Neutron production in LENR (Axil Axil)

The following post was submitted by Axil Axil

The overarching theme of this essay is to explain how neutrons are only transmuted from protons as a result of beta decay mediated under the control of the weak force. Nuclear decay requires the weak force and neutron production requires nuclear decay. Nuclear decay resulting in the production of neutrons from protons must occur INSIDE the nucleus.

To start off, quantum mechanics (QM) is a sometimes thing. Sometimes it does this and sometimes it does that. What QM does is based on probability. Nuclear decay is subject to the vagaries of probability. The production of a neutron from a proton is a sometimes thing. Because of the transient nature of beta decay, we cannot depend on nuclear decay to drive the LENR process. LENR must be produced by an absolutely certain cause…a cause that is guarantied to occur. Descriptions of what quantum mechanics does is absolutely adverse to absolute statements. And at the same time, it is nearly impossible to predict how subatomic particles and energy interact to get to the results that are later observed in LENR.

Next, the weak force is one of the four fundamental forces that govern all matter in the universe While the other forces hold things together, the weak force plays a greater role in things falling apart, or decaying. In nuclear physics, beta decay (β-decay) is a type of nucleon rebalancing function in which a proton is transformed into a neutron, or vice versa, INSIDE an atomic nucleus. This process allows the atom to move closer to the optimal ratio of protons and neutrons. Atoms want to have a one for one balance of protons and neutrons INSIDE the nucleus.

The weak force, or weak interaction that is responsible for turning a proton into a neutron is only effective at incredibly short distances. It acts on the subatomic level and plays a crucial role in keeping the number of protons and neutrons balanced in the nucleus or for converting stray neutrons that somehow get outside the nucleus and away from their proton partners into protons.

So it is seen that INSIDE the nucleus, the quark changes its flavor when interacting via the W- or W+. This interaction cannot be observed outside the nucleus because quarks do not exist outside the nucleus. Because of quark confinement, isolated quarks are not observed and the weak force only works in decay processes inside the nucleus. I am ignoring the decay of subatomic particles associated with nuclear processes.

There are many neutrons inside of atoms and they are universally stable when protons and neutrons are paired together INSIDE the nucleus. But if there is a very large mismatch in the number of protons or neutrons INSIDE the nucleus, a neutron can decay into a proton or a proton can become a neutron. When a neutron is outside of the nucleus, it will decay into a proton, positron and a neutrino. But in order for a stray neutron to decay into a proton, positron and neutrino, a very heavy W boson is needed to be born out of the energy of the vacuum to mediate the decay of the neutron through the weak force.

The weak force only manifests itself INSIDE the nucleus or INSIDE the neutron, not in or around the proton or the electron. The weak force is absolutely required to turn a proton into a neutron. In order for the weak force to manifest outside the nucleus, a massive W boson must be born out of the vacuum. Under the rules of virtual particle production, the probability that this huge amount of virtual energy could be borrowed from the vacuum is proportional to the mass of the W boson. Since the W boson is one of the heaviest boson that there can be… it is huge, the probability that the W boson will come into existence unbidden from the vacuum is vanishingly small. And if the W boson were generated from the vacuum, it would only be around for a very short time since its lifetime is inversely proportional to its mass. And if it did spring into existence from the vacuum, it would need to be produced and located within .1 percent of the diameter of the proton* to properly project the weak force during it almost near instantaneously short lifetime.

* ( the weak interaction involves the exchange of the intermediate vector bosons, the W and the Z. Since the mass of these particles is on the order of 80 GeV, the uncertainty principle dictates a range of about 10-18 meters which is about .1% of the diameter of a proton.)

The bottom line, the probability that the weak force affects subatomic particles OUTSIDE the nucleus is almost ZERO.

In beta plus decay, for a proton to become a neutron requires the proton to decay into a neutron, a positron, and a neutrino OUTSIDE of the nucleus. This virtual neutrino must be produced out of the energy of the vacuum just in the vanishingly short time that the W boson is in existence. This probability of two such extremely unlikely event occurring simultaneously is so small that this nearly impossible combination of events can occur together is close to zero.

Now in a 1 megawatt LENR reactor, there needs to be 10^25 LENR reactions more or less happening during each and every second. This implies that the LENR reaction must be a sure thing and absolutely prolific. Because of timing, the range of the weak force, and the large energies involved, the probability of the creation of neutrons outside the nucleus is almost zero. This beta decay OUTSIDE the nucleus therefore cannot be the cause of LENR.

Yes, neutrons are produced by LENR but that creation must be a result of beta decay INSIDE the nucleus after the proton has become a part of the nucleus and the weak force must subsequently re -balance the number of protons and neutrons to keep the nucleus in the zone of stability.

For all who propose the creation of neutrons OUTSIDE the nucleus as the root cause of LENR, they must address how the rules of the standard model, the production of virtual particles from the vacuum and the nature of beta decay and color change through the weak force are changed to allow this neutron production process to move forward with such great intensity and rapidity. Its not just meeting the requirements of energy balance, it’s meeting all the other conservation laws involved with beta decay and obeying all the rules of road for the standard model.

Axil Axil

  • Independent Experimenter

    The poster is somewhat misinformed about nuclear decay and quantum mechanics.
    Nuclear decay is certain. The “sometimes” applies to each and every individual atoms but the certain applies to the entire sample.

    Nuclear fusion is a “sometimes” phenomenon, even when it is occuring in the thermonuclear bomb. Despite that fact, it is certain that fusion will occur en masse in the thermonuclear bomb.

    In fact, the proton-proton fusion to yield deuterons through proton decay in the sun is an “almost never” phenomenon. Most of the time protons scatter elastically without forming deuterons. Yet it is certain that so many proton decays will occur at any given time that the sun certainly shines.

