Posted on 02/20/2014 11:14:24 AM PST by Kevmo
“Quasi-One-Dimensional Model of electrochemical loading of isotopic fuel into a metal” - Mitchell Swartz
“Codeposition of Palladium and Deuterium“ - Mitchell Swartz
Now for those of you who don’t know… Cold Fusion is based on the idea that if you load enough hydrogen or deuterium atoms inside a metal lattice, like Nickel or Palladium, they become so tightly packed close together, that they begin to fuse together. Two world renowned electrochemists Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann were the first to claim the discovery of excess heat effects in cold fusion. Some of their colleagues thought that since their discovery was so important it might be a good idea to go public with an announcement through the mainstream media. That turned out to be a very bad idea? The media turned against Pons and Fleischmann and started a witch hunt within the scientific community. Pons and Fleischman were quickly “debunked” and the entire concept of Cold Fusion was labeled a “Fiasco” and even a “hoax”. Two primary studies in particular were successful in shifting mainstream scientific opinion against Cold Fusion forever. These two studies are also cited by the patent offices for refusing any and all patents on Cold Fusion related devices. Those are the MIT and Caltech studies commissioned by the DOE’s Energy Research Advisory Board report, a report that would determine the federal response to cold fusion and shape energy policy at the highest level of government.. ( Read Remove Institutional Blocks for more.)
As some of you may know, Dr. Eugene Mallove wrote an article for the MIT Press in which he claims that MIT actually DID observe excess heat in their cells, and that they covered it up, in addition to holding a wake for Cold Fusion before their results from the lab were back. Dr. Mallove quit his position at MIT in outrage at the Cold Fusion circus of denial and ridicule. It’s important to note that Dr. Peter Hagelstein’s position on the MIT results is much different than Mallove’s. Dr. Hagelstein claims there is no way the MIT experiments could have seen excess heat because their loading was not high enough. That is, they did not pack enough deuterium molecules inside their cathodes to reach the required reaction range.
This is very important. Experiment trumps theory in science, and there are many scientists from all over the world risking their careers and reputations to claim positive results in cold fusion experiments. But when the early MIT and Caltech replication failed to reproduce the effect, those experiments were cited as complete proof that no such effect indeed existed. At MIT last week this team of scientists carefully laid out the FACTS regarding Cold Fusion and explained that according to their experiments you don’t ever see excess heat until you get over 90% D to Pd loading ratio. It maxes out at around 95% loading. Caltech and MIT never got above 80%, so this is why their experiments failed to produce any excess heat.
If this is true, then these are possibly the most epic scientific failures in modern technological history. The Caltech scientists who when told that their loading was not high enough, by other scientists in the field, even had the nerve to reply “the loading is plenty high! There is no effect!” (from an argument with Bob Huggins) and while critics and skeptics like to call Cold Fusion “pathological science”, in light of recent evidence it seems that their denial is the only thing that is “pathological”.
Well, if there really IS an effect, as more and more evidence seems to be piling up that Cold Fusion effects ARE real, that would mean that these scientists who ridiculed and mocked Cold Fusion back in the 80′s and 90′s and even today can be blamed for setting all of our technology back 20 years. Just imagine that today we might have hover boards, flying cars, and a booming space tourism business, had history gone a bit differently. And don’t laugh, there was a guy from Terrafugia at the IAP course last week at MIT, and he is serious about using cold fusion power to build flying cars.
This is serious business. (http://www.terrafugia.com/. Available in 2015.
While others are dreaming up ideas on what to do with cold fusion once we get the science nailed down, Dr. Hagelstein and Dr. Swartz are busy nailing down that science! They have begun to compile a list of conditions which enhance the production of excess heat in Cold Fusion experiments, and also a list of things that will kill the reaction or cause it to stop producing excess heat. For example applying an external magnetic field and shining an infra-red laser on the cathode have been shown to enhance the production of excess heat.
