The alpha particles could be a precursor of the "new fire". Once the fire the starts less smoke is produced.
starting a fire with hand drill https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CF9GiK_T4PA Or maybe alphas are like sparks for the starting the "new fire" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_35kxuwjcTs Harry On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > Of course, no statement can be made about any subject that does not invite > a counter argument. No idea about CF can be suggested that cannot be shown > to be false. Clearly, unless some triage is used to sort through the > arguments and some common sense is applied, the effect will be impossible > to understand. Naturally, I have considered the possibilities you suggest, > Axil, before I came to my conclusions. Of course what you propose might be > true. Nevertheless, I reached my conclusion by considering all of the > observed behavior. A reader will have to decide for themselves which > possibility they want to accept because it is impossible to debate such > details here and reach an agreed conclusion. No matter what arguments are > given, a counter argument can always be provided. > > I stated what I believe and gave the reasons. You stated what you believe > and gave your reasons. That is all we can do. > > Ed Storms > On May 6, 2013, at 12:25 PM, Axil Axil wrote: > > Ed Storms states: > > *“We know that when large amounts of heat are detected, alpha emission at > a comparable rate does not occur. Clearly, large heat production and alpha > emission are not related.”* > > This could be a false assumption as follows: > > When a thermalization mechanism that transfers nuclear energy directly to > the lattice is in place, alpha particles do not carry enough energy to > penetrate the surface of the CR-39. > > In this situation, the alpha particle drifts out of the nucleus at very > low energies rather than being fired off out at high speed. > > This thermalization mechanism of nuclear energy from LENR directly to the > lattice makes deductions about the behavior of alpha particles and their > associated behavior and measurement problematic and unreliable. > > > > > > On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com>wrote: > >> Eric, ALL nuclear reactions generate heat. Alpha emission is a nuclear >> reaction. Therefore, heat was generated. However, the rate of the reaction >> was too small to make detectable heat from this reaction. The only unknown >> is whether heat from a different reaction can occur. >> >> We know that when large amounts of heat are detected, alpha emission at a >> comparable rate does not occur. Clearly, large heat production and alpha >> emission are not related. Therefore, some other nuclear reaction is the >> source of the heat. The question is: What is this source? >> >> When a large amount of heat are produced, helium is detected. This helium >> does not come from alpha emission, as the above logic demonstrates. >> Therefore, it must result from a different nuclear reaction. The question >> is: What is this reaction? That is the question my and other theories are >> trying to answer. If you want to answer the question of where the alpha >> comes from, you need to start a different discussion because this emission >> is clearly not related to CF. >> >> And NO, helium can not be produced by a reaction that sometimes makes >> alpha and sometimes releases He without kinetic energy. Such a reaction is >> too improbable to be seriously considered. >> >> Ed Storms >> >> >> >> On May 6, 2013, at 10:45 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: >> >> Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>> But if there was no clear excess heat, we have little reason to >>> conclude we have learned anything from the CR-39 experiments about the >>> alpha particle flux when there is excess heat. >>> >> >> I do not think they did calorimetry in most of these experiments. We do >> not know whether there was heat. >> >> - Jed >> >> >> > >
