Thanks, Chuck, for being carefully, open-mindedly curious about WL -- with a Scientific American level of understanding, I've been intrigued for years that they seem able to tie so many diverse mysteries in science to their beta-decay chains... so my hunch is, where's there's a vertical chain of smoke puffs on the horizon, there's a signal, and there's a fire with patterned processes -- also, if it exists, it exists in variety and profusion, easily accessible to systems as simple as high density polyethylene insulation over periods of months in power cables...
!!? within the fellowship of service, Rich Murray 619-623-3468 Imperial Beach, CA 91932 On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 8:14 PM, Chuck Sites <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you Axil, > > After looking at that power point for a few hours now, it has me deeply > intrigued. I really never looked into W&L theory on LENR because it seemed > pretty far fetched that nuclear-weak interactions could be driving the heat > events. It's probably a bias I developed when discussing the PEP chain > nuclear synthesis for the Ni-H experiments. PEP (p+e+p -> D) just never > seemed possible given the models of the nuclear shell. > > I've changed my mind. I am beginning to understand WL theory and it has > really taken me aback. A (WL) neutron forms in a P+(e cloud) -> n. The > neutron is ultra-low momentum so interacts strongly with any open nuclear > shell slot. From there, any number of processes could occur. In my mind, > it certainly suggest a method were Ni-H can realistically work. > > This theory might actually be testable with my Nickel-Borax experiment, or > suggest a nano-metal-boron + H. If a neutron hits a B10 the result is B10 + > n -> Li7 + He4. or B10 + n -> B11. Then p+B11 -> 3 He4 + 8.7MeV if > somehow n -> p + e + anti-neutrino such that n+B11 -> 3 He4 + e + > anti-neutrino + 8.7MeV. > > Interesting enough, is the observation that resistance drops in the > electrolysis of Ni-H in borax. This fits very well with WL theory on > protonic superconductivity. Since late 80's I've thought CF would have to > show protonic superconductivity before fusion, simply because of the charge > a proton/deuteron carries and the quantum wave overlap thats needed prior > to fusion. > > All and all, this is a very interesting read. I'm becoming a real fan of > the WL theory. > > Best Regards, > Chuck > ---- > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 3:34 AM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CDIQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnewenergytimes.com%2Fv2%2Fsr%2FWL%2Fslides%2F20120911LatticeEnergySlides.pdf&ei=dXIsUcnPA6m80AHAz4CgBg&usg=AFQjCNExjKwx5EhG-rjpMn1BTnHckJMWjQ&sig2=W8FrUpUJEa1--spqHHDAsA >> >> Some interesting stuff. Maybe W&L are getting closer to the truth. >> Enjoy... >> Cheers: Axil > >
