Cold fusion is known as one of the biggest scientific hoaxes XX century. For a long time most physicists refused to discuss even the possibility of such a reaction. However, two Italian scientists recently presented to the public a device that, according to them, easily implements it. Is this synthesis really possible?
At the beginning of this year, interest in cold thermonuclear fusion, or, as domestic physicists call it, cold thermonuclear fusion, flared up again in the world of science. The reason for this excitement was the demonstration by Italian scientists Sergio Focardi and Andrea Rossi from the University of Bologna of an unusual installation in which, according to its developers, this synthesis is carried out quite easily.
In general terms, this device works like this. Nickel nanopowder and an ordinary hydrogen isotope are placed in a metal tube with an electric heater. Next, a pressure of about 80 atmospheres is built up. When initially heated to a high temperature (hundreds of degrees), as scientists say, some of the H 2 molecules are divided into atomic hydrogen, which then enters into a nuclear reaction with nickel.
As a result of this reaction, a copper isotope is generated, as well as a large amount of thermal energy. Andrea Rossi explained that when they first tested the device, they received about 10-12 kilowatts of output from it, while the system required an average of 600-700 watts of input (meaning the electricity that enters the device when it is plugged in). . It turned out that energy production in in this case was many times higher than the costs, but this was exactly the effect that was expected from cold thermonuclear fusion at one time.
However, according to the developers, in this device So far, not all hydrogen and nickel react, but a very small fraction of them. However, scientists are confident that what is happening inside is precisely nuclear reactions. They consider the proof of this: the appearance of copper in more, what could constitute an impurity in the original “fuel” (that is, nickel); the absence of a large (that is, measurable) consumption of hydrogen (since it could act as fuel in a chemical reaction); allocated thermal radiation; and, of course, the energy balance itself.
So, did Italian physicists really manage to achieve thermonuclear fusion at low temperatures(hundreds of degrees Celsius are nothing for such reactions, which usually occur at millions of degrees Kelvin!)? It is difficult to say, since so far all peer-reviewed scientific journals have even rejected the articles of its authors. The skepticism of many scientists is quite understandable - for many years the words " cold fusion"make physicists smile and associate it with a perpetual motion machine. In addition, the authors of the device themselves honestly admit that the subtle details of its operation still remain beyond their understanding.
What is this elusive cold thermonuclear, the possibility of which many scientists have been trying to prove for decades? In order to understand the essence of this reaction, as well as the prospects of such research, let's first talk about what thermonuclear fusion is in general. This term refers to the process in which the synthesis of heavier atomic nuclei from lighter ones occurs. In this case, a huge amount of energy is released, much more than during nuclear reactions of the decay of radioactive elements.
Similar processes constantly occur on the Sun and other stars, which is why they can emit both light and heat. For example, every second our Sun emits energy equivalent to four million tons of mass into outer space. This energy is created by the fusion of four hydrogen nuclei (in other words, protons) into a helium nucleus. At the same time, as a result of the transformation of one gram of protons, 20 million times more energy is released than during the combustion of a gram of coal. Agree, this is very impressive.
But can't people create a reactor like the Sun in order to produce large amounts of energy for their needs? Theoretically, of course, they can, since a direct ban on such a device is not established by any of the laws of physics. However, this is quite difficult to do, and here's why: this synthesis requires very high temperatures and the same unrealistically high pressure. Therefore, the creation of a classical thermonuclear reactor turns out to be economically unprofitable - in order to launch it, it will be necessary to spend much more energy than it can produce over the next few years of operation.
That is why many scientists throughout the 20th century tried to carry out a thermonuclear fusion reaction at low temperatures and normal pressure, that is, that same cold thermonuclear fusion. The first report that this was possible appeared on March 23, 1989, when Professor Martin Fleischmann and his colleague Stanley Pons held a press conference at their University of Utah, where they reported how they, by almost simply passing a current through an electrolyte, obtained a positive energy output in the form of heat and recorded gamma radiation coming from the electrolyte. That is, they carried out a cold thermonuclear fusion reaction.
In June of the same year, scientists sent an article with the results of the experiment to Nature, but soon a real scandal erupted around their discovery. The fact is that researchers from leading scientific centers The USA, the California and Massachusetts Institutes of Technology, repeated this experiment in detail and did not find anything similar. True, then two confirmations followed, made by scientists from the University of Texas A&M and the Georgia Institute of Technological Research. However, there was an embarrassment with them too.
When conducting control experiments, it turned out that electrochemists from Texas misinterpreted the results of the experiment - in their experiment, the increased heat generation was caused by the electrolysis of water, since the thermometer served as a second electrode (cathode)! In Georgia, neutron counters turned out to be so sensitive that they responded to the heat of a hand. This is exactly how the “emission of neutrons” was recorded, which the researchers considered to be the result of a thermonuclear fusion reaction.
As a result of all this, many physicists were filled with confidence that there was and could not be any cold thermonuclear, and Fleischmann and Pons simply cheated. However, others (and they are, unfortunately, a clear minority) do not believe that the scientists were fraudulent or even that there was simply a mistake, and hope that a clean and practically inexhaustible source of energy can be constructed.
Among the latter is the Japanese scientist Yoshiaki Arata, who spent several years researching the problem of cold thermonuclear fusion and in 2008 conducted a public experiment at Osaka University that showed the possibility of thermonuclear fusion occurring at low temperatures. He and his colleagues used special structures made of nanoparticles.
These were specially prepared clusters consisting of several hundred palladium atoms. Their main feature was that they had vast voids inside into which deuterium atoms (an isotope of hydrogen) could be pumped to a very high concentration. And when this concentration exceeded a certain limit, these particles got so close to each other that they began to merge, resulting in a real thermonuclear reaction. It involved the fusion of two deuterium atoms into a lithium-4 atom, releasing heat.
Proof of this was the fact that when Professor Arata began to add deuterium gas to the mixture containing the mentioned nanoparticles, its temperature rose to 70 degrees Celsius. After the gas was turned off, the temperature in the cell remained elevated for more than 50 hours, and the energy released exceeded the energy expended. According to the scientist, this could only be explained by the fact that nuclear fusion had occurred.
True, so far Arata’s experiment has also not been repeated in any laboratory. Therefore, many physicists continue to consider cold thermonuclear fusion a hoax and quackery. However, Arata himself denies such accusations, reproaching his opponents for not knowing how to work with nanoparticles, which is why they fail.
Cold fusion- the assumed possibility of carrying out a nuclear fusion reaction in chemical (atomic-molecular) systems without significant heating of the working substance. Known nuclear fusion reactions occur at temperatures of millions of kelvins.
In foreign literature it is also known under the names:
- low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR, low-energy nuclear reactions)
- chemically assisted nuclear reactions (CANR)
Many reports and extensive databases about the successful implementation of the experiment subsequently turned out to be either “newspaper ducks” or the result of incorrectly conducted experiments. The leading laboratories in the world were unable to repeat a single similar experiment, and if they did repeat it, it turned out that the authors of the experiment, as narrow specialists, incorrectly interpreted the result obtained or performed the experiment incorrectly, did not carry out the necessary measurements, etc. There is also a version that all development of this direction is deliberately sabotaged by the secret world government. Since the CNF will solve the problem of limited resources and destroy many levers of economic pressure.