    Were it not for the extremely forbidden nature of a diproton’s decay into a deuteron, the sun would detonate and stars would be impossible. The forbiddeness of diproton’s decay into deuteron is what moderates the fusion reaction in the sun and prevents it from becoming a thermonuclear bomb.

    Neutron production in LENR can be attributed to deuterium-deuterium fusion, especially if you can precisely measure the neutron energy with a scintillator detector. If you get 2.45 MeV neutrons, you know you have D-D fusion occuring.

    “it is nearly impossible to predict how subatomic particles and energy interact to get to the results that are later observed in LENR.”

    Go back to basics and insist on observing and measuring nuclear reaction results. Such as the production of tritium, high energy neutrons, helium-3 etc.

    You don’t need to go into deep theoretical understanding to mount a proper experiment. That’s why I’m not interested in calorimetry, I want to see real evidence of nuclear reactions such as fusion products and high energy particles.

    The W bosons you are talking about are virtual particles. The probability is very small for beta decay in the nucleus, depending on it’s forbidenness, but it is certain that a stray neutron in a vacuum will become a proton with an electron.

    Since the vacuum is like a bank, stingy, why should the vacuum lend you the energy ? What does it get in return ?

    I propose we burn our palladium and stop trying to conserve it. If you want deuterium’s energy as badly as I do, you will be ready to part with your palladium in order to get that energy. Who knows, the vacuum might just accept this crazy deal.

    “The bottom line, the probability that the weak force affects subatomic particles OUTSIDE the nucleus is almost ZERO.”

    Not when it comes to stray neutrons in a vacuum. The probability that they decay into protons and electrons is almost CERTAIN.

    • Frederic

      @ Independent Experimenter
      In case of nickel rather than palladium, would you mean that “to part with” nickel consists in transmuting Ni-58 into Ni-62, producing energy on this occasion, while the Ni-62 you get won’t be useful in the LENR reactor to get more energy ?

      • Axil Axil

        The transmutation of the famous Lugano nickel particle into pure Ni62 may have occurred in a single quantum mechanical event where countless Li7 atoms transferred a neutron to Ni58, Ni60, and Ni61. This operation leaves just Li6. All the lithium and nickel may have been entangled in a BEC when this cluster fusion occurred.

        • Independent Experimenter

          If Rossi and other replicators are having results with just mixing the powders together and heating them, I am astonished. This is very good news for me.

          Because their method is absolutely not the best way to have results with the powder. My method is a lot more susceptible to work. So if they have results I will certainly get results.

          In the case of Rossi’s Fuel, I suspect that the two following reactions are occuring:

          1) Ni-58 + LEN —> Ni-59 —> Co-59 + Beta Minus + 1 MeV
          2) K-39 + LEN —> K-40 —> Ca-40 + Beta Minus + 1.3MeV

          But there is a problem:

          Reaction 1) has a half-life of 76,000 years and reaction 2) has a half-life of 1.2 Billion years.

          With such half-lives they would absolutely not get much heat.

          So absorbing a low energy neutron must excite the nucleus into releasing it’s radiation faster, as Axil Axil said.

          So if absorbing Low Energy Neutrons accelerates the decay of the transmuted atom, this gives me very interesting ideas.

          I could test straight Potassium Hydride and see if a high energy surface plasmon will produce a lot of Beta decay occurences. The If it works, I will call this the Banana Bomb.

          • Axil Axil

            Rossi applies power to that powder is a special way(square waves with delays) in order to produce nano particles.

            Heat activation requires the production of nano particles from super saturated condensation using cooling plasma. This is a chemical process. This is done through temperature and pressure changes. Learn how to produce nano particles chemically in a gas.

            An electric arc will produce Rydberg matter(AKA nano particles) in the cooling plasma. This is what DGT used in their reactor, This nano particle production method is simpler to do, IMHO,

            Note: It’s energetic distortion of the vacuum that stabilized radioactive isotopes.

          • Independent Experimenter

            Lithium Aluminum Hydride has a very low melting point and it is conducting when it is melted, I wonder what are the prospect of sending a high voltage and high current electric arc through the molten fuel instead of simply heating it.

            Couldn’t Rossi’s fuel be made to react all at once if a high power electric arc was discharged directly through the fuel ?

            I refer to US Patent 4182650 which proposes to do just that with a much more difficult fuel.

            I would be interesting to test Rossi’s fuel using the method outlined in US Patent 4182650.

            Please tell me if you think it’s too dangerous to use Rossi’s fuel in this method.

          • Axil Axil

            I suspect that Leif Holmild has already done the type of cluster fusion experiment that you intend to do. He produced a huge amount of fusion of which 10^13 DD detected fusion events in a few nano seconds is just a tiny fraction of the whole amount. His method is different than Rossi’s. You will be interested is the potassium based fuel the Helmild used and how that catalyst generates Rydberg matter(nano particles).

            The fact that he is producing 14 MeV protons and 3 MeV protons implies that the vacuum based energy thermalization process that we discussed above in not applied, so a large amount of nuclear energy is not converted to heat. I call this the Joe Papp LENR reaction.

            This experiment was peer reviewed here http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360319915016018.

            I reference the draft experiment below in this post that I wrote a short time ago.

            Joe Papp used an electric arc in his reaction.

