On May 5, 2013, at 3:52 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
Thank you. I now have a better understanding the logic that has led
you to the slow-helium formation assumption.
On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Edmund Storms
<[email protected]> wrote:
The CR-39 measurements were not made when calorimetry was done.
Therefore, we do not know if the alpha relates to heat production or
not. In any case, so little radiation is detected that any
associated energy would be too small to detect.
Does the statement "so little radiation is detected that any
associated energy would be too small to detect" apply to the so-
called "hamburger" exposures, where the chip is completely pitted?
Also, since no calorimetry was made, it would seem that as far as
the CR-39 experiments are concerned, we have neither a basis for
concluding that there is a large amount of alpha flux when there is
excess heat nor that there is a small amount of alpha flux when
there is excess heat (as you seem to be doing here). It would be
really nice if someone could systematically measure the number of
pits while using decent calorimetry.
Eric, you need to do some calculations. The CR-39 is an accumulator.
The flux, which determines power , is very small during these studies
even though the final result looks large. At no time could heat be
detected from the reactions producing these products.
The logic is not complicated, although people keep making it
complicated. Once you accept this logic, my explanation gets much
easier to understand and accept. I have to wonder why people are
willing to explore complicated reactions and complex logic while
ignoring the most simple possibility.
In the assumptions that go into your hypothesis, there seems to be
an implicit model where at low energies you can sort of slide
hydrons into one another, with an attendant release of mass energy,
and the behavior is different than in the high energy case, where
there will either be a collision or they'll fuse.
Hot fusion is a well know process that results when deuterons come
together quickly with high energy. The laws of conservation of energy
and momentum require the final nucleus to explode in order to release
the mass-energy. This process can occur when a crack forms if the
resulting charge separation generates a high voltage gradient. This
effect is easy to cause. Just hit a crystal of LiD with a hammer and a
burst of neutrons will result. Cold fusion is an entirely different
process with NO relationship to hot fusion. This is not like your
analogy. The water is just acting like water but with a gradual change
in property as the velocity of impact increases. CF is not related to
HF in any way. There is no gradual change from hot fusion to cold
fusion as the applied energy decrease. As the energy goes down, the
hot fusion reaction rate simply becomes increasingly small until under
normal conditions it does not occur at all. CF and HF are two
entirely different phenomenon that can occur at the same time under
certain conditions. Trying to relate them has caused most of the
confusion. You need to stop thinking about how HF works and start
over using a different vocabulary.
Ed Storms
I am reminded of the difference in how water behaves when an object
hits it with great force, and when the object is allowed to slide
into it or drop into it from a low height. This understanding of
the electromagnetic force and of the nuclear force seems to be
implied by your hypothesis. I find it a very intriguing approach --
it would be pretty neat if under the right conditions the hydrogen
atoms could be slowly pushed into one another, and only at high
speeds do they bounce away from one another and provide a lot of
resistance. But it will be a long time before I'm willing to adopt
this model as a working hypothesis. Even if I found it likely, I
think it would be necessary to eliminate other possibilities first,
since it is such a departure from current understanding of the
strong and electrostatic forces, which, as I understand it, are
presented as static properties of the atoms that do not vary with
their speed relative to one another.
Eric
