Re: [Vo]:substitutes?
Hi Dennis, I like the idea that NI 62 might be the source of energy, initially I balked at selection of an isotope with the highest binding energy thinking the best candidate should exhibit the weakest binding energy and therefore be more susceptible to an induced form of decay provided by the cavity, This idea of causing an unnatural mixture of isotopes with excess binding energy and then mixing them in the NAE / catalyst may be a way to rapidly accelerate reactions and aging of, and between the isotopes. - I would like to read over your theory if you have a link. Regards Fran From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 2:57 PM To: vortex-l Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:substitutes? DJ Cravens The LENR reaction is driven by geometry not material. The high school reactor uses tungsten without isotope separation. The key to the process is to use micro and nanoparticles is a wide range of sizes to support dark mode EMF amplification. Additional theory is available upon request. On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 1:48 PM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.commailto:djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: yes Ni62 has the lowest binding energy/nuc. Fe 56 has the lowest mass per nuc. (due to p n masses). if some isotope of Fe or other material can be found to be active, there is a chance that alloys with some isotope of Fe and something that is permeable to p's might be useful. My guess right now is that perhaps Ni 62 is the energy out and that the other isotopes of Ni might be sucking up some of the energy. Dennis PS I am presently using La Ni 5 alloys. But perhaps a Fe Ti alloy might be worth a try. From: jone...@pacbell.netmailto:jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:substitutes? Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 09:31:32 -0700 From: DJ Cravens Ni-62 If we assume that speculation about Rossi is correct, what materials other than Ni-62 could be used? If it is p + X reaction, what other isotopes other than Ni62 could be used? Or perhaps it is really a p+p reaction with Ni-62 donating something??? Anyone have any suggestions? This is an important point - is there a substitute for Ni-62? The best way to approach the subject is to look at the isotope and ask - is there anything which is unique about this species? Then, if the answer is yes we must ask - how does the unique property materialize in the gainful reaction? As to the first part - yes - Ni-62 is a singularity in the periodic table, being the one isotope with the highest binding energy per nucleon of all known nuclides (~8.8 MeV per) ... and yet here it is being identified as active for the anomalous energy Rossi claims to have found with hydrogen. On the one hand, if there is true gain in this device primarily due to properties of this isotope - being a singularity could be an important clue. OTOH it is most surprising that the physical property for which it derives its uniqueness - is the opposite of what one logically expects in the situation. That property, which is highest binding energy means the isotope is the most stable. What is the next most stable? That would be an iron isotope, but iron could have chemical properties which interfere with the nuclear reaction As for Part-2 of the inquiry... which is why ... this has been addressed piecemeal in prior postings, and I will collect these, with revisions, in another posting. Jones
Re: [Vo]:substitutes?
The reason for the use of nickel in the Ni/H reactor is its ability to support the development of robust dipole activity on the surface of the micro-powder. This makes for stronger polariton development and associated strength in the formation of the power in the NAE.. On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 8:26 AM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: Hi Dennis, I like the idea that NI 62 might be the source of energy, initially I balked at selection of an isotope with the highest binding energy thinking the best candidate should exhibit the weakest binding energy and therefore be more susceptible to an “induced” form of decay provided by the cavity, This idea of causing an unnatural mixture of isotopes with excess binding energy and then mixing them in the NAE / catalyst may be a way to rapidly accelerate reactions and aging of, and between the isotopes. – I would like to read over your theory if you have a link. Regards Fran ** ** *From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, May 21, 2013 2:57 PM *To:* vortex-l *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:substitutes? ** ** DJ Cravens The LENR reaction is driven by geometry not material. The high school reactor uses tungsten without isotope separation. The key to the process is to use micro and nanoparticles is a wide range of sizes to support dark mode EMF amplification. Additional theory is available upon request. ** ** On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 1:48 PM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: yes Ni62 has the lowest binding energy/nuc. Fe 56 has the lowest mass per nuc. (due to p n masses). if some isotope of Fe or other material can be found to be active, there is a chance that alloys with some isotope of Fe and something that is permeable to p's might be useful. My guess right now is that perhaps Ni 62 is the energy out and that the other isotopes of Ni might be sucking up some of the energy. Dennis PS I am presently using La Ni 5 alloys. But perhaps a Fe Ti alloy might be worth a try. -- From: jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:substitutes? Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 09:31:32 -0700 *From:* DJ Cravens Ni-62 If we assume that speculation about Rossi is correct, what materials other than Ni-62 could be used? If it is p + X reaction, what other isotopes other than Ni62 could be used? Or perhaps it is really a p+p reaction with Ni-62 donating something???*** * Anyone have any suggestions? This is an important point – is there a substitute for Ni-62? The best way to approach the subject is to look at the isotope and ask – is there anything which is unique about this species? Then, if the answer is “yes” we must ask – how does the unique property materialize in the gainful reaction? As to the first part – yes - Ni-62 is a singularity in the periodic table, being the one isotope with the highest binding energy per nucleon of all known nuclides (~8.8 MeV per) … and yet here it is being identified as active for the anomalous energy Rossi claims to have found with hydrogen.* *** On the one hand, if there is true gain in this device primarily due to properties of this isotope - being a singularity could be an important clue. OTOH it is most surprising that the physical property for which it derives its uniqueness - is the opposite of what one logically expects in the situation. That property, which is “highest binding energy” means the isotope is the most stable. What is the next most stable? That would be an iron isotope, but iron could have chemical properties which interfere with the nuclear reaction As for Part-2 of the inquiry… which is “why” … this has been addressed piecemeal in prior postings, and I will collect these, with revisions, in another posting. Jones ** **
RE: [Vo]:substitutes?