            ———————————-

            http://icelandmonitor.mbl.is/news/news/2015/07/17/icelandic_scientist_may_have_found_solution_to_glob/

            The Sveinn Ólafsson news can reveal some insights into the LENR reaction. The LENR reaction produced by the LASER pulse is different from the Rossi reaction because it produces high energy protons rather than thermalized heat energy. This explosive reaction looks like the reaction that produces pressure in the Papp engine and is without heat. It is unlikely that this Leif Holmild reaction is a hot fusion reaction. It is more likely a reaction based on quantum mechanical entanglement and coherence in a aggregation of hydrogen crystals.

            http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0912/0912.5414.pdf

            Note the pictures of the rydberg matter in the figures at the end of this paper

            F. Winterberg, University of Nevada, Reno, has a reaction mechanism that I like a lot. It is based on a electron vortex and a Bose Einstein condensate(BEC) being imposed on the ultra dense hydrogen crystals of Rydberg matter. But unlike F. Winterberg thinking, I believe that the LASER pulse produces the BEC over the area that it irradiates.

            But Leif Holmild has this dense hydrogen covered through his detection of ultra dense hydrogen Rydberg matter molecule. Yes, that stuff is a molecule and not a single atom and it is very important in LENR. Holmild just showed an experiment that produced 10^13 fusion of D D to He4 using a laser. Holmild has taken control of this theory with work that extends for the last decade.

            http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1302/1302.2781.pdf

            After the LASER pulse, a very large number of high energy protons up to 14 MeV are detected and measures by test equipment, Up to 10^13 in number. Just like what happens in the Piantelli experiments where protons carry away the nuclear binding energy of copper transmutation, for Holmild, protons carry away the nuclear binding energy of D D fusion. That number of D D reactions exceeds any number of atoms that can be found in a single Rydberg crystal. The LASER must set up a BEC in the area that the laser spot covered. That area of radiance must have covered a large number of individual Rydberg crystals.

            Where the aggregation of crystals form a BEC, they become entangled and coherent. This is what cluster fusion is all about. The aggregation of Rydberg clusters act as a single super-atom. As F. Winterberg suggests, the laser changes the nature of the electrons into polaritons that form a vortex ring that reposition deuterium ions(protons, neutrons) at its center, These ions combine because they are so close in terms of QM entanglement; not PHYSICAL LOCATION. The deuterium atoms are separated physically, but overlap quantum mechanically. When the LASER pulse is complete, the superposition of the protons is resolved and the energy of the fusion of deuterium ions is imparted to the millions of protons in the QM core of the aggregation. But what makes the difference now, the LASER beam is not capable of connecting the region of positive vacuum energy with the associated negitive vacuum energy region so the energy produced by fusion is not thermalized over the population of polaritons. The LASER produces entanglement and not the polaritons so the polaritons do not get the energy, and the polaritons do not thermalize the energy from fusion.

            The important point to understand is that actual location of the deuterium atoms does not matter, the BEC moves all the atoms via the multi connection wormholes so that their wave forms all overlap.

            The formation of the BEC makes the LASER more powerful to induce fusion than does all the power produced in the National Ignition Facility, or NIF. There, a laser beam of 500 terawatt (TW) peak flash of light cannot produce fusion in deuterium. But with Rydberg matter of deuterium, fusion using a laser is easy.

            On the other hand, the Sveinn Ólafsson’s reaction is the Rossi reaction where potassium doped iron oxide produces the polariton vortexes the catalyze the fusion of deuterium and thermalize the nuclear energy of that fusion into heat.

          • Axil Axil

            “If Rossi and other replicators are having results with just mixing the powders together and heating them, I am astonished. This is very good news for me.”

            You need to go to the school of hard knocks to learn some humility. The reactors of the replicators blowout because of the cluster nature of the LENR reaction when powder is packed tightly together, The powder needs to be spread out. Use a nickel nano foam like DGT used to separate the nickel powder in space so that when the reaction kicks in, the reaction in all the particles will moderate. When a replicator’s reactor does not blow out, it is due to luck.

          • Independent Experimenter

            Nickel nano foam, aka “sponge” ?

            “You need to go to the school of hard knocks to learn some humility. ”

            No arrogance from my part here, I am simply stating that their method must necessarily be less efficient in order to act on a lot of fuel over a long period of time. Rossi et al want energy and excess heat.

            My method can only act on a very small amount of fuel at a time and would be impractical for generating useful power.

            How’s that for humility. I’m saying that if their method works with that much efficiency on the bulk of the fuel, which is itself not the most efficient way then with my method I’m bound to have success at observing particles and fusion products.

            I’m not competing with Rossi and other replicators, I’m specializing in trying to observe evidence for fusion and nuclear reactions.

            Rossi and others are working on a continuous reaction involving a lot of fuel. I’m working on a pulsing reaction involving a very small amount of fuel.

            Rossi’s goal is to produce energy, my goal is to produce nuclear evidence. I’m going to be a lot more efficient with my minute amount of fuel than Rossi with his big amount of fuel.

            But I will not produce excess heat nor break even.

      • Independent Experimenter

        Yes, that’s exactly what I mean, although it is quite different with palladium. In the Pd-D system, palladium acts on the vacuum state and probabilities, the “sometimes” that Axil Axil talks about. In the case of Nickel there are certain transmutations happening between the nickel and the low energy neutrons.

        To part with Nickel in this case means that Ni-58 transmutes to Ni-59 which beta decays to become Co-59.

        But, and this is probably Rossi’s Trade secret (borrowed From the Thermacore Corporation), I suspect that Rossi’s secret sauce is Potassium being transmuted into Calcium by fusing with protons. It has been reported in very early Nickel-Water experiments done by Thermacore. They used Potassium Carbonate as the electrolysis, Nickel as the Cathode and light water(H2O) instead of heavy water.

        They reported Calcium. I suspect that Rossi uses Nickel, Lithium Aluminum Hydride and Potassium Aluminum Hydride or Potassium Hydride.

