Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Sun, 21 Jul 2019 18:39:48 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>Bob
>
>One reason why the D* path is working like adding +2p/2e could be that 
>the internal electron from the neutron only needs to do a little push to 
>get to the k-shell. Thus no need to emit an electron!

K shells are not usually vacant, so such an electron would still upset things.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Tue, 23 Jul 2019 16:39:57 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>If a nuclear reaction (fusion) was responsible for the transmutation,
>wouldn't gamma radiation be produced?

Not necessarily as much as you might expect. It depends on the actual reaction.
If there are particles available to carry away the reaction energy, then very
few gammas are likely*. If those particles are electrons then some
bremsstrahlung is to be expected, but not so if they are heavy particles.
Positrons would of course result in annihilation gammas.

* This is because particle emission happens on the order of 1E-23 seconds,
whereas gamma emission is more on the order of 1E-17 seconds, so particles
usually carry the reaction energy away before a gamma has time to form.
This can result in a million times less gammas than one might otherwise expect.
If the number of reactions is small to start with, then the gammas may get lost
in the background noise, particularly if any such gammas are also shielded to
some extent by the apparatus itself.

Then of course, the experimenter also has to be looking for them.
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[Axil Axil]

If a nuclear reaction (fusion) was responsible for the transmutation,
wouldn't gamma radiation be produced?

On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 4:35 PM  wrote:

> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 22 Jul 2019 00:41:51 -0400:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >http://www.jmcchina.org/html/2019/1/20190101.htm
> >
> >Replication of biologic transmutation using a chemical reaction.
> >
> >The productivity of the transmutation was a function of the ambient
> >temperature of the solution. 75C produced the most transmutation. Note
> that
> >there was no report of a heating effect or other energy release that
> >accompanied the transmutation.
>
> The actual reported change was in the ppm range, so you should be able to
> calculate whether or not any normal nuclear reaction energy release would
> have
> been noticeable.
> [snip]
> Regards,
>
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> local asymmetry = temporary success
>
>

Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 22 Jul 2019 00:41:51 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>http://www.jmcchina.org/html/2019/1/20190101.htm
>
>Replication of biologic transmutation using a chemical reaction.
>
>The productivity of the transmutation was a function of the ambient
>temperature of the solution. 75C produced the most transmutation. Note that
>there was no report of a heating effect or other energy release that
>accompanied the transmutation.

The actual reported change was in the ppm range, so you should be able to
calculate whether or not any normal nuclear reaction energy release would have
been noticeable.
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

RE: [Vo]:Biological LENR

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Jones—

I assume the Chinese researchers looked for changes in B and Li isotope 
concentrations as well as Ca and K.

However, I did not notice a report of any such data?

Bob Cook

Sent from Mail for Windows 10


From: JonesBeene 
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2019 6:16:46 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: [Vo]:Biological LENR

Changed subject heading --- Prior heading managed to set the record for worst 
ever example of mindless misspelling

From: Axil Axil

http://www.jmcchina.org/html/2019/1/20190101.htm


  *   Replication of biologic transmutation using a chemical reaction.


Good find. The subject of biological LENR (or at least anomalous nuclear 
processes) – found in several forms of life  and derived from evolutionary 
pressure - turns up periodically, often with the name Louis Kervran.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corentin_Louis_Kervran

This particular subject is more discomforting to skeptics of LENR than is cold 
fusion itself – mainly because there is compelling  proof and wider 
implications, which is often ignored. Notably the Wiki article above omits the 
large amount of positive evidence from US government funded research which is 
supportive of biological transmutation especially transmutation of potassium 
into calcium – where the underlying evolutionary pressure  is procreation (egg 
shells).

I am happy to see this Chinese approach -  which shows a parallel chemical 
pathway – which offers completely  independent support to the evolutionary 
pathway which is found in avians.

The next step could be in the insect world – especially the  butterfly which 
can navigate over vast oceans for months - including hundreds of miles traveled 
at nighttime without solar capture or weight loss. This capability  could  
involve photoluminescence in some unknown way and probably SP (surface 
plasmons) which may be the route to hydrogen densification with energy derived 
from redundant ground states.

Re: [Vo]:Annihilation Technology from Norront - the future of LENR?

[Jones Beene]

 There is a possible cross-connection between the Mizuno breakthrough and the 
Holmlid technique for dense hydrogen conversion into energy, as practiced by 
Norront: i.e. "annihilation technology".

Basically both techniques could involve three basic steps: a spillover 
catalyst, dense hydrogen accumulation, and a photon-pumped SP (surface plasmon) 
activity in the substrate (or laser irradiation). 

The Mizuno operative mechanism could be annihilation instead of fusion, since 
the details favor that route - pending the documentation of adequate helium 
which would change things. The detail of interest is that protium works as well 
or better than deuterium, based on his earlier paper.

The Norront video clip claims: "Annihilation is the most efficient way of 
converting mass to energy." But in fact, prior to Holmlid - this was far from 
true - and it was extraordinarily inefficient. Annihilation required a 
beam-line with enormous acceleration gradient. 

Holmlid effectively discovered a low-tech method for pre-activation 
(densification) followed by photon irradiation, lowering the input energy by 
roughly a factor of a billion-to-one. It looks like a fabulous back-door 
method, but is it too good to be true? Can the deflated electron at some point 
"borrow" nuclear mass, to the extent that gluons cannot bind quarks effectively 
- thus the proton teeters on the edge of stability?

Norront does not explain how and why annihilation becomes efficient with only a 
small laser, nor do they mention that gain happens at a lower rate with only 
semi-coherent photon input - IOW a laser is not required (plasmons are a 
substitute). 

If you look at the original theory of Mills, as evolved through the eyes of 
others, we imagine that the electron of the hydrogen atom is first giving up a 
cascade of UV energy via  "shrinkage" or deflation - but then at very close 
proximity, suddenly there will be relativistic mass increase as the electron 
becomes relativistic. This mass-energy deficit at femtometer offset is met by 
coupling to the nucleus itself, which then becomes destabilized (i.e. the back 
door). Ultimately then, most of the excess energy seen will be derived from the 
nucleus, in addition to the ~500 keV shed from the deflated electron (so-called 
angular momentum).

As nuclear mass is being extracted beyond a stability point - perhaps we have 
the key to Holmlid's result; where proton annihilation is indeed "the most 
efficient way of converting mass to energy."
 ---

 This PR video was made for investors, and is impressive in its claims. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoWMJNT4J88
Of course, we are begging for more specific technical details about their 
progress. They claim to be converting charged particles from laser ablated 
dense hydrogen directly into electricity. That would be on a laboratory scale. 

Will it scale up?