Since the electromagnetic and the weak force are closely related I wonder….
If charge accumulation causes electromagnetic fields to build charge screening strong enough to completely lower the coulomb barrier, why is it safe to assume that the weak force will still be strong enough to operate the standard radioactive decay function. I wonder if the strong force will rearrange the nucleus during the fusion process in a way that does not consider any interaction or interference with the weak force therefore leading to the exclusive production of stable elements. If the electroweak force goes away, does the strong force change its nature? Do protons attract each other inside the nucleus the way electrons do in cooper pair formation as happens in superconductivity? The bottom line is, can we assume that our understanding of the way isotopes form and behave in cold fusion is the same as happens in nuclear physics? The lack of unstable isotopes in cold fusion might mean that cold fusion is not caused by neutrons but by charge screening. Cheers: Axil On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Eric Walker <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 2:12 AM, Alain Sepeda <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> one hypothesis about "normal isotopic ratio" in transmuted copper, is >> that the result is the same as nature, because the process is the same... >> Larsen talk about R and S nucleosynthetis process, not so different from >> WL (or similar neutron or hydrino absorption) >> > > I think the rate of flux is an important variable. With a high flux, the > isotope ratios that result after everything has settled will be different > than with those after an anemic flux. It is possible that you would need a > similar flux to what occurs during r-process nucleosynthesis in supernovae > to get similar ratios. Such a flux is generally very high. But another > variable here is the speed of the neutrons. I suppose those emanating from > a supernova will be traveling very fast, and if you had much slower ones, > the flux might not need to be high to get comparable ratios. > > Ed Storms brings up an excellent point about neutron-based explanations. > Here is my elaboration: it is true that the neutron-capture cross section > goes way down when the neutrons are very slow. But that's a relative > change of what is normally measured at higher energies, and even with a > hypothesized momentum near or at zero, the cross section will not be > infinite. So there will be some elastic collisions with atoms in the > environment, and some of the neutrons can be expected to thermalize and > exit the system. You would then expect to see a substantial number of > these be picked up in a detector, but this is not seen. > > Eric > >
