Nei, nå sporer du av. Brødeksemplet ditt har ingenting med denne saken å gjøre. Alminneliggjøring har alltid den faren med seg at den blir uriktig. Et gratis brød gir ingen forpliktelse eller lovnad om noe. Det er kun en normal markedsføringsteknikk for å få kundenes oppmerksom på produktet slik at de senere er villige til å betale for flere leveranser. Rossi er noe helt annet. Han setter ut en forventning uten nødvendig dokumentasjon ( mulighet for å smake på brødet). Å dra inn teorien om falsifikasjon her blir helt på viddene. Hvis man mener at denne vitenskapsteoretiske retningen åpner for at alle mulige påstander er korrekte inntil de er motbevist blir det hele absurd.
Du må klare å se det abstrakte i diskusjonen. Jeg reagerte kun på argumentasjonen til Harald1966, ikke argumentet som sådan. Du kan forsåvidt si at dette er irrelevant for diskusjonen, men jeg mener måten vi argumenterer også må holde mål.
Jeg holder på vitenskapelig skepsis og tviler på at Rossi har blitt nåtidens alkymist. Jeg er stort sett enig med deg, Torango. Jeg tror sågar jeg skrev noen innlegg om akkurat dette tidligere i tråden. Jeg er bare allergisk mot dårlige argumentasjonsmetoder.
Uansett, dette var utenfor emnet. Noen som har sett noen nyheter i det siste om Rossi og maskinen hans, i godt eller dårlig lys?
[...] Etter å ha kikket rundt på nettet er det faktisk flere anerkjente vitenskapsmenn som er positive til prosjektet [...]
Kan du dele linker til disse nettstedene?
Denne rapporten er det første en bør lese gjennom, og så bør en sjekke opp hvilken bakgrunn Essen og Kullander har. De er ikke noen tilfeldige hvem som helst-synsere. Report by Hanno Essén and Sven Kullander On Focardi and Rossi ECat (Cold Fusion) Nyteknik ^ | april 3, 2011 | Essen and Kullander
Experimental test of a mini-Rossi device at the Leonardocorp, Bologna 29 March 2011.
Participants: Giuseppe Levi, David Bianchini, Carlo Leonardi, Hanno Essén, Sven Kullander, Andrea Rossi, Sergio Focardi.
Travel report by Hanno Essén and Sven Kullander, 3 April 2011.
We gathered in the Leonardo Corporation building where the 10 kW apparatus for anomalous energy production by nickel and hydrogen was demonstrated during a press conference on 14th of January. References [1] to [4] for the original papers describing the innovation are listed at the end. In the same building, two CHP facilities were located, based on biodiesel from waste which Andrea Rossi, prior to his present Ni-H activity, had developed. The present test was done on a smaller device [5] than the 10 kW device that has been used earlier during the January press conference. One of the reasons for going to smaller dimensions is safety according to Rossi. The conclusions from the papers [1] to [4] are that nickel and hydrogen provide the fuel for nuclear processes inside a small container in a radiation shielded setup and that in the room outside, no radiation different from the ambient one is found. Figures 1 and 2 below depict the insulated device used for the experiment together with three spare devices. As can be seen on the bare devices there is a horizontal section with a central container. The tube was made of copper and according to Rossi, the reaction chamber is hidden inside in the central part and made of stainless steel. Note that on the main heating resistor which is positioned around the copper tube and made of stainless steel (Figure 3) you can read the dimensions and nominal power (50mm diameter and 300W). The vertical chimney is for the steam-water exhaust. The cooling inlet water of about 18 °C comes from a reservoir via a pump (yellow). The transparent blue rubber hose going from the reservoir to the device is visible above the yellow pump, on the left of the photo in figure 1. To the right at the chimney, a black hose of heavy rubber, for high temperatures, carries the hot water/steam to the sink on the wall of the adjacent room. At the end of the horizontal section there is an auxiliary electric heater to initialize the burning and also to act as a safety if the heat evolution should get out of control. The central container seen in figure 3 has an estimated volume of 50 cm3 and it contains 50 grams of nickel. The container has on its top, a pipe for the filling of hydrogen gas. During the running we used the rightmost one of the devices, figure 4, which is surrounded by a 2 cm thick lead shield, as stated by Rossi, and wrapped with insulation, figure 5. We had free access to the heater electric supply, to the inlet water hose, to the outlet steam valve and water hose and to the hydrogen gas feed pipe. The total weight of the device was estimated to be around 4 kg. Calibrations. The flow of the inlet water was calibrated in the following way. The time for filling up 0.5 liters of water in a carafe was measured to be 278 seconds. Visual checks showed that the water flow was free from bubbles. Scaled to flow per hour resulted in a flow of 6.47 kg/hour (Density 1 kg/liter assumed). The water temperature was 18 °C. The specific heat of water, 4.18 joule/gram/ °C which is equal to 1.16 Wh/kg/ °C is used to calculate the energy needed to bring 1 kg of water from 18 to 100 °C. The result is 1.16(100-18)=95 Wh/kg. The heat of vaporization is 630 Wh/kg. Assuming that all water will be vaporized, the energy required to bring 1 kg water of 18 °C to vapor is 95+630=725 Wh/kg. To heat up the adjusted water flow of 6.47 kg/hour from 18 °C to vapor will require 7256.47=4.69 kWh/hour. The power required for heating and vaporization is thus 4.69 kW. It should be noted that no error analysis has been done but according to Giuseppe Levi, a 5% error in the measurement of the water flow is a conservative estimate. Even with this error, the conclusions will not change due to the magnitude of the observed effects. Startup. Prior to startup, the hydrogen bottle with a nominal pressure of 160 bars was connected for a short moment to the device to pressurize the fuel container to about 25 bars. The air of atmospheric pressure was remaining in the container as a small impurity. The amount of hydrogen with the assumed container volume of 50 cm3 is 0.11 grams of hydrogen. The electric heater was switched on at 10:25, and the meter reading was 1.5 amperes corresponding to 330 watts for the heating including the power for the instrumentation, about 30 watts. The electric heater thus provides a power of 300 watts to the nickel-hydrogen mixture. This corresponds also to the nominal power of the resistor. Initial running to reach vaporization. The temperatures of the inlet water and the outlet water were monitored and recorded every 2 seconds. The heater was connected at 10:25 and the boiling point was reached at 10:42. The detailed temperature-time relation is shown in figure 6. The inlet water temperature was 17.3 °C and increased slightly to 17.6 °C during this initial running. The outlet water temperature increased from 20 °C at 10:27 to 60 °C at 10:36. This means a temperature increase by 40 °C in 9 minutes which is essentially due to the electric heater. It is worth noting that at this point in time and temperature, 10:36 and 60°C, the 300 W from the heater is barely sufficient to raise the temperature of the flowing water from the inlet temperature of 17.6 °C to the 60 °C recorded at this time. If no additional heat had been generated internally, the temperature would not exceed the 60 °C recorded at 10:36. Instead the temperature increases faster after 10:36, as can be seen as a kink occurring at 60 °C in the temperature-time relation. (Figure 6). A temperature of 97.5 °C is reached at 10:40. The time taken to bring the water from 60 to 97.5 °C is 4 minutes. The 100 °C temperature is reached at 10:42 and at about 10:45 all the water is completely vaporized found by visual checks of the outlet tube and the valve letting out steam from the chimney. This means that from this point in time, 10:45, 4.69 kW power is delivered to the heating and vaporization, and 4.69 – 0.30 = 4.39 kW would have to come from the energy produced in the internal nickel-hydrogen container. Operation. The experiment was continually running from 10:45 to 16:30 when it was stopped by switching off the heater and increasing the cooling water flow to a maximum of 30 liters per hour. On two occasions during the steam production phase, David Bianchini tested the radiation level which did not differ from the normal level in