Jones, since you brought this up, I'd like to ask a question about the copper.
According to the handy dandy periodic table on my desktop (Kalzium), copper has two stable isotopes, with 34 and 36 neutrons, respectively. Next best is 38 neutrons, with a half life of about 62 hours, and it's downhill from there. The nickel isotopes with 34 and 36 neutrons are also stable, but constitute less than 5% of natural nickel, most of which has either 30 or 32 neutrons. If 30% of a sample of nickel were transmuted into copper by the reaction Ni + H -> Cu, the result should, therefore, be highly radioactive, as /most/ of the copper so produced must have either 30 or 32 neutrons, with a half life, respectively, of 82 seconds and about 3.3 hours. In particular, after six months -- or even just one day! -- most of the newly formed copper will have decayed into something else, and won't show up as copper. So, what's the story here? How can the neutron balance work out? How can he have ended up with 30% of the nickel transmuted into (reasonably stable) copper? On 01/21/2011 11:23 AM, Jones Beene wrote: > To all concerned, or to anyone harboring lingering doubts about the Bologna > demo . > > There is a surprising simple and extremely convincing way to *remove all > doubt* that this device is real. > > It is so simple that the simple fact that it has not been published yet, is > suspicious in itself. (there has been one claim that a test was performed, > but not data). > > Rossi has stated that another long-running device, which was in operation > for 6 months continuous, was analyzed and a large percentage of nickel was > transmuted to copper. Even if it was less than 30%, it was a lot. > > This is the key. Based on other disclosures - the amount of transmuted > copper recovered from this sample should be in excess of 30 grams and could > be as much as a 300 grams. Even without the copper, the nickel from this > reactor will have had an isotope shift, so this spent fuel is another key to > instant credibility. It can be tested as mixed and there is no need to > separate the two metals. > > In other words, there is no shortage of evidence - either the copper - the > ash of the reaction, or the nickel . but the copper is preferable, even in a > mixed sample. > > If he claims the entire sample has been lost, he will lose all credibility > in my book. ALL. No one loses such a sample. He is essentially dead in the > water, in the eyes of 99% of Physics, if this sample is unaccounted for now. > > Copper has two isotopes: 63Cu is almost ~69% of the natural ratio. 65Cu is > ~31%. > > That never varies - no matter where the copper came from - Arizona or Chile > or Asia. > > A one gram sample is more than adequate to test - therefore 10 samples sent > to 10 labs for isotope analysis should put all doubts to rest, if the ratio > varies significantly. > > With the nickel, the sample should be depleted in 64Ni. > > There is no rational argument that can account for a ratio which comes from > a long standing nuclear reaction being identical to the natural ratio - and > if it is identical, then all the copper came from "migration" from other > parts of the device, which is to be expected. > > Rossi never mentions migration but surely is aware of it. > > My plea to Ing. Andrea Rossi is to sent samples out soon for testing by > University or National Labs. A list can be provided. > > It is time to put these skeptics of LENR down hard, and you can do that > dramatically and very easily, in short order and with minimal effort. They > have it coming. > > You d'man, Andre. show'm your stuff. > > Jones > > > > >
