Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 180 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
3mV VS 2mV ( final Experiment ) THX for Respect
by newton
Yesterday at 06:41 AM
Instruction Manual How To brake SYMETRY !
by newton
10/13/17 01:04 PM
Eureca during fast motion mass M become longer!!!
by newton
10/04/17 03:03 PM
Short story about SYMETRY .
by newton
10/04/17 08:13 AM
P=MV neutralizer
by newton
10/02/17 09:53 AM
The universes expansion accelleration solved.
by Marchimedes
10/01/17 01:51 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
newton 30
Marchimedes 1
Topic Options
#9382 - 11/11/06 03:39 AM Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"
erich knight Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 10/30/04
Posts: 142
Loc: Virginia
The Navy Heats up "Cold Fusion" with Use of CR-39 Detectors in LENR Experiment:

Extraordinary Evidence - "Cold Fusion"

The field of low energy nuclear reactions, historically known as cold fusion, has never had simple physical evidence of the claimed nuclear processes to physically place in the hands of doubters.

Until now.

Scientists at the U.S. Navy?s San Diego SPAWAR Systems Center have produced something unique in the 17-year history of the scientific drama historically known as cold fusion: simple, portable, highly repeatable, unambiguous, and permanent physical evidence of nuclear events using detectors that have a long track record of reliability and acceptance among nuclear physicists.

Using a unique experimental method called co-deposition, combined with the application of external electric and magnetic fields, and recording the results with standard nuclear-industry detectors, researchers have produced what may be the most convincing evidence yet in the pursuit of proof of low energy nuclear reactions.

New Energy Times, issue #19
"Extraordinary Evidence"
http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET19.htm#ee
_________________________
Erich J. Knight

Top
.
#9383 - 11/11/06 04:49 AM Re: Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
This looks to be a totally bogus self-serving promo.

There is not a single site finable with google that would lead me to a different conclusion.

It appears cold fusion will join UFOs as one of those things cranks report sighting.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#9384 - 11/11/06 06:34 AM Re: Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"
Steven Krivit Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 11/11/06
Posts: 5
"This looks to be a totally bogus self-serving promo. There is not a single site finable with google that would lead me to a different conclusion.
It appears cold fusion will join UFOs as one of those things cranks report sighting."

Hello DA Morgan,

Your post is very interesting to me and I would love to hear more about your thoughts and how and why you see this as (at least purely) self-serving.

I presume your second sentence meant to say "findable." I'm unsure as to both what fact you are drawing upon and what interpretation you are forming based on whatever fact(s) you are inferring.

I *think* you mean that you have performed Google searches on this topic - and you have found no other references to the story, no other corroborations, is that right? And considering how dramatic the claims appear to be in this story, your basis is that the story is a farce? If so, guess, what? You're not alone. I've heard this from a few other people today too. I'm not at all surprised or the least bit offended.

If you want to check the credibility of our story, I'll bend over backwards to assist you. It will be my pleasure.

So if you want to clear this up, send me an email (go to the contact page on newenergytimes.com) and I'll give you a personal introduction over the telephone to Gary Phillips, Larry Forsley of JWK Tech, Frank Gordon and Pam Boss at SPAWAR, Dave Nagel at George Washington University.

Would you like to visit the SPAWAR facility in person and see this for yourself? I'd be happy to make arrangements. Would you like to contact a genuine expert in CR-39 detectors and have them perform an analysis? I'd be very eager to see it and report it.

Regards,

Steve Krivit
Editor, New Energy Times

Top
#9385 - 11/11/06 02:39 PM Re: Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
SK wrote:
"If you want to check the credibility of our story, I'll bend over backwards to assist you. It will be my pleasure."

Yes "findable" and I teach at the University of Washington in Seattle so I have some rather sophisticated tools at my disposal for performing literature searches.

I could not find a single peer reviewed paper in any citation index supporting this as being anything of substance. And I must say I am less than impressed with someone in the field of medicine being named as an expert on fusion. An Adjunct Associate Professor in the Department of Radiation Medicine I'll grant. And his credentials in gamma-ray detection are well known. But there is a rather large, Grand Canyon sized gap, between his skills and those required to proclaim fusion. You might recall two Chem profs in Utah who made similar claims and now are the butt of jokes.

The work appears to be several years old and it appears that every attempt to duplicate it has failed.

If you can point me to someone credible in physics that can address the claim I'd be interested in following up.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#9386 - 11/11/06 08:12 PM Re: Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"
Steven Krivit Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 11/11/06
Posts: 5
Hi Daniel,

In response to your first sentence, I would venture to guess that you could not find any peer reviewed paper on this work yet. You appear to conclude that this news and these claims are not of substance because papers and citations do not exist. That is a fair perspective, and I respect your point of view.

Many people, particularly those who do not know much about nuclear science, will be better to pass on this story this until (if) a) a published paper appears and b) published replications appear. Considering the extraordinary nature of the claims, this is completely reasonable and fair. If we are not able to assess claims within our own area of competence, or discuss them with others we trust who are competent, deferring to authoritative publications is a wise move.

