Sunday, May 29, 2011

Properties of carbon useful in connection with "cold fusion"?


In any context, the chemical properties of carbon are amazing.  One use of carbon, as activated carbon, or charcoal, was mentioned in the "cold fusion" video discussed yesterday.   I highly recommend that video, by the way. Let's look at the advantages of carbon with respect to "cold fusion".

It is useful for absorption because of its surface area.  It can adsorb hydrogen, which may be useful in the nickel "cold fusion" reactions.  In the video, it was indeed useful, even necessary, in the palladium-deuterium reactions.  It is not clear that it is being used in the Rossi Focardi device, but the video could be hinting at this as a possibility.

Here are some advantages of carbon nanotubes that everyone may have heard about:

Carbon Nanotubes Are Superior To Metals For Electronics, According to Engineers

Questions:
Does this mean that it can be better used to store electrons, like a capacitor?  Can you "flick a switch" so that when the electron volts accumulate up to a certain point, then release the electrons to where you want them to go?  Would that be useful in "cold fusion" reactions? [ I think it could.]

Carbon Nanotubes can carry more current without deterioration.
They can conduct electricity as well as copper, conduct heat as well as a diamond, and are a hundred times stronger than steel at the same dimension.
Currently, more than 10 million amperes in a square centimeter area can be passed through a MWCNT continuously over six days without any deterioration. [emphasis added]

Question:
More current means more energy potential- would that be useful for "cold fusion"? [Yes, I think so.]

Speculation:

Here's what I am getting at: the current Rossi Focardi machine may be seen as crude, yet effective method of generating energy- as it may be seen from the future historical perspective.  It could be optimized in the future in order to produce even greater energy in smaller devices.

This is not to say that the current 1 MW design is inefficient.  Keep in mind that the first automobiles were effective in doing the job of moving people and goods, but they got more sophisticated as time went by.  The same is true of all new technologies.  This could be no exception.

I offer this speculation on the one hand to show how Rossi Focardi E-cat can work, but also to show how it might look in the future.

While I am at it, the following question could arise?  Who cares?  As long as it can produce energy for only 1 cent per kilowatt hour, what difference would it make?  I am thinking in terms of optimizing in size.  This would have advantages for spacecraft- inasmuch as any hardware can enforce mass penalties, the objective will be to minimize mass.

Note:  My book has arrived.  I will pick it up shortly.  The video mentioned above was made by the same man who authored the book- Eugene Mallove.

No comments: