The possibility of an "inverse (or reverse) Mossbauer effect" comes up from time to time in LENR. The key concepts are "recoilless nuclear resonance" and FRET, which is type of superradiant fluorescence. We have discussed FRET for many years on vortex, since it is strongly correlated to nanoscale geometry and that was even before we knew about SPP (surface plasmon polaritons). In effect, FRET connects SPP to LENR via an Inverted Mossbauer Effect.
Heck, you can impress friends and confuse enemies with this mantra SPP+FRET=LENR (If it were possible to squeeze those letters onto a vanity plate, it would be worth it). This is a complex hypothesis going back to the shock wave of P&F, and which has some relevance to the broader subject of "gammaless" emission. The first time I heard of it was circa 1990 in an article by Scott Chubb. Another name associated with this niche is Kozima, who labeled lithium to beryllium as a GLR (or gammaless reaction) like an Inverted Mossbauer Effect. Of keen interest in bringing all of this up now, 24 years later, is that Ni-61 and K-40, both of which are assumed to be involved in the Rossi effect - are Mossbauer isotopes. And they are more accurately called gammaless (GLR) than was beryllium. To backtrack: Chubb apparently got the idea from Cockcroft and Walton's experiments in the early 1930s which was the first reported accelerator driven nuclear reaction, and it involved Lithium bombarded with protons. The reaction proceeds via "excited Be-8." Two alphas are seen in the ash and with far less peak photon radiation than expected. However, lots of x-rays are seen, since the alphas are hot, as well as the protons. To the modern day cynic, trying to understand the Rossi effect - this 80+ year old experiment is actually better proof against the idea of a gammaless reaction - than for it. Of note. In modern usage there is no consensus for a definition distinguishing X-rays and gamma rays. The older and common practice in physics is to distinguish between the two types of radiation based on their source: X-rays being emitted by electrons and gamma being emitted by the nucleus. This definition has several problems, since many times the method of generation is not known, and hard x-rays can be stronger than many gammas. In science - one should never be required to define an important parameter based on its source - when only its geometry (or energy content) is overriding. Therefore the modern alternative is to distinguish X-rays from gamma radiation on the basis of wavelength or energy, but in terms of GLR - we are most interested in detectability. The limit of detectability with a thick reactor is generally low keV, and that depends on the Boltzmann tail of the energy distribution, since low keV from a coherent source will not penetrate thick stainless. A useful value for LENR is to define "gammaless" as radiation lower than 4 keV. If it is in that range it will never be a problem to shield cheaply - and will not be a negative feature that makes LENR subject to regulation by the NRC. Anyway, moving on - beryllium is a light metal which "should have" an isotope with amu of 8 but it does not. Thus the extremely strong gamma of normal fusion into helium seems to be somehow avoided if Be-8 is formed (since it is another anomaly itself) but if we want to connect that to deuterium and no lithium - this involves a four body reaction with the energy carried away by two alphas and no strong gamma. Elements which are higher and lower in mass than beryllium have 1:1 ratios of protons and neutrons but not beryllium - and this is due to the remarkable stability and other properties of helium-4, which in effect "forbids" Be-8. In contrast, Ne-10 does not keep boron from having an isotope at 10. Bottom line is that in describing Pd-D, "excited Be-8" became somewhat of a metaphor for GLR ... but that connection was a mistake IMO since this reaction is far from gammaless (in the sense of detectability) such as in the Rossi effect. Massive bremsstrahlung radiation is seen with "excited Be-8" and it makes a poor metaphor. This has been the preamble for moving onto the Rossi effect, as a possible versions of an "inverted Mossbauer effect." For it to be a similar metaphor, we must find the "key" or the forbidden element - which would be the "Be-8 of the Rossi effect". Is it Ni-59 ? Several other posts will be needed. Stay tuned or set your spam filter accordingly. Jones
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
