1995.05.06 /  jedrothwell@de /  Re: Patterson Power Cell Commercialisation
     
Originally-From: jedrothwell@delphi.com
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Patterson Power Cell Commercialisation
Date: Sat, 6 May 95 01:14:21 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)

DaveNugent <davenugent@aol.com> writes:
 
>Are there any plans to make the Patterson Power Cell available
>commercially to other labs can duplicate their results?
 
Yes. CETI is working with a select group of industrial, commercial labs.
They are doing intensive training with qualified people only, so that no
mistakes are made and the effect is replicated 100% of the time. One of
the biggest problems in this field has been that people have tried to
replicate by guess and by golly, with insufficient knowledge of the target
cell. People *think* they are replicating, but I have seen countless examples
where they are actually making elementary mistakes and their cells look
nothing like the target. CETI is determined to prevent that, by careful,
hands-on, step-by-step guidance. That's how it *should* be done! This field
would have jumped ahead years ago if other people had done that.
 
- Jed
cudkeys:
cuddy6 cudenjedrothwell cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.06 / Alan M /  Re: Jones' hypothesis about E-Quest Helium
     
Originally-From: "Alan M. Dunsmuir" <Alan@moonrake.demon.co.uk>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Jones' hypothesis about E-Quest Helium
Date: 6 May 1995 07:20:27 +0100
Organization: Home

In article: <USE2PCB791022889@brbbs.brbbs.com>  mdudley@brbbs.brbbs.com
(MARSHALL DUDLEY) writes:

> So you are saying Rockwell is incompetent to measure helium.

Why do you both e-mail this to me, and post on the Forum? My answer
is the same to both of course. I 
am saying nothing about Rockwell's competence. I am simply pointing
out Jed's standard hot air 
techniques in the NewsGroup.

-- 
Alan M. Dunsmuir [@ his wits end]     (Can't even quote poetry right)

         I am his Highness' dog at Kew
         Pray tell me sir, whose dog are you?
			      [Alexander Pope]

PGP Public Key available on request.


cudkeys:
cuddy6 cudenAlan cudfnAlan cudlnM cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.04 / Elliot Kennel /  Re: What's wrong with H2O cold fusion?
     
Originally-From: Elliot Kennel <71756.3025@CompuServe.COM>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: What's wrong with H2O cold fusion?
Date: 4 May 1995 13:35:56 GMT
Organization: Space Exploration Associates

Dear Dick and all,
	Surely, after all the comments we've sent each other over 
the years you recall that Hagelstein's theory does predict light 
water effects, although they require a higher cathode loading 
than metal deuterides.  

Best regards,
Elliot Kennel

-- 

Elliot Kennel
Yellow Springs OH
cudkeys:
cuddy4 cuden3025 cudfnElliot cudlnKennel cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.06 / Paul Koloc /  Re: POLL: How long till power plants? 2062  Tell me you joking? Help
     
Originally-From: pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M. Koloc)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: POLL: How long till power plants? 2062  Tell me you joking? Help
Date: Sat, 6 May 1995 06:02:22 GMT
Organization: Prometheus II, Ltd.

In article <3o61qp$qt2@deadmin.ucsd.edu> barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman) writes:
>In article <D7uAD5.4pw@prometheus.UUCP> pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M. Koloc)  
>writes:
>> About 10 percent by formation and thermal ballistics to compression
>> params, and then the rest by compression heating.  Although, for d^3He, 
>> the compression heating to say 40's keV will be continued by alpha 
>> particle heating 

>Won't such a plasmak need to be fairly large, so that the larmor orbit
>of the alpha is well inside the sphere?  Just how large do you envision
>a Plasmak as being, for power plan't applications?
 
You mean largeness in pressure??? right??  One certainly wants to avoid
largeness in physcal size, other wise we might end up like that "dumbo"
of fusion, the ITER.   Gee that's not fair ..  Dumbo could fly.   

During compression heating, the pressure at the outer boundary will rise 
to 20 kbar or higher, so on the toroidal axis the pressure could be only 
2-5 times as great (a function of beta scaling).   Well?? You're the chap 
with the calculator.   What is it, say within a meter or less.   .. .  
and the answer is ??? ah .. . .  about    Harrison .. where's that
estimate????    for say 50kbar (1.118 megaGauss)  is      two    
                                           milliMETERS.  
Still the meters part sounds big.. but the "milli" is what screws up
the biggness  and the "two" just doesn't help that much to fix things
up.  

So for a centimeter minor radius aspect ratio "2" --  burning Kernel, ... 
should heat enough ... ??  right.  

>You are mixing metaphors here---your basic point about a superball
>is correct, but soap bubbles return to spherical shape mainly due to their
>surface tension, not due to the higher internal pressure.

