The proton-proton chain and LENR

  • The sun's centre is hot enough, and it is a huge fusion reaction turning hydrogen into helium, and only avoids exploding and destroying the Solar system because of its own self-gravity, which holds it in.


    The "huge fusion reaction" is at a very low rate-- only the immense mass and volume of the Sun make it "huge". The core of our Sun (inner 24% of total radius, where ~99% of its energy is produced) has an average power volume of 276.5 watts per cubic meter, or 276.5 microwatts per cubic centimeter. At a 150 g per cubic centimeter, that translates to a power density of 1.84 microwatts per gram. It is sobering to consider that such a minuscule level of power at the Sun's 15.7 million Kelvin core temperature, and its maximum 250 billion atmosphere pressure, would likely be utterly undetectable in any terrestrial laboratory context.


    Against such a stellar example, any modest measurable over unity COPs or immodest Q values, especially from cool fusion, are very remarkable.

  • It is remarkable to think about how low the power density in the sun is:


    Theoretical models of the Sun's interior indicate a power density of approximately 276.5 W/m3, a value that more nearly approximates that of reptile metabolism or a compost pile than of a thermonuclear bomb.


    The thing that prevents the sun from burning much quicker is the step in the p-p chain at which the pp resonance transitions to pn (deuterium) via inverse beta decay (emission of a positron), which is the rate limiting step because it is a slow process.

  • The "huge fusion reaction" is at a very low rate-- only the immense mass and volume of the Sun make it "huge". The core of our Sun (inner 24% of total radius, where ~99% of its energy is produced) has an average power volume of 276.5 watts per cubic meter, or 276.5 microwatts per cubic centimeter. At a 150 g per cubic centimeter, that translates to a power density of 1.84 microwatts per gram. It is sobering to consider that such a minuscule level of power at the Sun's 15.7 million Kelvin core temperature, and its maximum 250 billion atmosphere pressure, would likely be utterly undetectable in any terrestrial laboratory context.


    Against such a stellar example, any modest measurable over unity COPs or immodest Q values, especially from cool fusion, are very remarkable.



    Regarding: "Against such a stellar example, any modest measurable over unity COPs or immodest Q values, especially from cool fusion, are very remarkable. "


    In other words: proton/proton fusion cannot be a factor...it cannot happen in cold fusion.


    See this info for an update on proton/proton fusion:


    https://www.newswise.com/doesc…uY29tL2FydGljbGVzL2xpc3Q=


    Proton-Proton Fusion: Powering the Sun


    Also see


    https://phys.org/news/2017-12-…-quarks-precise-view.html


    Large-scale simulations of quarks promise precise view of reactions of astrophysical importance


    For details see:


    http://nplqcd.ub.edu/


    img

    Nuclear Physics with Lattice QCD





    A list of related papers are included in this lattice QCD research summary.

  • Well then, how does your statement about PP fusion impossibility at room temperature and pressure be applies to LENR?

    False attribution, I never wrote of it, and I don't have a strong opinion on p-p fusion issues, if it is an issue. You appear to have missed my point.


    Please see Eric Walker above, although I doubt he is claiming priority as a source:


    The thing that prevents the sun from burning much quicker is the step in the p-p chain at which the pp resonance transitions to pn (deuterium) via inverse beta decay (emission of a positron), which is the rate limiting step because it is a slow process.

  • In other words: proton/proton fusion cannot be a factor...it cannot happen in cold fusion.


    axil : Seems your background is standard physics - the society of "no clue how a nucleus and dense matter really works". R.Mills currently is fusing protons. He just refuses to tell us about it, because this would invalidate (part of) his theory. But all his experimental parameters are perfect for H-H fusion. Just one hint: You need at least 10000 Amperes.

  • The thing that prevents the sun from burning much quicker is the step in the p-p chain at which the pp resonance transitions to pn (deuterium) via inverse beta decay (emission of a positron), which is the rate limiting step because it is a slow process.

    Eric, I may be missing something here: But, pp to pn could that "inverted beta decay" also be the nuclear absorption of an electron? Also, less mass deficit that direction, no?

  • Longview , I don't know enough to weigh in on whether electron capture competes with positron emission in the transition from pp to pn in the p-p chain. My understanding is that electron capture generally takes the form of inner shell electron capture — e.g., k– or l–shell electron capture — as these electrons spend some time in the nuclear volume. In the context of a plasma, I don't know whether this decay mode happens more than a negligible amount. It's an interesting question, though.


