On Dec 15, 2008, at 8:10 AM, Jones Beene wrote:[snip]
This is impossible in standard nuclear physics, so we also can
suggest that it "probably" involves LENR in the sense of a new and
previously unrecognized type of nuclear reaction which does NOT
create much excess energy, and therefore does not involve
protracted nuclear decay (beta decay). Instead, this reaction
happens in such an "energy neutral" way - that after a short
period, there is little residual radioactivity... This could only
be due IMHO to the existence of a "transmuton" which provides
nuclear change that is most apparent as an increase in the atomic
number. It must involve an extremely high threshold of applied
pressure, or else it would have been noticed before.
This is absolute heresy to the mainstream because there is no model
for this in their past education (which is understandable as it
requires millions of psi in pressure) ... and therefore the
"experts" are convinced that the nickel anomaly cannot be a
secondary nuclear transmutation at all, if it does not involve
alphas - but instead they now want to say (in their revision of the
past revision) that it is an ab initio variation in the formative
layers of supernova debris from which the planets formed. Bizarro!
(3rd misspelling). It is apparent that the mainstream is grasping
at straws now, since the facts do not fit the previous theories.
Anyway - one conclusion which (might) best fits the facts, if one
does not mind being on the "fringe" of opinion, suggests the
reality of a "transmuton". A transmuton is simply a proton which
has become stably bound to two electrons at very tight effective
orbital, such that the new particle (negative ion) displaces an
inner electron of its "host" ... at the exact same energy level
(and which reaction must have been under tremendous external
pressure for this happen, in the formative stages)...
[snip]
Jones
Two electrons would only be bound weakly to a proton at best, and
with a large wave function at that. I think a small Bose condensate
consisting of two hydrogens and two electrons, each superimposed
particle of a given type having opposed spins, would be a more likely
catalyst. For some discussion of this see page 10 of "BLUE GLOW vs
ELECTROSPARK":
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/GlowExper.pdf
"The dual electron boson, comprised of two electrons with opposed
spin, has no magnetic field. Similarly, a dual proton boson, assuming
such exists, has no magnetic field. The superposition of a dual
electron boson and dual proton boson creates a boson with no magnetic
field and no net charge. It is a tiny Bose-Einstein Condensate. Given
that stimulation of the condensate by an intervening particle can
cause waveform collapse, the formation of the de-energized He*
results, and the locus of that result may be inside a heavy nucleus."
The above applies to any of the isotopes of hydrogen when so paired.
For some other loosly related concepts:
http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/DualElectronCatFusion.pdf
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/PairLNR.pdf
Of course, ordinary deflation fusion could account for similar proton
additions, with ZPE making up any required balance of energy as the
deflated electron escapes the highly de-energized fused nucleus.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
