Nigel

With water, there is the phenomenon of “proton hopping” even without 
cavitation. 

The Hagelstein paper you cite proposes a neutron analog of electron hopping in 
semiconductors. This means that there are two natural phenomena on which to 
model neutron hopping.

Protons hop from one water molecule to another naturally and consequently the 
principle of proton mobility in water has been known for 200 years ... now 
called the Grotthuss mechanism – but all attempts to split water more 
efficiently by using it have failed. It is a very fast mechanism and apparently 
recombination is too rapid to make it useful.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grotthuss_mechanism

But the Grotthuss mechanism could be understood to provide a closer analogy to 
neutron hopping, since the mass difference is small between the two, with the 
huge advantage of the neutron having no difficulty with the Coulomb barrier.

Radiation in the range of 1-5 keV is surely evidence of some type of LENR but 
not cold fusion. It is too bad that the two are conflated.

From: Nigel Dyer
One of the systems mentioned in Hagelstein's 2015 paper 
(http://www.currentscience.ac.in/Volumes/108/04/0601.pdf) is the Vysotskii 
system where what appears to be a coherent collapse of cavitaion bubbles causes 
a shock wave to travel through a metal plate and generate a very sharp pulse of 
1-5keV X-rays from the metal surface on the other side. I have just come back 
from a conference where Vysotskii presented this.  
I felt that it was very clever and appeared to show some very interesting 
coherent energy conversion phenomena, but there did not appear to be any 
evidence of LENR
Nigel
JonesBeene wrote:
Hi Robin
 
The neutron “hopping” modality is indeed one way that gain could happen.
 
In fact you are probably referring to Hagelstein’s 1993 paper where he 
introduces this concept wrt palladium.
 
I do not think he was envisioning iron as the active metal at that time.
 
Perhaps he will be reminded of this possibility.
 
I like it but it also demands that the 2.4 MeV gamma is attenuated via the 
down-conversion aspect – so there are two miracles involved.
 
… or do you get both miracles for the price of one when you have up and down 
conversion together <g> ???
 



Reply via email to