Hydrogen + metal = surprising reactions without plasmas

[PhysicsProf]

   So this topic is not really new, but it is certainly developing.  I'm following, very interested.  Mostly the research is done in Italy and Japan.  This from the October 2018 paper from the Celani team in Italy:

Anomalous Heat Effects (AHE) have been observed in wires of Cu55Ni44Mn1 (Constantan) exposed to H2 and D2 in multiple experiments along the last 8 years. Improvements in the magnitude and reproducibility of AHE were reported by the Authors of the present work in the past and related to wire preparation and reactor design. In facts, an oxidation of the wires by pulses of electrical current in air creates a rough surface featuring a sub-micrometric texture that proved particularly effective at inducing thermal anomalies when temperature exceeds 400 °C.
     The hunted effect appears also to be increased substantially by deposing segments of the wire with a series of elements (such as Fe, Mn, Sr, K, via thermal decomposition of their nitrates applied from a water solution). Furthermore, an increase of AHE was observed after introducing the treated wires inside a sheath made of borosilicate glass (Si-B-Ca; BSC), and even more after impregnating the sheath with the same elements used to coat the wires. Finally, AHE was augmented after introducing equally spaced knots (the knots were coated with the mixture of Fe, Mn, Sr, K) to induce thermal gradients along the wire (knots become very hot spots when a current is passed along the wire). Interestingly, the coating appears to be nearly insulating and it is deemed being composed of mixed oxides of the corresponding elements (mostly FeOx, SrO). Having observed a degradation of the BSC fibers at high temperature, an extra sheath made of quartz fibers was used to prevent the fall of degraded fibers from the first sheath; recently the 2 sheaths assembly has been replaced with a hybrid single sheath developed by SIGI-Favier (i.e. made of both glass and quartz fibers). The treated wire, comprising knots and sheaths, was then wound around a SS316 rod and inserted inside a thick glass reactor. The reactor operates via direct current heating of the treated wire, while exposing it to a 5-2000 mBar of D2 or H2 and their mixtures with a noble gas (in these conditions electromigration phenomena are supposed to occur).

In 2014, the Authors introduced a second independent wire in the reactor design and observed a weak electrical current flowing in it while power was supplied to the first. This current proved to be strongly related to the temperature of the first wire and clearly turned to be the consequence of his Thermionic Emission (where the treated wire represents a Cathode and the second wire an Anode). The presence of this thermionic effect and a spontaneous tension between the two wires did strongly associate to AHE. All these observations were reported at various Conferences, and tentative explanations were provided for the observed effects. The presence of thermal and chemical gradients has been stressed as being of relevance, especially when considering the noteworthy effect of knots on AHE.
       The ICCF21 Conference held on June 2018 marked a turning point, and the scientific community did show a notable interest on the effects of knots and wire treatments, further increasing the confidence on the described approach. From that moment, attempts to further increase AHE focused on the introduction of different types of knots, leading to the choice of the "Capuchin" type (see fig.). This knot design leads indeed to very hot spots along the wire and features three areas characterized by a temperature delta up to several hundred degrees. Efforts were also made to better understand the thermionic effect of the wire, and the spontaneous tension that arises when a second wire is introduced close by (anode). Eventually a large AHE rise was noticed when introducing an extra tension between the active wire (cathode) and the second wire (anode) through an external power supply; a truly remarkable effect, despite his short duration due to the wire failure attributed to an AHE runaway able to melt it. Eventually the authors have observed a stunning similarity of the best performing reactor design and a thermionic diode where the active wire represents the cathode and the second wire the anode, whereas the electrodes are separated by fibrous layers impregnated with mixed oxides comprising Iron and alkaline metals. This observation allows to speculate on a thermionic power converter able to generate electricity through the thermionic emission of a cathode heated by AHE and collected by an anode (colder and/or featuring a different work function with respect to the cathode). The presentation, summarized in this abstract, reports the latest AHE results obtained from a new reactor design comprising capuchin knots and hybrid sheaths manufactured for the purpose.

Figure content uploaded by Francesco Celani

Figures can be seen here:  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326991285_First_evaluation_of_coated_Constantan_wires_comprising_Capuchin_knots_to_increase_anomalous_heat_and_reduce_input_power_at_high_temperatures

[PhysicsProf]

  Note that nickel metal and H2 (also D2) are used here.   I believe the first to claim anomalous heat production (AHP) from metals + H2, from H2O in his case, was Peter Davey of New Zealand in the 1940's.
(We've discussed his work in a different thread).

