The church of SM physics

Quote from RobertBryant

Or software. The text reads

"As a consequence we had to develop a new analyzing method that could deal with broad range/ large number (> 300) of different lines above background. Doing this manually is possible for a single spectrum and some key lines, but for hundreds (spectra & lines) we had to develop new software."

"As our experiments did show, LENR reactions can be strongly temperature dependent as the downscaling of fusion excess energy finally depends on the terminal coupling with a matching phonon state. So some of the lines we track below are spread over different spectra and temperatures where these are significantly elevated. We most of the time only show the most active single path. For a complete picture one should write more deep exploring software that integrates over all possible decay paths."

The work is still exploratory....as the results were unexpected

Kshells...extinct isotope revived...de novo elements...indium cadmium without a supernova....

and the there is the questions of the oxides... and H*H* formation etc

too early to narrow down anything..

Display More

The attempt at complexity is laudable, but all that work could have been applied to… maybe… a signal or two that theory suggests, in order to support such a theory. But if the preferred path is wandering in the rough filling pails with golf balls when one should find their own ball and play on, then continue on…

Quote from Paradigmnoia

. But if the preferred path is wandering in the rough filling pails with golf balls when one should find their own ball and play on, then continue on…

Maybe its time for P to read at least one of the 2o pages of text rather than wandering/blathering on?

with its own soft....

that would be respectful..

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356972251_A_new_experimental_path_to_nucleosynthesis

Here is a diagram to better illustrate my concerns about Wyttenbach's use of his peak-finding algorithm when the detector he is using has a relatively poor resolution (relative, that is, to the spacings of the peaks he is claiming to identify).

I have taken the background-subtracted spectra shown in Figure 1 from Wyttenbach's manuscript and first (top panel) superimposed a Gaussian distribution scaled to a width of about 10 keV which I suppose is about the minimal resolution for a single spectral peak in Wyttenbach's setup. The bottom panel is similar but shows what would be the expected if one had 2 sets of gamma signals 10 keV apart.

Main conclusions here are

1) The wiggles on top of the spectra, apparently regarded as separate peaks by Wyttenbach, go up and down faster that one would expect given the resolution of the detector used,

2) A single spectral line strong enough to be identified as such by Wyttenbach's peak-finding algorithms could also contribute counts to perhaps 20 or more neighbouring bins (bins are about 0.6 keV wide here). Would the algorithm then identify these as separate peaks?

3) For situations with multiple genuine gamma signals separated by 10 keV, virtually all spectral bins between the actual signal energies have counts almost as high as the centre peaks. Lots of room for false positives here.

In his manuscript, Wyttenbach says " ... if you understand gamma spectroscopy then you know that gamma lines usually are very precise and a peek does not spawn [sic] dozens of keV." [Note: I think that "spawn" is a typo and should actually read "span"]. It seems to me that Wyttenbach may be wrong here and that the finite resolution of his detector may indeed result in a peak spanning dozens of keV. I would like to see this problem addressed.

Russ and I calibrated the Theremino GS with several isotopes including Cs137, K40 and Thorium.

Quote from Alan Smith

Russ and I calibrated the Theremino GS with several isotopes including Cs137, K40 and Thorium.

OK. But I assume you mean calibrated for energy scale and I haven't really been concerned about that yet. I have been addressing issues surrounding the minimal resolution of the system.

If you saved some of the calibration data, the measured Full Width at Half Maximum of the photopeak may yield an empirical estimate of the actual obtained resolution.

Quote from RobertBryant

and the there is the questions of the oxides

ZrO2 and CaO seems to have some positive effect on LENR

Zr since Arata,, thru to Takahashi's CNZ..PNZ

and CaO with Iwamura's transmutation machine

Although the K alpha for O is around 500 eV ? out of range for gammaspec

could some effect show in the Zr K alpha?

Quote from Wyttenbach

You mix up a back scattering peek or a high energy peek with a low energy peek. A high energy photon is also back scattered in the detector itself. So your peek in part is a detector artifact. The peeks you think of only occur if we have a very high ( 1'000.. 10'000) count/s. So now you can look up the probability effect of a single line being exactly where it should be if it enters a detector at a random time.

I'm afraid I don't understand what you are saying here. The best I can make out is that you are saying that part of the spectra at low energies in your Figure 1 are due to various artefacts from scattering of higher energy photons that could not be background subtracted because they did not occur in the background. Is that right? Should I have therefore drawn my peaks like this?

Or maybe avoided the lowest energies like this?

I don't see how either of these scenarios would address my concern about how your peak-locating algorithms my falsely identify lines that are spread out by the finite resolution of the system.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Sometimes a lower sensitivity is just the best you can have...

Absolutely! But this does not, therefore, make your determination of line energies accurate and that is the issue here.

I think you mentioned earlier that you have a higher resolution detector now. I look forward to that.

Quote from Alan Smith

Russ and I calibrated the Theremino GS

Quote from Bruce__H

I am dubious, however, that such experiments would go ahead without Russ George on site

Perhaps Alan can take up the slack alone.. thorium is a bit heavy,, another of Bruce's 'concerns'?

Quote from RobertBryant

Perhaps Alan can take up the slack alone.. thorium is a bit heavy,, another of Bruce's 'concerns'?

The reason I am dubious is that, as far as I am aware, no one on site knows how the fuel pellets in the experiments were prepared. Replication, even in-house, is an issue.

