The Mills interpretation does not make chemical sense. Normally, NaH
decomposes into H2 and Na metal when this happens at high
temperature. This is an ionic bonded compound, which means the
bonding electron moves from an orbit main associated with H to an
orbit mainly associated with Na. Decomposition causes a reverse of
this situation. What extraordinary event or process would change this
expected and observed process? It is not logical to assume an event
just because it is required to fit your theory. Like the requirement
in cold fusion, the process used to explain the process must also be
observed and be consistent with events not associated with the
phenomenon.
Regards,
Ed
On Oct 23, 2008, at 4:23 PM, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
In reply to Mike Carrell's message of Thu, 23 Oct 2008 15:48:33
-0400:
Hi,
[snip]
There is something much simpler. NaH is formed by reactions given
from NaOH
coating of the R-Ni and heating. At some point the NaH decomposes,
releasing
Na and H atoms in close proximity, whereby Na++ then catalyses the H
producing H[1/3]. There are aspects of this which puzzle me.
[snip]
According to Randy, the NaH decomposes directly in Na+++ + H[1/3] +
3e- .
Na++ is not a catalyst. (The ionization energy is 71.641 eV).
In going from H[1] to H[1/3] the H requires an energy hole of 54.4.
eV. This is
the sum of the first and second ionization energies of Na (5.1391
eV & 47.286
eV resp.) and the energy required to break NaH into atoms (about
1.98 eV).
IOW the molecule can decompose directly into the final products, and
in so doing
provides its own "energy hole". This is probably why it is so
effective (the
coupling is all internal within the molecule).
BTW the whole hydrino reaction actually produces 108.8 eV, so the
difference
between the total energy released and the "energy hole" (54.4 eV)
will likely be
released as additional kinetic energy IMO.
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
