Categories

Peer Review

All the articles published on the Journal Of Nuclear Physics are Peer Reviewed. The Peer Review of every paper is made by at least one University Physics Professor.

Math Lessons - Prof. Sergio Focardi

.

Read the whole article
Download the ZIP file

.
Introduction
These pages have been given to me from Prof. Sergio Focardi, when I asked him to help me with math to set up my theory.
These pages have been very important to me and I hope will be as much useful to our readers.
This way, Prof. Focardi continues to teach.
.
Andrea Rossi
.
P.S.
The notes are mine. Therefore may be wrong.
.
.
.

185 comments to Math Lessons – Prof. Sergio Focardi

  • Andrea Rossi

    Greg Leonard:
    The paper of Prof. Daddi is very interesting.
    I cannot give any information about the theory behind the so called Rossi Effect, not even in negative, for obvious reasons.
    Thank you for your attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Greg Leonard

    Dear AR,
    As an aeronautical engineer with a little understanding of Nuclear Physics, it looks to me as though this new paper might be very close to your theory of the e-cat.
    Do you agree?

  • Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers:
    Today has been published on the Journal of Nuclear Physics the interesting paper of Prof. Lino Daddi ” Virtual neutrons and miniatoms in LENR of Hydrogen and Deuterium”.
    JoNP

  • Andrea Rossi

    Tom Conover:
    I cannot comment, because I am not and never have been in contact with Elforsk: the only thing I know of them is that they have funded the Swedish Professors in regard of the third party validation. Obviously, we are honoured from their attention to our work.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Stefano:
    We are working on the electric power issue, but I cannot give precise information until we have a plant in operation making electricity.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N Karels:
    I agree, but I cannot give precise information about these declinations before the end of the work of validation we are making now. But you are right.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I found an interesting on-line report on using nuclear power for heating applications. Applications include Hydrogen production, desalinization of sea water, etc. The link is http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/TE_1682_web.pdf
    I suggest your people review it for possible commercial applications of eCat technology. Highest output temperature I saw were below 950C.

    If you were to produce an eCat that was self-sufficent in electricity production and could support 950C output temperatures, I would think you would have an exceptional commercially viable product.

  • Stefano

    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    I would appreciate just a little update on the R&D on electric power production. Did you find the right turbine? Did you built a prototype? Is there any testing on it?

    Kind regards.

    Stefano

  • Tom Conover

    Dear Andrea,

    I followed a link to this article and google translated it for me, I thought I would post it here. Question…

    Can you confirm or dismiss the last paragraph of the article that Elforsk printed (see below) please?
    True or False

    “Estimated that there are around 20 players which in one way or another researcher or acting in the field of cold fusion, on behalf by Elforsk is now a knowledge of research position and results and more. The compilation will be available in October at Elforsks website.”

    Here is the entire article, with a link to it’s location …

    ———————-

    http://www.elforsk.se/Global/Trycksaker%20och%20broschyrer/elforsk_perspektiv_nr2_2013.pdf

    ELFORSK Perspektiv

    PAGEs 4 & 5

    UNKNOWN “NUCLEAR” PROCESS
    CAN REVOLUTIONIZE THE WORLD’S ENERGY

    LARGE VOLTAGE

    Andrea Rossi, Sven Kullander and Hanno Essen during the test run of a Ecat for two years ago. During the demonstration, which lasted Barely six hours generated energy catalyzer whole 25 kilowatt hours of energy. Photo Giuseppe Levi, What is happening when the Italian inventor and contractor Andrea Rossi demonstrates his so-called Energy catalyst ? Was the if a hitherto unknown nuclear reaction or is it just an illusion? Clearly Rossi invention, Ecat as he calls it, has evidently performance in the vicinity of a nuclear reactor but without the radiation that arises when the nuclei split or merged. it shows the astounding results of measurements witnessed by among others Swedish researchers.

     - The large power development is not explain today. It is essential much larger than what is possible to achieve through a chemical reaction, as for example when burning oil. The only explanation that I see it that in the case of a hitherto unknown nuclear process, says högenergifysikprofessorn and the President of the Academy of Sciences Energy Committee Sven Kullander.
     
    Even for just over two years ago he is a study in Bologna, at the invitation by Andrea Rossi for on-site witness a demonstration of the technology. on trip was also Hanno Essén, Associate Professor of theoretical physics and a lecturer at KTH.

    PUZZLING RESULTS

    How the E-cat works in detail is still unknown, according Andrea Rossi due to patent reasons. But one know that nickel and hydrogen along with a number of secret additives ( additives ) are included in the process. Kullander and Essén got at visit examine reactor apparatus without surrounding insulation and estimated it had a volume of about 50 cubic centimeter (about the size of a scooter cylinder), The reactor was made of stainless steel, Surface steel casing was a sleeve of copper and the space in between flowing the water shortly afterwards would be heated to the boil, During the demonstration, which lasted in just under six hours generated energy catalyzer full 25 kilowatt hours energy. A result that is still bewilders both Sven Kullander and Hanno Essén,

     - It is impossible that one could develop so much heat energy in a small space by ordinary combustion, says Sven Kullander which therefore does not exclude any form of nuclear physical process given rise to the measured energy, For magazine Ny Teknik says Kullander and Essén that throughout experiment had the opportunity to examine equipment.

     - We checked everything that could be check and we could walk around and turning and turn on the time, but that we could detect any abnormality, says Hanno Essén, stating that they have a hard time believing that Rossi scams.

