Norman Cook on E-Cat Fuel Elements (Tungsten and Iron mentioned)

On December 11-12, 2015 the The 16th Meeting of Japan CF-Research Society will be held at Kyoto University in Japan, and one of the presenters will be Norman Cook, who has collaborated with Andrea Rossi on theoretical work about the “Rossi Effect.”

The abstract of Cook’s presentation titled ‘A Hypothesis Concerning the Connection Between the
“Mössbauer Effect” and the “Rossi Effect”’ has been included in the program for the meeting (see here), and it includes some interesting information regarding the fuel of the E-Cat. Here is an excerpt:

In order to explain the “anomalous heat” generated by Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat (the “Rossi Effect”), I propose a mechanism based on the Mössbauer Effect and involving gamma ray resonances among nuclei. I hypothesize that the emission of gamma rays from low-lying excited-states of Mössbauer isotopes (e.g., 57Fe, 61Ni and 183W, that are contained in the E-Cat “fuel”) can induce resonances at relatively high-energies in non-Mössbauer isotopes (e.g., 27Al, 55Mn, 58Ni, 60Ni, and 62Ni) as a consequence of the overlap of transition energies at much higher nuclear levels. Resonances at energy levels higher than those of the Mössbauer Effect itself lead to a cascade of gamma emissions, as the excited states of the resonating non-Mössbauer nuclei de-excite through multiple steps leading toward their ground-states. Significant heat production is a consequence of the kinetic energy of the gamma emissions.

Interestingly, Cook includes both iron (Fe) and tungsten (W) as elements in the E-Cat fuel, which are not named in the fuel of Rossi’s recently approved US patent. We know that Cook and Rossi have worked closely together on theoretical work, and this week Rossi commented on the Journal of Nuclear Physics that Cook is one of the very few people who has visited the location of the 1MW plant test. It seems possible then that Cook is more aware than most of some of the more carefully guarded information about the E-Cat.

Hank Mills asked Andrea Rossi on the JONP about the the fuel composition mentioned in Cook’s abstract cited above, and whether it was an accurate representation of the E-Cat fuel composition, or just speculation. Rossi responded saying, “As for the specific inforation you are asking for, patents are in preparation and I cannot make pre-disclosure in positive or in negative.”

If Cook’s fuel description is accurate, it is possible that there is a different composition being used now in the E-Cat, which could account for Rossi’s claims of improved performance in both the 1MW plant, and the E-Cat X.

  • Axil Axil

    Fuel preprocessing post.

    The source of the many exotic elements found on the surface of the Lugano fuel particle may have come from the pretreatment of the fuel using an electric arc between electrodes made of heavy refractory elements like molybdenum or tungsten. The wide array of heavy elements look like a list of transmutation products rather than an additive of separate chemicals.

    There has been many LENR experiments where electric arc driven transmutation have produced an array of dozens of heavy element byproducts. This process may be how Rossi seeds his fuel with Exotic neutral particles produced through the action of an electric arc heating process. Rossi does not describe the nature of the heating process that he uses to preprocess his fuel in his patent. Fuel preprocessing is the key component in LENR engineering reaction designs.

    There is experimental evidence derived from exploding foil experiments that ENP can remain active for up to three days after ENP creation.

    Holmlid must preprocess his fuel for weeks using laser irradiation before his fuel becomes LENR active. The ENP must store a huge amount of EMF energy before it can become active and mobile in order to catalyze a LENR reaction.

  • Axil Axil

    http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0801/0801.2752.pdf

    Here is the math support for the “Mössbauer Effect”. It shows that a monopole magnetic field is the most sensitive element to the Mössbauer effect.

    From the Urutskoiev exploding titanium foil experiment experiment

    4) Various difficulties of interpretation gradually led Urutskoiev and his research team to the
    conclusion that magnetic poles could be a possible source of the strange radiation effects they had observed. They became aware of the present author’s work and a fruitful collaboration has been initiated.

    From the very beginning, an important experiment was realized by Urutskoiev and Ivoilov [54],
    using the fact that 57Fe is at the same time magnetic and the most sensitive element to the Mössbauer effect. They irradiated, at some meters from the source of the supposed monopoles, a sample of 57Fe . Behind the iron sample was one pole of a long linear magnet, in order to repel the monopoles of the same sign and attract the monopoles of the opposite sign. Owing to the Mössbauer effect, they found a distinct shift of a characteristic γ ray.

    They repeated the experiment with the other pole of the magnet behind the iron sample and, with the same exposure they found a γ ray shift in the opposite direction [54].

