# The process by which the proton decays in LENR

• The process by which the proton decays in LENR.

Some esoteric process is causing the proton to decay in LENR. This process is the root source for the production of energy and sub atomic particles in LENR.

Whatever is causing the proton to decay into strange matter is a new unrecognized if not unknown process in physics. This cause is not part of current standard model theory. This makes LENR theory doubly hard and mysterious. Not only do we need to explain the characteristics of LENR, but also LENR thinking gets involved in unrecognized physics that is itself ill-defined and speculative and rooted in solving the hardest and still unexplained issues in physics. As we go through this string of dots, you will get a feel for why LENR theory will not be fully understood for another century.

Gathering the dots together.

Before we attempt to connect the dots relegated to proton decay, we must define them and gather them together.

Solving the Riemann hypothesis

In mathematics, the Riemann hypothesis is a conjecture that the Riemann zeta function has its zeros only at the negative even integers and complex numbers with real part 1/2. It was proposed by Bernhard Riemann, after whom it is named. The name is also used for some closely related analogues, such as the Riemann hypothesis for curves over finite fields.

The Riemann hypothesis implies results about the distribution of prime numbers. Along with suitable generalizations, some mathematicians consider it the most important unresolved problem in pure mathematics.

The complex number system on which this conjecture is based was thought to have no meaning or application to any physical property in reality. But this feeling has turned out to be wrong.

In 1999, it was suggested by David Hilbert and George Pólya that in the nontrivial zeros form a set of real and discrete numbers in the Riemann zeta function are just like the eigenvalues of another function called a differential operator, which is widely used in physics.

This special newly discovered operator has close ties with quantum physics. The special operator in quantum physics is not Parity / Time (PT) symmetric in the complex number domain. If it can be shown that the PT symmetry is broken for the imaginary part of the operator, then it would follow that the eigenvalues are all real numbers, which would finally constitute the long-awaited proof of the Riemann hypothesis.

One of the pivotal dots to be connected in proton decay is Parity / Time (PT) symmetry breaking.

PT-symmetric quantum mechanics is an extension of conventional quantum mechanics into the complex domain. (PT symmetry is not in conflict with conventional quantum theory but is merely a complex generalization of it.) PT-symmetric quantum mechanics was originally considered to be an interesting mathematical discovery but with little or no hope of practical application, but beginning in 2007 it became a hot area of experimental physics.

The connection between PT symmetry, LENR, Proton decay is whispering gallery waves.

Because of their complex number based quantum behavior, whispering gallery wavesWGW) have mysterious properties that are seen in LENR. In whispering gallery waves, the complex number system relates to the index of refraction of the light contained in WGW type of the optical cavity. When two WGWs are near each other, there is a one way flow of energy between them and a translation of frequencies associated with that transfer. This energy extraction process is unleashed by PT symmetry breaking and the decay that this symmetry breaking produces.

The WGW is the structure that gives form to the Surface Plasmon Polariton. Via the SPP, the energy extraction process whereby the WPW pulls energy out of the proton includes a PT symmetry breaking process. This PT symmetry breaking frees the energy content of the proton as SPP breaks the PT symmetry that keeps the protons or neutrons from decaying.

The color force and proton stability is based on maintaining CPT stability. Here are some old posts that explain this behavior of the color force:

and

The possible Role of Axions in LENR

Violation of the CPT symmetry scrambles up fermions and bosons, particles and antiparticles and their quantum numbers.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.g…/hbase/Particles/cpt.html

Now that you understand how the proton decays in LENR, you have a 100 year head start in the science of LENR.

• Every week a new particle is the answer. Sometimes two a week. Bless you Axil, if you weren't real we would have to make you up. ps. Good job there are still plenty of particles to go.

• Every week a new particle is the answer. Sometimes two a week. Bless you Axil, if you weren't real we would have to make you up. ps. Good job there are still plenty of particles to go.

Alan, what are you talking about? I have been talking about the Surface Plasmon Polariton (SPP) since 2011 when I saw it referenced in the NASA LENR patent. If you search on whispering Gallery waves referenced on this site, you will see a long history of how it is included as part of the SPP mechanism. The recognition how CT violation is part of how the SPP works is new, and an important part of how energy is extracted from the proton. I have tried to make LENR easy to understand. It looks like I need to try harder at least in your case.