Quote from Bruce__H

as far as I am aware

Probably sintered? similar to Arata's stuff

probably variable in output which is why different mixes are being explored

the REEs appear to be the gamechaging addition...there might be ZrO2 simillar to Arata's ,,

might have been sourced from the history of LENR..R&D

Mischmetal... Kidwell's work with Gd. definitely the rhodium was worked on at SPAWAR

Future optimised formulations will be guided by the gamma spec work + calorimetry

Gd + Sm look promising... I have informed other researchers about that..

The gamma spec approach looks promising..

used sporadically ...in prior LENR R&D without intricate analysis

Hagelstein came up with interesting gamma to phonon conversion results(the low end of the chain)

but his sensor was cheap ZnS fragile and speciallised for alpha not gamma..(an X123)

https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/121824/1104134989-MIT.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

for R&D gamma to gamma 'conversion' from 10Mevs down to5 kevs.... 500ev or so(the high end)

a good gamma spec +sophisticated analysis is useful..

Quote from Wyttenbach

Even I don't know it...So as a scientist I don't like it too.

I am very glad to hear that you don't like the present situation either. You have spent years of your life analyzing data and writing a manuscript based on results that, right now, are irreproducible. Your entire project is therefore undercut from the very beginning and that is too bad.

Quote from Wyttenbach

But we now plan much cleverer experiments and it's all about knowledge and modelling where we are the only ones that know how to do it...

No it isn't. It isn't "all about knowledge and modelling". It is also about this fuel actually working in a repeatable way. But that is not happening. Almost 4 years on and not even Russ George's collaborators know how to reproduce his results.

Quote from Bruce__H

Almost 4 years on and not even Russ George's collaborators know how to reproduce his results.

But we do know how to improve on them

Quote from RobertBryant

Gd + Sm look promising. I have informed other researchers about that..

About one year ago I suggested to researchers who were

repilcating Mizuno's Ni/Pd reactor that they

try samarium on their nickel mesh....

this was just based on the minimal data in Wyttenbach's earlier paper .September,2019

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336107679_Nuclear_Particle_Physics_version_20_SO4_physics_Main_achievements

This is my email

On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 4:01 PM robert bryant ............. wrote:

Quote

Hi Dr SVP
Sure.. Maybe it is also good to contact Jurg Wyttenbach, The papers are on his researchgate The papers are not just on samarium.. Samarium is only a small part.

It is my deduction that not only Samarium ... but also other lanthanides may be helpful mainly because of low Kev gamma states in some of the odd numbered isotopes.. for example other researchers have found LENR effects with Samarium and mischmetal... like Dennis Cravens. The Dennis Cravens Golden Ball reaction

As Wyttenbach has said, the odd isotopes Ni 61 and Pd 105 are crucial in the Ni/Pd system.. but they only have a few low kev states.. The more different gamma states are available the easier is the LENR transfer of magnetic energy from the high 20 Mev of D_D fusion downwards to the 1 EV state s and beyond into the infrared( via electron shaking/ phonons
So isotopes like Sm151 are useful... notice that Sm 151 is actually synthesised in the reactor by fusion of 4 protons with Sm147. Because of Covid much research work is now stopped... but much more is needed on Eu, Sm, Gd,Dy Yb... These are not so rare and expensive as palladium and in fact more odd isotopes have much more low Kev gamma states than Ni or Pd..

Display More

Quote

God Bless your Research Robert Bryant Sydney

This was the reply..

Quote

Hi Fantabulous mail and heartfelt thanks for your mail/suggestions and time. I understood the gist and we are working on it. In fact, our lab is functioning continuously and we got good results during Corona time itself. We never closed our lab as we have a small yet dedicated team to work irrespective of sundays/festivals.... But of course we are struggling with the funding part as all funding has deviated to Covid -19 issues from the Government. I will study a lil and get back to you

SVP et al worked pretty quickly with minimal rupees and no gammaspec.

In October 2020, Ramarao reported 71W xs for 300W input with Pd/Ni.

In June 2021 , Ramarao reported 137W xs for 300W input with Pd/Ni/Sm.

The recent publication of Wyttenbach's "atomecology' paper

probably means that REEs cannot be locked up forever with a patent

by..SPAWAR,IH, and the like..although no doubt they will try.

The sooner this becomes public knowledge in the wider world... the better

http://ikkem.com/iccf23/speakervideo/1a-IN03-Ramarao.mp4

Quote from Wyttenbach

Once more this is a delta spectrum modified by the Theremino parameters for nearby bucket contributions.

I would still like to know how the background-subtracted spectra shown in Figure 1 of your ResearchGate manuscript have been modified "for nearby bucket contributions". I think that when you publicly post figures like this you need to explain them well enough so that your readers can understand what has been done.

What is the modification you mention?

Quote from Wyttenbach

These are standard spectra with default setting and definitely not shown to identify single lines as it is said in the text...

I have downloaded Theremino_MCA v7.3**. In this version there are many parameter settings where histogram files saved using the "export" menu button precisely reflect what is shown on the screen. For other settings (for instance when the IIR filter is engaged) this 1-to-1 relationship is lost.

Since in Figures 1 and 2 you choose to show these spectra in a way that somehow do not bear a 1-to-1 relationship with the data you actually carry out calculations on, I think you need to tell people how they differ. This is important. I have noted, for instance, that the spectra at 280C and 350C shown in Figure 1 are far too similar ... at the low bin occupancies you have these spectra should differ randomly 4-5 times more than seen in the Figure. Why? Is it artefact? This is unanswered.

Why not redo Figures 1 and 2 using data directly from the histogram files? It is trivial. And your figures need to be redone anyway because they are so blurry and hard to read.

**Note: I originally said v4.0. That was wrong. Sorry for the confusion