the room. The temperature at the outlet was controlled continually to be above 100°C. According to the electronic log-book it remained always between 100.1 and 100.2 °C during the operation from 10:45 to 16:30 as can be seen in figure 7. Between 11:00 and 12:00 o’clock, control measurements were done on how much water that had not evaporated. The system to measure the non-evaporated water was a certified Testo System, Testo 650, with a probe guaranteed to resist up to 550°C. The measurements showed that at 11:15 1.4% of the water was non-vaporized, at 11:30 1.3% and at 11:45 1.2% of the water was non-vaporized. The energy produced inside the device is calculated to be (1.000-0.013)(16:30-10:45)4.39 =25 kWh. Discussion. Since we do not have access to the internal design of the central fuel container and no information on the external lead shielding and the cooling water system we can only make very general comments. The central container is about 50 cm3 in size and it contains 0.11 gram hydrogen and 50 grams nickel. The enthalpy from the chemical formation of nickel and hydrogen to nickel hydride is 4850 joule/mol [6]. If it had been a chemical process, a maximum of 0.15 watt-hour of energy could have been produced from nickel and 0.11 gram hydrogen, the whole hydrogen content of the container. On the other hand, 0.11 gram hydrogen and 6 grams of nickel (assuming that we use one proton for each nickel atom) are about sufficient to produce 24 MWh through nuclear processes assuming that 8 MeV per reaction can be liberated as free energy. For comparison, 3 liters of oil or 0.6 kg of hydrogen would give 25 kWh through chemical burning. Any chemical process for producing 25 kWh from any fuel in a 50 cm3 container can be ruled out. The only alternative explanation is that there is some kind of a nuclear process that gives rise to the measured energy production. Acknowledgements. We are grateful to our Bologna hosts, the cited participants and Dr Giuliano Guandalini for warm-hearted hospitality. We also appreciate the instructive execution of the experiment and the information provided. However, the authors of this Travel report are responsible for the observations and for the conclusions. References. [1] A. Rossi (inventor), Method and Apparatus for Carrying out Nickel and Hydrogen Exothermal Reactions, (WO/2009/125444) http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp? WO=2009125444; [2] S. Focardi and A. Rossi, A new energy source from nuclear fusion, Journal of Nuclear Physics, http://www.journal-of-nuclearphysics.com/? p=66, February 2010; [3] D. Bianchini, Experimental evaluation, for radiation protection purpose, of photon and neutron radiation field during the public presentation of the prototype called ”Energy Amplifier”. http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com [4] G. Levi, Report on heat production during preliminary tests on the Rossi ”Ni-H” reactor, http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com. [5] A. Rossi, A Mini Apparatus for Ni-H energy production, private communication, 110329. [6] M. Tkacz, Enthalpies of formation and decomposition of nickel hydride and nickel deuteride derived from (p, c, T) relationships, J. Chem. Thermodynamics 2001, 33, 891–897.
(egen kommentar) Jeg ser i ettertid at det rettes en del kritikk til målingen av tørrheten på dampen. Om den er 100 % tørr vil det være en cop på 1:38 men om den inneholder 50% vann vil cop fremdeles være 1:19. Om noen ikke tror dette stemmer så må noen gjerne kontrollregne tallene, men de bør stemme. Dermed er diskusjonen om tørrheten på gassen kun redusert til en diskusjon om hvor stor effekten er stor eller vannvittig stor
[...] Etter å ha kikket rundt på nettet er det faktisk flere anerkjente vitenskapsmenn som er positive til prosjektet [...]
Kan du dele linker til disse nettstedene?
Her er det en teoretisk forklaring som er nyttig å lese
A detailed Qualitative Approach to the Cold Fusion Nuclear Reactions of H/Ni By prof. Christos Stremmenos
After several years of apparent inaction, the theme of cold fusion has been recently revitalized thanks to, among others, the work and the scientific publications of Focardi and Rossi, which has been conducted in silence, amidst ironical disinterest, without any funding or support. In fact, recently, practical and reliable results have been achieved based on a very promising apparatus invented by Andrea Rossi. Therefore I want to examine the possibility of further development of this technology, which I deem really important for our planet.
Introduction I will start with patent no./2009/125444, registered by Dr. Ing. Andrea Rossi. This invention and its performance have been tested and verified in collaboration with Prof. Sergio Focardi, as reported in their paper, published in February 2010 in the Journal of Nuclear Physics [1]. In that scientific paper they have reported on the performance of an apparatus, which has produced for two years substantial amounts of energy in a reliable and repeatable mode and they have also offered a theoretical analysis for the interpretation of the underlying physical mechanism.
In the history of Science, it is not the first time that a practical and reliable apparatus is working before its theoretical foundation has been completely understood! The photoelectric effect is the classic example in which the application has anticipated its full theoretical interpretation, developed by Einstein. Afterwards Einstein, Plank, Heisenberg, De Broglie, Schrödinger and others formulated the principles of Quantum Mechanics. For the interactive Nickel/Hydrogen system it would be now opportune to compile, in a way easily understood by the non expert the relevant principles and concepts for the qualitative understanding of the phenomenon. Starting with the behavior of electrically charged particles in vacuum, it is known that particles with opposite electric charge attract themselves and “fuse” producing an electrically neutral particle, even though this does not always happen, as for instance in the case of a hydrogen atom, where a proton and a electron although attract each other they do not “fuse”, for reasons that will be explained later. On the contrary, particles charged with electric charge of the same sign always repel each other, and their repulsion tends to infinity when their distance tends to zero, which implies that in this case fusion is not possible (classical physics).
On the contrary, according to Quantum mechanics, for a system with a great number of particles of the same electric charge (polarity) it is possible that a few of them will fuse, as for instance, according to Focardi-Rossi, in the case of Nickel nuclei in crystal structure and hydrogen nuclei (protons) diffused within it, Although of the same polarity, a very small percentage of these nuclei manage to come so close to each other, at a distance of 10-14 m, where strong nuclear forces emerge and take over the Coulomb forces and thus form the nucleus of a new element, either stable or unstable.
This mechanism, which is possible only in the atomic microcosm, is predictable by a quantum-mechanics model of a particle put in a closed box. According to classical physics no one would expect to find a particle out of the box, but in quantum mechanics the probability of a particle to be found out of the box is not zero! This is the so called “tunneling effect”, which for systems with a very large number of particles, predicts that a small percentage of them lie outside the box, having penetrated the “impenetrable” walls and any other present barrier through the “tunnel”! In our case, the barrier is nothing else but the electrostatic repulsion, to which the couples of hydrogen and nickel nuclei (of the same polarity) are subjected and is called Coulomb barrier.
Diffusion mechanism of hydrogen in nickel: Nickel as a catalyst first decomposes the biatomic molecules of hydrogen to hydrogen atoms in contact with the nickel surface. Then these hydrogen atoms deposit their electrons to the conductivity band of the metal (Fermi band) and due to their greatly reduced volume, compared to that of their atom, the hydrogen nuclei readily diffuse into the crystalline structure of the nickel, including its defects. At this point, in order to understand the phenomenon it is necessary to briefly describe the structure both of the nickel atom and the nickel crystal lattice.
