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”
Ha!.....LOL....
Well you just have a great weekend, and don’t worry about little old me....I sure won’t worry about you.
But I must correct that last errant assumption you made about being anti-science....That does not describe me, not even a little bit. I love science...I enjoy reading about it and I had no intention of making a issue of my skepticism regarding this device until you lambasted me over a post to someone else in which I tried to say that electrical measurements of the type the testers made are rarely if ever faked because it would show up in any subsequent test. The only way to do it would be to use de-calibrated or de-tuned measuring devices on each test. Some very unlikely to occur so the fakery, if there was any, was not electrical, or shielded power wiring.
The only use of electricity that I can see in the test of this device, as I said, seems to be to create heat to start a reaction or to create ions for the reaction. The primary measurement to watch would then be related to any excess heat produced in the chamber above and beyond what the electricity used could possibly make.
The fakery, if it occurred, would have been inside the device.
So I was not agreeing with the other skeptic. I was trying to show him he was wrong about the electrical power consumption being intentionally misread and only that.
But now I have indeed questioned the device’s legitimacy and unless and until I find out what his secret sauce is, I would never argue in favor of that device....not for one single second..
Transmutation indeed!....LOL
One can set outer boundaries for the possible energy present just based on the physical size of the device. There are only a few hundred cc's of space available. To get enough hydrogen into that volume would require gigantic pressures, and the device is clearly both too small and too flimsy to stand such. Storage as metal hydrides can be ruled out on a similar basis.
I should point out that one the the "Hot Cat" certainly does is rule out all the supposed fakes based on internal water bypasses, use of hydrogen peroxide or any other liquid fuel. The ONLY way the "Hot Cat" can be faked is by some mechanism of getting additional electromagnetic energy into the device.
E-Cat Tester Torbjörn Hartman Comments on Current Measurement in 3rd Party Report.
Try here.
If you want to get a REAL perspective of LENR as science, read the book by Charles Beaudette...."Excess Heat". It is a superb examination of the hard EXPERIMENTAL scientific evidence for the LENR effect. It is slightly out of date, as it only covers up until about 2005 or so, and much progress has been made since.
Rossi may turn out to be a fraud. LENR certainly is NOT.
The First Amendment is a restriction on the government, not Jim Robinson.
Of course, if the white little socket was rigged inside and the metal scews was long enough to go just through the wood, touching the metal sheet underneath, then the bench itself could lead current. I do not remember if I actually checked the bench frame for cables connected to it but I probably did.That doesn't seem very scientific. Sounds more like Hillary testifying.
Your most recent thread was pulled because it was originally from Wired. I sent you a FReepmail, so you should know that. But go ahead and play the victim as you pour gasoline on the flames of your own threads.
Thank you for the explanation about the one pulled thread.
time to take the mod’s advice and ignore you
Thanks 4 Bumping The Thread T4BTT.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2965392/posts?page=19#19
More questions for the so-called independent test: Was the nickle containing tube opened up and it’s contents analyzed?
Why was the external power not shut off, or disconnected even briefly, during the test or was it?
Was that e-cat capable of running in a self sustaining mode?
Some more questions are suggested at ‘Starts With a Bang’, just google, “the e-cat is back and people are still falling for it”.
The simplest way to perfom a scam here is have an ‘off’ switch that is never really ‘off;.
And the best way to keep it going is to not ask the most obvious questions, Is BIG SECRET!!
Your post does not make sense.
If I break it down any simpler I’ll have to use three letter words.
Explain how having a fake OFF switch will generate the ‘supposed’ appearance of energy density 10,000x that of gasoline.
Re: [Vo]:The inanity of the hidden input power hypothesis
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-
However, LENR is a field riddled with fraud and incompetence, with Rossi being the greatest and most well known example.
Oh please. Do you actually think that the validation team didn't look for hidden electric connections?? With two team members also members in good standing of "skeptics associations". Perhaps you should have a glance at the link I posted a few positions upthread. FAR more inspection went on that was included in the written report.
