Forums  > General  > LENR anyone?  
     
Page 2 of 6Goto to page: 1, 2, 3 ... 5, 6 Prev Next
Display using:  

AndyM


Total Posts: 2306
Joined: Mar 2004
 
Posted: 2015-09-28 10:39
Wait; there's something real there because groups investing other peoples' money, who have no ability to evaluate the scientific evidence, have put money into this? That's nuts. There is absolutely zero chance that these groups can take an informed view on the validity of the science; they just think they're buying a cheap call option (and, investing OPM, thus have a call option on a call option). Investment can't validate a thesis, only results can.

I used to be disgusted; now I try to be amused...

TSWP


Total Posts: 355
Joined: May 2012
 
Posted: 2015-09-28 10:52
> There is absolutely zero chance that these groups can take an informed view on the validity of the science;

Well, I am not sure I can agree with that. There have been a number of studies and tests made on this specific technology, including specific measuring of excess heat and other things, I am not an expert in this field, but if you re-read the thread there are some info on this.

Some paper research with data, specific to this LENR reactor, has been published by a number of researchers from some european universities, in Sweden and Italy. The data shows excess heat production, again re-read the thread for the links.

Then, you may disagree with their findings, but I would not probably say that there is NO information behind their investment (we could however agree that there is no information behind MOST investments made by most fund managers).

Btw, is >10 million a cheap call option?
Let me know if you know people that like to make these kind of hopeless bets, I can offer you a good one that has some hope in it (I promise: I take no commissions).

You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.

AndyM


Total Posts: 2306
Joined: Mar 2004
 
Posted: 2015-09-28 13:39
Information is everywhere. What is impossible is for a generalist fund manager to EVALUATE this information in a manner that would result in an investment edge. If you try to infer scientific validity from fund manager allocations, you're looking through the wrong end of the telescope.

I used to be disgusted; now I try to be amused...

Tradenator


Total Posts: 1570
Joined: Sep 2006
 
Posted: 2015-09-28 14:39
Never underestimate the stupidity of people in groups, especially when money is involved. There must be a way to short this...

TSWP


Total Posts: 355
Joined: May 2012
 
Posted: 2015-09-28 14:40
>If you try to infer scientific validity from fund manager allocations, you're looking through the wrong end of the telescope.

I agree with that.


What I was trying to say is that:

1) there seems to be physical evidence that this LENR process works, based on the tests that have been run and followed by publication of the results (publications made by university professors in the field)

2) there seems to be scientific validity from the papers and research written by some scientists (although it's not fully clear yet how it works and in theory it clashes with established current physics theories, but it works...)

3) there seems to be a group of investors (funds) that has allocated a lot of money specifically to one LENR research project and they plan to allocate more to see if it is a viable technology to produce anything

All the above does not mean certainty of anything, but it raises some interest in me, because it seems to be a completely new source of energy, it's not solar, it's not wind or sea waves, it's something else completely new that may change completely the energy scene (if it really works).

Out of curiosity, I started this thread to see if someone here was informed about LENR and could tell us something. That's all.

You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.

pj


Total Posts: 3305
Joined: Jun 2004
 
Posted: 2015-09-28 14:47
> publications made by university professors in the field
Which ones? Cool

OFFENDERS WILL BE TERMINATED

Tradenator


Total Posts: 1570
Joined: Sep 2006
 
Posted: 2015-09-28 14:58
Which ones?

The Journal of Irreproducible Results

goldorak


Total Posts: 979
Joined: Nov 2004
 
Posted: 2015-09-28 17:54

> The Journal of Irreproducible Results

A near relative of the journal of finance I suppose?


If you are not living on the edge you are taking up too much space.

goldorak


Total Posts: 979
Joined: Nov 2004
 
Posted: 2015-09-28 17:54

> The Journal of Irreproducible Results

A near relative of the journal of finance I suppose?


If you are not living on the edge you are taking up too much space.

TSWP


Total Posts: 355
Joined: May 2012
 
Posted: 2015-09-28 18:01
Which ones?

