Who are the kooks in fusion?

This forum is for other possible methods for fusion such as Sonolumenescense, Cold Fusion, CANR/LENR or accelerator fusion. It should contain all theory, discussions and even construction and URLs related to "other than fusor, fusion".
Post Reply
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14992
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Richard Hull »

For my dollar and from my view point, Cold fusion is as viable as hot fusion, regardless of how many lauded and annointed are on one side and how many of the supposed, self-deluded are on the other. One side has money and a past and the other side works from a feeling, gut-felt dedication, but with marginal evidence.

Are the kooks the ones without "good science" behind them or the ones holding out the carrot of hope and collecting huge sums of the public treasure on a circus barker's promise. Or... Are the kooks ourselves for believing or clinging to either. Perhaps it is just a fool's paradise, as it sometimes must surely seem to even the meanest intelligence willing to hop off the merry-go-round and observe the fete with cold dispassion.

I really don't care who wins. I just hope someone does. Regardless of the winner, the lucky donkey will be hailed and those who were never on board will say that they always figured something like that was probable, but just didn't think it was possible.

ITER may become the new Texas super collider debacle. Cold fusion, LENR, CANR, may remain as cold and fusionless as the annointeds believe. Meantime, the world's growing power needs will never be handled by increasing wind, solar, gas, or geothermal, even with stable and fixed coal and fission. More coal plants would help immediately. More fission of the right type will push the danger mark further out into the future. Even these bold increased CO2 and new fission moves would require a stable world economic and political environment. One wrong move and the entire human effort doesn't stumble, it falls. What might be left may not need all that projected future energy.

I guess I don't see how fusion research, as it is currently pursued, might have much of a chance in a battered world, be it from plague, war, faminine, etc. We might be lucky to have a good, solid, steam based industry, (circa 1910), left as we are crawling out of the mire with a couple of billion less people around.

My little ray of sunshine in all this.

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2127
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 9:50 pm
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Steven Sesselmann »

Richard,

What prompted my recent post was this paper here..

http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/wp- ... Submit.pdf

It appears an independent team have reproduced the e-cat device with positive results. I am in the process of reading the 52 page report now.

If Andrea Rossi turns out to be the lucky donkey, then it would be a shame, as the whole e-cat saga sounds and looks like a scam, with big claims unsubstantiated experiments and lots of secracy, not to mention demands for big dollars. All that aside, the latest results will no doubt be scrutinised by many.

The team who carried out the experiment admit that the current laws of physics can't explain the excess heat without the tell tail signs of gamma radiation, well that's what made me think.

Using a mixture of metallic powders, or perhaps layers of metallic powders lighter than nickel, possibly sintered in a ceramic tube, such reactions might just be plausible. As I briefly explained on my forum, the multi Z layered metal, forms an electrical potential funnel, into which ions of hydrogen or deuterium can fall, and as the ions bounce their way down the funnel, they give up their potential in the form of heat.

The materials for such an experiment is readily available, and I think it's worth a try.

Steven
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG
User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2127
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 9:50 pm
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Steven Sesselmann »

Richard,

Okay I had a quick read through the document, and the mind boggles as to why it took so many measurements and 52 pages to confirm a device that presumably put out 1.5 MW of power? It should hyave been bleedingly obvious. The other thing that disturbed me is on page 7 Andrea Rossi actually has some handling in the experiment.

I don't know, but there is something very "Uri Geller" about the whole e-Cat thing, don't you think? (Maybe it is just the way Andrea Rossi conducts himself)

Note the table at the end, where an almost unbelievable fraction 99.3 of the elements have transmuted into Ni62, even the best refining methods would struggle with that one ;)

Modern alchemy...

Steven

[added comment by Steven]
Page 7 of the report describes the insertion of the all important powder (fuel) into the reactor tube as "about 1 gram" , this is scientific crap, why would anyone write a 52 page report on the anomolous energy output of this new miracle reactor and NOT weigh the fuel?


* PS: For those of you who are too young to remember Uri Geller http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uri_Geller
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14992
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Richard Hull »

I agree! A 1.3 megawatt working anything shouldn't need a big report, beyond one showing how a multiplicity of errors lead to one wrong assumption after another making the whole thing a worthless debacle.

