Cold nuclear fusion

by E.N. Tsyganov
(UA9 collaboration) University of Texas Southwestern
Medical Center at Dallas, Texas, USA

Direct Download

Abstract
Recent accelerator experiments on fusion of various elements have clearly demonstrated that the effective cross-sections of these reactions depend on what material the target particle is placed in. In these experiments, there was a significant increase in the probability of interaction when target nuclei are imbedded in a conducting crystal or are a part of it. These experiments open a new perspective on the problem of so-called cold nuclear fusion.

PACS.: 25.45 – deuterium induced reactions
Submitted to Physics of Atomic Nuclei/Yadernaya Fizika in Russian

Introduction
Experiments of Fleischmann and Pons made about 20 years ago [1], raised the question about the possibility of nuclear DD fusion at room temperature. Conflicting results of numerous experiments that followed, dampened the initial euphoria, and the scientific community quickly came to common belief, that the results of [1] are erroneous. One of the convincing arguments of skeptics was the lack in these experiments of evidence of nuclear decay products. It was assumed that “if there are no neutrons, therefore is no fusion.” However, quite a large international group of physicists, currently a total of about 100-150 people, continues to work in this direction. To date, these enthusiasts have accumulated considerable experience in the field. The leading group of physicists working in this direction, in our opinion, is the group led by Dr. M. McKubre [2]. Interesting results were also obtained in the group of Dr. Y. Arata [3]. Despite some setbacks with the repeatability of results, these researchers still believe in the existence of the effect of cold fusion, even though they do not fully understand its nature.  Some time ago we proposed a possible mechanism to explain the results of cold fusion of deuterium [4]. This work considered a possible mechanism of acceleration of deuterium contaminant atoms in the crystals through the interaction of atoms with long-wavelength lattice vibrations in deformed parts of the crystal. Estimates have shown that even if a very small portion of the impurity atoms (~105) get involved in this process and acquires a few keV energy, this will be sufficient to describe the energy released in experiments [2].  This work also hypothesized that the lifetime of the intermediate nucleus increases with decreasing energy of its excitation, so that so-called “radiation-less cooling” of the excited nucleus becomes possible. In [5], we set out a more detailed examination of the process.  Quite recently, a sharp increase of the probability of fusion of various elements was found in accelerator experiments for the cases when the target particles are either imbedded in a metal crystal or are a part of the conducting crystal. These experiments compel us to look afresh on the problem of cold fusion.

Recent experiments on fusion of elements on accelerators
For atom-atom collisions the expression of the probability of penetration through a Coulomb barrier for bare nuclei should be modified, because atomic electrons screen the repulsion effect of nuclear charge. Such a modification for the isolated atom collisions has been performed in H.J. Assenbaum and others [6] using static Born-Oppenheimer approximation. The experimental results that shed further light on this problem were obtained in relatively recent works C. Rolfs [7] and K. Czerski [8]. Review of earlier studies on this subject is contained in the work of L. Bogdanova [9]. In these studies a somewhat unusual phenomenon was observed: the sub-barrier fusion cross sections of elements depend strongly on the physical state of the matter in which these processes are taking place. Figure 1 (left) shows the experimental data [8], demonstrating the dependence of the astrophysical factor S(E) for the fusion of elements of sub-threshold nuclear reaction on the aggregate state of the matter that contains the target nucleus 7Li. The same figure (right) presents similar data [7] for the DD reaction, when the target nucleus was embedded in a zirconium crystal. It must be noted that the physical nature of the phenomenon of increasing cross synthesis of elements in the case where this process occurs in the conductor crystal lattice is still not completely clear.

Figure 1. Up – experimental data [8], showing the energy dependence of the S-factor for sub-threshold nuclear reaction on the aggregate state of matter that contains the nucleus 7Li.  Down – the similar data [7] for the reaction of DD, when the target nucleus is placed in a crystal of zirconium. The data are well described by the introduction of the screening potential of about 300 eV.

The phenomenon is apparently due to the strong anisotropy of the electrical fields of the crystal lattice in the presence of free conduction electrons. Data for zirconium crystals for the DD reactions can be well described by the introduction of the screening potential of about 300 eV. It is natural to assume that the corresponding distance between of two atoms of deuterium in these circumstances is less than the molecular size of deuterium. In the case of the screening potential of 300 eV, the distance of convergence of deuterium atoms is ~510ˆ12 m, which is about an order of magnitude smaller than the size of a molecule of deuterium, where the screening potential is 27 eV. As it turned out, the reaction rate for DD fusion in these conditions is quite sufficient to describe the experimental results of McKubre and others [2]. Below we present the calculation of the rate process similar to the mu-catalysis where, instead of the exchange interaction by the muon, the factor of bringing together two deuterons is the effect of conduction electrons and the lattice of the crystal.

