{"id":62,"date":"2010-02-28T22:12:49","date_gmt":"2010-02-28T22:12:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com\/?p=62"},"modified":"2010-04-15T10:37:51","modified_gmt":"2010-04-15T15:37:51","slug":"a-new-energy-source-exp-results","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com\/?p=62","title":{"rendered":"A new energy – Exp.results"},"content":{"rendered":"

Experimental results<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

In this paper we report the results obtained with a process and apparatus not described here in detail and protected by patent in 90 countries, consisting of a system whose heat output is up to hundred times the electric energy input. As a consequence, the principle of the conservation of energy ensures that processes involving other energy forms are occurring in our apparatus.<\/p>\n

The system on which we operate consists of Ni, in H atmosphere and in the presence of additives placed in a sealed container and heated by a current passing through a resistor. The maximum temperature value can be set to a wide range of values and an external meter allows us to measure the electric energy input. The container is in thermal contact with an external tank full of water and thermally insulated in order to minimize outside heat exchanges. As consequence of the energy production of the system, water boils and the water pipe is under pressure. The steam pressure cannot exceed a limit, whose value can be changed in the range 3-6 bar, because of the opening of a valve. When the valve opens, new water, whose amount is measured by a meter, enters from the supply. These data allow us to calculate the power produced by our system.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

In stationary conditions the power output turns out to be much greater than the input (measured with an electric power meter). Some examples of the results obtained with this system (method A) in brief periods (~1-1,5 hours) are reported in lines 1-3 of the Table 1. The ratio between output and input power depends on changes occurring in the Ni-H system and on the time interval elapsed between the starting of the experiments and the measuring moments.<\/p>\n

We have subsequently achieved a forced warm water movement through some radiators connected in series. In this case, the energy produced has been evaluated by measuring the power needed to obtain the same radiator temperature with a normal heating system (method B). In Table 1, lines 4 and 5, the results of these measurements are also reported. The patented apparatus is able of producing a constant and reliable amount of energy for a period of months.<\/p>\n

A third method (method C) based on a closed circuit in which water is forced\u00a0to circulate by means of a pump was used in order to measure the power generated: a section of the circuit contains the energy amplifier opportunely insulated in order to minimize thermal exchanges with outside.<\/p>\n

Two thermocouples placed before and after the energy amplifier allow to detect continuously\u00a0the water temperatures which are recorded on a computer. As a consequence the measured temperature difference allows to calculate the thermal energy transferred from the energy amplifier to the water. The electric input energy is measured by means an electric power meter.<\/p>\n

In all cases the energy production is too high for any chemical process.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Table 1: Input and output energies, expressed in kWh, in some experiments.
\n(*) The anomaly in this experiment is due to contamination of the fuel.<\/p>\n

\n

In fact, assuming that each Ni atom in sample can realise, in optimal conditions, a typical chemical energy of some eV, the amount of energy emitted in the long lasting experiments would required at least 10\u02c628 atoms. That is something like a million of grams, a quantity enormously larger than the sample we have employed. For such a reason, we believe that form of energy involved is nuclear, and more specifically, due to fusion processes between protons and Nickel nuclei. They are exothermic with an energy release in the range 3-7,5 MeV, depending on the Nickel isotope involved.<\/p>\n

It is remarkable that similar results have been obtained in the factory of EON in Bondeno (Ferrara, Italy) in a test performed with ENEL spa on June, 25th 2009 and in another sery of tests made in Bedford, New Hampshire (USA) in a lab of LTI with the presence of the DOE (November\u00a019 2009) and of the DOD (November 20 2009).<\/p>\n

The proton capture process performed by a Nickel nucleus produces a Copper nucleus according to the scheme<\/p>\n

\n

\"\"(3)<\/p>\n

Copper nuclei, with the exception of the stable isotopes Cu63 and Cu65, decay with positron (e+) and neutrino (\u03bd<\/em>) emission in Ni nuclei according to the scheme<\/p>\n

\n

\"\"(4)<\/p>\n

A process alternative to (4), electron capture, in abbreviated form indicated as EC, consists in the nuclear capture of an orbital electron which gives rise to the process<\/p>\n

\n

\"\"(5)<\/p>\n

As a consequence, in this case, the reaction (4) must be replaced by<\/p>\n

\n

\"\"(6)<\/p>\n

with emission of an antineutrino.<\/p>\n

\n

\"\"Table 2: Energy (in MeV) released by Ni->Cu and Cu->Ni transformations for different Ni isotopes.<\/p>\n

The two decay processes (positron emission and EC) are alternative: their relative frequencies for the various copper isotopes are generally unknown with the only exception of Cu64 for which EC decay (6) is about twice as frequent as positron decay [4].<\/p>\n

The capture rate of protons by Nickel nuclei cannot depend on the mass values of different isotopes: in fact they possess the same nuclear charge and the same distribution of electrons in the various atomic shells. In practice, starting from Ni58 which is the more abundant isotope, we can obtain as described in the two above processes, Copper formation and its successive decay in Nickel, producing Ni59, Ni60, Ni61 and Ni62. Because Cu63, which can be formed starting by Ni62 is stable and does not decay in Ni63, the chain stops at Ni62. In Table 2, for every Nickel isotope, we report, expressed in MeV, the energies obtained from the process Ni(A)+p -> Cu(A+1) (column 2), those obtained from the process Cu(A+1) -> Ni(A+1) (column 3) and their total for the complete transformation Ni(A) -> Ni(A+1) (column 4). Data reported in columns 2 and 3, are obtained as differences between the mass values of the initial and final state: that reported in column 3 contain also the neutrino (or antineutrino) energy, particles which interact weakly with the matter and does not hand their energy locally.<\/p>\n

On the other hand we have to consider the energy equivalent of the electron rest mass due to the positron annihilation. Cu64 also decays in Zn64 with negative electron emission; the energies relative to both decays are reported in Table 2 (third column); the value carried in column four takes into account the relative frequencies of both Cu64 decay modes. The two isotopes Ni59 and Ni63 are unstable, but because their long lifetime (8×10\u02c64 years and 92 years respectively for Ni59 and Ni63) can be considered as stable in the times of our experiments.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Ni64, coming from the decay of Cu64, decays with electron emission, releasing 2,14 MeV: such a value must be added to 8,22 MeV reported in Table 2 (line 6, column 4).The two isotopes Ni59 and Ni63 are unstable, but because of their long lifetime (8×104 years and 92 years respectively for Ni59 and Ni63) can be considered as stable in the times of our experiments.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/span>For every nucleus in the mass range 58 – 64 amu, we have built Table 3 which contains:<\/p>\n