It is well known that the nickel atom is not so simple as the hydrogen atom, as its nucleus consists of dozens of protons and neutrons, thus it is much heavier and exerts a proportionally higher electrostatic repulsion than the nucleus of hydrogen, which consists of only one proton. In this case, the electrons, numerically equal to the protons, are ordered in various energy levels and cannot be easily removed from the atom to which they belong. Exception to this rule is the case of electrons of the chemical bonds, which along with the electrons of the hydrogen atoms form the metal conductivity band (electronic cloud), which moves quasi freely throughout the metal mass.
As in all transition metals, the nickel atoms in the solid state, and more specifically their nuclei, are located at the vertices and at the centre of the six faces of the cubic cell of the metal, leaving a free internal octahedral space within the cell, which, on account of the quasi negligible volume of the nuclei, is practically filled with electrons of the nickel atoms, as well as with conductivity electrons.
It would be really interesting to know the electrons’ specific density (number of electrons per unit volume) and its spatial distribution inside this octahedral space of the crystal lattice as a function of temperature.
Dynamics of the lattice vibration states Another important aspect to take into consideration in this system is the dynamics of the lattice vibration states, in other words, the periodic three dimensional normal oscillations of the crystal lattice (phonons) of the nickel, which hosts hydrogen nuclei or nuclei of hydrogen isotopes (deuterium or tritium) that have entered into the above mentioned free space of the crystal cell.
It could be argued that the electrons’ specific density and its spatial distribution in the internal space of the crystal structure should be coherent with the natural frequencies of the lattice oscillations. This means that the periodicity of the electronic cloud within the octahedral space of the elementary crystal cell of Nickel generates an oscillating strengthening of shielding of the diffused nuclei of hydrogen or deuterium which also populate this space.
I believe that these considerations can form the basis for a qualitative analysis of this “NEW SOURCE OF ENERGY” and the phenomenology related to cold fusion, including energy production in much smaller quantities and various reaction products.
Shielding of protons by electrons In the Focardi-Rossi paper the shielding of protons provided by electrons is suspected to be one of the main reasons of the effect, helping the capture of protons by the Ni nucleus, therefore generating energy by fusion of protons in Nickel and a series of exothermic nuclear reactions, leaving as by-product isotopes different from the original Ni (transmutations). Such shielding is one of the elements contributing to the energetic efficiency of the system. From this derives the opportunity, I think, to focus upon this shielding, both to increase its efficiency and to verify the hypothesis contained in the paper of Focardi-Rossi. Of course, what we are talking of here is a theoretical verification, because the practical verification is made by monitoring the performance of the apparatus invented and patented by Andrea Rossi, presently under rigorous verification by many independent university researchers.
In my opinion, the characteristics of the shielding of the proton from the electrons should be defined, as well as the “radiometric” behavior of the system.
In other words, the following two questions should be answered:
Which is the supposed mechanism that overcomes the powerful electrostatic repulse (Coulomb barrier) between the “shielded proton” and the Nickel nucleus? For what reason there is almost no radiation of any kind (experimental observation), while according to the Focardi and Rossi’s hypothesis there should have been some γ radiation (511 KeV) produced by the predicted annihilation of the β+ and β- particles that are being created during the Fusion? I believe that some thoughts based on general and elementary structures, data and principles of universal scientific acceptance, might shed some light to this exciting phenomenon. More specific, I refer to Bohr’s hydrogen atom, the speed of nuclear reactions (10-20 sec) and the Uncertainty Principle of Heisenberg.
I will take Bohr’s hydrogen atom as a starting point (figure 1a), which stays at its fundamental state forever in the absence of external perturbations, due to De Broglie’s wave, accompanying the sole electron.
As stated before, in contact with the metal, these atoms lose their fundamental state, as their electrons are being transmitted to the conductivity band. These electrons, together with the “naked nuclei” of hydrogen (protons), form a freely moving cloud of charges (plasma at a degenerate state) inside the crystalline lattice. That cloud is being defused through the surface to the polycrystallic mass of the metal, covering empty spaces of the non-canonical structure of the crystalline lattice, as well as the tetrahedral and octahedral spaces between the molecules. As a consequence, the crystalline structure is covered by “delocalized plasma” (degenerate state), which is consisted by protons, electrons produced by the “absorbed atoms” of hydrogen, as well as by the electrons of the chemical valence of Nickel of the lattice, at different energy states (Fermi’s band). (Fig. 2)
Fig.1b
In this system, if one considers the probability of the creation inside the crystalline lattice of temporary (not at the fundamental state) “pseudo-atoms” of hydrogen with neutral charge, for example at a time of the order of 10ˆ-17 sec, then that possibility is not completely ill-founded. (Fig 1b)
Fig.2
According to the Uncertainty Principle of Heisenberg, the temporary atoms of hydrogen will cover during that small time interval Δt, a wide range of energies ΔΕ, which means also a wide range of atomic diameters of temporary atoms, satisfying the De Broglie’s condition. A percentage of them (at fist a very small one) might have diameters smaller than 10ˆ-14 m, which is the maximum active radius of nuclear reactions. In that case, the chargeless temporary atoms, or mini-atoms, of hydrogen together with high energy but short lived electrons, are being statistically trapped by the Nickel nuclei at a time of 10ˆ-20 sec. In other words, the high speed of nuclear reactions permits the fusion of short lived but neutral mini-atoms of hydrogen with the Nickel nuclei of the crystalline lattice, as during that short time interval the Coulomb barrier (of the specific hydrogen mini-atom) does not exist.
Afterwards, it follows a procedure similar to the one described by Focardi and Rossi, but instead of considering the capture of a shielded proton by the Ni58 nucleus, we adopt the hypothesis of trapping a neutral temporary atom, or a mini atom, of hydrogen (with a diameter less than 10ˆ-14 m) which transforms the Ni58 nucleus into Cu59 (copper/59, short lived isotope*).
It follows the predicted “β decay” of the nuclei of the short lived isotope of copper, accompanied by the emission of β+ (positrons) and β- (perhaps the electrons of the mini atoms trapped inside that nucleus during the fusion). These particles are being annihilated with an emission of γ radiation (two photons of γ of energy 511 KeV each, for every couple of β+ and β-).
In other words, whoever has experimented with this system should have suffered the not-so-harmless influence of those radiations, but that never happened. The radioactivity measured at the experiments is almost zero and easily shielded.
In any case, a rigorous, in my opinion, theoretical approach for the interpretation of that phenomenon with quantum mechanical terms, would give clear quantitative answers to the above stated models. With my Colleges of theoretical chemistry, we are already planning to face the problem using the time-depended quantum mechanical perturbation theory, bearing in mind the following:
The total wave function (of the nucleus and the electrons) of temporarily, non-stable states. The total time-depended Hamiltonian, for temporarily states. Searching for the resonance conditions at that system. Such an approach had a successful outcome at a similar problem of theoretical chemistry and we hope that it will be valid in this case as well.
Let’s go back to the intuitive, with ideal models, approach, in order to give a qualitative explanation for the (almost) absent radiations of the system, by using:
First of all the Boltzmann’s distribution (especially at the asymptotic area of high energies). The photoelectric effect The Compton effect The Mössbauer effect We have already mentioned that from the temporary mini atoms of hydrogen, the ones with diameter less than 10ˆ-14 m, have a larger probability of fusion. But, in order for them to be created, high energy bond electrons should exist at the “delocalized plasma” of the crystalline lattice.
1. Boltzmann’s statistics: There are reasons to believe that the H/Ni system, at first at temperatures of about 400-500oC, contains a very small percentage of electrons in the “delocalized plasma” with enough energy to create (together with the diffused protons), according to the wave-particle duality principle, the first temporary mini atoms of hydrogen, that will trigger the fusion with the nickel nuclei and the production of high energy γ photons (511 KeV).
