 MeV.

            The muon comes from .5GeV kaon decay and 390 MeV kinetic energy which is enough to produce a very fast muon.

            Furthermore, It is the ultra dense hydrogen that is captured by a few mm of metal foil, not the sub atomic particles produced by the UDH.

          • Goodrice

            500 MeV u^-1 means 500 MeV/u. u is the symbol for the unified atomic mass unit, and muons have a mass of about 0.1u, so that means 50 MeV in the case of muons.

            Holmlid wrote that too. This is straight from the paper:

            […] The mass of the particles is definitely below unity, and the particles are thus mesons. Both kaons and pions are possible. Also muons are possible, at >500 MeV u -1 or >50 MeV.

            Once these muons are produced and emitted away from the apparatus they have to be slowed down in order to be captured. This is performed for example with layers of metals, which was described in this paper: http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/rsi/86/8/10.1063/1.4928109

            I’m not referring the the collection foil for the UDH.

          • Axil Axil

            Be as it may, so you don’t dispute that RELATIVISTIC muons(.75c) are produced by UDH subatomic reactions.

          • Goodrice

            50 MeV muons should already be relativistic. If you try to calculate their speed using the equation K.E. = 1/2 mv^2 (which doesn’t take into account relativity) they end up having a speed greater than light, which cannot happen.

          • Warthog

            “He now uses only light elements in his Quark.”

            And you know this how?? The last discussion I have seen regarding shielding was that he had switched from lead to tungsten. I have seen nothing to indicate that he is working “shielding free”.

          • Axil Axil

            I know because Rossi has said that the Quark is covered under his lone patent. The patent does not mention heavy element shielding. If I missed this point in the patent, please reference it for me.

          • Warthog

            I think the omission from the patent is deliberate, and falls under the category of “trade secret”. And I think that omission is why ALL the replication attempts have gotten much lower COP’s than Rossi claims. Inclusion of the tungsten is necessary for maximum performance.

          • Axil Axil

            I thought that omission of an important part of Rossi’s process would invalidate the patent. Do you think that Rossi would patent an incomplete process?

          • Warthog

            Not at all. The process in the patent is “complete” as written. Anyone who replicates the patent will get positive results (and all replication attempts have thus far done so), just not as large as Rossi ultimately can. This is the perfect way to obtain a patent and still retain an element of proprietariness, and delay and/or mislead competitors. That is what “trade secrets” do.

          • This does not invalidate his patent, this is just stupid if true.
            You now can just patent tungsten improvement, and Rossi will be prevented to do it himself unless he pays you a license.

            if.

          • Warthog

            If my supposition about tungsten is correct, I am sure that Rossi already has that “improvement patent” all ready to go, and may even have filed it. No way for us to know the status of any such until the Patent Department publishes something.

      • Bob Greenyer

        If you look at the fuelling video – you will see we have about 550mg of AH50 Hunter nickel which Alan had processed in H2 at 300psi, 175ºC for 200 hours. So there is very likely H2 ‘breathing’ from that Nickel.

        • Jones Beene

          Should this run be successful – with the main distinction being the 200 hour pretreatment — then we have a major breakthrough. The distinct possibility arises that prior positive results at Thermacore and BLP which employed Sherritt-Gordon processed nickel is the key to success. I posted this piece to Vortex about Sherritt-Gordon hydrothermal nickel a few months ago explaining what it is and why hot pressurized hydrogen can created dense H isomers which are retained in the nickel.

          https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg112784.html

          Brian Ahern also has an experiment ready to run which will be using Sherritt-Gordon nickel.

          If both are successful, this could open up a huge avenue for understanding the thermal anomaly.

    • Justa Guy

      If you guys have some Photographic Emulsion (Polaroid Film), place it near/around the CCD and cooler places, and then occasionally develop the film to look for tracks.

      … I’ll try to bring some, today/tonight… Mark

      • Axil Axil

        This test should also be done AFTER the reactor run by placing the ash on a paper covering the film. The ash should be left on the film for at least 24 hours.

        Leonid Urutskoev has performed this test on the ash from his exploding foil experiments and got “strange radiation”.

        http://condensed-plasmoids.com/images/urutskoev_track.jpg

        The energy of the particles can be found by measuring the length of the path.

        I beleive that these strange particles are excited Ultra Dense Hydrogen in the 2 GeV energy range.

        These particle have been identified by Keith Fredericks as “monopole tachyons”.

        See Keith Fredericks blog site:

        restframe.com

        These particles also show coherent behavior (swarming).

        IMHO, these particles are UDH based quasiparticles generating “monopole tachyons” reactions.

        For background and more particle tracks from other experiments, see

        http://condensed-plasmoids.com/history.html

      • Bob Greenyer

        Thanks Mark – looking forward to working with you again!

        • Stephen

          Hi Bob, all the best with this its already interesting! Are there also He3 neutron and 511 keV gamma events later in the day between 17:30 and 18:30 or are these just artifacts from the testing in progress? There’s an Optris temp spike at 18:30 too… I suppose some tests of changes in set up are occurring then though.

          Will there be an ongoing test commentary somewhere where we can follow what is happening in the experiment to compare with the data?

          • Bob Greenyer

            Yes…

            Don’t know if artefact, possible – I did not expect to see anything at this temperature – what we appear to have is one of the neutron detectors seeing elevated counts around the time of the 511keV

            Nearly at the start of the first occurrence we appear to have the most significant event on the ‘muon’ detector, moreover, the trace is the longest and has a shape not seen in nearly a week of sampling in a range of conditions.

  • Bob Greenyer

    We are preparing for hydrogen treatment / leak testing @ 10 bar

    The cell may move a little so the optris reading will be off from calibration and the TCs

    • Ged

      Can the Optris measurement boxes be moved in the software to stay in the same relative places? Not a big issue since this is just leak testing, though.

      • Bob Greenyer

        All fixed

  • Bob Greenyer

    We are preparing for hydrogen treatment / leak testing @ 10 bar

    The cell may move a little so the optris reading will be off from calibration and the TCs in the live data feeds

    • Ged

      Can the Optris measurement boxes be moved in the software to stay in the same relative places? Not a big issue since this is just leak testing, though.

      • Bob Greenyer

        All fixed

  • Bob Greenyer

    511keV or artefact?

    Not expecting to see anything, especially not at this early stage in the experiment – are we actually seeing positron electron annihilation 511keV photons or is it just artefact?

    https://youtu.be/jah461guR0I

    • Ged

      Guess we’ll just have to get more data to figure it out ;). Any other 511 keV detectors that could be added in? Even something low tech like film could help corroborate.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Mark is bring over some film I think later.

        • Ged

          I think he said something about Polaroid earlier below, but another easy and cheap solution may be using X-Ray film. We use it for radiation of all sorts, even beta. Can keep it in its cardboard box so it is safe from normal light, but X-Rays and Gammas will penetrate right through to the film no problem. It’ll slowly just get dark over time. Could even use a lead pattern mask to see it appear only in exposed spots. Don’t know how quickly one can find X-ray film though.

          • Bob Greenyer

            He should be here in 30 mins – we shall see what he has

          • Alan Smith

            Plenty of X-ray film on ebay- available in little pieces too, as sold for dental use. Possibly a local dental supply house will have some. The very best of luck Bob & Co, I am following with great interest.

          • LION
          • Bob Greenyer

            GS5.4 – 62Ni 18O : Main Run – Curie punch

            We will, as rapidly as possible, go through Ni curie temperature. We will hold at around 380 C.

            http://youtu.be/1mRZMwh2LSo

          • Ged

            The freeboard data doesn’t seem to be updating or matching the temperatures I see in the stream :(. Says 200 C while the stream shows 190 C. Are the detector data updating correctly in it too?

            Anyways, looking forward to the main show! Good luck, guys!

          • Bob Greenyer

            Should be fine now.

          • Rene
          • Bob Greenyer

            The fast neutron detectors have little bubbles in them all the time – detections are very obvious larger ones. moreover, there are 2 a day background here from previous testing.

  • Bob Greenyer

    511keV or artefact?

