The following announcement comes from the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project regarding a new test that they are preparing.
A fat chance of this happening. More taxpayers money keeps going down the drain.
“If everything goes to plan – which it almost certainly won’t – in 2035 ITER
will produce 500 megawatts of energy for a few hundred seconds. That will make it the first fusion reactor to produce more energy than it takes to operate.”
When will the experiment begin?
We are still working out teething issues with the Neutron detectors which means at this stage, live tests start times are not determinable.
From Lenr forum
POWER UP NOW MR ROSSI! – (Or what I learned in 2016 about making a working E-Cat.)
19 hours ago+2
POWERUP NOW MR ROSSI!
P O W E R U P N O W M R R O S S I !
P – Prepare nickel by removing oxides. (Ultrasound or acid etching will peel off the coating that hinders absorption of hydrogen exposing roughened surface.)
O – Only degassed and vacuumed nickel will be optimal. (Trapped gases must go. Under high vacuum heat nickel in stages for many hours or days.)
W – With one of many techniques pre-hydrogenate the nickel to create intergranular hydrogen bubbles and fill voids. (High pressure, spillover catalysts such as palladium and copper, etc.)
E – Employ Alfa Aesar LiAlH4 97% (The best brand to use due to small particle size, hydrogen content, and purity.)
R – Resolve to heat slowly through 225C at less than 1C per min. (This prevents the LiAlH4 from melting and allows for maximum time during critical temperature range.)
U – Use Thermal Shock Technique. (Go up from 225C to 725C, cut power and drop to 300C, then increase temperature rapidly. Cycle to higher temps repeatedly if needed.)
P – Provide second hydrogen source other than LiAlH4. (If LiAlH4 doesn’t seem to work alone, add supplemental hydrogen from a tank or other source.)
N – Need high voltage (300 or 400 volt) three phase AC square wave resonance frequency to boost stimulation. (Short spikes of voltage/current at resonant frequency can drive reaction.)
O – Open texts that explain how solenoids naturally have some degree of capacitance and inductance. (Learn how to tune in the frequency to match the particular reactor.)
W – Without exotic stimulation excess heat can still appear. (Do not think it is a requirement, but if you have the equipment it can optimize control and output.)
M – Maximize IR reflectivity back onto the reactor core by utilizing thick metal outer casing. (There was a reason for the early hot cats having thick walls.)
R – Reduce thermal loses and required input power by considering insulation around the encased reactor. (Refractory brick or foamed cement works well.)
R – Resistors should be appropriate to the temperature range, allow for thermal cycling, and be protected from oxidation. (Otherwise expect failures.)
O – Oxygen is your enemy. (In pre-processing keep the cleaned nickel away from atmosphere and in a hydrogen environment.)
S – Safety comes first not matter what. (One breath of LiAlH4 can kill, nickel can be toxic, electricity can zap you, heat can start fires.)
S – Shield yourself from the reactor. (A sheet or barrier between yourself and the reactor is a good idea. Eye protection is a must.)
I – Improve your results. (Don’t do one off tests. Test dozens or hundreds of times changing variables one at a time. For example, run a test with just nickel and a length of lithium wire if you have a hydrogen tank. Or add a small percentage of LiH which should break down at around 700C to produce a secondary increase in hydrogen pressure and provide more Li. Of course the simplest thing to try is to vary your ratios of nickel, LiAlH4, LiH, Li, etc. Most importantly, prepare your nickel fully before trying anything if you have the equipment. Removing the oxides, vacuuming, and pre-hydrogenating are all important.)
All of the above really can be summarized into a few short statements.
Pre-process your nickel well to get it ready for accepting hydrogen.
Get hydrogen into your nickel.
Stimulate the hydrogen that is in your nickel.
For goodness sakes, stay safe while you are experimenting.
The difficulty in replicating and producing massive excess heat is an illusion. Only the three above tasks must be achieved. By following the guidelines setup by, “POWER UP NOW MR ROSSI!” I’m convinced you can produce hundreds to thousands of watts per gram of fuel charge and most importantly achieve self sustained operation.
Question and Answer
Q: Where did you get the information in this phonetic from?
A: Several different individuals who claim the production of excess heat, hundreds of hours of reading papers relating to these topics (both LENR and non-LENR papers), and putting a large number of clues together.
