US Navy Patent on LENR / LANR Particle Source

I had this referenced in fragments down in a comment here:

https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2016/04/11/lenr-lithium-size-matters/#comment-67775

But, since it goes into so much detail, and since it clearly is a P&F derived Cold Fusion type of electrochemical cell and since they use it to create X-Rays and nuclear particles, I think it really needs a full on posting of its own (not least of which so I can find it again without digging through comments ;-)

It points to this Navy .MIL site that lists their patents and such for license:

http://www.public.navy.mil/spawar/pacific/techtransfer/productsservices/Pages/Technologies.aspx

Physical Chemistry
8419919: System and method for generating particles

and has a link to the patent itself.  This is a link to the PDF of the whole thing.

NavyPatentAll

So why bother to look at this thing? It goes into full detail on just how to make one. Enough that even I feel like I could do it. Oh, and it shows examples that let you tune the output for “soft X-rays” on up through neutrons to other “particles”. It also lists example uses of transmutation of nuclear waste to get rid of it (and that also ought to give you heat in the process… though if the thing can be tuned up for significant net energy gain is not clear to me right now as I’ve not yet absorbed / read the whole thing.)

In short, the US Navy says P&F found something, and they now have such control of it they can tune the output as desired. So maybe that means there really IS LENR / LANR / Cold Fusion, eh?

The actual patent:

http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8419919.PN.&OS=PN/8419919&RS=PN/8419919

For the images, you need to hit another link and scroll through them:

A very long ugly URL, so just click this instead

Note that this is USPTO.GOV the US PATENT OFFICE of the US Government. I’m just pasting in the whole thing, unadorned and un-commented. Search for things like “X-ray” or “neutron” or “alpha” or just skim through it as I did. The “magic sauce” seems to mostly consist of impressed magnetic or electric fields and / or using a substrate material different from the Pd/D2 deposited layer (and maybe a few more bits… I’ve not read the whole thing in detail just yet).

( 1 of 1 )
United States Patent 8,419,919
Boss , et al. April 16, 2013
System and method for generating particles

Abstract
A method may include the steps of supplying current to the electrodes of an electrochemical cell according to a first charging profile, wherein the electrochemical cell has an anode, cathode, and electrolytic solution; maintaining a generally constant current between the electrodes; exposing the cell to an external field either during or after the termination of the deposition of deuterium absorbing metal on the cathode; and supplying current to the electrodes according to a second charging profile during the exposure of the cell to the external field. The electrolytic solution may include a metallic salt including palladium, and a supporting electrolyte, each dissolved in heavy water. The cathode may comprise a second metal that does not substantially absorb deuterium, such as gold. The external field may be a magnetic field.

Inventors: Boss; Pamela A. (San Diego, CA), Gordon; Frank E. (San Diego, CA), Szpak; Stanislaw (Poway, CA), Forsley; Lawrence Parker Galloway (San Diego, CA)
Applicant:
Name City State Country Type

Boss; Pamela A.
Gordon; Frank E.
Szpak; Stanislaw
Forsley; Lawrence Parker Galloway
San Diego
San Diego
Poway
San Diego
CA
CA
CA
CA
US
US
US
US
Assignee: JWK International Corporation (Annandale, VA)
The United States of America as represented by the Secretary of the Navy (Washington, DC)
Family ID: 48049106
Appl. No.: 11/859,499
Filed: September 21, 2007
Related U.S. Patent Documents
Application Number Filing Date Patent Number Issue Date
60919190 Mar 14, 2007
Current U.S. Class: 205/220; 205/102; 205/265; 205/627
Current CPC Class: C25C 1/20 (20130101); C25C 5/02 (20130101); C25C 7/00 (20130101)
Current International Class: C25D 5/48 (20060101); C25C 1/20 (20060101)
Field of Search: ;204/229.4,660,663 ;205/339,340,565,627,102,220,265,441
References Cited [Referenced By]
U.S. Patent Documents
6248221 June 2001 Davis et al.
6379512 April 2002 Brown et al.
6444337 September 2002 Iyer
6562243 May 2003 Sherman
2001/0019594 September 2001 Swartz
2002/0009173 January 2002 Swartz
2002/0018538 February 2002 Swartz
2002/0021777 February 2002 Swartz
2003/0112916 June 2003 Keeney et al.
2003/0213696 November 2003 Dardik
2005/0045482 March 2005 Storms
2005/0129160 June 2005 Indech
2005/0236376 October 2005 Eccles
2005/0276366 December 2005 Dash
2006/0088138 April 2006 Jouanneau
2006/0153752 July 2006 Arata
2007/0095823 May 2007 Sedlmayr
2007/0140400 June 2007 Hodgson
2007/0206715 September 2007 Godes
2007/0269688 November 2007 McKubre et al.
2007/0280398 December 2007 Dardik
2007/0286324 December 2007 Hagelstein