    Not expecting to see anything, especially not at this early stage in the experiment – are we actually seeing positron electron annihilation 511keV photons or is it just artefact?

    https://youtu.be/jah461guR0I

    • Ged

      Guess we’ll just have to get more data to figure it out ;). Any other 511 keV detectors that could be added in? Even something low tech like film could help corroborate.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Mark is bring over some film I think later.

        • Ged

          I think he said something about Polaroid earlier below, but another easy and cheap solution may be using X-Ray film. We use it for radiation of all sorts, even beta. Can keep it in its cardboard box so it is safe from normal light, but X-Rays and Gammas will penetrate right through to the film no problem. It’ll slowly just get dark over time. Could even use a lead pattern mask to see it appear only in exposed spots. Don’t know how quickly one can find X-ray film though.

          • Bob Greenyer

            He should be here in 30 mins – we shall see what he has

          • Alan Smith

            Plenty of X-ray film on ebay- available in little pieces too, as sold for dental use. Possibly a local dental supply house will have some. The very best of luck Bob & Co, I am following with great interest.

          • LION
  • Bob Greenyer

    Live links are here: GS5.4 – Hydrogen treatment / leak testing 10 bar

    https://goo.gl/W1i0pY

    • Goodrice

      Can the audio in the live streams be improved? It’s choppy, muffled and very low bitrate.

      • Bob Greenyer

        ok – yes.. I have other mics I can use.

        I am also recording locally at 1080p

        • Ged

          What is going on now, Bob? I see the swageloks were taken off the ends?

          • Bob Greenyer

            There was a leak found in leak test – rewind latest live stream, you will see whole thing.

            Basically, looks like ferrule did not seat.

            So are having to replace it – no real problem, just causes delay – and this was meant to be a quick test!

          • Ged

            Better now than later! However, makes another good opportunity to see if the NaI or other detectors keeps buzzing or if the signal is gone with the reactor off.

          • Bob Greenyer

            My thoughts precisely

            Looks like we have it back on after a few parts swap out.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Live links are here: GS5.4 – Hydrogen treatment / leak testing 10 bar

    https://goo.gl/W1i0pY

    • Goodrice

      Can the audio in the live streams be improved? It’s choppy, muffled and very low bitrate.

      • Bob Greenyer

        ok – yes.. I have other mics I can use.

        I am also recording locally at 1080p

        • Ged

          What is going on now, Bob? I see the swageloks were taken off the ends?

          • Bob Greenyer

            There was a leak found in leak test – rewind latest live stream, you will see whole thing.

            Basically, looks like ferrule did not seat.

            So are having to replace it – no real problem, just causes delay – and this was meant to be a quick test!

          • Ged

            Better now than later! However, makes another good opportunity to see if the NaI or other detectors keeps buzzing or if the signal is gone with the reactor off.

          • Bob Greenyer

            My thoughts precisely

            Looks like we have it back on after a few parts swap out.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Leak tests sometimes find leaks… especially with H2

    https://youtu.be/q1bo6tUqk4o

    Here is a close up look at how an aluminum ferrule in a Swagelok pressure-welds to the Al2O3 reactore ceramic – only, it did not do a complete job this time, so it needs to be swapped.

    H2 is the smallest molecule known to man – and this is one of the toughest challenges for all researchers working with it.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Leak tests sometimes find leaks… especially with H2

    https://youtu.be/q1bo6tUqk4o

    Here is a close up look at how an aluminum ferrule in a Swagelok pressure-welds to the Al2O3 reactor ceramic – only, it did not do a complete job this time, so it needs to be swapped.

    H2 is the smallest molecule known to man – and this is one of the toughest challenges for all researchers working with it.

  • Bob Greenyer

    More hydrogen leak testing.

    Onto 3rd Swagelok ferrule – now with added loctite – will let cure for another 45 mins.

    http://youtu.be/tsdljwJDodY

  • Bob Greenyer

    More hydrogen leak testing.

    Onto 3rd Swagelok ferrule – now with added loctite – will let cure for another 45 mins.

    http://youtu.be/tsdljwJDodY

  • Bob Greenyer

    Looks like we are vac tight…

    Testing with H2 pressure

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Hi Bob. What’s the unit for the pressure readings (not displayed in the dashboard)?

      • Bob Greenyer

        Fixed on dashboard.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Looks like we are vac tight…

    Testing with H2 pressure

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Hi Bob. What’s the unit for the pressure readings (not displayed in the dashboard)?

      • Bob Greenyer

        Fixed on dashboard.

  • Bob Greenyer

    – vac tight
    – pressure tight
    – 511keV lead fixed

    … ready…

    • Rene

      Was the 511Kev a measurement artifact?

      • Bob Greenyer

        Yes – and thankfully we identified it and fixed it – now we are getting data as I would expect.

        Several things worried me last night

        – should never have seen anything at that temp
        – large flat area then nothing
        – was not seeing the same thing when having a quick look-see at the ROI in the Spectech software.

        What was really annoying was that the biggest peak dropped when we put the lead in front and then finding the largest track on the muon detector at the same approximate time as the apparent 511keV. This lost me a nights sleep!

        It was the cable and adaptor combination – now it works as expected – which is just as well, as now I can have confidence if we see something when it is theoretically more possible.

        Need to be aware though – we may see nothing – this is obviously a possibility.

        • Rene

          Excellent debugging.
          Excited to see the careful scientific approach to the experiments.

        • Ged

          This is great to hear. With all the cross referencing detectors and methods in place, it has turned out to be easy enough for a malfunctioning detector to be isolated and fixed. Simple fix too, which is pleasant.

          Diving into the unknown here with how this new fuel will behave, so I am thankful you all are taking this thoroughly slow and steady.

          • Bob Greenyer

            We may see nothing – that may tell us something when compared to GS 5.3 and 5.5.

            What is sure is that Alan is now fully tooled up with nice data feeds to boot.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Fixing the 511keV

            https://youtu.be/gyKH3Ay_VLo

            Having so many data feeds allowed us to clearly identify and correct what seemed like very out of place data.

    • Gerard McEk

      Bob, I assume that the strange 511kV signal you had in the last test run was caused by the lead? What was wrong exactly?
      Sorry, I read it below. No need to respond.
      Hope everything goes well today! Good luck.

  • Bob Greenyer

    – vac tight
    – pressure tight
    – 511keV lead fixed

    … ready…

    • Rene

      Was the 511Kev a measurement artifact?

      • Bob Greenyer

        Yes – and thankfully we identified it and fixed it – now we are getting data as I would expect.

        Several things worried me last night

        – should never have seen anything at that temp
        – large flat area then nothing
        – was not seeing the same thing when having a quick look-see at the ROI in the Spectech software.

        What was really annoying was that the biggest peak dropped when we put the lead in front and then finding the largest track on the muon detector at the same approximate time as the apparent 511keV. This lost me a nights sleep!

        It was the cable and adaptor combination – now it works as expected – which is just as well, as now I can have confidence if we see something when it is theoretically more possible.

        Need to be aware though – we may see nothing – this is obviously a possibility.

        • Rene

          Excellent debugging.
          Excited to see the careful scientific approach to the experiments.

        • Ged

          This is great to hear. With all the cross referencing detectors and methods in place, it has turned out to be easy enough for a malfunctioning detector to be isolated and fixed. Simple fix too, which is pleasant.

          Diving into the unknown here with how this new fuel will behave, so I am thankful you all are taking this thoroughly slow and steady.

          • Bob Greenyer

            We may see nothing – that may tell us something when compared to GS 5.3 and 5.5.

            What is sure is that Alan is now fully tooled up with nice data feeds to boot.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Fixing the 511keV

            https://youtu.be/gyKH3Ay_VLo

            Having so many data feeds allowed us to clearly identify and correct what seemed like very out of place data.

    • Gerard McEk

      Bob, I assume that the strange 511kV signal you had in the last test run was caused by the lead? What was wrong exactly?
      Sorry, I read it below. No need to respond.
      Hope everything goes well today! Good luck.

  • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

    That’s some serious science going on there. Hope you get some solid results!

    • Bob Greenyer

      Well – we are doing our best. Very happy that we fixed the last and most important detector bug.

