.
by
Stoyan Sarg Sargoytchev
York University, Toronto, Canada
.
Read the whole article
Download the ZIP file
.
Abstract
Advances in the field of cold fusion and the recent success of the nickel and hydrogen exothermal reaction, in which the energy release cannot be explained by a chemical process, need a deeper understanding of the nuclear reactions and, more particularly, the possibility for modification of the Coulomb barrier.
The current theoretical understanding does not offer an explanation for cold fusion or LENR. The treatise “Basic Structures of Matter – Supergravitation Unified Theory”, based on an alternative concept of the physical vacuum, provides an explanation from a new point of view by using derived three-dimensional structures of the atomic nuclei.
Steven N. Karels:
That is a possible application, but not in a short time. Certifications in that area can take ten to twenty years, as I learnt in a meeting with the CEO of an important truck- maker several years ago.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Wladimir Guglinski:
I have already explained and there is nothing to add. The JoNP works that way, and will not change. Again, if you think it is very important that your paper is read in short time, you can send it linked to a comment to the JoNP’s blog. This will not compromise its eventual publication in the Journal.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea Rossi wrote in November 24th, 2014 at 11:26 AM
Wladimir Guglinski:
There is a line of articles and we publish them, after peer reviewing, in the order we receive them. Every Author has his reasons to consider urgent his own paper’s publication and we do not grant privileges to anybody.
—————————————-
Dear Andrea Rossi,
it is not a question of privileges.
It seems the shape of the positive electric field (Coulomb barrier) of the nuclei may be the principal cause which makes possible the cold fusion occurrence.
There are other authors thinking about, as Dr. Stoyan Sarg, who is going to pronounce a speech where he defends the same hypothesis:
“At the beginning it discuses the major methodological error in scattering experiments that leads to a tremendously wrong vision about the Coulomb barrier.”.
http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/11/21/dr-stoyan-sarg-to-address-nanotek-expo-2014-on-lenr/
But…
the question is to discover what is the correct model for the shape of the Coulomb barrier, and how it allows the cold fusion occurrence, and such subjetct merits a discussion.
Why do not do it here?
Here we have some persons interested in the subject, as Joe, Calaon, Eernie, Steven Karels, Eric, Orsobubu, etc.
My paper Aether Structure for unification between gravity and electromagnetism just proposes how is composed the structure of the electric field of the elementary particles and the nuclei, and therefore it is of interest to discuss it here, since it can give us a better understanding on how the Coulomb barrier is formed around the nuclei.
So, the publication is of the interest of many readers here, instead of to be a question of previlege.
After all, you have to think about the privilege of the readers herein, i.e., their privilege of reading papers concerning what is of their interest: to understand the mechanisms which make cold fusion possible to occur.
regards
wlad
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Have you considered the application of eCat technology to long distance transportation? Assuming you can solve the issue of the eCat startup time, perhaps an eCat system to generate electricity to charge a large battery bank that drives trains?
According to Wikipedia, each drive wheel requires up to 3000 hp with around 8 drive wheel per locomotive. In total this would be around 20 MW of electrical power or about 50MW of thermal power as a rough estimate.
The cost economy for long distance hauling would be significant and there is no exhaust when operating in tunnels or inside buildings.
A similar larger system might apply for marine cargo transportation.
Bob:
1- I cannot give this information
2- I can say this: the total volume of the reactors of the 1 MW plant is half cubic meter ( 500 liters of volume). All the rest is heat exchangers.
Is much bigger the control system, entirely designed by our engineers ( 111 computers integrated). I think our team ( electronic engineers, physicists, blue collars, white collars has made a masterpiece.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Eernie1, Steven N. Karels:
I expressed myself wrongly: just wanted to say that I totally disagree with the mantras of the fuels doomed by the E-Cat. I agree with you. Sorry for the concision, that produced misunderstanding.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
eernie1 and Andrea Rossi,
I think you both are arguing the same point. Energy sources will be integrated. If LENR energy is cheaper than other energy sources, it will slowly displace them. But there is significant financial inertia to change, so the change will be slow to occur.
Dear Andrea Rossi
1. Do you know whether the so-called rossi effect occur:
a. in a cylinder that is not straight, as those shown in the Lugano report, but in a curved or spiraled shape?
b. in a cylinder with an angular bend?
c. in a vessel where the walls are not round like a cylinder, but in any other non-round shape?
2. Can you tell your readers the size of the largest and smallest e-cats you have constructed which have operated successfully.
Thanks
Bob
Dear Andrea Rossi
Can the so-called rossi effect occur
in a cylinder that is not straight, as those shown in the Lugano report, but curved?
2. Can the so-called rossi effect occur in a cylinder that is bent?
3. Can the so-called rossi effect occur in a vessel where the walls are not curved like a cylinder, but straight?
Dear Andrea,
I do not understand your disagreement. The necessary time required to integrate LENR with other sources will only increase the time that fossil fuels will be required. Can you elaborate?
Fond regards.
Eernie 1:
I totally disagree.
All the existing energy sources have to be integrated.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I have read many blogs that predict that a successful and non-refutable showing of your device would immediately make the fossil fuel industry disappear or at least non-profitable. However there are many markets where the fuels will be required for many years after introduction of LENR devices.
