The one clue that I believes tells the tale is the zero spin property of the NUCLEUS that can energy into weak to intermediate strength reactions.
Should read,,, The one clue that I believe tells the tale is the zero spin property of the various types of nuclei that either work or don't work in a weak to intermediate strength LENR reaction based solely on their nuclear spin. On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > The one clue that I believes tells the tale is the zero spin property of > the NUCLEUS that can energy into weak to intermediate strength reactions. > > Rossi states he uses NI62 and Ni64, DGT says Ni61 does not work, nitrogen > which has non zero spin is a vigorous LENR poison. > > The reason why zero spins work and non zero spins don't in LENR is that > NMR active (non zero spin) nuclei wastes energy by converting that magnetic > power into RF. > > Even Piantelli states that a cooper pair of protons are active in his > reaction. That cooper pair has zero spin. > > The orbits of electrons have no impact, the LENR spin toll gate is > controlled by nuclear spin only. > > I believe that the DGT revelation that the NiH reactor produces Huge RF > emissions. This is from NMR active elements in a magnetic field. > > > On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> Axil-- >> >> I disagree that the reaction is totally nuclear, although nuclei are >> involved. Orbital spin and both electron and photon spin are probably >> involved in the energy redistribution. I agree it is magnetically >> induced. I consider spin coupling is involved and the release of energy >> associated with spin angular momentum or spin mass. A better handle would >> be magnetically induced spin energy redistribution (MISER). >> >> Bob >> >> Sent from Windows Mail >> >> *From:* Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> >> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 6, 2014 9:00 AM >> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com >> >> LENR is a misnomer. The concept that this reaction is one of low energy >> is mostly not accurate. This sort of inaccuracy has lead to much >> counter-reactions from the orthodox scientific community over many >> years. The name should be changed to its final form...Magnetically Induced >> Nuclear Reactions (MINR). >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: >> >>> From: Peter Gluck >>> >>> … can you suggest an acronym that goes well with LENR? >>> >>> Yes. If and when Mizuno’s experiment is replicated, and if it is as >>> reliable >>> and robust as it was presented to be, then it will have marked a turning >>> point (or tipping point) in the progression from PF in 1989. >>> >>> Seriously, everything prior to early 2014 can be called LENR, but… >>> >>> …everything thereafter is MENR (pronounced “meaner”). Mizuno-enhanced- >>> nuclear-reaction. >>> >>> At least, if the new work from others follows Mizuno’s basic formula of >>> nickel-deuterium plasma, and especially if he gets the kilowatt reactor >>> running this year – the one pictured in the MIT slides. Imagine a >>> kilowatt >>> with good proof. >>> >>> The MIT presentation will then have been the overlooked tipping point, >>> but >>> most everyone missed it at first, since it did not fit into preconceived >>> notions. >>> >>> Jones >>> >>> >> >