From: DJ Cravens Ni-62 If we assume that speculation about Rossi is correct, what materials other than Ni-62 could be used? If it is p + X reaction, what other isotopes other than Ni62 could be used? Or perhaps it is really a p+p reaction with Ni-62 donating something??? Anyone have any suggestions? This is an important point - is there a substitute for Ni-62? The best way to approach the subject is to look at the isotope and ask - is there anything which is unique about this species? Then, if the answer is yes we must ask - how does the unique property materialize in the gainful reaction? As to the first part - yes - Ni-62 is a singularity in the periodic table, being the one isotope with the highest binding energy per nucleon of all known nuclides (~8.8 MeV per) ... and yet here it is being identified as active for the anomalous energy Rossi claims to have found with hydrogen. On the one hand, if there is true gain in this device primarily due to properties of this isotope - being a singularity could be an important clue. OTOH it is most surprising that the physical property for which it derives its uniqueness - is the opposite of what one logically expects in the situation. That property, which is highest binding energy means the isotope is the most stable. What is the next most stable? That would be an iron isotope, but iron could have chemical properties which interfere with the nuclear reaction As for Part-2 of the inquiry... which is why ... this has been addressed piecemeal in prior postings, and I will collect these, with revisions, in another posting. Jones attachment: winmail.dat
RE: [Vo]:substitutes?
yes Ni62 has the lowest binding energy/nuc. Fe 56 has the lowest mass per nuc. (due to p n masses). if some isotope of Fe or other material can be found to be active, there is a chance that alloys with some isotope of Fe and something that is permeable to p's might be useful. My guess right now is that perhaps Ni 62 is the energy out and that the other isotopes of Ni might be sucking up some of the energy. Dennis PS I am presently using La Ni 5 alloys. But perhaps a Fe Ti alloy might be worth a try. From: jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:substitutes? Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 09:31:32 -0700 From: DJ Cravens Ni-62 If we assume that speculation about Rossi is correct, what materials other than Ni-62 could be used? If it is p + X reaction, what other isotopes other than Ni62 could be used? Or perhaps it is really a p+p reaction with Ni-62 donating something??? Anyone have any suggestions? This is an important point – is there a substitute for Ni-62? The best way to approach the subject is to look at the isotope and ask – is there anything which is unique about this species? Then, if the answer is “yes” we must ask – how does the unique property materialize in the gainful reaction? As to the first part – yes - Ni-62 is a singularity in the periodic table, being the one isotope with the highest binding energy per nucleon of all known nuclides (~8.8 MeV per) … and yet here it is being identified as active for the anomalous energy Rossi claims to have found with hydrogen. On the one hand, if there is true gain in this device primarily due to properties of this isotope - being a singularity could be an important clue. OTOH it is most surprising that the physical property for which it derives its uniqueness - is the opposite of what one logically expects in the situation. That property, which is “highest binding energy” means the isotope is the most stable. What is the next most stable? That would be an iron isotope, but iron could have chemical properties which interfere with the nuclear reaction As for Part-2 of the inquiry… which is “why” … this has been addressed piecemeal in prior postings, and I will collect these, with revisions, in another posting. Jones
Re: [Vo]:substitutes?
Hi, On 21-5-2013 18:31, Jones Beene wrote: As to the first part - yes - Ni-62 is a singularity in the periodic table, being the one isotope with the highest binding energy per nucleon of all known nuclides (~8.8 MeV per) Ok, then the following questions pops into my mind: Why is it that although having the highest binding energy the stable Ni-62 isotope only accounts for 3.634 % of all Ni isotopes? Shouldn't that be a lot higher or is there a special reason why it is so low compared to Ni-58 (68.077 %), Ni-60 (26.223 %), Ni-61 (1.114 %) and Ni-64 (0.926 %)? Kind regards, Rob
RE: [Vo]:substitutes?
