Yes good point Horace, my chemical induced ionization hypothesis doesn't explain the barrier crossing. Unless maybe some neutral H atoms manage to leak through the micron-thin barrier before combining into H2? I suppose this would be much more likely in a contact arrangement, they don't say if their barrier tests were done by direct contact or with some air gap between the Pd sample and the barrier.
Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Horace Heffner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 7:52 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rout ICCF3 paper On Jun 6, 2007, at 6:39 AM, Michel Jullian wrote: > 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. This theory makes some sense except for the cases where a physical barrier was included. From: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RoutRKphenomenon.pdf "Fogging was also detected when thin filters (2 μm aluminised polycarbonate foil (0.25 mg/cm2) in one or several layers) were kept between the film and loaded samples. Weak fogging was always measured with one layer of such a filter (see Table 1). With two layers of filters fogging was observed only in one instance (barely above threshold). No fogging was ever observed, above threshold, with three or more layers of filters." Two microns is too much for tunneling to occur, so the barrier should be effective at preventing a chemical explanation *provided the barrier is not porous to chemical penetration.* The reduction of effect with increasing barrier thickness is consistent with higher than chemical energy particles. It might also be consistent with reduced chemical migration through pores. The fact the barrier is aluminized does make the prospect of ions moving through the barrier and actually reaching the film a less viable explanation though. Another explanation might be that both cation and anion chemical species with activated nuclei were created and selectively drawn to the barrier or film surface by the differing applied fields. Might be tritium in a LESS THAN NORMAL STATE OF NUCLEAR EXCITATION, only 300 eV. In an oxygen or air environment it would exist chemically in both cation (H+ or more likely H3O+) and anion (OH-) form, especially if the air were humid. In the past I have suggested a number of ways such lower that normal states of nuclear excitation might arise in CF. It would not matter if the ions discharged near the film, because the neutrals would be in proximity of the film and only migrate away by diffusion. All wild speculation, but I don't see any alternative explanations. Regards, Horace Heffner