      Thanks for paying attention.

  • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

    That’s some serious science going on there. Hope you get some solid results!

    • Bob Greenyer

      Well – we are doing our best. Very happy that we fixed the last and most important detector bug.

      Thanks for paying attention.

      • lrao

        Bob,

        I have lost some of the continuity from your prior experiments, where you claimed “the cookbook is in the signal”.. at the time I assumed you had a good handle on how to replicate (given the style and manner at which you exposed the results, etc)… I followed those with great interest.

        Since then, I haven’t heard much about connecting that cookbook with unequivocal results. But, I haven’t been able to follow all of this in a super detailed manner.

        Have I missed something, or was that discussion about the cookbook and signal premature, and you still don’t really have a means to replicate, or a real signal to discuss?

        Thanks for clarifying it for me…

        Luis
        PS. Although the above sounds passive-aggressive (attacking you in a subtle way), it is not my intention, I am really puzzled about where you really are.. this will help in understanding the current set of experiments

        • Bob Greenyer

          Well – the phrase “the cookbook is in the signal” is self-referential. It is to do with the re-enforcing nature of the emissions claimed by others and seemingly observed in 5.2.

          Our biggest challenge as a group is that we are volunteers – as a wider community, there are big challenges that everyone thinks they can do it better and so never actually replicate. We did do the best job we could in 5.3 (replication of 5.2) and saw similar apparent excess heat, but nothing that is going to move opinion – we did not see the same photon event, but we did see thermal neutrons, so building neutron detectors and devising experiments to determine if neutrons come with or without Lithium / Aluminium in place can help determine where, if anywhere they are coming from. This is part of the rationale for 5.4 and 5.5.

          There is actually a very long answer here to give and right now I have had little sleep for a few weeks and need to pack for a flight tomorrow – In writing up 5.4 I will go into this in more detail. Keep an eye out for it, thanks for your attention.

          • lrao

            Thanks for the explanation Bob! It helps a lot.

            Best of luck! And keep this very open attitude and work ethic, it says tons about you as a researcher and individual.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Thankyou for your kind words… It is not easy doing this, it can be exhausting but it can also be fun.

            The data is the data – sometimes it may be exciting – like the other night, but that does not mean it is real! Checking and correcting artefacts are one of the key disciplines and this was demonstrated amply in the prep for the main run when we identified a problem with the 511keV sensor – only because we had so much other instrumentation and historical understanding.

  • Goodrice

    The input power reading seems currently stuck at 80.658W.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Connection to power analyser lost

      https://youtu.be/IqubBoevAdk

      Connection to the PA1000 was lost – the Labjack still has a socket open to it so it cannot re-connect and a software change needs to be made.

      Not so critical as we can still see differential temperatures and temperatures off of calibration. Power levels are being monitored.

  • Goodrice

    The input power reading seems currently stuck at 80.658W.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Connection to power analyser lost

      https://youtu.be/IqubBoevAdk

      Connection to the PA1000 was lost – the Labjack still has a socket open to it so it cannot re-connect and a software change needs to be made.

      Not so critical as we can still see differential temperatures and temperatures off of calibration. Power levels are being monitored.

      We are working with Brian on a fix

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Interesting note by Ed Storms on Peter Gluck’s blog:

    “Unless the activated Ni is used, no LENR energy will be produced no matter how hot the material is heated. Heating Ni with LiAlH4 does not activate the Ni. Instead, Rossi uses preactivated Ni and then uses LiAlH4 only as a source of H2. Unless the Ni is preactivated, no LENR is possible no matter how it is heated. Ordinary Ni cannot make LENR energy.”

    http://egooutpeters.blogspot.de/2017/02/feb-05-2017-lenr-what-happens-when.html

    • Axil Axil

      I have an opinion here. All commercially available (COTS) nickel powder comes in batches in a very limited size range. For example, we can buy 10 nanometer powder up to 10 micron powder. I have not seen a COTS powder come in a wide mixture of sizes. In LENR, using the widest range of sized in nickel powder is important.

      In his patent, Rossi says that he preprocesses the COTS powder so that the COTS powder is transformed into a wide mix of sizes from 1 to 100 microns. It is my estimation that many smaller sizes are produced by this sintering based preprocessing but Rossi has never felt the inclination of documenting the very smallest particle fragments..

      This randomization of nickel powder sizes is important because of the way nanoplasmonics works.

      All open Rossi replications use COTS powder characterized by a very limited size range and I beleive that this is way most replication that we know of have limited success.

      There is a rule in nanoplasmonics that the most power is produced by a wide size distribution in the size of the nickel particles. In other words, a mixture of a very small particle and a very large particle will produce the most EMF power.

      If a replicator wants to see good results, they are well advised to use the widest sized nickel particle mix.

      For background on how particles work in nanoplasmonics, see

      http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1405/1405.1657.pdf

      Plasmonics with a twist: taming optical tornadoes on the nanoscale

      On page 15, the details about particle size range is discussed:

      12.5. Molding the river of light in vortex nanogear transmissions

      • LION

        Lift the damper on the piano, and strike a key and listen to the harmonics, oscillation, amplification, MORAY used this simple science in his tubes, the key is PUMPING.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        Anyway, using a mix might be a good idea – even if there should exist a ‘preferred’ particle size. Finding that size would require many separate experiments, but in the mix it could be present from the start. And if, as you say, a wide range of sizes were most gainful: even better.

    • Bob Greenyer

      And by ‘activated nickel’ does he mean one with cracks? if so – Alan processed the bulk of the nickel in this run with an aim to make cracks.

      • Ged

        This is the question I was about to post too–by what does he mean by “activated”. Need specific definitions of we are to test it all.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        I think he means cracks, but of the proper size – which is apparently not easy to obtain.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Interesting note by Ed Storms on Peter Gluck’s blog:

    “Unless the activated Ni is used, no LENR energy will be produced no matter how hot the material is heated. Heating Ni with LiAlH4 does not activate the Ni. Instead, Rossi uses preactivated Ni and then uses LiAlH4 only as a source of H2. Unless the Ni is preactivated, no LENR is possible no matter how it is heated. Ordinary Ni cannot make LENR energy.”

    http://egooutpeters.blogspot.de/2017/02/feb-05-2017-lenr-what-happens-when.html

    • Axil Axil

      I have an opinion here. All commercially available (COTS) nickel powder comes in batches in a very limited size range. For example, we can buy 10 nanometer powders up to 10 micron powder. I have not seen a COTS powder come in a wide mixture of sizes. In LENR, using the widest range of sized in nickel powder mixture is important.

      In his patent, Rossi says that he preprocesses the COTS powder so that the COTS powder is transformed into a wide mix of sizes from 1 to 100 microns. It is my estimation that many smaller sizes are produced by this sintering based preprocessing but Rossi has never felt the inclination of documenting the very smallest particle fragments..

      This randomization of nickel powder sizes is important because of the way nanoplasmonics works.

      All open Rossi replications use COTS powder characterized by a very limited size range and I believe that this is way most replication that we know of have limited success.

      There is a rule in nanoplasmonics that the most power is produced by a wide size distribution in the size of the nickel particles. In other words, a mixture of a very small particle and a very large particle will produce the most EMF power.

      If a replicator wants to see good results, they are well advised to use the widest sized nickel particle mix.

      For background on how particles work in nanoplasmonics, see

      http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1405/1405.1657.pdf

      Plasmonics with a twist: taming optical tornadoes on the nanoscale

      On page 15, the details about particle size range is discussed:

      12.5. Molding the river of light in vortex nanogear transmissions

      • LION

        Lift the damper on the piano, and strike a key and listen to the harmonics, oscillation, amplification, MORAY used this simple science in his tubes, the key is PUMPING.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        Anyway, using a mix might be a good idea – even if there should exist a ‘preferred’ particle size. Finding that size would require many separate experiments, but in the mix it could be present from the start. And if, as you say, a wide range of sizes were most gainful: even better.

    • Bob Greenyer

      And by ‘activated nickel’ does he mean one with cracks? if so – Alan processed the bulk of the nickel in this run with an aim to make cracks.

