Cold fusion reactor independently verified, has 10,000 times the energy density of gas

Intrade Gateway via Extreme Tech ^ | May 21, 2013 at 12:43 pm | Sebastian Anthony

[Kevmo]

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1563 ... ity-of-gas

Cold fusion reactor independently verified, has 10,000 times the energy density of gas By Sebastian Anthony on May 21, 2013 at 12:43 pm 338 Comments

Share This article

110 inShare.

Against all probability, a device that purports to use cold fusion to generate vast amounts of power has been verified by a panel of independent scientists. The research paper, which hasn’t yet undergone peer review, seems to confirm both the existence of cold fusion, and its potency: The cold fusion device being tested has roughly 10,000 times the energy density and 1,000 times the power density of gasoline. Even allowing for a massively conservative margin of error, the scientists say that the cold fusion device they tested is 10 times more powerful than gasoline — which is currently the best fuel readily available to mankind.

The device being tested, which is called the Energy Catalyzer (E-Cat for short), was created by Andrea Rossi. Rossi has been claiming for the past two years that he had finally cracked cold fusion, but much to the chagrin of the scientific community he hasn’t allowed anyone to independently analyze the device — until now. While it sounds like the scientists had a fairly free rein while testing the E-Cat, we should stress that they still don’t know exactly what’s going on inside the sealed steel cylinder reactor. Still, the seven scientists, all from good European universities, obviously felt confident enough with their findings to publish the research paper.

As for what’s happening inside the cold fusion reactor, Andrea Rossi and his colleague Sergio Focardi have previously said their device works by infusing hydrogen into nickel, transmuting the nickel into copper and releasing a large amount of heat. While Rossi hasn’t provided much in the way of details — he’s a very secretive man, it seems — we can infer some knowledge from NASA’s own research into cold fusion. Basically, hydrogen ions (single protons) are sucked into a nickel lattice (pictured right); the nickel’s electrons are forced into the hydrogen to produce neutrons; the nickel nuclei absorb these neutrons; the neutrons are stripped of their electrons to become protons; and thus the nickel goes up in atomic number from 28 to 29, becoming copper.

This process, like the “conventional” fusion of hydrogen atoms into helium, produces a lot of heat. (See: 500MW from half a gram of hydrogen: The hunt for fusion power heats up.) The main difference, though, is that the cold fusion process (also known as LENR, or low energy nuclear reaction) produces very slow moving neutrons which don’t create ionizing radiation or radioactive waste. Real fusion, on the other hand, produces fast neutrons that decimate everything in their path. In short, LENR is fairly safe — safe enough that NASA dreams of one day putting a cold fusion reactor in every home, car, and plane. Nickel and hydrogen, incidentally, are much cheaper and cleaner fuels than gasoline.

As far as we can tell, the main barrier to cold fusion — as with normal fusion — is producing more energy than you put in. In NASA’s tests, it takes a lot more energy to fuse the nickel and hydrogen than is produced by the reaction. Rossi, it would seem, has discovered a secret sauce that significantly reduces the amount of energy required to start the reaction. As for what the secret sauce is, no one knows — in the research paper, the independent scientists simply refer to it as “unknown additives.” All told, the E-Cat seems to have a power density of 4.4×105 W/kg, and an energy density of 5.1×107 Wh/kg.

If Rossi and Focardi’s cold fusion technology turns out to be real — if the E-Cat really has 10,000 times the energy density and 1,000 times the power density of gasoline — then the world will change, very, very quickly. Stay tuned; we’ll let you know when — or if — the E-Cat passes peer review.

Now read: Nuclear power is our only hope, or, the greatest environmentalist hypocrisy of all time

Research paper: arXiv:1305.3913 - “Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device”

[Kevmo]

Does this mean you’re too lazy to click through the thread to post #190? Do you expect me to speenfood you? Are you going to avoid these 3 questions now?

To: UCANSEE2

You’re going through all of this over a typo?

Treat the gas motor as a black box. How do you test it?

[UCANSEE2]

Why don’t you? Do you think scientists made some error 14,700 times in a row?

Not necessarily. I do question where you got the number 14,700. Although, since this has allegedly been going on since 1909, I could see it reaching that high a number.

This thing is very difficult, very tricky, it suffers from stigma and funding is virtually nil. Under those conditions, it takes more than 25 years to generate a breakthrough.

Well... that has the ring of truth.