To refute your statement, note that the first reference to Whispering Gallery Waves as a part of the SPP goes back to 2015 here on this site

LENR is a catalytic process

Among my first references to WGWs goes back to 2013

http://www.talk-polywell.org/b…t=3200&start=6000#p102568

The post was edited 3 times, last by axil ().

• Proton decay in LENR, especially in connection with axions and strange matter at the same moment(!) is complete utter nonsense.
The energy scale of particles involved would differ by fifteen orders of magnitude in that case.

The post was edited 2 times, last by Zephir_AWT ().

• https://phys.org/news/2017-01-…-optical-microcavity.html

Physicists have observed spontaneous symmetry breaking in an optical microcavity, they have demonstrated experimentally the emergence of spontaneous symmetry breaking in an ultrahigh-Q whispering-gallery microresonator. The Optical whispering gallery (WGW) microcavity is the structural form that the Surface Plasmon Polariton assumed in LENR. . These whispering gallery modes are analogous to the acoustic resonances in the whispering gallery in St. Paul Cathedral in London.

A critical clue to the role of symmetry breaking in LENR is the observation that the application of an electrostatic field catalyzes spontaneous symmetry breaking in the WGW via the Kerr effect.

The application of an electrostatic field has been listed as a trigger of the LENR reaction in Rossi's patent. When this electrostatic field is applied, the WGW produces symmetry breaking which induces a energy transfer between a proton and a simultaneous decay in that proton via a symmetry breaking based entangled interface.

• Axil,

Take what Alan said as a compliment. He is quite good with words when he wants to be. I was a bit discerned when I read some thread on ECW that you are done educating people. People can take an idea or leave it but it is a valuable contribution.

//On a different non related note altogether- MP knock it off

• It is turning out that the Surface Plasmon Polariton (SPP) is not LENR capable after it has been created. Initially, it is composed of two counter rotating currents of confined electron entangled light wave forms that work against each other to mitigate the SPPs ability to convert light into a strong magnetic beam projecting outward normal to the plane of the circulation of the light currents. To make the SPP LENR capable, an electrostatic field (the patented Rossi electrostatic stimulus) is applied (the Kerr effect) to the Whispering Gallery Wave (WGW). This electrostatic field induces a coupling between these two counter rotating light waveforms within the WGW so that these two waveforms combine into a very much strengthened and organized current of light.

When the WGW reaches LENR activation levels where protons decay, the energy produced by that decay in the form of photons is transferred from the nucleus during proton disintegration. The additional extracted light energy initiates a gainful positive feedback loop that makes self-sustain mode in LENR possible. From the researchers as follows:

http://english.pku.edu.cn/news_events/news/research/5335.htm

Interestingly, there exists a huge light to magnetic conversion amplification process involved in this circulating enclosed electron entangled light. Each time the photon aggregation that the WGW encloses make a complete rotation of the WGW, the combined magnetic spins projected by those photons in the aggregation is doubled. So if the photons which are confined for many millions of orbits, these orbital rotations will multiply the photon spins projected by the WGW by that total cumulative rotation count.

The post was edited 1 time, last by axil ().

• Axil said

"Now that you understand how the proton decays in LENR, you have a 100 year head start in the science of LENR."

Sorry axil I don't actually understand what the 'proton' IS for a start..

The word 'proton' was only coined 97 years ago by Rutherford, in 1920.

Maybe I am 97 years behind or maybe just 7 yrs

with that issue alone.

Matt Strassler,2010, has a picture of ONE proton composed of 12 up and 10 down quarks about 20 of their antiparticles,

and 30 or so gluons and a dozen or so strange quarks

https://profmattstrassler.com/…aq/whats-a-proton-anyway/

That's something which I don't quite understand. How the proton decays is another hurdle.

The post was edited 1 time, last by robert bryant ().

• Some esoteric axil is again posting nonsense. Everytime the same, as if something has changed since his last nonsense.explaining post... No, You are still no particly physicist.

