Electron-assisted fusion

  • P. K´alm´an and T. Keszthelyi, Forbidden nuclear reactions, Phys. Rev. C 99, 054620 (2019).


    These guys in Budapest have used Standard Model type math to find another "hope" for LENR..

    and have considered the Coulomb so-called barrier



    The assertion by Jarek of p-e-p being the only "hope" is a severe case hypothesis myopia..


    There are several hopeful explanations extant..

    and in fact a considerable amount of experimental support


    https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.05211v1.pdf


    P´eter K´alm´an and Tam´as Keszthelyi
    Budapest University of Technology and Economics,
    Institute of Physics, Budafoki ´ut 8. F., H-1521 Budapest, Hungary
    Based on our recent theoretical findings (Phys. Rev. C 99, 054620 (2019)) it is shown that proton
    and deuteron capture reactions of extremely low energy may have accountable rate in the case of all
    elements of the periodic table. Certain numerical results of rates of nuclear reactions of two final fragments of extremely low energy are also given.

    New way of thinking about low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR) phenomena is suggested. Possible explanations for the contradictory observations

    announced between 1905-1927 and possible reasons for negative results of ’cold fusion’ experiments published recently by the Google-organized scientific group (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-
    019-1256-6) are given

  • There is this ~500kB energy barrier - for reaching 3fm by two protons, probability of jumping through it with Boltzmann distribution in 1000K is ~exp(-500000/0.1).
    What do you think is probability of tunneling through it?



    LeBob,

    please specify - which experiment you think undermines Coulomb repulsion while taking two nuclei from nanometers to a few femtometers?

    I did not say Coulomb repulsion doesn't exist or is negated by any experiment. I'm saying brute force approaches though they work are not as practical for energy sources as more interesting approaches involving electron interactions and chemical-like mediating processes. My point is we may need more than the standard model to explain some of these results. Results that are being denied reality because explanations aren't present in todays textbooks. Even some experimenters mislabel phenomina because their mind only sees the possibilities they were trained to see.


    I'm refering to any and all experiments that show super-chemical energy production (with hydrogen plus other elements) while having less input energy per reaction than would be nessasary for hot fusion. I'm lumping the phenomina together regardless of if the experimenter believes the proccess is liken to nuclear fusion or something else is happening. What Lief Holmid, and Safire are doing, for example, isn't standard fusion. It can probably catalyze fusion technically, but to me it's much more interesting on it's own. According to observations and reading.

  • After more than 3 decades of irreproducable claims, not much hope has left, rather only wishthinking.


    Without electron assistance, you would need to cross ~500keV energy barrier to get to a few fm distance so nuclear force could take over - I don't see sources of this energy in these materials.

  • There is this ~500kB energy barrier - for reaching 3fm by two protons, probability of jumping through it with Boltzmann distribution in 1000K is ~exp(-500000/0.1).
    What do you think is probability of tunneling through it?


    This shows that you only know standard model Kindergarten physics. Moving charge is always equivalent to a field and charge inside e.g. a proton must move else no magnetic moment. Also a feature SM dos not understand.


    Now you have two choices. According Maxwell you can treat this charge/current like or flux like. SM Kindergarten physics only knows charge/potentials, what is the residual effect only. That's why SM is a total fail for describing dense matter as dense matter is flux only based and mostly sees virtual charge.


    After more than 3 decades of irreproducable claims, not much hope has left, rather only wishthinking.


    Bruoillon, Takahasi and many others have very well reproducible processes.


    "Wish thinking and hope" is what is left for the wrong side of the history. SM physicist in the nuclear & particle field will soon have to look for new jobs...

  • After more than 3 decades of irreproducable claims

    Jarek

    Try doing a proper literature review..

    Research the concept... hypothesis myopia


    Then publish your full bodied p-e-p hypothesis on researchgate without the "only hope" rhetoric.

    The effort on this thread so far seems a bit flimsy..

  • Jarek refers to this work.


    1991.Gryzinski

    ..Jarek might find it helpful to do more literature searching up to 2019 or so..