     - On the Internet you can find a variety of speculation is based on experiments is a forgery, Smuggling of electricity through ground wire and smuggling of DC when measuring instruments measured the AC have been proposed as explanations for deception, My reaction is that this is extremely unlikely. This power through soil management have been checked and DC theory can be ruled out for several reasons. Purely psychological works not that they are working intensively for years to deceive others with simple peasant prisoners trick, There is no credibility in such theory. A number of reports notes anomalous heat production, of several independent and competent persons, strengthens this hypothesis, says Hanno Essén,

    Test for power generation The great interest in the energy catalyzer has anyway led to new demonstrations of the technology in order to clarify its reliability and hitherto unknown properties, Most recently, in March 2013, when five Swedish (including Hanno Essén ) and two Italian researchers conducted a test run in Rossi’s premises in Bologna. This time of a larger apparatus for high temperatures (called Hotcat ) and with a view to generating electricity.  While these tests show an unexplained power consumption and heat generation, the researchers who compiled a report on the tests, partly financed by Elforsk (see report http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.3913 ),

    But still, no one, except possibly Andrea Rossi himself, explaining how the extraordinary heat production occurs, The core of the unit is a space containing nickel powder. hydrogen and heat is applied and this gives as inventor rise to a reaction which produces heat. In addition to these simple Ingredients learn the above, be smaller amounts secret additives powder.

    SCEPTICISM
    That it would move about so -called cold fusion or some kind lågenergikärn reaction, also referred LENR after of English Low Energy Nuclear Reaction, questioned however by many researchers, Among other things, they failed to demonstrate significantly elevated levels of ionizing radiation.

    - It is important to remember that tests of Rossi’s device only provides a indication of an abnormal heat generation, says Bo Höistad, professor of nuclear physics at Uppsala University, who participated as Representative of the last test run.

    - It remains to do more tests to fully safely determine that a heat actually carried out and under what conditions it occurs. Moreover, one can Not to mention a nuclear reaction before you certainly have identified the fuel nuclei have been converted into new nuclei, he says.

     Cold fusion has also long seen as humbug in the research community. Much because of the experiments that the American scientists Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons performed in the late 1980s and whose results would indicate the presence of fusion without extremely high temperatures. No they do not could lead to evidence through independent experiments and cold fusion has since more or less regarded as a utopia.

    REVALUATION

    But the area has again been recognized and dismissed today far from of all scientists ( Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons work is also under way to revalued and get a wide recognition as groundbreaking ),

    NASA conducts example, research on LENR and claims in a video that can be seen at network that the technology works, In the video say NASA researcher Joseph Zawodny to LENR proven to produce excess heat without impurities, and without creating ionizing radiation or hazardous waste. NASA also conducts cooperation with Boeing with the target to drive the jet engines with LENR,

    Other operators such company Hydro Fusion, with links to Andrea Rossi, already trying to commercialize the technology, The

    company is interestingly based in Stockholm and led by Swedes. another examples are Defkalion, previously collaborated with Andrea Rossi. company has developed a reactor that they Now trying to get out of the market in different applications including

    consumer products is one.

     Estimated that there are around 20 players which in one way or another researcher or acting in the field of cold fusion, on behalf by Elforsk is now a knowledge of research position and results and more. The compilation will be available in October at Elforsks website.

    Thank you for all your efforts!

    Tom Conover

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear JR.
    this is the second paper sent to me as attachment by Dr. Kolata:

    Direct Measurement of the LK Ratio in 7Be Electron Capture
    http://wisp.physics.wisc.edu/xray/publications/2002/2002-PhysRevLett_88_012501.pdf

    In the page 2 it is written:
    —————————————————–
    In our experiment the 7Be was produced with the
    TWINSOL [12] radioactive beam facility at the University of Notre Dame. A 100 particle nA beam of 6Li at 15 MeV was incident on a 2.54 cm long gas cell filled with one atmosphere of 3He, producing 7Be via the 3He6Li, 7Bed reaction. Recoil 7Be ions at a central energy of 8.5 MeV were brought to a focus 5.5 m downstream of the 3He cell by two superconducting solenoids. The 7Be flux and spatial distribution were measured with a position-sensitive silicon surface barrier detector to be 5 x 10^5 per second, uniform to within 50% over a 2.5 cm diameter circle.
    —————————————————–

    Note that in this experiment they had obtained 5×10^5 pps beam of 7Be, by using a beam of 6Li at 15 MeV.

    Thereby, you may realize that in this experiment published in 2002 they obtained a 7Be flux near to 10^6 pps.

    So, it seems that the production of 7Be is acually not a problem, because they can increase the rate by changing some variables. They used a beam of 6Li at 15MeV.

    With stronger beam above 15MeV they would succeed to get a 7Be beam with high-rate in the order of 10^6 or 10^7 pps.

    Regards
    wlad

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    JR wrote in October 22nd, 2013 at 1:02 PM

    ===================================================
    First, what does this have to do with the article you were quoting (which was about an experiment that tried to make measurements on 7Li but did not succeed)?

    Second, as the expert you contacted told you, there isn’t a machine that can produce the 7Be needed for such a measurement. If they can’t produce enough 7Be to make the measurement, then they can’t make the measurement – nothing strange about that.
    ====================================================

    Dear JR,
    you did not understand.

