The wholesale fusion of multiple heavy atoms in their entierty as scene in the LeClair reaction speaks against this idea.
Cheers: Axil On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Harry Veeder <[email protected]> wrote: > Similiar to Jones suggestion that the mass of a proton is just an > average, perhaps the charge of a proton is just an average, so what > takes place is a momentary reduction of charge instead of charge > screening. > > harry > > > > > On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > > For 20 years, most cold fusion research was stymied by the traditional > > belief of how fusion was supposed to work. There were a few others who > > recognized that electron screening was lowering the coulomb barrier but > > these workers were in the minority and not influential. > > > > Even E. Storms idea has electron screening as a root cause as a one > > dimensional topological electron charge carrier. > > > > I has assumed that Rossi had changed his technology, be he still uses the > > same approach he started out with so the nanotube idea is original to us > > here at vortex and may in fact work as you suggest. > > > > > > > > Cheers: Axil > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Kelley Trezise <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> > >> I am sure P&F had hopes of seeing clear signs of fusion by packing as > much > >> hydrogen into a sample of palladium as possible but after their initial > >> success it became apparent to them that the process was dicy, as in a > >> collection of samples, some worked and some did not. It should have been > >> obvious to them immediately that the alloying elements (impurities) > and/or > >> the crystal grains and work hardening effects also payed a role in the > >> results. If Storms is correct then palladium may be completely > unnecessary > >> as is now obvious from the success with nickel. If it is the micro > >> structural defects that provide the environment for the reaction to take > >> place then any material that provides such a place be it tungsten, iron, > >> cobalt, or what have you will suffice provided the hydrogen can make > its way > >> into the site. In the co-deposition of palladium and deuterium, the > built up > >> structure probably created the micro structural "defects" in abundance, > >> hence it was not necessary to wait around while the packing of palladium > >> into a bulk sample initiated cracks and created the necessary sites by > crack > >> propagation. (That is what hydrogen will do even to palladium) I am > assuming > >> here that there is no fusion of nickel with hydrogen but hydrogen to > >> hydrogen, etc. Storms suggested that the reactions take place on the > surface > >> of a palladium sample, which is where the strains are highest in the > case of > >> a material with an internal pressure created by the loading of deutrium > >> would be highest and as a result would be the place where cracking > would be > >> most developed and produce the most reaction sites. If nickel is > central to > >> the reaction then it is not necessary to have large quanties of nickel > in > >> the reactor just as in the case of no need for large qantities of > hydrogen. > >> The nickel could be built into the surface of a spongy mass of ceramic > that > >> simply provides a physical support to present the nickel itself in large > >> enough quantites. In which case the temps can be driven even higher. > > > > > >
