Jones, I think you may be wrong about this. If an f/H anion existed, it would be a very heavy negatively charged body, like a muon but heavier. As it approached a Ni atom, it would experience no force since the Ni electrons screen the Ni nuclear charge. The f/H anion would enter the Ni atom and kick out an electron keeping it a net neutral body. The f/H anion would quickly descend into a tight orbital around the nucleus due to its high mass.
In Piantelli's theory, a shock of some type in the Ni rod causes the metal grain, acting as a condensate, to draw in the hydrogen anion into the metal grain. As the hydrogen anion is drawn in by this metal grain condensate, I think it is possible (and Piantelli did not say this) that the hydrogen anion could get shrunken to DDL proportions, giving up the 500 keV to the distributed condensate. Piantelli was very concerned about creating the Ni with specific size metal grains. This is why I have proposed the idea of transient condensate behavior. There is much objection to condensates forming at these temperatures. I am starting to believe condensates occur at all temperatures - constantly forming and being statistically broken up as they are disrupted by thermal agitation. Could not Piantelli's shock cause the metal grain to form a longer, *transient condensate* - one whose lifetime has the potential to act collectively on a surface hydrogen anion. Once formed, a hypothetical f/H hydrogen anion would be almost sure to cause a nuclear reaction - it is at least 3x heaver than a muon and will approach the nucleus that much more closely. Where would a repulsion arise? The f/H anion would be negatively charged and the Ni nucleus is positive. On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 9:05 AM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > Bob, > > > > A compact f/H anion as it approaches a nickel atom, would experience > Coulomb repulsion, obviously – but that can be balanced against much > stronger magnetic attraction of the reduced orbital at a few picometers (if > we accept dense hydrogen). At some point, the f/H ion would find temporary > stability within the nickel electron cloud – where it substitutes for a > normal valence electron. > > > > A good explanation for most of the thermal gain is not fusion but – as you > stated previously - ejection of a fast proton. This could be the result of > SPP disruption of the temporary stability. > > > > As to what ultimately fuels that gain (accelerates the proton out of the > Ni orbital cloud, we have as a good candidate QCD strong force dynamics. > The mass which is converted to energy can derive from color charge of > either nucleus, and it is possible that only one nickel isotope is > responsible (i.e. Ni-62). Even then, since there is no fusion, there is no > net isotope change in nickel after the proton expulsion. > > > > *From:* Bob Higgins > > > > I asked Piantelli about how the hydrogen anion could enter a Ni atom and > approach the nucleus so closely when the anion itself is so big. In my > thinking, if the anion had not become some type of compact body, it would > have experienced Coulombic repulsion long before the hydrogen nucleus ever > closely approached the Ni nucleus. He said he had deduced what was > happening from his experimental data, and didn't have sufficient data to > say how it happened at the atomic and sub-atomic scale - it was just what > seemed to be happening from the observed branches of the reaction. > Remembering my DDL lore, I asked him if he had ever seen high energy > emissions in the reaction, and he said he had seen some 500keV emissions - > could this have been given up for the hydrogen anion to transition to a DDL > state? He said he had no evidence of that. He was not willing to publicly > speculate on details for which he had insufficient supporting data - a good > scientist's position. > > > > I subsequently wrote to Jerry Vavra at SLAC to ask if he was aware of > anyone who may have solved Dirac's equation for a DDL state of the hydrogen > anion. He was unaware that anyone had done this. I have not asked this of > Meulenberg. > > > > Jones Beene wrote: > > *From:* Bob Higgins > > Bob Cook wrote: One interesting item that Piantelli noted was important > in the 90’s was the existence of a H(-1) ion.… > > BH: Piantelli believes that the hydrogen anion is complicit in Ni-H > LENR. He believes that the anion on the surface of his Ni rod is absorbed > into a metal grain acting as a condensate when stimulated by a shock of > various types. The anion, thus absorbed, enters a Ni atom as though it > were a muon. > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Bob/Bob – As we have mentioned here for many years, the H anion > explanation works far better if it is merged with Mills-inspired f/H- > (which is a dense but stable negative ion, in contrast to the normal H- anion > of Piantelli, which is extraordinarily unstable). > > CQM from the beginning envisions a stable anion which RM calls > hydrino-hydride™. Due to trademark issues with that term, and the fact that > the > general concept works much better theoretically in the context of a > single dense state (as opposed to the 137 steps of Mills) and the fact > Mills persists in denying the nuclear origin of the gain, we find that a > hybrid explanation is called for. > > We can combine Piantelli with Mills and Holmlid into the most succinct > and instructive depiction of this anion – which is a dense stable > negative ion, requiring charge neutralization (in the form of an alkali or > s-block cation). Of course, there are the expected vanity impediments in > promoting such a hybrid viewpoint. The composite explanation alienates > purists in both the Mills and LENR camps (Holmlid doesn’t even have a camp > yet) and pleases mainly those who are seeking the most accurate description, > regardless of the twisted history. > > Jones > > >
