Posted on 01/11/2014 12:24:45 PM PST by Kevmo
Stanislaw Szpak ∗ , † and Frank Gordon ‡
SPAWAR Systems Center, San Diego, CA 92152. USA
Abstract
A selected group of experimental evidence indicates that the Pd/D–D 2 O system can be put in its nuclear active state. This is done by negatively polarizing the system which (i) starts the process of self-organization, i.e. development of coherent processes involving protons/deuterons and lattice defects to produce the pre-nuclear active state and (ii) creates conditions for the electron capture by proton/deuteron reaction to occur. The low energy neutrons transform the pre-nuclear active state into an active state, i.e. display of features such as hot spots, transmutation and particle emission which, in turn, yields information on participating reactions and processes.
© 2013 ISCMNS. All rights reserved. ISSN 2227-3123
Keywords:
Hot spots, Modeling, Particle emission, Transmutation
1. Introduction Shortly after the ICCF–2 meeting Fleischmann was asked by the Royal Society to give an account of the status of research in cold fusion. In his address he stated that In the development of any area of research (and especially in one likely to arouse controversy) it is desirable to achieve first of all a qualitative demonstration of the phenomena invoked in the explanation of the observations. It is the qualitative demonstrations which are unambiguous: the quantitative analyses of the experimental results can be the subject of debate but if these quantitative analyses stand in opposition to the qualitative demonstration then these methods of analysis must be judged to be incorrect [1].
Two of such phenomena are observed in operating cells Pd/D 2 O,Li + ,OD − /Pt employing massive Pd cathodes namely (i) excess enthalpy generation and (ii) time separating complete saturation and the onset of thermal activities, the incubation time. The first was examined in great detail [2,3].
It is the second that can be explained only through the participation of processes that put the system in its pre-nuclear active state. Fleischmann et al. [4], noted that, in this time period, nuclear reactions in a host lattice are affected by coherent processes, and that ... there are appropriate thermodynamic conditions for the formation of large large clusters of hydrogen nuclei or of regions of the lattice containing ordered arrays of hydrogen nuclei at high H/Pd ratios , resulting in the formation of clusters of deuterons dispersed in palladium lattice that would lead to the formation of ordered domains having high D/Pd ratios .
The formation of clusters of deuterons suggests that excess enthalpy generation is localized and can be displayed by infrared photography [5]. The thermodynamic arguments may be extended by the teachings of the non-equilibrium thermodynamics. To start, an equilibrium is defined as a state generated by the balance between operating forces.
Mathematically it is expressed by a minimum of the free energy (thermodynamic interpretation) or by the equality of forward and reverse velocities (kinetic interpretation), As the departure from equilibrium is increased, the system becomes unstable and evolves to form new structures exhibiting coherent behavior [4]. The system undergoes “self-organization”, the process of formation of new structures, which is complex [6]. It is quite accurately described by an interplay of kinetic and thermodynamic quantities. The interaction between them takes the form of a struggle – some are eliminated others are formed, i.e. there exists a state of dynamic equilibrium.
Concluding Remarks
Nearly a quarter century ago, a new phenomenon – the room temperature nuclear reaction in a test tube – was disclosed by Fleischmann and Pons. Since this effect was discovered by two professors of chemistry – one would expect that methods and reasoning of chemistry would be helpful in the interpretation and further development of the understanding of this phenomenon. But such has not been the case. The chemical aspects were replaced by topics of interest to physicists. Theories based on specific assumptions elegantly executed, were followed by a search for the predicted behavior. Here, we propose another approach, that advocated by Born [19], who wrote “My advice to those who wish to learn the art of scientific prophesy is not to rely on abstract reason, but to decipher the secret language of Nature from Nature’s documents,the facts of experience.”
In following this advise we relied on two observations, viz. hot spots and production of new elements, and drew conclusions based on chemical reasoning. The conclusions reflect our current understanding of the F–P effect. We conclude this communication with a statement that a lot can be gained by examining the chemical aspects of the polarized Pd/d–D 2 O system.