One market which is obvious is the gasoline driven devices now in use. There are hundreds of millions of autos, diesel engines, aircraft, power stations and other devices that depend on fossil fuels. These devices have cost their owners Trillions of dollars and have usage lifetimes of decades. Especially in the case of autos, the majority of owners would not be able to discard their present models and purchase LENR driven devices. So at least in this case there would be a market for fuels for many years, especially in less advanced societies. The same case can be made for the other markets(think of the cost of new passenger aircraft).
LENR will eventually replace the older devices but perhaps not before the cheap sources of fossil fuels will be depleted. The first positive effect of your device will be the decrease in cost of these fuels to people who can least afford them.
Fond regards.
Wladimir Guglinski:
There is a line of articles and we publish them, after peer reviewing, in the order we receive them. Every Author has his reasons to consider urgent his own paper’s publication and we do not grant privileges to anybody. If you want to speed up, you can just link your paper to a comment to the JoNP. In this case you get it immedialetly published here, where rules are totally different.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi
I had submitted my article Aether Structure for unification between gravity and electromagnetism 6 months ago to the JoNP.
I think would be of interest to publish it, so that I could talk about the formation of the electric fields with Joe, Eernie, and Andrea Calaon, and others.
In the case the electric field indeed has non-spherical shape as proposed in my theory, this property of the electric field can be connected with the cold fusion occurrence.
Therefore I think it is of interest to discuss it.
May you ask the reviewers to speed up the revision of the article?
regards
wlad
Joe wrote in November 24th, 2014 at 3:32 AM
Wladimir,
If the induced magnetic dipole of the rotating 1p1 electron of 3Li7 can attract the valence neutron of 3Li7, why would that neutron not stop and settle at the centre point of the rotation rather than proceed further and into the 28NiXX nucleus?
———————————————–
As I said in my comment of November 21st, 2014 at 7:07 PM:
“Due to the inertia, the neutron continues moving, and it enters within the Ni58 through the “hole” in the electrosphere of the Ni58.”
regards
wlad
Tommaso:
I prefer not to comment on the work of our competitors; I know that Ruggero Santilli has to be respected, though. His work is interesting.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Do you know the studies of Ruggero Santilli?
If so,what do you think about it?
Wladimir,
If the induced magnetic dipole of the rotating 1p1 electron of 3Li7 can attract the valence neutron of 3Li7, why would that neutron not stop and settle at the centre point of the rotation rather than proceed further and into the 28NiXX nucleus?
All the best,
Joe
Andrea Calaon wrote in November 23rd, 2014 at 5:49 PM
————————————–
You say: “When the neutron is crossed by a flux-n(o) down being in the outer side of DOUGLAS, its magnetic moment becomes positive: +1,913.” I don’t understand what you are saying. Sorry.
======================================
With figures is easier to understand.
The flux-n(o) of the 2He4 is shown in the figure:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Fig._3.JPG
In the inner side of DOUGLAS the neutron has magnetic moment -1,913 , because it is crossed by a flux-n(o)-up.
The neutron in the outer side of DOUGLAS has magnetic moment +1,913, because it is crossed by a fluz-n(o)-down.
All the other nuclei are formed by the capture of deuterons and neutrons by the flux-n(o) of the 2He4.
In the figure ahead the 3Li7 is formed by the central 2He4 and the deuteron-neutron captured by the flux-n(o)
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Calaon-guglinski-FIGURE3.png
The positive field of the proton is similar to the positive field of the 2He4:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Calaon-guglinski-FIGURE1.png
The field is non-spherical
But as the proton is made by quarks, and there is repulsion between the quarks up, then the body of the proton has chaotic spin, then in average the field of the proton becomes spherical.
regards
wlad
Andrea Calon, With regards your reply to Wladimir 23rd November 2014. As you are no doubt aware I do not know the academic teachings of nuclear physics. However, I think nuclear physics has some basic simple law to it that escapes many people who are at a complex level before grasping an introductory ABC level (proton, neutron, electron). You stated in your reply to Wladimir, ‘I cannot agree because the electric field symetry is a basic feature of electromagnetism. As a consequence the so called coulomb barrier is identical in all directions. Andrea, think about structure. Are you within a structure or are you outside of a structure?. From what I am aware nobody is outside of a structure and structure has a point (central position) and a periphery being the outer limit. Therefore your reply regards spherical symetry cannot be unless it’s at the centre of a system. This is why the Earth rotates and also nutates. If it was at at a centrifugal position it would not but it is at a centripetal position and it does what it does because it is not symetrical within its field. I believe that nothing can be absolutely spherical in our position within the solar system. Have I missed something?. Regards Eric Ashworth
Andrea Calaon wrote in November 23rd, 2014 at 5:49 PM
1) ———————————————-
You seem to say that the shape of the “electrostatic” field (intensity in different directions) is influenced by the kinetics of the particles. Let me say that, if I understood correctly, I can not agree, because the electric field symmetry is a basic feature of electromagnetism. As a consequence the so called Coulomb barrier is identical in all directions.
==================================================
No, you did not understand.
The field of particles and the field of the nuclei is composed by two spherical fields. Look for instance the two fields of the 2He4:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Calaon-guglinski-FIGURE1.png
But due to the chaotic rotation the fields takes in average the spherical shape:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Calaon-guglinski-FIGURE2.png
This explains why the Coulomb barrier is identical in all directions
.
2) ————————————–
You say: “When the neutron is crossed by a flux-n(o) down being in the outer side of DOUGLAS, its magnetic moment becomes positive: +1,913.” I don’t understand what you are saying. Sorry.
