If you look at the ICCF-18 transmutation study of nickel and palladium study by Cook, you will see that Mizuno shows the same isotopic shifts in nickel that DGT shows. Ni61 does not participate in the reaction but all other isotopes of nickel do.
Sorry, that link to this reference is broken. On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Arnaud Kodeck <arnaud.kod...@lakoco.be> wrote: > Jones, > > Why not consider also the Ni58 + 2p -> Zn60 -> Cu60 -> Ni60? Zn60 has a > spin > 0. > > _____________________________________________ > From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] > Sent: lundi 22 septembre 2014 17:34 > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: RE: [Vo]:Mizuno, Rossi & copper transmutation > > Typo- the suggested reaction is Ni58 + D -> Cu60 -> Ni60 > > _____________________________________________ > > I've looked through the isotope charts again - > searching for reactions that rapidly decay back to the starting element or > to any stable isotope which has already been reported to be there, and have > not found any other possibility... > > ...other than Ni58 (d,Cu59) -> Ni60 .... which > happens by EC or positron emission, with a half-life of 20 minutes or so, > and which fits the facts as reported in the most robust experiments (Rossi, > DGT, Thermacore, Mills). > > 1) No or few gamma > 2) No or little radioactive ash > 3) No tritium, helium or positron annihilation > 4) No or little bremsstrahlung > 5) Excess energy which is at least 1000 times more than chemical > > Since nickel absorbs a deuteron and decays back to > nickel in minutes, with low energy release, this reaction fits the bill. > You > may be thinking - what about the positron (beta positive) decay? No problem > there, since nuclei which decay by positron emission also decay by electron > capture in a known branching ratio which is dependant on the net energy of > reaction. > > According to wiki-the-wonderful, in low-energy > decays, electron capture is energetically favored by reactions below 1.022 > MeV. The final state will have an electron added or a positron removed - > and > so the energy released is determinative of what can happen in the > branching. > As the energy of the decay goes up, so does the branching ratio towards > positron emission. However, if the energy difference is low, then positron > emission cannot occur, and electron capture is the sole decay mode. This > would seem to be "ready-made" for the DDDL or deuteron-deep-Dirac-level > species, which uses its tight electron for more than one purpose and > probably reduces the net energy of the reaction as well. > > This still leaves spin conservation as the major > problem. The end products of this reaction would be Ni60, and the starting > nickel would be Ni58, so that is no problem. Both are spin 0. > > But the intermediary isotope, with short half-life > would be Cu60 which is spin 2+ and the deuterium can only add is 1+ spin, > and the EC electron another ½ spin. This over-simplification of spin issues > - probably means that the reaction can only happen if a neutrino is > captured, or else the inherent spin deficit decreases the half-life even > more than its short nature. Probably the neutrino. > > Best of all - as a general working hypothesis which > would make this relevant to LENR but is not expected to be seen anywhere > else (which explains why it is not documented in the physics literature, as > of now) there is NO other isotope in the periodic table (other than Ni58) - > which is both a proton conductor and demonstrably neutron-deficient ! (the > proof of that being that Ni-58 is lower amu than the preceding lower Z > element (cobalt-59). That's right it is a perfect storm scenario. If this > evolving explanation is correct, it will be seen nowhere else in the > periodic table, since it demands conditions which do not exist anywhere > else. > > This means, "anthropomorphically speaking" - that > Ni58 desperately "wants" two more neutrons, and to get them, it essentially > "steals" from its surroundings, whenever a deuteron comes too close... > especially a DDDL. > > Falsifiability? Yes, this is falsifiable in three > different way, which is a big advantage. Give me a working Rossi reactor > :-) > and a few months: if the [Ni<->Ni] explanation is true, if will be proved > beyond all reasonable doubt. > > P.S. do I get to keep the reactor? > > _____________________________________________ > > One more thing to add ... wrt the overdue > suggestion (Doh, slaps forehead) that Rossi's "secret sauce" is looking > like > it is deuterium. Thank you, Clean Planet. > > The reaction would probably work best if it > is started with regular hydrogen, and then deuterium is added later. This > is > because the "exchange" reaction between hydrogen and deuterium itself is so > robust. In fact, many of the early critics of LENR thought that the entire > phenomenon could be related to deuterium exchange. It is that energetic. > > As we know, Rossi has this mysterious > system > - which he calls cat-and-mouse. He has been intentionally vague on how it > functions. Yet in reappraisal, this system is fully consistent with having > two chambers, the main one containing hydrogen and the nickel reactant - > and > the smaller one deuterium (or a mix of H and D). The metering response can > be simply by voltage to a window, since deuterium will diffuse through many > proton conductors in direct proportion to negative charge. Positive charge > stops the diffusion, which is easily controllable by a sensor. > > The purpose of the small chamber (mouse) is > to meter D into the main chamber at a controlled rate, to avoid a runaway. > If Rossi can be believed, he suffered several runaways with the HotCat > which > we can imagine did not have this kind of metering device. > > This seems to fit into everything we know, > so long as one ignores Rossi's own denial of using deuterium. But deuterium > is the one thing which, if true - he would never admit to. That is, if Ni-D > is indeed the essence of E-Cat, in the same way that the change from > palladium to nickel could be the essence of the Mizuno reactor. > > Things just keep getting curiouser and > curiouser... > > _____________________________________________ > > One interesting detail, in retrospect, > about > Yoshino/Mizuno's MIT presentation and the switch to nickel (from palladium) > while keeping deuterium as the active gas may have been overlooked to date. > Apologies- if this slant on the underlying reaction has appeared before. > > It is the copper connection. As we know, > Focardi and Rossi believed that the E-Cat is/was transmuting nickel into > copper by fusing with a proton. When one mentions a copper connection, > seldom does Mizuno's amazing new work come to mind. 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. > > The same kind of signature radioactivity is > not true with deuterium as the active gas. In fact, the solution is so > stunning - that we have to wonder if Rossi may be using deuterium as his > "secret" ingredient. Terry will remember that in the very first image to > come from Rossi, there was a color-coded tank of deuterium in the Lab. > Apparently it was not intended to be noticed. When questioned about this > later, Rossi glibly said the purpose of D was to stop the reaction if it > got > out of hand ! > > With this new information... well... you > can > be the judge of whether Rossi's excuse was ever true. Notably deuterium in > never seen again... > > Nickel 58 is the most abundant isotope of > element 28, and as recently mentioned is "out-of-place" in the periodic > table, being lighter than any stable cobalt isotope, the element to the > left. By itself, that factoid would be unique in that it only happens in > one > other place in the entire periodic table, where elements routinely increase > in average amu, in step with z.... But wait there's more than "relative > lightness" (putative receptivity to nucleon addition). > > Look at Copper-60 , the expected product of > a deuteron fusing to Ni-58. Cu60 has a short half-life and decays back to > Ni60 in minutes. It could escape detection in any reactor - so long as a > reactor was not opened for a few hours, since all one would see is a nickel > isotope which is expected to be there. The beta decay is fairly strong > however. > > The biggest problem with this scenario > could > be conservation of spin. Ni58 is 0 spin, Cu60 is +2, and D is +1. A beta > decay ostensibly does not solve that problem. But the chance of this being > the gainful reaction in conjunction with nuclear spin-coupling as a > predecessor is otherwise worth looking at ways to get around conservation > of > spin. > > 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 more intriguing idea is that Rossi has > been using deuterium all along in his E-Cat, but the only time the secret > almost got out was in the original demo ! > > Jones > > > > >
