In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 8 Apr 2015 11:07:16 -0700: Hi, Li7 may give up a neutron to become Li6. If Li6 also gives up a neutron, it would become Li5 which immediately decays into He4 plus a proton.
> > >Surprise, surprise. > > > >Fresh on the heels of a paper which suggests that lots of helium should have >been found, Rossi suddenly reveals that yes, we found it but are just now >taking the opportunity to reveal that we found it. > > > >http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/04/08/rossi-helium-found-in-e-cat-reaction/ > > > >I not believe this new revelation is credible, based on the appearance of the >paper and the timing, since he has never before said that helium was >discovered. > > > >The guy is desperate for credibility. > > > > > > > >From: Bob Higgins > > > >Jones, What is your evidence for your statement: > > > >"The Lugano isotope data, even if it could be believed, completely negates the >entire scenario since Li-7 is NOT depleted according to the Lugano report - >but instead is converted to Li-6. " > > > >First of all, there is a crude assay based on the size of the pure sphere - >and no evidence of large imbalance of Li-7 elsewhere. More importantly, 85 >years of nuclear physics can present no thermal process where the bulk >isotopic distribution varies more than a few percent per stage, yet the Lugano >report, if it can be believed shows extremely pure Li-6 appearing in what is >essentially one stage in one sample many orders of magnitude purer than any >know process can deliver. > > > >There are three possibilities either the starting material was enriched in >pure Li-6, which is most likely, or else the process of heat generation has >converted the missing Li-7 into Li-6, which is endothermic, and unlikely to >have happened in a process where excess heat is generated. The third >possibility is that the ash was spiked with pure isotope. > > > >Neither of these possibilities can in any way support a conclusion of >lithium-7 plus proton fusion, especially with the lack of the expected gamma, >and no indication of helium. > > > >To say that Levis crew did not test for helium is a complete cop-out and only >indicative of further incompetence on the part of this team. With this claimed >excess heat over 30 days there should have been a large amount of helium, >actual overpressure: that is - if lithium fusion were taking place. A sample >of gas should at least have been stored for later testing. > > > >Most likely conclusion Rossi understood from the start that lithium-6 is the >active isotope, and he provided fuel which was highly enriched, and at the >same time, provided a different fuel for the testing of the before sample. >Only Rossi handled this fuel. He had complete control, and no one complained. >BTW - The cost of that much lithium-6 (about 50 milligrams) available from >several suppliers, is about $10. > > > >Jones > > > > > >What I drew from the report was the only thing that can be concluded was that >the 7Li is more commensurate to the 6Li in the ash as compared to the fuel. >There was no mass assay that determined how much total Li was present in the >ash compared to the fuel. We know that physically, a lot of the Li will be on >the walls of the alumina tube, so we don't have any idea of the absolute >depletion of Li mass in the reaction. > > > >While it is possible that the 7Li is converted to 6Li, it is only one of the >possibilities. The ICP-MS analysis is a full volume analysis and showed both >Li isotopes near equal in percentage in the ash. How these isotopes became >nearly equal is just blind speculation at the moment without further >experimental data. All of the possibilities for the ratio change from fuel to >ash should be laid out and the plausibility of each examined. > > > >Bob Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
