In reply to Axil Axil's message of Fri, 10 May 2019 02:20:24 -0400: Hi, [snip] >The CO that was not transmuted to Si and Fe is burned as CO2 and vented >then scrubbed. Neither C nor O combined chemically with FeSi as per >chemical analysis. But carbon was thought to transmute to Si and Fe as per >Carbon Arc LENR experiments [58] in which anomalous generation of Si and >Fe was observed..
Indeed:- "Neither C nor O combined chemically with FeSi as per chemical analysis." However C & O combined as a molecule of CO, may well have been included and later escaped as a gas in the early stages of analysis. Note that the author would not be able to tell whether CO was chemically bound or a nuclear reaction had taken place to convert it into Fe-Si, other than the fact that there was no crater, and thousands in the neighborhood didn't die from radiation poisoning. > >Using the estimated energy release values of 17.13 MeV/atom of Si or 49.58 >MeV per atom of Fe given in >Appendix B, for the postulated nuclear transmutation reactions, it can be >shown that corresponding to 4.25 ton of metal >transmutation, the power generated should have been the equivalent of the >total thermal power generated by hundreds >of 1000MWe nuclear power stations. ....which clearly didn't happen. This pretty much rules out a nuclear reaction, with the possible, if highly unlikely, option that all energy release was in the form of virtually undetectable neutrino anti-neutrino pairs. Note that in order for endothermic reactions to have completely compensated for exothermic reactions, numerous lighter elements would need to have been produced as well, some of which would undoubtedly have contaminated the end product, and have been detected during analysis. > >Appendix B contains the expected excess energy gain from nuclear binding >energy released in the transmutation process. > >This situation goes to show that transmutation produced by the LENR >reaction is not a major source of excess heat, Actually it doesn't. All it shows is that the author failed to consider all options. > >Richard P. *Feynman:* It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it >doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with *experiment*, >it's wrong. Indeed. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk local asymmetry = temporary success
