On Feb 22, 2011, at 2:11 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Horace Heffner wrote:

The above chart is merely a very approximate visual aid to show feasible reaction product probabilities by a rule of thumb estimate. Copper is visualized as a most likely product.

Izzatso? So you think the reports of copper can be explained by your theory?

- Jed

Not 30% of *actual* copper from Ni, as I posted earlier. The predominant element from "ordinary" LENR is copper, but only from the lesser abundance Ni isotopes. If a 30% conversion to copper is actually observed (which seems questionable at this point), then 58Ni and/or 60Ni must be involved. This and an alternative explanation (however tenuously speculative) for high *apparent* copper percentages were posted here earlier and appended below. I should also note the feasibility of deflation fusion reactions with hypernuclei, which could have unanticipated outcomes. It is known hypernuclei can support (bind to) up to two sigma+ or lambdas. A sigma+ can decay into an ordinary proton (plus other stuff), so this could provide a direct pathway to ordinary copper.

On Jan 25, 2011, at 1:40 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:

If the experiment is not a boondoggle, and there was actually observed by Rossi a 30% conversion of *all* the Ni to Cu, then it could simply be the copper is not really copper. It would then seem necessary 58Ni must be involved.

I showed some potential strange reactions earlier:

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg41755.html

You can see that one of them, as a subreaction:

p (938.27 MeV/c2) + e -> sigma+ (1189.3 MeV/c2) + K0 ( 497.6 MeV/ c2) + e

would replace a proton in the new copper with a sigma+. The resulting hyperon copper [copper hypernuclei] would be chemically indistinguishable from copper. I have no idea how long such material might be stable, or what the trigger energy would be to force decay kinetically if it is otherwise stable. Trigger energies for light hyperons [hypernuclei], like helium, are very low, on the order of 20 kEv.

As I noted earlier, the following reactions work fine creating ordinary Ni in the deflation fusion process:

62Ni28 + p* --> 63Cu29 + 6.122 MeV [-1.984 MeV] (B_Ni:28)
64Ni28 + p* --> 65Cu29 + 7.453 MeV [-0.569 MeV] (B_Ni:60)


However, if 30% quantities of Cu are actually found, then some 58Ni must be transmuted to non-radioactive copper. We know 59Cu is radioactive. We don't know if 59Cu with a sigma+ replacing a proton is stable, or quasi-stable.

Note also, that the neutral lambda0 reactions can both create transmuted Ni which appears to have added neutrons . This could happen numerous times per Ni. In this way 59Ni , 60Ni, 61Ni, and 62Ni hyperons [hypernuclei] containing lambda0 particles could be created. These could then be transmuted by an ordinary transmutation, or a sigma+ creating transmutation, to produce what appears to the eye to be normal Cu, but which is not. A sample from Rossi's device showing in mass spectroscopy an unusual amount of 59Ni, and no signs of EC, would be an indictor this is happening.

All this is extremely speculative, especially given that we know almost nothing about Rossi's device.

I do find it worrisome that the gamma counts were irregular as the counter was moved about by hand. If strange quark reactions are taking place in the device, then the signature would be K0_long particles, which in part decay into positrons. They would act like neutral neutrons close to experiment, and then can decay a meter or more away from the experiment, endangering the operators. The gamma counts might actually increase with distance up to a meter away from the experiment, if the K0's are normal, further if their low excitation energy permits a longer half-life.

One thing I do now feel fairly confidant is possible, that apparently no else believes is possible, is that strange pairs exist, are created from the vacuum, within protons and neutrons, and that high mass deflated electrons, if they exist, can catalyze virtual strange quark separation into real independent quarks resident in separate fissioned particles. If this is truly feasible and safely engineerable, then infinite Isp drives are feasible, as is light speed travel, as well as an infinite source of energy.


On Jan 21, 2011, at 4:23 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:


On Jan 21, 2011, at 8:31 AM, Peter Gluck wrote:

That device working for 6 months has produced approx. 50,000 kWhours heat.
Can this be explained by the reaction of transmutation of Ni to Cu?
Considering first 300 grams of nichel...? Rossi can tell how much
Ni is uesd - if he will. Am important rough energy balance anyway.
Peter

There are some very fundamental issues, and mysteries involved. The fundamental questions relate to exactly what reactions are involved. Some do not produce copper, so the new copper content only establishes a lower bound on energy at best. Further, the mechanisms involved may not be fixed or even energy conservative, so there is difficulty establishing even a lower bound based on copper production.

Generally, LENR has not been found to produce detectable high energy signatures. It also has not been found to produce radioactive products, especially neutrons. If weak reactions are eliminated, especially signature creating weak reactions that have more than femtosecond order, half lives, then what is left as feasible are strong force reactions without radiative products. Such reactions for nickel can be found starting on page 16 of:

http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/RptB.pdf

which is described in

http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/dfRpt

as noted earlier.

Note that a lot more output possibilities are feasible than just copper, but let's get on with assuming copper is the only output.

