The net increase in silicon from the input feed is 18%, The net increase in iron form the input feed is 28.4%. These increases in the output product are so large that such increases cannot be mistaken for CO being chemically bound as a trace contaminant either on a short term or long term basis.
Face it. You are fighting against a long term assumption about the way the LENR reaction and transmutation actually works. LENR is a pure quantum mechanical process involving superposition of particles and radiation as well as non-locality of matter and energy. When particles and radiation are in the state of superposition, they travel unobserved and without impact on their environment to a field very from their place of origin while the LENR reaction is active.. This quantum mechanical nature of the LENR reaction may be why few LENR experiments show excess heat and/or radiation. Experimenters expect to see immediate results, but positive results might only be observable until the LENR reaction terminates. Such is the nature of quantum mechanics. On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 5:03 PM <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote: > In reply to Axil Axil's message of Fri, 10 May 2019 02:20:24 -0400: > Hi, > [snip] > >The CO that was not transmuted to Si and Fe is burned as CO2 and vented > >then scrubbed. Neither C nor O combined chemically with Fe–Si as per > >chemical analysis. But carbon was thought to transmute to Si and Fe as per > >Carbon Arc LENR experiments [5–8] in which anomalous generation of Si and > >Fe was observed.. > > Indeed:- "Neither C nor O combined chemically with Fe–Si as per chemical > analysis." However C & O combined as a molecule of CO, may well have been > included and later escaped as a gas in the early stages of analysis. > > Note that the author would not be able to tell whether CO was chemically > bound > or a nuclear reaction had taken place to convert it into Fe-Si, other than > the > fact that there was no crater, and thousands in the neighborhood didn't > die from > radiation poisoning. > > > > >Using the estimated energy release values of 17.13 MeV/atom of Si or 49.58 > >MeV per atom of Fe given in > >Appendix B, for the postulated nuclear transmutation reactions, it can be > >shown that corresponding to 4.25 ton of metal > >transmutation, the power generated should have been the equivalent of the > >total thermal power generated by hundreds > >of 1000MWe nuclear power stations. > > ....which clearly didn't happen. This pretty much rules out a nuclear > reaction, > with the possible, if highly unlikely, option that all energy release was > in the > form of virtually undetectable neutrino anti-neutrino pairs. > > Note that in order for endothermic reactions to have completely > compensated for > exothermic reactions, numerous lighter elements would need to have been > produced > as well, some of which would undoubtedly have contaminated the end > product, and > have been detected during analysis. > > > >Appendix B contains the expected excess energy gain from nuclear binding > >energy released in the transmutation process. > > > >This situation goes to show that transmutation produced by the LENR > >reaction is not a major source of excess heat, > > Actually it doesn't. All it shows is that the author failed to consider all > options. > > > > >Richard P. *Feynman:* It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it > >doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with *experiment*, > >it's wrong. > > > Indeed. > Regards, > > > Robin van Spaandonk > > local asymmetry = temporary success > >
