Celani Replication Report Published — Radiation Detected (Jeff Morriss)

Jeff Morriss has published a report on the LENR-Forum titled “Celani-Type Ni + H2 Replication” in which he reports an experiment that attempts to replicate the work of Francesco Celani.

Morriss put a wound nickel wire inside a sealed quartz tube loaded with hydrogen. He then described the experiment as follows:

“An initial H2 pressure of 5 Torr was introduced with the cell at room temperature. Almost immediately the pressure began to drop, indicating that the Ni was absorbing H2. The cell was maintained at room temperature for approx. 30 minutes, at which time the H2 pressure had stabilized after dropping ~10% from its initial value. The cell was then powered at 10.0V, 15.0V and 20.0V, corresponding to Ni wire temperatures of 312, 398, and 498 °C, respectively. Each of the three temperatures was maintained for 30 minutes. At the end of the last heating cycle power to the Ni wire was turned off.”

Morriss reports that radiation was detected as the wire heated up. Here’s a chart from the paper showing the readings of the Geiger counter he used:

Jeffmorris

The full report can be read here: https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Attachment/529-Celani-Replication-pdf/?s=47434b39ee36d4ef82628a69db86864355c9e05d

LENR-Forum discussion thread with the author participating is here: https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/2847-Celani-Type-Replication/

  • Sanjeev

    Jeff is taking the claim back, he thinks the radiation is because of dust.

    https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/2847-jeff-Celani-Type-Replication/?postID=15010#post15010

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

      Radon fleas are very very common bugs!

  • Sanjeev

    Me356 is reporting another Celani wire replication, successful and this time with both excess heat and radiation. My kind of news 🙂
    https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject/posts/1132279306802767

    • Sanjeev

      Me further writes here:
      https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/2850-me356-Celani-Ni-Wire-replication/?postID=14873#post14873
      For last few months I have made many of these reactors, all with the
      similar design, different size, … And each one generated excess heat.

      Calibrations and post-calibrations and all kinds of measurements were
      done with expensive equipments so there is not a big room for an errors.

      • Mats002

        Repeated many times!

        Congratulations me356!

      • JiW

        “all kinds of measurements were done with expensive equipments”

        In future, I’d rather see the above expressed as “well-designed measurements with appropriate equipment”. “all kinds” and “expensive” won’t guarantee anything.

    • LuFong

      I’m really looking forward to these results. Me356’s efforts have always impressed me and he seems to have a good understanding of what is going on. It looks to me like he has (with MFMP’s help) attained MFMP’s goal of producing a inexpensive and reproducible LENR generator. It will be interesting to hear his comments on Matt Lewan’s theory as well.

      • Bob Greenyer

        damn FB with the editing thing – I’ll get them re-posted – will have lost descriptions though

  • passerby

    Celani wire replications seem to reliably produce radiation, given this news and the replications done by mfmp and me356.

    Is there an article that summarizes all of these recent replications done with this type, something of an executive summary fit for sharing on social media? If not I think there should be.

    • Bob Greenyer

      We may do one – at the moment the development is so fast by both Jeff and Me356

      We are hopefully going to get the scintillator used on GS5.2 to Jeff and we are trying to arrange to send a scintillator to me356 at the moment.

      I suspect the type of emissions will be similar to those seen in the GS5.2, photons of a wide range of energies.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Any 511 KeV gamma rays from electron-position annihilation?

    I was just wondering if nickel-58 hydride could absorb its two protons, p to become nickel-56, Ni(56) and an alpha, helium, He(4).

    p~Ni(58)~p > Ni(56) + He(4) 5.82MeV

    The nickel-56 could either undergo electron capture OR emit
    a positron to become cobalt-56.

    Then the cobalt-56 could either undergo electron capture OR emit
    a positron to become iron-56.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      In MFMP experiment there was a weak peak at 511 keV in raw data, but it disappeared when subtracting the background.

      • Alan DeAngelis

        Thanks.
        I like this experiment because it is so simple. Just hydrogen and nickel. I think we can learn a lot by comparing the ash of this with the ash of the experiments with LiAlH4.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      PS
      The other isotopes would yield stable isotopes in more
      exothermic reactions with no gamma rays.

      p~Ni(64)~p > Ni(62) + He(4) 11.8 MeV

      p~Ni(62)~p > Ni(60) + He(4) 9.87 MeV

      p~Ni(60)~p > Ni(58) + He(4) 7.90 MeV

      The MeV alphas would create x-rays when they knock out electrons.

