Re: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report--
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Thu, 11 Dec 2014 22:52:18 -0500: Hi, BTW for a Hydrino based explanation, consider the possibility that 4 negatively charged Hydrinohydride ions displace the electrons of a Lithium atom and arrange themselves in a tight tetrahedron with Li3+ at its core. This small dense negatively charged ion is then attracted to the highly positively charged Nickel nucleus. As it approaches, the proton in one of the Hydrinohydride ions acts as a stepping stone allowing a neutron to cross from the Lithium to the Nickel (a la Gullström). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report--
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Thu, 11 Dec 2014 22:52:18 -0500: Hi, The sample contained many trillions of atoms. The chances of such a result occurring accidentally are essentially non-existent. There had to be an underlying mechanism. I suggest you look for an SPP explanation for neutron hopping. (e.g. interaction with the neutron's magnetic field.) . This doesn't explain why the reaction stopped at 62Ni. The one particle is one in a million. The transmutation result is just a result of chance. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report--
Transmutation being 1 in 10^6 is good enough for me. On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: . This doesn't explain why the reaction stopped at 62Ni. The one particle is one in a million. The transmutation result is just a result of chance.
Re: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report--
In reply to Kevin O'Malley's message of Fri, 5 Dec 2014 17:40:29 -0800: Hi, [snip] This seems promising. I'm having trouble seeing the difference between neutron tunneling and neutron capture. [snip] Neutron capture assumes the presence of free neutrons, which one would also expect to turn up in detectors. In neutron tunneling there are no free neutrons. They simply jump from one stable nucleus to another nucleus. Because this process can only occur where there is a net energy gain, it is unlikely that they will form a radioactive nucleus. (Radioactive nuclei are unstable, because they are high energy nuclei.) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report--
It is more probable that hydrogen provides protons which enter the nucleus in the LENR reaction. This proton surplus excess is the function of hydrogen in the Ni/H reactor. The Ni/H LENR reaction results in a proton rich nucleus. This nuclear condition is stabilized through the emission of the energy value of a positron and a neutrino as a proton is transmuted into a neutron through proton decay which results in a more equal balance in the number of protons and neutrons in the transmuted nucleus. When a BEC covers the LENR reaction no positron and neutrino are formed but there is a transference of the energy value of the positron and the neutrino back to the SPP population along with excess binding energy. However, when there is no BEC positrons are produced. The formation of lithium 6 is a product of ubiquitous proton/proton fusion in the Ni/H reactor. The transmutation of nickel is a rare side reaction that contributes little to the energy output of the Ni/H reactor. The concept of free neutrons as causative in the Ni/H reaction is a philological hangover from all those years in nuclear engineering school. On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 4:12 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Kevin O'Malley's message of Fri, 5 Dec 2014 17:40:29 -0800: Hi, [snip] This seems promising. I'm having trouble seeing the difference between neutron tunneling and neutron capture. [snip] Neutron capture assumes the presence of free neutrons, which one would also expect to turn up in detectors. In neutron tunneling there are no free neutrons. They simply jump from one stable nucleus to another nucleus. Because this process can only occur where there is a net energy gain, it is unlikely that they will form a radioactive nucleus. (Radioactive nuclei are unstable, because they are high energy nuclei.) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
RE: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report--
https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:27064120
Re: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report--
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Thu, 11 Dec 2014 17:14:56 -0500: Hi, [snip] It is more probable that hydrogen provides protons which enter the nucleus in the LENR reaction. This proton surplus excess is the function of hydrogen in the Ni/H reactor. The Ni/H LENR reaction results in a proton rich nucleus. This nuclear condition is stabilized through the emission of the energy value of a positron and a neutrino as a proton is transmuted into a neutron through proton decay which results in a more equal balance in the number of protons and neutrons in the transmuted nucleus. When a BEC covers the LENR reaction no positron and neutrino are formed but there is a transference of the energy value of the positron and the neutrino back to the SPP population along with excess binding energy. Charge needs to be conserved, so if no positrons are produced, then electrons need to be captured. However, when there is no BEC positrons are produced. The formation of lithium 6 is a product of ubiquitous proton/proton fusion in the Ni/H reactor. The transmutation of nickel is a rare side reaction that contributes little to the energy output of the Ni/H reactor. This doesn't explain why the reaction stopped at 62Ni. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report--
. This doesn't explain why the reaction stopped at 62Ni. The one particle is one in a million. The transmutation result is just a result of chance.
