Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[Nigel Dyer]

Bob

As far as I understand the details, the sea-quarks are a not 
unreasonable explanation for the probe data. Interestingly, the Stubbs 
alternative proposal removes sea-quarks but then effectively introduces 
sea-electrons as the main constituent of muons.  The Stubbs model would 
need to be extended to include an explanation for the evidence that is 
consistent with free (but shortlived) mesons, which currently have a 
relatively simple explanation as being quark-anti quark pairs.


Nigel


On 23/05/2018 18:35, bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote:


Nygel--

How do you reconcile the Stubbs evaluation of real probe data?

Bob

Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Wed, 23 May 2018 05:47:32
+:
Hi Bob,
[snip]

That's fine. It also works with any other sub-particles that have charge,
regardless of what they are called, or how big they are.
BTW I wrote here below that it would account for all mass changes in nuclear
reactions. That's not quite true. Proton repulsion is partly responsible for the
mass change in fission reactions, implying that the resonance I mentioned may
only apply to near neighbors rather than the entire nucleus, and be only
responsible for the nuclear force that binds nucleons together.

>Robin—
>
>
>
>Quarks are merely a mathematical scheme to help make sense of high energy 
>physics.  IMHO the do not exist.  I will send you a separate study of electron 
>scattering experiments that shed light on the structure of protons and 
>neutrons.
>
>
>
>Bob Cook
>
>
>
>Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10
>
>
>
>
>From: mix...@bigpond.com <mix...@bigpond.com>
>Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2018 12:59:00 PM
>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>Subject: Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR
>
>In reply to  Andrew Meulenberg's message of Tue, 22 May 2018 05:36:11 -0400:
>Hi Andrew,
>
>I have been thinking about this since Bob mentioned relativistic mass a few
>posts back. It occurred to me that quarks probably move rapidly within 
>nucleons,
>lending relativistic mass to the particle. Now you mention them here below and
>that tends to solidify my thoughts. We could account for all mass changes 
>during
>nuclear reactions by assuming that the velocity of quark motion changes during
>the process. E.g. suppose that all the quarks in a nucleus both create and
>reinforce a resonant field. As nucleons are added to the nucleus the size of 
>the
>entire system increases physically. Maybe that increases the time constant of
>the resonance (lowers the frequency), implying that they all move more slowly,
>releasing energy as they slow down. IOW a nucleus rings like a bell. The larger
>the bell, the lower the tone.
>
>>I am glad to see a discussion of changes in mass depending on environment.
>>I feel that this is fundamental to the CF story of D-D => 4He and many
>>other observables.
>>
>>Rest mass (stationary, isolated in space, and with zero potentials) is
>>constant. Add velocity and the effective mass increases. Add
>>fields/potentials, and the effective mass (not the rest mass) increases or
>>decreases.
>>
>>Adding an electron to a proton orbit decreases the atomic mass to below the
>>combined rest masses of a proton and electron. The electron effective mass
>>increases from its increase in velocity. The remaining atomic mass (that of
>>the proton) must decrease as a photon is released.
>>
>>The Klein-Gordon and Dirac equations predict deep electron orbits with
>>binding energy of > 0.5 MeV. The
>>resulting femto-atom will have that much less mass. The femto-hydrogen
>>electron will be relativistic (~ 1 or ~100 MeV depending on the model
>>used). The nucleus (a proton) mass must be reduced by at least that amount.
>>In either model, the atomic mass changes by the same amount (~ 0.5 MeV).
>>This change in nuclear mass has a major impact on how we calculate things
>>and claim what is possible or not in this new regime.
>>
>>The basis for the nuclear change comes from the nucleon interactions in a
>>compound nucleus and in the quark interactions in even a single proton.
>>These charged components are greatly affected by the strong fields of a
>>proximate (fermi distance of a) deep-orbit electron.
>>
>>Andrew M.
>>
>>
>>On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 3:35 AM, Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Redefining the language in mid-stream always makes exchanging ideas
>>> difficult. The long standing convention is that all neutrons have the same
>>> mass, the binding energy in collections of nucleons in different nuclides
>>> varies.
>>>
>>> Everything gains mass as it approaches the speed of light.
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: mix...@bigpond.com <mix...@bigpond.com>
>>> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 10:42 PM
>>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR
>>>
>>> In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Mon, 21 May 2018 11:00:54 -0400:
>>> Hi,
>>> [snip]
>>> >Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >Might you point to a reference where the mass of neutrons in deuterium vs.
&

Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[Axil Axil]

 electron scattering experiments which polarized the electrons in terms of
this helicity, either right handed or left handed helicity shows that the
quarks inside the nucleons have spin that are chiral. The quarks are
entities that conform to conservation laws and physical constants that
apply to the strong and electromagnetic forces but not the weak force. In
light of this complex behavior, we must conclude that they are physical
entities.

