SRI International Hosts Seminar on Ultra-dense Hydrogen and Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (Update: Report on Meeting Published)

UPDATE: (Oct 23, 2015)

Thanks to the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project for sharing a link report from this meeting written by Jones Beene who attended the meeting, and posted about it on the Vortex-l archive here: https:[email protected]/msg105372.html

According to this report about 35 people attended including “a few heavy hitters who prefer not to be identified.”
Beene states that according to what Sveinn Ólafsson reported that the ultra-dense hydrogen fusion is neither hot or cold fusion, and that its inventor, Leif Holmlid, wants the process to be called “”Cold Spallation””.

Alan Goldwater of the MFMP also presented, and Beene describes his work as “very impressive”, and that “if and when Alan announces thermal gain in a Rossi style reactor – we can believe it.”

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The following announcement comes via the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project

Public Announcement

On Thursday, October 22nd, 2015 (10:30 AM PDT), Sveinn Ólafsson of the Science Institute, Physics Department, University of Iceland will present a 40 minute seminar/colloquium at SRI International (SRI, founded as Stanford Research Institute) in Menlo Park, California, entitled, “Ultra-dense Hydrogen and Low Energy Nuclear Reactions” (LENR), representing research he has conducted with Leif Holmlid from the University of Gothenburg, Sweden.

The talk will be geared towards a scientific/technical audience but Sveinn will make every effort to address those that have little or no previous knowledge of Muon/Particle Detection and Ultra-dense Hydrogen. For about 10 minutes after Sveinn’s presentation, Alan Goldwater representing the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project (MFMP, headed by Bob Greenyer), will present experimental work/techniques being conducted on reproducing/replicating results obtained from researchers such as Andrea Rossi & Alexander Parkhomov.

The final 10 minutes of the 1 hour long colloquium will be open to asking questions. Although there is no direct evidence at this time that Ultra-dense Hydrogen/Materials are responsible for the replication attempts being conducted by MFMP, the project is closely considering these possible materials in their ongoing open-ended research, as a cause of anomalous heat in replicating those experiments, amongst other explanations. So far, there is no conclusive evidence of anomalous heat by MFMP.

The meeting will take place on Thursday, Oct. 22, 2015 10:30 a.m. in Room G-124 at SRI Building G in Menlo Park, California. For more information about the meeting and for directions please see here: http://tempid.altervista.org/SRI_Seminar_Olafsson__Public_Announcement_.pdf

  • Jarea

    There are many good news in the email but also this one:
    From the email:
    “Like many others including myself, he accepts Bob Higgins
    downgraded assessment of the Lugano report (slight gain – perhaps COP~1.2
    see Bob’s white paper).”

    They think that Lugano Report didn’t have a COP of 3 but a COP of 1.2
    Did Rossi provide a device with a COP of 1.2?

  • builditnow

    Alan Goldwater of MFMP made a convincing argument for the new open science approach along with a detailed summary of progress so far on the glow stick experiments. Hopefully we pick up a few locals more willing to go open science.

    I was struck by the report from Sveinn Ólafsson as to how close the hydrogen atoms / nucleus can get in the ultra dense hydrogen as measured in the experiments. Along with that came evidence of nuclear interactions when excited by relatively low powered green lasers.

    A camera crew from RT (Russian TV) were there for the purpose of making a documentary on fusion, to include LENR. This documentary may be ready latter next year. I don’t know if any of the video will be made available.

    The room was full of “heavy hitters”. I spoke to some people from Brillouin and came away convinced they are making steady progress on their new reactors.

    Thanks to Mark for facilitating the event and thanks to SRI for hosting.

  • clovis ray

    Hi,uall.

    well, it all sounds good, like many other theories, i heard, we’ll see, Spallation i think we have already considered , along with sintering, superconducting, and a number of things as i recall. i am suspicious of old theories that maintain old physics .

    • bachcole

      “Nay, let’s just toss those observations that don’t fit in with our theories, even if we have to tell lies and slander good people with sterling reputations. It’s all good.”

