subject:"\[Vo\]\:Miley, et al \- 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes \-\- Fully reproducible"


At 04:44 PM 8/17/2012, ChemE Stewart wrote:
My singularity will rip matter apart in the near vacinity.  Any 
neutrons that escape it will be very low momentum, since the 
singularities quantum gravity pull sucked all of the energy out of 
them.  It also devours them.


Stewart, this is embarrassing.

You have not defined near vicinity. From the fact that the 
singularities you propose don't grow beyond bounds, we must consider 
near vicinity to be quite small. If it includes lattice atoms, it 
would suck them in (or be attracted to them, if they are more massive 
than it is). But this isn't the issue I'm addressing here.


A neutron created in the vicinity of the singularity will have an 
initial velocity. If it is already a ULM neutron, that means that it 
has very low velocity relative to the environment, and we must assume 
that this also means relative to the singularity, which must not be 
high velocity in the lattice, or else Katie Bar the Door. Such a 
neutron has a high capture cross section, that's the importance of 
ULM in LENR discussions.


Capture by what? An initial ULM neutron, near a singularity, will 
merge with the singularity, I'd assume, for a similar reason that it 
would be absorbed readily if not for the singularity.


You are proposing that neutrons that escape will be very low 
momentum, since the [singularities] [sic] gravity ... sucked all 
the energy out of them. Gravity does not suck energy out of 
things. It accelerates them, with a vector dependent on the field.


A neutron that escapes must have an initial escape velocity, which 
depends on its location relative to the singularity. If the escape 
velocity from a position is V(e), and the initial velocity of the 
neutron is V(n), then the final velocity of the neutron, if it 
escapes, will approach V(n) - V(e). Not zero or very low. With 
thermal neutrons or higher-energy neutrons, a neutron ending up as 
ULM would be a very rare coincidence, where V(n) happened to be 
almost exactly equal to V(e).


Kinetic energy is relative. It's not something that can be sucked 
out of a particle.


Note that a neutron would not be specially attracted to a singularity 
over other particles in the vicinity. Charged particles might have 
other forces acting on them, though. Nevertheless, a singularity 
sitting at a lattice site (center of the cubic lattice) would rapidly 
accumulate food. Hydrogen nuclei prefer that site. The growth of 
the singularity, from what I've read, casually, would be on the order 
of 10^9 protons or deuterons per second. I have no idea if this would 
result in net growth or would merely retard the evaporation of the singularity.


I'd expect to see, though, a *lot* of radiation from such a 
circumstance. If the singularity grows to a size that it begins to 
eat lattice atoms, it would rapidly grow beyond limit. Goodbye, planet Earth.


Steward, if you really do want to pursue this wild-hair idea, look at 
the stability and predicted lifetime of very small singularities, how 
fast they would have to be fed a diet of protons or deuterons to 
actually grow. There are also electrons available for food, there is 
always an electron presence anywhere in the lattice. But protons are 
way, way fatter, deuterons double that.


We know they don't grow. So the issue would be how long they would 
live if formed, and whether or not there are events, however rare, 
that might occasionally allow them to eat the lattice. Because if 
they eat the lattice, they will not stop there!


What is the critical size, how many AMU, is how I'd like to see it 
expressed. I can't see how a lattice-contained singularity could 
always avoid eating a lattice atom, unless its lifetime is very short 
and it is always formed at a cubic central site, and can't survive 
the journey to a lattice atom.


If it eats a lattice atom, say Pd, it would then be that size, 
minimum. If it was low-mass before that, it would now be that mass. 
What, then, would be its expected lifetime? How would such a 
singularity behave?


In all this, if you are proposing singularities as an explanation for 
LENR, you should understand that known LENR for PdD is a surface 
effect. It does *not* take place, to any major degree, in the 
lattice. At the surface, much is in motion  Storms makes a good 
case that the effect only takes place in surface cracks. Very messy.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

At 06:03 PM 8/17/2012, Daniel Rocha wrote:
6.2*10^7 neutrons per 5 min means 200 thousand neutrons per second.
If each one carries 1MeV, that means 3*10^-10^-8J. There's about
3*10^7s every year, which means about 1Joule of radiation emitted per year.

According to wikipedia:

The
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Commission_on_Radiological_ProtectionInternational
Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) recommends limiting
artificial irradiation of the public to an average of 1 mSv (0.001
Sv) of effective dose per year, not including medical and
occupational
exposures.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millisievert#cite_note-ICRP103-0[1]
Where 1 Sv = 1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JouleJ/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilogramkg
=1Gy

If those 62 million mean the total estimated from the source, given
an isotropic distribution, it means 1000x above maximum background levels.

According to this entries:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation-induced_cancerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation-induced_cancer

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

It is hard to figure out the effects, at least for me, of such
exposure for a long time. But, they are surely deadly.

That does not appear to be so.

First of all, an unconfirmed report of a burst or even steady neutron
radiation, doesn't establish much. Such reports have been in error before.

However, given the value reported, and the (very rough) calculation
done by Daniel, implying 1 joule/year, that is 1 joule for the full
emission, not 1 joule absorbed by a body. To get the full emission in
a body, you'd have to swallow the source, and it would have to all be
absorbed, not escaping. Please don't do that.

Neutrons produce interesting effects. 1 MeV neutrons are not
well-absorbed. I don't know the absorption cross-section for 1 MeV
neutrons, but high-energy neutrons are highly penetrating, and until
they interact, they mostly do nothing. You cannot translate directly
from total emitted energy to total absorbed energy.

1 mSv would be 1 J/kg of fully absorbed radiation. I'd think one
would want to limit radiation exposure to *every kilogram in the
body* to this level. A 1 joule per year neutron source would produce
an absorbed dose far under that for a kilogram at a distance. Easily
this might be under 1 mSv per year. But I'd certainly defer to more
accurate calculations.

Most cold fusion experiments, especially PdD ones, do not produce any
substantial neutron radiation, the levels found are close to
background, sometimes elevated above background to be detectable, but
not much beyond that!

I have not read this particular report yet, so this is not a comment
on it, just on the assertion that this level of radiation would be
deadly. Probably not. But don't sleep with your
specially-neutron-producing cold fusion experiment!

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

At 06:09 PM 8/17/2012, Daniel Rocha wrote:
It is interesting that they claim element generation up to lead.
That also happened in defkalion's data. Check that out.

People, please start to discriminate. This is the slide show:

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWSPROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ICCF-17%20Poster.pdfhttp://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWSPROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ICCF-17%20Poster.pdf

They are calling this LENR but that is not obvious. They are
showing evidence for d-d fusion, which is hot fusion, that is, this
is a different reaction from what is known as cold fusion. It may be
at lower temperatures, but hot fusion is actually a name for a
high-energy reaction that has no specific temperature cut-off. It
will occur at lower energies due to tunnelling and other effects.

What the slide show is presenting is evidence for results that are
the known results from hot fusion.

The slide show presents very little information. I was unable to find
any report showing the 62 million neutrons together with how they
were produced.

It is not clear *what* they are claiming. If hot fusion is taking
place, *of course* there would be transmutations.