Re: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report--
This seems promising. I'm having trouble seeing the difference between neutron tunneling and neutron capture. On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 9:33 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Mats Lewan in a revised addition to his book on Rossi earlier this year has added a comment about a paper from Carl-Oscar Gullström. He mentions that Carl-Oscar Gullström’s paper, “Low Radiation fusion through bound neutron Tunneling” got some positive attention from Bo Höistad, one of the authors of the Lugano report who told Mats: “It is very interesting. It fits like a glove with our results, both the isotopic changes and the absence of radiation. It is the first time that I see a scenario that could explain the results—it has not existed before!” The paper can be found form E-Cat World here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/244393652/Low-radiation-fusion-through-bound-neutron-tunneling This may be the answer to the Rossi effect that the Swedes are looking for. Carl-Oscar is a student at Uppsala University-- Bravo, Bob Cook
RE: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report--
What I find most interesting is that Elforsk, Gullstrom and Dr. Myron Evans have begun corresponding… Go to this site and do a search for LENR: https://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/ https://drmyronevans.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/a226thpaper.pdf https://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/2012/08/22/for-posting-uft226-sections-1-and-2/ https://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/2012/08/22/for-posting-background-notes-to-uft226/ Evans’ opinion about where fizzix took a wrong turn… “QED and QCD have their hidden adjustable parameters and their unobservables (virtual particles). They are not precise theories at all, and they are plagued with artificially removed infinities (renormalization). With the benefit of forty years of experience in chemical and theoretical physics I think that QED was a wrong turning entirely.” -mark iverson From: Bob Cook [mailto:frobertc...@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2014 9:34 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report-- Mats Lewan in a revised addition to his book on Rossi earlier this year has added a comment about a paper from Carl-Oscar Gullström. He mentions that Carl-Oscar Gullström’s paper, “Low Radiation fusion through bound neutron Tunneling” got some positive attention from Bo Höistad, one of the authors of the Lugano report who told Mats: “It is very interesting. It fits like a glove with our results, both the isotopic changes and the absence of radiation. It is the first time that I see a scenario that could explain the results—it has not existed before!” The paper can be found form E-Cat World here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/244393652/Low-radiation-fusion-through-bound-neutron-tunneling This may be the answer to the Rossi effect that the Swedes are looking for. Carl-Oscar is a student at Uppsala University-- Bravo, Bob Cook
Re: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report--
Solved, I think it is grape power https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCNNqgKqnaQ On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 1:20 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Neutron as produced, but the question is when. Are they primary to causation or are these neutron formed as an stabilizing adjustment of the nucleus after the LENR reaction takes place? The question is what gets through the coulomb barrier: neutrons, EMF, protons? On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 12:33 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Mats Lewan in a revised addition to his book on Rossi earlier this year has added a comment about a paper from Carl-Oscar Gullström. He mentions that Carl-Oscar Gullström’s paper, “Low Radiation fusion through bound neutron Tunneling” got some positive attention from Bo Höistad, one of the authors of the Lugano report who told Mats: “It is very interesting. It fits like a glove with our results, both the isotopic changes and the absence of radiation. It is the first time that I see a scenario that could explain the results—it has not existed before!” The paper can be found form E-Cat World here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/244393652/Low-radiation-fusion-through-bound-neutron-tunneling This may be the answer to the Rossi effect that the Swedes are looking for. Carl-Oscar is a student at Uppsala University-- Bravo, Bob Cook
Re: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report--
These papers identified by Mark reveal how Standard Physics used fudge factors in complex Dirac equations to fit nature. This issue has not been addressed very well in standard physics classes in the US and elsewhere, to my knowledge. I wonder why not? We have the computational capability of modern computers to thank for the revelation, since they do not need the introduction of fudge factors to solve the Dirac equation for various testable physical systems. I think this is what Evans, etal., are saying. Also Evans has taken action to set up a conference (Skype, I think) to review the published theories by the wordpress.com with Elforsk and Gullstrom relative to the Lugano results. Apparently, Axel Westrenius has been instrumental in setting up the conference and suggested the connection of the Lugano results, the Gullstrom paper and the wordpress.com theory cited by Mark. He apparently has been in communication with Evans for some time. It is interesting to note who else is involved and/or participates in the conference. It may have already happened. The plot thickens, as more people are throwing their hat in the ring and hoping for fame associated with explaining the Rossi Effect. Bob From: MarkI-ZeroPoint To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 12:06 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report-- What I find most interesting is that Elforsk, Gullstrom and Dr. Myron Evans have begun corresponding… Go to this site and do a search for LENR: https://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/ https://drmyronevans.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/a226thpaper.pdf https://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/2012/08/22/for-posting-uft226-sections-1-and-2/ https://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/2012/08/22/for-posting-background-notes-to-uft226/ Evans’ opinion about where fizzix took a wrong turn… “QED and QCD have their hidden adjustable parameters and their unobservables (virtual particles). They are not precise theories at all, and they are plagued with artificially removed infinities (renormalization). With the benefit of forty years of experience in chemical and theoretical physics I think that QED was a wrong turning entirely.” -mark iverson From: Bob Cook [mailto:frobertc...@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2014 9:34 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report-- Mats Lewan in a revised addition to his book on Rossi earlier this year has added a comment about a paper from Carl-Oscar Gullström. He mentions that Carl-Oscar Gullström’s paper, “Low Radiation fusion through bound neutron Tunneling” got some positive attention from Bo Höistad, one of the authors of the Lugano report who told Mats: “It is very interesting. It fits like a glove with our results, both the isotopic changes and the absence of radiation. It is the first time that I see a scenario that could explain the results—it has not existed before!” The paper can be found form E-Cat World here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/244393652/Low-radiation-fusion-through-bound-neutron-tunneling This may be the answer to the Rossi effect that the Swedes are looking for. Carl-Oscar is a student at Uppsala University-- Bravo, Bob Cook
