There is hot fission, hot fusion, cold fusion and warm fusion, now comes "warm fission."
Perhaps it should be called something else, as it is not really fission at all, but a rare kind of decay called double beta decay. For present purposes, I will call it: "decay fusion" or "DF" since the result is an increase in atomic number. It can be envisioned as a type of mid-Z LENR (i.e. a type of LENR not focused on hydrogen isotopes, but possibly catalyzed by them). There is a site for a related version of this online, and they do use and promote the misleading term: warm fission - but Norton sez it is a risky site, and it is also a bit inaccurate, so I will not copy the url. The relation to the Arata experiment is this: That experiment has been possibly misinterpreted heretofore, and it is NOT about deuterium per se - but instead it is the first good evidence for a way to catalyze the DF reaction of zirconium-96. The best background for understanding the general DF phenomenon is Wiki's entry for double beta decay. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_beta_decay This is normally a rare phenomenon, but can it be the focus of a QM "probability enhancement"? That enhancement could be a catalyst in the form of reduced orbital isotope. Thus the "pycno" or deuterino connection. That "probability enhancement" of a rare reaction is the $64 question- at least for moving this phenomenon into rapid commercialization. And I think the answer to that question is a "definite maybe" <g> . Plus, this reaction could be more desirable than the "cold fusion" type of LENR since the scaling-up should be easier and there is probably no need for palladium to achieve the catalytic pycno. This pronouncement is not likely to get the many CF proponents on vortex to suddenly change horses, but the wider perspective of cold fusion should be looked at now, and re-appraised in light of the Arata experiments and this reaction. 'Warm fission,' DF, "enhanced decay" or extropic decay are various names for it, take your pick but the phenomenon is a function of a few nuclei in nature, some of which are fairly common but just "barely radioactive." The half-life stability is millions of times longer than say uranium or thorium: but still radioactive due to an energy-heavy nucleus. There is probably as much recoverable net energy on earth in these DF species as there is in uranium. Importantly, DF typically produces stable 'ahs' that is two elements forward in the periodic table, and no neutrons. Another curious thing about DF, in contrast to even beta decay: NO charged-particles or strong gammas. The betas are captured by the emitting nucleus. IOW some of what passes for LENR now (Arata, in particular) might be related to DF more so than deuterium fusion. There is always the possibility of both. More details: At any rate, although there are a few dozen candidate isotopes, one in particular stands out: zircomium-96. Zirconium-96 is prevalent in natural ore ~3%, not overly difficult to enrich, fairly stable without catalysis, and the decay is "clean", powerful and efficient. Its daughter-product is Molybdenum, which is actually deemed essential for human health in small quantities. Zr-96 is already in production now and more abundant than lead or tin even in its small fraction of all Zr. Zr-96 has surplus energy just shy of being strongly radioactive: the nucleus overburdened by 99 KeV. Nuclear energy extraction methods may include catalysis - by the incursion of deuterons to destabilize a moderately stable nucleus. and to go further out on a limb: even more so by fractional hydrogen isotopes: "deuterinos" or "pycnodeuterium" since they will approach closed to the overburdened nucleus and thus stimulate the decay. You heard it first on vortex :-) Jones
