In reply to David Roberson's message of Tue, 5 Jun 2012 20:42:05 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] > >On occasion I find myself liking the hydrino concept. The gamma radiation >associated with element mutation is hard to accept without assuming a large >amount of leakage.
If the electron is ejected, which is a fast reaction, then there is no gamma radiation produced (slow reaction). Another possibility is that the reacting particle is actually a Hydrino molecule, and that one of the two protons gets ejected carrying the energy. Since protons are far more massive than electrons, they produce almost no bremsstrahlung. Where proton addition would create an unstable nucleus, it's also possible that the electron is captured in an "enhanced" electron capture reaction. I say "enhanced" because in normal EC reactions the nucleus has to try to "grab" a fast moving K electron on it's way through, whereas the Hydrino electron is already present, and not really intent on going anywhere. ;-) > >Unfortunately, there are some serious questions as to whether or not hydinos >exist. Indeed! > >It would be convenient if the proton and electron were sucked into the nucleus >since that would eliminate the barrier entirely. If this is true, why is it >difficult to achieve rapid LENR activity and the corresponding high powers? >Has anyone been able to answer the question as to why the reaction rate is >relatively low under this condition? Lack of sufficiently shrunken Hydrinos. As they get smaller is gets ever more difficult to catalyze shrinkage to a lower level. (I suspect the primary reason why Mills is using H[n=1/4]). > >Is it possible that the reaction rate for LENR devices is throttled by the >lack of hydrinos or your version of them? Highly probable; see above. > Maybe they are not too easily constructed in the real world and that is why > a special condition must be achieved where they can be generated. That would > be a neat reason for the difficulties encountered in our experiments. If > this is the case, it would be a good idea to concentrate on a method of > controlled generation for these components. I've already found it (in theory), I just need a bit of technical (engineering) help, and the finances to do it. Depending on what has to be paid for and how much it costs, the cost could vary anywhere from nothing to say 100 grand. Any university with an engineering department and a few willing grad students could probably do it for nothing. The device is quite simple. Testing it however could be a bit dicey, as it *might* produce copious gamma rays. It should produce power at the (multi)kilowatt level. (Consistently and controllably over a wide range). > >I wonder about the electron being ejected from the nucleus with all of the >reaction energy. Has anyone calculated how much ionization would be generated >by an electron with 6 MeV of energy? Would that not be easy to see in the >experiments? Beta emitters are generally relatively easily shielded AFAIK. However there are not many multi kilowatt beta emitters around! > >We are limited in our thought processes by the lack of data and I can hardly >wait until we finally obtain output material from Rossi's and DGT's devices >that can be independently measured. :-) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