At some point I should go over Miley's work. It's been a while.

In the classical FPHE, helium is the major transmutation product, by
far, other effects are far down from helium production. But other
effects are found, specifically, tritium, heavier transmutations,
X-rays, short-range charged particle radiation (probably), and even a
few neutrons. One should not lose sight of how rare these other
products are, compared to helium.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

No need to swallow. If that were to be used as a heater, within a few
years, where people sleep, the proximity would cause deadly effects, after
a few years.

Or, in any place where they would be stored together, like in a department
store, where dozens of them would be together. It would not be very safe
for non specialized or personal use. .

2012/8/19 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com


 However, given the value reported, and the (very rough) calculation done
 by Daniel, implying 1 joule/year, that is 1 joule for the full emission,
 not 1 joule absorbed by a body. To get the full emission in a body, you'd
 have to swallow the source, and it would have to all be absorbed, not
 escaping. Please don't do that.


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

Yes, this is why I say they are claiming. They do not show much (or
anything meaningful at all) concerning  what methods are being used, or
 Although, it is sort of interesting that these similar things are showing
up. Maybe a generalized contamination from overlooked common sources to
both experiments. Painting, plastics?

http://www.eoearth.org/article/Industrial_uses_of_lead




2012/8/19 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com

 People, please start to discriminate. This is the slide show:



-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible


At 06:11 PM 8/17/2012, Axil Axil wrote:

The hot fusion people and the nuclear physicist crowd will not 
believe that LENR is real unless they see lots of neutrons; this is 
a good political type experiment.


It hasn't worked before, why should it work now?

The main cold fusion reaction, responsible for the FPHE, does not 
produce neutrons. It's real, and that's easy to show. It does produce 
a nuclear product, helium. Think that's not a nuclear product? Be my 
guest, make it some other way.


Ah, yes, I should mention that the often-repeated meme that the 
helium could be leakage from ambient is *preposterous*, it's only 
possible to assert that by radically ignoring the actual experimental 
evidence, which includes, but is not limited to, situations where the 
produced helium rose above ambient, quite significantly.


The real kicker is that the helium produced is *always* proportional 
to the anomalous energy, and the ratio is consistent with deuterium 
fusion. Other reactions besides d-d fusion can do that, though they 
almost certainly involve, then, multibody fusion. I.e., 4D - 2He-4 
or the like.


Bottom line, we don't know what the main reaction is. The 
pseudoskeptical physics community has made a whole series of demands 
as to what would satisfy them. It's a moving target, because as 
evidence accumulated, the demands increased.


1. Reliable experiment. That means, for them, an experiment that 
always produces the same results. This is wilful blindness, and an 
imposition on other fields of particular expectations of physicists, 
who are accustomed to nice clean experiments where conditions are 
very precisely controlled. Naturally, these people hate 
electrochemistry with a passion. It's messy as hell. However, that 
doesn't mean that science can't be done, it can, and as in all the 
messier fields, one looks for statistical correlations.


2. Nuclear product. Originally, it was assumed that the reaction 
must be d-d fusion or nothing. So the expected products from d-d 
fusion were sought, and when it was shown, rather conclusively, that 
these products were not appearing, this was considered definitive 
refutation of cold fusion. It's an obvious error. What that worked 
showed was that the experiment did not reproduce the conditions of 
hot, d-d fusion. It's something else. It would be like assuming that 
all burglars wear watch caps with holes cut out for the eyes, and 
therefore a photo of a burglar is fake because the fellow has no watch cap on.


3. Two cups of tea on demand. This is a variation on reliable 
experiment. It's total nonsense, because lots of cold fusion 
experiments run hot and could be used to brew tea, it would mean nothing.


4. Commercial device. Of course they would be convinced if there is 
a commercial device. But a physical effect might be nowhere near 
ready for commercialization, might *never* be commercializable, and 
that has practically nothing to do with reality. Muon-catalyzed 
fusion is known and understood and will probably never be 
commercially useful. FPHE fusion depends on very difficult-to-control 
material conditions, and the material shifts during the experiment, 
in uncontrolled ways (so far).


5. An explanation. I.e., some explanation that will satisfy them.

*Sometimes,* PdD shows anomalous heat. This was shown in hundreds of 
reports, 153 in peer-reviewed journals alone. What is the source of 
that heat? That was, beginning in 1989, a simple scientific question. 
The physicists, because of a relatively small number of negative 
replications-- which only show replication failure -- began to assume 
unidentified calorimetry error. They stuck to this story in spite 
of massive reports, using many different kinds of calorimetry.


There never has been a peer-reviewed report that actually explained 
the source of the heat, other than attempts to explain it as a 
nuclear effect. Yet physicists, many of them, to this day, treat cold 
fusion as a closed book. Wasn't that proven to be bogus, twenty years ago?


No. It wasn't. That's plain and simple. Questions were raised, that's 
all. And then, over the next decade, the questions were answered, but 
the physicists stopped listening.


Most importantly, by 1991, expanded in 1993, the ash was identified: 
helium. And that does, in fact, explain the excess heat. It's 
proportional to the helium produced, at (approximately) the value 
expected from any form of deuterium conversion to helium. That does 
*not* explain the *mechanism.


To explain the mechanism is going to take, most likely, a concerted 
effort on the part of quantum physicists, using the most 
sophisticated tools of quantum field theory. And we aren't yet giving 
these physicists enough data, nor are they attempting to develop it themselves.


That is why this is truly a Scientific Fiasco. We have the mass 
abandonment of a field by those whose expertise would be needed to 
resolve mysteries. Chemists struggle along, with little guidance

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible


At 06:17 PM 8/17/2012, Daniel Rocha wrote:
But that is sort of bad news too. People won't be able to have these 
devices at home. It seems that there are bursts of high activity 
1000x above the high limit level is way too dangerous.


What devices?

Daniel, isn't that jumping to conclusions? The results reported in 
that poster session, if that's what it was, are for a particular 
experimental approach. Neutrons are *not* found in normal FPHE cold 
fusion work, and probably not with nickel, either (though I'm sure 
less work has been done).


(This was PdD, I think, but it's all vague, I did not find an 
original report with 62M neutrons. Rather some large-text, red 
letter claims in the slide show are being taken as if they were 
complete experimental reports.)


That analysis of high limit level was way pessimistic, as well. 
Radiation damage from fast neutrons would accumulate. Bursts would be 
effectively averaged over time. I really don't have any clear idea, 
at this time, if the levels of neutrons reported would be dangerous 
or not. What I'm clear about is that the analysis presented here was 
not at all careful.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible


At 06:32 PM 8/17/2012, Daniel Rocha wrote:
Not really bad news. Ed Storms came up with a theory that fusion 
happen in cracks of the lattice. Summing that, with what I see in 
the slides, they are thinking that a BEC of D is forced to be fused 
by the fractures. So, LENR is a kind of variation of fractofusion.


C'mon, Daniel. Get it straight. Fractofusion does not refer to 
fusion in cracks, as per Storms' ideas, not like that. Storms thinks 
that cracks create cavities of a necessary resonant size.