2. Photoelectric Effect: It is not possible, the HUGE amount of energy (in kW/h), that the Rossi/Focardi reactor produces, as measured by unrelated scientists in repeated demonstrations (at one of them by the writer and his colleagues, Fig 3), to be created due to the thermalization of the insignificant number of γ photons at the beginning of the reaction.
Fig.3
I believe that, as stated above, these photons are the trigger of fusion at a multiplicative series, based on the photoelectric effect inside the crystalline structure.
The two γ photons can export symmetrically (180°) two electrons from the nearest Nickel atoms. The stimulation, due to the high energy of γ, concerns electrons of internal bands of two different atoms of the lattice and has as a prerequisite the absorption of all the energy of the photon. A small part of that energy is being consumed for the export of the electron from the atom and the rest is being transformed into kinetic energy of the electron (thermal energy).
The result of that procedure is to enrich the “delocalized plasma” with high energy electrons that will contribute multiplicatively (by a factor of two) at the progress of the cold fusion nuclear reactions of hydrogen and nickel and at the same time transform the hazardous γ radiation into useful thermal energy.
3. The Compton Scattering: It gives the additional possibility of multiplication, this time due to secondary photons γ, in a wide range of frequencies, as a function of the angular deviation from the direction of the initial photon of 511 keV. That has as a result the increase of the export of electrons, due to the photoelectric phenomenon at the crystalline mass, in many energy/kinetic levels, which gives an additional possibility of converting the γ radiation into useful thermal energy.
4. The Mössbauer effect: It gives another possible way of absorbing the γ radiation and transforming it into thermal energy. It is based on the principle of conservation of momentum at the regression of the new Cu59 nucleus/ from the emission of a γ photon. Relative calculations (Dufour) showed that this mechanism has an insignificant (1%) contribution.
It follows that, according to given data, the Photoelectric phenomenon and the Compton Effect, could explain the absence of radiations in the Focardi-Rossi system, which, from the amount of producing energy versus the consumption of Ni and H2, as well as from the experimental observation of element transformations, lead undoubtedly to the acceptance of hydrogen cold fusion.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The author wishes to acknowledge Aris Chatzichristos for the contribution in formulating this paper in English
References: (1)www. journal-of-nuclear-physics.com /Focardi Rossi/ (A new energy source from nuclear fusion)
* I believe that the phasmatometric tracing of copper is the most definitive sign of nuclear fusion: From the relative bibliography (HANDBOOK OF CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS, 66TH edition), it follows that the stable non radioactive isotopes of nickel are the following five:
58, 60, 61, 62 and 64. These, when fused with a hydrogen nucleus, are being transmuted relatively to Cu-59, Cu-61, Cu-62, Cu-63 and Cu-65. From these isotopes of copper only the last two (Cu-63 and Cu-65) are not radioactive, i.e. they are stable. The other three Cu-59, Cu-61, Cu-62, are being transmuted again to Nickel, with an average life expectancy of some hours and the most unstable Cu-59 in 18 seconds.
Kan du si noe om hvordan Rossi svindler noen som helst??
Dette er god gammeldags bondefangeri Aasg. Rossi benytter seg av en morsom utgave av "bait and switch".
Motivet er like gammelt som det er overraskende: Penger. Og hvem vet, kanskje litt berømmelse også.
Nå skal jo den godeste Rossi saksøke sine partnere i Hellas. Og hva er det han skal ha fra dem? Joda, han skal ha penger. Han har åpenbart ikke fått med seg den økonomiske situasjonen i grekenland.
Problemet er dels at Rossi selv har sagt at han ikke vil drive med vitenskaplige tester, markedet skal være de som avgjør/dømmer produktet og ikke akademikere.
Hvorfor skal markedet få all moroa ;D Vi får forhåpentligvis et svar om ikke så lang tid, for vi kommer vel ikke lenger i denne diskusjonen. Begge sider har luftet sine synspunkter.
Men om den virker så gav oljen oss hundre år med økonomisk velstand og Enigma-Cat eller LENR kan være det som tar over etter oljen og gir verden muligheter vi aldri har hatt tidligere. Og den vil endre verden enda mer enn hva oljen har gjort, det er i alle fall sikkert. Om den virker, hvis ikke kan den benyttes i et jubileum for Fleichmann-Pons og mange andre som har trodd de har løst gåten tidligere. Uansett har Rossi kommet lenger enn alle de andre for han har gjenntatt forsøket mange ganger med kontrollerende vitenskapsmenn tilstede, og er det bare en svindel så er det mange professorer involvert.
Kan du si noe om hvordan Rossi svindler noen som helst??
Dette er god gammeldags bondefangeri Aasg. Rossi benytter seg av en morsom utgave av "bait and switch".
Motivet er like gammelt som det er overraskende: Penger. Og hvem vet, kanskje litt berømmelse også.
Nå skal jo den godeste Rossi saksøke sine partnere i Hellas. Og hva er det han skal ha fra dem? Joda, han skal ha penger. Han har åpenbart ikke fått med seg den økonomiske situasjonen i grekenland.
Ja, klarer han å få urettmessige penger ut av et søksmål er det klart det kan være en måte å svindle på. Berømmelsen han får blir i såfall ikke av den positive sorten, men han har jo noen sorte flekker fra tidligere. Men som svindler er han fra tidligere en lite vellykket utgave, forrige prosjekt endte vel stort sett med skam og fengselsstraff.
Men i et søksmål er det vel stort sett et dokumentert tap han vil få dekning for og om han ikke kan vise til en bevist funerende maskin spørs det ikke om han vil tape et søksmål like fort som ..ja.. en e-cat lager damp ;D
Nei, jeg er egentlig drit lei av hele e-cat og har en jævli masse jobb med artikler fremover så jeg kommer nok ikke til å ha tid til å "holde liv" i tråden, men den stopper neppe opp uten mitt bidrag.
[...] Etter å ha kikket rundt på nettet er det faktisk flere anerkjente vitenskapsmenn som er positive til prosjektet [...]
Kan du dele linker til disse nettstedene?
Her er det en teoretisk forklaring som er nyttig å lese
A detailed Qualitative Approach to the Cold Fusion Nuclear Reactions of H/Ni By prof. Christos Stremmenos
[...]
Beklager, Aasg, men dette er jo bare tull. Denne Christos Stremmenos har ikke publisert en eneste artikkel, såvidt jeg kan finne. Et artikkelsøk gir ingen treff. Et vitenskapelig søk gir KUN treff på nettstedet ecatnews.net.
Da er ikke dette snakk om noen annerkjent vitenskapsmann. Det mest fundamentale prinsippet i vitenskap er peer review og repetering av resultater. Når en "professor" aldri har utgitt en eneste publikasjon i en peer reviewed journal (mangler et godt norsk uttrykk her...) så er han per definisjon ikke noen annerkjent vitenskapsmann. Jeg ville sagt at han ikke er en vitenskapsmann i det hele tatt, men det blir jo en subjektiv oppfatning.
En liten rettelse: Jeg fant en publisert artikkel av den nevnte professor (medforfatter), fra 1973, i Journal of the Chemical Society, Faraday Transactions. Professoren er også nevnt på Uni Bolognas nettsider som innehaver av ulike verv.
Det endrer likevel ikke min oppfatning om at vedkommende ikke akkurat kan betraktes som et sannhetsvitne. Jeg finner ingen referanser til hans arbeid. Jeg mener det blir for tynt.