• Mesons from Laser-Induced Processes in Ultra-Dense Hydrogen H(0)

Leif Holmlid

http://journals.plos.org/ploso…69895#pone.0169895.ref007

Quote

The origin of the particle signals observed here is clearly laser-induced nuclear processes in H(0). The first step is the laser-induced transfer of the H2(0) pairs in the ultra-dense material H(0) from excitation state s = 2 (with 2.3 pm H-H distance) to s = 1 (at 0.56 pm H-H distance) [2]. The state s = 1 may lead to a fast nuclear reaction. It is suggested that this involves two nucleons, probably two protons. The first particles formed and observed [16,17] are kaons, both neutral and charged, and also pions. From the six quarks in the two protons, three kaons can be formed in the interaction. Two protons correspond to a mass of 1.88 GeV while three kaons correspond to 1.49 GeV. Thus, the transition 2 p → 3 K is downhill in internal energy and releases 390 MeV. If pions are formed directly, the energy release may be even larger. The kaons formed decay normally in various processes to charged pions and muons. In the present experiments, the decay of kaons and pions is observed directly normally through their decay to muons, while the muons leave the chamber before they decay due to their easier penetration and much longer lifetime.

As observed in his experiment, Holmlid has identified the decay of two protons into 3 kaons and 390 MeV. This decay requires an explanation. If you can't or won't explain proton decay, you must conclude that Holmlid is a nut and 43 years of his work is a fraud. I personally respect and support Holmlid and want to understand the implications of his experimentation. This type of ad hominem attack issued by damn_right_yes is usual in the naysayer community. However, if Holmlid is to be taken seriously, an explanation of how protons can transform into kaons and energy is required. In this thread, I have begun that exploration. By the way, Rossi's latest experimental paper claims that the sigma mesons are the active agent in his reaction. Where these mesons come also requires and explanation,

• https://phys.org/news/2017-03-proton.html

How did the proton get its spin?

Progress in understanding the nature of the proton.

• The problem is not the spin.

The problem for me with this complexity is understanding how every proton is exactly the same?

Or is that too much of an assumption.

Do individual protons differ in the numbers of u, d, s, U_,d_, s_, g ?

• Thanks for the link on protons. Any knowledge that can help explain something is worth reading. That said the link offers no proof in its premise on zillions of of lightweight particles called quarks, antiquarks and gluons, (also the 3 sub-links he referenced) are all 3 quark is a proton related.

No soup of particles no zillions. But a good read anyway.

• I have recently learned that Hermitian quantum mechanics cannot explain radioactive decay, the decay of the proton , and LENR. Hermitian quantum mechanics is the subject that everyone learns in school. It's formulation is based on waves and its mathematics uses real numbers only. It can only explain what happens in closed systems. Another type of quantum mechanics is required to understand what is going on inside open systems as represented by LENR, radioactive decay and the decay of the proton.

I have used terms in the above paragraph that requires a better explanation.

What is a closed system

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_system

A closed system is a physical system that does not allow certain types of transfers (such as transfer of mass) in or out of the system. The specification of what types of transfers are excluded varies in the closed systems of physics, chemistry or engineering.

In quantum physics

This equation, called Schrödinger's equation, describes the behavior of an isolated or closed quantum system, that is, by definition, a system which does not interchange information (i.e. energy and/or matter) with another system. So if an isolated system is in some pure state |ψ(t) ∈ H at time t, where H denotes the Hilbert space of the system, the time evolution of this state (between two consecutive measurements).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

What is an open system

An open system is a system that has external interactions. Such interactions can take the form of information, energy, or material transfers into or out of the system boundary, depending on the discipline which defines the concept. An open system is contrasted with the concept of an isolated system which exchanges neither energy, matter, nor information with its environment. An open system is also known as a constant volume system or a flow system.

Open system have input and output flows, representing exchanges of matter, energy or information with its surroundings.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hermitian quantum mechanics / Non Hermitian quantum mechanics

Space-time reflection symmetry, or PT symmetry, first proposed in quantum

mechanics by Bender and Boettcher in 1998

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…rmitian_quantum_mechanics

https://phys.org/news/2016-11-…nored-symmetry-space.html

A theory of LENR must conform to Non Hermitian quantum mechanics. This QM is a superset of Hermitian quantum mechanics extended to the complex number plane and provides for CPT phase change that is central to the decay of the proton.

The post was edited 1 time, last by axil ().

• Axil,

I am missing your point above completely. The Hermitian link is a stub. But the link on Carl M. Bender getting the prize was interesting. I also *read the comments. The user Hyperfuzzy looks like one of our posters here. I noticed the style of attacking others for proposing an idea. I have seen that somewhere...hmm.

This seems out of scope for LENR. Needs a better tie in.

