The alpha particle fission is endothermic. I accept your premise that fission is endothermic. But fission to lighter elements does occur. Where does the required energy for fission come from?
The alternative is that there is a huge amount of hydrogen fusion going on. On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 4:28 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > In reply to Axil Axil's message of Wed, 18 Dec 2013 00:40:02 -0500: > Hi, > [snip] > >The reaction is not based on accelerating charged particles; it is based > on > >screening caused by the production of intense EMF. > > Then why did you raise the issue of laser particle acceleration in one of > your > earlier posts? > > > > > > > > >This EMF turns down the force that keeps the nickel nucleus together. This > >is what I mean by photo-fission. Oftentimes, a single alpha particle is > >released from the nickel and iron is formed. Sometime, multiple alpha > >clusters are released as indicated by the large amount of light elements > >that are seen as transmutation produces in the DGT ash samples. That 7MeV > >of binding energy that you site is released into the gamma thermalization > >process of the BEC. > > I think you missed the point here. The 7 MeV is not extra it is deficit. > You > would need to supply 7 MeV to make the reaction happen. Even if you could > temporarily modify the strong force, the overall energy balance has to > turn out > positive if you are going to get excess heat. You need to indicate where > this > energy is coming from. It is not coming from the fission of 62Ni into 58Fe > and > 4He, because that costs energy, it doesn't produce it. > > > >The strong force is not affected or overcome by the > >kinetic energy of an excited particle; the strong force is just removed by > >an EMF that gently deactivates the strong force. > > > > > > > >The alpha particle drifts out of the nickel nucleus gently. Energy > handling > >is not kinetic, it is all electromagnetic. This lack of kinetic activity > >is why excited isotopes are not formed. All energy release processes are > >done at very low energies under the influence of the coherent and > entangled > >averaging potential of the polariton BEC. This BEC energy averaging is why > >no gamma radiation is seen in the Ni/H reactor. > > Even if the BEC were capable of doing this, the net effect of the 62Ni => > 58Fe > reaction that you mention would be cooling, not heating. > > > BTW there are a few such reactions that are indeed energy positive, e.g. > > 208Pb - 4He => 204Hg + 0.5 MeV. > 206Pb - 4He => 202Hg + 1.14 MeV. > > This might theoretically be useful, if the mechanism you describe actually > exists. > > > > > > > > > > >On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 3:56 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> In reply to Axil Axil's message of Mon, 16 Dec 2013 18:01:07 -0500: > >> Hi, > >> [snip] > >> > >> BTW as for the concept of laser induced nuclear reactions, consider the > >> following: > >> > >> Most of the thermal energy in a Rossi reactor will be random. Even if > some > >> of it > >> is made coherent by nano-particles, that is still likely to only be a > small > >> portion. Of that small proportion of coherent infra red, only a small > >> proportion > >> will accelerate charged particles. Of those accelerated charged > particles, > >> only > >> a small fraction (1 in 10000?) will actually trigger nuclear reactions. > >> > >> Therefore I think it very unlikely that sufficient energy would be > >> released by > >> those reactions to produce the original amount of laser energy that was > >> required > >> to start the process. IOW I doubt this approach would be energy positive > >> overall. > >> > >> However, I could be wrong...;) > >> > >> BTW, the most likely nuclear reaction (IMO) would be:- > >> > >> p (fast) + (A,Z) => (A+1,Z+1) > >> > >> which usually produces gamma rays, which are not in evidence. > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Robin van Spaandonk > >> > >> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html > >> > >> > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html > >
