We should be careful as contamination, mixing, enrichment, mays trouble the result... it is not a total analysis but a relative composition.
one possibility is that Li6 is not caused by fission/spallation, but by fusion or fusion/decay why not t+e+t -> li6+2e or like iwamura 6 deuteron absorption: p+e+p+e+p+e+p+e+p+e+p->e+li6+e no gamma required since momentum is null no neutron that can be thermalized I don't know if the reaction is exothermic, but it would be logical why not? It's based on p-e-p fusion idea coupled with iwamura 2/4/6 deuteron merging with heavy targets one question is whether it is a linear reaction à la hydroton, or a 3D reaction on 3 axis many electron should participate or the coulomb barrier would block... geometry is important so momentum before and after is null I don't see a geometry that works with localized electrons. however 6p+3e gives li6, assuming that it is 3 electronic orbitals that are like 8 number null at the center, symmetric like petals, and together placed on the 3 axis between 3 pairs of protons... imagine that protons in fact have electrons that are forbidden to go out of a linear axis (8 shape with the proton in the center), put them in chain like hidroton, or at 3D crossing and the p-e-p fusion is in fact a 1/2e + p + 1/2e + 1/2e + p+1/2e -> 1/2e + d +1/2e or (imagine 3D on ascii art) 1/2e + p + 1/2e [/-\] 1/2e + p + 1/2e x-axis 1/2e + p + 1/2e [...] 1/2e + p + 1/2e y axis 1/2e + p + 1/2e [\-/] 1/2e + p + 1/2e z axis -> 1/2e [/-\] 1/2e x-axis 1/2e [li6] 1/2e y axis 1/2e [\-/] 1/2e z axis if the same idea hold for 2D 1/2e + p + 1/2e [/-\] 1/2e + p + 1/2e x-axis 1/2e + p + 1/2e [\-/] 1/2e + p + 1/2e z axis -> 1/2e [/---\] 1/2e x-axis 1/2e [he4] 1/2e z axis for 1D if the same idea hold for 2D 1/2e + p + 1/2e [-] 1/2e + p + 1/2e x-axis -> 1/2e [d] 1/2e x-axis my vision explains Iwamura observation (I plagiarize/support storms!) 1/2e + d + 1/2e [/-\] 1/2e + d + 1/2e x-axis 1/2e + d + 1/2e [X] 1/2e + d + 1/2e y axis 1/2e + d + 1/2e [\-/] 1/2e + d + 1/2e z axis 1/2e [/----\] 1/2e x-axis 1/2e [X+3] 1/2e y axis 1/2e [\----/] 1/2e z axis -> I missed the electrons of the X, so maybe there is an error... maybe the electrons of the X participate the reaction and have to be delocalized as 6 petal orbitals too, aligned or diagonal with H orbitals this idea is just an idea ; it is probably wrong but i seriously support the idea that geometry is important, because it explain by null momentum that no gamma is produced, by electron absorption, that no neutron is ever thermalized... we should also forget about localized particles and round orbitals... geometry is the key... no neutron and gamma are the symptom I don't know if it relates to takahashi, or if it is even possible. is there a forgiving professor there ? (probably it is the wine shared with Bob Cook at home;) 2014-10-11 4:21 GMT+02:00 Jones Beene <[email protected]>: > Table 1 Appendix 3 on page 42 of the Rossi report is the EDS analysis of > the > Fuel and Ash with natural abundance comparison. Look particularly at the > Li-6 counts in the ash. > > This Table should tell us what is happening in the reaction, if it can be > believed but so far, an important detail seems to be overlooked. There > seems > to be a lot of lithium 6 showing up in the ash - too much for the source to > be lithium 7. In other words, there is new lithium coming into the ash from > some other source, what is that source? > > Correction - all we can be sure of is that there is an EDS signal being > attributed to lithium-6 but it may be relic of incomplete software, since > all the signals are assigned by what is essentially a library of known > correlations. For instance, if there was a new isomer or species in this > reaction, not known previously, then the software would probably assign it > to the closest near-miss which could be Li-6. > > This analysis is open to interpretation of course, since it is based on > ratios and they state that various particles vary from place to place. But > in general, if we look at nickel in the ash and in fuel, the total counts > are nearly identical for nickel in both cases - but the isotopes have > shifted drastically. Now compare total nickel to total lithium. That ratio > has shot up 300% in favor of Li - and relative to counts between fuel and > ash and this is happening at the same time the isotope ratio is shifting. > But in general, when compared to nickel counts, net lithium counts has > tripled and most of that is probably in the form of "new" Li-6 (not coming > from Li-7) or else attributable a new species which the EDS is assigning as > Li-6. > > What is the source of this "new" Li-6 if it is not a relic of > instrumentation? > > The available suspects are aluminum, oxygen and hydrogen.... > > >