=========================================
My theory is developed from the concept of non-empty space (aether), composed by elementary particles of the aether as electricitons, magnetons, gravitons, permeabilitons.
The concept of field in my theory emeges from the formation of physical fields composed by electricitons, magnetons, gravitons, and permeabilitons.
All the nuclei are composed by a central 2He4, which produces a gravity flux named flux-n(o). Each particle as proton and neutron is captured by such flux.
Due to the laws of interactions between the gravitons of the flux-n(o) and the spin of particles (protons and neutrons), the magnetic moment of those particles can change their sign depending on the direction of the flux-n(o).
If a flux-n(o)-up crosses the neutron, its magnetic moment is positive.
If a flux-n(o)-down crosses the neutron, its magnetic moment becomes negative.
3) ——————————
Wladimir, let me insist that what I proposed is not going against any consolidated law of physics, not to mention the so called Standard Model.
=================================
According to the Standar Model nuclear reactions cannot occur via electromagnetism, and the resaon is easy to be understood: nuclear reactions need to be promoted by particles bound via strong nuclear force.
Your theory requires a model in which protons and neutrons are bound via electromagnetism.
Therefore your theory is going against the Standard Model.
As I already said , the Coulomb barrier in the distances of 2fm within the nuclei is 100 times stronger than the electromagnetism interaction.
There is need a new nuclear model so that to explain how protons and neutrons can be bound via electromagnetism.
The Lugano Report is showing that the results obtained from Rossi’s E-Cat are incompatible with nuclear reactions occuring via strong force, as you did point out.
Therefore Rossi’s Effect is incompatible with the Standard Model, based on the hypothesis of protons and neutrons bound via strong force within the nuclei.
regards
wlad
Dear Wladimir Guglinsky,
thank you for the appreciation: “Calaon is an expert in nuclear and chemical reactions, a field in which he is working along years”. Wladimir, I have to admit that I am not an expert of nuclear reactions, nor a chemist. I only studied the subjects during University and keep doing it whenever I have time. I have but friends working in the fields of nuclear chemistry, chemistry and physics. However my proven involvement in Physics is only VERY marginal. I participated in the numerical simulation of details of ITER and Wendelstein 7-X, inclusive cracks, but never in the Plasma part. I am only a humble thermo-mechanical numerical simulations specialist, just very fond of Physics.
What I think helps me is that in my work as a Researcher I am used to strive for discerning between opinion and proven and “reproducible” fact. In the years I managed to debunk a series of misconceptions that had encrusted for long times.
Back to the LENR.
As you probably noticed, I have already “withdrawn” the idea of an actual coupling between Li nucleus and an electron, because it seems to me impossible that the coupling can cross the two 1s electrons protecting the Li+ ion.
I have to premise that I haven’t analysed your theory in detail. But there are some features I don’t understand or probably just do not agree with.
You seem to say that the shape of the “electrostatic” field (intensity in different directions) is influenced by the kinetics of the particles. Let me say that, if I understood correctly, I can not agree, because the electric field symmetry is a basic feature of electromagnetism. As a consequence the so called Coulomb barrier is identical in all directions.
My “theory”, which is Dallacasa’s in this respect, explains the “non-sphericity” of the nuclear attractive force among nucleons with the strong dependence of the attractive potential with the reciprocal orientation of the magnetic moments (i.e. spins) (and their phasing). Nothing exotic, just basic electromagnetism.
You say: “When the neutron is crossed by a flux-n(o) down being in the outer side of DOUGLAS, its magnetic moment becomes positive: +1,913.” I don’t understand what you are saying. Sorry.
I am trying to follow the suggestion of our Italian “bon-ton Guru” orsobubu putting a bit more “pepper” in the discussion.
But you know that actually I would never criticize someone’s work without a reason, and would never offend (consciously) anyone for having a different opinion.
Wladimir, let me insist that what I proposed is not going against any consolidated law of physics, not to mention the so called Standard Model. I am sure that there is no need to contradict any main evidence of physics to explain LENR. So far I just took the possible validity of the nuclear potential of Dallacasa to its extreme consequences.
Dear eerinie1,
it is possible that part of the phenomenology of the electron capture is actually due to the potential of Dallacasa, through what I proposed.
I would like to say something I think should guide anyone trying to understand the LENR and the device of Andrea Rossi.
The plethora of all LENR experiments, starting from the inception of F&P, depends on some unusual “mechanism” that is necessarily the same at work in the Hot-Cat. The probability of two different mechanisms at work is nil.
There must be a single explanation for all manifestations of excess energy. The variations must reside only in “common physics” details. It seems Andrea Rossi has found a way to make that mechanism much more efficient than any other known experiment.
As a consequence it makes no sense to think about any special mechanism that has the chance to work only with the conditions that the report of the 8th of October seem to have revealed.
The mechanism should depend critically on the presence of deuterium or hydrogen in a metal matrix.
It would be extremely interesting to work with all data of the How-Cat: frequencies, polarizations, correct stoichiometry, effects of missing elements or composition shortenings, … but it is impossible. So I am now trying to get suggestions from the works of Iwamura and Tadahiko Mizuno, who publish most of the data.
