1995.03.02 /  jonesse@vanlab /  RE:  Sonoluminescence and Fusion
     
Originally-From: jonesse@vanlab.byu.edu
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: RE:  Sonoluminescence and Fusion
Date: 2 Mar 95 13:32:16 -0700
Organization: Brigham Young University

Dear colleagues:

There have been several postings lately regarding sonoluminescence(SL),
and a possible connection to fusion.  Our work continues on searching for
neutron emissions associated with bubble cavitation in sound fields,
using our sensitive neutron detectors, deep underground, in Provo Canyon
(Utah).  I should report that we have not yet detected any neutron emissions
from SL, in deuterium-filled bubbles in aqueous solutions.  We have, however,
achieved both multi-bubble and single-bubble (clock-like) SL using D2
bubbles.  Terry Bollinger and I suggested a possible connection between SL
and fusion back in 1992 on this net, and I spoke briefly on the subject at the
ICCF-3 meeting in Nagoya in October 1992.  But nothing has panned out yet.  We
have not given up still.

Below I send updated information from a previous post to s.p.f.:

I would like to call your attention to two interesting articles on
sonoluminescence (SL).  The first was written by Lawrence Crum of
the Univ. of Washington, one of the true gentlemen of modern
science.  His article appears in this month's issue of Physics
Today (Sept. 1994).  Appended to this post find an earlier
commentary on Prof. Crum's colloquium at BYU in January 1994 and
related ideas.  Note that in that post the notion of fusion during
bubble cavitation in SL is advanced -- indeed, this idea was
discussed here on s.p.f. as early as 1992 (Jones, Bollinger, etc.).
Well, Prof. Crum is bold enough to advance the idea in his Phys.
Today article:

"The strong probability that SBSL results from an imploding shock
wave has now made this curious phenomenon one of considerable
interest.  ...This spherically symmetric implosion has the
potential for creating some exotic physics... Calculations suggest
that temperatures as high as 10^8 K are to be expected.  This
result has in turn prompted calculations of the possibilities of
inertial confinement fusion with a deuterium-tritium gas mixture,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
which yield a qualified estimate of 40 neutrons per second under
                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
ideal conditions [ref. 9]."

Whoa -- we can easily see 40 neutrons per *day* in our detector in
the Provo Canyon tunnel laboratory.  

So we look at ref 9, which is a paper in Phys. Rev. Lett. 72 (1994)
1380-1383 by Bradley Barber et al. from UCLA.  (The second must-
read paper.)  The calculation there is based on a shock-wave model
by Wu and Roberts which I have discussed previously here, found in
PRLett. 70 (1993) 3424.  The idea, in brief, is that the spherical
sound wave in the water impinges on a bubble (here D2+T2) in the
center of a spherical flask.  As the bubble collapses, a shock wave
forms which rapidly heats the gas near the origin.  After
reflection, the outgoing shock wave further heats the gas just
heated by the incoming shock -- and the result 0.1 ps after
focussing is a remarkable 3 X 10^8 K (!).

Bradley et al. then use standard formulas for d-t fusion, based on
sigma-v for d-t at 10 keV (10^8 K) to estimate a fusion yield of
40 n/s.

I have extended this calculation to hoped-for conditions of our
experiments using sigma-v values for d-d fusion (collapsing bubble
of deuterium simply), to get:

Temp. in shock-heated D2      fusion neutron yield
 ------------------------     ---------------------
10 keV                        1400 n/hour
5  keV                          10 n/hour
2  keV                           0.2 n/hour

Since our detector has an efficiency of 15% for 2.45 MeV neutrons
(from d-d fusion) with a background rate of 0.65 counts/hour, the
5 keV number (fusion yield of 10 n/h) would have to be achieved in
order for us to detect a signal.  Of course, if we could use D2+
tritium in the bubble, D2+T2, then a much lower temperature would
allow us to see the (14.1 MeV) neutrons from d-t fusion.  Indeed,
a temperature of 1 keV (11,600 K) would give a yield of about 10
neutrons/h for d-t fusion -- again easy to see in our detector in
Provo Canyon.  But I think we'd better stick with D2 for the
present.  Stay tuned.

I am intrigued also by Prof. Crum's comment that there is evidence
for occasional "super shocks" in which "internal shock waves would
occur that would be similar to those postulated for SBSL [see
below] but driven at much higher initial velocities.  Because of
the transient nature of the phenomenon it would be very difficult
to determine if and when these "super shocks" occurred."  [Phys.
Today, p. 28]  

I suggest that neutrons from fusion may provide a probe for such
unusual events.  Indeed, I maintain (getting bold here, but why
not) that the unusual neutron events which we announced in April
1989, Nature, may be due to just such events, following cavitation
in the D2 bubbles in our electrolysis experiments.  If this wild
hypothesis were true, then the metal lattice would have nothing to
do with the low-level fusion that we (perhaps) saw.  Indeed, the
fusion would be a form of hot fusion:  "hot-bubble fusion" one
might call it.                       