Actually, in a soap bubble the higher internal energy is due to the
volume confining 2-D surface tension.  So the higher internal energy
generates a force (additional air pressure) against the soap bubble 
film to neutralize net inward Radial force due to the volume confining
2-D surface tension.  There is also air viscous damping to keep it 
stable against oscillations.  It's kind of a of a point of view problem.  
The additional outgoing force governs??  or is it the incoming force??   
Eh .. .!!  So wat you Say..   that's the thing   ..  should I care???

>Personally, I would suspect the biggest show stopper would be 
>``turbulent'' effects, which might cause the plasmak to unravel
>before it can achieve the desired compression. After all---it is
>turbulence that is preventing the tokamak from working admirably.

There is a good reason tokamaks are tubulent, sort of like putting
fins on the inside walls of a cement mixer.  The integral number
of toroidal field coils cause discontinuities in the otherwise
smoother toroidal magnetic topology, and these "eddy regions" are
like white water for electron currents.   There are no such 
discontinuous toroidal folds or bends in the glass smooth toroidal
surface topology of a PLASMAK(TM) magnetoplasmoid, so it is quiescent.  

Incidentally, a PMK avoids resistive modes as well, so that is a big 
help.  

>So, what is your argument that there won't be large fluctuations, 
>with the resulting fluctuation driven transport ruining your confinement?

Flucuations of what??   turbidity (optical path is scattered by this 
to make the tokamak plasma "milky looking") in plasma temperature will 
NOT get into the magnetics, since the plasma conductivity is controlled by
energetic currents.  That is even though the traditional conductivity
of thermal currents will fluxuate, since their conductivity is trivial
by comparison with the orders 5 | 6 orders magnitude higher conductivity 
of current carrying energetic currents, then the effect on current of 
spatial variances of thermal fluxuations are for naught as far as the 
current and magnetic topology are concerned.  

The two natural occurances of the configuration, Ball lightning, and
the mag cavitation bubbles that form and then rise to the sub-photosphere 
of the sun's suface and then disrupt forming sun spots, are both examples 
of extremely stable long lived phenomena. 

The only reason the star version lasts order a decade (years that is
not seconds), is because it has a much larger size (inductance) so 
the L/R time is comparatively large.   So, they come in a wide variety 
of sizes,  and LONG lifetimes.   That must say something about "turbulence".  

>Even if ball lighting is a Plasmak like phenomena, it may be that that
>the higher neutral particle densities therein damp a lot of the fluctuations
>and make it more stable---but then such neutral levels would not be compatible
>with conditions necessary for fusion, so the natural phenomena may not
>scale up to a fusion reactor.  

Certainly not, EXCEPT for the fact that none of these neutrals ever 
exist within the innermost Mantle, the hot fusion fuel region of the 
Kernel plasma, AND the intervening vacuum magnetic insulating region.  
Now the only exception to this is when you see a BL start to turn bright
and white, and then begin to rise.  It means it the beta is up and 
the energetics are slowing rapidly (becoming more resistive and increasing
ohmic heating).   THEN you can get thermal instabilities, disruptions,
which are seen as blasting explosions  -- sometimes .. or just champagne
cork  "pops" by others (nearly spent) before catastrophic death.    
>--
>Barry Merriman
>UCSD Fusion Energy Research Center
>UCLA Dept. of Math
>bmerriman@fusion.ucsd.edu (Internet; NeXTMail is welcome)

cudkeys:
cuddy6 cudenpmk cudfnPaul cudlnKoloc cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszL cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.05 /  aahmed@realm.d /  support Child Sexual Abuse Prevention of Orange County
     
Originally-From: aahmed@realm.digex.net ()
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: support Child Sexual Abuse Prevention of Orange County
Date: 5 May 1995 06:23:51 GMT
Organization: Realm Internet Systems  (714) 261-1116


cudkeys:
cuddy5 cudenaahmed cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.05 /  aahmed@realm.d /  support Child Sexual Abuse Prevention of Orange County
     
Originally-From: aahmed@realm.digex.net ()
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: support Child Sexual Abuse Prevention of Orange County
Date: 5 May 1995 06:25:15 GMT
Organization: Realm Internet Systems  (714) 261-1116


cudkeys:
cuddy5 cudenaahmed cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.05 / Elliot Kennel /  Re: What's wrong with H2O cold fusion?
     
Originally-From: Elliot Kennel <71756.3025@CompuServe.COM>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: What's wrong with H2O cold fusion?
Date: 5 May 1995 14:01:30 GMT
Organization: Space Exploration Associates

Helium does not come only from fusion reactions.  Helium can 
come from alpha emission from heavy nuclei.

