DJ Cravens The LENR reaction is driven by geometry not material.
The high school reactor uses tungsten without isotope separation. The key to the process is to use micro and nanoparticles is a wide range of sizes to support dark mode EMF amplification. Additional theory is available upon request. On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 1:48 PM, DJ Cravens <djcrav...@hotmail.com> wrote: > yes Ni62 has the lowest binding energy/nuc. > Fe 56 has the lowest mass per nuc. (due to p n masses). > > if some isotope of Fe or other material can be found to be active, there > is a chance that alloys with some isotope of Fe and something that is > permeable to p's might be useful. > > My guess right now is that perhaps Ni 62 is the energy out and that the > other isotopes of Ni might be "sucking" up some of the energy. > > Dennis > > PS I am presently using La Ni 5 alloys. But perhaps a Fe Ti alloy might > be worth a try. > > > ------------------------------ > From: jone...@pacbell.net > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: RE: [Vo]:substitutes? > Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 09:31:32 -0700 > > > *From:* DJ Cravens > > Ni-62 > If we assume that speculation about Rossi is correct, what materials other > than Ni-62 could be used? > If it is p + X reaction, what other isotopes other than Ni62 could be used? > Or perhaps it is really a p+p reaction with Ni-62 donating something??? > Anyone have any suggestions? > > This is an important point – is there a substitute for Ni-62? > The best way to approach the subject is to look at the isotope and ask – > is there anything which is unique about this species? Then, if the answer > is “yes” we must ask – how does the unique property materialize in the > gainful reaction? > As to the first part – yes - Ni-62 is a singularity in the periodic table, > being the one isotope with the highest binding energy per nucleon of all > known nuclides (~8.8 MeV per) … and yet here it is being identified as > active for the anomalous energy Rossi claims to have found with hydrogen. > On the one hand, if there is true gain in this device primarily due to > properties of this isotope - being a singularity could be an important > clue. OTOH it is most surprising that the physical property for which it > derives its uniqueness - is the opposite of what one logically expects in > the situation. That property, which is “highest binding energy” means the > isotope is the most stable. What is the next most stable? That would be an > iron isotope, but iron could have chemical properties which interfere with > the nuclear reaction > As for Part-2 of the inquiry… which is “why” … this has been addressed > piecemeal in prior postings, and I will collect these, with revisions, in > another posting. > Jones > > > >