Calculation of the DD fusion rate for “Metal-Crystal” catalysis
The expression for the cross section of synthesis in the collision of two nuclei can be written as

where for the DD fusion

Here the energy E is shown in keV in the center of mass. S(E) astrophysical factor (at low energies it can be considered constant), the factor 1/E reflects de Broglie dependence of cross section on energy. The main energy dependence of the fusion is contained in an expression

that determines the probability of penetration of the deuteron through the Coulomb barrier. From the above expressions, it is evident that in the case of DD collisions and in the case of DDμcatalysis, the physics of the processes is the same. We use this fact to determine the probability of DD fusion in the case of the “metal-crystalline” DD-catalysis.  In the case of DDμ- catalysis the size of the muon deuterium molecules (ion+) is ~5×10ˆ13m. Deuterium nuclei approach such a distance at a kinetic energy ~3 keV. Using the expression (1), we found that the ratio of σ(3.0 keV)/σ(0.3 keV) = 1.05×10ˆ16. It should be noted that for the free deuterium molecule this ratio [ σ(3.0keV)/σ(0.03keV)] is about 10ˆ73.  Experimental estimations of the fusion rate for the (DDμ)+ case presented in the paper by Hale [10]:

Thus, we obtain for the “metal-crystalline” catalysis DD fusion rate (for zirconium case):

Is this enough to explain the experiments on cold fusion? We suppose that a screening potential for palladium is about the same as for zirconium. 1 cmˆ3 (12.6 g) of palladium contains 6.0210ˆ23(12.6/106.4) = 0.710ˆ23 atoms. Fraction of crystalline cells with dual (or more) the number of deuterium atoms at a ratio of D: Pd ~1:1 is the case in the experiments [2] ~0.25 (e.g., for Poisson distribution). Crystal cell containing deuterium atoms 0 or 1, in the sense of a fusion reaction, we consider as “passive”. Thus, the number of “active” deuterium cells in 1 cmˆ3 of palladium is equal to 1.810ˆ22. In this case, in a 1 cmˆ3 of palladium the reaction rate will be

this corresponds to the energy release of about 3 kW. This is quite sufficient to explain the results of McKubre group [2]. Most promising version for practical applications would be Platinum (Pt) crystals, where the screening potential for d(d,p)t fusion at room temperature is about 675 eV [11]. In this case, DD fusion rate would be:

The problem of “nonradiative” release of nuclear fusion energy
As we have already noted, the virtual absence of conventional nuclear decay products of the compound nucleus was widely regarded as one of the paradoxes of DD fusion with the formation of 4He in the experiments [2]. We proposed the explanation of this paradox in [4]. We believe that after penetration through the Coulomb barrier at low energies and the materialization of the two deuterons in a potential well, these deuterons retain their identity for some time. This time defines the frequency of further nuclear reactions. Figure 2 schematically illustrates the mechanism of this process. After penetration into the compound nucleus at a very low energy, the deuterons happen to be in a quasi-stabile state seating in the opposite potential wells. In principle, this system is a dual “electromagnetic-nuclear” oscillator. In this oscillator the total kinetic energy of the deuteron turns into potential energy of the oscillator, and vice versa. In the case of very low-energy, the amplitude of oscillations is small, and the reactions with nucleon exchange are suppressed.

Fig. 2. Schematic illustration of the mechanism of the nuclear decay frequency dependence on the compound nucleus 4He* excitation energy for the merging deuterons is presented. The diagram illustrates the shape of the potential well of the compound nucleus. The edges of the potential well are defined by the strong interaction, the dependence at short distances  Coulomb repulsion.