History of the emergence of chemical nuclear weapons
The assumption about the possibility of cold nuclear fusion (CNF) has not yet been confirmed and is the subject of constant speculation, but this area of science is still being actively studied.
CNS in the cells of a living organism
The most famous works on "transmutation" by Louis Kervran ( English), published in 1935, 1955 and 1975. However, it later turned out that Louis Kervran did not actually exist (perhaps it was a pseudonym), and the results of his work were not confirmed. Many consider the very personality of Louis Kervran and some of his works to be an April Fool's joke by French physicists. In 2003, a book by Vladimir Ivanovich Vysotsky, head of the department of mathematics and theoretical radiophysics at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, was published, which claims that new evidence of “biological transmutation” has been found.
CNF in an electrolytic cell
The report by chemists Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons about CNS - the transformation of deuterium into tritium or helium under electrolysis conditions on a palladium electrode, which appeared in March 1989, caused a lot of noise, but also was not confirmed, despite repeated checks.
Experimental details
Cold fusion experiments typically include:
- a catalyst such as nickel or palladium, in the form of thin films, powder or sponge;
- “working fluid” containing tritium and/or deuterium and/or hydrogen in liquid, gaseous or plasma state;
- “excitation” of nuclear transformations of hydrogen isotopes by “pumping” the “working fluid” with energy - through heating, mechanical pressure, exposure to a laser beam(s), acoustic waves, electromagnetic field or electric current.
A fairly popular experimental setup for a cold fusion chamber consists of palladium electrodes immersed in an electrolyte containing heavy or superheavy water. Electrolysis chambers can be open or closed. In systems open cells Gaseous electrolysis products leave the working volume, which makes it difficult to calculate the balance of energy received/expended. In experiments with closed chambers, electrolysis products are utilized, for example, by catalytic recombination in special parts of the system. Experimenters generally strive to ensure a steady release of heat by a continuous supply of electrolyte. Experiments such as “heat after death” are also carried out, in which excess (due to supposed nuclear fusion) energy release is controlled after turning off the current.
Cold fusion - third attempt
CYAS at the University of Bologna
In January 2011, Andrea Rossi (Bologna, Italy) tested a pilot chemical nuclear reactor installation for converting nickel into copper with the participation of hydrogen, and on October 28, 2011, he demonstrated an industrial installation for 1 MW to journalists from well-known media and a customer from the United States.
International conferences on CNF
see also
Notes
Links
- V. A. Tsarev, Low-temperature nuclear fusion, “Advances in Physical Sciences”, November 1990.
- Kuzmin R.N., Shvilkin B.N. Cold nuclear fusion. - 2nd ed. - M.: Knowledge, 1989. - 64 p.
- documentary about the history of the development of cold fusion technology
- Cold nuclear fusion - scientific sensation or farce?, Membrana, 03/07/2002.
- Cold thermonuclear fusion is still a farce, Membrana, 07/22/2002.
- A fusion reactor in the palm of your hand drives deuterons into the mane, Membrana, 04/28/2005.
- An encouraging experiment on cold nuclear fusion was carried out, Membrana, 05/28/2008.
- Italian physicists are going to demonstrate a finished cold fusion reactor, Eye of the Planet, 01/14/2011.
- Cold fusion was realized in the Apennines. The Italians presented the world with a functioning cold fusion reactor. "Nezavisimaya Gazeta", 01/17/2011.
- Is there an energy paradise ahead? "Noosphere", 08/10/2011. (unavailable link)
- Great October Energy Revolution. "Membrana.ru", 10/29/2011.
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.
WikipediaThe sun is a natural thermonuclear reactor. Controlled thermonuclear fusion (CTF) is the synthesis of heavier atomic nuclei from lighter ones in order to obtain energy, which, unlike explosive thermonuclear fusion (and ... Wikipedia
This article is about a non-academic area of research. Please edit the article so that this is clear both from its first sentences and from the subsequent text. Details in the article and on the talk page... Wikipedia
And falsification scientific research scientific coordination organization under the Presidium Russian Academy Sci. Established in 1998 on the initiative of Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Vitaly Ginzburg. The commission develops recommendations to the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences... ... Wikipedia
The Commission to Combat Pseudoscience and Falsification of Scientific Research is a scientific coordination organization under the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Established in 1998 on the initiative of Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Vitaly Ginzburg. The commission develops... ... Wikipedia
The Commission to Combat Pseudoscience and Falsification of Scientific Research under the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences was formed in 1998 on the initiative of Academician Vitaly Ginzburg. The commission develops recommendations to the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences on controversial issues... ... Wikipedia
A list of unsolved problems of modern physics is given. Some of these problems are theoretical in nature, which means that existing theories are unable to explain certain observed phenomena or experimental... ... Wikipedia
CNF- cold nuclear fusion... Dictionary of abbreviations and abbreviations
In the morning, a person wakes up, turns on the switch - electricity appears in the apartment, which heats the water in the kettle, provides energy for the operation of the TV and computer, and makes the light bulbs glow. A person has breakfast, leaves the house and gets into a car, which drives away without leaving behind the usual cloud of exhaust gases. When a person decides that he needs to refuel, he buys a gas cylinder, which is odorless, non-toxic and very cheap - petroleum products are no longer used as fuel. Ocean water became the fuel. This is not a utopia, this is an ordinary day in a world where man has mastered the cold nuclear fusion reaction.
On Thursday, May 22, 2008, a group of Japanese physicists from Osaka University, led by Professor Arata, demonstrated the cold fusion reaction. Some of the scientists present at the demonstration called it a success, but most said such claims would need to be independently repeated in other laboratories. Several physics publications wrote about the Japanese statement, but the most respected journals in the scientific world, such as Science And Nature, have not yet published their assessment of this event. What explains this skepticism from the scientific community?
The thing is that cold nuclear fusion has had a bad reputation among scientists for some time now. Several times, statements about the successful implementation of this reaction turned out to be falsification or an incorrect experiment. To understand the difficulty of carrying out nuclear fusion in the laboratory, it is necessary to briefly touch upon theoretical foundations reactions.
Chickens and nuclear physics
Nuclear fusion is a reaction in which the atomic nuclei of light elements fuse to form the nucleus of a heavier one. The reaction releases a huge amount of energy. This is due to the extremely intense attractive forces operating inside the nucleus, which hold together the protons and neutrons that make up the nucleus. At small distances - about 10 -13 centimeters - these forces are extremely strong. On the other hand, protons in nuclei are positively charged, and, accordingly, tend to repel each other. The range of action of electrostatic forces is much greater than that of nuclear forces, so when the nuclei are removed from each other, the former begin to dominate.
