On Dec 8, 2009, at 11:49 AM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Mon, 7 Dec 2009 20:27:03
-0900:
Hi,
[snip]
This is an interesting idea, but as noted above, a 50-50 D-T
experiment produced nominal high energy neutrons. For this idea to
be valid that hot T fusion works in a lattice, and cold T fusion does
not, there needs to be an explanation as to *why* lattice conditions
foster cold D+D but not cold D+T. In other words, hot T should not
be necessary for a reaction. If cold D fuses then cold T should also
fuse, and if anything better. It may well be there is a reason, but
on the surface it looks nonsensical.
[snip]
If De Broglie wavelength is involved in the CF mechanism, then
mixing isotopes
may not work due to the mismatch in masses disrupting the Hydrogen
lattice
(atoms with the same charge but different mass will oscillate
mechanically at
different frequencies). However if the fusion mechanism is based
either on
Horace's Deflation Fusion or a Mills variant, then mixing isotopes
shouldn't
make any difference.
Hence enriching the T percentage could help in determining what
sort of reaction
mechanism is involved.
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
This is a good point. Mass significantly affects tunneling hopping
rate. In the deflation fusion model this would significantly reduce
heavy element transmutation in a pure T2O environment because the
hydrogen is the tunneling entity in heavy LENR. It might reduce the
fusion rate, i.e. lattice-half-life to practically zero. In a 50:50
D-T environment, the fusion rate might drop by up to 75%, because the
tunneling would have to be the case of an ordinary D tunneling into
the location of a deflated (and thus cloaked) tritium nucleus. Here
is a case summary of why:
25%, DD - no neutrons
25%, DT - tunneling D, OK
25%, TD - tunneling T, reduced rate
25%, TT - tunneling T, reduced rate
In a normal CF cell environment the 50% reduction in fusion rate for
the trace tritium should have no practical consequence. For small
percentage p of tritium we have S = (1-p) ~=1, s^2 = 1, and s*p = p,
so here are the cases:
s^2 ~= 100%, DD - doesn't count toward neutron production.
s*p = p, DT - tunneling D, OK
s*p = p, TD - tunneling T, reduced rate
p^2 = 0, TT - tunneling T, reduced rate
We can see a complete inability of T to tunnel in a normal cell would
only reduce the T fusion rate by at most 50%, provided DD and DT
fusion occurs at all.
Here is the main point of interest to me: If CF excess heat is
really due principally to DD fusion, then trace tritium doping should
produce additional neutrons via DT fusion. If trace tritium doping
does not produce very substantial neutron count increases, especially
during excursion events, then something *major* has been learned
about CF. If trace tritium does produce increased neutron counts,
then an invaluable tool is available to get instant feedback on
lattice fusion conditions, actual fusion conditions.
On Dec 8, 2009, at 6:47 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Adding cold tritium to the mix will not increase this. It will
increase the incidence of d-t fusion, but each one of these
reactions might simply replace a d-d fusion. (i.e., instead of 4D -
> Be8*, we get 3D + T -> Be9*, and whatever that generates.)
So even if tritium is the source of the neutrons, adding tritium
may not increase the neutrons at all, or only a little.
Now the above is a very interesting possibility, because 9Be is
stable! However, there is no (conventional) channel for the release
of 26 MeV excess energy in Be* except:
Be9* --> alpha + alpha + n
where the n gets most of the kinetic energy of the 4 fusion reaction,
over 30 MeV. The Be9* has no trapped electron to radiate away the
excess energy in small increments in Takahashi's scheme. However, as
noted in the original deflation fusion article (page 11):
http://www.mtaonline.net/%7Ehheffner/DeflationFusion2.pdf
deflation fusion of two or more deuterons can occur, possibly
followed by weak reactions which produce 4H to 7H or 5He to 8He. A
deflated nucleus in a tetrahedral site can be the locus of a multiple
hydrogen wavefunction collapse, because it is bordered by
interstitial hydrogen just one site away in every adjacent site. In
a high fugacity lattice the wave function collapse of all the
adjacent hydrogens on the central hydrogen is not impossible, and
even probable if enough of the hydrogen is in a deflated state. The
presence of the electron or electrons in the fused nucleus should
provide additional decay channels by radiating away some of the
fusion energy, and by reducing the fusion energy available in the
first place. This scenario strikes me as more likely than lattice
mechanics being able to jam 4 hydrogen atoms into a single
tetrahedral site.
I think it will cause quite a stir inside and outside the community
if trace tritium doping produces no neutrons. It is difficult to
imagine a cheaper more important experiment, at least for those
licensed labs that already have instrumented excess heat producing or
particle producing cells, and have access to good neutron spectrometers.
As I noted earlier, the Rusov et al. 50-50 DT experiment is an
indication that trace tritium will very possibly produce no neutrons.
If neutrons are produced, even not in numbers matching the expected
fusion rate, then neutron energy spectra will tell a lot about the
processes that created them.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
