In matter of neutrons, Hideo Kozima has a lot of publications. His TNCF (trapped neutron catalyzed fusion) is described the best ib his book: The Science of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon, Elsevier Ed. 2006 Peter
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > This is a “boron day” for me … <g> not boring but boronic. > > > > Every day provides new or previously overlooked details, and perhaps an > element of Rossi’s good fortune will be that someone, probably not from U of > B, but from somewhere else is going to provide answers that could help him. > The role of boron may be one of them. > > > > I am still thinking about the commitment of NASA to this technology. > > > > The interest from Langley - from all reports - is much stronger than the > interviews indicate, and they seem to be hell-bent on it, with a large > staff, and are operating on the premise of it being at least partly related > to the W&L theory. When I say ‘partly related’ – in truth the active > particle seems much more likely to be a version of the “virtual neutron” > than the ULM since in the Rossi configuration, it must travel in a range of > 1-2 cm to activate the boron. The ULM cannot do that. > > > > To give credit where it is due, there are many names associated with the > idea that hydrogen, and especially spillover hydrogen (monatomic) can > “interact as a neutron” - due to electron orbital shrinkage, or deflation, > passivation, or whatnot – and the party that came up with the idea first > should be credited. Why that person, twenty years ago - did not actually > employ boron is a mystery. (that is if it is the active ingredient in E-Cat, > which is today’s “floater”. > > > > The names of Vigier, Dufour, Mills and Swartz from the early nineties are > associated in my mind with this virtual neutron concept - but I do not know > who should be credited as the originator – but for sure it is not Larsen > (unless he published something outside of the usual cannels and around 1991. > > > > *From:* Jones Beene > > > > Ø I will add, in deference to W&L theory and the ULM, that the stated > presence of boron does provide a more acceptable pathway for the high gain… > > > > This would be due to the very high cross-section of boron for neutrons > (thermal neutrons). I do not know that boron retains the high cross-section > for cold neutrons, but if you look at the tables, which do not address this > AFAIK - there is reason to believe that it would be higher – not lower. > > > > Thermal neutrons undergo a strong reaction with the boron-10, with the > result being an alpha particle and lithium 7. Those two would be the ash, so > the hypothesis is easily falsifiable. The downside of the hypothesis is that > the boron is not located in the reactor, so how do cold neutrons migrate? > > > > This is a very energetic reaction and bremsstrahlung would not have been > missed by V&B, so in summary, this route is just as doubtful as any nuclear > route – unless the there is a “new physics” version of some kind to hide > high energy photons. > > > > Jones > > > > > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