Under normal conditions, the kinetic energy of the nuclei of light atoms is too small for them to overcome electrostatic repulsion and enter into a nuclear reaction. You can force atoms closer together by colliding them at high speed or using ultra-high pressures and temperatures. However, theoretically there is also alternative way, allowing the desired reaction to be carried out practically “on the table”. One of the first to express the idea of carrying out nuclear fusion at room temperature in the 60s of the last century was the French physicist, laureate Nobel Prize Louis Kervran.
The scientist drew attention to the fact that chickens that do not receive calcium from their diet nevertheless lay normal shelled eggs. The shell is known to contain a lot of calcium. Kervran concluded that chickens synthesize it in their bodies from a lighter element - potassium. The physicist identified mitochondria, intracellular energy stations, as the site of nuclear fusion reactions. Despite the fact that many consider this publication by Kervran to be an April Fool's joke, some scientists have become seriously interested in the problem of cold nuclear fusion.
Two almost detective stories
In 1989, Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons announced that they had conquered nature and forced deuterium to turn into helium at room temperature in a water electrolysis device. The experimental design was as follows: electrodes were lowered into acidified water and current was passed through - a common experiment in water electrolysis. However, scientists used unusual water and unusual electrodes.
The water was "heavy". That is, the light (“ordinary”) isotopes of hydrogen in it were replaced by heavier ones, containing in addition to a proton also one neutron. This isotope is called deuterium. In addition, Fleischmann and Pons used electrodes made of palladium. Palladium is distinguished by its amazing ability to “absorb” large amounts of hydrogen and deuterium. The number of deuterium atoms in a palladium plate can be compared with the number of atoms of palladium itself. In their experiment, the physicists used electrodes previously “saturated” with deuterium.
When an electric current passed through “heavy” water, positively charged deuterium ions were formed, which, under the influence of electrostatic attraction forces, rushed to the negatively charged electrode and “crashed” into it. At the same time, as the experimenters were sure, they approached the deuterium atoms already located in the electrodes at a distance sufficient for the nuclear fusion reaction to occur.
Proof of the reaction would be the release of energy - in this case this would be expressed in an increase in the temperature of the water - and the registration of the neutron flux. Fleischman and Pons stated that both were observed in their setup. The physicists' message caused an extremely violent reaction from the scientific community and the press. The media described the delights of life after the widespread introduction of cold nuclear fusion, and physicists and chemists around the world began to double-check their results.
At first, several laboratories seemed to be able to repeat the experiment of Fleischmann and Pons, which the newspapers happily reported, but gradually it became clear that under the same initial conditions, different scientists obtained completely different results. After rechecking the calculations, it turned out that if the reaction of the synthesis of helium from deuterium had proceeded as described by physicists, then the released stream of neutrons should have immediately killed them. The breakthrough of Fleischmann and Pons turned out to be simply an ill-conducted experiment. And at the same time he taught researchers to trust only results first published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, and only then in the newspapers.
After this story, most serious researchers stopped working on finding ways to implement cold nuclear fusion. However, in 2002, the topic resurfaced in scientific discussions and the press. This time, US physicists Rusi Taleyarkhan and Richard T. Lahey, Jr. made a claim to conquer nature. They stated that they were able to achieve the convergence of nuclei necessary for the reaction using not palladium, but the cavitation effect.
Cavitation is the formation of cavities or bubbles filled with gas in a liquid. The formation of bubbles can be, in particular, provoked by the passage of sound waves through the liquid. Under certain conditions, the bubbles burst, releasing large amounts of energy. How can bubbles help in nuclear fusion? It’s very simple: at the moment of the “explosion,” the temperature inside the bubble reaches ten million degrees Celsius – which is comparable to the temperature on the Sun, where nuclear fusion occurs freely.
Taleyarkhan and Lehey passed sound waves through acetone in which the light isotope of hydrogen (protium) had been replaced by deuterium. They were able to detect a flux of high-energy neutrons, as well as the formation of helium and tritium, another product of nuclear fusion.
Despite the beauty and logic of the experimental design, the scientific community reacted more than coolly to the physicists' statements. Scientists were hit with a huge amount of criticism regarding the setup of the experiment and the recording of the neutron flux. Taleyarkhan and Leikhi rearranged the experiment taking into account the comments received - and again received the same result. However, a reputable scientific journal Nature published in 2006, which raised doubts about the reliability of the results. In fact, scientists were accused of falsification.
An independent investigation was conducted at Purdue University, where Taleyarkhan and Leahy went to work. Based on its results, a verdict was made: the experiment was carried out correctly, no errors or falsification were found. Despite this, while Nature no refutation of the article appeared, but the question of recognition of cavitation nuclear fusion scientific fact hung in the air.
New Hope
But let's return to the Japanese physicists. In their work they used the already familiar palladium. More precisely, a mixture of palladium and zirconium oxide. The “deuterium capacity” of this mixture, according to the Japanese, is even higher than that of palladium. Scientists passed deuterium through a cell containing this mixture. After adding deuterium, the temperature inside the cell rose to 70 degrees Celsius. According to the researchers, at this moment nuclear and chemical reactions occurred in the cell. After the flow of deuterium into the cell stopped, the temperature inside it remained elevated for another 50 hours. Physicists claim that this indicates that nuclear fusion reactions are occurring inside the cell - helium nuclei are formed from deuterium atoms that come close to a sufficient distance.
It is too early to say whether the Japanese are right or wrong. The experiment must be repeated several times and the results verified. Most likely, despite skepticism, many laboratories will do this. Moreover, the leader of the study, Professor Yoshiaki Arata, is a very respected physicist. The recognition of Arata’s merits is evidenced by the fact that the demonstration of the device’s operation took place in the auditorium bearing his name. But, as you know, everyone can make mistakes, especially when they really want to get a very definite result.
Academician Evgeniy Alexandrov
1. Introduction.
The release of energy during the fusion of light nuclei constitutes the content of one of the two branches nuclear power, which has so far been implemented only in the weapons direction in the form of a hydrogen bomb - in contrast to the second direction associated with the chain reaction of fission of heavy nuclei, which is used both in weapons implementation and as a widely developed industrial source of thermal energy. At the same time, the process of fusion of light nuclei is associated with optimistic hopes of creating peaceful nuclear energy with an unlimited resource base. However, the project of a controlled thermonuclear reactor, put forward by Kurchatov 60 years ago, today seems, perhaps, to be an even more distant prospect than it was seen at the beginning of these studies. IN fusion reactor It is planned to carry out the synthesis of deuterium and tritium nuclei in the process of collision of nuclei in a plasma heated to many tens of millions of degrees. The high kinetic energy of colliding nuclei should ensure overcoming the Coulomb barrier. However, in principle, the potential barrier to an exothermic reaction can be overcome without the use of high temperatures and/or high pressures, using catalytic approaches, as is well known in chemistry and, especially, in biochemistry. This approach to the implementation of the fusion reaction of deuterium nuclei was implemented in a series of works on the so-called “muon catalysis”, a review of which is devoted to a detailed work. The process is based on the formation of a molecular ion consisting of two deuterons bound instead of an electron by a muon - an unstable particle with the charge of an electron and with a mass of ~200 electron masses. The muon pulls together the deuteron nuclei, bringing them closer to a distance of about 10 -12 m, which makes tunneling overcoming the Coulomb barrier and fusion of nuclei highly probable (about 10 8 s -1). Despite the great successes of this direction, it turned out to be a dead end with regard to the prospects for extracting nuclear energy due to the unprofitability of the process: the energy obtained along these paths does not pay for the costs of producing muons.
