Stoyan Sarg: Structural Physics of Nuclear Fusion - new book

This is a book on the theory of Nuclear Fusion which ventures into theoretically defending cold fusion. Candobetter.net gets lots of scientific book reviews and we can only field a minority. It is good to give the more esoteric some publicity they might not otherwise get, even if we cannot actually review them. In this case candobetter.ed ran the subject and a cited paper past Dr Boris Osadin in Russia and you can read his comment at the bottom of this book.

Written by Dr. Stoyan Sarg, ‘Structural Physics of Nuclear Fusion’ offers a new understanding of the physical process.

Toronto, Ontario – Following a diligent period of research and development, Canada’s Dr. Stoyan Sarg is delighted to announce the launch of his new book – ‘Structural Physics of Nuclear Fusion’.

This latest book is a continuation of the original approach used in Sarg’s ‘Basic Structures of Matter - Supergravitation Unified Theory (BSM-SG)’, published by in 2002, where the feasibility of cold fusion was predicted. The remarkable advances in cold fusion during the last few years prompted a new book to focus on the problems that bother many theorists and researchers.

Using the atomic models derived in BSM-SG theory, Sarg theoretically shows that overcoming the Coulomb barrier does not require a temperature of millions of degrees, rather an accessible temperature by using properly selected isotopes and technical methods. Furthermore, it is possible to obtain nuclear energy with a lack of minimum radioactive by-products.

The book also provides a method for analysis of the cold fusion (LENR) experiments using the BSM-SG models, as well as a selection of isotopes suitable for a more efficient energy yield with a minimum of radioactivity. Finally, it focuses on practical considerations for selection of the technical method and the reaction environment.

“The cold fusion might be an environmentally safer replacement of the nuclear power based on enriched uranium-235. It also has a potential of a delocalized energy source with much lower cost,” says Sarg.

Structural Physics of Nuclear Fusion is available from Amason.com in paperback (ISBN9781482620030) and Kindle versions (ISBN9780973051582).

A video of a talk at the International Scientific Conference in 2012 preceding the publishing of the new book, is available here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3gJp8rLHWg

A scientific paper is available here: http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Essays/View/4805

About the Author:

Stoyan Sarg - Sargoytchev, a Bulgarian born Canadian, holds an engineering diploma and a PhD in Physics. From 1976 to 1990 he was a scientist at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, working on space projects coordinated by the program Intercosmos, established by the former Soviet Union in collaboration with European countries. From 1990 he was a visiting scientist at Cornell University for two years and worked on NSF project at Arecibo Observatory, PR.

In 1992 he took scientific positions in Canadian government institutions and universities working on space and atmospheric research projects. Paying attention to unexplained phenomena and unsolved problems in Physics, he arrived at an original idea about space, matter and energy that he elaborated in his treatise BSM-SG. Stoyan Sarg has over 70 scientific publications in English and Russian languages, four US patents, and four scientific books in English. He is an emeritus member of the Society for Scientific Exploration and a Distinguished scientific advisor to the World Institute for Scientific Exploration.

Contact:
Dr. Stoyan Sarg
sto.sarg@gmail.com
www.helical-structures.org

AttachmentSize
structural-physics.jpg11.42 KB
structural-physics-tiny.jpg3.61 KB

Comments

Plasma physicist Boris Osadin Cold on Cold Fusion

Comment by Boris Osadin:About the Cold Nuclear Fusion Probability
Boris Osadin is a plasma physicist who had written a cold-war history of plasma physics which is published in translation on candobetter.net here: "The plasma physics drama (Outlook from Moscow)"

I asked him to look at the paper referred to in the above article and tell me what he thought. His response is very laconic:

Dick Smith, Rossi and Sarg on cold fusion

If you check out Dr Sarg's filmed lecture, Part 1., here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3gJp8rLHWg, you will find that he refers to Andrea Rossi's patented claim to producing cold fusion and gives his opinion that Rossi's invention was unfairly buried.