RE: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report--
Morning Bob, Vorts, Evans has a pretty large following, and has been a *very* productive theorist, but is still marginalized by the mainstream… gee, don’t know why! ;-) I am encouraged by having some newbie theorists take a shot at LENR… can only help raise awareness. ATTN: ZPF/Casimir fans… For those who are looking at a possible connection with the ZPF/vacuum, you might want to check out my posting on 11/22, “Water, out with the old, in with the new? U-tube vid” He discusses possible interaction with the vacuum to explain some water anomalies… RE: missing neutrons and non-dead grad students… Also, the scientist mentions how an absorbed photon may not be emitted as usual when quantum coherence is present. -mark From: Bob Cook [mailto:frobertc...@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 9:42 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report-- These papers identified by Mark reveal how Standard Physics used fudge factors in complex Dirac equations to fit nature. This issue has not been addressed very well in standard physics classes in the US and elsewhere, to my knowledge. I wonder why not? We have the computational capability of modern computers to thank for the revelation, since they do not need the introduction of fudge factors to solve the Dirac equation for various testable physical systems. I think this is what Evans, etal., are saying. Also Evans has taken action to set up a conference (Skype, I think) to review the published theories by the wordpress.com with Elforsk and Gullstrom relative to the Lugano results. Apparently, Axel Westrenius has been instrumental in setting up the conference and suggested the connection of the Lugano results, the Gullstrom paper and the wordpress.com theory cited by Mark. He apparently has been in communication with Evans for some time. It is interesting to note who else is involved and/or participates in the conference. It may have already happened. The plot thickens, as more people are throwing their hat in the ring and hoping for fame associated with explaining the Rossi Effect. Bob From: MarkI-ZeroPoint mailto:zeropo...@charter.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 12:06 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report-- What I find most interesting is that Elforsk, Gullstrom and Dr. Myron Evans have begun corresponding… Go to this site and do a search for LENR: https://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/ https://drmyronevans.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/a226thpaper.pdf https://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/2012/08/22/for-posting-uft226-sections-1-and-2/ https://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/2012/08/22/for-posting-background-notes-to-uft226/ Evans’ opinion about where fizzix took a wrong turn… “QED and QCD have their hidden adjustable parameters and their unobservables (virtual particles). They are not precise theories at all, and they are plagued with artificially removed infinities (renormalization). With the benefit of forty years of experience in chemical and theoretical physics I think that QED was a wrong turning entirely.” -mark iverson From: Bob Cook [mailto:frobertc...@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2014 9:34 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report-- Mats Lewan in a revised addition to his book on Rossi earlier this year has added a comment about a paper from Carl-Oscar Gullström. He mentions that Carl-Oscar Gullström’s paper, “Low Radiation fusion through bound neutron Tunneling” got some positive attention from Bo Höistad, one of the authors of the Lugano report who told Mats: “It is very interesting. It fits like a glove with our results, both the isotopic changes and the absence of radiation. It is the first time that I see a scenario that could explain the results—it has not existed before!” The paper can be found form E-Cat World here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/244393652/Low-radiation-fusion-through-bound-neutron-tunneling This may be the answer to the Rossi effect that the Swedes are looking for. Carl-Oscar is a student at Uppsala University-- Bravo, Bob Cook
Re: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report--
Mats Lewan in a revised addition to his book on Rossi earlier this year has added a comment about a paper from Carl-Oscar Gullström. He mentions that Carl-Oscar Gullström’s paper, “Low Radiation fusion through bound neutron Tunneling” got some positive attention from Bo Höistad, one of the authors of the Lugano report who told Mats: “It is very interesting. It fits like a glove with our results, both the isotopic changes and the absence of radiation. It is the first time that I see a scenario that could explain the results—it has not existed before!” The paper can be found form E-Cat World here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/244393652/Low-radiation-fusion-through-bound-neutron-tunneling This may be the answer to the Rossi effect that the Swedes are looking for. Carl-Oscar is a student at Uppsala University-- Bravo, Bob Cook
Re: [Vo]: Neutron Tunneling Theory regarding Lugano Report--
Neutron as produced, but the question is when. Are they primary to causation or are these neutron formed as an stabilizing adjustment of the nucleus after the LENR reaction takes place? The question is what gets through the coulomb barrier: neutrons, EMF, protons? On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 12:33 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Mats Lewan in a revised addition to his book on Rossi earlier this year has added a comment about a paper from Carl-Oscar Gullström. He mentions that Carl-Oscar Gullström’s paper, “Low Radiation fusion through bound neutron Tunneling” got some positive attention from Bo Höistad, one of the authors of the Lugano report who told Mats: “It is very interesting. It fits like a glove with our results, both the isotopic changes and the absence of radiation. It is the first time that I see a scenario that could explain the results—it has not existed before!” The paper can be found form E-Cat World here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/244393652/Low-radiation-fusion-through-bound-neutron-tunneling This may be the answer to the Rossi effect that the Swedes are looking for. Carl-Oscar is a student at Uppsala University-- Bravo, Bob Cook