In addition to the very real mechanism of muon catalysis, over the past three decades, reports have repeatedly appeared about the supposedly successful demonstration of cold fusion in the conditions of interaction of hydrogen isotope nuclei inside a metal matrix or on the surface of a solid. The first reports of this kind were associated with the names of Fleischmann, Pons and Hawkins, who studied the features of the electrolysis of heavy water in an installation with a palladium cathode, continuing electrochemical research with hydrogen isotopes undertaken in the early 80s. Fleischmann and Pons discovered excessive heat release during the electrolysis of heavy water and wondered whether this was a consequence of nuclear fusion reactions in two possible ways:
2 D + 2 D -> 3 T(1.01 MeV) + 1 H(3.02 MeV)
Or (1)
2 D + 2 D -> 3 He(0.82 MeV) + n(2.45 MeV)
These works generated great enthusiasm and a series of testing works with variable and unstable results. (In one of the recent works of this kind (), for example, an explosion of a facility, presumably of a nuclear nature, was reported!) However, over time, the scientific community formed the impression that the conclusions about the observation of “cold fusion” were dubious, mainly due to the lack of neutron output or their excess is too small above the background level. This has not stopped proponents of searching for “catalytic” approaches to “cold fusion.” Experiencing great difficulty in publishing the results of their research in respectable journals, they began to gather at regular conferences with autonomous publication of materials. In 2003, the tenth international conference on “cold fusion” took place, after which these meetings changed their names. In 2002, under the auspices of SpaceandNavalWarfareSystemsCommand (SPAWAR), a two-volume collection of articles was published in the USA. Edmund Storm's updated review of A Student's Guide to Cold Fusion was republished in 2012, containing 338 references - available online. Today, this area of work is most often referred to by the abbreviation LENR – LowEnergyNuclearReactions.
Let us note that public confidence in the results of these studies is further undermined by individual propaganda releases in the media of reports about more than dubious sensations on this front. In Russia it still exists mass production so-called “vortex generators” of heat (electro-mechanical water heaters) with a turnover of about billions of rubles per year. Manufacturers of these units assure consumers that these devices produce heat on average one and a half times more than they consume electricity. To explain the excess energy, they resort, among other things, to talk about cold fusion, supposedly occurring in cavitation bubbles that arise in water mills. Currently very popular in the media are reports about the Italian inventor Andrea Rossi (“with a complex biography,” as S.P. Kapitsa once said about V.I. Petrik), who demonstrates to television crews an installation that performs the catalytic transformation (transmutation) of nickel into copper due, allegedly, to the fusion of copper nuclei with hydrogen protons, releasing energy at the kilowatt level. Details of the device are kept secret, but it is reported that the basis of the reactor is a ceramic tube filled with nickel powder with secret additives, which is heated by current while being cooled by flowing water. Hydrogen gas is supplied to the tube. In this case, excess heat release with power at the level of several kilowatts is detected. Rossi promises to show a generator with a power of ~1 MW in the near future (in 2012!). The University of Bologna, on whose territory all this is unfolding, gives some respectability to this venture (with a distinct flavor of scam). (In 2012, this university stopped collaborating with Rossi).
2. New experiments on “metal-crystalline catalysis”.
Over the past ten years, the search for conditions for the occurrence of “cold fusion” has shifted from electrochemical experiments and electrical heating of samples to “dry” experiments in which deuterium nuclei penetrate into the crystal structure of transition element metals - palladium, nickel, platinum. These experiments are relatively simple and appear to be more reproducible than those previously mentioned. Interest in these works has been attracted by a recent publication in which an attempt is made to theoretically explain by cold nuclear fusion the phenomenon of excess heat production during the deuteration of metals in the absence of the emission of neutrons and gamma rays, which would seem necessary for such fusion.
Unlike the collision of “bare” nuclei in a hot plasma, where the collision energy must overcome the Coulomb barrier that prevents the fusion of nuclei, when a deuterium nucleus penetrates the crystal lattice of a metal, the Coulomb barrier between the nuclei is modified by the screening effect of electrons of atomic shells and conduction electrons. A.N. Egorov draws attention to the specific “looseness” of the deuteron nucleus, the volume of which is 125 times greater than the volume of the proton. The electron of an atom in the S state has the maximum probability of ending up inside the nucleus, which leads to the effective disappearance of the charge of the nucleus, which in this case is sometimes called a "dineutron". We can say that the deuterium atom is part of the time in such a “folded” compact state in which it is able to penetrate into other nuclei - including the nucleus of another deuteron. An additional factor influencing the probability of nuclei approaching each other in a crystal lattice is vibrations.
Without reproducing the considerations expressed in, let us consider some of the available experimental substantiations of the hypothesis about the occurrence of cold nuclear fusion during the deuteration of transition metals. There are quite detailed description experimental techniques of the Japanese group led by Professor Yoshiaki Arata (Osaka University). The Arata installation diagram is shown in Fig. 1:
Fig1. Here are 2 containers from of stainless steel, containing “sample” 1, which is, in particular, a backfill (in a palladium capsule) of zirconium oxide coated with palladium (ZrO 2 -Pd); T in and T s are the positions of thermocouples that measure the temperature of the sample and container, respectively.
Before the start of the experiment, the container is warmed up and pumped out (degassed). After cooling it to room temperature a slow injection of hydrogen (H 2) or deuterium (D 2) from a cylinder with a pressure of about 100 atmospheres begins. In this case, the pressure in the container and the temperature at two selected points are controlled. During the first tens of minutes of inlet, the pressure inside the container remains close to zero due to the intense absorption of gas by the powder. In this case, the sample quickly heats up, reaching a maximum (60-70 0 C) after 15-18 minutes, after which the sample begins to cool. Soon after this (about 20 minutes), a monotonous increase in gas pressure inside the container begins.
The authors point out that the dynamics of the process are noticeably different in cases of hydrogen and deuterium infusion. When hydrogen is injected (Fig. 2), a maximum temperature of 610C is reached at the 15th minute, after which cooling begins.
When deuterium is injected (Fig. 3), the maximum temperature is ten degrees higher (71 0 C) and is reached somewhat later - at ~ 18 minutes. The cooling dynamics also reveal some differences in these two cases: in the case of hydrogen infusion, the temperatures of the sample and container (T in and T s) begin to approach earlier. Thus, 250 minutes after the start of hydrogen injection, the temperature of the sample does not differ from the temperature of the container and exceeds the temperature environment by 1 0 C. In the case of deuterium infusion, the temperature of the sample after the same 250 minutes significantly (by ~ 1 0 C) exceeds the temperature of the container and the ambient temperature by about 4 0 C.
