gamma have to be emited in most case, or else energy is transfered as momentum, who finish as indirect gamma or impacts.
anyway the implicit that may not be true is that this happen in one shot. the key idea of ed Storms is that the emission of excess energy is not done in one shot, but by the slow decay of an entangled group of atoms behaving like a big structured quantum object, able to emit small photons, because of a rich population of energy level... I feel that this idea cannot be avoided, but the question is how. Ponderomotive force if it can connect the EM field with the nucleus may allow an entangled hydroton (or a WL coherent patch, or anything similar) may allow the creation of the energy level, around keV... Is it ? I don't know, and I'm not optimistic... anyway it happens, so something must do the job. now, I propose a theory soup... Ed storms conclude that LENr is acaused by a NAE, which is a quantum object, insulated from chemistry context, which can emit middle enrgy photons (keV) from the potential energy of light nucleus. Widom/Srivastava propose that SPP, evanescent waves, allow huge EM field to exists at the surface of metals (field that are incredible out of surface), and that hydrogen nucleus may get entangled in groups and same with electrons. Ponderometive force came here to propose that very strong and ihomogeneous EM field may give energy to nucleons. connect all and you get another theory : SPP, evanescent waves, creates huge fields with huge gradients, which allows protons to get entangled, electron to get entangled. this gradient of EM field allows transitions associated with nucleus exchanges and moves. a NAE apears in that context, where nucleus, and electrons are insulated, in huge EM fields, and nucleus are entangled with tha EM field, and behave like a big quantum object. since it is insulated and entangled, that object can transitions between no so physical states, in not so physical ways, who however are not far in energy level... small photons are emited, absorbed. at one moment the energy level match a very physical state, where two nucleus have been swapped, or fusioned. the NAE can suffer decoherence... It is probably too simple, and I may have forgotten many details (spin conservation, effect of potential barrier on tunneling)... tell me where I forget a key detail... 2015-10-16 6:36 GMT+02:00 <mix...@bigpond.com>: > In reply to Bob Cook's message of Thu, 15 Oct 2015 21:26:22 -0700: > Hi, > [snip] > > It doesn't matter which element/isotope absorbs the neutron, or which > isotope it > creates. Every reaction is going to produce an energetic gamma > immediately. ALL > the excess energy from this process is going to be in the form of gammas, > and > most of them are going to escape the device, accomplishing two things:- > 1) There will be very little left to provide heating to continue the > process. > 2) The researchers will soon die of a severe radiation overdose. > > > >RE: [Vo]:Swedish scientists claim LENR explanation break-throughJones-- > > > >It was my conclusion reading the paper that the energy required to free a > neutron from Li-7 produced a thermal neutron which could be readily > absorbed by Ni-58. Note the paper does not address the use of other > isotopes of Ni. Natural Ni would pose a radioactive hazard if it is > sufficiently exposed to thermal neutrons. An assessment of the thermal > neutron flux in a Ni nano particle, based on the estimated production of > spalled neutrons would be a desirable side calculation. > > > >The paper makes note of the control of neutrons embodied within the Ni in > order to prevent outside activation—see the 3rd paragraph on page 4. > > > >There are a number of isotopes that can capture a neutron and still > remain stable. > > > > > > > > > > > >From: Jones Beene > >Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 12:48 PM > >To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > >Subject: RE: [Vo]:Swedish scientists claim LENR explanation break-through > > > >From: MarkI-ZeroPoint > > > >Ø > > > >Ø I posted a ref from physorg ... It involves a new observation > about resonance which might tie in with the Swede’s paper... > > > > > >Mark, No problem with the resonance. It’s the neutrons that are the > problem. > > > >What the Swedes should know, but apparently do not fully appreciate, is > that neutrons simply cannot be involved as a modality in LENR, since there > is no induced radioactivity. It is as simple as that. In fact, their theory > is almost an embarrassment. > > > > > > > >Neutrons are insidious and difficult to contain. Even at the lowest > energy (ultra-cold), neutrons will eventually activate almost everything > they come in contact with. The good news would be – this activation should > serve as instant proof of LENR when it happens, but the bad news is that it > never happens. > > > >Most of the mass of the Hot Cat is the element aluminum – in the form of > alumina ceramic. Neutron activation of aluminum occurs by numerous neutron > capture reactions and the cross-section is substantial for thermal neutrons > (few barns) and gets higher with colder neutrons. Such reactions as 27Al + > n = 28Al, 27Al(n,a) 24Na, 27Al(n,2n)26Al and 27Al(n,p)27Mg show up at once. > > > > > >Even if by some miracle, only one neutron out of a million diffuses to > the tube wall - these insidious little bastards would activate the alumina > into a radioactive health hazard within minutes of excess heat showing up. > The excited states following activation will undergo beta decay over > protracted time periods and emit gammas as the nuclei de-excite to their > respective ground states. Radioactivity would continue for months. > > > >Since this does not happen, we can be almost certain that neutrons are > not involved in the Hot Cat operation. > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html > >