Uh, me too. But I know how long it takes to read and digest technical subjects, and you haven't had that amount of time.
"I probably studied cold fusion before you were born."
Doubtful. I was born in 1947, graduated as PhD in 1973, and LENR was discovered (or perhaps rediscovered) in 1989.
“Uh, me too. But I know how long it takes to read and digest technical subjects, and you haven’t had that amount of time.”
You obviously forgot that I outed you last year as the LENR pimper.
“Doubtful. I was born in 1947, graduated as PhD in 1973, and LENR was discovered (or perhaps rediscovered) in 1989.”
What is your PhD and what did you write your dissertation on? In 1989 I went back to my university to discuss cold fusion with the professor doing research on it. I think 14 years is more than enough time given that reading just one article gives one a good idea that this is all conjecture.
“Why are you so invested in shouting down the subject??? “
Just asking where’s the meat? So far I have seen none.
“The author of the article answered the criticism about the danger of no neutron monitoring. “
His answer indicated he knows little about neutron monitoring.
Since I am not an "LENR pimper", you could not have "outed" me.
"What is your PhD and what did you write your dissertation on?"
PhD Analytical, Graphite Furnace AAS. More relevant is that in grad school, I minored in Nuclear Science, so I have the necessary background in nuclear measurements as well as the background in chemical measurements.
"In 1989 I went back to my university to discuss cold fusion with the professor doing research on it.
And who might that have been?
"I think 14 years is more than enough time given that reading just one article gives one a good idea that this is all conjecture.
Excuse me?? The 14 years refers to what?? And when did you read that "just one article??
Fourteen years ago??
"Just asking where’s the meat? So far I have seen none."
Well, since you refuse to read the published work, it is unlikely that you would see anything, now isn't it.
The vehemence with which the anti-LENR proponents (like yourself) attack LENR supporters (“LENR pimper”), and how effectively any research into the subject has been blocked, makes me wonder just what is going on. It seems to be something more than just an old-guard group protecting their scientific bailiwick or funding, which I’ve seen before. Does it have something to do with national defense?
” I minored in Nuclear Science, so I have the necessary background in nuclear measurements “
Then you should have caught the gross errors by your author on page 5.
“The vehemence with which the anti-LENR proponents (like yourself) attack LENR supporters (“LENR pimper”)”
I didn’t attack him. I just asked him to show me specific evidence which he refuses to do. He says the evidence is ‘scattered’! Whoop dee doo!
” It seems to be something more than just an old-guard group protecting their scientific bailiwick or funding, which I’ve seen before. Does it have something to do with national defense?”
Dang. You blew my cover.
Thanks for letting me know.
Page 5 of what??? Your maunderings are hard enough to interpret without "dangling references". I'm still trying to figure out what "14 years" is all about, and now we have "page 5".
But your post is yet another attempt to "change the subject" away from your total refusal to address the published data available from the information I gave you.
The sources I gave you have specific references to specific topics involving LENR. Some are only about excess heat, some are about the "ash" (He4) of the reaction, some are about the low-probability pathways yielding tritium, some describe transmutation. As is totally typical of every other field of research, different LENR researchers study different aspects of the phenomenon.
You're the one who invented out of thin air the notion that there should be a single reference that explains everything.
But of course, this is all smoke and mirrors on your part to deflect attention from your complete refusal to even LOOK at the published data.
“Page 5 of what??? “
Page 5 of post #1.
“You’re the one who invented out of thin air the notion that there should be a single reference that explains everything.”
I would like to see a single reference that explains ANYTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!
Didn't read it, so I can hardly be accused of not finding an error there. I'm not particularly interested in the "pursuit of neutrons", as it was obvious long ago that the main reaction pathway in Pd/D2 systems is aneutronic.
So read the papers referenced in either of the two review documents I recommended. But you won't. We both know that by this point.
It's been fun watching you dodge and weave to avoid addressing the published work, but I think I've wasted a sufficiency of time in so doing. Typical pathological skeptic antics. Bye!
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.