In response to your second sentence, regarding Gary Philips of Georgetown University, I would encourage you to take a second look at our introduction of him: "Gary W. Phillips, a nuclear physicist and expert in CR-39 detectors is similarly surprised by what he saw in SPAWAR?s detectors. Phillips has used the detectors to record nuclear events for two decades."

We said nothing about him being an expert on fusion, those are your words. There is a Grand Canyon sized-gap between making claims for fusion and making claims for a nuclear reaction. There are no claims in this article of attaining fusion. There is a reason why the field is now called "low energy nuclear reactions, historically known as cold fusion." That is because over the last 17 years, it has become clear that the researchers have observed reactions that cannot be explained by fusion, and the hypothesis of fusion is still debated even among the 200 or so experts who have been studying the field. I would appreciate if you refrain from introducing artifacts into this discussion.

Your comment about the work appearing to be "several years old" is confusing to me. I'm not sure what facts you are referring to or what points you are trying to make.

The SPAWAR work has been ongoing for 17 years; you can get an idea about the evolution of their work from Mosier-Boss' presentation http://newenergytimes.com/Library/2006BossP-Pd-D-NDIA-Presentation.pdf given at the Navy Science and Technology conference in Washington, D.C. this summer.

What was reported in New Energy Times this week was the latest result of the culmination of this research effort. The latest aspects of the research have been ongoing throughout this year. The photographs of the CR-39 Scanning Analysis are less than three weeks old.

Your comment about the work appearing to have failed in every duplication attempt is equally confusing. Are you referring to the recent SPAWAR work? If so, this makes no sense. The replication attempts just started within the last few weeks. I would really appreciate if you could be more specific and precise.

In your last point, you ask for my help to direct you to a physics authority that you consider credible to give you an authoritative opinion. I would be happy to do so. If you would be so kind as to tell me whom you consider credible, I will do my best to facilitate such a conversation.

Best regards,
Steve Krivit
Editor, New Energy Times
http://www.newenergytimes.com

Top
#9387 - 11/11/06 11:14 PM Re: Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
SK wrote:
"In response to your first sentence, I would venture to guess that you could not find any peer reviewed paper on this work yet."

Not to be harsh but real science is announced by being published in peer reviewed journals. Crackpot science is announced to the popular press (with I'll acknowledge a few notable exceptions).

There have been serious physicists that have looked at the claim. I find no evidence of the work being repeatable.

The PDF to which you link is no more reliable than would be something at physicsblog.com. It is not serious science, not peer reviewed, and widely viewed from what I can see, as another dead end.

My question to you though ... why the enthusiasm about something that is, at best unconfirmed, at most likely pseudo-science?
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#9388 - 11/12/06 07:25 AM Re: Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"
Steven Krivit Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 11/11/06
Posts: 5
Hi Daniel,

Since this was announced at the 2006 Naval Science & Technology Partnership conference in Washington, D.C. on August 2, rather than in a peer-reviewed journal, I can see how you might might find it reasonable to dismiss this as crackpot science.

And I can't argue with you about your point about the SPAWAR work not showing evidence of being reproducible. I see no such evidence of that yet either.

Thanks very much for the dialogue, I think I'll sign off for now.

Best regards,

Steven Krivit
Editor, New Energy Times
http://www.newenergytimes.com

Top
#9389 - 11/13/06 01:10 PM Re: Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
I'd be thrilled if it was real. Lets see what happens over the next 12-24 months.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#9390 - 11/13/06 07:24 PM Re: Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"
dr_rocket Offline
Member

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 196
Loc: Palo Alto, CA, USA
Hi guys,

I am aware of muon catalysed fusion and that it is relatively cold. This sort of reaction has in fact been demonstrated. See, for example, the article in Nature:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v321/n6066/abs/321127a0.html

Nature is as carefully reviewed a journal as there is.

When I checked the above mentioned web site I could find nothing of this sort. I specifically looked under the section "For Science Professionals". There are two papers quoted that are said to be from peer reviewed journals. The links to these are labeled:

1) Gozzi, D., et al., "X-ray, Heat Excess and 4He in the D:Pd System," Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry 452, (1998)

2) Arata, Y., "The Formation of ``Solid Deuterium'' Solidified Inside Crystal Lattice and Intense Solid-State Nuclear Fusion ("Cold Fusion'',)" Il Nuovo Saggiatore, Vol. 20, 2004, No.5-6, p. 66

The first of these leads to a paper in Italian. It has a nice picture of Jean-Baptiste Lamark (1744-1829). If memory serves this fellow had some interesting ideas on heredity. Since I don't read that language I refrain from further comment.

The second is in English and seems to be the one referred to by the first link. (Is this is a bit confusing?) The main concern seems to be about the calorimetry of the effect and some unaccounted for x-rays. The heat was never in dispute. The authors, in the concluding section (5), indicate that more work needed to be done on the bit about x-rays. The paper is date 1997 and I cannot find any follow-on.