Other References

J O’M. Bockris, R. Sundaresan, Z. Minevski, D. Letts. “Triggering of heat and sub-surface changes in Pd-D Systems.” The Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion. Transacations of Fusion Technology, Dec. 1994. vol. 25, No. 4T. p. 267. cited by examiner .
F. Celani, A. Spallone, P. Tripodi, A. Petrocchi, D. Di Gioacchino, M. Boutet, P. Marini, V. Di Stefano, M. Diociaiuti, W.Collis. “Reproducible D/Pd ratio >1 and excess heat correlation by 1-.mu.S pulse, high-current electrolysis.” Fusion Technology, May 1996, vol. 29. pp. 398-404. cited by examiner .
J.O’M. Bockris, R. Sundaresan, D. Letts, Z. Minevski. “Triggering of heat and sub-surface changes in Pd-D systems.” Proceeding: Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion. vol. 2: Calrimetry & Materials Papers. Jul. 30, 1994. pp. 1-1 to 1-46. cited by examiner .
P. Hagelstein. “Summary of the thrid annual conference on cold fusion.” Feb. 16, 1993. pp. 1-40. cited by examiner .
D. Cravens. “Factors affecting the success rate of heat generation in CF cells.” Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion. 1993 (no month). pp. 1-14. cited by examiner .
US Department of Energy. “Report of the review of low energy nuclear reactions.” Published Dec. 1, 2004. . cited by examiner .
R. Van Noorden. “Cold fusion back on the menu.” Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC). Published Mar. 22, 2007. . cited by examiner .
E. Berger. “Scientist may have cold fusion breakthrough.” Houston Chronicle. Published Mar. 23, 2009. . cited by examiner .
C. Barras. “Neutron tracks revive hopes for cold fusion.” NewScientist. Published Mar. 23, 2009. . cited by examiner .
Szpak, S., Mosier-Boss, P.A., Smith, J.J., “On the Behavior of the Cathodically Polarized Pd/D System: Search for Emanating Radiation”, Physics Letters A, Jan. 22, 1996, pp. 382-390, vol. 210, Elsevier Science B.V. cited by applicant .
Szpak, S., Mosier-Boss, P.A., “Nuclear and Thermal Events Associated With Pd + D Codeposition”, J. New Energy, 1996, p. 54, vol. 1, No. 3. cited by applicant .
Szpak, S., Mosier-Boss, P.A., Boss, R.D., Smith, J.J., “On the Behavior of the PD/D System: Evidence for Tritium Production”, Fusion Technol., 1998, p. 38, vol. 33. cited by applicant .
Szpak, S., Mosier-Boss, P.A., Gordon, F.E., “Precursors and the Fusion Reactions in Polarized Pd/D-D20 System: Effect of an External Electric Field”, 11th Int. Conf. on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, 2004, Marsailles, France. cited by applicant .
Szpak, S., Mosier-Boss, P.A., Young, C., Gordon, F.E., “The Effect of an External Electric Field on Surface Morphology of Co-Deposited Pd/D films”, J. of Electroanalytical Chemistry, May 23, 2005, pp. 284-290, vol. 580. cited by applicant .
Szpak, S., Mosier-Boss, P.A., Young, C., Gordon, F.E., “Evidence of Nuclear Reactions in the Pd Lattice”, Naturwissenschaften, Jul. 29, 2005, pp. 394-397, Springer-Verlag. cited by applicant .
Szpak, S., Mosier-Boss, P.A., J. Dea, Gordon, F.E, “Polarized D/Pd-D20 System: Hot Spots and Mini-Explosions”, 10th Int. Conf. on Cold Fusion, Cambridge, MA, 2003. cited by applicant .
Szpak, S., Mosier-Boss, P.A., Miles, M.H., Fleischmann, M., “Thermal Behavior of Polarized Pd/D Electrodes Prepared by Co-Deposition”, Thermochimica Acta, 2004, pp. 101-107, vol. 410, Elsevier B.V. cited by applicant .
Mosier-Boss, P.A. et al., “Use of CR-39 in Pd/D Co-Deposition Experiments”, The European Physical Journal–Applied Physics, Dec. 13, 2007, pp. 293-303, v. 40, EDP Sciences. cited by applicant .
Szpak, S., P.A. Mosier-Boss, and J.J. Smith, “Reliable procedure for the initiation of the Fleischmann-Pons effect”, Conference Proceedings–Italian Physical Society, 1991. v. 33, pp. 87-91. cited by applicant .
Szpak, S. and P.A. Mosier-Boss, and F.E. Gordon, “Precursors and the fusion reactions in polarized Pd/D-D2O system: effect of an external electric field”, Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, Proceedings of the International Conference on Cold Fusion, 11th, Marseilles, France, Oct. 31-Nov. 5, 2004, 2006: pp. 359-373. cited by applicant .
Szpak, S. and P.A. Mosier-Boss, and F.E. Gordon, “Further evidence of nuclear reactions in the Pd/D lattice: Emission of charged particles”, Naturwissenschaften, 2007, v. 94, No. 6, pp. 511-514. cited by applicant .
Szpak, S. and P.A. Mosier-Boss, “On the behavior of the cathodically polarized Pd/D system: a response to Vigier’s comments”, Physics Letters A, 1996, v.221, pp. 141-143. cited by applicant .
G.W. Phillips, et al., Neutron Spectrometry Using CR-39 Track Etch Detectors, Radiation Protection Dosimetry, vol. 120, No. 1-4, pp. 457-460, 2006. cited by applicant .
Szpak, S., et al., “Absorption of deuterium in palladium rods: model vs. experiment”, Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, 1994. v.365, No. 1-2, pp. 275-281. cited by applicant .
Szpak, S., P.A. Mosier-Boss, and J.J. Smith, “Comments on methodology of excess tritium determination”, Frontiers Science Series, 1993, v.4, pp. 515-518. cited by applicant .
Szpak, S., et al., Charging of the palladium/hydrogen or deuterium (Pd/nH) system: role of the interphase, Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, 1992, v.337(1-2), pp. 147-163. cited by applicant .
Szpak, S., P.A. Mosier-Boss, and J.J. Smith, “On the behavior of palladium deposited in the presence of evolving deuterium”, Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry and Interfacial Electrochemistry, 1991, v.302(1-2), pp. 255-260. cited by applicant .
F. H. Seguin, et al., “Spectrometry of charged particles from inertial-confinement-fusion Plasmas”, Review of Scientific Instruments, vol. 74, No. 2, 2003. cited by applicant .
G.W. Phillips, et al., “Neutron Spectrometry Using CR-39 Track Etch Detectors”, 4th International Solid State Dosimetry Conference, New Haven, CT, Jun. 28, 2004. cited by applicant.

Primary Examiner: Hendricks; Keith
Assistant Examiner: Friday; Steven A.
Attorney, Agent or Firm: Friedl; Ryan J. Eppele; Kyle
Parent Case Text

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/919,190, filed Mar. 14, 2007, entitled “Method and Apparatus for Generating Particles,” the content of which is fully incorporated by reference herein.
Claims

We claim:

1. A method comprising the steps of: supplying more than one current levels, each current level not exceeding about 500 .mu.A, to the anode and the cathode of an electrochemical cell according to a first charging profile, wherein the electrochemical cell comprises: a body portion, an electrolytic solution, contained within the body portion, comprising a metallic salt, comprising palladium, and a supporting electrolyte, each dissolved in heavy water, a cathode immersed in the electrolytic solution and vertically disposed adjacent to a first side of the body portion, the cathode comprising a metal that does not substantially absorb deuterium and is stable in the electrolytic solution when the cathode is polarized, and an anode immersed in the electrolytic solution apart from the cathode and vertically disposed adjacent to a second side of the body portion, the second side located opposite the first side, wherein the anode is stable in the electrolytic solution when the anode is polarized; and maintaining each of the supplied more than one current levels at a generally constant level during the first charging profile such that deposition of palladium on the cathode occurs in the presence of evolving deuterium gas during electrolysis of the electrolytic solution.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the metal is selected from the group of metals consisting of nickel, gold, silver, and platinum, and their alloys.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein the cathode is formed as a foil.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein the step of supplying more than one current levels, each current level not exceeding about 500 .mu.A, to the anode and the cathode of an electrochemical cell according to a first charging profile includes the steps of supplying a current of about 100 .mu.A to the anode and the cathode for a time period of about twenty-four hours, supplying a current of about 200 .mu.A to the anode and the cathode for a time period of about forty-eight hours and supplying a current of about 500 .mu.A to the anode and the cathode until deposition of metallic ions on the cathode terminates.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein the metal comprises nickel and the cathode is formed as a screen.

6. The method of claim 5 further comprising the steps of: exposing the electrochemical cell to an external magnetic field after the termination of the deposition of the palladium on the cathode; and supplying current to the anode and the cathode according to a second charging profile during the exposure of the electrochemical cell to the external magnetic field.

7. The method of claim 6, wherein the step of supplying current to the anode and the cathode according to a second charging profile includes the steps of: supplying a current of about 1 mA to the anode and the cathode for a time period of about two hours; supplying a current of about 2 mA to the anode and the cathode for a time period of about six hours; supplying a current of about 5 mA to the anode and the cathode for a time period of about twenty-four hours; supplying a current of about 10 mA to the anode and the cathode for a time period of about twenty-four hours; supplying a current of about 25 mA to the anode and the cathode for a time period of about twenty-four hours; supplying a current of about 50 mA to the anode and the cathode for a time period of about twenty-four hours; supplying a current of about 75 mA to the anode and the cathode for a time period of about twenty-four hours; and supplying a current of about 100 mA to the anode and the cathode for a time period of about twenty-four hours.
Description

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The embodiments of the invention relate generally to the field of electrochemistry.

