Single proton capture will not work because the spin of a single proton is non zero. Double proton capture will work because the spin of 2He is zero.
Piantelli shows a 6 MeV proton coming out of a nickel bar. This implies that a proton pair entered the nickel nucleus: one to produce the 6 MeV via fusion of nickel into copper and one proton to exit the nucleus to remove that energy from the nucleus. Also, the large amount of iron reported in Rossi’s ash assay, requires a reaction involving two protons. The abundance of light elements in the DGT ash assay requires fusion of multiple proton pairs with nickel. It is a safe assumption that pairing of protons is occurring. I 1H+1H+62Ni => 63Zn + n + 1.974 MeV 1H+1H+62Ni => 64Zn + 13.835 MeV 1H+1H+62Ni => 63Cu + 1H + 6.122 MeV 1H+1H+62Ni => 60Ni + 4He + 9.879 MeV 1H+1H+62Ni => 4He + 4He + 56Fe + 3.495 MeV <==== this one produces iron. 1H+1H+62Ni => 52Cr + 12C + 3.249 MeV 1H+1H+62Ni => 48Ti + 16O + 1.057 MeV 1H+1H+62Ni => 34S + 30Si + 2.197 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 65Ge + n + 10.750 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 66Ge + 24.037 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 63Ga + 3H + 4.007 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 64Ga + 2H + 8.108 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 65Ga + 1H + 17.778 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 61Zn + 5He + 7.372 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 62Zn + 4He + 21.156 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 63Zn + 3He + 9.692 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 59Cu + 7Li + 3.859 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 60Cu + 6Li + 6.667 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 61Cu + 5Li + 12.713 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 56Ni + 10Be + 3.707 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 57Ni + 9Be + 7.144 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 4He + 4He + 58Ni + 17.696 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 59Ni + 7Be + 7.795 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 60Ni + 6Be + 8.507 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 55Co + 11B + 7.769 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 56Co + 10B + 6.398 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 57Co + 9B + 9.338 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 52Fe + 14C + 7.721 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 53Fe + 13C + 10.230 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 54Fe + 12C + 18.662 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 55Fe + 11C + 9.239 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 56Fe + 10C + 7.316 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 51Mn + 15N + 10.550 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 52Mn + 14N + 10.252 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 53Mn + 13N + 11.752 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 54Mn + 12N + 0.627 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 48Cr + 18O + 6.010 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 49Cr + 17O + 8.549 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 50Cr + 16O + 17.406 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 51Cr + 15O + 11.003 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 52Cr + 14O + 9.819 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 47V + 19F + 5.899 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 48V + 18F + 6.011 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 49V + 17F + 8.415 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 50V + 16F + 0.951 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 44Ti + 22Ne + 7.983 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 45Ti + 21Ne + 7.147 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 46Ti + 20Ne + 13.575 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 47Ti + 19Ne + 5.591 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 48Ti + 18Ne + 5.580 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 41Sc + 25Na + 0.410 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 42Sc + 24Na + 2.949 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 43Sc + 23Na + 8.128 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 44Sc + 22Na + 5.408 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 45Sc + 21Na + 5.662 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 39Ca + 27Mg + 4.271 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 40Ca + 26Mg + 13.471 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 41Ca + 25Mg + 10.740 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 42Ca + 24Mg + 14.890 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 43Ca + 23Mg + 6.292 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 44Ca + 22Mg + 4.275 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 37K + 29Al + 5.425 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 38K + 28Al + 8.061 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 39K + 27Al + 13.413 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 40K + 26Al + 8.155 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 41K + 25Al + 6.885 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 34Ar + 32Si + 4.868 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 35Ar + 31Si + 8.406 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 36Ar + 30Si + 17.074 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 37Ar + 29Si + 15.252 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 38Ar + 28Si + 18.617 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 39Ar + 27Si + 8.036 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 40Ar + 26Si + 4.594 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 32Cl + 34P + 0.297 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 33Cl + 33P + 9.751 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 34Cl + 32P + 11.155 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 35Cl + 31P + 15.864 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 36Cl + 30P + 12.132 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 37Cl + 29P + 11.124 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 33S + 33S + 15.582 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 34S + 32S + 18.357 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 35S + 31S + 10.301 MeV 1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 36S + 30S + 7.137 MeV The last 4 produce lighter elements. There are also similar reactions for the other Ni isotopes, and also for the daughter products of the initial reactions, e.g. :- 1H+1H+64Zn => 66Ge + 10.202 MeV 1H+1H+64Zn => 65Ga + 1H + 3.942 MeV 1H+1H+64Zn => 62Zn + 4He + 7.321 MeV 1H+1H+64Zn => 4He + 4He + 58Ni + 3.860 MeV 1H+1H+64Zn => 54Fe + 12C + 4.827 MeV 1H+1H+64Zn => 50Cr + 16O + 3.571 MeV 1H+1H+64Zn => 42Ca + 24Mg + 1.055 MeV 