[Kevmo]

again, you are asking to be spoonfed? do you refuse to click through? are you that lazy? will you be avoiding these 4 questions?

[Kevmo]

agreed

[UCANSEE2]

it suffers from stigma and funding is virtually nil.

P.S. It's almost as if the scientific community (or the powers that fund them) don't want this technology to be available.

[UCANSEE2]

Then you wouldn’t mind if, say 10% of the funds for hot fusion, which has given us NOTHING, would go to cold fusion,

I wouldn't mind if it was 100%, but... I'm not in charge of dispensing the funding.

[Kevmo]

I haven’t avoided anything. I enjoy the debate, and hopefully will learn from it. I am here to learn. What are you here for ?
***I’m here for various reasons. I’m a conservative and this is a conservative forum, at least it used to be. If you are here to learn, why are you trying to get spoonfed?

May I ask, how come you seem to just lock onto ONE THING at a time and repeat it until everyone gets tired of you saying it?
***Will you be using this thread as an example? We’ve covered ground in many areas. How can you categorize that as ONE THING? What exactly do you mean by “locking onto ONE THING”? Don’t avoid the questions.

[UCANSEE2]

I’m not avoiding your question, I just don’t know how to get you to acknowledge that IT IS POSSIBLE this is being FAKED.

I acknowledge that there is a possibility that it is the REAL DEAL.

[Kevmo]

Good to know. The average skeptopath disparages the thought that cold fusion could receive even 1% of the funding that hot fusion receives.

[Kevmo]

ummmm.... duhhh

it would prove that the $hundreds of billions spent on hot fusion was the scam all along. And the libtards would be up in arms because 99% of those scientists working on hot fusion came from the weapons projects. So, yeah.

But I care about the science. The anti-science truthers who have been inhabiting these threads don’t really care about science. They care about the preservation of the status quo.

[UCANSEE2]

Does this mean you’re too lazy to click through the thread to post #190?

Yep. Are you too lazy to just include the question so the debate can continue?

Do you expect me to speenfood you?

I've never been speenfood and I'm pretty sure I don't want you to do it to me.

Are you going to avoid these 3 questions now? I see my statement that you were avoiding some of my questions really, really dug into your craw.

You’re going through all of this over a typo?

I am trying to discuss the potentially remarkable process with you and learn about it. Which would be easier if you quit making SO MANY TYPOS (SPEENFOOD, that's funny).

Treat the gas motor as a black box. How do you test it?

Well, first I would put it in a car and see how far I could drive it. If they wouldn't let me take it out of the factory where they had it bolted down and where I couldn't verify that there were no other 'inputs' other than the fuel they were claiming to use, I would not trust them.

[Kevmo]

I’m not avoiding your question, I just don’t know how to get you to acknowledge that IT IS POSSIBLE this is being FAKED.
***Then the 14,700 replications of the anomalous heat effect, which ALL occurred prior to Rossi coming on the scene, they were faked as well? All 7 scientists involved in the independent verification of Rossi’s claim were duped? Even though they knew he was of questionable reputation beforehand, so they would have been extra careful? The 2 scientists who were on SKeptics Societies were faking their involvement? Where does it end?

I acknowledge that there is a possibility that it is the REAL DEAL.
***Then address how this phenomenon is reported to be replicated more than 14,700 times, (all before Rossi came onto the scene) yet you don’t believe it. How is that? Error? Fraud?

[UCANSEE2]

will you be avoiding these 4 questions?

What I am avoiding is your insistence on being an arrogant ass to anyone who won't jump on your bandwagon. Which is weird since I am mostly in agreement with you.

And you wonder why your threads are pulled.

[Kevmo]

Kevmo:
Does this mean you’re too lazy to click through the thread to post #190?
ucansee:
Yep. Are you too lazy to just include the question so the debate can continue?
***ETFOOM. You are far more lazy than me, and besides, I DID include the question.

Kevmo: Do you expect me to speenfood you?

Ucansee: I’ve never been speenfood and I’m pretty sure I don’t want you to do it to me.
***Then do the simple clickthrough yourself. This is an amazing level of laziness that is being displayed.

Are you going to avoid these 3 questions now? I see my statement that you were avoiding some of my questions really, really dug into your craw.
***Not particularly. It just means I know bowlsheet when I see it.

You’re going through all of this over a typo?

