Reaction Focardi-Rossi: is cold fusion?

Innovations, ideas or patents for sustainable development. Decrease in energy consumption, reduction of pollution, improvement of yields or processes ... Myths or reality about inventions of the past or the future: the inventions of Tesla, Newman, Perendev, Galey, Bearden, cold fusion ...
User avatar
elephant
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6646
Registration: 28/07/06, 21:25
Location: Charleroi, center of the world ....
x 7

Reaction Focardi-Rossi: is cold fusion?




by elephant » 19/01/11, 10:11

As I explained a few moments ago (here https://www.econologie.com/forums/fusion-fro ... 99-50.html ), I suggest that we continue the discussions and the day before on the subject of the Focardi-Rossi reaction in this specialized subject.

Here is one of the basic links:

http://pesn.com/2011/01/17/9501746_Foca ... or_market/

and here is the patent:

http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/images4/PCT-P ... 125444.pdf

I consulted Jean Louis Naudin last night: he knows and seems to trust the experimenters.
0 x
elephant Supreme Honorary éconologue PCQ ..... I'm too cautious, not rich enough and too lazy to really save the CO2! http://www.caroloo.be
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 19/01/11, 11:34

elephant wrote:I propose to all to emigrate on a new subject, entitled

Focardi-Rossi's reaction: is this the cold fusion?

which will facilitate searches of Internet users.

If you agree, join me

Otherwise, let the new subject perish in the depths of oblivion ... : Cry:
Skeptical but after all, why not ?! ^^

Although it is very far from it, not so long ago, who thought that the plasma lance had such a power of fusion of any material to the point of crossing concrete walls without effort? And that just with the power of water?

If theoretically the cold fusion was possible (it is still necessary to determine what is meant by "ambient temperature") by dint of floor, there will be a day when someone will find the right combination with the right blend that no one had thought of yet!

The whole question would be whether cold fusion exists in a "natural" state in the cosmos and especially as you recall in the other subject: if the technology used can trigger the nuclear reaction in question: it could help, to make radiation measurements ... and that is in the realm of possibility!

It would be even funnier than when the whole scientific community rejects this theory, if someone can demonstrate that it is possible : Lol:

Because if it is possible, it risks calling into question the theoretical model : Mrgreen:
0 x
User avatar
elephant
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6646
Registration: 28/07/06, 21:25
Location: Charleroi, center of the world ....
x 7




by elephant » 19/01/11, 12:11

Obamot said:

that could help, to make measurements of radiation ... and that is of the field of the possible!


get the nickel powder, turn a copper piece, braze an inlet tube, an outlet tube to drain the air, wind a nichrome wire in soapstone beads around, borrow a Geiger or scintillation counter and a bottle of hydrogen.

And I don't even know whether to turn a copper piece, the copper tubes of the refrigeration circuits must hold at 10 atmospheres, I believe. DIY should be within the reach of a refrigeration engineer.

The small problem is that, when heated, copper oxidizes quickly. For the interior, no problem: under a hydrogen atmosphere, it will be clean like a new penny (the refrigeration circuits are brazed with silver under an argon atmosphere + 3% H2)

Unless .... Rossi forgot to say a little something ...
0 x
elephant Supreme Honorary éconologue PCQ ..... I'm too cautious, not rich enough and too lazy to really save the CO2! http://www.caroloo.be
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 19/01/11, 12:32

... can we vote? : Cheesy:
0 x
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 19/01/11, 13:23

In any case, this corresponds strictly to the cold fusion initiated by Pons and Fleishman in 1989 which did not succeed in reproducibly proving this type of experimental finding with release of excess energy and production of new chemical elements not present at the start. .
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_froide
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion
An armada of physical phenomena have shown in even more laboratories all over the world such strange effects not recognized, because they are not reproducible and strange, not consistent with what we know of clear and sure, that is to say reproducible !!! !

However, many phenomena remain to be discovered and understood, such as ball lightning, as strange and as non-reproducible, and it very real given the armada of testimonies.

Unlike most claims of excess energy, which are often very inconsistent at the logical level, this laboratory in Bologna has scientific consistency in its claims (except the understanding of the phenomenon of catalysis recognized as unexplained but considered correctly in the context of what is known in physics today) and therefore seen that the excess energy is enormous, it becomes possible to verify its reality by heating your house by measuring on their device without having to understand.
Their secret catalyst (otherwise assured flight of more than 10 years of research to make reproducible what many others have observed in the past in a random way) prevents from reproducing and therefore we must wait.
There is a risk of dangerous radiation and the mystery is that this radiation is weaker than expected a priori.


I give the basic info in particular the article to read first:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.c ... _paper.pdf

the video data by tagor:
https://www.econologie.com/forums/post190941.html#190941
in Italian and we guess:
and posts that follow.
that we find the videos with partial information on:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=360
the physical essentials are in:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.c ... _paper.pdf
and a patent:
http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?WO= ... SPLAY=DESC
with old articles in it and clear coherent explanations.

the site for this presents a summary:
http://pesn.com/2011/01/14/9501743_10_k ... _in_Italy/


What is on: A large number of scientific papers have published strange facts with physical treatments, heat, flows, electrolyses, discharges, with slight net change in chemical composition varied strange (new impurities) and random heat release.
All this is called cold fusion.
Rossi continues in this line, but with un great release of heat which if true is easy to measure indisputably.
inexplicable otherwise than by surprising nuclear transmutations.
So, given the scientific consistency of the information given, it deserves to measure this excessive heat release reproducible whatever the explanation remains to be discovered.