   Now the research focusses on H2 and D2 gas entering nickel (also other metals) at elevated temps (but well below plasma temps).  It seems important that the metal lattice be present.

Hence, a solid lattice is needed for the (presumed nuclear) reaction to occur.  That is what is so surprising, that a nuclear (not d-d fusion) reaction appears to occur at a sufficient rate for heat to be observed and measured.

[PhysicsProf]

  Here is a photo and corresponding drawing of one of the "knots" in the Constantan wire where the reactions evidently occur:

[ion]

Dear PhysicsProf;

Thanks for posting this research.

I was following the work with Constantan wire by Celani  et al back when it was being covered by MFMP, but lost track of their progress due to life circumstances intervening at that time.

Having a lot of Constantan wire on hand, various gauges, I hope to try something like this at some point. Rather than hot air calorimetry, I will use a differential method using two identical reactor tubes fed identical power, one loaded with H or D2, the control loaded with an inert gas. Power input can be balanced for identical heat output, then the H or D2 is introduced into the active tube. Small temperature differences will be easy to detect using this method of null balance.

Regards.

[Chet K]

also to note
Luc is also giving serious consideration to an attempt .

will just need clarity on needed equipment and test protocols .

If this protocol can be made as simple as ION outlined  ??

there could be plenty more experimenters playing with this heat anomaly .


what an opportunity !!

[ion]

also to note
Luc is also giving serious consideration to an attempt .

will just need clarity on needed equipment and test protocols .

If this protocol can be made as simple as ION outlined  ??

there could be plenty more experimenters playing with this heat anomaly .


what an opportunity !!

Hot air calorimetry is a good way to go if you are wishing to exactly quantify the amount of excess heat produced, but it is far more difficult to perform for the average experimenter, is messy and prone to errors if not performed properly.

If you just want to see a difference against a "control" then the differential method is within easy grasp of the average experimenter. Not to say that exact BTU output cannot be obtained using this method, it just requires one extra characterization step.

I would be happy to outline the differential technique if Luc is interested. I have already written quite a bit about it

Basic methods outlined here:

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2883.0

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2884.0

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2888.0

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2741.0

It would be good for Luc to acquaint himself with this work, then I can suggest any minor modifications.

I am available for phone discussion.

Regards

[PhysicsProf]

Hydrogen-Nickel Reactions
  Let me focus on what appears to be the most promising approach right now for hydrogen-metal reactions – and that is when the metal chosen is nickel, a cheap and abundant metal.  I acknowledge that when nickel is in the presence of other metals (e.g., an alloy), the reaction may be enhanced. 

  There are just five naturally-occuring isotopes of Nickel, these are:
58Ni  68%

60Ni  26%

61Ni  1.1%
62Ni  3.6%

64Ni  0.9%

Now the reaction that I and several others came up with, about the same time – is this:  add a proton to the nucleus!  The physicist will say, "But the Coulomb-barrier against the proton entering the nucleus is huge!"  And I will answer:
1 – First, the proton does not need to go over the barrier; it can possibly tunnel through the barrier (a quantum-mechanical process)
2 – Recall that the surprisingly high rate of d-d fusion observed in metals, which my team first discovered & published in Nature, has been verified (references), yet is not fully understood theoretically.  To me, experiments trump theory when theory is lagging behind experiments, which happens surprisingly often.  (Recall that high-temp superconductivity is not well understood theoretically, yet Nature allows it to occur even though our theory lags behind!) 
  3 – The proposed reaction occurs in the metal-catalyzed matrix, just as low-level (so far) d-d fusion is enhanced in metals (an empirical fact).  This environment for nuclear reactions is unique.

   We can look up the masses of the nuclear reactants and resultant products, and we see that substantial energy is released (call it ∆E) during the hypothesized proton + Ni-nucleus reactions.  We are not talking about creating energy out of nothing!  Rather, we apply Einstein's equation, ∆E = ∆mc2 .

