Dave,
If we are talking about the Farnsworth Fusor, which is the way the thread evolved, then the Fusor is fueled with the same deuterium as palladium cold fusion but NO helium-4 is seen. The reaction is going to either Helium-3 and a 2.4 MeV neutron or Tritium and a fast proton. Both of those secondary nuclei will further react. There is a different branching ratio than hot fusion and there are few gammas– another sign that this is not hot fusion. The 2.4 MeV neutron is characteristic of hot fusion. In O-P, which is accurate for a fraction of the Fusor’s reactions, the lowered threshold translates into less net energy than hot fusion since the stripped neutron acts as if has negative kinetic energy (according to O-P not me). Most of that faction of fusion goes to an emitted proton. Some of the neutrons which are seen from Fusors are believed to be spallation neutrons from the fast proton interacting with the tungsten of the cathode and some are the characteristic 2.4 MeV neutrons from the He-3 reaction. In any event, the plasma remains “warm” and too cool to emit gammas, so it cannot be typical hot fusion but more like a hybrid. Even a neon transformer provides sufficient voltage. In QM tunneling, energy can be “borrowed” to accomplish fusion and immediately repaid to balance the books. This should not be in dispute. Unfortunately, QM reactions are low in probability and the Fusor is almost impossible to scale up to breakeven. That is the tradeoff. We will not solve the energy dilemma with a Fusor unless dozens are used as a neutron source for subcritical fission – which has been proposed. From: David Roberson Jones, Are you saying that there are two reactions taking place in this situation where the final product results in the release of energy? I agree with Ed if the end products are a neutron and proton that are now unconnected. Perhaps it is possible to borrow energy for a short period of time with a quantum tunneling effect, but it must be repaid soon afterwards. Please explain when that happens. Dave From: Edmund Storms Here is the mass change D = 2.014101778 H= 1.00727647 n= 1.0086649 The gain in mass is D-n= p You are making an incorrect assumption. The O-P effect (i.e. “stripping”) is not thermonuclear, it is quantum mechanical - in effect a tunneling reaction. Quantum tunneling is one of Oppenheimer’s claims to fame. OK Jones, then were does the mass come from? No matter what you call the process, the energy MUST be conserved. This reaction requires energy be added to create the mass of the product. Where does this energy come from? Yes, mass-energy is conserved but we are talking about deuterium being converted into something else (tritium or He3)– so there is NOT necessarily a non-conserved mass of anything, since there is always the neutrino “wild card”. That, essentially, is the crux of your incorrect assumption. In the Fusor, the transmuted nucleus is left in an energy state as if it had fused with a neutron of negative kinetic energy, so there far less mass change than the thermonuclear reaction. The Fusor can be called “warm fusion” not hot, since the threshold energy for thermonuclear reaction is never attained. The only issue here is how the barrier is overcome, because once this happens, energy is created by the normal hot fusion reaction, i.e. the combined nucleus fragments into the observed particles which includes neutrons. That is what you seem to be missing in all of this. It is not hot fusion but CoE does apply. In the O-P reaction, the Coulomb barrier is overcome when two deuterons approach each other with the neutron end of each facing the other – i.e. being geometrically ahead of the proton end. The 1.7 MeV barrier is effectively lowered to about 10 keV. Why suggest some magic condition like negative energy. Robert Oppenheimer and Melba Philips suggested this. Who am I, or you, to suggest otherwise? The process is very simple. The two D are given enough energy to surmount the barrier. The Fusor simply does this in an efficient way. No, the Fusor never gets close to doing this at all, without QM. The energy to surmount the barrier is reduced by a similar amount to the deficit in net energy transfer. Once again, we appear to be seeing experts in one field who do not understand the full implications of QM and nuclear tunneling - and refuse to believe that energy on the quantum scale can be “borrowed” for a few femtoseconds before it is repaid. There is no 1.7 MeV threshold and there is corresponding mass change. In QM tunneling, the energy barrier for fusion is reduced and the excess energy is likewise reduced. Jones
