Skip to comments.NASA on Frontiers of Space Power and Energy -- LENR
Posted on 08/03/2021 12:13:51 PM PDT by Kevmo
Frontiers of Space Power and Energy
Document ID: 20210016143
Document Type: Technical Memorandum (TM)
Dennis M Bushnell (Langley Research Center Hampton, Virginia, United States)
Robert W Moses (Langley Research Center Hampton, Virginia, United States)
Sang H Choi
The part about cold fusion is on pages 15, 16 and 17.
Most of the power systems considered herein produce a large amount of heat as waste, some 60% of their energy output. Recovery and conversion of the waste heat into electrical power as noted in the previous energy conversion section provides additional useful power to the system and reduces the size and weight of thermal radiation panels.
Thermoelectric (TE) devices are commonly used to recover and convert thermal energy into electrical power. However, current semiconductor TEs have intrinsic Brillouin limits on mobile electrons within phase space which is dictated by mainly n-type and p-type dopant densities.
Therefore, the maximum achievable efficiency of such TEs is approximately 6~7 %. Limits on electron mobility also constricts heat flow carried by energetic electrons. In semiconductor TEs, the TE developers alter the lattice oscillatory (phonon) transmission in TE materials to increase the figure of merit performance.
This practice itself also constricts the overall heat flow into a TE domain, which lowers the energy to be converted. A new TE concept based on metallic junction TE (MJ-TE) was developed at NASA LaRC [refs. 26, 27]. A simulation analysis of MJ-TE shows very promising performance with 20% efficiency.
LENR - Revived (after experiments earlier in the 1900s) in the late 1980s [ref. 28] and dubbed “Cold Fusion,” what is now usually termed LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) was an experimental discovery with replication issues at the time and lacked an acceptable theory. Now, three decades of extant worldwide experiments [ref. 29] indicate “something nuclear” is real.
However, there does not yet exist a cogent, verified theory and therefore LENR has been looked at with askance by the physics community. There are now extant recent weak force and other weak neutron-based theories (not “hot” fusion) involving surface plasmons, electroweak interactions explicable via QED on surfaces, collective effects, heavy electrons, ultraweak neutrons, and utilizing neutron generation to obviate coulomb barrier issues.
There are now many patents and LENR is beginning to evolve into the marketplace. Given a validated theory to engineer, scale, and make safe, LENR would obviously be a major world energy revolution, especially with observed energy density levels surpassing those of chemical energy. In fact, LENR has been observed in the tens to hundreds and theoretical possibilities into the many thousands times chemical energy density levels.
In the Widom-Larsen Theory [ref. 30], H2 is adsorbed or “loaded” onto a metal surface and the resulting surface plasmon initiates collective effects. Some energy is added and several types of energy appear to work. From the LENR experiments and a sizable body of applicable related research, nano cracks/asperities in the surface morphology concentrate energy over an area and produce high localized voltage gradients.
Such voltage gradients excite collective electrons to combine with protons in the surface plasmon to form ultraweak neutrons. These neutrons readily interact, producing neutron rich isotopes which undergo beta decay and transmutations. The heavy electron cloud converts the beta decay to heat, sans worrisome radiation and coulomb barrier issues, in agreement with experiment(s).
From experiments thus far, surface materials are required that adsorb large amounts of hydrogen (H2 or D2) such as Ni, Palladium, etc. Once operating, internal IR appears to be capable of replacing the input energy. The LENR process occurs at surfaces or at nano morphology sites.
Generic LENR “products” from experiments include heat, transmutations, and possibly some radiation, especially during startup or shutdown where there may be incomplete coverage of heavy electrons to accomplish conversion to heat (an engineering issue). Also, transmutation products can include helium four and tritium.
The three decades of experiments, lacking theoretical guidance, produced mostly low levels of heat. A few studies produced up to KWs. Several experienced runaway when they evidently got it more right, which may be a greater morphological population of nano scale sites. When such occurred, sometimes windows were melted, fires occurred, even an explosion or two.
The experiments are now reproducible.
From three decades of many hundreds of, in many cases very detailed and careful experiments with redundant measurement approaches, positive results occurred over a relatively wide range of conditions/materials and energy input approaches.