Q: Can you guarantee that by following these instructions I’ll be able to produce excess heat?
A: Of course not. However, by following them (especially the prep of the nickel and using the best LiAlH4) I expect you will have a much higher chance at success.
Q: What do you mean by the difficulty of producing excess heat being an illusion? These systems are hard to make work!
A: Most replicators fail to go to great lengths to pre-process their fuel so it is optimized for the absorption of hydrogen. The removal of oxides, degassing of carbon monoxide and other gases trapped in the lattice, and pre-hydrogenation can be extensive processes that take days. Furthermore, with the usual sub-optimal fuel most replicators perform few tests and change few variables. They don’t change fuel ratios, heating rates, hydrogen pressures, or fuel preparation methods. Also, very few replicators use high quality Alfa Aesar brand LiAlH4 which seems to be far better than other brands. This is not their fault in most cases. Most replicators have limited time, money, or equipment/chemicals/supplies. But when a replicator gains enough experience after performing the steps in this phonetic, they realize producing excess heat with nickel and hydrogen (or even other metals) is not as mysterious as they previously thought.
Q: Some replicators seem to have had success without performing these steps. Is there a shortcut that can make it simpler?
A: Unless you thoroughly prepare your fuel, I think the outcomes of your test will often be highly variable. Although you may have random success on certain runs, the likelyhood of producing a similar quantity of excess heat on every test is small. In addition, the degree of processing on each brand/type/size of nickel powder required for producing significant excess heat will be different. Some powders may be heavily oxidized, for example, and require extensive ultrasonic irradiation, acid etching, or reduction with hydrogen. Other powders may contain impurities which could make the results of pre-hydrogenation far different than with high purity powder/wire.
Q: You mention nothing about particle size. Doesn’t surface area matter?
A: I no longer think that utilizing nickel with a particularly high surface area (such as carbonyl nickel created by the Mond process) is critical. Replicators have produced excess heat with multiple brands/types of nickel powder and even nickel wire. I think what’s much more important is the extent of the treatment you perform on the nickel to optimize hydrogen absorption.
Q: Have you performed any testing yourself?
Q: What else do you think is important?
A: Lots of things could be, potentially. This phonetic gives a good starting point in my opinion. I sincerely and whole heartedly think that the advice in this post provides solid advice that will put a replicator (who is most interested in mixed powder systems like myself) in a good position to see excess heat. I would advise them to adjust many parameters. Additionally, I’d suggest they incorporate methods of varying pressure during triggering. Once the nickel has been fully hydrogenated and the fast heating ramp is about to start, it might be a good idea to make sure the pressure is low.
Presentation given to the UN in Geneva by Francesco Celani
Frank, this news deserves its own posting. What of the tests being posted here of the orbo, was it working?
“Man fails to make perpetual motion machine”. Is this really news?
Frank – he’s right. Considering the amount of time that has been spent investigating this technology on this forum – and also the money that has been invested in it here – this news *really* deserves it’s own post. There are a lot of people who will be interested in how Steorn finally shook out.
For myself, I feel vindicated finally. I’m sure that there will be those who will continue to believe – in spite of everything. What can you do? But, I can finally let this go now.
You should keep your unaltered Orbo, Frank. It’s valuable. It doesn’t matter that it never worked. Years from now, when our time has become ancient history, it may be a popular piece in a museum dedicated to the outrageous alternative energy concepts in the early days of the 21st century – the ones that didn’t work. A window into the popular creative inventiveness during the time that ultimately spawned the one, ubiquitous and obvious by then (from that future perspective), energy invention that did work and replaced fossil fuels. Keep a copy of all the articles and posts that surrounded it during it’s investigation period here. People will be interested in our reasoning and motivation.
Think of the film footage we’ve all watched of the failed flying machines of the early 20th century. It was a time during which a group of people, a subset of that population, *knew* for sure that a flying machine was going to be invented – they just didn’t know how it would be done. That environment, and all the failures it produced, paved the road for the Wright brothers and air travel as we know it today.
Steorn, and it’s like, will be like the giant umbrella pump flying machine footage – the one where it bounces up and down and ultimately keels over on it’s side? Or – the one with the six wings that immediately nose-dived off the hill into the ground. The ones where mankind ultimately decided, “OK, well – definitely not that then…” before moving on to the next possibility.