The lifetime of the excited 4He* nucleus can be considered in the formalism of the usual radioactive decay. In this case,


Here ν is the decay frequency, i.e., the reciprocal of the decay time τ. According to our hypothesis, the decay rate is a function of excitation energy of the compound nucleus E. Approximating with the first two terms of the polynomial expansion, we have:

Here ν° is the decay frequency at asymptotically low excitation energy. According to quantum-mechanical considerations, the wave functions of deuterons do not completely disappear with decreasing energy, as illustrated by the introduction of the term ν°. The second term of the expansion describes the linear dependence of the frequency decay on the excitation energy. The characteristic nuclear frequency is usually about 10ˆ22  sˆ-1. In fusion reaction D+D4He there is a broad resonance at an energy around 8 MeV. Simple estimates by the width of the resonance and the uncertainty relation gives a lifetime of the intermediate state of about 0.810ˆ22 s. The “nuclear” reaction rate falls approximately linearly with decreasing energy. Apparently, a group of McKubre [2] operates in an effective energy range below 2 keV in the c.m.s. Thus, in these experiments, the excitation energy is at least 4×10ˆ3 times less than in the resonance region. We assume that the rate of nuclear decay is that many times smaller. The corresponding lifetime is less than 0.3×10ˆ18 s. This fall in the nuclear reaction rate has little effect on the ratio of output decay channels of the compound nucleus, but down to a certain limit. This limit is about 6 keV. A compound nucleus at this energy is no longer an isolated system, since virtual photons from the 4He* can reach to the nearest electron and carry the excitation energy of the compound nucleus. The total angular momentum carried by the virtual photons can be zero, so this process is not prohibited. For the distance to the nearest electron, we chose the radius of the electrons in the helium atom (3.1×10ˆ11 m). From the uncertainty relations, duration of this process is about 10ˆ-19 seconds. In the case of “metal-crystalline” catalysis the distance to the nearest electrons can be significantly less and the process of dissipation of energy will go faster. It is assumed that after an exchange of multiple virtual photons with the electrons of the environment the relatively small excitation energy of compound nucleus 4He* vanishes, and the frequency of the compound nucleus decaying with the emission of nucleons will be determined only by the term ν°. For convenience, we assume that this value is no more than 10ˆ12-10ˆ14 per second. In this case, the serial exchange of virtual photons with the electrons of the environment in a time of about 10ˆ-16 will lead to the loss of ~4 MeV from the compound nucleus (after which decays with emission of nucleons are energetically forbidden), and then additional exchange will lead to the loss of all of the free energy of the compound nucleus (24 MeV) and finally the nucleus will be in the 4He ground state.  The energy dissipation mechanism of the compound nucleus 4He* with virtual photons, discussed above, naturally raises the question of the electromagnetic-nuclear structure of the excited compound nucleus.

Fig. 3. Possible energy diagram of the excited 4He* nucleus is presented.

Figure 3 represents a possible energy structure of the excited 4He* nucleus and changes of its spatial configuration in the process of releasing of excitation energy. Investigation of this process might be useful to study the quark-gluon dynamics and the structure of the nucleus.

Discussion
Perhaps, in this long-standing history of cold fusion, finally the mystery of this curious and enigmatic phenomenon is gradually being opened. Besides possible benefits that the practical application of this discovery will bring, the scientific community should take into account the sociological lessons that we have gained during such a long ordeal of rejection of this brilliant, though largely accidental, scientific discovery. We would like to express the special appreciation to the scientists that actively resisted the negative verdict imposed about twenty years ago on this topic by the vast majority of nuclear physicists.

Acknowledgements
The author thanks Prof. S.B. Dabagov, Dr. M. McKubre, Dr. F. Tanzela, Dr. V.A. Kuzmin, Prof. L.N. Bogdanova and Prof. T.V. Tetereva for help and valuable discussions. The author is grateful to Prof. V.G. Kadyshevsky, Prof. V.A. Rubakov, Prof. S.S. Gershtein, Prof. V.V. Belyaev, Prof. N.E. Tyurin, Prof. V.L. Aksenov, Prof. V.M. Samsonov, Prof. I.M. Gramenitsky, Prof. A.G. Olshevsky, Prof. V.G. Baryshevsky for their help and useful advice. I am grateful to Dr. VM. Golovatyuk, Prof. M.D. Bavizhev, Dr. N.I. Zimin, Prof. A.M. Taratin for their continued support. I am also grateful to Prof. A. Tollestrup, Prof. U. Amaldi, Prof. W. Scandale, Prof. A. Seiden, Prof. R. Carrigan, Prof. A. Korol, Prof. J. Hauptmann, Prof. V. Guidi, Prof. F. Sauli, Prof. G. Mitselmakher, Prof. A. Takahashi, and Prof. X. Artru for stimulating feedback. Continued support in this process was provided with my colleagues and the leadership of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, and I am especially grateful to Prof. R. Parkey, Prof. N. Rofsky, Prof. J. Anderson and Prof. G. Arbique. I express special thanks to my wife, N.A. Tsyganova for her stimulating ideas and uncompromising support.

