LENR reactions with nickel is a very rare minority reaction. The primary reaction is in the extraction of nuclear energy from hydrogen crystals (Rydberg matter).
A NiH reactor can operates for months and years without much deterioration of the nickel nano-structures through transmutation. The NiH reactor produces only light elements. The DGT ash assay shows little nickel consumed and little copper produced. The nuclear energy produced in the NiH LENR reaction is absorbed in the hydrogen envelope because the 3 grams of nickel powder does not have sufficient thermodynamic presents to transfer heat to the structure of the reactor without deterioration through sintering. Many other transition metals are capable of supporting the LENR reaction. Nickel is best because it is a perfect infrared reflector. Ni58, Ni60, Ni62 and Ni64 are all capable of supporting LENR because they are NMR inactive. Ni61 is NMR active and will waste energy by producing radio frequency radiation. On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > If there is a real DDL species in LENR (hydrogen isomer with electron > orbital at less than 10 Fermi), even if it is a transitory species with a > lifetime of only nanoseconds, then there is a way for nickel to provide the > thermal gain, by spin coupling with no fusion required. In fact, if there > is > such a DDL species, chances are that it could be a transitory oscillator, > such that the rate of oscillation is resonant with the phonon rate of > nickel. > > Rice and Kim show here that the DDL is not stable for extended periods. > They > do not show that the DDL is impossible... > http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RiceRAcommentsona.pdf > but they also demonstrate that they do not understand Mills' CQM theory > > To overcome the objections to the DDL, and to nickel spin coupling, please > consider all of these points as a package, and not individually. Back in > early 2011, we talked about the final revision of the Rossi patent filing. > In his application Rossi's bets everything on Ni62 as THE important > reactant > - US 2011/0005506. His reasoning could be incorrect, but it is likely that > Rossi tested pure isotopes and found that Ni-62 was indeed the active > isotope. > > Otherwise Rossi would not have bet the farm on one isotope, since ... if he > is wrong on that single detail he has lost all protection against > infringement. QUOTE from application: "Accordingly, it is indispensable to > use, for the above mentioned exothermal reactions, a nickel isotope having > a > mass number of 62". That pretty much says it all when we consider the > properties of this isotope (and if we ignore Rossi's reasoning in the > patent > for why this isotope works). He could be "right for the wrong reason". > > BTW - the patent was granted in Europe to his wife Maddalena Pascucci, who > is an attorney, and presumably had good advice on patent law - but again - > the US application is not granted. However, the USA is a signator to the > PCT > so Pascucci could get protection here for the nickel-62 part - and perhaps > for little else. > > Why Ni-62 ... and why bet the farm? > > Nickel-62 is at the very pinnacle of stability - having the highest binding > energy per nucleon in the entire Periodic Table (8.8 MeV). There is no more > stable isotope known to science. This binding stability would actually > prohibit it from participating in proton nuclear fusion reactions, as Rossi > suggested, but would allow spin energy (part of the binding energy) to be > coupled and depleted - simply because there is plenty to spare. Too bad > that > he did not realize this distinction. BTW - it is duly noted that other > nickel and iron isotopes have very high binding energy as well, but a lot > of > weight goes to Rossi's testing of isotopes against each other. > > That is what is meant by Rossi being "right for the wrong reason" > > This stability of Ni-62, combined with ferromagnetism is especially > relevant > for the combination of a strong magnet with a material which cannot be > saturated; and the DDL, with an effective field strength at the 10 Fermi > level in the range of giga-T (billions of Tesla) is that strong magnet. > Deraz - claims there is no saturation level for NiO, and even if doubts are > warranted on that particular point, it could be important in the context of > spin coupling to find an extreme level of saturation capability, with which > to mate with giga-T fields. The result is spin coupling. > www.electrochemsci.org/papers/vol7/7054608.pdf > > In short, as of now, with dozens of alternative theories floating around > for > the gain in Ni-H, the best emerging scenario - from my perspective seems to > be one which is > 1) No fusion occurs in Ni-H. It is a different beast that Pd-D. > 2) But the gain is Nuclear, in the sense of mass conversion into > energy > 3) It is Nanomagnetic in the sense that spin energy is involved at > small geometry > 4) Probably involves a transitory version of the DDL, which oscillates > at IR frequency, due to SPP interaction at the top and spin coupling at the > bottom, such that the collapse and reinflation are slightly asymmetric in > energy > 5) Thus there is net heat. > 6) The gain comes mostly from Ni-62 by spin coupling to its high level > of composite spin, > 7) Oxygen if present in the nickel in small amounts could allow > increased saturation capability > 8) It is not clear if the Ni-62 gives up some of its own mass, or is a > gateway to the Dirac "sea" ... Either way, this is LENR but it is also > "non-fusion LENR" > > Any and all of these suggestion are subject to change as soon as better > data > arrives. All we can do now is look at the big picture as being shadows on > Plato's cave. > > > > > > >
