me356: Reactor parameters [part 2]

    HG Branzell wrote ""I think you will have to be satisfied with that."
    "
    and "Meaning: this is what you must accept if you want nuclear reactions."


    I don't accept that. Not all nuclear reactions are equal. Actinide fissions are different in effect from Beryllium 8 fission....
    just as a TNT explosion differs from a candle burning.


    The financial cost of the Fukushima cleanup is estimated at $105 billion dollars. The financial cost of Chernobyl is several times more.
    If you ask the citizens in these areas if they want the actinide nuclear fissions that were in these reactors reinstated they will say "Tondemonai" or simply " Nyet."


    On the other hand if you say to them.. there are nuclear reactions with the light elements nickel /lithium which produce much cheaper energy and cannot spread radioactive isotopes over large land areas ...


    they will say " shinjirarenai ","ya ne veryu v eto" and "prove it!"
    Which is basically what this LENR FORUM is about.. finding a nuclear reaction which is cheaper and safer than actinide fissions.

    robert_bryant

    Quote

    Which is basically what this LENR FORUM is about.. finding a nuclear reaction which is cheaper and safer than actinide fissions.


    I wish humans live forever, I wish a "perpetuum mobile" could exist, I wish .... etc.
    Unfortunately, Mother Nature is such that these are not possible. We have to face this.
    Nobody guaranties that energetically profitable LENR is possible.
    Of course, we should try and search since there is no proof of its impossibility (unlike for perpetuum mobile).
    However, one should be realistic in this search. The undeniable fact is that nuclei repel each other with a Coulomb force.
    To achieve their fusion, we have to somehow overcome this Coulomb barrier. There are only two ways for it: either raise the temperature or to make the barrier thinner.
    All exotic ideas based on non-standard physics (twists, time-worms, strings, etc...), even if possible, could have a negligible effect not sufficient to make LENR energetically profitable (otherwise they were discovered long ago). Forget about such things.
    Addition of any special chemicals cannot influence the Coulomb barrier. Forget about them. Nickel has charge 28: this means that Coulomb barrier H-Ni is 28 times higher and thicker that for two hydrogen nuclei. Forget about fusion of H with Ni.
    The only thing how nickel could help is via its crystalline lattice where hydrogen isotopes (when penetrate inside a crystal) are close to each other.
    All the ideas and possible effects must be studied separately and thoroughly. If we speak about hydrogen entering a crystal, study the conditions, concentration of hydrogen, depth of penetration etc. And without all such studies (perhaps tedious for most of the participants of this forum), one cannot jump to constructing a power plant. All the elementary processes involved must be studied separately, before you combine them together. And a final note: unfortunately, such studies are not possible for non-professionals and in a garage instead of a properly equipped laboratory.

    Quote

    Cs137 has a half-life of 30.3 years. Ten half-lives of decay are about 300 years to get down to about 0.1 % of the initial contamination assuming it is fixed in the soil or other permanent features near Fukushima. 100 years, or a little more than 3 half lives gets us down to around 10% of the original. But, perhaps that was not your point?


    Yes - my point was that I question your assumptions here when experts considering the radioactive contamination reckon residuals are safe now. I'd like to here what is the contrary argument. That 137Cs has a half-life of 30 years is not the issue.

    Rakitsa: Your unshakable trust in the mathematical models of reality is noble but dangerous. Your description of the modern understanding of nuclear forces is simply too certain. It fails to acknowledge that while it is consistent with current experimental evidence, it is not complete and many things are yet not known. No scientist should hold such a conviction that their "models" are complete and un-falsifiable. Nature will undoubtedly prove you wrong at some time, in some way!

    can you give an example of such a reaction?
    perhaps you mean an absorption of a neutron by a nucleus. It has nothing to do with fusion. Fusion happens when two positively charged nuclei approach each other from afar. It cannot be without Coulomb repulsion.

    Yes.
    If fusion is only respecting protons (ie increasing the Z), then that is why I suggest Isotope Displacement Reactions (IDR) as a new class of "sub-fusion" reactions.


    Conceivably, there are several cases where (somehow) adding or removing neutrons can greatly affect the likelihood of a spontaneous nucleus reaction where a change in Z is the final outcome, without being "classic" fusion (or fission). I am not talking about making a bomb.

    Mendeleev considered the discovery of radioactivity mistake. According to the beliefs of the then science atom could not on their own decay. Physicists also believed that the heated body radiates heat and light must be on the theory of self-cool to absolute zero.

    Dear plazma_max,
    I do not see logic in your statement. Your examples have nothing to do with the subject of our discussion. Did anybody observe energetically profitable cold fusion?
    Please, do not mention such liars as Rossi and me356.

