About the Coulomb Barrier in LENR Processes (Eugen Andreev)

The following paper has been submitted by Dr. Eugen Andreev of the Institute of Physics of the National Academy of Science in Kiev, Ukraine.

The paper was originally published in Russian (https://yadi.sk/i/tN0yf-fJkAqdM), and has been translated into English by the author. In preface he states, “This is the initial article on the LENR-mechanisms. Its basis – the idea of continuity and superfluidity of Dark Matter.”

http://www.e-catworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Coulomb-barrier-in-LENR.pdf

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Also, although I thought that Oppenheimer-Phillips reactions
    might be taking place between deuterium and palladium [my one sentence letter (May 15, 1989, C&E News page 3)] Magdi Ragheb and George Miley thought that an Oppenheimer Phillips mechanism might also explain the tritium formation in the F&P experiments.

    “The possibility of deuteron disintegration due to polarization in the coulomb field of a target nucleus according to an Oppenheimer-Phillips process is discussed within the context of
    electrochemically compressed D+ in a palladium cathode. This
    reaction is possible between deuterons and palladium isotopes, as well as between the deuterons themselves. In the last case, the equivalent of the proton branch of the deuterium-deuterium fusion reaction occurs in preference to the neutron branch. The process provides a possible explanation for the observed energy release, tritium production, and neutron suppression in the
    Fleischmann and Pons experiment.”
    http://www.ans.org/pubs/journals/fst/a_29155

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Just a final thought. The d-d Coulomb barrier is low but if the thermal neutron cross section is an indication of the size of the target a
    deuteron would see, it would be much easier for a deuteron to find a transition metal nucleus rather than another deuteron. This might help explain the Mitsubishi transmutations.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Joshua Cude made the point that the “..branching
    ratios in muon-catalyzed fusion are exactly the same as in ordinary thermal
    fusion…”. The point being that if it was just a matter of lowering the Coulomb barrier,
    the branching ratios of hot and cold fusion would be the same. See his comment
    here. http://coldfusionnow.org/electron-capture-by-a-proton-where-would-the-energy-come-from/

    • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

      He is right in his box.
      It is not an evidence LENr is non existent as he says, but that his assumption is BS.
      Cold fusion does not rape the coulomb barrier.
      If so, branching ratio would be the same, and there would be 24MeV of fusion scream added to the energy of the rape itself. forget it LENr is not breaking coulomb barrier the hot way, even through screening (rape by surprise).

      Cold fusion is slow seduction, and final cool wedding of a long living de facto couple.

      This is IMHO the real jey of Ed Storms theory : energy of the fusion (intercourse) is dissipated slowly before the fusion=wedding, though low energy radiation (keV).

      No clear idea, except Ed Storms proposal (which is deeply criticized as not working as is by physicists).

      my engineer vision is :
      – the NAE is as ed say rare, and linked to crack (not sure it is hydroton)
      – NAE emit radiation slowly puting many entangled nucleus into a collective state of lower energy.
      – I PROPOSE : a nanoscale quantum heat pump, use “triggering energy” (as many article say it is required) to pump energy from the nucleus collectivity, radiate it as x-rays/e-UV… this heat pump may be discrete breather, WLS corelated patch of electron and protons, … result is a collective state, a collective nuclear isomer
      – I PROPOSE : the heat pump is deep breather or similar non linear lattice phenomenon
      – I SUSPECT: the collective state invole not only hydrogen isotope but also heavier nucleus (lithium, palladium, …) as hydrogen 1 have no nuclear isomer… not sure as mosbauer effect may allow strange effects…
      – I SUPPORT: ed storm position that the final fusion is pep, or pep+X style, and it makes the nucleus collectivity back to a normal energy state.

      I’m not nuclear physicist, but as engineer the NAE engine show some clear properties that eliminate most theories, not by the details, but by the essence itself.

      a LENR theory should explain why LENR clearly prefers low energy outcome.
      many theory propose an excuse for not a tragic rape scream (WLS) but ed storms theory explains that not only rape scream are screened, but simply not produced, and that because of a clear preference to slow consensual love.

      to explain the ed storms slow radiation theory, i see only two possibility :
      – either the collectivity cool down like water ice in winter… but why does not this happen normally
      – either some heat pump make ice like in a fridge.

      • Alan DeAngelis

        By the way, soon after F&P’s press conference in a May 15, 1989 letter (page 3) to Chemical & Engineering News, Albert H. Alberts
        of The University of Groningen, Department of Chemistry mentions that D + D He(4) could be in equilibrium as mass is lost!

