I'm sure you don't mean pure lithium electrodes for hydrolosis? :-) Terry
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 11:04 AM, Jones Beene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The atomic mass of "paired lithium-6" atoms is 2x 6.01512 = 12.03024 > > If the pairing were strong, this unit - which is being called "dilithium" > could be arguably labeled as a bosonic-pair. There is evidence that it is > strong. More on that later. > > The atomic mass of carbon-12 is exactly 12. Carbon-12 is bosonic. > > The small difference of 3% has never been of much interest AFAIK - in any > previous scheme, or even wild hypothesis to use for nuclear energy for a > number of reasons. > > 1) Lithium has been used as targets, and especially as the fission source > for tritium, and in all kinds of nuclear experiments for 60 years or more; > and there is no anecdotal evidence of an "easy" fusion reaction of lithium-6 > to carbon. > > [however all of this prior R&D has approached lithium reactions from the > 'hot' side, and not the 'cold' side] > > 2) With the possible exception of deuterium cold fusion in condensed matter, > there is no good model for even suggesting a direct pathway to fusion to > Carbon. > > [Duh! that LENR model is precisely what has suggested this now] > > > Cosmology: > It should be noted that lithium is primordiual and was created in the "big > bang" but carbon was not. Our sun is a second generation star, so primordial > lithium has been depleted over many billions of years. Being a rare element > now, lithium has not been given much attention in physics, except as a > source for tritium via fission. The large amount of carbon we find today on > earth is assumed to have a stellar origin in a triple alpha process. A > stellar lithium fusion process is unlikey but that does not necessarily rule > out a "cold" QM (tunnelling) process having occured in first generation > planetary sytems such as in cold "gas giants" like Saturn. > > IOW the knowledge base for lithium, both in cosmology and in the lab, is > weak enough to permit a fizzix-meshugga to explore around the edges - > snooping for traces of somthing which has been overlooked (or intentionally > hidden)... and given that almost all QM processess have been overlooked > (compared to "hot" processes) in the past - that is more or less where I am > attempting to go with this unfolding hypothesis about a possible pathway to > clean energy from bosonic lithium. > > Besides the carbon pathway, there are at least two other possibilities worth > exploring. > > It goes without saying that in some few past LENR experiments - when using > lithium hydroxide as an electroyte, excess heat and anomalous carbon have > turned up. Since almost all available lithium that we have access to for > these experiment is actually strongly depleted in 6Li -- due to our weapons > programs, the source of this carbon from past experiments is likely NOT > related to the above hypothesis. However .... > > If any experimenter has or can obtain access to lithium electrolytes which > are strongly enriched in 6Li, then the preceding hypothesis could be > bolstered or else mostly falsified, by a showing of whether or not > comparatively robust amounts of carbon are turing up in the NAE. > > I have been told that there is an efficient low-tech way for someone with > access to large amounts of natural lithium to do a decent enrichment in the > light isotope for themself. Given that the ratio of 6:7 is so humongous, as > isotopes go - this sounds logical but I have not tried it and will not even > repeat it in public for fear of that being a touchy subject on the Homeland > Security front. > > Besides the carbon pathway, as mentioned, there are at least two other > possibilities worth exploring and it could be that energy is obtainable from > the bosonic state via a coupling to the ZPF, which is where this rambling > will attempt to go, in the next installment. > > Jones > > > > > >