I have always said of any wonderful new energy thingy that has been shown to supposedly work........... If real, we will know in weeks as they start hitting the market enmass under license. If two months goes by and then nothing, then it was a hoax.

Watts out in my hands, talks; B--- S--- walks.

Most of what I would call credible researchers in LENR are older and many have left the field. The backwash is filling with less that desirable elements and, I fear, hucksters. This gives what remains of any attempt at truly good work little room for consideration.

Rossi, I have felt, is and was always a fellow out for money.

As long as CANR and LENR work stays on the up and up with good researchers, it is worth keeping an eye on. Good people have seen interesting results which, once seen, has forced them , even once retired, to continue to probe. Something seems to be there, but what? On the positive side, they aren't dumping our billions into their effort.

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
User avatar
Rich Feldman
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 6:59 pm
Real name: Rich Feldman
Location: Santa Clara County, CA, USA

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Rich Feldman »

I read about the independent test (of apparatus made by Rossi) here:
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/10/12 ... or-32-days
followed by many comments on that popular forum.

At first glance, nobody ever claimed 1.5 megawatts.
It was 1.5 MWh total over 32 days, which is an average of about 2 kW.
The long run time, thus large total energy, are supposed to imply the minimum size and weight that would be required of conventional fuels or batteries.
All models are wrong; some models are useful. -- George Box
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14992
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Richard Hull »

Still, if you are making 2 kw...... You don't need a 42 page paper to show how you pulled that out of the noise.

I want my 2kw Rossi generator now! If you don't see it in your neighborhood real soon then they will say it was suppressed by "big energy". Nothing follows and hoax better than a good conspiracy theory as to why it didn't stand a chance of help "th' little guy".

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
Doug Browning
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 9:19 pm
Real name: Doug Browning

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Doug Browning »

With a claimed COPD of 3.6 to 3.7 it is less efficient than a heat pump from Home Depot. They are using electricity to make just heat. This is not going to be in stores soon.

The energy production curve does not drop off toward the end of the test, despite the fuel being nearly totally consumed by their isotope tests.

The isotopes are measured in a few granules of fuel only. Likely some thermal diffusion process has just separated the isotopes. They checked for gamma rays, but not for X-rays. Something would show up if there were really energetic particles.

The optical power out measurements sound impressive, but are they really integrating the total power output or just measuring some bright spots. A simple water cooled box over the whole thing would give an integrated measurement.

Are their electrical 3 phase power measurements capturing conduction currents through the hot ceramic between phases? The pick up in power after 10 days looks suspiciously like the lithium has diffused through the ceramic.
John Futter
Posts: 1848
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 10:29 pm
Real name: John Futter
Contact:

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by John Futter »

Doug
I fail to see your point on gamma vs x-ray

they are the same!!!!! only the making of is different, one is The jiggling of the nucleus, the other the jiggling of the electron orbitals.

no detector made can differentiate the which type, the detector can only give energy level and how much and treats each gamma or x-ray in the same way
User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2127
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 9:50 pm
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Steven Sesselmann »

Here is an independent analysis of the paper.

http://www.infinite-energy.com/iemagazi ... lysis.html

Not surprisingly the author points to many of the discrepancies we already identified, plus a few more.

Steven
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG
Doug Browning
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 9:19 pm
Real name: Doug Browning

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Doug Browning »

John,
I was merely suggesting that any particles emitted would be decelerating through the material to produce any excess heat, and would eventually produce radiation in the longer X-ray radiation region, as they drop down to zero energy (since none were seen escaping the material). If the detectors were able to detect the full wavelength range from X-ray to gamma ray, then fine. A clear indication that nothing H.E. is going on. Any accelerated electrons from the electromagnetic fields of the 3 phase heating assembly would also produce very low energy X-ray/UV optical, so that would be another range to check for. To be completely thorough, a check should cover down to Microwave/radio to wavelength = dimensions of the device. Not too likely to find anything there, but after 52 pages, why not put the last nail in the coffin. That would also help rule out any (hidden) exterior heating source as well. (the AC power switching devices shown in the diagrams could be producing RF power, above the detection bandwidth of the power metering, which then gets resonantly absorbed in the device under test.)
User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2930
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
Real name:

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Chris Bradley »

The difference between 'cold' and 'real' hot fusion is that hot fusion is a known physical phenomena.