I am trying to discuss the potentially remarkable process with you and learn about it. Which would be easier if you quit making SO MANY TYPOS (SPEENFOOD, that’s funny).
***Dude. Get a grip. Try not to be so lazy. Are you the typso police? (Yes, typso is purposefully misspelled, there’s even a ping list for typsos, not that you would be able to overcome your laziness to click through to it)

Treat the gas motor as a black box. How do you test it?

Well, first I would put it in a car and see how far I could drive it. If they wouldn’t let me take it out of the factory where they had it bolted down and where I couldn’t verify that there were no other ‘inputs’ other than the fuel they were claiming to use, I would not trust them.
***You’re avoiding the scenario I posted. They were all on the same track. Will you be avoiding this question as well?

[Kevmo]

Perhaps if you are going to be giving me a hard time about avoiding questions, then you shouldn’t be avoiding questions yourself.

How is such a position arrogant? Why does it rise to the level that you would call a fellow freeper an arrogant ass? Will you be avoiding these 3 questions as well?

[joseph20]

Let’s have another round:

“more power came out than went in”....
“what is inside the container”...
“it is a black box test”...
“yea, but what is inside the container”...
“it is a power in / power out test”...
“yea, but what is inside the container”...
...

[Kevmo]

I do question where you got the number 14,700. Although, since this has allegedly been going on since 1909, I could see it reaching that high a number.
***All it needs to be is replicated once for it to be real. The Anomalous Heat Effect has been replicated hundreds of times by more than a thousand scientists, even in mainstream peer-reviewed journals.

https://springerlink3.metapress.com/content/8k5n17605m135n22/resource-secured/?target=fulltext.pdf&sid=xwvgza45j4sqpe3wceul4dv2&sh=www.springerlink.com
.
Jing-tang He
• Nuclear fusion inside condense matters
• Frontiers of Physics in China
Volume 2, Number 1, 96-102, DOI: 10.1007/s11467-007-0005-8
This article describes in detail the nuclear fusion inside condense matters—the Fleischmann-Pons effect, the reproducibility of cold fusions, self-consistency of cold fusions and the possible applications
.
Note that Jing-tang He found there were 14,700 replications of the Pons Fleischmann Anomalous Heat Effect. http://www.boliven.com/publication/10.1007~s11467-007-0005-8?q=(%22David%20J.%20Nagel%22)

.
National Instruments is a multibillion dollar corporation that does not need to stick its neck out for “bigfoot stories”. After noting more than 150 replications, they recently concluded that with so much evidence of anomalous heat generation...
http://www.22passi.it/downloads/eu_brussels_june_20_2012_concezzi.pdf
Conclusion
• There is an unknown physical event and there is a need of better measurements and control tools. NI is playing a role in accelerating innovation and discovery.



The current state of the science of LENR is that the Pons Fleischmann Anomalous Heat Effect has been replicated and it is an established scientific fact. But it is not an established ENGINEERING field because the effect is difficult to generate and there is still some lingering stigma associated with the field. The level of pathological resistance this field receives is unconscionable for those of us who seek scientific answers and engineering solutions.

[RegulatorCountry]

I don’t participate in your LENR threads, but due to perusing FR via the comments tab I see them, all the time.

To say that you’re single-minded to the point of monomaniacal about this topic is not an overstatement. You’re putting Willie Green and his trains to shame, here.

Accept that some disagree or are skeptical with a little better grace, is all I’ve got to say. It’ll work out how it will, whether you’re on FR arguing with your “opposition” or not. Wanting so badly for something to be so can lead to disappointment. It’s scientific goldbuggery. Global warming is an example.

[Kevmo]

Then perhaps you would be willing to pursue the latest thread which was pulled? Try to find where I called these guys “Luddites”. Try to find who was delivering the insults. Tally them, from both sides. Report your findings. Tell us how the admin mod was justified in taking one side over the other.

I saw Willie Green threads. I skipped over them. They weren’t significant. If everything Willie Green said was true, what difference would it make? That’s why I skipped over them.

To say that you’re single-minded to the point of monomaniacal about this topic is not an overstatement.
***Then do all of us a favor and answer this: If LENR is a scaleable technology (which certainly seems to be the case, given the independent verification generated by this report), then wouldn’t it be the most disruptive technology in history, perhaps even more than gunpowder? Well? Is it monomaniacal to be involved in such a thing?

[RegulatorCountry]

I’m not getting drawn into this. My comment pertained to your possibly being obsessive regarding this subject. Believing in it is one thing. Attacking skeptics as you do is another. People will disagree, it’s human nature to do so. Get used to it. You just can’t control some things.