    Communication with Konrad Czerski in Szczecin might be salutary

    and Budapest is not so far way...from Krakow,,closer than Ockham

    https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.05211v1.pdf


    Peter Kalman and Tamas Keszthelyi

    Budapest University of Technology and Economics,

    Institute of Physics, Budafoki ´ut 8. F., H-1521 Budapest, Hungary

    Based on our recent theoretical findings (Phys. Rev. C 99, 054620 (2019)) it is shown that proton
    and deuteron capture reactions of extremely low energy may have accountable rate in the case of all
    elements of the periodic table. Certain numerical results of rates of nuclear reactions of two final fragments of extremely low energy are also given.

    New way of thinking about low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR) phenomena is suggested.

  • Dear RobertBryant i can understand that from where you live you can't guess everything 8)

    Currently Gryzinski is dead , always..

    JL Paillet told me about Kalman's papers since 5 years ago as well as he asked Biberian to invite him during first french lenr event RNBE.

    Unfortunately he didn't come because probably lake of money.

    Czerski doesn't need anybody because he gave a common proposal with Celani, Biberian, Mastromatteo, others for next 2020 European Lenr Project.

    Jarek Duda should have another Gryzinski's papers for people's interested, i guess.

  • Electron orbitals bounce like elastic balls around atom nuclei, once these collide. They also prone to mutual resonance of transverse and longitudinal waves spreading along their surface. During energetic collisions a substantial portion of electrons may emerge between atom nuclei and it would shield them against repulsive Coulomb force. Note also that energy density increases with increasing ionization fast - there is nearly energetic continuum between bottom electrons and underlying atom nuclei for heavier atoms: for their full ionization the hard X-ray is required, which would already fragment atom nuclei too. Many conundrums of cold fusion can be thus explained by merely classical physics, once we utilize common sense for atom dynamics.


    It's worth to realize though, that these effects apply only when atoms collide in thermodynamically improbable way, for example along single line as it's common within highly ordered metallic lattices or along their surfaces and/or dislocations. The thermodynamically most probably way of atom collisions inside random hot plasma (for which Lawson criterion were derived) decreases such an outcome sharply, because during collisions the kinetic energy and momentum of multiple atoms must be involved at the same moment. I believe that highly negentropic geometric arrangements are also the key for explanation of another negentropic overunity effects.

  • Classical thermodynamics only works under 3D symmetric conditions. As soon as we introduce cavities = small holes, this physics models brake down as the space angle for interactions tends to be "0".


    Classic catalysts usually have a fractal surface with plenty of hole like structures. We also have catalysts with regularly grown holes. H*/D* clusters develops much fast under such conditions, what allows LENR even at very high temperature.


    USPTO is well aware about this fact as many chemical catalysts seem to work because of this weak nuclear coupling (what is never disclosed in the patent..) .

  • Zephir_AWT

    agree with what you said , i know one who may have understood this then only have found a trick to improve probability of these events.


    Wyttenbach

    you are right space angle of small holes tends to "0" for example inside a particle however what's happen between particle ? a "virtual" crack ..rather in relation with zephir explanation..



    Electron orbitals bounce like elastic balls around atom nuclei, once these collide. They also prone to mutual resonance of transverse and longitudinal waves spreading along their surface. During energetic collisions a substantial portion of electrons may emerge between atom nuclei and it would shield them against repulsive Coulomb force. Note also that energy density increases with increasing ionization fast - there is nearly energetic continuum between bottom electrons and underlying atom nuclei for heavier atoms: for their full ionization the hard X-ray is required, which would already fragment atom nuclei too. Many conundrums of cold fusion can be thus explained by merely classical physics, once we utilize common sense for atom dynamics.


    It's worth to realize though, that these effects apply only when atoms collide in thermodynamically improbable way, for example along single line as it's common within highly ordered metallic lattices or along their surfaces and/or dislocations. The thermodynamically most probably way of atom collisions inside random hot plasma (for which Lawson criterion were derived) decreases such an outcome sharply, because during collisions the kinetic energy and momentum of multiple atoms must be involved at the same moment. I believe that highly negentropic geometric arrangements are also the key for explanation of another negentropic overunity effects.