LENR is apparently a non-obvious multistage process involving the weak force. Initial claims of “cold fusion” poisoned the well and became the energetics third rail. There was also lack of validated physics understanding and usually only low heat levels produced.
There was also a dearth of experiments focused on validating theory (or not), mostly variations on previous experiments vice the basic physics and efforts to identify such. It was often considered simply too good to be true…incredulity.
There were observations, beginning in the 1600s, and still ongoing, of transmutations including silicon, carbon, magnesium, potassium into calcium, and many others in biological systems. Experiments, many carefully done, were conducted before the late 1980s primarily in France, Germany, and Russia.
These cited transmutations observed occurring in plants, seeds, bacteria, microorganisms, and mammals. An oft cited instantiation is the calcium shell on chicken eggs.
If calcium is withheld in the diet, apparently mica and potassium are transmutated. If these are absent, there are no shells. This occurs with no observed heat or radiation.
From refs 31 and 32, the LENR effect has been replicated hundreds of times while using different materials and five different methods of energy addition. Each method is found to produce energy well in excess of any plausible chemical source and that is correlated with identified nuclear products.
LENR patent holders include: Airbus, Google, Leonardo, Brillouin, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Widom-Larsen, Boeing, MIT, and the U.S. Navy. LENR produces heat, which can be utilized directly or converted to electricity via such as Sterling Cycles, Thermoelectrics, Pyroelectrics, T-PV, Etc.
Recent research in Japan via long and careful experimentation, has proven that a major “missing controlled parameter” in the decades now of previous LENR research is the requirement for nano sized discrete surface morphology. As already noted, that enables localized energy concentration by orders of magnitude.
Major organizations (including Google) are now conducting research aimed at understanding and sorting out sensitivities and optimization. The major issues going forward include development of a viable, proven theory to allow engineering, scaling, and safety.
Given that, which at this point appears to be a work in progress, much with regard to power and energy could change, for climate/transportation/HVAC, energy costs overall, and in-space for propulsion, habs, ISRU, on body transportation.
for the cold fusion ping list
My guess is that NASA and the Pentagon have a lot more underway than they are admitting publicly.
Pentagon, yes. But NASA isn’t really allowed to run secret programs. They just keep secrets on the public programs they do run, such as what certain satellites are for when the shuttle deployed them.
A lightweight, safe space-borne nuclear reactor is pretty much the only thing standing between us and interplanetary commerce.
LENR would open the way for large amounts of electricity in space, which would open the way for large ion engines (which have been under development for about fifty years and are getting pretty good), which would open the way to much cheaper interplanetary travel.
Ion engines make about ten times better use of reaction mass than do chemical engines. Not to mention the fact that with space-borne LENR, ion engines could be supplied with reaction mass (i.e. “fuel”) from other planets and moons that have atmospheres. Immediately, the solar system is full of refueling stations.
Surely NASA has the ability to fashion nooks and crannies that escape routine public disclosure requirements. For example, NASA might do a joint project with the DARPA, with the project governed by military secrecy until NASA and DARPA agree to issue a public report.
Well this is somewhat surprising. I think they’ve got it right - there’s enough evidence that “something” is going on, but we haven’t cracked the nut yet. Speaking of nuts, I don’t think Rossi will be the one who does so, but the list of patent holders shows that others with deep pockets are taking LENR research seriously. Just need the right nutcracker.
They just keep secrets on the public programs they do run
Such as Apollo where many Hasselblad photos in their catalogues are missing, wrongly cataloged, blurred, altered via razor blade (P’shop of the day), and otherwise changed. NASA is a ostensibly a public program that falls under DoD over-site. All back-channel Apollo communications are still classified or otherwise not available to the public. Even many images taken by the Cassini Probe have disappeared from their website. As well as many images taken during the early days of the ISS and Shuttle missions. Early Mars mission images have suffered the same fate.
NASA has lots of secrets. We’re just not supposed to notice, and when someone does they are publicly ridiculed etc.
Yes, plenty of secrets but no big secret programs.
I agree that Rossi won’t crack that nut but if he does, more power to him.
They have the ability but I don’t think they are doing secret programs. They aren’t set up for that, and they kinda suck at keeping secrets.