      • clovis ray

        Bachcole, hi,
        It just, after all this time i have heard from some of the world leading scientist, on this matter, and hardly any have the same theory, which would lead one to believe that none of them know what this effect is, save dr.Rossi. and he’s not telling. so that leaves me to assume that it is new physics.
        And if so then ,when i hear known laws introduced, to a new and unknown subject, i wonder how reliable these conjectures are.

  • Stephen

    I wonder if Holmlid is able to identify exactly where the particles originate in his experiment.

    Do they come from:

    a) directly from the Rydberg Matter or UDD?
    b) indirectly from the catalyst?

    The reason I’m wondering about (b) is If the mesons need be produced through excitation within a single nucleus, it implies that the nucleus may need sufficient additional binding energy to hold the meson until it is manifested. Deuterium has very low overall total binding energy just a few MeV much lower than 139 MeV rest mass of a Pion. If I understand correctly to hold an additional pion a mid weight nucleon with 8 MeV per nucleon would need to be heavier than Oxygen? Could the excitation in the UDD be coupling somehow with the catalyst nuclei in such a way this can happen? could the mesons be being generated from nucleon pairs in the heavier nuclei of the Catalyst rather than in Deuterium?

    • Ecco

      Disregarding previously submitted information, In his calorimetry experiment published earlier this year (open access) he didn’t use the laser directly on the catalyst, but instead on an iridium support where the D(0) generated by the catalyst was expected to collect.

      • Axil Axil

        The Hydrogen Rydberg matter acts as an antenna to receive optical energy.The large rust particles convert the laser light to dipole motion. The small nanowires of the hydrogen matter act like sharp tips to concentrate the dipole power. The polaritons only allow dipole power to flow in the outway direction away from the big microparticles. This flow is called topolariton flow.

        https://physics.aps.org/synopsis-for/10.1103/PhysRevX.5.031001

        polariton power build up on the tips of the Rydberg matter were it accumulates open endedly.

        http://www.research.a-star.edu.sg/cms/figure/index/55e43a55140ba0db748b4b51

        When laser light hits grooves in a thin film of gold (left), it generates surface plasmon polariton waves (cyan dashed lines) that converge and interfere to create a nondiffracting beam (orange).

        Because the rydberg matter has a huge curvature (it is very sharp), it amplifies the polariton energy greatly.

    • Axil Axil

      B. see post below

  • Axil Axil

    Mesons come from tachyion condensation inside a SPP black hole. The SPP holds energy of 1,000,000 GeV, EMF captured by the SPP is reformatted into a quark based subatomic based discharge: Meson.

    See

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon_condensation

    • Stephen

      Axil I have yet to get fully into your theory, but it may get around some conservation issues if we are only considering nucleon disintigration. I’m curious how they resolve that in their theory but perhaps they have found a way that it can work through interaction with other nucleons and or through the products of the reaction. I’m curious to see what they come up with.

      • Axil Axil

        The SPP is dark matter. It converts EMF into mass. The SPP is just like the higgs boson that gives mass to electrons. The SPP gives mass to photons. When the SPP is very strong, the method that the SPP uses to disrupts atoms is by producing subatomic particles like muons and pions. But there are other ways when the SPP is less strong: like magnetic disruption, and multi particle entanglement. When the SPP is very weak, entanglement is the method that comes into play in biological transmutation. Entanglement is what keeps gammas and neutrons from showing up. Without entanglement, we get gamma and neutron radiation from LENR.

  • Axil Axil

    From Mark Jurich
    Here are the slides for Sveinn’s presentation, courtesy of Sveinn:

    http://tempid.altervista.org/SRI.pdf

    Bob Greenyer or some one: Please create a mirror and provide the link (via QuantumHeat.Org), as some may not be able to DownLoad from this site, easily.

    Thanks,
    Mark Jurich

    • Bob Greenyer

      Have backed up and re-posted slides to QH and also they have been posted at our FB page.

