Bob and Eric, the issue of transmutation is basic to understanding
LENR. First of all, transmutation has a very high barrier requiring an
explanation of how this can be overcome. Second, the resulting energy
has to be dissipated in ways known to be possible. I propose the
hydrogen fusion process provides the required energy and dissipates
much of the excess mass-energy. In other words, transmutation can not
occur unless fusion is taking place at the same time and place in the
material.
We now know that two kinds of transmutation occur. Iwamura shows that
D can be added to a target resulting in a stable heavier product. Most
other claims for transmutation are based on fragments of Pd being
found. Explaining these two different results is the challenge.
In the case of Ni+H, I propose the p-e-p fusion process deposits the
resulting d in the Ni nucleus, resulting in fragmentation of the
product in order to dissipate the excess mass-energy. I believe 2d
enter all isotopes of Ni when the fusion reaction is operating. As a
result, the 1.9 MeV obtained from the p-e-p reaction is added to any
energy resulting from occasional transmutation. When the Ni fissions,
it must conserve n and p, which produces a distribution of products
that can be calculated. This calculation shows a distribution that is
consistent with what is reported and reveals Ni-58 to be the most
active isotope for energy production. I will provide much more detail
and justification in my book. Meanwhile, you might consider this
proposed process.
I propose transmutation takes place in the Rossi cell, but he has
incorrectly identified its source and incorrectly attributed the
energy to transmutation. I propose most energy results from p-e-p=d
fusion, with transmutation resulting from fission of Ni adding only a
minor amount of energy. If this is the case, focus on Ni is a waste
of time.
Ed Storms
On Feb 7, 2014, at 10:39 AM, Bob Cook wrote:
Eric--
Your bring up some interesting questions about the Rossi reactor.
The information I have included come from Rossi and Focardi's
international patent application noted below.
1. Is Rossi separating Ni isotopes for the Ni he uses in the reactor?
This would be expensive. The natural isotopic abundances are:
Ni-58, 68.08%;
Ni-59, 0%--its radioactive with 1/2 life of 80,000 years;
Ni 60, 26.22%;
Ni-61, 1.14%;
Ni-62, 3.63%;
Ni-63, 0%--its radioactive with 1/2 life of 92 years;
Ni-64, 0.93%.
I would pick Ni-60 because it is more than one transmutation (Ni-
proton fusion) away from a radioactive residue.
2. Is there radioactive ash (Ni-59 or Ni-63) left in the spent
reactors?
Rossi and Focardi seem to contradict themselves with the
statements below:
"...we believe that form of energy involved is nuclear, and
more specifically, due to fusion processes between protons and
Nickel nuclei.
They are exothermic with an energy release in the range
3-7,5 MeV, depending on the Nickel isotope involved."
"No radioactivity has been found also in the Nickel residual
from the process."
This information attributed to Focardi and Rossi comes from their
instructive statements, which suggest the nuclear Ni-proton fusion,
in the following paper:
A new energy source from nuclear fusion
S. Focardi(1) and A. Rossi(2)--(1)Physics Department Bologna
University and INFN Bologna Section, (2)Leonardo Corp. (USA) -
Inventor of the Patent, March 22, 2010 (international patent
publication N. WO 2009/125444 A1)
My final observation is that the Rossi-Focardi comment that there is
no radioactivity in the residue needs to be checked. Other Ni-
hydrogen materials that have been produced by other experimenters
should be carefully checked for both the potential radioactive Ni
isotopes---Ni-59 and Ni-63. They should be easy to detect given
their well known decay modes and probable gamma emissions. (I will
look up this information and put it in a subsequent comment.) I
know that both Ni-59 and Ni-63 are problems when it comes to nuclear
waste disposal of activated metals.) A null radioactivity essay
would be revealing as to the process actually occurring in the Ni-
hydrogen reactions.
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Walker
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 7:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:MIT Course Day 5 -- NiH Systems
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Bob Cook <[email protected]>
wrote:
Also I suspect that the nano Ni that is produced is pretty pure.
That may be why Rossi uses it and may be the reason other
researchers do not have very good luck at getting a good reaction.
I'm guessing that the purity of Rossi's nickel (in terms of 62Ni and
64Ni) is related to avoiding beta-plus and beta-minus decay, and,
with beta-plus decay, the 511 keV positron-electron annihilation
photons.
Some vorts may enjoy this video of a small cloud chamber [1]. It's
remarkable that such a small event can have macroscopic effects.
Eric
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQVMrkJYShc
