It's scientific research!rjaypeters wrote:What would the First Mate have to say about that?
She new what she was getting into when she chose an engineer/scientist.
perhaps the universe exploited them already eons ago. so they are now relatively rare (ie. 'fabricated' - forgive the possible double entendre - say 'precisely configured').Giorgio wrote:I really find it hard to believe that there are mechanisms in nature as the one proposed by W&L and that we didn't see it till date.
indeed.Giorgio wrote: I would like before for them to verify the existence of these ultra low momentum neutrons and the ability of the SSP to capture the high energetic gamma.
I'm not allowed to tell. Let me just say that the reaction might no be entirely adverse. At least if the champagne was real and the hooker was fantasy.rjaypeters wrote:What would the First Mate have to say about that?MSimon wrote:I'd see how much fun I could have with the money.
IMO hookers and champagne would be a better investment.
There may be no need to capture any "high energetic gamma" (HEG). I've been spelunking the wikipedia and found at least one potential alternative to HEG. It is called "Internal Conversion".Giorgio wrote: I would like before for them to verify the existence of these ultra low momentum neutrons and the ability of the SSP to capture the high energetic gamma.
Seems some isotopes go 90%+ IC over gamma. 58Fe is 0% IC, or so WP says. This leaves the "gamma" with a frequency down in the Xray range.Wikipedia wrote:Internal conversion {IC} is a radioactive decay process where an excited nucleus interacts with an electron in one of the lower atomic orbitals, causing the electron to be emitted from the atom. Thus, in an internal conversion process, a high-energy electron is emitted from the radioactive atom, but without beta decay taking place. For this reason, the high-speed electrons from internal conversion are not beta particles (β particles), since the latter come from beta decay. Since no beta decay takes place in internal conversion, the element atomic number does not change, and thus (as is the case with gamma decay) no transmutation of one element to another is seen. Also, no neutrino is emitted in internal conversion.
Thank you for the response and playing along. I agree that that study looks like a an early prototype. Obviously the biggest difference is between Ni bars and Ni nanopowder.ransompw wrote: I believe he began with the last study done by Focardi. See
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Campar ... aceana.pdf
How much lead would it take to stop 1W of soft xray frequency gammas?MSimon wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_conversion
Uh. Let us assume 60 W of real energy production. 1 W going the "normal" nuclear route. 1 W is going to generate a LOT of gammas.
You have identified the two areas where I suspect the theory has the reality just slightly wrong.Giorgio wrote:I really find it hard to believe that there are mechanisms in nature as the one proposed by W&L and that we didn't see it till date.rcain wrote:Any views?Miley wrote:"I've taken a brief look at it so far," Miley said, "and from a first look, this theory agrees with the distinctive multipeak reaction product data from my experiments amazingly well. ...
I would like before for them to verify the existence of these ultra low momentum neutrons and the ability of the SSP to capture the high energetic gamma.
He says he has been working on this for years and believes he knows what is going on. He just hasn't been, and won't be, saying what his data / theories are any time soon.tomclarke wrote: Rossi has not yet, going by demos, bothered to do the first stuff - even once!
So when has that stopped you before? (Just teasing)Giorgio wrote:If you put "speculate" in bold like that I cannot really argue with you, else it will looks like I am being too pickyKitemanSA wrote: [Speculate] .... snip.... [/Speculate]
As far as I knew the mass of Polariton should be around 100 eV/c2.KitemanSA wrote:So when has that stopped you before? (Just teasing)Giorgio wrote:If you put "speculate" in bold like that I cannot really argue with you, else it will looks like I am being too pickyKitemanSA wrote: [Speculate] .... snip.... [/Speculate]
The whole idea hinges on the effective mass of a polariton. I found one place (yes, wikipedia) from whence I THINK I got the message that they can be ~50MeV/c². This is about 1/2 the mass of a muon. Does anyone have better information?