    I personally wonder about how solid our current understanding of electron capture is.

  • inner shell electron capture — e.g., k– or l–shell electron capture — as these electrons spend some time in the nuclear volume. In the context of a plasma, I don't know whether this decay mode happens more than a negligible amount. It's an interesting question, though.


    I wonder if at those pressures and temperatures, the core is far into a supercritical fluid, essentially a supercritical plasma, k- and l- shells being fully exposed if not ablated.

  • Bear in mind that electron capture is mediated by the weak interaction, which operates over extremely short distances (0.1 percent of the diameter of a proton). Because the range is so short, the electron to be captured must transit the nuclear volume. In the case of s-orbitals in the k– and l–shells, they are bound and spend some time there. I am pessimistic that free electrons will spend more than a tiny fraction of time there in comparison to bound electrons.

  • Good point, complete ionization a given at ordinary pressures anyway. The range of weak interaction ~1000th the diameter of a proton? I suppose that size is somehow a reflection of reactive cross section at these scales. Given the nominal ~0.8 fm charge diameter (or is that mass diameter?), I wonder if the weak interaction is aided or obviated by the Pressure X Volume work available in the solar core. You have caused me to look at p-p in that "never to be trusted for controversial information" online source under heading "proton-proton chain reaction". Hans Bethe's Nobel prize, by the way.


    Correct about s-orbitals as far as I know, and at least theoretically, the un-ionized 1s electron density in the nuclear volume approaches infinity, I would guess free electrons might also dynamically follow / occupy the 1s orbital regardless of temperature. Once again the work / energy needed to coalesce such an electron to inverse a beta decay may be enhanced in the solar core (still very rare and apparently rate-limiting, as you mentioned).


    Everything is collisional in that solar regime. No phase interfaces (see ~ 6 posts above) possible in a supercritical plasma, I presume. By contrast, a condensed matter (solid or liquid) to fluid (plasma / gas / liquid) interface, Nernst pressure can be immense, even with Mizuno's error. Surface plasmon resonance near range fields can also be very strong. At millimeter wavelengths "skin effect" in conductors can be very tightly confined to a surface and so on for interfaces of various sorts. A variety of orientations and temporal sequences of fields, forces and particles is possible at interfaces. To my knowledge, in purely collisional regimes (hot fusion, accelerators): collective velocity / energy, plasma density to some extent, "head-on" orientations and nearly instantaneous collisional time frames are about all that can be arranged .

  • The thing that prevents the sun from burning much quicker is the step in the p-p chain at which the pp resonance transitions to pn (deuterium) via inverse beta decay (emission of a positron), which is the rate limiting step because it is a slow process.

    Bear in mind that electron capture is mediated by the weak interaction, which operates over extremely short distances (0.1 percent of the diameter of a proton).


    This kinetic model of the sun is good example of classic kinetic fusion theory, that is more or less irrelevant for terrestrial purposes (except for ITER people sucking 100 billion of taxpayers money). The proton-proton fusion can only happen inside a very strong rotating magnetic field with a large E-field gradient. This has been detected when people analyzed the temperature of the corona especially in magnetic brake-out (flares).

    If we would use standard-model physics to explain the solar p-p fusion, then the earth would be a damn cold place.., as such event(s) should happen about once a second...

    As mentioned many times: Standard-model physics still has no clue how p-p fusion should run. Otherwise they would replicate Mills.

  • There is another theory of how the Sun produces energy. It is being explored in the SAFIRE project. To my way of thinking that power source is LENR.


    I am tracking these results since SAFIRE is seeing the emergence of the LENR reaction in hydrogen which includes transmutation and power production.


    http://www.safireproject.com/gallery.html


    Voltage-Current%20data%202.jpg


    The production of high power up to 2.000,000 watts from a input pf 3900 watts.


    Voltage-Current%20data%203.jpg


    High amperage and voltage discharge when ionized layers of hydrogen explode


    Plasus%203.jpg



    Transmuted elements that appear in the hydrogen envelope: He, C, N, O, Ne, Fe, Cu, Ag.


    Plasus%204.jpg


    Spectral lines of the various isotopes of transmuted elements.


    anode%20close%20up%201.jpg


    Transmuted elements that appear on the electrode.


    anode+cathode%2015.png


    Ball lightning like plasmodes that appear on the electrodes.


    anode%20metal%20ball@2x.jpg


    Low Energy Nuclear Reactions found in Hydrogen impregnated metallic electrodes.

