On Dec 9, 2008, at 11:46 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Horace Heffner wrote:
On Dec 9, 2008, at 8:11 AM, Edmund Storms wrote:
When C12 is converted to C13 by addition of a neutron, the following
mass change occurs:
12.0000000 + 1.0086649 = 13.0033548, which represent a loss of mass
equal to 0.0053101 AMU. This is equal to 4.95 MeV. The mechanism
does
not matter. If C12 is the starting material and C13 is the product,
this much energy MUST be removed.
Of course, the source of the neutron must be taken into account. If
the neutron has to be made from an electron and a proton, as Robin
said, 0.78 MeV must be subtracted from the 4.95 MeV. Again the
mechanism does not matter.
Of course, the possibility of this reaction actually occurring
depends
on whether a rational mechanism can be proposed. A considerable
amount
of experience shows that such a combination of reactions do not
occur
under ordinary conditions. To propose they occur in the Mizuno cell
requires some very unique conditions be identified and then show
how
they create a novel mechanism. The hydrino might to the job, but as
Robin noted, the amount of released energy would be huge if
significant C13 were made.
Ed
Congratulations! If the above is true then it should also be true of
all heavy LENR observed. Since heavy lattice element LENR has been
reported to occur without high energy signatures, or even concurrent
excess heat, your above assertions, in particular that no mechanism
exists carry off energy in an unseen way from nuclear reactions, have
proven the entire LENR field to be bunk.
Ahem ... I believe the argument here is not that no such reaction
could
have taken place, which is what you seem to be responding to.
The argument is, rather, that if the enormous number of transmutations
which are being claimed actually took place, then the aggregate energy
released would have been far too large for the observed effects.
I realize this, and I think there is good evidence this assertion is
not true, and not only that, typically not true. It is not typical
of heavy nucleus LENR that significant energy is produced.
This argument does *not* apply to (most?) cold fusion experiments.
I think it does. I don't think the observable energy produced
necessarily or even typically exactly corresponds to the mass loss,
either on a small scale or a large one. This especially applies to
heavy LENR experiments where heavy nuclei are transmuted.
Keep in mind, in a typical CF experiment the amount of material
which is
transmuted is microscopic, and is an insignificant fraction of the
material present in the experiment.
The amount of mass is irrelevant if no enthalpy is produced at all,
i.e. if the mass loss involved in even a tiny amount would vaporize
the material and produce massive amounts of high energy particles. I
don't know of any heavy transmutation experiments (other than maybe
this one if C13 production is confirmed, and no He production is
found) where significant energy production or signature particles
that could not be from light element fusion were noted. If heavy
transmutation occurs without energy production then you can transmute
a ton of the stuff and still get no excess energy. Various forms of
biological transmutation has been suggested (but also not adequately
confirmed) including Ca formation by chickens. This is transmutation
on a similarly massive scale - without vaporizing the host, except
maybe in the case of spontaneous human combustion. I think heavy
transmutation in cathodes observed even from the first days of
Bockris' team at TAMU was surprising due to the lack of high energy
signatures or corresponding excess heat.
Note that I am not saying heavy transmutation, especially biological,
is confirmed. I am only saying the lack of a mass energy balance is
not a reason to deny its possibility.
In this case the amount supposedly
transmuted was a major fraction of the input material mass, if I've
properly understood the discussion up to this point. That's a gross
difference, and is in fact the whole point being argued by Ed and
Jones:
Either there is a mechanism with allows the transmutations to take
place with (almost) no energy imbalance, or the number of
transmutations
can't be as large as claimed because there was insufficient observed
excess heat.
Actually it appears Ed is applying exactly the opposite argument
above. He is saying a mass balance must occur, as in typical high
energy reactions. What balances with mass? Energy. The suggested
number of transmutations *can* occur if there exists an energy sink,
such as vacuum transactions, or neutrino production, to eliminate
observable energy. I think it is also possible to tap an energy
source via nuclear - lepton interaction. The balance can go either way.
The issue is not how the excess heat made it from the reaction site to
the calorimeter without disrupting parts of the lattice. The issue is
that the excess heat which should have been present simply didn't make
it anywhere; it was not observed.
The issue I am raising is that in heavy LENR I don't know of *any*
case where the energy signature was matched to the transmutations,
even approximately. Further, in the case of cold fusion, i.e.
hydrogen fusion, an energy deficit explains the changed branching
ratios. The matching of excess heat to energy produced in cold
fusion is at best not precise, and highly imperfect when heavy
nucleus transmutations are not included in the energy balance and
only He4 production measured. Even the matching of He4 to excess
enthalpy has been questioned because it is extremely difficult.
Conveniently, the deflation fusion model of LENR provides reasons for
energy imbalances.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