References
1. M. Fleischmann, S. Pons, M. W. Anderson, L. J. Li, M. Hawkins, J. Electro anal. Chem. 287, 293 (1990).
2. M. C. H. McKubre, F. Tanzella, P. Tripodi, and P. Haglestein, In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Cold Fusion. 2000, Lerici (La Spezia), Ed. F. Scaramuzzi, (Italian Physical Society, Bologna, Italy, 2001), p 3; M. C. H. McKubre, In Condensed Matter Nuclear Science: Proceedings Of The 10th International Conference On Cold Fusion;  Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 21-29 August, 2003, Ed by P. L. Hagelstein and S. R. Chubb, (World Sci., Singapore, 2006). M. C. H. McKubre, “Review of experimental measurements involving dd reactions”, Presented at the Short Course on LENR for ICCF-10, August 25, 2003.
3. Y. Arata, Y. Zhang, “The special report on research project for creation of new energy”, J. High Temp. Soc. (1) (2008).
4. E. Tsyganov, in Physics of Atomic Nuclei, 2010, Vol. 73, No. 12, pp. 1981–1989. Original Russian text published in Yadernaya Fizika, 2010, Vol. 73, No. 12, pp. 2036–2044.
5. E.N. Tsyganov, “The mechanism of DD fusion in crystals”, submitted to IL NUOVO CIMENTO 34 (4-5) (2011), in Proceedings of the International Conference Channeling 2010 in Ferrara, Italy, October 3-8 2010.
6. H.J. Assenbaum, K. Langanke and C. Rolfs, Z. Phys. A – Atomic Nuclei 327, p. 461-468 (1987).
7. C. Rolfs, “Enhanced Electron Screening in Metals: A Plasma of the Poor Man”, Nuclear Physics News, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2006.
8. A. Huke, K. Czerski, P. Heide, G. Ruprecht, N. Targosz, and W. Zebrowski, “Enhancement of deuteron-fusion reactions in metals and experimental implications”, PHYSICAL REVIEW C 78, 015803 (2008).
9. L.N. Bogdanova, Proceedings of International Conference on Muon Catalyzed Fusion and Related Topics, Dubna, June 18–21, 2007, published by JINR, E4, 15-2008-70, p. 285-293
10. G.M. Hale, “Nuclear physics of the muon catalyzed d+d reactions”, Muon Catalyzed Fusion 5/6 (1990/91) p. 227-232.
11. F. Raiola (for the LUNA Collaboration), B. Burchard, Z. Fulop, et al., J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys.31, 1141 (2005); Eur. Phys. J. A 27, s01, 79 (2006).

by E.N. Tsyganov
(UA9 collaboration) University of Texas Southwestern
Medical Center at Dallas, Texas, USA

Direct Download

3,497 comments to Cold nuclear fusion

  • Mahler

    Grazie mille per la sollecita risposta!!
    Vorrei rubarle un altro minuto chiedendole di risponderci a un’ultima domanda. A una frequenza tanto bassa, per scaldare l’acqua occorre un’enorme intensità. Lei suppone che ogni evento (fusione di un singolo nucleo) generi migliaia di fotoni a bassa frequenza attraverso altrettante trasformazioni di stato invece che uno soltanto ad alta energia? È corretto? Altrimenti i conti continuano a non tornare…
    Le faccio nuovamente i miei migliori auguri.

  • Alvaro

    Dear Mr Rossi,
    When will you be able to let us know the name or your US partner?
    All the best for you and your team!!!

  • georgehants

    Dear Mr. Rossi,
    Is everything going well and on schedule.
    Best Wishes.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Gediminas:
    We buy hydrogen from the market.
    It is better not fossil-derived hydrogen.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dear Andrea Rossi,

    If its not a secret I would like to know. Do You planing to produce Hydrogen for Ecat reaction on power plant or do You going to buy it from another supplier ? What do You think what is most suitable stock for hydrogen production : gas, methanol , water or something new stock ?

    Best regards and Best wishes for 1MW plant proper work !
    Gediminas

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mahler:
    The frequencies of gamma rays inside our reactor are lower that the gamma rays you are talking about.
    No bata rads.
    Rumors are wrong.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Gent. Riccardo Vanni:
    Grazie infinite,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Bob K:
    Interesting proposal.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Bob K

    Mr. Andrea Rossi…..I believe that a great application for the Ecat would be in snow melting. Here in the Northeast US the winters can produce a lot of snow. By running plastic tubing with water and anti-freeze under sidewalks and driveways connected to a pump and heat source these surfaces can remain snow and ice free. It’s being done now, only very uneconomically.
    More importantly, where did you get those cool magnetic eyeglasses that join at the top of the nose?