• Axil,

I am missing your point above completely. The Hermitian link is a stub. But the link on Carl M. Bender getting the prize was interesting. I also *read the comments. The user Hyperfuzzy looks like one of our posters here. I noticed the style of attacking others for proposing an idea. I have seen that somewhere...hmm.

This seems out of scope for LENR. Needs a better tie in.

Here is more information about PT symmetry in quantum physics and Non Hermitian quantum mechanics from Bender

http://www.europhysicsnews.org…2016/02/epn2016472p17.pdf

The tie in is symmetry breaking. In an open system like radioactive decay, symmetry is broken when a particle is converted into another particle. When the neutron decay, an electron and a neutrino are created. To make this decay happen, a symmetry violation is required.

Quote

The laws of nature were long thought to remain the same under mirror reflection. The results of an experiment viewed via a mirror were expected to be identical to the results of a mirror-reflected copy of the experimental apparatus. This so-called law of parity conservation was known to be respected by classical gravitation, electromagnetism and the strong interaction; it was assumed to be a universal law.[20] However, in the mid-1950s Chen Ning Yang and Tsung-Dao Lee suggested that the weak interaction might violate this law. Chien Shiung Wu and collaborators in 1957 discovered that the weak interaction violates parity, earning Yang and Lee the 1957 Nobel Prize in Physics.[

also see

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP_violation

The post was edited 1 time, last by axil ().

• Rigel said "No zillions.."

True.. I could not find any evidence of that high number but

Strassler describes how the evidence (Compact Muon Solenoid) Large Hadron Collector CERN 2010 suggests a

intra-protonic community of up, down, strange, quarks and antiquarks as well as gluons.

His community in the proton is larger than the u-u-d triple we are told about in school physics textbooks.

My problem with his zillions is who or what accounts for the missing zillionth gluon to ensure that all protons are identical.

https://profmattstrassler.com/…ng-whats-inside-a-proton/

Strassler talks about the ideal bound state of the hydrogen atom as conjugal bliss but then talks about the central spouse, the proton being a

fluctuating community of adults and children. The human analogy starts to fail here.

However the idea of a more complex network for the proton than just u-u-d brings to mind the idea of a resilient, metastable proton which can store

lots of energy, spin, mass? within multiple network bonds in a hyperbound state.

Two metastable protons together could help stabilise a special metastable state in which two protons are squashed together in a

binuclear atom.. (The human analogy to this may perhaps be accommodated within our modern LGBT paradigm? or not?)

This is a recent idea which I have found intriguing and has some explanatory power(IMO) for a series of LENR exptal results over the decades

Ecce Binuclear hydrogen atom (Grazie, Paolo Accomazzi).

.

I am busy reading the associated pdf file for awhile .

The post was edited 2 times, last by robert bryant ().

• http://inspirehep.net/record/1119586/plots

An instanton is critical in the decay of the proton. An instanton is a pseudo particle that is produced as a condensate of magnetic force.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instanton

Monopole flux line will interconnect as shown above in the figure to form a particle. These instantons form inside the proton in the presence of monopole field lines. These instantons destabilize the actions of the quarks inside the proton and the proton decays.

I have always wondered why magnetic field lines that don't connect were important to the LENR process. This instanton creation process inherent in the connection between magnetic flux lines is made possible by the parallel topology of these monopole flux lines.

The post was edited 1 time, last by axil ().

• The QCD vacuum angle θ (AKA theta angle) is central to the decay of the proton, When this angle is very small, the proton does not decay. But when instantons are formed inside the proton, the theta angle increases. This change in the nature of the vacuum produced by instanton formation generates proton decay.

https://www.nikhef.nl/pub/serv…_pdf/thesis_J_Boomsma.pdf

Effects of instanton interactions on the phases of quark matter

IMHO, this thesis is a goldmine for LENR theory.

This paper explains how the formation of instantons inside the proton will produce P symmetry breaking which will result in proton decay.

Another example of pseudo particle formation from magnetic energy is the formation of magnetic instantons in the fractional quantum hall effect. This demonstrates an example of how magnetic field lines can generated fractionally charged pseudoparticles as typified by composite fermion theory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_fermion

The post was edited 2 times, last by axil ().

• Thank you for the response. I commented in the other thread (meson based model) with an easter egg (for old Tommy C.)

