NASA Publicly Reveals LENR Research

Cold Fusion News ^ | Jan 12 2012 | admin

[Kevmo]

Cold Fusion News
News about Cold Fusion Energy, Rossi E-Cat & LENR

NASA Publicly Reveals LENR Research

January 12, 2012

Tweet

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration or NASA has announced that it is working to develop a low energy nuclear reaction (LENR) or cold fusion power source. The agency has posted a video online that features a senior research scientist discussing LENR and explaining how it works.

The scientist is Dr. Joseph Zawodny a Senior Research Scientist at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Virginia near Washington DC.

Joseph Zawodny courtesy NASA

“It has demonstrated ability to produce excess amounts of energy cleanly without hazardous ionizing radiation without producing nasty waste,” Zawodny told the camera. In the video Zawodny stated that NASA’s method for enhancement of surface Plasmon Polaritons to initiate and sustain LENR releases energy by adding neutrons. When enough neutrons are added they sponteaneously decay into something of the same mass but another element.

 

In the video an announcer describes the system as:

“NASA’s method for Enhancement of Surface Plasmon Polaritrons to Initiate and Sustain LENR in Metal Hydride Solutions a clean nuclear energy for your power operated technology.”

 

This sounds a lot like Andrea Rossi’s e-cat LENR device. The video shows images from the US Navy SPAWAR  which was reportedly working on LENR devices of its own. A recent internet rumor has stated that SPAWAR has shut down its cold fusion research. No Mention is made of SPAWAR the Navy’s research arm in the video.

 

Zawodny did not mention Rossi or e-cat but he described a home use of the process that sounds a lot like Rossi’s. He mentioned that it could be used for heating, cool, water heating and electricity production in the home.

 

“The easiest implementation of this would be for the home. You would have a unit that would replace your water heater you would have some sort of cycle to derive electricity from that,” Zawodny said. “It would be a dual use thing it would produce heat, the waste heat would be used for environmental control and warm water.”

 

Interestingly enough Dr. Dennis M. Bushnell another senior scientist at Langely who is also involved in LENR research is not mentioned or shown in the video.

Nor or are any high level NASA officials shown. Scientists are shown working at computers but no LENR devices are shown. Instead stock footage of planes, trains and trucks is shown and fossil fuels are mentioned.

Facilities and Personnel at NASA's Langley Research Center

This is a very interesting development especially when there is widespread public interest in LENR and public pressure to investigate it. Combined with reports that the US Department of Energy could be changing its mind on the topic this is really good news. LENR skeptics won’t be able to dismiss Zawodny as a “cold fusion crank.”

 

There are some interesting implications from this, NASA could be getting ready to ask Congress for funding for LENR research. Or the Agency could be getting ready to patent a process. If that happens it could affect both Andrea Rossi and the Greek company Defaklion that claim to have working LENR heating devices. Rossi is selling such a device right now. Both he and Defkalion are planning to bring out home heating units using LENR this year.

 

One interesting development could be that NASA is planning to commercialize LENR. That could lead to a legal battle with Rossi and the companies he has licensed. There have been some unconfirmed rumors that NASA has purchased one of Rossi’s e-cat cold fusion devices. Other rumors indicate that the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency at the Pentagon or DARPA was the customer.

 

I also have to wonder if NASA has a working LENR device of some sort. If it does that could be a real game changer. We would also have to wonder why NASA hasn’t revealed the device to the public or the press. Perhaps they’re waiting for tests or a patent.

Concept drawing of a 5KW E-cat for home use Courtesy Ecat.com

Another possibility is that President Obama is keeping the device under wraps and planning to publicly unveil it during the Presidential campaign this fall. That would certainly get him a few votes. This is highly probably because it would justify his green energy technology agenda which has received a lot of criticism in recent months.

 

Either way it looks like the LENR deniers are going to have to change their tunes and eat their words. It also looks like this revolutionary energy source has high level support in Washington.

Related search:

• nasa lenr
• NASA Langley Low Energy Nuclear Reaction LENR
• lenr nasa
• nasa on cold fusion
• nasas method for a clean nuclear energy for your power operated technology

Post by jennifer in Breakthrough, E-Cat, Energy, Experiments, Investment, LENR, News, Products, Rossi

[PapaBear3625]

Check out the youtube direct from NASA.

[PapaBear3625]

NASA says it adds neutrons while Rossi adds hydrogen, that is protons.

Which is exactly what Rossi's device does. See Widom/Larson theory. The middle step is forcing an electron capture, turning the hydrogen proton into a low-energy neutron.

[citizen]

...when it says that Langley Research Center is outside of Washington. I guess a six hour drive to Hampton Roads/Norfolk counts as outside of Washington.

"Langley Research Center (LaRC) is located approximately 150 air miles south of Washington, D.C. in Hampton, Virginia" Source: http://crgis.ndc.nasa.gov/historic/Langley_Research_Center#Location_and_Land_Area

Uh...175 miles or so is a 6 hour drive for you?? You must be driving a Volt, pal!

[Moonman62]

NASA can't be making independent claims validating Rossi's approach if Rossi was a complete fraud.

