>>>Sample 2 was the fuel used to charge the E-Cat. It’s in the form of a very fine powder. Besides the analyzed elements it has been found that the fuel also contains rather high concentrations of C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, Mn and these are not found in the ash.>>>
This indicates that also virgin powder was analyzed. This was not explicitly mentioned in TIP2, was it? On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 8:33 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > The isotopic shift observed is only a side effect of the real reaction > that are taking place. From others LENR experiments one can suspect that > hydrogen is the fuel and that Ni is just modified by whatever is in its > vicinity. > > Do you remember all the internet ink was used to debate the copper ash in > the nickel powder; now all that is for naught. > > The transmutation pattern is based on the geometry of the reactor. As that > geometry changes so does the transmutation patterns. > > The analysis of transmutation was incomplete and much of the many > reactions were missed. > > For example from page 53... > > Sample 2 was the fuel used to charge the E-Cat. It’s in the form of a very > fine powder. Besides the analyzed elements it has been found that the fuel > also contains rather high concentrations of C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, Mn and these > are not found in the ash. > > And there was transmutation of aluminum. > > > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 2:06 AM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 7:21 PM, <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote: >> >> Li7 + Ni58 => Ni59 + Li6 + 1.75 MeV >>> Li7 + Ni59 => Ni60 + Li6 + 4.14 MeV >>> Li7 + Ni60 => Ni61 + Li6 + 0.57 MeV >>> Li7 + Ni61 => Ni62 + Li6 + 3.34 MeV >>> Li7 + Ni62 => Ni63 + Li6 - 0.41 MeV (Endothermic!) >>> >>> This series stops at Ni62, hence all isotopes of Ni less than 62 are >>> depleted >>> and Ni62 is strongly enriched. >>> >> >> This is very nice. I've been too attached to deuterium. In this >> particular instance, deuterium reactions above 62Ni would be exothermic: >> >> - 62Ni + n → 63Ni + p + Q (5.1 MeV) >> - 63Ni + n → 64Ni + p + Q (7.9 MeV) >> >> Since neither 62Ni nor 63Ni were seen in significant quantities in the >> ash, I think we can rule deuterium out for this particular test. Note that >> while 64Ni(7Li,6Li)65Ni is also endothermic, 63Ni(7Li,6Li)64Ni is >> exothermic. Since 63Ni is not found in nature, however, and since it won't >> be coming from the 62Ni(7Li,6Li)63Ni reaction, none will arise unless there >> is deuterium in the mix. It all feels a little precarious, because if you >> get any 64Ni, you can get penetrating radiation from deexcitation gammas >> from inelastic collisions. >> >> To add to your thought about the kinetic energy of the daughter 6Li being >> relatively low, for the maximum Q value in your list above, there would be >> 4.14 MeV / 6 nucleons = 690 keV per nucleon, which seems manageable. I >> will nominate you for the Vortex Nobel Prize for your insight about neutron >> stripping from lithium. >> >> Two questions I have: >> >> - Why use hydrogen at all if the reaction can be sustained with >> lithium? >> - What is the amount of force that would be needed to bring a 7Li to >> within a sufficient distance of a nickel nucleus for stripping to occur? >> It seems like it would be high. >> >> Eric >> >> >
