Isotopic Analysis of Fuel and Ash after 72-Hour Experiment (Songsheng Jiang)

The following post has been received from Songsheng Jiang, a LENR researcher at the China Institute of Atomic Research in response to a question I sent regarding his thoughts on the recently approved E-Cat patent of Andrea Rossi.

Dear Frank,

I have read Andrea Rossi’s recently approved patent, and also noticed the composition of Rossi’s fuel ( 50% nickel, 20% lithium and 30% LAH), and that nickel acts as a catalyst for the reaction and is not itself a reagent.

The things are quite different from early statements by Rossi, and the 2014 Lugano report. However, the lithium as a fuel reagent supports our recent experimental result. We have carefully carried out isotopic analysis for the fuel samples before and after the experiment in May using ICPMS.

About 3% low ratio of 6Li/7Li is found after the 72-hour experiment, the data uncertainty is better than 0.1%. However, no  different ratios are found for all nickel isotopic ratios within uncertainty for samples before and after experiment (see attachment below). The results of isotopic analysis in the Lugano report are completely different from ours. Our ICPMS result shows that lithum-6 probably is an important reagent, but not lithium7. Further experimentation will follow our own idea and experimental result.

songshengdata

 

Best regards,

Songsheng Jiang

CIAE

  • Axil Axil

    So sorry, please excuse me. I try my best but sometimes I fail. I can only try harder next time.

    “mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa”

  • greggoble

    LiALH4, LiBH4, and Li(CH3CH2)3BH nanoparticle production, found here by Toyota, is of interest.

    Quote

    “Toyota (NYSE:TM) has had its eye on LENR from day 1. Technova, a Toyota affiliated lab, actually hired Fleischmann and Pons and essentially gave them a new life in France away from the media circus in the US. They were hired for a secret research program in LENR, continuing their work in private. While they may have not created a commercially relevant reactor system, they did spark the interest of Toyota, whose work in LENR continues to this day. Recently Toyota replicated a key experiment of Mitsubishi, showing the massive opportunities in LENR energy as well as LENR transmutation. Toyota is a huge company and would be best for a long term investment.” – end quote

    Also of interest, here is the production of the nanoparticle hydrides which (quote) “can in some variations include a corresponding deuteride or tritide” of magnesium, scandium, titanium, vanadium, chromium, molybdenum, iron, cobalt, nickel, copper, silver, gold, zinc, cadmium, boron, indium, antimony, or bismuth.

    “Stable Complexes of Zero-valent Metallic Element and Hydride as Novel Reagents” US 20150098885 A1
    https://www.google.com/patents/US20150098885A1

    Publication date: Apr 9, 2015
    Filing date: May 5, 2014
    Priority date: Oct 4, 2013
    Inventors: Michael P. Rowe
    Original Assignee: Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc.

    ABSTRACT

    A composition and its method of production are provided. The composition includes at least one zero-valent metallic element atom in complex with at least one hydride molecule. The method of production includes ball-milling an elemental metal in a high-surface area form, with a hydride. The composition can be useful as a reagent for the synthesis of zero-valent metallic elemental nanoparticles.

    Claims

    20. The method of claim 18 wherein the zero-valent metallic element is magnesium, scandium, titanium, vanadium, chromium, molybdenum, iron, cobalt, nickel, copper, silver, gold, zinc, cadmium, boron, indium, antimony, or bismuth.

    BACKGROUND

    Hydrides, compounds in which metals or metalloids are bound directly to hydrogen, are relatively energetic molecules with a large variety of known and developing applications in chemistry and energy technology. Such applications include uses as reducing agents, hydrogenation catalysts, desiccants, potent bases, components in rechargeable batteries, and potentially as solid hydrogen storage vehicles in fuel cell technology.

    Metal nanoparticles, particles of elemental metal in pure or alloyed form with a dimension less than 100 nm, have unique physical, chemical, electrical, magnetic, optical, and other properties in comparison to their corresponding bulk metals. As such they are in use or under development in fields such as chemistry, medicine, energy, and advanced electronics, among others.

    Another embodiment of this patent has been granted.

    “Stable complexes of zero-valent metal and hydride as novel reagents” US 8980219 B1
    https://www.google.com/patents/US8980219B1
    Publication type: Grant
    Publication date: Mar 17, 2015
    Filing date: Oct 4, 2013
    Priority date: Oct 4, 2013
    Inventors: Michael Paul Rowe, Rana Mohtadi, Daniel Jeffrey Herrera
    Original Assignee: Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc.

