On Dec 7, 2009, at 6:22 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 05:36 PM 12/7/2009, Horace Heffner wrote:
Other neutrons are undoubtedly created, but only tritium reactions
produce energies high enough to make the triple tracks.
Interesting. Well, we do know there is some tritium there. It could
be hot tritons that would then fuse with high cross-section, given
all the deuterium nuclei in the vicinity.
I don't think it has to be "hot" at all. From page 28 of:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/CFnuclearReactions.pdf
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - -
The SPAWAR data does indeed seem to suggest high energy neutrons from
a DT reaction. The source of the tritium in SPAWAR experiments
logically can be expected to be DD fusion, and thus of a low
probability because the concentration of tritium (or possibly some
form of tritium precursor) is very low. It should be no surprise that
tritium can be produced in small quantities via cold fusion reactions.
The conclusion of the Mosier-Boss et al. article, that triple tracks
are due to the 12C(n,n’)3α reaction, implies the need for repeating
exactly the same experiment using D2O + trace T2O instead of just
D2O. If the flux of high energy neutrons does not increase, then the
conclusion is suspect. Otherwise, this will provide some confirmation
of the Mosier-Boss et al. conclusion. More importantly, if high
energy neutrons can be reliably produced using the more
sophisticated, successful, and controlled protocol as used by Mosier-
Boss et al., this could provide a solid starting point for narrowing
down the underlying physics. A tritium atom does not differ
significantly from a deuterium atom with respect to the Coulomb
barrier. Whatever mechanism permits deuterium to defeat the Coulomb
barrier should also permit tritium to do so also. The difference
should be that the tritium lattice lifetime is shorter and the
tritium reaction signature unmistakable and highly repeatable.
Though the use of tritium can only be done in the US by licensed
labs, and practical devices would preferably be deuterium only, trace
tritium doping experiments may provide a necessary step in the
progress toward practical devices.
Because the tritium available in the SPAWAR deuterium loaded cathode
must be nominal in the extreme, and likely primarily there due to DD
fusion, the cross section for lattice based DT fusion has to be
enormous, much larger than 100 times the DD cross section (if cross
section is even a valid concept for lattice assisted fusion) to
support the DT hypothesis. The tritium must be used up very quickly
after forming. Lattice half-life (LHL) would be a better terminology
than cross section, as applied to hydrogen loaded loaded lattices,
because the term cross section presupposes a collision, kinetic
interaction, hot fusion. LHL is a term which would have meaning only
in the context of a specific degree of lattice loading. When highly
confirmed theories of LENR are available such a term can be defined
including a formula component descriptive of lattice loading conditions.
If Mosier-Boss et al. are correct in their deductions of the source
of high energy neutrons, then a huge breakthrough is at hand. If
contradictions are found in the DT hypothesis, or unexpected energy
spectra are identified, it does not necessarily mean that increasing
the DT reaction rate is not useful, and it does not mean huge
benefits cannot be obtained by increasing the miniscule T
concentration even by a factor of a few orders of magnitude. Trace
tritium doping should be useful for analyzing and improving any CF
protocol, especially those capable of producing excess heat, because
detectable heat production requires a large number of reactions.
Lattice assisted DD fusion nearly eliminates the neutron forming
branch, but there is no reason to believe that lattice assisted DT
fusion will suppress neutron generation. In the case of DD fusion
there are three branch possibilities, two of which create no
neutrons. Given that a lattice assisted DD fusion nucleus is not
created by energetic kinetic action, but rather by electron
catalysis, it should be no surprise the branch producing the highest
energy is highly favored, namely D(D,γ)α, and the other feasible
branches highly suppressed. There is no similar alternative branch
probable for the DT or TT fusion that creates no neutrons. Trace
tritium use is thus valuable for diagnosing whether excess heat is
from actual fusion or from some other source.