My January 1994 post below is reposted to provide background for
those who missed it:

Prof. Lawrence Crum of the University of Washington provided a
colloquium on the subject of "Synchronous Picosecond
Sonoluminescence" (SP-SL) at BYU on January 21, 1994.  Here is his
abstract for his talk:

When an acoustic wave of moderate pressure amplitude is propagated
through an aqueous liquid, light emissions can be observed.  This
conversion of mechanical energy into electromagnetic energy
represents and energy amplification per molecule of over eleven
orders of magnitude!  Recently, we made the discovery that a
single, stable gas bubble, acoustically levitated in a liquid, can
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 emit optical emissions each cycle for an unlimited period of time. 
Presumably, the oscillations of the bubble cause the gas in the
interior to be heated to incandescent temperatures during the
compression portion of the cycle.  We have no current explanation
for how this mechanical system sustains itself.  Furthermore, some
recent evidence from Putterman and colleagues at UCLA indicates
that the lifetime of the optical pulse is less than 50 picoseconds,
and that the temperatures elevated in the interior of the bubble
for times on the order of tens of nanoseconds, it is likely that
some rather unusual physics is occurring.  The best guess is that
a shock wave is created in the gas which is then elevated to high
temperatures by inertial confinement.  If shock waves are the
mechanism for SL emission, then optimization of the process could
lead to extraordinary physics.  A general review of this intriguing
phenomenon will be presented as well as the latest explanations for
the anomalous behavior.


Here I provide notes based on his talk and our discussions
together, along with other literature.

First, it is important to distinguish stable, SB-SL from the
previously known *transient* sonoluminescence (T-SL).  These appear
to be quite different phenomena, as a table will demonstrate:

Transient (garden-variety)SL   Stable single-bubble SL [SB-SL]
 ----------------------------- -------------------------------- 

Multiple cavitation sites      One cavitation site (or few)
 with random spatial and         with same bubble(s) repeatedly
 temporal distribution           collapsing
                               
(To simplify discussion, I will consider the SB-SL case of a single
bubble at the center of a spherical flask full of H2O or D2O.)

Can be produced by traveling   Requires standing sound waves (SW)
or standing waves of sound

Easily obtained, with much     Very difficult to realize; requires
gas dissolved in liquid         <5% dissolved gasses.  Bubble must
                                be *injected* into liquid.

Discovered 1933 by N.Marinesco  Discovered 1988 by D. Gaitan, L. 
 & J. Trillat.                      Crum and C. Church.

Emitted light spectrum shows   Emitted light shows no distinct
distinct lines, e.g., N+N -->   lines; rather, spectrum fits black
N2; so chemiluminescence         curve quite well.
postulated.

Bubles tend to collapse asym-  Bubbles tend to collapse symmetric
metrically, thus introducing   "developing an imploding shock wave
liquid into bubble, which is    within the gas." [L.A. Crum, J.
heated by adiabatic compression.    Acoust. Soc. Am. 94(1993) 1 ]

From above, Temp ~ 5000 K      From above, Temp up to 100,000 K
deduced, during cavitation.     deduced during cavitation.

Normal physics, no shock       "Extraordinary physics"; shock waves
waves needed.                   implied.  

Time between pulses quite      Time between pulses clock-like; 
random; pulse-length typically   pulse-length < 50 *pico*seconds
several nanoseconds.

(Sychronous picosecond SL:

!__________!__________!__________!__________!__________!____
   Time between light-flashes ! = 50 microsec +- 50 Picosec
     for 20 kHz driving field; sound source good to 1 part in
     10^4, light source stable to 1 part in 10^6. )
   

No fusion possible.             Fusion during cavitation possible?
                                 like inertial-confinement approach
                                 with holraum-like target.  Allows
                                 compression with less heating than
                                 ablation approaches IMHO.  No   
                                 experimental tests yet.  I suggest
                                 comparing p-d,d-d and d-t targets
                                 (gases in cavitating bubble).


Additional notes from Barber and Putterman, Nature 352 (1991) 318:

1.  "SL is a non-equilibrium phenomenon in which the energy in a
sound wave becomes highly concentrated so as to generate flashes
of light in a liquid.  We show here that these flashes, which
comprise over 10^5 photons, are too fast to be resolved by the
fastest photomultiplier tubes available.  Furthermore, when SL is
driven by a resonant sound field, the bursts can occur in a
continuously repeating, regular fashion."

2.  "These bursts represent an amplification of energy by eleven
orders of magnitude."

