If the electrons are shrunken, then they may well tunnel along with the
protons,
To fully understand physics you must model all particles as EM mass -
the exact opposite of what standard model does.
An electron always attaches as magnetic flux at the proper resonant
point. The error already started with Bohr and his invention of an orbit
model that now is fully debunked. The so called Bohr level has nothing
to do with an electron orbiting a proton. It simply is the resonance
point of the electrons magnetic mass, when it attaches an other magnetic
mass. You can get the resonance point very easily... : E-Bohr = m_e *
α^2 = 27.211386..eV (This is the mass defect if its part of an other EM
mass... but you need to divide by 2=(2^1/2 )^1/2 due to a metric change
- 4D orbit = larger radius in classic view)m_e * in electron Volts!
There is absolute no need for a Bohr radius and a force equation as this
is already coded into α!
So electrons do not shrink. These either attach an other EM mass or
enter a nucleus and release their mass except the small chunk needed for
the magnetic bond.
I strongly urge people not to do experiments with fission material
except they use professional shielded reactors. LENR only sounds like
low energy....
J.W.
On 16.09.2020 04:31, Robin wrote:
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 16 Sep 2020 00:51:24 +0000 (UTC):
Hi,
[snip]
If the electrons are shrunken, then they may well tunnel along with the
protons, making an enhanced electron capture
process possible. A possibility which you may recall I first posted here in the
thread "Mizuno phenanthrene paper
uploaded" on 3 Dec. 2008. (previously suggested in private correspondence to
Mike Carrell on 14 Nov. 2002).
However it surprises me that the whole bound molecule tunnels rather than a
single proton/atom.
I find it even further surprising that this happens with something as large as
n=1/4, and that two EC reactions occur. I
would have thought one would at least occasionally see that only one or no EC
reactions occurred.
Depending on the target nucleus, there should be some combinations where
capture of one or more protons would lead to a
more stable nucleus than capture of two neutrons? Odd numbered nuclei might be
an interesting starting point. E.g. Al27,
since capture of a proton here yields the very stable Silicon. Also desirable
since Al27 is so common in the Earth's
crust. If two neutrons are captured, then a good starting point would be light
isotopes of even numbered nuclei. E.g.
O16 + H*-H* -> O18 + 10.6 MeV. Both start and final isotopes are stable, and O16
is plentiful. H2O => O18? :)
Perhaps the electron shrinks during the capture process, providing better
shielding to the proton(s)? If so, I wonder if
there is a threshold shrinkage level where this collapse begins?
Think about the implications of dense hydrogen in the role of binding and
reacting with another (larger) nucleus as if were two neutrons. This is
completely new physics.
Such a discovery would open an entirely new world of overlooked nuclear
reactions which were never given much hope before. It could make nuclear
fission the top energy source once again, in the grand scheme of things and rid
us of the false expectation that nuclear fusion has a real future. It is simply
too expensive.
However we cannot gauge probabilities yet, and all of this is speculative. It
would be essential to know the cross-section of various element (for absorption
of H*-H*) so as to determine the commercially valuable products and isotopes.
It might be possible to get more in value from new isotopes than from the
excess heat of hydrogen densification... or it all could be used together so
that fission energy becomes far more attractive than before.
Here is one kind of potential reaction that you may not have thought about.
Thorium based.
If the H*-H* acts like two neutrons with thorium as a target, one might expect
to convert 232Th into 234Th which has a short half-life and goes to 234Pa and
then to 234U. Now 234U is interesting in a surprising way if it can be made
cheaply, even though it is NOT fissile. Well, technically. it is not fissile -
but it can be viewed as virtually fissile.
The hidden value of 234U would be because it has a long half life plus a known
and very large cross section for neutrons. Thus in a reactor it would almost
immediately become 235 U which is probably the best of all uranium isotopes.
Thus a breeder reactor becomes very feasible possibly with natural U.
In short although this is a naive possibility given that we have so little data
to look at - the H*-H* having similar reactivity to 2n - that would be
extremely important in framing a revival of fission, and who knows what else?
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