1H+1H+64Zn => 36Ar + 30Si + 3.239 MeV 1H+1H+64Zn => 37Ar + 29Si + 1.417 MeV 1H+1H+64Zn => 38Ar + 28Si + 4.782 MeV 1H+1H+64Zn => 35Cl + 31P + 2.029 MeV 1H+1H+64Zn => 33S + 33S + 1.746 MeV 1H+1H+64Zn => 34S + 32S + 4.522 MeV A polariton is a photon and an electron locked together in a pair. This pair orbits around a cavity on its edge. The spin of all polaritons are pointed such that the polariton ensemble produces a magnetic field at the center of the soliton perpendicular to the circular polariton current (whirlpool). This current is superconducting. When photons and electrons enter into the soliton, they don’t exit. By the way, polariton solitons are used as a research tool to understand the behavior of astrophysical black holes. I believe that the magnetic field projections from the soliton screen the charge of all fermions in the nucleus including the nucleus and all protons in the neighborhood. When the nucleus and many di-protons pairs around it reorganizes, gamma energy travels back on the magnetic field lines from the soliton and the photons gain energy generating increase magnetic field strengths going forward. The magnetic fields produced by such solitons can get huge. The spin of the polariton produces the magnetic field in the same way that an iron magnet produces a magnetic field; that is through spin alignment except that it has only one pole. Charge movement does not produce a current. The magnetic field projects out of a polariton ring normal to it in one direction or the opposite direction depending on the spin orientation of the polariton. Like spin, the underlying cause of LENR is directional and not symmetric. A magnetic anapole field in a focused projection has a well definite and sharply defined direction. The way the nickel powder or more generally the magnetic field source is configured has a decisive effect to define which LENR reaction occurs. We can categorize LENR theories into two distinct classes based on the mechanism of causation, local and remote. For example, Dr. Miley’s cavity theory is a local theory were the a nano-cavity encloses a nano-crystal of hydrogen. causes fusion close to the cavity. Ed Storms theory is a local theory where the reaction occurs inside the crack. Local theories will produce nuclear ash produces comprised of heavy metals. Miley says that a initial heavy element comprised of over 300 deuterons will form an then fission into lower Z elements. On the other hand, the magnetic beam theory is a remote theory where the anapole magnetic beam may cause nuclear reactions at some considerable distance from the volume of space that has produced the magnetic beam. The magnetic beam projects out from the volume of space that produced it toward a remote location beyond the origin of the beam. Like a bullet out of a gun, the bullet projects power remotely onto a target at a remote location. We can tell how the reaction is caused either local or remote by looking at the nuclear ash produced by the reaction. If the ash is mostly light elements, the reaction is remote because the magnetic beam is projecting out into the hydrogen envelope. If the ash is heavy, like iron, the beam may be local because most of the reaction occurs close to the nickel that is supporting the reaction. But there is a complication. A reaction at a distance may look like a local reaction if the volumes of production are closely packed together. If the particles of the nickel powder are packed close together, the chances are good that the hydrogen and nickel will both be involved in the reaction producing iron and copper as an ash product because the magnetic beam will interact with a nickel particle that is very close to the volume that produced the beam. In a tightly packed volume of nickel particles, the chances are good that the magnetic beam will hit another nickel particle producing copper or iron. This is like a gunfight in a room packed with gunfighters. Any given bullet does not need to travel far from the gun that fired it before it hits a target very close to the point of its firing. In the Rossi reactor, a goodly amount of iron and copper is produced. This tells me that the nickel powder in the Rossi reactor is packed tightly together. In the DGT reactor, almost no iron or copper is produced. This tells me that the nickel particles are well spaced apart and their negative face is pointing outward away from the nickel foam mesh that is supporting them. This nickel form support structure for the nickel power is a wonderful idea. The supporting nickel mesh provides a positively charged backplane that protects the micro particles from the nuclear reactions and projects the magnetic beam outward into the hydrogen envelope. This mesh network of nickel fibers also allows the passage of EMF interconnect signals between nickel micro particles which makes Bose Einstein condensation involving all the nickel micro particles a certainty. This innovation is why the DGT reactor is a better design then the Rossi design where more nickel micro particle destruction occurs. This destruction will cause eventual reaction quiescence. In the Mizuno design, the magnetic beam projects outward from the positively charged surface of the electrode. This geometry allows from a goodly amount of the nuclear reactions to occur in the hydrogen envelope and a small amount in the nickel electrode surface itself. On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > > However, all reactions of nickel with a proton result in a >> radioactive isotope with a half-life which is long enough for it to have >> been seen. This kind of hot isotope is not reported in any study of the >> Rossi reactor - but his proponents are hoping that the TIP2 report will >> find >> evidence of copper transmutation. >> > > I don't think anyone here has been advocating for proton capture for a > while. Robin might still like the idea in connection with shrunken > hydrogen, for in that case the ejected electron can fill in for the gamma > and carry the momentum. I've personally run with the idea of proton > capture in the past, but have stepped away from it. Perhaps you're > referring to proponents in other forums? > > This elegant possibility of a gainful reaction in which stable nickel >> converts to stable nickel, giving up energy, is why my prediction for the >> Mizuno presentation in November is to suggest that they will see a >> relative >> decrease in Ni58 and a relative increase in Ni60. >> > > The nickel to nickel idea seems very promising. I doubt there is deuteron > capture, because if there is deuteron capture, there is probably proton > capture as well, along with all of the nasty gammas. This is what is > leading me to deuterium stripping -- e.g., 60Ni(d,p)61Ni. Here the neutron > is stripped off of the deuteron and added to the nickel, and the proton > flies in the other direction, rather than there being a full capture. > > Eric > >
