The problem I have with this analysis is that in the Lugano reaction, whose fuel/ash analyses are the basis of the hypothesis, the Ni seemed to have been largely converted to 62Ni and the Li converted almost completely to 6Li; yet in the experiment, the excess heat showed no signs of abatement. The reaction gave no indication of running low on fuel. It appeared that the reaction heat continued even though the fuel had been converted to 6Li and 62Ni. How is this explained in your theory?
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 5:05 PM, <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote: > In reply to Axil Axil's message of Fri, 17 Jul 2015 01:17:15 -0400: > Hi, > >How does your wonder particle stop at neutron formation just at Ni62? > [snip] > > I previously posted the following to Vortex on Oct. 9 2014, but can't get > the > archive to show me posts for 2014. > > _____________________________________________________________________________ > > In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 8 Oct 2014 09:22:13 -0700: > Hi, > [snip] > > Li7 + Ni58 => Ni59 + Li6 + 1.75 MeV > Li7 + Ni59 => Ni60 + Li6 + 4.14 MeV > Li7 + Ni60 => Ni61 + Li6 + 0.57 MeV > Li7 + Ni61 => Ni62 + Li6 + 3.34 MeV > Li7 + Ni62 => Ni63 + Li6 - 0.41 MeV (Endothermic!) > > This series stops at Ni62, hence all isotopes of Ni less than 62 are > depleted > and Ni62 is strongly enriched. > > I have only briefly skimmed the report, but the basic reaction appears to > be a > neutron transfer reaction where a neutron tunnels from Li7 to a Nickel > isotope. > The excess energy of the reaction appears as kinetic energy of the two > resultant > nuclei (i.e. Li6 & the new Ni isotope), rather than as gamma rays. Because > there > are two daughter nuclei, momentum can be conserved while dumping the > energy as > kinetic energy in a reaction that is much faster then gamma ray emission. > Because both nuclei are "heavy" and slow moving, very little to no > bremsstrahlung is produced. There is effectively no secondary gamma from > Li6 > because the first excited state is too high. (I haven't checked Li7). > There is > unlikely to be anything significant from Ni because the high charge on the > nucleus combined with the "3" from Lithium tend to keep them apart (minimum > distance 31 fm). > > It would be nice to know if the total amounts of each of Li & Ni in the > sample > were conserved (I'll have to study the report more closely). > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html > >
