Compact Flourescent Lightbulbs: We are surrounded by LENR in our own homes (Gordon Docherty)

The following was posted by Gordon Docherty

Why use gas when you can use a lightbulb 😉

Interesting news indeed:

Cold Fusion Nuclear Reactions Inside Compact Fluorescent Bulbs?http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2014/12/04/compact-fluorescent-fusion/

Unique Hg Stable Isotope Signatures of Compact Fluorescent Lamp-Sourced Hghttp://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es303940p

I believe the e-cat could also be reduced in size – in fact, it could well be seen as an IR lightbulb…

What is needed now are better ways of collecting the em radiation (IR – visible – UV) by such devices. Perhaps a graphene sleeve ? :

http://www.graphenea.com/pages/graphene-uses-applications#.VIF1C3uGIuM

Such a sleeve could then be used to generate electricity, reducing the need for heat input to just system startup. With a much smaller amount of gas needed, a canister-based methane and/or hydrogen starter could be used – and if it is “just” electricity that is required, then a simple power switch would be all that would be needed to source the electricity from whatever source was to-hand, with preference given to power tapped from the graphene sleeve.”

What is really important, however, is that what is happening to the isotopic ratios of Mercury inside “normal” compact fluorescent lightbulbs used in hundreds of millions of homes across the world is undeniably transmutation. So, for transmutation-based systems – and that means slow neutron transfer systems – it is now safe to say “the cat is very much out of the bag” [ pun intended 🙂 ]. We are literally surrounded by LENR in our own homes…

With so many inexpensive fluorescent light bulbs around (probably billions by now), it should not be too expensive or hard to test…

As to there being no cold fusion, it all depends on how tight your definition is. There is certainly no cold version of classical hot fusion going on (how could there be, no Deuterium / Tritium) and, indeed, it looks like there is a large increase in the relative abundance of 196Hg at the expense of the other isotopes, showing a loss of neutrons (more “fission” than “fusion”, loss than gain), so it is a wonder where those neutrons wen t. Now, either these fluorescent light bulbs are beaming out “neutron death rays”, or slow neutrons are being released that are relatively benign (that is, don’t kill the cat as it sits under the fluorescent light bulb, or neutrons are being broken down in some way – now, there’s a thought.

What this research does suggest, however, is that university labs around the world need to get busy re-assessing the safety of these fluorescent light bulbs, in particular looking for any telltale signs of fast neutrons and gamma radiation, then slow neutrons, and finally some other form of em radiation that may be emanating from the light bulb (perhaps the bulbs are brighter than they should be, for example, or maybe that is part of how they are generating their light and why they st art to fade?)

  • GordonDocherty

    thanks Zack – much appreciated. I like to post up ideas to get people thinking… so, the more comment, the better. Silence is the only thing that is really bad. Silence and obvious personal attacks. Anything else that gets the brain going – great! Only when we all share do we all win. Otherwise, we all lose. That’s my view, anyway. So, once again, many thanks… 🙂

  • Obvious

    Plants selectively upgrade Ni isotopes also. Not enough to farm for Ni, although blueberries are hyperacumulators for Ni.

  • GordonDocherty

    From what I am reading here, with those who have access to the full paper, it is good news. There is no need to account for transmutation or neutrons moving around. So, on this “discovery”, we can move on… 🙂

    • Obvious

      I thought we went over this topic a few months ago, and solved it then, too.

  • Asterix

    What’s surprising and perhaps shocking about the Larsen paper is that Larsen jumps to a conclusion without first testing the null hypothesis (i.e. that nothing nuclear is going on; that things are simply getting redistributed) and attempting to disprove it.

    Without that method of reasoning, the danger becomes that one begins to see biblical prophesy in the arrangement of Froot Loops in one’s breakfast bowl.

  • Ivy Matt

    “What is really important, however, is that what is happening to the isotopic ratios of Mercury inside ‘normal’ compact fluorescent lightbulbs used in hundreds of millions of homes across the world is
    undeniably transmutation. So, for transmutation-based systems – and that means slow neutron
    transfer systems – it is now safe to say “the cat is very much out of the bag” [ pun intended ]. We are literally surrounded by LENR in our own homes…”

    Indeed, as many of us learned from the Lugano report, that unnatural isotopic ratios are a sure sign of nuclear reactions, it can be shown that LENR occurs in many places where it was previously unsuspected, including gas centrifuges. In fact, it’s my understanding that some researchers have noticed samples of ~99% nickel-62 (the same ratio as the ash from the Lugano E-Cat) appearing in gas centrifuges.

    “There is certainly no cold version of classical hot fusion going on (how could there be, no Deuterium / Tritium)”

    I was taught that fusion was the joining of any two nuclei. I guess it just goes to show that you can’t trust anyone.

  • Gerard McEk

    So the megansim that is observed is that mecury atoms, excellerated by the glow discharge and that hit the wall change in isotopes. In my view there are two combined forces in play:
    1. Electrical: The Hg atoms may be ionized, causing a static electrical force to atoms nearby.
    2. Mechaical: Speedy Hg atoms hit other material (glass only or does the phosphor layer play a role?).
    Is there any known meganism that could change isotopes by either of these or in combination of these two forces, apart from the huge atomic accellerators?