Well, what can I say? All I'm trying to do is read-up on the subject and I get a run-around. Seems like a dry hole.


Dr. R.

Top
#9391 - 11/13/06 09:19 PM Re: Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
DR wrote:
"Seems like a dry hole."

That's certainly my impression.

Presenting some crackpot idea to the US military is a great way to create funding. It is not a great way to create credibility.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#9392 - 11/14/06 12:44 AM Re: Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"
Steven Krivit Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 11/11/06
Posts: 5
Hi Dr. Rocket,

I noticed you had some trouble with finding papers on the New Energy Times Web site. My guess is that you went here http://newenergytimes.com and then clicked on the link "For Science Professionals." Once you got there you probably saw a page with about two dozen links and you clicked on this one: Papers Showing Excess Heat & Nuclear Product Correlation.

The first paper that you listed in your message, and the ninth displayed on that page, by Gozzi, is written in English, published by Elsevier, and does not have any sort of picture. Perhaps you could refresh your Web browser, maybe it was not displaying the page correctly.

The second paper which you listed in your message, and the first displayed on that page, is by Arata. Our bibliographic reference states that his paper begins on page 66. Take another look and page down until you get to page 66. You'll see that it, too, is written in English. Sorry for the inconvenience.

If you would like references to other published papers on low energy nuclear reactions, I suggest this link, Selected Papers: Current Publications and Older Papers of Interest. You'll find several dozen there.

If you'd like another collection of interesting papers, I also suggest this link November 2003 Review of a few Cold Fusion Papers

Please let me know if there is anything further I can help you with.

Steven Krivit
Editor, New Energy Times
http://www.newenergytimes.com

Top
#9393 - 11/14/06 03:13 PM Re: Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"
Anonymous
Unregistered


Mr. Krivit:
Your reply seems to be lacking in linking. Did you mean to post links in your 4th and 5th paragraphs?

Amaranth Rose

Moderator

Top
#9394 - 11/15/06 06:46 AM Re: Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"
Steven Krivit Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 11/11/06
Posts: 5
Hi Amaranth Rose,

Please call me "Steve." Yes, that was my intention. Looks like many links failed. Must have been a BCD error. I'll try again for all links:

Site address: http://newenergytimes.com/
For Science Professionals: http://newenergytimes.com/Reports/reports-sci.htm
Correlation Papers: http://newenergytimes.com/Reports/Heat&NuclearProductCorrelation.htm
Selected Published Papers: http://newenergytimes.com/Reports/SelectedPapers.htm
November 2003 Review: http://newenergytimes.com/Reports/Review20ColdFusionPapers.htm

Kind regards,

Steven Krivit
Editor, New Energy Times
http://www.newenergytimes.com

Top
#9395 - 11/16/06 07:23 AM Re: Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"
Anonymous
Unregistered


Steve,
I followed your links. Very interesting.

Amaranth

Top
#9396 - 11/25/06 04:05 PM Re: Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"
Anonymous
Unregistered


artifacts in electrolytic cells (witch's brew) simulate putative nuclear reactions, Kirk L. Shanahan on micropits in CR-39 plastic, re claims by Richard A Oriani and JC Fisher 2002, Pamela Mosier-Boss 2006.08.02: Murray 2006.11.24
groups.yahoo.com/group/AstroDeep/22

kirk.shanahan@srs.gov,orian001@umn.edu,nrg1@newenergyinstitute.org,frank.gordon@navy.mil,bossp@nosc.mil,phillipg@georgetown.edu,

jedrothwell@mindspring.com,britz@kemi.aau.dk,storms2@ix.netcom.com,staff@infinite-energy.com,little@earthtech.org,

As a unqualified, uneducated, inexperienced scientific layman, I've written many critical reviews of cold nuclear fusion (CNF) and Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) claims -- rather a True Believer (TB) from 1989 to December 1996, I quickly became a pragmatic skeptic,
active until 2000, as by carefully studying the actual claims, I
invariably found multitudinous obvious flaws, simple enough to be discernible to a patient layman, and, invariably, implacable but telling resistance from the enthusiatic, closed TB minds.

So, I was intrigued by the persistence of claims by Pamela Mesier-Boss,
since I am ever hopeful that a genuine, irrefutable anomaly will pop up,
as is so common in all areas of science. I soon turned to a search on
Google Groups on "Kurt Shanahan", Oriani, since I've always found
him to be the most careful, experienced, persistent, and lucid of the skeptics.

The problem, really, is that the seemingly small, simple, stable, clear, low-cost, low-energy, safe, comprehensible, stable vial of an electrolysis cell is operationally a witch's brew, a concentrated magic potion of constantly changing ingredients, phases, reactions,
temperatures, bubbles, and potent impurities of boggling complexity and variety, in brief, an archtypal kluge -- a technical mess that somehow
produces irregular, unpredictable, inexplicable, and uncontrolable
results -- complex, surprising, and even impressive, sufficient to
entrance TBs, challenge skeptics, and warm the coals of avarice in canny operators.

