Re: [Vo]:Gamma radiation from proton-proton fusion

[Axil Axil]

Correction:

Rossi now believes that proton decay powers the Sun

should read

Holmlid believes that proton decay powers the Sun



On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/
> journal.pone.0169895#pone.0169895.ref007
>
> In his latest article, Holmlid rejects fusion as too weak to power the
> energy output that he is seeing in his experiments.
>
> Holmlid states:
>
> "The origin of the particle signals observed here is clearly
> laser-induced nuclear processes in H(0). The first step is the
> laser-induced transfer of the H2(0) pairs in the ultra-dense material
> H(0) from excitation state *s* = 2 (with 2.3 pm H-H distance) to *s* = 1
> (at 0.56 pm H-H distance) [2
> ].
> The state *s* = 1 may lead to a fast nuclear reaction. It is suggested
> that this involves two nucleons, probably two protons. The first particles
> formed and observed [16
> 
> ,17
> ]
> are kaons, both neutral and charged, and also pions. From the six quarks in
> the two protons, three kaons can be formed in the interaction. Two protons
> correspond to a mass of 1.88 GeV while three kaons correspond to 1.49 GeV.
> Thus, the transition 2 p → 3 K is downhill in internal energy and releases
> 390 MeV. If pions are formed directly, the energy release may be even
> larger. The kaons formed decay normally in various processes to charged
> pions and muons. In the present experiments, the decay of kaons and pions
> is observed directly normally through their decay to muons, while the muons
> leave the chamber before they decay due to their easier penetration and
> much longer lifetime."
>
> Holmlid is now saying that proton decay is where all the energy and mesons
> are derived from.
>
> Holmlid states:
>
> The time variation of the collector signals was initially assumed to be
> due to time-of-flight of the ejected particles from the target to the
> collectors. Even the relatively low particle velocity of 10–20 MeV u-1 found
> with this assumption [21
> 
> –23
> ]
> is not explainable as originating in ordinary nuclear fusion. The highest
> energy particles from normal D+D fusion are neutrons with 14.1 MeV and
> protons with 14.7 MeV [57
> ].
> The high-energy protons are only formed by the D + 3He reaction step,
> which is relatively unlikely and for example not observed in our
> laser-induced D+D fusion study in D(0) [14
> ].
> Any high-energy neutrons would not be observed in the present experiments.
> Thus, ordinary fusion D+D cannot give the observed particle velocities.
> Further, similar particle velocities are obtained also from the
> laser-induced processes in p(0) as seen in Figs 4
> 
> , 6
> 
>  and 7
> 
>  etc,
> where no ordinary fusion process can take place. Thus, it is apparent that
> the particle energy observed is derived from other nuclear processes than
> ordinary fusion. It is clear that such laser-induced nuclear processes
> exist in p(0) as well as in D(0). The low laser intensity used here, of the
> order of 3×10^12 W cm-2 makes it impossible to directly accelerate the
> particles (especially the neutral ones) to high energies. For example, in
> Refs. [58
> 
> ,59
> ]
> more than 10^19 W cm-2 was used to accelerate heavy ions to > 1 MeV u-1 
> energies,
> thus close to 10^7 higher intensity than used here.
>
> In contradiction to the PP fusion theory of the Sun's nuclear reaction,
> proton decay is the true source of the Sun's energy.
>
> Rossi now beleives that proton decay powers the Sun
>
> http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2017JA024498/abstract
>
> Abstract
>
> Ultradense hydrogen H(0) is a very dense hydrogen cluster phase with H-H
> distances in the picometer range. It has been studied experimentally in
> several publications from our group. A theoretical model exists which
> agrees well with laser-pulse-induced 

Re: [Vo]:Gamma radiation from proton-proton fusion

[Axil Axil]

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0169895#pone.0169895.ref007

In his latest article, Holmlid rejects fusion as too weak to power the
energy output that he is seeing in his experiments.