Some names are at the top of the document
"Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device containing hydrogen loaded nickel powder"
(maybe you can google each name to find out about them)

Giuseppe Levi
Bologna University, Bologna, Italy

Torbjörn Hartman, Bo Höistad,
Roland Pettersson and
Lars Tegnér
Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

Hanno Essén
associate professor of theoretical physics and a lecturer at the Swedish Royal Institute of Technology and former chairman of the Swedish Skeptics Society

other names:
Leif Holmlid, professor emeritus University of Gothenburg, Sweden
http://www.gu.se/omuniversitetet/aktuellt/nyheter/detalj//smaskalig-karnfusion-kan-bli-ny-energikalla.cid1323710


Goldorak, I think you meant a relative of LA GAZZETTA DELLO SPORT Big Smile

You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.

TSWP


Total Posts: 355
Joined: May 2012
 
Posted: 2015-09-28 18:11
Btw I am impressed by the level of skepticism of some of you.

I certainly do not know if this works, but I am curious...

On the other hand it seems some of you already know FOR SURE that this is not working, without even knowing anything about it, you have a presumption of non-existence of something, based on ... (fill in the blanks at will).

Quite interesting.

You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.

pj


Total Posts: 3305
Joined: Jun 2004
 
Posted: 2015-09-28 18:48
> it seems some of you already know FOR SURE that this is not working

Me thinks I am included into of one of those Doubting Thomas.

I can answer only about myself though.

I wouldn't bet a farm that I am right, and
I would love to be wrong, sincerely.

But
1) When, it seems to contradict the orthodox physics.
2) When Andrea Rossi is a convicted scam artist.
3) When there are quite a few fake news about the
scientists (Google Translate the Chinese "scientist's" name).

May I stay unconvinced and to not check further?

Or you have bet your yacht on the LENR?

Good luck then.

I don't think that a few semi-anonymous posts in this esteemed
phorum will change it one way or another.

OFFENDERS WILL BE TERMINATED

TSWP


Total Posts: 355
Joined: May 2012
 
Posted: 2015-09-28 20:23
pj,

no hard feelings, I am pointing out whatever information I have found (very little I admit) to trigger discussion about LENR.

It's not just Andrea Rossi, others are studying LENR, including NASA and some people at Airbus that will hold a workshop in Toulouse/France at an Airbus facility in October.

Sure, it may be all just research into something that may never become a new viable source of energy, but I think it's worth investigating the topic further.

You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.

svisstack


Total Posts: 284
Joined: Feb 2014
 
Posted: 2015-09-28 22:17
@TSWP: its great that you have a hobby, but when you want get better answers, then i suggest you changing forum in this matter. You know, its not much related to finance you must admit it, so i would say its desired output that no one really cares here about that. Most of people are here bcs they need finance job done right or looking for inspiration. http://physics.stackexchange.com/

edit: btw. should be in offtopic not in general as it not fits "Non-specific Quantitative Finance related chatter."

Time well wasted.

TSWP


Total Posts: 355
Joined: May 2012
 
Posted: 2015-09-29 09:24
svisstack,
OK, but the question originated from a trading perspective, as explained at the start of the thread, it affects how I model the trading of OIL (CL) and other energy products in the future.

If I know that fossil fuels and other energy commodities will lose a lot of value in the coming years (beginning in a year or two) because a new source of energy (LENR) will come to the forefront, then this has implications for my research and models on these commodities.

Hence my question about LENR here, not a hobby but a research-related question.

Think of it as an equivalent of research made on subprime mortgages when everybody was saying that everybody is cool and we are headed for 10 years straight of growth and incredible Bull market, circa 2006...

You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.

Tradenator


Total Posts: 1570
Joined: Sep 2006
 
Posted: 2015-09-29 09:59
TWSP, you need to read
this.

TSWP


Total Posts: 355
Joined: May 2012
 
Posted: 2015-09-29 11:23
All right, this thread is a waste of time.

Let's leave it at that.

You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.

mikeRobeer


Total Posts: 1
Joined: Oct 2015
 
Posted: 2015-10-02 19:10
Hi TSWP,

I haven't been trained in physics to know that LENR is not possible and I don't know anyone with direct experience with the reaction. But, I have spent considerable time checking out the people who do have direct experience with it and what they have said and written about it. I found that there are several respected people with reputations at stake giving it a thumbs up.