  • Riccardo Vanni

    Egr. ing. Rossi, lavoro nel settore di produzione energia da ormai 35 anni, prima nel nucleare, poi nel termoelettrico ed ora nelle fonti rinnovabili.
    Mi sono sempre occupato della realizzazione, esercizio e manutenzione di Centrali, prima con Enel, poi con Tirreno Power ora con una mia piccolissima società.
    Le scrivo solo per dare un incoraggiamento sentito alla sua ricerca. Spero vivamente che i suoi sforzi portino alla rivoluzione energetica tanto attesa che é quasi impossibile da immaginare.
    Non ci deluda, protegga la sua ricerca e dia al mondo questa ancora di salvezza.
    cordialmente
    Riccardo Vanni

  • Mahler

    Gentile ing. Rossi,
    sul blog di Daniele Passerini ci stiamo sforzando di capire com’è possibile che il riscaldamento dell’acqua possa avvenire solo con raggi gamma. Purtroppo tutti i nostri calcoli porterebbero a concludere che se il meccanismo fosse questo lei sarebbe già morto da un pezzo. Ci può dire a che frequenza vengono emessi i gamma? Non è necessario che sia preciso se non vuole rivelare segreti industriali. Basta solo che ci dia un range di frequenza “a occhio e croce”. O anche che lei ci dica al di sotto di quale frequenza vengono emesse le radiazioni.
    Ancora due domande:
    – ha riscontrato radiazione beta (elettroni)?
    – girano rumors su presunti test che lei starebbe svolgendo presso la NASA proprio in questi giorni; se la sente di commentare?

    Grazie mille per il tempo concesso! Io ormai faccio il conto alla rovescia.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Alan De Angelis:
    We have to purge also.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Dear Ing. Rossi:
    I’m just curious. When organic chemists do catalytic hydrogenations (with palladium, nickel, et cetera) in a pressurized shaker http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogenation they first purge air out of the system by cycling back and forth between vacuum (with a vacuum pump) and hydrogen several times before they finally pressurize with hydrogen. Do you do this with the E-Cat or do you just blow the air out with some hydrogen and go straight to the pressurization? (Don’t feel obliged to answer this if it would reveal too much about the process.)

    All the best,
    Alan DeAngelis

  • Alessandro Casali

    Dear Dr. Rossi, Dear A. Goumy

    Very interesting document mr. Goumy but that should not be the case with the e-cat because, for what whe know, nichel powder in the e-cat should be in a bigger scale than nano.

    In my previous post I have also made a mistake considerind 1500° above melting point of nichel wich is actually not, this means that this temperature can easly be reached among the nichel powder without causing it to melt.

    Warm Regards,
    ac

  • Christopher Henderson

    Dear Mr. Rossi:

    Outstanding! Thanks for answering my questions, and keep up the good work! I can’t wait until the 1MW rollout next month.

    Best regards,

    Christopher Henderson

  • Italo A. Albanese

    Dear A. Goumy,
    Only Rossi knows what kind of rays shine inside the e-cat, maybe can be used for something else than heat generation.

    Alessandro Casali: Probably 1500° is the instant maximum temperature of very little “hot spots” where the Ni/H fusion actually take place.

    Best regards,
    Italo A.

  • Claud

    Dear Mr Rossi,
    when I began to join your blog on the J.O.N.P. (many months ago) reading since then each and every post, I was obviously hoping the best success to your project but the future was still much uncertain. As you announced the realization of your first applicative plant of 1 MW in the next October, I felt in my mind that if no particular problem would arise within the end of August the success would have mostly achieved.
    Well, despite “snakes and spies, tricks ‘n lies” August is gone and your project seems to be stronger than ever. Moreover you changed the site of the experimental plant in another continent and no delay was thus scheduled.
    Holding my fingers crossed, today I feel that the most is done and remaining problems will be easily overcome. I’m not a wizard but rarely fail my feelings.
    Good luck again hoping the best for you and your sensational discovery.