Goodness me, well what a surprise!
This guy was running his own Tokomak long con
Now our are jumping to unscientific conclusions.
You cannot prove it was a con.
Maybe he did succeed in building a perpetual motion machine in his office and all the experts are wrong.
It has not been proved categorically that he does not in fact have a perpetual motion machine.
Maybe the 23 million euros was stolen by the CIA to make him look bad.
I will ask my pet unicorn what she thinks.
Bob Greenyer —
Can we get an update on me356, please.
Hi LENR G,
I have spoken in recent days with me356 where I offered to meet with him. He re-confirmed his commitment to let us review his work at the earliest possible opportunity. Whilst he does claim significant progress, he says that he is not ready to engage with anyone at this time and that doing so would only frustrate his efforts.
I have to say that’s disappointing. Horns have been pulled back it seems.
I guess in the fullness of time we can conclude if it was disappointing overall – me356 is someone who likes to reveal when he has something that just works and he is confident in.
If nothing else, the fact that he is still researching indicates that he feels there is adequate reason to.
Meanwhile, the MFMP will continue to share and operate in the open.
Sure but he had reached a point where his cooperation with you/MFMP could have accelerated emergence of this technology.
It now appears that he would rather figure out the science himself or prepare a product for market… or he had nothing all along and was playing us all.
Assuming he’s not evil, his choice to continue to fly solo is disappointing. He can proceed in whatever way he pleases of course. I’m just disappointed that another potential avenue of verification has been blocked.
Enough of these avenues get blocked or barricaded or blown up and you have to start to wonder.
We will get there, one way or another.
Thanks for the update Bob…
Nothing too do with thread but a couple of interesting articles.
This looks good, although thermal decreasing shocks may be difficult (if needed?). It will cause a lot less stress on the heating coils.
Good luck with the tests!
Good luck! Your setup is coming along great–too bad about the fittings, but swagelok should do you well. Very much looking forward to what data you all find 😀
It is possible that the nature of the radiation is DIFFERENT from what might be expected from a nuclear reaction based LENR. What experimenter has taken the effort to look at other radiation mechanisms such as high levels of ionization of matter from a LENR reaction? Five experimenters have already reported the results of charged particle ionization separately and without correlation in their experiments.
Unsolicited observations from these experimenters including Rossi, ME356, Eros, Holmlid, and Defkalion of identical befuddling experimental consequences lends credence to the prediction of a common causative mechanism.
For Example, Defkalion saw no commercial or competitive advantage in reporting a major problem that they suffered in the testing and demonstration of their system that later turned up in other dissimilar systems. ME356 explained why his testing instruments and sensors were malfunctioning 3 meters away from his reaction. This is very similar to what Defkalion had reported. Now Holmlid tells us why such observations are a result of intense muon production. This common shared LENR reaction characteristic is one of the reasons that I beleive that Defkalion has a valid LENR reaction going on.
Now from Holmlid, the picture becomes a little clearer, a common thread can be drawn to the point that if ionization production is not observed in a LENR experimental situation, then the power production of the reaction and even its existence is rightly questioned. What can MFNP do the debunk of support this experimental revelation?
THE METAL-LEAF ELECTROSCOPE
I built an Electroscope in fourth grade. Its easy to build and use.
This device can detect muon ionization in the same way that it can detect beta radiation.
Electrostatics at Home
My electroscope used two gold leaf strips that separated when a charge was applied to the electrode.
Movement of the strips will show a change in the ionization level around the reactor. Aren’t you experimenters ashamed of such a horrendous lack of attention to such an important aspect of LENR when its detection is so easy and cheap?
If muons are found coming from the LENR reaction, I bet that a person good at numbers could tell what the muon flux is from the speed of deflection change in the metal leafs.
I fail to understand why muons formed by LENR would be particularly penetrating. The ones formed by cosmic ray impact should have tremendously high energy, and be highly penetrative because of that. But muons formed in the solid state should be of MUCH lower energy, and more easily stopped than beta particles.
But I am beginning to think that we are looking at a purloined letter situation, with the solution in plain sight. WHERE IS THE TUNGSTEN?? Rossi has specifically said that he incorporates tungsten as a shielding agent in place of lead due to lead’s low melting point.
