Document: Isotopic Composition of Rossi Fuel Sample (Unverified)

Quote from Mary Yugo

Anyone who has ever taken a nuclear physics course would know that Rossi’s nickel transmutation results cannot possibly be real. For example, Ni-58 comprises 68% of natural nickel. To “climb the ladder” of nickel isotopes up to Ni-62 as Rossi’s bogus results imply would require the formation of Ni-59 as a first step. Ni-59 is radioactive, but it has a long half-life of 76,000 years (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_nickel). And yet, there is no Ni-59 whatsoever in Rossi’s fake E-Cat “ash” results. He is not even smart enough to produce a good deception. If he actually believes any of his own crap, then he is simply delusional.

MY: May be next time you ask somebody familiar with the field!

As irrational as its sounds for old school physicians, LENR transmutation usually happen in clusters of 4 sometimes 2. The exception is Li₇ which goes down to Li₆. So as H,D, Li is just a donor of one P and not the product of a typical transmutation.
Further on LENR avoids unstable nuclei, which may sound even more irrational to old school physicians...

Quote from Mary Yugo

To “climb the ladder” of nickel isotopes up to Ni-62 as Rossi’s bogus results imply would require the formation of Ni-59 as a first step.

In Fisher's theory more than 1 neutron can be transferred at a time? The argument from personal incredulity, is a well known fallacy. Just because someone has taken a course in nuclear physics doesn't mean they have studied any LENR theory.

But the bottom line is that whilst Fisher's theory does not predict any 59Ni, it does predict radio-active 66Ni which has not been observed. So it looks unlikely but we cannot be sure. After all Fisher may have wrongly assigned parameters to his model.

Quote from Wyttenbach

The exception is Li7 which goes down to Li6.

Just because 6Li appears to increase relative to 7Li doesn't imply that is is a product. Conversely we do not know that 7Li is a fuel. But at least one of the 2 alternatives must be true.

@Mary Yugo

You clearly haven't read the link in the first post of this thread?

The 99% Ni62 result was from Lugano.

There is no "whole story changed". The isotopic results that I copied above are a recent semi-verified leak supposedly from the 1 year long Rossi test.

Again, this is the original ECW post, so that you understand what we are talking about in this thread:

http://www.e-catworld.com/2016…i-fuel-sample-unverified/

@Erik Walker
I have prepared a brief summary with some simulated data: http://heliorite.com/LENR/LENT_simulations_nickel_E-Cat.pdf .
The result is interesting but prove nothing. You are welcome to discuss it but without my participation. The E-Cat-related discussions tend to be negative, emotional and time-consuming.

Quote from Wyttenbach

MY: May be next time you ask somebody familiar with the field!

As irrational as its sounds for old school physicians, LENR
transmutation usually happen in clusters of 4 sometimes 2. The exception
is Li7 which goes down to Li6. So as H,D, Li is just a donor of one P
and not the product of a typical transmutation.

Further on LENR avoids unstable nuclei, which may sound even more irrational to old school physicians...

I suppose I qualify in the group old school physicist (actually both old-school physicist and
old school-physicist :-)) Yes, as a nuclear physicist I find it
irrational. There seems to be a separate reality when it comes to LENR:
coupled reactions, no primary radiation, avoiding unstable nuclides (does
the parent nucleus have intelligence and knows that the product is
radioactive?), reduced Coulomb potential and also catalysis. How does
nature know when to apply LENR laws and when to apply standard nuclear
physics laws? There is an easier explanation according to Occam's
razor: there is no nuclear reaction at all. No, Nature is not malicious,
so if LENR is real it must have at better explanation!

As far as I can see there is no proof that isotope analysis has even
been performed. The result is thus a row of numbers with unknown origin,
so Rossi would not even have to fiddle with the samples.

My guess is that Engineer48 is Rossi and Aldopho A (see link) is Dewey or somebody connected to IH.

Document: Isotopic Composition of Rossi Fuel Sample (Unverified)

Quote from Peter Ekstrom

As far as I can see there is no proof that isotope analysis has even
been performed.

Can You elaborate this somewhat more? .. ?

Quote from Mary Yugo

many of whom I suspect were his colleagues in prison.

Oh my dear Mary. Really ? Haven't you read and heard about the fact that Rossi was cleared by all accusations ?

Fear Uncertainty and Doubt dominates the argumentation of people who has no arguments.

Quote from Peter Ekstrom

avoiding unstable nuclides (does the parent nucleus have intelligence and knows that the product is radioactive?),

This is a major stumbling block for most models. But surely the resolution is that whatever the correct explanation turns out to be, no penetrating radiations are expected under the experimental conditions.
It may well be that novel conditions, yet to be verified will produce penetrating radiation. And we could attempt to identify those conditions by examining, in detail, what theories predict. Alas most theorists cherry pick their predictions to coincide with generally accepted observations (like heat and helium). Conversely they are reluctant to spell out clearly what radiation is expected and when. It is not surprising that very little attention is given to theory! Unfalsifiable theory is not convincing!

I find that the obsession with "excess heat" and the neglect of far more sensitive nuclear measurements to be quite pathological. It is a poor argument indeed to claim (27 years later) that the anomalies must be nuclear because we cannot think of any other explanation. This is the fallacy of arguing from personal incredulity. To be fair there are some indications of nuclear anomalies. But in that case, they should be investigated in detail, energies, intensities, etc. measured.

It is equally pathological to claim that some kind of exotic chemistry is involved when the same mini atoms / molecules would be expected to fuse just like muon catalysed fusion. Where are the expected gammas?

@Eric Walker and I seem to favour fragmentation as a method to explain helium production and to suppress penetrating radiation. But there is a problem - the so called Hagelstein limit - we do not see expected neutrons in deuterated systems from secondary / tertiary reactions. I may be clutching at straws but I would like to see this limit experimentally verified. After all, Peter Hagelstein has been proposing several incompatible models over the last decades. Maybe the limit is not relevant?

Quote from Hermes

I find that the obsession with "excess heat" and the neglect of far more sensitive nuclear measurements to be quite pathological.

As some might know, sono-fusion (Pt,D₂O) is well correlated with excess-heat and H₄/H₃ production. Most reactions happens on the surface (of Pt) and are quasi "open face". But even there "no" radiation is measured. Where "no" means far,far less than classical physicists expect!

Quote from Mary Yugo

What link, Peter? Engineer48 certainly sounds made up. Maybe Rossi, maybe an enthusiast, maybe one of Rossi's buddies, many of whom I suspect were his colleagues in prison.

There is a link at the end of the post with Alan's message. The original is in ECW, and I don't know how to link it directly (it is hidden among more than 400 posts) Aldopho A's post seems to have disappeared, at least I cannot find it. Possibly due to ECW:s censuring principles. It said, in short, that A had access to a series of isotope results that indicated no effect. It is definitely not believable.

Edit: The disappearance of the post was due to the fact that Adolpho spelt his name inconsistently.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Can You elaborate this somewhat more? .. ?

Isotope analysis is not trivial and is normally performed by a specialized institute or company. An official report would prove that the analysis was performed. I have seen no such report for the 1MW. For earlier cases there are detailed reports leaked to the Internet.