Re: [Vo]:explaining CF
The mechanism must logically explain how He4, tritium, and transmutation are produced without energetic radiation being detected. ***A couple of years back I thought EN Tsyganov was onto something. http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Cold%20nuclear%20fusion.pdf 4. THE PROBLEM OF “NONRADIATIVE” RELEASE OF NUCLEAR FUSION ENERGY. As we have already noted, the virtual absence of conventional nuclear decay products of the compound nucleus was widely regarded as one of the paradoxes of DD fusion with the formation of 4He in the experiments [2]. We proposed the explanation of this paradox in [4]. We believe that after penetration through the Coulomb barrier at low energies and the materialization of the two deuterons in a potential well, these deuterons retain their identity for some time. This time defines the frequency of further nuclear reactions. Figure 2 schematically illustrates the mechanism of this process. After penetration into the compound nucleus at a very low energy, the deuterons happen to be in a quasi-stabile state seating in the opposite potential wells. In principle, this system is a dual “electromagnetic-nuclear” oscillator. In this oscillator the total kinetic energy of the deuteron turns into potential energy of the oscillator, and vice versa. In the case of very low-energy, the amplitude of oscillations is small, and the reactions with nucleon exchange are suppressed. Fig. 2. Schematic illustration of the mechanism of the nuclear decay frequency dependence on the compound nucleus 4He* excitation energy for the merging deuterons is presented. The diagram illustrates the shape of the potential well of the compound nucleus. The edges of the potential well are defined by the strong interaction, the dependence at short distances Coulomb repulsion. The lifetime of the excited 4He* nucleus can be considered in the formalism of the usual radioactive decay. In this case, N(t) /N0 = t e Here is the decay frequency, i.e., the reciprocal of the decay time . According to our hypothesis, the decay rate is a function of excitation energy of the compound nucleus E. Approximating with the first two terms of the polynomial expansion, we have: Here 0 is the decay frequency at asymptotically low excitation energy. According to quantummechanical considerations, the wave functions of deuterons do not completely disappear with decreasing energy, as illustrated by the introduction of the term 0. The second term of the expansion describes the linear dependence of the frequency decay on the excitation energy. The characteristic nuclear frequency is usually about 1022 s 1. In fusion reaction D+D4He there is a broad resonance at an energy around 8 MeV. Simple estimates by the width of the resonance and the uncertainty relation gives a lifetime of the intermediate state of about 0.810 22 s. The “nuclear” reaction rate falls approximately linearly with decreasing energy. Apparently, a group of McKubre [2] operates in an effective energy range below 2 keV in the c.m.s. Thus, in these experiments, the excitation energy is at least 4103 times less than in the resonance region. We assume that the rate of nuclear decay is that many times smaller. The corresponding lifetime is less than 0.310 18 s. This fall in the nuclear reaction rate has little effect on the ratio of output decay channels of the compound nucleus, but down to a certain limit. This limit is about 6 keV. A compound nucleus at this energy is no longer an isolated system, since virtual photons from the 4He* can reach to the nearest electron and carry the excitation energy of the compound nucleus. The total angular momentum carried by the virtual photons can be zero, so this process is not prohibited. For the distance to the nearest electron, we chose the radius of the electrons in the helium atom (3.110 11 m). From the uncertainty relations, duration of this process is about 10 19 seconds. In the case of “metal-crystalline” catalysis the distance to the nearest electrons can be significantly less and the process of dissipation of energy will go faster. It is assumed that after an exchange of multiple virtual photons with the electrons of the environment the relatively E small excitation energy of compound nucleus 4He* vanishes, and the frequency of the compound nucleus decaying with the emission of nucleons will be determined only by the term 0. For convenience, we assume that this value is no more than 1012-1014 per second. In this case, the serial exchange of virtual photons with the electrons of the environment in a time of about 10 16 will lead to the loss of ~4 MeV from the compound nucleus (after which decays with emission of nucleons are energetically forbidden), and then additional exchange will lead to the loss of all of the free energy of the compound nucleus (24 MeV) and finally the nucleus will be in the 4He ground state. The energy
Re: [Vo]:explaining CF
