Excuse me. I didn't realize your level of understanding.
Mass and energy are related by E = m c^2. If the inputs and outputs
have a mass difference, then that mass is converted to energy, in
kinetic form, radiant form, or both.
This is the basis of most all nuclear reaction energy calculations,
and the energy calculations I provided for many hundreds of feasible
(though most of them improbable) reactions here:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/dfRpt
Note the deuterium reactions here:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/RptC
By this investigation I cam up with an entirely new form of LENR,
namely "nuclear catalytic" action, exemplified by the many reactions
in Report C. These are reactions of the form:
X + 2 D* --> X + 4He + 23.847 MeV
The conventional D+D fusion reaction, using mass differences, is:
D + D --> 4He + 23.847 MeV
The heavy lattice atoms are closer to absorbed hydrogen than hydrogen
in adjacent lattices. The tunneling probability of a deflated
hydrogen nucleus to the vicinity of a heavy nucleus is higher than to
an adjacent lattice site. If immediate strong reaction does not
occur, as is the case for heavy nuclei where it is not energetically
feasible, then the second catalytic action, producing a helium
nucleus (alpha particle) is feasible. This kind of reaction might be
engineered to produce a high rate of energy production using the
right kind of lattice with deuterium.
In any case, as you can see, the mass deficit is 23.847 MeV/c for D+D
--> 4He, no matter by what pathway this occurs.
On Dec 27, 2011, at 11:28 AM, Charles Hope wrote:
If the helium levels are "what they should be" compared to the
heat, that assumes some theory that correlates them. Which theory
is that?
On Dec 27, 2011, at 12:24, Horace Heffner <[email protected]>
wrote:
It is not theory, it is experimental result. Go to:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/
and enter "Miles helium" and "McKubre helium".
On Dec 27, 2011, at 8:00 AM, Charles Hope wrote:
How's that? According to what theory?
On Dec 27, 2011, at 11:01, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]>
wrote:
Jouni Valkonen wrote:
If I have understood correctly, the correlation is meaningless,
because there are orders of magnitude too tiny amounts of
helium compared to observed heat.
You do not understand correctly. The amounts of helium are right
what they should be compared to observed heat. Please read Miles
or McKubre.
- Jed
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