        Rossi is pulling a Microsoft on Thermacore. He is taking Thermacore’s developments and further improves them. Just like Bill Gates took Xerox and Apple’s developments and repackaged them as his own.

        Rossi = Thermacore Corporation.

        • Axil Axil

          In the Lugano fuel analysis, not much potassium was detected. LENR activity in the hot cat is carried by hydrogen and lithium. In the E-Cat, potassium is the LENR active element.

          The alkali element selected as the LENR active element determines the heat range of the reactor. Any of these alkali metals or combinations will produce Rydbeg matter when its plasma is cooled. Rydberg matter is nano particles.

          • Independent Experimenter

            Thanks for confirming my suspicions that potassium could be the active element in the fuel.

            Why not use potassium with the hot cat ? Too dangerous ?

        • GreenWin

          i.e., what you are really saying is Rossi=Randell Mills whose name “should” appear on Thermacore’s patent #5,273,635 December 28, 1993
          Inventors: Gernert; Nelson J. (Elizabethtown, PA); Shaubach;
          Robert M. (Litiz, PA); Ernst; Donald M. (Leola, PA) — since Gernert stated it was Mills’ idea.

          Mills moved to gas loaded metals when he started BLP and is now working on plasma systems.

          You forget to include the additional assistance Dr. Rossi receives from various Navy and National labs.

          • Independent Experimenter

            So it looks like Andrea Rossi is the first one to have actually made a working embodiment. I also see he made a doctoral thesis on with a thesis on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity and its interrelationship with Edmund Husserl’s phenomenology.

            Very very interesting. Rossi is amazing. So he really is after the mind in the matter, or in this case the mind in the fuel.

            Dr. Rossi’s Doctoral thesis, Dr. Edmund Storm’s “seducing the Coulomb barrier” etc.

            So it turns out I invented nothing after all. As a consolation, their work does validate my assumptions.

      • Independent Experimenter

        It could be that Rossi’s fuel is burning Potassium-39 by means of transmutation with low energy neutrons which then becomes excited Potassium-40, and undergoes Beta minus decay into Calcium-40.

        This would explain the lack of radiation. Excited Potassium-40 Beta decay would not be capable of penetrating the Alumina shell of the reactor.

        This might be generating X-Rays however. They should be looking for X-Rays due to bremsstrahlung and not Gamma nor any other radiation.

        They should also analyze the spent fuel for presence of Calcium-40.

        The Rossi “scam” might be that he is hiding this Calcium-40 and Transmutation of Potassium into Calcium and lets experimenters play with straight nickel and straight lithium aluminum hydride.

        The Nickel to Cobalt transmutation is very slow and could not produce the excess heat reported by Rossi. But the Potassium to Calcium can.

        In this case, Nickel acts more as a catalyst than as the direct fuel.

    • Axil Axil

      Regarding: “Nuclear decay is certain.”

      I am interested in how rapid if not almost instantaneous radioactive stabilization of radioactive isotopes occurs in LENR and only stable isotopes result from nuclear reactions caused by a nanoplasmonic based effect. I am impressed by the possible role of negative vacuum energy in this regard as described in the paper “Effects of Vacuum Fluctuation Suppression on Atomic Decay Rates”.

      At: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0907.1638v1.pdf

      Nuclear decay rates are subject to the state of the vacuum in which the nuclear decay happens. LENR affects the state of the vacuum by separating the vacuum into a zone of high positive vacuum energy and negative vacuum energy. The zone of negative vacuum energy produces a greatly accelerated flow of time in which nuclear decay proceeds essentially instantaneously.

      • Independent Experimenter

        Thank you very much Mr. Axil Axil for clarifying this subject with me. I appreciate. I absolutely agree with your explanation that LENR affects the state of the vacuum in which the nuclear reactions are happening. That’s exactly what I am betting on with my own experiments.

        • Axil Axil

          IF you think of the SPP as a rotating black hole, the magnetic energy that projects from its poles produced the disturbances in the vacuum. This magnetic field provides LENR “action at a distance” Energy applied to the vacuum will always distort it. The stabilization of radioactivity is inherent integral to the LENR causal mechanism.

          I have referenced papers here on this site to show how the confinement of electrons and light as SPPs on the surface of gold nanoparticles: a nanoplasmonic mechanism, can change the half-life of U232 from 69 years to 6 microseconds. It also causes thorium to fission.

          See references:

          http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CC4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fpdf%2F1112.6276&ei=nI6UUeG1Fq-N0QGypIAg&usg=AFQjCNFB59F1wkDv-NzeYg5TpnyZV1kpKQ&sig2=fhdWJ_enNKlLA4HboFBTUA&bvm=bv.46471029,d.dmQ

          Experiments showing the same mechanism as listed below:

          “Laser-induced synthesis and decay of Tritium under exposure of solid targets in heavy water”

          http://arxiv.org/abs/1306.0830

          Initiation of nuclear reactions under laser irradiation of Au nanoparticles in the presence of Thorium aqua ions

          http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0906/0906.4268.pdf

          ===============================

          In these experiments, nano geometry converts light energy from the laser into vortex motion of electrons in a nanoplasmonic soliton produced on the surface of the gold nanoparticles. Without the gold nanoparticles, laser light alone is ineffectual in this type of experiment.

          The soliton produces the separation of the vacuum into positive and negative energy zones. It also forces the entanglement of the soliton with the U232 nucleus by pumping energy into the vacuum. This vacuum energy pumping using EMF energy from microwaves also happens in the EmDrive system.

          • Independent Experimenter

            I was well aware of the laser experiment involving U232, but I was not aware of the laser-induced synthesis and decay of tritium. That’s very interesting. Thanks.

