In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 5 Dec 2008 13:50:32 -0900: Hi, [snip]
As I understand "ordinary" QM, the electron spatial distribution in an ordinary Hydrogen atom is such that the electron spends much of it's time in the neighborhood of the nucleus anyway, and the chance that it will be at any given radius is a monotonic function. Your model appears to deviate from this in that you suggest that there are two separate (but degenerate) states. Note also, that while you speak of a collapsed state Hydrogen atom possibly tunneling into another nucleus, one can also view exactly the same event from the point of view of the other nucleus, (particularly when the other nucleus is also a Hydrogen isotope), and see it as tunneling into the collapsed state atom. (They start out separate and end up combined, so who is to say which of the two did the tunneling? In practice, it will probably be an even split, assuming both nuclei have the same mass and nominal charge, e.g. D + D). In fact determining which of the two does the tunneling may actually be an act of choice of frame of reference. This alternate point of view effectively describes a Hydrogen isotope tunneling into a nucleus where an electron is already present (i.e. your collapsed state atom), which is precisely what I said in my previous post. [snip] >> I would expect C12 + D -> N14, particularly since C14 normally >> decays to N14, >> hence I wouldn't expect the reverse process to occur. > >Yes, but I still think there is reason to expect some can go to C14 >in the electron catalyzed reaction. If C+p+e causes an electron >capture with observable probability, This is different in that C12 + p -> N13 which normally decays to C13 anyway. IOW the reaction C12 + p + e -> C13 is energetically preferred above C12 + p -> N13. Even so, I would still expect C12 + p -> N13 to prevail because it can happen without a weak force transition. If the p is actually a well shrunken Hydrino however then the chance of C12 + p + e -> C13 should increase dramatically due to the proximity of the electron. The same could also be said of a reaction involving your collapsed state Hydrogen. Whereas C + D -> N14 has the double advantage over C + D + e -> C14 that the former is both energetically favoured and also no weak force transition takes place. This would IMO skew the chances so far in its favour that no detectable C14 production would take place. > despite all common sense to the >contrary, and despite the assumedly small week force reaction cross >section, then C+D+e may similarly result in an electron capture, as >may C13+p+e. > >The reasons I made the suggestion to check for C14 are: (1) it is >cheap, (2) it is quantitatively very accurate to incredibly small >quantities, (3) it can be accomplished after the fact, and (4) the >probability of increased C14 ma be small but finding it could have >dramatic consequences. Note also that there is always a tiny amount of "natural" C14 present anyway, and this would probably dwarf any that might be produced via the suggested reaction pathway, or at the very least muddy the waters to the extent that no strong conclusion could be drawn. > >BTW, I ran across the following patent application that may be of >interest: > >http://www.freepatentsonline.com/EP1156492.html > This patent is obviously very much a fringe patent, and I am tempted to consider the thinness of the line between genius and lunacy. ;) (IOW I would need to see it to believe it.) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