Generated particles may be captured by other nuclei to create new elements, to remediate nuclear waste, to treat cancerous tumors, or to create strategic materials. Previous efforts to create a reproducible method and corresponding system to generate particles during electrolysis of palladium in heavy water have been unsuccessful.

Therefore, a need currently exists for a reproducible method and corresponding system that can generate particles.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 illustrates a flow chart of an implementation of a method for generating particles.

FIG. 2 illustrates a flow chart of an implementation of a first charging profile for an implementation of the method for generating particles.

FIG. 3 illustrates a flow chart of an implementation of a second charging profile for an implementation of the method for generating particles.

FIG. 4 illustrates a front perspective view of an embodiment of a system for generating particles using an external magnetic field.

FIG. 5 illustrates a cross-section view of an embodiment of a system for generating particles using an external magnetic field, during a co-deposition process.

FIG. 6 illustrates a cross-section view of an embodiment of a system for generating particles using an external electric field

FIG. 7A illustrates a front view of one side of an embodiment of a system for generating particles using an external magnetic field, illustrating an embodiment of the cathode.

FIG. 7B illustrates a front view of one side of an embodiment of a system for generating particles using an external magnetic field, illustrating an embodiment of the cathode.

FIG. 7C illustrates a front view of one side of an embodiment of a system for generating particles using an external magnetic field, illustrating an embodiment of the cathode.

FIGS. 8A and 8B show images of alpha particle tracks in a CR-39 detector, where the microscope optics are focused on the surface of the detector and the bottom of the pits, respectively.

FIGS. 8C and 8D show images of Pd/D co-deposition generated tracks in a CR-39 detector, where the microscope optics are focused on the surface of the detector and the bottom of the pits, respectively.

FIGS. 9A and 9B show images taken of the CR-39 detector after a Pd/D co-deposition experiment in a magnetic field.

FIG. 10A shows features observed when a CR-39 detector is exposed to depleted Uranium.

FIG. 10B shows features observed when a CR-39 detector has undergone exposure to a Pd/D co-deposition experiment in the presence of an external electric field.

FIG. 11 illustrates an image of a CR-39 detector indicating X-ray emission, in accordance with an embodiment of the system and method for generating particles.

FIG. 12A shows an image taken of a CR-39 detector after a Pd/D co-deposition experiment on a Ni screen cathode in the presence of a magnetic field.

FIG. 12B shows an image of a CR-39 detector after a Pd/D co-deposition experiment on a Ni/Au composite cathode in which Au is a high Z material.

FIG. 13A shows an SEM of the Pd deposit obtained on a Au foil cathode in a magnetic field experiment.

FIGS. 13B-13D show images taken of a CR-39 detector after a Pd/D co-deposition experiment in a magnetic field using a Ag wire cathode.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF SOME EMBODIMENTS

FIG. 1 shows a flow chart of an implementation of a method for generating particles 10. One implementation of method 10 may utilize an electrochemical cell 100 as shown in FIGS. 4 and 5. As such, method 10 will be discussed with reference to electrochemical cell 100. Method 10 may be performed at conditions of ambient temperature and standard atmospheric pressure. Method 10 may begin at step 20, where a current may be supplied to the electrodes of an electrochemical cell according to a first charging profile. For example, step 20 may involve supplying current to the positive electrode, anode 130, and the negative electrode, cathode 132, of electrochemical cell 100. Current may be supplied to anode 130 and cathode 132 by connecting a galvanostat/potentiostat 140 to anode 130 and cathode 132. Step 20 is discussed in further detail with regard to FIG. 2. Following step 20, method 10 may proceed to step 30. Step 30 may involve maintaining a generally constant current between the positive and negative electrodes during the first charging profile such that deposition of metal 172 on the cathode occurs in the presence of evolving deuterium gas during electrolysis of an electrolytic solution. As an example, step 30 may involve maintaining a generally constant current between the anode 130 and cathode 132 during the first charging profile. Maintaining a generally constant current serves to ensure that deposition of metal 172 that substantially absorbs deuterium on cathode 132 occurs in the presence of evolving deuterium gas 174 during electrolysis of electrolytic solution 170 (see FIG. 5). A generally constant current may be defined as current that is stable, but that may have minor fluctuations. Step 30 may be performed by connecting a galvanostat/potentiostat 140 to anode 130 and cathode 132.

Method 10 may next proceed to step 40, where electrochemical cell 100 may be exposed to an external field, such as a magnetic field. For example, step 40 may be performed by positioning magnets 160 and 162 opposite one another on opposing sides of electrochemical cell 100 (see FIGS. 4 and 5). Step 40 may occur during the deposition of the metal on the cathode. In other embodiments, step 40 may occur after the termination of the deposition of the metal on the cathode. The determination that the deposition of the metal on the cathode has terminated may be made by a visual inspection that the plating solution within electrolytic solution 170 has turned from a red-brown color to clear. The plating solution turns clear when metal has all been plated onto cathode 132. Method 10 may then proceed to step 50, where a current may be supplied to the electrodes according to a second charging profile during the exposure of the electrochemical cell to the external field. For example, step 50 may involve using a power source to supply a current to anode 130 and cathode 132 according to a second charging profile during the exposure of electrochemical cell 100 to an external magnetic field (not shown).

Particles are generated from the application of method 10. As used herein, the term “generated” is used to refer to the forming of particles through a process involving chemical and, depending upon the substrate, magnetic interaction. Examples of the types of particles generated and detected may include, but are not limited to: alpha particles, beta particles, gamma rays, energetic protons, deuterons, tritons, and neutrons. The particles generated by the implementations of method 10 may have various applications. For example, the generated particles may be captured by other nuclei to create new elements, may be used to remediate nuclear waste, may be used to create strategic materials, or may be used to treat cancerous tumors. As an example there are some sites that have groundwater that is contaminated with radionuclides, such as technetium, Tc-99. The particles emitted by electrochemical cell 100 may be absorbed by the radionuclide, Tc-99 via neutron capture, transmuting it to Tc-100 with a half life of 15.8 seconds to Ru-100, which is stable where the reaction is shown by .sup.99Tc.sub.43(n,.gamma.).sup.100Tc.sub.43 and the .sup.100Tc.sub.43 .beta..sup.- decays to .sup.100Ru.sub.44 with a half-life of 15.8 seconds.