    One can make two remarks about this experiment :

    a) This is one of the most brilliant proof of monopole magnetism. But there are others : for instance, the fact that Ivoilov focused a monopole beam with an electromagnet.

    b) If the 57Fe target sample used in the Mössbauer experiment is abandoned for three days, the
    preceding characteristic γ ray spectrum goes back to its mean normal position. This half-life effect
    seems to hold for all the effects of magnetism induced by monopoles: they seem to have a limited time of life (not predicted by theory). But other effects, such isotopic shifts are definitive.

    54. N. Ivoilov & L. Urutskoiev, The influence of « strange » radiation on Mössbauer spectrum of F57 in metallic foils, Rus. Applied Physics, N° 5, 2004 (in Russian).

  • Andreas Moraitis

    How could this kind of attenuation work if gammas are released on, or near the outer surface of the fuel? If the reactions which produce the gammas are not constrained to the deeper layers of the metal grains, one might guess that attenuation occurs not, or not exclusively, in the ‘active zone’ of the reactor.

    • Axil Axil

      IMHO, LENR is catalytic and act at a distance. The nuclear reaction could be inside or outside of the surface where the nuclear catalyst forms. Magnetic effects might produce LENR reactions through these magnetic effect can be measured up to 2 meters distant from the point of creation. See my Post above on monpole magnetism.

  • MasterBlaster7

    There isn’t. That is the main problem with LENR theory. Where does the gamma go. Haglestein has been pulling his hair out for 20 years trying to figure it out. He likens it to chopping Godzilla into about a billion gerbils…as radiative heat.

    • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

      The only “not too incredible” solution I’ve heard of for that is Ed Storms.

      He propose that the gamma are emitted as X-rays before the fusion, when the NAE is a coherent quantum object.

      I see no better vision, and by the way it explains and requires the strange “preference to low energy” outcome of LENR.

      One possible image is :
      take one thousands atoms in line, correlated quantumly, insulated like a schrodinger cat.
      reduce the energy of nucleus interactions by steps of 1/1000 of a fusion (emit two x-ray of 12kev)
      after 1000 steps
      one atom may fuse/have fused/find-itself-fused with a colleague to restore the classical physics energy.

      my question to nuclear physicist is “how can you reduce the energy state of an hydroton schrodinger cat by eg: 24keV)”

      • Axil Axil

        This Bose condensate effect is a catalytic effect that Ed Storms does not agree with. Only a catalytic based reaction can support Bose condensation. A catalytic object is the same before and after the reaction…it does not change.

        This clustered reaction effect is called super-absorption. But in the experiments of J.C, Fisher, he shows that tens of thousands of LENR reactions are caused by a single catalytic exotic neutral particle (ENP). It is possible that this free moving particle is entangled with others of it kind in a bose condensate.

        For example in a extreme case, it looks like the 100 micron nickel Lugano ash particle #1 was converted to Ni62 in one clustered LENR reaction involving many billions of nickel and lithium atoms.

  • builditnow

    In case you missed this:
    “Bill Gates will invest as much as $2 billion in new clean energy partnership with US and India”

    http://www.theverge.com/2015/11/27/9806698/bill-gates-clean-energy-partnership-us-india-paris-climate

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/28/us/politics/bill-gates-expected-to-create-billion-dollar-fund-for-clean-energy.html?_r=0
    Likely worth another entry at E-Catworld.com so that we can all express our amazement at how Bill avoids the clear choice, LENR. I’m expecting his announcement to once again avoid LENR despite the evidence of a big push in India (a supposed partner) towards LENR.
    What a shocker if I’m wrong, but, right now, based on Bill’s past, I’m leaning back comfortably in my armchair, muttering to myself, “Bill will miss it once again, just watch”.

    • http://renewable.50webs.com/ Christopher Calder

      Wasn’t there a story a while back about Gates investing 20 million of his own personal money in LENR? There was a picture of him at a LENR research center in Italy as I recall.

      • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

        the millions were just about his projects…
        Nothing said on LENR except the photography.

        He does not seems convinced, or pretend not to be.
        If you look at ENEA results, and probably hear the “Rossi is not is serious scientists, he have no peer reviewed paper” that any LENR scientists will repeat, you conclude it is very interesting but far from ready.
        Add warning by “Experts”, and you prefer “transatomic power” style of investments.