58Ni  + p →  59Cu   which then decays by β+ emission;

60Ni  + p →  61Cu   which then decays by β+ emission

61Ni  + p →  62Cu   which then decays by β+ emission
62Ni  + p →  63Cu   which is stable (does not decay)
64Ni  + p →  65Cu   which is stable (does not decay)

In a chart of nuclides, we find the masses involved and calculate straightforwardly the energy released in each (fusion-type nuclear) reaction, for example, 58Ni plus a proton:

M of proton = 1.007276467 u
M of 58Ni = 57.9353429 u
Adding these we find that th ue mass of reactants = 1.00727646688u +  57.9353429 =  58.942619367 u
And the mass of the resulting  59Cu (postulated) = 58.9394980 u
Then -∆m = Minitial – Mfinal = (1.00727646688 +  57.9353429) u - 58.9394980 u = 58.942619367 -  58.9394980 = 0.003121367 u
We multiply this by the speed-of-light squared, to get the energy released in the reaction, and convert to a standard unit of energy  (MeV = Million-electron-Volts, and 931.5 MeV/c2 = 1 u)
and we find: 
∆E = ∆mc2 = 2.908 MeV per reaction.

Turns out that is a lot of energy released, considering that many many reactions are possible per second.  These reactions would in turn result in radioactive products that would release β+ emission, which don't travel far in matter.  The next product would be gamma-rays mostly at 1.011 MeV, which are easy to shield against.

   Since Nature has surprised us before, she may do so again.  It may be that the reactions resulting in stable (non-radioactive) copper might dominate the process, so there would finally be but few gammas relative to the large heat energy released:
62Ni  + p →  63Cu   
64Ni  + p →  65Cu   
  All of these isotopes are stable, that is, not radioactive at all.  Only experiments will tell.

   In my own experiments along these lines, I have focussed on using electrolysis to place protons in the nickel matrix.  Then I measure heat production.  My results are occasionally up to 1.09 of "anomalous power".  I'm still working on achieving 100% reproducibility, which is the great ELUSIVE goal in this field at the moment.

   My path to HyNi came through muon-catalyzed fusion, then d-d cold fusion in metals, then learning about the Peter Davey claims of excess heat in ordinary water in the 1940's – followed by my own experiments using ordinary H2O.  My results are encouraging – along with those of MANY others now, world-wide.  Others have taken various paths, and several now use gas-loading of Hydrogen into nickel and other metals.

   It is basically a "race for humanity" at this time, to see who can achieve: 
1 – 100% reproducibility, each and every experiment.
2 – higher power yields, to make measurements more straightforward.
3 – still higher power yields, to make a useful device.
4 – release the inventions to benefit humanity.
It will be interesting to see which group in which country gets there first.  It might be that our community will "crack the code" for 100% reproducibility FIRST.  Groups in Italy and Japan are working on this. (Not so much in the USA for some reason.)

  We should consider the alternative approaches for loading hydrogen into metals, before diving in (IMO).  Some of these are:

1 - Electrolysis involving H2O, an approach which also allows for co-deposition of various metals (including lithium, one of my personal favorites) onto a metal cathode at the same time as hydrogen (protons) are introduced into the matrix.  I credit Peter Davey for pioneering in this particular approach in the 1940's - not Pons &Fleischmann who used H2O for control-experiments, and who came later anyway.

2 -  H2 gas-loading, with the metal heated in various ways including Joule-heating (E.g., Takhashi in Japan and Celani in Italy).

3-  Chemical decomposition of hydrogen-rich compounds into metals (E.g., Parkhomov)

4-  H+  ion bombardment at various beam energies, into various test-metals.  (I don't know of anyone using this approach at this time).


I'm going to stick my neck out prognosticate that one of these approaches will succeed big-time in the next year or two.  The FIRST to achieve 100% reproducibility in anomalous hydrogen-metal reactions will greatly benefit humanity.   The lack of repeatability is the greatest bottleneck at the moment, as I see it.

[Chet K]

Physics Prof
I was asked a question regarding seeing possible changes on the  bench  other gasses showing up which would indicate
an anomalous event.

specifically using bright line spectrum , is this something to consider ?
is there a simple open source Data logger which could watch for this "change" [an open question to all readers]

very exciting stuff to say the least.

[Centraflow]

Physics Prof
I was asked a question regarding seeing possible changes on the  bench  other gasses showing up which would indicate
an anomalous event.

specifically using bright line spectrum , is this something to consider ?
is there a simple open source Data logger which could watch for this "change" [an open question to all readers]

very exciting stuff to say the least.

Chet I went down that path some years ago, very expensive, 250,000$ for a desk top.

Regards

Mike

[ion]

https://makezine.com/projects/make-24/high-res-spectrograph/

Just a starting point, adding a camera and some software would improve.

