Jones--
You are mystical in your assessment of spin coupling. I am also a mystic.
The presence of a magnetic field is known to separate the energy states
associated with spin energy. The variation of magnetic fields may allow the
random connection with resonant frequencies and spin quantum states in a
matrix of Ni or any other solid state material.
I do not know about Heffner or Springer, but more power to them.
Why has Peter not taken up spin coupling except in passing noting that his
new Hamiltonian is relativistic and considers a loosy spin-boson model with
(I assume) energy coupling?
My thoughts about spin coupling go all the way back to P&F in 1989. They
were vague and reflected my ideas presented in my early correspondence with
Vortex-l in February. The subsequent discussion with you and others on this
blog have certainly enhanced my ideas. The two dimensional and one
dimensional issues associated with nano particles and structures I believe
is a key issue in understanding the reaction potential and spin coupling in
a magnetic field. Your third item in the list below regarding hydrogen bonds
is also noted and may be a key model to consider in the fractionation of
spin energy from nuclei to a matrix or molecule with hydrogen bonding.
The comment I made to Eric regarding his recent spread sheet follows
hereinafter and addresses potential spin coupling between Ni-62 and Cu-63.
The first reaction that produces Ni-59 will end up as Co-59 with no
gammas since the Ni-59 decay involves an electron capture and a hot beta
+, which will give thermal energy to the matrix ( about .0.52 Mev) with a
subsequent beta+, beta- decay with its back-to-back .51 Mev gammas. The
total energy from the Ni-59 decay--half live 7.6x10^4 years-- is 1.073
Mev. Ni-59 has a -3/2 spin and and Co-59 has a -7/2 spin. It seems that
spin is changed since the beta+ particle would only carry +or- 1/2 spin.
I do not understand how spin angular momentum is conserved in the Ni-59
decay reaction, unless there are several neutrinos involved which could
carry away spin angular momentum.
You have not considered neutron capture reactions with the various Ni
isotopes. If the H reacts in the magnetic field in the Rossi device with an
electron to form a neutron as an intermediate virtual particle, then Ni-58
would go to Ni-59 and hence to Co-59 as described above.
Proton absorption reaction with Ni-60 would give Cu-61 with a 3.41 H half
life. Cu-61 decays by electron capture and gives a beta+ with soft gammas
(.28 and .65 Mev) and a stable Ni-61 isotope. (Focardi indicated that Cu was
formed and in non-natural isotopic ratios in the Rossi device.) This
conclusion seems to differ from your table regarding the desirability of the
reaction.
Proton absorption reaction with Ni-58 gives Cu-59 which decays with a half
live if 82 s and produces a beta+ at 3.75 Mev and hot gammas at 1.3 Mev.
Total energy of this decay is 4.8 Mev. This does not look like it would be a
reaction that Rossi would like given the hot gamma. And there is a
radioactive product, since the final item is Ni-59 with its long half life
and its .51 Mev gammas from the beta+ annihilation.
A proton reaction with Ni-62 would give Cu-63, which is stable. This
reaction would involve a decrease in energy (mass) of about 6.22 Mev. How
the energy would be released is a question. It may be distributed by spin
coupling to the rest of the matrix electrons and hence as thermal energy.
Rossi would not want Ni-58, but Ni-62 and Ni-62 would seem to be ok. Ni-61
would be undesirable also since it gives Cu-62 with the addition of a
proton, and Cu-62 decays with a hot gamma of 1.17 Mev.
It is my thought that there may be two reactions occurring at the same time
with spin of the resulting Cu-63 isotopes having equal but opposite excited
spin states such that spin angular momentum change is 0 and each of the two
new Cu-63 nuclei decay from their excited states at the same time, coupling
with electrons in the matrix, with each electron receiving a quanta or two
in the process. It may be that a pair of protons, a Cooper pair, actually
react with two Ni-62 nuclei in a solid state BEC configuration. The magnetic
field that exists in the Ni matrix would cause the degenerative quantum
states in the adjacent Ni nuclei to allow the necessary excited spin states
to handle the excess mass energy released in the reactions. All this is
without gammas. >>>
How's that for a guess?
Bob Cook
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jones Beene" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2014 12:17 PM
Subject: [Vo]:Spin Coupling
"Spin coupling" is a superset phrase for several types of energy transfer
mechanisms, including angular momentum coupling, magnetic coupling and much
more. Unfortunately, there is no scholarly paper to elucidate all of the
intricacy of this phenomenon, as it applies to LENR. Mention was made of
spin coupling in gravimagnetics by Horace Heffner years ago, and it is too
bad he is not here to bring those comments up to date in a broader context.
It was part of Julian Schwinger's approach to LENR, far earlier.
Spin coupling exists as a way to transfer energy across vast scales of
geometry, all the way from galaxies down to quarks. Included in the term are
1) magnetic dipole coupling
2) LS coupling of hydrogen and possibly potassium, where the electron spins
interact among themselves in groups to form a total spin angular momentum
(similar to magnons);
3) J coupling, which is also called indirect dipole-dipole coupling which is
mediated through hydrogen bonds connecting two spins.
4) JJ coupling happens between heavier atoms like nickel;
5) Spin-spin coupling
6) Magnon coupling
7) Mössbauer coupling
8) Nuclear coupling, which is stronger at short distances and is
incorporated directly into the nuclear shell model.
9) Subatomic spin coupling of quarks and pions QCD etc.
Certainly there are others under the umbrella of spin coupling.
A focus on spin coupling phenomenon - as the main source of nuclear gain,
without gamma radiation, is new to somewhat new to LENR and it is not clear
who to attribute the idea to, possibly Schwinger in a simpler form - but it
stands as an alternative way to transfer mass-energy from heavy nuclei,
directly to light nuclei, then to electrons, then to magnons (in the sense
of a coherent array). The energy is nuclear, but there is no fusion nor is
it Mills, even if reduced orbitals are involved.
The result is spatial thermal gain which is similar in some respects to the
way a magnetic core of a transformer heats up. Yet in the end the gain is
mass-to-energy - since nuclear mass converts to spin at a basic subatomic
level, starting at the quark level and QCD.
The main problem is that there could be much more going on in any LENR
experiment than spin coupling. In fact, spin coupling can co-exist with
nuclear fusion, beta decay, hydrinos or any other nuclear process. Plus,
gain from spin coupling can make incidental fusion reactions seem more
robust than they in actuality ... or vice-versa. By that, it is suggested
that spin coupling, providing only milli-eV of energy per nucleon, but which
is transferred at terahertz rates, is a mechanism which can provide many
Watts of thermal gain, which can make a few incidental fusion reactions
stand-out as being more important than they are... or vice versa.
This is a complex and interesting angle - for looking at gain in
nickel-hydrogen systems for several reasons. First, of course is that nickel
is ferromagnetic and many experiments have shown changes around the Curie
point of nickel. Second is the Letts/Cravens effect and the recent NI-Week
demo of Dennis Cravens, and the magnetic work of Mitchell Swartz - all of
which show a strong connection of magnetism to excess heat.
Jones