Just suppose that the tungsten is a tube INSIDE the ceramic heater, and that the Ni/H tube is inside that. My pure speculation is that the “mouse” is the Ni/H element, but that the tungsten contacts it. The mouse generates muons, the tungsten stops muons, and is where the majority of the really hot reactions are happening. This also fits with the name……QuarkX
“Muons have a mass of 105.7 MeV/c2, which is about 207 times that of the electron. Due to their greater mass, muons are not as sharply accelerated when they encounter electromagnetic fields, and do not emit as much bremsstrahlung (deceleration radiation). This allows muons of a given energy to penetrate far more deeply into matter than electrons since the deceleration of electrons and muons is primarily due to energy loss by the bremsstrahlung mechanism. As an example, so-called “secondary muons”, generated by cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere, can penetrate to the Earth’s surface, and even into deep mines.”
“Muons penetrate not only the calorimeter, but any matter better, than any other known particles, save the neutrinos. The main reason is that they don’t interact strongly, so they very rarely undergo hard collisions with atomic nuclei, where they could lose significant energy. They do interact electromagnetically, so they collide with electrons, but because they are much heavier than electrons, they only lose a small fraction of energy in those collisions. Also, because of their high mass, they don’t radiate as much energy during passage through matter as electrons do. With a lot of simplification you may say, that due to the higher mass they undergo much smaller acceleration in the electric field of atomic nuclei. And classically the power of radiation by an accelerated charge is proportional to acceleration squared. Thus a muon, being over 200 times heavier than an electron, would radiate 40.000 less power.”
For the same energy, a lighter charged particle is more penetrating than a heavy one. For example, beta is more penetrating than alpha. When energy is fixed, the light particle moves faster than the heavy one and therefore it has less time to interact with the Coulomb field of a slow particle when flying by.
What you quoted is also correct, but it holds to so high kinetic energies that nuclear reactions start to play a role and particles are fully or nearly relativistic.
Overall, though, I’m sceptical about the muon thing in LENR. The muon rest mass is well above the typical energy that can is available from nuclear reactions of mid-mass elements. In order to generate them one should therefore somehow combine the energy output from more than one elementary process. Also, muons are ionising radiation, and we don’t see it.,Rossi is still alive etc.
True, the decay of the proton is an outlier theory, but it does provide 1 GeV of energy to eventual particle formation.
Yes, but the above quote refers to HIGH ENERGY muons (i.e. those formed by cosmic ray collisions). Any muons formed in LENR will be “low energy”, and still have a negative charge…so they should be stopped by the same electrostatic forces as beta particles.
A properly configured cload chamber will measure the energy of the muon. The magnetic field will cause the muon to spiral as it loses energy. the length of the path of the particle defined the amount of energy that it carried when it was formed.
I understand cloud chambers quite well. I simply don’t understand why any muon formed in an LENR device would exhibit the ability to penetrate that you are claiming, given its charge and mass. Where does the energy to drive that penetration come from??
The metallic hydride has a large store of energy in the GeV range. That energy is shared through entanglement with the particles the metallic hydride generates.
The behavior of the muon come from experimental and operational reports from DGT and ME356. For example, ME356 claims that his electrical equipment is disables at a distance of 3 meters,
Sorry, but I just can’t buy it.
Any detector of ionizing radiation should “see” these particles, including run of the mill GM tubes. The only way for this not to happen is for the muons to be formed in the reactor as some kind of uncharged virtual particle, disappear from the LENR reactor, and re-appear as the charged particle at distance “X” away.
These guys need to stop looking for heat, as it appears they have discovered the Star Trek transporter.
Superposition in QM can act in the way you describe.
See how Holmlid built his own muon detector based on detecting tradition from muon catalyzed nuclear reactions.
