Tuesday, October 10, 2017

Edmund Storms HYDROTON A Model of Cold Fusion

It wasn't long back and we were swinging in the trees but now we are designing nano-machines that will be able to produce an abundance of cheap, non polluting energy through cold fusion. Scientists don't know how it works and so are not able to develop mathematical theories for it, so they have to set up loads of experiments on a trail and error basis to find which combination works best.

It would be good to get away from oil.

HYDROTON A Model of Cold Fusion describes the nano-gap and hydroton theory with Dr. Edmund Storms, a nuclear chemist and cold fusion researcher now retired from Los Alamos National Laboratory . It picks up where Storms' 2014 book The Explanation of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction: An Examination of the Relationship between Observation and Explanation left off. He proposes a unique chain of hydrogen and electrons that would assemble in the nano-cracks and nano-spaces of materials, fusing through a slow resonance process where smaller bits of mass are converted to quanta of energy through coherent photon emission. If true, it would describe an extension of the 100-year-old conventional nuclear theory. Several of the Nano-gap Hydroton Hypotheses are now being tested for confirmation.


Matt Franko said...

"It wasn't long back and we were swinging in the trees"

Must be worse in the U.K. than I previously thought.....

Alain Coetmeur said...

Cold Fusion aka LENr is a real subject, today only an experimental observation, widely replicated and rejected because there is no conformed theory.

I feel Edmund Storms is in the good direction, but there is a missing link, a quantum description of hos energy dis slowly dissipated.

I'm worried that for most people, deniers or supporters, the question of theory precede the question of experimental validity.

for more information there are few Quora articles that refers to many available resources, scientific papers, reviews, booklets


My position is that unless someone can fund real good old research (not far from what happened during the troubled first years when research was not yet widely known to be dangerous for your career), witrh a budget of around 25 Mn$, there is no hope of any breathrough.
Despite enthusiasm of some observers, I see that all today's reseashers work with shoestring, even the japanese, and we need serious investigation wit modern instruments like what is done for nanotechnology and accumulator research:
my best example of what should be done
Old ape of LENR research were fascinated by this work, which may answer some of their question.

By the way, for me only PdD lener is experimentally certain.
NiH experimental results are sparse and not confirmed/replicated.
Anyway I judge from the mass of resulst and from theoretical extrapolation that probably we could design LENR NAE in many hydride materials, NiH, TiH/D, WH/D, alloys, and why not graphene, organic compounds, proteins...

among key resources I would advise

Kaivey said...

Interesting, Alain. I put it out because it is a little bit of positive in our troubled world.

I was amazed at the nano particle machines they were designing. A hundred years ago we had steam trains and now look at the technology. You can buy software programs of sampled grand pianos for a £100 to £300 which sound as good as the world's greatest grand pianos.

Alain Coetmeur said...

being positive is just rationality.
Things get really better.
Current feeling in the West (only there) is an amazing and sad sociology fiasco.

just have to follow Max Roser world in data

if you follow what count and not prediction that fails, all goes better.