The Lugano report is one of the most important events so far in this story. It is a report of a 32 day test of the device conducted last year. They reported a huge amount of anomalous heat. Check out the people and companies involved. There is a book about it, "The Impossible Invention".

Check out the investors, Cherokee Fund and Woodford Patient Capital Trust. Serious people. Tom Darden was business man of the year at Triangle business park.

Then checkout the response that physicists gave when asked about the Wright Brother's heavier than air flying machine prior to one flying over their head.

A one megawatt plant, thermal energy output, is currently running a one year test in an industrial setting. The test will end in February 2016. The power in and out is being audited by a third party. The company consuming the power has it's eye on their power bill.

There is an amazing story brewing in my opinion. I wish it wasn't impossible.

pj


Total Posts: 3305
Joined: Jun 2004
 
Posted: 2015-10-02 20:44
And what about the Russian and Chinese "Scientists":
i.e. Paxomov, and Elevator Pitch?

OFFENDERS WILL BE TERMINATED

TSWP


Total Posts: 355
Joined: May 2012
 
Posted: 2015-10-02 23:28
Yawn...

What time is it?

You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.

goldorak


Total Posts: 979
Joined: Nov 2004
 
Posted: 2015-10-06 20:03
Just saw that on /.

deuterium powered homes

If you are not living on the edge you are taking up too much space.

goldorak


Total Posts: 979
Joined: Nov 2004
 
Posted: 2015-10-08 14:43
e-cat

If you are not living on the edge you are taking up too much space.

TSWP


Total Posts: 355
Joined: May 2012
 
Posted: 2015-10-08 16:13
Well, I guess if Ethan Siegel (?) on the website medium.com (?) says so, and even Goldrake agrees, then they must be right.


You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.

TSWP


Total Posts: 355
Joined: May 2012
 
Posted: 2015-10-08 22:53
I'll try to put some value again in this thread.

The following comes from the research notes of Louis F. DeChiaro, Ph.D, a physicist with the US Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA), Dahlgren Warfare Center.
The entire presentation with slideshow is here, but let's focus on something else: what DeChiaro says below (read it, is interesting) is that unless you get right all the single aspects of the process (and many of these aspects are obscure and difficult to get right without a theory, or if you want to change theories) the Edisonian process of trial and error will fail:

Without knowing what one is doing and why it works, the probability of achieving successful results via the so-called Edisonian method of trial and error is disappointingly low.

Let's compare that with the process of creating a trading system: if you try to create something that needs to have a lot of aspects rights, and is hard to get them all rights beforehand, you have a high possibility of failure. Still, if you want to fly above the flock level you gotta try something more difficult than what is already established, known and tested (i.e. arbitrage, trend-following, market making, etc.) and this attempt may require you to enter unchartered territories. America was discovered like that by Columbus, in case someone has forgotten.


DeChiaro says:

As for duplicating the Pons and Fleischmann results, we now have a much better understanding of the phenomenon, and the list of prerequisite conditions is rather lengthy. Failure to meet even one of those conditions results in zero excess energy output. The data suggest that there may be more than one initiation mechanism, so I’m most qualified to comment upon what is known as the atomic vibrational LENR initiation mechanism (because my formal background is in Condensed Matter Physics). If one had to summarize the list in a fairly brief manner, I would write it as follows:

1. It is necessary to set up conditions favoring the formation of molecular hydrogen (H2 or D2) inside the solid lattice for a certain range of possible values of lattice constant and for some fraction of the allowed values for electron momentum. This condition alone rules out almost ALL the elemental , because the electron density is just too large to permit molecules to form, except near vacancies in the lattice where a metal atom is absent.

2. The overall hydrogen loading fraction (ratio of hydrogen to palladium atoms, for example) must exceed the minimum threshold of about 0.88, otherwise the “party” never even gets started. Achieving this level of loading in Pd is not trivial.

3. Conditions must be set up (by appropriate choice of materials parameters and achieved by the right kind of alloying) so that these hydrogen molecules can be caused to break up and then re-assemble very rapidly in a periodic time sequence when an appropriate physical quantity such as background electric charge, magnetic field, etc. is made to oscillate periodically over a small range.