Fractofusion refers to fusion through acceleration of particles by 
high voltages created by crack formation. If fractofusion is real, it 
is hot fusion, so of course it would generate neutrons.


It might be so that the present report involves fractofusion, but I'm 
not seeing any clear present report. I'm seeing a slide 
presentation with sime large red type claims. It's not at all clear 
what it means.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

FHPE has no normal conditions only workable conditions. Generally, they
either do not work or just work softly. But, sometimes wires and pieces of
metal explodes for God knows why reasons or just bursts of more intense
activity. Up to this result, IF that is correlated with cold fusion, I was
not aware that such emission could happen. Something vaguely similar in
terms of radiation poisoning hazard was told was during a visit from Celani
to Rossi, where he measured some intense (whatever he means with that)
gamma rays bursts.

2012/8/19 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com

  Neutrons are *not* found in normal FPHE cold fusion work, and probably
 not with nickel, either (though I'm sure less work has been done).


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

That's the final stage of his theory, which has a resonant requirement. The
longest wavlength for a cavity with 1nm is 2nm or ~500eV. This is
wavelength has a strong absorption in matter in general because it
ressonates with the inner orbitals of atoms. So, it is a highly ionizing
radiation which would soon heat and melt the surroundings. But that is not
the only problem, since even if this wavelength is easily absorbed, a
cavity that small is essentially transparent to it. So, there is no cavity.

Besides, I cannot see how that could exclude fractofusion. The breakdown
potential for a subnanometer is extremely small to consider an acceleration
to thousands of KeV. Consider that the electronics industry spends billions
just to keep the off state current leak bellow 0.01% of the On state, and
that is one of the main problems. Intel went 3D transistors to increase
the gate area so that leaks could be avoided.  But let's say current could
be contained, vacuum has an electric strength of up to 20-40MV/m, depending
on the shape of the electrodes. That means that a 1nm breakdown would
require 20-40mV of potential, hardly enough to accelerate any ion to
fusion. The use of Mica could improve that to 0.1eV, so a separation of
0.1mm could indeed cause fusion.

Now, I was calling for a pressure mechanism, that would require far less
energy than what was stated above. Considering the size of what I had in
mind (I didn't write yet), it would operate more or less like an enzyme.
But, that doesn't matter anymore, right?

2012/8/19 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com

 Storms thinks that cracks create cavities of a necessary resonant size.


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible


At 01:27 PM 8/18/2012, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

Hello Akira,

I can't see any bad news.

If I'm correct, Miley's team reports a much more robust reaction than
previously seen, along with a variety of extremely anomalous
transmutations.


Where is the report? Miley's reports of transmutations are not new. 
The slide show that was at the head of this thread is very shallow, 
mostly large print red statements with little data.


http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWS%26PROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ICCF-17%20Poster.pdf

So what is pagnucco's statement based on?

I've no difficulty at all accepting a wide variety of transmutations. 
Any fusion reaction is likely to lead to at least some of these. The 
neutron report is far outside the norm, however.


I'm waiting to see a more complete report than that slide show! It is 
practically unintelligible.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

2012-08-19 Thread pagnucco

Abd,

Firstly, cheer up a bit.
Way too much hostility.

The proceedings paper is at:

Surface Effect for Gas Loading Micrograin Palladium for Low Energy
Nuclear Reactions LENR
http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWSPROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ProceedXX.pdf

They sound quite confident that they can reproduce the effect at will now
- and they regard the intensity of neutron generation as a milestone.

The transmutations may indicate D-D fusions along with other complex
multibody reactions.

Unless they badly misinterpreted all of their instrument readings, more
detail and replications should follow.

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 01:27 PM 8/18/2012, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:
Hello Akira,

I can't see any bad news.

If I'm correct, Miley's team reports a much more robust reaction than
previously seen, along with a variety of extremely anomalous
transmutations.

Where is the report? Miley's reports of transmutations are not new.
The slide show that was at the head of this thread is very shallow,
mostly large print red statements with little data.

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWS%26PROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ICCF-17%20Poster.pdf

So what is pagnucco's statement based on?

I've no difficulty at all accepting a wide variety of transmutations.
Any fusion reaction is likely to lead to at least some of these. The
neutron report is far outside the norm, however.

I'm waiting to see a more complete report than that slide show! It is
practically unintelligible.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

That paper certainly didn't cheer me up. Indeed it made me very sad.
Myonic fusion? Yes, I know what they meant. The paper reads like it
was written with Voice Recognition software, without editing, more or
less off-the-cuff, by someone who knows a lot but is utterly
disorganized.

The neutron experiment isn't clearly described in this paper. It's
apparently in another conference paper

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 19, 2012, at 11:07 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

Abd,

Firstly, cheer up a bit.
Way too much hostility.

The proceedings paper is at:

Surface Effect for Gas Loading Micrograin Palladium for Low Energy
Nuclear Reactions LENR
http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWSPROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ProceedXX.pdf

They sound quite confident that they can reproduce the effect at
will now

- and they regard the intensity of neutron generation as a milestone.

The transmutations may indicate D-D fusions along with other complex
multibody reactions.

Unless they badly misinterpreted all of their instrument readings,
more

detail and replications should follow.

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

At 01:27 PM 8/18/2012, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

Hello Akira,

I can't see any bad news.

If I'm correct, Miley's team reports a much more robust reaction
than

previously seen, along with a variety of extremely anomalous
transmutations.

Where is the report? Miley's reports of transmutations are not new.
The slide show that was at the head of this thread is very shallow,
mostly large print red statements with little data.

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWS%26PROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ICCF-17%20Poster.pdf

So what is pagnucco's statement based on?

I've no difficulty at all accepting a wide variety of transmutations.
Any fusion reaction is likely to lead to at least some of these. The
neutron report is far outside the norm, however.

I'm waiting to see a more complete report than that slide show! It is
practically unintelligible.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

2012-08-18 Thread ChemE Stewart

Right,  they made up a new state called Inverted Rydberg State  that has
ultra high density.  Don't they really mean collapsed?

Axil, I really don't think we are that far off.  In both my theory and
Miley a cluster of ultra high density matter is shredding it's environment
and leaving a host of products.

Do these inverted states hang around in their environment once they are
created?



On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 6:34 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 It gets even better. Many of my most favored words are in the
 description.as follows:

 *Clusters* of 156 deuterons (10pm diameter) in *non-localized
 Bose-Einstein** *state react with Pd

 nucleus (or as *inverted Rydberg state*) for element production via *compound
 nucleus *element with A

 = 306 (or 310) having two *magic numbers*.

 Cheers:Axil


 On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 I am pleased to draw your attention to this opinion from the experimenter.

 The presentation states:

 Based on solid experiment of neutron emission and LENR-element
 generation: hypothetical models:

 Reactions in 2 pm distance due to *Coulomb screening* by factor 13 (5
 for hot plasmas).
 Coulomb screening is confirmed; no gremlins here.