    • Omega Z

      As to the link to the VERGE
      Gates has been working toward this for several years. It is not new to many who keep up.
      As-
      “to reach zero global carbon emissions in the next 35 years”

      No one believes this is possible. Even attempting to accomplish this would collapse the world economy & exasperate the poverty level to a likes never seen. What, are they going to tell half the world they must live in the dark & cold?
      People like Bill Gates are clueless to the realities of the world. They need to get out of their Ivory towers once in a while. Check out reality.

      I would point out that economically/financially this isn’t possible, but to many confuse assets with cash money. So, consider there is not enough HUMAN capital. You can’t build something if there are no skilled people to build it.

      With acknowledgment of this fact, It wouldn’t matter if Governments printed money to pay for it, It wont happen any faster. There isn’t & wont be enough skilled people to build a green system in 35 years. It is why Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel indicated it would be 2100 before the green transition would be complete.

      • jimbo92107

        Don’t expect any financial help from Gates. He’s never been a visionary, just a guy that’s really good at making himself rich.

        • bachcole

          This seems a harsh judgment towards Gates when such a judgment should be directed at people who put him on a pedestal. I never expected vision or wise philanthropy from him.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Well, I don’t know if it is important, but I do think that a Tungsten evaporation boat/element was used in the original Ecat, as said in the recent live E2.0 broadcast. Presentation here (Slide 25):

    https://goo.gl/Wvm3WT

    And we know that Iron was present in Lugano Fuel.

    • artefact

      Great revelations in the presentation

    • clovis ray

      BOB, bob, bob, why do you distain Dr. Rossi so much you are constantly second guessing his info, and now norman logic as well, you and MF/MP will be better off to stop such criticizing of their tips, i promise you keep it up, and you guys will be the last group that he helps, you have to do the work, nothing is free in this line of endeavor. your paper is full of inunda, and disrespect, for a couple of the world, best scientist, bar non.

      • henk

        Because Bob is firmly in the Piantelli camp

        • Bob Greenyer

          I spend inordinate amounts of my personal time and resources on Rossi/Parkhomov replications, research and assisting the same. I have spent only a small fraction of that on understanding and disseminating what the crowd allowed the MFMP to understand of Piantelli’s theory and his experimental work.

          It is interesting how, when I asked Cook ( who I also like very much, including his structural models of the nucleus ), about the absence of an explanation in his paper for the proton projectiles – he said he simply did not know where they came from.

          It is also interesting that the only company in the world to use all available means to have Piantelli’s patent revoked was Leanardo Corporation – now what explanation can one make that fits the reality?

          Rossi freely admits his work with Cook is not ready for prime-time, this recent discussion point is an idea they are clearly considering, and it is an interesting one. Cook himself speculated a potential explanation for the existence of 62Ni which I included in the paper. I also included the Gullstrom explanation (Neutron Stripping) and a reasoned argument that it may have been in the cell from the outset, having been told that he had purchased an enriched isotope of nearly exactly the same purity as that seen in the ash and based on the location of the ashes extraction in combination with behaviour of the reactor and Rossi’s previous patent.

          On slide 28 I do mention how 62Ni may be bred slowly in the reactor if Piantelli theory is assumed (and valid).

          On the subject of Neutron stripping.

          1. If it is the main reaction, then how does the yield compare with the reaction claimed by Rossi/Cook (and also incidentally by Piantelli)
          2. Why, if at the end of Lugano, when all the Ni is 62Ni, has the reaction not slowed significantly, if 62Ni is not accepting more Neutrons, then should the reaction not stop?

          The are two ways to answer these two questions.

          1. Seeing Helium production in a reaction
          2. knowing the full numbers of atoms of 6Li in the before and after from Lugano (unless it is W-L, and W-L is valid)

      • Bob Greenyer

        Hi Clovis, I am not sure how you got the impression that I have anything other than the greatest of respect for Rossi. He is a prolific and extremely self motivated person who has spearheaded a resurgence in a field the I have followed since its inception in 1989. I have noticed a few times recently that you have the impression that I am in some way disrespectful – this is not how I want to be understood.

        My paper was research with specific reference to facts as written by the people discussed, it is like a paper review to find correlation and clarity, not innuendo. If you have well-researched counter arguments we can discuss them.