    Claudio Rossi

  • A. Goumy

    Dear Mr Rossi, Dear Alessandro Casali,

    Just for information, few people are aware that melting point is smaller in material at nanoscales than in bulk materials. So, melting point of nickel powder inside the reactor may be locally smaller than 1455 °C:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melting-point_depression

    Best regards,

    A.G.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Alessandro Casali:
    I can only repeat that I cannot give information regarding the internal parts of the E-Cat,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Alessandro Casali

    Dear Dr. Rossi,

    I know you can’t release information about the inside of the reactor but I was wandering, after readig your recent claim of a temperature of 1500° inside the reactor, how can you avoid such an amount of heat to transfer to the nichel powder that would inevitably melt?

    Maybe your reactor has a second chamber surrounding the core filled with lead, the inner wall of the chamber is made of some low conducing material while the outer wall is made of some high coducing one. The gamma rays heat up the lead wich is confined and can melt without creating any problem, the inner wall prevents the nichel from melting while the outer wall transfers the heat to the flowing water.

    This kind of design would imply the use of special materials both for the inside and the outside wall of the lead chamber, i.e. ceramic for the inside and tungsten for the outside.

    Now i’m not asking you to confirm my gues, i would just like to know if the 1500° temperature refers to the temperature of the internal lead shield or to the nichel chamber?

    Hope everything is going well with your 1MW plant.

    Warm Reagards,
    ac

  • A. Goumy

    Dear Italo A. Albanese,

    The irradiation of human body for cancer treatment needs very specific characteristics, which, if I have understood correctly, E-Cat cannot supply. To give two among many, X-rays used are monoenergetic in the MV range (from 1.3 to 25 MV), and dose rates delivered to the patient should be constant and accurate during a treatment session. So, this type of applications is not suitable.

    Best regards.

    A.G.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Keith Thomson:
    Thank you for your insight,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Keith Thomson

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Speculative thoughts on Ni-H fusion and possible future R&D work:

    My understanding of your Ni-H process would be as follows. Starting with a structured nickel particle of sufficient surface area, pressurised hydrogen gas atoms are forced through nickel crystal grain boundaries, migrate from the crystal surfaces then accumulate within the internal lattice structure. Pressure also stops out gassing from the lattice after it is heated. Applied pressure and heating induced thermal vibration, squeezes and distorts crystal grain boundary structure and some crystal surface internal lattice structure, this increases the already extreme hydrostatic pressure on hydrogen atoms clustered within nickel atom lattice cubic cages. With this pressure combined with sufficient lattice vibration and in combination with manoeuvring of the trapped packed hydrogen atoms to the correct orientation and position, eventually a hydrogen atom is forced close enough to a nickel atom for physics to take over.

    As the hydrogen atoms “combine” with the nickel 62 and 64 isotopes then convert direct to copper 63 & 65 isotopes (with emitted gamma rays stopped by shielding that then heats up), it is likely that these larger copper atom replacements within the nickel lattice will lead to further lattice distortion, adjacent nickel atoms would be pushed into a closer spacing with increased hydrostatic pressure on the nearby hydrogen atoms trapped within the lattice, eventually more hydrogen atoms position for fusion, this process then slowly propagates though the nickel lattice. (Any start up and shut down excess of gamma rays, may be from pressure variations within crystals and internal lattices due to initial distortion then settling down for running then reshaping at shut down after pressure removal).

    A possible variation to the above process would be to add quantities of smaller or larger atoms (doping) to the nickel atom lattice to provide tension or compression distortions / dislocations within the lattice structure (just like in electronic chip manufacture).

    Doping the lattice structure to give an already inbuilt lattice distortion may lead to either a lower running pressure requirement or for the same pressure currently used, allow further extreme distortion of the lattice structure and subsequently greater compression of nickel atoms surrounding groups of hydrogen atoms with increased reaction rates. Another option is to add quantities of larger gas atoms (helium?) to the hydrogen gas within the lattice to provide tighter atom packing combinations in the space between the nickel atoms.

    Either method individually or combined may lead to a greater number of optimum compressed atomic spacing’s and locations where hydrogen atoms are positioned in the correct close hydrostatic pressure relationship to the nickel atoms, leading to greater rate of reactions with decreased nickel powder usable lifespan.

    Best Regards, Keith.

  • Italo A. Albanese

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    Maybe have you heard of “gamma knife” or cobalt radiotherapy. Cobalt 60 was used as a gamma ray source, now substituted by very large and expensive linear accelerators. Other uses for gamma rays (from wikipedia): sterilization of medical supplies and medical waste, radiation treatment of foods for sterilization (cold pasteurization), industrial radiography (e.g. weld integrity radiographs), density measurements (e.g. concrete density measurements). Energy generation is obviously more important, but gamma ray generators could be interesting too. I suggest you (after November!) to contact some specialist.