A great video. I will look at your links, but I think I found the answer in the comments look for someone named David S. Please never take what I say as a conflict, I just did not understand as the graphic as it showed it... but I did not see the connection. I just have a tendency to follow up questions that I do not understand. We have such great minds here... Spending them on Rossi to me is like trying to fix burnt toast by scraping it off. Holmlid may have something, I am unaware if he has a video of what he thinks is going on. Mills quite honestly I have serious doubts of as he moves his target by financial quarter just like ITER or big science does. Anyway I enjoyed the video immensely.

• In this edition of EGO OUT (Tuesday, April 11, 2017) Peter has referenced a wonderful and impactful idea in this article:

Proton-nuclei smashups yield clues about 'quark gluon plasma' Physicists probe exotic state of nuclear matter at Europe's LHC

https://www.sciencedaily.com/r…ly%3A+Top+Science+News%29

Science is studying the "chiral magnetic effect" (CME) in Quark-gluon plasma, or QGP. The magnetic fields that are generated in the QGP have a similar effect on quarks that LENR has on protons. The CME that appeared after the big bang in the QGP that existed back then was strong enough to keep energy from condensing into protons. Now-a-days, such vacuum altering magnetic fields are only seen in LENR. As stated by Jorn Kerst Boomsma in the summary of his thesis:

https://www.nikhef.nl/pub/serv…_pdf/thesis_J_Boomsma.pdf

Effects of instanton interactions on the phases of quark matter

IMHO, this thesis is a goldmine for LENR theory.

Quote

"Summary”

“There are strong indications that in heavy-ion collisions a new phase of matter is created, quark matter, which is a state of matter with deconfined quarks. Besides being created in heavy-ion collisions, it is also believed to have existed in early universe.

Today it might exist in the interior of very dense neutron stars. In this thesis we have studied how quark matter is influenced by instantons. These nonperturbative effects are closely related to the QCD vacuum angle θ. Because of the existence of instantons observables can become θ-dependent. In Nature θ appears to be very close zero, an additional argument for this was presented in Chapter 4 of this thesis. In heavy-ion collisions θ may effectively become nonzero, at least that conclusion is drawn from an effective low-energy theory of the strong interaction. When θ is different from 0 (mod π), the theory is not invariant under CP."

As additional background on this subject, the following article explains why CP violation is important to how the universe was created after the big bang:

http://cerncourier.com/cws/article/cern/28092

• Rigel and Robert Bryant

Thank you for the response. I commented in the other thread (meson based model) with an easter egg (for old Tommy C.)

A great video. I will look at your links, but I think I found the answer in the comments look for someone named David S. Please never take what I say as a conflict, I just did not understand as the graphic as it showed it... but I did not see the connection. I just have a tendency to follow up questions that I do not understand. We have such great minds here... Spending them on Rossi to me is like trying to fix burnt toast by scraping it off. Holmlid may have something, I am unaware if he has a video of what he thinks is going on. Mills quite honestly I have serious doubts of as he moves his target by financial quarter just like ITER or big science does. Anyway I enjoyed the video immensely.

The video covers the fusion-centric thinking that predominated LENR in the early 1990s. This thinking has be superseded by more recent experimental insights in the LENR process. The most prominent is the transmutation results that come from many LENR systems: i,e the Ni62 transmutation anf the Li7 to Li6 transformation. These reactions cannot be explained by fusion. Then there are the Mesons seen by Rossi and Holmlid. The only why that these mesons can form is from sub atomic particle decay. Fusion as a prime mover in LENR should be disregarded.

• Axil said "The video covers the fusion-centric thinking that predominated LENR in the early 1990s."

True dat. Very perceptive . I 'm working myself forwards slowly..I''ll be up with the instantons eventually.

• I propose that we give the (possible) magnetic monopole particle a name: the Axilon.

Whether it is a virtual particle or a physical one isn't clear, but at least by naming it, we instantiate it in the thought universe.

Besides N_Axilons and S_Axilons, I suppose there could be a neutral version with internal flux but no external B-field, as well as

other short-lived variants like Grave and Silly Axilons.

April 1 is long past, and I make this proposal not as a joke, but rather in recognition of the thought and research Axil has given to the concept.

• Go Axil- but the antiparticle has to be called the Zephilon. Dirac would not have it any other way. One seems to be bent on destroying the other. I will leave this alone. But good job on having a particle named after you. Have to get Profmattstrassler to acknowledge this name also. I am also serious about this. Your work should be acknowledged and at least be appreciated.

