Rossi energy catalyst – a big hoax or new physics?

[MSimon]

http://aleklett.wordpress.com/2011/04/1 ... w-physics/

To make stable Cu-63 from stable Ni-58 the following must happen. Ni-58 picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu-59 which decays to Ni-59, which in turn picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu-60 which decays to Ni-60, which in turn picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu 61 which decays to Ni-61, which in turn picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu-62 which decays to Ni-62, which in turn picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu-63 which is stable. If this reaction chain would be true even though none of the reactions that I mention can be made with the knowledge we have today, then the isotopic distribution Cu-63/Cu-65 must be greater than 80/20, probably closer to 99/01. Right now, my conclusion is that the isotope distribution measured and the fact that the sample had 10% copper indicate that it is contaminated with natural copper. Of course I am willing to change my opinion if you can prove me wrong.

[D Tibbets]

http://aleklett.wordpress.com/2011/04/1 ... w-physics/

To make stable Cu-63 from stable Ni-58 the following must happen. Ni-58 picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu-59 which decays to Ni-59, which in turn picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu-60 which decays to Ni-60, which in turn picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu 61 which decays to Ni-61, which in turn picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu-62 which decays to Ni-62, which in turn picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu-63 which is stable. If this reaction chain would be true even though none of the reactions that I mention can be made with the knowledge we have today, then the isotopic distribution Cu-63/Cu-65 must be greater than 80/20, probably closer to 99/01. Right now, my conclusion is that the isotope distribution measured and the fact that the sample had 10% copper indicate that it is contaminated with natural copper. Of course I am willing to change my opinion if you can prove me wrong.

I think there are several errors or shortcuts here.
Ni58 either picks up a proton to yield Cu59 or Ni58 picks a neutron to yield Ni59, which quickly beta decays to Cu 59. Etc...

I think the idea is that low energy neutrons are made out of protons (hydrogen nucleus). If so a cascade of neucleosynthesis may be reasonable. But why stop at Cu63. Couldn't you go all the way to uranium or beyond? Thermal neutrons should continue the process till a whole zoo of heavier isotopes are obtained (admittedly in decreasing amounts , but still measurable). Much as a reverse of the isotope soup from uranium fission that is heat producing and (some) long lived. The key to this nucleosynthesis is the production of exothermic neutrons in the first step (burning from ~ carbon/ oxygen to iron along with any left over lighter elements.in certain types of supernova. The lighter elements quickly fuse to ~ iron, and a whole bunch of neutrons. These neutrons then build successively heavier elements till the neutrons are all consumed or they exit the area.

If this is the mechanism of the Rossi device, then radiation spectra should reveal this, and absence of this data is both curious and not threatening. I think this would not reveal any secrete catalyst, except for possibly the starting isotope of nickel. So preventing gamma measurements does not have any proprietary advantage

Also, with this picture, any number of situations/ experiments should have shown this obvious and relatively intense LENR reaction,
I speculate that even warm Nickel Metal Hydride batteries would show this effect (they can get quite hot if charged too quickly) and led to head scratching and investigation by the battery industry.

Thus the claimed secret catalyst can not be some natural isotope of nickel (enriched or not). It has to be some other real or imagined ingredient.

If the proton to neutron reaction can occur based on the Widom-Larsen theory, it must be so very rare that it is totally insignificant, as there are just too many natural situations in astronomy and on Earth where it would have been obvious - if not devastating to our possibilities of existence.
Even if you argue that there is some resonance or very narrow range of conditions where this can occur, the magnitude of the effect would have to be many orders of magnitude multiplication (like 10^20-30 X ?) to get energy densities claimed for the Rossi device.

IE: In my reasoning, if the Widom-Larsen theory is valid it must be a very small effect (much less than the recognized P-P fusion sequence in stars), and as such it is not a candidate for the huge effects claimed for the Rossi device. I suspect it would also be many orders of magnitude in strength to weak to explain the more feeble main line LENR claims. And, if it exists I don't know if it would even apply to systems using deuterium as the fuel. Though, accepting the premise, the deuterium (heavy water) LENR cells might have had their low, and less obvious excess heating due to natural water contaminates in the heavy water. But, if that was the case, surely many of the labs would have used normal water in their cells as a control. The surprising results, possibly from proton reversed beta decay, would then have been very obvious early on.

Note : If the protons (hydrogen nuclei) are not being fused into heavier elements like deuterium, helium, etc. that are lighter than iron, but it is being added to nickel- directly or through a conversion to a neutron intermediate, these are generally endothermic reactions. Unless the initial proton to neutron reaction yielded enough energy to overcome the endothermic neucleosynthesis of Nickel to heavier elements, there is no way there could be a positive energy balance. The nickel in a 'conventional' LENR cell might catalyze or enhance the conversion of eg- deuterium to helium by exotic pathways that do not make measurable radiation, and yield excess energy. But if the Nickel is a fuel , transmutting it to copper will consume energy, not produce it, no matter what other catalyst might be involved.