Regards to all
Andrea Calaon
eernie1 wrote in November 23rd, 2014 at 12:47 PM
1) ————————————
However using the p electron of the Li, although very volatile, to create a neutron bridge between the 3Li7 and the 28Ni58 etc. seems to be more difficult and the energy balance more complex than just pulling out the loosely bound neutron in the nucleus of the 3Li7 which may be easily done with an external field. Since the neutron is a low energy(thermal)neutron it has a large cross section for reacting with the 28Ni58 and a reasonable life time to accomplish this.
=======================================
Dear Eernie,
cold fusion is not an easy process, because if it was we were seeing cold fusion occurring every time in the nature.
So, discarding a harder process in favour of another easier one does not seems to be a strong reason.
Besides, even in the case of the Calaon theory, perhaps it is yet missing the resonance contribution, which I did not mention in my interpretation of his theory via my nuclear model, in order to give the most simplest explanation of the fundamental mechanism due to the electron’s contribution.
Also, note that Calaon needs to change a litle his initial version.
2) ————————————-
I was inspired to think of this approach by your theory of the distortions occurring in even perfect spherical nuclei by the geometry of internal energy fields and spin considerations.
========================================
Dear Eernie,
actually I dont know what is the correct process.
But as I said, I think cold fusion does not occur via the most easy way, in spite of I can be wrong and perhaps the Nature uses the mechanism proposed by you instead of the mechanism proposed by Calaon.
regards
wlad
Dear Steven N. Karels,
You asked:
“I see that silicon is present in the ash. Could the following reaction be possible?
27Al + 7Li + e -> 28Si + 6Li
…”
Let me say. Hehehe. You noticed those lines at 28 on Figure 9 (lone) and 11 (with Al as well) of the ITPR.
Let me first say that the reaction you wrote is impossible, because 28Si is equal to 27Al plus a proton, not a neutron.
In the light of what I said in my last post, I think that direct exchanges of neutrons between nuclei with more than one proton are impossible (He4 is excluded, so from Li upwards).
The possible sequence that would lead to Si28 is:
1 : p + e -> pe
2 : Al27 + pe -> Si28 + e
The impression, also looking at other LENR experiments is that, once Hydronion (pe) is formed, it can reach any nucleus present, especially those with high magnetic moments:
Li7: +3.26 [muN]
Al28 : +3.64 [muN]
So I would not be surprised to see that Si28 is formed in the Hot-Cat.
One curiosity is the strong line at 43, because without ions, 43 is only Ca43, a relatively rare isotope.
Regards
Andrea Calaon
Franco Sarbia:
In the future all is possible, just associated to a probability percentage that I am not able to evaluate now on the specific issue you are asking for.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr. Andrea Rossi, the fuel of the gas fueled Hot Cat could be hydrogen in the future?
Warm regards.
Franco Sarbia.
Dear Wlad,
I have been an advocate of chemo-nuclear reactions causing the Rossi effect ever since he first revealed his device, since the electrons are more easily manipulated and can cause disruptions in the nucleus of atoms as shown by Fermi etal. I understand the process you and Andrea C. are proposing. However using the p electron of the Li, although very volatile, to create a neutron bridge between the 3Li7 and the 28Ni58 etc. seems to be more difficult and the energy balance more complex than just pulling out the loosely bound neutron in the nucleus of the 3Li7 which may be easily done with an external field. Since the neutron is a low energy(thermal)neutron it has a large cross section for reacting with the 28Ni58 and a reasonable life time to accomplish this. I was inspired to think of this approach by your theory of the distortions occurring in even perfect spherical nuclei by the geometry of internal energy fields and spin considerations.
Fond regards.
orsobubu wrote in November 23rd, 2014 at 9:04 AM
>Then Calaon needs to decide what he prefers to do
Yes, he can decide, but think twice about it, sounds like a low-profile compromise to me, I really don’t like where this is going
What have we become, a Boy Scouts blog? all those battles, the threats, the abuses, the taunts, and now all friends ending up singing kumbaya? and then, what will we do here alone? Please please Sarg, JR, Joe, what the hack are you waiting, it’s just two people after all, this thing can not be heading this way, add a bit of fuel to the fire, come on! For example, what’s this story about Calaon-Guglinsky, who tells me that Guglinsky-Calaon wouldn’t be much better?
——————————————
Dear Orsobubu
Calaon is an expert in nuclear and chemical reactions, a field in which he is working along years.
His theory trying to explain Rossi’s Effect is compatible with my nuclear model, since Calaon starts from the hyphotesis that the interactions occuring in the phenomenon are not promoted by strong force.
I have a nuclear model which can help him to understand the mechanisms involved in the phenomenon.
Therefore, I think it is of interest to help one each other, since he is collecting data about nuclear and chemical reactions, and he showing evidences that Rossi’s Effect must be due to electromagnetic reactions (compatible with my nuclear model).
This is not a dispute.
It is actually an attempt so that to try to understand and to explain the mechanisms involved in cold fusion and Rossi’s Effect.
I cannot propose to work together neither with an author with a theory incompatible with my nuclear model neither with the author of a new nuclear model (competitor to my nuclear model, as Dr. Sarg).
If a good work results from a Calaon-Guglinski theory, the benefit is for the science’s advancement.
regards
wlad
>Then Calaon needs to decide what he prefers to do
Yes, he can decide, but think twice about it, sounds like a low-profile compromise to me, I really don’t like where this is going
What have we become, a Boy Scouts blog? all those battles, the threats, the abuses, the taunts, and now all friends ending up singing kumbaya? and then, what will we do here alone? Please please Sarg, JR, Joe, what the hack are you waiting, it’s just two people after all, this thing can not be heading this way, add a bit of fuel to the fire, come on! For example, what’s this story about Calaon-Guglinsky, who tells me that Guglinsky-Calaon wouldn’t be much better?
