Cold fusion device in production

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by quantum_wave, Apr 26, 2011.

  1. Jarek Duda Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    212
    Quantum_wave, for fusion purpose we don't need this whole controversial approximation of atomic model - what is enough is just scattering process of electrons on protons (accelerated mainly by Coulomb attraction): that for some parameters, electrons bounces back and so can jump between two nuclei, screening their Coulomb repulsion.
    This scattering can be understand classically (thanks of taking electron's magnetic moment into consideration) - his theories has started with such classical scattering approximations, which worked really good and so this paper has 488 citings (and I haven't found any nonpositive):
    http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PR/v138/i2A/pA336_1
    His atomic model is just such succeeding scatterings, but for this purpose we should remember for example about thermodynamics his model forgets about - and so including it, his (zero angular momentum!) hydrogen after longer time should average into just symmetric probability density.

    ps. If LENR cannot work, there is also another looking promising alternative, which seems to be noncontroversial but practically unknown: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywell
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2011
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,671
    Thanks Jarek Duda, JD. I know there are a lot of people who share the excitement and the anticipation. Your links are very informative and show that you are keeping up with developments in energy production advancements.

    Would you share with me your thinking of why AR does not turn off the power input or the heater when the device starts to generate enough power on it own? He says it is for safety reasons but I'm puzzled by that.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Jarek Duda Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    212
    I don't know, but you have to remember how huge and rare such fusion processes would be - about 10^-12J per process, so 1kW means about 10^15 events per second - if it would be one mole it means about 1 nucleus per billion per second (veeery long time for such processes).
    It's like having an environment with extremely rare but powerful explosions - energy distribution would be very chaotic (large variation) and a lot of it is absorbed by shielding, while we need some optimal range of parameters for fusion - I would say the heater is just to stabilize the process ... (if it's not a hoax, what is strongly suggested e.g. by this interesting article...).
    Here are speculations about reactor construction: http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/SpeculativeRenderingsRossiEnergyCatalyzer20111.shtml
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,671
    Thanks for the info and the links.
     
  8. rpenner Fully Wired Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,833
    The speculative renderings raise some important points.

    If there is a "secret ingredient" in making the device work, then the patents should be invalid.

    None of the designs appear well thought out, since Rossi's claim is 30% conversion in six months. Is this reactor (assuming arguendo that the physics is sound) supposed to operate only on even-numbered years and be torn down and rebuilt to remove the "waste" copper on the odd ones?

    Why is there any lead shielding at all if there is no evidence of radiation and the lead is wholly insufficient to block the physics-predicted gamma rays for the hypothesized spontanenous and "catalyzed" nuclear reactions?
     
  9. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,671
    Good observations. I am assuming that he doesn't understand the physics of the reaction and that in early and undisclosed experiments he learned that the process can get out of hand. Keeping the individual units small, controlling the heat input to the core device instead of letting the device keep the core heated from the steam output after start up, lead shielding, and not disclosing the catalyst are all signs that there are dangers involved that require all parameters to be keep within strick ranges, IMHO.
     
  10. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Those are all very valid points.

    And they only add to the likelihood that this is nothing more than - at worst - a scam to get funding for research or - at best - a deluded group of researchers.
     
  11. Jarek Duda Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    212
    I also don't understand the reason of patent not specifying the most essential ingredient - in this case the patent cannot protect against using it.
    This 30% could e.g. depend on nanoparticle size - the required protons can react only with nuclei near surface and so the 70% nickel would be the average inner part of nanoparticle.
    Piantelli required atomic hydrogen (H-) to make it easier to get closer nickel nucleus, so probably the catalyst would be mainly about it.
    The shielding can only stop low energetic gammas (like <200keV).
    The real question is why in reaction producing a few MeV-s, we don't observe higher energetic gammas?
    There might be a few (not excluding each other) types of answers, like:
    - large portion of energy was taken by the helping electron - it is much easier absorbed than gammas,
    - the fusion is multistage process - divide this energy into many photons,
    - produced energy is delocalized, e.g. in form of spherical wave from radial collapse of nucleus,
    - ...?
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2011
  12. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,671
    Here is what Eli Gin speculates is the reason to leave the heater on. It seems to make sense based on the recent links and discussion here:

    Eli Gin
    May 25th, 2011 at 11:39 PM
    Dear Mr. Rossi,

    I have an idea of why you need to keep the heater turned on all the time.
    I think that the energy generation reaction inside E-cat is not uniform/smooth but that
    it rather goes in bursts that result in temporary interruptions in energy production.
    So, I think that you need heater working all the time to bridge these “gaps” to avoid temperature drops that will make it difficult to restart the E-cat.
    I would appreciate if you could answer me using my private email address – the one that I provided when I signed in. That way you will keep your answer confidential between you and me.

