Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger?
It is possible to both manipulate and respond to electromagnetic radiation just by ajusting the shape and number of a collection of atoms. To understand this, consider the properties of a newly developed tool of quantum mechanics called Quantum dots. Quantum dots are very, very tiny particles on the order of a nanometer in size. They are composed of a hundred to a thousand atoms. These materials can be made from any number of pure elements such as nickel, gold, or copper, or a compound, such as nickel or copper hydride. Color of visible light is well known to be influenced by particle size in both quantum dots and nanoparticles. Quantum dots are of much interest for the other unusual properties that they possess. These other properties include electrical and nonlinear optical properties. These unique properties of nano sized particles are partly the result of the unusually high surface to volume ratios for these particles, as many as one-third of the atoms are on the surface of the particle. As a result electrons and "holes" (holes result when an electron moves away from a bond, leaving a positively charged particle) are confined in a limited space inside the cluster. So it’s possible to ionize and quantize a metal into long lived cooper pairs of protons just by making the size of a particle small. Quantum dots can emit or absorb light at a particular wavelength at great efficiency in relation to its size (atom count), the smaller the dot, the higher the energy of the emitted/absorbed light. This ability to create dots that emit a rainbow of colors just by the adjustment of their size suggests that they could be used to transform EMF radiation. Quantum dots do not degrade as rapidly so it is possible to make light-emitting diodes (LEDs) with long service lives from quantum dots. But segregation of atoms is not restricted to the size of their physical aggregation. Aggregation can also be done by quantum mechanical characteristics. I believe that the detailed study of the Ni/H reaction suggests that we can now aggregate matter by not only particle size but by coherent zones of entangled quantum mechanical characteristics to form coherent pseudo quantum dot ensembles which can extend over physical boundaries and include various materials. It is this wondrous property of matter that can downshift EMF from the gamma ray frequencies to the thermal frequencies, delay completed nuclear reactions in indefinitely suspended quantum superposition states and make nuclear reactions sensitive to heat. * * On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 7:06 PM, David Roberson wrote: > **I agree with you that the details probably contain what we desire if we > can read them properly. It is apparent that heat is one of the major > factors involved in the reaction rate and we must understand why this is > so. I have requested on many occasions for Rossi or Defkalion to release a > graph plotting the energy release of a small volume of material as a > function of its internal temperature but it has not been delivered. One > day I hope to see this chart. > > It might be that the cosmic rays just begin the process of storing energy > since they allow the material to overcome the coulomb barrier at any > temperature. > > Dave > > > -Original Message- > From: Axil Axil > To: vortex-l > Sent: Thu, Dec 22, 2011 3:56 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger? > > Cosmic ray background is random but essentially a continuous condition > on the time scale of nuclear active site generation. > > Both the Rossi and Piantelli reactors are subject to run away burn up > conditions when the temperature of the hydrogen and nickel rises above a > critical temperature. > > The essentially continuous Cosmic ray background cannot explain how and > why this condition could occur. > > If heat is a triggering condition, such a triggering mechanism would > explain how reactor burn up could happen. > > Details, details, details…it’s all in the details. > > If one assumes that the Ni/H reaction occurs as described in detail by > both Rossi and Piantelli, many amazing and astounding quantum mechanical > clockwork implications must be drawn. > > Such implications might one day open a doorway to the stars; a good reason > to look into the details and implications of this technology with great > vigor. > > > > > On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Horace Heffner wrote: > >> >> On Dec 22, 2011, at 7:41 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote: >> >> Horace: >> The problem I see with some kind of outside trigger is that the “turn-on” >> of excess heat would occur randomly… how does one control when that cosmic >> ray or muon will initiate the reaction? In one of the demos, it appeared >> to turn on at a specific te
Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger?