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Gerard, according to the cited papers the isotopes do not change, they are just unequally distributed in the lamp. This is, however, a hypothesis – there are still open questions which should give reason for further investigations. For example, the researchers did not find 196Hg. If there were slow neutrons involved, 196Hg would possibly transmute into 197Au. I would at least expect that somebody checks if there is gold in the ash. (But maybe this is a secret, who knows…)

      • Gerard McEk

        So I should have said that due to some reason Hg atoms at the wall have somehow been enriched or depleted. If that is the case than elsewhere the oposite should have taken place. Has that been found also? I am sure nobody is able to provide a good explanation for this process either. So I prefer Larson’s suggestion and yours Andreas. (It is also more exciting 🙂 ).

  • http://www.russgeorge.net/ russ george

    The point of this is that in the context of natural isotope shifts being found in the third decimal place and the fact that cold fusion glow discharge experiments are on record showing dramatic isotope anomalies like these. There is a trail suggested here. The author experimentalists do not explain their results so easily as ‘sound bite’ armchair skeptopaths, The authors say there is isotope mystery within that is 4 decimals out of place in the 1% of the mercury that comes from the glow discharge plasma.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Interesting. There is another paper by the same group:

    http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AGUFM.V31B2325M

    They observed an enrichment of 202Hg – the naturally most abundant isotope – in the liquid phase (the ‘raw material’), while the other isotopes were enriched in the bulb wall. The authors hypothesize that this effect could be explained by a different degree of “self-shielding” against ionization.

    However, in the E-Cat the most abundant isotopes (7Li and 58 Ni) are depleted in the fuel, whereas one would expect the opposite according to the above-mentioned hypothesis. Nevertheless, fractionation – by whatever mechanism – is an important issue. It has, by the way, been mentioned here on ECW as a possible reason for the reported results inTPR2. Maybe MFMP could commission isotopic analyses both of the powder and the reactor wall material before and after an active run. This would hopefully help to clarify this important question.

  • http://www.russgeorge.net/ russ george

    What the paper clearly shows is that the trapped Hg that has transported and co-deposited on the glass shows a huge shift in isotopes. The source puddle of Hg in the tube shows no such change. There is no reference to any known simple fractionation mechanism in the paper, indeed the authors make it clear this is a never before seen observation with Hg isotopes. They report on their attempt to reconcile the observations with several hypothesis but in the end state that the observations are “unique” and clearly suggest some “yet to be discovered” Hg isotope effects are in play.

  • Anon2012_2014

    I am not so quick to assign it to transmutation, but I find it extremely interesting. I have read Larsen’s slide deck, and he thinks it is possible that LENR occurs frequently at low rates in common devices. It is possible. The whole key is getting the neutrons out of protons or deuterons, and Widom-Larsen model is as good as any other model at this stage to accomplish that.

    Something additional to think about is that mercury is a vapor within the tube and if the tube was a sea level pressure, it would be liquid. I keep hearing the hypothesis (unproven) that LENR stops when the metal melts. Not sure what we think about LENR when the metal is liquid. They also have tungsten cathodes and various 1 to 10 micron sized phosphor salts on the tube walls. I don’t know, maybe the phosphors are at work supplying neutrons for the mercury.

    Lastly, a fusor can operate at as low as 15 KeV and I believe the DT fusion can be achieved with 3 or 4 KeV. So there can certainly be fusion in things like neon signs that run at that energy that would not be described as “cold” assuming they had within them the right materials (deuterium for example).

  • Zack Iszard

    There is no enrichment observed here, only separation. What is trapped in the glass is removed from the amalgam pellet, and the net composition remains the same. See figure 3.

  • Gerard McEk

    Now we all can do our private test: Measure the electrical power in and measuer the increase in heat energy and voila, we can claim our test results. positive or negative! 😉

  • Thomas Clarke

    Yes, there are many ways to enrich natural isotopes through diffusion – and this one is understood.

    Now, Roger Bird: “This is huge, IMHO, but only for those willing to connect the dots. (Skeptopaths don’t want to connect the dots….snip…)”

    I agree. I also think that “skeptopaths” are right to be slow in connecting dots and this example shows why. Perhaps a more appropriate name could be found for them?

    In this case, for example, skeptics would start by wondering why (conveniently) the isotopic conversion just happened to be from one natural isotope to another. Possible but a bit of coincidence if the mechanism is neutron capture as claimed by WL Free low energy neutrons will interact with a lot of nuclei, and create isotopes never found naturally as well as natural ones.

