10KW LENR Demonstrator?

[KitemanSA]

If the reaction p + 62N = 63Cu occurs, for whatever reason, is that reaction endo or exo-themic? That is the "If" in question. So please answer that question.

Ok. I am answering. That will occur if that type of reaction is possible in principle. And if that possible, so that is already would be investigated.

By the way, you didn't answer. Would the reaction be endo or exo thermic? Please answer. Simple question, simple answer. Endo or exo?

[Kahuna]

Evidently Rossi gave an interview while in Stockholm on July 5th. It has some interesting stuff relative to Ni grain size, the nature of the catalyst, preferred Ni Isotopes, his agreement with Uppsala University, and his thoughts on Dr. Kims (Bose-Einstein ) theory out of Purdue. Its probably worth the read for most following the story:


http://ecatreport.com/rossi/andrea-ross ... at-part-12

[Joseph Chikva]

Did Rossi do it? I don't know. But there is no scientific reason that H:Ni LENR COULDN'T work that anyone has presented yet.

Scientific?
Yes, if you talk about reaction between proton, deuteron or alpha-particle with carbon, azoth, copper, nickel, gold, etc., etc. That was investigated many years ago. Here I mean the bombardment by mentioned three particles the fixed targets consists from different elements.

If you or any other are talking about the possibility of reaction in special conditions pulling out from a sleeve Bose-Einstein condensate or Rydberg matter, no, I have not heard about even possibility of that. But I have done some searchings and learned out that Bose-Einstein condensate can appear in crystal lattice at temperatures near absolute zero, and reading about conditions in which Rydberg matter can be created I have read about number density of 10^29 cm^-3 corresponding for e.g. Ni58 to density 10 metric tons per cubic centimeter.
Or in the other words in both cases special conditions are required that has not been provided. Or can anybody say that some catalyst can provide those special conditions?
No, the last - surely the possibility of reaction in those conditions was not investigated. But you first of all you create those conditions Ni (10 t per cm3 ) then let's talk.

[JoeP]

<snip>...
I would believe that not well trained man can invent some device. Example – Mikhail Kalashnikov. But that device works on well known principles and only design is novelty.
And what we see in Rossi’s case?

As far as I can tell the fact that LENR/CF theory is not accepted by mainstream science is the main reason why Rossi is likely fooling himself, or perhaps attempting to fool everyone around him, so I agree with you there.

However, since you mention inventors -- there is a small chance -- very small -- that Rossi is kind of like an Edison: a guy that stubbornly attempts hundreds of variations on experiments and works towards a solution empirically. If there is anything at all to CF reactions in reality, then it may be that Pons & Fleischmann were able to produce a very unreliable and weak form of it, then Rossi may have moved towards a more powerful version in this way, by stubborn empiricism.

[Joseph Chikva]

<snip>...
I would believe that not well trained man can invent some device. Example – Mikhail Kalashnikov. But that device works on well known principles and only design is novelty.
And what we see in Rossi’s case?

As far as I can tell the fact that LENR/CF theory is not accepted by mainstream science is the main reason why Rossi is likely fooling himself, or perhaps attempting to fool everyone around him, so I agree with you there.

However, since you mention inventors -- there is a small chance -- very small -- that Rossi is kind of like an Edison: a guy that stubbornly attempts hundreds of variations on experiments and works towards a solution empirically. If there is anything at all to CF reactions in reality, then it may be that Pons & Fleischmann were able to produce a very unreliable and weak form of it, then Rossi may have moved towards a more powerful version in this way, by stubborn empiricism.

I see a big difference between Rossi and Edison.
Edison created useful devices on based of known. Even in his era everybody knew that if you propagate the current through metallic conductor you can heat that.
But Rossi like conjurer offers some black box the process in which is not clear first of all for him. What can he find? Looking how he calculate heat I see a pity amateur.

[Carl White]

Rossi may have moved towards a more powerful version in this way, by stubborn empiricism.

This is what he said he did, and not only by himself, but by building on Piantelli's work.

[Joseph Chikva]

This is what he said he did, and not only by himself, but by building on Piantelli's work.

And what Piantelli has discovered?

[Joseph Chikva]

Evidently Rossi gave an interview while in Stockholm on July 5th. It has some interesting stuff relative to Ni grain size, the nature of the catalyst, preferred Ni Isotopes, his agreement with Uppsala University, and his thoughts on Dr. Kims (Bose-Einstein ) theory out of Purdue. Its probably worth the read for most following the story:


http://ecatreport.com/rossi/andrea-ross ... at-part-12

So, as I see the Kim's explanation http://www.physics.purdue.edu/people/fa ... drogen.pdf is acceptable for Rossi.

If the velocities of mobile Ni atoms/nuclei under the condition (1) are sufficiently slow, their de-Broglie wavelengths become sufficiently large and may overlap with neighboring two-proton composite Bosons which are also mobile, thus creating Bose-Einstein condensation of two species of Bosons.

If Rossi‟s device is operated at temperatures greater than the Curie temperature ~ 358 oC and with hydrogen pressures of up to ~ 22 bars, the conditions (1) and (2) may have been achieved in Rossi‟s device.