I agree with you that the details probably contain what we desire if we can read them properly. It is apparent that heat is one of the major factors involved in the reaction rate and we must understand why this is so. I have requested on many occasions for Rossi or Defkalion to release a graph plotting the energy release of a small volume of material as a function of its internal temperature but it has not been delivered. One day I hope to see this chart. It might be that the cosmic rays just begin the process of storing energy since they allow the material to overcome the coulomb barrier at any temperature. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l Sent: Thu, Dec 22, 2011 3:56 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger? Cosmic ray background is random but essentially a continuous condition on the time scale of nuclear active site generation. Both the Rossi and Piantelli reactors are subject to run away burn up conditions when the temperature of the hydrogen and nickel rises above a critical temperature. The essentially continuous Cosmic ray background cannot explain how and why this condition could occur. If heat is a triggering condition, such a triggering mechanism would explain how reactor burn up could happen. Details, details, details…it’s all in the details. If one assumes that the Ni/H reaction occurs as described in detail by both Rossi and Piantelli, many amazing and astounding quantum mechanical clockwork implications must be drawn. Such implications might one day open a doorway to the stars; a good reason to look into the details and implications of this technology with great vigor. On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Horace Heffner wrote: On Dec 22, 2011, at 7:41 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote: Horace: The problem I see with some kind of outside trigger is that the “turn-on” of excess heat would occur randomly… how does one control when that cosmic ray or muon will initiate the reaction? In one of the demos, it appeared to turn on at a specific temperature. -mark Cosmic ray background is random but essentially a continuous condition on the time scale of nuclear active site generation. Nuclear active sites capable of chain reactions are not dense. They are islands which apparently grow with time, otherwise events many orders of magnitude larger than 10^4 fusions would occur. The size of craters would not be nearly uniform. The cross section of such islands to cosmic rays etc. apparently grows slowly, and is affected by temperature, and external conditions and forms of stimulation. This is one reason LENR can not be expected to be useful for nuclear explosives. Triggers in the form of cosmic rays and other background radiation are constantly present in the environment. The active sites have to be generated on demand. Practical LENR is inherently a dynamic process. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger?
You description of nuclear active sites reminds me of the operation of a laser. If the excited atoms such as copper due to a reaction between nickel and a proton maintain the excess energy for a long time(many seconds according to wikipedia), maybe it can be stimulated by the proper trigger to cascade with others. Seems like a form of population inversion waiting to release the stored energy. Dave -Original Message- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l Sent: Thu, Dec 22, 2011 1:14 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger? On Dec 22, 2011, at 7:41 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote: Horace: The problem I see with some kind of outside trigger is that the “turn-on” of excess heat would occur randomly… how does one control when that cosmic ray or muon will initiate the reaction? In one of the demos, it appeared to turn on at a specific temperature. -mark Cosmic ray background is random but essentially a continuous condition on the time scale of nuclear active site generation. Nuclear active sites capable of chain reactions are not dense. They are islands which apparently grow with time, otherwise events many orders of magnitude larger than 10^4 fusions would occur. The size of craters would not be nearly uniform. The cross section of such islands to cosmic rays etc. apparently grows slowly, and is affected by temperature, and external conditions and forms of stimulation. This is one reason LENR can not be expected to be useful for nuclear explosives. Triggers in the form of cosmic rays and other background radiation are constantly present in the environment. The active sites have to be generated on demand. Practical LENR is inherently a dynamic process. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger?
I was reading the Wikipedia about copper isotopes. All of them seem to take an extremely long time before they decay into nickel so I was wondering about the statement about the reaction happening far faster than melting or moving of the large atoms. What type of reactions do you think are occurring within the material? Could you give an example? Dave -Original Message- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l Sent: Thu, Dec 22, 2011 5:06 am Subject: Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger? On Dec 20, 2011, at 8:41 AM, David Roberson wrote: Second, if a small volume of material achieves reaction and releases several MeV of energy does the material then allow the reaction to spread? Of course the release of many MeV at the active region now would be adequate to enable more reactions since it far exceeds the 100 keV threshold suggested if in the correct form. Is there evidence pro or con as to whether or not this is happening? Chain reactions happen far faster than big atoms move or melt. The melting is a secondary effect that happens after the reaction is finished. The nuclear active site, or NAS, appears to be located below the surface. The melting and expansion drives the material out through the surface, making a "crater" like formation. Various estimates of energies and reaction rates have been given. http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/SzpakSprecursors.pdf "(vi) Location/size. The presence of discrete, randomly distributed sites (hot spots, craters, boulders, etc) implies the existence of volumes within the electrode material where conditions promoting the highly energetic reactions exist. In estimating their magnitude, one must make a certain number of assumptions, eg (i) energy per single event is that of the reaction D + D He, (ii) the number of single events to produce a crater is on the order of 10^4 or higher, depending upon its radius[9], (iii) the number of single events needed to generate the “hot spot” displayed by IRimaging is on the order of 10^4 or higher, depending upon its size and brightness. Under these conditions and assuming the loading ratio greater than unity, one can calculate the radius of this volume to be on the order of 100 Å or higher. The events take place within the bulk material in the close vicinity to the contact surface." If producing one watt of output requires 6.24x10^11 fusions, as shown earlier, and each comic ray triggers 10^4 reactions, then 6.24x10^7 pits per second should show up, per watt of output. This does not appear to be a reasonable pit formation rate, nor anywhere near a cosmic ray background count. At 4 kW output that would be about 10^16 pits for a 10 hour test. Pit formation then is a very unusual thing if high energy density long term reactions exist, as Rossi claims. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger?
