Vortex will not accept an attachment so you will have to find the
paper elsewhere.
J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci. 11 (2013) 1–15
Research Article
Nature of Energetic Radiation Emitted from a Metal Exposed to H2
Edmund Storms∗ and Brian Scanlan
Begin forwarded message:
From: Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com>
Date: May 21, 2013 5:40:25 PM MDT
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Isotope separation technology can be improved
Jones, I have a unified theory that explains helium, tritium and
hopefully deuterium while using only one miracle. This miracle is
required to explain anything involving CF, including transmutation.
The phenomenon shows that a nuclear reaction, either fusion or
transmutation must take place by a process that can dissipate the
energy in an unconventional way. This is the unique aspect of the
discovery that needs to be acknowledged. This is not in any way like
hot fusion. The phenomenon is unique, but requires only one miracle.
Proposing transmutation as the nuclear reaction does not change this
requirement. In fact, this process requires not one but several
miracles. That is why I'm amused by all the attention applied to
transmutation only because Rossi claims this is the source of
energy, even though this reaction has huge conflicts with known
behavior.
As for looking for the radiation, several people have done this and
found radiation, including myself. This information has all been
published and is summarized in the attached paper. The low energy
of the radiation cause most to be absorbed by the apparatus, with
only a small fraction being available for detection.
Ed Storms
On May 21, 2013, at 5:08 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
From: Edmund Storms
Jones, there is no ash because no one has looked for deuterium.
Everyone who might find enough deuterium to detect is focused on
transmutation. If they now find deuterium, their favorite
explanation will go up in smoke and the patents that claim to need
nickel will be useless. I'm trying to get someone to look for
deuterium and report the results. So far, no luck. Until this test
is made, no conclusion is worth accepting.
Hi Ed,
Almost everyone agrees that deuterium (and helium and tritium)
should be looked for in the ash of this device, but that this
probably will not happen soon. Your explanation of why Rossi
doesn’t want to know this could be absolutely correct. He shoots
himself in the foot. Someone else must do this, if it is to be done.
If the ratio of H to D in the gas was 6,500:1 when it was filled –
and after a week of run-time the ratio was 5,000:1 then that
finding would be meaningful. Hydrogen is unlikely to leak
preferentially, so the large change in ratio would indicate fusion
as the prima facie explanation.
However, if protium was fusing into deuterium, which is an
extremely rare reaction to begin with, there should be gamma
radiation. If you say there is no gamma radiation because this is a
novel type of fusion reaction which shows none, then there is still
a huge problem (aside from the extra miracle) – tritium. At a
certain point, tritium is favored and its decay radiation will be
obvious – even after shutdown… yet none shows up, when any
decent monitor should see it.
You probably do not want to add a third miracle by suggesting that
no tritium happens. Thus, the lack of tritium makes the search for
extra deuterium of lower priority than it otherwise would be. In
the end, if the H/D ratio is substantially different – we will
have found something that indicates a novel form of hydrogen
fusion, which Rossi’s patent does not cover.
However, another smart thing to do– if someone besides AR really
wants to find out the modus operandi would be to first look for the
lower energy photons – EUV. Rossi does not want to do that because
of the huge portfolio of prior art from BLP. OTOH, Mills and
company might want to do this kind of testing in a replica AR cell,
as a way to get royalties from Rossi, in the event that he beats
them to market.
Many theories suggest the gain could be coming from EUV photons -
and it is easier to document them than deuterium, but I doubt we
will know form Rossi. I hope that Mills looks at the Ni-62
possibility, in the context of his theory.
This could pay off handsomely, Randy …
From: Bob Higgins
I don't understand why 62Ni would make a difference in the
reaction. Are we now seriously considering that the Ni nucleus
participates in the nuclear reaction that causes the heat
IMO this is a “Mills type” reaction (BLP), involving deep
hydrogen redundancy - and the Ni does not transmute into another
element.
This particular isotope is simply a much better catalyst for deep
redundancy at the 300 eV level. This mechanism goes beyond Randell
Mills theory into QM and wave function collapse, which Mills rejects.
Rossi and Focardi apparently believe that nickel transmutes to
copper, but the proof offered indicates otherwise. Others believe
that protons fuse to deuterium. There is no proof of that.
Many qualified observers, at this stage, have markedly different
opinions.
However, it is worth repeating that if it is a nuclear reaction –
there should be gamma radiation and/or radioactive ash. There is
none.
Jones