Mentioned conditions temperature ~ 358 oC and pressure ~ 22 bars very easy to achieve.
But I have read at another place:
Ground-state lattice vacancies and Bose-Einstein condensation in a quantum crystal
http://prb.aps.org/abstract/PRB/v14/i5/p1946_1

...Within mean-field theory and by using the concept of pseudospin, the Helmholtz free energy per lattice cell is obtained as a function of the fraction of lattice vacancies, the crystalline long-range order, and Bose-Einstein condensation order parameter....A crude estimation that the transition temperature would lie in the range between 0.01 and 0.1 K is given.

I am not expert. But think that 0.01 and 0.1 K is too far from requested temperature ~ 358 oC.

[Carl White]

This is what he said he did, and not only by himself, but by building on Piantelli's work.

And what Piantelli has discovered?

I suggest that you do the background reading and piece the story together. All I can do is repeat them.

[Joseph Chikva]

I suggest that you do the background reading and piece the story together. All I can do is repeat them.

Regardless how I will read "the background" and "piece the story" together or separately, the question is remaining at the same place: what has that respectful man discovered?
As the explanation of process with the help of Bose-Einstein Condensate (BEC) doesn't maintain any criticism. If process requires at least 631 K deg and if BEC transition is possible only at near zero temperatures.
May be I have wrong information?

[tomclarke]

Many of the speculative theories of cold fusion revolve around condensates such as BECs being formed. It is interesting to note that, within a solid, coulomb screening effects might lower the separation between nuclei resulting in the possibility of degenerate overlap of wavefunctions at higher temperatures than in the gas phase. I can't see how this would apply to nickel in this case however.

BEC like condensates do exist in liquids and have been used to theoretically explain super-fluidity.

OK - I agree BEC can have liquid behaviour. But idea of BEC at such high temperatures is more than absurd.

Yes, it is understandable people latch onto this, since quantum effects are the only available deus ex machina. But they are invoked very loosely.

Coulomb screening is real. But you can't get much of it from a lattice because the spatial scale is all wrong due to 2000 X mass difference between electrons and nucleons.

The suggestions here of nuclei being coherent/superimposed/etc are wrong.

As you say, the only possibility would be some electron resonance that leads to 2000X normal charge density in vicinity of a nucleon. It is not easy to see how that can happen, but I don't know enough to rule it out. On the other hand somone with better understanding of solid state physics might see the problems more clearly.

Tom

[KitemanSA]

Did Rossi do it? I don't know. But there is no scientific reason that H:Ni LENR COULDN'T work that anyone has presented yet.

Scientific?
Yes, if you talk about reaction between proton, deuteron or alpha-particle with carbon, azoth, copper, nickel, gold, etc., etc.

YADA YADA YADA... still no answer. Endo or exo?

[Joseph Chikva]

If the reaction p + 62N = 63Cu occurs, for whatever reason, is that reaction endo or exo-themic? That is the "If" in question. So please answer that question.

Ok. I am answering. That will occur if that type of reaction is possible in principle. And if that possible, so that is already would be investigated.

By the way, you didn't answer. Would the reaction be endo or exo thermic? Please answer. Simple question, simple answer. Endo or exo?

Oops, I missed your question.
What's problem in calculation?
Add mass of two nuclei separately and compare with mass of prospective nucleus mass.
The next and bigger question: is that reaction possible in general?

PS: What do you think, why people try to fuse He4 using D-T or D-He3 reactions and donot try the direct way - to take two protons and two neutrons for further merging?

[Joseph Chikva]

Did Rossi do it? I don't know. But there is no scientific reason that H:Ni LENR COULDN'T work that anyone has presented yet.

Scientific?
Yes, if you talk about reaction between proton, deuteron or alpha-particle with carbon, azoth, copper, nickel, gold, etc., etc.

YADA YADA YADA... still no answer. Endo or exo?

Little boy in little school learned addition 2+2=4 and very proud?
What will be happen when he'll learn 2*2=4?

[KitemanSA]

Ok. I am answering. That will occur if that type of reaction is possible in principle. And if that possible, so that is already would be investigated.

By the way, you didn't answer. Would the reaction be endo or exo thermic? Please answer. Simple question, simple answer. Endo or exo?

Oops, I missed your question.
What's problem in calculation?
Add mass of two nuclei separately and compare with mass of prospective nucleus mass.

YADA YADA YADA. Endo or exo. Please answer.

The next and bigger question: is that reaction possible in general?.

In general, unless there is something unknown (or at least novel) at work, the probability that such a reaction will result in anything but the re-emission of the proton is miniscual. However, since there has been little real investigation of low energy proton:Ni interaction in a lattice, I don't pretend to know that there is no chance of unknown or novel interactivity.

PS: What do you think, why people try to fuse He4 using D-T or D-He3 reactions and donot try the direct way - to take two protons and two neutrons for further merging?

Not sure what you are gettin at here. The cross section for p-p is miniscual and the probability of simultaneous combination of 4 particles is smaller than remote. What of it?
Do you know of a way to use a lattice to change that probability? Do you think yourself omniscient and claim there is NO such possibility? And since NEITHER is what is being discussed vis-a-vis the Rossi Reactor, why did you bring this totally inane issue up? Are you constitutionally unable to carry on a meaningful conversation?