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:47 AM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Robin—
>
>
>
> Quarks are merely a mathematical scheme to help make sense of high energy
> physics.  IMHO the do not exist.  I will send you a separate study of
> electron scattering experiments that shed light on the structure of protons
> and neutrons.
>
>
>
> Bob Cook
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
> Windows 10
>
>
> --
> *From:* mix...@bigpond.com <mix...@bigpond.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 22, 2018 12:59:00 PM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR
>
> In reply to  Andrew Meulenberg's message of Tue, 22 May 2018 05:36:11
> -0400:
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> I have been thinking about this since Bob mentioned relativistic mass a few
> posts back. It occurred to me that quarks probably move rapidly within
> nucleons,
> lending relativistic mass to the particle. Now you mention them here below
> and
> that tends to solidify my thoughts. We could account for all mass changes
> during
> nuclear reactions by assuming that the velocity of quark motion changes
> during
> the process. E.g. suppose that all the quarks in a nucleus both create and
> reinforce a resonant field. As nucleons are added to the nucleus the size
> of the
> entire system increases physically. Maybe that increases the time constant
> of
> the resonance (lowers the frequency), implying that they all move more
> slowly,
> releasing energy as they slow down. IOW a nucleus rings like a bell. The
> larger
> the bell, the lower the tone.
>
> >I am glad to see a discussion of changes in mass depending on environment.
> >I feel that this is fundamental to the CF story of D-D => 4He and many
> >other observables.
> >
> >Rest mass (stationary, isolated in space, and with zero potentials) is
> >constant. Add velocity and the effective mass increases. Add
> >fields/potentials, and the effective mass (not the rest mass) increases or
> >decreases.
> >
> >Adding an electron to a proton orbit decreases the atomic mass to below
> the
> >combined rest masses of a proton and electron. The electron effective mass
> >increases from its increase in velocity. The remaining atomic mass (that
> of
> >the proton) must decrease as a photon is released.
> >
> >The Klein-Gordon and Dirac equations predict deep electron orbits with
> >binding energy of > 0.5 MeV. The
> >resulting femto-atom will have that much less mass. The femto-hydrogen
> >electron will be relativistic (~ 1 or ~100 MeV depending on the model
> >used). The nucleus (a proton) mass must be reduced by at least that
> amount.
> >In either model, the atomic mass changes by the same amount (~ 0.5 MeV).
> >This change in nuclear mass has a major impact on how we calculate things
> >and claim what is possible or not in this new regime.
> >
> >The basis for the nuclear change comes from the nucleon interactions in a
> >compound nucleus and in the quark interactions in even a single proton.
> >These charged components are greatly affected by the strong fields of a
> >proximate (fermi distance of a) deep-orbit electron.
> >
> >Andrew M.
> >
> >
> >On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 3:35 AM, Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Redefining the language in mid-stream always makes exchanging ideas
> >> difficult. The long standing convention is that all neutrons have the
> same
> >> mass, the binding energy in collections of nucleons in different
> nuclides
> >> varies.
> >>
> >> Everything gains mass as it approaches the speed of light.
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: mix...@bigpond.com <mix...@bigpond.com>
> >> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 10:42 PM
> >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR
> >>
> >> In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Mon, 21 May 2018 11:00:54 -0400:
> >> Hi,
> >> [snip]
> >> >Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> &g

RE: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Nygel--

How do you reconcile the Stubbs evaluation of real probe data?

Bob




From: Nigel Dyer <l...@thedyers.org.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2018 9:10:57 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR


Bob

Up until a year or so ago I might have gone along with the idea that quarks do 
not exist.  However, my son has produced a nice paper from which the 
fundamental particles (electrons, neutrinos and quarks) emerge in such a 
beautiful way that I am now completely convinced that they are real.   The 
challenge is to get the paper accepted, something this group will be well 
familiar with

Nigel

On 23/05/2018 06:47, bobcook39...@hotmail.com<mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com> 
wrote:

Robin—



Quarks are merely a mathematical scheme to help make sense of high energy 
physics.  IMHO the do not exist.  I will send you a separate study of electron 
scattering experiments that shed light on the structure of protons and neutrons.



Bob Cook



Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[H LV]

Thoughts undoubtedly exist. The existence of anything else can be doubted.
At least no one has shown otherwise.

harry

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 12:10 PM, Nigel Dyer  wrote:

> Bob
>
> Up until a year or so ago I might have gone along with the idea that
> quarks do not exist.  However, my son has produced a nice paper from which
> the fundamental particles (electrons, neutrinos and quarks) emerge in such
> a beautiful way that I am now completely convinced that they are real.
> The challenge is to get the paper accepted, something this group will be
> well familiar with
>
> Nigel
> On 23/05/2018 06:47, bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> Robin—
>
>
>
> Quarks are merely a mathematical scheme to help make sense of high energy
> physics.  IMHO the do not exist.  I will send you a separate study of
> electron scattering experiments that shed light on the structure of protons
> and neutrons.
>
>
>
> Bob Cook
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail  for
> Windows 10
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[JonesBeene]

Without getting too Clintonesque, the resolution to any disagreement here most 
likely depends on the meaning of “exist”… (or what is ‘is’)...

If the lifetime is sufficiently short, then either stance is viable. A ‘meme’ 
exists for quarks, which if nothing else, guarantees (almost) eternal life.

There is one huge advantage in favor of the Stubbs alternative model. It 
provides a universe with an equal amount of matter and antimatter. 

The disparity between the two (matter vs antimatter) has always been the main 
criticism of the standard model. The is no satisfactory alternative for a large 
disparity. Stubbs handles that most basic problem elegantly enough that if 
nothing else, he has created a new meme which will strengthen over time.

In the same way that other dualities are rationalized, this one can be handled 
the same way. Waves and particles coexist. Quarks and neutrinos, which began 
life as mathematical constructs, can likewise be both real and imaginary… as 
can phonons, phasons, magnons and so on. In many ways, quasiparticles are more 
real than so-called real particles, since they can explain details that are 
otherwise mysterious if not incomprehensible. 

Bottom line: when neither ‘either’ nor ‘or’ are sufficient, we must find a way 
to accept ‘both,’ as distasteful as that may be.


From: Nigel Dyer

Bob
Up until a year or so ago I might have gone along with the idea that quarks do 
not exist.  However, my son has produced a nice paper from which the 
fundamental particles (electrons, neutrinos and quarks) emerge in such a 
beautiful way that I am now completely convinced that they are real.   The 
challenge is to get the paper accepted, something this group will be well 
familiar with
Nigel
bobcook wrote:  Robin—
 
Quarks are merely a mathematical scheme to help make sense of high energy 
physics.  IMHO the do not exist.  I will send you a separate study of electron 
scattering experiments that shed light on the structure of protons and neutrons.
 

Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[Nigel Dyer]

Bob

Up until a year or so ago I might have gone along with the idea that 
quarks do not exist.  However, my son has produced a nice paper from 
which the fundamental particles (electrons, neutrinos and quarks) emerge 
in such a beautiful way that I am now completely convinced that they are 
real.   The challenge is to get the paper accepted, something this group 
will be well familiar with


Nigel

On 23/05/2018 06:47, bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote:


Robin—

Quarks are merely a mathematical scheme to help make sense of high 
energy physics.  IMHO the do not exist.  I will send you a separate 
study of electron scattering experiments that shed light on the 
structure of protons and neutrons.


Bob Cook

Sent from Mail  for 
Windows 10

Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[Andrew Meulenberg]

Dear Robin,

I believe that quarks and their constituent parts move rapidly within the
nucleus. The parts (I would hold to be leptons) are definitely highly
relativistic. If they slow down in the presence of external fields, then
their effective mass would definitely decrease.

I also agree with your concept of the nucleus and its components as
resonators.

Bob Cook's statement of Quarks being mathematical constructs is correct.
However, that does not prevent them from leading to the understanding of a
physical 'reality'. I would be interested in the paper that he mentioned.
(I may already have the one to which he is referring. If so, it has some
good and some weak points.)

Andrew M.

_ _ _ _

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 3:59 PM, <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote:

> In reply to  Andrew Meulenberg's message of Tue, 22 May 2018 05:36:11
> -0400:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> I have been thinking about this since Bob mentioned relativistic mass a few
> posts back. It occurred to me that quarks probably move rapidly within
> nucleons,
> lending relativistic mass to the particle. Now you mention them here below
> and
> that tends to solidify my thoughts. We could account for all mass changes
> during
> nuclear reactions by assuming that the velocity of quark motion changes
> during
> the process. E.g. suppose that all the quarks in a nucleus both create and
> reinforce a resonant field. As nucleons are added to the nucleus the size
> of the
> entire system increases physically. Maybe that increases the time constant
> of
> the resonance (lowers the frequency), implying that they all move more
> slowly,
> releasing energy as they slow down. IOW a nucleus rings like a bell. The
> larger
> the bell, the lower the tone.
>
> >I am glad to see a discussion of changes in mass depending on environment.
> >I feel that this is fundamental to the CF story of D-D => 4He and many
> >other observables.
> >
> >Rest mass (stationary, isolated in space, and with zero potentials) is
> >constant. Add velocity and the effective mass increases. Add
> >fields/potentials, and the effective mass (not the rest mass) increases or
> >decreases.
> >
> >Adding an electron to a proton orbit decreases the atomic mass to below
> the
> >combined rest masses of a proton and electron. The electron effective mass
> >increases from its increase in velocity. The remaining atomic mass (that
> of
> >the proton) must decrease as a photon is released.
> >
> >The Klein-Gordon and Dirac equations predict deep electron orbits with
> >binding energy of > 0.5 MeV. The
> >resulting femto-atom will have that much less mass. The femto-hydrogen
> >electron will be relativistic (~ 1 or ~100 MeV depending on the model
> >used). The nucleus (a proton) mass must be reduced by at least that
> amount.
> >In either model, the atomic mass changes by the same amount (~ 0.5 MeV).
> >This change in nuclear mass has a major impact on how we calculate things
> >and claim what is possible or not in this new regime.
> >
> >The basis for the nuclear change comes from the nucleon interactions in a
> >compound nucleus and in the quark interactions in even a single proton.
> >These charged components are greatly affected by the strong fields of a
> >proximate (fermi distance of a) deep-orbit electron.
> >
> >Andrew M.
> >
> >
> >On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 3:35 AM, Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Redefining the language in mid-stream always makes exchanging ideas
> >> difficult. The long standing convention is that all neutrons have the
> same
> >> mass, the binding energy in collections of nucleons in different
> nuclides
> >> varies.
> >>
> >> Everything gains mass as it approaches the speed of light.
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: mix...@bigpond.com <mix...@bigpond.com>
> >> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 10:42 PM
> >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR
> >>
> >> In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Mon, 21 May 2018 11:00:54 -0400:
> >> Hi,
> >> [snip]
> >> >Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Might you point to a reference where the mass of neutrons in deuterium
> vs.
> >> >> other nuclides is said to be different.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >I do not understand. Is the claim here that a neutron in deuterium is
> >> >heavier or lighter than a neutron in some other element?
> >>
> >> Yes (heavier), that's what I'm suggesting.
> >>
> >>

RE: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Robin—



Quarks are merely a mathematical scheme to help make sense of high energy 
physics.  IMHO the do not exist.  I will send you a separate study of electron 
scattering experiments that shed light on the structure of protons and neutrons.



Bob Cook



Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10




From: mix...@bigpond.com <mix...@bigpond.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2018 12:59:00 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

In reply to  Andrew Meulenberg's message of Tue, 22 May 2018 05:36:11 -0400:
Hi Andrew,

I have been thinking about this since Bob mentioned relativistic mass a few
posts back. It occurred to me that quarks probably move rapidly within nucleons,
lending relativistic mass to the particle. Now you mention them here below and
that tends to solidify my thoughts. We could account for all mass changes during
nuclear reactions by assuming that the velocity of quark motion changes during
the process. E.g. suppose that all the quarks in a nucleus both create and
reinforce a resonant field. As nucleons are added to the nucleus the size of the
entire system increases physically. Maybe that increases the time constant of
the resonance (lowers the frequency), implying that they all move more slowly,
releasing energy as they slow down. IOW a nucleus rings like a bell. The larger
the bell, the lower the tone.