FIG. 2 shows a flow chart of an implementation of step 20 of method 10. Step 20 may include more than one current level and more than one time period, wherein each of the current levels is supplied across the anode and the cathode for one of the time periods. Step 20 may be performed to assure good adherence of the palladium, a deuterium absorbing metal, to cathode 132, which may be a wire having a length of 2 cm and a diameter of 0.5 cm. Step 20 may involve low current densities for adhering the palladium to cathode 132. As an example, step 20 may begin at step 22, where a reducing current of 100 .mu.A may be supplied to the anode and cathode for a time period of about twenty-four hours. Next, step 24 may involve supplying a reducing current of 200 .mu.A to anode 130 and cathode 132 for a time period of about forty-eight hours. Step 20 may then proceed to step 26, where a reducing current of 500 .mu.A may be supplied to anode 130 and cathode 132 until the completion of the deposition process. The completion of the deposition process will occur when the plating solution appears clear as described above. As an example, the amount of time required for the completion of the deposition process may be between approximately 3 and 7 days, depending upon the surface area of cathode 132 and the first charging profile used.

As current is applied, Pd is deposited on the cathode. Electrochemical reactions occurring at the cathode include: Pd.sup.2++2e.sup.-Pd.sup.0 D.sub.2O+e.sup.-D.sup.0.+-.OD.sup.- (Eq. 1) Once formed, the D.sup.0 is either absorbed by the Pd or binds to another D.sup.0 to form a deuterium molecule, D.sub.2. At standard temperature and pressure, D.sub.2 is a gas. The result is that metallic Pd is deposited on the cathode in the presence of evolving D.sub.2.

FIG. 3 illustrates a flow chart of an implementation of step 50 of method 10. Step 50 may be performed to load metal 172 on cathode 132 with deuterium. In one embodiment, step 50 may involve more than one current levels and more than one time periods, wherein each of the current levels is supplied across the anode and the cathode for one of the time periods. In one embodiment, step 50 may involve levels of increasing current density to load the palladium lattice with deuterium such that the ratio of deuterium to palladium is .gtoreq.1. As an example, one implementation of step 50 may begin at step 52, where a current of 1 mA is supplied to anode 130 and cathode 132 for a time period of about two hours. Next, step 54 may involve supplying a current of 2 mA to anode 130 and cathode 132 for a time period of about six hours. Next, step 56 may involve supplying a current of 5 mA to anode 130 and cathode 132 for a time period of about twenty-four hours. Next, step 58 may involve supplying a current of 10 mA to anode 130 and cathode 132 for a time period of about twenty-four hours. Next, step 60 may involve supplying a current of 25 mA to anode 130 and cathode 132 for a time period of about twenty-four hours. Next, step 62 may involve supplying a current of 50 mA to anode 130 and cathode 132 for a time period of about twenty-four hours. Next, step 64 may involve supplying a current of 75 mA to anode 130 and cathode 132 for a time period of about twenty-four hours. Finally, step 66 may involve supplying a current of 100 mA to anode 130 and cathode 132 for a time period of about twenty-four hours.

Referring to FIGS. 4 and 5, electrochemical cell 100 may include an electrolytic solution 170, an anode 130, and a cathode 132. Electrolytic solution 170 may comprise a metallic salt having a first metal that substantially absorbs deuterium when reduced to an atomic state, and a supporting electrolyte, each dissolved in heavy water. As an example, the metallic salt may be selected from the group of transition metals, such as palladium. In one embodiment, where the deuterium atoms bind to one another to create deuterium gas, the reduced metal 172, such as palladium, absorbs deuterium 174. In another embodiment, as shown in FIG. 5, gaseous deuterium atoms collect on the surface of cathode 132 and enter into the lattice of metal 172 when in a reduced state. In one implementation, electrolytic solution 170 comprises 20-25 mL solution of 0.03 M palladium chloride and 0.3 M lithium chloride in deuterated water.

Cathode 132 may be partially immersed in electrolytic solution 170. Cathode 132 may comprise a second metal that does not substantially absorb deuterium 174 and is generally stable in electrolytic solution 170 when cathode 132 is polarized. For example, cathode 132 may be comprised of Au, Ag, Pt, as well as their alloys. In some embodiments, cathode 132 may comprise a second metal that does absorb deuterium 174 and is generally stable in electrolytic solution 170 when cathode 132 is polarized. As an example, cathode 132 may be comprised of Ni or its alloys. Cathode 132 may be formed into various shapes, such as a wire, rod, screen, or foil. In some embodiments, cathode 132 may be shaped as a wire having a diameter of 0.25 mm and a length of 2.5 cm. Anode 130 may also be partially immersed in electrolytic solution 170 and may be stable in electrolytic solution 170 when anode 130 is polarized. Anode 130 may be manufactured from any electrically conductive material which is stable in electrolytic solution 170, such as Pt, as well as their alloys. The term “stable” with reference to anode 130 and cathode 132 means that the materials employed in the construction of anode 130 and cathode 132 do not substantially corrode when they are polarized and generally do not react with the electrolyte or products of electrolysis. Anode 130 may be formed into various shapes, such as a wire, rod, screen, or foil. As an example, anode 130 may be shaped as a wire having a diameter of 0.25 mm and a length of 30 cm.

FIG. 4 illustrates a front perspective view of an embodiment of a system 100 for generating particles using an external magnetic field. System 100 may include an electrochemical cell 110, power supply 140, and magnets 160. Cell 110 may include a body portion 120 and a top portion 122. Cell 110 may be rectangular, square, cylindrical, cubical, or various other shapes as recognized in the art. Cell 110, an example of which is commercially available from Ridout Plastics, model AMAC, part number 752, may be comprised of various non-metallic materials that do not react with the electrolyte, such as butyrate. Body portion 120 may be configured to contain an electrolytic solution 170 (see FIG. 5). As an example, body portion 120 may be cubic in shape and may be comprised of a non-conductive material, such as plastic. Top portion 122 may be configured to cover body portion 120. Top portion 120 may be comprised of a non-conductive material, such as plastic. Top portion 122 may contain an opening 124 therein where an anode 130 may be passed therethrough, and also an opening 126 where a cathode 132 may be passed therethrough. Top portion 122 may also contain an opening 128 for venting purposes.

Anode 130 may comprise a wire mounted on a support 150 and may be partially immersed in electrolytic solution 170 (see FIG. 5). Support 150 may be comprised of a chemically inert material, such as polyethylene. Cathode 132 may be shaped as a single wire (as shown in FIG. 7A), a screen (as shown in FIG. 7B), or a foil (as shown in FIG. 7C). One end 131 of anode 130 may be connected to power supply 140. One end 133 of cathode 132 may be connected to power supply 140. Power supply 140 may be a potentiostat/galvanostat, an example of which is commercially available from Princeton Applied Research, model 363. The other end 135 of anode 130 may be coupled to a support 150 (see FIG. 5), which may be secured to body portion 120. Cathode 132 may be coupled to a particle detector 152 that may be attached to body portion 120. Both particle detector 152 and cathode 132 may be mounted to body portion 120. In one embodiment, particle detector 152 may be contiguous with cathode 132. In another embodiment, detector 152 may be in proximity to cathode 132, such that particles emitted from cathode 132 may contact particle detector 152. For example, particle detector 152 may be positioned adjacent to cathode 132. As another example, particle detector 152 may be positioned between cathode 132 and body portion 120. Particle detector 152 may be used to detect the occurrence of particles.

