In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Thu, 02 Dec 2004 19:12:56 -0900: Hi, [snip] >At 1:24 PM 12/3/4, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >> >>The thing that bothers me most about this is that if hydrinos are >>producing nuclear reactions, then I would expect to see at least the >>occasional gamma ray. >>(Though there may be possible particle reactions that are far more >>probable than gamma ray production). > >Maybe we can expect no gammas, at least when it comes to D + D reactions. >Consider the ordinary branching ratios: > >D + D -> T (1.01 MeV) + p (3.02 MeV) (50%) > -> He3 (0.82 MeV) + n (2.45 MeV) (50%) <- most abundant fuel > -> He4 + about 20 MeV of gamma rays (about 0.0001%; depends > somewhat on temperature.) > > >One argument against the possiblity of CF is "We know what the branching >ratios of He* is, so CF can't be real because" there is no signature >radiation. This argument is bous. In electron catalysed fusion, or >hydrino fusion, there is an electron present in the reaction which does not >necessarily gain any momentum from the fusion which it catalyses. The CF >reaction is thus: > > D + D + e -> ? + e > > >That catalysing electron does not "fall into the Coulomb well" and thus the >resulting excited fused nucleus is not the conventional He* at all. There
...but the electron doesn't fall into the Coulomb well in any of the conventional reactions above. The excited state of the nucleus has nothing to do with electrons. It is simply a consequence of the mass excess of deuterons compared to alpha particles. >is much less excitement! How much less depends on four things: (1) the Consequently, the degree of excitement wouldn't be expected to change (with one small exception - the "reflation" of the shrunken electron from the hydrino could absorb some of the energy of the excited nucleus - about 250 keV at most). Alternatively, the shrunken electron may tunnel into the nucleus along with the proton/deuteron, and promptly be expelled as a fast beta particle - this is one of the possible particle reactions I alluded to above. >size of the electron wavefunction at the moment of fusion, (2) the amount >of energy supplied to the catalytic electron from the ZPE sea to expand its >wavefuntion out of the nucleus, (3) the amount of energy the electron >radiates while captured by the nucleus and (4) whether or not an electron >capture occurs. We seem to be saying more or less the same thing here, except that I see the reflation energy coming from he mass excess rather than the ZPE. (However these may in fact be one and the same thing, if all mass is a consequence of ZPE interactions with charge anyway). > >I feel it might be argued that at the moment of fusion the wavefunction of >the electron, or the entire fused body for that matter, exists at a point. >The energy of the combined wavefunctions is momentarily returned to the >vacuum. The quantum wavefuntions of the participating bodies collapse into >a single point. The ensuing wavefunction inflation depends upon energy >exchanged with the vacuum. There is no convenient formulation to determine >exactly what signature energy will be available! The potential energy U of >an electron and nucleus pair depends upon the separation of that pair. If >that separation is momentarily zero, then, by definition, a singularity >exists. It is entirely possible the electron could require the entire 20 >MeV to escape. It is further even likely that the branching ratios for D + >D + e differ entirely from those for D + D. It makes sense that the most >likely branch might look like: > > D + D + e + energy -> He + e - 13.59844 eV I think this should be D + D + e -> He + e + energy The energy is about 23.8 MeV, and completely overwhelms the energy required to reflate the electron from nuclear dimensions (or reinflate hydrino shrunken electrons). The - 13.59844 eV has to do with the energy difference between the ground state and infinite separation. The energy difference between a singularity and infinite separation would be infinite. That between nuclear dimensions and infinite separation is 7-800 keV. > >In other words, as I posted in "THE ATOMIC EXPANSION HYPOTHESIS" thread >here some years ago, the catalysing electron may only be able to dig itself >out of the hole by borrowing (back) from the vacuum enough energy to reach >equilibrium, i.e. to become a ground state orbital electron. To that >extent, this concept is compatible with Puthoff's theory that orbital >stability, i.e. the failure of the orbit to collapse, depends on the >orbital electron reaching equilibriumn with the zero point field. If the >electron radiates during its catalysis, or the expanding orbital radiates >during its expansion, or dislocates neighboring orbitals that radiate or >produce phonons, then that accounts for the modicum of free energy >observed. Increasing the free energy then amounts to additional >confinement of the expanding orbitals. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > BTW I wasn't primarily thinking of the D+D reaction when I wrote my previous post, but rather about reactions like M(z,A) + Hy -> M(z+1,A+1)*, or possibly M(z,A) + Hy -> M(z,A+1)* if the electron is also captured. Deuterino reactions would likely primarily go like: M(z,A) + D -> M(z,A+1)* + H or M(z,A) + D -> M(z+1,A+1)* + n Reactions like this might be expected to yield the occasional gamma, as at least some of the time one might expect the newly formed nucleus to be formed in an energetic state that then relaxes back to the nuclear ground state by emitting gamma rays. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread.