I don’t criticize the effort. I think it may well be a total waste of time but we usually learn many things from the experimentation.
But you have to see the obvious here...
Transmutation of elements has been pursued for centuries. In the past and even in the present it has been to manufacture gold, but with todays science knowledge and social needs changing, the goal is now energy which is just as valuable as gold.
In comparison a gold bug with dreams of gilded walls is replaced by the low cost energy bug with dreams of walls covered with dollars and the idea that he saved the planet is also high on the list of dreams...
Saved the planet from what, would be my question but I digress...
For me, until the secrecy of the catalyst and perhaps some spectrometer analysis to back up whatever the claims of the contents and byproducts are, I will always see this one as a likely exothermic reaction.
Similar to a Cad welder in a box...... since I am quite familiar with exothermic bonding of copper. If this guy wants to get officially published, he will have to make his experiment wide open for others to repeat. He will have to give up the secret sauce.
If this is real, he will....If it’s fake...he won’t.
My bet is that he never does....and simply continues down this path asking for investment capital. Never doing a cost analysis since he cannot reveal all of the contents and what is consumed to create the heat.
Until he does......well........It’s just another one of those energy scams that replaced the gold scams of yesterday.
What would be a total waste of time??? Reading Beaudette's book??
"But you have to see the obvious here..."
I'm a PhD chemist, with a Nuclear Science minor. I think I'm reasonably qualified to "see the obvious", and sometimes the "not so obvious"
"Transmutation of elements has been pursued for centuries. In the past and even in the present it has been to manufacture gold, but with todays science knowledge and social needs changing, the goal is now energy which is just as valuable as gold."
And now transmutation is done on a daily basis. Heck, even "I" used to do it, back when I was carrying out analyses by neutron activation analysis. And transmutation has been identified and validated as happening in "cold fusion" (by both Toshiba and Mitsubishi.....companies with a reasonable reputation for competence).
"In comparison a gold bug with dreams of gilded walls is replaced by the low cost energy bug with dreams of walls covered with dollars and the idea that he saved the planet is also high on the list of dreams...
Any scientist worth his degree would be motivated to do so, either from monetary remuneration, to benefit humanity, or both.
"Saved the planet from what, would be my question but I digress...
More like saved the human race from (eventual) extinction. Controlling fusion is the key to getting mankind off this planet and onto (or into) other locales. I don't know about you, but I think a high-energy usage future is better than a low-energy one.
"For me, until the secrecy of the catalyst and perhaps some spectrometer analysis to back up whatever the claims of the contents and byproducts are, I will always see this one as a likely exothermic reaction.
Both of the above have been done and validated...though not for Rossi's system (yet). The palladium/deuterium system has been thoroughly examined, and the reactants, products and energy balanced.
Some more questions are suggested at ‘Starts With a Bang’, just google, “the e-cat is back and people are still falling for it”.
Here is the link.
I find this part interesting.
Well, the short of it is, it got very hot and stayed very hot — about three-to-seven times hotter than you’d expect based on 360 W of continuous power — for the entire time that it ran.And then, when you get all the way to page 20, you find this red flag:
During the coil ON states, the instantaneous power absorbed by the E-Cat HT2 and the control box together was visible on the PCE-830 LCD display. This value, with some fluctuations in time, remained in any case within a range of 910-930 W. By checking the video image relevant to the PCE-830 LCD display, we were also able to estimate the length of the ON/OFF intervals: with reference to the entire duration of the test, the resistor coils were on for about 35% of the time, and off for the remaining 65%.So… it wasn’t a continuous 360 Watts, but rather there was a switching between on/off states, where it was drew over 900 W of power for about a third of the time, and then far less for the other two-thirds. They also only approximate, rather than measure (or provide data for) the amount of power drawn.
Kevmo gave the impression that they are ex-members.
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.