DIA, DARPA, those kinds of entities would be able to (and have done so).
The Cold Fusion/LENR Ping List
Keywords: ColdFusion; LENR; lanr; CMNS
Best book to get started on this subject:
Why Cold Fusion Research Prevailed by Charles Beaudette
Updated No Internal Trolling Rules for FR per Jim Robinson
If someone says stop, then stop. Do not enter onto a thread on a topic you don’t like just to disrupt, rattle cages, poke sticks, insult the regulars, or engage in trolling activities, etc. ~Jim Robinson
Please refrain from posting anything that doesn’t legitimately address the issue.
Something is going on in this segment of science. There are a considerable number of research groups studying the matter. -Sidebar Moderator
There are those — including some former astronauts — who believe that NASA has kept quite a few secrets about UFO sightings and alien contact.
Read the book. You’ll understand the technology. They’re secret weapons deriving from experiments that go back a hundred years. You’ve heard of Ludwig Prandtl? Oscar Schrenk?
There is an aspect of this scientific investigation and
discovery, that is easy to lose sight of.
When Ponds and Fleischmann announced their discovery to
the world, it was little more than pointing to a door, and stating
there was something important behind it. I think they were
a bit premature in their announcement, but people did start
looking into what had taken place.
Then there was that other segment of the scientific community
that operated with the same know it all attitude that has
sprung up from the midst of groups of friends, all the way
up to groups of the greatest scientific minds of the day.
“Oh, that can’t work. You’re wasting your time. You’ll be
seen as the fool you are.”
This group has reared it’s ugly head across centuries, and
I’m sure many thousands of years as well. It causes delay
in scientific discovery. It has probably prevented some
astounding discoveries, that faded out of sight because
someone became discouraged.
The point is this. The Earth is not flat. The planets
do not orbit the Earth. The sound barrier was not a barrier
to man’s ability to travel faster than it. Traveling
across the universe faster than the speed of light, can be
achieved in theory, with folded space.
One needs to be very careful with matters of science and
talking in absolutes. One’s beliefs are only as sound as
the yet undiscovered scientific realities just barely out
of sight of the best scientific minds of the day.
It’s okay to remind folks of current scientific concepts.
It’s not okay to close the door to new theories and the
resultant discoveries the sciences will always deliver.
New discoveries have a nasty habit of happening in chains.
You block one new theory, at the risk of closing the door
to every new reality that will come with it.
We see it here. Closed minds never discover anything except
undeserved personal contentment.
I enjoy these threads, and look forward to many more.
The invective against tectonic plate theory had similar levels of... nonsense.
Science progresses one funeral at a time. ~Planck
Thanks for the mention.
That’s and insightful quote.
Document 4-13, Hugh B. Freeman to Chief of the Aerodynamics Division
[Elton W. Miller], “Boundary-layer research,” 18 April 1932, in RA file 201,
LHA, Hampton, Va
April 18, 1932
MEMORANDUM For Chief Aerodynamics Division
Subject: Boundary-layer research.
1. The purpose of this memorandum is to call attention to the lack of largescale experimental data relative to the boundary-layer problem and to suggest a
program of research which will provide information along these lines.
2. The field of boundary-layer control, in this writer’s opinion, offers greater
possibilities for the improvement of aircraft performance and safety than any other.
This is because the control of the boundary layer influences every important aerodynamic characteristic of an aircraft. The three most important advantages offered
by the control of the boundary layer are: (1) increase in lift, (2) an increase in the
angle-of-attack range below the burble, and (3) a decrease in minimum drag. The
first two advantages have been shown repeatedly by tests on small models, principally those of Oscar Schrenk in Germany, who obtained a maximum lift coefficient
= 5.0 and an L/D ratio of 50 by the method of removing the boundary layer
on the upper surface of an airfoil by suction.
forgot the link
I find it hard to credit the explanation of UFOs as all being ours. Granted, some are, but other aspects of the UFO phenomenon exceed that explanation. There are centuries of sightings before electricity was even in use, persistent reports of alien abductions, and UFO intrusions into military airspace and close surveillance of and interference with nuclear weapons.
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.