Piantelli also found the two channel effect in his radiation experiments. This behavior was caused by the speed in which hydrogen loading was done in nickel. Slow loading produced radiation and fast loading produced heat.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnewenergytimes.com%2Fv2%2Flibrary%2F2004%2F2004Focardi-EvidenceOfElectromagneticRadiation.pdf&ei=WqpaULaAFIXy0gGb94DABQ&usg=AFQjCNHu3w5dimV_JIaouNutOQePoXu2Pg&sig2=D0x1bSsDVfrhx7bM0uaKyg A formation of condensate of proton pairs would thermalize the energy coming out of these LENR based nuclear reactions. If the proton condensate does not form, the LENR associated radiation comes out of the nucleus as energetic particles since there is no proton condensate available to thermalize this nuclear energy. Cheers: Axil On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 4:33 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Good points, Jeff > > Maybe, I'm assuming incorrectly, bu from Mosier-Boss paper excerpt - > > "These results indicated that there were at least two channels - an > aneutronic channel that produced heat (the so-called true Fleischmann-Pons > effect) and another channel that favored formation of energetic charged > particles, neutrons, and tritium. It was Swartz [3] who suggested that, by > adjusting the experimental parameters, one could > switch from one channel to the other." > > - I surmised that rather than just fully aneutronic channels, there were > also low energy neutrons, since (I think) transmutations have been reported > in the absence of high energy neutron emissions. > > Yes, Pu-239 is very long-lived, but doesn't this mean it will hang around > long enough to capture enough neutrons to convert to some shorter-lived > isotope? And, similarly with other long-lived byproducts? > > -- Lou Pagnucco > > Jeff Berkowitz wrote: > > I'm having a hard time making sense of this on several levels. > > > > For a one thing, the Mosier-Boss results (including the paper you link > > below and previous papers, all found in a page on their site) document > > fast > > neutrons, not thermal neutrons. For another thing, fission would put the > > lie to their waste claims. Methinks fission is fission; you're going to > > get > > the standard double-hump distribution of daughters, all radioactive. > > > > I suppose you could moderate and thermalize the neutrons, But after > > neutron > > capture (as opposed to fission) by U-238, a short decay chain ensues that > > quickly lands on Pu-239, which is long-lived and fissile. Not exactly a > > desirable result. > > > > Is there a real physicist in the house!? ;-) > > > > Jeff > > > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 11:15 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> A company formed by some SPAWAR alumni (and others), Global Energy > >> Corporation claims to have a green fission technology nearly ready for > >> testing in smaller markets - > >> > >> GUAM POWER AUTHORITY EXPLORES NUCLEAR POWER > >> Next generation facilities could reduce power costs > >> http://pidp.eastwestcenter.org/pireport/2012/February/02-13-02.htm > >> > >> Virginia firm offers nuclear energy > >> > >> > http://www.mvariety.com/cnmi/cnmi-news/local/46996-virginia-firm-offers-nuclear-energy.php > >> > >> (Company website) http://www.globalenergycorporation.net/ > >> > >> A possibly relevant ICCF-17 paper - > >> "It’s not Low Energy – But it is Nuclear" - Pamela A. Mosier-Boss > >> > >> > http://newenergytimes.com/v2/conferences/2012/ICCF17/ICCF-17-Mosier-Boss-Its-Not-Low-Energy-Paper.pdf > >> > >> My interpretation is that they expect to use LENR to generate relatively > >> low-energy neutrons to initiate fission chains starting with U-238 and > >> terminating in fairly harmless wastes. To me, it seems similar to the > >> Thorium reactor approach. > >> > >> Their adviser list seems impressive. Any opinions? > >> > >> - Lou Pagnucco > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > >
