[Vo]:Fission may be the best fit for future LENR

[Jones Beene]

Nuclear fission has a lot of critics, and rightly so ... but all of the 
problems of fission derive from trying to control a multi-ton critical 
mass of explosively enriched U in a steam pressurized reactor. Even with 
that major design problem, the French have demonstrated to the rest of 
the World that fission can make economic sense.


Even with Fukushima still smoldering, we must consider that an improved 
version of nuclear fission can make great economic sense. This is 
especially true for countries without much oil. When the electric car 
goes into mass production at lower cost (soon) off-peak recharging is a 
feature which makes fission more economically viable in the 'big picture'.


A "new and improved" version of fission means ditching enrichment, going 
subcritical, going small and modular and with direct conversion of heat 
to electricity. It is easily possible that fission can be made 
preferable to hot fusion in every way, and less costly than any other 
option including coal and cold fusion, if Pd is required. Surprisingly, 
fission is cleaner than fusion when radioactive waste is burned in situ.


However, the major and almost insurmountable problem of small 
subcritical natural uranium reactors is this: finding a cheap source of 
makeup neutrons. It was once considered impossible.


Enter the virtual neutron - in the form of UDH.

We may be on the verge of a new atomic age... by adopting the lessons 
learned from LENR into the existing infrastructure of fission. Assuming 
that reports of neutron generating devices based on converting hydrogen 
are accurate, we are past the prototype stage and product is being 
shipped. Here is a long and confused explanation of the phenomenon to 
convert hydrogen into a neutron or something close... which overlooks 
UDH and the work of Holmlid and thus is missing the most important insight.


http://www.i-b-r.org/Rutherford-Santilli-neutron.htm

The premise here is that UDH is so similar to a real neutron that it can 
be designated as virtual, becoming the needed "cheap source of makeup 
neutrons" for subcritical fission. Never mind that we are not sure that 
UDH will induce fission as easily as a neutron, but as far back as 1929 
Walter Nernst discovered a phenomenon that indicates it will.


The irony cannot be overlooked - the future of affordable and renewable 
energy may have shifted one eccentric Italian to another, even more 
eccentric Italian. Rossi and Santilli - both now Floridians have a 
common heritage in more ways than one.


LOL - this is almost gallows-humor in a way. The trickster rules... or 
perhaps, in some dark and mysterious way, we are experiencing the legacy 
of the great Fermi... chi lo sa?

RE: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

TWO ideas about noble gases and fuel preparation:


  1.  Being inert, they can be used in combination with H or D to diffuse into 
a metallic lattice  and cause mico-cracking   with creation of LENR active 
sites with large internal surface areas for formation of SSP’s.
  2.  Repeated cycling, gassing and degassing,  would allow measurement of 
increased number of mico-cavities until a desired density is established.   
Careful measurement of the volume of gas that diffuses in and out with each 
cycle would be instructive in this regard.  A mass spectrometer to determine 
ratios of the diffusing gases and knowledge of their diffusion rates in the 
fuel should provide additional information regarding the status of micro-cavity 
density in the fuel.



A nano-particle fracture mechanics analysis may be warranted to determine 
desirable pressure and temperatures during cycling/fuel preparation.  
Brittle-ductile transition temperature of the metallic fuel lattice would help 
determine appropriate lower temperatures for cycling, since brittle fractures 
with 1 or 2 dimensional characteristics may be a desirable LENR geometry for 
SSP’s.  Acoustic emission   monitoring of the fuel cycling would aid in 
determination of fracturing occurring during cycling at various temperatures, 
pressures and noble gases being used.  (Cavities that are too big  may be bad 
for LENR+.



Bob Cook
From: Axil Axil
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 10:46 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

ECCO shows that the preparation of the LENR fuel is required for a sucessful 
LENR reaction to take hold.

This was true for the Papp engine all the way up to and including the Rossi and 
ME356 reactors.

We have to ask ourselves, what can the preparation of fuel do to enable the 
LENR effect? Something is produced in the fuel that is special. A theory of 
LENR must include a description and the function of the special element in the 
fuel. ECCO uses cavitation to produce this special thing. One of the most 
closely held secret that Rossi has is his method of fuel production. For 
example in the IH/Rossi lawsuit settlement, IH was force to destroy all written 
records about the production of the fuel. In the ME356 reactor test, ME356 
states that this fuel was weak because he did not have enough time to process 
the fuel. So the duel must be a state of matter that contains a LENR sensitive 
factor that takes time to produce and that factor increases over time. The ECCO 
fuel preparation process takes 200 hours to complete. So a cavitation based 
factor must accumulate the LENR factor a little at a time to become LENR 
enabled.

What can noble gas compounds and cavitation have in common?

Anybody have any ideas?

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

[Che]

On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 2:57 PM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> TWO ideas about noble gases and fuel preparation:
>
>
>
>1. Being inert, they can be used in combination with H or D to diffuse
>into a metallic lattice  and cause mico-cracking   with creation of LENR
>active sites with large internal surface areas for formation of SSP’s.
>2. Repeated cycling, gassing and degassing,  would allow measurement
>of increased number of mico-cavities until a desired density is
>established.   Careful measurement of the volume of gas that diffuses in
>and out with each cycle would be instructive in this regard.  A mass
>spectrometer to determine ratios of the diffusing gases and knowledge of
>their diffusion rates in the fuel should provide additional information
>regarding the status of micro-cavity density in the fuel.
>
>
>
> A nano-particle fracture mechanics analysis may be warranted to determine
> desirable pressure and temperatures during cycling/fuel preparation.
> Brittle-ductile transition temperature of the metallic fuel lattice would
> help determine appropriate lower temperatures for cycling, since brittle
> fractures with 1 or 2 dimensional characteristics may be a desirable LENR
> geometry for SSP’s.  Acoustic emission   monitoring of the fuel cycling
> would aid in determination of fracturing occurring during cycling at
> various temperatures, pressures and noble gases being used.  (Cavities that
> are too big  may be bad for LENR+.
>
>
>
> Bob Cook
>
First it starts with the by-chance, haphazard nano-fracking.
Then follows the sophisticated, calculated, systematic nano-tek
build-system...

Re: [Vo]:Fission may be the best fit for future LENR

[Che]

On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Nuclear fission has a lot of critics, and rightly so ... but all of the
> problems of fission derive from trying to control a multi-ton critical mass
> of explosively enriched U in a steam pressurized reactor. Even with that
> major design problem, the French have demonstrated to the rest of the World
> that fission can make economic sense.
>
> Even with Fukushima still smoldering, we must consider that an improved
> version of nuclear fission can make great economic sense. This is
> especially true for countries without much oil. When the electric car goes
> into mass production at lower cost (soon) off-peak recharging is a feature
> which makes fission more economically viable in the 'big picture'.
>
> A "new and improved" version of fission means ditching enrichment, going
> subcritical, going small and modular and with direct conversion of heat to
> electricity. It is easily possible that fission can be made preferable to
> hot fusion in every way, and less costly than any other option including
> coal and cold fusion, if Pd is required.


I hear they're getting energy out of windmills and solar panels too, these
days.