        (I have a hard copy but it’s too long to copy).

    • Andreas Moraitis

      I guess it would make a difference if excited nuclei were involved.

  • http://www.animpossibleinvention.com/ Mats Lewan

    Really interesting paper, at least from my limited knowledge horizon, and also interesting comments by Zephir here below.
    Amazing how nuclear science so easily can reject the idea of cold fusion when there’s so much to be discovered outside the dominant field of two-particle interactions.

  • Winebuff67

    This is off topic. My friend just went to the blacklight demo and will give me a rundown when he gets back.

    • Anon2012_2014

      “My friend just went to the blacklight demo and will give me a rundown when he gets back.”

      How did he get invited?

      What data could he observe to corroborate power in or power out, energy in or energy out?

      (The Demo video on their website looks like a carbon arc lamp — tells us nothing.)

      • Winebuff67

        Haven’t seen the video yet. I’ll take a look.

        • Anon2012_2014

          Out of curiosity I read the three 2014 reports on their website.

          One experiment is in a bomb calorimeter sealed in aluminum. They claim there is no aluminum oxidation when they look at the results under xray diffraction spectroscopy. I have my doubts on that as they heat the insides to plasma temperatures and then for some reason, the free oxygen is not suppose to interact with the very exothermic O + Al reactions???

          Same risk in the underwater spark experiments.

          I’d like to know that someone has closed off these avenues and others to making the reaction appear more exothermic than it is.

          I also wonder if the reports are 2014 why they don’t have wide spread demos and why they are still asking individual investors for money in secret. What’s the big secret — you either have it or you don’t.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Could any of these tracks be due to protons from the following Oppenheimer-Phillips reactions?

    Pd(102) + D > Pd(103) + P 5.4 MeV

    Pd(104) + D > Pd(105) + P 4.9 MeV

    Pd(105) + D > Pd(106) + P 7.3 MeV

    Pd(106) + D > Pd(107) + P 4.3 MeV

    Pd(108) + D > Pd(109) + P 3.9 MeV

    Pd(110) + D > Pd(111) + P 3.5 MeV

  • Zephir

    The understanding the role of Coulomb barier is complex, but its main aspects are still imaginable for laymen. It can be divided into three parts: 1) classical mechanics of collective motion of electrons inside of atom orbitals 2) classical mechanics of collective motion of atoms withing lattice, 3) quantum mechanical effect of collective motion of entangled electrons and atom nuclei 4) nuclear aspects of cold fusion.

    First of all, we can imagine the electrons like the lightweight but still inertial objects flying around atom nuclei. When hydrogen atom nuclei collide during hot fusion, the situation is rather simple, because the energy of collisions is much higher, than the ionization energy of single electron, so that the electrons can be peeled with impact as easily, as the flesh of cherry from its stone. The presence of electrons therefore isn’t important there at all.

    At the case of cold fusion inside the nickel lattice, the nickel atoms contain lotta electrons with compare to hydrogen. The stripping of few first electrons is as easy, as the stripping of electron from proton in hydrogen atom, but with increasing number of electrons the ionization energy rises steadily. The last dozen of electrons require as high energy, as the nuclear transition inside of nuclei itself, which essentially means, there is not sharp energy boundary between bottom electrons and surface of atom nuclei. Their peeling proceeds like the peeling of flesh from mango, which is nearly impossible to do perfectly.

    • Zephir

      First of all, we can imagine the electrons like the lightweight but still inertial objects flying around atom nuclei. When hydrogen atom nuclei collide during hot fusion, the situation is rather simple, because the energy of collisions is much higher, than the ionization energy of single electron, so that the electrons can be peeled with impact as easily, as the flesh of cherry from its stone. The presence of electrons therefore isn’t important there at all.

      At the case of cold fusion inside the nickel lattice, the nickel atoms contain lotta electrons with compare to hydrogen. The stripping of few first electrons is as easy, as the stripping of electron from proton in hydrogen atom, but with increasing number of electrons the ionization energy rises steadily. The last dozen of electrons require as high energy, as the nuclear transition inside of nuclei itself, which essentially means, there is not sharp energy boundary between bottom electrons and surface of atom nuclei. Their peeling proceeds like the peeling of flesh from mango, which is nearly impossible to do perfectly.

