Re: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickelFran-- The slow neutron idea is not mine, its Godes’s idea or at least as professed by his patent application: United States Patent Application 20150371723 Kind Code: A1 Abstract: A treatment of a possibly powdered, sintered, or deposited lattice (e.g., nickel) for heat generating applications and a way to control low energy nuclear reactions (“LENR”) hosted in the lattice by controlling hydride formation. The method of control and treatment involves the use of the reaction lattice, enclosed by an inert cover gas such as argon that carries hydrogen as the reactive gas in a non-flammable mixture. Hydrogen ions in the lattice are transmuted to neutrons as discussed in U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0206715 (Godes_2007)). Hydrogen moving through the lattice interacts with the newly formed neutrons generating an exothermic reaction.
From: Roarty, Francis X Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 10:16 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [Vo]:Re: Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel Bob, that’s an interesting theory.. wasn’t over abundant copper one of the anomalous Rossi claims? Fran From: Bob Cook [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 11:51 AM To: [email protected] Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Re: Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel Ni-64 + neutron = Ni-65. Ni-65 (natural decay 2.5 hr to Cu-65 via a beta – emission.) It only takes a regular H to react with a electron to form a slow neutron. Analysis of Cu isotopes (before and after) is warranted relative to the Ni-64 question IMHO. Bob Cook From: Jones Beene Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 7:33 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel HLV: “The stimulated decay of 64Ni should be accompanied by neutrons and/or radioactivity. If it decayed directly to 62Ni this would generate detectable neutrons and other radioactive isotopes. On the other hand if 64Ni decayed to 62Ni by first decaying to 63Ni, then 63Ni should be detectable since it has a half-life of about 100 years. Harry I see that another older, possible slant on the identity of the gainful reaction of 64Ni is still online, which is the Oppenheimer-Phillips effect. This goes back 6 years! http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/06/cold-fusion-and-blacklight-power.html The OP mechanism gives the effect of neutron absorption in nickel without the need of free neutrons. Thus, secondary activation is not a problem. The main problem with the OP hypothesis is that it limits the gainful reaction to the one nickel isotope (64) in combination with deuterium - so why does it not happen with the other nickel isotopes? Does the 64Ni nucleus possess enough of a shielded positive charge at the near-field, due to the extra neutrons? That would allow only the heavy nickel to participate in stripping, but it is a stretch. And here is a further stretch… The OP effect depends on deuterium and ostensibly does not involve hydrogen, and there is simply not enough natural deuterium available – unless…that is… the OP effect also works with “virtual deuterium” which would be pretty good description of the UDD molecule. But that is adding another miracle into the mix J Hey… why not?... we’re getting close to Easter.