>I am glad to see a discussion of changes in mass depending on environment.
>I feel that this is fundamental to the CF story of D-D => 4He and many
>other observables.
>
>Rest mass (stationary, isolated in space, and with zero potentials) is
>constant. Add velocity and the effective mass increases. Add
>fields/potentials, and the effective mass (not the rest mass) increases or
>decreases.
>
>Adding an electron to a proton orbit decreases the atomic mass to below the
>combined rest masses of a proton and electron. The electron effective mass
>increases from its increase in velocity. The remaining atomic mass (that of
>the proton) must decrease as a photon is released.
>
>The Klein-Gordon and Dirac equations predict deep electron orbits with
>binding energy of > 0.5 MeV. The
>resulting femto-atom will have that much less mass. The femto-hydrogen
>electron will be relativistic (~ 1 or ~100 MeV depending on the model
>used). The nucleus (a proton) mass must be reduced by at least that amount.
>In either model, the atomic mass changes by the same amount (~ 0.5 MeV).
>This change in nuclear mass has a major impact on how we calculate things
>and claim what is possible or not in this new regime.
>
>The basis for the nuclear change comes from the nucleon interactions in a
>compound nucleus and in the quark interactions in even a single proton.
>These charged components are greatly affected by the strong fields of a
>proximate (fermi distance of a) deep-orbit electron.
>
>Andrew M.
>
>
>On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 3:35 AM, Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Redefining the language in mid-stream always makes exchanging ideas
>> difficult. The long standing convention is that all neutrons have the same
>> mass, the binding energy in collections of nucleons in different nuclides
>> varies.
>>
>> Everything gains mass as it approaches the speed of light.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: mix...@bigpond.com <mix...@bigpond.com>
>> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 10:42 PM
>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR
>>
>> In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Mon, 21 May 2018 11:00:54 -0400:
>> Hi,
>> [snip]
>> >Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >Might you point to a reference where the mass of neutrons in deuterium vs.
>> >> other nuclides is said to be different.
>> >>
>> >
>> >I do not understand. Is the claim here that a neutron in deuterium is
>> >heavier or lighter than a neutron in some other element?
>>
>> Yes (heavier), that's what I'm suggesting.
>>
>> > There are
>> >different kinds or neutrons, or entering deuterium changes the mass?
>>
>> The latter. The energy release from the nuclear reaction has to came from
>> somewhere. I am simply saying that it comes from the conversion of part of
>> the mass of the constituent particles.
>>
>> >
>> >That seems extremely unlikely to me.
>>
>> Then you need to explain where the fusion energy comes from. (I'm counting
>> addition of a neutron to a nucleus as a form of fusion).
>>
>> Note that the formation of D from a free proton & a free neutron releases
>> only
>> 2.2 MeV of energy whereas at the other extreme, addition of a neutron to a
>> Ni nucleus releases about 8 MeV of energy. Hence my conclusion that
>> neutrons
>> in Ni have lower mass than those in D.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>> Robin van Spaandonk
>>
>> local asymmetry = temporary success
>>
>>
>>
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 21 May 2018 18:11:35 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>Is the binding energy released from a change in the configuration of the
>nucleus derived from the protons and neutrons that comprise the nucleus or
>does it come from the nucleus itself?
[snip]
Are these two mutually exclusive?
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[mixent]

In reply to  Andrew Meulenberg's message of Tue, 22 May 2018 05:36:11 -0400:
Hi Andrew,

I have been thinking about this since Bob mentioned relativistic mass a few
posts back. It occurred to me that quarks probably move rapidly within nucleons,
lending relativistic mass to the particle. Now you mention them here below and
that tends to solidify my thoughts. We could account for all mass changes during
nuclear reactions by assuming that the velocity of quark motion changes during
the process. E.g. suppose that all the quarks in a nucleus both create and
reinforce a resonant field. As nucleons are added to the nucleus the size of the
entire system increases physically. Maybe that increases the time constant of
the resonance (lowers the frequency), implying that they all move more slowly,
releasing energy as they slow down. IOW a nucleus rings like a bell. The larger
the bell, the lower the tone.