Those aneutronic strong force copper producing reactions involving 4 or fewer proton fusions with Ni are:

62Ni28 + p* --> 63Cu29 + 6.122 MeV [-1.984 MeV] (B_Ni:28)
62Ni28 + 2 p* --> 63Cu29 + 1H1 + 6.122 MeV [-10.582 MeV] (B_Ni:33)
64Ni28 + p* --> 65Cu29 + 7.453 MeV [-0.569 MeV] (B_Ni:60)
64Ni28 + 2 p* --> 65Cu29 + 1H1 + 7.453 MeV [-9.080 MeV] (B_Ni:65)
64Ni28 + 3 p* --> 63Cu29 + 4He2 + 17.922 MeV [-7.605 MeV] (B_Ni:83)

Note that equations (B_Ni:83) and (B_Ni:65) the extra proton involved merely plays a catalytic role, holding the nucleus together for a longer period and in an initially much more de- energized state. So, excluding weak reactions, and reactions involving large clusters of protons, the most likely candidate reactions producing CU are:

62Ni28 + p* --> 63Cu29 + 6.122 MeV [-1.984 MeV] (B_Ni:28)
64Ni28 + p* --> 65Cu29 + 7.453 MeV [-0.569 MeV] (B_Ni:60)
64Ni28 + 3 p* --> 63Cu29 + 4He2 + 17.922 MeV [-7.605 MeV] (B_Ni:83)

Looking at the first two reactions as likely candidates, with mean atomic weight near 63.6, and mean reaction energy about 7.2, we have an estimated energy density of

  E = (1/(63.6 gm/mol))*Na*7.2 MeV = 1.09x10^10 J/gm

The production of 50,000 kWh then produces, using the above two reactions and considering Ni abundances, roughly produces a mass of copper M:

  M = (50,000 kWh)/(1.09x10^10 J/gm) = 16.5 gm

We are left with some obvious questions. What about the other isotopes of nickel? Shouldn't they be involved? What prohibits radioactive nuclei from forming?

We have involved the naturally occurring 58Ni, 60Ni, 61Ni 62Ni, and 64Ni, as well as trace amounts of 59Ni, as well as the other unknown and intentionally not disclosed ingredients. Given that 58Ni has 68% natural abundance, it is of interest as to why we do not see:

58Ni28 + p* -> 59Cu29

which normally decays into 59Ni38 quickly, or possibly, given the deflation fusion scenario, the involvement of an apparently instantaneous electron capture:

58Ni28 + p* -> 59Ni28

which has a 76000 y half life. Apparently, neither this nor any other radioactive material shows up in the output, however. Not a surprise, as few, or at least no confirmed, heavy LENR reactions produce radiative byproducts, except possibly tritium. Tritium production, is from a different process, tunneling of hydrogen to a cloaked hydrogen location, not tunneling of cloaked hydrogen to lattice nuclei locations which is responsible for heavy transmutation LENR. It seems a reasonable premise then that no radioactive material is *ever* produced in Rossi's experiment. Why this happens in general in LENR needs an answer. Nothing will be fully understood until why this happens is answered.

A clue as to what might be happening is offered in pp 20-24 of:

http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/CFnuclearReactions.pdf

n ( 939.57 MeV/c2) + e -> lambda0 (1115.7 MeV/c2) + K0 ( 497.6 MeV/c2) + e

p (938.27 MeV/c2) + e -> lambda0 (1115.7 MeV/c2) + K0 ( 497.6 MeV/c2) + antineutrino

p (938.27 MeV/c2) + e -> sigma+ (1189.3 MeV/c2) + K0 ( 497.6 MeV/ c2) + e

These are sub-reactions, that are confined within the boundaries of the new heavy composite nucleus, except possibly for the escape of the K0. Given the extended stay of the electron in the de-energized nucleus, the probability of strange quark pairs in the vicinity increases, as does the above three reactions. These reactions, due to the catalytic effect of the nuclear electron, produce mass from the vacuum. The energy actually released from the reactions immediately to the environment is similar to that released by ordinary deflation fusion, and due to zero pint energy transactions while the nuclear electron is present. The product, however, differs. Strange quarks remain. The K0 particle created by such kinetically de-energized reactions may be itself de-energized, thus stable and neutral, similar to a neutron, except not capable of activation like the neutron. On the other hand, the lambda0 and sigma+ are known to be able to bind in nuclei, replacing their non- strange counterparts, the neutron and proton respectively. Due to the highly de-energized state of the creating nucleus, the lambda0 and sigma+ that result in heavy LENR may be initially highly de- energized themselves, but should eventually pick up thermal energy from the ZPF, the hot nuclear environment, for reasons I describe here:

http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/NuclearZPEtapping.pdf

Nuclei with strange hadron replacements can be called hyperons [hypernuclei] . The presence of hyperons [hypernuclei] may be difficult to pick up in mass spectroscopy. The masses of lambda0 and sigma+ do not differ much from protons and neutrons, so have little effect in heavy element spectroscopy. They would act similar to ordinary matter, until highly perturbed, possibly in a chain reaction. The key signature, and the enormous extra mass, is in the form of the K0 particles, or nuclear additives. These may act like light neutrons in heavy nuclei.

The ability to catalyze the long term existence of hyperons from the vacuum would have an enormous impact on space travel cabilities, as well as free energy capabilities. It means infinite Isp drives, and faster than light speed travel, as well as large amounts of on board energy. The mass imbalance of the above reactions, plus the ability to recover the original electrons and protons from the decay of the hyperons, is of great practical importance.

Assuming the Rossi-Focardi experiments are not a fraud, it may be that these experiments produce something that looks like copper, but is not. The copper-like material may not readily decay, even though ordinary nuclei with similar mass would. Mass spectrometry may produce some surprises, including possibly unexpected decay of the nuclei when they hit a target. This is all speculation, but speculation with a logical basis, as established on pp 20-24 of:

http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/CFnuclearReactions.pdf

Most everything regarding the Rossi experiments and patent applications are highly speculative, so what is one more speculation.


Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/




Reply via email to