Hypothesis to explain Lugano, MFMP 'Bang!' and Parkhomov observations, assuming Piantelli empirically tested theory / standard model

Bob W. Greenyer B.Eng.(Hons.)

NOTE: This spreadsheet is for comment only, It is subject to revision and may contain material errors

How to do a Parkhomov

Piantelli patent

<< Most of the basis for these calculations is here, however the 6.7MeV energy of ejected 1H and detailing of 7Li as key receiver was in his pre-Lugano

Patent extension

Gammas reported here from previously published Piantelli experiments

<< Focardi stopped working with Piantelli before Piantelli had developed his understanding of Proton capture / ejection and this shows in the Focardi/Rossi paper here

The author has discovered this paper for the first time after completing the exercise below and it is largely in line with the work herein

Key from this paper is reference to other work right at the end

"The effect of electron screening on low-energy fusion processes has been investigated by Assembaum et al [20]: they report the increasing of the Coulomb

barrier penetrability and calculate, for some reactions induced by protons (p + Li7 and p + B11) quantitative effects, that look very relevant, though probably

not sufficient to interpret our experimental results. More recently, in a series of interesting papers [21-23], Raiola et al con-

firmed experimentally the significant increase of nuclear reactions cross sections in metals due to electron screening."

[20] H. J. Assenbaum, K. Langanke and C. Rolfs, Z. Phys. A 327, 468 (1987).

[21] F. Raiola et al, Eur. Phys. Journal A 13, 377 (2002). [22] F. Raiola et al, Eur. Phys. Journal A 19, 283 (2004). [23] F. Raiola et al, Eur. Phys. Journal A 27, 79 (2006).

This is not a hypothesis focussing on the mode of transmutation of Ni isotopes, such as that based on 7Li neutron transfer, it is one focussing on the Rossi/Parkhomov/MFMP results

WHAT IS AN ION?

Useful presentation on Nuclear interactions

1H+xNi reactions and decays are listed lower down (reactions from 15+) as are reactions between alpha and 6Li and 7Li (reactions from 31+)

Natural element

Type "isotope of ..." and get decay tables from wikipedia

α captures electrons and becomes 4HE or may interact with 58Ni to produce 62Ni (see reaction below)

proceed via reaction 1

For the purpose of this reaction, it remains as 26Al and proceeds by reaction 3

Likely to boil out and condense as stable 29Si out of reaction zone

Likely to boil out and condense as stable 30Si out of reaction zone

Likely to boil out and remain as stable 31P out of reaction zone

Gamma thermalised, 7Li proceeds to further stage, electron density speeds 7Be EC decay rate (H- and potential for ejected electron?)

α captures electrons and becomes 4He, gasses leave reaction zone

4He and 3He leave reaction zone

α captures electrons and becomes 4He

α captures electrons and becomes 4He

NOTE: there are likely many other reactions, 31P could proceed to 32S which is stable and would go to gas phase

Aluminium completely disappeared from Lugano fuel (see page 53 of Lugano report)

Silicon found in Lugano ash (p.53) and MFMP 'Bang!' reactor sintered core

Magnesium not found in ash in Lugano but present in fuel

Nickel oxides are very green or grey, the sintered fuel rod was never green and not grey to begin with in “Bang!”

Initial presence of 3 isotopes of phosphorous may account for immediate red/brown colour that fades over time to grey (with slight brown)

Given that the sample is claimed in Lugano to have been taken from the centre, the P would likely have condensed out at the cooler ends (280ºC) which is in line with our lower assessment of the Lugano reactors actual temperatures.

28, 29 and 30Si might account for the silicon found in our Bang sintered ash rod sample and in Lugano ash

Higher silicon after time would account for greying of ash as would oxidation of Nickel, Parkhomovs old successful ash grey

Remaining potential for stable 31P could leave residual red/brown tinge, perhaps even a phosphide

Helium dissipates in chamber / maintains pressure / less likely to leak than Hydrogen

SPECULATION: Could the captured H-, through Ni nucleus reorganisation, result in 1 “virtual neutron” and an ejected electron (and nutrinos in the mix) may accelerate decay of 7Be and promote α to 4He conversion

* Mg boiling point at 1 atm is 1091ºC, it may still be a liquid at 1130ºC at pressures calculated in 'Bang!' and 27th/2/2015 Parkhomov reactions, might want to keep below this until 27Al & Mg burned

Nickel oxides are first removed by the high pressure H2 evolved from the LiAlH4 and then fixed into Alumina. N2 is fixed into Aluminum Nitride, evidence of Nitrogen fixing

was found on the MFMP 'Bang!' EDX of our shards however, since we loaded under Argon, this may have happened after the breach of the core, when it was hot and exposed to the air. All the same N is present.

The Li, Al and H are the fuel and the surface area of the Nickel is the reaction surface, since the secondary reaction only takes place in the immediate vacinity of a non-changing Ni surface area, the rate is

relatively constant until all fuel burned. It may increase slightly as the reaction progresses due to fragments breaking away from the sintered body

into the liquid Li Al H. Nickel provides the key primary reaction resulting in Ni isotopic transmutation perhaps through a combination of virtual neutrons/ejected electron,

or Piantelli nuclear re-organisations and ejected 1H and e- which would only travel extremely small distances ordinarily, but in this case, the recipients (Li,Al,Mg and Si atoms) are directly next to the Nickel

Above 600bar (pressures calculated to be in MFMP and Parkhomov cells, Ni should absorb H/H- into the bulk allowing bulk transmutation over time)

'Bang!' potential emissions at time of testing with Geiger tube

30P (longest

Ratio of peak emission rate at this time

time past midnight

from 'Bang!'

meaningful)

is 9/1000ths potentially not material

is 5/10,000ths likely not material

** Not Meaningful as mostly decayed

Testing this hypothesis

Evidence for proposed reaction zone Silicon has already been found in both Lugano and 'Bang!' experiments, does Dr. Parkhomov's 'successful' cores have Si?

Need to capture gas and look for helium, helium would NOT be from fusion, but from standard decay reactions.

Deliberately blow up reactor and immediately dump in cloud chamber, as we know there are no unstable elements in fuel, a few spirals would be interesting!

Look for traces of 31P

Dr. Parkhomov's reactor tubes had high percentage of Si, the MFMP used 99.8% pure Al2O3, BUT we did have a SiC element in the mix!

If Phosphorous isotopes were above 300ºC and in air why did it not spontaneously ignite?

If minute amounts of Phosphorous did exist, it may have condensed onto the rod in H2 atmosphere because of the enclosed nature of the apparatus

or perhaps it was in solution with the LiAl and then came to the surface as Li solidified at 180.5ºC, below Phosphorous auto-ignition temperature in air

Nucelear Magnetic Resonance

Carbon is reported to be in the Lugano fuel but not the ash, 13C and 1H are both examples of NMR nuclei

Hydrogen is resonant at 50Mhz in a 1.4T field, 900mhz in a 21Tesla field

Could radio frequency drive the 1H or could an extremely high momentary current in a low turn coil cause very high momentary magnetic field to resonate the 1H or 13C

Perhaps one of these?

13C +1H would go to stable 14N that would be fixed out of the fuel by the Aluminum on the reactor walls as seen in the 'Bang!' reactor

14C +1H would go to stable 15N that would be fixed out of the fuel by the Aluminum on the reactor walls as seen in the 'Bang!' reactor