Til sammenligning er også jeg medforfatter av publiserte artikler, uten at det gjør meg til en spesielt stor vitenskapspersonlighet.
(egen kommentar) Jeg ser i ettertid at det rettes en del kritikk til målingen av tørrheten på dampen. Om den er 100 % tørr vil det være en cop på 1:38 men om den inneholder 50% vann vil cop fremdeles være 1:19. Om noen ikke tror dette stemmer så må noen gjerne kontrollregne tallene, men de bør stemme. Dermed er diskusjonen om tørrheten på gassen kun redusert til en diskusjon om hvor stor effekten er stor eller vannvittig stor
Her er det mye tullprat og rør som vanlig.
Hva er det som er så fantastisk med COP 1:38??? Vi har da hatt kjernekraft i mange ti-år allerede, med veldig bra COP.
Hvis denne maskina fra Rossi produser radioaktivt avfall er det ikke en eneste oppegående person som vil ha noe slikt i hus, dessuten er det forbudt.
Det hjelper ikke stort med billig oppvarming i boligen om man risikerer at barna får kreft.
Signatur
Audi og VW har mange flotte bilmodeller, men dårlig kvalitet, skyhøye verkstedregninger og nedlatende kundebehandlig gjennom mange år har ført til at jeg har lovet meg selv på tro og ære at jeg resten av livet aldri skal kjøpe noe som helst hos VAG igjen. Aldri.
Kan du si noe om hvordan Rossi svindler noen som helst??
Når det gjelder innovasjon virker det som om du har et åpent sinn, men når det gjelder mulighet for svindel og bedrag evner du ikke engang å se til nesetippen. Forstå det den som kan...
Signatur
Audi og VW har mange flotte bilmodeller, men dårlig kvalitet, skyhøye verkstedregninger og nedlatende kundebehandlig gjennom mange år har ført til at jeg har lovet meg selv på tro og ære at jeg resten av livet aldri skal kjøpe noe som helst hos VAG igjen. Aldri.
Du må klare å se det abstrakte i diskusjonen. Jeg reagerte kun på argumentasjonen til Harald1966, ikke argumentet som sådan. Du kan forsåvidt si at dette er irrelevant for diskusjonen, men jeg mener måten vi argumenterer også må holde mål.
Jeg holder på vitenskapelig skepsis og tviler på at Rossi har blitt nåtidens alkymist. Jeg er stort sett enig med deg, Torango. Jeg tror sågar jeg skrev noen innlegg om akkurat dette tidligere i tråden. Jeg er bare allergisk mot dårlige argumentasjonsmetoder.
Uansett, dette var utenfor emnet. Noen som har sett noen nyheter i det siste om Rossi og maskinen hans, i godt eller dårlig lys?
Denne rapporten er det første en bør lese gjennom, og så bør en sjekke opp hvilken bakgrunn Essen og Kullander har. De er ikke noen tilfeldige hvem som helst-synsere.
Report by Hanno Essén and Sven Kullander On Focardi and Rossi ECat (Cold Fusion)
Nyteknik ^ | april 3, 2011 | Essen and Kullander
Experimental test of a mini-Rossi device at the Leonardocorp, Bologna 29 March 2011.
Participants: Giuseppe Levi, David Bianchini, Carlo Leonardi, Hanno Essén, Sven Kullander, Andrea Rossi, Sergio Focardi.
Travel report by Hanno Essén and Sven Kullander, 3 April 2011.
We gathered in the Leonardo Corporation building where the 10 kW apparatus for anomalous energy production by nickel and hydrogen was demonstrated during a press conference on 14th of January. References [1] to [4] for the original papers describing the innovation are listed at the end. In the same building, two CHP facilities were located, based on biodiesel from waste which Andrea Rossi, prior to his present Ni-H activity, had developed. The present test was done on a smaller device [5] than the 10 kW device that has been used earlier during the January press conference. One of the reasons for going to smaller dimensions is safety according to Rossi. The conclusions from the papers [1] to [4] are that nickel and hydrogen provide the fuel for nuclear processes inside a small container in a radiation shielded setup and that in the room outside, no radiation different from the ambient one is found. Figures 1 and 2 below depict the insulated device used for the experiment together with three spare devices. As can be seen on the bare devices there is a horizontal section with a central container. The tube was made of copper and according to Rossi, the reaction chamber is hidden inside in the central part and made of stainless steel. Note that on the main heating resistor which is positioned around the copper tube and made of stainless steel (Figure 3) you can read the dimensions and nominal power (50mm diameter and 300W). The vertical chimney is for the steam-water exhaust. The cooling inlet water of about 18 °C comes from a reservoir via a pump (yellow). The transparent blue rubber hose going from the reservoir to the device is visible above the yellow pump, on the left of the photo in figure 1. To the right at the chimney, a black hose of heavy rubber, for high temperatures, carries the hot water/steam to the sink on the wall of the adjacent room. At the end of the horizontal section there is an auxiliary electric heater to initialize the burning and also to act as a safety if the heat evolution should get out of control. The central container seen in figure 3 has an estimated volume of 50 cm3 and it contains 50 grams of nickel. The container has on its top, a pipe for the filling of hydrogen gas. During the running we used the rightmost one of the devices, figure 4, which is surrounded by a 2 cm thick lead shield, as stated by Rossi, and wrapped with insulation, figure 5. We had free access to the heater electric supply, to the inlet water hose, to the outlet steam valve and water hose and to the hydrogen gas feed pipe. The total weight of the device was estimated to be around 4 kg. Calibrations. The flow of the inlet water was calibrated in the following way. The time for filling up 0.5 liters of water in a carafe was measured to be 278 seconds. Visual checks showed that the water flow was free from bubbles. Scaled to flow per hour resulted in a flow of 6.47 kg/hour (Density 1 kg/liter assumed). The water temperature was 18 °C. The specific heat of water, 4.18 joule/gram/ °C which is equal to 1.16 Wh/kg/ °C is used to calculate the energy needed to bring 1 kg of water from 18 to 100 °C. The result is 1.16(100-18)=95 Wh/kg. The heat of vaporization is 630 Wh/kg. Assuming that all water will be vaporized, the energy required to bring 1 kg water of 18 °C to vapor is 95+630=725 Wh/kg. To heat up the adjusted water flow of 6.47 kg/hour from 18 °C to vapor will require 7256.47=4.69 kWh/hour. The power required for heating and vaporization is thus 4.69 kW. It should be noted that no error analysis has been done but according to Giuseppe Levi, a 5% error in the measurement of the water flow is a conservative estimate. Even with this error, the conclusions will not change due to the magnitude of the observed effects. Startup. Prior to startup, the hydrogen bottle with a nominal pressure of 160 bars was connected for a short moment to the device to pressurize the fuel container to about 25 bars. The air of atmospheric pressure was remaining in the container as a small impurity. The amount of hydrogen with the assumed container volume of 50 cm3 is 0.11 grams of hydrogen. The electric heater was switched on at 10:25, and the meter reading was 1.5 amperes corresponding to 330 watts for the heating including the power for the instrumentation, about 30 watts. The electric heater thus provides a power of 300 watts to the nickel-hydrogen mixture. This corresponds also to the nominal power of the resistor. Initial running to reach vaporization. The temperatures of the inlet water and the outlet water were monitored and recorded every 2 seconds. The heater was connected at 10:25 and the boiling point was reached at 10:42. The detailed temperature-time relation is shown in figure 6. The inlet water temperature was 17.3 °C and increased slightly to 17.6 °C during this initial running. The outlet water temperature increased from 20 °C at 10:27 to 60 °C at 10:36. This means a temperature increase by 40 °C in 9 minutes which is essentially due to the electric heater. It is worth noting that at this point in time and temperature, 10:36 and 60°C, the 300 W from the heater is barely sufficient to raise the temperature of the flowing water from the inlet temperature of 17.6 °C to the 60 °C recorded at this time. If no additional heat had been generated internally, the temperature would not exceed the 60 °C recorded at 10:36. Instead the temperature increases faster after 10:36, as can be seen as a kink occurring at 60 °C in the temperature-time relation. (Figure 6). A temperature of 97.5 °C is reached at 10:40. The