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:24 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: One thing that comes to mind right away is the transition from a metastable nucleus to a stable nucleus by way of the emission of a gamma-ray photon. Sometimes in a fusion you get one or more metastable states rather than a transition straight to the ground state. Each state corresponds to an isomer that has more energy than the ground state, and sometimes I believe there is more than one transition. As I further reflect on the matter of isomer transitions and the emission of gamma-ray photons, it seems to me that this is an interesting way to make the energy loss more granular, but it is also telling in that the quanta are large -- on the order of MeV, typically. So obviously isomer transitions aren't going to do it. This is suggestive of three possibilities: 1. Any draining off of mass-energy is done at the level of the electron shells (e.g., Mills's f/H). 2. There are new physics to be found, where some kind of metastable combination of two fusion precusrors can be brought and then juiced, like you might squeeze an orange, without pushing the separate pieces together so quickly that the mass-energy is released all at once. This gets back to Dave's demon thought experiment. Robin thought it would be hard to keep the nucleons apart once the strong force kicked in. 3. There has been a misdiagnosis about the draining off of mass-energy, and the energy that is released really is a quantum of 24 MeV, but it occurs in a relatively benign way (a la Ron Maimon's theory). I don't see how (2) is any more justified than (3). They both seem pretty fantastic. Have I misunderstood (2)? Eric
[Vo]:explaining CF
I would like to provide some advice to people attempting to explain LENR. This advice comes from someone who has studied the subject for the 23 years, who has an extensive background in chemistry and physics, and who has read almost every paper about the subject. I believe new ideas in physics are required, so my approach is not based on an unwillingness to explore new ideas. We know from centuries of observation and well developed understanding of materials that a nuclear interaction, whether it be fusion or transmutation, is not possible in normal material. Consequently, a novel and rare condition must be created. Two separate questions require answers. 1. What aspect of a material is able to initiate a spontaneous nuclear reaction? Something about a material must change and this change must involve only a small part of the material, i.e. the NAE. Once this change occurs, the nuclear interaction occurs spontaneously without extra energy being required. This condition must be created first and be consistent with the mechanism that causes the nuclear reaction in the NAE. This unique feature has been suggested to be metal atom vacancies, deuterium atom vacancies, clusters of D of various sizes with and without BEC being involved, gaps of a small size, locations were neutrons can form or be released, and unique features present in a highly loaded lattice that can initiate fusion. These features must be consistent with known chemical behavior and physical processes. No magic happens at this level. Although the condition is consistent with conventional chemical behavior, it must form rarely by random processes. 2. What mechanism can drain the mass-energy away from a collection of hydrogen nuclei before the final nucleus is formed? The final nucleus can be result from fusion or transmutation. This process must drain the energy in a way that produces some detectable photon radiation, but not enough to be consistent with the excess power. This draining process must be complete before the final nucleus forms to avoid conflicts with the law of conservation of momentum. The mechanism must logically explain how He4, tritium, and transmutation are produced without energetic radiation being detected. The mechanism must show a positive effect of temperature, must occur in a variety of materials including oxides, must be sensitive to magnetic fields and laser light, and must be initiated using a variety of methods. These requirements are created by observed behavior and severely limit the kind of mechanisms that are plausible. I have examined all the theories with these requirements in mind. My first conclusion is that the NAE cannot be created in the lattice itself without violating known facts about thermochemical behavior. This conclusion leaves gaps as the only plausible location. Gaps have the ability to form and host several types of clusters or structures. These structures need to be explored to discover how they can drain the mass-energy in a way that is consistent with requirement #2. This draining process represents the missing knowledge about nuclear interaction that cold fusion has revealed. I suggest the Nobel prize will be found in the explanation of this draining process. Ed
Re: [Vo]:explaining CF
