On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 10:19 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote:

I would be concerned about the cost of platinum.  Stainless steel might
> work since it is un reactive.


The problem of cost is an important one, since we're talking about a
tabletop experiment.

The danger of falling back upon "unreactive" materials such as gold, carbon
and stainless steel is that they are only relatively inert under chemical
reactions.  Under proton or deuteron capture, for example, they are quite
reactive:

- 197Au + p -> 194Pt + α + 8.4 MeV
- 197Au + D -> 199Hg + 11 MeV
- 12C + D -> 13C + p + 2.7 MeV
- 52Cr + p -> 53Mn + 6.6 MeV (chromium is an ingredient in stainless steel)

I appreciate that there is no consensus on this list that proton and
deuteron capture are taking place, and beyond that, there is incredulity.
 But people such as Ed Storms take the possibility seriously, and the
numbers are very suggestive when one looks at the transmutation results in
the aggregate.  So if it might be the case that these processes are
occurring, this dimension can be included in a search for suitable controls
as well as possibly being used for further investigation.  Not taking it
into account could lead to frustrated attempts to find a blank -- and it
occurs to me that this itself is an interesting detail.

Taking a second look at carbon, I see that it is inert under proton
capture, so graphite might actually be a good choice or hydrogen-1 after
all (but not hydrogen-2).  But at the moment I'm looking at data for an
experiment in which palladium was used with hydrogen-1; along the lines
I've been suggesting in previous posts, this would be a good combination
for a control run, since proton capture is not energetically favorable in
palladium.  This turns out to be too simplistic an approach, however; in
the case of this experiment, the choice of electrolyte, Na2CO3, appears to
have been important, and isotope shifts in the vicinity of sodium were
observed, in addition to many others.  For similar reasons, the material of
the container could be important -- teflon (with carbon and fluorine in
it), pyrex (with boron) and stainless steel, for example, might all be
susceptible to whatever processes are taking place within the active
material nearby.

So if proton and deuteron capture are occurring, the search for a control
may need to take into account not just the substrate and the isotope of
hydrogen, but the composition of the electrolyte and container as well.
 Once we start talking about deuterium, the search for a control system
that meets the present criteria becomes nearly impossible, because
deuterium can combine in exothermic reactions with itself.  Under those
circumstances, going with the present assumptions, the substrate need not
be anything more than a matrix that facilitates the various reactions.

Eric

Reply via email to