LENR- THE FORESHADOW OF A POSITIVE TREND
Date: Saturday, November 21, 2015 @ 23:51:20 EST
Topic: Testimonials


From Dr. Peter Gluck's Ego Out blog: ...Before my travel, Edmund Storms wrote: Peter, if progress is to be made, we need to apply what is known as a fact, not use proposed theories as a starting point. If the facts are applied effectively, most present explanations would have to be totally rejected.  We have too many of explanations only because the facts are ignored.  Instead, everyone picks the facts that fit their imagined theory or use a phenomenon popular in physics as justification. I see no acknowledgement of there being any basic facts of importance or of the need to include basic chemical understanding in an explanation.  Consequently, I'm not optimistic for any progress any time soon.  Right now, what little money is being applied, is under the restraints imposed by commercial interests.  I see very little hope for progress until public money is applied and universities get involved.  Until this happens, we can debate and complain all we want with out any effect on the future use of LENR.

Peter Gluck
: With all due respect, I am thinking very differently:


A. What is known about LENR s facts is not much and I doubt that what is true about a wet system at 70 C is also directly applicable or transferable for a dry system at 500 or 1200 C with a different metal and the other isotope of hydrogen.

I think NAE, active sites is a fact indeed but their nature as empty not structured cracks has to be demonstrated.

Essentially, I think firmly that what we do not know is still much more decisive for both explaining and developmental success. For solving the Problems. A commercial triumph is the way toward theoretical understanding not the opposite. I am aware this is a heretic idea.

Ed Storms (by email): Peter, your idea is not heretic. Like most people, you keep looking for ways you can disagree with me even if you have to create disagreement out of thin air.  I'm frustrated by an almost uniform unwillingness in this field to reach a common understanding.  Everyone seems intent on going their own way.

Your response did not address my comment, yet you say you have a different opinion.  Based on your response, you believe the PdD system operates by different rules compared to the NiH system.  Presumably, you believe chemistry and physics operate differently in the two materials.  Even if the two mechanisms are different, why would you expect the mechanism operating in NiH to violate basic chemical rules; the same rules I insist PdD follows?

Would not an understanding of how PdD produces energy have a relationship to how NiH does the same thing? Would not use of what we know about PdD provide some insight into another mechanism having the same effect? Why does ignoring the facts about PdD,  give any advantage?  My comment above contained these issues, which you ignored.

We know a lot about about how PdD causes LENR but practically nothing about NiH. We are also unable to get good information from the people who can cause NiH to produce LENR. We do not have this problem with the people studying PdD.  Can you join me in trying to solve this problem?

By the way, leaving a comment on your blog is not possible unless a person has some kind of account, at least that has been my experience. That is why I respond this way.

More: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/11/nov-21-2015-lenr-foreshadow-of-positive.html

_________________________________________
Here are two interesting comments by Axil:

The use of deuterium in LENR first came about because of the “Hot fusion theory” that deuterium was required to produce neutrons, helium, and heat. This theory overhang fiasco has lasted until this very day and has become an unthinking idea that has clouded LENR reasoning for these past 26 years.

I have just posted how I believe that Protium and deuterium should be used properly as far as the polariton theory is concerned. Deuterium should be used in the XUV range only. Don’t expect heat to be generated by deuterium. The experiments of Holmlid have verified this thinking. In his experiments, UV light from florescent tubes in Holmlid’s lab produce subatomic emissions.

Holmlid’s deuterium based reaction produces a shock wave where subatomic and atomic nuclear residue explode outward at 1/3 the speed of light. Rather that use this wonderful pressure wave to produce energy, Holmlid wants to utilize heat like F&P had done so long ago.

LENR is like a radio; if you want to hear the music, you must tune to the right frequency.

Yesterday, Phonon Energy put out this request for help to find the right frequency in the infrared as follows:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1_tFmz65k8BeC1aTWY1eFJfUzBNYnV3WVB6RVA4aHFtUk1J/view

Because Phonon Energy is taking its queue from the LENR old school who still wants to use deuterium to produce heat, Phonon Energy will be wasting its time with infrared lasers looking for the right frequency of infrared EMF to use. So Sad.

The right frequency to get the most out of deuterium is in the XUV range and shockwaves are how LENR energy is produced there. If we want to use deuterium, we must build a Papp engine with pistons pushed by shockwaves and NO HEAT.

We can’t tell Mother Nature what to do, She has her own way of doing things and if we don’t tune in to what she wants, then will not here her sweet songs.

..........

How to harvest energy from the deuterium based XUV LENR reaction.

The Papp engine produced excess electrons and that system used XUV EMF to stimulate the LENR reaction. The Papp engine used special electrodes called hollow screw threaded closeable buckets which contained an alpha emitter in a cavity like radioactive radium or thorium, where a electric arc greatly stimulated the alpha emitter. The excess electrons produced by the XUV based reaction were attracted to highly ionized positively charged buckets. This technology was used in the 1930's for lightning rods where Papp pick its up its use from.

http://www.pittas.gr/en/pages/services/radioactive-lightning-rod-removal/

Since 1975 and under license from the Greek Atomic Energy Commission, installing radioactive lightning conductors was allowed. The lightning rod’s head had radioactive isotopes Am-241 or Ra-226. The intensive ionization of air around the rod’s head caused by the charged particles, created an attractive pole for lightning. Depending on the amount of radioactivity in the head – in μCi – the protection radius was determined from R = 50 to 400 meters.


The Papp engine that was self powered by recycling overunity electrons produced by the XUV LENR reaction.

To see how this all works, look at starting at 21:10 of the video below. Watch the motor in the background driven by the feedback current gathered by the electrons gathered by the thorium filled buckets. During firing, the motor has a spinning white circular disk on it with four holes placed around the edge that allows you to see the disk in motion.

Bob Rohner still uses buchet electrodes to gather excess electrons but he still uses noble gases to produce the reaction. IMHO, deuterium is far better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zWJNyoFgJM

Holmlid also uses XUV and deuterium that produces K-mesons which eventually decay to electrons. It seems like XUV based high energy LENR reactions produce excess electrons.

IMHO, Rossi is using the XUV high energy LENR reactions in the E-Cat X to also produced excess electrons.







This article comes from ZPEnergy.com
http://www.zpenergy.com

The URL for this story is:
http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3665