If 'cold fusion' was real, we would see it in nature. We don't. It's not real. It is a scam. Period.
John Futter
Posts: 1848
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 10:29 pm
Real name: John Futter
Contact:

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by John Futter »

Doug
I still fail to see what you are talking about from gamma to x-ray region.
What does that mean??
a 20keV gamma is exactly the same as a 20keV x-ray
a 12MeV x-ray is exactly the same as a 12MeV gamma
Doug Browning
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 9:19 pm
Real name: Doug Browning

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Doug Browning »

"I still fail to see what you are talking about from gamma to x-ray region."

Look at the chart:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray

You are calling everything gamma rays!
Just a historical distinction maybe. My dentist never uses a gamma ray machine. And if you put gamma rays through airline passengers going through security, you will be arrested.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"It's not real. It is a scam. Period."

One need merely think of how one would pull this off. Rossi speaks of special (secret no doubt) electromagnetic treatment required to activate the C. fusion reaction. So he has a special uP controlled power modulator in the 3 phase power line going to the device. All it has to do is put RF on the lines to cause excess heating. This would work really well if the device resonantly absorbs the RF power. So his "modulator" is necessarily part of any test group's apparatus. As long as the power monitoring metering cannot see the RF, the game is on. The test group in the paper only shows the power metering to be sensitive to modestly higher harmonics than the 50 Hz power line, so the RF is well out of range.
User avatar
Rich Feldman
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 6:59 pm
Real name: Rich Feldman
Location: Santa Clara County, CA, USA

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Rich Feldman »

Doug, wikipedia is not a generally respectable reference. It can be useful for learning (with due caution) and for finding proper references.

As for the distinction between x-rays and gamma rays:
The wikipedia article you cited is (today) biased toward a boundary in the energy or wavelength domain.
However, it does mention the view implicit in John Futter's recent post:
There is no universal consensus for a definition distinguishing between X-rays and gamma rays. One common practice is to distinguish between the two types of radiation based on their source: X-rays are emitted by electrons, while gamma rays are emitted by the atomic nucleus.[6][7][8][9]

By that definition, you can't tell x-rays and gamma rays apart with a detector.
If I may use an overextended analogy, consider a metal fastener
which is technically a screw (if turned into a threaded hole)
and technically a bolt (if tightened with a nut on the far side of unthreaded holes).
Last edited by Rich Feldman on Tue Oct 14, 2014 4:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
All models are wrong; some models are useful. -- George Box
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14992
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Richard Hull »

I would go along with the definition just quoted by Rich Feldman. Where do the photons originate and by what process are they produced? While I still use gamma and x-ray terms they are all just photons. For me, their energy will never qualify them as to which are X and which are Gamma. You gotta' know where they came from.

It's like what is and what is not, pornography.......I'll know if it is porn when I see it.

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
Doug Browning
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 9:19 pm
Real name: Doug Browning

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Doug Browning »

"There is no universal consensus for a definition distinguishing between X-rays and gamma rays. One common practice is to distinguish between the two types of radiation based on their source: X-rays are emitted by electrons, while gamma rays are emitted by the atomic nucleus.[6][7][8][9] "

This is the "distinction" I have always seen. Of course, both are just different wavelength regions for EM waves. I have maybe 50 years of physics books on the shelf that do follow this outline. But no doubt current physics books and journal articles and detector advertisers have simplified the approach, in the interest of expediency or saving trees. With some overlap in the applicable wavelength regions, the detection side of matters would be an obvious incentive. The electronics field is littered with simplifications and re-definitions of terms to the point that oldies and newbies can hardly converse. So nothing new here.
But when conversing outside the narrow confines of physics, your dentist or hospital will definitely be using an X-ray machine. If you have an appointment with the gamma ray machine, you will want your Last Will etc... in order.

"It's like what is and what is not, pornography.......I'll know if it is porn when I see it."

