At 07:38 PM 4/1/2010, Jones Beene wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
> "The skeptics assumed that if helium were being generated, it would be
easy to detect the associated gamma rays, so most ruled out helium
from the start. That, simply, assumed deuteron fusion, D+D, two
deuterons, one helium nucleus resulting, plus a gamma ray. The
obvious and simple conclusion is that this is not the reaction...."
Quite true. The immediate problem with the "new reaction" hypothesis is
pretty obvious, and I'm sure most everyone here has thought about the
ramifications of *no gamma*. But clearly if there is no gamma, then the
entire 24 MeV equivalence thing is close to being out the window as well. It
could just as easily be 48 MeV or 5 MeV, since the 24 MeV is almost always
seen in the form of a gamma ray in brute force thermonuclear fusion (the old
reaction) an alpha could come from the metal matrix instead of fusion, and
be mistaken for fusion ash.
If the Q value is 24 MeV, it is reason for strong inference that the
reaction takes in deuterium and leaves behind helium. Not quite
proof, but damn close! That helium is produce in quantities within
roughly a factor of two, and assertedly much loser, of the deuterium
fusion value is a stunning result, Huizenga was right: this result
would solve a major puzzle. It did exactly that. The ash, or the
predominant ash, is helium.
So, how do you get there? Well d-d fusion remains some kind of
possibility, but something very strange is going on if that's it. I
prefer to look toward some process that forms Be-8, with ordinary
photon emission from the excited nucleus transferring most of the
energy to the lattice, before it decays to two helium nuclei, with
some residual energy, but the problem with this is the Hagelstein
paper just published, that places an upper limit that may be too low.
I'm told that an alternate theory is cluster fusion, basically a BEC,
if I'm correct, that transfers the energy to the BEC as a whole,
before it breaks up.
The hypothesis that seems to work best now, in 2010 for the "new reaction"
is the one of the many versions of the BEC / 4D / Takahashi or variant,
which is essentially the four deuteron hypothesis, and it coincidentally
comes along when about a half dozen efforts at replicating Arata have found
a loading ratio of close to four-to-one. That is not coincidental IMO.
Maybe, maybe not. If that's the peak loading, maybe. I.e., if higher
loading is obtainable does the fusion rate not continue to increase?
(how the hell do they get 4:1 anyway, without that lattice
disintegrating, but so many questions, so little time.)
To reiterate where we may be going in terms of a workable theory - via
paraphrased quote from Lomax: "Be-8 fusion would resolve the branching ratio
issue, it would be 4D -> Be-8 -> 2 He-4 + 47.6 MeV, and the 47.6 would end
up almost entirely as heat. 4D fusion seems really unlikely to people
[without a transitory BEC] .... However, 4D is just two deuterium molecules,
and Takahashi proposes, as I read it, that they form a Bose-Einstein
condensate in lattice confinement, which would put them in a symmetrical,
tetrahedral arrangement. And then he calculates that if the TSC forms, it
will collapse and fuse with 100% frequency within a femtosecond.
Let me add that what Takahashi is describing is not a true BEC, but could
resemble its immediate aftermath - which leads to the so-called "Bosenova"
which is a mainstream invention. IOW a true BEC is deuterium which "look"
like one, no tetrahedron, as that is not the same quantum state - and they
cannot fuse as a BEC...
I think what he is saying is that if the deuterons form the
tetrahedral pattern, as they will with two D2 molecules, if I'm
correct, they will form the condensate and collapse. But, hey, this
is rocket science. Quantum field theory. Daddy Feynman said, "too complicated!"
But since this is not a true BEC, and is transitory,
the tetrahedron is the highest probability arrangement of the four atoms
when they can fuse, and it is the prime candidate for the "new reaction"
that avoids the gamma issue.
Yeah. It looks that way to me. But the book is open, the case is not
closed, by far.
Jones
N.B. The "Bosenova" is all about applying a magnetic field to a BEC. Arata's
nanopowder is ferromagnetic, another non-coincidence. When the magnetic
field strength is raised, the transitory condensate can implode and shrink
beyond detection, followed by explosion. This is proved. About half of the
atoms in the condensate seem to have disappeared from the experiment
altogether (Cornell experiment, mentioned in prior posts).
Yeah, I noticed that, too.
Carl Wieman explained that under current atomic theory this characteristic
of Bose-Einstein condensate could not be explained because the energy state
of an atom near absolute zero should not be enough to cause an implosion,
and certainly fusion is out.
Why, certainly! Don't even think of it! They stick you in a
straight-jacket and haul you away. Well, they used to, and I see
signs that some people are still spooked.
We can transpose some of those remarks to the transitory-BEC. This mainline
work with the Bosenova is a lot more mysterious than anything in LENR.
They are both mysterious. But the Bosenova is not a widely replicated
phenomenon. Maybe the cat ate the atoms that disappeared. Who knows?
When I read the Bosenova stuff, it's pretty obvious what to think of.
But, AFAIK, some transient heat-generating phenomenon a lot smaller
than fusion could have a similar effect. What can happen in BECs is
not well known, again, AFAIK. If we are seeing, in palladium
deuteride, BECs, the mystery may not be that they fuse, but how in
the world they get cold enough. Confinement of a certain kind might
do that, perhaps, absorbing the heat from the trapped deuterium so
that it snuggles up. Wild guesses, really. I should read Kim.