4. The critical value of lattice constant at which this break up and reassembly occurs must lie very close to the nominal value of lattice constant for which the ground state energy of the lattice is minimal. This requirement alone rules out essentially all of the elemental lattices and about 99% of the binary and ternary alloys.

5. A departure from equilibrium must be established that will permit an external energy source (eg. the DC power supply in an electrolysis experiment and/or a pair of low power lasers as in the Letts/Hagelstein two laser experiment) to feed energy into the H-H or D-D stretching mode vibrations. The difference in chemical potential that is established in gas loading experiments can also serve very nicely; in this case the flux feeds energy into the stretching mode vibrations.

6. The nature of the lattice must permit these stretching mode vibrations to grow so large (over a period of perhaps many nanoseconds) that their amplitude becomes comparable to the lattice constant. When this occurs, the H atoms oscillate so violently that at the instants of closest approach, the curvature of the parabolic energy wells in which the atomic nuclei vibrate will become perturbed. Thus the curvature of the well oscillates as a periodic function of time. These very large amplitude vibrations are known as superoscillations in the Western literature and as “discrete breathers” in the Ukrainian literature. Under the right conditions, these oscillations can grow without impacting the atoms, which are much more massive than the hydrogens. We explored this computationally via Density Functional Molecular Dynamics runs.

7. When the curvatures of the parabolic energy wells of the nuclei are modulated at a frequency very near the natural resonant frequency, the quantum expectation value of the nuclear wave function spatial spread will oscillate with time in such a way that the positive-going peaks grow exponentially with time. Originally, I found this idea in the Ukrainian literature and was skeptical. So, we verified it by doing a direct numerical solution of the time-dependent Schrodinger Equation for a single nuclear particle in a parabolic energy well. These oscillations in spatial spread will periodically delocalize the nucleus and facilitate the tunneling of adjacent nuclei into the Strong Force attractive nuclear potential well, giving rise to nuclear fusion at rates that are several tens of orders of magnitude larger than what one calculates via the usual Gamow Factor integral relationship.

Almost none of this material was obvious back in 1989. Without knowing what one is doing and why it works, the probability of achieving successful results via the so-called Edisonian method of trial and error is disappointingly low. Reasonable scientists and engineers can be forgiven for their difficulty in believing that there might exist ANY circumstances under which such things could be possible. And to be blunt, it was only in the last few months that the causal chain finally became clear.

An old saying holds that it is easy to appear tall when standing on the shoulders of giants. My colleagues and I are most humbly grateful to have been given the opportunity to stand on the shoulders of such giants, however briefly. I would also suggest that some praise might be due to people like Andrea Rossi, who (by and large) had little alternative but to employ the Edisonian method and nevertheless appear to have obtained positive results. We have run materials simulations (also known as Density Functional Theory simulations) on our best guess of Rossi’s alloy material. It satisfies all the conditions given above, while pure Nickel does not.

In like manner, the Naval Research Labs (NRL) ran over 300 experiments using pure Pd cathodes, all of them yielding negative results. Then somebody suggested that NRL should try an alloy of 90% Pd and 10% Rh. The very first such alloy cathode they tried yielded over 10,000 Joules of excess thermal energy – all from less than 1 gram of cathode material. I ran Density Functional Theory simulations on that alloy, and it, too, satisfies all the conditions given above, while pure Pd and pure Rh do not.

NRL christened this cathode with the name Eve, after the obvious Biblical analogy. I’m pleased to share the news that Eve had a number of “sisters” who produced equal and even greater excess thermal energy, among a number of other more interesting effects. Finally, I can observe that the materials simulations now make it fairly easy to evaluate any given solid lattice material and estimate its level of LENR activity. We have good correlations between the simulation results and the known levels of experimentally-determined LENR activity in a number of different alloys whose dominant elements come from the Transition Metal Group of the Periodic Table. Hopefully, we will be able to get all the details of this material released for publication to the general public over the next few weeks.


You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.

pj


Total Posts: 3305
Joined: Jun 2004
 
Posted: 2015-10-09 07:07
What are Parxomov and Elevator Song are doing in there?
Cool

OFFENDERS WILL BE TERMINATED
Previous Thread :: Next Thread 
Page 2 of 6Goto to page: 1, 2, 3 ... 5, 6 Prev Next