I don't think that electrons have anything to do with the production of NUCLEAR produces as registered by radiation detectors. To generate these radiation produces, the nucleus must be excited and a subsequent decay must occur. This process is sticky fission.
On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 7:11 PM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com < bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Jones— > > > > Why do muons react more easily with relativistic electrons in the 6s shell > of Pb than with less energetic ones? Is it because of the greater loss of > energy associated with the lower differential masses, and/or some resonance > in the energy field coupling between a muon and a heavy (relativistic) > electron? Neutral muons should not be affected the same way IMHO. > > > > I wonder what electro chemists have to say about the Swedish/Finish > article? > > > > Are there other elements that conduct electricity well that have heavy > electrons like Pb? Is it only s shell electrons that become/are > sufficiently heavy to cause the higher voltage during an > oxidation/reduction? Thorium comes to mind as likely having heavy s shell > electrons. > > > > Bob Cook > > > > *From: *JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net> > *Sent: *Tuesday, April 17, 2018 12:43 PM > *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject: *RE: [Vo]:The ultrafast 6s orbital of certain heavy metals > > > > *From: *Nigel Dyer <l...@thedyers.org.uk> > > > > Interesting... > > I have reproduced a version of Vysotskii's undamped thermal waves results > which he detects using a peizo-electric detector with a high frequency > range (which I could only get from the states). The results suggest that > whatever is being detected is travelling far faster than the velocity of > sound. The detectors are made of PZT = lead zirconate titanate. Could > this unusual property of lead be a clue to what is going on with the Vysotskii > measurements? > > Nigel, > > Yes that is a distinct possibility. I would imagine that the relativistic > electrons can transfer quanta of spin energy - following which their > velocity is replenished by the zero point field. > > The spin would initially interact with thermal waves in the THZ or IR > range in the process of downshifting. > > > > JonesBeene wrote: > > > > Despite its 150 year-old history, the lead-acid battery is not as > well-understood as one might suspect. On paper it should hardly work at > all. Tin – a similar metal to lead will not work when substituted. > > > > More recently, in experiments in 2011 it was demonstrated that most of the > power of the lead-acid batter: 80%+ – or roughly 10 V out of the 13 V of > the electrical potential- comes from relativistic electron effects (as > opposed to redox chemistry) ! This is due to the unusually fast 6s orbital > of lead and a few other heavy metals. The relativistic electrons (they are > paired) could relate to why lead shielding (or normal radioactivity) could > actually increase the signal from muon interaction, rather than shielding > against it. > > > > https://phys.org/news/2011-01-car-batteries-powered-relativity.html > > > > Possibly - the relativistic electron effect has relevance to LENR in the > form of trace elements found in electrodes by chance- and there are a few > candidate elements which have the 6S electron. But palladium or nickel do > not. > > > > Yet from the earliest days of P&F, some electrodes worked better than > others of the same nominal composition. In their hero effort in France only > 2 of 7 Pd electrodes worked. In commercial metallurgy – anything less than > 1% contamination is seldom reported since it is either not deemed to be > critical or the alloy assay techniques are not accurate for low percentages. > > > > In fact, “Coolessence” the Colorado Lab now defunct, did some interesting > work with lead and palladium. No one took notice. > > > > The element mercury is another candidate dopant which has the relativistic > 6s electrons. There are at least 4 metals of interest. > > > > Mercury is found in palladium ore (temagamite > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temagamite>) and could inadvertently be > present as a trace element in Pd electrodes as a fractional percent but > never mentioned. The reason Hg is a liquid relates to the relativistic > orbital which is also found in the element bismuth. It is possible that > traces of mercury, lead or bismuth could be the “mystery element” – the > hidden reactant in certain palladium electrodes which work better than > pure metal. BTW - Silver does not have the relativistic electrons but gold > does. > > > > The “inert pair effect” of lead, mercury, gold and bismuth refers to the > tendency in these heavy metals for their 6s electrons in the valence cloud > to resist oxidation - and the effect could possibly be put to planned use > by doping with higher levels. In fact, although not well known, hydrogen > can react with lead to form a gas called Plumbane, PbH4, but this is not > well characterized or studied, since it is unstable. Lead is a Mills > catalyst and so it is reasonable that densification activity with hydrogen > would lead to a more stable form of the molecule along with excess energy. > The chemical instability could be a plus in terms of asymmetry. > > > > It would be interesting to see if plumbane, which is a gas at ambient > temperature (surprisingly) could be reacted or densified in such a way that > one or more of the four protons drop to the 54.4 eV redundancy state. This > would be a fabulous rocket fuel, even with the high density of led, no? > > > > The further possibilities of having chemical access to relativistic > electrons and/or as a method to densify hydrogen or turn a heavy element > into a gas are mind boggling. The name ‘Led Zeppelin’ comes to mind. > > > > > > > > >