PROGRESS ON DUAL LASER EXPERIMENTS - Dennis G. Letts, Dennis Cravens, and Peter L. Hagelstein
Things like cracking or brittleness caused by defects in the metal or by loading too quickly cause the deuterium to leak out and not maintain sufficient loading thus killing the reaction. They have also determined that the reactions are occurring at the surface of the materials possibly through an effect of the surface plasmons. So to maximize the effect you need to maximize surface area. But as you do that you also produce a lot of Helium4 fusion product which needs to be dissipated from the system, so what they have done is to use Deuterated Palladium nanomaterial suspended like chocolate chips inside a cookie dough of Zirconium Oxide. This, is the basic design behind Micthell Swartz? NANOR technology, which uses nanomaterials to maximize Cold Fusion reaction rates and efficiency. His best NANORs put out 14 times excess power, which is a very huge deal.
And though the NANORs may not look all too impressive (basically just a copper wire) This is quite possibly the beginning of the largest technological breakthrough that our generation will witness. One teaspoon of water has the fusion fuel energy of an entire gallon of gasoline. In the theoretical future, you’ll be able to fill your car’s gas tank with one gallon of water and drive 55,000 miles.
The Cold Fusion revolution should render coal, gas, and nuclear fuels obsolete, completely decimating a multi-billion dollar industry and freeing humanity from the economic restraints of rising energy costs, and meter based centralized distribution systems. The future these corporate energy mega-giants fear most will be one built on decentralized, off-the-grid home power and heating systems based on Cold Fusion water-powered technology. No wonder there is so much top level resistance to the idea, same as there continues to resistence to thorium energy.
The original MIT and Caltech studies FAILED to replicate the Cold Fusion excess heat effect because they did not achieve high enough loading in their cathodes. That claim alone should make the entire scientific community questions those studies and want to go redo the experiments with better quality Palladium and achieve 95% loading.
There is a reason that they call it “RE-Search” in science, because you find out what changed, what factors are the key essential elements to getting something to work, and you re-search by doing experiments. You don’t just do one or two experiments and then give up on the most promising energy source ever to be allegedly discovered in the history of science & technology.
Read more: http://www.exposingthetruth.co/mit-scientists-discover-secret-cold-fusion/#ixzz2ttJYaQHP Follow us: @Exposing4Truth on Twitter | ExposingTheTruth on Facebook
“Quasi-One-Dimensional Model of electrochemical loading of isotopic fuel into a metal” - Mitchell Swartz
I’m pretty sure Sheldon threw this line at the blonde next door the other night.
It was a fine, current event comedic post...I enjoyed it.
labeled a “Fiasco” and even a “hoax”.... Appropriately so.
***Then it is appropriate to label Controlled Hot Fusion (CHF) efforts an even bigger fiasco and a bigger hoax. In fact, when you contrast the hundreds of $billions poured down the CHF fraud rathole for what we’ve gotten, Cold Fusion delivers 25 ORDERS of MAGNITUDE better bang for the buck.
Asked & answered
-———————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg90393.html-———————
Why do you insist on posting this ridiculous stuff here day after day, and revealing your obsessive sickness to everyone?
***Because if it scalable, it solves the world’s greatest energy problems. Duhh. Why do you ridicule and jump on the same bandwagon that stands behind OPEC’s agenda?
No one but you and your alter ego care about it.
***Only maybe 3 times have I logged onto some thread that I didn’t care about to tell those people engaged in the conversation that I didn’t care about it. Why did you? Some sick, twisted, irrational need to jump on AdamHenryBandWagons?
There is more evidence that my ass generates excess heat.
***The P-F Anomalous Heat Effect has been replicated more than 14,700 times. Big Companies like Scientific Instruments aren’t putting their reputations on the line to say there’s a genuine anomaly in the excess heat coming out of your ass, but they are when it comes to LENR.
asked & answered
-———————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg85732.html———————
Still batting a thousand, I see. Not one post from you has furthered the science behind LENR. Not even ONE.