Particle detector 152 may be comprised of a non-metallic material. In one implementation, particle detector 152 may be comprised of CR-39 material. CR-39 is a thermoset resin that is chemically resistant to the electrolyte and to electromagnetic noise. CR-39 may be commercially obtained from Landauer. Particle detector 152 may comprise various shapes. As an example, particle detector 152 may be rectangular in shape with dimensions of 1 cm.times.2 cm.times.1 mm. When traversing a plastic material such as CR-39, particles create along their ionization track a region that is more sensitive to chemical etching than the rest of the material. After treatment with an etching agent, tracks remain as holes or pits that may be seen with the aid of an optical microscope. The size, depth of penetration, and shape of the tracks provides information about the mass, charge, energy, and direction of motion of particles generated by method 10. Neutral particles, like neutrons, will produce knock-ons, or charged particles resulting from the collision with the neutron that will leave ionization tracks, or, with sufficient energy (e.g. >12 MeV) cause .sup.12C present in the CR-39 resin to fission into 3 charged .alpha. particles that will leave ionization tracks.

Magnets 160 and 162 may be positioned adjacent to body portion 120 such that a magnetic field is created within electrochemical cell 100 between anode 130 and cathode 132 and though electrolytic solution 170. In some embodiments, the magnetic field created between magnets 160 and 162 may be sufficient to hold magnets 160 and 162 in position adjacent to body portion 120. In other embodiments, magnets 160 and 162 may be attached to body portion 120. Magnet 160 may be positioned adjacent to the surface of body portion 120 that contacts support 150. Magnet 162 may be positioned adjacent to the surface of body portion 120 that contacts detector 152. Magnets 160 and 162 may be comprised of various magnetic materials, such as NeFeB. As an example, the dimensions of magnets 160 and 162 may be 1 in.times.1 in.times.0.25 in. Magnets 160 and 162 may be commercially obtained from Dura Magnetics, part number NS-10010025. As an example, the external magnetic field created by magnets 160 and 162 may have a magnetic flux between about 1800 and 2200 Gauss. Magnets 160 and 162 may be permanent magnets or may be electromagnets.

FIG. 5 illustrates a cross-section view of a cell 110 during a co-deposition process. As shown, cell 110 is connected to power supply 140 and includes electrolytic solution 170 therein. Electrolytic solution 170 may comprise a soluble metallic salt (not shown) having a first metal, such as palladium, and a supporting electrolyte (not shown), wherein the palladium and chlorine are combined to form a palladium chloride complex anion, PdCl.sub.4.sup.-. The palladium chloride complex anion may be dissolved in heavy water (D.sub.2O) (not shown), with the palladium absorbing deuterium 174 when in a reduced state. The supporting electrolyte may include an ionizable salt to increase solution conductivity. Examples of ionizable salts may include: alkali metal chlorides, nitrates, and perchlorates. In one embodiment, electrolytic solution 170 may be comprised of a metallic salt such as 0.05 M PdCl.sub.2 and a salt such as 0.3 M LiCl dissolved in 99.9 percent pure heavy water. During the co-deposition process, metal 172 infused with deuterium 174 may be deposited on cathode 132, while oxygen 176 accumulates around anode 130.

FIG. 6 illustrates a cross-section view of an embodiment of a system 200 for generating particles using an external electric field. System 200 may include an electrochemical cell 210, power supply 240, and external electrodes 260 and 262. Cell 210 may include a body portion 220 and a top portion 222. Top portion may contain an opening 224 (not shown) therein where an anode 230 may be passed there through, and also an opening 226 (not shown) where a cathode 232 may be passed there through. Top portion 222 may also contain an opening 228 (not shown) for venting purposes. Cell 210 may be rectangular, square, cylindrical, or various other shapes as recognized in the art. Cell 210 may be comprised of various non-metallic materials, such as butyrate. Anode 230 and cathode 232 may be connected to power supply 240. Power supply 240 may be a potentiostat or a galvanostat. Anode 230 is attached to a support 250. Cathode 232 may be coupled to a particle detector 254 that is attached to a support 256. Particle detector 254 may be comprised of a non-conductive material. In one implementation, particle detector 254 is comprised of CR-39 material.

Electrodes 260 and 262 may be positioned adjacent to body portion 220 such that an electric field may be created between anode 230 and cathode 232. In some embodiments, electrodes 260 and 262 may be secured to body portion 220 by an adhesive. Electrodes 260 and 262 are positioned adjacent to the surface of body portion 220 perpendicular to anode 230 and cathode 232. Electrodes 260 and 262 may be comprised of various conductive materials as recognized by one with ordinary skill in the art, such as copper. As an example, electrodes 260 and 262 may be less than one inch in diameter. Electrode 260 may be connected to a regulated high voltage source 264 via wire 266, whereas electrode 262 may be connected to regulated high voltage source 264 via wire 268. Wires 266 and 268 may comprise any suitable electrical wire as recognized by one with ordinary skill in the art. An example of a voltage source 264 that may be utilized with system 200 is voltage source model 4330, which may be commercially obtained from EMCO. Voltage source 264 may be used to apply 6000V DC (with about 6% AC component) across electrodes 260 and 262.

Electrochemical cell 210 includes an electrolytic solution 270. Electrolytic solution 270 may comprise a metallic salt having a first metal that substantially absorbs deuterium when in a reduced state (not shown), and a supporting electrolyte (not shown), each dissolved in heavy water (not shown). As an example, the metallic salt may be selected from the group of transition metals, such as palladium. In one embodiment, where the deuterium atoms bind to one another to create deuterium gas, the reduced deuterium absorbing metal 272, such as palladium, absorbs deuterium 274. In another embodiment, deuterium atoms collect on the surface of cathode 232 and enter into the lattice of deuterium absorbing metal 272 when in a reduced state. In one implementation, electrolytic solution 270 comprises 20-25 mL solution of 0.03 M palladium chloride and 0.3 M lithium chloride in deuterated water.

Referring to FIGS. 7A-7C, FIG. 7A shows a front view of one side of an embodiment of system 100, illustrating an embodiment of the cathode 132. As shown, cathode 132 is attached to detector 152. In this implementation, cathode 132 consists of a wire 134. As an example of a commercially available wire 134, may be obtained from Aldrich, Au wire part number 326534 or Pt wire part number 349402. The cathode may be 0.25 mm in diameter, and be 3 cm in length. FIG. 7B illustrates a front view of one side of an embodiment of system 100, illustrating another embodiment of cathode 132. As shown, cathode 132 is attached to detector 152. In this implementation, cathode 132 is formed as a screen 138. Screen 138 may serve to increase the surface area for particle emission. Screen 138 may be comprised of various metallic materials, such as Ni, Cu, Ag, and Au. As an example, a screen 138 commercially available from Delker, part number 3 Ni 5-077, is comprised of nickel, is 3 cm in size, has a thickness of 0.08 mm, and has eyelet dimensions of 1.5 mm.times.2.0 mm. FIG. 7C illustrates a front view of one side of an embodiment of system 100, illustrating another embodiment of cathode 132. As shown, cathode 132 is attached to detector 152. In this implementation, cathode 132 is formed as a foil 139. Foil 139 may serve to increase the surface area for particle emission. Foil 139 may be comprised of various metallic materials, such as Ni, Cu, Ag, and Au. As an example, a foil 139 commercially available from Aldrich, part number 349267, is 2.5 cm in size and has a thickness of 0.025 mm.