    Best regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Carl Nelson:
    Ampenergo is our commercial Licensee for the Americas and Caribean Area: they are very good Partners at 360°. You can also contact them directly.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Christopher Henderson:
    1- No, there are others
    2- Yes
    3-Yes
    4- 6:1
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Enzo:
    I always am delighted of good luck wishes, but…what happens tomorrow of special?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Italo A. Albanese:
    I do not know the field of gamma rays application in medicine, so I am not able to answer.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Italo A. Albanese

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    Gamma rays have many interesting uses in medicine. Could an e-cat be used as a gamma rays generator?

    Best regards,
    Italo A.

  • Enzo

    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    good luck for tomorrow 😉

  • Christopher Henderson

    Dear Mr. Rossi:

    Although I don’t have a scientific background and my knowledge of physics is quite lacking, I have been reading of your developments with great interest. Would it be possible, sir, for you to address several questions?

    (I apologize in advance if they are obtuse or if you have already answered them elsewhere.)

    1) In trying to get my remedial-at-best knowledge base up to speed, I’ve read many times recently about how cold fusion generators require the use of heavy water. Yet I don’t remember hearing about that requirement with regard to the E-Cat. Instead it seems the fuel consists of specially processed nickel powder and hydrogen gas. Is this correct, and if so, is your proprietary technology the only cold fusion system in the works that doesn’t utilize heavy water?

    2) I understand that the E-Cat’s modular design means that it can be scaled up considerably–up to, including, and perhaps even more than the 1MW generator you will soon unveil (best wishes and blessings on that!). Is it true that the steam turbines used in coal-based electricity plants here in the US and other places could also be used in conjunction with cold fusion generators? If so, that would be great news because we could simply use the current energy infrastructure, thereby limiting expenditures to upgrading the power plants themselves. (Of course, making small generators available to end-user households would be really good, too.)

    3) Do you foresee a time in the near future in which E-Cats could be used to power a generation of desalination plants far more efficient and cost-effective than the current systems in use? If so (and as others far more knowledgeable than I in the ways of cold fusion have already suggested), this would have tremendously positive implications for the future of humanity.

    4) If you don’t mind my asking, what OU ratio do you predict the 1MW plant will operate at? 6:1, 8:1, or perhaps even more?

    Grazie mille, Mr. Rossi! May God bless you and your wonderful invention!

  • Carl Nelson

    Dear Mr. Rossi,

    Will Ampenergo play a significant role in how the 1 MW E-Cat power plant will be demonstrated? I would love to hear some more news about AmpEnergo and their activities in promoting the E-Cat to large corporations and institutions in the Americas. Can you tell us anything?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear David Roberson:
    Gamma rays are the ones that heat the coolant fluid in our reactors, therefore all our energy comes from the photons. The issue is that so far the efficiency of direct conversion is too low.
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

  • David Roberson

    Dear Mr. Rossi and Others,

    Thank all of you for the interesting comments and questions concerning the direct conversion of gamma rays into electrical energy. My question arose because I would find the E-CAT structures even more exciting than present if the excess heat released was relatively low after conversion into electricity and mechanical energy. This suggests high efficiency operation. Under these conditions, it would be easier to expel the remaining heat into the atmosphere.

    I am not in any way an expert in conversion of gamma rays into electricity by photoelectric means or others. My question was generated as a result of one of the other blog posters that suggested he was aware of such a means.

    Mr. Rossi, is it possible to give us a relative proportion of the energy released by gamma rays? If the fraction is too small, the concept I am thinking of would not be worth further consideration. On the other hand, if most of the energy is gamma rays initially, then further pursuit would be potentially very productive.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Emidio Laureti:
    Thank you!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Rick Gresham:
    As I said, I cannot explain without breaking the confidential shield.
    Thank you anyway for your suggestions,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Rick Gresham

    Andre,

    You have said inside the reactor, the operating temperature is around 1500C. Yet the outside of the reactor is cooled to only a little over 100C or so. Temperatures greater than 500C would be very useful for generating electricity if supplied in sufficent quantities.