Horace, does your theory mentioned below demonstrate the increased reaction rate that appears as the temperature increases within the device core material? Is it capable of operation at the relatively low temperatures expected within the ECAT type of devices? Any idea about the energy release rate as a function of temperature? Also, is there evidence to support that this mechanism is actually occuring? Thanks, Dave -Original Message- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l Sent: Thu, Dec 22, 2011 4:32 am Subject: Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger? I just saw this post. I am only reading about 1 in 20 posts due to lack of time. I hope if anything technical develops in long threads that new threads with meaningful titles are created. On Dec 20, 2011, at 8:41 AM, David Roberson wrote: On an earlier post I suggested that the LENR reactions such as those exhibited by Rossi could have been triggered by cosmic rays. I was a little disappointed by the few comments that were generated and I was hoping to further study this possibility. One of the main skeptic positions is that it takes far more energy to activate the fusion like reaction than is available at normal temperatures. Why should we limit our thoughts to some form of steady state conditions for the initiation of the reactions when it may just take some triggering events to overcome the barriers? How many different initiation locations are required to make a block of TNT explode? Hopefully these are not occurring randomly, and if they were, who could store the material safely? Let’s try to determine whether or not the basic cosmic ray trigger concept is possible. If it is, what evidence should we look for in an effort to make that determination? First, is there enough energy available within a cosmic ray to activate a LENR reaction at any location within a nickel-hydrogen complex? Mr. Cude suggests that it takes in excess of 100 keV to overcome the proton to nickel coulomb barrier. His number seems agreeable to me, and now the question is whether or not this can be obtained by cosmic ray collisions? Second, if a small volume of material achieves reaction and releases several MeV of energy does the material then allow the reaction to spread? Of course the release of many MeV at the active region now would be adequate to enable more reactions since it far exceeds the 100 keV threshold suggested if in the correct form. Is there evidence pro or con as to whether or not this is happening? Third, are the pits seen on the electrodes of electrolysis type systems an indication that small regions are undergoing some form of extreme spot heating? Could this crater forming type of event suggest that miniature reactions involving millions of atoms are occurring? If so, why does the reaction head along one main path toward the surface instead of spread out uniformly? Could it be that the reaction follows the path of one of the suspect cosmic ray particles as it moves like a bulldozer through the matrix? Is it possible that the energy is released in a favorable direction to conserve momentum? Forth, I was reading that muons are one of the main particles remaining once a cosmic ray reaches the ground level. Have they been shown to activate cold fusion reactions in lab experiments and considered a well respected proven concept? I understand that the normal process is for DT reactions to be catalyzed, but there is mention of formation of a neutron like atomic structure. The size of this combination proton-muon group is extremely tiny and might be capable of overcoming the coulomb barrier by tunneling into the nickel nucleus. Why could this not happen within the Rossi type reactor where hydrogen gas is held within a high temperature and pressure environment? Could this then deliver the triggering energy needed? The muon reaction does not work for p + p because p + p is a weak reaction, thus has a very small cross section, very small reaction distance. It requires (in nuclear terms) a much long exposure time and much closer proximity than D+D, D+T or P+D. As you can see, I have listed a lot of questions that seek answers. The vortex community has numerous experts available that could help enlighten me and others if they would take a little time to consider these questions. I would find your responses as a well deserved break from the endless semantic games that are filling the bandwidth. Was the vortex originally formed as a collection of scientifically interested persons intending to discuss new concepts? Please demonstrate that we are here to work together instead of arguing endlessly. Thanks guys. Dave In my deflation fusion theory the Coulomb barrier is overcome due to formation of a small magnetic force based electron orbital. The resulting hydrogen is neutral, thus there is no Coulomb barrier to it tunneling into a nearby nucleus as an ensemble. Further, magnetic
Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger?