Holmlid states:

"The origin of the particle signals observed here is clearly laser-induced
nuclear processes in H(0). The first step is the laser-induced transfer of
the H2(0) pairs in the ultra-dense material H(0) from excitation state *s* =
2 (with 2.3 pm H-H distance) to *s* = 1 (at 0.56 pm H-H distance) [2
].
The state *s* = 1 may lead to a fast nuclear reaction. It is suggested that
this involves two nucleons, probably two protons. The first particles
formed and observed [16

,17
]
are kaons, both neutral and charged, and also pions. From the six quarks in
the two protons, three kaons can be formed in the interaction. Two protons
correspond to a mass of 1.88 GeV while three kaons correspond to 1.49 GeV.
Thus, the transition 2 p → 3 K is downhill in internal energy and releases
390 MeV. If pions are formed directly, the energy release may be even
larger. The kaons formed decay normally in various processes to charged
pions and muons. In the present experiments, the decay of kaons and pions
is observed directly normally through their decay to muons, while the muons
leave the chamber before they decay due to their easier penetration and
much longer lifetime."

Holmlid is now saying that proton decay is where all the energy and mesons
are derived from.

Holmlid states:

The time variation of the collector signals was initially assumed to be due
to time-of-flight of the ejected particles from the target to the
collectors. Even the relatively low particle velocity of 10–20 MeV u-1 found
with this assumption [21

–23
]
is not explainable as originating in ordinary nuclear fusion. The highest
energy particles from normal D+D fusion are neutrons with 14.1 MeV and
protons with 14.7 MeV [57
].
The high-energy protons are only formed by the D + 3He reaction step, which
is relatively unlikely and for example not observed in our laser-induced
D+D fusion study in D(0) [14
].
Any high-energy neutrons would not be observed in the present experiments.
Thus, ordinary fusion D+D cannot give the observed particle velocities.
Further, similar particle velocities are obtained also from the
laser-induced processes in p(0) as seen in Figs 4

, 6

 and 7

etc,
where no ordinary fusion process can take place. Thus, it is apparent that
the particle energy observed is derived from other nuclear processes than
ordinary fusion. It is clear that such laser-induced nuclear processes
exist in p(0) as well as in D(0). The low laser intensity used here, of the
order of 3×10^12 W cm-2 makes it impossible to directly accelerate the
particles (especially the neutral ones) to high energies. For example, in
Refs. [58

,59
]
more than 10^19 W cm-2 was used to accelerate heavy ions to > 1 MeV
u-1 energies,
thus close to 10^7 higher intensity than used here.

In contradiction to the PP fusion theory of the Sun's nuclear reaction,
proton decay is the true source of the Sun's energy.

Rossi now beleives that proton decay powers the Sun

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2017JA024498/abstract

Abstract

Ultradense hydrogen H(0) is a very dense hydrogen cluster phase with H-H
distances in the picometer range. It has been studied experimentally in
several publications from our group. A theoretical model exists which
agrees well with laser-pulse-induced time-of-flight spectra and with
rotational spectroscopy emission spectra. Coulomb explosions in H(0) in
spin state *s* = 1 generate protons with kinetic energies larger than the
retaining gravitational energy at the photosphere of the Sun. The required
proton kinetic energy above 2 keV has been directly observed in published
experiments. Such protons may be ejected from the 

Re: [Vo]:Gamma radiation from proton-proton fusion

[Nigel Dyer]

In fact I have unilaterally removed the offending gamma from the 
Wikipedia page. I dont expect it to return.  The only gamma rays that it 
continues correctly to mention are those associated with the 
annihilation of the positron with an electron.


The Mark Davidson paper is very good.  I will have to get my son to go 
over the variable mass hypothesis as it is very much in his territory.   
Indeed he has some ideas and a paper that he is working on that may be 
very relevant.  The roundup of nuclear anomalies is very good.  I was 
reassured that there were no surprises in the list.


I agree that proton-proton fusion would appear to be low probability.  
However there are still some situations, all of which are included in 
the list where I think it would be premature to rule this out at this 
stage.  I spent some time looking at thunder storm related anomalies, 
which are a lot more complex and 'poorly understood' than the one 
paragraph in the paper would suggest and still think that proton-proton 
fusion might be part of the story.


Bringing the two together, given that the Davidson paper also includes 
radioactive decay variation (ie weak force effects) in the list of 
anomalies, then perhaps he should have included neutrinos and their mass 
in his thinking.  This could then be of relevance if there does turn out 
to be some proton-proton fusion scenarios,  which is why I came to be 
looking at the Wikipedia page in the first place


Nigel

On 31/08/2017 15:22, JonesBeene wrote:


Proton-proton fusion is of such low probability that it is almost a 
waste of time to think that it has relevance in the real world, 
despite the mainstream view. We see gamma radiation in stars with or 
without fusion (even Jupiter and the gas giants have lots of gamma 
emission) but this usually derives from positron/electron events, not 
fusion. A related phenomenon used to be called Wheeler’s “quantum 
foam” but the term has gone out of favor. (Wiki has an entry). A real 
proton/proton fusion event would be akin to winning every prize in the 
lottery on every draw for a year in a row… and has no applicability to 
LENR because of rarity.


There has to be a better crossover explanation - but proton fusion in 
so engrained that it will be difficult to weed out. Even Ed Storms has 
fallen for it.


As an alternative to proton-proton fusion, there is a fully reversible 
diproton reaction with asymmetry. The diproton reaction is the most 
common reaction in the universe but it always reverses quickly. It is 
assumed to be net neutral in energy, mainly because of the assumption 
that proton mass is quantized - but that assumption is probably wrong 
- and each reaction event could have small gain contributory to 
stellar CNO fusion which is real: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNO_cycle


Bottom line, if the proton has variable mass, then the reversible 
diproton reaction alone can power a star or it can be contributory . A 
population of protons which is not quantized can capture and convert 
mass to energy in several ways including the complete annihilation 
event of Holmlid. This has relevance to LENR and at one time here, I 
was promoting an alternative hypothesis for Ni-H gain called RPF – or 
Reversible Proton Fusion... but, alas - there is nothing new under the 
sun, as they say and someone had already thought of it.


In the “small world” category, or maybe it is in the meme category – a 
theorist who lives not far away, came up with the same suggestion 
earlier. “Variable mass theories in relativistic quantum mechanics as 
an explanation for anomalous low energy nuclear phenomena” by Mark 
Davidson. Worth a read.


//

/https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/615/1/012016/pdf 
/


//

*From: *Nigel Dyer 

In the text of the wikipedia page about proton proton fusion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton%E2%80%93proton_chain_reaction

It says that in the first stage, when two protons fuse, a gamma ray

proton is produced.  However this is not shown in the diagram, or in

anyone elses diagram, or in anyone else's text.   Is the wikipedia page

incorrect.   If no gamma ray photon is produced then where does the

excess energy (0.42MeV) from this first stage go?

Nigel

RE: [Vo]:Gamma radiation from proton-proton fusion

[JonesBeene]

Proton-proton fusion is of such low probability that it is almost a waste of 
time to think that it has relevance in the real world, despite the mainstream 
view. We see gamma radiation in stars with or without fusion (even Jupiter and 
the gas giants have lots of gamma emission) but this usually derives from 
positron/electron events, not fusion. A related phenomenon used to be called 
Wheeler’s “quantum foam” but the term has gone out of favor. (Wiki has an 
entry). A real proton/proton fusion event would be akin to winning every prize 
in the lottery on every draw for a year in a row… and has no applicability to 
LENR because of rarity. 

There has to be a better crossover explanation - but proton fusion in so 
engrained that it will be difficult to weed out. Even Ed Storms has fallen for 
it.

As an alternative to proton-proton fusion, there is a fully reversible diproton 
reaction with asymmetry. The diproton reaction is the most common reaction in 
the universe but it always reverses quickly. It is assumed to be net neutral in 
energy, mainly because of the assumption that proton mass is quantized - but 
that assumption is probably wrong - and each reaction event could have small 
gain contributory to stellar CNO fusion which is real: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNO_cycle

Bottom line, if the proton has variable mass, then the reversible diproton 
reaction alone can power a star or it can be contributory . A population of 
protons which is not quantized can capture and convert mass to energy in 
several ways including the complete annihilation event of Holmlid. This has 
relevance to LENR and at one time here, I was promoting an alternative 
hypothesis for Ni-H gain called RPF – or Reversible Proton Fusion... but, alas 
- there is nothing new under the sun, as they say and someone had already 
thought of it.

