Merciful 2/Merciful - Disc 2.iso/software/p/projectufo3.dms/projectufo3.adf/FUSION.MET

Text File | 1989-04-17 | 14KB | 320 lines

Article 4701 of sci.physics:
Path: dasys1!cucard!rocky8!cmcl2!nrl-cmf!ukma!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!husc6!lotto
From: [e-mail] (Gerald I. Lotto)
Newsgroups: sci.chem,sci.physics
Subject: Other metals for cold fusion system
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 31 Mar 89 15:18:42 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: Harvard Chemistry Dept., Harvard University
Lines: 24
Xref: dasys1 sci.chem:24 sci.physics:4701
Posted: Fri Mar 31 10:18:42 1989

I have seen many references to Ti as an alternative to Pd in the
cold fusion system that has received some attention :-) in these
newsgroups lately. d-block metal H affinities seem to fall into
two broad categories:

1) Little or none - generally true of metals not mentioned in the
following paragraph(s).

2) Ti, Zr, Hf (IVa) and V, Nb, Ta (Va) form (exothermically) hydrides
that are pretty stable. Ti and Zr in particular form materials that
are commonly used as reducing agents in metallurgy. These tend to be
nonstoichiometric hydrides in a 1:~1.5 M:H ratio.

Pd is unique in how labile the "hydrides" that it forms are. Copper is
also strange - but in a different way, not particularly useful in this
context. If other metals are to be used for this process, I would
think that Ru or Rh would be more likely candidates than Ti from a
chemical standpoint.

More info from:

F. A. Lewis, The Palladium-Hydrogen System, Acad. Press, 1967
--
Gerald Lotto - Harvard Chemistry Dept.


Article 4728 of sci.physics:
Path: dasys1!cucard!rocky8!cmcl2!nrl-cmf!ames!think!husc6!m2c!wpi!mchamp
From: [e-mail] (Marc J. Champagne)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Palladium vs Titanium fusion claims
Keywords: cold fusion, palladium, titanium
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 1 Apr 89 02:08:25 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, Mass.
Lines: 103
Posted: Fri Mar 31 21:08:25 1989


I've recently seen several postings on USENET regarding reports of
   cold fusion occuring within titanium now, as well as palladium.
   This is basically being reported as a manifestation of the same
   property which theorists are saying allows the fusion of deuterium
   to occur in the lattice wells of palladium.  I disagree.  Can
   anyone confirm the following, and offer some possible explanations.


1) lattice structure
     -palladium has a type of cubic lattice structure at STP ; the
      lattice is reportedly saturated with palladium ions during a 10
      hour "charging time", after which fusion occurs via tunneling
     -titanium has a stable hexagonal structure below 882 C ; it's
      cubic lattic is only stable ABOVE 882 Celsius

2) hydrogen absorbtion
     -palladium is known to absorb 800-900 times its own volume in
      hydrogen
     -titanium decomposes steam at 700 C to oxidize ; it liberates
      hydrogen ; at the temperature at which it has the lattice
      structure to hold the deuterium ions, it would break down the
      heavy water and react with the oxygen, not absorb the hydrogen

3) electrical resistance
     -palladium is an extremely good conductor ; it is commonly used
      in relays and other electrical-mechanical components, since it
      compares favorably to platinum at a fraction of the cost (about
      1/4)
     -titanium is a poor electrical conductor by comparison to copper

4) reactivity
     -palladium is one of the most (if not the most) reactive of the
      platinum group metals ; yet, it is relatively inert compared to
      other metals, having a resistance to oxidation somewhere between
      that of silver and gold
     -titanium is a VERY reactive metal ; this reactity is well known,
      since it makes it very difficult to refine and causes some
      serious brittleness tendancies under a variety of circumstances

5) superconductivity
     -I have never seen any claims that palladium has superconducting
      properties
     -titanium has been shown to have superconductive tendancies at
      extremely low temperatures, and was the center of a good deal of
      research in this area


All of the above are facts which would tend to suggest we are NOT
   looking at a cold fusion supporting ability in these two metals
   based on their common electro-chemical properties.....they have
   very few common and significant properties.  Just what is going on
   here?