Trace tritium doping provides a window into what is happening in the
lattice, via the energy spectrum of the resulting high energy
neutrons. It is not logical that DD fusion can occur in a lattice
assisted manner and yet DT or even TT or Tp fusion can not. The
Coulomb barrier is the same. Tritium likely provides a large
tunneling target because the DT hot fusion cross section is large. If
DT fusion is indeed in fact occurring in the lattice, as Mosier-Boss
et al. hypothesize, it is therefore unreasonable to not expect
neutron generation if T is present. However, the mechanism of
fusion in the lattice is energetically different from hot fusion,
and it can be expected the neutron energy to differ from hot fusion
reactions. High energy neutrons as a result of DT deflation fusion
can be expected to exhibit a spectrum of kinetic energies. Under
that or any electron catalysis scenario, 14 MeV neutrons from DT
fusion reactions can not be expected, while a significant number
above 6 MeV would be expected, with a fuzzy peak.
Trace tritium doping should (a) produce highly repeatable and
incontrovertible proof of nuclear reactions and (b) provide an
effective means of quickly measuring reaction rates while dynamically
varying experimental conditions.
If trace tritium doping is used, then lattice assisted fusion should
also result in the Tp reactions: T(p,n)3He and T(p,gamma)4He. The
latter reaction might be considered as unlikely as D(D,gamma)4He is
conventionally considered to be due to initial kinetic energy
requirements and lack of an inertial pair to distribute resulting
kinetic energy. However, under the deflation fusion scenario, or some
other electron catalyzed fusion scenarios, the nucleus enclosed
electron provides a means of releasing radiant energy and momentum in
small increments, and high initial energies are not required to
trigger the reaction. The T(p,n)3He reaction requires from 1 to 5
MeV kinetic energy to pull off as hot fusion. Given that electron
catalyzed fusion reactions result in highly de-energized nuclei, and
the resulting radiant energy is largely from the vacuum, it may be
that T(p,n)3He is feasible as a cold electron catalyzed reaction. If
lattice assisted DT reactions can occur with much higher observed
frequencies than expected for the reactant concentrations, as
possibly indicated in SPAWAR results, then Tp reactions may also have
a higher frequency than expected for the reactant concentrations.
Protium from ambient humidity can be expected to contaminate D2O
cells, especially long running open cells. This could account for
highly variable neutron production over long run times. In a D2O
experiment an initial period is required to build up trace T and
another period is required to build up p. The SPAWAR CR-39 could
possibly have 3He tracks resulting from T(p,n)3He or D(D,n)3He
reactions, as well as neutron reaction induced tracks. All this
indicates that tritium doping of even all protium based experiments
may not provide adequate controls.
If lattice fusion reactions should produce high energy particles,
especially third particle Bose condensate stimulation based reactions
(as opposed to low energy electron catalyzed reactions) produce high
energy particles, and conditions for producing many small Bose
condensates exist, then it is clear that unexpected chain reactions
can result. The D(D,n)3He reaction, for example, produces two
particles for each reaction. It is thus important to diagnose
exactly what conditions in the lattice are producing energetic
results in what proportions. It seems feasible that both 3rd particle
seeded Bose condensate collapse mechanisms as well as electron
catalyzed fusion mechanisms can be at work in differing proportions
in differing experiments, or a given experiment at differing times.
What has been missing is a means to diagnose these kinds of things.
Trace tritium doping may well lead to such a diagnostic capability.
It may also lead to the conclusion that the tripe tracks are not from
high energy neutrons.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - -
The D+D reaction creates a 0.82 MeV 3He and a 2.45 MeV neutron. The
2.45 MeV neutron can have a knock-on reaction with a proton and
produce a 1-2 MeV proton that will make a small but visible track in
the CR-39. It can also fuse with a proton and make a visible 2.45
MeV deuteron track in the CR-39. Other candidate reactions for high
energy neutrons are:
T + T --> 4He + 2 n + 11.3 MeV
T + 3He --> 4He + p + n + 12.1 MeV
but those reactions are not likely to occur in D2O CF experiments
Agreed.