>I am glad to see a discussion of changes in mass depending on environment.
>I feel that this is fundamental to the CF story of D-D => 4He and many
>other observables.
>
>Rest mass (stationary, isolated in space, and with zero potentials) is
>constant. Add velocity and the effective mass increases. Add
>fields/potentials, and the effective mass (not the rest mass) increases or
>decreases.
>
>Adding an electron to a proton orbit decreases the atomic mass to below the
>combined rest masses of a proton and electron. The electron effective mass
>increases from its increase in velocity. The remaining atomic mass (that of
>the proton) must decrease as a photon is released.
>
>The Klein-Gordon and Dirac equations predict deep electron orbits with
>binding energy of > 0.5 MeV. The
>resulting femto-atom will have that much less mass. The femto-hydrogen
>electron will be relativistic (~ 1 or ~100 MeV depending on the model
>used). The nucleus (a proton) mass must be reduced by at least that amount.
>In either model, the atomic mass changes by the same amount (~ 0.5 MeV).
>This change in nuclear mass has a major impact on how we calculate things
>and claim what is possible or not in this new regime.
>
>The basis for the nuclear change comes from the nucleon interactions in a
>compound nucleus and in the quark interactions in even a single proton.
>These charged components are greatly affected by the strong fields of a
>proximate (fermi distance of a) deep-orbit electron.
>
>Andrew M.
>
>
>On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 3:35 AM, Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Redefining the language in mid-stream always makes exchanging ideas
>> difficult. The long standing convention is that all neutrons have the same
>> mass, the binding energy in collections of nucleons in different nuclides
>> varies.
>>
>> Everything gains mass as it approaches the speed of light.
>>
>> -----Original Message-
>> From: mix...@bigpond.com <mix...@bigpond.com>
>> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 10:42 PM
>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR
>>
>> In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Mon, 21 May 2018 11:00:54 -0400:
>> Hi,
>> [snip]
>> >Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >Might you point to a reference where the mass of neutrons in deuterium vs.
>> >> other nuclides is said to be different.
>> >>
>> >
>> >I do not understand. Is the claim here that a neutron in deuterium is
>> >heavier or lighter than a neutron in some other element?
>>
>> Yes (heavier), that's what I'm suggesting.
>>
>> > There are
>> >different kinds or neutrons, or entering deuterium changes the mass?
>>
>> The latter. The energy release from the nuclear reaction has to came from
>> somewhere. I am simply saying that it comes from the conversion of part of
>> the mass of the constituent particles.
>>
>> >
>> >That seems extremely unlikely to me.
>>
>> Then you need to explain where the fusion energy comes from. (I'm counting
>> addition of a neutron to a nucleus as a form of fusion).
>>
>> Note that the formation of D from a free proton & a free neutron releases
>> only
>> 2.2 MeV of energy whereas at the other extreme, addition of a neutron to a
>> Ni nucleus releases about 8 MeV of energy. Hence my conclusion that
>> neutrons
>> in Ni have lower mass than those in D.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>> Robin van Spaandonk
>>
>> local asymmetry = temporary success
>>
>>
>>
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[mixent]

In reply to  Russ's message of Tue, 22 May 2018 08:35:29 +0100:
Hi,
[snip]
>Redefining the language in mid-stream always makes exchanging ideas
>difficult. The long standing convention is that all neutrons have the same
>mass, the binding energy in collections of nucleons in different nuclides
>varies. 

If the constituent particles of a nucleus retained the mass they had as separate
particles, then nuclei would be more massive.

>
>Everything gains mass as it approaches the speed of light. 
>
>-Original Message-
>From: mix...@bigpond.com <mix...@bigpond.com> 
>Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 10:42 PM
>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>Subject: Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR
>
>In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Mon, 21 May 2018 11:00:54 -0400:
>Hi,
>[snip]
>>Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>Might you point to a reference where the mass of neutrons in deuterium vs.
>>> other nuclides is said to be different.
>>>
>>
>>I do not understand. Is the claim here that a neutron in deuterium is 
>>heavier or lighter than a neutron in some other element?
>
>Yes (heavier), that's what I'm suggesting.
>
>> There are
>>different kinds or neutrons, or entering deuterium changes the mass?
>
>The latter. The energy release from the nuclear reaction has to came from
>somewhere. I am simply saying that it comes from the conversion of part of
>the mass of the constituent particles.
>
>>
>>That seems extremely unlikely to me.
>
>Then you need to explain where the fusion energy comes from. (I'm counting
>addition of a neutron to a nucleus as a form of fusion).
>
>Note that the formation of D from a free proton & a free neutron releases
>only
>2.2 MeV of energy whereas at the other extreme, addition of a neutron to a
>Ni nucleus releases about 8 MeV of energy. Hence my conclusion that neutrons
>in Ni have lower mass than those in D.
>
>Regards,
>
>
>Robin van Spaandonk
>
>local asymmetry = temporary success
>
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[Andrew Meulenberg]

I am glad to see a discussion of changes in mass depending on environment.
I feel that this is fundamental to the CF story of D-D => 4He and many
other observables.

Rest mass (stationary, isolated in space, and with zero potentials) is
constant. Add velocity and the effective mass increases. Add
fields/potentials, and the effective mass (not the rest mass) increases or
decreases.

Adding an electron to a proton orbit decreases the atomic mass to below the
combined rest masses of a proton and electron. The electron effective mass
increases from its increase in velocity. The remaining atomic mass (that of
the proton) must decrease as a photon is released.

The Klein-Gordon and Dirac equations predict deep electron orbits with
binding energy of > 0.5 MeV. The
resulting femto-atom will have that much less mass. The femto-hydrogen
electron will be relativistic (~ 1 or ~100 MeV depending on the model
used). The nucleus (a proton) mass must be reduced by at least that amount.
In either model, the atomic mass changes by the same amount (~ 0.5 MeV).
This change in nuclear mass has a major impact on how we calculate things
and claim what is possible or not in this new regime.

The basis for the nuclear change comes from the nucleon interactions in a
compound nucleus and in the quark interactions in even a single proton.
These charged components are greatly affected by the strong fields of a
proximate (fermi distance of a) deep-orbit electron.

Andrew M.