    The experiment described in Coulomb excitation of the 1/2- state in 7Li is concerning a DIFFERENT alternative method, which do not depend on the production of a high-rate of 7Be.

    Dr. Kolata did not say “there isn’t a machine that can produce the 7Be needed for such a measurement.”

    He did say nothing about the production of 7Be. You are making confusion with that other sort of experiments which require the production of a high-rate of 7Be.

    Actually Dr. Kolata said:
    —————————————–
    We have not attempted to measure the 7Be quadrupole moment. In principle (but likely not in practice) one might derive this quantity from the reorientation effect in sub-Coulomb scattering from high-Z nuclei, which could be measured here. However, as shown in the attached paper, this would be extremely difficult due to coupling to the breakup channel.
    ——————————————–

    So, it’s very strange that along 40 years they did not try to eliminate the difficulty, so that to measure the quadrupole moment for 7Be.

    The paper sent to me as attachment by Dr. Kolata is here:

    COULOMB EXCITATION OF THE ½- STATE IN 7Li
    http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1972NuPhA.194..193B

    regards
    wlad

  • JR

    Dear Wladimir,

    you said:
    “And along 40 years did not they try to measure Q for 7Be ?

    It’s very strange.”

    First, what does this have to do with the article you were quoting (which was about an experiment that tried to make measurements on 7Li but did not succeed)?

    Second, as the expert you contacted told you, there isn’t a machine that can produce the 7Be needed for such a measurement. If they can’t produce enough 7Be to make the measurement, then they can’t make the measurement – nothing strange about that.

    The fact that you don’t understand the complexities of nuclear physics measurements doesn’t mean that they’re all easy to do. Let me assure you, they aren’t. It simply means that you should try and learn more about a subject to see if there is something to your gut feeling, rather than claiming that your ignorance provides any kind of evidence for a conspiracy.

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    ====================================================
    5. Discussion
    This work has not fulfilled its aim of serving as a test case for the reorientation method. The data obtained could be used for a measurement of the ground state quadrupole moment, once more information becomes available concerning the radiative capture of ct on t or the photo-break-up of 7Li. Such experiments are now in progress 22, 23). The estimated value for the B(E2) is in good agreement with previous results but is definitely lower than the value obtained by H~usser et al. The deduced Q~ is also consistent with both the sign and magnitude of the best known value.
    The data obtained in the present experiment served as a consistency check between various electromagnetic properties of the 7Li nucleus. In this way the Coulomb excitation data was correlated with the radiative capture information and gave a consistente picture.

    22) I. Rode, private communication
    23) R. Moreh, private communication
    ======================================================

    MY COMMNENT:

    And along 40 years did not they try to measure Q for 7Be ?

    It’s very strange.

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    ====================================================
    From: James.J.Kolata.1@nd.edu
    To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
    CC: fdb@umich.edu
    Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 11:27:43 -0400
    Subject: Re: production of 7Be for measurement of its quadrupole moment

    We have not attempted to measure the 7Be quadrupole moment. In principle (but likely not in practice) one might derive this quantity from the reorientation effect in sub-Coulomb scattering from high-Z nuclei, which could be measured here. However, as shown in the attached paper, this would be extremely difficult due to coupling to the breakup channel.

    I have also attached a copy of the only atomic measurement we have carried out with 7Be…which however is not really relevant for your interest.

    JJK
    =====================================================

    –Forwarded Message Attachment–

    On Oct 19, 2013, at 7:15 PM, Wladimir Guglinski wrote:

    Dear Dr. James J. Kolata

    Production and use of �He, 7Be, �Li, 12B and metastable nuclear beams is a paper published in 1991 by you and some researchers of three universities, where in the item 2.3 it is explained the production of 7Be at the University of Notre Dame Van de Graaff accelerator:

    http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/29368/0000438.pdf?sequence=1

    The quadrupole moment Q for 7Be is not quoted in the nuclear tables.

    But it is very important for the confirmation of the theory which explains the flux of high-energy neutrinos generated in the solar core.

    In the paper Theoretical evaluation of the 7;9Be� 2s2p2 4P1=2;3=2;5=2 hyperfine structure parameters and Be 2s2p 3Po electron-affinity , the authors explain that 7Be is a low produced radioactive element, and this is the reason why it had not been used yet by the experimentalists.

    Look what they write in the Introduction of their paper:

    —————————————————-
    The nuclear quadrupole moment value for 9Be has been extracted by combining the ab initio electric field gradient value [7] and the experimental quadrupole coupling constant of the metastable levels 9Be(2s2p 3Po 2;1), measured by the atomic-beam magnetic-resonance method [8]. A similar experiment for exploring the hyperfine structure of 7Be in its metastable levels would not be easy to realize on a low produced radioactive element such as 7Be.
    —————————————————-

    https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/47084/3/be-8.pdf

    As 7Be is largelly produced in the Van de Graff accelerator since 1989, I would like to know if it has already been requested by experimentalists, so that to measure the quadrupole moment for 7Be.

    Or perhaps the quadrupole moment for 7Be had already been measured in the laboratories of the University of Notre Dame.

    In the case the quadrupole moment Q for 7Be had already been measured, I would like to know why the value of Q was not reported yet, and it is not quoted in the nuclear tables.

