I though that deuteride lithium was forbidden for common use by the nuclear authorities because it is a key to a functioning hydrogen bomb.
any crystall with deutrons- nuclei can be used
The possible theory of LENR (the reaction goes in a narrow temperature range)
-
How come LENR also works with protium and nuckel? No fusion is possible there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…0%93proton_chain_reaction
In general, proton–proton fusion can occur only if the kinetic energy (i.e. temperature) of the protons is high enough to overcome their mutual electrostatic or Coulomb repulsion.[2]
In the Sun, deuterium-producing events are rare. Diprotons are the much more common result of proton-proton reactions within the star, and diprotons almost immediately decay back into two protons. Since the conversion of hydrogen to helium is slow, the complete conversion of the hydrogen in the core of Earth's Sun is calculated to take more than 1010 (ten billion) years
-
Display More
How come LENR also works with protium and nuckel? No fusion is possible there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…0%93proton_chain_reaction
In general, proton–proton fusion can occur only if the kinetic energy (i.e. temperature) of the protons is high enough to overcome their mutual electrostatic or Coulomb repulsion.[2]
In the Sun, deuterium-producing events are rare. Diprotons are the much more common result of proton-proton reactions within the star, and diprotons almost immediately decay back into two protons. Since the conversion of hydrogen to helium is slow, the complete conversion of the hydrogen in the core of Earth's Sun is calculated to take more than 1010 (ten billion) years
see evaluation in the article. proton dimensions are much more less then deutron( near 3). thus an amount of reaction acts must be less (near 10). but!- in this case I agree- jne need usr models of nuclei interaction.
-
Please note that the low dimensionality of low energy nuclear reactions not only makes them sensitive/selective to the original nuclides, but also to nuclides produced. During cold fusion reactions the thermodynamically more equilibrial nuclides are produced (He4 instead of He3 like at the case of cold fusion). This is just because during slower collisions this equilibrium has more time for to establish itself. This brings the cold fusion even more advantage, because it decreases amount of neutron fragments and as such it increases the thermal yield of fusion reaction. This is because fusion is draining heat from merging (decreasing surface/volume ratio) of atom nuclei - every particle-like fragment (like the neutron or muon) would decrease the overall energy yield. Not to say, these fragments would make the cold fusion reactor radioactive in the same way, like during hot fusion. From this perspective, the muon formation doesn't belong into mechanism of cold fusion - it's the unwanted hot fusion byproduct of it instead and it should be avoided.
-
Quote
How come LENR also works with protium and nuckel? No fusion is possible there.
Yes, the proton dimension is much smaller than the deuterium - but the nickel atom nuclei are much larger instead, which balances this effect. What we know from Piantelli experiments is, the deuterium fusion runs with nickel as easily as with protium, but not in mixtures (just the excess of 5% of deuterium reportedly kills the reaction with protium). IMO it has something to do with isotopic effect again - the lattice vibrations can propagate and attenuate at distance only when all its members have the same mass. Every foreign atom in line of colliding atoms would be the source of scattering of charge wave. I presume, the same effect could be also derived from ab-initio quantum calculations. Note also, that at the case of lithium - deuterium fusion the isotopic effect is much more pronounced (all atoms have lower mass) and the reaction doesn't run with protium, because the lithium nuclei are also quite small. Intuitively we can understand it with merging of mercury droplets: the smaller these droplets are, the more they resist their merging. The nickel nuclei therefore serve as a catalyst of fusion not because of screening effect of their electrons, but also by their compactness and large size. In particular the 62-Ni is the nuclei with the highest binding energy per nucleon of any known nuclide (8.7945 MeV), which makes its surface smooth and compact (free of halo neutrons protruding from it) - which promotes the fusion of small atom nuclei which are just waiting for large flat surfaces which they could merge with.
-
The Lipinski fusion runs in twenty degrees of centigrade range only... The truly nuclear mechanism cannot be such a sensitive - it's evident, that its trigger is in lattice vibrations.
Zephir_AWT : I extensively studied the Lipinski setup. They see the most intense result at 100eV, what is close the optimum of 98eV. In the case of the Li-disk experiment they generate a surface plasma, where the vertical (the LENR reaction dimension is along the proton beam) axes forces are amplified by a sheer Alfen wave.
One outcome of their experiment is that in fact we see Li-H* fusion going over intermediate 8Li!!