  • axil

    "There is another theory of how the Sun produces energy. It is being explored in the SAFIRE project. To my way of thinking that power source is LENR."


    How much e.g. Nickel is there already "made" in our sun (and any other G2V type star), when following this theory?

    Does this really match the well observed Hertzsprung-Russell and Bethe-Weizsäcker theory?

    What makes you so sure about the SAFIFRE and LENR?

  • If we would use standard-model physics to explain the solar p-p fusion, then the earth would be a damn cold place.., as such event(s) should happen about once a second...


    It may be correct that any given proton in our Sun will productively yield a deuterium on fusion with another proton only about once in a billion years. However, here is where the size of the sun must be important: even the Sun's core (20 to 25% of the whole solar radius) where 99% of its energy is said to be produced, has an huge number of protons as hydrogen nuclei, while only having a composition of 33 to 40% protium.


    Likely it is fairly described in the now famously "never to be trusted source for information on controversial subjects" (e.g. for CF etc). There, the "Sun" article gives: "The proton–proton chain occurs around 9.2×1037 times each second in the core, converting about 3.7×1038 protons into alpha particles (helium nuclei) every second (out of a total of ~8.9×1056 free protons in the Sun)".


    The 38 orders of magnitude difference between your assertion and that admittedly often "out to lunch" famous online source is difficult to reconcile. Please clarify.


    Hans Bethe's Nobel prize for recognizing this proton-proton mechanism and quantifying its applicability to our Sun ranks, IMHO, second only to his timely and outspoken recognition of the fallibility of the 1980s US "Star Wars" project.


  • Quote

    How much e.g. Nickel is there already "made" in our sun (and any other G2V type star), when following this theory?


    On earth, the function of nickel in LENR is to provide nanocavities in LENR to produce metallized hydrogen. In the Sun, metalized hydrogen is produced by temperature and pressure, therefore, nickel is not required to activate LENR inside planets and stars.


    Quote

    Does this really match the well observed Hertzsprung-Russell and Bethe-Weizsäcker theory?


    These nuclear based theories will eventually be reworked to take into account the magnetic catalyzation of the LENR reaction on the surfaces of stars.


    Holmild has shown in his latest paper that the nature and energies of solar winds fits well into the experimentally observed nature of the metallic hydrogen base LENR reaction.


    The 11 year solar cycle points to magnetic based LENR reactions


    The 2,000,000 degree heat produced by the corona also points to magnetic based LENR reactions.


    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com…002/2017JA024498/abstract


    Abstract

    Ultradense hydrogen H(0) is a very dense hydrogen cluster phase with H-H distances in the picometer range. It has been studied experimentally in several publications from our group. A theoretical model exists which agrees well with laser-pulse-induced time-of-flight spectra and with rotational spectroscopy emission spectra. Coulomb explosions in H(0) in spin state s = 1 generate protons with kinetic energies larger than the retaining gravitational energy at the photosphere of the Sun. The required proton kinetic energy above 2 keV has been directly observed in published experiments. Such protons may be ejected from the Sun and are proposed to form the solar wind. The velocity distributions of the protons are calculated for three different ejecting modes from spin state s = 1. They agree well with both the fast and the slow solar winds. The best agreement is found for H(0) cluster sizes of 3 and 20–50 atoms; such clusters have been studied experimentally previously. The properties of ultradense hydrogen H(0) give also a few novel possibilities to explain the high corona temperature of the Sun.


    Plain Language Summary




    The solar wind contains protons from the Sun with high velocity. The mechanism for their ejection from the strong gravitation at the Sun's surface has been debated for a long time. Protons with high enough energy can be ejected from a condensed form of hydrogen called ultradense hydrogen, which is stable even at the temperature of the Sun. Experiments show that such a mechanism exists. Calculations now give good agreement with the velocities of both the slow and the fast solar winds.


    Quote

    What makes you so sure about the SAFIFRE and LENR?


    Transmutation is a sure indicator that LENR is at play.



    See


    Liquid Metallic Hydrogen: A Building Block for the Liquid Sun



    http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2011/PP-26-07.PDF




    The reference puts forth a case that explains the sun as a condensed matter object made up of a liquid hydrogen lattice. The evidence that supports this idea is rooted in the continuous black body spectrum of the light that the sun produces. Only a solid like graphite can produce such a continuous spectrum. This idea that the sun is a condensed matter object rather than a gas explains many of the solar mysteries that have perplexed solar science for the last two centuries. But what cannot be explained and what is discouraging the idea that he sun is a condensed matter body made up of liquid hydrogen is how that liquid could remain liquid under the tremendous heat and pressure that exists inside the sun and in its atmosphere.



