Hi Robin, Sounds more like Randell Mills than Storms ... and now that you mention it, I remember being surprised to hear this from Ed at the time - since it raises more questions than it answers. The HUGE unsolved problem is that with deuterium as the active gas, two deuterons cannot shed anywhere close to enough mass-energy to eliminate gammas, at least not without reducing their own nuclear mass significantly.
The two electrons - even if completely converted to photons - are deficient in mass energy - reducing the ~24 MeV known to occur in deuteron fusion by only a few MeV (3 MeV if one e- remains to catalyze the fusion). In short, the deuterium fusion, if there is any via QM time reversal, needs to be prompted by a massively larger "zone of depletion" - and not from simply the two atoms. Now it gets interesting if one wants to stick to the two-atom-only explanation. If some portion deuteron mass can be physically converted to energy, say up to 11 MeV via UV/x-ray photon release - even in principle- then there is no reason to proceed all the way to fusion to see spectacular gain. Any gain prior to fusion should show up easily as an extremely intense light source. In fact, deuterium-filled arc emission bulbs for lighting have been used for 50 years in microscopy, with no reported thermal anomaly. Could that kind of anomaly have gone unnoticed? -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] What do you make of the following message from the archives? http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg90378.html >> Well, there is also a possible analogy of the QM depletion zone, which might arise in a combined type of Millsean-LENR situation, such that the "makeup" nuclear reaction only occurs in a severely depleted zone (due to orbital redundancy being brought back up to equilibrium by time-reversed fusion reaction.) > >This sounds like Ed's theory. ;) > > >...Except... there is a rather huge fundamental difference between: > >a) fusion-first followed by thousands of stepwise decreases in energy >release, delayed over an extended time frame. > >and > >b) millions of small energy releases happening first - from a non-nuclear >mechanism, followed by a new type of QM tunneling fusion reaction which can >only happen in a severely depleted spatial zone. > >My apologies to Ed if he has changed his view to reconcile the two.
