Heavy element production in MM

Gregg, The first fission bomb (Trinity) yielded ~ 15-19 kilotons (I don't remember the exact yield and my source is not in front of me). The first Hydrogen Bomb (Mike) yielded 15 megatons!

Once again, examine carefully the "fusion" reaction in a hydrogen bomb. You begin with tritium and deuterium and end up with helium and a neutron. The upgrade of tritium to helium is a very small sideshow in comparison to the splitting of deuterium. The fusion part consumes a very small amount of energy. The fission part releases a very large amount of energy.

Pons and Fleischman did get energy out of their experiment. But it was from fission, not fusion. They began with deuterium and ended up with a very small amount of helium, a larger amount of tritium and a MUCH larger amount of neutrons. Everyone thinks that fusion is giving the energy. They are mistaken.

All fusion requires energy.


Gregg Wilson

Lets get this straight, are you saying deuterium is fissile? Deuterium cannot be split since it only contains 1 proton. It is hydrogen with a neutron, tritium is hydrogen with 2 neutrons. In fusion reactors no large elements are present, the yield is totally from fusion. Helium is a noble gas meaning it does not react chemically with any element further meaning that it can be yielded by any chemical reaction therefore synthesis of helium must occur through nuclear processes. The two most familiar are alpha emission and fusion. Pons and Fleishman got energy from fusion, is it cheap?...no, is it reliable?...no, is it a practical solution?...no, is it possible?...definately. The "problem" of fusion is simply containment, material science, and cost. When you want to make a small sun, you better don the asbestos gloves so to speak.

Also, please recall the example of the Mike H-bomb, remember that it had a very similar fission trigger... the yield due to fusion was an order of magnitude greater than the fission reaction could have possibly produced. It simply provided the neutrons, xrays, and activation energy required to fuse hydrogen atoms.

Look at: sopris.net/mpc/military/mike.html




Mark Vitrone

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by MarkVitrone</i>
<br />Lets get this straight, are you saying deuterium is fissile?
Mark Vitrone
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Yes. That is exactly what I am saying. What is a neutron? Well, when a "neutron" is released from a nucleus, it decays into a proton and an electron in about 12 minutes, on average. The apparent lifespan of a proton is "forever". We build a star from a hydrogen cloud. Where are all the neutrons, that turn up in all the heavier elements, isotopes?

What heats up the star to begin nuclear fusion(at millions of degrees)? The gravitons. What is the first entity made by hydrogen fusion? Deuterium. Where did the neutron come from? I propose that deuterium is two fused protons. Trapped between them is the "strong nuclear" force, that is, elysium at "100 million" degrees. I propose that a neutron is simply a proton in an altered state.

How do we get to helium? We have the "weak nuclear" force. That is, a different, much less energetic, trapping of elysium between two protons. Have one deuterium nucleus split a second deuterium nucleus. The two protons coming from the split deuterium, are pasted onto the surviving deuterium nucleus. Remember that a "neutron" freed from a nucleus does not have an electron, and therefore electrical repulsion. It takes about 12 minutes for the suddenly freed proton - "neutron" - to build an electron from the elysium. Of course helium is also created by alpha decay from a larger nucleus. This action is associated with the weak nuclear force.

How do you build heavier elements? How about polydeuterium?If one examines the elements, their isotopes, and all the isomers of the isotopes, you have about 20,000 distinct nuclei. Is there a "divine fusion path" (of great length) to every single one of those 20,000 nuclei?


Gregg Wilson

Okay, I read your reply. This integration of elysons into nuclear structure is elegant but what evidence supports this? I also point out that the hydrogen fusing in stars doesn't have to be deuterium. The heat and pressure (they are really the same thing at the atomic level) that started the star is greater than that which occurs in even our most powerful H-bombs. It could likely be that neutrons are formed when these forces at the core of the sun overcome electrostatic forces and combine protons and electrons to form neutrons whose nearly identical mass to the proton allow inclusion into the nucleus due to gravity then securing the neutron with strong and weak forces. I am curious if evidence would show which isotopes of hydrogen predominate in the stars.

Also lets not forget the fact that other forces may be at work causing anomalous data. One such is the interaction of gravitons with elysons. I recall the idea that this interaction may be responsible for background energy such as zero point energy. How the elysium and the nuclei interact though is speculation at this point; but, it is speculation that will answer a great many questions. I predict that when we know the answers to this is when we will be zipping through the galaxy at superluminous speed. ~30 years.

Mark

Mark Vitrone

The H-bomb was a lot more powerful than the engineers that did the deed expected which proves whatever happened was not understood and still is not understood. All the stuff posted here is speculation not data. The data is not available. The transformation of the elements is very poorly researched mainly because of poor models.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by MarkVitrone</i>
<br />Okay, I read your reply. This integration of elysons into nuclear structure is elegant but what evidence supports this?
Mark Vitrone
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

The thoughts that I am releasing are like prairie dogs popping up in a field. I will assemble them together in a paper in three to four weeks. Its not official, or cleansed with holy water, or blessed. Strictly speculation. But it ties many things together.

The main theme is that there is no such thing as an attractive force. I propose that an apparent attractive force can be disected and found to be a combination of geometry and repulsive force.

If you can "push" an electron into a proton then you have a "neutron". But my details on this differ strongly from standard theory. Creation of elements is greatly simplified and happens all at once.

Suppose you are a "god" and you have a hydrogen nebula. You want to make a solar system. Well, you need to construct the elements first. Is it realistic to believe that when you build the elements, you will get free energy in the bargain?

TANSTAAFL


Gregg Wilson