Cosmic ray background is random but essentially a continuous condition on the time scale of nuclear active site generation. Both the Rossi and Piantelli reactors are subject to run away burn up conditions when the temperature of the hydrogen and nickel rises above a critical temperature. The essentially continuous Cosmic ray background cannot explain how and why this condition could occur. If heat is a triggering condition, such a triggering mechanism would explain how reactor burn up could happen. Details, details, details…it’s all in the details. If one assumes that the Ni/H reaction occurs as described in detail by both Rossi and Piantelli, many amazing and astounding quantum mechanical clockwork implications must be drawn. Such implications might one day open a doorway to the stars; a good reason to look into the details and implications of this technology with great vigor. On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Horace Heffner wrote: > > On Dec 22, 2011, at 7:41 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote: > > Horace: > The problem I see with some kind of outside trigger is that the “turn-on” > of excess heat would occur randomly… how does one control when that cosmic > ray or muon will initiate the reaction? In one of the demos, it appeared > to turn on at a specific temperature. > -mark > > > Cosmic ray background is random but essentially a continuous condition on > the time scale of nuclear active site generation. Nuclear active sites > capable of chain reactions are not dense. They are islands which > apparently grow with time, otherwise events many orders of magnitude larger > than 10^4 fusions would occur. The size of craters would not be nearly > uniform. The cross section of such islands to cosmic rays etc. apparently > grows slowly, and is affected by temperature, and external conditions and > forms of stimulation. This is one reason LENR can not be expected to be > useful for nuclear explosives. Triggers in the form of cosmic rays and > other background radiation are constantly present in the environment. The > active sites have to be generated on demand. Practical LENR is inherently > a dynamic process. > > Best regards, > > Horace Heffner > http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/ > > > > >
Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger?
On Dec 22, 2011, at 7:41 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote: Horace: The problem I see with some kind of outside trigger is that the “turn-on” of excess heat would occur randomly… how does one control when that cosmic ray or muon will initiate the reaction? In one of the demos, it appeared to turn on at a specific temperature. -mark Cosmic ray background is random but essentially a continuous condition on the time scale of nuclear active site generation. Nuclear active sites capable of chain reactions are not dense. They are islands which apparently grow with time, otherwise events many orders of magnitude larger than 10^4 fusions would occur. The size of craters would not be nearly uniform. The cross section of such islands to cosmic rays etc. apparently grows slowly, and is affected by temperature, and external conditions and forms of stimulation. This is one reason LENR can not be expected to be useful for nuclear explosives. Triggers in the form of cosmic rays and other background radiation are constantly present in the environment. The active sites have to be generated on demand. Practical LENR is inherently a dynamic process. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger?
*I speculate that the trigger results in a release of potential energy to kinetic energy in a quantum mechanical system.* *The nuclear reaction (fusion) is kept in a state of inaction or IOW, quantum mechanical superposition (QMS) for an indefinite timeframe until triggered.* *This trigger causes decoherence of the state of QMS to release the potential energy stored in the system.* On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint < zeropo...@charter.net> wrote: > Horace: > > The problem I see with some kind of outside trigger is that the “turn-on” > of excess heat would occur randomly… how does one control when that cosmic > ray or muon will initiate the reaction? In one of the demos, it appeared > to turn on at a specific temperature. > > -mark > > ** ** > > *From:* Horace Heffner [mailto:hheff...@mtaonline.net] > *Sent:* Thursday, December 22, 2011 1:32 AM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger? > > ** ** > > I just saw this post. I am only reading about 1 in 20 posts due to lack > of time. I hope if anything technical develops in long threads that new > threads with meaningful titles are created. > > ** ** > > ** ** > > On Dec 20, 2011, at 8:41 AM, David Roberson wrote: > > > > > > On an earlier post I suggested that the LENR reactions such as those > exhibited by Rossi could have been triggered by cosmic rays. I was a > little disappointed by the few comments that were generated and I was > hoping to further study this possibility. > > One of the main skeptic positions is that it takes far more energy to > activate the fusion like reaction than is available at normal > temperatures. Why should we limit our thoughts to some form of steady > state conditions for the initiation of the reactions when it may just take > some triggering events to overcome the barriers? How many different > initiation locations are required to make a block of TNT explode? > Hopefully these are not occurring randomly, and if they were, who could > store the material safely? > > Let’s try to determine whether or not the basic cosmic ray trigger concept > is possible. If it is, what evidence should we look for in an effort to > make that determination? > > First, is there enough energy available within a cosmic ray to activate a > LENR reaction at any location within a nickel-hydrogen complex? Mr. Cude > suggests that it takes in excess of 100 keV to overcome the proton to > nickel coulomb barrier. His number seems agreeable to me, and now the > question is whether or not this can be obtained by cosmic ray collisions?