that is interesting.I think that Ni 56 then quickly to Ni 60 is the end product of a Si cycle involving alpha additions. That is why there is more of it. But yes, why could 62 be good? Dennis Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 19:51:43 +0200 From: manonbrid...@aim.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:substitutes? Hi, On 21-5-2013 18:31, Jones Beene wrote: As to the first part - yes - Ni-62 is a singularity in the periodic table, being the one isotope with the highest binding energy per nucleon of all known nuclides (~8.8 MeV per) Ok, then the following questions pops into my mind: Why is it that although having the highest binding energy the stable Ni-62 isotope only accounts for 3.634 % of all Ni isotopes? Shouldn't that be a lot higher or is there a special reason why it is so low compared to Ni-58 (68.077 %), Ni-60 (26.223 %), Ni-61 (1.114 %) and Ni-64 (0.926 %)? Kind regards, Rob
RE: [Vo]:substitutes?
Revised from a prior posting: Naïve metaphorical approach to Rossi's claim of Ni-62 thermal gain: Imagine a number of strong springs subject to compressive loads. The strongest spring gives the fastest return to normal geometry following compression. What is the limiting factor on how close to 100% return of energy is available? Whatever that factor consists of, arguably makes the spring more subject to catastrophic failure. This kind of logic explains why it is true in Nature - that the nucleus with the highest binding strength of all is found in low enrichment. By all rights Ni-62 - which is the strongest spring in the period table, should represent more than 3.6 percent of all nickel atoms, since it possesses the highest bonding strength possible. But there are other factors involved. Secondly - ductile metals like nickel, are tough because the atoms are forced together by a sea of electrons. The negative charge agglomeration (electron glue) is subject to self-limiting Coulomb forces from the nucleus. At the limit of electron cohesive strength, we may also find a coupling to nuclear stability - and we may also find the beginning of the next plateau of friability (to continue the metaphor). Ni-62 is neutron heavy, and this has implications for the expression of nuclear positive charge. Thus Ni-62 having reached the pinnacle of nuclear strength among all elements, could be in a slot where it can fail catastrophically via a wave-function modality that is triggered by electron collapse. Too much local charge, in effect. This collapse affects adjacent protons in some way, even if the nickel eigenstate cannot evolve net energy. This is a bosonic version of wave function collapse resulting in a superposition of the different possible eigenstates, which appears to reduce to a single state. With nickel, this collapse will occasionally involve the 7th and 11th ionization potentials - especially the 11th which is an almost perfect energy hole for ground state (Rydberg) redundancy. The resulting photon is about 300 eV which will not show up on any gamma detector, but gives hundreds of times more heat than a chemical reaction. Ni-62 is bosonic - an atomic and nuclear boson - and we must make the adjacent protons appear bosonic, such as f/H or inverted Rydberg hydrogen - so as to act as if bosonic. Thus a population of f/H is required to achieve gain from nickel. (which is the function of the Rossi mouse unit). If this sounds a bit Millsean - then so be it. Perhaps Mills failed to recognize that certain isotopes themselves, especially singularities such as Ni-62 can possess latent physical properties (perhaps bosonic) which make them more conducive to promoting the kind of ground state, deep level redundancy - which produces excess heat. This is Mills' own contribution to the field, but he did not go far enough. Strange bedfellows, eh? Rossi and Mills? _ From: Jones Beene From: DJ Cravens Ni-62 If we assume that speculation about Rossi is correct, what materials other than Ni-62 could be used? If it is p + X reaction, what other isotopes other than Ni62 could be used? Or perhaps it is really a p+p reaction with Ni-62 donating something??? Anyone have any suggestions? This is an important point - is there a substitute for Ni-62? The best way to approach the subject is to look at the isotope and ask - is there anything which is unique about this species? Then, if the answer is yes we must ask - how does the unique property materialize in the gainful reaction? As to the first part - yes - Ni-62 is a singularity in the periodic table, being the one isotope with the highest binding energy per nucleon of all known nuclides (~8.8 MeV per) ... and yet here it is being identified as active for the anomalous energy Rossi claims to have found with hydrogen. On the one hand, if there is true gain in this device primarily due to properties of this isotope - being a singularity could be an important clue. OTOH it is most surprising that the physical property for which it derives its uniqueness - is the opposite of what one logically expects in the situation. That property, which is highest binding energy means the isotope is the most stable. What is the next most stable? That would be an iron isotope, but iron could have chemical properties which interfere with the nuclear reaction As for Part-2 of the inquiry... which is why ... this has been addressed piecemeal in prior postings, and I will collect these, with revisions, in another posting.
Re: [Vo]:substitutes?