      In this case the inertia of remaining electrons must be considered, as these residual electrons represent a shielding of Coulomb force from atom nuclei and when the nickel atoms collide, then the residual electrons must move aside from the place of collision – or they get involved in the nuclear reaction.

      • LindbergofSwed

        Super!! How can you use this information to controll the reaction?

        • Zephir

          In multiple ways, I hope. For example, when we know, that the cold fusion gets promoted with low-dimensional collisions, we may enforce the low-dimensional character of material by usage of whiskers (which will also accelerate the load of hydrogen). This is the route which Piantelli followed. During co-deposition of palladium the thin crystals get also formed, when the concentration of ions remains low, so that the crystals are forced to grow fast. It may explain multiple observations of narrow jets escaping from thin films during nuclear transmutations: the narrow crystals serve as a pump of particles there. It may explain approaches, in which the Russian cold fusion gets realized, and so on.

          • LindbergofSwed

            So if you would recomend a setup for MFMP what would that be?

            • Zephir

              First of all I’d start with replication of twenty years old experiments with co-deposition of nickel and lithium from lithium and potassium carbonate solutions. These experiments are cheap, safe (you can leave them and go to work), reportedly quite reproducible (Notoya, Niedra, Pattersson) and you can run many of them at the same moment.

              The MFMP experiments are IMO also overly complex: simple welded nickel pipe heated with induction machine should be enough. It could be filled with mixture of nickel dust and lithium hydride diluted with molten eutectic salts mixture for to improve the cooling and prohibit the overheating. I’m planning such an experiments myself.

              • LindbergofSwed

                thanks, interesting link, it seems like the line between success and no excess heat is a thin line, but the potential is enormous.

                “…said that an input of 1 watt would generate more than 1,000 watts of excess heat…”

    • Zephir

      At second, the collisions of atoms during hot fusion are omnidirectional and the simultaneous collision of multiple atoms in a single moment is extremely unprobable. Not so much at the case of cold fusion, during which the dimensionality of collisions remains limited and multiple atoms
      collide along single line as a single body. The mutual speed of such collisions is lower, but the inertia of colliding mass is much higher. This leads into group of lattice effects (Mossbauer resonance, Gauss gun effect and Astroblaster effect), which lead into temporal and local,
      but intensive increase of energy density.

      We may imagine the consequences with increasing size of particles during shaking of sand inside the closed vessel. Until the particles of sand are small, then the energy of their collision is also low. But when we shake pebbles, then the inertia of collisions gets high and the local temperature gets high, so that formation of sparks occurs. This local concentration of momentum and amplification impulse is what also makes the cold fusion different from hot fusion.

    • Zephir

      At third, the role of quantum effects can be understood most easily by pilot wave interpretation of quantum mechanics. This theory conjectures, that around fast moving or accelerating particles the vacuum gets more dense and its energy density increases. When multiple atoms collide along single line, then their inertia gets multiplied and the energy density during collision may get so high, it will become comparable with energy density of remaining electrons and also surface of atom nuclei, so
      that the energetic continuum will get formed there. You may imagine it like dense zone of vacuum at the connection line of multiple atoms, along which both the electrons, both atom nuclei can move freely like the electrons within superconductor stripes (the principle is also the same: the high compression and acceleration of electron motion by vacuum fluctuations). In brief, the formation of dense energetic zone along connection line of atoms entangles them and it opens the way for their mutual quantum tunneling.

      The establishing of quantum tunnel is not only important for elimination of Coulomb barrier and for acceleration of atom nuclei, but also for the effective cooling (thermalization) of products of collision. Due to energy of fusion, the resulting fragments (neutrons) must pass through a sufficiently thick layer of vacuum for to brake bellow speed, during which they can be reabsorbed with remaining atom nuclei. Which means, the compact line of atoms not only serves for acceleration of atom nuclei like tiny accelerator by utilizing the Gauss riffle mechanism, but it also works in the opposite way: i.e. like effective decelerator of products of collisions.

    • Zephir

      The last effects of Coulomb barrier are connected with activation barrier of mutual merging of atom nuclei of different size. You may imagine these atom nuclei as a very dense but superfluous mercury droplets (nuclear droplet model). When tiny mercury droplets collide, then the high positive curvature of tiny atom nuclei serves as an effective barrier against their merging. This is the case of hot fusion, when only lone protons collide mutually.

