More fusion hype?

Reflections on fusion history, current events, and predictions for the 'fusion powered future.
User avatar
Frank Sanns
Site Admin
Posts: 1600
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 6:26 pm
Real name: Frank Sanns
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA

Re: More fusion hype?

Post by Frank Sanns » Fri Apr 27, 2012 11:43 pm

Where are the experiments that could show if there is something there? Repeating the variations on the same is not good method. Where are the samples were the palladium is doped with elements across the periodic table groups? Where are the experiments with 50% D and T? Where are the experiments that generate more energy than normal chemical heats of solution or annealing? Where are the experiments with neutron rich substrates? Where are the experiments with fission prone materials. I can think of dozens of experiments that make sense from discovery point of view yet little of the more diverse approaches to characterize what might or might not be there are absent. Instead, work hovers very closely around a only the basics. There have been a couple of good papers out within a limited exploration range but for the most part it is same ole, same ole, which along with no published details, is a fairly certain sign of snake oil. Call it zero point energy, perpetual motion, over unity cracker kernel modulation or what ever you please but without robust design and results, it is snake oil.

Frank Sanns

User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2108
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: More fusion hype?

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Sat Apr 28, 2012 4:50 am

With virtue and tenacity, I believe the fusion dragon will be tamed, the big guys have already shown us that the dragon just gets stronger the more power you fight it with.

The dragon is of course the Coulomb force, and the way to defeat it is to work with it and not against it, tame it and let it unleash it's energy for you.

That should F.I.C.S. it....

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: Sun Mar 11, 2012 2:19 am
Real name: Doug Browning

Re: More fusion hype?

Post by Doug Browning » Sun Apr 29, 2012 12:01 am

Reading through the Brillouin white paper was rather interesting. I find it hard to believe that colllective phonons along with electrons could develop the 782 KeV for proton to neutron conversions. On the other hand, there may be a clue here as to what is going on (assuming something is for the moment at least). They are using a pulsed current thru the metal lattice (very thin wires) to produce reactions (so claimed), with the theorized expectation of producing this sea of phonons.

The protons solvated in the lattice are restricted to specific pockets between the lattice atoms. The high permeability of hydrogen diffusion thru the lattice means they can exchange positions readily, but are normally kept apart by coulomb forces. If the pulsed conduction electrons are passing thru the boundary regions between two protons (either a raised orbital, or an atom to atom tunneling case), a lattice assisted three way collision could be enabled (phonons maybe giving a low energy push as well along a lattice axis, so technically a four or more way interaction). The intermediary electron removes the coulomb repulsion long enough for two protons to bump together via phonon pushes. A three or four way interaction like this could avoid most of the 782 KeV or similar coulomb barrier, since the electron now binds to two positives.

There is no law against removing a barrier if the complete reaction is energetically favored. This multi way collision would be statistically impossible in a plasma state, but perhaps possible in a cold lattice network providing the dimensional constraints. Subsequent reactions would involve adding another proton, one at a time, via a similar electron interaction. Whether their scenario of reaching 4H and decay to 4He is possible, this is new physics certainly. An interesting point they make however about very low energy window states not being complete in the national database.

Since the 1H lattice solvated protons have a similar repetitive spacing as the background metal lattice (when fully packed), could there be a periodicity in the wavefunction of a conduction or tunneling electron that would put a peak at the opportune positions for mediation. This might explain why only certain metals or alloys or packing level will work. The slight expansion of the palladium when packed, at the very least, says that the protons are well localised in the lattice gaps.

The proposed decay of 4H to 4He involves a Beta emission. At Mev levels, the acceleration/deceleration of the Beta alone should produce gamma rays. Very surprising that gamma rays would not be detected here if the proposed reactions were occuring. Are the resulting 4He/alphas detected above background levels? They propose energy absorption and conversion to phonons. I would guess that some further mechanism is still needed at Mev levels. Multi photon or phonon some how? There is coulomb coupling to the lattice that could do multi phonon, but most likely that is way way too weak for effective nuclear Mev coupling. With maybe eight surrounding lattice atoms, they would each have to be capable of 100 KeV order interactions! A really tough one to solve.

It would seem that something must directly interact with the nuclear decay somehow, like lattice fields to slow down a nuclear spin transition. Is there a missing 4H -- 4He intermediary isomer state or two with a spin change? Does palladium have a MeV order nuclear isomer state that could absorb the gamma rays and decay in smaller steps? Their proposed 4H state clearly needs to be verified, and its decay modes fully understood. So they added Nickel to the mix now... Is this alloy ferromagnetic or paramagnetic?

User avatar
Frank Sanns
Site Admin
Posts: 1600
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 6:26 pm
Real name: Frank Sanns
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA

Re: More fusion hype?

Post by Frank Sanns » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:21 am

Don,

The total energy produced (if produced) always comes to an abrupt end with no more heat production. That shoots down just about all nuclear and chemical theories except for solvation or phase transitions.

Frank Sanns

Doug Browning
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 2:19 am
Real name: Doug Browning

Re: More fusion hype?

Post by Doug Browning » Tue May 01, 2012 5:52 pm

Regardless of what the results are with this LENR/CF stuff, it would be quite interesting to take one mini Palladium/Nickel wire (lattice pre-loaded with 1H or 2D, like Brillouin et al use) and put a 10,000 Amp pulse, or more, (cap discharge) through it. Sufficient current to implode the wire (a massive phonon if you will), and sufficient current to saturate the lattice with conduction electron flow (to get hoped for charge neutralization in between the protons or D's). The test conducted with some radiation test gear of course (a metal sleeve around everything to shield out the EMP for the test equipment). This configuration looks even more interesting than 2D filled, hollow carbon fibers.

I assume someone has tried this already? Probably the real question here would be: whether the intense electron conduction flow in between the reactants lowers the fusion Coulomb threshold any? Maybe a less severe current pulse is needed then.

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 11427
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: More fusion hype?

Post by Richard Hull » Wed May 02, 2012 3:56 pm

Don's comments above are dealt with in a bit more depth as a possible alternate fusion experiment. see this thread posted in the proper forum.

viewtopic.php?f=15&t=7293#p49165

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
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

Post Reply