Re: [Vo]:Robert Godes comments on the report
6p+3e-li6 (add the neutrino) it can be made zero momentum I take it from hydroton theory, with a possibility that it is not 1D, but 3D reaction It is not so crazy as Iwamura transmutations are 1/2/3 pairs of deuteron pairs of hydrogen nucleus is logical to conserve momentum 3D is much harder to accept, but for that reaction it can explain why only 6 half electrons are merged, while a 1D model would put 4... my model is maybe wrong, but not more than all our speculations... being sure of anything, ruling out possibilities is more than premature. 2014-10-13 18:04 GMT+02:00 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net: *From:* Alain Sepeda you forgot the clear logic... it is a product of fusion, Fusion of what? Please state clearly the reaction you have in mind. All we are asking for is some semblance of science here.
RE: [Vo]:Robert Godes comments on the report
From: Alain Sepeda 6p+3e-li6 (add the neutrino) it can be made zero momentum I take it from hydroton theory, with a possibility that it is not 1D, but 3D reaction Please clarify: six protons coming together at one time is a six-body reaction, no? How do all 6 get there at the same instant in any dimension?
Re: [Vo]:Robert Godes comments on the report
clearly the 6 proton have to be synchronous/intricated/coherent if you succeed with a 3 body p-e-p (which need some be be coherent) why not 6. but you are right 1D variant looks more acceptable D-He4-li6 looks like Brillouin theory, but with Iwamura style (even hydrogen fusion). my reason to challenge the 1D sequence of pure hydroton is that the intermediate 4H disintegrate with gamma... but maybe simply is the electron a witness. there are many question, like the symmetry of electrons... it is more symmetric with 3D 3p-3e-3p fusion. I don't say I'm right (it is improbable ah ah ) , just that it is too early to eliminate hypothesis. Something coherent have to happen anyway. multibody reaction are required by LENR, this is not an argument. 3 body reaction without reaction and nearly impossible... 2 body is not observed. 3 or 6, are miracle, which mean there is a trick, an easy trick, easier than hotfusion; if easy for 3 why not for 6 ? 2014-10-14 15:03 GMT+02:00 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net: *From:* Alain Sepeda 6p+3e-li6 (add the neutrino) it can be made zero momentum I take it from hydroton theory, with a possibility that it is not 1D, but 3D reaction Please clarify: six protons coming together at one time is a six-body reaction, no? How do all 6 get there at the same instant in any dimension?
Re: [Vo]:Robert Godes comments on the report
6 protons can fuse and produce three neutrons through the emission of three positrons. On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: clearly the 6 proton have to be synchronous/intricated/coherent if you succeed with a 3 body p-e-p (which need some be be coherent) why not 6. but you are right 1D variant looks more acceptable D-He4-li6 looks like Brillouin theory, but with Iwamura style (even hydrogen fusion). my reason to challenge the 1D sequence of pure hydroton is that the intermediate 4H disintegrate with gamma... but maybe simply is the electron a witness. there are many question, like the symmetry of electrons... it is more symmetric with 3D 3p-3e-3p fusion. I don't say I'm right (it is improbable ah ah ) , just that it is too early to eliminate hypothesis. Something coherent have to happen anyway. multibody reaction are required by LENR, this is not an argument. 3 body reaction without reaction and nearly impossible... 2 body is not observed. 3 or 6, are miracle, which mean there is a trick, an easy trick, easier than hotfusion; if easy for 3 why not for 6 ? 2014-10-14 15:03 GMT+02:00 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net: *From:* Alain Sepeda 6p+3e-li6 (add the neutrino) it can be made zero momentum I take it from hydroton theory, with a possibility that it is not 1D, but 3D reaction Please clarify: six protons coming together at one time is a six-body reaction, no? How do all 6 get there at the same instant in any dimension?