      But during cold fusion the merging of atom nuclei of different size occurs. The merging of large droplets of mercury is quite easy, as the surface tension effect get diminished there. The activation energy barrier for merging of large atoms is therefore much lower, but also their repulsive Coulombic force gets high because of high number of protons involved. This doesn’t apply at the case of lone proton collision with nickel nuclei, which optimizes both factors toward cold fusion.

    • Zephir

      At the very end we should consider another effects, which are special for particular atoms. We for example know, that the cold fusion runs smoothly with metals, which dissolve hydrogen well, because inside such atoms the hydrogen gets negative charge (hydride anion), which gets attracted to atom nuclei and as such it fuses easier (Piantelli mechanism). After then we have to explain, why some metals absorb hydrogen well, whereas the others not. In my opinion it’s because the surface undulations of electron orbitals get into resonance with longitudinal vibrations for orbitals of certain size (Znidarscic mechanism). This explains, why only few atoms dissolve the hydrogen well in their lattice (nickel, palladium in particular).

      • Andreas Moraitis

        Zephir, I appreciate your contributions to this blog, but what has all this to do with the above cited paper?

        • Zephir

          It just discusses the Coulomb barrier effects in their entirety.

          The above article is trying to explain, why the cold fusion of deuterium should rune easier than the fusion of hydrogen by polarization effects of deuterium to Coulomb potential curve. It’s already well known, that the neutron inside the deuterium is relatively weekly bound, which may contribute to observations of cold fusion in deuteron plasmas (Sternglass and others).

          But I don’t think, that these effects are these most substantial factors, as the cold fusion runs better with deuterium in palladium, but worse in another systems (like the nickel), probably due to isotopic effects during hydride formation.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            “The above Russian article is trying to explain, why the cold fusion with deuterium should run easier than the fusion of hydrogen by polarization effects of deuterium to Coulomb potential curve.”

            That does not seem to be the point. The author derives his model of a non-spherical Coulomb field from the distribution of the quark charges. That field would allow even an attraction of two protons if their axes could be properly aligned (see. Fig. 4).

  • Jarea

    Where is Axil Axil?
    He will enjoy this post about relating LENR with Dark matter. 😀

  • Alan DeAngelis
  • Gerard McEk

    Again a interesting theory that aims to explain the fusion of protons in a lattice. It would be so nice that we had a better understanding of the nucleus and the forces that play a role there. Maybe this theory will give us this. I unfortunately omit the knowledge to value this on its merit, but I surely like the approach of Dr Eugene Andreev.

    • http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/ barty

      Unfortunately it is not peer reviewed by a serious journal.

      • Warthog

        And thus will never be, as “serious journals” don’t accept LENR papers, even from Nobel Laureates (Julian Schwinger). But what is needed at this point is not another theory, but an experimental setup which can be replicated easily.

      • Alan DeAngelis

        Those peer reviews can be killers.
        http://www.quotesdata.com/Giordano_Bruno_quotes.jpg

      • Zephir

        In standard peer-review the cold fusion is still impossible – which is also why the highest impacted journals like the Nature or Science don’t accept the articles about cold fusion in general. The requirement of peer-review by serious journal is therefore sorta oxymoron under current situation- no matter how well minded it is.

        • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

          it depend on what you call standards.

          Speciality journal accept LENr experimental papers in their domain.
          High impact paper refuse any LENr paper without reading nor submitting to reviewers.

          The differenehave been rexplained recently.

          Speciality journal (Naturwissenschaften, JJAP, Journal of Electroanalythical Chemistry) cannot reject papers without a good reason. They work with the author to improve it but finally accept honest papers.

          High Impact journals can reject whatever they decide without any explanation, and they reject LENR thus.

      • Zephir

        Not only serious journals are moderated, but their preprint servers are censored too. It’s two layer control.

        http://www.iqoqi-vienna.at/nicolas-gisin/

    • Andreas Moraitis

      There are several approaches that deal with an asymmetric Coulomb barrier. I am inclined to like this one as well since it provides a mathematical framework but can be understood intuitively at the same time. The decisive question seems to be how two protons could be arranged in the way that is shown in Fig. 4/4 – maybe a magnetic field could do the job. Configuration 4/4 would be much easier to realize than numbers 4/2 or 4/3, which appears to be an advantage over similar concepts.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        In addition, in configuration 4/4 the Coulomb force would even be attractive, so that one could go without H- ions and the like. On the other hand, one might ask why such reactions do not occur spontaneously with a significant probability.