    I apologize for being persistent – I am an inventor myself and I am simply very curious about this revolutionary technology.

    Thank you very much in advance!

    Best regards,
    Eli
     
  13. Jarek Duda Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    212
    It's what I've said, but honestly it looks a bit far-fetched: of course there is water flow decreasing temperature, but there is also quick heat exchange, so temperature should easily equilibrate - especially that water flow shouldn't rather directly interact with the nickel (it would cause washing out and contamination).
    ps. Here has started discussion about electrons assisting while fusion.
     
  14. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,228
    There are circumstances where it would be a good strategy to leave important steps out of your patent - you get wider coverage, and it's harder for someone to design a new device that gets around your patent. But if you're caught leaving essential stuff out, your patent will be invalid (in the US, anyway).

    Edit: To expand on what I said above, suppose you invent a device with components X, Y, and Z. If your patent covers a device with X, Y, and Z, then someone else can figure out a replacement for either X, Y, or Z and get around your patent. But if you can get a patent on "a device having X and Y," then it doesn't matter if they figure out an alternative for Z. If you just get "a device having X," then even better.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2011
  15. Pete It's not rocket surgery Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,167
    I have a cynical suspicion that he can't maintain the impression that it's producing the reported heat unless he tightly controls it to keep the outlet temperature reading just over normal boiling point.

    I don't know if he's fooling himself, knowingly trying to fool others, or what... but as of now, the biggest mystery about the device is how much energy it actually produces.

    And that shouldn't be a mystery. Basic calorimetry is not difficult. There's no need for Rossi to calculate the heat production based on the assumption that all the water through the device is converted to steam - it would be simpler to directly measure the heat production.

    So why isn't he?
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2011
  16. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,671
    Good point. So we wait and see I guess.
     
  17. jpappl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,985
    Wasn't this answered in the "supposed" 18 hour test by Levi. ?

    Do you think it's possible that if he did indeed perform the test that he could be that far off with his calculations ?

    Or would that just implicate him in the scam if it is indeed one.

    There are many new players now, firms, associated to Rossi's prior company that makes me very skeptical and points not to a small scale scam to dupe a minor investor or individuals, but a large scale scam to get money from DOE or elsewhere with promises never kept. Something just doesn't feel right about the way it's all coming together.

    However, I can also see the need to keep his cards close to his chest if it's valid. It's all very strange.
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2011
  18. Pete It's not rocket surgery Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,167
    Maybe. We don't have enough information to be sure.

    That experiment was not well controlled and not well reported, and neither of those things are hard to achieve.
     
  19. Jarek Duda Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    212
  20. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,671
    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=360&cpage=19#comments

    Andrea Rossi
    June 2nd, 2011 at 8:01 AM
    Dear Mr Riccardo:
    I think that the household targeted items will arrive later. We have to resolve the problem to make them self-destructive in case of opening the reactors. Otherwise, with few thousands of dollars anybody has access to the confidential aspects of the technology. In industrial plants this issue is more easy to afford and has been resolved.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.


    This post by AR leads to some other comments about the self-destruct plan. Yikes. This sounds like a case of suppressing the technology of the Frisbee or the hula hoop, lol
     
  21. 1337spb Registered Member

    Messages:
    21
    At a glance, none of the linked websites appear to be professional or famous (I don't read a lot of physics on line though so please correct me if wrong). Do any of these 'independent judges' have home pages at universities like every professional academic?

    If decent people endorse it then I'll believe it - any evidence for this?
     
  22. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,671
    Andrea Rossi and E-Cat seem to be cautiously supported by those who have witnessed the demonstrations, by investors and potential investors, and by US Gov't entities like the DOD and NASA. However, that level of support doesn't make me a believer yet, lol. I have to see the successful launch of the production models before I believe. Until then I am hopeful and I think that is where you are too?
     
  23. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    The "evidence" shown some while back that the DOD and NASA had interest in this thing seemed pretty weak to me. Do you know of any solid sources that prove any interest/involvement of either of those two agencies?
     

Share This Page