[PhysicsProf]

P-Metal Reactions (PMR) – Review of research progress

I'm currently traveling home from family reunions in Pennsylvania.  I pause at our motel in Ohio to write a brief summary, and I invite you all to fill in, helping with links to videos and publication-references and links. 

  1- Home-inventor class
      The first known inventor who claimed anomalous heat production (AHP) involving hydrogen-metal-type reactions is Peter Davey of New Zealand.  His claims go back to the 1940's, and are featured in several youtube videos and also news-media coverage.  Davey evidently thought the key to the AHP was acoustic resonance in his bell-like electrodes operating in H2O.  He was reportedly seeking funding before disclosing his secret; and evidently when this funding did not come, he took his secrets to the grave.
      Numerous inventions have followed the same line of research.  One of the most interesting researchers is our friend Woopy in Belgium, who shows a line of H2O-based electrolysis devices reminiscent of Davey, but he adds significant Power-out/Power-in measurements.  I recently asked Woopy why he stopped this line of research – did he identify a problem?  He said that was not the case, he continues to support the conclusions he had reached, he simply moved on to other research interests.
Woopy used voltages up to 220V, which is somewhat more difficult in the US – but I think the same results could be achieved with 125V maxima, which are easy to achieve.
      I also have dabbled in this area, before my big move to Missouri, and I would like to get back into it.   By operating starting with hot water, I was able to measure AHP and also input power.  COP's around 1.1 were typical, but I did yet not achieve 100% repeatability – which is a primary goal of this research.  Focus is on nickel and nickel-alloys as cathodes in H2O-electrolysis.

2--  Uber-scientific class
    The work of Akito Takahashi in Japan and Francesco Celani in Italy are in this class, with first-rate equipment to load H2-gas into various metals.  Both post results at ResearchGate, and I have posted some of their results here at overunityresearch.com. 
    This H2-gas approach with sophisticated calorimetry is very promising, but difficult to achieve in small laboratories (compared to H2O-electrolysis and water-calorimetry).  D2 gas also works, but Takahashi shows that H2 works just as well (perhaps better than D2) and is certainly MUCH less expensive.
    The work by Parkhomov in Russia, again using H2 gas, might fit in this category.

3--  Pons-Fleischmann class
  P&F claimed d-d "cold" fusion in electrolytic cells involving D2O and LiOD.  For these experiments, H2O is the control – no AHP is expected therefore when H2O (or H2) is used.  From what I can see, the d-d-cold-fusion approach in heavy-water electrolysis has been pretty much abandoned by now.

4--  Geo-Fusion class
   In our 1989 paper in Nature, my colleagues and I claimed that AHP could occur in the earth, specifically in the hydrogen-bearing nickel-iron core of the earth.   Since then, I've posited that the main reaction in earth's core could be proton-metal reactions PMR, a type of geo-Fusion. 
   Experiments along this line would involve molten nickel+iron with dissolved hydrogen.  These are probably not easy experiments to realize in a small lab like mine, and nothing like this has yet been tried in the laboratory AFAIK.

5-  Commercial class
   Two companies claim PMR leading to AHP, but their claims are shrouded in business-related secrecy.  These companies are:
Defkalion – who presented a demonstration to the big ICCP conference at the University of Missouri in 2013.  I was present, and I asked a question of a Defkalion scientist which was then posted on youtube.  I really haven't heard about Defkalion since then; and I wonder what they are up to now.

E-cat:  this from wikipedia:  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer
The Energy Catalyzer (also called E-Cat) is a claimed cold fusion reactor devised by inventor Andrea Rossi with support from the late physicist Sergio Focardi. An Italian patent, which received a formal but not a technical examination, describes the apparatus as a "process and equipment to obtain exothermal reactions, in particular from nickel and hydrogen".

E-cat claims have been challenged and are controversial, shrouded in secrecy.  It would be interesting to find out what they are up to now, if any claims have been tested/verified or not.

[PhysicsProf]

  Here is a recording of my question to the Defkalion scientist - and his reply:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lPnUt4cNzM

  That was 5 years ago.  Looked good.  Would like to know what Defkalion people are doing now!

[Smudge]

I saw a documentary back in about 1994 on our UK channel 4 TV that showed the Patterson cell delivering AHP.  It also featured Meyer's hydrogen production and     Grigg's water heater using the water hammer effect.  It was that film that got me interested in OU.
Smudge

[PhysicsProf]

I saw a documentary back in about 1994 on our UK channel 4 TV that showed the Patterson cell delivering AHP.  It also featured Meyer's hydrogen production and     Grigg's water heater using the water hammer effect.  It was that film that got me interested in OU.
Smudge

Interesting!  Thanks.

