Use of CR-39 Detectors Heats up "Cold Fusion"

[erich]

The Navy Heats up "Cold Fusion" with Use of CR-39 Detectors in LENR Experiment:

 

Extraordinary Evidence - "Cold Fusion"

 

The field of low energy nuclear reactions, historically known as cold fusion, has never had simple physical evidence of the claimed nuclear processes to physically place in the hands of doubters.

 

Until now.

 

Scientists at the U.S. Navy’s San Diego SPAWAR Systems Center have produced something unique in the 17-year history of the scientific drama historically known as cold fusion: simple, portable, highly repeatable, unambiguous, and permanent physical evidence of nuclear events using detectors that have a long track record of reliability and acceptance among nuclear physicists.

 

Using a unique experimental method called co-deposition, combined with the application of external electric and magnetic fields, and recording the results with standard nuclear-industry detectors, researchers have produced what may be the most convincing evidence yet in the pursuit of proof of low energy nuclear reactions.

 

New Energy Times, issue #19

"Extraordinary Evidence"

http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET19.htm#ee

[Rade]

2009 Update on Navy cold fusion research:

 

March 2009 News Release:

'Cold Fusion' Rebirth? New Evidence For Existence Of Controversial Energy Source

 

2009 publication:

http://www.newenergytimes.com/Library2/2008/2008BossTripleTracks.pdf

 

===

I would be interested in learning how others think the Coulomb barrier was overcome in this Navy experiment. Also, is it really clear that the 3-pit pattern in Fig 1 © was made by three alpha particles ? It is not clear to me at all, I think each pit represents a nucleon. Any comments ?

[CraigD]

http://www.newenergytimes.com/Library2/2008/2008BossTripleTracks.pdf

 

===

I would be interested in learning how others think the Coulomb barrier was overcome in this Navy experiment. Also, is it really clear that the 3-pit pattern in Fig 1 © was made by three alpha particles ? It is not clear to me at all, I think each pit represents a nucleon. Any comments ?

According to the original paper’s abstract (see http://www.springerlink.com/content/022501181p3h764l), Mosier-Boss, Szpak1, Gordon and Forsley believe the “triple tracks” in the CR-39 detector material are caused by 3 alpha particles (helium nuclei, each consisting of 2 protons and 2 neutrons) due to the “breakup” (forced fission) of a single carbon nucleus (6 protons and 6 neutrons).

 

Because of the high energy requirement of breaking carbon ([math]\ge 9.6 \,\mbox{MeV}[/math]), the authors believe their finding suggests that this energy if from the fusion of a deuterium (1 proton and 1 neutron) and tritium (1 proton and 2 neutrons) isotopes of hydrogen into a helium nucleus (2 protons and 2 neutrons), releasing a fast-moving neutron. This fast-moving neutron has 14.1 MeV of kinetic energy, enough to break a carbon nucleus

 

This suggestion is, however, speculation. The claims of cold fusion “believers” that these results are “unambiguous” “evidence” “to physically place in the hands of doubters” are, IMHO, premature and overly enthusiastic.

 

I wish Mosier-Boss and her collaborators, or another group, would submit their or a similar paper in a journal dedicated to nuclear physics. The journal it was published in, Naturwissenschaften, is an “interdisciplinary” journal usually focusing on biology and biology-related subjects, so is not a very good place for a paper like Mosier-Boss et all’s, as it isn’t read by the most expert people, and may not have been reviewed by a specialist prior to publication (the identity of journal reviewers are usually confidential). Even better for amateurs like me would be submitting a paper to arxiv.org, where anyone would read it for free.

[Rade]

To CraigD:

 

You can read the Navy paper for free here:

 

http://www.newenergytimes.com/Library2/2008/2008BossTripleTracks.pdf

 

Thank you for the reply. I have many questions about the published Navy experiment.

 

The hypothesis of the Navy, that the 3-pit patterns they see (obviously they do see them) is from breakup of Carbon-12----does that hypothesis make sense to you (for fun, let us assume some sort of fusion did occur in their experiments).

 

Would it not mean that Carbon-12 must have three alpha pre-existing, and not N and P in independent nuclear shells ? So, a picture of Carbon-12 would then be:

 

Carbon 12 = [NNPP] + [NNPP] + [NNPP] , three alpha

 

But, is the above not against the current Standard Model of nuclear structure for carbon-12. Are not the N and P packed with energy shells in the nucleus that follow rules of quantum mechanics ?

