Our related recent thread looked at conservation or lack of conservation of reactants within the dog bone reactor. It generally assumed some function of Li-7 in the reaction. It may be that Li-H vapor is actually the catalyst that aligns the Li-7 with the various Ni isotopes to allow the neutron tunneling of the Gullstrom theory to occur.
Li-H is probably a polar molecule with potentially non-zero spin in its electron structure. Spin alignment/coupling with Ni isotopes may lead to lower energy states and facilitate coupling of the molecule when it encounters a Ni atom. The coherence of the Li-7-H-Ni system results in a lower energy Ni isotope, letting go of the Li-6 at low energy as a result. Li-6 energy could help distribute the energy from the reaction site and not cause to much damage to the nano fuel structure. One would want to look for a spectrum of low energy Li-6 ions with differing energies associated with the different Ni isotope reactions involved to confirm such a reaction. Bob Cook ----- Original Message ----- From: Bob Cook To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 11:21 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone Eric-- Also keep in mind the physics student, Carl-Oscar Gullstrom, at the Uppsala University and under one of the Lugano authors, has a theory that is similar to Robin's idea. Its worth reviewing. http://www.scribd.com/doc/244393652/Low-radiation-fusion-through-bound-neutron-tunneling Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: Eric Walker To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote: It may be that the hydrogen only acts to help distribute the Li-7 to the Ni isotopes for the Li-7+Ni reactions Jones suggested back in October and Eric has just reviewed. Just a small correction. It was Robin that suggested that what was going on was a chain of 7Li(Ni,Ni)6Li neutron-stripping reactions. This is a suggestion that I'm still partial to. Unless there has been an error in my analysis, I'm inclined to think the percentage of lithium reported in the 2mg sample from the Lugano assay was unrepresentative of the percentage of lithium in the total charge by a factor of 10-20. Admittedly, this is a heavy strike against the proposed involvement of 7Li, all else being equal. Most advances in technology are based on a mixture of trial and error work and application of half-baked theory. They go hand in hand. Nice summary. Eric
