----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark S Bilk" > Would this reaction p + 11B -> 3 alphas + 8.7 Mev > be a candidate for hydrino fusion (resulting in fission), in an > electrolytic or plasma-electrolytic cell? 80% of boron atoms > are 11B, the rest are 10B. Boric acid (H3BO3) and borax (Na2B4O7) > are highly soluble in hot water.
Of course it would be the ideal candidate, if boron is a catalyst for hydrinos, or if hydrinos generated elsewhere can use solid boron as a target. That is the implication of the deGeus patent, in which - unlike Mills, he considers boron to be active for creating hydrinos, and says that he has the proof, but again - forget the plasma. Boron will never work with protons in a plasma. It will have to be either used with hydrinos or as a solid ICF target. > Is the required proton energy for hot fusion of p+11B higher > than for d+t or d+d? MUCH higher. Orders of magnitude higher. That is why only hydrinos would work in a non ICF configuration. > If so, does that mean that the proton > has to get closer to the B nucleus to fuse, thus requiring > an even tinier hydrino than for deuterino+deuterino fusion? Maybe Robin can answer that one as to the normal hydrino, but if the 1/137 hydrino is real and an expected end-product, then it will be almost neutral, like a neutron but with a larger negative near-field, then it seems to me that there should be no problem that I can see. > Here's an analysis of neutron production in p + 11B hot fusion > from secondary reactions (fixed -- it was written in all lower > case, with no paragraph breaks). Again forget hot plasma fusion. It is a non-starter. > Maybe in water the alphas would be slowed down before they could react with boron and create a neutron? Only if the "water" was heavy water, and then the cross-section is very low. However the CANDU reactor has demonstrated that heavy water under irradiation produces "extra" neutrons which are not accounted for in normal physics. Thus the surprising efficiency of the CANDU, many of which have operated at well over 100% for tens of years at a stretch. > > An "aneutronic" reaction is often defined as one where no more than > > 1% of the total fusion energy released is carried by neutrons. > > Detailed calculations [Heindler and Kernbichler, Proc. 5th > > Intl. Conf. on emerging nuclear energy systems, 1989, pp. 177-82] > > show that at least 0.1% of the reactions in a thermal p-B11 plasma > > would produce neutrons. This is still an awful lot of neutrons, > > as can be seen by the following simple calculation. This whole piece is totally meaningless, antiquated information. Again forget hot plasma fusion. It is a non-starter. Since this was written, everyone who has looked into it has agreed that boron CANNOT be used in a plasma situation with protons, so it does no one any good to waste time on a process that cannot work. Concentrate on hydrinos or solid-state ICF, where a tiny amount of frozen borane is the target for laser irradiation, ion irradiation, or a small energetic chemical reaction. This could even take the form of a small manufactured sphere, about the size of a large marble. You would have a high tensile skin of filament wound carbon, and underneath that a few mm of your chemical reactants, which would likely be in two parts (layers) separated by a heat sensitive membrane or skin, and inside of that would be a hollow sphere of cryo-grey-tin, and then a milligram core of frozen borane. There is a pronounced reverse economy-of-scale here, so there is no terrorist potential. Chill and serve... (by dropping the marble) into a tank of molten salt to start the chemcal reaction; and the resultant two-part bootstrapped compression; and then capture the heat of the reaction, then use the molten salt to produce electricity. Clear as mud, huh? You can even augment it with solar heated molten salt during the day time. This requires an adjoining factory to make the targets, of course, and is so complicated that one hope that the 1/137 hydrino is "real". Jones