    Regards
    Wladimir Guglinski

    ===================================================
    COULOMB EXCITATION OF THE ½- STATE IN 7Li

    A. BAMBERGERt, G. JANSEN +t, B. POVH, D. SCHWALM and U. SMILANSKYttt
    Max Planck Institut fiir Kernphysik
    and Physikalisches lnstitut der Universit?it Heidelberg, Germany
    Received 7 June 1972

    Abstract: Coulomb excitation of the ½- state in VLi was induced by scattering 7Li on 2°Spb and ~°gBi targets. The excitation probabilities were measured for a wide range of scattering angles and bombarding energies. The deviations of the measured excitation probabilities from the predictions of first-order Coulomb excitation theory were analysed in terms of the reorientation effect. With the inclusion of contributions from virtual El excitations of the ct+t channel it was possible to give an estimate of the ground state quadrupole moment and thc B(E2, ] ~ ½) value which are consistent with the results of previous independent measurements.

    5. Discussion
    This work has not fulfilled its aim of serving as a test case for the reorientation method. The data obtained could be used for a measurement of the ground state quadrupole moment, once more information becomes available concerning the radiative capture of ct on t or the photo-break-up of 7Li. Such experiments are now in progress 22, 23). The estimated value for the B(E2) is in good agreement with previous results but is definitely lower than the value obtained by H~usser et al. The deduced Q~ is also consistent with both the sign and magnitude of the best known value.
    The data obtained in the present experiment served as a consistency check between various electromagnetic properties of the 7Li nucleus. In this way the Coulomb excitation data was correlated with the radiative capture information and gave a consistente picture.

    22) I. Rode, private communication
    23) R. Moreh, private communication
    =====================================================

    MY COMMENTS:

    1- The paper had been published in 1972

    2- In spite of Dr. Kolata says that this would be extremely difficult due to coupling to the breakup channel, I cant understand why they did not try to measure Q for 7Be.
    After all, along decades since 1972 they probably could get success to find many solutions so that to solve the problems.

    3- Or perhaps they had tried, but had obtained values very lower than the expected theoretical value Q= 0,07b for 4Be7, and have attributed it to the imperfection of the process measurement.

  • JR

    Dear Wladimir,

    FYI, a new article appeared today discussing charge radius measurements of other (unrelated) isotopes: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1310.5171.pdf

    They were able to make the measurement with particle production rates as low as 4000 ions/second.

  • JR

    Dear Wladimir,

    In your first example, it’s not clear to me how much they actually generate, and contaminating a system with 7Be is not the same a generating and separating significant quantities to use as a source for a 7Be beam. Being produced with a 20 GeV beam, it certainly can’t be used as a direct source, so you’d need to make 7Be in bulk to use as a source in a separate accelerator. Maybe it’s sufficient, but a quick look at the paper doesn’t make it at all clear that this is doable.

    You second suggestion certainly doesn’t work. It’s possible to build an accumulator ring to store up nuclei over significant time. But while it is in principle well understood and “easy” to do so, building an accumulator ring is not a minor, simple, or inexpensive upgrade. In addition, you can accumulate 1000 sec. of beam with 10^4 pps (particles per second), and then extract it to get 1 second of beam at 10^7pps. But that doesn’t help you; you don’t actually get more nuclei by accumulating them and releasing them in one big bunch – it’s actually worse.

    Your third comment: You *suppose* that a 10^6 pps beam is required to measure the charge radius, but that doesn’t mean it’s true. You’ve supposed a lot of things in previous arguments, and they’re often wrong. In any case, different measurements have different requirements for number of particles, energy of the nuclei, etc… There are charge radius measurements that have been made with 10^5-10^6 pps, so charge radius measurements don’t need particularly high particle rates (depending on how they’re done, of course). And even if it has been produced at 10^6pps, that isn’t a terribly high rate, and you’re just making wild guesses as to what is required.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Confirmation and consolidation of the results obtained in all the former tests, after a long period of operation made by a third party and by a Customer.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear JR
    look at the email sent by Dr. Csoto, telling me that quadrupole moment for 7Be has not been measured yet.

    =====================================================
    From: csoto@matrix.elte.hu
    Subject: Re: measurement of the 4Be7 quadrupole moment
    To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
    Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 15:26:07 +0200

    Dear Wladimir,

    No, it has not been measured yet. The charge radius of Be7 was measured a few years ago.

    Best ragards, Attila Csoto
    =====================================================

    However,
    I suppose that there is need a high-rate about 10^6 pps for measuring the charge radius of 7Be.

    As it had been measuered few years ago, then why didn’t they measure the quadrupole moment for 7Be ?

    Dont you think it is very strange ?

    regards
    wlad

  • Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    What would be the definition of success to you in your V-R&D work?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    SECOND ALTERNATIVE to get a high-rate 7Be beam

    JR wrote in October 20th, 2013 at 4:04 PM

    Dear Wladimir,
    —————————————————
    …(it’s usually quoted in particles per second (pps).

    To give an approximate scale, thousands of pps is typically a rate that’s so low you can’t use it for much, a million pps is low but useful for somethings, and 10-100 million pps it typically considered a good/high rate.
    ————————————————-

    COMMENT:

    Dear JR,
    The accelerator in the University of Notre Dame produces 7Be beam with low-rate of the order of 10^4 pps

    It is easy to convert it in a high-rate in the order of 10^7 pps, as follows:

    1- When the Van der Graff accelerator starts up to produce the 7Be beam, it will be collected by a ring (similar to the CERN), where the 7Be beam will be circulating.