        There was no second guessing in the paper with respect to Rossi purchasing 62Ni – it came directly first hand from the company that sold it to him. It is also of nearly exactly the same purity as that found in the Lugano reactor and Cook struggles to explain its existence and Rossi, in his own words, distances himself from the findings relating to 62Ni. Then, in the Cook/Rossi paper, a paper they jointly both wrote, they say that the tested Nickel ash was “encrusted on the internal surface of the reactor” – none of the experiments we have conducted or seen have Nickel ash deposited there at the end of the run – but if it was vapour deposited there before the “fuel” was put in it would explain:

        1. Even heat along the whole length of the Lugano reactor (something people have had difficulty explaining before)
        2. Nickel encrustations on the inside surface of the reactor (as quoted by Cook/Rossi)
        3. Finding pure 62Ni in the ash without any sleight of hand from Rossi in the extraction process ( and supported by the statements of Rossi saying the inside was more complex)

        In addition it makes logical sense to couple the reaction heat generation surfaces/collector to the path of heat extraction. Moreover, as I showed in the paper, in Rossi’s original E-Cat patent (Italian one) it says “Nickel is coated in a copper tube” – I am not making this up – you can look at the patent, it does not say “filled with Nickel Powder” it says coated.

        Lastly, particle 3 in the Lugano fuel was predominantly Iron based.

    • Axil Axil

      http://www.currentscience.ac.in/Volumes/108/04/0565.pdf

      “AHE has been observed during electrolysis following dynamic stimulation of the cell by time dependent electrolytic currents (SuperWaves) and ultrasonic excitation.”

      Why doesn’t MPMF find out what the “SuperWave” is? Why don’t replicators use the SuperWave”?

      • Bob Greenyer

        We understand that whilst everything else was transferred to SKINNR – “SuperWave” remains protected IP of Dardik.

        As I understand it it is a key frequency and side bands and the side bands are treated as key frequency and side bands and so on in a pattern structure that is similar to a 2D fractal and can be applied as pressure, light, electromagnetic.

        Mathieu has spent quite a bit of effort getting to the bottom of it – even having long conversations with Arik Boher and buying the exact same power amplifier they use.

        As for what it is used for, I asked Arik on a tour of Skinner what it was for and he said (to the best of my recollection) cleaning the electrodes. I have a video recording of that somewhere which I will try to find.

        • Axil Axil

          Thanks for that information.

          • Bob Greenyer

            If I have time to dig out the video and post it, you’ll be first to know Axil.

            I have recalled a bit more (I think) – he said that without cleaning, the performance of the electrodes dropped – need to check, like I say, it is in the recording.

  • Stephen

    I’m looking forward to seeing this paper and the eventual paper from Andea Rossi and Norman Cook too. I naively speculated about gamma absorption a while ago but this idea by Norman Cook is much smarter, more deaply considered and far more developed, Looking at the Mossbauer effect and carefully considering specific resonances and nucleus states. I’m intrigued how it devlopes and wish him the best with this interesting approach. The idea of using resonances from low energy levels in specific nuclei with similar energy transitions at higher energy levels in other atoms is really interesting. I’m quite intrigued by what effects and benefits this could lead too. And also how these high excitation transitions fit with his nucleus model. I wish I could be there to ask him questions about it.

    I’m curious how how the higher energy levels would initially be be achieved to allow resonance transitions at these higher energy levels. Perhaps if the nucleus is already excited by another resonance mechanism, or phonon effects or or following another nucleon absorption for example? Or would some other mechanism come into play?

    Would the gamma actually be emitted and absorbed or would it be transferred between nucei directly?

    Could multiple excitation transitions occur resulting in a nuclei with very high energised states

    Would the resonance be a collective behaviour over many nuclei?

    Could the resonances either signally or collectively lead to sufficiently high energy states to allow energy transitions that could produce mesons?

    Also it mentioned I think that the thermal energy is generated by the low energy gamma radiation from these high level transitions. I’m curious about this and how the gamma radiation is thermalised in his approach. Is it through multiple emissions kineticly exciting an individual nuclei or does it require the nuclei to be bound in a molecule or in a crystal so the energy is shared with other nuclei some how?

    This is a great idea of Norman Cook I think and if I understand it well enough it seems to fit quite well with some other ideas already discussed here such as phonon excitation effects and particular usage of materials etc. I hope it pans out and I wish him well with the presentation.

  • Herb Gillis

    This might explain the difficulties people are having in reproducing the effect.

  • Pekka Janhunen

    I don’t understand where the energy comes from in this model. I guess one has to wait for the presentation to find out.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      I interpreted it that way that the Mössbauer effect is used in order to explain the absence of relatively strong gammas. The energy would be produced by primary nuclear reactions. But maybe I’m wrong.