    Lol, Rakitsa calls out us as ignorant and uneducated. He argue for example that the Coloumb potential is impenetratable. And probably thinks that
    the audience here are ignorant of the difficulty to overcome it. FIrst of all, in order to penetrate the coloumb potential you need energy to overcome
    the potential and also energy not to deflect from the target. Now Having a proton approach a target atom means that at some point a combined electron
    cloud around the two nuclei has to form that are cigarr formed and this process may actually aim the incoming proton against the nuclei effectively result in
    1) A much increased hit rate with lower energies (still high though)
    2) At the hit both nuclei is at typically at much lover speed relative each other than what typically is the case when we study hot fusion e.g. the physics
    in the hit at these low energies hits is typically not well studied and it is an extrapolation to take our understanding to this low energy case hence it is prudent to expect some
    new physics needs to be developed. To rant as he does is premature in my book, especially since there are well established results indicating that
    the electron cloud increases the hit rate many orders of magnitudes at moderate speeds (still very high to prove cold fusion though). To call Me365 a lier is a bit
    uggly. He clearly works his ass out doing his garage research and anybody that work hard needs respect in my book. Is he right? That's another question. And the
    answer to that is simply wait and see and anybody calling bad things is nothing but an ignorant troll - especially as me365 does not try to milk money from anyone,
    On the other hand It is good to point out that there is nothing proved and no science here and remind people that it all probably is a pipe dream.


    One thing is true though: old farts that think that everything
    is known and nothing new and revolutionary can ever happen has been proven wrong over and over again. So be polite and wait and see, and for gods sake, have fun.

    LENR other mechanism, not nuclear fusion. This nuclear-chemical reactions taking place via the serial to capture protons and electrons formed by beta decay of neutrons with the restructuring of the core in the intermediate reaction. The reaction proceeds at the interface "a solid body - gas". Therefore, the Coulomb barrier does not hinder the passage of the reaction.


    I spent a lot of experiments and analyzed the results of other experiments on the transmutation of chemical elements.

    Quote from axil

    Paradigmnoia wrote:
    Too bad Rakitsa is leaving before asking the Right Question, which is:


    How does one go about moving a neutron from one atom to another intentionally, in an energy gainful way, without leading to a runaway event or a radioactive mess?


    Teleportation via worm hole.


    Add a bottle of whiskey!

    @rakitsa
    Let me say that I agree with you: in LENR experiments the Coulomb barrier cannot be overcome by kinetic energy (temperature), and it would be hot fusion ...
    You say:

    Quote

    To achieve their fusion, we have to somehow overcome this Coulomb barrier. There are only two ways for it: either raise the temperature or to make the barrier thinner.


    Well I am proposing a third way. What if the nuclear force, which is precisely what balances the Coulomb repulsion between protons allowing the existence of nuclei, is not a residuum of the strong interaction, but instead is an electromagnetic effect? And this effect can in some rare cases attract the electron and lead to the formation of neutral particles (neutral nuclei) different form the neutrons?
    The suggestion of an electromagnetic nuclear force is not mine, and goes back to the '80s.
    Then you can generate a large neutral nucleus with a huge magnetic moment (see RF emissions) which can reach heavy nuclei like Ba and allow for "soft and perturbed" nuclear reactions which strongly prefer stable nuclei.
    You can find the details of my theory in this presentation:
    http://lenr-calaon-explanation…ted_nuclear_reactions.pdf


    With my theory the nuclear force itself grabs the electron, and there is no need for a kinetic overcoming of the Coulomb barrier.
    Plus you explain:

    • That most of the nuclear energy is emitted as EUV emissions (non-thermal near IR by Swartz and direct detection by Mills),
    • The gamma emissions,
    • The preference for stable nuclei,
    • The strange traces on nuclear emulsions,
    • What is the NAE and which are the best atoms for it. You discover that Ca is the best one, as Iwamura knows with his diffusion activated transmutations. Zr follows suite and Li is not too far. But there are some other atoms not explored!
    • The radio emissions,
    • Why top chemists did not manage to improve the NAE density by chemical means,
    • Which is the difference between hydrogen and deuterium loadings,
    • Why sometimes you get neutrons,
    • How you get tritium without neutrons,
    • Why energy correlates well with production of He4 with deuterium loading,
    • Why there are evident metachronous effects triggered by phonons,
    • Why explosions can take place (accumulation of neutral nuclei in condensed matter),
    • Why Holmlid needs K, and measures clusterings at 2 [pm] and less,
    • Why zeolites seem to push the existence of life on this planet to times when the planet was too hot,
    • And many other things.

    So there is a third way to nuclear reactions triggered at "chemical energies".

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.