 *It is Coulomb screening that is ripping atoms apart.*

 **

 *Cheers: Axil*




 On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 5:44 PM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.comwrote:

 Jojo,

 My singularity will rip matter apart in the near vacinity.  Any neutrons
 that escape it will be very low momentum, since the singularities quantum
 gravity pull sucked all of the energy out of them.  It also devours them.

 I am thinking about a new newsgroup for Evaporative Matter Nuclear
 Science.

 On Friday, August 17, 2012, Akira Shirakawa wrote:

 On 2012-08-17 20:39, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

 Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using
 shock
 procedure
 - Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully
 reproducible


 I'm not a theoretician (so please correct me if I'm wrong), but isn't
 this *not* predicted by the W-L theory?

 Cheers,
 S.A.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

2012-08-18 Thread Eric Walker

On Aug 18, 2012, at 5:53, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:

 Axil, I really don't think we are that far off.  In both my theory and Miley 
 a cluster of ultra high density matter is shredding it's environment and 
 leaving a host of products.

I think a black hole is somewhat different than a Bose-Einstein condensate.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

2012-08-18 Thread pagnucco

Hello Akira,

I can't see any bad news.

If I'm correct, Miley's team reports a much more robust reaction than
previously seen, along with a variety of extremely anomalous
transmutations.

Certainly, any fusion reaction will require enough energy to surmount high
potential barriers between colliding particles.  I think it's a matter of
how focused and localized that high energy event is.  Macroscopically
cold reactions may be hot at the nanoscale - for instance, look at the
surface micro-volcanoes on LENR Pd, Ni or Ti surfaces.

If LENR is real, why should we assume that there is not a continuum of
reactions yielding a continuous range of particles/energies depending on
experimental parameters?

Cheers,
Lou Pagnucco


Akira Shirakawa wrote:
 On 2012-08-18 01:11, Axil Axil wrote:
 The hot fusion people and the nuclear physicist crowd will not believe
 that LENR is real unless they see lots of neutrons; this is a good
 political type experiment.

 I have to bring some potentially bad news. I've just been told that this
 Ti-D neutron claim is for a hot fusion reaction based on fractofusion
 that was discovered and replicated years ago. See the following
 bibliography (I'm copying and pasting from a private email, I haven't
 found these for myself):

 1. Menlove, H.O., et al. Reproducible neutron emission measurements from
 Ti metal in pressurized D2 gas. in Anomalous Nuclear Effects in
 Deuterium/Solid Systems, AIP Conference Proceedings 228. 1990. Brigham
 Young Univ., Provo, UT: American Institute of Physics, New York. p. 287.

 2. Menlove, H.O. High-sensitivity measurements of neutron emission from
 Ti metal in pressurized D2 gas. in The First Annual Conference on Cold
 Fusion. 1990. University of Utah Research Park, Salt Lake City, Utah:
 National Cold Fusion Institute. p. 250.
[...]

[Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

Pardon if I missed this in the deluge of recent postings

ICCF-17 Presentation -

 Surface Effect for Gas Loading Micrograin Palladium for Low Energy
Nuclear Reactions LENR
- Heinrich Hora1, George H Miley, Mark Prelas, Kyu Jung Kim, Xiaoling Yang

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWSPROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ICCF-17%20Poster.pdf

(Slide 2)

Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using shock
procedure
- Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

It sounds like LENR appears in many guises.

Does anyone have the accompanying paper?

-- Lou Pagnucco

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

2012-08-17 Thread ChemE Stewart

Any upset to the thermodynamic or spatial equilibrium of a micro
singularity(collapsed matter), once formed, will trigger an instant
response Once a singularity is present within matter, they take in matter
and energy in and return radiation out. The collapse of matter and/or
radiation can trigger a secondary fission or fusion event.  They are a
nuclear furnace.  You can kick them, drop them, wave them around, yell at
them,  cool them, heat them, radiate them and they return radiation as well
as expand and contract. Gremlins.

Stewart
http://wp.me/p26aeb-4


On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 2:39 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

 Pardon if I missed this in the deluge of recent postings

 ICCF-17 Presentation -

  Surface Effect for Gas Loading Micrograin Palladium for Low Energy
 Nuclear Reactions LENR
 - Heinrich Hora1, George H Miley, Mark Prelas, Kyu Jung Kim, Xiaoling Yang


 http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWSPROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ICCF-17%20Poster.pdf

 (Slide 2)

 Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using
 shock
 procedure
 - Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

 It sounds like LENR appears in many guises.

 Does anyone have the accompanying paper?

 -- Lou Pagnucco

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

2012-08-17 Thread Jojo Jaro

Yes, singularities may belch out radiation like x-rays and gammas, but will it 
pruduce neutrons?  I don't believe so.  Can your theory explain this flux of 
neutrons?

Neutrons has got to be coming from some sort of fusion going on.  Being not an 
expert, someone correct me if I'm wrong on this.


Jojo



  - Original Message - 
  From: ChemE Stewart 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2012 3:17 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully 
reproducible


  Any upset to the thermodynamic or spatial equilibrium of a micro 
singularity(collapsed matter), once formed, will trigger an instant response 
Once a singularity is present within matter, they take in matter and energy in 
and return radiation out. The collapse of matter and/or radiation can trigger a 
secondary fission or fusion event.  They are a nuclear furnace.  You can kick 
them, drop them, wave them around, yell at them,  cool them, heat them, radiate 
them and they return radiation as well as expand and contract. Gremlins.


  Stewart
  http://wp.me/p26aeb-4



  On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 2:39 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

Pardon if I missed this in the deluge of recent postings

ICCF-17 Presentation -

 Surface Effect for Gas Loading Micrograin Palladium for Low Energy
Nuclear Reactions LENR
- Heinrich Hora1, George H Miley, Mark Prelas, Kyu Jung Kim, Xiaoling Yang


http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWSPROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ICCF-17%20Poster.pdf

(Slide 2)

Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using shock
procedure
- Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

It sounds like LENR appears in many guises.

Does anyone have the accompanying paper?

-- Lou Pagnucco

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

2012-08-17 Thread Akira Shirakawa


On 2012-08-17 20:39, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using shock
procedure
- Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible


I'm not a theoretician (so please correct me if I'm wrong), but isn't 
this *not* predicted by the W-L theory?


Cheers,
S.A.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

2012-08-17 Thread ChemE Stewart

Jojo,

My singularity will rip matter apart in the near vacinity.  Any neutrons
that escape it will be very low momentum, since the singularities quantum
gravity pull sucked all of the energy out of them.  It also devours them.

I am thinking about a new newsgroup for Evaporative Matter Nuclear Science.


On Friday, August 17, 2012, Akira Shirakawa wrote:

 On 2012-08-17 20:39, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

 Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using
 shock
 procedure
 - Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible


 I'm not a theoretician (so please correct me if I'm wrong), but isn't this
 *not* predicted by the W-L theory?

 Cheers,
 S.A.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

I am pleased to draw your attention to this opinion from the experimenter.

The presentation states:

Based on solid experiment of neutron emission and LENR-element generation:
hypothetical models:

Reactions in 2 pm distance due to *Coulomb screening* by factor 13 (5 for
hot plasmas).
Coulomb screening is confirmed; no gremlins here.


