this post changed my mind about fission as a source of light
nuclear ash.
You might get fission to lighter elements, if you initially add
enough energy in
the form of excess mass to more than make up for the energy deficit.
Yes that means Hydrogen fusion with the Ni. However there is only
one 62Ni
fission reaction that is exothermic if only one proton is added, and
that is the
reaction:-
1H+62Ni => 59Co + 4He + 0.346 MeV
However, if 2 protons are added simultaneously, there are many more
possible
exothermic reactions, e.g. :-
1H+1H+62Ni => 63Zn + n + 1.974 MeV
1H+1H+62Ni => 64Zn + 13.835 MeV
1H+1H+62Ni => 63Cu + 1H + 6.122 MeV
1H+1H+62Ni => 60Ni + 4He + 9.879 MeV
1H+1H+62Ni => 4He + 4He + 56Fe + 3.495 MeV <==== this one produces
iron.
1H+1H+62Ni => 52Cr + 12C + 3.249 MeV
1H+1H+62Ni => 48Ti + 16O + 1.057 MeV
1H+1H+62Ni => 34S + 30Si + 2.197 MeV
The last 4 produce lighter elements.
There are also similar reactions for the other Ni isotopes, and also
for the
daughter products of the initial reactions, e.g. :-
1H+1H+64Zn => 66Ge + 10.202 MeV
1H+1H+64Zn => 65Ga + 1H + 3.942 MeV
1H+1H+64Zn => 62Zn + 4He + 7.321 MeV
1H+1H+64Zn => 4He + 4He + 58Ni + 3.860 MeV
1H+1H+64Zn => 54Fe + 12C + 4.827 MeV
1H+1H+64Zn => 50Cr + 16O + 3.571 MeV
1H+1H+64Zn => 42Ca + 24Mg + 1.055 MeV
1H+1H+64Zn => 36Ar + 30Si + 3.239 MeV
1H+1H+64Zn => 37Ar + 29Si + 1.417 MeV
1H+1H+64Zn => 38Ar + 28Si + 4.782 MeV
1H+1H+64Zn => 35Cl + 31P + 2.029 MeV
1H+1H+64Zn => 33S + 33S + 1.746 MeV
1H+1H+64Zn => 34S + 32S + 4.522 MeV
Note the many light elements/isotopes.
Generally speaking by the time one gets to the mid-range elements,
fission
becomes much less likely when only a single nucleon is added (one
can see this
by checking neutron absorption cross sections). However concurrent
addition of
*two* protons could be a whole different kettle of fish.
Why do I even consider two proton additions? Because a severely
shrunken Hydrino
molecule is electrically neutral and even more massive than a
neutron, so I
think it may be possible for it to pass through the electron shells
of other
atoms and approach the nucleus, just as neutrons do.
And they bring two protons to the party *at the same time*.
Note that just because a reaction is exothermic, that doesn't
necessarily mean
that it will happen frequently/easily or even at all for that matter.
Furthermore, the more energy/mass that is initially added, the more
likely
fission becomes. Since it is also possible for two Hydrino molecules
to be
magnetically bound together, reactions involving the addition of 4
protons may
also be possible, e.g. :-
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 65Ge + n + 10.750 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 66Ge + 24.037 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 63Ga + 3H + 4.007 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 64Ga + 2H + 8.108 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 65Ga + 1H + 17.778 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 61Zn + 5He + 7.372 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 62Zn + 4He + 21.156 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 63Zn + 3He + 9.692 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 59Cu + 7Li + 3.859 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 60Cu + 6Li + 6.667 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 61Cu + 5Li + 12.713 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 56Ni + 10Be + 3.707 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 57Ni + 9Be + 7.144 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 4He + 4He + 58Ni + 17.696 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 59Ni + 7Be + 7.795 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 60Ni + 6Be + 8.507 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 55Co + 11B + 7.769 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 56Co + 10B + 6.398 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 57Co + 9B + 9.338 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 52Fe + 14C + 7.721 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 53Fe + 13C + 10.230 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 54Fe + 12C + 18.662 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 55Fe + 11C + 9.239 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 56Fe + 10C + 7.316 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 51Mn + 15N + 10.550 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 52Mn + 14N + 10.252 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 53Mn + 13N + 11.752 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 54Mn + 12N + 0.627 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 48Cr + 18O + 6.010 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 49Cr + 17O + 8.549 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 50Cr + 16O + 17.406 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 51Cr + 15O + 11.003 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 52Cr + 14O + 9.819 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 47V + 19F + 5.899 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 48V + 18F + 6.011 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 49V + 17F + 8.415 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 50V + 16F + 0.951 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 44Ti + 22Ne + 7.983 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 45Ti + 21Ne + 7.147 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 46Ti + 20Ne + 13.575 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 47Ti + 19Ne + 5.591 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 48Ti + 18Ne + 5.580 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 41Sc + 25Na + 0.410 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 42Sc + 24Na + 2.949 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 43Sc + 23Na + 8.128 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 44Sc + 22Na + 5.408 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 45Sc + 21Na + 5.662 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 39Ca + 27Mg + 4.271 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 40Ca + 26Mg + 13.471 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 41Ca + 25Mg + 10.740 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 42Ca + 24Mg + 14.890 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 43Ca + 23Mg + 6.292 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 44Ca + 22Mg + 4.275 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 37K + 29Al + 5.425 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 38K + 28Al + 8.061 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 39K + 27Al + 13.413 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 40K + 26Al + 8.155 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 41K + 25Al + 6.885 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 34Ar + 32Si + 4.868 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 35Ar + 31Si + 8.406 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 36Ar + 30Si + 17.074 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 37Ar + 29Si + 15.252 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 38Ar + 28Si + 18.617 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 39Ar + 27Si + 8.036 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 40Ar + 26Si + 4.594 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 32Cl + 34P + 0.297 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 33Cl + 33P + 9.751 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 34Cl + 32P + 11.155 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 35Cl + 31P + 15.864 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 36Cl + 30P + 12.132 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 37Cl + 29P + 11.124 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 33S + 33S + 15.582 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 34S + 32S + 18.357 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 35S + 31S + 10.301 MeV
1H+1H+1H+1H+62Ni => 36S + 30S + 7.137 MeV
As you can see, this may produce masses of light elements.
On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
First off, the production of only stable isotopes via fusion, points
to no transfer of any angular momentum or kinetic energy by the cold
fusion reaction. This points to photofusion.
The report that only even numbers of protons and neutrons in the
nucleus before fusion resulting in a zero nuclear spin points to
photofusion.
The clue that transmutation is not due to fission which cannot
happen because of negative energy coming out of the fission
reaction or multiple separate serial fusion events because multiple
lighter elements are produced by fusion; so the cause must be a
result of one massive fusion reaction of many diprotons into the
nickel atom. This points to a total removal of nuclear repulsion for
all these nucleons which all combine into two or more lighter
resultant nuclei. Also the production of all those highly
concentrated cooper pairs of protons point to suspension of nuclear
repulsion.
On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 11:16 AM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On 2/3/14, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Let us discuss this reference:...
No, let us discuss an experiment of YOUR design, the results of which
would differentiate YOUR theory from competing theories.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 1:53 AM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>> Theory is not made of repetition and citation but of reflection and
>> experimental testing.
>>
>> One of the nice things about coming up with a novel theory is it
allows
>> you to come up with novel experiments and if appropriately
tempered by
>> economic those experiments may be quite practical.
>>
>> What is your experimental test?
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 11:49 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>
>>> I speak with the authority of repetition. I have gone over this
stuff
>>> fifty times and no one has countered me except Ed Storms to my
great
>>> joy.
>>>
>>> Theory is not made of sunshine and roses. Like steel, it is
tempered by
>>> repeated blows and forged in fire, between the hammer and the
anvil.
>>>
>>> In each post I provide one or more supporting references. All the
>>> opinions I provide are based on established science as defined
by the
>>> references I list.
>>>
>> http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0306126v2.pdf
>>>
>>> As above In this thread, I provide a reference on how EMF
frequencies
>>> can
>>> be both down shifted and up shifted in an optical cavity. This
is called
>>> Fano resonance. I have described Fano resonance hundreds of
times as
>>> simple
>>> as I can. Who else has provided a reference in this thread? No
one!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 12:29 AM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Axil, you speak with the authority of one who knows -- perhaps
even
>>>> more
>>>> so than ChemE.
>>>>
>>>> Does your authoritative knowledge shed light on an economical
>>>> demonstration of that knowledge?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 11:24 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Radioisotopes are not produced in LENR when the nucleus is
suppressed
>>>>> (coulomb barrio screened) by magnetic fields, because these
photons do
>>>>> not
>>>>> excite the nuclus like neutrons do. They carry no angular
momentum or
>>>>> kinetic energy to excite the nucleus.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 11:39 PM, Eric Walker
>>>>> <eric.wal...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 8:03 PM, Jed Rothwell
>>>>>> <jedrothw...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These discussions about "suppressing" gamma rays and neutrons
have
>>>>>>> been around since the beginning of cold fusion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is true that some people in this thread have been arguing
about
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> suppression of MeV-range gammas. Like you say, this sounds
pretty
>>>>>> far-out.
>>>>>> Better not to have powerful gammas in the first place. What
is more
>>>>>> interesting in the recent discussion is whether p+Ni fusion
is ruled
>>>>>> out by
>>>>>> the evidence, and that has been what has absorbed a lot of our
>>>>>> attention.
>>>>>> If low-level penetrating radiation is not allowed (e.g.,
photons in
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> keV range, some of which might be considered "gammas"), then p
+Ni is
>>>>>> contraindicated, because everything we know about p+Ni says
that it
>>>>>> will
>>>>>> result in short-lived radioisotopes and associated emissions
after it
>>>>>> takes
>>>>>> place, for a period of hours or days. If low-level radiation
is
>>>>>> allowed,
>>>>>> then p+Ni is not necessarily ruled out. That is the heart of
much of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> recent thread.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jones wants to say that there is no penetrating radiation
whatsoever
>>>>>> in NiH. He no doubt has his reversible proton fusion in
mind. Ed
>>>>>> wants to
>>>>>> say that what low-level radiation there is above a very low
threshold
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> due to side channels (if I have understood him). He has his
hydroton
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> mind. I've argued that the evidence bears otherwise on both
counts,
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> that low-level penetrating radiation is both seen and is
perhaps
>>>>>> inherent
>>>>>> to NiH cold fusion and not due to a side channel. Although
this
>>>>>> discussion
>>>>>> might look like the usual discussion about MeV gammas, really
it has
>>>>>> been a
>>>>>> discussion about short-lived radioisotopes that follow upon
whatever
>>>>>> it is
>>>>>> that cold fusion consists of. So we've been having a
discussion that
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> different than the usual "gamma" discussion. Rossi's
terminology
>>>>>> confuses
>>>>>> things, because he appears to refer to all photons in his
system as
>>>>>> gammas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Eric
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
