International Precious Metals (IPMCF) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : International Precious Metals (IPMCF)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Richard Mazzarella who wrote (30847)	3/4/1998 10:43:00 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (1) of 35569

Richard, what you are missing is that the most likely daughter nuclei (assuming that indeed you could cold fuse two (or three according to Champion) nuclei to form a heavier one. Furthermore, in cold fusion you GAIN energy in the reaction (the weight of the daughter nuclei is less than the weight of the parents), in Champion examples, the weight of the daughter nuclei is larger than the sum of the parents and thus you lose energy (or you have to put some in it. The graph of mass per nuclei (except for light nuclei where there is quite a structure to the curve) has a minimum around the 3d transition metals (ventered around iron) thus combining lighter nuclei to form iron is energy positive, but combining nuclei with mass above iron to form higher atomic number nuclei is energy negative. Or, if you remember your atomic bomb night stories, when you fission a high atomic number nucleus to lower ones you gain energy, the reverse process would require energies more or less equivalent to those released by a fission weapon. Zeev

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next