I can accept that such a test may not be totally 100% definitive. But if the device is real then it could definitely pass. The fact that they're fucking around instead of just doing the obvious shows that they're full of it.
Edit: regarding potential external effects, these devices are supposed to put out a megawatt of power. There's no solar trickery that's going to let you fake that.
http://nari.arc.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/Wells_TM2014-21...
Here's a pithy excerpt:
"Many theories surfaced to explain the energy output from a lower energy input, but there is one theory that seems to explain it using existing physics models: the Widom-Larsen Theory. The Widom-Larsen Weak Interaction Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) Theory is believed to be the best explanation of the LENR process because it does not require new physics models. The phenomenon now called LENR requires relatively low temperatures or energy stimulus to initiate reactions. It is a form of nuclear energy which has conservatively been estimated to have over 4,000 times the energy density of chemical energy sources and potentially much more."
The non-conservative estimate is up to 1,000,000 times the energy density of chemical reactions. :-)
Imagine - virtually unlimited, guilt-free energy. It would change everything! Flying cars, colonization of the solar system...no limits!
Here is an excerpt from the pdf: This report does not explore the feasibility of LENR. Instead, it assumes that a working system is available.
Your statement: there are folks at NASA and SPAWAR that think LENR (not fusion per se) is real., is incorrect, they assume it works for the purposes of the discussion about aircraft.
You are either scamming or are being scammed. In the latter case (and I'm trying to help you here), please make an effort with some serious research and re-evalaute your opinions.
Correct, however it is referring to a functioning, practical reactor, not the underlying phenomenon. The statement I made: "First off, there are folks at NASA and SPAWAR that think LENR (not fusion per se) is real" is entirely accurate.
More than that, there is substantial, rigorous scientific evidence that LENR is real.
===========================================================
From the SPAWAR materials:
Experimental Results Since 1989
– Excess Heat >> chemistry (F&P, SRI, CL, Bockris, Storms, Energetics, ENEA, Miley, Swartz)
– 4He, commensurate with excess heat (SRI, China Lake (CL), ENEA)
– Low intensity, soft X-rays (0.5-20 kev), (SRI, CL, SPAWAR, Karabut)
– Tritium Production; a species of nuclear ash (BARC, Bockris, Storms, Claytor, SPAWAR, SRI)
– CR-39 tracks suggest MeV neutron emission. (SPAWAR, BARC, Takahashi, Jones, Mizuno)
– Many nuclear transmutations, ΔZ = +2, +4, +6 (MHI, Mizuno, Bockris, Dash, SPAWAR)
– Sensitivity to radio freq & near IR stimulation (Bockris, Letts/Hagelstein, NRL).
– Emission of strong RF signals near 85 GHz (ENEA) and 1-5 MHz (NRL).
From the NASA materials (slide 5):
Current LENR Technology (LENR reactor 12/12 and 3/13 respectively):
- Energy Produced (Wh): 62,000 / 160,000
- Power Density (W/Kg): 530,000 / 7,000
- Thermal Energy Density (Wh/kg): 61,000,000 / 680,000
- Reaction mass: 1g / 1g
- Test duration (h): 96 / 116
- Max. Temp. (deg C): 496 / 308
===========================================================
Those results could only be from nuclear phenomena - chemistry is entirely unable to explain the power output, transmutations, and radiation.
Links:
https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Attachment/386-IE... https://connect.arc.nasa.gov/p1zygzm2h3i/?launcher=false&fcs...
Get a clue - I'm trying to help you here.
It doesn't matter whether the paper you linked is discussing the phenomenon in general or a specific device. The fact remains that it is clearly a hypothetical exercise in which it assumes that the device works, and sees how it could be used if that were the case. That doesn't mean they think the device actually works, only that there's enough potential to have a few people think about it for a little while.
Same deal with the NASA presentation you posted in this comment. From the Objective slide: "Explore the application of LENR technology not the technical aspects and feasibility." "Assumed device existed with these parameters." It's a hypothetical exercise. Nothing here supports your assertion that NASA thinks this is real.
In any case, my main point remains: why hasn't anyone done the obvious test to prove that this device is real? We're not talking about some delicate scientific experiment producing subtle mysterious phenomena. We're talking about a concrete physical device which the creators claim is a megawatt nuclear reactor. Isolate it and make it produce power and prove beyond all reasonable doubt that it does what it says. Why is that so hard?
BTW, to this point:
In the information I linked was data from the 12/12 LENR NASA run which produced 62 KWh of excess energy over the course of a 96 hour run - using one gram of material.
That is entirely consistent with LENR, and utterly inconsistent with any chemical explanation. It was observed under rigorous experimental conditions by NASA research scientists.
Edit: to be clear, I'm wondering what the experimental setup was. What sort of device were they testing, how were inputs and outputs measured, etc. Not just the results, but the experiment from which they got those results.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.3913
The NASA material is worth reviewing in its own right though - and the Navy has conducted quite a few LENR experiments of its own.
They state that they couldn't weigh the device because it was already running when the test began. Why would they start it before doing basic tasks like seeing how much it weighs?
Oh, because the test was conducted at the company that makes the devices, and I guess the company set up the device and turned it on before the scientists got there.
Then one naturally wonders, who set up the equipment to monitor the electrical power consumed by this device? As far as I see, the paper does not say.
One further wonders, why does it need a continuous input of electrical power at all, if that power is only connected to resistor coils in the device as claimed? The paper says that electric heat is needed to start the reaction, but why doesn't the reaction sustain itself on its own heat after starting? Why can't they just unplug the thing at that point?
Finally, the experiment was conducted with the device sitting out in the open, radiating and convecting into the air. Output power was estimated by pointing an IR camera at it (measuring only half of it!) and calculating power based on the observed temperature. All of this in an environment controlled by the company that makes the device.
I hope you can see how this experiment is 1) nothing like the definitive test I describe and 2) suspicious as all hell.
The test I describe is not difficult to set up and would not be difficult for a real, working device to pass. So again, why don't they do it? That they don't doesn't automatically mean it's a scam, but then what is the answer?
The main controversy around LENR has been whether or not there's a real phenomenon. Clearly there is. Given the experimental results so far, as well as Rossi's work, it seems pretty clear to me there'll be practical reactors in the future if there aren't already. The first principles need to be better understood for best results.
Time will tell, eh?
> If it can't provide that much energy, then it's a worthless fusion device.
A fusion device that produces more energy than you put in but doesn't produce a shit ton of energy right now is a useful breakthough in fusion.
If you believe there's something wrong with what I'm saying, please explain, random internet guy.
> random internet guy
Are you sure you're more qualified to discuss this than the poster you're replying to? Why make a point of it if you aren't?
Ideas (should) stand on their own around here. Take this lame attempt at Argument from Authority somewhere else.
For it to be a real test you'd have to exceed the total energy output of any plausible chemical system. Calculate the total amount of energy of a stoichiometric mixture of, say, liquid oxygen and kerosene, and then draw power until you have exceeded that. At that point you can be pretty damn sure it's not a chemical battery.