[ I confess that I, too, make public scientific claims that are brazen and audacious, re which I seek critical feedback:

Hubble Infrared Ultra Deep Field clearly reveals deep cosmic background
fractile 3D mesh of H filaments lit by hypernovae: Murray 2006.11.21
groups.yahoo.com/group/AstroDeep/20 ]

To Kurt's suggestions, I add that exploding microbubbles in a liguid on a solid surface can generate surprisingly potent jets.

First, I summarize a major recent PR release by vested interests, I hope, not unfairly, and then a relevant Usenet exchange on alt.physics.fusion, and, lastly, my simple theory for hydrogen and oxygen chemical micro explosions, easily capable of instantly metals in an electrolysis cell, producing complex surface structures.

In mutual service, Rich Murray
************************************************************************

Rich Murray, MA Room For All rmforall@comcast.net
505-501-2298 1943 Otowi Road Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505
groups.yahoo.com/group/rmforall/messages

groups.yahoo.com/group/AstroDeep/messages

groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/messages
group with 78 members, 1,381 posts in a public, searchable archive
http://RMForAll.blogspot.com
************************************************************************

[ earthtech.org/publications/AIAA-2006-4909-871.pdf
50 kb S. R. Little, "Null Tests of Breakthrough Energy Claims,"
Proceedings of 42nd AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference,
AIAA 2006-4909 (2006 July). ]


/newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET19.htm#ee

Extraordinary Evidence by Bennett Daviss and Steven Krivit

Bennett Daviss is a science writer based in New Hampshire.
Steven B. Krivit writes for and publishes New Energy Times, a Webzine specializing in low energy nuclear reaction research.
[ He is founder of New Energy Institute Inc.
11664 National Blvd. #142 Los Angeles, California, 90064 USA
310) 470-8189 nrg1@newenergyinstitute.org
newenergytimes.com/contact/contact.htm
newenergytimes.com/weblinks/weblinks.htm ]


Scientists at the U.S. Navy?s San Diego SPAWAR Systems Center have
produced something unique in the 17-year history of the scientific drama
historically known as cold fusion: simple, portable, highly repeatable,
unambiguous, and permanent physical evidence of nuclear events using
detectors that have a long track record of reliability and acceptance among nuclear physicists......

[ spawar.navy.mil/sandiego/
spawar.navy.mil/sandiego/html/contact.html ]

But the field has never had simple physical evidence of those nuclear processes to physically place in the hands of doubters.

Until now. Using a unique experimental method called co-deposition, combined with the application of external electric and magnetic fields, and recording the results with standard nuclear-industry detectors, scientists at the U.S. Navy?s San Diego SPAWAR Systems Center
have produced what may be the most convincing evidence yet in the pursuit of proof of low energy nuclear reactions......

The chips that the SPAWAR Systems Center scientists had brought to
Washington were slices of CR-39 plastic, a common, transparent polymer that resists fogging and abrasions and is used to make eyeglass lenses, among other things.

The researchers had placed the small pieces of plastic inside several of their electrochemical LENR test cells to capture and preserve any fleeting evidence of nuclear events.

"We heard about the use of CR-39 detectors from other LENR researchers
at the 11th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science in Marseilles, France, in 2004," Mosier-Boss said.

She and her colleagues later learned that these same simple detectors have long been used by researchers in inertial confinement fusion (a form of hot fusion) and other areas of nuclear science to
record the passage of neutrons, protons,and alpha particles (the two-proton nuclei of helium atoms stripped of their
electrons). The traveling particles? charges shatter the bonds linking the plastic?s polymers, leaving pits or ?tracks? in the plastic.

CR-39 detector Photo: Steven Krivit

Pamela Mosier-Boss displaying microscope-computer
viewing station for the CR-39 detectors
Photo: Steven Krivit

Tracks on CR-39 Detector from Radioactive Uranium
Source (500x)
Photo: Pamela Mosier-Boss

Tracks from LENR Experiment (Au/Pd/D, 6000V EField, 500X)
Photo: Pamela Mosier-Boss

After a CR-39 detector [ polyallyldiglycol carbonate polymer ] is exposed to a source of nuclear emissions, the detector is bathed in a sodium hydroxide solution, typically for six or seven hours, at a temperature between 65 and 73 degrees C.

?If the solution is too hot, that damages the chips; if you [wash the detectors] too long, you etch away the pits,? Mosier-Boss noted.

The bath scours away the collision?s debris, and the resulting tracks are visible with a microscope or, if they?re present in sufficient densities, with the unaided eye.

?CR-39 detectors are ideal for detecting particles in LENR experiments because we can put them right inside the cell where the placement of electronics would otherwise be highly impractical,? Gordon said.

?You don?t need complicated instrumentation like you do with calorimetry or tritium analysis," he said. "It?s an easy detection tool that?s very straightforward.?.....