Re: [Vo]:Robert Godes comments on the report
I have one idea, linked to my pet theory (don't laugh guys, I have stolen most of it to competent people; the stupid part is my adding). as Godes says, most of external Li must have gone. and if there was some in the powder maybe it was inside the active part, why not produced by the reaction... like the helium which is locked in the first layer of the palladium ? even if very few Li6 was produced, if most natural Li6/7 is gone, it can looks like a huge enrichment while it is tiny local production. 2014-10-13 2:28 GMT+02:00 Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com: So, Brillouin implies that they can produce a similar reaction. The before and after test results are consistent with the Brillouin Hypothesis. It is unfortunate that there equipment only reports the stable isotopes of Ni and they probably cut it off from Cu detection or figured the Cu65 without any Cu63 was an erroneous reading. It is almost a certainty that 59Ni with a half-life of 76000 years and 63Ni with ~100 year half-life. It is also almost a certainty that the 64Ni that was present at 0.9% turned into 65Ni which has a 2.5Hr half-life and becomes 65Cu before the measurement took place. There is no other reasonable explanation for what happened to the 64Ni which went missing on page 29. The Li seems to have disappeared during the test as well but this is not surprising as the boiling point of Li is 1342 °C and it probably evaporated out of the system fairly quickly. I would have preferred that they used a more direct measurement technique. I would have placed the reactor inside of a tube in a pressure vessel with a release valve set for 20 bar and measured the amount of water vaporized. The pressure valve tells you what the temperature of the escaping water vapor was. All this being said, this was a very convincing test proving that the reaction is both real and nuclear in nature. Further it also proves that there is no penetrating radiation from this type of reaction. - Robert Godes Craig On 10/12/2014 08:21 PM, H Veeder wrote: Robert Godes from Brillouin comments: http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/734- Short-text-from-Robert-Godes-regarding-the-test/ Harry
RE: [Vo]:Robert Godes comments on the report
From: Alain … even if very few Li6 was produced, if most natural Li6/7 is gone, it can looks like a huge enrichment while it is tiny local production. Yes, I thought of that too. Unfortunately, in scouring the literature, Li6 does not show up as the product of any known nuclear reaction of nickel or aluminum or alumina. Plus if you look at the Counts in the Appendix - lots of it was produced. The Counts are 4 times higher than all of the nickel. The best if not the only explanation is that the sample was compromised by the addition of Li6.
Re: [Vo]:Robert Godes comments on the report
you forgot the clear logic... it is a product of fusion, 2014-10-13 16:13 GMT+02:00 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net: *From:* Alain … even if very few Li6 was produced, if most natural Li6/7 is gone, it can looks like a huge enrichment while it is tiny local production. Yes, I thought of that too. Unfortunately, in scouring the literature, Li6 does not show up as the product of any known nuclear reaction of nickel or aluminum or alumina. Plus if you look at the Counts in the Appendix - lots of it was produced. The Counts are 4 times higher than all of the nickel. The best if not the only explanation is that the sample was compromised by the addition of Li6.
RE: [Vo]:Robert Godes comments on the report
From: Alain Sepeda you forgot the clear logic... it is a product of fusion, Fusion of what? Please state clearly the reaction you have in mind. All we are asking for is some semblance of science here.
Re: [Vo]:Robert Godes comments on the report
So, Brillouin implies that they can produce a similar reaction. The before and after test results are consistent with the Brillouin Hypothesis. It is unfortunate that there equipment only reports the stable isotopes of Ni and they probably cut it off from Cu detection or figured the Cu65 without any Cu63 was an erroneous reading. It is almost a certainty that 59Ni with a half-life of 76000 years and 63Ni with ~100 year half-life. It is also almost a certainty that the 64Ni that was present at 0.9% turned into 65Ni which has a 2.5Hr half-life and becomes 65Cu before the measurement took place. There is no other reasonable explanation for what happened to the 64Ni which went missing on page 29. The Li seems to have disappeared during the test as well but this is not surprising as the boiling point of Li is 1342 °C and it probably evaporated out of the system fairly quickly. I would have preferred that they used a more direct measurement technique. I would have placed the reactor inside of a tube in a pressure vessel with a release valve set for 20 bar and measured the amount of water vaporized. The pressure valve tells you what the temperature of the escaping water vapor was. All this being said, this was a very convincing test proving that the reaction is both real and nuclear in nature. Further it also proves that there is no penetrating radiation from this type of reaction. - Robert Godes Craig On 10/12/2014 08:21 PM, H Veeder wrote: Robert Godes from Brillouin comments: http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/734-Short-text-from-Robert-Godes-regarding-the-test/ Harry
Re: [Vo]:Robert Godes comments on the report
They use a pulse train also. I like his pressure relief valve idea, I have worked around lots of boilers/pressure vessels. These heating devices, assuming they work could be used like rods in a boiler almost immediately to stop the use of coal. On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 8:21 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Robert Godes from Brillouin comments: http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/734-Short-text-from-Robert-Godes-regarding-the-test/ Harry
