Replies

Here’s the best comment...

——————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg88136.html-————

Here are a few further musings on this fine paper.

The electron assisted neutron exchange process is interesting for nickel
since the yield is almost 600 keV for each of the two see-saw isotopes. This
is on the high side of what can remain “gammaless”. The downside is that
Ni61 is only 1+% of natural nickel, and it is required for all 3 exothermic
reactions. In practice this would probably limit the lifetime of the
reaction severely without some kind of enrichment.

The downside for Rossi - if this theory is correct, is that he blew it and
has little IP protection ... since essentially, in his filing, Rossi bet the
farm on Ni62 being the active isotope. However, it is unlikely that the
neutron exchange reaction is the only gainful reaction in any experiment, or
even a main reaction - and it could be only contributory. It could be one
of a dozen pathways, any of which will reinforce the probability of others
in a synergetic way.

Here are a few of the most viable hypotheses for gain - well over a dozen of
them. But the most controversial suggestion is that these are not mutually
exclusive, and that several or even ALL of them could be at work
simultaneously and contributory in a given experiment which has the
necessary components. There is not even a good candidate for “most likely”
IMHO.

* The original theory of P&F applicable to palladium and deuterium,
involving fusion to helium or tritium caused by coherent electron effects
(screening)
* Coulomb mediated reactions in general, including the deflation
fusion model of Horace Heffner.
* The “hydrino” (fractional hydrogen) mechanism of Randell Mills.
* The dense hydrogen or dense deuterium model, differentiated by Miley
and others as inverted Rydberg hydrogen or a DDL (deep Dirac layer).
* The Storms mechanism for NiH, which envisions protons fusing to
deuterium via screening in a specific kind of NAE site, evolved from
“fractofusion.
* The NASA effort (US 20110255645) suggests a method for producing
“heavy electrons” as a fusion catalyst (screening).
* The Yeong Kim (Zubarev) proposal of a BEC Bose-Einstein Condensate
* The Takahashi tetrahedral TSC model is similar to the BEC.
* The beta decay/ ultracold neutron mechanism popularized by
Widom-Larsen which is similar to a Focardi/ Rossi/ Brillouin/ NASA
explanation.
* Polariton catalysis in general - which is a theory involving
plasmons, surface phonons and photons. This is more of an “enabler” pathway.
* Casimir dynamics, in general including a dynamical effect. This is
also an “enabler” pathway as are other geometry constraints.
* Accelerated nuclear decay. Some experiments benefit from long-lived
but unstable isotopes like potassium-40.
* RPF or reversible proton fusion, which is based on the strong force,
QCD and a transient state, the diproton, deriving energy from quark or gluon
mass.
* The “nanomagnetism” ideas of Brian Ahern - which is a formative
theory involving magnons and cyclical phase change around the Curie point of
Ni.
* Any combination or permutation of the above - since none of them is
mutually exclusive and most experiments cannot be defined by a single
hypothesis.

There are many more, especially variations and refinements. Pardon me if I
have overlooked your favorite, but this is a running effort and your
favorite may appear on the next list.

And here’s another good one.

-———————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg88150.html-——————

[Vo]:RE: More on the Kalman paper

Jones Beene Sat, 21 Dec 2013 09:23:00 -0800

Apologies in advance for the long posting.

Earlier is was suggested: The downside for Rossi - if
Kalman’s paper is correct, is that he blew it and has little IP protection
... since essentially, in his filing, Rossi bet the farm on Ni62 being the
active isotope. However, it is unlikely that the neutron exchange reaction
is the only gainful reaction in any experiment, or even a main reaction -
and it could be only contributory.

In light of the Kalman paper and the fact that the proposed “neutron
exchange reaction” has “hit a raw nerve” amongst many who are striving to
find accurate answers to the underlying modality of LENR, and the active
isotopes - there are a few more points to consider.

Keep in mind that Kalman requires Ni61 instead of Ni62 (Rossi patent).

Many months ago, it was learned from a source in the isotope enrichment
business - who prefers to remain anonymous, that Andrea Rossi had indeed
purchased enriched nickel isotopes for testing. That is essentially all that
was learned - other than the price paid (very high) and the fact that Rossi
was longer a customer of this supplier.

The main value of this information now, as we go into 2014 - is that it came
near the time that Rossi’s patent application was changed to focus
essentially on this one specifically named isotope (Ni-62) AND that it
verified that indeed, Rossi had used enriched nickel isotopes in testing.
Many had doubts that Rossi would have gone to great expense of doing this
since he made the claim that “he did not need to enrich”. But that was a
half-truth.