On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 3:35 AM, Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Redefining the language in mid-stream always makes exchanging ideas
> difficult. The long standing convention is that all neutrons have the same
> mass, the binding energy in collections of nucleons in different nuclides
> varies.
>
> Everything gains mass as it approaches the speed of light.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: mix...@bigpond.com <mix...@bigpond.com>
> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 10:42 PM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR
>
> In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Mon, 21 May 2018 11:00:54 -0400:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >Might you point to a reference where the mass of neutrons in deuterium vs.
> >> other nuclides is said to be different.
> >>
> >
> >I do not understand. Is the claim here that a neutron in deuterium is
> >heavier or lighter than a neutron in some other element?
>
> Yes (heavier), that's what I'm suggesting.
>
> > There are
> >different kinds or neutrons, or entering deuterium changes the mass?
>
> The latter. The energy release from the nuclear reaction has to came from
> somewhere. I am simply saying that it comes from the conversion of part of
> the mass of the constituent particles.
>
> >
> >That seems extremely unlikely to me.
>
> Then you need to explain where the fusion energy comes from. (I'm counting
> addition of a neutron to a nucleus as a form of fusion).
>
> Note that the formation of D from a free proton & a free neutron releases
> only
> 2.2 MeV of energy whereas at the other extreme, addition of a neutron to a
> Ni nucleus releases about 8 MeV of energy. Hence my conclusion that
> neutrons
> in Ni have lower mass than those in D.
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> local asymmetry = temporary success
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[Russ]

Redefining the language in mid-stream always makes exchanging ideas
difficult. The long standing convention is that all neutrons have the same
mass, the binding energy in collections of nucleons in different nuclides
varies. 

Everything gains mass as it approaches the speed of light. 

-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com <mix...@bigpond.com> 
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 10:42 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Mon, 21 May 2018 11:00:54 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Might you point to a reference where the mass of neutrons in deuterium vs.
>> other nuclides is said to be different.
>>
>
>I do not understand. Is the claim here that a neutron in deuterium is 
>heavier or lighter than a neutron in some other element?

Yes (heavier), that's what I'm suggesting.

> There are
>different kinds or neutrons, or entering deuterium changes the mass?

The latter. The energy release from the nuclear reaction has to came from
somewhere. I am simply saying that it comes from the conversion of part of
the mass of the constituent particles.

>
>That seems extremely unlikely to me.

Then you need to explain where the fusion energy comes from. (I'm counting
addition of a neutron to a nucleus as a form of fusion).

Note that the formation of D from a free proton & a free neutron releases
only
2.2 MeV of energy whereas at the other extreme, addition of a neutron to a
Ni nucleus releases about 8 MeV of energy. Hence my conclusion that neutrons
in Ni have lower mass than those in D.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

RE: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

I was taught some time back that potential energy created by electric charges 
separated in space in a coherent system adds rest mass to that system.

Binding energy is potential energy and, thus ,IMO adds mass to the respective 
coherent system which it binds together.

Does anyone consider binding energy is NOT associated with a field  and the 
potential energy the field manifests  as it maintains a separation of charged 
primary particles with their own rest mass and charge?

Bob Cook
.



From: Axil Axil
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 3:11 PM
To: vortex-l<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subjgect: Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

Is the binding energy released from a change in the configuration of the 
nucleus derived from the protons and neutrons that comprise the nucleus or does 
it come from the nucleus itself?

On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 5:42 PM, 
<mix...@bigpond.com<mailto:mix...@bigpond.com>> wrote:
In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Mon, 21 May 2018 11:00:54 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com<mailto:russ.geo...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>Might you point to a reference where the mass of neutrons in deuterium vs.
>> other nuclides is said to be different.
>>
>
>I do not understand. Is the claim here that a neutron in deuterium is
>heavier or lighter than a neutron in some other element?

Yes (heavier), that's what I'm suggesting.

> There are
>different kinds or neutrons, or entering deuterium changes the mass?

The latter. The energy release from the nuclear reaction has to came from
somewhere. I am simply saying that it comes from the conversion of part of the
mass of the constituent particles.

>
>That seems extremely unlikely to me.

Then you need to explain where the fusion energy comes from. (I'm counting
addition of a neutron to a nucleus as a form of fusion).

Note that the formation of D from a free proton & a free neutron releases only
2.2 MeV of energy whereas at the other extreme, addition of a neutron to a Ni
nucleus releases about 8 MeV of energy. Hence my conclusion that neutrons in Ni
have lower mass than those in D.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[Axil Axil]

Is the binding energy released from a change in the configuration of the
nucleus derived from the protons and neutrons that comprise the nucleus or
does it come from the nucleus itself?

On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 5:42 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Mon, 21 May 2018 11:00:54 -0400:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >Russ  wrote:
> >
> >Might you point to a reference where the mass of neutrons in deuterium vs.
> >> other nuclides is said to be different.
> >>
> >
> >I do not understand. Is the claim here that a neutron in deuterium is
> >heavier or lighter than a neutron in some other element?
>
> Yes (heavier), that's what I'm suggesting.
>
> > There are
> >different kinds or neutrons, or entering deuterium changes the mass?
>
> The latter. The energy release from the nuclear reaction has to came from
> somewhere. I am simply saying that it comes from the conversion of part of
> the
> mass of the constituent particles.
>
> >
> >That seems extremely unlikely to me.
>
> Then you need to explain where the fusion energy comes from. (I'm counting
> addition of a neutron to a nucleus as a form of fusion).
>
> Note that the formation of D from a free proton & a free neutron releases
> only
> 2.2 MeV of energy whereas at the other extreme, addition of a neutron to a
> Ni
> nucleus releases about 8 MeV of energy. Hence my conclusion that neutrons
> in Ni
> have lower mass than those in D.
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> local asymmetry = temporary success
>
>

Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[mixent]

In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Mon, 21 May 2018 11:00:54 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>Russ  wrote:
>
>Might you point to a reference where the mass of neutrons in deuterium vs.
>> other nuclides is said to be different.
>>
>
>I do not understand. Is the claim here that a neutron in deuterium is
>heavier or lighter than a neutron in some other element?

Yes (heavier), that's what I'm suggesting.

> There are
>different kinds or neutrons, or entering deuterium changes the mass?

The latter. The energy release from the nuclear reaction has to came from
somewhere. I am simply saying that it comes from the conversion of part of the
mass of the constituent particles.

>
>That seems extremely unlikely to me.