*It is Coulomb screening that is ripping atoms apart.*

**

*Cheers: Axil*




On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 5:44 PM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:

 Jojo,

 My singularity will rip matter apart in the near vacinity.  Any neutrons
 that escape it will be very low momentum, since the singularities quantum
 gravity pull sucked all of the energy out of them.  It also devours them.

 I am thinking about a new newsgroup for Evaporative Matter Nuclear
 Science.

 On Friday, August 17, 2012, Akira Shirakawa wrote:

 On 2012-08-17 20:39, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

 Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using
 shock
 procedure
 - Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible


 I'm not a theoretician (so please correct me if I'm wrong), but isn't
 this *not* predicted by the W-L theory?

 Cheers,
 S.A.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

It gets even better. Many of my most favored words are in the
description.asfollows:

*Clusters* of 156 deuterons (10pm diameter) in *non-localized Bose-Einstein*
* *state react with Pd

nucleus (or as *inverted Rydberg state*) for element production via *compound
nucleus *element with A

= 306 (or 310) having two *magic numbers*.

Cheers:Axil


On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 I am pleased to draw your attention to this opinion from the experimenter.

 The presentation states:

 Based on solid experiment of neutron emission and LENR-element generation:
 hypothetical models:

 Reactions in 2 pm distance due to *Coulomb screening* by factor 13 (5 for
 hot plasmas).
 Coulomb screening is confirmed; no gremlins here.


 *It is Coulomb screening that is ripping atoms apart.*

 **

 *Cheers: Axil*




 On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 5:44 PM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:

 Jojo,

 My singularity will rip matter apart in the near vacinity.  Any neutrons
 that escape it will be very low momentum, since the singularities quantum
 gravity pull sucked all of the energy out of them.  It also devours them.

 I am thinking about a new newsgroup for Evaporative Matter Nuclear
 Science.

 On Friday, August 17, 2012, Akira Shirakawa wrote:

 On 2012-08-17 20:39, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

 Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using
 shock
 procedure
 - Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible


 I'm not a theoretician (so please correct me if I'm wrong), but isn't
 this *not* predicted by the W-L theory?

 Cheers,
 S.A.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

2012-08-17 Thread Jojo Jaro

Somebody correct me, but wouldn't Very Low Momemtum Neutrons be undetectable?

I guess we need to see this paper to ascertain what energy neutrons they 
detected.


Jojo



  - Original Message - 
  From: ChemE Stewart 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2012 5:44 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully 
reproducible


  Jojo,


  My singularity will rip matter apart in the near vacinity.  Any neutrons that 
escape it will be very low momentum, since the singularities quantum gravity 
pull sucked all of the energy out of them.  It also devours them.


  I am thinking about a new newsgroup for Evaporative Matter Nuclear Science.  

  On Friday, August 17, 2012, Akira Shirakawa wrote:

On 2012-08-17 20:39, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

  Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using 
shock
  procedure
  - Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible


I'm not a theoretician (so please correct me if I'm wrong), but isn't this 
*not* predicted by the W-L theory?

Cheers,
S.A.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

2012-08-17 Thread Jojo Jaro

Axil, where's the paper?  Did you forget to link it?

I'd be interested in looking at this more closely.

Jojo

  - Original Message - 
  From: Axil Axil 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2012 6:27 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully 
reproducible

  I am pleased to draw your attention to this opinion from the experimenter.

  The presentation states:
  Based on solid experiment of neutron emission and LENR-element generation: 
hypothetical models:

  Reactions in 2 pm distance due to Coulomb screening by factor 13 (5 for hot 
plasmas).

  Coulomb screening is confirmed; no gremlins here.

  It is Coulomb screening that is ripping atoms apart.

  Cheers: Axil

  On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 5:44 PM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:

Jojo,

My singularity will rip matter apart in the near vacinity.  Any neutrons 
that escape it will be very low momentum, since the singularities quantum 
gravity pull sucked all of the energy out of them.  It also devours them.

I am thinking about a new newsgroup for Evaporative Matter Nuclear Science. 

On Friday, August 17, 2012, Akira Shirakawa wrote:

  On 2012-08-17 20:39, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using 
shock
procedure
- Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

  I'm not a theoretician (so please correct me if I'm wrong), but isn't 
this *not* predicted by the W-L theory?

  Cheers,
  S.A.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

Hello Akira,

It's important that the results are reported to be reproducible.

If they are correct, they are very complex multibody reactions,
e.g.,  slide #12 -

Clusters of 156 deuterons (10pm diameter) in non-localized Bose-Einstein
state react with Pd nucleus (or as inverted Rydberg state) for element
production via compound nucleus element with A = 306 (or 310) having two
magic numbers.

Slides 7-8 show that a great variety of heavy nuclei are synthesized.
Hard to classify the reaction(s).

It would be interesting to know what the neutron energies were.

W-L surmise that electroweak reactions in lightning (and other arcing
phenomena) can produce neutrons also.

Since Ruby Carat at Coldfusionnow.org reads Vortex, maybe she could
interview Miley, or a coauthor, and ask Ed Storms for an analysis.

Prelas, Miley, et al, have seen similar results before.
A Review of Transmutation and Clustering in Low Energy Nuclear Reactions
research.missouri.edu/vcr_seminar/Prelas.ppt

I hope this actually is reproducible - that would dispel any doubts on LENR.

-- Lou Pagnucco


Akira Shirakawa wrote:
 On 2012-08-17 20:39, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:
 Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using
 shock
 procedure
 - Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

 I'm not a theoretician (so please correct me if I'm wrong), but isn't
 this *not* predicted by the W-L theory?

 Cheers,
 S.A.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

6.2*10^7 neutrons per 5 min means 200 thousand neutrons per second. If each
one carries 1MeV, that means 3*10^-10^-8J. There's about 3*10^7s every
year, which means about 1Joule of radiation emitted per year.

According to wikipedia:

 The International Commission on Radiological
Protectionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Commission_on_Radiological_Protection
(ICRP)
recommends limiting artificial irradiation of the public to an average of 1
mSv (0.001 Sv) of effective dose per year, not including medical and
occupational 
exposures.[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millisievert#cite_note-ICRP103-0

Where 1 Sv = 1 J
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule/kghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilogram
 =1Gy

If those 62 million mean the total estimated from the source, given an
isotropic distribution, it means 1000x above maximum background levels.

According to this entries:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation-induced_cancer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_poisoning

It is hard to figure out the effects, at least for me, of such exposure for
a long time. But, they are surely deadly.

2012/8/17 pagnu...@htdconnect.com

 Pardon if I missed this in the deluge of recent postings

 ICCF-17 Presentation -

  Surface Effect for Gas Loading Micrograin Palladium for Low Energy
 Nuclear Reactions LENR
 - Heinrich Hora1, George H Miley, Mark Prelas, Kyu Jung Kim, Xiaoling Yang


 http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWSPROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ICCF-17%20Poster.pdf

 (Slide 2)

 Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using
 shock
 procedure
 - Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

 It sounds like LENR appears in many guises.

