(sanity check) It goes without saying that the most likely implication of finding Ni-Cu-Fe is that it was intended to be there for reasons related to the properties of any mu metal, and that it was not formed from transmutation.
However, mu metal as an intended reactant may relate to excess heat in a
number of ways, and we know from Claytor’s presentation at MIT that he uses
mu metal as his cathode.
Either way, magnetism - once again - seems to be relevant to LENR in ways
which are not fully appreciated.
_____________________________________________
From: Jones Beene
One more detail to add into the mix of the Kullander finding
(which has always looked suspicious before now).
The very first patent for Mu metal was GB279549. Smith, et
al July 27, 1926. “A nickel-copper-iron alloy of high magnetic
permeability”
Mu metals today can still be found which are
nickel-copper-iron.
Additionally, there are similarities between
superconductivity and Mu metal. Expelling a magnetic field is one
similarity, accomplished in different ways.
I wish we had some confidence in the Kullander report, and
that indeed the results of a long run of the Rossi reactor is that nickel
converts to Ni-Cu-Fe
From: Danny Ross Lunsford
I've always suspected that LENR Is a
complicated nuclear oscillation process about the highest possible binding
energy for a nucleon. It must share with superconductivity that this
oscillation, once stimulated, can continue undissipated indefinitely.
[snip] just for laughs…
consider…
Two Ni-58 plus a proton
equals 117 nucleons; and one Cu-63
plus one Fe-54 is the same.
Kullander supposedly found
that about 21% of Rossi’s
starting nickel had been transmuted into 10%
copper and 11% iron, and that
the copper and nickel were in natural
isotopic proportions. The implication
is that some kind of musical-chairs shuffle
of nucleons is possible (if we
believe his findings) and that nickel
nucleons convert to copper and iron in
roughly equal proportions in a novel
reaction. This is bizarre, but no more
so than anything else Rossi has claimed.
Maybe this novel reaction is
Higgs-mediated :-)
What is a nucleon exchange
reaction? Well, this is actually
not unheard of, and the Oppenheimer-Phillips
reaction is the simple version.
It takes a lot of imagination to go any
further than that, but there are a
few papers out there…
FWIW – the reason that the Higgs “particle”
was mentioned as the catalyst
for a nucleon exchange reaction is that
1) The “particle” is more of an
energy-sink than a real particle, based
on the way it was discovered and documented
at LHC. The Higgs has the
features of a quanta of energy which is
absorbed in an adjoining dimension
as a stabilizing mechanism or energy sink.
2) The putative mass energy of the
Higgs is 125 GeV which is larger
than 117 nucleons, but possibly within a
working range of resonance.
3) The hypothesis is that the Higgs
quanta is induced into 3-space by
some mechanism related to the very high
nuclear stability of nickel, and
that it forms a kind of ghostly shadow on
the reactants, resulting in
nucleon exchange which Kullander discovered.
4) After all, we are still trying to
find a justification for the $5
billion bucks or more which was spent on LHC
in order to obtain this ghostly
bit of information
In conclusion, this adds a whole new meaning
to “Zeitgeist” or should that
be “Geisteskrank”
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