Looking at the theoretical explanations which have been formed
   (preliminary and unconfirmed, I admit, but nonetheless logical) to
   explain deuterium fusion in the palladium lattice structure, I
   would have to say that fusion of this type could either NOT occur
   in titanium or would be guaranteed to be FAR BELOW the break-even
   point.  Perhaps fusion HAS been occuring in certain types of
   electro-chemical reactions involving deuterium for quite some time,
   but the occurances have been so isolated in time that we have not
   had any reason to sit up and take notice.  Perhaps the
   palladium-platinum-deuterium electrolysis system set up in Utah has
   drawn our attention to a relatively common occurance, except that
   the fusion has occured at such a fantastic rate that it was the
   first system in which it was really NOTICED.

If this is a correct assumption, than fusion on titanium probably is
   not capable of occuring above the break-even point and has
   absolutely **ZERO** commercial viability.  The people out there
   trading palladium futures probably have nothing to worry about yet
   (grin).  After all, palladium is the most common of the
   platinum-group metals in the earth's crust (which seem to be the
   prime fusion "environment" candidates according to the cold fusion
   theories produced so far).


Still, it raises some interesting regulatory questions.  Even if
   fusion on titanium (or perhaps some even MORE common metal) is not
   possible above the breakeven point (not commercially viable for
   power production), some person who sets up such a device has made
   himself a potent little neutron-generator.  How can we possibly
   hope to prevent such a person from neutron-activating a variety of
   materials, or worse yet from intentionally/accidentally exposing
   living organisms (God forbid, people) from this device?  The NRC
   has pretty tight control over nuclear material and "special"
   nuclear material.  But these devices which seem to be cropping up
   involve nothing more rare than several publicly traded metals and a
   little heavy water.  Even if you enact more stringent controls on
   heavy water possession, you can seperate out the deuterium from
   sea-water using a Physics 101 electrolysis setup.  Junk the oxygen
   and allow the deuterium to settle below the hydrogen because of its
   mass.  That's a grossly inefficient method, but you can easily get
   process seawater to have a 25-40% deuterium content by only
   slightly more advanced methods.  And the Canadians routinely enrich
   the deuterium content above 98% (can't remember the exact figure)
   for their heavy-water reactors.


Even if the readers out there would rather not touch the regulatory
   issues, I'm despirately looking for informed opionions on the
   palladium vs titanium fusion claims.


Article 4733 of sci.physics:
Path: dasys1!cucard!rocky8!cmcl2!rutgers!sunybcs!lanthony
From: [e-mail] (Lawrence Anthony)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Palladium vs Titanium fusion claims
Summary: Are close-packed structures necessary for solid-state fusion?
Keywords: cold fusion, palladium, titanium
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 1 Apr 89 09:31:34 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Lawrence Anthony)
Organization: SUNY/Buffalo Computer Science
Lines: 21
Posted: Sat Apr  1 04:31:34 1989

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Marc J. Champagne) writes:
>
>1) lattice structure
>     -palladium has a type of cubic lattice structure at STP ; the
>      lattice is reportedly saturated with palladium ions during a 10
>      hour "charging time", after which fusion occurs via tunneling
>     -titanium has a stable hexagonal structure below 882 C ; it's
>      cubic lattic is only stable ABOVE 882 Celsius
>

Both the face-centered cubic (cubic close-packed) structure of Pd
and the hexagonal close-packed structure of Ti are close-
packed structures, even if the c/a ratio for the latter departs
somewhat from the ideal.  This close-packed structure seems to be a
common property of all the putative fusion-supporting lattices
mentioned thus far.



bitnet:        [e-mail]
internet:    [e-mail]


Article 24 of sci.chem:
Path: dasys1!cucard!rocky8!cmcl2!nrl-cmf!ukma!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!husc6!lotto
From: [e-mail] (Gerald I. Lotto)
Newsgroups: sci.chem,sci.physics
Subject: Other metals for cold fusion system
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 31 Mar 89 15:18:42 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: Harvard Chemistry Dept., Harvard University
Lines: 24
Xref: dasys1 sci.chem:24 sci.physics:4701
Posted: Fri Mar 31 10:18:42 1989

I have seen many references to Ti as an alternative to Pd in the
cold fusion system that has received some attention :-) in these
newsgroups lately. d-block metal H affinities seem to fall into
two broad categories:

1) Little or none - generally true of metals not mentioned in the
following paragraph(s).

