are'nt gamma the way to compensate momentum ? and neutron the expected nuclear products?
by the way I appreciate the way yeong kim explain why lattice is not free space : "even though I clearly recognized that the conventional nuclear scattering theory at positive energies cannot directly be applied to nuclear reactions involving deuterons bound in a metal, which is a negative-energy bound-state problem. Quantum scattering theory describing the Coulomb barrier problem is applicable to scattering experiments with nuclear beams." a much more sexy explanation than my microelectronic experience that QM in solid is ... strange... ( ;-) ) 2013/6/7 Harry Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> > Peter, > > Kim says Huizenga's three miracles are: > (1) suppression of the DD Coulomb repulsion (Gamow factor) * * > (2) no production of nuclear products (D+D → n+ 3He, etc.) > (3) the violation of the momentum conservation in free space > > In other places I have seen Huizenga three miracles written like this : > (1) the mystery of how the Coulomb barrier is penetrated > (2) the lack of strong neutron emissions > (3) the lack of strong emission of gamma or x-rays > see for example > http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/Chubb93Editorial.pdf > http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/Theories/LiTheory.shtml#miracles > > > The second set does not mention of violation of momentum conservation in > free space. > Which set is correct? > > Harry > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 11:14 PM, Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> *Prof. Yeong Kim interviewed*: a veteran finally gets optimistic following >> a technological breakthrough. >> Please see: >> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/06/a-veterans-voice.html >> >> -- >> Dr. Peter Gluck >> Cluj, Romania >> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >> > >