Dan Tibbets

[DancingFool]

http://aleklett.wordpress.com/2011/04/1 ... w-physics/

To make stable Cu-63 from stable Ni-58 the following must happen. Ni-58 picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu-59 which decays to Ni-59, which in turn picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu-60 which decays to Ni-60, which in turn picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu 61 which decays to Ni-61, which in turn picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu-62 which decays to Ni-62, which in turn picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu-63 which is stable. If this reaction chain would be true even though none of the reactions that I mention can be made with the knowledge we have today, then the isotopic distribution Cu-63/Cu-65 must be greater than 80/20, probably closer to 99/01. Right now, my conclusion is that the isotope distribution measured and the fact that the sample had 10% copper indicate that it is contaminated with natural copper. Of course I am willing to change my opinion if you can prove me wrong.

From Rossi's site:

Daniel de França MTd2
April 29th, 2011 at 2:09 PM
Dr Mr. Rossi,

Concerning the Nickel input in the experiment, do you deplete it of Ni58?

Best,

Daniel.

Andrea Rossi
April 29th, 2011 at 2:47 PM
Dear Mr Daniel De Francia:
Yes
Warm regards,
A.R.

So, you see, Rossi has also developed an isotope separation process that costs pennies per gram.

He's been busy, hasn't he?

[Giorgio]

The more he talks the more my sceptic side takes over.....

[KitemanSA]

Note : If the protons (hydrogen nuclei) are not being fused into heavier elements like deuterium, helium, etc. that are lighter than iron, but it is being added to nickel- directly or through a conversion to a neutron intermediate, these are generally endothermic reactions.

Code: Select all

Weights in Isotopic Mass (u)
63Cu  = 62.9295975
62Ni  = 61.9283451
        -------------
Delta =  1.0012524 

Proton=  1.00782503207

The proton weighs MORE than the delta between 62Ni and 63Cu. The difference is converted into energy. The reaction is EXOthermic. Please remember that. This is the second time folks on this forum have got it wrong. It is just that 62Ni is more stable than 63Cu so the conversion is not likely to stick. TYPICALLY, if a Ni absorbes a proton, it will just spit it back out again. Seems something has to interrupt that "spit it out" process to make the proton stick. (Same with a neutron I believe).

[seedload]

http://aleklett.wordpress.com/2011/04/1 ... w-physics/

To make stable Cu-63 from stable Ni-58 the following must happen. Ni-58 picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu-59 which decays to Ni-59, which in turn picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu-60 which decays to Ni-60, which in turn picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu 61 which decays to Ni-61, which in turn picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu-62 which decays to Ni-62, which in turn picks up a hydrogen nucleus to form Cu-63 which is stable. If this reaction chain would be true even though none of the reactions that I mention can be made with the knowledge we have today, then the isotopic distribution Cu-63/Cu-65 must be greater than 80/20, probably closer to 99/01. Right now, my conclusion is that the isotope distribution measured and the fact that the sample had 10% copper indicate that it is contaminated with natural copper. Of course I am willing to change my opinion if you can prove me wrong.

Rossi clearly states that ONLY NI62 and NI64 'react'. Apparently, other isotopes of NI do not react.

Rossi has 'invented' a new method of isotopic enrichment/separation to increase the ratio of NI62 and NI64 in his powder.

Apparently he enriches to the correct ratios to have the resulting copper almost identical to that of natural copper isotopic ratios.

[chrismb]

I have to admit, this did fox me to start with. There does appear to be some spare energy kicking around.

But if we have an excited 63Cu then 59Co+4He seems more likely and is still 'exothermic'.

1H + 62Ni = 1.00782503207 + 61.928345115 = 62.93617014

4He + 59Co = 4.00260325415 + 58.933195048 = 62.935798

I don't pretend to know enough to explain why it would take the most 'stable' route, rather than the 'lowest mass end-point' route (with 63Cu 62.929597474) but it is a matter of thermodynamics beyond my understanding. Funnily enough, I was just about to post it on fusor.net to see if anyone there could shed light.

The question is; do nuclear reaction branches favour maximum binding energy outcomes, or minimum mass outcomes, and, whichever way around, what is the thermodynamic argument for it?

What can be said; either way doesn't really back up the claims. In the 63Cu+hv, that should be a 6MeV gamma that easily penetrates 1 cm of lead, so the gammas should be intense.

Where does the heat come from if the excess mass is being released as gammas!?!?

If it is a thermal outcome, that suggests the 59Co+4He route. Where is the 59Co? If he'd claimed 59Co as the end result, then he's got a stronger case based on theory (nothwithstanding a lack of explanation for getting past the Coulomb barrier).

[KitemanSA]

What can be said; either way doesn't really back up the claims. In the 63Cu+hv, that should be a 6MeV gamma that easily penetrates 1 cm of lead, so the gammas should be intense.