 Does anyone have the accompanying paper?

 -- Lou Pagnucco




-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

Hi JoJo

It is found at the top of this thread, but here it is for you.

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWSPROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ICCF-17%20Poster.pdf

Axil

On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote:

 **
 Axil, where's the paper?  Did you forget to link it?

 I'd be interested in looking at this more closely.

 Jojo



 - Original Message -
 *From:* Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Sent:* Saturday, August 18, 2012 6:27 AM
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully
 reproducible

 I am pleased to draw your attention to this opinion from the experimenter.

 The presentation states:

 Based on solid experiment of neutron emission and LENR-element generation:
 hypothetical models:

 Reactions in 2 pm distance due to *Coulomb screening* by factor 13 (5 for
 hot plasmas).
 Coulomb screening is confirmed; no gremlins here.


 *It is Coulomb screening that is ripping atoms apart.*

 **

 *Cheers: Axil*




 On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 5:44 PM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:

 Jojo,

 My singularity will rip matter apart in the near vacinity.  Any neutrons
 that escape it will be very low momentum, since the singularities quantum
 gravity pull sucked all of the energy out of them.  It also devours them.

 I am thinking about a new newsgroup for Evaporative Matter Nuclear
 Science.

 On Friday, August 17, 2012, Akira Shirakawa wrote:

 On 2012-08-17 20:39, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

 Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using
 shock
 procedure
 - Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible


 I'm not a theoretician (so please correct me if I'm wrong), but isn't
 this *not* predicted by the W-L theory?

 Cheers,
 S.A.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

Well, Daniel

If those neutrons are real, they would still be welcome news.
Hopefully, the reaction could be modulated to reduce emissions, or their
energies.

-- LP


Daniel Rocha wrote;
 6.2*10^7 neutrons per 5 min means 200 thousand neutrons per second. If
 each
 one carries 1MeV, that means 3*10^-10^-8J. There's about 3*10^7s every
 year, which means about 1Joule of radiation emitted per year.

 According to wikipedia:

  The International Commission on Radiological
 Protectionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Commission_on_Radiological_Protection
 (ICRP)
 recommends limiting artificial irradiation of the public to an average of
 1
 mSv (0.001 Sv) of effective dose per year, not including medical and
 occupational
 exposures.[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millisievert#cite_note-ICRP103-0
 
 Where 1 Sv = 1 J
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule/kghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilogram
  =1Gy

 If those 62 million mean the total estimated from the source, given an
 isotropic distribution, it means 1000x above maximum background levels.

 According to this entries:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation-induced_cancer
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_poisoning

 It is hard to figure out the effects, at least for me, of such exposure
 for
 a long time. But, they are surely deadly.

 2012/8/17 pagnu...@htdconnect.com

 Pardon if I missed this in the deluge of recent postings

 ICCF-17 Presentation -

  Surface Effect for Gas Loading Micrograin Palladium for Low Energy
 Nuclear Reactions LENR
 - Heinrich Hora1, George H Miley, Mark Prelas, Kyu Jung Kim, Xiaoling
 Yang


 http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWSPROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ICCF-17%20Poster.pdf

 (Slide 2)

 Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using
 shock
 procedure
 - Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

 It sounds like LENR appears in many guises.

 Does anyone have the accompanying paper?

 -- Lou Pagnucco




 --
 Daniel Rocha - RJ
 danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

It is interesting that they claim element generation up to lead. That also
happened in defkalion's data. Check that out.

2012/8/17 pagnu...@htdconnect.com

Well, Daniel

If those neutrons are real, they would still be welcome news.
Hopefully, the reaction could be modulated to reduce emissions, or their
energies.

-- LP

Daniel Rocha wrote;
6.2*10^7 neutrons per 5 min means 200 thousand neutrons per second. If
each
one carries 1MeV, that means 3*10^-10^-8J. There's about 3*10^7s every
year, which means about 1Joule of radiation emitted per year.

According to wikipedia:

The International Commission on Radiological
Protection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Commission_on_Radiological_Protection

(ICRP)
recommends limiting artificial irradiation of the public to an average of
1
mSv (0.001 Sv) of effective dose per year, not including medical and
occupational
exposures.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millisievert#cite_note-ICRP103-0

Where 1 Sv = 1 J
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule/kg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilogram
=1Gy

If those 62 million mean the total estimated from the source, given an
isotropic distribution, it means 1000x above maximum background levels.

According to this entries:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation-induced_cancer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_poisoning

It is hard to figure out the effects, at least for me, of such exposure
for
a long time. But, they are surely deadly.

2012/8/17 pagnu...@htdconnect.com

Pardon if I missed this in the deluge of recent postings

ICCF-17 Presentation -

Surface Effect for Gas Loading Micrograin Palladium for Low Energy
Nuclear Reactions LENR
- Heinrich Hora1, George H Miley, Mark Prelas, Kyu Jung Kim, Xiaoling
Yang

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWSPROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ICCF-17%20Poster.pdf

(Slide 2)

Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using
shock
procedure
- Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

It sounds like LENR appears in many guises.

Does anyone have the accompanying paper?

-- Lou Pagnucco

--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

The hot fusion people and the nuclear physicist crowd will not believe that
LENR is real unless they see lots of neutrons; this is a good political
type experiment.


Axil

On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 7:06 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

 Well, Daniel

 If those neutrons are real, they would still be welcome news.
 Hopefully, the reaction could be modulated to reduce emissions, or their
 energies.

 -- LP


 Daniel Rocha wrote;
  6.2*10^7 neutrons per 5 min means 200 thousand neutrons per second. If
  each
  one carries 1MeV, that means 3*10^-10^-8J. There's about 3*10^7s every
  year, which means about 1Joule of radiation emitted per year.
 
  According to wikipedia:
 
   The International Commission on Radiological
  Protection
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Commission_on_Radiological_Protection
 
  (ICRP)
  recommends limiting artificial irradiation of the public to an average of
  1
  mSv (0.001 Sv) of effective dose per year, not including medical and
  occupational
  exposures.[1]
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millisievert#cite_note-ICRP103-0
  
  Where 1 Sv = 1 J
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule/kg
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilogram
   =1Gy
 
  If those 62 million mean the total estimated from the source, given an
  isotropic distribution, it means 1000x above maximum background levels.
 
  According to this entries:
 
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation-induced_cancer
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_poisoning
 
  It is hard to figure out the effects, at least for me, of such exposure
  for
  a long time. But, they are surely deadly.
 
  2012/8/17 pagnu...@htdconnect.com
 
  Pardon if I missed this in the deluge of recent postings
 
  ICCF-17 Presentation -
 
   Surface Effect for Gas Loading Micrograin Palladium for Low Energy
  Nuclear Reactions LENR
  - Heinrich Hora1, George H Miley, Mark Prelas, Kyu Jung Kim, Xiaoling
  Yang
 
 
 
 http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWSPROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ICCF-17%20Poster.pdf
 
  (Slide 2)
 
  Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using
  shock
  procedure
  - Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible
 
  It sounds like LENR appears in many guises.
 