Great post Ed! I've thought along those same lines as well (as I'm sure many bright people have). I won't say that CF theory require miracles, but it does require something very unusual an unique. We already have one unique aspect; that being the Hydrated Metal. Astronomic properties of hydrated metals may be really interesting in the afterglow of a supernova. It might be interesting to look a the spectrum of a supernova afterglow for a metal hydride CF signature. Even measuring He4 content in Ni/Iron meteors really might suggest how robust the CF process is in the supernova aftermath where hydrogen/deterium/He4 might be embedded in the hot metal ejecta. An imbalance of He4 compared to T, d, p would do it. On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 8:38 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: I would like to provide some advice to people attempting to explain LENR. This advice comes from someone who has studied the subject for the 23 years, who has an extensive background in chemistry and physics, and who has read almost every paper about the subject. I believe new ideas in physics are required, so my approach is not based on an unwillingness to explore new ideas. We know from centuries of observation and well developed understanding of materials that a nuclear interaction, whether it be fusion or transmutation, is not possible in normal material. Consequently, a novel and rare condition must be created. Two separate questions require answers. 1. What aspect of a material is able to initiate a spontaneous nuclear reaction? Something about a material must change and this change must involve only a small part of the material, i.e. the NAE. Once this change occurs, the nuclear interaction occurs spontaneously without extra energy being required. This condition must be created first and be consistent with the mechanism that causes the nuclear reaction in the NAE. This unique feature has been suggested to be metal atom vacancies, deuterium atom vacancies, clusters of D of various sizes with and without BEC being involved, gaps of a small size, locations were neutrons can form or be released, and unique features present in a highly loaded lattice that can initiate fusion. These features must be consistent with known chemical behavior and physical processes. No magic happens at this level. Although the condition is consistent with conventional chemical behavior, it must form rarely by random processes. 2. What mechanism can drain the mass-energy away from a collection of hydrogen nuclei before the final nucleus is formed? The final nucleus can be result from fusion or transmutation. This process must drain the energy in a way that produces some detectable photon radiation, but not enough to be consistent with the excess power. This draining process must be complete before the final nucleus forms to avoid conflicts with the law of conservation of momentum. The mechanism must logically explain how He4, tritium, and transmutation are produced without energetic radiation being detected. The mechanism must show a positive effect of temperature, must occur in a variety of materials including oxides, must be sensitive to magnetic fields and laser light, and must be initiated using a variety of methods. These requirements are created by observed behavior and severely limit the kind of mechanisms that are plausible. I have examined all the theories with these requirements in mind. My first conclusion is that the NAE cannot be created in the lattice itself without violating known facts about thermochemical behavior. This conclusion leaves gaps as the only plausible location. Gaps have the ability to form and host several types of clusters or structures. These structures need to be explored to discover how they can drain the mass-energy in a way that is consistent with requirement #2. This draining process represents the missing knowledge about nuclear interaction that cold fusion has revealed. I suggest the Nobel prize will be found in the explanation of this draining process. Ed
Re: [Vo]:explaining CF
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: 2. What mechanism can drain the mass-energy away from a collection of hydrogen nuclei before the final nucleus is formed? This question seems to imply that a quantum of energy (the eventual mass deficit to 4He) can be broken up into smaller pieces. It would be interesting to look at other examples of this kind of thing. Eric
Re: [Vo]:explaining CF
I wrote: This question seems to imply that a quantum of energy (the eventual mass deficit to 4He) can be broken up into smaller pieces. It would be interesting to look at other examples of this kind of thing. One thing that comes to mind right away is the transition from a metastable nucleus to a stable nucleus by way of the emission of a gamma-ray photon. Sometimes in a fusion you get one or more metastable states rather than a transition straight to the ground state. Each state corresponds to an isomer that has more energy than the ground state, and sometimes I believe there is more than one transition. Eric