    2- The time need to convert a beam with 10^4 pps to a beam with 10^7 pps is:

    T = 10^7/10^4 = 10^3 seconds = 1000/3600 hours = 15 minutes

    So, in 15 min you get a beam with 10^7 pps

    In 100/3600 hours = 1,5 min you get a bem with 10^6 pps.

    It’s a process very easier than that complex method proposed by Godefroid and his collegues.

    regards
    wlad

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    JR wrote in October 20th, 2013 at 4:04 PM

    Dear Wladimir,

    —————————————————
    …(it’s usually quoted in particles per second (pps).

    To give an approximate scale, thousands of pps is typically a rate that’s so low you can’t use it for much, a million pps is low but useful for somethings, and 10-100 million pps it typically considered a good/high rate.
    ————————————————-

    COMMENT:
    Here there is a production of 7Be in any quantity you wish:

    7Be BUILD-UP IN A LARGE WATER BEAM DUMP SYSTEM
    AT THE STANFORD LINEAR ACCELERATOR CENTER

    http://www.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-wrap/getdoc/slac-pub-0521.pdf

    There is need only to use an accelerator so that to create a 7Be beam with any pps you wish, by using the 7Be isotope obtained from that Stanford Linear Accelerator.
    As its half-life is 53 days, the process is perfectly viable.

    regards
    wlad

  • Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    The Journal Of Nuclear Physics is open to all the scientists and the persons that want to participate by their comments. I am delighted to see that the discussion goes on also indipendently from me.
    As for my work, in this period we are limiting our work to a long, rigorous, difficult work of validation and R&D that leaves not time to talk too much. This is for us a ” the-less-you-talk-the-better-is-period”. We are collecting and recording an enormous amount of data and the results of our V-R&D ( Validation- Research and Development) work will be published as soon as the work will have been completed. Maybe the results will be negative, maybe the results will be positive.
    I hope will be positive and work for it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, please forgive me but….
    It seems like other scientists taken over your website.
    You have to have a few PhD’s under your belt to know what he is talking about.
    I guess he keeps a few people happy.
    Why doesn’t he get a website of his own ?
    He sure has a lot to say, some of his posts are HUGE.

    What ever happened to that great invention ?
    I think they called it E-cat.

    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
    USA

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    email sent to Dr. Jonson ==========================
    From: Wladimir Guglinski
    Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 12:22 PM
    To: Per Jönsson
    Subject: your paper of 2003 on 7Be quadrupole moment

    Dear Dr. P. Jönsson

    In 2003 you had published a paper together with M. Nemouchi , M. Godefroid, and J. Pinard :

    Theoretical evaluation of the 7;9Be¡ 2s2p2 4P1=2;3=2;5=2 hyperfine structure parameters and Be 2s2p 3Po electron-affinity
    https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/47084/3/be-8.pdf

    In the end of the article it is written:
    ————————————————–
    However, the B3=2 factor, from which one can extract the quadrupole moment, is much smaller, being estimated to be ¡0:8 MHz from the
    present work. Despite its smallness, this quantity should be still large enough to allow its determination using the experiment described above: with a distant between the

    Ramsey loops of 10 cm, the interaction time is of the order of 10 ¹sec, and the linewidth
    of the resonance is of the order of 65 kHz. The central position of the resonance could
    then still be measured with an accuracy of the order of the kHz, quite sufficient to
    extract a reliable value of the B fator.
    —————————————————-

    So, I would like to know if the experiment sugested in the paper had already been made.

    Thank you for the attention
    Wladimir Guglinski
    =====================================================

    REPLY:
    =====================================================
    From: per.jonsson@mah.se
    To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com; Michel.Godefroid@ulb.ac.be
    Subject: RE: your paper of 2003 on 7Be quadrupole moment
    Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 21:38:57 +0000

    Dear Wladimir,

    Thank you for your email. I do not know. I believe that Prof. Godefroid is more updated on this and thus I put him in the conversation. Hope he can give you an answer.

    Best wishes
    Per Jönsson
    ===================================================

    .

    ———————————
    NOTE:
    the email was sent to Dr. Godefroid too, but he did not reply yet
    ———————————

  • Just a small comment to this part of the speculation Steven N. Karels sent October 14th, 2013 at 10:09 PM :

    “The assumed nuclear reactions are primarily Hydrogen-to-Hydrogen, ultimately yielding Helium which probably escapes the containment unit because of its high level of diffusion.”

    => Hydrogen also diffuses easily. Why speculatively generated helium would escape the containment but the surely needed hydrogen would not ?

    kind regards

    Ville Kanninen

  • JR

    Dear Wladimir,

    I never said that 7Be couldn’t be produced, just that the rates were very low. If you want to claim that it can be produce at a high rate, don’t just claim that it must be so because somebody measure something, do some research and figure out what kind of rates are possible (it’s usually quoted in particles per second (pps). To give an approximate scale, thousands of pps is typically a rate that’s so low you can’t use it for much, a million pps is low but useful for somethings, and 10-100 million pps it typically considered a good/high rate.

    The fact that *you* don’t understand why it hasn’t been done is not evidence of any kind that there’s some kind of conspiracy or that the quadrupole moment is near zero. It’s even sillier to argue this after pointing to a paper where a novel technique is proposed to do the measurement, specifically because of the difficulty doing it with standard techniques due to low production rates.