Fig. 2 Change in time of pressure H 2 inside the container and temperatures T in and T s.
Rice. 3 Change in time of pressure D 2 and temperatures T in and T s.
The authors claim that the observed differences are reproducible. Beyond these differences, the observed rapid heating of the powder is explained by the energy of the chemical interaction of hydrogen/deuterium with the metal, during which hydride-metallic compounds are formed. The authors interpret the difference in the processes in the case of hydrogen and deuterium as evidence of the occurrence in the second case (with a very low probability, of course) of the fusion reaction of deuterium nuclei according to the scheme 2 D+ 2 D = 4 He + ~ 24 MeV. Such a reaction is completely incredible (about 10 -6 compared to reactions (1)) in the collision of “naked” nuclei due to the need to satisfy the laws of conservation of momentum and angular momentum. However, under solid-state conditions, such a reaction may be dominant. It is significant that this reaction does not produce fast particles, the absence (or deficiency) of which has invariably been considered as a decisive argument against the hypothesis of nuclear fusion. Of course, the question remains about the channel for the release of fusion energy. According to Tsyganov, in solid state conditions, processes of gamma quantum fragmentation into low-frequency electromagnetic and phonon excitations are possible.
Again, without delving into the theoretical justification of the hypothesis, let us return to its experimental justification.
As additional evidence, graphs of the cooling of the “reaction” zone at a later time (beyond 250 minutes), obtained with a higher temperature resolution and for different “backfilling” of the working fluid, are offered.
It can be seen from the figure that in the case of hydrogen infusion, starting from the 500th minute, the temperatures of the sample and container are compared with room temperature. In contrast, when deuterium is injected, by the 3000th minute a stationary excess of the sample temperature over the temperature of the container is established, which, in turn, turns out to be noticeably warmer than room temperature (by ~ 1.5 0 C for the case of the ZrO 2 -Pd sample).
Another important evidence in favor of nuclear fusion was the appearance of helium-4 as a reaction product. This issue has received considerable attention. First of all, the authors took measures to eliminate traces of helium in the released gases. For this purpose, an influx of H 2 /D 2 was used by diffusion through the palladium wall. As is known, palladium is highly permeable to hydrogen and deuterium and poorly permeable to helium. (The inlet through the diaphragm additionally slowed down the flow of gases into the reaction volume). After the reactor cooled, the gas in it was analyzed for the presence of helium. It is stated that helium was detected when deuterium was injected and was absent when hydrogen was injected. The analysis was carried out by mass spectrometry. (A quadrupole mass spectrograph was used).
The next slide is taken from Arata's (non-English speaking!) presentation. It contains some numerical data related to the experiments and estimates. These data are not entirely clear.
The first line apparently contains an estimate in moles of heavy hydrogen absorbed by the powder, D 2 .
The meaning of the second line seems to boil down to estimating the adsorption energy of 1700 cm 3 D 2 on palladium.
The third line appears to contain an estimate of the “excess heat” associated with nuclear fusion – 29.2...30 kJ.
The fourth line clearly refers to the estimate of the number of synthesized 4 He atoms - 3*10 17 . (This number of helium atoms created should correspond to a much greater heat release than indicated in line 3: (3*10 17) - (2.4*10 7 eV) = 1.1*10 13 erg = 1.1 MJ.).
The fifth line represents an estimate of the ratio of the number of synthesized helium atoms to the number of palladium atoms - 6.8*10 -6. The sixth line is the ratio of the numbers of synthesized helium atoms and adsorbed deuterium atoms: 4.3*10 -6.
3. On the prospects for independent verification of reports on “metal-crystalline nuclear catalysis.”
The experiments described appear to be relatively easy to reproduce, since they do not require large capital investments or the use of ultra-modern research methods. The main difficulty appears to be related to the lack of information about the structure of the working substance and the technology for its production.
When describing the working substance, the expression “nano-powder” is used: “ZrO 2 -nano-Pd sample powders, a matrix of zirconium oxide containing palladium nanoparticles” and, at the same time, the expression “alloys” is used: “ZrO 2 Pd alloy, Pd-Zr -Ni alloy.” One must think that the composition and structure of these “powders” - “alloys” play a key role in the observed phenomena. Indeed, in Fig. 4 one can see significant differences in the dynamics of late cooling of these two samples. They reveal even greater differences in the dynamics of temperature changes during the period of saturation with deuterium. The corresponding figure is reproduced below, which must be compared with a similar figure 3, where the “nuclear fuel” was ZrO 2 Pd alloy powder. It can be seen that the heating period of the Pd-Zr-Ni alloy lasts much longer (almost 10 times), the temperature rise is significantly less, and its decline is much slower. However, a direct comparison of this figure with Fig. 3 is hardly possible, bearing in mind, in particular, the difference in the masses of the “working substance”: 7 G - ZrO 2 Pd and 18.4 G - Pd-Zr-Ni.
Additional details regarding working powders can be found in the literature, in particular in.
4. Conclusion
It seems obvious that independent reproduction of experiments already performed would have great importance for any result.
What modifications could be made to the experiments already done?
It seems important to focus primarily not on measurements of excess heat release (since the accuracy of such measurements is low), but on the most reliable detection of the appearance of helium as the most striking evidence of the occurrence of a nuclear fusion reaction.
One should try to control the amount of helium in the reactor over time, which was not done by Japanese researchers. This is especially interesting considering the graph in Fig. 4, from which it can be assumed that the process of helium synthesis in the reactor continues indefinitely after deuterium is introduced into it.
It seems important to study the dependence of the described processes on the reactor temperature, since theoretical constructions take into account molecular vibrations. (One can imagine that as the temperature of the reactor increases, the probability of nuclear fusion increases.)
How does Yoshiaki Arata (and E.N. Tsyganov) interpret the appearance of excess heat?
They believe that in crystal lattice metal, there is (with a very low probability) fusion of deuterium nuclei into helium nuclei, a process that is practically impossible during the collision of “bare” nuclei in plasma. A special feature of this reaction is the absence of neutrons - a clean process! (the question of the mechanism of transfer of the excitation energy of the helium nucleus into heat remains open).
Looks like I need to check it out!
Cited literature.
1. D. V. Balin, V. A. Ganzha, S. M. Kozlov, E. M. Maev, G. E. Petrov, M. A. Soroka, G. N. Schapkin, G. G. Semenchuk, V. A. Trofimov, A. A. Vasiliev, A. A. Vorobyov, N. I. Voropaev, C. Petitjean, B. Gartnerc, B. Laussc, 1, J. Marton, J. Zmeskal, T. Case, K. M. Crowe, P. Kammel, F. J. Hartmann M. P. Faifman, High precesion study of muon catalyzed fusion in D 2 and HD gases, Physics elementary particles and atomic nucleus, 2011, vol. 42, issue 2.