      • Ged

        This is the question I was about to post too–by what does he mean by “activated”. Need specific definitions of we are to test it all.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        I think he means cracks, but of the proper size – which is apparently not easy to obtain.

  • Bob Greenyer

    ‘On Air’ light – so we don’t infringe youtube rules

    https://youtu.be/_aTFLtK26jk

    In GS 5.3 we put some music on in the background as you would in a workspace. Youtube asked us to pull those videos due to copyright. This ‘On Air’ light is in place to prevent this from happening again.

  • Bob Greenyer

    ‘On Air’ light – so we don’t infringe youtube rules

    https://youtu.be/_aTFLtK26jk

    In GS 5.3 we put some music on in the background as you would in a workspace. Youtube asked us to pull those videos due to copyright. This ‘On Air’ light is in place to prevent this from happening again.

  • Stephen

    Hi Bob can you remind us what the temperature was when you saw potential thermal neutrons in GS5.3?

    • Justa Guy

      Bob recalls that it was 304 C … Mark

      • Stephen

        Thanks so we are in that region already?

    • Ged

      It was about 220 C to 250 C.

      • Justa Guy

        Bob thinks that 220 C to 250 C might have been the outside temperature. He recalls asking Alan at the time, what the core temperature was, hence the 304 C value.

        • Ged

          Yes, that was the outside temp range of the active side.

  • Stephen

    Hi Bob can you remind us what the temperature was when you saw potential thermal neutrons in GS5.3?

    • Justa Guy

      Bob recalls that it was 304 C … Mark

      • Stephen

        Thanks so we are in that region already?

        Wish I was living in PST right now 😉 all the best what ever comes up.

        Is the pressure ok at the moment?

    • Ged

      It was about 220 C to 250 C.

      • Justa Guy

        Bob thinks that 220 C to 250 C might have been the outside temperature. He recalls asking Alan at the time, what the core temperature was, hence the 304 C value.

        • Ged

          Yes, that was the outside temp range of the active side in GS 5.3.

  • Bob Greenyer

    GS5.4 – 62Ni 18O : Main Run – Curie punch

    We will, as rapidly as possible, go through Ni curie temperature. We will hold at around 380 C.

    http://youtu.be/1mRZMwh2LSo

    • Ged

      Edit: Nevermind, realized the answers on my own, hah.

      Anyways, looking forward to the main show! Good luck, guys!

      • Bob Greenyer

        Should be fine now.

  • Bob Greenyer

    MFMP On air sign V2

    https://youtu.be/rO3LJGZhJO8

  • Bob Greenyer

    MFMP On air sign V2

    https://youtu.be/rO3LJGZhJO8

  • Adam

    Could you expose the reactor to strong magnetic current by the means of a strong permanent magnet located “some” distance away from the reactor?
    There is no particular reason to do it other than a “gut” feeling…

    • Bob Greenyer

      I have a not great permanent magnet – I shall try that in a little while – if I can find it!

      • Hi Bob,

        you should indeed try to test some things, especially if you don’t see any excess heat.
        Instead just shutting the reactor down, you should try electromagnetic and electrostatic impulses. Maybe shocks on the table with a simple hammer.

        Be creative. I guess this was what lead others to (claimed) positive results 🙂

        • Bob Greenyer

          Do a wish list and perhaps, Alan, Mark and Skip will find ways to try – I have to fly out tomorrow.

          I am excited that with the work of Alan Goldwater, Bob Higgins, Brian Albiston and others, and kind donations, Alan is now in a position to test faster. There are bugs to fix – but it is a huge leap forward in detection on data accessibility.

          If we can get him the process board for the Optris – he can read 3 separate regions and this will make building reactors far faster as we will not need to put on TCs and all the problems they create.

          If as the Italian General said to me on Dec 14th 2012 in Rome “you need to add an alkaline metal” is true, perhaps, in part, and as intended/devised, this experiment in combination with 5.5 (that adds only Li to the SAME fuel run in 5.4) can answer it. There will need to be some further iterations also to deal with the permutations.

          • Adam

            Great stuff; thank you for considering this in your experiments. Make sure to keep the permanent magnets some distance away from the excessive heat.
            “When heated above 80° Celsius magnets will quickly lose their magnetic properties. The magnet will become permanently demagnetized if exposed to these temperatures for a certain length of time or heated at a significantly higher temperature (Curie temperature).”
            I think Rossi uses electromagnetic pulses for “something” and hence my idea with permanent magnets or electromagnets.

          • Bob Greenyer

            This is a crowd effort, funded by the crowd, if we didn’t listen to the considered suggestions of the crowd it would be a dereliction of duty.

            AlNico magnets have a high curie – considered them before for Celani cells.

      • Great that you did it!

        Maybe you can use an alligator wrench to fix it there for a longer time?

        • Bob Greenyer

          I think I only got away with it because Alan is asleep!

          the challenge is that the metal face presents a heat reflecting surface towards the cell and that was noticeable on the live data – the active was tweaked up – but not anything LENR.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Lugano Thermal Assessment Take 2

          https://goo.gl/uOrgO2

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Some statements by DW on LENR forum (you may have noticed):

            1) “The Lugano reactor was molded in a silicon rubber compound using a threaded metal rod as the base. Cotronics Durapot 810 Powder was the alumina cement compound with a dielectric strength of 270v/mil and a volume resistivity of 1010 ohm-cm at room temp. Resistance wire was from Hyndman Industrial Products, part number 167660-14. Res .2650 Ohms/Ft. .0571 diameter, alloy KA1, Heat# B381142. This was tightly twisted into a pair by IH.“

            2) „[…] the reactor was painted before the test.”

            https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/3261-the-playground/

            If #2 is correct, an unusual type of paint must have been used. Durapot 810 is not pure alumina. It has been supposed that the samples which have been identified as pure Al2O3 might have come from the sealing cement, rather than the reactor body.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Thankyou .

            We – amazingly used the same technique – in addition, I think we used the same Durapot material.

            Our resistance wire in previous DBs was Kanthal – in this one it is the highest specification inconel. It does not really matter much as long as the heat is dissipated in the reactor and not in the connections.

            The Lugano report says that a sample of the reactor outside was taken and that it was Al2O3. In reality again, it does not matter what the material it is since we will be calibrating our real material with a known high emissivity paint specifically designed for this purpose and using the method as described in the Optris hand book. The physical form of the reactors radiating surface is equivalent.

            We have generally used the value recommended on p.42 of the optris handbook for ceramic that is 0.95 for our *GlowStick* 5.3 & 5.4 experiments and the derived temperatures are accurate when compared to TCs across a wide range to within a degree or two so very tight for the purposes of this experiment.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            I agree about the wires – although using the original make could shed some light on the atypical resistivity drop. Durapot 810 might have a different (lower) emissivity than similar products of the same company. However, the paint would modify the reactor characteristics anyway. Maybe it was indeed based on Al2O3, which could explain the results of the XRD analysis.

          • Bob Greenyer

            We are not in a position to make another dummy – but we do have this one made and all the other components in place for testing.

          • Ged

            Well, this shall be fun. Thanks goes to the team for doing this again, and comprehensively! The Dogbone is still a cool design.

          • Bob Greenyer

            There were some recent questions raised which needed to be settled.

            Personally I had three things I wanted to account for
            1. Blocking the ends of the reactor tube rather than having them open.
            2. We established by way of the Williamson IR 3mm spot that the average of the top third of the ridges was 100ºC hotter than the same span in the crevice. This meant that the K-Type and B-Type TCs, which had end beads of differing sizes, read slightly differently in the original tests.
            3. The original TCs were held in place by fine Kathal wire and so were partially in convective flow – in this case they are bonded to the surface, leveraging the TC bonding experience we have gained since.

            In this test, the high emissivity paint (1 at 800ºC) is in a flat area and the comparason adjascent alumina has been flattened also – this should remove the ridge/crevice issue from the original tests.

            More details and a quick RAVI (Radio Metric AVI) file to download so you can learn to play with the set-up

            https://goo.gl/NSZYMD

            If you have a windows PC, you can download the free Optris PI-Connect, load the sample RAVI from the set up and import the Layout – with this, you can play with the regions and emissivity to your hearts content and be ready for a similar file we intend to share after the main test.

  • Adam

    Could you expose the reactor to strong magnetic current by the means of a strong permanent magnet located “some” distance away from the reactor?
    There is no particular reason to do it other than a “gut” feeling…

    • Bob Greenyer

      I have a not great permanent magnet – I shall try that in a little while – if I can find it!

      • Hi Bob,

        you should indeed try to test some things, especially if you don’t see any excess heat.
        Instead just shutting the reactor down, you should try electromagnetic and electrostatic impulses. Maybe shocks on the table with a simple hammer.

        Be creative. I guess this was what lead others to (claimed) positive results 🙂

        • Bob Greenyer

          Do a wish list and perhaps, Alan, Mark and Skip will find ways to try – I have to fly out tomorrow.

          I am excited that with the work of Alan Goldwater, Bob Higgins, Brian Albiston and others, and kind donations, Alan is now in a position to test faster. There are bugs to fix – but it is a huge leap forward in detection on data accessibility.

          If we can get him the process board for the Optris – he can read 3 separate regions and this will make building reactors far faster as we will not need to put on TCs and all the problems they create.

          If as the Italian General said to me on Dec 14th 2012 in Rome “you need to add an alkaline metal” is true, perhaps, in part, and as intended/devised, this experiment in combination with 5.5 (that adds only Li to the SAME fuel run in 5.4) can answer it. There will need to be some further iterations also to deal with the permutations.

          • Adam

            Great stuff; thank you for considering this in your experiments. Make sure to keep the permanent magnets some distance away from the excessive heat.
            “When heated above 80° Celsius magnets will quickly lose their magnetic properties. The magnet will become permanently demagnetized if exposed to these temperatures for a certain length of time or heated at a significantly higher temperature (Curie temperature).”
            I think Rossi uses electromagnetic pulses for “something” and hence my idea with permanent magnets or electromagnets.

          • Bob Greenyer

            This is a crowd effort, funded by the crowd, if we didn’t listen to the considered suggestions of the crowd it would be a dereliction of duty.

            AlNico magnets have a high curie – considered them before for Celani cells.

      • Great that you did it!

        Maybe you can use an alligator wrench to fix it there for a longer time?

        • Bob Greenyer

          I think I only got away with it because Alan is asleep!

          the challenge is that the metal face presents a heat reflecting surface towards the cell and that was noticeable on the live data – the active was tweaked up – but not anything LENR.

  • Rene
    • Bob Greenyer

      The fast neutron detectors have little bubbles in them all the time – detections are very obvious larger ones. moreover, there are 2 a day background here from previous testing.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Well – the phrase “the cookbook is in the signal” is self-referential. It is to do with the re-enforcing nature of the emissions claimed by others and seemingly observed in 5.2.

    Our biggest challenge as a group is that we are volunteers – as a wider community, there are big challenges that everyone thinks they can do it better and so never actually replicate. We did do the best job we could in 5.3 (replication of 5.2) and saw similar apparent excess heat, but nothing that is going to move opinion – we did not see the same photon event, but we did see thermal neutrons, so building neutron detectors and devising experiments to determine if neutrons come with or without Lithium / Aluminium in place can help determine where, if anywhere they are coming from. This is part of the rationale for 5.4 and 5.5.

    There is actually a very long answer here to give and right now I have had little sleep for a few weeks and need to pack for a flight tomorrow – In writing up 5.4 I will go into this in more detail. Keep an eye out for it, thanks for your attention.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Pressure puzzle?

    https://youtu.be/XLVnnJqmPUs

    How does the pressure go from approximately 0.5 to 0.25bar abs when the temperature goes from 337ºC to 392ºC ?

  • Bob Greenyer

    Pressure puzzle?

    https://youtu.be/XLVnnJqmPUs

    How does the pressure go from approximately 0.5 to 0.25bar abs when the temperature goes from 337ºC to 392ºC ?

    I say 45ºC hotter in video, meant 55ºC obviously… need more sleep

    • AbyssUK

      Expanding volume or most likely a leak, which then sealed itself. Hot Swagelok connection maybe.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Well – it is 0.5 – 0.25 bar (vacuum) so leak less likely – I quite like the volume change concept – needs a bit of calculation.

        • TVulgaris

          Phase change and resulting solubility product change?

          • Bob Greenyer

            yes – another possibly contributory factor.

  • Bob Greenyer

    GS5.4 – 62Ni 18O : Main Run – Hold 2 / Pressure Pulse

    Putting 4 bar of fresh Hydrogen into the cell, then returning pressure to 0.5bar

    https://youtu.be/SaXPRwwz0to

  • Bob Greenyer

    GS5.4 – 62Ni 18O : Main Run – Hold 2 / Pressure Pulse

    Putting 4 bar of fresh Hydrogen into the cell, then returning pressure to 0.5bar

    https://youtu.be/SaXPRwwz0to

  • Bob Greenyer

    Pressure pulse to 4 bar

    https://youtu.be/RZA-Gr6lERE

    Aprroximately 1 minute after taking the pressure from approx. 0.25 – 4 bar by adding H2 – we see the 511keV appear – is it real? is it repeatable?

  • Bob Greenyer

    Pressure pulse to 4 bar

    https://youtu.be/RZA-Gr6lERE

    Aprroximately 1 minute after taking the pressure from approx. 0.25 – 4 bar by adding H2 – we see the 511keV appear – is it real? is it repeatable?

  • LION

    Science ever new and exciting:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4199576/Bizarre-new-helium-compound-rewrite-science-books.html

    Perhaps theorists should dream wilder dreams?

  • Bob Greenyer

    I need to confirm with Alan, but it seems he added more H2 – pressure is going down, however active is running hotter than calibration by 2 – 4 degrees – null on calibration.

    @125W in during calibration gave Tact 333.3 and Tnull 327.9ºC

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7c9215f3b3115e10a9ca1f98b5f4e94527d59238f39f152b84e32ec7f5ce37ca.png

    The Optris is on wrong calibration curve at moment and so is reading wrong.

    • aryth

      Are the labels wrong? (looks like the blue is Tactive)

      • aryth

        ah, against callibration, not null.. sorry, got it.

    • Ged

      Very interesting. Pulsing with H2 seems to be yielding more results.

      • Warthog

        This was seen in Pd/D2 systems both by Miley and NASA.

  • Bob Greenyer
  • Bob Greenyer
    • Stephen

      I must admit I was wondering about this too even the trends seem to match up as well as some peaks. It’s curious. But are the counts coming from the same device? Or using common parts, sensors or power supplies etc?

      • Bob Greenyer

        Hi Stephen,

        The Geiger counter is powered by its own USB and detects broad spectrum photons, therefore there has to be significant additional radiation to clear the noise – is this significant on its own, more analysis needed.

        The Region of Interest (ROI) for the NaI scintillator in the Spectrum Techniques monitoring software is set to 500 – 520 keV, so it is much more discriminating of the background photon noise. The Spectrum Techniques Multi-Channel Analyser has its own separate power supply.

        The two peaks I have highlighted are the highest two in both sets of data and their 1 min averages are both offset by approximately the same 3.5 mins. The third highest peaks in both sets of data are coincident – could this be due to averaging based on the previous rolling average state?

        • Stephen

          Interesting. I wonder how the overlay would look with the apparent time off set removed.

          Also if there is a real offset if it is due to averaging or if it is due to the process itself.

        • US_Citizen71

          Is there a UPS system on the power? If not it might be a good addition for the future to help prevent line noise from entering the equation, just a thought.

          • Bob Greenyer

            There is already a UPS system.

  • Bob Greenyer
    • Stephen

      I must admit I was wondering about this too even the trends seem to match up as well as some peaks. It’s curious. But are the counts coming from the same device? Or using common parts, sensors or power supplies etc?

      Did you compare the GMC signal with the 6Li neutron signal too?

      If the correlations are real and not a trick of the eyes it woud be interesting to see if there was any correlation in the control tests too

      • Bob Greenyer

        Hi Stephen,

        The Geiger counter is powered by its own USB and detects broad spectrum photons, therefore there has to be significant additional radiation to clear the noise – is this significant on its own, more analysis needed.

