Well... if we take the Wikipedia source that claims that this discovery was first made in 1909, it's been 104 years.
Posted on 05/24/2013 6:35:28 PM PDT by 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”
I don’t mind skepticism. What I do mind is hyperskepticism. Such as what is displayed in this thread, where they find themselves forced to defend ever-expanding conspiracy theories, and that 7 scientists can’t read multimeters and thermometers when their reputations are on the line.
LENR is the most disruptive technology in history, if it is true. To be “possibly obsessive” over such a development isn’t misguided.
Sure don’t ... BTW, I like the pixie dust designation ... for the Rossi thingy.
It looks like you won’t be doing us all a favor by answering a simple question.
I’m not getting drawn into this
***Then why did you log onto the thread, other than to spread your ‘sunshine’ and leave? Afraid of a simple question? Perhaps the most significant technical development in history, and you paint its proponent as “possibly obsessive”? What exactly do you contribute?
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.
***Both of us say the same thing, but you avoid the question of energy density. A car that gets 500 miles/gallon, how much more dense is the energy than the car that gets 50miles/gallon? Here, let me spoonfeed you the answer: It is 10X more dense. If you can understand that, why can’t you understand the title of this thread?
There is NO proof "that these 7 scientists are not really 'independent"." NONE. The sole difference between these scientists and some others is that they have not automatically and immediately disowned Rossi's experiments as fraudulent, but have consistently said that, by the facts as they saw them, the phenomenon is real.
That is it, period.
I see statements to the effect that Dr. Levi is a friend of Rossi. NO! Dr. Levi is a friend and associate of Dr. Focardi, which is how he got involved. AFAIK, Levi, at that point in time, didn't even KNOW Rossi. This is not to say that they didn't become friends afterwards. That may well be.
Certainly not the whole scientific community (there are plenty who think it is real, but only those who have investigated what the data show).
But there "is" a subset that most absolutely DO want LENR to "not be available".....high energy physicists....as the biggest source of money in their gravy train is hot fusion research. And unfortunately, that subset is the one that largely has their hands on the "levers of power" in the politics of science. They and their students are high in the heirarchies of the various government funding sources, a power they gained during development of atomic weapons, and which they have retained. If LENR is successful, much of that gravy train gets derailed.
Most of the scientific community simply doesn't know and isn't interested in a "borderline" subject like LENR.
And they most definitely want it to STAY "borderline".
Thank you for both of your informative and non-combative responses.
Well... if we take the Wikipedia source that claims that this discovery was first made in 1909, it's been 104 years.
Well, so far I haven't been able to find any, other than Focardi and Levi, as you mentioned.
The sole difference between these scientists and some others is that they have not automatically and immediately disowned Rossi's experiments as fraudulent,
Actually, didn't one of them say Rossi was fraudulent, but then now is on board ?
but have consistently said that, by the facts as they saw them, the phenomenon is real.
The phenomenon does seem to be real (been going on for 104 years), but it also does not seem to be something that can be commercially marketed on a large scale (at least yet).
That, in particular, is what Rossi keeps promising, and yet fails to produce. Although the experiment is probably not fraudulent, Rossi's promise to 'change the world' and have his devices running Factory floors and Power plants seems to be fraudulent.
Here is a timeline where his promises to 'produce' a device for commercial use are listed, and time after time have turned out to be failed promises.
The burden of proof is on those claiming independence, especially when an experienced and accomplished con-artist is involved.
You've gone from using "luddite" to "skeptopath". Keep it up and watch this thread and others get pulled. Yet again, a cold fusion thread has degraded into endless bickering, with you in the lead. This nonsense does no favors to FR and it's larger membership.
with you in the lead.
***You’re keying up on post #229. Post #10 was much sooner than that, so that’s who’s in the lead, not me. They even used the dreaded term “luddite”, which I have not. You’re saying I’m in the lead when you look at post #229 which is 219 posts after #10?
BOTH sides should be told to stop insulting and sneering. If the admin mod is willing to review just one of these threads and call to attention such behavior throughout the thread (rather than one post at 229), it would be helping FR and its larger membership. Just pick one of the threads, maybe even one that was pulled. Just one thread, and you’re done with it. Show us why one side shouldn’t be allowed to send even very direct personal insults such as “kevmo is a liar”, or scam artist, or stupid, and the other side shouldn’t be using terms like “Luddite” or “skeptopath”.
So I can’t even encourage someone who has distinguished himself as a small-s (genuine) skeptic? I didn’t call that person a skeptopath in post #229, I called OTHERs out for their behavior in contrast to his. I can’t even do that? Is it the position of the admin mods that hyperskepticism does not exist?
The admin mod overlooks the blatant insults towards well-trained scientists throughout this thread, and throughout so many of these LENR threads. Please post your guidelines because I am baffled at the level of one-sidedness. One side gets to insult ‘scientists’ and call them scam artists even though it is an independently verified result. The other side doesn’t get to use any terms.
Let us know what terms are allowed... obviously the other side gets to insult vey qualified scientists all day long (but we can’t say they’re anti-science) while you key up on the other side’s insults.
Sounds like it’s reaching back to obscurity. 99.9% of the population never heard of cold fusion until 1989, so I’ll stick with that date as the best threshold.
Most of the scientific community simply doesn’t know and isn’t interested in a “borderline” subject like LENR.
And they most definitely want it to STAY “borderline”.
***I think a more appropriate viewpoint is that they want to stay out of the fight between hot-fusion and cold-fusion.
That, in particular, is what Rossi keeps promising, and yet fails to produce. Although the experiment is probably not fraudulent, Rossi’s promise to ‘change the world’ and have his devices running Factory floors and Power plants seems to be fraudulent.
***Well, like the Ringling brothers, his claims have been overblown in the past, but not fraudulent. Rossi’s device has been independently verified, so his claims don’t look so overblown any more. He went through a learning curve in terms of what it takes to get a prototype into a production unit (it’s just a bunch of business stuff, and that’s easy, right?) and so it might not seem so farfetched that he sent one or two of these kinds of units to actual, paying customers as he has claimed.
Good afternoon. Hope the Holiday weekend is treating you well.
I have a ‘policy’, and that is that I forget yesterday, and only deal with what is happening today. Seems you are a step ahead of me. I Thank You for that.
I wanted to ask, how much energy do you get out of igniting compressed Hydrogen ?
I wanted to ask, how much energy do you get out of igniting compressed Hydrogen ?
***I don’t know. I imagine it’s on some lookup table somewhere.
A gal. of gasoline has 114,000 btu’s and 10,000 times 114,000 equals (cypher, cyphyr,....) 11,400,000,000. That would be eleven billion four hundred million btu’s. ELEVEN BILLION PLUS.
No questions permitted though since this has been “independently verified”.
IIRC, he was convicted of something other than fraud, and it was overturned.
Rossi’s device has been independently verified, so his claims don’t look so overblown any more.
I think that everyone can see that it was independently verified even though it had to be done 'in situ', so to speak. However, his claims have proven overblown, because he claimed two years ago that these would be in common use in several factories. AFAIK, that is not true.
He went through a learning curve in terms of what it takes to get a prototype into a production unit (it’s just a bunch of business stuff, and that’s easy, right?)
I think that is an apt description.
.... and so it might not seem so farfetched that he sent one or two of these kinds of units to actual, paying customers as he has claimed.
He might. Don't you think they would be bragging about it ? That the investment is something that would be known throughout every office in that company ? Or do you think they were sworn to secrecy ?
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.