Steven N. Karels:
Sorry, I can’t answer regarding our internal R&D.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
In the eCat reactor used in the Lugano Report, the interior chamber of the reactor has three helixes of heating wire. The result of applying a current through these wires was both generation of thermal energy to heat the reactor and generation of a magnetic field due to the current.
Have you preformed measurements with an applied magnetic field independent of the heating wires (e.g., a permanent magnet or a second electromagnet with either a continuous current or a variable current as part of your control system)?
You will probably decline to directly answer the question but it is an experiment your team needs to perform if it has not already done so.
Joe wrote in November 22nd, 2014 at 11:37 PM
1. ) ———————————–
Why do you have only the outer electron of 3Li7 involved in the process of neutron transfer? Why are the outer (3d, 4s) electrons of the 28NiXX not involved at all in the Calaon-Guglinski neutron transfer process?
=========================================
Joe,
perhaps they are also involved, since the Ni also changed the shape of its positive field due to the nucleus, and so the electrons in the electrosphere change their orbits, and the outer electrons of the Ni have interaction with the positive field of the 7Li.
However, in order to simplify the explanation, I had explained only what happens with the outer electron of the 7Li.
.
2. ) ——————————–
Why would the valence neutron at 7fm prefer exiting along the z-axis in which direction it has no momentum than along the xy-plane in which it has angular momentum?
=====================================
First of all, the neutron is not at 7fm, actually it is at a distance of 2,391fm.
The neutron exits along the z-axis because the orbit of the electron p1 in the Figure 6 induces a magnetic dipole moment vector along the z-axis:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_moment
FIG. 6:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Calaon-guglinski-FIGURE6.png
As the magnetic moment vector of the neutron is also along the z-axis, then the neutron is pulled by the magnetic moment of the electron p1 toward the z-axis.
.
3. ) ———————————–
(Remember that Andrea Calaon has the two nuclei with their z-axes parallel rather than collinear as per your view.)
=========================================
Calaon has not a new nuclear model so that to allow him to understand the physical mechanism involved in the Rossi’s Effect.
Note that he even did not respond to my question, when I asked to him how to solve that puzzle regarding the nuclear models which do not consider the strong force as the cause of the agglutination of the nuclei: as the electromagentism is 100 times weaker than the Coulomb repulsions in the distances of 2fm within the nuclei, how can the electromagnetis to be responsible for the nuclei aggregation?
So, he is trying to understand what happens (as everybody) by considering what he knows from the known models (in which the electrosphere of the nuclei is spherical and unalterable).
Then Calaon needs to decide what he prefers to do.
He can either keep his initial version or to adopt the new way I am suggesting to him.
regards
wlad
Dear Joe,
You asked: “Are you saying that an electron can orbit beneath the ground state of an atom?”.
In a sense yes. It does sound VERY unplausible …, but …
Probably the p/d/t-e bound state can be interpreted as something beneath the 1s ground state of an hydrogen atom. A bare hydrogen nucleus (any isotope) has no electron orbitals that could interfere with an incoming electron and I proposed that under special conditions the electron couples with the naked nucleus. The bound electron should not have a wave function with the the classical electron orbital, but it would be a bound.
This bound state is most probably not stable, in the sense that as soon as a photon with the right energy interacts with it, the coupling is destroyed and the electron can either remain bound to the nucleus in a standard orbital or become completely unbound.
As I already mentioned I suspect that the spectra measured by Randell Mills at al. (if real) are the emissions at the formation of this probably unstable bound state in a plasma.
For a Lithium ion (+1), which is surrounded by the fully occupied spherical 1s(2) orbital, for me it is still difficult to imagine a mechanism that arrives to the Li-e coupling.
Think now to the experiments of Yasuhiro Iwamura of Mithsubishi Heavy Industries, where deuterium seems to be able to “enter” into very different nuclei: Ca, W, Ba, Sr, Cs, … plus all intermediate nuclei involved in the large isotopic shifts measured. The only way a positive charge (the deuteron) can reach another nucleus, which is protected by both a negative “sticky” barrier (the inner electron orbitals) and a positive “repelling” barrier (the positive charge of the nucleus), is becoming “picometrically neutral”, at least for a while. If the p/d/t-e pseudo particle is stable enough it can travel through the two barriers and “grab itself” to other nuclei, through Dallacasa’s potential. What follows has been described by me a number of times.
Another problem with the reaction
Li7 + e + Nixx -> Li6 + e + Nixx+1
is that, even if it can form, the Li7-e would need to reach the nucleus of Ni. And this nucleus is protected by its electron shells: 1s2 2s2 2p6 3s2 3p6 4s2 3d8. It seems to me extremely implausible that something of the size of a 1s orbital (the Li+ ion electronic inner shell) can penetrate all those Ni shells. Resuming: a direct neutron exchange between Li7 and Nixx is impossible.
Something more plausible is that a pe (let us call it “Hydronion”) forms first, then Li7 abandons a neutron, …:
1 : p + e -> pe
2 : Li7 + pe -> Li6 + pen
3 : pen -> de (“Deuteronion”)
4s: Nixx + de -> Nixx+2 + neutrino
4c: Nixx +de -> Nixx+1 + pe
The pen pseudo-particle reacts immediately becoming Deuteronion (de). Deuteronion would be what actually penetrates the Ni electron shells.