  • Zeddicus23

    I’m not sure this makes any sense, but if we believe that porous Ni treated using Piantelli’s or Celani’s methods can create X-ray radiation when cycled through the proper temperature range, and we know that Rossi has stated that most of the energy in his reactors comes from a nuclear reaction involving Li, could it be that a primarily radiation-producing reactor (possibly with little or no Li ) is the “mouse”, while this radiation activates the “cat” which contains Li as well as Ni ?

    • Pekka Janhunen

      I guess it’s a possibility. One thing that I’m permanently wondering is why nickel preparation seems to be important even though the nanostructure should be quickly erased by high temperature.

      • e-dog

        Im thinking the same thing!

      • Ecco

        According to Leif Holmlid and others (e.g. George Miley) the interaction of hydrogen with the surface of certain surfaces (for example alkali-promoted catalysts) or compression in lattice voids/defects upon absorption in a metal can cause hydrogen atoms to transition to reactive dense clusters with characteristics similar to metallic hydrogen. These clusters have been observed to be metastable and responsible for excess heat and other anomalies in LENR experiments.

        If enough of these clusters are created at a lower temperature, the anomalous reaction could be triggered even if sintering occurs at higher ones.

      • Sanjeev

        Once the H atoms are trapped in lattice, it shouldn’t matter if the structure is destroyed. I guess its good if the pores close down later on, as the H will remain trapped.
        Open the doors, let the protons in then close it. Increase the temperature, now we have ultra dense H vibrating at a very high rate and no where to go.

        • Pekka Janhunen

          Sanjeev, Echo, thanks for good points. Do I understand correctly: Diffusion moves H around, gathering some into pores/voids/defects where some form ultradense clusters which (due to their size or other reason) are no longer mobile.

          • Ecco

            In Miley’s case, who uses metallic Pd/Ni nanoparticles, most of this novel form of hydrogen remains trapped/adsorbed in lattice voids. As far as I understand he’s got sintering problems to solve, which prevents the reaction from being repeated many times with the same efficiency. Also see here: http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/08/21/new-paper-progress-in-development-of-an-lenr-power-cell-for-space-george-miley-et-al/

            Holmlid uses a slightly different approach involving commercially available porous (nanostructured), alkali-promoted iron oxide catalysts. Here these dense clusters of hydrogen produced, which are actually quite mobile, are for the most part produced on the surface and can easily leave it and collect elsewhere, i.e. in a different location than where they are produced. Because of this separation of roles (host lattice vs reactive ultra-dense hydrogen clusters), he often describes this form of hydrogen to potentially be a good target material for inertial confinement fusion.

            It’s not clear exactly in what form Nickel powder is being used in Rossi’s high temperature reactors, but long term usage at temperatures where where sintering is a factor would require either the production beforehand of enough amounts of this novel state of hydrogen or a reactor structure promoting its formation without sintering.

            For the former, this would mean either in-situ formation at lower temperatures (like Holmlid) or the usage of metallic particles (“fuel”) that have already been processed to include these dense clusters of hydrogen (similar to Miley’s approach).

            If on the other hand the latter was true it would imply in an unexpected turn of events that nickel doesn’t actually participate to the reaction or its preparation, and that some other component could be responsible for this instead.

            My hypothesis (one of many admittedly) is that since according to Holmlid alkali atoms can desorb thermally in an excited state from metal oxide surfaces at high temperatures/low pressure and promote the formation of (ultra-) dense hydrogen clusters (long story short), the walls of the ceramic tube used for hosting the “fuel” – if one was actually used – could be a good “active component” candidate, provided that it was properly treated/doped beforehand.

          • Sanjeev

            Of course I’m just speculating on why sintering seems to enhance the reaction instead of killing it. It seems H2 has an affinity for Ni (it surely has a great affinity for Pd and Pt, which absorb it in great quantities), and increasing the surface area by some treatment simply accelerates the H2 diffusion. Once its inside its anyone’s guess what form it takes, but the pores and defects of lattice have served their purpose, lenr can proceed without them.

