In reply to Eric Walker's message of Fri, 23 Nov 2012 19:49:15 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 7:45 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Do you have a URL for Ron's work?
>>
>
>
>> See the section titled "My Personal Theory" and what follows it in Ron's
>response to this physics.SE question:
>
>http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/3799/why-is-cold-fusion-considered-bogus/13734
>
>The explanation he proposes is part of a longer response to the question,
>"Why is cold fusion considered bogus?"
>
>Eric
I think what he's trying to say is that a fast D nucleus can also knock an inner
electron out of Pd, which can then in turn accelerate another D nucleus, in a
train of reactions.
However the problem with that is that a fast D will lose most of its energy
ionizing valence electrons rather than K shell electrons, so the process
actually dies almost instantly. Hence I don't really see a "band state" being
reasonably populated.
A great many concurrent reactions would need to occur for two Ds to find
themselves in the neighbourhood of the same nucleus, at the same time. I guess
the question is whether or not enough Kshell holes are created by the fusion
reaction products to make the whole process OU.
There is also the question of what gets the process kicked off initially, though
natural background radiation might act as a trigger.
Essentially what this theory does is provide a means of temporarily storing the
energy of a fusion reaction, and parceling it out to lots of other D nuclei so
that hopefully at least one two of them can fuse too.
Note also that as the Z of the host nucleus rises (with consequent increase in K
shell energy) two things happen:
1) The D's get closer which should enhance the individual reaction rate.
2) The number of K shell vacancies created by fast particles decreases, which
should decrease the overall reaction rate.
Since 1 and 2 work in opposite directions, there may be an optimal Z value for
the host lattice. Of course the host lattice also has to absorb H/D.
I note that Ron doesn't try to apply this explanation to the Ni-H results. The K
shell electron of Ni only has an ionization energy of about 7-8 keV, which is
rather on the low side.
All that having been said however I still rather like this theory. It seems to
have much going for it.
{BTW quote:
"Now suppose that two of these accelerated deuterons happen to come close to the
same Pd nucleus. This can easily produce a fusion event at the turning point,
the deuterons have around 20KeV after all, and the fusion rates at 20 KeV in
beams is not that small, let alone in cases where the wave function is
concentrated near a nucleus with a classical turning point (where the wave
function is enhanced)."
I think what he's trying to say here is a that when the deuterons come to a halt
near another nucleus, they are also relatively motionless with regard to one
another, but at close range. That means that there is a large overlap in their
De Broglie waves, and the tunneling probability is consequently enhanced.}
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