Maybe Rossi is just a 99.9% fraud.

NASA is now confirming that there is something there.

How so? Is it just words from one of their nutbag employees or can they back it up?

[Moonman62]

Widom-Larsen theory isn't all that great.

Critiques.

[Lx]

How do they create an element that is the same mass as the original one but is a different element by adding neutrons; is that possible? I saw this video yesterday. He is giving a list of benefits and uses of LENR research but he doesn't drill down to anything promising except for mentioning that NASA is working on something that when you add neutrons, the element changes to another element but weighs the same like in my first sentence.

The best that can be said about it, is that NASA is doing LENR research.

I prefer NASA to spend money on this than Muslim outreach. Based on all the research I've done, I am convinced LENR OR CANR or both is real and it makes sense for someone in America to research it.

The problem with NASA is they always have to go hat in hand to get funds and the worse thing about NASA is that they report to the VP or at least, used to. I wouldn't trust Biden to fund this even if he understood its ramifications.

[Bellflower]

NASA looked at Rossi's E-Cat. It didn't work on the two days they were there to observe it, and Rossi threw them out when they asked questions about how it worked.

That is NASA's story. Maybe there was a reason Rossi felt he needed to throw them out. Not stating as fact, but I do not trust the government nor government programs.

[Kellis91789]

Could you please use the keyword field when posting on LENR ?

I always do keyword searches on FR and expect to find LENR updates under “Energy” but you never use the keyword field.

[rottndog]

How do they create an element that is the same mass as the original one but is a different element by adding neutrons; is that possible?

Table Of Nuclides

The element doesn't change, only its' atomic mass. The number of protons determines what the element is. The number of neutrons determines how the element behaves. Some elements have many different isotopes (different numbers of neutrons), and can behave very differently. Some naturally occurring, some produced/manufactured by nuclear processes, some merely theoretical.

The best example if course is U-235, a very stable isotope of Uranium. Add a neutron and get U-236, a very unstable isotope of Uranium which has a very short half-life and decays (fissions) extremely quickly.

[Johnny B.]

That is NASA's story. Maybe there was a reason Rossi felt he needed to throw them out. Not stating as fact, but I do not trust the government nor government programs.

The trouble is, in order to believe Rossi, you have to disbelieve a long list of people who by any objective standard are more trustworthy.

[Kevmo]

The keywords I use are

cmns; coldfusion; ecat; lenr;

There are only 4 keywords allowed when posting an article.

[Kevmo]

That is NASA’s way of distancing themselves from Rossi.

They’re going in hard for the Widom-Larson Theory, which seems to be derived from the need for political correctness more than explaining observations. By invoking the weak nuclear force, the theory claims that what is not taking place is cold fusion, even though you start with 2 atoms and you end up with 1 fused atom (at relatively cold temperatures). It’s roundabout cold fusion.

[Kevmo]

NASA saw Rossi’s device and claimed that it didn’t run long enough to rule out non-nuclear sources. The problem is that their requirements for how long it runs in self-sustain mode are completely arbitrary. Basically, no chemical reaction can run in that mode for more than a few minutes, and Rossi’s runs for 6 hours. NASA chose 8 hours as the cutoff point.

[Kevmo]

Oh, and also... you could just join a ping list like mine.

[Johnny B.]

Basically, no chemical reaction can run in that mode for more than a few minutes,

That is the most ridiculous thing you've ever said on the subject, and you've said plenty of ridiculous things.

Your statement that "no chemical reaction can run in that mode for more than a few minutes" is not only wrong, it's ridiculous. His later gadget has a hidden volume of 30 liters, and he spent hours pumping heat into the gadget prior to the "start" of the dog & pony show. It would be trivial to fake his results under those conditions.

Also, since it's supposed to be a nuclear reactor, he ought to be able to run it for months at a time. For his October 6th test, he promised that he would let it run at least 12 hours. But then, after only 4 hours, he shut it down.

There is no actual evidence that the E-Cat can run more than 4 hours, in spite of all of Rossi's extravagant claims.

[Wonder Warthog]

"Not as interesting as the fact the Rossi's gadget won't work when qualified outside observers are there to examine it."

My, you have a selective memory, don't you. There have been DOZENS of "qualified outside observers" examining the E-cat, yet you choose to believe only those who pan Rossi.

Of course, this is no different from the rest of your factoids.

"Not as interesting as Rossi becoming "enraged" when they dared to ask meaningful questions about his gadget."

"Meaningful questions" as in seeking information on things that are trade secrets, perhaps. Indicating that the viewers were actually competitors rather than customers. I think I'd get PO'd at that, too.

[Lx]

Right at the beginning of the video he says, “You keep adding neutrons until you end to the point where they spontaneously decay and then you end up with something of the same mass but a different element”. As far as I know, it’s the number of Protons that determine the element so how is that possible?

[Kevmo]

His later gadget has a hidden volume of 30 liters, ***That’s baloney.

and he spent hours pumping heat into the gadget prior to the “start” of the dog & pony show.
***If he did that each time, it would be evidence of the fraud, so post the evidence.

