The high energies seen might require the production of D-mesons. A timeline based decay chain map as holmlid has done would tell what subatomic particles are being produced and how they decay to lower energies.
The nuclear process involved might be the decay of the proton and neutron in the nucleus. On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Russ George <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote: > I vote for option #2 being the source of this signal, the ‘neutral’ > particles being crazy neutrons, ‘mischugenons’ as described Edward Teller > in earlier closely related cold fusion work. Some few of us have been able > to produce these critters. It’s good news if this particular recipe works > and is rapidly repeated. Some obvious steps will define the nature of the > emission. > > > > *From:* Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, February 24, 2016 9:45 AM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ? > > > > One of the researchers that I discussed this with suggested that the > spectrum looked like a blackbody radiation. I did some analysis and can > tell you that it does NOT look like blackbody radiation. Blackbody > radiation cuts off very sharply on the high energy side. At 100 million > degrees, there would be some energy at 100keV, but by the time it got to > 1MeV, the blackbody radiation would have declined by 40 orders of > magnitude. That is not what is seen here. > > > > It is really hard to explain a continuous spectrum that looks like it > probably spans at least 2 orders of magnitude in photon energy with maximum > energies over 1MeV. The best explanations so far (and there has not been a > chance for widespread vetting) are that it is due to: 1) Bremsstrahlung > from really high energy light charged particles [electrons, positrons] with > a distribution of energy, or 2) interference in the NaI detector by a flux > of neutral particles causing the apparent spectrum by activation of the Na, > I, and Th in the detector crystal. > > > > Thank you for the links. I will have a look these papers. > > > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > The peak is at least 10x more than that of you provided... > > Bob Higgins, in my work with Akito, I proposed that in cold fusion you > have, unlike the conventional fusion, the fusion of more than 2 nuclei. > There are not experiments with more than 2 nuclei fusioning (C12 is formed > by B8, which is stable for 10^-15s, I am talking here of something less > than 10^-23s in coincidence). This will form an excited ball that will > shine at a few kev. There will surely be brehmstralung, from this weak gama > rays. > > http://vixra.org/abs/1209.0057 > > http://vixra.org/abs/1401.0202 > > >