3.  "The flash widths that we find are so short that one wonders
whether some phenomenon stimultes the atoms to fire in usison. 
Known cooperative phenomena include laser action, super-radiance
and super-fluorescence.  Any cooperative phenomenon underlying our
observations must be of a spherical nature, however, because a
randomly oriented dipose emission would lead to a broad spread in
the distribution of pulse heights....no such broadening is seen.
Nevertheless, it is reasonable to expect that some type of
correlation characterizes the outgoing photons, because the spacing
between light-emitting sources is much less than the wavelength of
the emitted light."  

4.  "The huge, spontaneous (non-equilibrium) amplification factors
discussed above are noteworthy in that they are controllable and
reproducible.  In this respect, stable synchronous SL differs from
other phenomena (such as dust explosions, ball lightning and highly
speculative conditions for nuclear fusion) that also require large
spontaneous energy concentrations. [Note evident reference to cold
fusion.]  If we could understand the mechanism behind synchronous
SL, we might see a way to achieve large but controllable energy
concentrations more generally."

With colleagues, we are now preparing experiments to study stable,
single-bubble SL as a possible means of achieving nuclear fusion
reactions.  Our neutron detectors are capable of unambiguously
identifying neutron emissions at a rate of a few neutrons per hour. 
A previous posting describes our redundant detectors, employing
fast waveform digitizers, in a deep tunnel in the Wasatch mountains
near the campus of Brigham Young University.

--Steven Jones
cudkeys:
cuddy2 cudenjonesse cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszL cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.03.02 / Paul Koloc /  Re: Re JET Labs fusion stuff
     
Originally-From: pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M. Koloc)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Re JET Labs fusion stuff
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 07:15:28 GMT
Organization: Prometheus II, Ltd.

In article <3il93c$co5@ds8.scri.fsu.edu> jac@ds8.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr) writes:
>|m.kenward@bbcnc.org.uk (Michael Kenward) wrote:
>|> We pinned out hopes on ITER as the follow up. Now we see
>|> that the US is up to its usual tricks, talking of building 
>|> an interim machine on its own and running the risk that we 
>|> will be left out. (This is reminiscent of other 'collaboration' 
>|> projects, where the rest of the world is expected to fit in 
>|> with the US's plans.) 

Actually, it's the local piggies wanting their cake AND the Ice Cream.  
Do you think PPPL, GA  others will give up all without some try
at continued "support fare".  

>In article <JTCHEW-210295114727@afrdcrdn.lbl.gov> 
>JTCHEW@lbl.gov (Ad absurdum per aspera) writes:
>>Besides possibly drawing conclusions about the US from a
>>small anecdotal data set as other people have pointed out,

>How many international projects have there been, and how many have 
>been subject to this sort of problem?  Since I have heard a person 
>who was actually doing the negotiations to line up foreign partners 
>for the SSC make this same point, I think you should not ignore 
>what your european colleague is trying to tell you.  

>>you're ascribing *far* too much intentionality and self-
>>consistency to our actions.  The Congress contains the full
>>spectrum of possible opinions on ITER.   <and so on, all true> 

There is always lots of cooperation BEFORE the final decisions
are made.  Then when they are made and the bill comes; that's when
most countries find out they are putting a lot more in than they
are getting out, and that's when they get "real" about the numbers
the progress, and the chances, and the apologies begin.  Then it's
curtains  Mr.   MONEY ITER .. (joe davidson).  

BTW there was a time under the female PM that the UK was getting
very short with continued tokamak fusion.  Even talk about 
nationalizing JET or at least part of it.  

Wait 'til the "greenies" find that tritium is radioactive and 
drinkable, eatable, and leakable.   On yes, the future looks
brigher already.    

>of a long-term perspective into our project management. 

Right from a central Gestapo???   

Come on let's toss it up for grabs, and let the best concept 
win without Government support.  It will by and by; just depends 
on how long this distracting side show goes on.  That's where the 
"real management" works with decisive actions to drop concepts as 
well as pick up new ones.  But, this decade after decade confidence 
game???      

>-- 
> James A. Carr   <jac@scri.fsu.edu>     |  Tallahassee, where the crime rate 
>    http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~jac        |  is almost twice that in New York 
> Supercomputer Computations Res. Inst.  |  City.  Reported crimes, that is.  
> Florida State, Tallahassee FL 32306    |  A subtle statistical detail.  
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Paul M. Koloc, Bx 1037 Prometheus II Ltd, College Park MD 20741-1037    |
| mimsy!promethe!pmk; pmk%prometheus@mimsy.umd.edu   FAX (301) 434-6737   |
| VOICE (301) 445-1075   *****  Commercial FUSION in the Nineties *****   |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+

cudkeys:
cuddy2 cudenpmk cudfnPaul cudlnKoloc cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.03.02 / Paul Koloc /  Re: Tritium, Cold Fusion, and the Military.
     