There is, however, an account of how Rossi's invention was treated on Wikipedia, which includes Australian Dick Smith's offer of $1m to Rossi to demonstrate it, which was refused.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer

Energy Catalyzer
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Energy Catalyzer (also called E-Cat) is a purported cold fusion or Low-Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) heat source[1][2] built by inventor Andrea Rossi[3][4] with support from physicist Sergio Focardi.[5][6] An Italian patent, which received a formal but not a technical examination, describes the apparatus as a "process and equipment to obtain exothermal reactions, in particular from nickel and hydrogen".[7][8] Rossi and Focardi say the device works by infusing heated hydrogen into nickel, transmuting it into copper and producing heat.[9][10] An international patent application[1] has received an unfavorable international preliminary report on patentability because it seemed to "offend against the generally accepted laws of physics and established theories" and to overcome this problem the application should have contained either experimental evidence or a firm theoretical basis in current scientific theories.[11]

The device was demonstrated to an invited audience several times, and commented on by various academics and others, but was not independently tested. Mark Gibbs of Forbes commented: "until a verifiably objective analysis is conducted by an independent third party that confirms the results match the claims there's no real news".[12]

Professor Ugo Bardi of the University of Florence, noting contradictory claims made by Rossi regarding the emission or non-emission of gamma radiation, the location of a supposed factory – in Florida, or not in the United States at all – and the fact that some of his supporters are apparently deserting him, said "...the E-Cat has reached the end of the line. It still maintains some faithful supporters, but, most likely, it will soon fade away in the darkness of pathological science, where it belongs".[13]
Contents

1 Reactions to the claims
2 Patents
3 Demonstrations
4 Commercial plans
5 References
6 External links

Reactions to the claims

Because of his research in the cold fusion for over 15 years, Sergio Focardi was contacted by Andrea Rossi in 2007 in order to validate the apparatus at its early stage of development.[14][15] After four years of work and measurements together with Rossi, Focardi concluded that nuclear fusion reactions happen inside the Energy Catalyzer. Focardi states that the nuclear process is facilitated by a secret additive, known only by Rossi and not by him. According to Focardi, the process would be much less intense without this additive.[16] Rossi and Focardi are then reported to have been unable to find a peer-reviewed scientific journal that would publish their paper describing how they claim the Energy Catalyzer operates.[17] Their paper appears only in Rossi's self-published blog,[18] Journal of Nuclear Physics.[19]

University of Bologna researchers have attended some E-Cat experiments, but only as observers. On 5 November 2011, the University of Bologna clarified that its researchers had not been involved in the demonstrations and that none of the experiments took place at the university. Rossi had signed a contract with the university, but no research had been done because Rossi hadn't made the first payment.[20][21][22][23] The contract was terminated by the university in January 2012 because Rossi hadn't fulfilled his contractual obligations.[24][25]

Peter Ekström, lecturer at the Department of Nuclear Physics at Lund University in Sweden, concluded in May 2011, "I am convinced that the whole story is one big scam, and that it will be revealed in less than one year."[26] He cites the unlikelihood of a chemical reaction being strong enough to overcome the Coulomb barrier, the lack of gamma rays, the lack of explanation for the origin of the extra energy, the lack of the expected radioactivity after fusing a proton with 58Ni, the unexplained occurrence of 11% iron in the spent fuel, the 10% copper in the spent fuel strangely having the same isotopic ratios as natural copper, and the lack of any unstable copper isotope in the spent fuel as if the reactor only produced stable isotopes.[26] Kjell Aleklett, physics professor at Uppsala University, said the percentage of copper was too high for any known reaction of nickel, and the copper had the same isotopic ratio as natural copper. He also stated, "Known chemical reactions cannot explain the amount of energy measured. A nuclear reaction can explain the amount of energy, but the knowledge we have today says that this reaction cannot take place."[27]

Other reactions to the device have been mixed. Dennis M. Bushnell, Chief Scientist at NASA Langley Research Center, described LENR as a "promising" technology and praised the work of Rossi and Focardi.[28] Roland Pettersson, retired Associate Professor from Uppsala University, who witnessed the 6 October demonstration said "I'm convinced that this works, but there is still room for more measurements".[29] Skeptic James Randi, discussing the E-Cat in the context of previous cold fusion claims, predicts that it will eventually be revealed to not function as advertised.[30]

Theoretical astrophysicist Ethan Siegel and nuclear physicist Peter Thieberger argue that the claims for the E-Cat are incompatible with the fundamentals of nuclear physics.[31] In particular, the Coulomb barrier for the claimed fusion reaction is so high that it is unsurpassable anywhere in the known universe, including the interior of stars. The reaction also would create gamma radiation that would penetrate the few inches of shielding apparently provided by the E-Cat, leading to acute radiation syndrome in persons involved in the demonstrations.[31] Given numerous other scientific inconsistencies – such as the ratio of isotopes in the supposed copper "fusion product" being identical to that in natural copper[32] – the authors argue that it is now time "for the e-Cat's proponents to provide the provable, testable, reproducible science that can answer these straightforward physics objections."[31]

