Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
drbubb

Cold Fusion / Breakthrough Energy technologies Poll #2

Free Energy Technologies  

4 members have voted

  1. 1. Is Free Energy a possibility?

    • Yes. Working technologies exist and are being developed, and will be commercial
      1
    • Yes. Technologies exist, but are being surpressed
      1
    • Maybe. The possibility is strong, and something may be commercially viable soon
      1
    • Maybe, but it will require laws of physics to be superceeded
      0
    • No. Not unless new scientfic principles emerge one day
      0
    • No. It is an impossibility under the immutable laws of science
      1
    • I am not sure
      0
  2. 2. Should this thread be in the Main section ?

    • Yes, I always had an interest in such technology
      2
    • 2. Yes, things appear to be developing & and I want to be better informed
      1
    • Maybe, but it depends on how the discussion develops
      1
    • Maybe, but perhaps only temporarily
      0
    • No, not yet. There's no enough evidence yet that it is real
      0
    • No. Topics like this just put people off
      0
    • No, and probably not ever. The whole concept is an impossibility
      0
    • Not sure
      0
  3. 3. Is there a connection between UFO's and Free Energy?

    • Both are equally likely
      1
    • Both are equally unlikely
      1
    • Free Energy is more likely than Space aliens visiting Earth
      1
    • Space aliens visiting Earth is more likely than Free Energy
      0
    • All or most of UFO's are "ours", and our governments already have Free Energy technology
      1
    • I have no strong opinion on any of the above
      0


Recommended Posts

Cold Fusion / Free Energy technologies Poll #2

 

There's been some news... since the last Poll

 

Scientist claims to have mastered cold fusion

3News NZ-14 Oct 2014
PSC1112_PP_045.jpg?itok=3IBwqM-e
Unplugged
Rossi in his Bologna warehouse with a 10-kilowatt E-Cat module. He has been criticized in the past for not unplugging his machine during demos.

Incredible new technology providing almost limitless energy could be just around the corner thanks to an Italian scientist.

Andrea Rossi claims he's developed the world's first cold fusion power plant, and it's small enough to fit into a shipping container.

But AUT chemistry professor Allan Blackman is sceptical, calling it possibly too good to be true.

Fusion is the process that powers the sun, but current scientific belief is that it can only occur at extremely high pressure and temperatures of around 10 million degC – conditions that can't be safely replicated on Earth.

 

But Rossi's device appears to work, according to a supposedly independent report, but no one – not even the researchers who looked at it – seems to know how, and Rossi isn't telling.

(2)
Cold fusion reactor verified by third-party researchers,

seems to have 1 million times the energy density of gasoline

...
ExtremeTech-9 Oct 2014
Andrea Rossi's E-Cat — the device that purports to use cold fusion to generate massive amounts of cheap, green energy –
has been verified by third-party researchers, according to a new 54-page report. The researchers observed a small E-Cat over 32 days, where it produced net energy of 1.5 megawatt-hours, or “far more than can be obtained from any known chemical sources in the small reactor volume.” The researchers were also allowed to analyze the fuel before and after the 32-day run, noting that the isotopes in the spent fuel could only have been obtained by “nuclear reactions” — a conclusion that boggles the researchers: “… It is of course very hard to comprehend how these fusion processes can take place in the fuel compound at low energies.”
The Peak Oil Crisis: Cold Fusion – A New Report
Falls Church News Press-9 Oct 2014

The second independent report on the performance of Andrea Rossi’s low energy nuclear reactor was just released. Even though the first round of tests were conducted by a group of respected European physicists, they received considerable criticism from those who believe “cold fusion” to be impossible and that the scientists reporting positive test results had simply been duped. Thus a second test of Rossi’s latest device took place in the spring of this year. For those who have not been following this saga, it should be noted that Rossi moved his research to North Carolina last year and is now working for a new well-financed company called “Industrial Heat” which is currently developing commercial versions of his devices.

This time the testing took place in an independent laboratory in Switzerland where the six European scientists conducting the tests had complete control. The tests were sponsored by the Royal Swedish Academy of Science and Elforsk AB, which is Sweden’s version of the U.S. Electric Power Research Institute which should reduce concerns about their validity. This second round of testing was designed to eliminate experimental error and the possibility of fraud.

For this test Rossi gave the team a new version of his reactor which is made of ceramic alumina, and is able to withstand temperatures beyond 1400° C. The actual test which lasted a month had the reactor running continuously at 1260° C and 1400° C. Unlike the previous test, the testers had access to the nickel powder which fueled the reaction and were able to conduct detailed scientific analysis of the fuel before and after the test.

Although Rossi was present during the loading and unloading of the fuel, he was not present during the bulk of the testing or the analysis. As with the first test, the scientists reported nearly unbelievable results which, of course, is the problem. Conventional science says the amount of heat being produced simply cannot be happening through nuclear reactions at relatively low temperatures. The six scientists who conducted the tests admit they have no satisfactory scientific theory as to why so much heat is being produced.

The report makes public for the first time some, but not all, details of how Rossi’s device works. We now know that the “catalyst” which makes the reaction possible is likely lithium-aluminum hydride which breaks down when heated and supplies the hydrogen to the reaction. We also know that to get started the reaction requires some form of an electro-magnetic pulse similar to those used by Brillouin Energy’s LENR devices.

The test seems to have been run without a hitch, which is a reminder that during the first test the investigators managed to melt down the device they were testing. This time they were far more conservative, running the apparatus first at “modest” 1260° C and then at 1400° C. despite Rossi telling them that it will run at higher temperatures. The test ran for a previously agreed upon 32 days and then the device was shut down so that the residue of the fuel could be tested.

. . .

How fast this technology will be adopted is still an open question. Obviously it has the potential to replace most uses of fossil fuel, giving a massive boost to the global economy, and stopping nearly all carbon emissions if universally deployed. So far the U.S. and other governments seem to be holding to a position that this cannot be possible despite credible test results. Rapid deployment of this or a similar technology would, of course, be one of the most disruptive events in industrial history and would obviously meet resistance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THIS may be a key item for those who remain skeptics:

" Rossi moved his research to North Carolina last year and is now working for a new well-financed company called “Industrial Heat”

which is currently developing commercial versions of his devices. "

 

/ this story came out back in January, and the skeptics were still everywhere /

 

Industrial Heat sinks money into E-cat cold fusion “technology”

Jan 27, 2014 - A U.S. company called Industrial Heat has bought the rights to the notorious (and dubious) cold fusion technology called the Energy Catalyzer, ...
There has never been a definitive test of the device and Rossi would not let others have it to test. The one paper on it is problematic and even though he claims it was verified by a third party, no one should feel confident that his paper-thin promises will overturn physics as we know it.
> I posted a Note on GEI, mentioning the Fund manager behind Industrial Heat:
Tom-Darden-150x150.jpg : Cherokee: http://www.cherokeef.../renewables.htm
Mr.Darden is the Chief Executive Officer of Cherokee Investment Partners, a private equity fund that invests in brownfields. Cherokee made its first brownfield investment in 1990 and has since raised five funds: $50 million in 1996, $250 million in 1999, $620 million in 2003 and $1.4 billion in 2006. Beginning in 1984, Mr. Darden served for 16 years as the Chairman of Cherokee Sanford Group, a brick manufacturing and soil remediation company. From 1981 to 1983, he was a consultant with Bain & Company in Boston. From 1977 to 1978, he worked as an environmental planner for the Korea Institute of Science and Technology in Seoul, where he was a Henry Luce Foundation Scholar.
THIS IS SERIOUS, Ladies and Gents,
and maybe paradigm-changing too !
Best to be Awake and Aware, as the world may be getting set for some big changes !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Many are not buying the Cold Fusion story... including VT):

 

Fusion: Junk Science For Rubes

isis_133.jpg

…by Jeff Smith, Science Editor, … with Gordon Duff

Today Lockheed announced that it will have fusion reactors running American warships in 20 years. Based on our publications on negative buoyancy this month, we don’t even begin to know how to respond.

