ch-tkr@wasatch.UUCP (Timothy K Reynolds) (04/01/89)
The following is the text of a handout which was given to
most of the attendees of Dr. Pons seminar at the University
of Utah on 3/31/89. (reprinted w/o permission, but it was
freely distributed)
^^^^^^^^^^^^begin text^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
BACKGROUND FOR NUCLEAR FUSION SEMINAR
FRIDAY, MARCH 31, 1989
2008 HENRY EYRING CHEMISTRY BUILDING
An article written by Drs. B. Stanley Pons and Martin
Fleischman describing their nuclear fusion research at the U
of U has been accepted for publication by the "Journal of
Electroanalytical Chemistry." The article is expected to
appear in the publication in late April or early May.
In the article the researchers state: "We conclude that the
conventional deuterium fusion reactions are only a small
part of the overall reaction scheme and that other nuclear
processes must be involved."
There is not yet a complete understanding of where the heat
is coming from. Fusion occurs in the cells but fusion
reactions do not account for all the heat that is observed.
As we stated at the press conference last week and on
several occasions since then, the investigators believe that
no chemical reaction can account for the heat output so they
attribute it to nuclear processes.
Evidence for nuclear fusion includes; generation of heat
over long periods that is proportional to the volume of the
electrode and reactions that lead to the generation of
neutrons and tritium which are expected by-products of
nuclear fusion.
The researchers have also co-authored and submitted a second
article to "Nature" for consideration for publication
Dr. James J. Brophy
Vice President for Research
University of Utah
^^^^^^^^^^^^^end text^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What follows is a summary of my notes from the lecture by
Dr. Pons. Due to limited seating, I watched the lecture on
a projection TV. Not very good resolution, so I missed some
of the equations, but I think I got most of it. Also the
physicist in our group didn't get a seat in either lecture hall
and was not able to verify my notes/impressions. He did
look at my notes with me though and helped clear some things
up.
Electrochemically Induced Fusion
By Dr. B. Stanley Pons
Dr. Pons began with a brief history of the work began by he
and Fleischman. Initially, their interests were in the
development of a metallic hydrogen material for use as a
semiconductor. They realized that immense pressures were
required in a lattice for this to occur. However, they
theorized that it would be possible to bring about the
equivalent of this immense pressure by electrochemical
methods. From these initial musings, they also considered
whether this "electrochemical pressure" could be used to
fuse like nuclei (deuterium).
The initial experiment used a cube of Pd (size not stated)
in D2O at high current density (again not stated). A Geiger
counter was used to detect any radiation from the fusion
reaction of D. However no radiation was detected. The
experiment was discontinued by reducing the current density,
and shortly thereafter (overnight I think is what he said)
the experimental apparatus was vaporized. Left
approximately 1/10 of the initial Pd.
Current apparatus uses a Pd rod in 0.1M D2O in a cell which
has been widely seen in the media. It consists of a Pd rod
surrounded by a Pt coil in a special made glass container.
There are openings for charging and adding D2O, measuring
temperature, and heaters. The use of rod gives better
control of the surface to volume ratio. During electrolysis
of the D2O the following reactions take place:
D2O + e- <---> Da + OD-
Da <---> Dlat
Da + D2O + e- <---> D2 + OD-
where Da is deuterium adsorbed on the surface of the Pd rod,
and Dlat is deuterium diffused into the lattice of the Pd.
Before the surface of the electrode is saturated with Da,
the D diffuses into the lattice of the Pd. The evidence
suggests that the deuterium diffuses into the lattice as
deuterons and electrons. The electrons go to the k band of
the lattice.
Dr. Pons stated that the potential of this electrochemical
couple is 0.8V. In terms of pressure to get the same degree
of difference in chemical potential = 10**27 atmospheres.
Dr. Pons explained a control experiment where they used a
closed cell to detect tritium (else some tritium would be
lost as by exchange with D2O). Tritium was detected, and
its concentration increased over time. Also the neutron
flux was measured as 10**4 n/s. This is 3X higher than
background and was considered statistically significant.
However, the reactions to produce tritium and 3He do not
explain the amount of heat produced.
In this same vein, he pointed out that their experiments
indicated that the heat produced was proportional to the
volume of the electrode used, not the surface area of the
electrode. This indicates that the process is not
electrochemical in nature. An energy density of 26W/cc of
electrode was calculated. One experiment produced 4MJ of
heat in 120 hours. He reiterated that this could not be due
to any known physical or chemical process. Since the fusing
of deuterium is only part of the overall reaction scheme,
other as yet unknown processes produce the rest of the heat
which is detected. Dr. Pons believes these unknown
processes must be nuclear processes.
He also surmised that the deuterons existed in the Pd
lattice as a low temperature plasma which is shielded by
electrons.
Dr. Pons then answered several questions from Faculty
members (there were no microphones in the room with the
graduate students where I was). The content of his
responses are summarized below.
This reaction is diffusion controlled, with the diffusion
coefficient for deuterons in Pd given as 10^-7 cm^2/s.
The production rate of tritium was found to match that of
the neutrons.
Although the cross-section of Pd is too small to allow for
significant reaction with energetic neutrons, it may react
with neutrons back-scattered from the heavy water. No assay
of the Pd electrodes has been undertaken to check for
activation by-products of Pd.