    • Axil Axil

      “The bottom line, the probability that the weak force affects subatomic particles OUTSIDE the nucleus is almost ZERO.”

      should read

      “The bottom line, the probability that the weak force affects protons and electrons and their interactions OUTSIDE the nucleus is ZERO.”

  • Gerard McEk

    Axil, your explanation is clear and absolutely convincing to me. It does not comply with the W-L theory, does it? It does also require a proton to fuse with another proton, lithium- or nickel atom, which may be more difficult to explain. Maybe it comes nearer to the Rossi-Cook suggestion, at
    least for the lithium part? I am sure the surface plasmons are part in that explanation, which is more W-L again?

    • Independent Experimenter

      Dr. Widom also explains that lithium-ion battery thermal runaway could be due to the surface plasmons turning hydrogen into low energy neutrons transmuting lithium-7 into lithium-8 which beta decays into beryllium-8 with the release of a lot of energy.

      However, unexcited Beryllium-8 has a decay energy of only 6.8 eV. It is questionable as wetter the low energy neutrons, a few eV themselves, are sufficient to lead to high energy Beryllium-8 decay. Lithium-8 decays with a Beta minus at 16 MeV, that’s a lot of energy.

      Lithium-7 is stable and I doubt that a low energy neutron would lead to the formation of Lithium-8. It seems Dr. Widom wants to get something for nothing.

    • Axil Axil

      Any theory that depends on neutrons that are formed from coalescence of electrons and protons thus permitting the penetration of the coulomb barrier is wrong in that posit.

      Cluster fusion of N hydrogen atoms might well occur in a single quantum mechanical event to produce a heavier element.

  • Gerard McEk

    Axil, your explanation is clear and absolutely convincing to me. It does not comply with the W-L theory, does it? It does also require a proton to fuse with another proton, lithium- or nickel atom, which may be more difficult to explain. Maybe it comes nearer to the Rossi-Cook suggestion, at
    least for the lithium part? I am sure the surface plasmons are part in that explanation, which is more W-L again?

    • Independent Experimenter

      Dr. Widom also explains that lithium-ion battery thermal runaway could be due to the surface plasmons turning hydrogen into low energy neutrons transmuting lithium-7 into lithium-8 which beta decays into beryllium-8 with the release of a lot of energy.

      However, unexcited Beryllium-8 has a decay energy of only 6.8 eV. It is questionable as wetter the low energy neutrons, a few eV themselves, are sufficient to lead to high energy Beryllium-8 decay. Lithium-8 decays with a Beta minus at 16 MeV, that’s a lot of energy.

      Lithium-7 is stable and I doubt that a low energy neutron would lead to the formation of Lithium-8. It seems Dr. Widom wants to get something for nothing.

    • Axil Axil

      Any theory that depends on neutrons that are formed from coalescence of electrons and protons thus permitting the penetration of the coulomb barrier is wrong in that posit.

      Cluster fusion of N hydrogen atoms might well occur in a single quantum mechanical event to produce a heavier element.

  • Axil Axil

    Regarding: “Nuclear decay is certain.”

    I am interested in how rapid if not almost instantaneous radioactive stabilization of radioactive isotopes occurs in LENR and only stable isotopes result from nuclear reactions caused by a nanoplasmonic based effect. I am impressed by the possible role of negative vacuum energy in this regard as described in the paper “Effects of Vacuum Fluctuation Suppression on Atomic Decay Rates”.

    At: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0907.1638v1.pdf

    Nuclear decay rates are subject to the state of the vacuum in which the nuclear decay happen. LENR affects the state of the vacuum by separating the vacuum into a zone of high positive vacuum energy and negative vacuum energy. The zone of negative vacuum energy produces a greatly accelerated flow of time in which nuclear decay proceeds essentially instantaneously.

  • Axil Axil

    “The bottom line, the probability that the weak force affects subatomic particles OUTSIDE the nucleus is almost ZERO.”

    should read

    “The bottom line, the probability that the weak force affects protons and electrons and their interactions OUTSIDE the nucleus is ZERO.”

  • Eyedoc

    can someone clarify ‘energy of the vacuum’ for an old layman, (who thought he was taught the vacuum of space is total nothingness, devoid of any properties at all)

  • Eyedoc

    can someone clarify ‘energy of the vacuum’ for an old layman, (who thought he was taught the vacuum of space is total nothingness, devoid of any properties at all)

  • Axil Axil

    The transmutation of the famous Lugano nickel particle into pure Ni62 may have occurred in a single quantum mechanical event where countless Li7 atoms transferred a neutron to Ni58, Ni60, and Ni61. This operation leaves just Li6. All the lithium and nickel may have been entangled in a BEC when this cluster fusion occurred.

  • Independent Experimenter

    Dear Mr. Axil Axil,

    You wrote:

    “Now in a 1 megawatt LENR reactor, there needs to be 10^25 LENR reactions more or less happening during each and every second.”

    1 Megawatt = 1 Megajoule / second

    1 Megajoule = 6.24 x 10^24 eV

    By saying that it requires 10^25 LENR reactions per second, you are implying that each reaction generates only 624 meV of energy, which is about 5 times less than chemical energy. That’s about the energy of electrons quantum tunneling through the Fowler-Nordheim barrier in Zener diodes. Hardly anything nuclear.

    I’m not following you on the 10^25 LENR reactions. Please explain more.

    • Axil Axil

      I might have over estimated reaction rate, but who can tell at this juncture.

      There is a possibly that a large amount of energy is consumed in the Rossi reactor directed toward the whole cloth production of electrons. You have not accounted for that energy drain, Rossi has said that he might be able to directly extract electric power from the E-Cat.