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    From: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
    To: bondili@wicc.weizmann.ac.il
    Subject: FW: production of 7Be for measurement of its quadrupole moment
    Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 09:52:19 -0200

    Dear Dr. B. S. Nara Singh

    New Precision Measurement of the 3He4He; 7Be Cross Section is a paper published in 2004 by you and some researchers of the Weizmann Institute of Science, where it is explained the production of 7Be beams:

    ————————————————–
    The target length l and 4He gas pressure P accordingly adjusted for each of the beam energies to obtain EHe that gives a negligible averaging effect but a high 7Be production yield.
    ————————————————–
    http://www.int.washington.edu/PROGRAMS/solar_papers/3He+4He/singh.pdf

    The quadrupole moment Q for 7Be is not quoted in the nuclear tables.

    But it is very important for the confirmation of the theory which explains the flux of high-energy neutrinos generated in the solar core.

    In the paper Theoretical evaluation of the 7;9Be¡ 2s2p2 4P1=2;3=2;5=2 hyperfine structure parameters and Be 2s2p 3Po electron-affinity , the authors explain that 7Be is a low produced radioactive element, and this is the reason why it had not been used yet by the experimentalists.

    Look what they write in the Introduction of their paper:

    —————————————————
    The nuclear quadrupole moment value for 9Be has been extracted by combining the ab initio electric field gradient value [7] and the experimental quadrupole coupling constant of the metastable levels 9Be(2s2p 3Po 2;1), measured by the atomic-beam magnetic-resonance method [8]. A similar experiment for exploring the hyperfine structure of 7Be in its metastable levels would not be easy to realize on a low produced radioactive element such as 7Be.
    —————————————————
    https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/47084/3/be-8.pdf

    As 7Be is largelly produced in the Van de Graff accelerator at the Weizmann Institute, I would like to know if it has already been requested by experimentalists, so that to measure the quadrupole moment for 7Be.

    Or perhaps the quadrupole moment for 7Be had already been measured in the laboratories of the Weizmann Institute.

    In the case the quadrupole moment Q for 7Be had already been measured, I would like to know why the value of Q was not reported yet, and it is not quoted in the nuclear tables.

    Regards
    Wladimir Guglinski

  • Steven N. Karels

    JR and Wladimir,

    Thanks for the discussion and for presenting it a way that the “layman” can understand.

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    And more mystery on the 4Be7 quadrupole moment

    Dear JR,

    The TUNL Nuclear Data Evaluation shows that everything already had been obtained from measurements concerning the 4Be7, except its quadrupole moment:

    http://www.tunl.duke.edu/nucldata/HTML/A=7/07Be_2002.shtml

    Look the quantity of papers already published about the 4Be7:
    http://www.tunl.duke.edu/nucldata/HTML/A=7/07Be_1988.shtml

    And so, the question:
    As everything has been obtained about the 4Be7 from the measurement of its properties, why its quadrupole moment had been measured ????

    It’s hard to suppose that nobody tried to measure the quadrupole moment for 4Be7.

    regards
    wlad

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    JR wrote in October 19th, 2013 at 7:38 AM

    Dear Wladimir,

    1-
    —————————————–
    While you point out that the 7Be half life is longer than for 11C, half-life isn’t relevant – it’s a question of how easy they are to produce. This paper states that it is the low production rate that is the limiting factor.
    ———————————————-

    COMMENT:

    Those authors are wrong.
    4Be7 is produced since 1989 in the Van de Graff accelerator at the University of Notre Dame:

    Production and use of “He, 7Be, ‘Li, 12B and metastable nuclear beams
    http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/29368/0000438.pdf?sequence=1

    PRODUCTION AND USE OF THE RADIOACTIVE 7Be BEAMS
    http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/28394/0000169.pdf?sequence=1

    The 7Be beams are produced in 3 different levels:
    20,8 MeV
    15,1 MeV
    23,0 MeV

    2-
    ——————————————
    So it sounds to me like the mystery is solved.
    ——————————————

    COMMENT:
    So, the mystery is not solved.
    Actually the mystery is growing up.

    3-
    —————————————-
    People think it’s an interesting measurement although this paper suggests it is a much less interesting now that the ‘solar neutrino problem’ has been explained), but it’s a very difficult measurement. If existing radioactive beam facilities can’t produce enough 7Be, then it would require an entirely new facility or an upgrade of one of the existing ones, which is a LOT of money to make one measurement (which I think everyone agrees is much, much, much lower priority than trying to find the Higgs was). They suggest a different (but certainly non-trivial) way to make the measurement, so it’s possible it has been done, but this paper seems to argue very clearly against your suggestion that people made the measurement, found a zero result, and just didn’t publish because they didn’t believe it. Of course, that argument never made a lot of sense; if someone measured a value consistent with zero, they would most likely have published it – people making measurements tend to like it when their results differ from theory and ‘conventional wisdom’.
    ———————————————-

    COMMENT:
    So, you are wrong.

    Regards
    wlad

  • JR

    Dear Wladimir,

    That paper is a very interesting find, providing some useful insight. I’m curious to see if anyone did attempt the measurement. Unfortunately, it requires atomic physics expertise and it is often the case that experts in one area of physics are not motivated to do measurements that relate to another topic (nuclear physics), since that is not where their main interests like.

    One key thing this paper provides is some insight into the fact that the quadrupole moment hasn’t already been measured. They provide specific reasons which support my speculation (and that of Dr. Csolo) that this is a difficult measurement to perform using the techniques used for 9Be and other nuclei. While you point out that the 7Be half life is longer than for 11C, half-life isn’t relevant – it’s a question of how easy they are to produce. This paper states that it is the low production rate that is the limiting factor.