    DETAILED DESCRIPTION

    Compositions of zero-valent metals in complex with hydrides and methods of synthesizing the compositions are described. A zero-valent metal can alternatively be described as a metal which is in oxidation state zero or as an elemental metal.

    As used here, a “metal” can refer to an alkaline earth metal, an alkali metal, a transition metal, or a post-transition metal. The phrase “transition metal” can refer to any D-block metal of Groups 3 through 12. The phrase “post-transition metal” can refer to Group 13 through 16 metals.

    As used here, a “hydride” can be a binary metal hydride (e.g. NaH, or MgH2), a binary metalloid hydride (e.g. BH3), a complex metal hydride (e.g. LiALH4), or a complex metalloid hydride (e.g. LiBH4 or Li(CH3CH2)3BH). In some examples the hydride will be LiBH4. The term “metalloid” can refer to any of boron, silicon, germanium, arsenic, antimony, tellurium, or polonium. The term hydride as described above can in some variations include a corresponding deuteride or tritide.

  • Bob Greenyer

    MURR, University of Missouri isotopic analysis of Ni and Li

    []=Project Dog Bone=[]

    The analysis is for Parkhomov Ni and LiAlH4 as well GS2 Ash and GS3 Fuel/Ash (which contained Parkhomov Ni) and was conducted at

    http://acg.missouri.edu

    Postings here

    https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject/posts/1037875912909774

    http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/504-first-independent-isotopic-results

    At the moment, for the GS2/GS3 – we do not know which sample is which.

  • SSJiang

    I have a question about isotopic ratio change of 6Li/7Li. There is any other
    factor that may cause a low 6Li/7Li ratio at high temperature, such as Isotope fractionation, except
    nuclear reaction? I expect an answer. .

    • Axil Axil

      From the Lugano isotope results where isotope change was detected, the fuel preperation stage subjected both the Nickel and Lithium content of the fuel load to extremely high temperatures as witnessed by the sintering of the 5 micron nickel particles into a large 100 micron particle. This heating process of the lithium and nickel was most likely done without the presence of hydrogen and aluminum. The isotope ratios in the fuel load showed natural abundance.

      During the reactor run, the temperature was pushed high one again but this time a hydride of lithium and aluminum was added to the nickel and lithium. This produced a reaction where isotopic shifts in both lithium and nickel occurred. The nickel shift was remarkable and in fact beyond belief in that pure Ni62 was produced in an isotope transmutation process throughout the entire 100 micron particle that did not affect the its psychical structure of that particle in any way.

      The evidence provided by the Lugano test run looks like a nuclear process produced the isotope shift since high temperatures phase transitions that would usually produce isotope fractionation would have have been detected when the fuel isotope base line was established before the test run.

      • SS Jiang

        Thank you for your detail response.

  • Curious

    That is quite a significant shift.

  • ss dd

    So is this the first detected isotopic shift since Lugano? That’s quite the news!

  • ss dd

    Random thoughts a layman had in the shower:

    1) Is it a matter of probabilities? 6LI having the highest chance of isotopic shift, but after 30 days we would see shifts with other isotopes/elements?

    2) With nickel being dominant (90% in weight + use of a nickel cell), maybe most of the nickel wasn’t exposed to the reaction, therefore isotopic changes for nickel would be negligible.

    3) Could it be that nickel is both a catalyst and a reagent? As in, nickel would also be a catalyst for its own isotopic shift?

  • Sanjeev

    It looks promising and thanks to Jiang for openly sharing his findings.
    Accuse me of moving the goal posts, but it needs to be repeated a few times till all the dust settles down. And yes, even the Lugano like tests on the E-cat needs to be repeated, no different standards for it. Lets push it beyond any doubts. Especially those who are claiming a success need to do this asap.

  • Omega Z

    “The results of isotopic analysis in the Lugano report are completely different from ours.”

    2 things to keep in mind. Huge variances are possible.

    1. The Lugano testers only had a small sample to work with. And we don’t know if IH/Rossi had additional tests on the remainder of the ash.
    2. 30 days verses 72 hours.

  • Nigel Appleton

    With regard to the isotopic analysis of the Lugano ash, I remain unconvinced that sampling error and/or partition effects were not present. Only a very small amount of the stuff was analysed.
    So I’m open minded about that. I would love it to be proved that my reservations are groundless.

    On the broader front, it seems to me that the paucity of consistent replications of even a low level of excess heat means that Rossi knows much more than all the dogged experimenters out there. These people are not dummies – not by a very long chalk – , but are struggling to get any reliable system to work with.

    Perhaps those now adding extra lithium to their fuel will do better.