OK, we throw down the gauntlet. We claim that Lockheed is simply making it all up, pure junk science to scam some cash. Now that we have made the irresponsible accusation, we will prove it:

All Fusion process are lossy. They never get above 98% efficiency. So they never break even. Fusion can be produced at any level but it always takes more energy to fuse a hydrogen atom together than it will release in excess energy. The containment and or compression systems are always lossy.

In reference to Kesche

If the fuel cell does not produce Helium, Gama rays, x-rays or neutrons that are detectable then it is a simple catalytic converter.

If the light is not blue, IE; in the UV light range, then it is just a liquid light emitting diode or sodium lamp. If you put a plant hydrometer in the heavy water and if the pH is anything but 7, it is an electrolyte and you have a simple battery that is being back charged producing excess heat. If the fuel cell is electrically conductive it is an electrolyte. If you measures an open voltage between the plates it is a platinum / palladium battery.

The critical area for the fusion of hydrogen gas is about 600 miles or the size of the photosphere of the sun. In a reactor the critical area / size / mass of uranium-235 enriched to 5% is 24 by 24 feet. At 97% enrichment it is 1 foot by 1 foot and for PU-239 it is 6 inches X 6 inches at 19.7 moles per cm density.Less if it is compressed at 2 or 4 to one in density. The critical area of a reactor drops in size and mass as density and enrichment goes up. One pound of uranium in liquid form creates a critical mass when formed
in the shape of a sphere.

A reactor made from 1 pound of U-235 in a ceramic form that is about the size of a basketball will produce over 100 Kilowatts of thermal power per hour for 20 years. With no moving parts. You just give it a neutron reflector a single control rod and cool it with water that drives a steam turbine. At the end of its usable life you just crush the uranium
sphere, mix it with glass, place it in boronated porcelain cement and bury it in the ground as low level waste.

If you read Glasstones 1960 book on controlled nuclear fusion you will understand why it does not work. Only fission works. That’s why we use it.

=

Cold fusion is based on “slow thermal neutron” absorption by Cadmium and not Palladium. When you electrolyze heavy water it splits the hydrogen and oxygen atoms by ionization, with the hydrogen atoms moving towards the Cadmium electrode and the oxygen atoms moving towards the other electrode.

The neutron cross section in Barns for Cadmium is 2400 and for Palladium it is 8. As you can see Cadmium works a lot better for fusing neutrons than Palladium or Platinum. Cadmium’s neutron resonant peak is about .18 electron volts. If the thermal neutron voltage is too high they will bounce off of the Cadmium electrode and not undergo nuclear fusion. The high current and very low voltage electrons compress the hydrogen atoms into the crystal lattices structure of the Cadmium electrode fusing them together forming Alfa particles, IE positive ionized Helium atoms, electrons, UV photons, X-rays, neutrons and Gama rays.

The excess nuclear radiation from the “slow thermal fusion” process produce the thermal heat by boiling the water. However when the heavy water starts to boil it interrupts the electron compression process of the hydrogen atoms in the Cadmium crystal lattice and the process becomes sub critical and shuts down.

The amount of electron energy that it takes to start up the process and maintain it will always be at a loss. The is called the conservation of energy rule and you cannot get around it except for nuclear Fission of heavy atomic elements with a critical energy ratio higher than 35 and up to 45. (Thorium, Uranium and Plutonium) Anything with an atomic number higher than 108 and a mass number higher than 260 will undergo instantaneous fission.
See Principles of Nuclear Reactors, page 103 to 108

==

> MORE: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/10/16/fusion-junk-science-for-rubes/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The questions were not well worded but here are my answers:

 

Is Free Energy a possibility?

I assume by "free" you mean no input. Effectively a perpetual motion machine.

I voted: No. It is an impossibility under the immutable laws of science.

 

Scams such as Rossi's come along all the time but they soon disappear.

This will be no different but amazingly it always seems to fool the same people every time.

 

Should this thread be in the Main section ?

I voted: Yes, I always had an interest in such technology.

Despite being a scam this is Green Energy related and should be in the main section. More than most topics there in fact.

If people really want ot learn about green energy they need to be able to understand the science and spot the scams.

 

Is there a connection between UFO's and Free Energy?

By UFO's I assume you mean alien intelligence on Earth and not just an unidentified sighting.

In that case both are equally unlikely.

The probability is not nil, as there's much we don't know, but it's effectively nil based on current facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WiseBear,

A guy called Daniel Sheehan has a pretty thorough understanding of what drives one's reactions towards breakthroughs.

 

He talks about how one's world view will determine how people react to things like:

The JFK assassination, the 9/11 Inside-Job conspiracy, and the embargo against the truth of UFO's and Free Energy.

You might want to look at it: http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index.php?showtopic=19536

 

=

The Eight Octaves - may be associated with chokras

 

"Our worldview determines how we see UFO phenomena"

 

Sheehan's Eight Octaves
== (lower to higher vibrations)

# note Chokra : Politics

=====
8 : do : Higher - White Light
7 : te : Crown... - violet : utopians
6 : la. : 3rd Eye - Indigo : progressives
5 : so : Throat... - Blue.... : liberals
4 : fa. : Heart..... - Green. : moderates
3 : mi : Solar pl - Yellow : conservatives
2 : re. : Sacrum - Orange : reactionaries
1 : do : Root...... - Red........ : authoritarians
=====
linear bar - Politics Left to right - Talcott Parsons
Politics:
XX : Uto : Pro : Lib (Mod) Con : Rea : Aut :

==

ColorChakraTable.jpg

 

 

com0511h.jpg

 

I think you may be one of the classic types that he describes, on THIS END of the spectrum:

3 : mi : Solar pl - Yellow : conservatives
2 : re. : Sacrum - Orange : reactionaries
1 : do : Root...... - Red........ : authoritarians

 

Personally, I keep an Open mind, and have a pretty easy time, examining new evidence, even if it does not fit in with

the views of traditional physics.

 

As Dr Richard Alan Miller has said, the "science" of Physics shifts its paradigms every few decades, and we are probably

overdue for such a shift

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Free Energy a possibility?

I assume by "free" you mean no input. Effectively a perpetual motion machine.

I voted: No. It is an impossibility under the immutable laws of science.

 

I'm in favor of this thread.

And I think that Breakthrough Energy technologies are coming.

There's no need to get into an argument over whether or not Cold Fusion is a "free" energy technology or not.

It is definitely a "breakthrough", which if it works, will change the Energy paradigm on our planet.

We can get the energy breakthroughs even before we learn whether ET's are here.

 

Bring it on !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

( Responding to OneHundred )


 

There's no need to get into an argument over whether or not Cold Fusion is a "free" energy technology or not.

It is definitely a "breakthrough", which if it works, will change the Energy paradigm on our planet.

 

The fusion process is very well understood. The energy certainly exists but it's locked very tightly into an atoms nucleus - the problem is therefore releasing it in a controlled way.

While not "free" energy in the sense that some may define it, it would certainly appear to be free.

We've been trying to harness this energy for decades but it's still illusive.

Overcoming the strong nuclear force requires a massive input of energy.

I expect it is impossible at room temperature (cold fusion) but I watch the (slow) progress of fusion reactors with interest.

 

We can get the energy breakthroughs even before we learn whether ET's are here.

I don't ever expect to see cold fusion work but it would be interesting if hot fusion reactors became a reality in our lifetimes.

The problem then becomes political. An effectively free energy source would need to be shared with the world but greed & power ensures that it won't happen and that means more conflict.

I no longer comment on the silliness of ET's on Earth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WiseBear,

A guy called Daniel Sheehan has a pretty thorough understanding of what drives one's reactions towards breakthroughs.