Yawn? Maybe this detail is not a yawner - thanks to the new paper. The
emerging value of this factoid, given a reinterpretation - is that it can be
a strong clue to where we stand today IF (big “if”) the Kalman neutron
exchange reaction is accurate for a large percentage of the gain which is
seen in the Rossi reaction, especially in the HotCat - and the Ni62 route is
relatively minor. Both could be active but one could be far more active.

It should be realized that the prime function of free electrons in the
Kalman paper can be supplied by plasmon-polaritons in a thermal zone, and
that the Rossi HotCat seems to be an ideal vehicle for all of these major
types of polaritons (which can supply the charge disruption which is
required for neutron substitution). They are:

1) Phonon-polaritons result from coupling of an infrared photon with a
thermal phonon;
2) Exciton-polaritons result from coupling of photons with excitons
3) Intersubband-polaritons result from coupling of an infrared photon
in the conduction band of a semiconductor heterostructure (like SiC).
What Kalman seems to have missed, but which we can now have the luxury to
re-evaluate in the context of the HotCat is that the charge disruption
(preceding neutron substitution) can be of either negative or positive
polarity, probably does not require electrons per se, and that a polariton
would be an good substitute vehicle for this task !

One other thing. If we assume that Rossi did actually try a number of
isotopes before deciding to risk everything in his IP protection on only one
isotope - doesn’t this pretty much rule out the Kalman “neutron shuffle” -
since that modality absolutely demands Ni61 ?

The answer is a resounding NO! In fact it shows precisely where Rossi could
have made his big mistake in trying to cut corners with the high price of
isotopes.

Hint. If you must use enriched isotopes in any process, it is much easier
and less costly to remove either the heavy fraction OR the light fraction,
rather than to try to isolate a single isotope. Removal by density gradient
can often be done in an ultracentrifuge (meaning that almost any lab could
do it). The cost difference between buying nickel which is enriched in the
heavy fraction (by removing only Ni58 and Ni60) and any pure isotope is
about 1000:1.

The light isotopes (58 and 60) are over 94% or natural nickel, so to deplete
them preferentially can give one a high multiple of enrichment in the heavy
fraction for about $20 gram (in high volume) instead of $20,000 per gram for
pure Ni62. This is a ballpark estimate.

Thus - a tentative hypothesis, taking all of this old info into account in
the new context, is that sometime in 2012 Rossi learned that the heavy
isotope fraction of nickel was where the activity was, and to reduce cost -
he thereafter bought nickel which was depleted in the light isotopes.

My apology for the complicated attempt to explain all of this in a single
posting, and I realize that most who have followed Rossi will balk at this
explanation, given that it is dependent on a new understanding (Kalman)
which is unproved.

Especially disappointed will be those who have been enamored with DGT.
However, it would be a mistake to overlook this possibility, especially
since the spokesman for Defkalion stated emphatically that “all the isotopes
all work, other than Ni61”.

In fact, the truth (if Kalman is correct) is just the opposite: ONLY Ni61
works !

Yet this makes perfect sense. A company like Defkalion who has no IP and who
have lied about so many other things in the past, including their so-called
move to Canada (Not!) would be expected to make the most untruthful claim
possible to mislead competitors - which is exactly what has happened.

In short, the bottom line is that the heavy isotope fraction of nickel is
only 6% of natural, and includes Ni61, Ni62 and Ni64 - with most of that
being Ni62. When Rossi found this heavy fraction to be more active, he may
have jumped to a conclusion on the single isotope Ni62 - reasoning it can be
transmuted to stable copper with a proton addition... AND furthermore that
to avoid a patent which is based on Ni62 the practitioner would need to
remove it, at which point the reactor would presumably not work.

When in truth, Rossi was getting high enrichment in Ni61 at the same time,
along with the Ni62 ... and since Ni61 can NOT go to copper with a proton
addition (there is no stable Cu62) he could not have guessed that it was
actually the active isotope. Also, this is because Focardi had convinced him
years ago that the gain comes from nickel going to copper. But as Kalman
shows us, the gainful substitution reaction happens in nickel, which does
NOT TRANSMUTE to copper. (at least that is the premise of this posting).

The result is completely clean- no free neutrons and no gammas. This revised
explanation is so elegant and logical in fitting into the historical
picture, that I will savor the moment with another café latte ...

...before someone comes along and bursts Kalman’s hydrogen filled balloon
:-)

Jones