The half life of Ni63 is 98.7 years. That path would not be useful in Rossi's device.
Dave -----Original Message----- From: pagnucco <pagnu...@htdconnect.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Tue, Jun 5, 2012 11:14 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:about Triumph Management (and LENR) Thanks ny.min, I assumed that a neutron was captured by 62Ni which then beta-decays to 3Cu. (Unless my quick calculations are wrong,) when you substract the inimum energy required to form a neutron from an electron + proton approx. 780 Kev) from the energy released from that beta-day, you do wind p with about an excess of over 0.006[u] energy - close to your alculation. I am not sure whether you are proposing direct proton capture via creening. If not, it looks like either W-L theory, or hydrinos could xplain the transmutations Rossi is claiming. Lou Pagnucco ny.min wrote: http://sire.com/fusion.htm -----Original Message----- From: pagnucco <pagnu...@htdconnect.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Mon, Jun 4, 2012 10:49 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:about Triumph Management (and LENR) David, Can you explain your conclusion. I can't see how any energy is released in these Ni --> Cu transmutations. Lou Pagnucco David Roberson wrote: > I may have been a bit to fast in pointing out the possible endothermic > nature of the Ni62 and Ni64 reactions. They actually are the best two > isotopes to use if you were not to rely upon the beta plus decay for a > substantial portion of the energy release. They further are not > susceptible to having the 511 keV gammas that would no doubt be released > by the reactions involving the other nickel isotopes since copper 63 and > 65 are stable and do not decay into nickel by that process. > > So, if Rossi is actually able to overcome the coulomb barrier by some > mechanism and his device only uses the Ni62 and Ni64 isotopes then it > could be functional. The energy released per atom for these two isotopes > is only 1 or 2 MeV after satisfying the coulomb barrier, but that is a > lot more than any chemical reaction can deliver. I wonder if the > relatively modest amount of energy release also can be more safely > directed toward useful forms such as vibrational coupling into the > surrounding structure. > > All of my estimates and calculations assume the reaction path that has > been suggested by Rossi instead of the W&L process which would be much > more energetic. Each of these proposed mechanisms has it's own particular > problems to overcome. > > Dave > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Mon, Jun 4, 2012 10:30 am > Subject: Re: [Vo]:about Triumph Management (and LENR) > > > I just wanted to point out that if Ni62 and Ni64 are the only isotopes > that work then the addition of a proton to either results in the > production of a stable isotope of copper which does not undergo beta plus > decay. Much less energy is released per atom if the beta plus decay is > avoided. My calculations suggest that these two reactions might actually > be endothermic due to the large coulomb barrier. > > Perhaps this is a bit of misdirection? > > Dave > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: integral.property.service <integral.property.serv...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Mon, Jun 4, 2012 9:30 am > Subject: Re: [Vo]:about Triumph Management (and LENR) > > > A.R. from Florida with love, > "Andrea Rossi