2) Ti, Zr, Hf (IVa) and V, Nb, Ta (Va) form (exothermically) hydrides
that are pretty stable. Ti and Zr in particular form materials that
are commonly used as reducing agents in metallurgy. These tend to be
nonstoichiometric hydrides in a 1:~1.5 M:H ratio.

Pd is unique in how labile the "hydrides" that it forms are. Copper is
also strange - but in a different way, not particularly useful in this
context. If other metals are to be used for this process, I would
think that Ru or Rh would be more likely candidates than Ti from a
chemical standpoint.

More info from:

F. A. Lewis, The Palladium-Hydrogen System, Acad. Press, 1967
--
Gerald Lotto - Harvard Chemistry Dept.


Article 36 of sci.chem:
Path: dasys1!cucard!rocky8!cmcl2!lanl!hc!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!hplabs!hplabsz!dleigh
From: [e-mail] (Darren Leigh)
Newsgroups: sci.chem,sci.physics,rec.arts.sf-lovers
Subject: Jack Williamson was right
Summary: Now we've had it!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 4 Apr 89 00:55:46 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Darren Leigh)
Followup-To: rec.arts.sf-lovers
Organization: Open Fly Systems
Lines: 24
Xref: dasys1 sci.chem:36 sci.physics:4779 rec.arts.sf-lovers:16336
Posted: Mon Apr  3 19:55:46 1989

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gerald I. Lotto) writes:

>Pd is unique in how labile the "hydrides" that it forms are. Copper is
>also strange - but in a different way, not particularly useful in this
>context. If other metals are to be used for this process, I would
>think that Ru or Rh would be more likely candidates than Ti from a
>chemical standpoint.

I bet they would be!  Now I've got it all figured out.  Palladium,
Ruthenium, Rhodium . . .  I can add two and two.  Our friendly Utah
researchers haven't discovered cold fusion, they've discovered
rhodo-magnetism!  Now we're really in trouble.  The humanoids
undoubtedly detected the reactions and are on their way at this very
instant.  The only decent weapon to use against them is a
rhodo-magnetic monopole and where the hell are we going to get one of
those?

The only advice I can give you is DON'T BUY ANY ROBOTS!  Especially
not black ones with metal eyes.  Don't even let them in your house.

Cowering in terror,
Darren Leigh
Internet:  [e-mail]
UUCP:      hplabs!dleigh


Article 4763 of sci.physics:
Path: dasys1!cucard!rocky8!cmcl2!lanl!hc!ames!lll-winken!uunet!mcvax!ukc!reading!minster!martin
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Palladium, etc
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 31 Mar 89 23:54:56 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (martin)
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of York, England
Lines: 28
Posted: Fri Mar 31 18:54:56 1989

I was just looking at a table of `Electronic configurations of the
elements', (with particular interest in the entry for Pd - You can
probably guess why!) and I noticed that Palladium is unique in that it
has a completely full, `naked' d electron subshell.  Ie it is a bit
like an inert gas, except that they all have full p subshells - all
other elements with full d subshells have electrons either in the
corresponding f subshell, or in the s subshell of the next shell.
In either case `outside' the d subshell. (Sorry that sounds convoluted,
I hope it is clear enough!)

Could someone who understands the implications of this tell me more?
Is there a simple explaination as to why this happens? (Or is it
`just life'!). Are there any interesting properties of Pd which
result from this?  Is there any possibility that this could have any
bearing on the current speculation? If the report of similar results
using Titanium are true then presumeably the answer to that is `no'.

Martin

usenet: ...!mcvax!ukc!minster!martin
JANET:  [e-mail]
surface:
    Martin C. Atkins
    Dept. of Computer Science
    University of York
    Heslington
    York YO1 5DD
    ENGLAND