time taken to bring the water from 60 to 97.5 °C is 4 minutes. The 100 °C temperature is reached at 10:42 and at about 10:45 all the water is completely vaporized found by visual checks of the outlet tube and the valve letting out steam from the chimney. This means that from this point in time, 10:45, 4.69 kW power is delivered to the heating and vaporization, and 4.69 – 0.30 = 4.39 kW would have to come from the energy produced in the internal nickel-hydrogen container. Operation. The experiment was continually running from 10:45 to 16:30 when it was stopped by switching off the heater and increasing the cooling water flow to a maximum of 30 liters per hour. On two occasions during the steam production phase, David Bianchini tested the radiation level which did not differ from the normal level in the room. The temperature at the outlet was controlled continually to be above 100°C. According to the electronic log-book it remained always between 100.1 and 100.2 °C during the operation from 10:45 to 16:30 as can be seen in figure 7. Between 11:00 and 12:00 o’clock, control measurements were done on how much water that had not evaporated. The system to measure the non-evaporated water was a certified Testo System, Testo 650, with a probe guaranteed to resist up to 550°C. The measurements showed that at 11:15 1.4% of the water was non-vaporized, at 11:30 1.3% and at 11:45 1.2% of the water was non-vaporized. The energy produced inside the device is calculated to be (1.000-0.013)(16:30-10:45)4.39 =25 kWh. Discussion. Since we do not have access to the internal design of the central fuel container and no information on the external lead shielding and the cooling water system we can only make very general comments. The central container is about 50 cm3 in size and it contains 0.11 gram hydrogen and 50 grams nickel. The enthalpy from the chemical formation of nickel and hydrogen to nickel hydride is 4850 joule/mol [6]. If it had been a chemical process, a maximum of 0.15 watt-hour of energy could have been produced from nickel and 0.11 gram hydrogen, the whole hydrogen content of the container. On the other hand, 0.11 gram hydrogen and 6 grams of nickel (assuming that we use one proton for each nickel atom) are about sufficient to produce 24 MWh through nuclear processes assuming that 8 MeV per reaction can be liberated as free energy. For comparison, 3 liters of oil or 0.6 kg of hydrogen would give 25 kWh through chemical burning. Any chemical process for producing 25 kWh from any fuel in a 50 cm3 container can be ruled out. The only alternative explanation is that there is some kind of a nuclear process that gives rise to the measured energy production. Acknowledgements. We are grateful to our Bologna hosts, the cited participants and Dr Giuliano Guandalini for warm-hearted hospitality. We also appreciate the instructive execution of the experiment and the information provided. However, the authors of this Travel report are responsible for the observations and for the conclusions. References. [1] A. Rossi (inventor), Method and Apparatus for Carrying out Nickel and Hydrogen Exothermal Reactions, (WO/2009/125444) http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp? WO=2009125444; [2] S. Focardi and A. Rossi, A new energy source from nuclear fusion, Journal of Nuclear Physics, http://www.journal-of-nuclearphysics.com/? p=66, February 2010; [3] D. Bianchini, Experimental evaluation, for radiation protection purpose, of photon and neutron radiation field during the public presentation of the prototype called ”Energy Amplifier”. http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com [4] G. Levi, Report on heat production during preliminary tests on the Rossi ”Ni-H” reactor, http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com. [5] A. Rossi, A Mini Apparatus for Ni-H energy production, private communication, 110329. [6] M. Tkacz, Enthalpies of formation and decomposition of nickel hydride and nickel deuteride derived from (p, c, T) relationships, J. Chem. Thermodynamics 2001, 33, 891–897.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(egen kommentar)
Jeg ser i ettertid at det rettes en del kritikk til målingen av tørrheten på dampen. Om den er 100 % tørr vil det være en cop på 1:38 men om den inneholder 50% vann vil cop fremdeles være 1:19. Om noen ikke tror dette stemmer så må noen gjerne kontrollregne tallene, men de bør stemme. Dermed er diskusjonen om tørrheten på gassen kun redusert til en diskusjon om hvor stor effekten er stor eller vannvittig stor
Her er det en teoretisk forklaring som er nyttig å lese
A detailed Qualitative Approach to the Cold Fusion Nuclear Reactions of H/Ni
By prof. Christos Stremmenos
After several years of apparent inaction, the theme of cold fusion has been recently revitalized thanks to, among others, the work and the scientific publications of Focardi and Rossi, which has been conducted in silence, amidst ironical disinterest, without any funding or support. In fact, recently, practical and reliable results have been achieved based on a very promising apparatus invented by Andrea Rossi. Therefore I want to examine the possibility of further development of this technology, which I deem really important for our planet.
Introduction
I will start with patent no./2009/125444, registered by Dr. Ing. Andrea Rossi. This invention and its performance have been tested and verified in collaboration with Prof. Sergio Focardi, as reported in their paper, published in February 2010 in the Journal of Nuclear Physics [1]. In that scientific paper they have reported on the performance of an apparatus, which has produced for two years substantial amounts of energy in a reliable and repeatable mode and they have also offered a theoretical analysis for the interpretation of the underlying physical mechanism.
In the history of Science, it is not the first time that a practical and reliable apparatus is working before its theoretical foundation has been completely understood! The photoelectric effect is the classic example in which the application has anticipated its full theoretical interpretation, developed by Einstein. Afterwards Einstein, Plank, Heisenberg, De Broglie, Schrödinger and others formulated the principles of Quantum Mechanics. For the interactive Nickel/Hydrogen system it would be now opportune to compile, in a way easily understood by the non expert the relevant principles and concepts for the qualitative understanding of the phenomenon. Starting with the behavior of electrically charged particles in vacuum, it is known that particles with opposite electric charge attract themselves and “fuse” producing an electrically neutral particle, even though this does not always happen, as for instance in the case of a hydrogen atom, where a proton and a electron although attract each other they do not “fuse”, for reasons that will be explained later. On the contrary, particles charged with electric charge of the same sign always repel each other, and their repulsion tends to infinity when their distance tends to zero, which implies that in this case fusion is not possible (classical physics).
On the contrary, according to Quantum mechanics, for a system with a great number of particles of the same electric charge (polarity) it is possible that a few of them will fuse, as for instance, according to Focardi-Rossi, in the case of Nickel nuclei in crystal structure and hydrogen nuclei (protons) diffused within it, Although of the same polarity, a very small percentage of these nuclei manage to come so close to each other, at a distance of 10-14 m, where strong nuclear forces emerge and take over the Coulomb forces and thus form the nucleus of a new element, either stable or unstable.
This mechanism, which is possible only in the atomic microcosm, is predictable by a quantum-mechanics model of a particle put in a closed box. According to classical physics no one would expect to find a particle out of the box, but in quantum mechanics the probability of a particle to be found out of the box is not zero! This is the so called “tunneling effect”, which for systems with a very large number of particles, predicts that a small percentage of them lie outside the box, having penetrated the “impenetrable” walls and any other present barrier through the “tunnel”! In our case, the barrier is nothing else but the electrostatic repulsion, to which the couples of hydrogen and nickel nuclei (of the same polarity) are subjected and is called Coulomb barrier.
