Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: COLD FUSION - a cool review



At 06:44 PM 8/30/2003 -0700, Ludwik, you wrote:
The 10th International Cold Fusion conference
ended yesterday. A student project demonstrated
at that conference is described in item 103 at:

http://blake.montclair.edu/~kowalskil/cf/

Here is the "cold fusion" aspect of that student project (as extracted from
Ludwik's site.)

"Two electrolytic cells were connected in series with a power supply
delivering a constant
current of 3.5 amperes. Cell #1, labeled 'control',had two platinum
electrodes and used
an ordinary water electrolyte. Cell #2, labeled 'sample', had a palladium
cathode and a
platinum anode. It used a heavy water electrolyte. The DOP on the control
cell was 3.03
volts while the DOP on the sample cell was 2.80 volts. In other words the
electric energy
was delivered to cell #1 at the rate of 10.6 W while to cell #2 it was
delivered at the
rate of 9.8 W. The two cells were geometrically identical; they also had
identical
catalysts recombining gases (hydrogen and oxygen).

On that basis one would expect cell #2 to be warmer than cell #1 (10.6 W
versus
9.8 W) . But the equilibrium temperatures measured did not confirm this
expectation.
The temperature of cell #1 turned out to be 82.3 C while the temperature of
cell #2
was 89.2 C. The difference of temperature, nearly one degree, could be
interpreted
as an indication that some kind of additional energy was converted into
heat in
cell #2."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

When you apply a battery charger to a car battery, I understand that
at first the battery stays cool, but later grows warm with the evolution of
hydrogen
bubbles. This may be said to illustrate the different ways that
electrical energy
may be transformed or stored.

I also recall an unusual property of palladium, that it has the distinction of
storing up to 700 volumes of hydrogen internally.

I notice in this narrative, that 9.8 W applied to cell #1 was associated
with an
operating temperature of 82.3 degC
But 10.6W (or 8.2% more power) applied to a second cell was associated with a
higher temperature of 89.2 degC (or 8.4% higher temperature) where
the temperature expected for 10.6 W might be 1.082 X 82.3 = 89.05 degC

This seems to be a modest difference of 0.15 degC from the expected value.....
could it be that warmed hydrogen was lost from one cell, but retained by
another? or did I miss something?


Brian Whatcott Altus OK Eureka!