* > *** > > Second, if a small volume of material achieves reaction and releases > several MeV of energy does the material then allow the reaction to spread? > Of course the release of many MeV at the active region now would be > adequate to enable more reactions since it far exceeds the 100 keV > threshold suggested if in the correct form. Is there evidence pro or con > as to whether or not this is happening? > > Third, are the pits seen on the electrodes of electrolysis type systems an > indication that small regions are undergoing some form of extreme spot > heating? Could this crater forming type of event suggest that miniature > reactions involving millions of atoms are occurring? If so, why does the > reaction head along one main path toward the surface instead of spread out > uniformly? Could it be that the reaction follows the path of one of the > suspect cosmic ray particles as it moves like a bulldozer through the > matrix? Is it possible that the energy is released in a favorable > direction to conserve momentum? > > Forth, I was reading that muons are one of the main particles remaining > once a cosmic ray reaches the ground level. Have they been shown to > activate cold fusion reactions in lab experiments and considered a well > respected proven concept? I understand that the normal process is for DT > reactions to be catalyzed, but there is mention of formation of a neutron > like atomic structure. The size of this combination proton-muon group is > extremely tiny and might be capable of overcoming the coulomb barrier by > tunneling into the nickel nucleus. Why could this not happen within the > Rossi type reactor where hydrogen gas is held within a high temperature and > pressure environment? Could this then deliver the triggering energy needed? > > > ** ** > > The muon reaction does not work for p + p because p + p is a weak > reaction, thus has a very small cross section, very small reaction > distance. It requires (in nuclear terms) a much long exposure time and > much closer proximity than D+D, D+T or P
RE: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger?
Horace: The problem I see with some kind of outside trigger is that the "turn-on" of excess heat would occur randomly. how does one control when that cosmic ray or muon will initiate the reaction? In one of the demos, it appeared to turn on at a specific temperature. -mark From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheff...@mtaonline.net] Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 1:32 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger? I just saw this post. I am only reading about 1 in 20 posts due to lack of time. I hope if anything technical develops in long threads that new threads with meaningful titles are created. On Dec 20, 2011, at 8:41 AM, David Roberson wrote: On an earlier post I suggested that the LENR reactions such as those exhibited by Rossi could have been triggered by cosmic rays. I was a little disappointed by the few comments that were generated and I was hoping to further study this possibility. One of the main skeptic positions is that it takes far more energy to activate the fusion like reaction than is available at normal temperatures. Why should we limit our thoughts to some form of steady state conditions for the initiation of the reactions when it may just take some triggering events to overcome the barriers? How many different initiation locations are required to make a block of TNT explode? Hopefully these are not occurring randomly, and if they were, who could store the material safely? Let's try to determine whether or not the basic cosmic ray trigger concept is possible. If it is, what evidence should we look for in an effort to make that determination? First, is there enough energy available within a cosmic ray to activate a LENR reaction at any location within a nickel-hydrogen complex? Mr. Cude suggests that it takes in excess of 100 keV to overcome the proton to nickel coulomb barrier. His number seems agreeable to me, and now the question is whether or not this can be obtained by cosmic ray collisions? Second, if a small volume of material achieves reaction and releases several MeV of energy does the material then allow the reaction to spread? Of course the release of many MeV at the active region now would be adequate to enable more reactions since it far exceeds the 100 keV threshold suggested if in the correct form. Is there evidence pro or con as to whether or not this is happening? Third, are the pits seen on the electrodes of electrolysis type systems an indication that small regions are undergoing some form of extreme spot heating? Could this crater forming type of event suggest that miniature reactions involving millions of atoms are occurring? If so, why does the reaction head along one main path toward the surface instead of spread out uniformly? Could it be that the reaction follows the path of one of the suspect cosmic ray particles as it moves like a bulldozer through the matrix? Is it possible that the energy is released in a favorable direction to conserve momentum? Forth, I was reading that muons are one of the main particles remaining once a cosmic ray reaches the ground level. Have they been shown to activate cold fusion reactions in lab experiments and considered a well respected proven concept? I understand that the normal process is for DT reactions to be catalyzed, but there is mention of formation of a neutron like atomic structure. The size of this combination proton-muon group is extremely tiny and might be capable of overcoming the coulomb barrier by tunneling into the nickel nucleus. Why could this not happen within the Rossi type reactor where hydrogen gas is held within a high temperature and pressure environment? Could this then deliver the triggering energy needed? The muon reaction does not work for p + p because p + p is a weak reaction, thus has a very small cross section, very small reaction distance. It requires (in nuclear terms) a much long exposure time and much closer proximity than D+D, D+T or P+D. As you can see, I have listed a lot of questions that seek answers. The vortex community has numerous experts available that could help enlighten me and others if they would take a little time to consider these questions. I would find your responses as a well deserved break from the endless semantic games that are filling the bandwidth. Was the vortex originally formed as a collection of scientifically interested persons intending to discuss new concepts? Please demonstrate that we are here to work together instead of arguing endlessly. Thanks guys. Dave In my deflation fusion theory the Coulomb barrier is overcome due to formation of a small magnetic force based electron orbital. The resulting hydrogen is neutral, thus there is no Coulomb barrier to it tunneling into a nearby nucleus as an ensemble. Further, magnetic gradients make the tunneling energy positive, thus greatly increasing the tunneling range, and thus reducing the lattice half-life of
Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger?
On Dec 20, 2011, at 8:41 AM, David Roberson wrote: Second, if a small volume of material achieves reaction and releases several MeV of energy does the material then allow the reaction to spread? Of course the release of many MeV at the active region now would be adequate to enable more reactions since it far exceeds the 100 keV threshold suggested if in the correct form. Is there evidence pro or con as to whether or not this is happening? Chain reactions happen far faster than big atoms move or melt. The melting is a secondary effect that happens after the reaction is finished. The nuclear active site, or NAS, appears to be located below the surface. The melting and expansion drives the material out through the surface, making a "crater" like formation. Various estimates of energies and reaction rates have been given. http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/SzpakSprecursors.pdf "(vi) Location/size. The presence of discrete, randomly distributed sites (hot spots, craters, boulders, etc) implies the existence of volumes within the electrode material where conditions promoting the highly energetic reactions exist. In estimating their magnitude, one must make a certain number of assumptions, eg (i) energy per single event is that of the reaction D + D He, (ii) the number of single events to produce a crater is on the order of 10^4 or higher, depending upon its radius[9], (iii) the number of single events needed to generate the “hot spot” displayed by IRimaging is on the order of 10^4 or higher, depending upon its size and brightness. Under these conditions and assuming the loading ratio greater than unity, one can calculate the radius of this volume to be on the order of 100 Å or higher. The events take place within the bulk material in the close vicinity to the contact surface." If producing one watt of output requires 6.24x10^11 fusions, as shown earlier, and each comic ray triggers 10^4 reactions, then 6.24x10^7 pits per second should show up, per watt of output. This does not appear to be a reasonable pit formation rate, nor anywhere near a cosmic ray background count. At 4 kW output that would be about 10^16 pits for a 10 hour test. Pit formation then is a very unusual thing if high energy density long term reactions exist, as Rossi claims. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger?
I just saw this post. I am only reading about 1 in 20 posts due to lack of time. I hope if anything technical develops in long threads that new threads with meaningful titles are created. On Dec 20, 2011, at 8:41 AM, David Roberson wrote: On an earlier post I suggested that the LENR reactions such as those exhibited by Rossi could have been triggered by cosmic rays. I was a little disappointed by the few comments that were generated and I was hoping to further study this possibility. One of the main skeptic positions is that it takes far more energy to activate the fusion like reaction than is available at normal temperatures. Why should we limit our thoughts to some form of steady state conditions for the initiation of the reactions when it may just take some triggering events to overcome the barriers? How many different initiation locations are required to make a block of TNT explode? Hopefully these are not occurring randomly, and if they were, who could store the material safely? Let’s try to determine whether or not the basic cosmic ray trigger concept is possible. If it is, what evidence should we look for in an effort to make that determination? First, is there enough energy available within a cosmic ray to activate a LENR reaction at any location within a nickel-hydrogen complex? Mr. Cude suggests that it takes in excess of 100 keV to overcome the proton to nickel coulomb barrier. His number seems agreeable to me, and now the question is whether or not this can be obtained by cosmic ray collisions? Second, if a small volume of material achieves reaction and releases several MeV of energy does the material then allow the reaction to spread? Of course the release of many MeV at the active region now would be adequate to enable more reactions since it far exceeds the 100 keV threshold suggested if in the correct form. Is there evidence pro or con as to whether or not this is happening? Third, are the pits seen on the electrodes of electrolysis type systems an indication that small regions are undergoing some form of extreme spot heating? Could this crater forming type of event suggest that miniature reactions involving millions of atoms are occurring? If so, why does the reaction head along one main path toward the surface instead of spread out uniformly? Could it be that the reaction follows the path of one of the suspect cosmic ray particles as it moves like a bulldozer through the matrix? Is it possible that the energy is released in a favorable direction to conserve momentum? Forth, I was reading that muons are one of the main particles remaining once a cosmic ray reaches the ground level. Have they been shown to activate cold fusion reactions in lab experiments and considered a well respected proven concept? I understand that the normal process is for DT reactions to be catalyzed, but there is mention of formation of a neutron like atomic structure. The size of this combination proton-muon group is extremely tiny and might be capable of overcoming the coulomb barrier by tunneling into the nickel nucleus. Why could this not happen within the Rossi type reactor where hydrogen gas is held within a high temperature and pressure environment? Could this then deliver the triggering energy needed? The muon reaction does not work for p + p because p + p is a weak reaction, thus has a very small cross section, very small reaction distance. It requires (in nuclear terms) a much long exposure time and much closer proximity than D+D, D+T or P+D. As you can see, I have listed a lot of questions that seek answers. The vortex community has numerous experts available that could help enlighten me and others if they would take a little time to consider these questions. I would find your responses as a well deserved break from the endless semantic games that are filling the bandwidth. Was the vortex originally formed as a collection of scientifically interested persons intending to discuss new concepts? Please demonstrate that we are here to work together instead of arguing endlessly. Thanks guys. Dave In my deflation fusion theory the Coulomb barrier is overcome due to formation of a small magnetic force based electron orbital. The resulting hydrogen is neutral, thus there is no Coulomb barrier to it tunneling into a nearby nucleus as an ensemble. Further, magnetic gradients make the tunneling energy positive, thus greatly increasing the tunneling range, and thus reducing the lattice half-life of such an entity. Anything that increases electron density and flux around/through absorbed hydrogen nuclei, without destroying the lattice, increases the density of the deflated state and the probability of fusion. I think controlled electron flux is much better than electrons freed by cosmic rays, because lattice destruction should be much less in
Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger?
Cosmic ray triggers have been discussed since early on as cold fusion triggers. This is not a novel idea. I have even suggested this myself. See page 2 ff of: http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/BoseHyp.pdf Page 4 and 9 of: http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/PartOrb.pdf Page 18 and 25 of: http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/CFnuclearReactions.pdf my similar comments earlier: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg58166.html The following post made last January in regard to Rossi may be of interest. http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg41599.html As Robin states, the problem is the reaction mechanism after the triggering. A huge number of nuclear reactions per cosmic ray have to occur. A typical muon secondary can be expected to produce only about 30 fusions (i.e. that is about the number expected in pure liquid deuterium.) The problem with the triggering idea is the number of cosmic rays required to trigger enough reactions to produce measurable heat (unless of course an extensive chain reaction is involved.) Suppose 1 watt of heat is produced, and the reaction involved releases on the order of 10 MeV energy (it is probably way less if it is a Ni transmutaion.) Each second a J of energy has to be produced. A J is 6.24x10^18 eV, or 6.24x10^12 MeV. At 10 MeV per reaction, that is 6.24x10^11 reactions, requiring 6.24x10^11/30 = 2.08x10^10 muons for that second. That is a way above background. Alternatively, at 1 cosmic ray per second in a small area, the cosimic ray would have to produce about 10^10 reactions to produce the 1 watt. Rossi's small 4 kW reactors would have a cross section with only about 100 muons per second. To produce Rossi's 4 kW then would require about 40 * 2.08x10^10 = 8x10^11 reactions per second, each and every second. This is not a viable explanation. However, as I noted here in an above reference post, if energetic alphas or betas can trigger even small reaction chains, then doping a lattice with radioactive material, e.g. 137Cs (beta), or 241Am (alpha), can have a signifiant effect. On a related note, following is a post I made in 2009, which points out that cosmic ray muons may trigger much larger amounts of fusions than what was measured for pure liquid hydrogen (i.e. about 30 per muon, as measured by Jones et al.) This implies perhaps some muon studies should be conducted with appropriately loaded lattices. There are other Rossi related tidbits too. NAS, hot spots, and electromigration I have noticed a surprising similarity between infra-red photos of loaded cathodes showing small hot spots and my observations of clearly visible bright spots on high voltage anodes in electrospark or electroluminescence experiments. For example, one similarity that was surprising to me is the tendency for such spots to be located interior to the edges of plate electrodes. Before gaining some experience, I thought the edges, having higher field intensities, would have more hot spots. Looking at former sites of electrospark anode hot spots under a microscope, on dried anodes post run, I noticed they were indentations, small holes in the somewhat dull anodized surface, with highly reflective interior surfaces. Again, it may seem surprising such holes tended to reside away from the anode edges - unless one considers the anodization process tends to produce thinner anodization away from the edges. Thinner pacification layers means easier layer penetration, easier formation of low resistance short circuits between the anode interior and the electrolyte. This