In the absence of an external electric/magnetic field, Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) analysis of electrodes prepared by Pd/D co-deposition exhibit highly expanded surfaces consisting of small spherical nodules to form a cauliflower-like morphology. Cyclic voltammetry and galvanostatic pulsing experiments indicate that, by using the co-deposition technique, a high degree of deuterium loading (with an atomic ratio D/Pd>1) is obtained within seconds. These experiments also indicate the existence of a D.sub.2.sup.+ species within the Pd lattice. Because an ever expanding electrode surface is created, non-steady state conditions are assured, the cell geometry is simplified because there is no longer a need for a uniform current distribution on the cathode, and long charging times to achieve high deuterium loadings are eliminated.

Using the Pd/D co-deposition process, radiation emission and tritium production were documented. The results indicated that the reactions were nuclear in origin and that they occurred in the subsurface. To enhance these surface effects, experiments were conducted in the presence of either an external electric or magnetic field. SEM analysis showed that when a polarized Au/Pd/D electrode was exposed to an external electric field, significant morphological changes were observed. These changes ranged from re-orientation and/or separation of weakly connected globules, through forms exhibiting molten-like features. EDX analysis of these features showed the presence of additional elements (in an electric field Al, Mg, Ca, Si, and Zn; in a magnetic field Fe, Cr, Ni, and Zn) that could not be extracted from cell components and deposited on discrete sites.

To verify that the new elements observed on the cathodes were nuclear in origin, the Pd/D co-deposition was done in the presence of a CR-39 detector. CR-39 is a polyallydiglycol carbonate polymer that is widely used as a solid state nuclear track dosimeter chip. When traversing a plastic material such as CR-39, charged particles create along their ionization track a region that is more sensitive to chemical etching than the rest of the bulk. After treatment with an etching agent, tracks remain as holes or pits and their size and shape can be measured.

It should be noted that, in the area of modern dosimetry, CR-39 dosimeter chips are the most efficient detectors for the detection of light particles (alphas or protons). Experiments were conducted in which either a Ni screen or Au/Ag/Pt wire was wrapped around a CR-39 chip and was then used as the substrate for the Pd/D co-deposition. After the Pd was completely plated out, the cell was exposed to either an external electric or magnetic field. The experiment was terminated after two days and the CR-39 chip was etched using standard protocols (6.5 N NaOH at 70.degree. C. for 6-7 hrs). After etching, the chip was examined under a microscope.

The Pd/D co-deposition generated pits in CR-39 have the same properties as those created by nuclear particles as shown in FIGS. 8A and 8B. FIGS. 8A and 8B are microphotographs 300 and 400, respectively, of tracks in CR-39 due to an alpha source. When the microscope optics are focused on the surface of the detector, as shown in FIG. 8A, it can be seen that the tracks 310 are symmetrical in shape and dark in color. When the microscope optics are focused inside the pits 410, as shown in FIG. 8B, bright spots 420 are observed. Tracks have a conical shape. The bright spot 420 is caused by the bottom of the track acting like a lens when the detector is backlit. The dark, symmetrical shapes with bright spots at their centers are diagnostic of nuclear generated tracks.

FIGS. 8C and 8D show microphotographs 500 and 600, respectively, of Pd/D co-deposition generated tracks 510 and 610 obtained by focusing the microscope optics on the surface and the bottom of the pits, respectively. It can be seen that the Pd/D co-deposition generated tracks are dark and symmetrical in shape, with bright spots 520 and 620, respectively, inside them.

FIGS. 9A and 9B show images taken of the CR-39 detector after a Pd/D co-deposition experiment in a magnetic field. FIG. 9A illustrates a magnified image 700 of a CR-39 taken after a Pd/D co-deposition experiment in a magnetic field in accordance with an embodiment of the system and method for generating particles. FIG. 9B illustrates a further magnified image of image 700.

The electrode substrate used to create these images is a 0.25 mm diameter Ag wire. Visible inspection of the CR-39 chip showed a cloudy area where the electrode substrate was in close proximity to the CR-39 detector. The cloudy area 710 shown in FIG. 9A is approximately 0.5 mm wide and 4.6 mm long. The fact that the cloudy area was only observed where the detector was in close proximity to the cathode indicates that the cathode has caused the cloudiness. The 500.times. magnification of the center of the cloudy area shown in FIG. 9B illustrates the presence of numerous overlapping tracks 720, both large and small. The number of tracks is far more than are observed in laser fusion experiments (typically DD or DT).

FIGS. 10A and 10B show a side-by-side comparison of features observed when the detector is exposed to depleted U and a detector that has undergone exposure to a Pd/D co-deposition experiment in the presence of an external electric field. FIG. 10A illustrates a magnified image 800 of a CR-39 detector exposed to depleted uranium. FIG. 10B illustrates a magnified image 900 of a CR-39 detector exposed to a Pd/D co-deposition experiment performed on a Au wire in the presence of a 6000V external electric field in accordance with the disclosed subject matter. Since the features look the same, and since depleted Uranium is giving off alphas, it stands to reason that the features observed for the co-deposition experiment are also due to high energy particles. These particles can be either alphas, protons, or neutrons.

It should be noted that in the absence of an external electric/magnetic field, when Ni screen is used as the cathode, no tracks are observed on the CR-39 chip, as shown in FIG. 11. FIG. 11 illustrates an image 1000 of a CR-39 detector indicating X-ray emission, in accordance with an embodiment of the system and method for generating particles. Instead of tracks, the impression of the electrode substrate is observed in the CR-39 detector which has been caused by the emission of soft X-rays from the cathode.

The size of the tracks is proportional to the energy of the particle that created the track. It has been observed that the energy of the particles created in these experiments can be controlled by the electrode substrate. When the Pd/D co-deposition reaction is done on a light Z material such as Ni, the particles are small and homogeneous in size, as shown in image 1100 shown in FIG. 12A. However, when the reaction is done on a higher Z material, such as Ag, Au, or Pt, both large and small particles are observed, as shown in FIGS. 9A, 9B, 10B, 12A, and image 1200 shown in FIG. 12B.

FIG. 13A shows an SEM image 1300 of the Pd deposit on Au foil that has been exposed to a magnetic field. The Lorentz lines of the magnetic field have caused the Pd micro-globules to form star-like features. FIGS. 13B-13D show images 1400, 1500, and 1600, respectively, taken of a CR-39 detector after a Pd/D co-deposition experiment in a magnetic field using a Ag wire cathode. FIG. 13B shows that the tracks coincide with the Pd deposit indicating that the Pd deposit is the source of the tracks. FIGS. 13C and 13D show magnified images of the tracks. The tracks vary in size indicating that particles of different types and energies are being produced.

Specific Example

Materials

Palladium chloride (99%, Aldrich), lithium chloride (analytical grade, Mallinckrodt), deuterated water (99.9% D, Aldrich), 0.25 mm diameter gold wire (99.9%, Aldrich), 0.5 mm diameter silver wire (99.9% Aldrich), 0.25 mm diameter platinum wire (99.9%, Aldrich), nickel screen (Delker, 0.35 mm thick and eyelet dimensions of 3 mm.times.1.9 mm).