Here is the intro
Both positive and negative muons are formed naturally in the upper atmosphere1 from impact of particles with cosmic
origin. They move down to the surface of Earth and into the ground despite their short lifetime.1,2 Muons are the final
unstable particles formed by meson decay3 and decay themselves (at 2.2 μs, thus, slower than any mesons) to electrons or positrons plus neutrinos. Muons can be produced at large flux densities by high-energy (hundreds of GeV) protons impacting targets at so called muon factories, for example, at CERNSPS
(Super Proton Synchrotron).4 The research on muons is also coupled to the production of neutrinos at so called neutrino factories.5 Here, muons formed by nuclear processes
in ultra-dense hydrogen H(0)6,7 are studied by their interaction with solid converter materials. These interactions give both
electrons and x-ray photons which are detectable by photomultipliers
(PMTs). The electrons and x-ray photons are here studied by pulse-height energy analysis giving characteristic energy spectra. The practical instrumental goal is to measure
the intensity and energy of muons with a small device, to be able to assess the risks of small-scale fusion devices which may emit large fluxes of muons.8
Ultra-dense hydrogen has been studied mainly in our
group for several years.6 It is normally indicated as H(0) and
has been studied in the two forms of ultra-dense deuterium
D(0)9 and ultra-dense protium p(0).10 Due to the extremely
high density of this material with interatomic distances normally
of 2.3 pm,7 it is expected that it will be an excellent fuel for laser-induced nuclear fusion.11–13 The density of this fuel is so high that further compression is not needed to reach fusion conditions, but only an igniting laser pulse. Laser induced fusion processes have, indeed, been reported.9,11,12
Such fusion processes have been observed by mass spectrometry to give both 3He and 4He.14 The fast particles at >10 MeV u−1 observed from the laser-induced processes in
H(0) also indicate nuclear processes.12,15–17 The particle energy is high enough to give electron-positron pair production.
18 These MeV u−1 particles decay in a few ns to other particles.19 The lifetimes of the MeV u−1 particles agree with those for kaons and pions3 which all decay forming muons.
In our thermal (calorimetric) laser-induced fusion experiments in D(0) (in press), a substantial fraction of the total particle
energy from the fusion process was not measurable. It was leaking out in an unidentified way, apparently as penetrating
particles but not as neutrons. A search was then initiated to identify gamma radiation or other high-energy particles. This resulted in detection of very intense beta-like energy spectra and line spectra due to muons. It appears likely that many small-scale fusion test systems emit muons, and it is thus
important to understand how to selectively detect muons with high sensitivity. Progress in this direction is now reported.
Muons are often observed by detectors composed of a plastic scintillator (PS) and a PMT.20,38 The muon signal is here detected with much higher signal yield after converting
the muons more effectively into electrons with energy distributions similar to beta distributions. This conversion method
for muon detection has not been reported previously. The beta electrons are observed directly by the PMT. The detection
mechanism responds to muons entering the detector through a thick metal enclosure. The muons fall with a large probability into low-energy levels around the nuclei in the materials close to the PMT cathode, forming muonic atoms.21 The subsequent
capture into the nucleus normally transfers a proton in the nucleus to a neutron, giving an excited nucleus with atomic number decreased one step. This excited nucleus decays relatively rapidly by beta decay. In reality, the processes are more complex varying also with the energy of the captured muons,
so other nuclei and other particles than electrons may also be
formed by the nuclear decay. The general principles of the
muon capture are well known,2 but for each different nucleus,
several different outcomes are possible.
Axil, what energy levels are you expecting the muons generated from LENR to carry?
Pinging Axis with hopes for a reply. Axil, you have stated grave concerns of massive muon flux or perhaps high energy muon flux out of LENR. Can you give us your estimate of energy levels and how those fit in with your various theories?
That setup looks a bit different than the MFMP ClamShell project that Bob Higgins is working on. Is this new setup an evolution of the Clamshell project? It seems to have higher heat losses than v1.0. The Clamshell’s goal was to be able to use only 200W to achieve activation.
My current project draws on Bob Higgins’ Clamshell design, but is based on the Glowstick platform. I simply retro-fitted a pair of identical split refractory bricks to the intact GS5-3 reactor. It’s got over 100 hours at heat and still measures close to spec. But it has a slow leak, so the Hydrogen is all gone after 3 months.
The goal of these tests is to increase the slope of the temp-to-power plot, thus improving the resolution of COP measurement. Unfortunately this also causes measurement issues. The Optris camera is no longer useful, and measurements of radiation will be limited by the bricks.
David’s Glowstick replica is looking really nice, and I have high hopes for his work. Every detail matters in these systems, and it takes a while to sort out the problems.
Here’s the full calibration, with a thermocouple inside the core (Null side)