It would be trivial to fake his results under those conditions.
***It probably would be trivial. Unfortunately, those are not the conditions he has operated under.

[Kevmo]

The guys on Vortex-L discuss this fact that self-sustain mode only needs a few minutes to surpass chemical capability at times. Here's an example. http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg51317.html Re: [Vo]:The September E-Cat Jed Rothwell Thu, 15 Sep 2011 07:51:45 -0700 Horace Heffner wrote: > More importantly, the claim that all the water was being converted to > steam, the repeated, defended, and heralded basis for thinking something > practical has been created, the basis for the "calorimetry" of the public > demos, is now shown to be without basis in fact. The hose was taken off. > Water pulsed out of the outlet right at the exit of the E-cat in large > quantity. It obviously did not condense there. That is true. However, in the Krivit test and other previous tests, the flow rate was lower, so I do not think you can compare them. Also if they had put a probe into this stream of steam and water and withdrawn it, it would have come out wet, whereas in previous tests it was dry. In general I agree that a non-steady state mixture of water and steam is difficult to measure. I wish that Lewan had sparged the steam and water. Before this test, I sent messages to Lewan, Rossi and others urging them to do this, but they did not. They had a perfect opportunity to do this, with that large plastic trashcan. It will easily hold enough water to condense all of the steam. By the way, flow rate was almost exactly 3 g per second. Input power will be enough to vaporize 0.7 g assuming no heat radiated from the device. That is extremely unrealistic. So the fact that about half the water was vaporized does indicate there was excess heat. More to the point, during the 35 min. heat after death event, the temperature did not decline much. This is proof that there was anomalous heat. Stored heat can only produce a temperature that declines rapidly at first and then gradually. After the power went off the temperature did not decline rapidly. Therefore the input power of 2.5 kW was only a fraction of the total power. If the total power was around 5 kW where 2.5 kW was half, the temperature would've fallen a lot faster and sooner. Lewan estimates the water volume of the cell at 22 to 30 L. If there had been no anomalous heat the temperature would have fallen sharply within minutes. You can boil a pot of 22 L of hot water and observe this easily. Turn off the heat, and it stops boiling instantly. It starts to cool a few degrees in minutes. The temperature never rises and never stabilizes, unless you change the insulation (or the flow rate, in this case). In this case the temperature will certainly fall quickly because during the 35 min. 6 kg of cold water was added to the cell. The heat capacity of this water far exceeds the total heat capacity of all the metal in the cell. > Now the new E-cat never reaches equilibrium. This is a far more difficult > regime in which to do accurate calorimetry, and a far better regime for self > deception. That is true, but there is no doubt it was boiling for 35 minutes with no input power. Anyone who ignores this fact is engaged in the worst kind of self-deception imaginable. > Further, the E-cat mass has been greatly increased, and the max input > power increased. The "heat after death" from mundane causes will now > obviously be much longer. This cannot sustain boiling for more than a few seconds, at this flow rate. Metal cannot store much heat, and this cell was producing excess heat the whole time, so there was no possible storage at all. With 2.5 kW input only, it would have transitioned from boiling about one third of the water to boiling none of it, and that would have taken a few seconds at most. - Jed

[Kevmo]

Another example. There are probably several more.

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex- href=”mailto:l@eskimo.com”>l@eskimo.com/msg51346.html

Re: [Vo]:The September E-Cat
Jed Rothwell
Thu, 15 Sep 2011 13:00:03 -0700

Horace Heffner wrote:

As I showed numerically, it was not reasonable that no water was ejected in the prior demonstration tests unless the tests were run at precisely the right input power (from electric plus LENR) at all times to just boil all the water yet not raise the steam temperature. Not likely!

Quite likely. Any cook knows how to keep a pot from boiling over.

This would have been far superior to doing nothing. Better to insulate the barrel.

That is not necessary. Just use a lot of water and keep the test limited to around 5 min. As long as the overall water temperature does not go much above ambient you don’t have to worry about heat losses.

Of course the thermal mass could possibly be mostly lead (at 0.14 kJ/(kg K)), but on the other hand it could be mostly Mg ((at 1.05 kJ/(kg K)). We don’t really know. Even if it is mostly lead, and driven to 200°C, it will still hold more than required to bring the 6 kg to boiling. Since the amount of steam was not actually measured not much more energy has to be supplied to provide some steam.

At least half of it was boiled. Lewan tells me the the boiling did not decrease noticeably during the heat-after-death event. Furthermore, the entire experimental run before that heat-after-death event was highly exothermic. There was no time during the run when heat might have been stored up. On the contrary the machine should have cooled down several hundred degrees. It should have been covered with frost, like a canister of butane firing a grill. (Boyle’s law is readily apparent in Atlanta outdoor grilling weather.) The heat came out as quickly as it went in. With 2.5 kW going in it would have been barely boiling, less than 0.7 g out of 3 g for the overall run. After the power went off, the metal would have quickly cooled down to stop all boiling.

I doubt it would have boiled at all with only 2.5 kW. Even with insulation the box, the pipes and other components would have radiated so much heat, only hot water would have come out. Anyway the major heat loss path was from the fluid, not through the insulation.

- Jed