Cell Design

Cell design as shown in FIGS. 4-6.

Charging Procedure

Typically 20-25 mL solution of 0.03 M palladium chloride and 0.3 M lithium chloride in deuterated water is added to the cell. Palladium is then plated out onto the cathode substrate using a charging profile of 100 .mu.A for 24 h, followed by 200 .mu.A for 48 h followed by 500 .mu.A until the palladium has been plated out. This charging profile assures good adherence of the palladium on the electrode substrate. Once the palladium has been plated out of solution, the external electric or magnetic fields are applied. In the external electric field configuration as shown in FIG. 6, copper electrodes (.about.1 inch in diameter) are taped to the outside of the cell wall. A regulated high voltage source (EMCO model 4330) is used to apply 6000 V DC (and has a .about.6% AC component) across these copper electrodes. In the magnetic field configuration as shown in FIGS. 4 and 5, the attractive forces between the 1 in.times.1 in.times.0.25 in permanent NdFeB magnets (available from Dura Magnetics) hold them in place on either side of the cell, as shown in FIGS. 4 and 5. The strength of the magnetic field is on the order of 2000 Gauss. After the palladium has been electrochemically plated out and the external field has been applied, the cathodic current is increased to 1 mA for 2 h, 2 mA for 6 h, 5 mA for 24 h, 10 mA for 24 h, 25 mA for 24 h, 50 mA for 24 h, 75 mA for 24 h, and 100 mA for 24 h.

Summary of Results

With a Ni screen cathode and no external field, there is X-ray emission (see FIG. 11). There are charged particles seen (alphas and protons) when an external electric or magnetic field is applied. For cathodes made of higher Z materials (Ag, Au, Pt), charged particles are obtained in the absence of an external field. Tracks are observed on the back of the CR-39 which is indicative of neutron generation. The neutrons produced can have various energy levels. Besides the emission of alphas, protons, soft X-rays, and neutrons, the cells also produce tritium, gammas, and betas.

A summary of some necessary conditions to obtain pits are contained in Table 1 shown below. The column labeled “Experiment” indicates the type of cathode used, while the “Field” column indicates whether an electric or magnetic field was used. Unless otherwise indicated, Pd/D co-deposition was performed using LiCl and D.sub.2O.

TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Experiment Field Result Ni screen None No pits, see impression of Ni screen Ni screen E or B Pits in patches Ag wire None, E, or B High density of pits Au or Pt wire E or B High density of pits Ag, KCI E or B High density of pits Ag, H.sub.2O E or B Pits, less dense than D.sub.2O Pd wire, no co-dep E or B Pits in patches CuCl.sub.2 in place of PdCl.sub.2 None, E, or B No pits

Additionally, Table 2 shown below represents a summary of experiments performed to determine if the CR-39 pits were due to contamination or electrolysis.

TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Experiment Result Place PdCl.sub.2 powder on surface of CR-39 No pits Immerse CR-39 in PdCl.sub.2–LiCl–D.sub.2O No pits Wrap cathode substrates around CR-39 No pits Electrolysis using Ni screen and LiCl–D.sub.2O No pits

Many modifications and variations of the system and method for generating particles are possible in light of the above description. Therefore, within the scope of the appended claims, the system and method for generating particles may be practiced otherwise than as specifically described. Further, the scope of the claims is not limited to the embodiments and implementations disclosed herein, but extends to other embodiments and implementations as may be contemplated by those with ordinary skill in the art.

* * * * *

Subscribe to feed

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in Energy, Nukes, Science Bits, Tech Bits and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to US Navy Patent on LENR / LANR Particle Source

  1. BobN says:

    For those that want a PDF version of a patent with the figures, here is a good web site that is free
    http://www.patent2pdf.com/

    Just enter the patent number, get it and open and save to you PC

  2. E.M.Smith says:

    @BobN:

    Thanks for the link. You “encouraged” me to figure out how to embed a PDF link into the posting, so I did ;-)

    Now you can get the whole PDF via two different ways ;-)

    What I find interesting about the patent is that while most commercial patents are rather, um, vague about EXACTLY what to do to make something work, this Navy patent is very precise and specific. In theory all patents are supposed to be enough for someone “skilled in the art” to do it, many are deliberately vague so you can’t just “cook book” a replication. They leave out a lot of “expected skill in the art”. This one is pretty darned explicit.

    FWIW, I’m tempted to try doing a “cook book” on one of their examples… then again, the idea of “accidental X-Rays and Neutrons” that I can’t detect banging around inside me is not exactly enticing ;-)

    I think I need a bigger lab and more equipment ;-)

  3. bob sykes says:

    Cold fusion is impossible, because overcoming Coulombic repulsion between nuclei requires enormous amounts of energy and monstrously high temperatures, around 100×10^6 K for protons. Lubos Motl gives a short answer,

    http://motls.blogspot.com/2016/04/cold-fusion-turns-to-hot-legal-battles.html

    The persistence of the Navy and other agencies in this nonsense merely illustrates how incompetent they are. Actually, the physics community today is filled with charlatans. M. Alford (physicist Washington Univ., St. L.) actually believe that faster than light communication is possible.

  4. Alex Zmey says:

    Cold fusion is impossible. Yep. But Earth was also flat for a long time… Try to explain quantum tunneling. You know, also a potential barrier…

  5. p.g.sharrow says:

    E.M.Smith says:I think I need a bigger lab and more equipment ;-)
    I have been thinking the same thing………….. for 22 years. :-)
    I do have a great site in the middle of 20 acres 200yards from the nearest neighbor’s house as well as a semi-buried in the ground building. Some knowledge and experience with hazardous materials.
    WE are both semi-retired. All we need is an angel. Lol…;-)…pg

  6. E.M.Smith says:

    @Bob Sykes:

    It’s generally a very bad idea to say “impossible”, especially about things happening at the quantum level. It becomes very strange down there.

    For example, your sneer at the idea of Faster Than Light communications. The use of quantum entanglement, by all observations, causes changes to one particle to instantaneously be reflected in another. This observation leads to the theoretical possibility of faster than light communications. (Yes, horridly difficult as somehow one must move the two particles very far apart without them interacting with other matter and changing their entanglement, yet something does connect them at FTL speeds… Now I may think it ‘nearly impossible’ from an Engineering POV, but that does not make it impossible from a physics POV.)

    Similarly, the Motls rant is a mix of “restatement of known hot physics” and bile based on prejudice, ignoring the same quantum level at which the crystal lattice based processes happen. Not a single mention of wave functions, though he did mention “quantum tunneling” so is getting near to the space… Stating “I can (only) make a match via phosphorous and sulfur” does not prove one can not also make flame via flint, steel, and butane…

    Frankly, ALL arguments of the form: “I don’t know how FOO works, therefor FOO is impossible!” and / or “FOO can’t happen since we know it can only happen via BAR!” are simply arguments that ‘ignorance is superior to evidence’. They are fundamentally broken arguments. (Please note that this is a “general truth” and not directed at any particular topic or person. Also, in the Geek world, “FOO” and “BAR” – as in fubar – are used to label “this” and “that” in unambiguous ways.) The history of humanity is littered with examples of that kind of assertion going down in flames…

    So your assertion reduces to the sound of a mind firmly snapping shut based on a firm belief in it having absorbed the totality of all physics, both known and unknown… the belief in an impossibility of great size… and self perfection. Then seasoned with ‘everyone else are idiots and stupid as dirt’ via statements like the researchers at the Navy being “incompetent”. Now they very well may be, but that is not proved by anyone saying so. It is proved (or falsified) by taking their patent / recipe and trying to make one of the gizmos. Then testing it.