  • Independent Experimenter

    Dr. Howard Reiss experimented with accelerating beta decay of Cesium-137 using 20MHz transverse radio waves inside a coaxial tube. He complained that the electron shell was shielding the nucleus from the radio waves and used Cesium Chloride which exposed the nucleus a little bit.

    The Cesium-137 nucleus has a spin of 7/2+ and is susceptible to radio waves. His results were conclusive, he did accelerate beta decay to observable levels.

    Now, Potassium-39 has a nuclear spin of 3/2- and Potassium-40 has a nuclear spin of 4+.

    If low energy neutrons were absorbed by the Potassium-39 nucleus, this abrupt spin change would have a very powerful effect on the nucleus and could perhaps indeed cause the Potassium-40 to immediately beta decay into Calcium-40 by having a transient superallowing effect on the nucleus.

    This fractional spin into whole spin and this sign change must be a lot more powerful than simply exciting the nucleus with radio waves like Howard Reiss did.

    Hence most of Rossi’s heat must be coming from Potassium rather than Nickel.

    Perhaps I will get my Banana Bomb after all. Thank you Mr. Rossi and Mr. Reiss.

    • Axil Axil

      The LENR reaction is not concentrated in the nickel micro particle because the LENR reaction can endure for a year or more (as per some reports). In order for the micro particles to retain their long term catalytic potency, character and structure, the nuclear active areas must be outside of the nickel micro particles.

      In the Lugano nickel particle examination, that particle was completely covered with lithium. The surface of the micro particles are where the LENR reaction is occurring. The LENR reaction must be occurring in the alkali metal nano particles that find their way onto the surface of the nano wire covering of the nickel particles. These particles form aggregates in which the spaces, projections and voids between and among the collections of these nano particles are the places where LENR reactions occur. It is within these aggregates that SPP solitons form.

      • Independent Experimenter

        That’s my point, forming surface plasmon polaritons from heat is a very inefficient way of doing it. Yet Rossi and other replicators are having great success at it. It’s, however, the most economical way of doing it if your goal is to act on a lot of fuel to generate excess heat for a long period of time.

        The most efficient way is to use laser pulses to generate the surface plasmon. That’s my method but it can only act on a very small amount of fuel and it’s of no use for energy generation given that it’s the most expensive way of doing it.

        Given that Rossi and others are having such success with their heat method, I’m bound to observe nuclear evidence with my method.

        So you better keep your hard knocks for yourself, I know what I’m talking about. I’m not putting down Rossi, rather I’m anticipating that I will observe nuclear evidence.

    • Axil Axil

      The radio waves inside the tube may have produced regions of increased and reduced concentration of EMF based on EMF interference patterns do to resonance just like in the EMdrive microwave resonator.

      This EMF pattern would produce associated regions of increased positive and negative vacuum energy. The change in the distribution of vacuum energy inside the tube might have produced a change in nuclear decay rates.

      Because of the distortions in the vacuum produced by EMF interference, I predict that the EMdrive microwave resonator will change the rates of decay for radioactive isotopes.

      • Independent Experimenter

        My point being that transmuting Potassium-39 into Potassium-40 with low energy neutrons will cause the newly formed Potassium-40 to decay almost instantly as opposed to taking already existing Potassium-40 and placing it in the EM resonator which would be very slow.

        Howard Reiss’s results were conclusive but the acceleration was very very slow. Low energy neutrons might be the way for rapid acceleration and nuclear waste remediation.

  • Axil Axil

    The LENR reaction is not concentrated in the nickel micro particle because the LENR reaction can endure for a year or more (as per some reports). In order for the micro particles to retain their character and structure, the nuclear active areas must be outside of the nickel micro particles.

    In the Lugano nickel particle examination, that particle was completely covered with lithium. The surface of the micro particles are were the LENR reaction is occuring. The LENR reaction must be occurring in the alkali metal nano particles that find their way onto the surface of the nano wire covering of the nickel particles. These particles form aggregates in which the spaces, projections and voids between and among the collections of these nano particles are where the LENR reaction occur. It is within these aggregates that SPP solitons form.

  • Axil Axil

    The radio waves inside the tube may have produced regions of increased and reduced concentration of EMF based on EMF interference patterns do to resonance just like in the EMdrive microwave resonator.

    This EMF pattern would produce associated regions of increased positive and negative vacuum energy. The change in the distribution of vacuum energy inside the tube might have produced a change in nuclear decay rates.

  • Axil Axil

    IF you think of the SPP as a rotating black hole, the magnetic energy that projects from its poles produced the disturbances in the vacuum. This magnetic field provides LENR “action at a distance” Energy applied to the vacuum will always distort it. The stabilization of radioactivity is inherent integral to the LENR causal mechanism.

    I have referenced papers here on this site to show how the confinement of electrons and light as SPPs on the surface of gold nanoparticles: a nanoplasmonic mechanism, can change the half-life of U232 from 69 years to 6 microseconds. It also causes thorium to fission.

    See references:

    http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CC4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fpdf%2F1112.6276&ei=nI6UUeG1Fq-N0QGypIAg&usg=AFQjCNFB59F1wkDv-NzeYg5TpnyZV1kpKQ&sig2=fhdWJ_enNKlLA4HboFBTUA&bvm=bv.46471029,d.dmQ

    Experiments showing the same mechanism as listed below:

    “Laser-induced synthesis and decay of Tritium under exposure of solid targets in heavy water”

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1306.0830

    Initiation of nuclear reactions under laser irradiation of Au nanoparticles in the presence of Thorium aqua ions

    http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0906/0906.4268.pdf

    ===============================

    In these experiments, nano geometry converts light energy from the laser into vortex motion of electrons in a nanoplasmonic soliton produced on the surface of the gold nanoparticles. Without the gold nanoparticles, laser light alone is ineffectual in this type of experiment.