That the triple tracks are from 12C breakup is, to my mind, not
seriously in doubt.
I think there may be a little bit of reason for doubt, as I noted in:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/CFnuclearReactions.pdf
pages 20, and 26-30, the latter pages being the "TRACE TRITIUM AND
TRIPLE TRACKS" section.
My doubt is based on: Rusov VD, et al.,"Fast neutron recording by
dielectric track detectors in a palladium-deuterated-tritiated water
system in an electrolytic cell", Pis'ma Zh. Tekh. Fiz. 15(#19) (1989)
9--13 {In Russian}.
I wrote: "Rusov et al. observed 8 (+-4) high energy neutrons per
second in CR-39 using pure 50:50 DT water and 72% Pd, 25% Ag, 3% Au
electrodes, and 200 V electrolysis potential. This experiment
provides a solid indication of a nominal amount of DT fusion even
though there is no indication that proper lattice conditions for cold
fusion were established. If repeatable, that is a landmark
achievement because it proves fusion from chemical conditions.
Hopefully with what is known today the results can be greatly
improved. However, the low counts even at 50-50 DT mix may also be an
indication that the SPAWAR tracks are not from high energy neutrons.
The SPAWAR lattice must have a negligible amount of tritium, created
by cold fusion itself. The tritium branch in cold fusion is highly
suppressed. Even a slight doping of the electrolyte with tritium
should multiply the neutron counts in SPAWAR co-deposition style
experiments by orders of magnitude - provided the high energy
neutrons are from DT reactions."
That is not much of an improvement considering a 50:50 D-T mix. His
electrolysis method or choice of lattice could have botched any
chance of fusion, so the situation is indeterminate - but that means
doubt.
So, as I read this, the doubt is that tritium reactions could be
producing neutrons of the requisite energy. I still consider the
triple tracks as being diagnostic of energetic neutrons, and I've
seen no cogent suggestion of anything else that wouldn't be a much
greater mystery.
When hot particles collide, causing a fusion reaction that itself
releases energy, the original kinetic energy remains. There could
be hot alphas all the way up to 23.8 MeV. That energy could be
added to whatever energy was released from the secondary reaction,
or the secondary reaction could actually absorb some energy, and
there would still be enough energy left for triple-track-causing
neutrons.
As I go on to say, there are other candidate reactions, including the
proton knock-on:
lambda0 + p --> p + p + pi-
There may be exotic reactions. But the triple tracks seem to be
three equal tracks. And I don't see any need to postulate exotic
reactions. What would be the source of the lambdas"?
Clearly you haven't read:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/CFnuclearReactions.pdf
especially pages 18-26.
which can fill the bill, if the strange (and also weird!) reactions I
specified are actually occurring. What is interesting about the
strange matter theory is that it accounts for the tendency of excess
heat to occur in excursions. What is not good about it is there
should be some detectable gammas. OTOH, there are lots of theories
regarding how gammas can get swallowed up by the lattice. I think I
referenced one by Mitchell Swartz, who lurks here, at least on
occasion.
What's speculative at this point is the source of the neutrons,
other than "from the cathode."
Neutrons are present in cosmic ray showers, but they would be very
unlikely to appear to be coming from the cathode, as the SPAWAR
tracks appear to do. Also, triple tracks don't show up in the
control experiments.
Right. Further, it's not just triple tracks. There are plentiful
tracks that appear to be proton knock-on. It would be nice if
someone looked that the apparent proton tracks and the apparent
triple-tracks, and correlated them. It would simply be a
confirmation that it's neutrons, that ratio should be a constant
for a given material and incident neutron energy, until the energy
falls too low to fracture carbon.
There are not enough triple tracts to correlate to anything. There
will likely not be unless much bigger budgets become feasible.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