    I’m curious whether you’ve considered alternative designs that would more directly couple the internal heat to the external coolant, for example ceramic tubes coated on the inside with the nickel powder or possibly microchannel heat exchangers in which the nickel powder is deposited in the “hot” tubes while coolant flows through the “cold” tubes. Such an approach is proposed and is being developed by the Gen Iv Nuke developers flowing molten salts through the “hot” tubes in a Heatric printed circuit heat exchanger and supercritical CO2 through the “cold” tubes. The nature of SC-CO2 around its critical point enables it to absorb and shed inordiante amounts of heat with little temperature change and the high thermal coefficient and very small distances involved enable very rapid heat transfer from hot side to cold side. The diffusion bonded stack is useful, for example, at 100 bar at over 800C whereas the SC-CO2 power systems being prototypred at Sandia operate closer to 600C. (http://www.heatric.com/temp_pressure_capabilities.html)

    Ceramatec in Salt Lake City has been working with the Gen IV consortium to develop ceramic heat exhchanger that can be operated at much highet temperatures, even up to the interanl temperature of the e-cat. I sometimes wonder if such an apporach (powder in a ceramic microchannel heat exchanger) would enable the e-cat to opearate in a sort of “controlled runaway reaction” mode, operating at very high reaction rate producing heat at about the same rate it can be transferred to the coolant. Using high thermal transfer coeeficient materials in a microchannel design would enable very high transfer rates and high power density, considerably higher than the stainless steel tube you’re currently using.

    http://www.ceramatec.com/technology/other-ceramic-technologies/compact-microchannel-heat-exchangers-and-reactors.php

    I don’t know enough about the subject to know whether this would be useful information or not but this is taken from Lawrenceville Plasma Physics (focused fusion) website.

    “… Some of the X-ray energy produced by the plasmoid can also be directly converted to electricity through the photoelectric effect (like solar panels). ”

    http://www.lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=62&Itemid=80

  • Sig. Rossi la sua impresa ad Ottobre 2011 si configura di tipo colombiano e quidi mi sembra opportuno accompagnarla con una pregiera di ringraziamento e protezione identica a quella di Cristoforo Colombo in navigazione verso il nuovo mondo.
    Dal nostro sito sperimentale Asps-Calmagorod

    http://www.calmagorod.eu/salveregina.htm

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Jonathan Mc Cabe:
    I think tat Enrico Billi has got the core of the issue. Anyway, good info, thanks.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Italo A. Albanese:
    Thank you for the information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Peter Heckert:
    You are right, but to explain I should disclose the inside operation of the reactor.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Georgehants:
    I am sorry, but I didn’t write any book!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Alessandro Ferrari

    Dear Mr Rossi,
    maybe David Roberson was talking about photovoltaic gamma ray to electricity conversion.
    I talk about it in my previous comment but I’m not an expert about it and I can’t offer more insights.
    If David Roberson was referring to an other kind of conversion I’m interested in it.

  • georgehants

    Dear Mr. Rossi,
    Please send me an autographed copy of your new book, The history and story of the E-CAT.
    Many thanks.

  • Peter Heckert

    Mr. Rossi,
    You wrote “Inside the reactor temperatures are around 1500 °C”.
    The melting point of nickel is 1455 °C and the melting point of copper and lead is much lower.
    I dont know about stainless steel.
    So I think this cannot be the case.
    Best,
    Peter

  • Italo A. Albanese

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    For what I found in this (http://iopscience.iop.org/0268-1242/23/8/085001/) article, is it possible to convert gamma rays to electricity with a sort of solar cell, with a good efficiency too. If the Ni/H reaction produces beta rays can be used the old “betavoltaics” technology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betavoltaics). Those batteries where used in pacemakers many years ago.

    Best regards,
    Italo A.

  • Enrico Billi

    To David Roberson: in experimental physics ramma radiation usually are detected with scintillator materials and then converted in electric signal using amplifiers, where did you read the gamma radiation can be directly converted in electricity? Because gamma rays need large volume to be efficiently absorbed.

  • Jonathan McCabe

    Dear Mr Rossi,
    I am filled with great hope and admiration for your work, it will have a very favourable impact on society and also will spare the environment the problems caused by exploiting other energy sources.
    Just out of interest I see that the focus fusion people have an idea to convert X-rays to electricity at 80% efficiency, by exploiting the photo-electric effect: http://focusfusion.org/index.php/site/article/lpp_submits_patent_application/
    As I understand it your gamma radiations are at a similar energy, so perhaps the technique could be useful in the future.
    All the Best,
    Jonathan

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear David Roberson:
    I do not think that gamma radiations can be turned directly into electric energy, you need anyway a medium for the conversion. At least, this is what I know so far.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>