If transmutation is always accompanied by meson production, then the area around the electric furnace might have an elevated background radiation profile. Four tone of transmutation would imply a huge number of muons produced on a daily basis.
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 1:56 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > The mass differential between 2 Si-28 (27.9769) and Fe-56 at a.m. of > 55.93494 is not very much. It may be that Si fusion is involved in the > Indian steel plant. > > > > Bob Cook > > > > Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for > Windows 10 > > > > *From: *Jones Beene <[email protected]> > *Sent: *Sunday, March 12, 2017 8:35 PM > *To: *[email protected] > *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Sleeper from ICCF20 > > > > Yes - that's correct... the impossibility of fusing the starting elements > into iron in a smelting operation comes from overcoming the Coulomb > barrier, not from the final energy balance. > > There is no calcium at the start, but if there were - long before carbon > and calcium could fuse (if this were happening on a dying star) - the > carbon would fuse with another carbon or other light element. There is no > "clean" pathway to get iron alone as a desired goal, especially without > deadly radioactivity. > > It's kind of absurd really. Bottom line - no mechanism exists to get > excess iron via transmutation of silica and carbon. Even if there were, it > would not add mass magically. Thus, it is likely that gross measurement > error is the likely explanation. Otherwise, this kind of thing does not go > unnoticed in a poor country. India is not exactly a major iron producer but > would be if this were not some kind of silly anecdote. (It's a bit early > for April 1). > > [email protected] wrote: > > No, quite the reverse. Changing almost anything into Iron is exothermic, > because > the Iron is near the top of the binding energy curve .e.g. 44Ca+12C => > 56Fe + 19.137 MeV > > > > >