    • Gerard McEk

      It is a very small part of the picture. I would love to see another part that also explains the isotope shift and the transmutations occurring and the reactions that produce the gammas. I assume that Cook is not certain of this energy sharing between Mössbauer and non-Mössbauer particles and wants others opinion about this. One would expect that some level of gamma’s can be measured outside the reactor.

      • Omega Z

        In all Rossi’s tests, the radiation is always in range of normal background.

        OK, Background radiation isn’t exact. It varies. Maybe a 4 in one location & 5 in another. What I notice in Rossi’s tests is if they show a normal background of 4, their test equipment show like 4.5 during the E-cat operation. But that is still within range of normal variation. Just slightly higher for the location during operation.

        • Gerard McEk

          I agee, see my answer to Axil, above!

      • Axil Axil

        IMHO, LENR is catalytic and act at a distance. The mechanism that produced gamma thermalization is integrated into and is inherent to the catalytic process.

        • Gerard McEk

          It maybe so, Axil, but why can’t we measure any gamma’s outside the hot-cat reactor, which isn’t even screened. That means that all reaction gammas are being absorbed by these non-Mössbauer particles, and that is odd, espeially because many of us expect these reactions to take place at the surface. Maybe Ed Storms is right and it does indeed thake place at nano-cracks inside the palladium (and other elements). At the same time it seems that the number of required catalytic elements increase (like W, Fe Cr) grow and grow. How can they all contribute in some way to make an optimal catalyzer, without gamma-leaks? Could these element particles be some kind of antenna, that absorb gamma’s of certain frequencies?

          • Axil Axil

            http://newinflow.ru/pdf/Klimov_Poster.pdf

            Look here:
            ————
            Spectrometer X-123SDD records soft X radiation (0.1 ÷ 30 keV) in heterogeneous plasmoid. X-receiver is arranged
            at different cross sections of PVR testing section and cross sections behind nozzle at L = 1 ÷ 100 cm
            from it.

            • Heterogeneous plasmoid behind PVR nozzle is γ-radioactive. Soft X-radiation 100 – 10000 eV from this plasmoid. X-radiation decrement is very small (radiation intensity decrease is about 20% at L = 100 cm).

            ———–

            Gamma does appear at the very beginning of the LENR reaction in this experiment, but it is rapidly thermalized as the Exotic neutral particles(ENP) travels down the flow of the argon, water and aluminum vapor.

            The experimenter can tell how long gamma thermalization takes to occur by measuring the intensity of the residual gamma radiation as the ENP travel down the vapor/gas jet and calculate the time of travel in that jet at the point of measurement.

    • Zephir

      I already explained it for example here https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/2ip31z/ecat_report_released_not_a_conventional_source_of/cl8nnf8

      Mossbauer effect is about low-dimensional collisions inside the atom lattice which attenuate energy in similar way, like the Gauss gun or laser https://i.imgur.com/mQZVUMj.gif

      The same effect works in the opposite way, too – it doesn’t only accelerate the atom nuclei in mutual collisions, it also slows down and thermalizes the products of nuclear reaction so no radiation gets evolved at the end – only heat.

  • Gerard McEk

    This new revelation is another little step in the slow opening of Andrea’s curtains between us and the E-cat (X).

    • Pekka Janhunen

      Commercial W-Ni-Fe alloys exist. For example, http://www.mi-techmetals.com/products_tni.htm gives some. For the melting point, http://www.mi-techmetals.com/faqs.htm says “Tungsten melts at 3410° C (6170° F). Nickel melts at 1453° C (2647° F) and iron melts at 1535° C ( 2795° F).
      Tungsten heavy alloy begins to form a liquid phase when heated in excess of 1450° C (2642° F).”

      These particular alloys have more than 90% of tungsten, http://www.mi-techmetals.com/hd-typical.htm

      It seems that the alloy must contain a significant amount of tungsten if one wants to use it above nickel melting point.

  • MasterBlaster7

    This lines up with DeChiro’s SPAWAR alloy blend. I was originally thinking Iron as the alloy blend as it is a transition metal. Tungsten is also a transition metal. DeChiro said that the Rhodium/Nickle alloy, that worked, had ‘sisters’. Are Iron and Tungsten some of the sisters? The plot thickens.

  • Axil Axil

    There is one thing that I do not understand from the Lugano fuel analysis. Appendix 3 shows a wide range of heavy elements in the fuel and Appendix 4 only shows a few. What are those heavy elements that are shown in appendix 3?

    It could be that the heavy elements were only in the surface of the fuel particle. Appendix 4 looked at what elements made up the entire particle.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      I think that this explanation may be right.