Electrolysis simultaneously co-deposits deuterium and palladium,
in particles 60 nm in diameter, in equal amounts onto the cathode?s neutral substrate, typically a thin wire made of either nickel or gold......

To gather evidence, the team plated a film of palladium particles and deuterium atoms onto a copper mesh or wires of platinum, gold, or silver about .25 mm in diameter. During the plating process, the cathode is in contact with a CR-39 detector in the cell to which the scientists had
applied an external electric or magnetic field. After the experiments had completed their runs of eight to 11 days, Mosier-Boss and Szpak saw dense, cloudy areas on the portions of the detector near the cathode.

?The fact that the cloudy areas are observed where the detector was in close proximity to the cathode suggests that the cathode caused the cloudiness,? Mosier-Boss said.

As a control, Mosier-Boss also exposed CR-39 detectors to electrolysis in a lithium solution without palladium in it. The result: only a sprinkling of tracks, randomly distributed and so few
in number that they could be accounted for by background radiation.

She also immersed the detectors in the usual solution of palladium chloride and lithium chloride in deuterium but without applying the external electric current. The outcome was the same: no unusual shower of tracks from high-energy particles......

In one notable test, University of Minnesota physicist Richard Oriani and his partner, John Fisher, suspended CR-39 detectors 1.5 cm above and below nickel and palladium cathodes. [11]

Although their cell design and experimental method differed sharply from those of the SPAWAR group's, the detectors caught particles that Oriani and Fisher calculated to be traveling at energies of two mega-electron volts, a force liberated only through nuclear reactions.

A five-MeV particle will travel less than half a millimeter in the liquid environment of a LENR cell. The 1.5-cm distance ?was the closest that Oriani and Fisher could place the detectors [to the palladium cathode] without impeding the uniform loading? of deuterons, Mosier-Boss
explained.

She said that was not close enough to record most of the nuclear particles flying from the cathode.

?In our experiments, the co-deposition reaction was performed with the cathode wire wrapped around the CR-39 detector,? she added.

?Oriani and Fisher reported charged particle track densities between 1.5 and 38 tracks per square millimeter; their controls yielded densities of 0.5 to 5.4 tracks per square millimeter," Mosier-Boss said. [12]

She was quick to emphasize that the results of the SPAWAR team?s co-deposition experiments can?t be compared directly with Oriani?s and Fisher?s because of the sharp differences in cell design.
"We conservatively estimate that our recent external field
co-deposition experiments yielded track densities greater than 10,000 tracks per square millimeter in the cloudy areas,? she noted.

?Because of the close proximity between the cathode and the detector,? Mosier-Boss added,?we have the optimum geometry to detect any particles that could potentially be emitted from the cathode. Put simply, these newer results are nearly three orders of magnitude greater than
the Oriani-Fisher results.".....

SPAWAR scientists contend that their CR-39 detectors that captured the particles are physical evidence of not just low-temperature nuclear reactions but also reactions that are unusually intense.

Thousands of tracks from the LENR experiment are visible
on this CR-39 detector
Photo: Pamela Mosier-Boss

Conventional nuclear scientists well-versed in reading CR-39 detectors agree. A researcher (who asked not to be named) at a major research university was one of the first to analyze SPAWAR?s CR-39 detectors. He said that the detectors held far more tracks than he?d seen in his own inertial confinement fusion experiments.

Gary W. Phillips, a nuclear physicist and expert in CR-39 detectors is similarly surprised by what he saw in SPAWAR?s detectors. Phillips has used the detectors to record nuclear events for two decades.

He said that the tracks recorded in SPAWAR?s CR-39 experiments are ?at
least one order of magnitude greater? in number than those in any other
conventional nuclear experiments he?s seen.

?I've never seen such a high density of tracks before,? Phillips noted. ?It would have to be from a very intense source ? a nuclear source. You cannot get this from any kind of chemical reaction.?.....

But by now, after tens of thousands of experiments and a steady search for high-energy neutrons, it is clear to LENR scientists that their cells don?t produce high-energy neutrons as the dominant, or even a prominent, product. Some researchers do register a few neutrons
coming from their cells, but their quantity, as well as their energies, are negligible......

The fact that Fleischmann, Pons and the hundreds of other experimenters have not died is proof that these experiments do not yield high-energy
neutrons or strong gamma radiation.

Indeed, it has become increasingly hard for scientists bound by convention to dispute the mounting data from SPAWAR and other LENR labs.

?We?ve been publicly quiet but scientifically rigorous,? Gordon said. ?At SPAWAR Systems Center, we haven?t called press conferences, but we have followed the scientific process of carefully performing experiments and reporting the results in peer-reviewed journals ?- 15 papers so far.

?We've conducted very few experiments looking for excess heat because it?s very difficult to perform good calorimetry.?

