Cosmic ray triggers have been discussed since early on as cold fusion
triggers. This is not a novel idea. I have even suggested this
myself. See page 2 ff of:
http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/BoseHyp.pdf
Page 4 and 9 of:
http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/PartOrb.pdf
Page 18 and 25 of:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/CFnuclearReactions.pdf
my similar comments earlier:
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg58166.html
The following post made last January in regard to Rossi may be of
interest.
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg41599.html
As Robin states, the problem is the reaction mechanism after the
triggering. A huge number of nuclear reactions per cosmic ray have
to occur.
A typical muon secondary can be expected to produce only about 30
fusions (i.e. that is about the number expected in pure liquid
deuterium.)
The problem with the triggering idea is the number of cosmic rays
required to trigger enough reactions to produce measurable heat
(unless of course an extensive chain reaction is involved.) Suppose
1 watt of heat is produced, and the reaction involved releases on the
order of 10 MeV energy (it is probably way less if it is a Ni
transmutaion.) Each second a J of energy has to be produced. A J is
6.24x10^18 eV, or 6.24x10^12 MeV. At 10 MeV per reaction, that is
6.24x10^11 reactions, requiring 6.24x10^11/30 = 2.08x10^10 muons for
that second. That is a way above background. Alternatively, at 1
cosmic ray per second in a small area, the cosimic ray would have to
produce about 10^10 reactions to produce the 1 watt. Rossi's small 4
kW reactors would have a cross section with only about 100 muons per
second. To produce Rossi's 4 kW then would require about 40 *
2.08x10^10 = 8x10^11 reactions per second, each and every second.
This is not a viable explanation.
However, as I noted here in an above reference post, if energetic
alphas or betas can trigger even small reaction chains, then doping a
lattice with radioactive material, e.g. 137Cs (beta), or 241Am
(alpha), can have a signifiant effect.
On a related note, following is a post I made in 2009, which points
out that cosmic ray muons may trigger much larger amounts of fusions
than what was measured for pure liquid hydrogen (i.e. about 30 per
muon, as measured by Jones et al.) This implies perhaps some muon
studies should be conducted with appropriately loaded lattices. There
are other Rossi related tidbits too.
NAS, hot spots, and electromigration
I have noticed a surprising similarity between infra-red photos of
loaded cathodes showing small hot spots and my observations of
clearly visible bright spots on high voltage anodes in electrospark
or electroluminescence experiments. For example, one similarity that
was surprising to me is the tendency for such spots to be located
interior to the edges of plate electrodes. Before gaining some
experience, I thought the edges, having higher field intensities,
would have more hot spots.
Looking at former sites of electrospark anode hot spots under a
microscope, on dried anodes post run, I noticed they were
indentations, small holes in the somewhat dull anodized surface, with
highly reflective interior surfaces. Again, it may seem surprising
such holes tended to reside away from the anode edges - unless one
considers the anodization process tends to produce thinner
anodization away from the edges. Thinner pacification layers means
easier layer penetration, easier formation of low resistance short
circuits between the anode interior and the electrolyte. This is
exactly what the hot spots appeared to be, small short circuited
wells in a partially insulating surface.
Once an anode hot spot was initiated, it tended to flash or
periodically glow when operated at just above the anodization
voltage. I think this was probably due to bubble formation and
release and periodic thin anodizations followed by breakdowns. When
operated at the elevated voltage the electrospark spots diminished,
probably due to anodization. However, when the voltage was pushed
substantially, say doubled, all the previously existing glow spots
would reappear. When foil electrodes were used, the hot spots would
deepen all the way through the foil and then expand radially,
eventually consuming large amounts of foil.
Higher intensity glow spots can also be observed on both anodes and
cathodes when operated in low voltage luminescence experiments on
aluminum or tantalum electrodes operated in oxygen rich electrolytes,
e.g. hydrogen peroxide containing electrolytes.
