It could be. He coats that expensive nickel around a thin shell around. A nanometer coating would be very cheap. This is like using very cheap medication, like some tranquilizers, which just targets a few cells and are rated in micrograms. But in grams, they are rated in thousand$...
2012/1/21 Axil Axil <[email protected]> > I think that Rossi coats micro particles of nickel he buys commercial off > the shelf. > > During the secret particle resurfacing process of these micro particles, > he uses nickel enriched in heavy isotopes in a very thin nano-sized low > quantity surface cover. > > Even through the ratio of heavy nickel isotopes will be low in the bulk of > the nickel powder as a whole, the heavy isotopes will be in a critical > location: on the particles surface where the NiH reaction is most probable. > > The fusion reaction will occur to a depth into the micro particle > defined by the penetration depth of the reaction proton pair. > > On the whole, the enrichment of nickel may be very low or even non > detectable in an post run isotopic survey. > > I speculate that the cross section of proton tunneling into nickel is > increased with the proportion of heavy neutron rich nickel isotopes. It’s a > probability thing. > > Reaction performance is increased in the neutron rich heavy nickel > isotopes, but the reaction still occurs in light nickel but at a lowered > cross section. > Kim gives us this prediction of how the post isotopic analysis will go > assuming a proton pair based fusion reaction as follows. > > > Focardi and Rossi [6] reported that the experimental results of Rossi et > al. indicate the production of stable isotopes 63Cu and 65Cu with an > isotopic ratio of 63Cu /65Cu ~ 1.6 (natural abundance is 63Cu/ 65Cu = > 2.24). This production of Cu may be due to reactions (i). The production of > 63Cu and 65Cu with isotopic ratio of 63Cu /65Cu different from the natural > isotopic ratio is expected and can be explained by estimating the reaction > rates for 62Ni(2p(S=0), p)63Cu and 64Ni(2p(S=0), p)65Cu. Reaction rates > estimates based on transmission probability calculated from a barrier > tunneling model similar to the alpha-decay theory indicate that the > reaction rates for stable Cu productions, 62Ni(2p(S=0), p)63Cu and > 64Ni(2p(S=0), p)65Cu, are expected to be Purdue Nuclear and Many Body > Theory Group (PNMBTG) Preprint PNMBTG-6-2011 (June 2011) 3 much larger > than the reaction rates for production of radioactive Cu, > > 58Ni(2p(S=0), p)59Cu and 60Ni(2p(S=0), p)61Cu. This leads to the > prediction that intensities of the gamma-rays from the decays of 59Cu and > 61Cu are expected to be weak and do not commensurate with the observed heat > production, which is mostly from stable Cu production reactions > 62Ni(2p(S=0), p)63Cu and 64Ni(2p(S=0), p)65Cu. > > > There are other exit reaction channels which are (nearly) radiation-less, > such as reactions (ii) > ANi(2p(S=0), α)A-2Ni, (even A=58, 60, 62, and 64) [9]. For this case, we > expect that the natural isotopic ratio of Ni isotopes will be changed in a > particular way, which can be checked from the sample after each experiment. > Even though reactions (ii) produce radioactive isotope 56Ni, it can be > shown using the alpha-decay theory that its reaction rate is much slower > (by many order of magnitudes) than those of other reactions. > > Other exit reaction channels, > > ANi(2p(S=0), d)ACu, ANi(2p(S=0), 3He)A-1Ni, and ANi(2p(S=0), t)A-1Cu (all > with even A=58, 60, 62, and 64) are ruled out since these reactions all > have negative Q-values. There are possibilities of neutron-emission exit > reaction channels, such as reactions (iii) ANi(2p(S=0), n)A+1Zn, (even A= > 62, and 64; Q is negative for A = 58 and 60). However, reaction rates for > reactions (iii) are expected be substantially smaller than those for > reaction (i). Reactions (iii) involve emission of a tightly bound neutron > (62Ni → 61Ni + n, Q = -10.597MeV or 64Ni → 63Ni + n, Q = -9.657MeV) while > reactions (i) involve emission of a loosely bound proton from an excited > compound nuclear state consisting of ANi (even A) and 2p(S=0). Therefore, > the transmission probability of a neutron tunneling through the centrifugal > barrier in reactions (iii) is expected to be substantially smaller than > that of a proton tunneling through the centrifugal barrier in reactions > (i). > > The branching ratios of reactions (i) and (ii) need to be determined by > measurements of gamma-ray energies and changes in isotopic ratios from > future Ross-type experiments. Theoretically, the branching ratios can be > estimated by calculating transmission probability of an emitted charged > particle tunneling through both Coulomb and centrifugal barriers in the > exit reaction channel, as done in the alpha-decay theory. > > III. Other Possible Reactions > > In addition to the above reactions described in II, there are > possibilities of reactions involving additives used (not disclosed so far). > For an example, if lithium is added as an additive, reaction (iv) > > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Daniel Rocha <[email protected]>wrote: > >> The price of the enrichment will be much more expansive than the raw >> material. But to what extent, I don't know. But, the quantity that has to >> be separated of Ni is smaller than the one of boron given that they have a >> natural proportion of 5/1 of B10 to B11 against 20/1 of Ni 62+64, although >> in the case of the ecat, it doesn't have to be very pure. >> >> >> 2012/1/21 John Milstone <[email protected]> >> >>> OK, does anyone have a ballpark figure for isotopically enriched >>> Boron? >>> >>> I agree that it seems reasonable that the difficulty of separating the >>> isotopes of Boron and Nickel would be comparable (but I don't know). The >>> only problem using Boron as an analogy is that the raw material is almost >>> 150 times as expensive as Nickel. That might make any direct comparison >>> doubtful. >>> >>> I've found several companies selling isotopically enriched Nickel, but >>> none of them provide a price online. And, I'm very reluctant to start >>> calling/writing these companies looking for such information, since I >>> don't want to get on any more Government lists than I'm already on. >>> >>> As Sheldon from "The Big Bang Theory" said (paraphrasing), "It seems >>> that if you hack in to a National Defense super-computer, and try to buy >>> Uranium-235 on Craigslist, the NSA calls your Mother!" >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From:* Daniel Rocha <[email protected]> >>> *To:* John Milstone <[email protected]> >>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 21, 2012 10:40 AM >>> >>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:I`ll just leave this here >>> >>> In the specific case of Rossi, he wants to exclude nickel below 62, but >>> purity is not a necessity, but an optimazation. So, if he roughly excludes >>> most of what is bellow 62, that is good enough. Given that most of Ni is 58 >>> and 60, he can determine a threshold of, say, Z=62, more or less, and >>> roughly separates around this value. It doesn't need to bu pure and the >>> weight difference is quite big, about the same of what is needed to separte >>> boron 10 from 11, even so, not so precise. I think you should look for the >>> costs of enrich boron estimate from there. >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Daniel Rocha - RJ >> [email protected] >> >> > -- Daniel Rocha - RJ [email protected]