In the “small world” category, or maybe it is in the meme category – a theorist 
who lives not far away, came up with the same suggestion earlier. “Variable 
mass theories in relativistic quantum mechanics as an explanation for anomalous 
low energy nuclear phenomena” by Mark Davidson. Worth a read.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/615/1/012016/pdf
 


From: Nigel Dyer

In the text of the wikipedia page about proton proton fusion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton%E2%80%93proton_chain_reaction

It says that in the first stage, when two protons fuse, a gamma ray 
proton is produced.  However this is not shown in the diagram, or in 
anyone elses diagram, or in anyone else's text.   Is the wikipedia page 
incorrect.   If no gamma ray photon is produced then where does the 
excess energy (0.42MeV) from this first stage go?

Nigel

Re: [Vo]:Gamma radiation from proton-proton fusion

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Wed, 30 Aug 2017 14:15:30 -0400:
Hi,

Actually a half life of 14 billion years sounds like it's about the right order
of magnitude for the power output of the Sun, given the number of particles that
are present.
(Note that most of the energy comes from the follow on reactions which are near
"instantaneous" by comparison.)

>Two particles are created, the positron and the neutrino. Is it possible
>that the excess energy (0.42MeV) from this first stage goes into into
>producing  movement(aka kinetic energy) in one and/or both of those new
>particles?
>
>By the way, PP fusion inside the core of the Sun has a cross section of 14
>billion years.  In other works it can't happen as a source of energy, even
>inside the core of the Sun. It stands to reason that PP fusion cannot
>produce the energy seen in the NI/H reaction. Therefore, LENR is not a
>fusion reaction.
>
>On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:22 AM, Nigel Dyer  wrote:
>
>> In the text of the wikipedia page about proton proton fusion
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton%E2%80%93proton_chain_reaction
>>
>> It says that in the first stage, when two protons fuse, a gamma ray proton
>> is produced.  However this is not shown in the diagram, or in anyone elses
>> diagram, or in anyone else's text.   Is the wikipedia page incorrect.   If
>> no gamma ray photon is produced then where does the excess energy (0.42MeV)
>> from this first stage go?
>>
>> Nigel
>>
>>
>>
>>
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:Gamma radiation from proton-proton fusion

[mixent]

In reply to  Nigel Dyer's message of Wed, 30 Aug 2017 09:22:51 +0100:
Hi,
>In the text of the wikipedia page about proton proton fusion
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton%E2%80%93proton_chain_reaction
>
>It says that in the first stage, when two protons fuse, a gamma ray 
>proton is produced.  

That's because you are not reading it correctly. The gamma ray photons mentioned
come from the ensuing positron-electron annihilation, not from the initial
reaction.
[snip]
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:Gamma radiation from proton-proton fusion

[Axil Axil]

Two particles are created, the positron and the neutrino. Is it possible
that the excess energy (0.42MeV) from this first stage goes into into
producing  movement(aka kinetic energy) in one and/or both of those new
particles?

By the way, PP fusion inside the core of the Sun has a cross section of 14
billion years.  In other works it can't happen as a source of energy, even
inside the core of the Sun. It stands to reason that PP fusion cannot
produce the energy seen in the NI/H reaction. Therefore, LENR is not a
fusion reaction.

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:22 AM, Nigel Dyer  wrote:

> In the text of the wikipedia page about proton proton fusion
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton%E2%80%93proton_chain_reaction
>
> It says that in the first stage, when two protons fuse, a gamma ray proton
> is produced.  However this is not shown in the diagram, or in anyone elses
> diagram, or in anyone else's text.   Is the wikipedia page incorrect.   If
> no gamma ray photon is produced then where does the excess energy (0.42MeV)
> from this first stage go?
>
> Nigel
>
>
>
>