onthecuttingedge2005 said:

Quote
...I really have doubts that any fusion reaction will take place to produce 4He, deuterium is a stable isotope and requires about 2 million atmospheres to obtain a fusion reaction.

I thought about it, before I saw you wrote it above.  You're right.  The core of a star has these conditions.

Quote
I really don't see how molten Nickel will react on a nuclear level with deuterium. ... I would still like to see some results in a lab with the proper safety equipment in place.

That intrigues me.  Why nickel?  Is it as good or better than aluminum?  And the safety precautions are very important, you're correct.

--Lee

Quote from: the_big_m_in_ok on October 22, 2009, 10:10:05 AM
onthecuttingedge2005 said:I thought about it, before I saw you wrote it above.  You're right.  The core of a star has these conditions.That intrigues me.  Why nickel?  Is it as good or better than aluminum?  And the safety precautions are very important, you're correct.

--Lee

Hi Lee.

I think Plato is thinking that by modeling a Nickel and or an Iron Core into a molten sphere that he would achieve a fusion reaction by modeling it like 'some stars'.

Nickel isn't even needed in the equation, usually Stars that burn really hot and really fast generate Iron and maybe a bit of Nickel, but usually Slow burning stars that burn less hot live a lot longer than normal and they contain very little Iron or other elements that would impede on its stable steady state.

I think he is missing the fundamental forces that are needed to obtain such a reaction, A star requires very strong fundamental forces just to hold itself together during a fusion reaction. Gravity is pulling in on the Star while Photon Pressure is keeping it from collapsing in on itself, if the photoreaction stops then the Star will begin to shrink, if it shrinks fast enough it would go into a super nova cascade reaction.

our star is theorized to be one of the lucky ones that will slowly die as a small dwarf. a stable death. not to old though.

now if radioactive cores are generated then this could cause a Star to burn more energetically specially if the the Core was comprised of partially 60Iron and some 60Cobalt. the additional Gamma Rays would knock off Neutrons from the Deuterium to produce very hot plasma Gases.


I think that Gravity and Photo Pressure play the largest role in normal fusion reactions. Nickel wouldn't be needed from what I see. if Nickel was used then 63Nickel would be the subject although a Star would not contain much of it or even any at all.

Stable heavy Elements don't do to much good for Stars because the Stable elements don't add to the reaction much, it is the radioactive elements which re-add their energy to make it more energetic.

1. Radioactivity..(Nuclear fundamental forces).
2. Photo Pressure.(EMF fundamental forces).
3. Gravity..(Gravitational fundamental forces).
4. Fuel Ratio mix.
5. amount of usable fuel available.

these are important in determining how a star lives its life.

All metals have the ability to absorb hydrogen/deuterium gas atoms at different rates.  When this happens under certain conditions, we have interesting reactions which are not covered in modern science text books.  Excess heat, transmutation, and nuclear products have been observed by scientists in different parts of the world. 

Palladium is preferred due to its great absorption rate but is too expensive. I chose nickel instead because of its availability and price.

According to the standard model, our sun is mainly composed of plasma. This is a claim I do not agree with for many reasons.  Here are a few:

•   Surface features like Sunspots have enough stability to stay in place uniformly as the sun rotates. How can stability be present when violent nuclear reactions at the core are supposedly occurring? The standard model can’t explain it without violating thermodynamics.
•   Standard model; hottest part of the sun is its core.  Fact: temperature gets cooler as we explore closer to the surface and have yet to measure anything beyond it. This suggests the Sun’s  high energetic reactions are an atmospheric phenomenon. (8/14/09 Nanoflares!)
•   Heavy metal (like Ni + Fe) abundance for formation of space bodies is critical. The standard model expects us to ignore this fact and insists Hydrogen plays a more important role.

Satellite observations confirm presence of iron in heavy concentrations. Considering our Sun’s strong gravity, it should be reasonable to expect more undetected Iron underneath.  (Link ) 

The electric Sun model (Birkeland) has served me well because of its consistency with observation. 

Here are a few other resources relevant to the device.  You will notice some subjects posted here have been largely ignored by the scientific establishment for one reason or another. My only concern is observational data above all else. Let someone else worry about religious and science dogmas.   


Electric Sun Model

•    Thesunisiron.com
•    Thesurfaceofthesun.com
•    Solar Abundances of the Elements
•    Thermalphysics.org 

Observations made in science experiments:

•    U.S. Navy Cold Fusion Research
•    Physicist Claims First Real Demonstration of Cold Fusion
•    Infinite Energy
•   Lenr-canr.org
•    Molten Salt Techniques for Reproducible Excess Heat

Relevant observations made in nature:

•    Expansion of planets and moon (Videos)
•    Fissures on the Sun
•    Temporary solid formations on the Sun
•    Water detected in Sunspots
•    Water abundance in star nursery (Orion Nebula)

Observations suggesting “cold” fusion power source in UFOs:

•     TO CATCH A FLYING STAR, A SCIENTIFIC THEORY OF UFOs
•    Falcon Lake case. 
•    Falcon Lake case (my illustrations along with speculation) 
•    Cases involving molten metals

I am getting some weird results with iron pyrite and light water. Will post details when more observations are available.

Quote from: plato on December 12, 2009, 10:39:40 PM
I am getting some weird results with iron pyrite and light water. Will post details when more observations are available.

Can you be more specific?
Are you subjecting the iron pyrite to electricity under water?  Using an electromagnetic field against the iron pyrite?  Some of both?

Is the water doing something unusual?  Disassociating, for instance?

Looking forward to your reply...

--Lee