2. Fleischmann, M., S. Pons, and M. Hawkins, Electrochemically induced nuclear fusion of deuterium. J. Electroanal. Chem., 1989. 261: p. 301 and errata in Vol. 263.
3. M. Fleischmann, S. Pons. M.W. Anderson. L.J. Li, M. Hawkins, J. Electroanal. Chem. 287 (1990) 293.
4. S. Pons, M. Fleischmann, J. Chim. Phys. 93 (1996) 711.
5. W.M. Mueller, J.P. Blackledge and G.G. Libowitz, Metal Hydrides, Academic Press, New York, 1968; G. Bambakadis (Ed.), Metal Hydrides, Plenum Press, New York, 1981.
6. Jean-Paul Biberian, J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci. 2 (2009) 1–6
7. http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEastudentsg.pdf
8. E.B. Aleksandrov “Miracle mixer or the new coming of the perpetual motion machine”, collection “In Defense of Science”, No. 6, 2011.
9. http://www.lenr-canr.org/News.htm; http://mykola.ru/archives/2740;
http://www.atomic-energy.ru/smi/2011/11/09/28437
10. E.N. Tsyganov, “COLD NUCLEAR fusion”, NUCLEAR PHYSICS, 2012, volume 75, no. 2, p. 174–180
11. A.I. Egorov, PNPI, private communication.
12. Y. Arata and Y. Zhang, “The Establishment of Solid Nuclear Fusion Reactor,” J. High Temp. Soc. 34, pp. 85-93 (2008). (Article in Japanese, abstract in English). A presentation of these experiments in English is available at
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2008/NET29-8dd54geg.shtml#...
Under the Hood: The Arata-Zhang Osaka University LENR Demonstration
By Steven B. Krivit
April 28, 2012
International Low Energy Nuclear Reactions Symposium, ILENRS-12
The College of William and Mary, Sadler Center, Williamsburg, Virginia
July 1-3, 2012
13. Publication regarding the technology for obtaining a working powder matrix:
“Hydrogen absorption of nanoscale Pd particles embedded in ZrO2 matrix prepared from Zr-Pd amorphous alloys.”
Shin-ichi Yamaura, Ken-ichiro Sasamori, Hisamichi Kimura, Akihisa Inoue, Yue Chang Zhang, Yoshiaki Arata, J. Mater. Res., Vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 1329-1334, June 2002
This explanation seems initially untenable: nuclear fusion reactions are exothermic only under the condition that the mass of the nucleus of the final product remains less than the mass of the iron nucleus. Fusion of heavier nuclei requires energy expenditure. Nickel is heavier than iron. A.I. Egorov suggested that in A. Rossi’s installation a reaction takes place to synthesize helium from deuterium atoms, which are always present in hydrogen as a small impurity, with nickel playing the role of a catalyst, see below.
There is a good article on this topic in the magazine "Chemistry and Life" (No. 8, 2015)
ANDREEV S. N.
FORBIDDEN TRANSFORMATIONS OF ELEMENTS
Science has its forbidden topics, its taboos. Today, few scientists dare to study biofields, ultra-low doses, the structure of water... The areas are complex, turbid, and difficult to understand. It’s easy to lose your reputation here, being known as a pseudoscientist, and there’s no need to talk about getting a grant. In science it is impossible and dangerous to go beyond generally accepted ideas and encroach on dogmas. But it is the efforts of daredevils, ready to be different from everyone else, that sometimes pave new roads in knowledge.
We have observed more than once how, as science develops, dogmas begin to waver and gradually acquire the status of incomplete, preliminary knowledge. This happened more than once in biology. This was the case in physics. We see the same thing in chemistry. Before our eyes, the textbook truth “the composition and properties of a substance do not depend on the methods of its preparation” has collapsed under the onslaught of nanotechnology. It turned out that a substance in nanoform can radically change its properties - for example, gold will cease to be a noble metal.
Today we can state that there are a fair number of experiments, the results of which cannot be explained from the standpoint of generally accepted views. And the task of science is not to brush them aside, but to dig and try to get to the truth. The position “this cannot be, because it can never be” is convenient, of course, but it cannot explain anything. Moreover, incomprehensible, inexplicable experiments can become harbingers of discoveries in science, as has already happened. One of these hot topics, literally and figuratively, is the so-called low-energy nuclear reactions, which today are called LENR - Low-Energy Nuclear Reaction.
We asked Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences Stepan Nikolaevich Andreev from the Institute of General Physics named after. A. M. Prokhorov RAS to acquaint us with the essence of the problem and with some scientific experiments performed in Russian and Western laboratories and published in scientific journals. Experiments, the results of which we cannot yet explain.
REACTOR “E-CAT” ANDREA ROSSI
In mid-October 2014, the world scientific community was excited by the news - a report was released by Giuseppe Levi, a professor of physics at the University of Bologna, and co-authors on the results of testing the E-Cat reactor, created by the Italian inventor Andrea Rossi.
Let us recall that in 2011 A. Rossi presented to the public the installation on which he had been working for many years in collaboration with physicist Sergio Focardi. The reactor, called "E-Cat" (short for Energy Catalyzer), produced an abnormal amount of energy. Over the past four years, E-Cat has been tested different groups researchers because the scientific community insisted on independent review.
The reactor was a ceramic tube 20 cm long and 2 cm in diameter. Inside the reactor there was a fuel charge, heating elements and a thermocouple, the signal from which was supplied to the heating control unit. Power was supplied to the reactor from electrical network with a voltage of 380 Volts through three heat-resistant wires, which were heated red-hot during operation of the reactor. The fuel consisted mainly of nickel powder (90%) and lithium aluminum hydride LiAlH4 (10%). When heated, lithium aluminum hydride decomposed and released hydrogen, which could be absorbed by nickel and enter into an exothermic reaction with it.
The inventor does not disclose how the reactor is designed. However, it is known that a fuel charge, heating elements and a thermocouple are located inside the ceramic tube. The surface of the tube is ribbed for better heat dissipation
The report stated that the total amount of heat generated by the device over 32 days of continuous operation was about 6 GJ. Elementary estimates show that the energy content of the powder is more than a thousand times higher than the energy content of, for example, gasoline!
As a result of careful analyzes of the elemental and isotopic composition, experts reliably established that changes in the ratios of lithium and nickel isotopes appeared in the spent fuel. If in the original fuel the content of lithium isotopes coincided with natural ones: 6Li - 7.5%, 7Li - 92.5%, then in the spent fuel the 6Li content increased to 92%, and the 7Li content decreased to 8%. The distortions in the isotopic composition for nickel were equally strong. For example, the content of the nickel isotope 62Ni in the “ash” was 99%, although it was only 4% in the original fuel. The detected changes in the isotopic composition and anomalously high heat release indicated that nuclear processes may have occurred in the reactor. However, no signs of increased radioactivity characteristic of nuclear reactions were recorded either during operation of the device or after it was stopped.