Swedish physicists, Hanno Essén and Sven Kullander stated that if the claims that they had read about the e-cat were true, then it must operate through some kind of a nuclear reaction. However, they had no access to privileged information about the catalysts in Rossi's device. According to Kullander it is "important "to consider the experimental facts and not indulge too much in speculation about what could happen in theory". Kullander also emphasized that measurements of excess heat must be made accurately and independently: "You have to rely on Rossi that he is true to what he conveys and through discussions with him we may try to conclude how reliable the measurements are."[33] [34]

Theoretical nuclear physicist Yeong E. Kim of Purdue University has proposed a potential theoretical explanation of the reported results of the device,[35] but has stated that, for confirmation of this theory, "it is very important to carry out Rossi-type experiments independently."[36] Kim had previously put forward this theory to explain the results of the discredited Fleischman and Pons cold fusion experiment in 1989.[37]
Patents

An application in 2008 to patent the device internationally had received an unfavorable preliminary report on patentability at the World Intellectual Property Organization[38] from the European Patent Office, noting that the description of the device was based on "general statements and speculations" and citing "numerous deficiencies in both the description and in the evidence provided to support its feasibility" as well as incompatibilities with "generally accepted laws of physics and established theories."[39] The patent application was published on 15 October 2009.[1]

On 6 April 2011 an application was approved by the Italian Patent and Trademark Office, which issued a patent for the invention, valid only in Italy. Under then-current Italian law, the examination of the application was more formal and less technical than for the corresponding PCT application.[40][1][7][41] International, European, and U.S. patent applications are still pending.[42][1][7]
Demonstrations

Typically during demonstrations the device was covered up.[43] The device was not independently verified. Invited guests attended several demonstrations in Bologna in 2011.[16][44][45] Of a January demonstration, Discovery Channel analyst Benjamin Radford wrote that "If this all sounds fishy to you, it should," and that "In many ways cold fusion is similar to perpetual motion machines. The principles defy the laws of physics, but that doesn't stop people from periodically claiming to have invented or discovered one."[46] According to PhysOrg (11 August 2011), the demonstrations held from January to April 2011 had several flaws that compromised their credibility and Rossi had refused to perform tests that could verify his claims.[2]

The six published demonstrations from December 2010 to July 2011 might contain a crucial flaw, according to Australian researcher and skeptic Ian Bryce, who was investigating for entrepreneur Dick Smith. He believes that the E-cat is misconnected, and that the power attributed to fusion is supplied to the device through the earth wire. He noted that the misconnection could have been inadvertent.[47][48] Dick Smith offered Rossi one million dollars to demonstrate that the E-Cat system worked as claimed, while the power through the earth wire was also being measured, which Rossi refused.[49][50] Peter Thieberger, a senior physicist at Brookhaven National Laboratory, said it would be very difficult for this misconnection to happen by accident and that the issue could only be cleared with a fully independent test.[47]

Another demonstration on 6 October 2011 reportedly lasted for about eight hours.[51][52][53] Roland Pettersson, retired Associate Professor from the University of Uppsala, who witnessed it said "I'm convinced that this works, but there is still room for more measurements".[29]

On 28 October 2011 the unit was "customer tested" and was said to release 2,635 kWh during five and a half hours of self-sustained mode, an average power of 479 kilowatts – just under half the promised power of one megawatt. Independent observers were not allowed to watch the measurements or make their own, and the plant remained connected to a power supply during the test allegedly to supply power to the fans and the water pumps.[54][55][56][57]
Commercial plans

Originally, a new Greek company, Defkalion, was to deliver a heating plant based on the Energy Catalyzer, but this deal was terminated.[58][59] Since then Defkalion have announced that they plan to make a similar device.[60][61] In 2012 an Italian company, Prometeon Srl,[62] became the official Italian licensee for the Energy Catalyzer.[63]

Ecat.com is a website for taking pre-orders for the device, run by four Swedish entrepreneurs, two of them particle physicists. One of the physicists, Magnus Holm, in response to suggestions that he was "contributing to fraud" replied "We are not engaged in any deception, and I do not think Rossi is engaged in any fraud either. If it would turn out that it does not work, in spite of everything, I would think it is about self-deception."[15] In September 2012 they pulled out from investing in a new version of the E-Cat, a prototype high temperature reactor, after a test by the SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden failed to demonstrate excess output energy because there was more input energy than measured by Rossi. Holm says that they are still interested in investing in the 1MW version, which they intend to validate separately.[64]

..... More on the site.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.