• This material is very complicated, far more complicated than the coulomb barrier and its penetration thereof. So I will try to pull things together in a better way.

The Surface Plasmon Polariton(SPP) is the optical cavity that holds the soliton of photons as described in post 5 above. That soliton is a whispering gallery wave. That whispering gallery wave projects monopole magnetic field lines when it is exposed to the KERR effect that is produced by using a high voltage electrostatic potential whose description was added to the Rossi patent in update 2. Without the application of the KERR effect, the SPP is inoperative as the active agent in LENR.

From this post:

https://animpossibleinvention.…u-people-wouldnt-believe/

Fabiani remarks about the KERR effect as the E-Cat stimulus E-Cat reaction as follows:

Quote

“Over the years we realized that the reaction needs more stimuli than only heating. Everyone thinks that thermal stimulus is enough but that’s just the beginning. It’s not enough for maximum efficiency. It’s the base, the synthesis of the reaction. But the reaction has almost behaviors as of living matter, and it has responses as a function of the stimuli. They can be of many types other than thermal. And these are the ones that trigger, let’s call it the most fun part of it, allowing excellent gains in terms of response to the stimuli.”

Fabiani then talks about the SPP as a soliton of photons(ball lightning) and the KERR effect that activates that soliton as follows:

Quote

Talking about the validity of the E-Cat technology, Fabiani continues:

“With the failures, I found myself having to believe in it. Why? Because when something fails, you see the behavior of the object. The next time you adjust it, then you see that it behaves very differently. And then you realize that it is something unique. We have it all filmed, which still cannot be disclosed. We have photographs of creatures that emit pure light that have completely melted the reactor down, all in a very quiet way. You just turn off the stimuli system and the reaction is switched off. It’s impressive.

The creatures that emit pure light are the SPPs which is activated by a high voltage electrostatic field: the activating stimulus. In Rossi's patent, he defines this stimulus potential as being between 50 and 100 thousand volts.

Bob calls these SPPs the EVO defined by KEN Shoulders.

The post was edited 2 times, last by axil ().

• It may not look like it, but all the posts that I have authored are all connected and comprise a complete description of a theory of LENR that replaces the coulomb barrier penetration theory that Pons and Fleischmann invented back in the day. That fusion based theory was disruptive to understanding and acceptance of LENR as real. More than that, the LENR fusion theory also kept LENR from being reproduced in the Lab since the fusion theory of LENR was nonsense.

Nuclear theory—the theory of how protons and neutrons interact—explains how fusion works and generates many expectations about what we should observe when fusion actually happens. According to nuclear theory, deuterium atoms fuse and release energy in a two-step process:

1)The two deuterium atoms unite to form a single atom of helium-4 (helium with two protons and two neutrons).

2) This helium-4 atom has a lot of energy—so much energy that it is unstable.

The unstable atom quickly discharges some of this energy in one of three ways: releasing a neutron, proton, or gamma ray (a type of electromagnetic radiation) . In LENR experimentations, these fusion signs were not seen, so professional science discounted both LENR and LENR theory as pseudo-science.

If professional science were to accept LENR, another nuclear based reaction was responsible for LENR and the experimental results that were seen in LENR had to support that nuclear reaction.

It turns out that this nuclear reaction is the decay of the proton. The decay of the proton must have happened just after the Big Bang for the universe to exist, so why does it not happen today? Professional sciences are running some very expenses experiments to try to find out are the proton is decaying. LENR theory explains why the proton decayed after the big bang and why it is stable today but not when the proton is acted on in a in the very unusual conditions set up in a LENR experiment.

• This helium-4 atom has a lot of energy—so much energy that itis unstable.

Huh? 4He is 99.99+ % of all naturally occurring Helium and is quite stable. Perhaps there's a detail you omitted here.

• Huh? 4He is 99.99+ % of all naturally occurring Helium and is quite stable. Perhaps there's a detail you omitted here.

• That is one way to look at it, but the "high-energy helium-4" is usually not shown in path 1. The more conventional notation has the neutron (2.45 MeV) ejected as part of the reaction, which is generally seen in hot plasma fusion but not in LENR.

I understand your thinking differs from the usual approach to the nuclear process(es) in LENR (cf. Storms). Can you explain why you think your path 1 above is the correct one? If it is in fact the dominant path, there would be lots of neutrons and thus secondary radiation (and dead experimenters).