Originally-From: pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M. Koloc)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Tritium, Cold Fusion, and the Military.
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 07:20:17 GMT
Organization: Prometheus II, Ltd.

In article <3inkj9$g6f@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com> aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) writes:
>Mr. Frsank Close, in his 'Too Hot To Handle' book of 1991, put out by 
>the Princeton University Press, has an interesting section on pages 
>49-51 about the tritium stockpile of the United States.

>  It seems the U.S. has on hand about 100 kilgrams of Tritium 
>stockpiled, including what is in the fusion bombs (missiles like 
>Poseidon--etc.).And 5-6 kilograms of this Tritium has to be replenished 
>each ear due to the half-life of 12.3 years. If nothing is done to 
>replenish, you have automatic nuclear disarmament going on.

>   The existing nuclear reactors operated by the DOE that supplied the 
>Tritium were getting old ( one of them: Savannah River Reactor) and 
>being shut down for repairs. By 1989, the search for tritium was 
>becoming critical (militarily). Then when the announcement for cold 
>fusion came out, DOE (and the military) was looking for the tritium 
>production possibility rather than the energy production aspect 
>ballyhooed in the press. And since the cold fusion effect was 
>aneutronic, dropped it like a 'bomb'. They had other priorities in mind.

                       S - | T

>-AK-
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Paul M. Koloc,Bx 1037, Prometheus II, Ltd., College Park, MD 20741-1037 |
| mimsy!promethe!pmk; pmk%prometheus@mimsy.umd.edu   FAX (301) 434-6737   |
| VOICE (301) 445-1075   *****  Commercial FUSION in the Nineties *****   |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
cudkeys:
cuddy2 cudenpmk cudfnPaul cudlnKoloc cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.03.04 / Robin Spaandonk /        Re: Fusion plants
     
Originally-From: rvanspaa@ozemail.com.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject:       Re: Fusion plants
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 07:46:28 GMT
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway

While fusion may end up more expensive than other forms of energy in 
the near future, the almost inexhaustible fuel supply guarantees it a 
very long life, during which time much will be done in the way of 
development. Compare early car engines to what we have currently. 
I suspect that this means that within one to two hundred years we 
should have what would now be considered very competitive fusion 
power. For this reason it is advisable to continue with research in 
this field. Though not necessarily with the Tokamac design.
In other words, it uses a fuel with a future. As of course do solar 
and wind.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa@ozemail.com.au>

cudkeys:
cuddy4 cudenrvanspaa cudfnRobin cudlnSpaandonk cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.03.02 / I Johnston /  Re: Don't buy no untested gadgets!
     
Originally-From: ianj@castle.ed.ac.uk (I Johnston)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Don't buy no untested gadgets!
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 10:32:48 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

jedrothwell@delphi.com wrote:
: I Johnston <ianj@castle.ed.ac.uk> writes:
:  
: >So why doesn't Griggs give a formal written guarantee of over-unity
: >performance?
:  
: For all I know he would do that. I have no business dealings with Griggs, I
: do not know what kinds of sales contracts he offers. I would offer that if
: I was him.
:  
So you would agree that in the circumstances it would be strange for him
not to offer an over-unity guarantee?

Ian
cudkeys:
cuddy2 cudenianj cudfnI cudlnJohnston cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.03.02 / Gary Steckly /  Re: Heard any good ultrasound lately?
     
Originally-From: gsteckly@clark.dgim.doc.ca (Gary Steckly)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Heard any good ultrasound lately?
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 95 18:03:40 GMT
Organization: Industry Canada

In article <3j3es7$bg3@deadmin.ucsd.edu> barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman) writes:
>From: barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman)
>Subject: Re: Heard any good ultrasound lately?
>Date: 2 Mar 1995 03:43:03 GMT


>Rather than worry about ultrasound---which I don;t see as having
>any clear bearing on whether its over unity or not---I would
>suggest simply doing a good job of the power in and heat out
>measurements, for a room temp to room temp run.

(deletia)

>If you want to measure other things (ultrasound, N rays, etc), fine,
>but not at the expense of any resources (time, effort, money) better
>put into the thing we are really looking for.

Since Marshall's trip is not being funded by the group in any way shape or 
form, I would think it is up to Marshall to decide what measurements he wants 
to make.  Considering the number of times that the alleged "ultrasonic 
connection" has been raised on this conference, I believe it would be a good 
idea to lay this question to rest once and for all. Lets nail down as many 
loose ends as possible.

Go for it Marshall.  And regarding the use of the piezo transducers...I 
wouldn't think that their resonance characteristics wouldn't be all 
that critical when you you are using them in a passive (microphone) mode.  
Perhaps when you drive them with an ultrasonic signal the resonance would 
be a more significant factor.

best of luck!

