In reply to Jones Beene's message of Mon, 15 Dec 2008 09:10:40 -0800 (PST): Hi Jones, [snip]
What's the real difference between your transmuton and Hydrinohydride? Consider also that a Hydrino molecule would also nicely "fill the bill", supplying the required 2 protons in one hit, and being essentially neutral such as to possibly allow it to penetrate the electron shells of the Fe, much as would a neutron. Furthermore, the two shrunken electrons allow for energy dissipation via IC. [snip] >In fact, the most probable route for the transmutation of iron to nickel does >NOT involve an alpha particle at all, and may have been relatively recent in >time - and probably involves the absorption of two proton equivalents ! > >This is impossible in standard nuclear physics, so we also can suggest that it >"probably" involves LENR in the sense of a new and previously unrecognized >type of nuclear reaction which does NOT create much excess energy, and >therefore does not involve protracted nuclear decay (beta decay). Considerable energy release doesn't necessarily result in radioactivity. As you so astutely point out Fe56 + 2P = Ni58, which is stable. In fact one might argue that the planetoid between Mars and Jupiter was blown apart by the energy release. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk <mix...@bigpond.com>
