From: David Roberson
In open space you suggest that these energy transfers occur
often due to the abundance of atomic He+. What radiation signature should
we observe as a result of these collisions? The “energy hole” of Helium for Mills theory is 54.4 eV – but as a catalyst to promote fractional hydrogen formation, this seems to me like one of the weaker parts of the theory. It should be a very rare situation indeed to see this 54.4 eV Rydberg value come about - due to the physical peculiarities of helium. As a practical matter, mixes of hydrogen and helium have been used as the residual for gas-filled tubes (triode, thyratron etc) for many decades - yet never was there a reported thermal (or UV) anomaly AFIK. There should have been many reported thermal anomalies - if this reaction is commonplace. Of course – the situation could be different in cosmology. Since all helium is atomic (He2 as a molecule does not exist) the helium ground state consists of only of two 1s electrons which are tightly bound – extraordinarily bound in fact … suffice it to say that the energy required to remove one of them is the highest ionization energy of any atom in the periodic table. And the worst part is that essentially, you must have the energy available to remove BOTH of them in order to get to the proper Rydberg level (which is for the second electron by itself, and not the first plus the second in combination) … and at the same time you must have non-ionized atomic hydrogen present! Bizarre to even suggest. This strikes me as almost an impossibility… which has been the motivation for is finding an alternative (and more defensible) explanation for the energy gain. I believe some of the reports of gain coming from BLP are valid. Nevertheless, in any kind of energetic environment where the two gases exist as a plasma – hydrogen ionizes first and neutralizes last - and therefore there is no hydrino possibility. IOW - If adequate energy is available in any local environment or plasma, how can there be atomic hydrogen to complete the reaction at 54.4 eV - since hydrogen will ionize with a fraction of the energy of helium (which requires a full 79 eV to get it to the proper state for a “hole” at 54.4 eV to happen) ? It is little wonder that Mills is shunned by most physicists, despite some alluring parts to his theory; and yet there is a good chance that he may end up with a working device, hopefully soon – even with a theory that has more holes than … err… a block of Raney nickel. That is because there is another explanation for moderate-sized gain, which is at a modest level which is less than what is usually assumed to be nuclear and much more than chemical. I’m on record as advocating that most of these gainful hydrogen reactions involving nano-porosity, where only UV or soft x-rays are released (no gammas or neutrons) are RPF reactions (reversible proton fusion). This is by far the most common nuclear reaction in the Universe, but it has never been thought to be gainful in the past. The gainful energy released in RPF would be “nuclear” in a semantic way but at moderate levels – coming from QCD quantum color dynamics during the transitory fusion event, before it reverses to two protons which were there before the event. This can happen because quark mass is not quantized, and some of it can be converted to energy during a “failed” (i.e. reversible) fusion event, but it is not a lot of energy in comparison with even beta decay. Jones
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