There are two possibilities for reaction 4: 4s (stopping) and 4c (catalytic). If the main reaction chain that realizes the neutron exchange is (1,2,3,4c), the Hydronion (pe) would act as a catalyst, re-entering the chain at reaction 2.
Deuterium could have not been detected because at 1,400 [C] it would immediately find a way to escape in the gas during the LENR.
Regards
Andrea Calaon
Dear Joe,
You asked: “Are you saying that an electron can orbit beneath the ground state of an atom?”.
In a sense yes. It does sound VERY unplausible …, but …
Probably the p/d/t-e bound state can be interpreted as something beneath the 1s ground state of an hydrogen atom. A bare hydrogen nucleus (any isotope) has no electron orbitals that could interfere with an incoming electron and I proposed that under special conditions the electron couples with the naked nucleus. The bound electron should not have a wave function with the the classical electron orbital, but it would be a bound.
This bound state is most probably not stable, in the sense that as soon as a photon with the right energy interacts with it, the coupling is destroyed and the electron can either remain bound to the nucleus in a standard orbital or become completely unbound.
As I already mentioned I suspect that the spectra measured by Randell Mills at al. (if real) are the emissions at the formation of this probably unstable bound state in a plasma.
For a Lithium ion (+1), which is surrounded by the fully occupied spherical 1s(2) orbital, for me it is still difficult to imagine a mechanism that arrives to the Li-e coupling.
Think now to the experiments of Yasuhiro Iwamura of Mithsubishi Heavy Industries, where deuterium seems to be able to “enter” into very different nuclei: Ca, W, Ba, Sr, Cs, … plus all intermediate nuclei involved in the large isotopic shifts measured. The only way a positive charge (the deuteron) can reach another nucleus, which is protected by both a negative “sticky” barrier (the inner electron orbitals) and a positive “repelling” barrier (the positive charge of the nucleus), is becoming “picometrically neutral”, at least for a while. If the p/d/t-e pseudo particle is stable enough it can travel through the two barriers and “grab itself” to other nuclei, through Dallacasa’s potential. What follows has been described by me a number of times.
Another problem with the reaction
Li7 + e + Nixx -> Li6 + e + Nixx+1
is that, even if it can form, the Li7-e would need to reach the nucleus of Ni. And this nucleus is protected by its electron shells: 1s2 2s2 2p6 3s2 3p6 4s2 3d8. It seems to me extremely implausible that something of the size of a 1s orbital (the Li+ ion electronic inner shell) can penetrate all those Ni shells. Resuming: a direct neutron exchange between Li7 and Nixx is impossible.
Something more plausible is that a pe (let us call it “Hydronion”) forms first, then Li7 abandons a neutron, …:
1 : p + e -> pe
2 : Li7 + pe -> Li6 + pen
3 : pen -> de (“Deuteronion”)
4s: Nixx + de -> Nixx+2 + neutrino
4c: Nixx +de -> Nixx+1 + pe
The pen pseudo-particle reacts immediately becoming Deuteronion (de). Deuteronion would be what actually penetrates the Ni electron shells.
There are two possibilities for reaction 4: 4s (stopping) and 4c (catalytic). If the main reaction chain that realizes the neutron exchange is (1,2,3,4c), the Hydronion (pe) would act as a catalyst, re-entering the chain at reaction 2.
Deuterium could have not been detected because at 1,400 [C] it would immediately find a way to escape in the gas during the LENR.
Reagards
Andrea Calaon
Wladimir,
1. Why do you have only the outer electron of 3Li7 involved in the process of neutron transfer? Why are the outer (3d, 4s) electrons of the 28NiXX not involved at all in the Calaon-Guglinski neutron transfer process?
2. Why would the valence neutron at 7fm prefer exiting along the z-axis in which direction it has no momentum than along the xy-plane in which it has angular momentum? (Remember that Andrea Calaon has the two nuclei with their z-axes parallel rather than collinear as per your view.)
All the best,
Joe
Regards Calaon – Guglinski material. Yes you are correct. For me what you are showing is a chain system. The sun sits within an interregnum where the north of one system connects with the south of another system. The atomic interaction which you show is a simple state of a more complex solar interaction. Whether energy interacts on a micro or macro scale the outcome is an energy interaction. The reason for an interregnum is because I believe there is a law connected to gravity that pulls energy back with regards a state of loss at the centre of a system.
Well done, Eric Ashworth
Daniel De Caluwé wrote in November 22nd, 2014 at 7:23 PM
@Wladimir Guglinski,
@Andrea Calaon,
Wow, I’m impressed! Calaon-Guglinski very convincing to me!
——————————-
Daniel,
it seems I have now two Andreas in my life
regards
wlad
eernie1 wrote i November 22nd, 2014 at 12:09 PM
Dear Andrea C and Wlad.
Fermi, Alvarez and Wick have shown both theoretically and experimentally that the injection of an electron into the nucleus occurs naturally in some of the heavier atoms, causing them to be radioactive, emitting Beta particles. These electrons(usually s or p level) are considered present in the nucleus either field wise or particle wise dependent upon whether the investigator treats them as particles or an EM field.
———————————————
Dear Eernie,
it is not the case.
