Projects by members > Bubz

Water Droplets

<< < (3/3)

I apologize for not stating the videos are parts of a series found from here...


--- Quote from: Bubz on October 23, 2010, 06:26:17 am ---Cold fusion? How did you guys come to that conclusion? The only aspect I see the two have in common is they both use electricity...

--- End quote ---

After watching these videos, I realized some similarities that I was unaware of. It turns out Pons and Flieschman used Laser type light also to enhance the process. Only, there target was the palladium  and not so much the solution or electrolyte, medium, whatever you would like to call it. So, I take that back and agree that Pons and Flieschman compared to Stan Meyer do have relative aspects. But, cold fusion is primarily a low energy nuclear reaction, where, Stan's mostly deals with the atomic energies.

The Pons-Fleischmann Process

It was originally thought that, as the voltage is applied across the electrodes through electrolysis, the heavy water (D2O) is split into oxygen and deuterium (Pons and Fleischmann, 1989). The deuterium atoms are absorbed into the palladium at octahedral sites on the crystal lattice while oxygen accumulates at the platinum anode. The deuterium density is greater than that of liquid hydrogen.

The fusion reaction is catalyzed by the deposition of D+ and metal ions from the electrolyte at (and into) the negative electrode. The deuterium atom ionizes with its electrons entering the band structure of the palladium. After various times of charging (or "aging"), the palladium rod is supersaturated with deuterons, and it has a crystal lattice structure like NaCl (King, 1989). All lattice sites are occupied, and the excess free deuterons form a "protonic fluid" which can aid electrical conduction. Thus, although metals such as palladium and titanium are used to support the fusion reaction, they are not consumed in the process of solid-state fusion. Instead the fuel consumed is the deuterium in the heavy water.

Your theory about water droplets is exactly the same phenomenon as the "skin effect" that we see in stranded wire.  Water broken down into smaller volumes (ie drops) has a larger surface area than water in larger volumes.  As such, it is able to hold a larger charge.  As for the stream of water breaking up, this is exactly because of its natural inclination to distribute the charge evenly, it breaks up the water to achieve a greater surface area to more evenly distribute the charge.


Hi TS! Thank you for the observation. Nature is such a great teacher, and I, so ignorant. "Charge distribution", I believe, is also one of the key factors of breaking up water molecules. I could explain it like such... In addition to the larger "macro" voltage exciters (electrodes), which are positive and negative in nature, we can also utilize "micro" voltage exciters in the form of charged gases homogeneously mixed with water droplets. So, in essence, we would have much better "Charge distribution".

As the old adage goes... "Divide and conquer"


[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version