Posted on 06/02/2021 1:27:37 AM PDT by Kevmo
“you’re unwelcome on these cold fusion threads”
With Mev energies before fusion it is certainly no cold fusion!
Per the rules, this person has (yet again) been asked to leave the thread.
to split a deuteron costs 2.2 MeV. Hot fusion of two deuterons
yields about 4 MeV. At best this would
never yield more than about a factor of 2....and that’s not taking into account
any of the losses. And those losses will
be very significant.
1) Maybe 1% of the electrons will create significant x-rays, of which only a
fraction will have the requisite minimum
energy of 2.2 MeV. => most of the electron energy ends up as heat.
2) Only a fraction of the 2.2 MeV or greater x-rays will split a deuteron
(1%?). The rest just ionize atoms and end up
as heat.
3) Of the split deuterons, only a fraction will produce neutrons with even the
minimal energy required to fuse two
deuterons (5 keV? - but the more the better).
4) Of those neutrons, only a fraction will actually accelerate a deuteron
resulting in a fusion reaction.
5) A fusion reaction will primarily create two energetic particles, both of
which can further accelerate other
deuterons, however only a tiny fraction of them will actually do so. Most will
simply lose energy ionizing surrounding
atoms, and end up as heat.
In all, …. they would be lucky to get even one part in a million of the
electron beam energy out as fusion energy,
if the proposed method were actually an accurate description of what happens in
their reactor.
< https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-
Jones Beene Thu, 06 Aug 2020 08:23:11 -0700 H LV wrote: ***Remember 10-12 years ago the buzz around x-rays from peeling tape?
https://youtu.be/r63e5y3Z3R8
*** If this way of generating x-rays could be harnessed it would make this lattice confinement fusion more economical.
That is a QM effect which does not scale up. The same could be said for much of LENR. In addition, it would seem that the Lawson criterion of hot plasma fusion would also apply, in a modified (reworded) way to the new and improved semantics for lattice enhanced but no longer "cold" fusion. i.e. when we observe effective temperature and pressure on the femtoscale.
As for input - an external electron beam of hot fusion could be modeled as internal k-shell or l-shell resonant electron. Here is the Wiki site for Lawson.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawson_criterion
IOW - one needs only to reduce the geometry of the active site to its actual minimal dimension to see the similarity to plasma fusion, except for one big distinction.. The lack of gamma radiation remains the main difference between hot and (formerly) cold -- and this is where the lattice itself comes into play.
We have to assume that Hagelstein got that part right, or close - and that the lattice carries away most of the downshifted excess instead of gamma radiation. With that addition, the old "cold fusion" becomes the new QM-lattice-fusion.
It never was cold, was it?
https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg119229.html
RE: [Vo]:Spacecraft of the Future Could Be Powered By Lattice Confinement Fusion
bobcook39...@hotmail.com Thu, 06 Aug 2020 10:58:21 -0700
The reason why there is no gamma stems from the transfer of spin energy in
small quanta of angular momentum—nuclear to elecroic—with the same entangled
system—the crystalline lattice of the host material. The time frame may be
very short—less than a femto- second.
The new entangled system in effect changes phase with to a quasi stable
condition. The potential energy of the nuclear components is lower and the
kinetic l energy of the atomic electrons is higher with total energy being the
same. The higher kinetic energy (thermal energy) is then shared with the
universe by radiation of EM energy until it comes to a thermal equilibrium with
the environment at a slow pace compared to a femto-second or shorter pace.
***From my standpoint LANT (lattice assisted nuclear transmutation) is a more accurate description of the phenomena that occurs in the entangled system, and the 2nd law of TD does not apply
Bob Cook
https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-
Re: [Vo]:Spacecraft of the Future Could Be Powered By Lattice Confinement Fusion
Jack Cole Fri, 07 Aug 2020 11:06:25 -0700
By “our” last experiments I mean you and I. The idea was mostly yours if I
recall correctly. I don’t have the site up anymore, but you can see it
here:
http://web.archive.org/web/20180613041630/http://lenr-coldfusion.com/
***On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 7:45 PM Jones Beene {jone...@pacbell.net} wrote:
Jack Cole wrote:
It is also hard to not see some parallels with our last experiments (2016) with TiH2, nickel sheets, and light.
Jack
Do you have an online citation for this work?
Re: Lattice Confinement Fusion Terry Blanton Wed, 19 Aug 2020 11:43:21 -0700
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 12:39 PM CB Sites wrote:
” Any ideas as to why they chose Erbium for the host metal?”
*** I can think of one reason:
Palladium 2,197.00 USD per Troy Ounce
Platinum 962.50 USD per Troy Ounce
Erbium $650 per kilogram!
https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-
So does Hunter Biden..........................
...and the mess thereafter. Flood that well!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.