Diffusion mechanism of hydrogen in nickel: Nickel as a catalyst first decomposes the biatomic molecules of hydrogen to hydrogen atoms in contact with the nickel surface. Then these hydrogen atoms deposit their electrons to the conductivity band of the metal (Fermi band) and due to their greatly reduced volume, compared to that of their atom, the hydrogen nuclei readily diffuse into the crystalline structure of the nickel, including its defects. At this point, in order to understand the phenomenon it is necessary to briefly describe the structure both of the nickel atom and the nickel crystal lattice.
It is well known that the nickel atom is not so simple as the hydrogen atom, as its nucleus consists of dozens of protons and neutrons, thus it is much heavier and exerts a proportionally higher electrostatic repulsion than the nucleus of hydrogen, which consists of only one proton. In this case, the electrons, numerically equal to the protons, are ordered in various energy levels and cannot be easily removed from the atom to which they belong. Exception to this rule is the case of electrons of the chemical bonds, which along with the electrons of the hydrogen atoms form the metal conductivity band (electronic cloud), which moves quasi freely throughout the metal mass.
As in all transition metals, the nickel atoms in the solid state, and more specifically their nuclei, are located at the vertices and at the centre of the six faces of the cubic cell of the metal, leaving a free internal octahedral space within the cell, which, on account of the quasi negligible volume of the nuclei, is practically filled with electrons of the nickel atoms, as well as with conductivity electrons.
It would be really interesting to know the electrons’ specific density (number of electrons per unit volume) and its spatial distribution inside this octahedral space of the crystal lattice as a function of temperature.
Dynamics of the lattice vibration states
Another important aspect to take into consideration in this system is the dynamics of the lattice vibration states, in other words, the periodic three dimensional normal oscillations of the crystal lattice (phonons) of the nickel, which hosts hydrogen nuclei or nuclei of hydrogen isotopes (deuterium or tritium) that have entered into the above mentioned free space of the crystal cell.
It could be argued that the electrons’ specific density and its spatial distribution in the internal space of the crystal structure should be coherent with the natural frequencies of the lattice oscillations. This means that the periodicity of the electronic cloud within the octahedral space of the elementary crystal cell of Nickel generates an oscillating strengthening of shielding of the diffused nuclei of hydrogen or deuterium which also populate this space.
I believe that these considerations can form the basis for a qualitative analysis of this “NEW SOURCE OF ENERGY” and the phenomenology related to cold fusion, including energy production in much smaller quantities and various reaction products.
Shielding of protons by electrons
In the Focardi-Rossi paper the shielding of protons provided by electrons is suspected to be one of the main reasons of the effect, helping the capture of protons by the Ni nucleus, therefore generating energy by fusion of protons in Nickel and a series of exothermic nuclear reactions, leaving as by-product isotopes different from the original Ni (transmutations). Such shielding is one of the elements contributing to the energetic efficiency of the system. From this derives the opportunity, I think, to focus upon this shielding, both to increase its efficiency and to verify the hypothesis contained in the paper of Focardi-Rossi. Of course, what we are talking of here is a theoretical verification, because the practical verification is made by monitoring the performance of the apparatus invented and patented by Andrea Rossi, presently under rigorous verification by many independent university researchers.
In my opinion, the characteristics of the shielding of the proton from the electrons should be defined, as well as the “radiometric” behavior of the system.
In other words, the following two questions should be answered:
Which is the supposed mechanism that overcomes the powerful electrostatic repulse (Coulomb barrier) between the “shielded proton” and the Nickel nucleus?
For what reason there is almost no radiation of any kind (experimental observation), while according to the Focardi and Rossi’s hypothesis there should have been some γ radiation (511 KeV) produced by the predicted annihilation of the β+ and β- particles that are being created during the Fusion?
I believe that some thoughts based on general and elementary structures, data and principles of universal scientific acceptance, might shed some light to this exciting phenomenon. More specific, I refer to Bohr’s hydrogen atom, the speed of nuclear reactions (10-20 sec) and the Uncertainty Principle of Heisenberg.
I will take Bohr’s hydrogen atom as a starting point (figure 1a), which stays at its fundamental state forever in the absence of external perturbations, due to De Broglie’s wave, accompanying the sole electron.
As stated before, in contact with the metal, these atoms lose their fundamental state, as their electrons are being transmitted to the conductivity band. These electrons, together with the “naked nuclei” of hydrogen (protons), form a freely moving cloud of charges (plasma at a degenerate state) inside the crystalline lattice. That cloud is being defused through the surface to the polycrystallic mass of the metal, covering empty spaces of the non-canonical structure of the crystalline lattice, as well as the tetrahedral and octahedral spaces between the molecules. As a consequence, the crystalline structure is covered by “delocalized plasma” (degenerate state), which is consisted by protons, electrons produced by the “absorbed atoms” of hydrogen, as well as by the electrons of the chemical valence of Nickel of the lattice, at different energy states (Fermi’s band). (Fig. 2)
Fig.1b
In this system, if one considers the probability of the creation inside the crystalline lattice of temporary (not at the fundamental state) “pseudo-atoms” of hydrogen with neutral charge, for example at a time of the order of 10ˆ-17 sec, then that possibility is not completely ill-founded. (Fig 1b)
Fig.2
According to the Uncertainty Principle of Heisenberg, the temporary atoms of hydrogen will cover during that small time interval Δt, a wide range of energies ΔΕ, which means also a wide range of atomic diameters of temporary atoms, satisfying the De Broglie’s condition. A percentage of them (at fist a very small one) might have diameters smaller than 10ˆ-14 m, which is the maximum active radius of nuclear reactions. In that case, the chargeless temporary atoms, or mini-atoms, of hydrogen together with high energy but short lived electrons, are being statistically trapped by the Nickel nuclei at a time of 10ˆ-20 sec. In other words, the high speed of nuclear reactions permits the fusion of short lived but neutral mini-atoms of hydrogen with the Nickel nuclei of the crystalline lattice, as during that short time interval the Coulomb barrier (of the specific hydrogen mini-atom) does not exist.
Afterwards, it follows a procedure similar to the one described by Focardi and Rossi, but instead of considering the capture of a shielded proton by the Ni58 nucleus, we adopt the hypothesis of trapping a neutral temporary atom, or a mini atom, of hydrogen (with a diameter less than 10ˆ-14 m) which transforms the Ni58 nucleus into Cu59 (copper/59, short lived isotope*).
It follows the predicted “β decay” of the nuclei of the short lived isotope of copper, accompanied by the emission of β+ (positrons) and β- (perhaps the electrons of the mini atoms trapped inside that nucleus during the fusion). These particles are being annihilated with an emission of γ radiation (two photons of γ of energy 511 KeV each, for every couple of β+ and β-).
In other words, whoever has experimented with this system should have suffered the not-so-harmless influence of those radiations, but that never happened. The radioactivity measured at the experiments is almost zero and easily shielded.
In any case, a rigorous, in my opinion, theoretical approach for the interpretation of that phenomenon with quantum mechanical terms, would give clear quantitative answers to the above stated models. With my Colleges of theoretical chemistry, we are already planning to face the problem using the time-depended quantum mechanical perturbation theory, bearing in mind the following:
The total wave function (of the nucleus and the electrons) of temporarily, non-stable states.
The total time-depended Hamiltonian, for temporarily states.
Searching for the resonance conditions at that system.
Such an approach had a successful outcome at a similar problem of theoretical chemistry and we hope that it will be valid in this case as well.
