Thanks Jone,
I have never really thought about that natural source of energy. It sounds
like there are people attempting to tap the stored joules and I wish them
success.
In a manner of speaking, the energy you mention is a form of fossil fuel.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Thu, Jan 24, 2013 12:10 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Chemonuclear Transitions
David,
Good question … and yes - natureprovides us with a few clues.
Without getting intoanything proprietary – you need only look at the oceans of
earth for the sourceyou are asking about.
In effect – “hydronium” isa component of water and represents a free source of
protons – albeit transitory.The hydronium ion is a cation H3O+ formed
naturally- is the result of temporaryprotonation. The pH of the oceans
represents the free protons available, and itis gigatons at any given moment.
The emphasis there is on “at any given moment”.J
So far, attempts toharvest hydronium have been in the easy ways have been
futile – that goeswithout saying, since we are still burning oil. That may not
be the case withadvancing technology. Note that while hydrogen as a gas is
diamagnetic, theproton is intensely magnetic.
The important point isthat QM (nature) can provide protons which are
essentially “free”. It is up toinventors to find a cost effective way to
harvest them.
From:David Roberson
Jones,
I can see how the 13.6 eV of energy would be very substantiallylarger than the
normal burning of hydrogen at 1.4 eV as you mention. Myproblem with this
concept arises when I try to find the original source of the13.6 eV of energy.
Clearly, free hydrogen is available to burn withoxygen delivering the 1.4 eV
since it exists in nature with the energystored ahead of time. But the 13.6 eV
you mention is nowhere to befound until the electron is stripped away from the
proton in the initial phase.
Do you know of a source for stripped protons that can be obtainedwithout that
input of energy?
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Thu, Jan 24, 2013 10:53 am
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Chemonuclear Transitions
.....
This ostensibly non-nuclear but supra-chemical gain is available because of
the Rydberg value of mass-energy of 13.6 eV for hydrogen. This basically
represents the energy which is obtainable from a proton capturing an
electron, and it is astronomically high, so to speak. I do not know if this
extreme value has ever been conclusively seen except in Space. Since protons
in Space are more common than any other form of mass out there - UV
spectroscopy can be used to pick up this signature everywhere we look - but
closer to home it is harder to see the strongest Rydberg evidence.
In stark contrast to this 13.6 eV Rydberg value, the highest amount of
chemical energy that can be obtained practically from burning hydrogen in
oxygen is about 1.4 eV and seldom does that happen (it is a rough
equivalence to 14,000 degrees K). A figure of about half that represents
practical reality as seen in rocketry.
In short, as you can see instantly from comparing 13.6 eV to 1.4 eV or less
- that hydrogen without combustion would offer an easy (but not naïve) way
to achieve a COP of ~10 ... if (big IF) ... we can simply engineer a proton
conductor which is not electrically conductive - to occasionally allow the
full transition energy of a free electron capture.
Thus Mills, or LENR, needs little else, other than nascent hydrogen magic in
order to show high gain (COP ~10) and to do it ostensibly through only
chemistry. After all, chemistry is also {mass to energy conversion} in one
perspective, so we are really talking semantics with nascent hydrogen being
non-nuclear. There is a way that it can be both.
More on those details later,
Jones