I'm back home now, will do some digging...

[ion]

Here is part one of the Patterson Cell documentary available on youtube in 4 parts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUQfYw_HEJs

Somewhere I also have this on VHS tape recorded from my TV back then.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterson_power_cell

[Centraflow]

I was not going to step in here as I have too much on my plate atm, but I have reproduced time and time again without fail, a localised high heat in the SMD cell.

This heat is enough to melt 316 stainless steel, see the picture attached.

The driving force to do this is the abrupt electrode transition from negative to positive in oscillation at a low frequency change over.

I believe it is this pulling of electrons and probably photons inside the metal and in a changing gaseos environment of hydrogen and oxygen.

Why I believe the above. There seems to be an excess of electrical energy developed which can be seen on an oscilloscope measuring current on both sides of the circuit. This energy is coming from a complex electrode reaction which is extracting electrons which are used in part to charge the second half of the circuit.

Anybody can do this at home, the thing you can't do at home is testing for any fusion or nuclear reaction.

I wish a lab would take this up and test it.

Regards

Mike

[PhysicsProf]

Regarding the Patterson cell - complicated, but evidently uses regular H2O, therefore along the same lines as described in this thread.
From Wikipedia:  "A replication has been attempted at Earthtech, using a CETI supplied kit. They were not able to replicate the excess heat. They looked for cold fusion products, but only found traces of contamination in the electrolyte.[17]
"

So using a kit supplied by Patterson's company, "They were not able to replicate the excess heat. "

I was not going to step in here as I have too much on my plate atm, but I have reproduced time and time again without fail, a localised high heat in the SMD cell.

This heat is enough to melt 316 stainless steel, see the picture attached.

The driving force to do this is the abrupt electrode transition from negative to positive in oscillation at a low frequency change over.

I believe it is this pulling of electrons and probably photons inside the metal and in a changing gaseos environment of hydrogen and oxygen.

Why I believe the above. There seems to be an excess of electrical energy developed which can be seen on an oscilloscope measuring current on both sides of the circuit. This energy is coming from a complex electrode reaction which is extracting electrons which are used in part to charge the second half of the circuit.

Anybody can do this at home, the thing you can't do at home is testing for any fusion or nuclear reaction.

I wish a lab would take this up and test it.

Regards

Mike

What do you want us to do, Mike - that is, can you provide either the device (or a kit) or detailed directions?  I'm sure there are several including myself, willing to "take this up and test it."

Again, we carefully measure and calculate Pout/Pin = COP; and concern ourselves about any nuclear reaction later.  Perhaps the energy comes from nuclear reactions - but perhaps from something else.  AHP is awesome, whatever its source turns out to be.

The first step is repeatably achieving COP > 1.

[PhysicsProf]

  ION - I would rather deal with water calorimetry which I've done quite lot of - rather than air calorimetry! 

   Let me suggest the easiest way I found to do these experiments is to first heat the water - electrolyte to near boiling (I used a cheap immersion coil-heater) in a WELL insulated container, then measure the mass of the water in grams.  (I weighed the whole device including insulation; subtracting the tare weight.)    Next I would perform the experiment which would hopefully yield AHP, then measure the mass of the electrolyte again.
 
The heat produced was then calculated simply:  Q =  2257 Joules/gram x (Minitial - Mfinal)

A very straightforward calorimeter indeed.

I also used the formula for heating water from room temp, but this involved measuring the temp in the jar after the experiment, and I found that stirring-errors were large.  I prefer the simpler "heat to vaporization" method described above.

I also measured the volume of H2 and O2 produced sometimes - but found this to be a fairly small "correction" to the above.  Also, I tried to get as much recombination of H2+O --> H2O as possible, in the cell.

Besides, we are looking for COP >1.3 in woopy's cells (for example), so smaller corrections can wait until we repeatedly get COP >1.3 using Q =  2257 Joules/gram x (Minitial - Mfinal)
-- and concern ourselves about small details (which generally increase the value of COP)  later.

[PhysicsProf]

  With this ""heat to vaporization calorimeter" in mind for our initial experiments, I propose to look first at Woopy's star-in-jar claims, which go back to 2013 and 2014.   
  However, if Mike wishes to share details of his approach, I would personally look at that first!

