In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sat, 1 Jun 2013 14:33:22 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>Eric,
>
>
>
>I have dined on crow before and prefer mine well-charred with a nice Pinot
>Noir
>
>
>
>The ultimate source of energy cannot be determined as of now but Rossis
>hundreds of hours of operation at kilowatt levels with no gammas clearly
>indicates NO fusion.
Some clean reactions: (Type I)
64Ni + H2 => 62Ni + 4He + 11.8 MeV ("no" gammas)
62Ni + H2 => 60Ni + 4He + 9.88 MeV ("no" gammas)
60Ni + H2 => 58Ni + 4He + 7.9 MeV ("no" gammas)
Alternatives: (Type II)
64Ni + H2 => 65Cu + H (fast) + 7.45 MeV ("no" gammas)
62Ni + H2 => 63Cu + H (fast) + 6.12 MeV ("no" gammas)
Dirty:
58Ni + H2 => 56Ni (radioactive) + 4He + 5.83 MeV
60Ni + H2 => 61Cu (radioactive) + H (fast) + 4.8 MeV
Decay reactions:
56Ni => 56Co (radioactive) => 56Fe
61Cu => 61Ni
However, if you start with 62Ni (& 64Ni) then you need to wait a very long time
before enough 56Ni shows up to produce significant radioactivity.
The "no" means no (few) primary gammas. A very small percentage of the fast
particles will produce the occasional spallation neutron, which will in turn,
over a long period of time, result in the production of some radioactive
isotopes. However the rate of production may be below the rate at which they
decay, so the overall level of radioactivity may remain very small.
The H2 is of course f/H molecules.
I have no idea whether Type I or Type II reactions would predominate.
Note also that in the Type II case, follow on Type II reactions would result in
stable Zn isotopes.
Nevertheless, I suspect that indeed the primary source of energy in his reactor
is the formation of f/H.
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