  Does anyone have the accompanying paper?
 
  -- Lou Pagnucco
 
 
 
 
  --
  Daniel Rocha - RJ
  danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

But that is sort of bad news too. People won't be able to have these
devices at home. It seems that there are bursts of high activity 1000x
above the high limit level is way too dangerous.

2012/8/17 Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com

 The hot fusion people and the nuclear physicist crowd will not believe
 that LENR is real unless they see lots of neutrons; this is a good
 political type experiment.


 Axil



-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

2012-08-17 Thread Akira Shirakawa


On 2012-08-18 01:11, Axil Axil wrote:

The hot fusion people and the nuclear physicist crowd will not believe
that LENR is real unless they see lots of neutrons; this is a good
political type experiment.


I have to bring some potentially bad news. I've just been told that this 
Ti-D neutron claim is for a hot fusion reaction based on fractofusion 
that was discovered and replicated years ago. See the following 
bibliography (I'm copying and pasting from a private email, I haven't 
found these for myself):



1. Menlove, H.O., et al. Reproducible neutron emission measurements from Ti metal in 
pressurized D2 gas. in Anomalous Nuclear Effects in Deuterium/Solid Systems, AIP 
Conference Proceedings 228. 1990. Brigham Young Univ., Provo, UT: American 
Institute of Physics, New York. p. 287.

2. Menlove, H.O. High-sensitivity measurements of neutron emission from Ti 
metal in pressurized D2 gas. in The First Annual Conference on Cold Fusion. 
1990. University of Utah Research Park, Salt Lake City, Utah: National Cold 
Fusion Institute. p. 250.

3. Menlove, H.O. and M.C. Miller, Neutron-burst detectors for cold-fusion 
experiments. Nucl. Instr. Methods Phys. Res. A, 1990. 299: p. 10.

4. Menlove, H.O., et al., Measurement of neutron emission from Ti and Pd in 
pressurized D2 gas and D2O electrolysis cells. J. Fusion Energy, 1990. 9(4): p. 
495.

5. Menlove, H.O., et al., The measurement of neutron emission from Ti plus D2 
gas. J. Fusion Energy, 1990. 9: p. 215.

6. Mengoli, G., et al. Tritium and neutron emission in conventional and contact glow 
discharge electrolysis of D2O at Pd and Ti cathodes. in Second Annual Conference on Cold 
Fusion, The Science of Cold Fusion. 1991. Como, Italy: Societa Italiana di 
Fisica, Bologna, Italy. p. 65.

7. Seeliger, D., et al. Evidence of neutron emission from a titanium deuterium system. in 
Second Annual Conference on Cold Fusion, The Science of Cold Fusion. 1991. 
Como, Italy: Societa Italiana di Fisica, Bologna, Italy. p. 175.


Is this really related to LENR? Why and how was it presented during ICCF-17?

Cheers,
S.A.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

Not really bad news. Ed Storms came up with a theory that fusion happen in
cracks of the lattice. Summing that, with what I see in the slides, they
are thinking that a BEC of D is forced to be fused by the fractures. So,
LENR is a kind of variation of fractofusion.

2012/8/17 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com

 On 2012-08-18 01:11, Axil Axil wrote:

 The hot fusion people and the nuclear physicist crowd will not believe
 that LENR is real unless they see lots of neutrons; this is a good
 political type experiment.


 I have to bring some potentially bad news. I've just been told that this
 Ti-D neutron claim is for a hot fusion reaction based on fractofusion that
 was discovered and replicated years ago. See the following bibliography
 (I'm copying and pasting from a private email, I haven't found these for
 myself):

  1. Menlove, H.O., et al. Reproducible neutron emission measurements from
 Ti metal in pressurized D2 gas. in Anomalous Nuclear Effects in
 Deuterium/Solid Systems, AIP Conference Proceedings 228. 1990. Brigham
 Young Univ., Provo, UT: American Institute of Physics, New York. p. 287.

 2. Menlove, H.O. High-sensitivity measurements of neutron emission from
 Ti metal in pressurized D2 gas. in The First Annual Conference on Cold
 Fusion. 1990. University of Utah Research Park, Salt Lake City, Utah:
 National Cold Fusion Institute. p. 250.

 3. Menlove, H.O. and M.C. Miller, Neutron-burst detectors for cold-fusion
 experiments. Nucl. Instr. Methods Phys. Res. A, 1990. 299: p. 10.

 4. Menlove, H.O., et al., Measurement of neutron emission from Ti and Pd
 in pressurized D2 gas and D2O electrolysis cells. J. Fusion Energy, 1990.
 9(4): p. 495.

 5. Menlove, H.O., et al., The measurement of neutron emission from Ti
 plus D2 gas. J. Fusion Energy, 1990. 9: p. 215.

 6. Mengoli, G., et al. Tritium and neutron emission in conventional and
 contact glow discharge electrolysis of D2O at Pd and Ti cathodes. in Second
 Annual Conference on Cold Fusion, The Science of Cold Fusion. 1991. Como,
 Italy: Societa Italiana di Fisica, Bologna, Italy. p. 65.

 7. Seeliger, D., et al. Evidence of neutron emission from a titanium
 deuterium system. in Second Annual Conference on Cold Fusion, The Science
 of Cold Fusion. 1991. Como, Italy: Societa Italiana di Fisica, Bologna,
 Italy. p. 175.


 Is this really related to LENR? Why and how was it presented during
 ICCF-17?

 Cheers,
 S.A.




-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

 The production of neutrons may well be avoidable if the reaction is
properly designed. As a model, Rossi has been purifying his reaction for
more than a year.  My guess is that the use of Deuterium is conducive to
neutron production.   If the deuterium ion enters into the nucleus of the
substrate lattice atom, the resultant combined nucleus will expel any
excess neutrons if many excess neutrons are introduced into the
nucleus.   However,
if a very low neutron carrying isotope is used as a substrate in the
supporting lattice, then the added neutron from deuterium would be accepted
in the final nuclear product because no excess neutrons would have been
assembled.   It is easier all the way around to use hydrogen and stay
strictly with proton fusion.

Axil


On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Akira Shirakawa
shirakawa.ak...@gmail.comwrote:

 On 2012-08-18 01:11, Axil Axil wrote:

 The hot fusion people and the nuclear physicist crowd will not believe
 that LENR is real unless they see lots of neutrons; this is a good
 political type experiment.


 I have to bring some potentially bad news. I've just been told that this
 Ti-D neutron claim is for a hot fusion reaction based on fractofusion that
 was discovered and replicated years ago. See the following bibliography
 (I'm copying and pasting from a private email, I haven't found these for
 myself):

  1. Menlove, H.O., et al. Reproducible neutron emission measurements from
 Ti metal in pressurized D2 gas. in Anomalous Nuclear Effects in
 Deuterium/Solid Systems, AIP Conference Proceedings 228. 1990. Brigham
 Young Univ., Provo, UT: American Institute of Physics, New York. p. 287.