            Lenr being an atomic level phenomena should have nothing to do with macro structures (I guess) and at atomic level, as you know, there is nothing there but probabilities, there is no matter at this level. My favorite hypothesis is a combination of uncertainty principle and quantum tunneling, which elegantly and non-violently turn particles into various configurations, releasing some energy.
            We are in the era of brute force atomic power. I’m sure there are more elegant ways to extract energy from matter, lenr seems to be one of them.

            • Pekka Janhunen

              @Sanjeev Of course we don’t know what happens there, but I found your comments valuable because this was the first time I realised that the E-cat fuel might lose its nanostructure soon after startup and still be able to run for 12 months with optional breaks. Not certain to be so, but a logical possibility.

        • Pekka Janhunen

          (Ecco not Echo, sorry.) I add speculation: Maybe LT E-cat was one where pores were open all the time, outgassing-limited work cycle 6:1, so COP<=6. HotCat was what you said, temperature high so that pores closed. In E-cat X the same but replaced Ni by Ni-W alloy.

        • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Agaricus

          A tuneable, oscillating EM field would stimulate ‘vibration’ through magnetostriction. IMHO, driving CF with heat alone is like trying to ride a bike with only one pedal.

          • nietsnie

            That is my suspicion also.

        • Ophelia Rump

          If that is the case, then precook the fuel into a liquid state, then pour it into solid molds. You could shape it into sheets or even thin films. It would give you more control over the fuel distribution and the density of the reaction. Potentially you could distribute beads of it into a waffle matrix of heat and or electrically conductive material to produce large surface area fuel units.

          • Sanjeev

            People have tried various forms, like (Piantelli’s) rod, wires, powders, beads etc. So yes possible to engineer it nicely.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Pekka, I hope to make this completely crystal clear this week.

      • Ted-X

        My hypothesis: a stable form of a Bose-Einstein Condensate forms in the preparation stage (or something similar, like a meta-nickel (with a neutron ring outside of the nucleus… or still something else, which is so far unknown). My guess is that the preparation is a cryogenic crunching of nickel particles, as the first patent application of Rossi’s was slightly hinting at that.

        • Ted-X

          Proton rings are also possible and known. The proton ring would be strongly exposed and perhaps inclined to capture an electron a muon or to undergo some other change.

    • Mats002

      Yes, this is my conclusion after digesting the info about the Rossi effect and the pioneers of the NiH system and live open experiments over the years.

      The magic moment is how x-ray forms powerful enough to explain the observed output energies (mouse).

      The Cat is still to discover, but I bet on some kind of resonance/coherence in the EM spectra. The EM frequency can be controlled by choice of thermalizing/reflecting material, ie W or Ag or Au etc.

      • greggoble

        Matsoo2

        Excellent comment
        The works of Seldon Technologies as well as the works of Liviu Popa Simil explore anodes as transducers in LENR nuclear batteries.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Yes…

      Both the ejected protons and the 1H + 7Li > 2 Alpha/4He are all energetic particles that are easy to stop.

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

    To catch a ‘radon flea’ one merely needs to place a paper filter, a piece of tissue will suffice or coffee filter over a computer cpu fan, attending to details to direct airlfow through the filter. Run the fan for a few to many hours and place the filter on your trusty geiger counter… voila radon fleas will be revealed with characteristic decay curves.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Hi Russ, You are missing the suggestion by obvious below to get a whole vacuum cleaner full of dust next to the detector.

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

        Au contraire, try both methods and you will see which one works, the time trusted method or the arm chair social media pundit method… this problem is far more expansive than the topic of radon fleas.

        • Bob Greenyer

          The other option is to replace the wire with platinum and re-run.

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

            Well before rebuilding the working system I hope he runs it much more with some variations. The idea that the signal is a radon flea is not likely… as for methods for collecting and studying radon fleas the method I mentioned has been common practice and used for decades while looking at vacuum bags full of room dust is not an established practice, my point was don’t reinvent very well tested and trusted tools.

            • Bob Greenyer

              We are arranging to send him our scintillator and some lead bricks, then he can discriminate using the spectra.