        The Region of Interest (ROI) for the NaI scintillator in the Spectrum Techniques monitoring software is set to 500 – 520 keV, so it is much more discriminating of the background photon noise. The Spectrum Techniques Multi-Channel Analyser has its own separate power supply.

        The two peaks I have highlighted are the highest two in both sets of data and their 1 min averages are both offset by approximately the same 3.5 mins. The third highest peaks in both sets of data are coincident – could this be due to averaging based on the previous rolling average state?

        • Stephen

          Interesting. I wonder how the overlay would look with the apparent time off set removed.

          Also if there is a real offset if it is due to averaging or if it is due to the process itself.

          • Bob Greenyer

            I could give that a go.

            Bob

          • Stephen

            Well it could be interesting or a red herring of course.

            I miss Ecco’s amazing deap analysis and insights. Is he still in contact with MFMP?

            But I suppose this study is only just in the beginning.

          • Bob Greenyer

            I think ecco is with us in a different guise.

            Ok – so here is an animation with 210s offset on the Geiger Counter data.

            I have done a frame where incident overlay and muted variance is visualised.

            Just looking at the start of the graph up to ‘A’ in my opinion there does seem to be a degree of correlation.

            I now understand WHY you need two scintillators, and they both need the same ROI. This would be a lot easier… perhaps we can get Alan’s to Bob Higgins or Vice Versa for up and coming runs.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/23cf84ad07e8869bce9c70670149581c42ba98d23431894d99d526e9d8971991.gif https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c9f57326b278892343efc3f498082e315bffd22684d17433854fd8e90858f52b.gif

          • Bruce__H

            What is in the bottom figure? Why are the traces so correlated?

          • Bob Greenyer

            Please see my post above about the 22Na post calibration by Alan.

            With 22Na in place the Geiger counter is far less sensitive it seams (may have just been position of source) – but the Geiger counter precedes the NaI in a similar way to the in-experiment observed data.

            Will need to take a long term post-experiment background.

        • US_Citizen71

          Is there a UPS system on the power? If not it might be a good addition for the future to help prevent line noise from entering the equation, just a thought.

          • Bob Greenyer

            There is already a UPS system.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    We should not forget that Rossi uses high voltage (probably pulsed) to accelerate particles:

    “In one embodiment, the reagents are placed in the reaction chamber at a pressure of 3-6 bar and a temperature of from 400 C to 600 C. An anode is placed at one side of the reactor and a cathode is placed at the other side of the reactor. This accelerates electrons between them to an extent sufficient to have very high energy, in excess of 100 KeV. Regulation of the electron energy can be carried out by regulating the electric field between the cathode and the anode .”

    https://www.google.com/patents/WO2016018851A1?cl=en&hl=de

    Discussion here:

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/02/23/rossis-european-patent-application-includes-new-details-ecco/

    If the HV is a crucial component (which would make sense), going without it might not lead to the desired results.

    • Bob Greenyer

      *GlowStick* 6 generation will have this.

      I will attempt to explain why I think this is important and how it works when I can get time to gather my thoughts and put together a walk-through presentation.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    We should not forget that Rossi uses high voltage (probably pulsed) to accelerate particles:

    “In one embodiment, the reagents are placed in the reaction chamber at a pressure of 3-6 bar and a temperature of from 400 C to 600 C. An anode is placed at one side of the reactor and a cathode is placed at the other side of the reactor. This accelerates electrons between them to an extent sufficient to have very high energy, in excess of 100 KeV. Regulation of the electron energy can be carried out by regulating the electric field between the cathode and the anode .”

    https://www.google.com/patents/WO2016018851A1?cl=en&hl=de

    Discussion here:

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/02/23/rossis-european-patent-application-includes-new-details-ecco/

    If the HV is a crucial component (which would make sense), going without it might not lead to the desired results.

    • Bob Greenyer

      *GlowStick* 6 generation will have this.

      I will attempt to explain why I think this is important and how it works when I can get time to gather my thoughts and put together a walk-through presentation.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Comment and visualisation about only detection from ‘muon’ detector during GS5.4 run….

    Dr. Don Groom, co-developer of the CCD based approach to muon detection we attempted to replicate in GS5.4 said of the attached event

    “Probably a Compton recoil with maybe a delta ray (Knock-on electron) making the bright pixels.”

    Visualisation courtesy of Diadon Acs https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a20106cb4c9c366a8940dfc302ad483c16869f9b2dd1bdacca4886dafc46384b.png https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1f7e6c66764c24959151c61f0227ae12bdebbff7dc09070a0a7f1dc7472b8933.png

    • Stephen

      Is it possible from this picture to determine the direction and possible origin of the original particle?

      Is it confirmed it is a muon that is decaying or could it be another particle or particle collision that causes the Compton recoil?

      • Bob Greenyer

        Stephen, I have these questions too.

    • Ged

      Very cool, Bob. More evidence of gammas if it is Compton scattering.

      So far, does the evidence support P, G, and/or S? Or none of those?

      • Stephen

        Ahh yes you are right I was thinking of Rutherford scattering due to a coulomb interaction.

        It would be interesting and consistent maybe if the 511 keV emissions were actually real if it is a Compton Scattering event though

        • Bob Greenyer

          There is 1cm of lead, much of any 511keV would be attenuated. Muon is not a photon – so Don Groom is suggesting this is a photon therefore it is high enough energy to clear 1cm of lead… from this calculator

          http://web-docs.gsi.de/~stoe_exp/web_programs/x_ray_absorption/index.php

          around 17% of 511keV photons would get through.

          • Ged

            Which means it would be a suitably rare event, if Compton scattering from 511 keV.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Yes

      • Bob Greenyer

        Hi Ged,

        Well – if we really are seeing 511keV (and I am not convinced of that yet) it would support P. There is no evidence of support for G – we would have seen a broad spectrum form the 4.8MeV beta to the best of my knowledge.

        NOT seeing thermal neutrons in 5.4 is supportive of S.

        Seeing 511keV in 5.5 and thermal neutrons (with Lithium in play) would be supportive of P and S respectively.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Comment and visualisation about only detection from ‘muon’ detector during GS5.4 run….

    Dr. Don Groom, co-developer of the CCD based approach to muon detection we attempted to replicate in GS5.4 said of the attached event

    “Probably a Compton recoil with maybe a delta ray (Knock-on electron) making the bright pixels.”

    Visualisation courtesy of Diadon Acs https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a20106cb4c9c366a8940dfc302ad483c16869f9b2dd1bdacca4886dafc46384b.png https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1f7e6c66764c24959151c61f0227ae12bdebbff7dc09070a0a7f1dc7472b8933.png

    • Stephen

      Is it possible from this picture to determine the direction and possible origin of the original particle?

      Is it confirmed it is a muon that is decaying or could it be another particle or particle collision such as a proton collision with a nucleus or scattering of a beta particle that causes the Compton recoil?

      The bright spot is interesting too

      Would the brightness depend on the velocity of the charged particle? I.e brighter when it is moving slower?

      Can we determine any properties of the particle from the length of the track and it’s brightness and change in angle assuming a Compton recoil?

      • Bob Greenyer

        Stephen, I have these questions too.

    • Ged

      Very cool, Bob. More evidence of gammas if it is Compton scattering.

      So far, does the evidence support P, G, and/or S? Or none of those?

      • Stephen

        Ahh yes you are right I was thinking of Rutherford scattering due to a coulomb interaction.

        It would be interesting and consistent maybe if the 511 keV emissions were actually real if it is a Compton Scattering event though

        • Bob Greenyer

          There is 1cm of lead, much of any 511keV would be attenuated. Muon is not a photon – so Don Groom is suggesting this is a photon therefore it is high enough energy to clear 1cm of lead… from this calculator

          http://web-docs.gsi.de/~stoe_exp/web_programs/x_ray_absorption/index.php

          around 17% of 511keV photons would get through.

          • Ged

            Which means it would be a suitably rare event, if Compton scattering from 511 keV.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Yes

      • Bob Greenyer

        Hi Ged,

        Well – if we really are seeing 511keV (and I am not convinced of that yet) it would support P. There is no evidence of support for G – we would have seen a broad spectrum form the 4.8MeV beta to the best of my knowledge.

        NOT seeing thermal neutrons in 5.4 is supportive of S.

        Seeing 511keV in 5.5 and thermal neutrons (with Lithium in play) would be supportive of P and S respectively.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Post calibration shows level of drift of NaI in 5.4 and that 511keV is nearly out of range of ROI now.

    From Alan Goldwater

    “I have just done a post-calibration with 137Cs. The lower peak at 32.993 keV is spot on. the upper peak has drifted from 662.8 to 670.0 keV. This drift places 511 keV barely within the ROI, so unsure if there is an issue.

    As a final test I put the 22Na source in, which has a strong 511k line. A screen grab of the result is attached, and it’s also available on the Cloudstation archive. The 22Na reference lines shown are based on the spectrometer’s calibration. The actual recorded spectrum is from the 22Na source, and shows the 511 peak at 520 keV”

    Attached is the spectra for 22Na and that the live data CLEARLY shows 511keV ROI signal with 22Na in place even considering the drift.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7cc1c19be7606e81009d70db647de7b10b4efd8ae89b05dc7275f3f19099d6c5.png https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ed81f322d2b80f316e8d76885577da743e2c5e9df6fd6c21ca769b2faf0ead07.jpg

    • Ged

      Can the instrument be recalibrated? It’s good it did not drift out of detection range yet, but seems it will do so soon if something can’t be done on the fly for it. At least the 22Na and 137Cs give a good calibration source.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Bob Higgins has a 137Cs source in the way of his scintillator and uses that to continuously re-calibrate his data (post run)

    • Stephen

      Probably nothing but did the Geiger go to 60 CPM. At 08.00 this morning?

      • Bob Greenyer

        It is nothing – just variance.

        The guys prepared the stage for a re-validation of the Lugano []=Dog Bone=[] reactor dummy test to address subsequent challenges to our previous work in the field and some minor issues that needed to be covered for completeness.

        http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/541-lugano-thermal-assessment-take-2

        • Stephen

          Great and good luck Bob. I first became aware of LENR through your original dog bone tests.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Which is funny, because they are the only series of tests that never had any claimed active component in them.

          • Stephen

            Yup there was a small comment from a colleague at work a couple of years back who mentioned Cold Fusion was still being investigated in France… I thought wow really ? then I started browsing. That’s when I came across MFMP. I was amazed just how deap and rich the studies have been since 1989.

            Seems still word and mouth is the first trigger to start looking and thinking. But I get the feeling that thanks to your and MFMP efforts and also Franks here too more and more people are paying attention.
            Cheers.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Hi Stephen,

            I have been working on something for a few months now which is intended to make the whole field more accessible with higher exposure and I am readying to start rolling it out. It will not conflict with the excellent work and contribution of Frank, Peter Gluck or established Forums. More eyes are better and those eyes should not have to wade through the nonsense to engage.

            I also hope it will allow sustainable expansion and acceleration of the work I do with absolutely no compromise to my ideals and ensure that the MFMP and its great contributing scientists and participants (of which you are integral part) can be supported further to maintain their strength and integrity.

            Believe me, there is a war on right now, and I’m with the common interest.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Post calibration shows level of drift of NaI in 5.4 and that 511keV is nearly out of range of ROI now.

    From Alan Goldwater

    “I have just done a post-calibration with 137Cs. The lower peak at 32.993 keV is spot on. the upper peak has drifted from 662.8 to 670.0 keV. This drift places 511 keV barely within the ROI, so unsure if there is an issue.

    As a final test I put the 22Na source in, which has a strong 511k line. A screen grab of the result is attached, and it’s also available on the Cloudstation archive. The 22Na reference lines shown are based on the spectrometer’s calibration. The actual recorded spectrum is from the 22Na source, and shows the 511 peak at 520 keV”

    Attached is the spectra for 22Na and that the live data CLEARLY shows 511keV ROI signal with 22Na in place even considering the drift.

    Note how little the 7317 is sensitive to the Na22 and that the 511keV induced peak precedes the ROI in a similar way to the data previously observed from the run.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7cc1c19be7606e81009d70db647de7b10b4efd8ae89b05dc7275f3f19099d6c5.png https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ed81f322d2b80f316e8d76885577da743e2c5e9df6fd6c21ca769b2faf0ead07.jpg

    • Ged

      Can the instrument be recalibrated? It’s good it did not drift out of ROI detection range yet, but seems it will do so soon if something can’t be done on the fly for it. At least the 22Na and 137Cs give a good calibration source.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Bob Higgins has a 137Cs source in the way of his scintillator and uses that to continuously re-calibrate his data (post run)

    • Stephen

      Probably nothing but did the Geiger go to 60 CPM. At 08.00 this morning?

      • Bob Greenyer

        It is nothing – just variance.

        The guys prepared the stage for a re-validation of the Lugano []=Dog Bone=[] reactor dummy test to address subsequent challenges to our previous work in the field and some minor issues that needed to be covered for completeness.

        http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/541-lugano-thermal-assessment-take-2

        • Stephen

          Great and good luck Bob. I first became aware of LENR through your original dog bone tests.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Which is funny, because they are the only series of tests that never had any claimed active component in them.

          • Stephen

            Yup there was a small comment from a colleague at work a couple of years back who mentioned Cold Fusion was still being investigated in France… I thought wow really ? then I started browsing. That’s when I came across MFMP. My initial assumptions were quite naive but the more I studied the more I was amazed just how deap and rich the studies have been by all kinds of people since 1989.

            Seems still word and mouth is the first trigger to start looking and thinking. But I get the feeling that thanks to your and MFMP efforts and also Franks here too more and more people are paying attention.
            Cheers.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Hi Stephen,

            I have been working on something for a few months now which is intended to make the whole field more accessible with higher exposure and I am readying to start rolling it out. It will not conflict with the excellent work and contribution of Frank, Peter Gluck or established Forums. More eyes are better and those eyes should not have to wade through the nonsense to engage.

            I also hope it will allow sustainable expansion and acceleration of the work I do with absolutely no compromise to my ideals and ensure that the MFMP and its great contributing scientists and participants (of which you are integral part) can be supported further to maintain their strength and integrity.

            Believe me, there is a war on right now, and I’m with the common interest.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Please see my post above about the 22Na post calibration by Alan.

    With 22Na in place the Geiger counter is far less sensitive it seams (may have just been position of source) – but the Geiger counter precedes the NaI in a similar way to the in-experiment observed data.

    Will need to take a long term post-experiment background.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Lugano Thermal Assessment Take 2

    https://goo.gl/uOrgO2

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Some statements by DW on LENR forum (you may have noticed):

      1) “The Lugano reactor was molded in a silicon rubber compound using a threaded metal rod as the base. Cotronics Durapot 810 Powder was the alumina cement compound with a dielectric strength of 270v/mil and a volume resistivity of 1010 ohm-cm at room temp. Resistance wire was from Hyndman Industrial Products, part number 167660-14. Res .2650 Ohms/Ft. .0571 diameter, alloy KA1, Heat# B381142. This was tightly twisted into a pair by IH.“

      2) „[…] the reactor was painted before the test.”

      https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/3261-the-playground/

      If #2 is correct, an unusual type of paint must have been used. Durapot 810 is not pure alumina. It has been supposed that the samples which have been identified as pure Al2O3 might have come from the sealing cement, rather than the reactor body.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Thankyou .

        We – amazingly used the same technique – in addition, I think we used the same Durapot material.

        Our resistance wire in previous DBs was Kanthal – in this one it is the highest specification inconel. It does not really matter much as long as the heat is dissipated in the reactor and not in the connections.

        The Lugano report says that a sample of the reactor outside was taken and that it was Al2O3. In reality again, it does not matter what the material it is since we will be calibrating our real material with a known high emissivity paint specifically designed for this purpose and using the method as described in the Optris hand book. The physical form of the reactors radiating surface is equivalent.