Fermi, Alvarez, and Wick were speaking about absorption of electrons of the inner levels s and p of some heavy nuclei by those own nuclei.
In the case of the Rossi’s Effect, Calaon and I are not speaking about the electrons of the inners levels s and p of the heavier nucleus Ni being absorbed by the own Ni.
We are speaking about the contribution of the inner levels s and p of the lighter 7Li in the transmutation of the heavier Ni.
As you know, dear Eernie, in 2006 was published my Quantum Ring Theory where I had predicted that even-even nuclei with Z=N have non-spherical shape. People used to call me mad, because I had the audacity of defy a dogma considered untouchable along 80 years by the nuclear theorists, according to which those nuclei have spherical shape.
But in 2012 the journal Nature published a paper showing that my prediction was correct: even-even nuclei with Z=N have non-spherical shape:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v487/n7407/full/nature11246.html
More recently, since 1989 the nuclear theorists have considered along more than 25 years that cold fusion is impossible.
They supposed cold fusion to be impossible because according to the Standard Nuclear Physics the positive electrosphere of the nuclei has spherical shape.
So, they believed that, if a particle positively charged will enter within a nuclei, it must win the Coloumb barrier under conditions of high conditions of pressure and temperature (hot fusion), because the Coulomb barrier involves spherically the whole nucleus.
But they are wrong.
The shape of the positive electric field of the nuclei is non-spherical, as the nuclear theorists believed along 80 years.
However, due to the chaotic rotation of the nuclei, in average the positive electric field of the nuclei takes the spherical shape. And this is the reason why hot fusion occurs needs to occur in the Sun.
Soon or later, the nuclear theorists will realize that Rossi’s Effect must be explained via the consideration that the positive electrosphere of the nuclei is non-spherical, and this nuclear property is responsible for the occurrence of cold fusion.
And soon or later, the nuclear theorists will realize that, again, I am right.
Eernie,
perhaps we are witnessing the birth of a new theory, to be known in the future as Calaon-Guglinski theory.
regards
wlad
@Wladimir Guglinski,
@Andrea Calaon,
Wow, I’m impressed! Calaon-Guglinski very convincing to me!
Kind Regards,
Daniel.
JC Renoir:
The only thing that can help our work are well working products. Mass media go with the wind: masses of matter make the wind.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Bernie Koppenhofer:
The fact that we moved the mountains with our hard work is positive.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
I am sure you have read the articles about Bill Gates being briefed on LENR. Do you agree, with more money for research, there could be for example, 10 or more pilot installations and research projects which would speed the introduction of the Rossi effect?
Dear Andrea C and Wlad.
Fermi, Alvarez and Wick have shown both theoretically and experimentally that the injection of an electron into the nucleus occurs naturally in some of the heavier atoms, causing them to be radioactive, emitting Beta particles. These electrons(usually s or p level) are considered present in the nucleus either field wise or particle wise dependent upon whether the investigator treats them as particles or an EM field. The process is called Reverse Beta, conversion electrons, or just Beta decay since the electron presence is subsequently ejected form the nucleus along with a Beta+ or Beta- particle, a Neutrino and a photon whose energy depends on the angle of entrance of the electron. Once the influence of the electron is felt in the nucleus, its spin and its field energy can play havoc with the equilibrium of the resting nucleus resulting in perhaps some strange outcomes. The inner electrons can also be induced to enter the nucleus by imposing an outer negative field on the electron sphere(perhaps a negative Hydrogen ion?).
Energetic regards.
gio51:
Our Team is working as hard as possible and resolving problems.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dott. Rossi
Underdeveloped countries need DESPERATELY your devices…!!!!! Pleaase, please, hurry up..!!!
Gio
The main stream media of the world are beginning to take seriously your work. Does this help your work?
JCR
Robert Curto:
This is one of the possible applications.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea Calaon,
Are you saying that an electron can orbit beneath the ground state of an atom?
All the best,
Joe
Andrea Calaon wrote in November 20th, 2014 at 7:33 AM :
Let me spend a few words to advertise my theory .
In the reactions above I explicitly added (+e) because I believe that the “secret” of the LENR is a coupling with the electron. Li7 in a uncommon “physical-chemistry” event in the metal matrix, couples with one electron becoming a sort of “new particle”: Li7e. Then this pseudo-particle, which is neutral already at picometric scales, can easily couple (through the same mechanism) with a Ni isotope: Li7eNixx. Li7 and Nixx become forced to travel inside the “circular” electron potential well. Soon they reach “nuclear contact” (at 2-3 [fm]) with very low excess kinetic energy, and can exchange the neutron because it is energetically convenient and probably Li7 offers it on the plane orthogonal to its magnetic moment, right where Nixx can easily “grab it”.
—————————————————————————
Dear Calaon,
I have analysed your idea on the “new particle” Li7e, taking in consideration my nuclear model, and I have arrived to some interesting conclusions.
Let me explain it.
Figure 1 ahead shows the nucleus 2He4 with its positive electric field, produced by the two protons.
FIG. 1:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Calaon-guglinski-FIGURE1.png
The nucleus 2He4 has spin about the z-axis shown in the Figure 1.
However, the two protons have residual repulsion (not in that magnitude of the repulsion considered in the Standard Model, because the electric fields of the protons are immersed within the electric field of the 2He4), and due to the repulsion the two protons have oscillations (zig-zag motion), and since the neutrons are bound to the protons via the spin-interaction, the neutrons also oscillate.