        • Obvious

          FWIW, I was talking about testing to see if bumping the gamma detector counts by 5 to 7 times by dust was reasonable or easily testable, not seeing what a radon decay looks like.

          I think we are all “arm chair social media pundit”s when we show up here.

          I also consider that you are in effect suggesting building a small vacuum cleaner.

  • Jamie Sibley

    Anybody catch this part ” Constant airflow through the calorimeter guaranteed that neither the cell nor the detector head overheated.”
    Makes it seem unlikely that dust would accumulate, then dissipate, from the quartz tube, and only during the hydrogen runs. I’m putting my vote in against the magic dust hypothesis.

    • Ged

      It is a perposterous hypothesis. If it were dust, then everytime the HVAC ran, or if he turned on a fan, we’d see way more counts from the Much stronger air currents and direct dust spewing.

  • Mats002

    Oh – and don’t forget: the radiation signal can be due to dust (background radiation dust as in normal background level) that denses around the reactor because of heated air flows or static electricity.

    How to mitigate this cause of error in the signal?

    • Ged

      Just test the detector next to another equally hot heat source in the same place, easy peasy.

      • Mats002

        Hi Ged! I see the heat thing but is your solution enough to mitigate the static electricity thing?

        • Ged

          Of course. Static electricity isn’t going to just -magically appear-. If heat is the cause of currents of dust that build static, then -any- source of heat will be the same. And of course, any source of heating by an electrical unit, will have plenty of electrical current too.

          Saying it’s dust or static causing the results is Really a stretch. I’ve worked with radiation detectors, they are not that fickle, and unless there is known radioactive contamination, natural dust doesn’t magically make radiation increase if it’s disturbed as it’s already in the air.

          But, the -heat-, on the other hand, is a different matter. I don’t believe for one second the theories about suddenly a small heat source causing currents that spike radiation, because that’s not how background radiation works, but I am very wary about ambient heating affecting the detector and making it report radiation when there isn’t any. We know, already from past MFMP tests, and on how the physics of gamma detectors work, that heating can give a false signal due to thermal expansion effects inside the detector itself. This needs to be controlled for.

          But -all- the objections you and I raise here, are controlled for by simply putting a new electronic heat source in the same place the device was and raising it up to a similar temperature to see if the behavior begins to emerge. It is a ridiculously easy control, and it needs to be done.

    • Obvious

      Just how many kgs of dust is suspected to be floating around to be enough swamp the signal from the planet?

      • Mats002

        Good question! Can you make a ballpark answer?

        • Obvious

          A lot.

          • Mats002

            Ha ha! This is a serious question raised by Thomas Clarke the Lugano-emissivity-debunk-guy, do you have some number on ‘a lot’?

            • Obvious

              It’s a very tricky calculation, which is probably why he didn’t attempt it when I suggested he do that the first time he mentioned it. The data is scarce also.

              • Mats002

                Any way I see your point – one Kg of dust is impossible to dense without being visible for the naked eye ^^

                • Obvious

                  I think you could get a much bigger background increase from the ground drying out after a rainstorm than from dust floating past a sensor.

                • Obvious

                  A fun test might be holding up a full vacuum cleaner bag near the detector.

                • Mats002

                  Tell’im!

                • Obvious

                  Somebody would probably complain that the dust came from somewhere else, or is blocking the background because there is too much…

                • Mats002

                  Or the bag itself is composed of a shielding material – my my this is too much…

                • Bob Greenyer

                  hahah – too funny obvious…

                  I think we can conclude that Celani’s approach is valid.

    • Slad

      Move the Geiger counter closed to the reactor, and see if the count goes up ….Much like Jeff did.

  • Pekka Janhunen

    It’s a preliminary result, but the approach looks professional. Hopefully he can find the instruments he’s planning to use in the next phase.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Alan could lend him one of the Scintillators we have

  • http://www.drboblog.com Doctor Bob

    Question to Jeff: Have you tried pouring (Oxidated) water on the cell during operation?
    If so, what happened?

    (This is one of these jokes that’ll take a few weeks or months to appreciate)

  • Mike Henderson

    I am curious, what is the magnetic field profile inside of a coiled coil? And if two coils are prepared and the larger outer coil is turned in opposite directions (relative to the direction of finer coiling), does the induced field cancel / add? My head spins and Google fails me.