is exactly what the hot spots appeared to be, small short circuited wells in a partially insulating surface. Once an anode hot spot was initiated, it tended to flash or periodically glow when operated at just above the anodization voltage. I think this was probably due to bubble formation and release and periodic thin anodizations followed by breakdowns. When operated at the elevated voltage the electrospark spots diminished, probably due to anodization. However, when the voltage was pushed substantially, say doubled, all the previously existing glow spots would reappear. When foil electrodes were used, the hot spots would deepen all the way through the foil and then expand radially, eventually consuming large amounts of foil. Higher intensity glow spots can also be observed on both anodes and cathodes when operated in low voltage luminescence experiments on aluminum or tantalum electrodes operated in oxygen rich electrolytes, e.g. hydrogen peroxide containing electrolytes. All this may seem irrelevant, but perhaps there is some significance to all this in regards to NAS formation. Perhaps the NAS, at least in some cases, is not strictly a localized lattice state, but rather a location of unusually high current density. Such high current density spots may take a whi
Re: [Vo]: Cosmic Trigger?
In reply to David Roberson's message of Tue, 20 Dec 2011 12:41:59 -0500 (EST): Hi, The trigger isn't the problem. The problem is the necessary chain reaction mechanism after the trigger is applied. >On an earlier post I suggested that the LENR reactions such as those exhibited >by Rossi could have been triggered by cosmic rays. I was a little >disappointed by the few comments that were generated and I was hoping to >further study this possibility. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
[Vo]: Cosmic Trigger?
On an earlier post I suggested that the LENR reactions such as those exhibited by Rossi could have been triggered by cosmic rays. I was a little disappointed by the few comments that were generated and I was hoping to further study this possibility. One of the main skeptic positions is that it takes far more energy to activate the fusion like reaction than is available at normal temperatures. Why should we limit our thoughts to some form of steady state conditions for the initiation of the reactions when it may just take some triggering events to overcome the barriers? How many different initiation locations are required to make a block of TNT explode? Hopefully these are not occurring randomly, and if they were, who could store the material safely? Let’s try to determine whether or not the basic cosmic ray trigger concept is possible. If it is, what evidence should we look for in an effort to make that determination? First, is there enough energy available within a cosmic ray to activate a LENR reaction at any location within a nickel-hydrogen complex? Mr. Cude suggests that it takes in excess of 100 keV to overcome the proton to nickel coulomb barrier. His number seems agreeable to me, and now the question is whether or not this can be obtained by cosmic ray collisions? Second, if a small volume of material achieves reaction and releases several MeV of energy does the material then allow the reaction to spread? Of course the release of many MeV at the active region now would be adequate to enable more reactions since it far exceeds the 100 keV threshold suggested if in the correct form. Is there evidence pro or con as to whether or not this is happening? Third, are the pits seen on the electrodes of electrolysis type systems an indication that small regions are undergoing some form of extreme spot heating? Could this crater forming type of event suggest that miniature reactions involving millions of atoms are occurring? If so, why does the reaction head along one main path toward the surface instead of spread out uniformly? Could it be that the reaction follows the path of one of the suspect cosmic ray particles as it moves like a bulldozer through the matrix? Is it possible that the energy is released in a favorable direction to conserve momentum? Forth, I was reading that muons are one of the main particles remaining once a cosmic ray reaches the ground level. Have they been shown to activate cold fusion reactions in lab experiments and considered a well respected proven concept? I understand that the normal process is for DT reactions to be catalyzed, but there is mention of formation of a neutron like atomic structure. The size of this combination proton-muon group is extremely tiny and might be capable of overcoming the coulomb barrier by tunneling into the nickel nucleus. Why could this not happen within the Rossi type reactor where hydrogen gas is held within a high temperature and pressure environment? Could this then deliver the triggering energy needed? As you can see, I have listed a lot of questions that seek answers. The vortex community has numerous experts available that could help enlighten me and others if they would take a little time to consider these questions. I would find your responses as a well deserved break from the endless semantic games that are filling the bandwidth. Was the vortex originally formed as a collection of scientifically interested persons intending to discuss new concepts? Please demonstrate that we are here to work together instead of arguing endlessly. Thanks guys. Dave