    • ss dd

      If we are to believe Rossi, he learned something from the Lugano ash analysis and improved the e-cat based on those findings. Assuming this is all true, there is a good chance that there is some truth to the ash analysis.

      IMO

  • GordonDocherty

    The ratio of 61Ni to 58Ni : is that massive change in ratio a typo (0.1673 -> 0.01671)? If not, what has the 61Ni been transmuted into, assuming the level of 58Ni remained reasonably constant (as the other ratios suggest) – if not, then that means all other Nickel isotope levels increased in proportion, at the expense of 61Ni.

    • foobario2

      The “Before” entry is certainly a typo if for no other reason than the +/- error parameter would make no sense for the stated value.

      From my brief reading of the table, the only isotopes that showed even a potentially noticeable change were the Li6/Li7 ratios.

    • Ged

      Must be a typo, I think, since he said it didn’t change, and if one moves the decimal once to the right, there is no change.

    • SSJiang

      Thank you for your mentioning a significant change of
      61Ni/58Ni ratio after experiment, but the value close to the error data. So it
      is hard to say now, more data are needed. The nuclear reaction might occur in
      nickel element, because the excess heat is observed in hydrogen-loaded nickel
      wire with no lithium in the experiments.

    • SSJiang

      A typographical error for 61Ni/58Ni, 0.1673 should be changed to 0.01673. .

  • LCD

    At the very least you might expect li6 to leak out faster than li7 thus making the ratio smaller. So a little disappointing

    • Ged

      I doubt. It appears a statistically significant difference by my calculations, and they aren’t doing ultracentrifugation or particle accelleration to separate isotopes ala uranium enrichment, so there should be no normal process by which the ratio could change.

      • LCD

        Well remember there is about a 15% mass difference. I personally don’t know if it’s a strong argument but there has to be more than one experiment. Also isn’t Rossi’s results opposite of that? Can’t remember

  • bfast

    The lithium, as expected, carries the significant result. Result delta of 0.003 with a precision +- 0.0008, that’s notable. The fact that nothing short of a nuclear reaction could produce such a change — that’s news, or at least it should be.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Li(6) + H(1) > He(4) + H(3) 4.02 MeV ?

    Any helium-3 found?

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Pardon me,
      Li(6) + H(1) > He(4) + He(3) 4.02 MeV ?

      • Alan DeAngelis

        Or something really crazy:
        Li(6) + Li(6) > 4 He(4) 20.9 MeV ?

        • Mats002

          Maybe established solutions do not work for LENR. If the underlying processes are strong magnetic waves and vortexes as in a roaring sea a stormy day, then those old school simple abstractions is of no use. Or they are still valid but there are many different transmutations going on at the same time in a random manner not possible to sum up to one single path.

        • Alan DeAngelis

          pardon me again
          Li(6) + Li(6) > 3 He(4) 20.9 MeV

  • bachcole

    My calculation shows that the lithium changed by 0.03407225 after averaging the three tests. I don’t know enough to comment.

    • Ged

      I get a pooled average of the ash of 0.078 +- 0.0007. The difference from the fuel is 0.0028. Using the two tailed unpaired t-test manually (since we have standard devs and mean, just assuming an N of 3 used for the fuel), the t stat is 3.47, and t crit at alpha=0.05 is 2.76 assuming equal variance, or 3.18 if variance distributions unequal (or if fuel read N is 2 not 3. Must be at least 2 to have a standard dev, so we know it is no less than that N).

      So either way, it is a statisticaly significant difference in the Li6/Li7 ration between fuel and ash.

      • bachcole

        Your first paragraph lost me. I believe your second paragraph merely because you said it and you are knowledgeable and have no reason to lie.

        Seems like 72 hours is way too short a time frame. I do so wish that Mr. Jiang would do it much longer.

        • Ged

          Well, t stat is the divergence between the populations as seen by the Student’s t-test. T crit tells us how big the difference must be to say with 95% certainty that the two populations are indeed different. So, any t stat above that t crit is statistically significantly different ;).

          Nerd the full dataset to do a completely proper analysis though.

          I also agree, 3 days is super short, particularly compared to Lugano’s 30. As transmutation rate should be proportional to heat release, unless it is a huge COP, a short time would be expected to not have enough changes to be easily seen.

          However, that also depends on the sensitivity of the measurement method. The method they use is extraordinarily sensitive, and being ratiometric makes it vastly even more sensitivr. So, seems it is good enough for the lithium. Barely, but indeed as far as this data suggests.

          • bachcole

            (1st & 2nd paragraph) Ged, you need to stop on that heavy duty statistics while you are ahead and I am not so far behind. (:->)

            (The rest) good