Best regards, 
Elliot Kennel
Yellow Springs OH

-- 

Elliot Kennel
Yellow Springs OH
cudkeys:
cuddy5 cuden3025 cudfnElliot cudlnKennel cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.06 /  jedrothwell@de /  Re:  Jones' hypothesis about E-Quest Helium
     
Originally-From: jedrothwell@delphi.com
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re:  Jones' hypothesis about E-Quest Helium
Date: Sat, 6 May 95 09:09:55 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)

<jonesse@plasma.byu.edu> writes:
 
>Jed misses a significant point here:  the helium may come from the glass,
>as opposed to "leak"ing through the glass.  Helium is stored in the glass, 
>following exposure of the glass to air, for example.
 
Jones misses the ENTIRE point. Yes, of course there was glass, but it could
not have been the source of the helium. They tested for that time after time,
by injecting hydrogen into the chamber and by other methods. The only time
they saw helium was when there was excess heat from the CF device.
 
It is not enough to hypothesize that glass *might have been* the source of
the helium. You have to actually verify that by experiment. They checked,
they determined it is not true. End Of Story.
 
- Jed
cudkeys:
cuddy6 cudenjedrothwell cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.06 /  ElliotKenl /  Re: Theory for H2O fusion.
     
Originally-From: elliotkenl@aol.com (ElliotKenl)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Theory for H2O fusion.
Date: 6 May 1995 12:51:08 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)

Dick,
  I tried to send this message earlier, but I think it misfired.  Anyway:

     It seems that within the cold fusion community, there is a great deal
of skepticism about results with light water.  If you approach the
experimental results with the idea that there a single fusion reaction,
perhaps with different branching ratios, then you are in trouble, no
question.  On the other hand, if the cold fusion reaction is a different
class of reactions, then there is a different story.  You know what I am
going to say next--a well respected (before cold fusion, anyway) physicist
has put forward a theory of lattice-nuclei interactions which indicates
via an extension application of quantum electrodynamics that unexpected
neutron exchange is possible between heavy and light elements when a
deuterided OR hydrided metal undergoes exothermic  outgassing.  For Pd-D,
the needed deuterium ratio is about 0.85. For Pd-H the ratio is higher,
but still physically attainable. Depending on the loading ratio (which may
also vary locally as  has been experimentally verified), the following
reactions can occur:  neutron transfer to deuterium from Pd or other
lattice atom, creating tritium; alpha emission creating helium; or neutron
shifting on a surface silicide layer (created by leaching silicon from
glass containment due to LiOD or LiOH transport) creating excess heat.  
     It is not trivial to create a highly loading Pd cathode as is well
known.  However, the Patterson approach of using a very thin Pd layer with
a high surface area to volume ratio appears to be a very sound approach to
simplifying that problem.  It may very well be that he can achieve
Faradaic loading efficiencies up beyond the 0.90 range, which would be
high enough to achieve Hagelstein-predicted cold fusion effects. 
Incidentally, nickel-light water and titanium-light water effects are also
predicted.
     Don't ask me to defend zero-point energy or other fringe theories. 
In addition, deuterium-fusion theories are also in serious trouble (but
you and I have both been skeptical of these from the beginning).  But as
far as lattice-moderated nuclear reactions is concerned, the data
accumulated by Patterson and Cravens (not to mention the Japanese groups)
tends to greatly support and strengthen the theory.

Note also that ultrasonic techniques such as Stringhams have been shown to
load deuterium and hydrogen very effectively.  It is conceivable that
these systems work.
     I would go so far as to say that if other observables predicted by
Hagelstein can be confirmed--such as phonon gain and isotope shifting in
certain silicon systems-- then his theory of cold fusion would largely be
confirmed, and CF would be given a theoretical basis in quantum mechanics
and solid state.
     
Best regards, 
Elliot 
cudkeys:
cuddy6 cudenelliotkenl cudlnElliotKenl cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.06 / David Wyland /  Re: H2O is a-okay; a priori is NOT science
     
Originally-From: dcwyland@ix.netcom.com (David Wyland)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: H2O is a-okay; a priori is NOT science
Date: 6 May 1995 19:08:42 GMT
Organization: Netcom

A very small comment in defense of theory.  

You cannot have an experiment without a working hypothesis to be
tested: At the minimum, you have to have some idea of what you are
looking for, or you won't see it.  The hypothesis may be quite basic:
"I expect to see unusual results in the form of excess heat or
particles (or something else specific enough to instrument for) when I
do an experiment of this type."  

A theory describes a cause and effect relationship between experimental
action and results.  A testable hypothesis is the beginning of a
theory, since it defines at least one testable cause and effect
relationship.  Theory does not drive the data, but an experiment
without an experimental goal would be a record of random numbers.   

Dave Wyland
"Just for fun - and a little curiosity"

cudkeys:
cuddy6 cudendcwyland cudfnDavid cudlnWyland cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
processed by cud.pl ver. 0.5 Sun May  7 04:37:03 EDT 1995
------------------------------