 

He talks about how one's world view will determine how people react to things like:

The JFK assassination, the 9/11 Inside-Job conspiracy, and the embargo against the truth of UFO's and Free Energy.

You might want to look at it: http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index.php?showtopic=19536

 

=

 

I think you may be one of the classic types that he describes, on THIS END of the spectrum:

3 : mi : Solar pl - Yellow : conservatives

2 : re. : Sacrum - Orange : reactionaries

1 : do : Root...... - Red........ : authoritarians

 

Personally, I keep an Open mind, and have a pretty easy time, examining new evidence, even if it does not fit in with

the views of traditional physics.

 

As Dr Richard Alan Miller has said, the "science" of Physics shifts its paradigms every few decades, and we are probably

overdue for such a shift

This all looks very weird - almost made up.

 

I'm a very practical, evidence based person.

If something has huge amounts of good quality data then it becomes fact.

Anyone can have any hypothesis they want but a good hypothesis must operate within the know physical laws.

An open mind outside of modern physics is a waste of time and has never resulted in any useful breakthrough.

I can't think of a single paradigm shift in science ever - just the usual scientific process at work; new discoveries, new data and the refinement of our understanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm in favor of this thread.

And I think that Breakthrough Energy technologies are coming.

There's no need to get into an argument over whether or not Cold Fusion is a "free" energy technology or not.

It is definitely a "breakthrough", which if it works, will change the Energy paradigm on our planet.

We can get the energy breakthroughs even before we learn whether ET's are here.

 

Bring it on !

 

Good point.

I am changing the Title of this thread... Replacing "Free" with "Breakthrough"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possible Deus Ex Machina move?

 

Restarting The Atomic Age? Lockheed Martin Announces Break-Through In Nuclear Fusion

 

Monday November 24, 2014 15:08

 

In post-war USA, “Skunk Works” was Lockheed Martin’s near-autonomous research and development group that gave the country products like the “U-2” spy plane or the “SR-71 Blackbird”, pushing technology to limits no one else had dared to explore before.

20141124ba_image002.png

 

A “Skunk Works” team headed by Thomas McGuire, MIT graduate and aeronautical engineer at a division humbly named “Revolutionary Technology Programs” recently presented their new “Compact Fusion Reactor” (CFR), a device which Lockheed claims will be small enough to fit on an eighteen-wheeler and be capable of providing enough power for a city of a hundred thousand people.

 

Nuclear fusion is, in a way, the opposite of nuclear fission, the process used in nuclear power plants around the world today. Nuclear fusion has been a long-time dream of scientists, oft attempted but never accomplished, the challenge being to obtain more energy from the reaction constantly than is afforded to run it. It’s, as Lockheed points out, what the sun has been doing for us for a very long time.

 

In recent years we did, however, see promising results by many different research organizations around the world working different angles to find a solution. The different processes typically use deuterium which can be obtained from water, and tritium which is obtained from lithium meaning that resources are abundant. These developments are relevant to technology metals in several of ways:

  • A process presented by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory earlier this year uses gold as containment vessel;
  • Magnets used for plasma confinement, although secret in their individual composition, are likely to contain significant amounts of magnetic rare earth elements such as neodymium.
  • Related technologies like low energy nuclear reaction and transmutation utilize precious metals, or claim to produce technology metals as reaction byproducts.

> MORE: http://www.kitco.com/ind/Albrecht/2014-11-24-Restarting-The-Atomic-Age-Lockheed-Martin-Announces-Break-Through-In-Nuclear-Fusion.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?79769-Russians-duplicate-Dr.-Andrea-Rossi-s-cold-fusion-E-CAT-reactor

 

Russians duplicate Dr. Andrea Rossi's cold fusion E-CAT reactor

As reported earlier today by Joseph P. Farrell at COLD FUSION RACE HEATING UP?:

 

=======

The Cold Fusion Race Just Heated Up

 