 

Can you think of other ways a 3-pit pattern could be formed in such an experiment ?

[Rade]

To correct a misunderstanding of the journal "Naturwissenschaften" where the Navy experiment was published. This is not a journal of biology--in the past Einstein and Heisenberg published in this journal, it is well respected.

[CraigD]

You can read the Navy paper for free here:

 

http://www.newenergytimes.com/Library2/2008/2008BossTripleTracks.pdf

Thanks for the reference, which gave me a chance to read this paper, “Triple tracks in CR-39 as the result of Pd–D Co-deposition: evidence of energetic neutrons” by Pamela A. Mosier-Boss & Stanislaw Szpak & Frank E. Gordon & Lawrence P. G. Forsley.

 

This 2008/2009 paper references a 2007 EPJ Appl Phys paper by the same authors, "Use of CR-39 in Pd–D co-deposition experiments", which can be read here. The 2008/2008 paper doesn’t completely summarize the experiment, while the 2007 paper does, including the triple tracks most discussed in the 2007 paper. The major difference between the two papers appears to me to be

• The 2007 paper finds several double pits, and only a single triple pit, which is described as “the two side pits are splitting away from the central pit”, while the 2008/2009 paper finds more triple tracks with a more symmetrical shape, though still “The number of triple tracks observed in these CR-39 detectors is very low. It is estimated that less than ten such tracks are present on each detector”, some, inexplicably, on the surface of the GR-39 detector facing away from the cathode (?!).
  
• The 2008/2009 paper suggests the triple tracks are due to carbon shattering, while the 2007 paper suggests only that they appear to have been made by alpha particles
  

The experiments in both papers involve long exposures (2 to 5 weeks) of the CR-39 detector, which is placed as closely as possible to a palladium-plated gold cathode without interfering with its absorption of deuterium (hydrogen-2). It was repeated under many different conditions, including control experiments with a know alpha particle source, radioactive americium-241, in place of the H-2 saturated Pd, and experiments to rule out the possibility of contamination with unknown radioisotopes.

 

The strongest evidence the triple tracks observed with the Pd cathode are due to alpha particles is their similarity to the single tracks observed with the Am-241.

Thank you for the reply. I have many questions about the published Navy experiment.

 

The hypothesis of the Navy, that the 3-pit patterns they see (obviously they do see them) is from breakup of Carbon-12----does that hypothesis make sense to you

Yes. I think it’s a reasonable, but still speculative, hypothesis.

 

An important detail is that the “shattered” carbon nuclei is not from of the H-2 saturated Pd plated cathode, but from the CR-39 detector material itself, which is a plastic polymer of carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen. My understanding of nuclear chemistry isn’t adequate for me to more than guess, but I guess that shattered oxygen (8 protons and 8 to 10 neutrons) wouldn’t consistently produce 3 identical tracks, while hydrogen, of course, can’t produce more than 1 track.

Would it not mean that Carbon-12 must have three alpha pre-existing, and not N and P in independent nuclear shells? ...

No. I don’t believe the “carbon shattering” suggested in the paper conflicts with the nuclear shell model.

 

It’s important to understand that the nuclear shell model is essentially a classical approximation of the quantum physical interactions that occur in a nucleus, so should not be though of as describing protons, neutrons, and their binding gluons having definite positions, but rather as a “smeared out” collection of probabilities of a given particle being detected in a given position at a given instant. In essence, each sub-atomic particle may be though of as being wherever it had to be for an observed event to have occurred.

Can you think of other ways a 3-pit pattern could be formed in such an experiment ?

Mosier-Boss and her co-authors suggest several such possible explanations.

 

My favorite is that the triple tracks are due to the same particles that form the single and double tracks in the CR-39. It would be helpful and interesting, I think, to run some computer simulations of track-making, and compare the results to Mosier-Boss et. al’s actuals, something that, from what I’ve read, has not yet been done.

 

In short, I think Mosier-Boss et. al. have done good work, but are far from being able to suggest more than very speculative explanations for their results.

To correct a misunderstanding of the journal "Naturwissenschaften" where the Navy experiment was published. This is not a journal of biology--in the past Einstein and Heisenberg published in this journal, it is well respected.

