A post from Alan Smith that describes the way Russ's LENR reactor produces heat and/or gamma raditaion as follows:
The 'why are there no dead graduate students' meme to justify not believing on cold fusion goes back a long way. Actually it should not be confused with hot fusion at all, which as any fule do know produces truckloads of radiation, there is a different mechanism at work entirely. Actually we have seen several different behaviours in various fuel mixes, sometimes several different behaviours in the same fuel. We have heat with no gammas, gammas with no heat, both together, and very strong gamma bursts from fuel kept at room temperature for days. The idea that gamma output is directly related and in proportion to the heat is wrong. We have seen 20+ watts of anomalous heat in a powered-down cooling reactor and very little gamma output If only 1 watt of that heat was produced by gammas hitting the relatively flimsy walls of our reactors, we would indeed be dead, but we are not quite there yet. On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 4:20 PM Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Axil Axil > > Regarding: "but sadly, almost everything else out there, as theory, is > demonstrably weaker if it cannot explain the lack of lack of radiation as > well." > > > This lack of radiation is due to the polarization of particle chirality. > The strength of the weak force is proportional to the proportion of left > handed or right handed spins involved in the reaction. > > > But Axil - even if one could "polarize chirality" on demand - does this > really tell you anything about lack of high energy radiation in cold fusion > ? > > Not really, unless I am missing something. > > For most of the believers in LENR of the P&F variety, the relevant > reaction is fusion of deuterium into helium. No decay involved. > > Since there is no beta decay and no weak force involvement - even if > chirality could be polarized like a magnetic field, it would not be > relevant to that reaction. > > AFAIK, no theory adequately explains why strong gamma radiation is always > missing from cold fusion other than "by definition"... which is to say by > the "second miracle". (the first miracle is that deuterons overcome the > Coulomb barrier and fuse, the second miracle is that in fusing they do not > release the known radiation signature.) Lower energy gammas are sometimes > seen but not the expected ~24 MeV gamma. If that gamma turned up in a burst > once per hour, or even once per week, things would be far different. > (including the dead grad student). > > Of course, every explanation can involve something new and unexpected > which can be labeled as "miracle" in a derogatory sense - but after all > these years, there is plenty of evidence for excess heat and plenty of > controversy over the lack of strong gamma and the appearance of helium. > > I will leave the helium controversy to Brian Ahern but I agree with him > that the evidence is far weaker than that for the excess heat. Thus there > is justification for looking for a different approach - which involves > decay - as opposed to fusion. >