Critics can, too easily if erroneously, dismiss claims of anomalous heat. ??Did the researcher get the settings right? Or they didn?t do this right, they didn?t account for that,?? Gordon said.
?Besides, heat evidence doesn?t tell you much about what?s actually happening.?

By using CR-39 detectors, he said, ?we?re using instrumentation that the nuclear industry has accepted and used for decades. Even if some skeptics might claim that our experiment is flawed, it?s still producing charged particles. Our experimental results provide compelling
evidence that nuclear events are occurring."

Skeptical physicists asking whether the SPAWAR group performed a quantitative energy analysis were unable to find any such results. However, skeptics are left to confront the fact that only two sources of energy affecting the test cells. The first is a few volts from the current applied through electrolysis; the second is the external electric field of about 6,000 volts. The particle tracks look identical to tracks made by nuclear particles that have at least 2 million
electron-volts.

Because particles carrying millions of electron-volts of energy aren?t created by reactions powered by a few thousand volts at most, a larger question lingers: What is the source of the anomalous energy that seems to be arising from within the LENR cells?

?We don?t make claims that we?ve developed a new energy source,? Gordon emphasized. ?Our hope is that, by developing an understanding of the processes and how to stimulate them, we?ll be able to use this knowledge for whatever benefit it may offer.?

In the same spirit, he offered no theories to explain the nuclear process he suspects is taking place along those thin layers of palladium in his group?s cells.

?There?s a saying, 'Theory guides but experiments decide.' Consider our data,? he exhorts challengers. ?If it is what it appears to be, and the scientific community confirms it through replications, then new theories will need to be considered, and this may be challenging for
some people to accept.?.....


* For researchers interested in performing a replication of this experiment, please see the Galileo Project Web site, (thegalileoproject.org) for more information.

Frank Gordon's NDIA Slide Presentation
newenergytimes.com/Library/2006GordonF-NDIAPresentation.pdf
[ Dr. Frank E. Gordon frank.gordon@navy.mil
Head, Navigation and Applied Sciences Department, Code 230
SPAWAR Systems Center, San Diego
frank.gordon@navy.mil

Pamela Mosier-Boss's NDIA Slide Presentation
newenergytimes.com/Library/2006BossP-Pd-D-NDIA-Presentation.pdf
[ 31 slides with spectacular photos
boss@nosc.mil, 919-553-1603 ]

New Energy Institute Short (non-technical) Video Documentary
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ke_ZhgAKjhs

References: (most papers are available at lenr.org/)

1. Szpak, S., et al., "Thermal Behavior of Polarized Pd/D Elect
rodes Prepared by Co-Deposition,"
Thermochimica Acta, Vol. 410, p. 101, (2004)

2. Mosier-Boss, P.A. and S. Szpak, "The Pd/(N)H System: Transport Processes and Development of Thermal Instabilities,"
Nuovo Cimento, Soc. Ital. Fis. A, Vol.112, p. 577, (1999)

3. Szpak, S., et al., "Evidence of Nuclear Reactions in the Pd Lattice," Naturwissenschaften, Vol. 92(8), p. 394-397, (2005)

4. Szpak, S., et al., "The Effect of an External Electric Field on Surface Morphology of Codeposited Pd/D Films," Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, Vol. 580, p. 284-290, (2005)

5. Szpak, S., Mosier-Boss, P.A. and Smith, J.J., "On the Behavior of the Cathodically Polarized Pd/D System: Search for Emanating Radiation," Physics Letters A, Vol. 210, p. 382, (1996)

6. Szpak, S., et al., "On the Behavior of the Pd/D System: Evidence for Tritium Production," Fusion Technology, Vol. 33, p. 38, (1998)

7. Szpak, S., P.A. Mosier-Boss, and S.R. Scharber, "Charging of the Pd/(n)H System: Role of the Interphase,"
Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, Vol. 337, p. 147, (1992)

8. Szpak, S., P.A. Mosier-Boss, and J.J. Smith, "Deuterium Uptake During Pd-D Codeposition,
Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, Vol. 379, p. 121, (1994)

9. Szpak, S., et al., Cyclic Voltammetry of Pd + D codeposition," Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, Vol. 380, p. 1, (1995)

10. Lipson, A.G., et al., "Evidence for Low-Intensity D-D Reaction as a Result of Exothermic Deuterium Desorption From Au/Pd/PdO:D Heterostructure,"
Fusion Technology, Vol. 38, p. 238, (2000)

11. Oriani, R.A. and J.C. Fisher, "Energetic Charged Particles Produced in the Gas Phase by Electrolysis,"
Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Cold Fusion, Cambridge, Mass., (2003)

12. Oriani, R.A. and J.C. Fisher, "Generation of Nuclear Tracks During Electrolysis,"
Japanese Journal of Applied Physics A, Vol. 41, p. 6180-6183, (2002)
lenr-canr.org/acrobat/OrianiRAgeneration.pdf
lenr-canr.org/acrobat/OrianiRAdetectiono.pdf

13. Lipson, A.G., et al., "Phenomenon of an Energetic Charged Particle Emission From Hydrogen/Deuterium Loaded Metals,"
Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Cold Fusion, Cambridge, Mass., (2003)


"The question becomes how can I explain that supposed observation.