Then you need to explain where the fusion energy comes from. (I'm counting
addition of a neutron to a nucleus as a form of fusion).

Note that the formation of D from a free proton & a free neutron releases only
2.2 MeV of energy whereas at the other extreme, addition of a neutron to a Ni
nucleus releases about 8 MeV of energy. Hence my conclusion that neutrons in Ni
have lower mass than those in D.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[mixent]

In reply to  Russ's message of Mon, 21 May 2018 06:37:55 +0100:
Hi Russ,
[snip]
>Might you point to a reference where the mass of neutrons in deuterium vs.
>other nuclides is said to be different.

Just calculate, or look up, the per nucleon mass, for several nuclei. If the
difference is not due to difference in mass of the constituent particles, then
to what would you ascribe it?


>
>-Original Message-
>From: mix...@bigpond.com <mix...@bigpond.com> 
>Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2018 10:56 PM
>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>Subject: Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR
>
>In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Sun, 20 May 2018 15:10:28 -0400:
>Hi,
>[snip]
>> The proton proton (PP) fusion reaction is the most enigmatic nuclear 
>>reaction that you will ever run across. This reaction has concerned me 
>>a lot and still confuses me.
>>
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...
>>
>>Proton-proton chain reaction
>>
>>
>>
>>The PP reaction should not occur, but it is said to occur as the power 
>>source of the Sun as well as all the other stars because there is so 
>>much hydrogen involved in the energy cycle of the Sun.
>>
>>"In the Sun, deuterium-producing events are rare. Diprotons are the 
>>much more common result of proton-proton reactions within the star, and 
>>diprotons almost immediately decay back into two protons. Since the 
>>conversion of hydrogen to helium is slow, the complete conversion of 
>>the hydrogen in the core of the Sun is calculated to take more than 
>>10^10 (ten
>>billion) years."
>>
>>The PP reaction should be impossible to happen here on earth, but there 
>>is evidence that helium is being generated in all sorts of LENR 
>>systems. Why does LENR make PP fusion possible or possible very likely to
>occur?
>
>The PP reaction probably doesn't happen here on Earth. The neutron in
>Deuterium is quite heavy compared to the neutrons in other nuclei. In short,
>when a proton converts to a neutron inside another nucleus much less energy
>has to be found, so it can happen much faster.
>IMO that's why the half lives of beta+ decay reactions for isotopes heavier
>that D are much shorter than for the PP reaction.
>[snip]
>Regards,
>
>
>Robin van Spaandonk
>
>local asymmetry = temporary success
>
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[Jed Rothwell]

bobcook39...@hotmail.com  wrote:

Neutrons would change their mass if they approach the speed of light.  If
> they happen to circulate in a coherent system they may become more massive
> based on their velocity in the system.  I doubt that rest mass changes any.
> IMHO a neutrons mass is related to the mass of the electrons and positrons
> that make it up, plus the binding energy that keep the electrons  and
> positrons together.
>

Ah. So the environment of the deuteron changes the mass. It is unlike other
atoms. Interesting.

I can't judge, but I see what you mean.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Neutrons would change their mass if they approach the speed of light.  If they 
happen to circulate in a coherent system they may become more massive based on 
their velocity in the system.  I doubt that rest mass changes any. IMHO a 
neutrons mass is related to the mass of the electrons and positrons that make 
it up, plus the binding energy that keep the electrons  and positrons together.

William Stubbs paper in issue 129 of Infinite Energy (October 2016) evaluating 
high energy scattering data probing the structure of protons and P. Hatt’s 
theory of proton, neutron and muon structure are pertinent to the determination 
of rest masses of these particles.

I am planning a seminar  to address these papers and other related theory and 
experimental data concerning this question of physical reality, during a 
evening meeting at the ICCF-21 conference on June 6. 2018 at Ft. Collins, CO 
CSU campus.

Bob Cook



From: Jed Rothwell<mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 8:01 AM
To: Vortex<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com<mailto:russ.geo...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Might you point to a reference where the mass of neutrons in deuterium vs.
other nuclides is said to be different.

I do not understand. Is the claim here that a neutron in deuterium is heavier 
or lighter than a neutron in some other element? There are different kinds or 
neutrons, or entering deuterium changes the mass?

That seems extremely unlikely to me.

Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[Jed Rothwell]

Russ  wrote:

Might you point to a reference where the mass of neutrons in deuterium vs.
> other nuclides is said to be different.
>

I do not understand. Is the claim here that a neutron in deuterium is
heavier or lighter than a neutron in some other element? There are
different kinds or neutrons, or entering deuterium changes the mass?

That seems extremely unlikely to me.

RE: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[Russ]

Might you point to a reference where the mass of neutrons in deuterium vs.
other nuclides is said to be different.

-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com <mix...@bigpond.com> 
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2018 10:56 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Sun, 20 May 2018 15:10:28 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
> The proton proton (PP) fusion reaction is the most enigmatic nuclear 
>reaction that you will ever run across. This reaction has concerned me 
>a lot and still confuses me.
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...
>
>Proton-proton chain reaction
>
>
>
>The PP reaction should not occur, but it is said to occur as the power 
>source of the Sun as well as all the other stars because there is so 
>much hydrogen involved in the energy cycle of the Sun.
>
>"In the Sun, deuterium-producing events are rare. Diprotons are the 
>much more common result of proton-proton reactions within the star, and 
>diprotons almost immediately decay back into two protons. Since the 
>conversion of hydrogen to helium is slow, the complete conversion of 
>the hydrogen in the core of the Sun is calculated to take more than 
>10^10 (ten
>billion) years."
>
>The PP reaction should be impossible to happen here on earth, but there 
>is evidence that helium is being generated in all sorts of LENR 
>systems. Why does LENR make PP fusion possible or possible very likely to
occur?

