Bob, This makes sense to me, thanks - but an important question still remains.
Why is the Ni62 nearly pure? The reaction was stopped for reasons which were
pre-planned, and not related to a depletion of reactants. They made this
clear.
Do you agree that the tested sample in question - should have been fully
loaded with the step-wise intermediaries Ni59, Ni60 and Ni61 - as opposed to
almost pure Ni63?
Jones
_____________________________________________
From: Robert Ellefson
Recall that the bulk results show 57% Li-6 enrichment, vs.
92% surface enrichment. I believe the higher fraction of Li-6 on the
surface is the result of starvation of the reaction cycle resulting in an
excess of Li-6 as compared to the steady-state balance during operation,
which is reflected in the bulk composition.
Read these messages for further details:
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg98020.html (msg has an
error, should read ni62, not ni68)
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg98350.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg98422.html
-Bob
_____________________________________________
From: Jones Beene
Ok - I can buy the cyclic reaction, but how
do you explain the great preponderance of Li-6 in the ash, compared to all
other isotopes? That does not indicate a cycle so much as a major shift...
and where are the intermediaries in the nearly pure sample - which would
indicate one neutron at a time? Surely you are not suggesting multi-body?
_____________________________________________
From: Robert Ellefson
Jones,
I can only give you the assurances that I
received from the report itself. All of the claims I am making are coming
from there. Pages 28 and 53 describe the ICP methods as involving the
entire sample mass.
I do not believe this is indicative of
fraud. I believe this indicates a cyclic reaction is occurring that results
in a steady-state heat-generating reaction that cycles between Li-7 and Li-6
and results in Ni-62 enrichment. I put some more thoughts into this
message:
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg98422.html
-Bob
_____________________________________________
From: Jones Beene
[mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 4:16 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: Isotope conversion
completeness, was RE: [Vo]:Pomp weighs in
Let me put it this way, if what you say is
true - that the sample tested to 99.3% purity of Ni-62, then we have a major
problem. Are you certain?
...this information is very important, so
please assure us that is true.
Jones
From: Robert Ellefson
First, as I explain in this
(rather-long-winded) mail from yesterday, the ENTIRE ASH SAMPLE BULK was
analyzed by ICP-MS as consisting of 99.3% enriched Ni-62.
( see:
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg98350.html )
Allow me to repeat this crucially-important
point: The 2.13mg ash sample contained 2.12mg of PURE Nickel-62.
Only the SEM/EDS and ToF-SIMS methods are
restricted to analyzing the surface-layer composition.
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