        We have generally used the value recommended on p.42 of the optris handbook for ceramic that is 0.95 for our *GlowStick* 5.3 & 5.4 experiments and the derived temperatures are accurate when compared to TCs across a wide range to within a degree or two so very tight for the purposes of this experiment.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          I agree about the wires – although using the original make could shed some light on the atypical resistivity drop. Durapot 810 might have a different (lower) emissivity than similar products of the same company. However, the paint would modify the reactor characteristics anyway. Maybe it was indeed based on Al2O3, which could explain the results of the XRD analysis.

          • Bob Greenyer

            We are not in a position to make another dummy – but we do have this one made and all the other components in place for testing.

    • Ged

      Well, this shall be fun. Thanks goes to the team for doing this again, and comprehensively! The Dogbone is still a cool design.

      • Bob Greenyer

        There were some recent questions raised which needed to be settled.

        Personally I had three things I wanted to account for
        1. Blocking the ends of the reactor tube rather than having them open.
        2. We established by way of the Williamson IR 3mm spot that the average of the top third of the ridges was 100ºC hotter than the same span in the crevice. This meant that the K-Type and B-Type TCs, which had end beads of differing sizes, read slightly differently in the original tests.
        3. The original TCs were held in place by fine Kathal wire and so were partially in convective flow – in this case they are bonded to the surface, leveraging the TC bonding experience we have gained since.

        In this test, the high emissivity paint (1 at 800ºC) is in a flat area and the comparason adjascent alumina has been flattened also – this should remove the ridge/crevice issue from the original tests.

        More details and a quick RAVI (Radio Metric AVI) file to download so you can learn to play with the set-up

        https://goo.gl/NSZYMD

        If you have a windows PC, you can download the free Optris PI-Connect, load the sample RAVI from the set up and import the Layout – with this, you can play with the regions and emissivity to your hearts content and be ready for a similar file we intend to share after the main test.

  • sam

    The Close up Layout Explanation video is awesome Bob.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Thanks. Due to my financial situation these past years I had the same phone since 2012 and it was getting tired. Given that my son had dropped my phone and the wifi antenna had failed I had to get a new phone. I did an animation job at the end of last year and used the proceeds to get myself a new S7 and frankly – I am blown away with what it can do – nearly all of the videos for GS 5.4 were recorded and edited on the phone – it allowed very immediate reporting and documenting of the work being done – with full manual control also and pause recording, I could set exposure and focus (even to macro) rapidly on a per video segment basis. Very happy – and to think I once paid $5000 for a Sony FX1 which was huge and so simply could not get this close to the action.

      • TOUSSAINT francois

        Thx to Moor’s law !

        • Bob Greenyer

          Really amazing… and I am speaking as someone who bought the first 24bit hand scanner for a personal computer, the first Kodak commercial digital 1Mpix camera and the wonderful Sony 3CCD TRV900 – in real terms, all of these were the significantly more expensive than this phone.

  • sam

    The Close up Layout Explanation video is awesome Bob.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Thanks. Due to my financial situation these past years I had the same phone since 2012 and it was getting tired. Given that my son had dropped my phone and the wifi antenna had failed I had to get a new phone. I did an animation job at the end of last year and used the proceeds to get myself a new S7 and frankly – I am blown away with what it can do – nearly all of the videos for GS 5.4 were recorded and edited on the phone – it allowed very immediate reporting and documenting of the work being done – with full manual control also and pause recording, I could set exposure and focus (even to macro) rapidly on a per video segment basis. Very happy – and to think I once paid $5000 for a Sony FX1 which was huge and so simply could not get this close to the action.

      • TOUSSAINT francois

        Thx to Moor’s law !

        • Bob Greenyer

          Really amazing… and I am speaking as someone who bought the first 24bit hand scanner for a personal computer, the first Kodak commercial digital 1Mpix camera and the wonderful Sony 3CCD TRV900 – in real terms, all of these were the significantly more expensive than this phone.

  • R101

    Hi Bob, do you think any fusionating is happening with the latest fusionater yet?
    🙂

    • Bob Greenyer

      The data needs to be looked at – but nothing was really obvious – which maybe a good thing, since as I have said before, I was told on Dec 14, 2012 “You need to add an alkaline metal” and this experiment deliberately did not have any.

      • R101

        Ok and thanks Bob for sharing. Keep up the great work MFMP!

  • R101

    Hi Bob, do you think any fusionating is happening with the latest fusionater yet?
    🙂

    • Bob Greenyer

      The data needs to be looked at – but nothing was really obvious – which maybe a good thing, since as I have said before, I was told on Dec 14, 2012 “You need to add an alkaline metal” and this experiment deliberately did not have any.

      • R101

        Ok and thanks Bob for sharing. Keep up the great work MFMP!

  • Obvious

    Bob, is it possible to attempt to duplicate the temperature regions comparable to Figure 7 of the Lugano Report?

    200-237.5°C

    Thanks. MFMP, for doing this stuff.

    • Bob Greenyer

      You want an external temp in that range?

      You can make the regions yourself in the free PI Connect linked on the blog at Quantumheat.org
      by using the RAVI we publish.

      • Obvious

        Yes, an external temperature.
        Since Figure 7 shows part of the Lugano calibration, this is an important temperature segment to understand.

        I have your layout loaded and running. I just tried one of the older glow stick RAVI files also.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Great – you can learn how to configure zones then and set it up in advance.

          I have spoken to Alan – and your request is a go… here is what he said specifically

          “Yes, that is possible. I won’t be getting into the Dogbone test until next week due to work commitments, but I see that as a plus. It will give ample time to refine the proposed test protocol, and resolve some computer issues that appeared yesterday (systems locked up because of DHCP conflicts when the WAN IP address rolled over).

          Today we’re breaking down the GS5.4 cell to recover the fuel.”

          So – within the power limits of 0-700W (due to coil resistance) think about what you might want in the protocol to address any questions you might have.

          • Obvious

            How hot do you think this replica can go?

          • Bob Greenyer

            We are limited to about 700W due to the low resistance of the coil, however, I have a suggestion for Alan to get round this, we have another coil in series in the dummy core.

  • Obvious

    Bob, is it possible to attempt to duplicate the temperature regions comparable to Figure 7 of the Lugano Report? (In a RAVI file sequence)

    200-237.5°C

    Thanks. MFMP, for doing this stuff.

    • Bob Greenyer

      You want an external temp in that range?

      You can make the regions yourself in the free PI Connect linked on the blog at Quantumheat.org
      by using the RAVI we publish.

      • Obvious

        Yes, an external temperature.
        Since Figure 7 shows part of the Lugano calibration, this is an important temperature segment to understand.

        I have your layout loaded and running. I just tried one of the older glow stick RAVI files also.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Great – you can learn how to configure zones then and set it up in advance.

          I have spoken to Alan – and your request is a go… here is what he said specifically

          “Yes, that is possible. I won’t be getting into the Dogbone test until next week due to work commitments, but I see that as a plus. It will give ample time to refine the proposed test protocol, and resolve some computer issues that appeared yesterday (systems locked up because of DHCP conflicts when the WAN IP address rolled over).

          Today we’re breaking down the GS5.4 cell to recover the fuel.”

          So – within the power limits of 0-700W (due to coil resistance) think about what you might want in the protocol to address any questions you might have.

          • Obvious

            How hot do you think this replica can go?

          • Bob Greenyer

            We are limited to about 700W due to the low resistance of the coil, however, I have a suggestion for Alan to get round this, we have another coil in series in the dummy core.

  • gregha

    Without going thru all this, what’s the latest; any (+) COP?

  • gregha

    Without going thru all this, what’s the latest; any (+) COP?

  • magicsnd1

    No excess heat was detected, or expected. In this test we were looking for a specific radiation signature that might help identify the reaction path in Nickel-Hydrogen systems. No reproducible signal was seen, but the test run helped debug the extensive new instrumentation and live data display. The next test will begin in about three weeks.

  • magicsnd1

    No excess heat was detected, or expected. In this test we were looking for a specific radiation signature that might help identify the reaction path in Nickel-Hydrogen systems. No reproducible signal was seen, but the test run helped debug the extensive new instrumentation and live data display. The next test will begin in about three weeks.