Skip to comments.MIT IAP Course on Cold Fusion 1.01 - Brief Summaries of Week 1 and 2
Posted on 02/06/2013 10:38:15 AM PST by Kevmo
MIT IAP Course on Cold Fusion 1.01 - Brief Summaries of Week 1 and 2
Jan. 28, 2013 - On day 5, Dr. Mitchell Swartz continued with the substantial experimental proof for cold fusion (lattice assisted nuclear reactions). After discussion of the materials involved in the desired reactions, he surveyed the methods of calibration of heat producing reactions including the copious controls, time-integration, thermal waveform reconstruction, noise measurement and additional techniques, as well as those methods which are not accurate. Many examples of excess heat generated by CF/LANR systems were shown, using aqueous nickel and palladium systems. Then using the Navier Stokes equation, he developed the flow equations for both "conventional" cold fusion and codeposition. Optimal operating point operation was shown to have the ability to determine the products, and how the OOP manifolds demonstrate that CF is a reproducible phenomenon, applicable to science and engineering. He focused on the salient advantages of the LANR metamaterials with the PHUSOR®-type system being one example. Returning to the experimental results and engineering methods developed to control cold fusion, he surveyed "heat after death" and its control and useful application, and the use of CF/LANR systems to drive motors.
Jan. 29, 2013 - On day 6, Dr. Mitchell Swartz continued with the discussion of cold fusion (lattice assisted nuclear reactions) in aqueous systems, beginning with the near infra red emissions from active LANR devices, and the use of CF to generate electricity. Problems in the feedback loop were discussed. Then the focus was on the new dry, preloaded nanomaterial CF/LANR materials. After discussing their novel characteristics and electrical breakdown (avalanche) issues, and which electric drive regions actually generate excess energy, he presented the development of several types of the NANOR®-type CF electronic components. Using multiple ways of documenting the excess energy produced, he presented the results of the latest series of such devices, such as were shown at MIT over several months in the second series of open demonstrations of cold fusion by JET Energy, Inc . With energy gains from 14 and greater, these electronic components, in conjunction with advanced driving circuits, were shown to have excess energy documented by temperature rise, heat flow, and calorimetry; heralding their revolutionary potential to change the energy landscape in circuits, distributed electrical power systems, artificial internal organs, propulsion systems, space travel, and more.
Jan. 22, 2013 - On day 1, attendees intently focus on Prof. Peter Hagelstein's lecture on palladium hydrides and the role of the highly loaded lattice, beyond the miscibility gap, as required for achieving successful deuterium fusion in cold fusion (LANR) as initially (correctly) reported by Drs. Fleischmann and Pons in 1989.
Jan. 23, 2013 - On day 2, Prof. Peter Hagelstein presented his original theory involving de novo helium formation in CF/LANR, specifically at vacancies surrounded by loaded octahedral sites, and made very clear -in that light- exactly why early attempts at reproduction of CF were so difficult to achieve. The roles of loading (Volmer, Tafel, and Heyrovsky reactions), chemical potential, sigma-bonded hydrogen, codeposition, embedded atom theories, vacancy diffusion and stabilization by loading, and the important differences between Pd and Ni were also made clear; as he tied these together based upon years of condensed matter data.
Jan. 24, 2013 - On day 3, Prof. Peter Hagelstein went through the experimental proof that de novo He4 production is commensurate with excess energy (Miles, and Case, and SRI experiments), and its rate of production is commensurate with excess power (Gozzi). He discussed the role of cell temperature in positive feedback in the CF/LANR system (Fleischmann, and Cravens, and Storms, and Swartz); and then focused on the problem associated with helium occupancy at the critical sites of CF/LANR in active systems. Moving through Rutherford issues to the Hamiltonian, he also demonstrated the roles of deuteron flux as well as loading. Finally, using an analogy similar to Corkum's mechanism, he led the way towards the spin boson model of Cohen-Tannoudji, but demonstrated exactly where it was insufficient to explain CF/LANR in the absence of his discovery of the role of destructive interference and other loss and dephasing issues.