As you may recall, I have postulated that apparent excess arises due to a calibration constant shift, which in turn arises because of a redistribution of heat sources in the cell. I also speculate further that the electrode surfaces becomes 'active' to normal recombination. This implies that there are miniature chemical explosions (H2/D2 + O2) occurring at the electrode.

The CR-39 plates are placed in close proximity to the electrodes, sometimes even between them, and represent about half of the available cross-sectional area of the cell. (This is a major disturbance in and of itself, and the cases of above and between ought to be discussed separately, at least to establish whether they are the same or different.) The speculation is what exploding bubbles of D2+O2 would do to the Cr-39 material. I find it hard to exclude, a priori, a chemical effect of this on the CR-39, which would then be observed by 'etched tracks' in the developed plates. Clearly, any such effect should be quite position dependent, and that whole aspect should be more fully explored than it is in the paper. While they did place controls
in the electrolyte (separately, no electrolysis ongoing) and test what
unreactive D2 bubbles might do, I contend that that does not simulate the physical/chemical action of exploding D2+O2 bubbles, possibly right on the CR-39 plates." Kirk Shanahan 2002.11.13 kirk.shanahan@srs.gov


"I realized this morning that I have probably missed an even more
important potential cause of 'proto-pits' in CR-39, namely
oxidative attack. In the active electrolysis cell, there are
multitudes of O2 bubbles around. When pure O2 contacts a carbon-
hydrogen compound, oxidation is almost guaranteed to occur. The
extent of that would depend on contact time primarily I would
think, and the solution should be well-stirred, which would
minimize that. The contact point between an O2 bubble and the
CR-39 surface would then be the nucleation point of an etch pit.

This would also potentially explain why sometimes the opposite
side of the CR-39 shows more pits than the side towards the Pd.
Since the O2 comes from the _other_ anode, placement closer to
it might produce more contact on that side, depending of course
on mixing patterns.

Further, the Miley results with Cu foils, might also make sense
in that the foil would trap O2 bubbles longer, allowing the
oxidized area to grow larger, thus leading to bigger etch pits.

This is easily testable. Bubbling O2 over the CR-39 (instead of
H2 or D2) at the same temp, with some stirring perhaps, should
do the same. (Bubble size might be important due to surface
tension effects.)

Note that this does not negate my shock damage theory, it just
seems more likely in comparison to me today. More data and I
would readjust. That's just the scientific process - pony up
a hypothesis, test it, refine it based on results, repeat. The
point is that now I have proposed two potential mechanisms to
explain the CR-39 observations."
Kirk Shanahan 2002.11.26 kirk.shanahan@srs.gov

groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.fusion/browse_frm/thread/476cb86afc70cac1/a6267a14de28c605?lnk=st&q=%22Kirk+Shanahan%22%2C+Oriani%2C+&rnum=2&hl=en#a6267a14de28c605

? Start of topic ? Older Messages 11 - 12 of 12 Newer ? End of topic ?

?2006 Google
************************************************************************

groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.fusion/browse_frm/thread/e62a04ff0b42efd/6546378f67ca860b?lnk=st&q=sci.physics.fusion%2C+Murray&rnum=11&hl=en#6546378f67ca860b

From: Rich Murray - view profile
Date: Fri, Jan 7 2000 12:00 am
Email: Rich Murray <rmfor...@earthlink.net>
Groups: sci.physics.fusion, sci.physics, sci.skeptics


Jan 7 2000 Hello all, I am reposting these critiques, since John Dash
is claiming complex microstructures and transmutation products on Ti
cathodes from electrolysis in acidified heavy water. Since Au has an
molar density of 197 gm/mole, which is 4 times that of Ti, 48 gm/mole,
then for the same loading of H in the Ti, the burning of an O2
micro-bubble against the metal, forming steam, will soften and foam
about 4 times the volume of metal as in the case of Au. My reports
contain proposed experimental tests for this process of
electrochemical formation of complex corrosion structures. In addition,
I give detailed analysis that simple impurities are the source of the
"transmutation" products. This may help in avoiding these known
sources of error in Dash's work. Rich Murray.....


June 24, 1998 Little Lily Theory [this version a little improved]

Hello all, The report in May, 1998 Fusion Technology by Ohmori, Mizuno,
and Enyo describes 7 to 30 day runs at 1 to 3 A on 2.5 to 5 cm2 Au
electrodes in 0.5 M Na2CO3 and Na2SO4 H2O electrolyte, from a Pt anode.
producing after a few days up to ~1 mg mostly Au precipitates, and
leaving myriad little lily volcano-like or ear-like foam structures on
scraped (rough) sites on the Au, as large as 20 microns wide and 30
deep, with detected Pt, Pd, Ni, Os, and Ti, and other elements, with
claimed isotopic ratio anomalies. In another post I have discussed the
sensible interpretation that Pt, Pd, Ni, Os, and Ti, and other elements,
are impurities in the system, electrochemically concentrated at the
cathode at rough microspots, where the current density is much higher.