All this may seem irrelevant, but perhaps there is some significance
to all this in regards to NAS formation. Perhaps the NAS, at least in
some cases, is not strictly a localized lattice state, but rather a
location of unusually high current density. Such high current
density spots may take a while to form because the bulk of the
electrode surface must first be insulated before holes in this
insulation can provide the high current density spots. As I have
noted here recently, achieving a minimum current density has been
identified as necessary to fusion initiation in a number of types of
experiments.
Celani's note that R/R0 increases at an anomalous rate when direct
current is flowing indicates to me the possibility that increasing
the temperature increasingly disrupts the conduction bands, thereby
forcing an electron flow increasingly into the vicinity of the
adsorbed hydrogen. If true, this increases the probability of the
deflated state. More importantly, increased resistance means a
higher internal electric field for a given current density, which
means a higher tunneling rate vs ordinary diffusion rate. The effect
of the lattice local electric field, i.e. the effect of net energy
gained from tunneling, is exponential on the tunneling rate. This to
me indicates some important approaches:
1. Use a higher resistance lattice material. This permits a higher
internal electrostatic field for a given amount of Joule heating, and
thus a higher hydrogen tunneling rate.
2. Operate in pulsed current mode. This permits the current to be
driven by a much higher voltage, and thus to achieve a higher
internal field per the amount of Joule heating. It permits driving
the lattice at a higher maximum current density without destroying
the lattice due to Joule heating. Various experiments have shown
excess heat being related to achieving a threshold current density -
and I think the reason for this is that the local electric field has
to be above some minimum value (for a given lattice type) before
tunneling the required distances becomes likely.
3. Use a lattice material that is highly permeable at some feasible
high loading temperature, but which locks hydrogen in place at a
somewhat lower temperature, i.e. prevents ordinary diffusion but, at
the right temperature and internal field strength, permits electro-
migration.
4. As has been done in some experiments, imbed in the lattice
material numerous appropriate layers or particles which impede
ordinary diffusion and increase tunneling based electromigration.
5. Design lattice material mixes which provide narrow channels of
high conductivity and diffusion, but which also provide a high
overall heat conductivity and strength that protects the lattice
structure. The imbedding of low conductivity low diffusion rate
granules permits a higher overall resistance and thus formation of
high internal fields to support electromigration. Much engineering
is required to achieve all this plus uniform expansion rates that
avoid fracturing.
I think a high tunneling rate (not just high hopping rate)
environment combined with a high loading factor are critical to
achieving large excess heat. Operating in a high temperature
environment helps this by varying the instantaneous tunneling
distances away from the mean, and since the probability of a
tunneling event is exponentially related to the distance, heat can do
this with great effect if the lattice is in a threshold state.
However, in Pd and various other hydrogen adsorbing metals at high
temperatures the tunneling based migration is very low compared to
the ordinary diffusion migration. One way to improve this situation
is to provide many thin barriers in the electromigration path that
require hydrogen tunneling to enable diffusion, and which create
large local internal fields. This kind of layered electromigration
approach is illustrated simplistically in Fig. 2, Page 15 of:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/DeflationFusionExp.pdf
http://tinyurl.com/cef4pu
though creating a uniform high density mix of close nano-sized chunks
of diffusion supporting lattice material may be more effective.
Of possible separate interest is that, if a significant volume of
lattice is in a threshold state, fusion for that volume might be
triggered by a cosmic ray event, especially a muon event, by suddenly
raising the temperature and pressure in a highly localized region.
In other words, in some conditions, the number of fusions triggered
by a muon may far exceed those in which the muon is directly
involved. This could give the impression of much larger NAS and a
much smaller density of NAS than is correct. It could also
significantly change the energy break even point for muon creation.
The effectiveness of muon catalysis is often investigated in pure
hydrogen environments, not numerous and varied loaded lattice
environments.
On Dec 21, 2011, at 4:57 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to David Roberson's message of Tue, 20 Dec 2011 12:41:59
-0500 (EST):
Hi,
The trigger isn't the problem. The problem is the necessary chain
reaction
mechanism after the trigger is applied.
On an earlier post I suggested that the LENR reactions such as
those exhibited by Rossi could have been triggered by cosmic
rays. I was a little disappointed by the few comments that were
generated and I was hoping to further study this possibility.
[snip]
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
