I wrote this yesterday and maybe there is something worth reading it
it, maybe not. I'll have better stuff later today, I hope.
At 10:33 AM 5/5/2010, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
Fro Abd:
> I'd really like to see a decent explanation of W-L theory that
addresses the
> obvious problems; what I've seen from W-L themselves simply
avoids the whole
> rate issue, that, in the absence of a strict 1:1 final step, the
> intermediates should be found at higher concentrations than the final
> product, i.e., helium or other ash.
>
> W-L theory, of course, has much wider implications. If neutrons can be
> generated from protons like that, this opens up a whole new world of
> possibilities.
FWIW I recently googled the following article on W-L:
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Widom-Larsen.php
Not sure if this article addresses some of the criticisms adequately or not.
I've seen this before. It appears to be hand-waving. Now, I could
easily be wrong, but I'll explain why it doesn't get the message
across. But first:
Just a personal comment here: It was my understanding that W-L is
supposed to address (theoretically) a whole slew of
unexpected/unexplainable "transmutations" that have been detected from
numerous independent experiments.
Transmutations will occur with many of the cold fusion theories.
Takahashi's Be-8 theory will produce a range of energetic alpha
particles that might cause secondary reactions, just about anything
that fuses deuterium to helium has to produce some level of
radiation. Transmutations are taking place in CF cells, but other
other than deuterium -> helium, in large quantities, they are
side-reactions, almost certainly.
Sure, if slow neutrons are being generated, they will cause
transmutations. But not terribly selectively!
To the article:
the W-L theory proposes that collective processes involving many
particles acting in concert to generate neutrons with negligible
kinetic energies, i.e., they have 'ultra low momentum' (ULM)
Why are the kinetic energies "negligible"? Relative to what? I.e.,
the kinetic energy of a particle is relative to a reference frame. I
suppose that if a particle is created as a "collective process," the
energy might be low relative to the average velocity of the collective entity.
Such neutrons are created within collectively oscillating patches of
protons or deuterons (found on surfaces of hydrogen-loaded metallic
hydrides) that can react directly with heavy-mass electrons created
by the huge local nanoscale electric fields that also occur on the
hydrogen-coated metallic surfaces.
"Huge nanoscale electric fields"? What fields? Why are there such
high electric fields at the surface of the hydride? Is there evidence
that these exist?
From another W-L paper:
It 'costs' a minimum of 0.78 MeV of input energy to make a
heavy-mass electron (e*) that has enough additional effective
mass-energy to successfully react with a given 'base fuel' such as
hydrogen H = (p) or deuterium D = (p,n) to produce the ultra low
momentum (ULM) neutrons (n). The required input energy that is
'pumped' into the collective plasmon polariton electrons found on
all metallic hydride surfaces can be in the form of an externally
imposed electric current, laser pulse, injection of energy into a
local magnetic field, pressure gradient across a metallic hydride
'membrane', and so on.
To compare with 0.78 MeV or 780 KeV, ignition energy for
deuterium-deuterium fusion (hot fusion) is 35 KeV, I think.
How can a "pressure gradient" produce 780 KeV electrons? If there is
something to this, obviously, I'm going to need a lot more explanation.
At a 'size' of 0.2 nanometre, a thermal neutron is only able to
interact with just a few atoms at any given instant; and it is also
moving fast. In contrast, the gigantic ULM neutrons can interact
collectively with literally thousands of nearby 'target' atoms all
at once. This unique property increases the probability of their
being absorbed by those nearby atoms to nearly 100 percent. A
nuclear physicist would say ULM neutrons have phenomenally high
"absorption cross-sections."
High absorption cross-section is characteristic of slow neutrons in
general. Very slow neutrons, it's being asserted, will all be
absorbed. No problem with that. Is this all that "ULM" means?
The W-L theory also explains why hard gamma and X-rays are not
released during LENR system operation [8]. This arises from unique
heavy-mass electrons created by the very strong nanoscale electric
fields that occur in regions above localized patches of collectively
oscillating protons and deuterons where neutron production and
absorption are taking place. Unlike isolated normal-mass electrons
situated in a vacuum or a hot plasma, heavy-mass electrons created
in condensed matter LENR systems can directly absorb a hard gamma or
X-ray photon, "ring like a bell" for an infinitesimal fraction of a
second, then (according to conservation of energy) reradiate a much
larger number of much less energetic photons (mostly in the infrared
region, with a much smaller 'tail' of soft X-ray photons).
They are claiming that the heavy electrons absorb the gamma rays
produced by neutron activation. There must be a lot of them to be an
effective shield. What I see in W-L theory is a whole series of
hypothesized new phenomena. While it can't absolutely be ruled out
that cold fusion is caused by three miracles, i.e., three new
phenomena, the fact is that we have other theories that seem to
require no new physics, and really about one "miracle." In the case
of Takahashi's TSC theory, that would be the occurrence of double
deuterium molecular confinement in a single position, such that the
tetrahedral arrangement of the nuclei is formed (efficient packing).
From that point, quantum field theory leads to his prediction of
Bose-Einstein condensation collapse and fusion to Be-8. It's a single
reaction that doesn't take place with less than four deuterons, and
it explains a great deal. There is no stable intermediate, the
unstable Be-8 would decays promptly into two helium nuclei with the
energy as observed. But this isn't proven, it is merely a decent
explanation with a few unanswered questions left.
I don't see any explanation of WL-theory that goes into reaction
rate/product issues.