    Finally, you misunderstand their discussion in sec. 4.4. The calculate the expected atomic levels and transitions using their best knowledge of the 7Be structure (based on data where available, estimates where no data exist) and use this to predict what the experiment should see. If a measurement were to see something different, then they would use the result to extract Q(b) by modify Q(b) in their calculation until it reproduces the data. So their technique wouldn’t have a bias built into it and does NOT rely on the structure being similar to 7Li. Even if Q(b) were zero, they would still be able to perform the measurement and extract a value.

    So it sounds to me like the mystery is solved. People think it’s an interesting measurement although this paper suggests it is a much less interesting now that the ‘solar neutrino problem’ has been explained), but it’s a very difficult measurement. If existing radioactive beam facilities can’t produce enough 7Be, then it would require an entirely new facility or an upgrade of one of the existing ones, which is a LOT of money to make one measurement (which I think everyone agrees is much, much, much lower priority than trying to find the Higgs was). They suggest a different (but certainly non-trivial) way to make the measurement, so it’s possible it has been done, but this paper seems to argue very clearly against your suggestion that people made the measurement, found a zero result, and just didn’t publish because they didn’t believe it. Of course, that argument never made a lot of sense; if someone measured a value consistent with zero, they would most likely have published it – people making measurements tend to like it when their results differ from theory and ‘conventional wisdom’.

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    ==================================================
    And the mystery of the 4Be7 quadrupole continues… without understandable reason
    ==================================================

    In 2003 the physicists M. Nemouchi, P. Jönsson, J. Pinard and M. Godefroid published the paper Theoretical evaluation of the 7;9Be¡ 2s2p2 4P1=2;3=2;5=2 hyperfine structure parameters and Be 2s2p 3Po electron-affinity , where they propose an experiment so that to measure the quadrupole moment for the 4Be7, based on hyperfine structures.
    https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/47084/3/be-8.pdf

    In the Introduction they write:
    ——————————————————-
    1. Introduction
    The accuracy of the 7Be(p; °)8B reaction factor is often presented as an important limiting factor in the determination of the flux of high-energy neutrinos generated in the solar core [1]. Although the key to the solar neutrinos problem might have been found recently [2], it is still worthwhile to improve the experimental and theoretical estimates of the relevant low-energy astrophysical S17 factory. In this line, it has been shown that this S factor is linearly correlated with the quadrupole moment of the 7Be nucleus [1]. There is thus some hope to refine the value of the S factor from the knowledge of the nuclear quadrupole moment.
    ——————————————————

    So, the authors emphasize the importance of the 4Be7 quadrupole moment for the confirmation of the theory which explains the flux of high-energy neutrinos formed by the nuclear reactions in the Sun.

    In the Introduction they continue saying:
    ——————————————————
    Atomic spectroscopy experiments on unstable beryllium isotopes are performed these days, thanks to the ISOLDE facility at CERN [4]. In this latter reference, isotope shift and hyperfine structure measurements are announced [5] for 7;9;10Be II and a preliminary value of the nuclear magnetic dipole moments of 7Be has been reported in this context [6].
    The nuclear quadrupole moment value for 9Be has been extracted by combining the ab initio electric field gradient value [7] and the experimental quadrupole coupling constant of the metastable levels 9Be(2s2p 3Po 2;1), measured by the atomic-beam magnetic-resonance method [8]. A similar experiment for exploring the hyperfine structure of 7Be in its metastable levels would not be easy to realize on a low produced radioactive element such as 7Be.
    Therefore, some experiment consisting in measuring the hyperfine structures of the metastable negative ion 7Be¡(2s2p2 4P) which should allow the extraction of the nuclear moment is hereafter proposed.
    ——————————————————-

    This is very strange. They say that the method applied to 9Be cannot be applied to 7Be because “would not be easy to realize on a low produced radioactive element such as 7Be”.

    But for the research of looking for the Higgs bóson the CERN had available billion of dollars. While there is not money so that to produce 7Be element in the quantity necessary for the experiment to measure its quadrupole moment.

    And so, because the CERN is so poor, those four authors of the paper had been constrained to propose another complex method of measuring the quadrupole moment Q for 4Be7.

    However, 6C11 is radioactive too, its half-life is 20,4 minutes (while 4Be7 has 53days), and its quadrupole moment had been measured by atomic beam, and the experimentalist got Q(6C11) = 0,032 b.

    Very intriguing…

    .

    Now look what they write in the item 4.4 :

    ——————————————————
    4.4. Hyperfine structure of 7Be¡

    7Be has a rather long half-life (T1=2 = 53:29 d) and is a good candidate for performing atomic spectroscopy measurements. Like the stable isotope 9Be, its nuclear spin is I = 3=2. The magnetic moment has been estimated recently by comparing hyperfine structures of 2s 2S1=2 ¡ 2p 2Po 1=2 for 7Be+ and 9Be+, as obtained from collinear fastbeam laser spectroscopy with optical detection. The preliminary value reported in [6] is = 1:398(15) ¹N. The quadrupole moment of this isotope has been estimated to be -0,060 < Q(7Be) < -0,069 b [1] from a set of parameters that reproduce simultaneously the most important properties of 7Be, 7Li and 8B. We adopted the mean value, i.e. Q(7Be)= -0,0645 b.
    ——————————————————-

    And so, the method is not very complex only, but is also very strange, because the authors had started up from the following premises:

    1- It is considered that 7Be has a structure similar to 7Li. But we are not sure this is true (3Li7 has the structure shown in the Fig. 19 page 23 of my paper Stability of Light Nuclei published in Rossi’s blog, while the structure of 4Be7 is shown in the Fig. 37 page 48, and the two structures are very different)
    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Stability%20of%20light%20nuclei.pdf

    2- They start their method by considering an initial value Q= -0,0645for 4Be7.
    However, they are just proposing a method for measuring the Q for 4Be7.
    Therefore, if Q for 4Be7 is very different than -0,0645, it means that their method is unacceptable, because it is introducing an initial error in the method.

