Bob,
An error you seem to be making, leading to your conclusion of "way lower than the magnitude of energy reported by Rossi" is an underlying assumption. You assume a symmetrical, chemical, or one-way reaction. What is not being factored into the equation, nor do we know, is the most important detail in any hypothesis involving suprachemical protons - which can been called for lack of a better term - the "transaction rate" for the asymmetry. If reaction is not a chemical reaction of valence electrons, but is a see-saw reaction where proton mass is converted into energy, repeatable in a short time frame and asymmetric, then the kind of energy reported by Rossi is easily possible with any "recombination" hypothesis. The ultimate energy source is "like nuclear" but not really to be a known nuclear reaction, and the reaction must happen sequentially - over and over many times per second. There is lots of excess mass in a proton, since the quarks are the only quantized mass. It might well happen that protons can donate surplus mass at a rate which is a function of surface interaction of phonons with protons, which can be at a very high rate - many THz and higher. Obviously, this rationale is not possible with chemical reactions which are largely symmetric - Lamb shift not included. If you want to plug in the numbers of having one gram of hydrogen in a reactor and providing 6 kWhr, you need only find a transaction rate (for the high gain regime) of 1000/sec. but even if the Lamb shift is the only asymmetry, a very low gain per iteration - you can still get there. That is essentially the teaching of the Moddel patent (it is a hypothesis on paper and not demonstrated, unless Rossi is the demonstration.) In short - with phonons moving in the terahertz range of blackbody radiation - then it is quite easy to imagine this as pumping some kind of sequential asymmetry. The problem as always is defining the ultimate energy source of the asymmetry. I think it is the strong force, not the weak force. A large transaction rate may itself be dependent on the extraordinary surface area of nanopowder. From: Bob Higgins The calculation in the link below appears to be in large error because the conversion from kWhr to MeV is wrong by 1E19 (1 kWH = 2.25E19 MeV). What I get is that the association energy of 1g of H to 1g of H2 would be 60 wH (0.06 kWhr), which would be way lower than the magnitude of energy reported by Rossi. Anyone else get a different answer? Terry Blanton <[email protected]> wrote: > As far as I know, Rossi he discovered this method of doing cold fusion. I would urge everyone to go back and take a look at an earlier thread: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg60606.html Which shows that 1 g atomic hydrogen can release 5.35 x 10^16 kWh of . . . -- Regards, Bob Higgins