 2. Menlove, H.O. High-sensitivity measurements of neutron emission from
 Ti metal in pressurized D2 gas. in The First Annual Conference on Cold
 Fusion. 1990. University of Utah Research Park, Salt Lake City, Utah:
 National Cold Fusion Institute. p. 250.

 3. Menlove, H.O. and M.C. Miller, Neutron-burst detectors for cold-fusion
 experiments. Nucl. Instr. Methods Phys. Res. A, 1990. 299: p. 10.

 4. Menlove, H.O., et al., Measurement of neutron emission from Ti and Pd
 in pressurized D2 gas and D2O electrolysis cells. J. Fusion Energy, 1990.
 9(4): p. 495.

 5. Menlove, H.O., et al., The measurement of neutron emission from Ti
 plus D2 gas. J. Fusion Energy, 1990. 9: p. 215.

 6. Mengoli, G., et al. Tritium and neutron emission in conventional and
 contact glow discharge electrolysis of D2O at Pd and Ti cathodes. in Second
 Annual Conference on Cold Fusion, The Science of Cold Fusion. 1991. Como,
 Italy: Societa Italiana di Fisica, Bologna, Italy. p. 65.

 7. Seeliger, D., et al. Evidence of neutron emission from a titanium
 deuterium system. in Second Annual Conference on Cold Fusion, The Science
 of Cold Fusion. 1991. Como, Italy: Societa Italiana di Fisica, Bologna,
 Italy. p. 175.


 Is this really related to LENR? Why and how was it presented during
 ICCF-17?

 Cheers,
 S.A.

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

2012-08-17 Thread Ruby


On 8/17/12 4:32 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
Not really bad news. Ed Storms came up with a theory that fusion 
happen in cracks of the lattice. Summing that, with what I see in the 
slides, they are thinking that a BEC of D is forced to be fused by the 
fractures. So, LENR is a kind of variation of fractofusion.


D, I happen to be right now editing a video interview with Ed Storms 
conducted after his NPA talk - 47 minutes long!


I'm quite sure that he distinguishes fracto-fusion from LENR. They are 
not at all related in his mind.


He believes, by definition, any process that emits this type of 
radiation is not LENR.  If a process releases this type of radiation, 
then it is by definition, related to hot fusion.


In *An Explanation of Low-energy Nuclear Reactions (Cold 
Fusion)*published in JCMNS #9 and which you can find here 
http://coldfusionnow.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Storms-JCMNS-published.pdf, 
he writes:


2.2. Additional requirements for evaluating an explanation
Behavior initiated by hot fusion needs to be identified and not used to 
explain LENR. Because both hot fusion and LENR can occur in the same 
materials and sometimes at the same time, the results of these two 
independent reactions need to be separated. Crack formation is known to 
initiate nuclear reactions in material containing deuterium. This 
process, called fractofusion [42--45], creates brief high voltage in the 
crack that can cause fusion by the hot fusion process with the expected 
energetic nuclear products.


Because neutrons result, they are frequently detected as brief pulses, 
which must be carefully evaluated before they are attributed to LENR. 
Another example of potential hot fusion is obtained when solid materials 
are bombarded by energetic deuterons [46--48]. The resulting hot 
fusion-like reaction
is sensitive to the electron concentration in the material when applied 
energy is low. This is not an example of LENR because the reaction 
products are very energetic and are the ones expected to result from 
conventional hot fusion, not LENR.A clear separation between how LENR 
and hot fusion are caused to happen must be maintained because entirely 
different mechanisms are apparently operating.


Holy moly, what's happening to me?
Ruby





--
Ruby Carat

r...@coldfusionnow.org mailto:r...@coldfusionnow.org
United States 1-707-616-4894
Skype ruby-carat
www.coldfusionnow.org http://www.coldfusionnow.org

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

You are believing in all he says. He may only be partially right since LENR
could well have several different stages. So, he could be right up to a
point, but not right about everything.



2012/8/17 Ruby r...@hush.com


 Holy moly, what's happening to me?
 Ruby





  --
 Ruby Carat

 r...@coldfusionnow.org
 United States 1-707-616-4894
 Skype ruby-carat
 www.coldfusionnow.org




-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

2012-08-17 Thread Ruby


On 8/17/12 4:59 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
You are believing in all he says. He may only be partially right since 
LENR could well have several different stages. So, he could be right 
up to a point, but not right about everything.


I had hoped I was describing faithfully what *his* claims are.



--
Ruby Carat

r...@coldfusionnow.org mailto:r...@coldfusionnow.org
United States 1-707-616-4894
Skype ruby-carat
www.coldfusionnow.org http://www.coldfusionnow.org

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

You asked what was happening to you...

2012/8/17 Ruby r...@hush.com

  On 8/17/12 4:59 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

 You are believing in all he says. He may only be partially right since
 LENR could well have several different stages. So, he could be right up to
 a point, but not right about everything.


 I had hoped I was describing faithfully what *his* claims are.



 --
 Ruby Carat

 r...@coldfusionnow.org
 United States 1-707-616-4894
 Skype ruby-carat
 www.coldfusionnow.org




-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

2012-08-17 Thread Harry Veeder

If the neutrons could be collimated they could be used in neutron
scattering experiments.

Harry

On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 7:06 PM,  pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:
 Well, Daniel

 If those neutrons are real, they would still be welcome news.
 Hopefully, the reaction could be modulated to reduce emissions, or their
 energies.

 -- LP


 Daniel Rocha wrote;
 6.2*10^7 neutrons per 5 min means 200 thousand neutrons per second. If
 each
 one carries 1MeV, that means 3*10^-10^-8J. There's about 3*10^7s every
 year, which means about 1Joule of radiation emitted per year.

 According to wikipedia:

  The International Commission on Radiological
 Protectionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Commission_on_Radiological_Protection
 (ICRP)
 recommends limiting artificial irradiation of the public to an average of
 1
 mSv (0.001 Sv) of effective dose per year, not including medical and
 occupational
 exposures.[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millisievert#cite_note-ICRP103-0
 
 Where 1 Sv = 1 J
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule/kghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilogram
  =1Gy

 If those 62 million mean the total estimated from the source, given an
 isotropic distribution, it means 1000x above maximum background levels.

 According to this entries:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation-induced_cancer
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_poisoning

 It is hard to figure out the effects, at least for me, of such exposure
 for
 a long time. But, they are surely deadly.

 2012/8/17 pagnu...@htdconnect.com

 Pardon if I missed this in the deluge of recent postings

 ICCF-17 Presentation -

  Surface Effect for Gas Loading Micrograin Palladium for Low Energy
 Nuclear Reactions LENR
 - Heinrich Hora1, George H Miley, Mark Prelas, Kyu Jung Kim, Xiaoling
 Yang


 http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWSPROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ICCF-17%20Poster.pdf

 (Slide 2)

 Absolute confirmation of Nuclear Fusion from deuterated titanium using
 shock
 procedure
 - Mark Prelas: 62Million Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible

 It sounds like LENR appears in many guises.

 Does anyone have the accompanying paper?

 -- Lou Pagnucco




 --
 Daniel Rocha - RJ
 danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes -- Fully reproducible