Let’s go back to the intuitive, with ideal models, approach, in order to give a qualitative explanation for the (almost) absent radiations of the system, by using:
First of all the Boltzmann’s distribution (especially at the asymptotic area of high energies).
The photoelectric effect
The Compton effect
The Mössbauer effect
We have already mentioned that from the temporary mini atoms of hydrogen, the ones with diameter less than 10ˆ-14 m, have a larger probability of fusion. But, in order for them to be created, high energy bond electrons should exist at the “delocalized plasma” of the crystalline lattice.
1. Boltzmann’s statistics:
There are reasons to believe that the H/Ni system, at first at temperatures of about 400-500oC, contains a very small percentage of electrons in the “delocalized plasma” with enough energy to create (together with the diffused protons), according to the wave-particle duality principle, the first temporary mini atoms of hydrogen, that will trigger the fusion with the nickel nuclei and the production of high energy γ photons (511 KeV).
2. Photoelectric Effect:
It is not possible, the HUGE amount of energy (in kW/h), that the Rossi/Focardi reactor produces, as measured by unrelated scientists in repeated demonstrations (at one of them by the writer and his colleagues, Fig 3), to be created due to the thermalization of the insignificant number of γ photons at the beginning of the reaction.
Fig.3
I believe that, as stated above, these photons are the trigger of fusion at a multiplicative series, based on the photoelectric effect inside the crystalline structure.
The two γ photons can export symmetrically (180°) two electrons from the nearest Nickel atoms. The stimulation, due to the high energy of γ, concerns electrons of internal bands of two different atoms of the lattice and has as a prerequisite the absorption of all the energy of the photon. A small part of that energy is being consumed for the export of the electron from the atom and the rest is being transformed into kinetic energy of the electron (thermal energy).
The result of that procedure is to enrich the “delocalized plasma” with high energy electrons that will contribute multiplicatively (by a factor of two) at the progress of the cold fusion nuclear reactions of hydrogen and nickel and at the same time transform the hazardous γ radiation into useful thermal energy.
3. The Compton Scattering:
It gives the additional possibility of multiplication, this time due to secondary photons γ, in a wide range of frequencies, as a function of the angular deviation from the direction of the initial photon of 511 keV. That has as a result the increase of the export of electrons, due to the photoelectric phenomenon at the crystalline mass, in many energy/kinetic levels, which gives an additional possibility of converting the γ radiation into useful thermal energy.
4. The Mössbauer effect:
It gives another possible way of absorbing the γ radiation and transforming it into thermal energy. It is based on the principle of conservation of momentum at the regression of the new Cu59 nucleus/ from the emission of a γ photon. Relative calculations (Dufour) showed that this mechanism has an insignificant (1%) contribution.
It follows that, according to given data, the Photoelectric phenomenon and the Compton Effect, could explain the absence of radiations in the Focardi-Rossi system, which, from the amount of producing energy versus the consumption of Ni and H2, as well as from the experimental observation of element transformations, lead undoubtedly to the acceptance of hydrogen cold fusion.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The author wishes to acknowledge Aris Chatzichristos for the contribution in formulating this paper in English
References:
(1)www. journal-of-nuclear-physics.com /Focardi Rossi/ (A new energy source from nuclear fusion)
* I believe that the phasmatometric tracing of copper is the most definitive sign of nuclear fusion: From the relative bibliography (HANDBOOK OF CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS, 66TH edition), it follows that the stable non radioactive isotopes of nickel are the following five:
58, 60, 61, 62 and 64. These, when fused with a hydrogen nucleus, are being transmuted relatively to Cu-59, Cu-61, Cu-62, Cu-63 and Cu-65. From these isotopes of copper only the last two (Cu-63 and Cu-65) are not radioactive, i.e. they are stable. The other three Cu-59, Cu-61, Cu-62, are being transmuted again to Nickel, with an average life expectancy of some hours and the most unstable Cu-59 in 18 seconds.
By prof. Christos Stremmenos
Dette er god gammeldags bondefangeri Aasg. Rossi benytter seg av en morsom utgave av "bait and switch".
Motivet er like gammelt som det er overraskende: Penger. Og hvem vet, kanskje litt berømmelse også.
Nå skal jo den godeste Rossi saksøke sine partnere i Hellas. Og hva er det han skal ha fra dem? Joda, han skal ha penger. Han har åpenbart ikke fått med seg den økonomiske situasjonen i grekenland.
Hvorfor skal markedet få all moroa ;D Vi får forhåpentligvis et svar om ikke så lang tid, for vi kommer vel ikke lenger i denne diskusjonen. Begge sider har luftet sine synspunkter.
Men om den virker så gav oljen oss hundre år med økonomisk velstand og Enigma-Cat eller LENR kan være det som tar over etter oljen og gir verden muligheter vi aldri har hatt tidligere. Og den vil endre verden enda mer enn hva oljen har gjort, det er i alle fall sikkert. Om den virker, hvis ikke kan den benyttes i et jubileum for Fleichmann-Pons og mange andre som har trodd de har løst gåten tidligere. Uansett har Rossi kommet lenger enn alle de andre for han har gjenntatt forsøket mange ganger med kontrollerende vitenskapsmenn tilstede, og er det bare en svindel så er det mange professorer involvert.
Ja, klarer han å få urettmessige penger ut av et søksmål er det klart det kan være en måte å svindle på. Berømmelsen han får blir i såfall ikke av den positive sorten, men han har jo noen sorte flekker fra tidligere. Men som svindler er han fra tidligere en lite vellykket utgave, forrige prosjekt endte vel stort sett med skam og fengselsstraff.
Men i et søksmål er det vel stort sett et dokumentert tap han vil få dekning for og om han ikke kan vise til en bevist funerende maskin spørs det ikke om han vil tape et søksmål like fort som ..ja.. en e-cat lager damp ;D
Nei, jeg er egentlig drit lei av hele e-cat og har en jævli masse jobb med artikler fremover så jeg kommer nok ikke til å ha tid til å "holde liv" i tråden, men den stopper neppe opp uten mitt bidrag.
Beklager, Aasg, men dette er jo bare tull. Denne Christos Stremmenos har ikke publisert en eneste artikkel, såvidt jeg kan finne. Et artikkelsøk gir ingen treff. Et vitenskapelig søk gir KUN treff på nettstedet ecatnews.net.
Da er ikke dette snakk om noen annerkjent vitenskapsmann. Det mest fundamentale prinsippet i vitenskap er peer review og repetering av resultater. Når en "professor" aldri har utgitt en eneste publikasjon i en peer reviewed journal (mangler et godt norsk uttrykk her...) så er han per definisjon ikke noen annerkjent vitenskapsmann. Jeg ville sagt at han ikke er en vitenskapsmann i det hele tatt, men det blir jo en subjektiv oppfatning.
Det endrer likevel ikke min oppfatning om at vedkommende ikke akkurat kan betraktes som et sannhetsvitne. Jeg finner ingen referanser til hans arbeid. Jeg mener det blir for tynt.
Til sammenligning er også jeg medforfatter av publiserte artikler, uten at det gjør meg til en spesielt stor vitenskapspersonlighet.
Hva er det som er så fantastisk med COP 1:38???
Vi har da hatt kjernekraft i mange ti-år allerede, med veldig bra COP.
Hvis denne maskina fra Rossi produser radioaktivt avfall er det ikke en eneste oppegående person som vil ha noe slikt i hus, dessuten er det forbudt.
Det hjelper ikke stort med billig oppvarming i boligen om man risikerer at barna får kreft.