  • Jarekrefers to this work. I well understand Jurg thoughts however sometimes Occam Razor way could be worthy of interest too !?


    The Relation to Holmlid is much more fruitful. His experiments also invalidate SM and can only be explained with a complex magnetic resonance.


    Occams razor basically repeats old cheese with no significant impact. Either you understand how energy is coupling/exchanged or you end up in SM gossip about violating x anti y or non z. Something I know from organic chemistry logic ...

  • New USPTO Patent Application, based on the Physical Review C paper ---


    "Nuclear fusion reactions in deuterated metals"

    https://journals.aps.org/prc/a…15597a86203c464d727b8de5b


    United States Patent Application 20200051701 February 13, 2020

    "METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR FACILITATING LOCALIZED NUCLEAR FUSION REACTIONS ENHANCED BY ELECTRON SCREENING"

    Abstract

    Methods and apparatuses for facilitating localized nuclear fusion reactions in a globally cold deeply screened fuel source are disclosed, where the volume of cold fuel is much larger than that of hot fuel participating in fission reactions, maintaining structural integrity. Such a deeply screened environment may facilitate the combination of shell and conduction electrons and plasma channels created from external x-ray and/or gamma irradiation. Deeply screened fuel nuclei can tunnel at lower energies, and can much more effectively scatter at high angles, leading to increased tunneling probabilities. Local "hot" fusion conditions may be created by providing neutral hot particles (e.g., hot neutrons) that are substantially more effective at high angle scattering off charged fuel nuclei and can deliver around a half of their kinetic energy in one collision to result in a hot fuel nucleus. Such methods and apparatuses may have various applications, such as heat or medical isotope production.


    http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi…0051701&RS=DN/20200051701


    Described as "locally hot but globally cold nuclear fusion"

  • There is a lot of talk about electron screening to increase Lenr. In this patent, it's used to increase hot fusion.

    In a crystal lattice, we always imagine electrons speed as harmonious without too much speed variation.

    However, this is not the case, it varies greatly but locally.

    This happens in voids, cracks, and especially amorphous metal.

    This explains well Japanese powder's results which has an amorphous core.

    So in very specific locations some electrons slow down and just near others accelerate, we can imagine the local impact on magnetism.

    It's not enough, both it's also necessary that H/D reach these locations.

    We understand better P&F experiments high loading need because a maximum of H/D must reach these locations.

    It should be understood that not all locations have sufficient amplitude.

    This is related, how to say ? with presence or absence of local superconducting behavior from some electrons.

    Classical electrons having a trajectory like an "8" while those superconductive move like a coil.

    Strong electronic speed fluctuations meet at interface between these 2 states, these 2 types of trajectories.

  • Or in other words we need to include a lump of plutonium in our cold fusion reactors to generate sufficient neutrons and gamma radiation to enable a significantly high rate of reaction? Electron screening alone simply doesn't overcome the C-barrier we have to beam in high energy electrons, neutrons, gamma or deuterons to do what, generate a few watts of excess heat? That will still consume more power than it produces. Another solution would be to build another ITER out of palladium or titanium maybe around a fission reactor to provide extra neutrons?:)

  • Or in other words we need to include a lump of plutonium in our cold fusion reactors to generate sufficient neutrons and gamma radiation to enable a significantly high rate of reaction? Electron screening alone simply doesn't overcome the C-barrier we have to beam in high energy electrons, neutrons, gamma or deuterons to do what, generate a few watts of excess heat? That will still consume more power than it produces. Another solution would be to build another ITER out of palladium or titanium maybe around a fission reactor to provide extra neutrons?:)

    Good idea! But doesn't allow cheap and modular energy sources to the world quite as confidently. Something like a spheromak around a simple solid state or homogenous liquid state SMR with one or two moving parts.

  • Would Brillouin Energy Corp be willing to boost their COP by adding in a neutron source? Such research would at least support the notion that LENR on its own is probably insufficient to reliably produce power (otherwise we 'd have LENR reactors online by now!) but such nuclear fusion reactions need to be boosted by an additional source of nuclear energy - something if we are going to be honest we've probably suspected all along. Judging by this new NASA patent which uses the combined benefits of fission and fusion.:)