Maybe most of the Ni-62 has been converted in nature since it is the most reactive. Dave -Original Message- From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, May 21, 2013 1:56 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:substitutes? that is interesting.I think that Ni 56 then quickly to Ni 60 is the end product of a Si cycle involving alpha additions. That is why there is more of it. But yes, why could 62 be good? Dennis Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 19:51:43 +0200 From: manonbrid...@aim.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:substitutes? Hi, On 21-5-2013 18:31, Jones Beene wrote: As to the first part - yes - Ni-62 is a singularity in the periodic table, being the one isotope with the highest binding energy per nucleon of all known nuclides (~8.8 MeV per) Ok, then the following questions pops into my mind: Why is it that although having the highest binding energy the stable Ni-62 isotope only accounts for 3.634 % of all Ni isotopes? Shouldn't that be a lot higher or is there a special reason why it is so low compared to Ni-58 (68.077 %), Ni-60 (26.223 %), Ni-61 (1.114 %) and Ni-64 (0.926 %)? Kind regards, Rob
Re: [Vo]:substitutes?
DJ Cravens The LENR reaction is driven by geometry not material. The high school reactor uses tungsten without isotope separation. The key to the process is to use micro and nanoparticles is a wide range of sizes to support dark mode EMF amplification. Additional theory is available upon request. On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 1:48 PM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: yes Ni62 has the lowest binding energy/nuc. Fe 56 has the lowest mass per nuc. (due to p n masses). if some isotope of Fe or other material can be found to be active, there is a chance that alloys with some isotope of Fe and something that is permeable to p's might be useful. My guess right now is that perhaps Ni 62 is the energy out and that the other isotopes of Ni might be sucking up some of the energy. Dennis PS I am presently using La Ni 5 alloys. But perhaps a Fe Ti alloy might be worth a try. -- From: jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:substitutes? Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 09:31:32 -0700 *From:* DJ Cravens Ni-62 If we assume that speculation about Rossi is correct, what materials other than Ni-62 could be used? If it is p + X reaction, what other isotopes other than Ni62 could be used? Or perhaps it is really a p+p reaction with Ni-62 donating something??? Anyone have any suggestions? This is an important point – is there a substitute for Ni-62? The best way to approach the subject is to look at the isotope and ask – is there anything which is unique about this species? Then, if the answer is “yes” we must ask – how does the unique property materialize in the gainful reaction? As to the first part – yes - Ni-62 is a singularity in the periodic table, being the one isotope with the highest binding energy per nucleon of all known nuclides (~8.8 MeV per) … and yet here it is being identified as active for the anomalous energy Rossi claims to have found with hydrogen. On the one hand, if there is true gain in this device primarily due to properties of this isotope - being a singularity could be an important clue. OTOH it is most surprising that the physical property for which it derives its uniqueness - is the opposite of what one logically expects in the situation. That property, which is “highest binding energy” means the isotope is the most stable. What is the next most stable? That would be an iron isotope, but iron could have chemical properties which interfere with the nuclear reaction As for Part-2 of the inquiry… which is “why” … this has been addressed piecemeal in prior postings, and I will collect these, with revisions, in another posting. Jones
RE: [Vo]:substitutes?
notice the jump in Nickel stocks... example NILSY up about 1.5% today. I wonder. Dennis
RE: [Vo]:substitutes?
Oh and notice gold is down, Ni up and most metal are flat today. It is though someone out there is selling some gold to buy Ni and Ni stocks. Just a guess. Dennis From: djcrav...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:substitutes? Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 14:13:51 -0600 notice the jump in Nickel stocks... example NILSY up about 1.5% today. I wonder. Dennis
Re: [Vo]:substitutes?
Back in the day, Dennis, I turned $10K into $150K in a matter of weeks. Palladium futures! Andrew - Original Message - From: DJ Cravens To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 1:19 PM Subject: RE: [Vo]:substitutes? Oh and notice gold is down, Ni up and most metal are flat today. It is though someone out there is selling some gold to buy Ni and Ni stocks. Just a guess. Dennis -- From: djcrav...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:substitutes? Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 14:13:51 -0600 notice the jump in Nickel stocks... example NILSY up about 1.5% today. I wonder. Dennis
RE: [Vo]:substitutes?
Well, If I had the $$. but of course I have spent most of my savings on nano Ni, gas systems, and experimental things.. Oh and expect to use the reminder on a NI Week trip and set up. Oh, well. I have long since given up on trying to make any money from this field. Dennis From: andrew...@att.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:substitutes? Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 13:24:41 -0700 Back in the day, Dennis, I turned $10K into $150K in a matter of weeks. Palladium futures! Andrew - Original Message - From: DJ Cravens To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 1:19 PM Subject: RE: [Vo]:substitutes? Oh and notice gold is down, Ni up and most metal are flat today. It is though someone out there is selling some gold to buy Ni and Ni stocks. Just a guess. Dennis From: djcrav...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:substitutes? Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 14:13:51 -0600 notice the jump in Nickel stocks... example NILSY up about 1.5% today. I wonder. Dennis
