Ed and Jones--
The definition of gamma emission is cropping up again. Jones I assume you
mean any electromagnetic radiation that stems from a nuclear transition of some
sort. This would include low energy photons that Ed describes as well as
nuclear magnetic resonance transitions to higher spin states activated by
external oscillating magnetic fields and subsequent radiation emitted by the
excited nucleus.
However, I assume gamma radiation would NOT include small amounts of
electromagnetic radiation released by electrons in a metal lattice that share
spin energy/angular momentum with near by nuclei, but are not part of the
nuclei.
Bob
From: Edmund Storms
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 8:34 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:"Christopher H. Cooper"
On Mar 5, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
From: Eric Walker
This working assumption (of a known fusion reaction) is not justifiable by
facts, logic or common sense.
Sure. That's you're opinion. You're entitled to an opinion.
Sorry to have made this blanket statement in regard to your prior post
specifically, Eric, since it is a generic criticism to many of the posts on
Vortex and not personal - but…
No, it’s not opinion when 100% of the available proof is on your side.
It is fact that LENR is not and cannot be a known fusion reaction, since it
is fact that no known nuclear fusion reaction is gamma free. QED.
Jones, this statement is not correct. LENR emits photons. These photons are
not as energetic as those produced by many normal nuclear reactions, hence most
do not escape the apparatus. Nevertheless, the mass-energy is released as
photons as is normal and is required of a nuclear reaction. The only unknown is
the mechanism causing this process. Obviously, a process is required that does
not operate during hot fusion. Nevertheless, nuclear products are formed that
can only result from a nuclear reaction having the known and well understood
consequences.
Ed Storms