    Another mystery about the sun is why it is not far denser than it is. There is a force intrinsic to the liquid hydrogen from becoming degenerate and therefore keeps the fusion going in the sun.



    Degeneracy removes all of the forces which lead to fusion. As such, it should be more reasonable to maintain the relative incompressibility of condensed matter. The Sun, after all, has a very ordinary density of 1.4 g/cm3 [141] and the same is true for the giant planets.



    From the conclusion



    Relative to the Sun, a condensed approach brings interesting contrasts and dilemmas versus the gaseous models. The latter are endowed with tremendous mathematical flexibility [1, 2], but their physical relevance appears limited. Gases cannot by themselves impart structure and the solar spectrum is not easily explained in a gaseous framework [9]. The gaseous stars suffer from the stellar opacity problem [9]. Conversely, a liquid metallic hydrogen model imparts a wonderful ability to explain the origin of the solar spectrum relying on the layered structure held in common with graphite [141–149]. Metallic hydrogen possesses a very high critical temperature and can exist as condensed matter even on the solar surface accounting for many features of the Sun best characterized by material endowed with a lattice [141]. Most of the physical attributes of the Sun are more simply explained within the framework of a liquid model [141]. However, a condensed Sun is not as open to theoretical formulations. The advantages of a liquid Sun are now so numerous [20, 141–149] that it is difficult to conceive why the model was not proposed long ago. This speaks to the allure of the gaseous Sun and the mathematical beauty of the associated equations of state. In closing, it should be highlighted that there is currently an effort to describe the Sun as “liquid-like” (e.g. [162]). In the end, the author believes that such terminology should be avoided. If the Sun is condensed, it should be viewed as liquid, not “liquid-like”. Even gases could be “liquid-like”. Such terms cannot be sufficient, since a real lattice is required for production of the solar thermal spectrum. No compromise can be made on this point for those who have studied thermal emission in real materials. “Liquid-like” might refer to anything from a gas, to plasma, to fully degenerate matter, to supercritical fluid and none are necessarily endowed with a lattice. The contention of this work remains that the photosphere of the Sun is liquid, with true lattice structure and ordered interatomic distances. The adoption of liquid metallic hydrogen as a solar constituent brings with it a wealth of possibilities in describing solar structures and understanding the solar spectrum. Central to this advancement, the lattice must remain the foremost element in all of condensed matter, whether here on Earth, within the Sun, and even, in the firmament of the stars. Acknowledgement Luc Robitaille is acknowledged for producing a rendition of graphite’s layered lattice.



    LENR is a fundamental force of nature. LENR gives liquid hydrogen its incompressibility. We who have been studying LENR understand that a monopole magnetic shield protects the liquid hydrogen that we know as Rydberg hydrogen matter from becoming degenerated matter in the giant planets and stars. Degenerate matter cannot support fusion so LENR is keeping the sun shining. This monopole force keeps the biggest and most massive stars from burring out and collapsing in on themselves. This monopole force gives LENR the ability to produce nuclear reactions directly within the nucleus of the atom as the strong force. The evidence from the sun and the planets adds to our understanding of what LENR is.


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

    As another example, if our view of how the sun works can be changed to look in it as a ball of liquid rather than a ball of hot gas, then many enlightening ideas spring from the new opinion. Problems like the solar neutrino problem might be solved correctly.

    As neutrino detectors became sensitive enough to measure the flow of neutrinos from the Sun, it became clear that the number detected was lower than that predicted by models of the solar interior. In various experiments, the number of detected neutrinos was between one third and one half of the predicted number. This came to be known as the solar neutrino problem.

    If the sun is viewed as a cold fusion reactor, then all kinds of fusion reactions can take place all throughout the entire volume of the sun and not just in the hot gas in the core involving just PP hot fusion. This bad hot fusion assumption gums up neutrino science and the standard model. In general, unless science takes cold fusion seriously, it is headed for disaster. Problem solving needs to be based on the understanding about the correct foundation of the structure of the universe.


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


    There is a tremendous amount of heat coming from the interior of Pluto and its small satellite; so much so, that the surface of Pluto is resurfaced by the eruption of ice from the interior of Pluto. Also there is a constant replenishment of the nitrogen atmosphere of Pluto from the interior.