The PP reaction probably doesn't happen here on Earth. The neutron in
Deuterium is quite heavy compared to the neutrons in other nuclei. In short,
when a proton converts to a neutron inside another nucleus much less energy
has to be found, so it can happen much faster.
IMO that's why the half lives of beta+ decay reactions for isotopes heavier
that D are much shorter than for the PP reaction.
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[Axil Axil]

>From the Lugano report:


"The Lithium content in the fuel is found to have the natural composition,
i.e. 6Li 7 % and 7Li 93 %. However at the end of the run a depletion of 7Li
in the ash was revealed by both the SIMS and the ICP-MS methods. In the
SIMS analysis the 7Li content was only 7.9% and in the ICP-MS analysis it
was 42.5 %. This result is remarkable since it shows that the burning
process in E-Cat indeed changes the fuel at the nuclear level, i.e. nuclear
reactions have taken place. It is notable, but maybe only a coincidence,
that also in Astrophysics a 7Li depletion is observed"

http://amsacta.unibo.it/4084/1/LuganoReportSubmit.pdf

The increase in the strength of the weak force produced an increase in the
decay rate of neutrons in lithium 7.

According to accepted theory, the energy for the activation of the weak
force reaction comes from the instantiation of virtual particles from the
vacuum. The weak force borrows the energy from the vacuum and then when the
decay process is complete, returns that energy back to the vacuum.

In S. Ólafsson and Sindre-Zeiner Gundersen poster for ICCF=21

Adler–Bell–Jackiw anomaly in electroweak
interactions, the 3p+ ➝ 3L+ process and links to
spontaneous UHD decay and transmutation
process

"One very recent interpretation is disintegration of the proton into
lighter particles in a process of
3N-proton -> 3N-anti-lepton process. This process is allowed according to
the Standard Model of
High energy physics but has never been observed since it would need post
big bang high
temperature conditions to occur to high energy for LHC accelerator at CERN.
This process could
maybe solve one of the biggest remaining mystery in cosmology i.e.
Baryogenisis. The hypothetical
physical process that took place during the early universe that produced
baryonic asymmetry, i.e.
the imbalance of matter (baryons) and antimatter (antibaryons) in the
observed universe.
This 3N-proton -> 3N-anti-lepton process is driven by the *Adler–Bell–Jackiw
anomaly* in
electroweak interactions in the Standard model. Why it can occur in our
experiments at room
temperature condition is an obvious mystery, but first idea for solution
could be quantum Bose
Einstein condensation of the protons or neutrons inside the Ultra-dense
phase of Hydrogen. Both
the spontaneous and laser induced entanglement breaking when laser pulse
impinges on the
condensate."

On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 5:55 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Sun, 20 May 2018 15:10:28 -0400:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> > The proton proton (PP) fusion reaction is the most enigmatic nuclear
> >reaction that you will ever run across. This reaction has concerned me a
> >lot and still confuses me.
> >
> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...
> >
> >Proton–proton chain reaction
> >
> >
> >
> >The PP reaction should not occur, but it is said to occur as the power
> >source of the Sun as well as all the other stars because there is so much
> >hydrogen involved in the energy cycle of the Sun.
> >
> >"In the Sun, deuterium-producing events are rare. Diprotons are the much
> >more common result of proton–proton reactions within the star, and
> >diprotons almost immediately decay back into two protons. Since the
> >conversion of hydrogen to helium is slow, the complete conversion of the
> >hydrogen in the core of the Sun is calculated to take more than 10^10 (ten
> >billion) years."
> >
> >The PP reaction should be impossible to happen here on earth, but there is
> >evidence that helium is being generated in all sorts of LENR systems. Why
> >does LENR make PP fusion possible or possible very likely to occur?
>
> The PP reaction probably doesn't happen here on Earth. The neutron in
> Deuterium
> is quite heavy compared to the neutrons in other nuclei. In short, when a
> proton
> converts to a neutron inside another nucleus much less energy has to be
> found,
> so it can happen much faster.
> IMO that's why the half lives of beta+ decay reactions for isotopes
> heavier that
> D are much shorter than for the PP reaction.
> [snip]
> Regards,
>
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> local asymmetry = temporary success
>
>

Re: [Vo]:The PP fusion reaction in LENR

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Sun, 20 May 2018 15:10:28 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
> The proton proton (PP) fusion reaction is the most enigmatic nuclear
>reaction that you will ever run across. This reaction has concerned me a
>lot and still confuses me.
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...
>
>Proton–proton chain reaction
>
>
>
>The PP reaction should not occur, but it is said to occur as the power
>source of the Sun as well as all the other stars because there is so much
>hydrogen involved in the energy cycle of the Sun.
>
>"In the Sun, deuterium-producing events are rare. Diprotons are the much
>more common result of proton–proton reactions within the star, and
>diprotons almost immediately decay back into two protons. Since the
>conversion of hydrogen to helium is slow, the complete conversion of the
>hydrogen in the core of the Sun is calculated to take more than 10^10 (ten
>billion) years."
>
>The PP reaction should be impossible to happen here on earth, but there is
>evidence that helium is being generated in all sorts of LENR systems. Why
>does LENR make PP fusion possible or possible very likely to occur?

The PP reaction probably doesn't happen here on Earth. The neutron in Deuterium
is quite heavy compared to the neutrons in other nuclei. In short, when a proton
converts to a neutron inside another nucleus much less energy has to be found,
so it can happen much faster.
IMO that's why the half lives of beta+ decay reactions for isotopes heavier that
D are much shorter than for the PP reaction.
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success