Due to the oscillation of the two protons and two neutrons, the z-axis is changing its direction all the time. By this reason in average the positive field of the 2He4 is spherical, as shown in the Figure 2, and the two electrons in the electrosphere take the levels s1 and s2.
FIG. 2:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Calaon-guglinski-FIGURE2.png
Now consider the 3Li7 nucleus, shown in the Figure 3.
FIG. 3:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Calaon-guglinski-FIGURE3.png
The magnetic field of the 3Li7 is shown by North-South (blue-pink).
The magnetic force which links the deuteron to the central 2He4 is induced by the rotation of the proton. The neutron has no charge, and therefore it does not induce magnetic force. The centrifugal force tries to expel the neutron, but it is bound to the deuteron due to spin-interaction.
The radius of the orbit of the deuterion is 0,405fm, while the radius of the orbit of the neutron is 2,391fm. The two values are calculated in the paper Stability of Light Nuclei published in JoNP, based on the equilibrium between magnetic force on the proton and the centrifugal force on the deuteron-neutron, and I had used the magnetic moment of the 3Li7 measured in the experiment so that to calculate the values 0,405 and 2,391.
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Stability%20of%20light%20nuclei.pdf
As the neutron in the 3Li7 is bound to the deuteron via the spin-interaction, but the radius orbit of the neutron is very big (2,391fm), it means that the neutron is weakly bound to the deuteron (and it is the deuteron that avoids the neutron to be expeled by the action of the centrifugal force).
As happened in the case of the 2He4, the three protons of the 3Li7 are submitted to oscillations due to repulsions, and as the neutron is bound to the deuteron, also the neutron has oscillation.
So, in spite of the deuteron-neutron move about the z-axis, however the z-axis has a chaotic motion, changing its direction all the time.
Therefore, in average the positive electric field of the 3Li7 due to the three protons is spherical, and the distribution of the electrons in the positive electrosphere of the Li7 takes the levels shown in the Figure 4.
FIG. 4:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Calaon-guglinski-FIGURE4.png
In the page 3 of the Lugano Report it is said:
”Three braided high-temperature grade Inconel cables exit from each of the two caps: these are the resistors wound in parallel non-overlapping coils inside the reactor.”
Therefore the electric current in the coils induces an internal magnetic field inside the alumina cylinder of the reactor, and when a nucleus 3Li7 approaches to a nucleus 28Ni58 and they couple chemically, both the Li7 and the Ni58 align their nuclear z-axis toward the axis of the alumina cylinder of the E-Cat.
Being the two z-axis of both Li7 and 58Ni aligned toward the same direction, the two nuclei couple their nuclear magnetic moment, and by this way both the nuclei of 3Li7 and 58Ni stop to gyrate chaotically, and so the nuclear z-axis of the 3Li7 and 58Ni stops of changing their direction: their nuclear z-axis keep the same direction of the axis of the alumina cylinder.
As the two nuclei stopped to gyrate chaotically, then the two positive electrospheres of 7Li and 58Ni lose the spherical shape they had when they were gyrating chaotically. In other words, both nuclei of 7Li and 58Ni get back the shape of electrosphere shown in the Figure 1 for He4 and Figure 3 for Li7.
This changing in the electrosphere of the 7Li is shown in the Figure 5, where we see that the electrons s1, s2, and p1 change their orbits.
FIG. 5:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Calaon-guglinski-FIGURE5.png
But note that the electron of the level p1 occupies an unstable level, because its negative charge is attracted not only by the positive electrosphere of the Li7, but it is also attracted by the positive electrosphere of the Ni58.
So, the electron of the level p1 is attracted by the electrosphere of the Ni58, and then the electron p´1 changes its orbit, taking the place shown in the Figure 6, between the nuclei Li7 and Ni58.
FIG. 6:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Calaon-guglinski-FIGURE6.png
The orbit of the electron of the level p1 works now like a coil inducing a strong magnetic moment toward the direction of the two nuclear z-axis of the two nuclei 7Li and 58Ni.
As the neutron in the 7Li is weakly bound, and it has a big magnetic moment (-1,913), it will be pulled by the magnetic field of the electron p1 toward the direction of the nucleus Ni58.
Due to the inertia, the neutron continues moving, and it enters within the Ni58 through the “hole” in the electrosphere of the Ni58.
NOTE: look at the Figure 3 of the paper Stability of Light Nuclei the magnetic moment of the neutron within the nuclei depends on the position of the neutron. When the neutron is crossed by a flux-n(o) down being in the outer side of DOUGLAS, its magnetic moment becomes positive: +1,913.
FIG. 4 of the paper Stability of Light Nuclei:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Fig._3.JPG
Therefore, the 7Li transmutes to 6Li, and 58Ni transmutes to 59Ni.
The same happens with the isotopes 60Ni, 61Ni, 62Ni.
I think your theory has chance to be correct, dear Calaon. But it seems there is no way to conciliate your theory with the Standard Model.
I think your theory requires my nuclear model so that to explain the Rossi’s Effect.
Regards
Wlad
Dr. Rossi, they have a Machine that will melt snow. They have 4 Machines.
The smaller one, number two, consumes 40 to 60 gallons of diesel per hour. The fuel tank holds 550 gallons.
Could an E-Cat supply heat at a lower cost ?
Google:
Snow Dragon
Robert Curto
Ft. Lauderdale Florida
USA