The processes occurring in the reactor could not be nuclear fission reactions, since the fuel consisted of stable substances. Nuclear fusion reactions are also excluded, because from the point of view of modern nuclear physics, a temperature of 1400°C is negligible to overcome the forces of Coulomb repulsion of nuclei. That is why the use of the sensational term “cold thermonuclear” for this kind of process is a mistake that is misleading.
Probably, here we are faced with manifestations of a new type of reactions in which collective low-energy transformations of the nuclei of elements that make up the fuel occur. An estimate of the energies of such reactions gives a value of the order of 1-10 keV per nucleon, that is, they occupy an intermediate position between “ordinary” high-energy nuclear reactions (energies of more than 1 MeV per nucleon) and chemical reactions (energies of the order of 1 eV per atom).
So far, no one can satisfactorily explain the described phenomenon, and the hypotheses put forward by many authors do not stand up to criticism. To establish the physical mechanisms of the new phenomenon, it is necessary to carefully study the possible manifestations of such low-energy nuclear reactions in various experimental settings and generalize the data obtained. Moreover, a significant number of such unexplained facts have accumulated over many years. Here are just a few of them.
ELECTRIC EXPLOSION OF TUNGSTEN WIRE – BEGINNING OF THE XX CENTURY
In 1922, Clarence Irion and Gerald Wendt, employees of the chemical laboratory of the University of Chicago, published a paper devoted to the study of the electrical explosion of a tungsten wire in a vacuum (G.L. Wendt, C.E. Irion, Experimental Attempts to Decompose Tungsten at High Temperatures. "Journal of the American Chemical Society", 1922, 44, 1887-1894).
There is nothing exotic about an electric explosion. This phenomenon was discovered no less at the end of the 18th century, and in everyday life we constantly observe it when, short circuit light bulbs burn out (incandescent light bulbs, of course). What happens during an electric explosion? If the current flowing through a metal wire is high, the metal begins to melt and evaporate. Plasma is formed near the surface of the wire. Heating occurs unevenly: “hot spots” appear in random places on the wire, where more heat is released, the temperature reaches peak values, and explosive destruction of the material occurs.
The most striking thing in this story is that scientists initially expected to experimentally detect the decomposition of tungsten into lighter chemical elements. In their intention, Irion and Wendt relied on the following facts already known at that time.
Firstly, in the visible spectrum of radiation from the Sun and other stars there are no characteristic optical lines belonging to heavy chemical elements. Secondly, the temperature on the surface of the Sun is about 6000°C. Consequently, they reasoned, atoms of heavy elements cannot exist at such temperatures. Thirdly, when a capacitor battery is discharged onto a metal wire, the temperature of the plasma formed during an electric explosion can reach 20,000°C.
Based on this, American scientists suggested that if a strong electric current is passed through a thin wire made of a heavy chemical element, for example, tungsten, and heated to temperatures comparable to the temperature of the Sun, then the tungsten nuclei will be in an unstable state and will decompose into lighter elements . They carefully prepared and carried out the experiment brilliantly, using very simple means.
The electric explosion of a tungsten wire was carried out in a glass spherical flask (Fig. 2), by connecting a capacitor with a capacity of 0.1 microfarad, charged to a voltage of 35 kilovolts, to it. The wire was located between two fastening tungsten electrodes, soldered into the flask on two opposite sides. In addition, the flask had an additional “spectral” electrode, which served to ignite a plasma discharge in the gas formed after the electric explosion.
It is worth noting some important technical details experiment. During its preparation, the flask was placed in an oven, where it was continuously heated at 300°C for 15 hours and all this time the gas was pumped out of it. Along with heating the flask, an electric current was passed through the tungsten wire, heating it to a temperature of 2000°C. After degassing, the glass pipe connecting the flask to the mercury pump was melted using a burner and sealed. The authors of the work claimed that the measures taken made it possible to maintain an extremely low pressure of residual gases in the flask for 12 hours. Therefore, when a high-voltage voltage of 50 kilovolts was applied between the “spectral” and fastening electrodes, there was no breakdown.
Irion and Wendt performed twenty-one electrical explosion experiments. As a result of each experiment, about 10^19 particles of an unknown gas were formed in the flask. Spectral analysis showed that it contained the characteristic line of helium-4. The authors suggested that helium is formed as a result of the alpha decay of tungsten induced by an electrical explosion. Let us recall that alpha particles appearing in the process of alpha decay are the nuclei of the 4He atom.
The publication of Irion and Wendt caused a great stir in the scientific community of that time. Rutherford himself took notice of this work. He expressed deep doubt that the voltage used in the experiment (35 kV) was high enough for electrons to induce nuclear reactions in the metal. Wanting to check the results of American scientists, Rutherford performed his experiment - he irradiated a tungsten target with an electron beam with an energy of 100 kiloelectronvolts. Rutherford did not find any traces of nuclear reactions in tungsten, about which he made a short report in the journal Nature in a rather harsh form. The scientific community took the side of Rutherford, the work of Irion and Wendt was recognized as erroneous and forgotten for many years.
ELECTRIC EXPLOSION OF TUNGSTEN WIRE: 90 YEARS LATER
Only 90 years later, a Russian scientific team under the leadership of Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences Leonid Irbekovich Urutskoev began repeating the experiments of Airion and Wendt. The experiments, equipped with modern experimental and diagnostic equipment, were carried out at the legendary Sukhumi Institute of Physics and Technology in Abkhazia. The physicists named their installation “HELIOS” in honor of the guiding idea of Airion and Wendt (Fig. 3). The quartz explosion chamber is located at the top of the installation and is connected to a vacuum system - a turbomolecular pump (painted blue). Four black cables run to the explosion chamber from a capacitor bank discharger with a capacity of 0.1 microfarads, which stands to the left of the installation. For an electric explosion, the battery was charged to 35-40 kilovolts. The diagnostic equipment used in the experiments (not shown in the figure) made it possible to study the spectral composition of the glow of the plasma that was formed during the electric explosion of the wire, as well as the chemical and elemental composition of the products of its decay.
Rice. 3. This is what the HELIOS installation looks like, in which L. I. Urutskoev’s group studied the explosion of a tungsten wire in a vacuum (2012 experiment)
The experiments of Urutskoev’s group confirmed the main conclusion of the work ninety years ago. Indeed, as a result of the electric explosion of tungsten, an excess amount of helium-4 atoms was formed (about 10^16 particles). If the tungsten wire was replaced with an iron one, then helium was not formed. Note that in experiments at the HELIOS installation, researchers recorded a thousand times fewer helium atoms than in the experiments of Airion and Wendt, although the “energy input” into the wire was approximately the same. What causes this difference remains to be seen.
During an electric explosion, the wire material was sprayed onto inner surface explosion chamber. Mass spectrometric analysis showed that these solid residues were deficient in the tungsten-180 isotope, although its concentration in the original wire corresponded to the natural one. This fact may also indicate the possible alpha decay of tungsten or another nuclear process during the electric explosion of a wire (L. I. Urutskoev, A. A. Rukhadze, D. V. Filippov, A. O. Biryukov, etc. Study of the spectral composition of optical radiation during an electrical explosion of a tungsten wire." Brief messages on physics FIAN", 2012, 7, 13-18).
