Jump to content
nicke

Mizuno Seeks Replications

Recommended Posts

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTincreasede.pdf

Increased Excess Heat from Palladium Deposited on Nickel

Tadahiko Mizuno
Hydrogen Engineering Application and Development Company,
Kita 12, Nishi 4, Kita-ku, Sapporo 001-0012, Japan
head-mizuno@lake.ocn.ne.jp

Jed Rothwell
LENR-CANR.org,
1954 Airport Road, Suite 204, Chamblee, GA 30341, U.S.A.
JedRothwell@gmail.com

Abstract

We have developed an improved method of producing excess heat with nickel mesh coated with palladium. The new method produces higher power, a larger output to input ratio, and it can be controlled effectively. With 50 W of input, it produces ~250 W of excess heat, and with 300 W it produces ~2 to 3 kW. This paper is a comprehensive description of the apparatus, the reactant, and the method. We hope this paper will allow others to replicate the experiment. Keywords: Air flow calorimetry, Deuterium gas, Excess heat, Nickel reactant, Pd coating, Simple method.

 

image.thumb.png.10b65ddbc5ab7bd5bcfdcf7365645202.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it’s a space heater? How much does it cost to produce this heat (including the palladium, of course)?

Most energy generation systems quote the amount of useful energy produced (which I assume here is zero) rather than the waste heat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the "paper":

Quote

Over 24 hours, average input electric power was 50.6 W. An average of 46.6 W of heat was captured in the stream of air. After taking into account heat losses from the calorimeter walls, the average was 50.5 W.

So the energy output is almost exactly the same as the energy input.

By cherry-picking data from a small time period (when the heating element is still hot but less input is being provided, presumably) you can make it look like there is an excess energy output.

I am absolutely certain that this is just sloppy science and not a deliberate attempt to defraud investors. After all, no one would fake results just to make money, would they.

The fact that this research is not published in a peer-reviewed journal is also irrelevant, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@Strange

With all due respect, Strange, your certainty confuses me.  As does your quote of the data.  Elsewhere in the document find many runs where output exceeds input.  Read.

Bottom line, in my opinion, this needs verification.  Replication.

Thank you for sharing your perspective, Strange.

@swansont

Replication can demonstrate what the utility or lack thereof of this device/process might be.

Spaceheater?  Perhaps.  Paperweight?  At this juncture, Strange claims it is.

Apologies for putting words and thoughts into other posters.

Edited by nicke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, nicke said:

With all due respect, Strange, your certainty confuses me.  As does your quote of the data.  Elsewhere in the document find many runs where output exceeds input.  Read.

I'm not really certain of anything (I was exaggerating for "humorous" effect). 

It is trivially easy to produce (deliberately or by accident) a system that produces more power out over a short time period. Which is why the only figure that seemed relevant was the energy consumption over a long period (24 hours) where the inputs and outputs balance out.

41 minutes ago, nicke said:

Bottom line, in my opinion, this needs verification.  Replication.

Agreed. However, as it is not being published in a reputable journal but in what can best be described as a fan-club, doesn't fill me with much hope that it will be replicated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am reminded of the most telling question asked of Fleishman and Pons:

"Why are you not dead?".
They had no answer.

 

If they really had nuclear fusion happening as they had claimed, the neutron flux would have killed them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@swansont

Replication can demonstrate what the utility or lack thereof of this device/process.

Spaceheater?  Perhaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I would expect to at least see mention of embrittlement as an issue.

 I don't know anyone here who'd be interested in spending money replicating this, but you should feel free to do so yourself if you think they have something.

Edited by Endy0816

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, nicke said:

@swansont

Replication can demonstrate what the utility or lack thereof of this device/process.

Spaceheater?  Perhaps.

I enjoyed my free meal but it did repeat (I suffered). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.