Once I understood it was a slam on the nut who posts these threads, I enjoyed it too.
No, you’re not stupid, she just doesn’t express herself well at all, doesn’t know zip about science, and has a strong desire to jump on AdamHenry*BandWagons.
Sounds somewhat similar to loading firewood into a stove,
***And if you were to look at the same set of effects in One Dimension rather than 3, some effects would be magnified while others were attenuated. Would there be more heat or less heat for 1 dimension than corresponding to 3 dimensions? How about for light? How about for smoke generation? That is the direction the discussion is going.
For instance, there is a 1 dimensional phenomena in physics known as the Luttinger Liquid, recently verified in observation, giving weight to the Vibrating 1 Dimensional Luttinger Liquid Bose-Einstein-Condensate theory. The V1DLLBEC theory.
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-
nut who posts these threads
***Well, now. This is the FReeper always whining about name calling and claiming that it starts from the LENR crowd.
Being neither him or his alter ego I state as a physics major and amatuer scientist that I do care about these postings as they have demonstrated true scientific research using the scientific method.
Your comment: “No one but you and your alter ego care about it.” - is invalid.
In fact there’s even a ping list I’m lucky enough to be on.
Here’s another supposed technobabbler...
It is known that Maxwell’s electrodynamics—as usually understood at the
present time—when applied to moving bodies, leads to asymmetries which do
not appear to be inherent in the phenomena. Take, for example, the
reciprocal electrodynamic action of a magnet and a conductor. The
observable phenomenon here depends only on the relative motion of the
conductor and the magnet, whereas the customary view draws a sharp
distinction between the two cases in which either the one or the other of
these bodies is in motion. For if the magnet is in motion and the conductor
at rest, there arises in the neighbourhood of the magnet an electric field
with a certain definite energy, producing a current at the places where
parts of the conductor are situated. But if the magnet is stationary and
the conductor in motion, no electric field arises in the neighbourhood of
the magnet. In the conductor, however, we find an electromotive force, to
which in itself there is no corresponding energy, but which gives
rise—assuming equality of relative motion in the two cases discussed—to
electric currents of the same path and intensity as those produced by the
electric forces in the former case.
Examples of this sort, together with the unsuccessful attempts to discover
any motion of the earth relatively to the “light medium,” suggest that the
phenomena of electrodynamics as well as of mechanics possess no properties
corresponding to the idea of absolute rest. They suggest rather that, as
has already been shown to the first order of small quantities, the same
laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of
reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good.1 We will raise
this conjecture (the purport of which will hereafter be called the
“Principle of Relativity”) to the status of a postulate, and also introduce
another postulate, which is only apparently irreconcilable with the former,
namely, that light is always propagated in empty space with a definite
velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting
body. These two postulates suffice for the attainment of a simple and
consistent theory of the electrodynamics of moving bodies based on
Maxwell’s theory for stationary bodies. The introduction of a “luminiferous
ether” will prove to be superfluous inasmuch as the view here to be
developed will not require an “absolutely stationary space” provided with
special properties, nor assign a velocity-vector to a point of the empty
space in which electromagnetic processes take place.
The theory to be developed is based—like all electrodynamics—on the
kinematics of the rigid body, since the assertions of any such theory have
to do with the relationships between rigid bodies (systems of
co-ordinates), clocks, and electromagnetic processes. Insufficient
consideration of this circumstance lies at the root of the difficulties
which the electrodynamics of moving bodies at present encounters.
The rest of paper is here:
https://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
and guess what... that technobabbler recently had his famous theory shown to be off by 20 orders of magnitude across 250 experiments.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3125257/posts
These sorts of reports — out of MIT—if true —should be getting better circulation than posts in private blogs.
You want to see this stuff move up the information food chain.
Agreed, neither one works. However, it's more appropriate to label CHF a "failure" rather than a hoax or a fraud, since at least the basic science behind the CHF is valid.
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.