  • Bob Matulis
  • Stephen

    Wow! Jones Beene’s account of the presentation by Sveinn Ólafsonn on the Leif Holmlid experiment is astonishing if true. Could it really go that far ?

    It must have been amazing to be there with Alan and Svein and everyone else who was there in the same place to exchange ideas and experience.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Astonishing – and even more controversial than LENR.

      Whilst Alan was there, he received catalyst and we will be distributing it to replicators in Stateside and Europe.

      • Axil Axil

        It is LENR: there is only one LENR.

      • Alain Samoun

        What is the catalyst made of?

        • Axil Axil

          Styrene catalyst Fe2O3:K

          It is all in the presentation above

      • Sanjeev

        If you are not joking or sensationalizing it, then its a very BIG news !
        Hopefully the catalyst is not the stuff we already know of.

        • Ecco

          As other have mentioned, it’s a potassium-iron oxide catalyst of the kind used in several petrochemical processes. It’s not hard to come by nor expensive, but I guess that for the effect to show one needs a rather good initial vacuum. Apparently these catalysts also work properly only if a thin layer of carbon is applied on their surface. In the case of Holmlid, a too high concentration of potassium is also detrimental to the effect (ultra-dense hydrogen formation) and in that case, it must be reduced with heating over a fairly long time.

          It would be interesting to know if during the SRI meeting Ólafsson added some details on the processing needed and the exact steps involved for reliably replicating the effect.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Just to clarify, it was NOT material received from Sveinn Ólafsson. It is, as far as we can determine, a similar catalyst previously order for the MFMP by Alan that arrived at his house whilst he was at the event.

          It is this catalyst

          http://chinacatalyst.en.alibaba.com/product/1977300230-209451568/HTED_04_Ethylbenzene_Dehydrogenation_Catalyst.html

          BUT… what about this research…

          http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00942884

          With the 100um Fe2O3 fuel Particle 3 in the Lugano report, free O2 in the air and Al from the LiAlH4, could it be that a dehydrogenation catalyst was being made in-situ in the Lugano reactor by careful decomposition/heat treatment of the reactants and atmosphere?

          • Ecco

            From the Rossi-Cook paper it appears that the fuel powder was scraped off the walls of the reactor tube.

            http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1504/1504.01261.pdf

            […] Nickel was found to be encrusted on the internal surface of the reactor, from which a 2 mg sample of “ash” was obtained near to the center of the charge.

            It is possible that Rossi could have created a dehydrogenation catalyst in-situ, but given the above information, I think an easier explanation for the iron oxide particle could be that the internal ceramic tube was preprocessed to have catalytic properties, perhaps in the form of a thin layer.

            I wonder if lithium would still work as an alkali promoter instead of potassium.

            • Bob Greenyer

              The Fe particle was in the fuel.

              The Nickel location is a different story.

              • Ecco

                Just checked again the report… yes you’re right! The iron particle was indeed in the fuel, sorry.

          • Ecco

            [after checked out the Lugano report again, sorry for recalling details incorrectly in another message]

            Looking at particle 3 (d) on page 44, I would say that with Fe, O, Si, Cr, Mn, and some C (in apparent order of abundance), this iron-rich particle seems consistent with some sort of typical dehydrogenation catalyst being mixed in the fuel powder. Perhaps if one looked closely at TOF-SIMS analyses on the following pages, more clues about this could be found.

  • Justa Guy

    FYI: If the above (posted) “more information” link does not work for you, try this alternate link: http://WWW.MagicSound.US/SRI_Seminar_Olafsson__Public_Announcement_.pdf

  • http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/ barty
    • http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/ barty

      Temperature just increased by > 15C without changing input power

  • Obvious

    I bring this paper to your attention once again.

    Note several common threads in LENR research.

    One is the long loading period of electrolysis. In this case it is constant but slight overcharging, but it is effectively the same process. The process, essentially accidental, takes 3 to 5 years to become significant. (Perhaps this can be optimized). This makes replication rather difficult.

