A close look at the patent application indicates specific mention of "copper" in the disclosure.
The only way to eliminate the expected migration of copper from one part of the reactor to another - is a comparison of the two isotopes: 63Cu and 65Cu. The correct ratio in nature is 69.17 / 30.83 - ergo if testing should show is something like 60/40 then that is proof positive. Case solved ! and let the mass production begin, at the same time as we watch the price of oil careen through the floor. Again - this kind of isotope testing gives away nothing important from Rossi's perspective, if it is limited to only copper isotopes. Anyone communicating with Rossi should press for independent testing of the copper in the spent fuel. Why could Levi not do this? He seems to be trusted by everyone concerned, and no doubt Frascati can do it technically- we have seen their sophisticate mass spec equipment which can distinguish He from D2 - so we know without question that they can do it. Please, Dr. Rossi - let them do it, and before you pack up for India ! Jones From: Horace Heffner The 59Cu explanation seems to be nonsensical, at least with the conventional reaction explanation implied below, because (1) it does not explain the presence of gram quantities of observable copper (due to the 1.36 minute half-life of 59Cu), (2) the huge flux of 0.5 MeV gammas from positron annihilation would be a major risk to the observers, and proof positive of nuclear reaction, eliminating the need to measure heat, (3) the logarithmic tail-off of positron emission, even given the 1.36 m half-life, should be readily detectable for a long time after power off, (4) and the presence of gram quantities of Ni59, with 76000 y half-life for EC, should be readily detectable in the ash via auger electrons or x-rays. On Jan 22, 2011, at 3:46 AM, Peter Gluck wrote: Thank you, now everything depend on-Cu is real, or not! Peter On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 12:25 AM, <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote: In reply to Peter Gluck's message of Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:31:09 +0200: Hi, [snip] >That device working for 6 months has produced approx. 50,000 kWhours heat. >Can this be explained by the reaction of transmutation of Ni to Cu? >Considering first 300 grams of nichel...? Rossi can tell how much >Ni is uesd - if he will. Am important rough energy balance anyway. >Peter [snip] If all Ni isotopes react equally, and 2/3 of Ni is Ni-58, and we assume single proton fusion, then the primary reaction would be: Ni-58 + H -> Cu-59 + 3.42 MeV which then decays rapidly via positron decay according to Cu-59 -> Ni-59 + e+ + neutrino + 4.8 MeV (however a considerable portion of this will be lost via neutrinos; say 1/2?). so the total reaction energy is 3.42 + 2.4 = 5.82 MeV / Ni-58. 2/3 *50000 kWh / 6 MeV = 1.2E23 Ni-58 reactions, which is 12 gm Ni-58, or about 18 gm Ni altogether (assuming the other isotopes all yield about the same amount of energy / atom). So quite within the realm of possibility. OTOH, if he had 300 gm of Ni, and 1/3 was converted to Cu, then that represents considerably more energy, and one has to wonder where it all went? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
