The reason why a quantum dot idea won't work is the fact that electrons conform to the Pauli exclusion principle.
The quantum dot can be thought of as a single atom with thousands of ascending electron orbital energy levels. As these levels absorb gamma radiation, it get increasingly harder for the higher energy levels to absorb ever higher energy photons. With bosons, this limitation does not exist. On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > The almost intractable problem for explaining LENR to physicists, or even > undergrads in physics - is that there is no gamma - presenting a major > obstacle to our understanding if there is to be real fusion. Almost all of > the other problems in Ni-D, the Mizuno reaction, including lack of > transmutation products and lack of neutrons have a possible explanation, > since there is a known reaction with a short half-life that converts Ni58 > and a deuteron to Ni60, leaving no lingering radioactivity. As mentioned in > prior postings, Ni58 is a bit of an anomaly in having too few neutrons > (lower amu than cobalt, for instance). Ni58 could be favored for this kind > of reaction. > > Unfortunately, this reaction is so energetic in net energy, that the lack > of > gamma is almost as problematic as the situation with putative fusion of > deuterons to helium. The most accepted solution to the lack of gammas is > based on Hagelstein's evolving theory, which can be called gamma > fractionalization. That theory is based on downshifting of gamma level > energy, but without the photon emission, all the way to phonon vibrations > at > 8-16 THz, which is a massive drop of about 8-9 orders of magnitude - or a > ratio of at least 100,000,000:1 (100 million to one) - which is an enormous > reduction in energy over a very short time frame. > > Yet, the Hagelstein model, as a general premise could apply to the > fractionalization to other energy levels - other than all the way to weak > phonon vibrations, which are a fractional eV. For instance, a > fractionalization down to the DDL (dark matter) level, is intriguing - in > which case the ratio is much easier to deal with. Apparently, PH has never > considered this as an option, so it is worth mentioning as a possibility > for > future inclusion into a broader theory. > > In Ni-D, such as the recent Mizuno experiment, where deuterium would > transmute Ni58 to Ni60, if that much energy (12 MeV prompt + 6 MeV delayed) > could be taken away as spin, transferred to a large number of atoms - then > voila, that would be a solution. The spin would serve to decrease electron > orbitals of deuterons to form the DDL. The ratio which is required drops > from (100 million to one) all the way down to a few thousand to one. > > In short, Hagelstein's general premise can be improved via a DDL mechanism > (dense deuterium or deep Dirac level). For this to work in practice, there > would need to be perhaps 3000+ molecules of deuterium-loaded-nickel, > operating as a unit (quantum dot unit) with some level of quantum wave > coherence, with which to share the 12 MeV... which energy release would > provide about 3.5 keV per molecule of deuterium - to push the molecule down > into the DDL state. This level would have escaped detection. The quantum > dot > is typically the correct size, but is typically a semiconductor, like NiO > instead of a metal. > > Most of these "shrunken" molecules simply re-expand, giving back the 3.5 > keV > (which is the signature of "dark matter") which is undetectable in > operation, but if at least one or two of them were to fuse to nickel, in > order to repeat the cycle, then we have a limited chain reaction. > > The problem is that even if this scenario worked most of the time, we > should > see a percentage of high energy gammas. When none are seen, this casts > doubt > on the entire explanation. > > But it is worth mentioning, especially if Mizuno's new results should > report > an relative increase in Ni60 relative to Ni58 - or radiation in the 3-4 keV > range. > > Jones > > >