  • BroKeeper

    What would happen if they replaced Hg with the right Ni, H, Li compound? The mini-e-Cat. It not only provides light but also heat the room. 🙂

  • http://www.russgeorge.net/ russ george

    The problem as always amongst those experimentalists able to routinely tease substantial cold fusion on their lab bench is that this ‘cold fusion nuclear heat’ is the big problem and frequently arrives as too much to fast or not at all. Goldilock’s is very shy. This heat overwhelms thermal transfer destroying the materials in play… Engineering the cold fusion reactions to be thermally dilute is the challenge. This is why nano-particulates are such a good trail to follow as they are easy to dilute amongst inert ‘filler,’ so yes fiddling the mix is a good trail to follow. At least this is my view as an ecologist studying the environments of atoms as in http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net

  • http://www.russgeorge.net/ russ george

    Argon that is used in CFL’s typically contains 3-4% ordinary hydrogen of which 1 part in 6000 is deuterium. Mercury readily forms a hydride/deuteride and in the co-deposition environment of a glow discharge tube it’s easily a candidate for being a ‘Fleischmann fusion metal hydride’ (ffmh). That’s a hydrogen loaded metal which in that environment is a nanoscopic compound. Cold fusion it is except for sissy’s.

    As for the finger pointing acclamations of ‘he was first’ there is a list of competent experimentalists who have worked in ‘glow discharge cold fusion’ environments for decades before Larsen began theorizing in the field of cold fusion.

    (; Better to look for alphas and weak beta decay half life of hrs than neutrons. 😉

    • Andreas Moraitis

      If there were significant amounts of helium in the ash, the reason would likely be fusion. However, we do not know if this is the case. There is no way to explain the isotopic shifts in the mercury by fusion reactions. Therefore, I would prefer to speak of LENR as long as there is no further evidence. Widom-Larsen theory is not at all about fusion, by the way.

      • http://www.russgeorge.net/ russ george

        In my semantics any time one nucleus enters another that is fusion. Sometimes the entering bit doesn’t remain but leaves something behind following which from time to time something new is born out of the pregnant nucleus. 😉

  • EEStorFanFibb

    Do these Google guys have any connection to Darden and Vaughn because it looks like they are saying we need the hot cat!

    “Unfortunately, most of today’s clean generation sources can’t provide
    power that is both distributed and dispatchable. Solar panels, for
    example, can be put on every rooftop but can’t provide power if the sun
    isn’t shining. Yet if we invented a distributed, dispatchable power
    technology, it could transform the energy marketplace and the roles
    played by utilities and their customers. Smaller players could generate
    not only electricity but also profit, buying and selling energy locally
    from one another at real-time prices. Small operators, with far less
    infrastructure than a utility company and far more derring-do, might
    experiment more freely and come up with valuable innovations
    more quickly.

    Similarly, we need competitive energy sources to power industrial
    facilities, such as fertilizer plants and cement manufacturers. A cement
    company simply won’t try some new technology to heat its kilns unless
    it’s going to save money and boost profits. Across the board, we need
    solutions that don’t require subsidies or government regulations that
    penalize fossil fuel usage. Of course, anything that makes fossil fuels
    more expensive, whether it’s pollution limits or an outright tax on
    carbon emissions, helps competing energy technologies locally. But
    industry can simply move manufacturing (and emissions) somewhere else.
    So rather than depend on politicians’ high ideals to drive change, it’s a
    safer bet to rely on businesses’ self interest: in other words, the
    bottom line.”

    http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/what-it-would-really-take-to-reverse-climate-change

    I don’t agree with them that renewables can’t do it all… but I’m thinking they are hinting at something with this “new energy technology for industrial processes” theme. It almost looks like they are setting the stage for a LENR+ reveal.

  • bachcole

    I just sent this to all of my contacts { except the ones that have told me that they are tired of hearing about it (:->) }:

    Low energy nuclear reactions (LENR) are happening in EVERY compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulb in the the world.

    This has been determined by examining the isotope concentrations before and after they have been used:

    http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2014/12/04/compact-fluorescent-fusion/

    And
    more good news: there is absolutely, positively no gamma rays or fast
    neutrons coming out of your CFL. (Some people are bothered by the
    flicker effect, but that is a different issue.)

    This proves that
    LENR power production is possible, and it proves that the mainstream
    physics community is WRONG when they said that LENR is impossible. They
    say that hundreds of millions of degrees are necessary for nuclear
    reactions, and they are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

    Roger Bird

    • Anon2012_2014

      Roger/Bachcole,

      Maybe it is evidence for a nuclear interaction with Mercury in CFLs. Or maybe it is evidence for mercury diffusion into the glass, or into other components of the bulbs.

      As it has been hypothesized to be diffusion or LENR, it unfortunately gives another hypothesis to test/disprove on Rossi’s Lithium/Nickel fuel/ash isotopic shift — differential diffusion out of the fuel into the reaction chamber or the environment.

  • Curbina

    Lattice Energy LLC has been doing “backwards identification” of possible LENR in many instances, as in this case, and also in the exhaust pipe catalizators of cars. This is what motivated the whole “H-cat” replication months ago. Indeed is interesting to think in these everyday items as potential LENR phenomena sources that have so far got unnoticed.

  • Bob Greenyer
  • Bob Greenyer

    This was publicly identified by Lattice Energy some time back.

  • Ophelia Rump

    Gordon, I do not know or care if you are right about there being LENR in CFLs.
    But the mere suggestion of it thrills me as the perfect introduction for the safety of LENR technology.

    “LENR The safe nuclear reaction which has been in your home for years.”

    Nicely done. If you are correct about the CFLs, that’s also nice. A real plus.