    The soliton produces the separation of the vacuum into positive and negative energy zones. It also forces the entanglement of the soliton with the U232 nucleus by pumping energy into the vacuum. This vacuum energy pumping using EMF energy from microwaves also happens in the EmDrive system.

  • Axil Axil

    In the Lugano fuel analysis, not much potassium was detected. LENR activity in the hot cat is carried by hydrogen and lithium. In the E-Cat, potassium is the LENR active element.

  • Axil Axil

    Rossi applies power to that powder is a special way(square waves with delays) in order to produce nano particles.

    Heat activation requires the production of nano particles from super saturated condensation using cooling plasma. This is a chemical process. This is done through temperature and pressure changes. Learn how to produce nano particles chemically in a gas.

    An electric arc will produce Rydberg matter(AKA nano particles) in the cooling plasma. This is what DGT used in their reactor, This nano particle production method is simpler to do, IMHO,

    Note: It’s energetic distortion of the vacuum that stabilized radioactive isotopes.

    • Independent Experimenter

      Lithium Aluminum Hydride has a very low melting point and it is conducting when it is melted, I wonder what are the prospect of sending a high voltage and high current electric arc through the molten fuel instead of simply heating it.

      Couldn’t Rossi’s fuel be made to react all at once if a high power electric arc was discharged directly through the fuel ?

      I refer to US Patent 4182650 which proposes to do just that with a much more difficult fuel.

      I would be interesting to test Rossi’s fuel using the method outlined in US Patent 4182650.

      Please tell me if you think it’s too dangerous to use Rossi’s fuel in this method.

      • Axil Axil

        I suspect that Leif Holmild has already done the type of cluster fusion experiment that you intend to do. He produced a huge amount of fusion of which 10^13 DD detected fusion events in a few nano seconds is just a tiny fraction of the whole amount. His method is different than Rossi’s. You will be interested is the potassium based fuel the Helmild used and how that catalyst generates Rydberg matter(nano particles).

        The fact that he is producing 14 MeV protons and 3 MeV protons implies that the vacuum based energy thermalization process that we discussed above in not applied, so a large amount of nuclear energy is not converted to heat. I call this the Joe Papp LENR reaction.

        This experiment was peer reviewed. I reference the draft experiment below in this post that I wrote a short time ago.

        ———————————-

        http://icelandmonitor.mbl.is/news/news/2015/07/17/icelandic_scientist_may_have_found_solution_to_glob/

        The Sveinn Ólafsson news can reveal some insights into the LENR reaction. The LENR reaction produced by the LASER pulse is different from the Rossi reaction because it produces high energy protons rather than thermalized heat energy. This explosive reaction looks like the reaction that produces pressure in the Papp engine and is without heat. It is unlikely that this Leif Holmild reaction is a hot fusion reaction. It is more likely a reaction based on quantum mechanical entanglement and coherence in a aggregation of hydrogen crystals.

        http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0912/0912.5414.pdf

        Note the pictures of the rydberg matter in the figures at the end of this paper

        F. Winterberg, University of Nevada, Reno, has a reaction mechanism that I like a lot. It is based on a electron vortex and a Bose Einstein condensate(BEC) being imposed on the ultra dense hydrogen crystals of Rydberg matter. But unlike F. Winterberg thinking, I believe that the LASER pulse produces the BEC over the area that it irradiates.

        But Leif Holmild has this dense hydrogen covered through his detection of ultra dense hydrogen Rydberg matter molecule. Yes, that stuff is a molecule and not a single atom and it is very important in LENR. Holmild just showed an experiment that produced 10^13 fusion of D D to He4 using a laser. Holmild has taken control of this theory with work that extends for the last decade.

        http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1302/1302.2781.pdf

        After the LASER pulse, a very large number of high energy protons up to 14 MeV are detected and measures by test equipment, Up to 10^13 in number. Just like what happens in the Piantelli experiments where protons carry away the nuclear binding energy of copper transmutation, for Holmild, protons carry away the nuclear binding energy of D D fusion. That number of D D reactions exceeds any number of atoms that can be found in a single Rydberg crystal. The LASER must set up a BEC in the area that the laser spot covered. That area of radiance must have covered a large number of individual Rydberg crystals.

        Where the aggregation of crystals form a BEC, they become entangled and coherent. This is what cluster fusion is all about. The aggregation of Rydberg clusters act as a single super-atom. As F. Winterberg suggests, the laser changes the nature of the electrons into polaritons that form a vortex ring that reposition deuterium ions(protons, neutrons) at its center, These ions combine because they are so close in terms of QM entanglement; not PHYSICAL LOCATION. The deuterium atoms are separated physically, but overlap quantum mechanically. When the LASER pulse is complete, the superposition of the protons is resolved and the energy of the fusion of deuterium ions is imparted to the millions of protons in the QM core of the aggregation. But what makes the difference now, the LASER beam is not capable of connecting the region of positive vacuum energy with the associated negitive vacuum energy region so the energy produced by fusion is not thermalized over the population of polaritons. The LASER produces entanglement and not the polaritons so the polaritons do not get the energy, and the polaritons do not thermalize the energy from fusion.

        The important point to understand is that actual location of the deuterium atoms does not matter, the BEC moves all the atoms via the multi connection wormholes so that their wave forms all overlap.

        The formation of the BEC makes the LASER more powerful to induce fusion than does all the power produced in the National Ignition Facility, or NIF. There, a laser beam of 500 terawatt (TW) peak flash of light cannot produce fusion in deuterium. But with Rydberg matter of deuterium, fusion using a laser is easy.