I didn’t intend to cast aspersions upon "Naturwissenschaften", which is, as Rade states, an old and respected journal, nor on Mosier-Boss et. al, who I think have done good work. However, I stand by my characterization of it as

Naturwissenschaften, is an “interdisciplinary” journal usually focusing on biology and biology-related subjects, so is not a very good place for a paper like Mosier-Boss et all’s, as it isn’t read by the most expert people, and may not have been reviewed by a specialist prior to publication

I base this characterization on the Journal’s above linked description page, which begins

Naturwissenschaften - The Science of Nature - is Springer’s flagship multidisciplinary science journal covering all aspect of the natural sciences. The journal is dedicated to the fast publication of high-quality research covering the whole range of the biological, chemical, geological, and physical sciences. Particularly welcomed are contributions that bridge between traditionally isolated areas and attempt to increase the conceptual understanding of systems and processes that demand an interdisciplinary approach. However, this does not exclude the publication of high-quality topical articles, which will continue to be the core of the journal.

its listed “subject collection”, “Biomedical and Life Sciences ”, the scientific specialties of its editors-in-chief, Sven Thatje and Tatiana Czeschlik, Biology and Psychology, and a glance at the table of contents of the issues containing the Mosier-Boss et. al. paper (Jan 2009) and 2 others (Oct 2008 and Apr 2009). Only 1 of these issue’s 53 articles, the Mosier-Boss et. al paper, is not about biology. I think it’s reasonable, therefore, to conclude that most of the journal’s regular readers expect papers about biology, not nuclear chemistry, and that few nuclear chemistry experts regularly read it.

[Rade]

CraigD,

 

Thank you for the detailed reply--also the link to the Navy 2007 paper, which I have not yet read. Not sure about others in the forum, but I find the work presented by Navy to be of great interest, and I would like to continue discussion here.

 

Your comment that the 3-pit pattern "could" be explained by what causes the 1-pit and 2-pit patterns sounds very possible, and as you say, detailed measurements on the pits would be needed.

 

Seems to me using Occum's Razor that the most simple explanation is that each basic 'pit' seen on CR-39 film is caused by a single nucleon, either a proton [P] or a neutron [N] that results from a fusion reaction of some sort at the Pd electrode. Clearly the Navy has no idea what the form of the fusion may be. Both single [P] and [N] are predicted to be released from DD fusion--I think even of the LENR type.

 

So, suppose the 1-pit pattern is caused by a single nucleon from a DD fusion, then the 2-pit pattern could result from two nucleons close packed released after a secondary fusion reaction and each hits CR-39 film at similar time and location (perhaps a NN type cluster). Then the 3- pit pattern caused by three close packed nucleons released together (either tritium [NPN] or helium-3 [PNP]). This hypothesis eliminates the need for the more convoluted Navy explanation that carbon-12 is split into 3 alpha thus causing the 3-pit pattern. If as suggested by Navy there also is DT fusion in addition to DD, then the DT event is predicted to have one path that results in a 4-pit pattern (the alpha). Other patterns are possible if there also are TT fusion and/or helium-3 + helium-3 fusion as secondary reactions.

 

My point being is that the Navy explanation is just so convoluted--that a fusion event released a neutron--that the high energy neutron hit the CR-39 film--that just happened to catch a carbon-12 atom in a quantum state with 3 perfectly matched alphas--that the three alphas released at the same time to hit CR-39.

 

So, why not just fusion at Pd electrode resulting in release of helium-3 [PNP] and/or tritium [NPN] to explain how the 3-pit patterns are formed--three individual nucleons close packed that hit CR-39 at same time, each pit caused by a single nucleon ? Where in either 2007 or 2008 papers would this hypothesis be experimentally falsified in a robust manner ?

 

I'll read the 2007 paper and post any questions I have. Thanks for your interest.

[Rade]

Comment on my posts above:

 

After further investigation, it has been made clear to me that it is very unlikely that the 3-pit pattern observed by Navy could be from break-up of a tritium and/or helium 3 isotope. There is just not enough energy predicted, plus no good way to explain break-up of tritium or helium-3 into individual nucleons, plus even so, impact pits would not be at diameter reported in Navy experiment.

 

So, it does appear that Navy has evidence of high energy nuetrons (in range 9-15 MeV) being released from their deuterium loaded Pd electrode that hit carbon-12 found within the CR-39 media that caused the carbon-12 within CR-39 to be split into 3 alpha--thus forming the 3-pit pattern they report.

 

The major importance of this Navy experiment is the claim that a cold fusion devise has released a neutron in 9-15 MeV range. So, a new line of cold fusion experimentation now open for anyone having interest in this field of study.