I am disputing their claim that the precipitates and spots are evidence
of low energy nuclear transmutations, and suggesting a chemical reaction
theory, namely that the most abundant and obvious and reactive chemicals
present, naturally enough, H2 and O2, are recombined at the cathode.

I don't know how much the Au will load with H2. However, Pt, Pd, Ni,
Os, and Ti will naturally be electrodeposited as concentrations at any
tiny rough spots, and then will both load with H and catalyze the swift
reaction of that H with any tiny positively charged O2 bubbles that are
also attracted and conveyed by the turbulent bubbling from the anode 1
cm away to attach to the rough spot. The bubble and the spot will heat
up quickly, so quickly that there is little time for heat loss by
radiation, conduction, or convection at the Au-H2O interface. As the Au
heats and softens, the contained H will build up pressure and expand it
like popcorn, creating a popped blister of frozen foam, expelling some
of the metal, and leaving the impressively ugly little lily vocanos.
The process would tend to reoccur at the thus even rougher spot,
building up a cluster of lilies of various sizes, as is shown in
Ohmori's dramatic images.

I will calculate the details for a 0.1 cm3 amount of O2.

Au melts at 1063 degrees C, 1336 degrees K.
The molar specific heat Cm = 26.9 J/mol degC.

For Au, 197 g/mol 5.08X10E-3 mol/g 19.32 g/cm3 9.81X10E-2 mol/cm3

10.2 cm3/mol To heat from 27 to 1063 deg C, a delta of 1036 deg C,

takes heat (1036 deg C)(26.9 J/mol) = 2.79X10E4 J/mol, and to melt takes

1.27X10E4 J/mol, known as the molar heat of fusion. These conveniently

add up to 4.06X10E4 J/mol, or 40.6 KJ/mol to heat and melt the Au. That

certainly sounds like a lot!

Now, we get the moles of O2 in the 0.1 cm3 O2:

n = PV/RT = (1 atm X 10-4 L)/(8.2X10E-2 atm L/degK mol)X(300 deg K) =

4.065X10E-6 mol O2. That's not very much.

We know that one mole O2 reacts with 2 moles H2, and may as well assume
with 50% loading that the H2 is held within 4 moles of Au.

The reaction is 2 H2 (g) + O2 (g) -> 2H2O (g), and the enthalpy is

2 X 241.8 KJ/mol = 483.6 KJ/mol, for each mole of O2.

So the enthalpy released is

Ec = (4.065X10E-6 mol)X(483.6 KJ/mol) = 1.97X10E-3 KJ = 1.97 J.

Now, 2 J is the energy from 1 A at 1 V for 2 sec. Note: this is the

range that heats perhaps a milligram of W to incandescence in a

flashlight.

The moles of Au heated and melted by this heat are

Nm = (1.97X10E-3 KJ)/(40.6 KJ/mol) = 4.85X10E-5 mol

and the volume of Au melted is

Vm = (4.85X10E-5 mol)X(10.2 cm3/mol) = 4.95X10E-4 cm3, which, assuming

for convenience a cube, has a width .791 mm, and

mass Mm = (4.85X10E-5 mol)X(197 g/mol) = 9.56 mg, or ten times the

maximum precipitates found by Ohmori after 30 days of electrolysis at up

to 3 A and a few volts, an input energy for 2.592X10E6 sec, if at 5 V

and 3 A, of 38,880,000 J. So the 2 J to create 10 mg of melted Au is a

most minute fraction of the available input energy.

Now, the results are the same if we have one 0.1 cm3 O2 bubble, or a
million bubbles of size 10E-7 cm3, spread out randomly over the 30 day
run, about 1 event every 2-3 seconds, creating the same total of 10 mg
melted Au. These million bubbles would as little cubes have widths
.004641 cm = 46.4 micron, about the right size for our little lilies.
Each of these events would then have an average energy of 2X10E-6 J.

It should be possible to detect IR, visible, and UV radiation, and
acoustic signals, about 1 event per 2 to 3 seconds. Another test would
be to use an anode which does not contribute Pt, Pd, Ni, Os, and Ti, and
in contrast, to use an anode enriched in these metals. Also, a barrier
could be used to prevent O2 bubbles from reaching the cathode from the
anode, and in contrast, positioning the anode to maximize O2 bubble
transfer.

If the word, "POOF!" is microplated onto the Au as a layer of Pt 10 to
100 microns thick, then the resulting lily volcanos should spell,
"POOF!".....
***********************************************************************

Top
#9397 - 11/25/06 09:12 PM Re: Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"
Anonymous
Unregistered


A little more brevity would be in order, please.

Amaranth

Moderator

Top



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.