Where does the heat come from if the excess mass is being released as gammas!?!?

If it is a thermal outcome, that suggests the 59Co+4He route. Where is the 59Co? If he'd claimed 59Co as the end result, then he's got a stronger case based on theory (nothwithstanding a lack of explanation for getting past the Coulomb barrier).

It seems likely that the most probable, VASTLY most probable, outcome under normal circumstances with p + 62Ni is to eject the proton again, resulting in EFFECTIVELY no reaction (there was one, but it had no consequence). Thus, in order for there to BE a reaction of consequence, there must be something that interrupts the "ejection" process. And if there is indeed something to interrupt that process, it may also provide an alternate path for energy release. Perhaps that results in very low energy gamma, or even down in the Xray or UV for the final release.

One possible process suggests itself. Given that this material is supposed to be highly Hydrogen loaded, this may make it PLAUSIBLE that as the ejection candidate is getting to where the nucleus would otherwise release it, it interacts with another Hydrogen nucleus, resulting in that p gaining a substantial amount of the energy of the Ejection Candidate, energy it would have taken to eject it in the first place. Now, not having sufficient energy for ejection, the EC returns back to the nucleus. How many times will the nucleus TRY to eject a proton before it finally falls back on the tried and true EM radiation? In all that trying, might it nudge another H or dozen or milliard?

Just a thought. Not even a hypothesis.

[DancingFool]

On(e) possible process suggests itself. Given that this material is supposed to be highly Hydrogen loaded,

Nope. You're thinking along P/F lines. Rossi claims his reaction takes place in a very fine powder, with no loading process required. He claims it's a surface phenomenon, enabled by the Secret Catalyst.

Basically, Rossi is claiming that pretty much everything we know about nuclear physics is wrong. He claims fusion with some alpha particles and weak gamma radiation. No neutrons. At the same time, his patent application specifies boron or borated water as the material for thermalization of the process energy. His patent application claims beta + decay, but somehow the resulting gammas (from the positron emission) never occur. What he does claim is that the gamma spectrum allows identification of the catalyst, and - get this - the gamma radiation from an amorphous powder sample is anisotropic. That is, he can find an orientation of the detectors WRT the sample which will not show catalyst artifacts.

It just goes on and on.

[Nik]

Well, sounds like he's about to qualify for either the Nobel Prize in Physics, or a padded cell plus the next IgNobel (*).

He does so much in such a clumsy way, as if to convince skeptics that he's a fraud, then blows the act it by funding stuff himself...

I'm baffled...

(*) If latter, he may be sharing with 'Rapture' Camping...

[seedload]

He does so much in such a clumsy way, as if to convince skeptics that he's a fraud, then blows the act it by funding stuff himself...
.

In the Ampenergo announcement, they said that they already gave him money.

They also said that the are looking for investors and that they are selling licenses.

[KitemanSA]

On(e) possible process suggests itself. Given that this material is supposed to be highly Hydrogen loaded,

Nope. You're thinking along P/F lines. Rossi claims his reaction takes place in a very fine powder, with no loading process required. He claims it's a surface phenomenon, enabled by the Secret Catalyst.

Interesting. Perhaps it is just a language difference, but I am under the impression that any time one brings H into contact with the surface of Ni, especially under heat, the H enters into surface micro-cracks and finally works its way into the lattice itself. Given nano particles, the amount of surface micro-cracking would be huge, accelerating the diffusion into the lattice. This would load the lattice without a long duration "loading process". ICBW.

[Giorgio]

Interesting. Perhaps it is just a language difference, but I am under the impression that any time one brings H into contact with the surface of Ni, especially under heat, the H enters into surface micro-cracks and finally works its way into the lattice itself. Given nano particles, the amount of surface micro-cracking would be huge, accelerating the diffusion into the lattice. This would load the lattice without a long duration "loading process". ICBW.

Even assuming this, it would not explain how the whole process of fusion could occour.

[KitemanSA]

Interesting. Perhaps it is just a language difference, but I am under the impression that any time one brings H into contact with the surface of Ni, especially under heat, the H enters into surface micro-cracks and finally works its way into the lattice itself. Given nano particles, the amount of surface micro-cracking would be huge, accelerating the diffusion into the lattice. This would load the lattice without a long duration "loading process". ICBW.

Even assuming this, it would not explain how the whole process of fusion could occour.

You are correct. This just suggests that IF some sort of nuclear reaction occurs then the result MAY be heat and not gamma (or at least not your typical gamma).

I am wondering whether WL's surface plasmon polariton(sp?) thingees would spread across all the surface area of the Ni particles if they were created on the inner surfaces of the cylinder of Ni powder. I believe I read that Rossi worked with nano particles which are the bases of quantum dot lasers, no? Might his "catalyst" be the same thing as his "heater" which is a SPP generator? If so, then the initiating particle would be a neutron, not a proton, and INITIATING a nuclear reaction would be simple.

[MSimon]

What is an atypical gamma? What is an SPP? HPA.