Gary
cudkeys:
cuddy2 cudengsteckly cudfnGary cudlnSteckly cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.03.03 / Paul Koloc /  cmsg cancel <D4sw84.1Jn@prometheus.UUCP>
     
Originally-From: pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M. Koloc)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: cmsg cancel <D4sw84.1Jn@prometheus.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 02:53:34 GMT
Organization: Prometheus II, Ltd.

This article was probably generated by a buggy news reader.
cudkeys:
cuddy3 cudenpmk cudfnPaul cudlnKoloc cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.03.03 / Atlas Systems /  cmsg cancel <3j5f5a$ck5@alpha.bin-sixx.com>
     
Originally-From: atlas@alpha.bin-sixx.com (Atlas Computer Systems)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: cmsg cancel <3j5f5a$ck5@alpha.bin-sixx.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 14:30:46 GMT
Organization: OpenVision Technologies, Inc.

Cancelling spam.  See explanation in news.admin.misc.
cudkeys:
cuddy3 cudenatlas cudfnAtlas cudlnSystems cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.03.03 / John Logajan /  Re: Cold Fusion Qestions #1
     
Originally-From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Cold Fusion Qestions #1
Date: 3 Mar 1995 02:46:14 GMT
Organization: SkyPoint Communications, Inc.

Zoot 131 (zoot131@aol.com) wrote:
:    1)  Why is it possible for Deuterium to fuse and not regular hydrogen
: (even durring extreme temperatures)?  Is it because of the added mass of
: the neutron, if so does that mean that the Coulomb Barrier is relative to
: each element?

I don't even know if 2He is stable (can't find it in my CRC table of
isotopes.)  So I think H+H ==> 2He is unlikely because there isn't any
2He to be found, meaning it has no stability.

However, we can just play the numbers (if we don't have any additional
observations -- which I don't but which is probably out there in the
literature) and speculate that maybe such reactions as:

 H + H ==> D + positron emission.

I don't believe the above reaction violates any of the more obvious
conservation laws and it is energetically feasible.  That doesn't mean
it really happens, though. :-)


:   3) Randel Mills had announced a theory in wich the energy is released by
: the collapse or shrinkage of the electron shell around the Hydrogen atom. 
: How can the electron shell shrink? The only possible way that I could come
: up with is to make the element a positive ion, but how would this apply to
: hydrogen?

In the normal scheme of things, the electron at its lowest "orbit" is
still a non-zero distance away from the nucleus.  Mills was suggesting
that that "floor", conventionally called the "ground state" or minimum
energy state, is not really a minimum energy state at all.  That it can
fall to heretofore unseen lower orbital levels.  It's quite a suggestion
and it'll require some convincing evidence.

--
 - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com  --  612-633-0345 -
 - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA -
 -   WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan    -
cudkeys:
cuddy3 cudenjlogajan cudfnJohn cudlnLogajan cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.03.03 / William Rowe /  Re: Signature of Stored Energy
     
Originally-From: browe@netcom.com (William Rowe)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Signature of Stored Energy
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 04:39:16 GMT
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)

In article <3j3jcn$frj@stratus.skypoint.net>, jlogajan@skypoint.com wrote:

>Richard A Blue (blue@pilot.msu.edu) wrote:
>: If the transfer of heat from the rotor decreases due to softer thermal
>: coupling the familiar signature of cool down will not show up so
>: clearly.
>
>Yes!  It will be exaggerated!!!!
>
>That is to say that the power out must therefore necessarily decline
>(though it will also linger for a longer period.)  This decline in
>power out will look like an accelerated decrease in temperature.
>
>A simple analogy is an RC circuit.  You are counting coulombs * potential
>* time.  If you increase the interface Resistance in the RC circuit,
>the charge on the Capacitor now takes longer to discharge, but simultaneously
>the potential it is delivered at is reduced (at the output.)
>
>So anyhow, you can't have a decline in output power caused by an increase
>in the thermal resistance without detecting a decline in the measured
>COP -- yet the Griggs device showed no such decline in the two posted runs
>of data.
>
>--
> - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com  --  612-633-0345 -
> - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA -
> -   WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan    -


The only run data I've seen is that which was in Jed Rothwell's paper. It
consisted of three runs. The first was a blank run done for one hour with
a flow rate of 0.05 gal/min raw COP of 59%, adjusted COP 98%. The second
was for 19 min 40 sec, flow rate 0.2 gal/min, raw COP of 117%, adjusted
COP of 168%. The third was for 30 min, also with a flow rate of 0.2
gal.min, raw COP of 109%, adjusted COP of 157%. This data shows the
decline in COP you mention. Is there other data which conflicts with this?