-
@Wyttenbach Thank You for your info. How the optimum 98eV has been derived/determined? The energy threshold reported in original Minari's experiments was higher, about 300 eVolts and asymptotic, i.e. with no optimum.
-
Wyttenbach Thank You for your info. How the optimum 98eV has been derived/determined? The energy threshold reported in original Minari's experiments was higher, about 300 eVolts and asymptotic, i.e. with no optimum.
Zephir_AWT : According to Mills the inner two S-electrons of Lithium are paired = entangled. They react (in a first order approach) as a single obejct to EM perturbation. Thus 98V is just the average bond energy they share. But there is some good reason to belive that it is 5 V less (93eV) if the perturbation of the S2 orbit is counted in.
There is an urgent call to be made, that somebody repeats the Lipinski Lithium disk experiment. This experiment will explain everything about LENR!
(The COP - calculated, but wrong according to my understanding - is over 3000 at 100eV average proton energy !)
-
that thesis will work only if the laser energy is much higher than the typical Planck thermal energy.
Don't you have that backwards? We know that 1 eV represents a 1240 nm photon, in the near infra red, about half the energy per photon of red visible light. But, if what I see, at say, the Physics Stack Exchange is correct, we readily find that 1 eV is also equivalent to 11,604 K, [that is 6 places of CO-DATA value of 10 digits, BTW.] Another competing and quite distinct interpretation is that 1 eV represents not temperature (a colligative property) but bond energy, i.e. ~1.6 X 10 to minus 19th Joules. One implication of the two incommensurate figures, is that an incoherent thermal source at modest (say a 3400 K color temperature halogen lamp) is FAR LESS effective at specific photochemical activation than say a laser also having the requisite per photon energy minimum for say the same bond specific activation, or say a specific bond scission.
Regardless of those incommensurate interpretations at the Stack Exchange, it appears that you THHuxley are implying, that laser energy is somehow less adequate to the task of doing electronic bond work than mere heat? Quite the contrary, for several easily understood reasons, laser energy is much more capable in this regard (per watt) than incoherent and/or thermal radiation having say a Boltzmann mean, or "tail" above the same threshold energy. Photon fluence rates, and for higher order reactions, photon coincidence rates, coherence, energy specificity ALL are typically vastly better on a per watt basis than any similarly powered incoherent, broadband, incandescent, fluorescent photon or even LED source.
-
The upshot of my comment above Re: THHuxleynew, and with respect to this thread, is that there very well may be specific photonic energies that promote the specific reactions, and surely some that are often identified as LENR. That is effectively quite equivalent to a very "narrow temperature range", if we are hunting for electron "pushing"... whether in bonds or perhaps as part of say initiating a "vector potential" discharge. Here is an elaborated hierarchy of photon sources, subject to more expert review:
Incoherent broadband sources, rough order of increasing spectral narrowness:
1. Incandescent lamps
2. Halogen lamp (hotter, at least)
3. Fluorescent photon sources (CFL, phosphored white fluorescent bulb, some "white" LEDs)
4. Color phosphor sources (some "neon" sign tubing, some old color fluorescent bulbs)
5. specific color LEDs (many have quite narrow, say 15 to 40 nm MWHM, last I looked, and now extend out to near 200 nm UV
6. "Neon" style gas discharge lamps, with single narrow spectral peaks defined by the gas content (H, He, Na, Ar, Ne, Hg and many others)
Coherent narrow bandwidth sources, rough order of increasing coherence and narrowness:
7. Gas discharge "super-radiant" lasers, eg. TEA types
8. Linear gas discharge lasers (eg. some CO2 IR and some deep UV )
9. Diode lasers
10. Gas discharge pumped lasers
11. Diode pumped lasers
12. Fabry-Perot cavity style "classical" (tuned / mirror) lasers
-
-
I ask about mistakes in my model ))))
-
In your paper, linked (again) below for convenience you say. 'Apparently, we can assume that in a certain narrow range of temperatures / kinetic energies of the nanocrystal nuclei there is the possibility of a nuclear fusion reaction and other nuclear reactions.' I have no problem with this premise, having observed this effect happening. In fact, there might be more than one temperature band for any given system where fusion takes place. Can you explain the factors which you consider to be important in establishing the active temperature ranges? Is it particle size, nuclear mass etc etc.