        On the other hand, the Sveinn Ólafsson’s reaction is the Rossi reaction where potassium doped iron oxide produces the polariton vortexes the catalyze the fusion of deuterium and thermalize the nuclear energy of that fusion into heat.

  • Axil Axil

    I might have over estimated reaction rate, but who can tell at this juncture.

    There is possibly that a large amount of energy is consumed in the Rossi reactor directed toward the production of electrons. You have not accounted for that energy drain, Rossi has said that he might be able to directly extract electric power from the E-Cat.

  • Axil Axil

    “If Rossi and other replicators are having results with just mixing the powders together and heating them, I am astonished. This is very good news for me.”

    You need to go to the school of hard knocks. The reactors of the replicators blowout because of the cluster nature of the LENR reaction when powder is packed tightly together, The powder needs to be spread out. Use a nickel nano foam like DGT used to separate the nickel powder in space so that when the reaction kicks in, the reaction in all the particles will moderate.

  • Stephen

    Thanks again Axil for another clear and well written explanation. Thanks also to Independent Experimenter for your discussions I learnt a lot from them.

    I am quite persuaded by your arguments that Neutrons are unlikely to be generated from Protons out side a nucleus. It does seem extremely unlikely if it relies on the weak interaction in that way.

    This is clear for Protons outside the atom. Could you clarify that this is the case even for a Proton that is already close to the nucleus. I suppose there are 2 cases:

    A) A fully ionised atom.

    B) A atom retaining inner shell electrons

    I suppose in both these cases the Proton is still well outside the influence of the Weak force so probably your comments still fully apply. However, can the nucleus or shell elections influence the process ? :

    Case A: I think even if the nucleus is able to influence a near by proton by some kind of resonance effect or other disturbance due to the nucleus shape, size, spin and or magnetic moment it is extremely unlikely that an available electron would be around at the same time and sufficient energy would be available for this to occur.

    Case B: If we consider a slow proton approaching a nucleus in an atom with inner electrons. As the Proton approaches the nucleus it may disturb the inner electrons due to changes in Potential well and also their reduced mass. Could those electrons then have insufficient energy to occupy their inner energy level? If so could this increase the likelihood of and interaction with the Proton to form a Neutron perhaps taking other influences form the nucleus such as nucleus shape, size, spin and or magnetic moment into account? I suppose the energy for the weak interaction would not be present but its an interesting case to consider.

  • Stephen

    Thanks again Axil for another clear and well written explanation.

    Thanks also to Independent Experimenter for your discussions I learnt a lot from them. I wish you well with your experiment and look forward to seeing the results. Will you also publish them here?

    I am quite persuaded by your arguments that Neutrons are unlikely to be generated from Protons out side a nucleus. It does seem extremely unlikely if it relies on the weak interaction in that way.

    This is clear for Protons outside the atom. Could you clarify that this is the case even for a Proton that is already close to the nucleus. I suppose there are 2 cases:

    A) With a fully ionised atom.

    B) In an atom retaining inner shell electrons

    I suppose in both these cases the Proton is still well outside the influence of the Weak force so probably your comments still fully apply. However, can the nucleus or shell elections influence the process ? :

    Case A: I think even if the nucleus is able to influence a near by proton by some kind of resonance effect or other disturbance due to the nucleus shape, size, spin and or magnetic moment it is extremely unlikely that an available electron would be around at the same time and sufficient energy would be available for this to occur.

    Case B: If we consider a slow proton approaching a nucleus in an atom with inner electrons. In effect we could have for a short time an atom with a compound nucleus i.e consisting of the original nucleus and the additional proton. As the Proton approaches the nucleus could it disturb the inner electrons due to changes in Potential well and also affect their reduced mass? Could those electrons then have insufficient energy to occupy their inner energy level? If so could this increase the likelihood of and interaction with the Proton to form a Neutron perhaps taking other influences form the nucleus such as nucleus shape, size, spin and or magnetic moment and the nucleus interaction with the electron wave function into account? I suppose the energy for the weak interaction would not be present but its an interesting case to consider.

    I do agree with your comment:

    “For all who propose the creation of neutrons OUTSIDE the nucleus as the root cause of LENR, they must address how the rules of the standard model, the production of virtual particles from the vacuum and the nature of beta decay and color change through the weak force are changed to allow this neutron production process to move forward with such great intensity and rapidity. Its not just meeting the requirements of energy balance, it’s meeting all the other conservation laws involved with beta decay and obeying all the rules of road for the standard model.”

    I suppose its unlikely that interaction with the nucleus and external factors such as magnetic fields in Cases A and B can full fill all these requirements. If so I agree if this is the case that Neutron formation in cases A and B above are unlikely to occur.

  • GreenWin

    i.e., what you are really saying is Rossi=Randell Mills whose name “should” appear on Thermacore’s patent #5,273,635 December 28, 1993
    Inventors: Gernert; Nelson J. (Elizabethtown, PA); Shaubach;
    Robert M. (Litiz, PA); Ernst; Donald M. (Leola, PA) — since Gernert stated it was Mills’ idea.

    Mills moved to gas loaded metals when he started BLP and is now working on plasma systems.

    You forget to include the additional assistance Dr. Rossi receives from various Navy and National labs.

    • Independent Experimenter

      So it looks like Andrea Rossi is the first one to have actually made a working embodiment. I also see he made a doctoral thesis on with a thesis on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity and its interrelationship with Edmund Husserl’s phenomenology.

      Very very interesting. Rossi is amazing. So he really is after the mind in the matter, or in this case the mind in the fuel.

      Dr. Rossi’s Doctoral thesis, Dr. Edmund Storm’s “seducing the Coulomb barrier” etc.

      So it turns out I invented nothing after all. As a consolation, their work does validate my assumptions.