    Nickel catalyzes the formation of ionic, then atomic H. Due to long periods of overcharging, the electrons are constantly “busy”, enabling the assembly of Atomic Metallic Hydrogen. The defects in the Ni lattice assist this process.
    The Ni stabilizes large clusters of AMH, which would otherwise decompose to H and H2. The result is an alloy, with the average composition of NiH34.9. This alloy is reported to be quite stable. After 3 to 5 years in this particular system, the AMH-Ni alloy can be harvested in macroscopic quantities.

    There could be serious errors in this report. On the other hand, it could be a group of important clues.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1312.6851

    • Ecco

      FYI, Rydberg Matter Hydrogen and ultra-dense hydrogen can also be regarded as metallic hydrogen, and Holmlid, Ólafsson and colleagues are reporting that they are able to produce it in a controlled manner with a potassium/iron-oxide catalyst and that it’s likely the culprit for many observations in the LENR field.

      That no electrolysis is needed in their case means that what probably matters the most is the lattice structure of the active material. In their case it’s inherently nanostructured and it’s specialized at forming atomic H, way more than bulk or modified Ni.

      • Obvious

        Agreed. The report I mention above is simply another angle where the dense H system is encountered. The time period is rather onerous, and almost certainly could be optimized once understood. I suspect that if this report is not totally off the rails, that a Pd-D analogue may exist, and the formation of metallic D to significant volumes may be at the root of the reproducibility and cathode design problems encountered in the F&P systems. A wet system is not ideal for forming these dense H and D clusters. However, the possibility of stabilizing metallic/ ultra dense D or H by specific dopants which also are the catalyst may be the most significant contribution of the paper I mention. If not a solution to LENR problems, it could be a solution for H storage, as long as the energy needed to form and maintain the dense clusters is not too excessive or unstable, and are scaleable.

        • Ecco

          The Pd-D analogue most certainly exists too and I believe that is also Edmund Storms’ hypothesis, according to which a new hydrogen molecule – which he calls the Hydroton – with the characteristics of metallic hydrogen and responsible for excess heat and fusion products in cold fusion experiments forms at the nuclear active environment (NAE), defined as being possibly “cracks” in the materials at the nanoscale. This is briefly mentioned in this somewhat dated interview at minute 13:24 here:

          xxx.youtube.com/watch?v=S4wUUpMBdQY&feature=youtu.be&t=804
          (change ‘xxx’ to ‘www’)

          With the proper materials this process should occur immediately instead of having to rely on time, stresses and random impurities, and in fact that’s what Holmlid has been publishing all along. Ultra-dense hydrogen is reported to be relatively stable if left undisturbed, although it’s not clear how scalable the production process is.

      • Axil Axil

        There is only one LENR causation

    • Warthog

      “One is the long loading period of electrolysis”

      It is no longer necessary to do “long loading times” with electrolysis. The SPAWAR technique of co-deposition of palladium and deuterium shortens the time to build an active layer hugely. It seems to me that a good experimental vehicle would be to use co-deposition to deposit a fully loaded Pd/D layer on a thermocouple, and then use that in a thermal experiment Same for Ni-H. Has anybody ever DONE a co-deposition trial for the Ni-H system.

      • Obvious

        Co- deposition makes sense as an optimizer to the metallic catalysis process. The question is, has anyone ever tested whether it is optimizing for metallic/dense D or H? Would we know if we saw it, if we weren’t specifically looking for it?

  • gdaigle

    Perhaps LENR could also work with liquid H if the resonance applied to the nickel was so efficient as to not raise the temperature much.

  • bfast

    Ultra-dense Hydrogen. Hmmm. Is this the stuff of blacklight? I googled ultra-dense hydrogen, and found discussion correlating with fusion. Could these two technologies, LENR & blacklight, be merging? It would make a lot of sense to me if they did. Finding two truly independent super energy sources at the same time is kinda inconceivable, much less conceivable than finding the same source from two different angles.

    • Axil Axil

      Blacklight is LENR