    The standard causes given for planetary heat production does not apply, that being heat from the sun, radioactive decay, and friction caused by tidal stretching. Furthermore, there is evidence that other smaller free standing bodies in the Kuiper belt sometimes called the Edgeworth–Kuiper belt, are at the far edge of the solar system are producing their own internal heat.


    Although to date most KBOs still appear spectrally featureless due to their faintness, there have been a number of successes in determining their composition. In 1996, Robert H. Brown et al. obtained spectroscopic data on the KBO 1993 SC, revealing its surface composition to be markedly similar to that of Pluto, as well as Neptune's moon Triton, possessing large amounts of methane ice.


    Water ice has been detected in several the Kuiper belt objects (KBO)s, including 1996 TO66, 38628 Huya and 20000 Varuna. In 2004, Mike Brown et al. determined the existence of crystalline water ice and ammonia hydrate on one of the largest known KBOs, 50000 Quaoar. Both of these substances would have been destroyed over the age of the Solar System, suggesting that Quaoar had been recently resurfaced, either by unexplained internal tectonic activity or by meteorite impacts.


    In my opinion, LENR based on metalized hydrogen is a possible answer to these strange cosmological conundrums.


    finally see




  • bang99 "How much e.g. Nickel is there already "made" in our sun (and any other G2V type star), when following this theory?


    Data from the corona/photosphere indicates nickel/iron/ silicon

    Data from the SAFIRE model about possible transmutations is very sparse..appears to be mainly iron.


    However the SAFIRE metallic electrode may contain iron already


    Perhaps Axil can keep us updated if better data eventuates from SAFIRE?

  • Degeneracy removes all of the forces which lead to fusion.As such, it should be more reasonable to maintain the relativeincompressibility of condensed matter. The Sun, after all, has a very ordinary density of 1.4 g/cm3 [141] and the same is true for the giant planets.


    That is the mean solar density. The core density, where nearly all the energy production is said to occur, ranges up to 160 g / cm cubed at the center, and at 24% of the whole radius, that "core" has an outer density estimated at ~20 g. per cc. Hence the outer boundary of the energetic core is nearly as dense as the densest element Osmium (22 g/ cm cubed at STP). interestingly these densities are not far from what might be seen in CF / CANR / LENR, palladium at 11.9 and nickel at 8.9 g/cc. But once again I remind readers that phase interfaces of several types and interfacial phenomena may be essential to real LENR and to any hypothetical planetary or stellar core LENR.


    By the way, if we are talking terrestrial mean density, Earth is about 3.9 times that of the Sun. Our planet surely has some phase interfaces (crust to mantle and mantle to outer core etc.) , whether these are LENR active would be a question for theory and research. Structure for Earth interior at http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.g…/Geophys/earthstruct.html 

  • LENR is a fundamental force of nature. LENR gives liquid hydrogen its incompressibility. We who have been studying LENR understand


    While sympathetic to LENR as a possible phenomenon that appears to have gained some evidence of operability here on Earth..... I can assert with considerable confidence that LENR is not a "force" whether it is natural or not. I doubt LENR is responsible for any limit to hydrogen's very substantial compressibility (only exceeded by helium). Blathering about LENR without respect for falsifiability or much concern for formulating hypotheses that even have a remote chance of being any more testable than say psychoanalysis or Marxism (two of Popper's favorites)-- will only harm LENR theory and research in the longer term.


    And by the way, the deviation from ideality which allows "ultradense hydrogen" appears is very much a surface-associated phenomenon-- perhaps this is the commonality you wish to identify as "LENR". It is instead most likely a result of restraint of motion not necessarily invoking all new physics. So perhaps you, Axil, meant to write something akin to "surface associated ordering [may] contribute to hydrogen's evident high compressibility in LENR contexts...."

  • http://mclarage.blogspot.com/2…ject-update-apr-2017.html


    In this description of the SAFIRE project, a description of the double layer is provided. This structure is very much like the structure of metallic hydrogen where there is a charge separation between the positive core and the electron envelope. The very high pressure cavitation process produces a metallic water structure that demonstrates the same charge separation mechanism.


    the description of the double layer can inspire an understanding of how metallic hydride materials behave.


    The double layer concept is explained after figure 5.

  • While sympathetic to LENR as a possible phenomenon that appears to have gained some evidence of operability here on Earth..... I can assert with considerable confidence that LENR is not a "force" whether it is natural or not. I doubt LENR is responsible for any limit to hydrogen's very substantial compressibility (only exceeded by helium). Blathering about LENR without respect for falsifiability or much concern for formulating hypotheses that even have a remote chance of being any more testable than say psychoanalysis or Marxism (two of Popper's favorites)-- will only harm LENR theory and research in the longer term.