Very much like the difference between "complete" and "finished".
(assuming you have seen that viral email:
http://www.jumbojoke.com/whats_the_diff ... ished.html )

Hopefully we are completely finished on this peculiar topic.
John Futter
Posts: 1848
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 10:29 pm
Real name: John Futter
Contact:

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by John Futter »

Doug
I work in an accelerator laboratory for a day job and use pixe pige nra rbs and rnra as methods to analyse various samples.
The detectors are common to all and the energies are common to all.
nothing to do with wavelength only on the process of how they are created.
Nearly all texts tend to keep x-rays at the longer wavelengths and gammas for the more energetic shorter wavelengths. This is an oversimplification to placate the uneducated and suffices for 99.9 % of the population.
this oversimplification is not correct but as you can see it satisfies casual interest.
Fusor.net is among the 0.01% of the population where people want to further their knowledge ---it pays to do this correctly and unlearn the oversimplification.
Another for you to ponder is if you use helium instead of hydrogen or its isotopes in your fusor the resultant plasma is made up of Alpha particles.
I have never seen this mentioned here on the site but go to any accelerator lab and they refer to a helium ion beam as an Alpha particle beam.

As for dental x-rays the military use an Americium gamma source for field hospitals the 57kV gamma is excellent for x-raying teeth (note:/- with gammas not x-rays). The generator only weighs 0.3kg go find an x-ray head including power source that weighs less than ten times that.

PS I have given up correcting wikipedia on many fronts.
It is peer reviewed by failed teachers who continue the mis-truths.
Last edited by John Futter on Wed Oct 15, 2014 2:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14992
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Richard Hull »

Based on the forgoing we need a section titled "semantics for and from pendantics." Folks will speak as they will, always. The smart ones, the .01%, can still speak "old speak", but they know the full story, regardless of what comes out of their mouth.

Mark Twain once said (paraphrase)... Always endeavor to speak the truth, in this fashion you will gratify most people and amaze the rest.

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
Doug Browning
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 9:19 pm
Real name: Doug Browning

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Doug Browning »

I really think the semantics between X-ray and Gamma ray is bordering on trivia. Everyone knows this derives from historical precedence. Are we going to put RF in the same category too? They are shorthands for referring to approximate energy (or wavelength) range, not rigorous definitions. They can often be helpful in denoting the type of detector used. Can we put this silly conversation to rest....

"PS I have given up correcting wikipedia on many fronts.
It is peer reviewed by failed teachers who continue the mis-truths."

That may not be wise. The people who determine funding for big projects may at best consult Wikipedia, the rest read the newspaper. Who do you want determining your future, a newspaper editor or a "failed teacher". They can't even spell correctly in most newspaper articles nowadays.
User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2930
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
Real name:

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Chris Bradley »

Please delete the argument posts about x ray versus gamma. A total thread drift of no value at all.
Dan Tibbets
Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 1:29 am
Real name:

Re: Who are the kooks in fusion?

Post by Dan Tibbets »

The Rossi scam is unchanged in my openion. The recent test supposedly produced `2 KW out for 1 KW in. The system seems to have been set up to maximize the opacity of measurement methods. Just like when steam production was supposed to be a positive indicator that was so uncertain due to many possible variables. That could have been quickly and definitively resolved by setting up the experiment so that the calorimetry did not involve a phase shift of water (steam), but only a warming of liquid water. That this was not done speaks volumes. As for the Ni62, that was provided by Rossi from an envelope, not extracted from the machine by the researchers. That the claimed reaction involves conversion of Ni58 and possibly several other Ni isotopes to Ni62 and the supplied "post test sample" was almost pure Ni62 is problematic because the reaction rate was reported as constant, and its been reported that it should have slowed as the Ni58 was consumed. What ever the other cold fusion efforts yield, I am confident that Rossi's machine is pure fraud, and poorly disguised fraud at that.

My attitude towards Tokamaks has changed over the years. JET and others have come close enough to Q=1 that it seems they will eventually get there, perhaps with ITER in 30 more years, or even a revamped JET in 5-6 years. The Tokamak, while a possible scientific success, is an economic disaster. Even if it works as expected the cost of the electricity produced will be many times greater than fossil, fission, solar, wind, etc.

Meanwhile the Polywell, Lockheed's Skunkwork;s approach, several FRC approaches, DPF, General Fusion's approach continue to advance without any show stoppers. All have valid physics, especially as high Beta operation has now been demonstrated convincingly. That does not mean they will work, but at least they have withstood the attempts by some to discredit them as bad science .

Dan Tibbets
Post Reply

Return to “Other Forms of Fusion - Theory, Construction, Discussion, URLs”