I still consider that the transition to a more stable isotope is via an
anharmonic coupling that responds to local hydrogen loading in the Ni
lattice, magnetic fields and spin coupling to a zillion electron in the nano
particle, and thermal motion in preferred direction associated with the
local magnetic fields.
The LENR energy is released relatively slowly as a proton overlaps a Ni
nucleus and loses kinetic energy to potential energy of the new Ni isotope
and some kinetic energy to the vibration of the lattice nucleons induced by
excited electronic spin states. All the other possibilities seem to suggest
energetic particles and necessary high energy EM radiation or at least some
EM that would be seen. Electron capture or beta emission occur, as
warranted, to reach the more stable nuclear configuration.
THE ENERGY DISTRIBUTION from the LENR MUST BE IN SMALL INCREMENTS TO BE
CONSISTENT WITH THE SAFE, LOW RADIATION RESULTS OF THE LENR.
The idea that the high energy gammas would be shielded by the apparatus
seems like a miracle to me.
Therefore, I agree with Jones that Robins alternative is too energetic. And
I guess I have not really accepted any of the f/H ideas yet.
Bob Cook
-----Original Message-----
From: Jones Beene
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 6:03 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Parhomov paper
Robin,
You propose a massive amount of energy per reaction. Under the
circumstances, that level seems too energetic; but it is difficult to rule
out f/H in some capacity.
A three-body reaction would be unlikely based on probability. Fusion seems
unlikely based on lack of high energy radiation, but if helium turns up you
are in business. Sooner or later, someone will look for it. You will be
waiting ;-)
Until then, this looks like a stimulated weak force reaction. The likely
role of the hydrino would be to penetrate the nickel electron cloud of 64Ni
deeply in order to stimulate beta decay in an apparently stable nucleus with
too many neutrons. The energy per reaction would be 500 times less than
fusion, but that is adequate to fit the facts.
-----Original Message-----
From: mix...@bigpond.com
Consider the following reactions:-
Hy2 + 64Ni => 62Ni + 4He + 11.8 MeV
Hy2 + 62Ni => 60Ni + 4He + 9.88 MeV
Hy2 + 60Ni => 58Ni + 4He + 7.91 MeV
The amount of 62Ni may have remained more or less stable because it was both
contributing to the 60Ni, and receiving from the 64 Ni. If this is the
actual reaction mechanism, then it shouldn't make much difference how much
64Ni is present.