Jan. 25, 2013 -On day 4, Prof. Hagelstein began with evidence, based upon PdD and D2O as the detectors, that de novo Helium 4 must be "borne" with energies below 10 keV or less, and that the upper limit for neutron production must be less than 0.01 neutrons/joule. Then, having demonstrated that destructive interference in the spin boson model prevents its use in CF/LANR, he corrected that, and expanded the Hamiltonian to now include coupling parameters and examined the quantum exchange characteristics based upon coherence. Successful energy transfer was demonstrated to require interactions of all the atoms in the lattice. For further analysis, a donor-receptor system was then included. At that point, he showed how the Coulomb barrier need not be overcome, because by this method the factor is linear, rather than quadratic (needed for classical analysis of D+D interactions). Supporting this analysis is the Karabut data in glow discharge on Pd which yielded both diffuse emissions and collimated x-radiation. with beamlets of energy bandwidth which were consistent with the theory Prof. Hagelstein developed. Finally, he used the Foldy-Wouthuysen rotational operation, and demonstrated how this analysis is becoming assymptotic with what is being observed in CF/LANR, with the use of his corrected condensed matter nuclear science (CMNS) Hamiltonian. Finally, with the addition of nonlinear Rabi oscillations (which yields Dicke superradiance), his model was shown to also be near-complete and consistent with both the observed pulse emissions and the wide bandwidth.
The Cold Fusion/LENR Ping List
Yes, but what about the Clebsch-Gordan coefficients in the framework of the explicit direct sum decomposition of the tensor product in the SO(3) group?
I mean, without resolving that aspect what good is any of it?
Even with my hearing aids and computer gain cranked all the way up, it is heavy slogging to hear the sound track.
Just for the record, an MIT IAP course is not a regular course for credit. People should also look into the credentials of Swartz and Hagelstein before believing any of this stuff. For instance, do either of them have advanced degrees in chemistry or physics?
Hehehe. I thought to myself, “Who the hell still uses Cold Fusion?”
Thanks for bumping the thread
Put me on your ping list so I can bump it sooner.
Swartz has been working in this area for a long time. He has SB, SM, and SCD degrees in Course 6 (electrical engineering in MIT-speak; I also went there and my degree is in the same course).
No. Your stalking is effective already. You bump these threads before 90% on the ping list anyways.
Swartz's cold fusion generator (Nanor) was recently shown to generate a COP of 80. This is up significantly from that demonstrated at last years MIT cold fusion short course, where the same device was putting out a COP of 14.
One of the more interesting comments from Swartz was "...our device exhibits a COP of 80....attempts to reach higher outputs resulted in the device melting". Since the device consists of a dispersion of palladium nanoparticles in a zirconium matrix, this means that quite a high temperature was reached.
If you're interested in an excellent review of the science of LENR, I highly recommend Charles Beaudette's book "Excess Heat". It can be purchased from Amazon, or, if you don't want to shell out the bucks, your local library can borrow it for you via "Interlibrary Loan", for either no cost, or a small fee (usually just to cover postage).
“People should also look into the credentials of Swartz and Hagelstein “
You really think so?
Swartz will not allow a video because he says it belongs to Jet Energy. I believe that Swartz IS Jet Energy. JE has a one page website ....
Here is another of Kevmo’s masterpieces ...
Some unknown named Sweeney writes a letter to a magazine ...
Here is Kevmo’s source for the 11 million (which he has this week upped to 20 million!).
Some dude named Jennifer!
Note that Jennifer also blogs about the Cyclone Engine!
Note that LENR ‘expert’ Kim is also a consultant for the Cyclone Engine!
Dr. Swartz says the technology will not be accepted in his lifetime. Due you know how old he is?
With Kevmo it’s always about quantity, not quality. Combine that with his probable mental illness and you get thousands of posts on FR about cold fusion.
Post #36 shows Kevmo at his finest. Post and article and then claim it says something it doesn’t and when you challenge him on it he claims it is in the article and you just can’t read.
What an awesome display of the AdamHenry*BandWagon index being so high, and 2 seagull trolls squawking with each other. And the freeper isn’t even responding on the thread, he’s responding on a different thread. There appears to be no length that these jerks won’t go to in their quest for vigilante censorship.
Since the device consists of a dispersion of palladium nanoparticles in a zirconium matrix,
***Sounds an awful lot like Dr. Arata’s pycnodeuterium. He used a zirconium matrix as well.
“There appears to be no length that these jerks wont go to in their quest for vigilante censorship.”
I am not the one calling names and yelling to stop posting ...
Please stop posting to me, seagull.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.