It is certain that syears old the electrical repulsion between nuclear nuclei the nuclear nuclei would instantly merge into a huge supernova releasing gigantic nuclear energy (energy from the sun in a second instead of 8 billion years) to finish in iron cores of minimal energy and a neutron star (fig 1 of pdf).
So we and our earth and the sun are metastable as a hydrogen-oxygen mixture, but with colossal nuclear energy, over a million times.
Rossi claims to have a composition of catalyst and treatment impurities which reduces the Coulomb repulsion (electrostatic) to less rarely allow this fusion with enormous energy.
He has a coherent speech, and measured new elements not present at the beginning.
It protects against possible radiation with lead and boron.
So to check carefully by the energy release of 10 times the energy supplied. and the comprehension will be made only after the measurement of an indisputable and reproducible reality, even if incomprehensible ..

It is therefore to verify.

An article by a French Dufour who discusses the possibilities:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=275
and that will discuss a lot !! as in :
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@es ... 38023.html
with a lot of similar past works and patents they forget in their patent (but much less energy) !!!
0 x
User avatar
elephant
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6646
Registration: 28/07/06, 21:25
Location: Charleroi, center of the world ....
x 7




by elephant » 19/01/11, 14:14

Thanks Deledeco for "resetting" the subject.

You said:

An armada of physical phenomena have shown in even more laboratories all over the world such strange effects not recognized, because they are not reproducible and strange, not consistent with what we know clearly and sur, that is to say reproducible !!! !


Basically we're doing Roentgen and Marie Curie: they noticed weird things (veiled photographic plates, uranium ore more radioactive than expected), they worked, they found.

We would have made the first Curie measurements with an ore of other origin, we would not have had the same results.
0 x
elephant Supreme Honorary éconologue PCQ ..... I'm too cautious, not rich enough and too lazy to really save the CO2! http://www.caroloo.be
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 19/01/11, 14:39

Before the Curies, there have been other strange past sightings on photo plates who reported it to Becquerel who after verification gave it to Marie Curie subject snap, if not impossible, but she was great and hard at work too, very helped with the discoveries of Pierre Curie essential to measure in detail !!!
Otherwise it would have been delayed by 10 or 20 years ???

Same for strange electricity for over 2000 years, and very gradually studied and understood even more slowly !!

So everything is possible but it must be made reproducible and measurable !! Whatever the oddity !!!
0 x
User avatar
elephant
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6646
Registration: 28/07/06, 21:25
Location: Charleroi, center of the world ....
x 7




by elephant » 19/01/11, 15:04

Let's be honest now: some research is no longer the field back kitchen or garage background: it is not because we are great that we have access to mass spectrometer, scanning electron microscope and other heavy or hyper-heavy machinery.

However, these devices are sometimes essential to analyze the "why it works" of certain manipulations.
0 x
elephant Supreme Honorary éconologue PCQ ..... I'm too cautious, not rich enough and too lazy to really save the CO2! http://www.caroloo.be
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 19/01/11, 18:21

With these large means, some, around the world, have found and published the appearance of atoms of impurities which did not exist before, without understanding any more !!
In Bologna they pretend the same !!
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 19/01/11, 18:44

And with a bit of chat and cheek, some have published strange things that have turned out to be special effects in some cases (the mouse grafted on I don't know which Russian anymore), others have been forgotten (in the years 70, Kervran developed a theory on biological transmutation - see: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corentin_Louis_Kervran - and agronomists have followed suit "coryant" that atoms of Calcium were transformed into Potassium - which avoided the purchase of fertilizers; Benvéniste "theorized" the memory of water to explain homeopathy; an American researcher defends tooth and nail that there is no link between HIV and AIDS ...).

Among the researchers, there are also people who have an "ego" like that, others who are desperate to become famous, others desperate for anything because fundraising also depends on notoriety and hype. media, others too bad to never be invited to a conference and which suddenly will be solicited around the world ...

The thing that bothers me is not that we are not explaining a strange phenomenon.

This is because an experiment would a priori contradict all known theories.

Which is significantly different from the phenomenon which cannot be explained by "knowledge vacuum". The phenomena linked to electric current (sparks, magnetic fields, etc.) could not be explained until the current was known.

Water flows from top to bottom and as long as you don't know gravity, you can't explain it. But then, once the gravity is known, hard to believe when making incantations, the water will flow from the bottom to the top (except of course, on the face exposed to the winds of some buildings, with the air rising, causes drops; or except "ram", etc ...).

So the question is: "knowledge void" or "contradiction" with what we know about nuclear energies. At this level, I am incompetent. And skeptical by nature ...
Last edited by Did67 the 19 / 01 / 11, 18: 51, 1 edited once.
0 x

Go back to "Innovations, inventions, patents and ideas for sustainable development"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 97 guests