"Energy Catalyzer" - First Report of Interviews With E-Cat Trio / General Chatting / Forums

Forums

4hv.org :: Forums :: General Chatting

« Previous topic | Next topic »

"Energy Catalyzer" - First Report of Interviews With E-Cat Trio

previous 1 2

Move Thread

LAN_403

Ash Small

Mon Jun 27 2011, 01:29PM

Registered Member #3414 Joined: Sun Nov 14 2010, 05:05PM
Location: UK
Posts: 4245

Proud Mary wrote ...

.
How can 30% of nickel in Rossiâ€™s reactor be transmuted into copper?

While I'm no expert on this stuff I did spend a year or more researching various types of fusion after the bankers 'stole all the money' in 2008, as I spent a year out of work.

I've never come across 'masked protons' before, or electrons being 'expelled' from the nucleus (except for some theories where a neutron decays into a proton and electron, other theories say a proton decays into a neutron by emitting a positron, and maybe a neutrino).

I'm familiar with muon catalysed fusion, where a muon, which is like a huge electron, about 2/3 the size of a proton, can 'pull' two protons close enough to fuse (or two tritium nuclei, to be more precise) before the muon is expelled, and goes on to repeat the process, but the 'masked proton' theory proposed here sounds completely implausible.

(For clarification, a muon can 'mask' a proton, but an electron can't, and there probably aren't sufficient 'natural' muons about, even at times of increased cosmic radiation, to explain the results claimed here)

I found the following while googling. This shows Rossi's 'dismissive' reply to the type of question I'd like to ask:

HRG
April 9th, 2011 at 8:51 PM
Dr. Rossi:

Thank you for taking so much of your time to answer questions.
Are you reasonably certain that both Ni62 and Ni64 are indeed reacting? If so; which one reacts fastest?
I would also like to ask your opinion about a possible experiment to conclusively determine if the hydrogen is reacting as a â€œneutron-likeâ€ or â€œproton-likeâ€ species:
There are a number of nuclei that have much higher neutron capture cross sections (for slow neutrons) than either Ni62 or Ni64. These include B10, Cd, and Hf. Other nuclei, such as B11, have a strong affinity for protons but not for neutrons. Reactions of these nuclei give off radiation that would clearly indicate the type of reaction. For example; B10 reacts with neutrons to form Li7 and an alpha, while B11 can react with a proton to form three alphas. Would it be reasonable to prepare a sample of the nickel fuel that is intimately mixed (ie. doped or alloyed into the Ni crystal structure) with minor amounts of these â€œindicator elementsâ€ and then look for their reaction products when the fuel sample is burned? I think it might be very useful if there are conditions under which the reactive intermediates generated by the nickel fuel particles can be â€œtrappedâ€. It would be useful in order to learn about the nature of the reactive intermediate, and if they can be used to drive other nuclear reactions.

Andrea Rossi
April 9th, 2011 at 10:00 PM
Dear Dr Gillis HRG:

I do not know which one reacts fastest.
Interesting the other suggestions.
Warm Rgards,
A.R.

(I could go into this further, about fusion cross-sections for nickel compared to other elements, but I think most of the relevant points are made in the above question)

Proud Mary wrote ...

What gets me most about LENR is its very frequent dependence on Track Etch Detectors (TEDs). No cloud or bubble or ion chamber, no GM or proportional tube, silicon drift detector, diamond detector, GEM or microstrip gas detector, scintillator, etc etc etc ever seems to record very much around LENR experiments. Only yer actual boil-in-a-bag TEDs. There is nothing controversial about TEDs themselves - they are widely used in radon detectors, cosmic ray detectors, and what have you (I've even had a go at KOH etching myself, with microscope slides coated with model aeroplane dope) but they cannot speak to us in the time domain - no counts per second, no quantity versus time, and so on - the very data that appraisal of reported LENR phenomena most badly needs.

I agree.

Pinky's Brain

Mon Jun 27 2011, 01:32PM

Registered Member #2901 Joined: Thu Jun 03 2010, 01:25PM
Location:
Posts: 837

Proud Mary wrote ...

Someone setting out to plan an elaborate pre-meditated fraud involving a number of principals would be most unlikely to choose to build their web of deceit around something so fanciful and implausible as a 'free energy' machine.

I don't think they set out to do it ... it starts out like ye average free energy experimentation nut, for one reason or another he thinks he really has something and seeks funding ... and finds it. After that the lust for money takes over, they might rationalize it to themselves with "I know I can get it to work, I just need a little more money/time" ... but they become liars both to themselves and others.

Free energy is no more fanciful than say infinite compression, an area I'm a little more familiar with ... and rife with investment scams.

Download

Wed Jun 29 2011, 09:55AM

Registered Member #561 Joined: Sat Mar 03 2007, 02:46AM
Location: Adelaide Australia
Posts: 230

Anyone seen those free energy things where they just slap Tesla's name on it? Quite a few of them on eBay, but they must be profitable considering how many their are

previous 1 2

Moderator(s): Chris Russell, Noelle, Alex, Tesladownunder, Dave Marshall, Dave Billington, Bjørn, Steve Conner, Wolfram, Kizmo, Mads Barnkob