From: Terry Blanton
If - in fact it turns out that Rossi is using this particular nickel isotope, and from the Kurchatov source, there is a good chance the above scenario is a fairly accurate portrayal of what is happening. Any comment on the net energy balance? Terry - In a naïve approach of adding mass-energy of nucleons there is a net loss of.005 amu, going from nickel to copper representing roughly the energy unaccounted-for of about 4.6+ MeV. 1 amu = 931 MeV Mass energy of Ni-62 .. 61.928 amu Mass energy of proton 1.007 amu Total .. 62.935 Mass energy of Cu-63 . 62.930 amu I use the Oxford reference values, and there are some differences with other tables. An astute observer, who does not post publicly - has reminded me that this RPF (diproton) hypothesis - in which protons in reversible fusion to helium-2 and back, can effectively remove (borrow) 4-5 MeV before the QM books are balanced is not much different on the bottom line - from Hagelsteins magic phonons. In both cases there are small dispersions of energy involving lots and lots of atoms for every single identity change nuclear reaction. Wow. You know I cannot disagree with that assessment, other than to say that RPF is not just real, it is the most prevalent nuclear reaction in the Universe, by far. Why invent a model that has no precedent in any other field to explain a phenomenon when the best model for that explanation is overhead at noon every day? Of course, with RPF there is the necessity of QM time reversal, which can be verbalized as borrowing before payback - but that too is a known QM phenomenon. Whereas Hagelsteins model, when all is said and done, is an invention created to match an experimental outcome (which it does) but with no precedent in physical reality. Jones