    And by the way, the deviation from ideality which allows "ultradense hydrogen" appears is very much a surface-associated phenomenon-- perhaps this is the commonality you wish to identify as "LENR". It is instead most likely a result of restraint of motion not necessarily invoking all new physics. So perhaps you, Axil, meant to write something akin to "surface associated ordering [may] contribute to hydrogen's evident high compressibility in LENR contexts...."

    Holmlid states above as seen in his experiments as follows:


    Coulomb explosions in H(0) in spin state s = 1 generate protons with kinetic energies larger than the retaining gravitational energy at the photosphere of the Sun. The required proton kinetic energy above 2 keV has been directly observed in published experiments.


    2KeV translates into a temperature of 20,000,000C.


    Eugene Wigner and Hillard Bell Huntington predicted that under an immense pressure of around 25 GPa (250,000 atm; 3,600,000 psi) hydrogen would display metallic properties:


    If it takes that much pressure to form metallic hydrogen, it should require at least that much pressure to destroy it.


    When Silvera and Dias managed to turn hydrogen metallic, it was at a pressure of 495 GPa, well beyond the 360 GPa of Earth's core.


    That is 4,950,000 atm of pressure at least to destroy it.


    But when metallic hydrogen forms, then you need to deal with degeneracy pressure.


    View this video to understand degeneracy pressure.




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


    Quote

    Electron degeneracy pressure will halt the gravitational collapse of a star if its mass is below the Chandrasekhar limit (1.39 solar masses[5]). This is the pressure that prevents a white dwarf star from collapsing. A star exceeding this limit and without significant thermally generated pressure will continue to collapse to form either a neutron star or black hole, because the degeneracy pressure provided by the electrons is weaker than the inward pull of gravity.


    This video is informative also.


    Where to Find Some Metallic Hydrogen - Ask a Spaceman!



  • Longview wrote


    " Our planet surely has some phase interfaces (crust to mantle and mantle to outer core etc.) , whether these are LENR active would be a question for theory and research"


    There is a relatively new theory about aneutronic fusion at the centre of the earth..in iron deuteride lattices...just a few major assumptions.. interesting though


    Possible generation of heat from nuclear fusion in Earth’s inner core by Mikio Fukuhara


    http://www.nature.com/articles/srep37740

  • Hans Bethe's Nobel prize for recognizing this proton-proton mechanism and quantifying its applicability to our Sun ranks, IMHO, second only to his timely and outspoken recognition of the fallibility of the 1980s US "Star Wars" project.


    Longview :


    Bethes model makes two absurd assumptions:

    1. A di-proton is generated
    2. Good spends some energy and lets one of the protons decay...

    Protons can never decay and the probability to kinetically build a di-proton is exactly “0”. Even worse if you have two high momentum particles symmetric H-H → D fusion can be 10000% excluded because of momentum conservation. But this is exactly what Bethe claims...

    Nevertheless the Sun does H-H fusion and the result is live on earth. Luckily for Bethe the energy calculation will always be the “same”, independent of any fantastic theory.

  • For the sake of argument, let's set aside the transition from pp to pn (deuterium) via the weak force and replace it with something else. How do we then understand the accumulation of heavier elements (e.g., helium, nickel, etc.) in stars? Presumably there is fusion occurring at some point?

  • For the sake of argument, let's set aside the transition from pp to pn (deuterium) via the weak force and replace it with something else. How do we then understand the accumulation of heavier elements (e.g., helium, nickel, etc.) in stars? Presumably there is fusion occurring at some point?


    LENR is know to produce every element that exists. This can be done using magnetic catalyzation via quark fusion and not nuclear fusion.

  • LENR is know [sic] to produce every element that exists. This can be done using magnetic capitalization via quark fusion and not nuclear fusion.


    So far it is barely accepted to produce ANY element that exists, and that would only be in our community of believers. Where, by the way, I am currently a 'warm' agnostic, accepting F&P type electrolytics, Mitchell Swartz nanors and phusors, both barring conclusive disproofs).


    More likely "magnetic capitalization" via Bitcoin, other cryptocurrencies and "pump and dump" schemes to fleece the "bigger fool" as in tulip mania. Quarks are already quite fused at LENR temperatures.