Piantelli has seen a 6 MeV proton in a cloud chamber.
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 4:34 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: > Ed, the energy can be released in the form of a particle, such as an > alpha, and a gamma ray. Energy and momentum can be conserved in that > manner. The bulk of the energy will be given to the gamma ray due to the > large difference in masses. Think of a rifle firing a bullet. Most of > the energy ends up in the bullet while linear momentum is conserved. > > Dave > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Cc: Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> > Sent: Wed, Mar 5, 2014 4:09 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:"Christopher H. Cooper" > > Bob, we are discussing a basic and fundamental concept. The energy > generated when mass-energy is released requires emission of at least two > particles for the energy to be dissipated. I know of no example in nature > where this requirement does not operate when energy is released. If energy > is not released immediately, but is retained in the nucleus, this nucleus > is found to be unstable and will eventually release energy over a period of > time by emission of a particle, including a photon. This is how nature is > found to behave. Imagining otherwise is not useful unless you have observed > support for the idea. > > Ed Storms > > > On Mar 5, 2014, at 2:01 PM, Bob Cook wrote: > > Ed-- > > You said: > > >>Yes, that is what I'm saying. LENR can not result in a single alpha > because two particles are required to conserve momentum when energy is > released. << > > I note that, if there is no linear momentum to start, two particles would > not be required. I do not believe conservation of angular momentum > requires two particles either. And keep in mind that potential energy may > be changed to the energy of angular momentum/spin energy in LENR. > > Bob > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Cc:* Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 05, 2014 12:06 PM > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:"Christopher H. Cooper" > > > On Mar 5, 2014, at 12:28 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > > From: Edmund Storms > > Jones, bremsstrahlung or "slowing down radiation" is not > produced by photons. > > Who said it was? > > > I'm not answering a claim. I'm simply giving information. You brought up > photons by talking about gamma emissions, which are photons. You then added > the production of bremsstrahlung, which I simply pointed out is not > produced by gamma. > > You brought up photons. I asked for adequate documentation > of intense photon emission - and am still waiting. > > > I sent a list of references. If you want a copy of a particular paper to > read, ask and I will send what I have. Unfortunately, I can not send using > Vortex and I can not send all the papers. > > > This is generated by energetic electrons or particles such > as alpha emission. LENR produces neither kind of radiation. > > What? Are you now saying that the helium you claim to see in Pd-D does not > begin as an alpha particles? > > > Yes, that is what I'm saying. LENR can not result in a single alpha > because two particles are required to conserve momentum when energy is > released. > > > Therefore, bremsstrahlung is not an issue because all the > mass-energy is dissipated as photons. > > There is no proof of this. > > > The proof is in the behavior. This is the only conclusion consistent with > all behavior. Unfortunately, a book is required to present this information > in a form and as complete as you require. I'm attempting to do this. Please > be patient. > > > The only question is how this happens. I have proposed a > mechanism. The only issue is whether this mechanism is plausible and > consistent will all the other observations. > > It is not plausible if you cannot document photons sufficient to account > for > the heat. > > > I agree, the measurement of heat and radiation have not been done in a > way to show a quantitative correlation. However, I suggest you apply this > standard to the other explanations as well. If you do, I think you will > have to agree that no explanation meeting this requirements presently > exists, including your own. > > Ed Storms > > > Where is the documentation? > > Jones > > > <winmail.dat> > > > > >