-- 
_______________________________________________________________________________
William Rowe                                                   browe@netcom.com
MD5OfPublicKey: F29A99C805B41838D9240AEE28EBF383
cudkeys:
cuddy3 cudenbrowe cudfnWilliam cudlnRowe cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.03.04 / C Cagle /  DOES ANYONE KNOW WHEREABOUTS OF ROBERT GOLKA?
     
Originally-From: singtech@teleport.com (C. Cagle)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: DOES ANYONE KNOW WHEREABOUTS OF ROBERT GOLKA?
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 1995 00:37:38 -0800
Organization: Singularity Technologies, Inc.

Robert Golka conducted many experiments with huge tesla coils at Windover,
Utah/Nevada in the early and mid-seventies.  He was trying to reproduce
ball lightning for use in fusion experiments.

If anyone knows where he is: Please send phone, address, fax, email address.

Thanks in advance,

C. Cagle
Chief Technical Officer
Singularity Technologies, Inc.
1640 Oak Grove Road, N.W.
Salem, OR  97304
503/362-7781

email to:  singtech@teleport.com
cudkeys:
cuddy04 cudensingtech cudfnC cudlnCagle cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.03.02 /  jonesse@vanlab /  Re: Solar -VS- Fusion; the Biomass option
     
Originally-From: jonesse@vanlab.byu.edu
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Solar -VS- Fusion; the Biomass option
Date: 2 Mar 95 14:07:33 -0700
Organization: Brigham Young University

Barry Merriman writes regarding fusion (hot):

"Its not the power source of our dreams, but if push comes to shove (and it
will in ~ 100 years) we could use this stuff as our primary power source...
In the absence of any alternative, it thus makes national security sense to
keep this project going."

Stephen Lajoie writes:

"I remember touring Livermore labs, and I hear all kinds of promises [regarding
fusion].  None of which was ever realized.
Now, SOLAR and wind, on the other hand, are impractical for several reasons. 
In order to get any kind of reliability out of solar and meet the energy needs
of the U.S., a solar collector the size of the state of Colorado would be
necessary.... I've talked to several power engineers who claim that windmills
are a pain in the a**...sporadic, undependable, and often out of phase with the
grid."

I would like to mention an alternative which, although not new, deserves a
closer look IMHO.  No, not "cold fusion"  -- I hope I've made it abundantly
clear based on experiments performed here and elsewhere that I'm convinced that
there is *not a chance* for P&F-style cold fusion to produce useful power. 

BIOMASS
The western states hold vast areas of essentially unused land.  The solar
collector proposed consists of plant matter.  Specifically, a collaboration
here at BYU (which I helped organize) is looking at Chrysothamnus, also
sal sola and kochia -- all of which grow hardily in the western deserts without
irrigation.  These hardy bushes collect solar energy and can be mowed and the
vegetative material can be bundled or compressed into pellets for fuel.  Our
studies suggest that in some areas, Chrysothamnus can be harvested twice per
year, following judicious initial seeding (by aircraft).  It then grows back,
unlike sage brush.  This bush is resistant to disease, insects, animals and
drought.  It tolerates alkaline/salty soils.  It propagates easily.  Its rubber
content is comparable to that of Guayule, which adds to its fuel and other
values.  This source is renewable and does not add to the CO2 inventory of the
atmosphere.  Radiation problems are completely obviated.  Biomass provides a 
means to collect and store solar energy, and it
is designed to do very well despite intermittent sunlight conditions. { 8^) }

We are prepared at BYU to select fast-growing plants for this purpose, using
calorimetric techniques pioneered by Prof. Lee Hansen to evaluate plant
respiration rates.     (The same who 
demonstrated that apparent "excess heat" in some P&F style electrolytic cells 
can be traced to recombination {chemical} reactions).

As Tom Droege says, one can tell where my opinions lie from the direction my
research is taking:  I am still very interested in power-production problems.
 And I have made extensive studies of nuclear fusion and fission options...

I would appreciate any comments.

--Steven Jones

cudkeys:
cuddy2 cudenjonesse cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.03.03 /  Conny /  Fusion and Radioactive Waste......?
     
Originally-From: ie2_06@griffin.got.kth.se (Conny H„gstr”m)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Fusion and Radioactive Waste......?
Date: 3 Mar 1995 15:51:15 GMT
Organization: KTH-Visby (Royal Institute of Technology in Visby, Sweden)

I just wondered if the extremely hot fusion process would be able to 
destroy small amounts of radioactive material from a Fission Reactor..

Is there anyone that could answer this wuestion...


*WPG Mats AAhlberg   ig3_07@griffin.got.kth.se
*Royal Institute of Higher Technical Education on Gotland.

cudkeys:
cuddy3 cudenie2_06 cudlnConny cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.03.02 / aaron patula /  Take Cold Fusion Seriously
     
Originally-From: apatula@ub.d.umn.edu (aaron patula)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion,alt.conspiracy,alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Take Cold Fusion Seriously
Date: 2 Mar 1995 01:25:31 GMT
Organization: University of Minnesota, Duluth

Take Cold Fusion Seriously, Advises University Chemist

Richard Oriani in an Address to IT Alumni


Printed in the Univ. of Minnesota's Office of Technology Transfer's 
"Research Review," Vol. 24, No. 8, Feb. 1995, pages 1, 4-5.

Research Review
1100 Washington Ave. South
Ste. 201
Minneapolis, MN 55415-1226

Cold fusion, Richard Oriani told an audience of Institute of Technology 
alumni, "is certainly worthy of study and funding."

There are good reasons for skepticism, he acknowledged, but there are 
also good reasons for genuine interest. "Here is some new kind of nuclear 
physics, and it is too late to heap ridicule on it," he said.

Oriani, professor emeritus in the University's Department of Chemical 
Engineering and Materials Science, spoke at a December 7 seminar 
sponsored by the IT Alumni Society. He wished to give his audience "an 
appreciation of where cold fusion research is after these five years," he 
said. "People have made a lot of headway."

Oriani framed his presentation with comments on the reputation and abuse 
of cold fusion, but he devoted most of his time to reviewing two sets of 
data from the scientific literature: first, "credible experiments" by 
twelve groups of researchers, including Oriani's own group, who have 
measured energy production from palladium and deuterium at relatively low 
temperatures; second, reports from ten groups who have measured tritium, 
helium, neutrons and charged particles released from combinations of 
deuterium with palladium or titanium. Throughout his review, Oriani 
emphasized the lengths the experimenters went to avoid contamination of 
samples and error in instruments.

When nuclear reactions release energy, Oriani's explanation of the data 
began, it is because some part of the mass involved is converted to 
energy. For example, in one of the reactions theoretically associated 
with cold fusion, an atom of deuterium combines with an atom of tritium 
to yield helium, a free neutron, a decrease in mass of 0.0188 atomic mass 
units (amu), and energy at the rate of 1.49 x 10 raised to the -10 joules 
per amu (equivalent to 8.97 x 10 raised to the 13 joules per mole).

In the five most accurate energy- measurement experiments, the energy 
output ranged from 106 percent to 170 percent of the energy put into a 
palladium- deuterium system. For two groups of experimenters, there was a 
net gain of energy every time they tried the experiment. Oriani's group 
produced a net gain in two attempts, but thirty subsequent attempts 
produced no energy. The inconsistent results, said Oriani, seem to depend 
on the sample of palladium. His third success came after the thirty 
failures when he obtained a new sample of palladium from a Japanese 
source. Other groups have measured, in three less accurate experiments, 
energy production ranging from 5 to 15 times the energy input.

Oriani's second set of reports dealt with observed effects that could 
only result from nuclear reactions. For example: Fritz Will et. al., 
electrolyzed heavy water with cathodes made of palladium from two 
different suppliers. (Heavy water is D (subscript) 2 O, i.e. water 
containing deuterium rather than common hydrogen. Will was director of 
the Utah Cold Fusion Institute). One type of palladium yielded no 
tritium. The other type yielded tritium at 50 times the background level, 
in four trials out of four. From that second type of palladium, 140 
samples not subjected to electrolysis were found to contain no tritium.

Melvin Miles and Benjamin Bush, using palladium and heavy water, produced 
helium in concentrations ranging from 5.4 parts per million to 9.7 ppm. 
The background concentration of helium in air is 5.2 ppm. George and 
Stringham, using sound to cavitate heavy water on palladium foil, 
produced helium at 10 times background levels in ten trials out of ten. 
Y. R. Kucherov, et. al., by means of "glow discharge" with a palladium 
electrode in low- pressure deuterium gas, produced helium at 4 to 100 
times background levels and counted 10 raised to the 7 neutrons per second.

Skepticism and ridicule of cold fusion began in 1989, Oriani remembered, 
when Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann announced their discovery 
through publicity rather than peer review. "They described their work so 
poorly it seems they wanted to keep it obscure," said Oriani. His own 
interest in cold fusion was sparked shortly after that, by the work of 
Steven Jones at Brigham Young University.

Since the Pons and Fleischmann debacle, cold fusion experiments have not 
been adequately published, Oriani argued, because the journals Science 
and Nature have been "caustic and abusive" toward the work. When Oriani 
tried to publish his own experiments, he said, the two journals' replies 
were to the effect of "We already know cold fusion doesn't work, and you 
don't understand your results. We're not going to publish them." Oriani's 
reply: "Many things are published without full understanding, and that's 
the way it should be."