    In the end of the paper at the bottom of the page 13 they write:
    ——————————————————
    However, the B3/2 factor, from which one can extract the quadrupole moment, is much smaller, being estimated to be -0,8 MHz from the present work. Despite its smallness, this quantity should be still large enough to allow its determination using the experiment described above: with a distant between the Ramsey loops of 10 cm, the interaction time is of the order of 10 ¹sec, and the linewidth of the resonance is of the order of 65 kHz. The central position of the resonance could then still be measured with an accuracy of the order of the kHz, quite sufficient to extract a reliable value of the B factor.
    —————————————————–

    Yesterday I found the email of Dr. Jönsson and Dr. Godefroid , and I sent them the same message to each one of them, asking if the experiment proposed by them had already been made.

    The email to Dr. Godefroid is ahead:

    ===================================================
    From: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
    To: mrgodef@ulb.ac.be
    Subject: your paper of 2003 on 7Be quadrupole moment
    Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 22:43:30 -0300

    Dear Dr. Michel Godefroid

    In 2003 you had published a paper together with M. Nemouchi, P. J¨onsson, and J. Pinard :

    Theoretical evaluation of the 7;9Be¡ 2s2p2 4P1=2;3=2;5=2
    hyperfine structure parameters and Be 2s2p 3Po
    electron-affinity
    https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/47084/3/be-8.pdf

    In the end of the article it is written:
    ——————————————————
    However, the B3=2 factor, from which one can extract the quadrupole moment, is much smaller, being estimated to be ¡0:8 MHz from the
    present work. Despite its smallness, this quantity should be still large enough to allow its determination using the experiment described above: with a distant between the

    Ramsey loops of 10 cm, the interaction time is of the order of 10 ¹sec, and the linewidth
    of the resonance is of the order of 65 kHz. The central position of the resonance could
    then still be measured with an accuracy of the order of the kHz, quite sufficient to
    extract a reliable value of the B fator.
    ——————————————————

    So, I would like to know if the experiment sugested in the paper had already been made.

    Thank you for the attention

    Wladimir Guglinski
    ===================================================

    .

    Of course, if 4Be7 has actually quadrupole moment very different than -0,0645 as the authors had assumed in their paper, sure that any experiment will never get Q for 4Be7 between -0,06 and -0,07 (as predicted from the current nuclear models, and considered in their paper).

    And if my supposition is correct and 4Be7 has quadrupole moment near to zero, the experimentalists will never succeed to measure it.

    Dr. Jönsson and Dr. Godefroid did not reply to my email

  • Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    We are working on it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea,
    Is the strange EMF, that was mentioned before, already integrated in the theoretical or computational model ?
    I ask this because I’m very worried about the eventual negative outcome of the research, and it was an idea that the EMF might be a direct or indirect “handle” to control the reaction on extreme COP’s.
    Every gift of God, as is E-Cat, usually contains some clusters that are hard to unravel. But we have to trust in the gift and its donor.
    Kind regards.
    Koen

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear “Brian”:
    I respect your request not to publish your email and answer publicly to your question, which is interesting, regarding what I did with the thermoelectric technology in the late nineties and if this technology can be used to produce electric power from the heat made by the E-Cat.
    I worked very throughly on the Seebeck Effect in between 1996 and 2000, in New Hampshire, with Leonardo Corporation. In collaboration with a Russian scientist, who supplied me the raw material from Russia, I produced a prototype that was very promising, with an efficiency of between 15 and 16%, if I well remember ( it was 15 years ago). The big problem was that to make that prototype, whose power was about 100 W, I had to work on the directional fusion of the bismuth telluride for about 2,000 hours: the directional fusion is an extremely slow and difficult process, that needs high level skill and a lot of time, because you must straighten the molecules to make symmetric their position, otherwise the ohmic resistance made by the asymmetric molecules forbids the semiconductivity. The task is made more difficult by the necessity to direct- fusing also the antimony and the selenium which have to me melted with the bismuth telluride to dope it making, respectively, the positive and the negative poles of the diodes. In conclusion, my 100 W prototype costed around 30,000 $, between man labor and materials. It is true that the efficiency was very interesting, but the cost ( 300,000 $/kW) was unsustainable as a product. We tested it in a university and in an industry, with very promising results. At that point we had to find the way to lower the costs. We made a research in collaboration with LTI and DOE, trying to make the alloys by a manufacturer with industrial systems, to obtain an acceptable cost, but the efficiency dropped to 3%. Eventually I applied the thermocouples to Diesel generators, to make power with the heat from the exhaust gas, but the low efficiency did not give a big advantage, also because the Seebeck Effect is not listed to get the green certificates. Here is where I arrived. Obviously, if new thermoelectric technologies will be set forth, I will be very interested.
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>