The ignition/vaporization of the initial experiment was
caused by a steep concentration gradient of D+ as the
current density was decreased. This gave rise to
compression (even greater than *normal*) as the D+ species
moved out from the lattice in a radial direction. This
"shock" resulted in the vaporization.
No 2.45Mev neutrons were detected. He speculated that these
neutrons may be consumed by reaction with Li:
7Li + n + 2.45MeV ---> 3T + 3He + n
6Li + n ---> 3T +3He + 4.5MeV
The concentration of the deuterons in the Pd lattice is
greater than 0.67 (deuterons/Pd atoms) and is estimated to
be 1.0 - 1.2. They are believed to cluster at the
octahedral sites in the Pd (Pd has a face centered cubic
crystal structure).
In looking for products of fusion, 3He was not seen but 4He
was. Part of the reason for not seeing 3He is due to the
apparatus used (apparently not very airtight) and
instruments used.
Other metals (which were not specified) were tried as
electrodes but no heat was detected. Radiation was not
monitored.
No experiments have been carried out in magnetic fields to
determine quadrupole effects. He admitted that spin-spin
interactions could have an effect.
The reaction is diffusion controlled. In a 0.4 - 0.5mm rod
with X=10^-7 cm^2/s, the time required to start the reaction
is [ (0.2)^2 / X ].
He did not know the effective mass of the electron carriers
in the Pd matrix.
He felt that the addition of hydrostatic pressure to the
cell would have a negligible affect on the rate of the
reaction. The potential gradient at the D2O Pd interface is
on the order of 10^12 V/m. This gradient can not be
achieved in gas or vacuum phase conditions.
They have recently achieved a 1W in 10W out energy ratio.
Essentially no neutrons or tritium are detected until the
fusion process begins.
He jokingly predicted that 100 years would be needed to
bring this technology to commercial use.
He admitted that the results were just as puzzling to him as
they are to many others. He openly admits that much more work
is needed to understand this phenomenon. (He did not seem to
resent any questions, and was honest in his responses.)
He ended his talk with a WARNING. Please do not DO NOT
attempt to repeat this experiments until you have read the
journal articles or have consulted with Drs. Pons or
Fleischman directly. The initial experiment which vaporized
is no joke. Please consult with them or wait for the
articles to appear before you begin a possibly dangerous
experiment. Please act responsibly in this regard.
[Please remember, these are my personal notes taken during a
lecture presented in less than optimum conditions. If there
are any gross errors, they are probably my fault. As I
said, I briefly went over these notes with a physicist from
or lab, and he did not point out any glaring errors.
Nonetheless, the information presented is essentially that
presented by Dr. Pons. No sound or video recordings were
allowed, so the opportunity to check my notes was limited.
In other words please don't flame me.]
ch-tkr@wasatch.utah.edu Behind the Zion Curtainrhaller@oregon.uoregon.edu (04/01/89)
> > Current apparatus uses a Pd rod in 0.1M D2O in a cell which > has been widely seen in the media. It consists of a Pd rod > surrounded by a Pt coil in a special made glass container. > There are openings for charging and adding D2O, measuring > temperature, and heaters. The use of rod gives better If someone has details on the composition of the electrolyte solution, please post.
chiaravi@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (Lucius Chiaraviglio) (04/03/89)
In article <1495@wasatch.UUCP> ch-tkr@wasatch.UUCP (Timothy K Reynolds) writes: > No 2.45Mev neutrons were detected. He speculated that these > neutrons may be consumed by reaction with Li: > > 7Li + n + 2.45MeV ---> 3T + 3He + n > 6Li + n ---> 3T +3He + 4.5MeV Neither of these equations is balanced -- the first contains 3 protons and 5 neutrons on the left as opposed to 3 protons and 4 neutrons on the right; the second contains 3 protons and 4 neutrons on the left as opposed to 3 protons and 3 neutrons on the right. Also, are you sure the second reaction is supposed to be exothermic? I think I have seen these before, but I can only remember the first one with any degree of accuracy: (7)Li + n --> (3)H + (4)He + n where the neutron comes out slower than it went in (thus supplying the energy for the reaction). I can't remember whether the second reaction should be (6)Li + n --> (3)H + (4)He or (6)Li + n --> (3)H + (3)He + n with the neutron again coming out slower than it went in. I saw these equations (obviously only one version of the second one, but I can't remember which one) in some report on conventional fusion experiments discussing ways to breed tritium. (I think this report was from the Princeton Plasma Fusion Physics Laboratory, but couldn't swear to that.) My other question is: these people used a cell with palladium and platinum electrodes and heavy water. Where would the lithium come from? I didn't hear any mention of lithium in the electrodes or in the solution before this article that I am replying to. -- | Lucius Chiaraviglio | ARPA: chiaravi@silver.bacs.indiana.edu BITNET: chiaravi@IUBACS.BITNET (IUBACS hoses From: fields; INCLUDE RET ADDR) ARPA-gatewayed BITNET: chiaravi%IUBACS.BITNET@vm.cc.purdue.edu Alt ARPA-gatewayed BITNET: chiaravi%IUBACS.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu
jgs@hardees.rutgers.edu (Geoff Sullivan) (04/03/89)
us