Oriani then published in the December 1990 issue of Fusion Technology 
(Oriani, John C. Nelson, Sung-Kyu Lee, and J. H. Broadhurst, 
"Calorimetric Measurements of Excess Power Output During the Cathodic 
Charging of Deuterium into Palladium," volume 18, pp. 652- 658). Fusion 
Technology and the Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry and Interfacial 
Electrochemistry, where Pons and Fleischmann first published, are the 
only two journals still publishing such work, said Oriani. 

"I want you to understand my attitude," said Oriani. "A new idea should 
expect to fight its way to recognition. But in this particular case the 
fight has been particularly hindered by ridicule. Cold fusioneers have 
been accused to incompetence, self-delusion, and pathological science. 
Bockris at Texas A&M was accused to fraud by Gary Taubes in Science [vol. 
248 (1990), pp. 1299-1304], of doping his experiment with tritium. That 
certainly was not the case."

Among sound reasons for skepticism regarding cold fusion, Oriani 
acknowledged several:

One, "the results are not yet [consistently] reproducible, and we don't 
know why," he said.

Two, no one has satisfactorily explained what is taking place. "There are 
as many theories and theorists," said Oriani.

Three, classical physics says the nuclear reaction supposedly taking 
place can only take place under tremendous heat and pressure, like inside 
the Sun.

Four, "Cold fusion has attracted a lot of crackpots and mystics," said 
Oriani. "You have no idea the letters I receive from people who know cold 
fusion works because the spirit has told them."

It may not be odd, then, that cold fusion research has been difficult to 
publish or fund. Small federal funding has come from only one agency, the 
Office of Naval Research, said Oriani. A half-dozen other U. S. groups 
are working "on a shoestring." The University of Minnesota originally 
funded Oriani's experiments. They are now "self-funded," he says. In 
addition, the U. S. Patent Office rejects all applications that mention 
cold fusion.

Nonetheless, said Oriani, there are pockets of rich funding for cold 
fusion: SRI International (formerly the Stanford Research Institute) has 
$2 million a year from the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), 
Japanese interests have equipped a lab in Southern France for Pons and 
Fleischmann, and significant work is being done in several labs in Japan. 
"The Japanese are really going after this," said Oriani. "The U. S. is 
getting behind the 8-ball." A U. S. corporation is, however, buying every 
cold-fusion-related patent application it can get its hands on, he added.

And the reason EPRI and the Japanese are investing in cold fusion? "If 
cold fusion is real," said Oriani, "it's an inexpensive source of energy."



cudkeys:
cuddy2 cudenapatula cudfnaaron cudlnpatula cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszL cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.03.03 / MARSHALL DUDLEY /  Re: Solar -VS- Fusion; the Biomass option
     
Originally-From: mdudley@brbbs.brbbs.com (MARSHALL DUDLEY)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Solar -VS- Fusion; the Biomass option
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 1995 14:16 -0500 (EST)

jonesse@vanlab.byu.edu writes:
 
-> The western states hold vast areas of essentially unused land.  The solar
-> collector proposed consists of plant matter.  Specifically, a collaboration
-> here at BYU (which I helped organize) is looking at Chrysothamnus, also
-> sal sola and kochia -- all of which grow hardily in the western deserts with
-> irrigation.  These hardy bushes collect solar energy and can be mowed and th
-> vegetative material can be bundled or compressed into pellets for fuel.  Our
-> studies suggest that in some areas, Chrysothamnus can be harvested twice per
-> year, following judicious initial seeding (by aircraft).  It then grows back
-> unlike sage brush.  This bush is resistant to disease, insects, animals and
-> drought.  It tolerates alkaline/salty soils.  It propagates easily.
 
Reminds me a lot like the great claims TVA made for Kudzu before planting it
all over the south for "erosion control".  Now it is an ecological disaster.
 
                                                                Marshall
 
cudkeys:
cuddy03 cudenmdudley cudfnMARSHALL cudlnDUDLEY cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.03.03 / G Schramkowski /  Applied magnetohydrodynamics / electrodynamics
     
Originally-From: schramko@fys.ruu.nl (George Schramkowski)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Applied magnetohydrodynamics / electrodynamics
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 14:22:49 GMT
Organization: Physics and Astronomy, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands


Dear Everyone,

I am looking for references (preferably comprehensible reviews or accassible
research papers) on applied magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) and applied 
electrodynamics. In particular, I am interested in topics which have gained
considerable attention recently (< past 5 years).
Please E-mail me at schramko@fys.ruu.nl if you can help me.

                 Thanks in advance!

                              George Schramkowski
    
cudkeys:
cuddy3 cudenschramko cudfnGeorge cudlnSchramkowski cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
processed by cud.pl ver. 0.5 Sun Mar  5 04:37:03 EST 1995
------------------------------
