In LENR, sometimes gamma rays are produced.
On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 2:59 PM, H Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote: > cold fusion can be distinguished from hot fusion by the three "miracles" > > http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/Theories/TakahashiTheory.shtml#miracles > > Harry > > > On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Robert Dorr <rod...@comcast.net> wrote: > >> >> Ed and Axil, >> >> Maybe it would be nice if we could define "Cold Fusion", "LENR" , as >> fusion at room temperature that only requires the addition of heat, below >> let's say 1000 degrees centigrade and possibly some pressure to start the >> fusion process. Any other type of fusion that requires a high energy >> process such as a high energy ion beam, that was used in the experiment >> being discussed here, would be considered a form of "hot" fusion. Just an >> thought. >> >> Bob >> >> At 09:15 AM 7/7/2013, you wrote: >> >> My point Axil, is that the authors have no idea what they are talking >> about. This confusion is common and results in a great deal of confusion >> about how cold fusion works. Unless this confusion is eliminated from >> discussion, no agreement is possible. This paper simply adds to the >> confusion, which many other papers have done as well. >> >> Ed >> On Jul 7, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Axil Axil wrote: >> >> The paper says that the experimenters are claiming cold fusion. There is >> no mixing of fusion definitions involved in this paper to my understanding >> of it. >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> >> wrote: >> That is not a useful criteria because the Lawson criteria applies to a >> plasma and to a reaction that results in the hot fusion products, i.e. >> neutrons, tritium, etc. Cold fusion does not occur in plasma and results in >> helium without kinetic energy. The reaction is defined as LENR only if the >> conditions and reaction products fit the conditions on which the definition >> is based. You are not free to change the definition to suit your personal >> beliefs. >> >> Ed >> >> >> >> On Jul 7, 2013, at 9:29 AM, Axil Axil wrote: >> >> I am drawing a distinction between hot fusion and LENR in terms of the >> "Lawson criterion". Specifically, if a fusion reaction cannot be >> characterized in terms of plasma density, plasma confinement time and >> plasma temperature, then the reaction is LENR. >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hot fusion is a nuclear reaction in which two or more atomic nuclei >> collide at very high speed and join to form a new type of atomic nucleus of >> compressing matter to high temperatures at high densities as defined by the >> to the Lawson criterion, >> In nuclear fusion research, the Lawson criterion, first derived on fusion >> reactors (initially classified) by John D. Lawson in 1955 and published in >> 1957, is an important general measure of a system that defines the >> conditions needed for a fusion reactor to reach ignition, that is, that the >> heating of the plasma by the products of the fusion reactions is sufficient >> to maintain the temperature of the plasma against all losses without >> external power input. As originally formulated the Lawson criterion gives a >> minimum required value for the product of the plasma (electron) density ne >> and the "energy confinement time" . Later analyses suggested that a more >> useful figure of merit is the "triple product" of density, confinement >> time, and plasma temperature T. The triple product also has a minimum >> required value, and the name "Lawson criterion" often refers to this >> inequality. >> You are consistent at least; you had the same mindset as demonstrated >> here when you described the LeClair experiment as some other type of hot >> fusion. >> The LeClair experiment is demonstrating a LENR reaction no matter what >> LeClair thinks is causing it. >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> >> wrote: >> If we cannot even agree about what the term LENR means or which >> phenomenon it describes, I see no hope in arriving at any common >> understanding. Please, can you make an effort to agree on some basic ideas >> so that the discussion can move forward? We are dealing with two different >> phenomenon. One uses high applied energy from various sources and the other >> requires no applied energy. One results in neutrons when deuterium is used, >> The other results in helium when deuterium is used. Can you at least >> acknowledge that these two different reactions occur? >> >> Ed >> >> On Jul 7, 2013, at 8:20 AM, Axil Axil wrote: >> >> It seems to me that the reaction mechanism of the experiment referenced >> in this thread is electrostatic in nature relating to high voltage >> causation of fusion. >> >> >> To draw a comparison, this is identical to the mechanism used in the >> Proton-21 experimental series. >> >> >> Since Proton-21 is considered a cold fusion or more properly termed a >> LENR experiment, so to this referenced experiment should be termed a LENR >> experiment. >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> >> wrote: >> This paper makes the common mistake of mixing hot- and cold-fusion. >> These are two separate and independent phenomenon. They are not related >> except both are nuclear reactions involving fusion. However, the >> conditions required for initiation and the nuclear products are entirely >> different. As long as hot- and cold-fusion are considered in the same >> discussion, no progress will be made in understanding cold fusion. >> >> Ed >> >> On Jul 7, 2013, at 2:31 AM, David ledin wrote: >> >> Interesting paper from nature about successful cold fusion experiment >> >> http://fire.pppl.gov/cyrstal_fusion_nature.pdf >> >> >> > > > > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2013.0.3345 / Virus Database: 3204/6471 - Release Date: 07/07/13 > > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2013.0.3345 / Virus Database: 3204/6471 - Release Date: 07/07/13 > >
