In reply to Bob Higgins's message of Sat, 18 Jul 2015 08:34:52 -0600: Hi, >The problem I have with this analysis is that in the Lugano reaction, whose >fuel/ash analyses are the basis of the hypothesis, the Ni seemed to have >been largely converted to 62Ni and the Li converted almost completely to >6Li; yet in the experiment, the excess heat showed no signs of abatement. >The reaction gave no indication of running low on fuel. It appeared that >the reaction heat continued even though the fuel had been converted to 6Li >and 62Ni. How is this explained in your theory?
Only a tiny sample of the ash was analyzed, and it may not have been representative. IOW we got lucky (our esteemed professors chose their particle well ;). At least some other particles probably still contained some unreacted nickel. As for the Li6, I have also previously postulated that the Li6 might also take part in reactions where it acquired a neutron (e.g. from O17), thus reforming Li7. The ratio of Li6 to Li7 would be determined by the balance between the rates of formation and destruction. Much like a chemical shift reaction, except that in this case we are talking about a "nuclear shift reaction". IOW as long as there was a source of neutrons available (e.g. O17), the reaction could continue with a more or less constant ratio of Li6 to Li7. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