   Here are some of Woopy's basic videos which I recommend.  He has several more.  These describe his method with variations, and results, and are enough to get us started.  Others were doing these experiments in the same time period - I did some also, but got distracted by a very serious illness (Rocky-mtn spotted fever).

  woopy basic star-in-jar, cop 1.45  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1eA0u7MBz4

woopy star-in-jar variation showing magnet jumping, cop not calculated  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lre05U1Bpso

woopy insulated jar, cop 1.6  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO1pq0h6e0g

pressurized star-in-jar, cop not calculated  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmGufAr0uoM

  The beauty of this simple system is that regular water is used, not D2O, and a hydrogen-plasma is formed right at the cathode = a very good way to introduce hydrogen at high-temperature into the metal!  (We do this while avoiding the complications faced by Takashi and Celani, who used H2 gas at high temperatures.)

Again, I recently asked Woopy if he found some error in his measurements with this system.  He said "no"; he simply moved on to other interests.

   Woopy used a tungsten-lanthanum cathode.  Right soon after replicating Woopy - I would switch to a NICKEL cathode, as nickel seems to be a desirable metal, based on the most recent work (described in an earlier post of mine, above).

   

   

[PhysicsProf]

  With this ""heat to vaporization calorimeter" in mind for our initial experiments, I propose to look first at Woopy's star-in-jar claims, which go back to 2013 and 2014.   
  However, if Mike wishes to share details of his approach, I would personally look at that first!

   Here are some of Woopy's basic videos which I recommend.  He has several more.  These describe his method with variations, and results, and are enough to get us started.  Others were doing these experiments in the same time period - I did some also, but got distracted by a very serious illness (Rocky-mtn spotted fever).

  woopy basic star-in-jar, cop 1.45  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1eA0u7MBz4

woopy star-in-jar variation showing magnet jumping, cop not calculated  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lre05U1Bpso

woopy insulated jar, cop 1.6  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO1pq0h6e0g

pressurized star-in-jar, cop not calculated  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmGufAr0uoM

  The beauty of this simple system is that regular water is used, not D2O, and a hydrogen-plasma is formed right at the cathode = a very good way to introduce hydrogen at high-temperature into the metal!  (We do this while avoiding the complications faced by Takashi and Celani, who used H2 gas at high temperatures.)

Again, I recently asked Woopy if he found some error in his measurements with this system.  He said "no"; he simply moved on to other interests.

   Woopy used a tungsten-lanthanum cathode.  Right soon after replicating Woopy - I would switch to a NICKEL cathode, as nickel seems to be a desirable metal to achieve anomalous heat production (AHP), based on the most recent work (described in an earlier post of mine, above).

   

[Centraflow]

Regarding the Patterson cell - complicated, but evidently uses regular H2O, therefore along the same lines as described in this thread.
From Wikipedia:  "A replication has been attempted at Earthtech, using a CETI supplied kit. They were not able to replicate the excess heat. They looked for cold fusion products, but only found traces of contamination in the electrolyte.[17]
"

So using a kit supplied by Patterson's company, "They were not able to replicate the excess heat. "

What do you want us to do, Mike - that is, can you provide either the device (or a kit) or detailed directions?  I'm sure there are several including myself, willing to "take this up and test it."

Again, we carefully measure and calculate Pout/Pin = COP; and concern ourselves about any nuclear reaction later.  Perhaps the energy comes from nuclear reactions - but perhaps from something else.  AHP is awesome, whatever its source turns out to be.

The first step is repeatably achieving COP > 1.

Steven, I can give you all the information, it is not complicated and certainly not expensive, you may even have all in house.

You need a signal generator down to 1 Hz. with variable duty cycle. A 555ic in astable could be used.
                 scope 2 channel
                 12v coil changeover relay with 10amp contacts
                 3 316 Stainless steel tubes 6"" X 1/2"
                 12v 7ah battery
                 Low ESR cap 25v min @ around 330uf high amperage type
                 Sodium hydroxide, best, or sodium bicarbonate if you can't get the hydroxide.
                 8% acetic acid (white vinegar with no additives) supermarket or drugstore.
                 2 DMM's

The sodium hydroxide and acetic acid is to make the electrolyte, sodium acetate. You could buy sodium acetate trihydrate on E-bay and mix with distilled water.

I can give you the circuit and test protocol when you have everything, just message me

Regards

Mike

[PhysicsProf]

  Awesome!  thanks, Mike!