    Given that these Navy folks do this kind of thing for a living, have things like physical evidence for particle generation, list in great detail how to replicate, have published this publicly, and have a pretty good lab at their disposal in which they have done the work: I’m inclined to think them decent folks at their job until proven otherwise. Oh, and the folks at Matsushita found very similar things, so a kind of corroboration. (Or are they, too, “incompetent” or in collusion somehow?).

    At what point does the list of folks with Ph.D.s who claim to have done replications and observed the same effect become large enough that they can’t all be incompetent and fraudulent? One? Probably not. Two? Maybe not. Three? Possibly. A dozen? At that point its getting darned hard to call them all fools and idiots… yet we are well past a dozen. At at least a half dozen very “Name” places. MIT, Navy Nukes, SRI, Matsushita, and a few European Universities; with a few to a dozen or so folks at each place. (And that’s the very short list off the top of my head…)

    So Motls makes an argument of the form “I know it must be done via BAR, therefor FOO is impossible!”, an argument from ignorance in form, and you think that superior to physical evidence (see the images in the patent – they include photos of particle tracks in detectors) and laboratory results? Really?

    Well, you are free to hold that opinion, and you are free to voice it; but please do not indulge in the insult of calling others “incompetent” (or other slurs) based on your ‘argument from ignorance’ forms. The world can be far far stranger than you, or I, can know or understand. Any short dip into the quantum world shows that… Motls “poo poos” the idea of tunneling into the nucleus, yet we build and use Josephson Junction devices that depend on quantum tunneling to work. So quantum tunneling has an ‘existence proof’ of tunneling, which means that other forms of tunneling can’t be tossed out on a whim. Or via insult.

    Disclaimer:

    Please note that I am also not asserting that LANR / LENR is absolutely proven to work nor that it MUST work via quantum tunneling or any other particular process. My assertion is only that the “weight of the evidence” is now stacking up on the side of “it is real”, and that it can be replicated and has been replicated many times. That we’ve reached the point where the “recipes” are detailed enough that anyone with even a mediocre lab can “give it a go” and validate for themselves. And I’m asserting that calling folks “fraudulent” or “incompetent” is a very hard way to observe or listen…

    So “when I can buy one at the hardware store, take it home, and it works” remains my ultimate “proof” that it is real. When I can go see one on display at a trade show is my “probably real” (though I’ve found enough “vaporware” at trade shows to know it’s not proof of any sort). And when someone says “We have it running in the lab” it’s a pretty good “maybe”. When 4 vendors all say “We have it running in the lab” and two of them are doing NDAs and demonstrations to potential customers (and one to Congress…) with independent lab validations, I class that as a “very strong maybe” or even a “probably so”. To say “nobody can do that” when it’s being done is just not a very good proof… nor is it a good proof to say “somebody says they can do that”, but it points to a place to go looking…

  7. MacTee says:

    So is Andrea Rossi an honest man? If he is then we shall soon see the first LENR electrical generators on the market.

  8. MacTee says:

    @bob sykes says: 12 April 2016 at 1:39 pm
    Science is made by testing the ‘impossible’.
    It was impossible to make a heavier than air machine fly.
    It was impossible to float a ship made of steel.
    It was impossible to split the atom

  9. Jason Calley says:

    I am reminded of Arthur C. Clark’s eponymous laws:

    Clarke’s first law
    When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.

    Clarke’s second law
    The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.

    Clarke’s third law
    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

  10. E.M.Smith says:

    @MacTee:

    That’s sort of the $64 Billion question…

    He states he is going ahead with manufacture. IH say THEY have rights to go ahead with patents and manufacture. So both ought to be selling if there be something to sell…

    I’d bet that there is (mostly based on all those OTHER folks doing replications and other forms of LENR from places with a good reputation to protect – i.e. Navy Nuke guys and MIT sorts…)

    @Jason Calley:

    When I first ran into evidence and proofs that Quantum Mechanics was “right”, that was the moment when I realized that our perception of reality and our understanding of it is nothing but a polite lie we tell ourselves so we do not go crazy… At that point, all sorts of impossible things are not only quite possible, but provably so…

    From the “2 Slit” experiment to Quantum Tunneling (as Alex said above) to the simple fact that a single electron in a P orbital is simultaneously on both sides of the nucleus with equal probability but the probability of being in the plane in the middle is zero. Not near zero, zero… The universe is built directly and irrevocably upon “an impossible world” of QM. Which means our “rational” explanation of things is, at best, a total fabrication and we have no clue what is really possible.

    I’ll side with Clark any day…

  11. M Simon says:

    A patent is not proof of anything. Actual proof? Many people build it and it works.

    Back in the bad old days there would be leaks of “science” aimed at getting the USSR to spend money on stuff that couldn’t work. They often fell for it.

  12. M Simon says:

    What does work? The Farnsworth Fusor.

  13. E.M.Smith says:

    @M.Simon:

    While it isn’t proof it works, it IS supposed to be a recipe that is replicable by those ‘skilled in the art’ and ti does show what is the claim for others to test. IF you don’t have enough in the patent to replicate, it can be rescinded.

    Ah, yes, the Farnsworth Fusor. Just doesn’t seem to make much net gain (yet…), but it will advance.

  14. R. Shearer says:

    Anyone paying actual money to license this patent? JWK, named a co-assignee, is a government contractor.

    With regard to Rossi, his 1MW waste heat generator is offered for sale at $1.5 million. More effective electric or gas powered heat or steam generators can be had for a small fraction of that cost and the difference could purchase a lot of power or fuel.

  15. E.M.Smith says:

    @Sera:

    Interesting patent… especially that it lists some of the same metals I’d speculated might work in processes like the eCat. Also that B is listed as an alternative to Li as a fuel atom.

    Then there’s those ‘small clusters of atoms’ point… shades of my speculation on a Papp Engine:
    https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2013/03/19/papp-lenr-superatoms-fusion/
    where atom clusters were speculated to be important…

    (I’d now add that any Papp Engine likely needs a piston / heads / cylinder made with a Laves Structure metal alloy, most likely, and probably a roughened surface for better H and He / Xe absorption… and given that oxygen bonds to Ni in surfaces and the e-Cat replications dehydrate and deoxygenate the metal, I’d add those processes along with NOT using oxygen in the gas mix – just N2 as “air” if a straight H2 / Noble gas mix doesn’t “go”…)

    Given the long list of metals showing up in that patent, and in the Navy one, and at least 3+ target “fuel” atoms, it is starting to look like all sorts of variations on a theme can be built…

Anything to say?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s