    I would like to see a DC voltage drop added to the coiled heater around the glowstick so the magnetic field has both an oscillating component (from AC) and a fixed-directional component.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Essentially the process was the same as Celani wire preparation. Oxidisation on purpose is key to creating the spongy nano structures which appear after reduction.

    http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/503-how-to-make-a-celani-wire-is-coming#!20140527_180740

    You can see it all spelt out in Celani’s 2012 patent application which was reported here:

    http://ecatnews.com/?p=2359

    “Abstract: Thin nano structured layers on surfaces of nickel or its alloys for quickly achieving high hydrogen adsorption values (H/Ni˜0.7) through direct metal/gas contact. The said layers are produced by a process comprising the step of oxidising the said surfaces, applying a film of aqueous silica sol to them, subsequent heating in an -oxidising atmosphere and final activation through reduction in a reducing atmosphere. …”

    Notice the absolutely critical last step – removing the oxides.

    • Ecco

      Copy/pasting here (and extending) for the sake of discussion.

      The critical detail that is a bit vague from Celani’s patent application is the temperature at which the final reduction step occurs. According to claim 32 in Celani’s patent:

      32. A process according to claim 31, wherein said treatment in a hydrogen atmosphere is carried out at temperatures between 120 and 900° and for a time of between 50 and 1200 seconds.

      From the paper linked in the other thread and in Jeff’s document it’s apparent that only if this step is performed at high enough temperatures the finely porous structures are created.

      http://i.imgur.com/eMvmvEQ.gif

      In reply to Sanjeev from the other thread:

      So Celani’s process is no more a secret now.

      Probably no more, with this paper showing the oxide reduction kinetics at different temperatures.

      • Bob Greenyer

        The paper adds clarity – but does not change the fact that Celani made a working procedure with the same principle that pre-dated the papers work significantly.

        • Ecco

          I don’t want to detract from Celani’s patent but generally speaking a final reduction step in H2, CO or a mix thereof is routinely performed in order to “activate” laboratory- or industrially-made heterogeneous catalysts whose synthesis comprises a calcination step (heating in air at high temperature). Here’s one of far too many examples to list:

          http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1319610310001365

          Kudos to Celani for using this process (first?) in a LENR patent!

          The paper linked in Jeff Morriss’s document shows that the reduction step, at least on NiO crystals, can more efficiently and quickly create fine nanostructures at higher temperatures than those usually assumed to be a safe limit for this process.

      • Sanjeev

        Oh yes, as Bob mentioned, it was no secret. However a verification that it works makes all the difference. Now its further revealed that this actually works.
        As Bob mentioned, MFMP could get the radiation at will from such wires. I can’t recall what happened but it never reached the stage of lenr kits.
        I’d like E-Cat DIY kits because of its potential for a very high heat output and months of service, but Celani wires are simpler to make into kits.

    • Sanjeev

      Noticing some similarities with E-Cat’s powder preparation. So the on site creation of spongy nano structures seems to be important. Can’t say about heat yet, but it seems it does produce some radiation via lenr.

    • Ecco

      I’d also like to point out that silica (SiO2) which Celani applies to the wire multiple times in the form of a colloidal solution is an oxide as well. However unlike NiO it cannot be easily reduced in hydrogen at the temperatures used for the process described here. This is not a bad thing because the SiO particles will among other things act as structural promoters (i.e. prevent sintering from happening to some extent), which is also the reason why in other fields catalysts are usually in the form of [reduced] metal particles applied on stable ceramic surfaces.

      What I’m pointing at with this and previous comments is that it’s the side effect of reducing the oxides which probably matters the most, rather than simply having an oxide-free surface (which alone wouldn’t explain results by others – e.g. Holmlid – with porous industrial iron oxide catalysts).

      • Bob Greenyer

        The oxide free transition metal is critical.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Brilliant, well done Jeff!

    • Ged

      Wonder if his equipment logged the spectrum. That could be very informative. Also good to do calibration of the detector with another heat source of equal magnitude and distance, to baseline correct for any heating artifacts in the detector.

      The community is getting there now!

      • Bob Greenyer

        I think that is the plan for next experiments – to do spectra to determine the nature of the signal – not least to discount Radon.

        Oh, yeh… we’re getting there.