Hi Jed, Very interesting paper. They observed the radiations not just in air, but also in oxygen to a lesser extent, and also in hydrogen to an even lesser extent, cf their table 1:
Table 1. Density of autoradiographs under various conditions. Density averaged and normalised to 24 h exposure time. Condition for autoradiography Density (× 10-3) 1 In normal air atmosphere 80 2 In oxygen atmosphere 32 3 In hydrogen atmosphere 3.5 4 In air with 0.25 mg/cm2 filter 6.0 5 In air with +0.67 kV/cm field 230 6 In air with -0.67 kV/cm field 210 The facts that the presence of an electric field increases the phenomenon, and that the polarity makes little difference, indicate that ions of both signs are formed. The effect of the electric field would be to make the opposite signed ions move in opposite directions (one going to the sample to discharge, the other going to the film) rather than meet and combine. I'll dare a theory: combination of two desorbed atomic H (or D) atoms into molecular hydrogen being highly exoenergetic as is well known, the kinetic energy of the resulting H2 (or D2) molecule is sufficient to impact-ionize some of the ambient gas molecules and/or the palladium (electron emission). Those initial reactions could in turn induce further ionization reactions in some gases. You would expect different ionization rates in different gases or gas mixtures as observed, none in some gases as observed, and none in vacuum of course as observed. Let's see how this fares. For 2H(g)->H2(g) my thermochemistry calculator says 434 kJ/mole at 25°C, which is ~4.5 eV per H2 molecule if I am not mistaken. Bombarding ambient air with 4.5 eV particles will definitely induce some ionization reactions I am pretty sure. Also there are many metals whose electron work function (the K.E. required for an impact to eject an electron out of it) is below 4.5 eV. Pd's is 5.12 eV i.e. not too far, so you would expect some tunneling probability, and a much higher probability if lower work function impurities are present e.g. lithium (electron work function: 2.9 eV!). Well, the hypothesis does seem to have have at least one leg to stand on. Comments/critiques/corrections welcome. Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jed Rothwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 8:30 PM Subject: [Vo]:Rout ICCF3 paper > See: > > http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RoutRKphenomenon.pdf > > These results are baffling because the reaction only occurs in the > presence of air. It does not work with a vacuum, helium or nitrogen gas (p. > 2). > > - Jed > >