Now there's a hugely important point to notice in this article, and that is that the Russians have apparently successfully duplicated Dr. Andrea Rossi's cold fusion E-CAT reactor, and though the results are more modest than his claims, nonetheless with significant results. Referencing the report of the Universities of Uppsala and Bologna last year, and their conclusion that Rossi's device is indeed producing low energy nuclear reactions, the so-called Lugano Report, about which we blogged last year, and about which there has been considerable controversy, the article notes,

 

"The report was promptly savaged by sceptics, pointing out that Rossi was present for the test and questioning how independent it was. Steven B. Krivit, editor of New Energy Times, headlined his account "Rossi Handles Samples in Alleged Independent Test of His Device".

 

"The arguments about the Lugano Report continue, meanwhile there has been an even more surprising development. Prof Alexander Parkhomov of Lomonosov Moscow State University has published a paper describing his successful replication of the E-Cat, based on the available information about it.

 

The paper is in Russian; there is a link and commentary and video in English on E-Cat World. Parkhomov's results are more modest, but the energy output of his cloned E-Cat claimed to be up to 2.74 times as great as the input.

 

"Parkhomov presented his results earlier this week at a cold fusion seminar at the Research Institute for Nuclear Power Plant Operation in Moscow."

 

In other words, the Russians are in the cold fusion game and in a major way, and given the context of this week's "space focus" in our blogs, this again provides an interesting context on just what appears to be going on. The pattern we have seen in the past few months of last year, and continuing into this year and perhaps - depending on one's perceptions - even intensifying, is (1) there seems to be a push underway to give attention to stories involving space, and in particular revelations or talk of some cutting edge technology in that respect, and (2) there is also, at the same time, a push underway to give attention to stories involving alternative energy technologies, in this case, Rossi's E-CAT cold fusion reactor (or, let us recall, Lockheed-Martin's curious cold-fusion story that was disclosed mere days after the release of the Lugano Report, a story that, you'll recall, pictured a device looking suspiciously like Philo Farnsworth's plasmator and fusor patents of the 1960s).

 

In the context of the second aspect of this pattern, you'll recall that last year also saw the announcement that the Rockefeller Foundations were divesting themselves of petroleum securities in their portfolios.

 

Even more curious in this article is its mention of yet another strange conspiracy theory in connection to cold fusion:

"None of this is likely to bother sceptics in the global energy market, though there are signs of panic among conspiracy theorists. Russian media has repeated a rumour that President Obama discussed Chinese E-Cat production under licence with Xi Jinping in his recent visit, a move that might destroy Russia's vital energy exports." (Emphasis added)

 

Given the rather close connection between "Russian media" and the Russian government itself, one wonders just how reliable the rumor is. But let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the rumor is true. President Obama would not be in any position to offer a license to Xi Jinping or the Chinese government for the E-Cat process. It is not his process to offer, and, as the article indicates, Parkhamov's process is already open. So what might the truth, if any, be behind the rumor?

 

Again, for the sake of argument, for Obama to offer any such thing to the Chinese would, on the face of it, make no geopolitical sense, since his administration is "pivoting to the Pacific" precisely to counteract growing Chinese power and influence in the region. But again, assume for the sake of argument that the rumor is true and that he made some sort of cold fusion offer to the Chinese government. He could only offer what the USA has some degree of control over, and that brings to mind once again the Lockheed-Martin cold fusion claims that appeared shortly after the Lugano Report's release.

 

Whether true or not (and I am strongly inclined to believe it isn't) the rumor nevertheless suggests - when added to the Rockefeller announcement of last year, and the emerging strange pattern of space-and-alternative-energy technology stories that seem to be on the uptake - that one thing that we are perhaps looking at is a new geopolitical game emerging, one involving space, its commercialization, and technologies that are, for the moment, and in the public venue at least, still the stuff of science fiction.

 

But I strongly suspect, like the article itself indicates, that we're going to see not only more E-CAT stories this year, but also that we will see that pattern dramatically expand. When and if if does, we'll have more dots to connect.

=======

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×