Accelerating alpha decay with a laser
Low-energy nuclear reactions also include some processes that accelerate spontaneous nuclear transformations of radioactive elements. Interesting results in this area were obtained at the Institute of General Physics. A. M. Prokhorov RAS in the laboratory headed by Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences Georgy Airatovich Shafeev. Scientists discovered an amazing effect: the alpha decay of uranium-238 was accelerated under the influence of laser radiation with a relatively low peak intensity of 10^12-10^13 W/cm2 (A.V. Simakin, G.A. Shafeev, Effect of laser irradiation of nanoparticles in aqueous solutions of uranium salt on the activity of nuclides. "Quantum Electronics", 2011, 41, 7, 614-618).
This is what the experiment looked like. A gold target was placed in a cuvette with an aqueous solution of uranium salt UO2Cl2 with a concentration of 5-35 mg/ml, which was irradiated with laser pulses with a wavelength of 532 nanometers, a duration of 150 picoseconds, and a repetition rate of 1 kilohertz for one hour. Under such conditions, the surface of the target partially melts, and the liquid in contact with it instantly boils. Vapor pressure sprays nanosized gold droplets from the target surface into the surrounding liquid, where they cool and turn into solid nanoparticles with a characteristic size of 10 nanometers. This process is called laser ablation in liquid and is widely used when it is necessary to prepare colloidal solutions of nanoparticles of various metals.
In Shafeev’s experiments, in one hour of irradiation of a gold target, 10^15 gold nanoparticles were formed in 1 cm3 of solution. The optical properties of such nanoparticles are radically different from the properties of a massive gold plate: they do not reflect light, but absorb it, and the electromagnetic field of a light wave near nanoparticles can be amplified 100-10,000 times and reach intra-atomic values!
The nuclei of uranium and its decay products (thorium, protactinium), which found themselves near these nanoparticles, were exposed to multiply enhanced laser electromagnetic fields. As a result, their radioactivity changed noticeably. In particular, the gamma activity of thorium-234 doubled. (The gamma activity of the samples before and after laser irradiation was measured with a semiconductor gamma spectrometer.) Since thorium-234 arises from the alpha decay of uranium-238, an increase in its gamma activity indicates an acceleration of the alpha decay of this uranium isotope. Note that the gamma activity of uranium-235 has not increased.
Scientists from the Institute of General Physics of the Russian Academy of Sciences have discovered that laser radiation can accelerate not only the alpha decay, but also the beta decay of the radioactive isotope 137Cs - one of the main components of radioactive emissions and waste. In their experiments, they used a green copper vapor laser operating in a pulsed-periodic mode with a pulse duration of 15 nanoseconds, a pulse repetition rate of 15 kilohertz, and a peak intensity of 109 W/cm2. Laser radiation affected a gold target placed in a cuvette with an aqueous solution of 137Cs salt, the content of which in a 2 ml solution was approximately 20 picograms.
After two hours of irradiating the target, the researchers recorded that a colloidal solution with gold nanoparticles 30 nm in size formed in the cuvette (Fig. 4), and the gamma activity of cesium-137 (and, consequently, its concentration in the solution) decreased by 75%. The half-life of cesium-137 is about 30 years. This means that such a decrease in activity, which was obtained in a two-hour experiment, should occur under natural conditions in about 60 years. Dividing 60 years by two hours, we find that during laser exposure the decay rate increased approximately 260,000 times. Such a gigantic increase in the rate of beta decay should turn a cuvette with a cesium solution into a powerful source of gamma radiation accompanying the usual beta decay of cesium-137. However, in reality this does not happen. Radiation measurements showed that the gamma activity of the salt solution does not increase (E.V. Barmina, A.V. Simakin, G.A. Shafeev, Laser-induced caesium-137 decay. “Quantum Electronics”, 2014, 44, 8, 791-792).
This fact suggests that under laser irradiation the decay of cesium-137 does not proceed according to the most probable (94.6%) normal conditions scenario with radiation of a gamma quantum with an energy of 662 keV, and in the other - non-radiative. This is presumably direct beta decay with the formation of a nucleus of the stable isotope 137Ba, which under normal conditions occurs only in 5.4% of cases.
Why such a redistribution of probabilities occurs in the cesium beta decay reaction is still unclear. However, there are other independent studies confirming that accelerated decontamination of cesium-137 is possible even in living systems.
Low-energy nuclear reactions in living systems
The search for low-energy nuclear reactions in biological objects has been carried out for more than twenty years by Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences Alla Aleksandrovna Kornilova at the Faculty of Physics of Moscow state university them. M. V. Lomonosov. The objects of the first experiments were bacterial cultures of Bacillus subtilis, Escherichia coli, and Deinococcus radiodurans. They were placed in a nutrient medium depleted of iron, but containing manganese salt MnSO4 and heavy water D2O. Experiments showed that this system produced a deficient isotope of iron - 57Fe (Vysotskii V. I., Kornilova A. A., Samoylenko I. I., Experimental discovery of the phenomenon of low-energy nuclear transmutation of isotopes (Mn55 to Fe57) in growing biological-logical cultures, “Proceedings of 6th International Conference on Cold Fusion", 1996, Japan, 2, 687-693).
According to the authors of the study, the 57Fe isotope appeared in growing bacterial cells as a result of the reaction 55Mn+ d = 57Fe (d is the nucleus of a deuterium atom, consisting of a proton and a neutron). A definite argument in favor of the proposed hypothesis is the fact that if heavy water is replaced with light water or manganese salt is excluded from the nutrient medium, then the bacteria do not produce the 57Fe isotope.
Having made sure that nuclear transformations of stable chemical elements are possible in microbiological cultures, A. A. Kornilova applied her method to the deactivation of long-lived radioactive isotopes (Vysotskii V. I., Kornilova A. A., Transmutation of stable isotopes and deactivation of radioactive waste in growing biological systems. " Annals of Nuclear Energy", 2013, 62, 626-633). This time Kornilova worked not with monocultures of bacteria, but with a super-association of microorganisms various types to increase their survival in hostile environments. Each group of this community is maximally adapted to joint life activities, collective mutual assistance and mutual defense. As a result, the superassociation adapts well to a wide variety of environmental conditions, including increased radiation. The typical maximum dose that conventional microbiological cultures can withstand is 30 kilorads, but superassociations can withstand several orders of magnitude more, and their metabolic activity is almost unimpaired.
Equal amounts of concentrated biomass of the above-mentioned microorganisms and 10 ml of a solution of cesium-137 salt in distilled water were placed in glass cuvettes. The initial gamma activity of the solution was 20,000 becquerels. Salts of vital microelements Ca, K and Na were additionally added to some cuvettes. Closed cuvettes were kept at 20°C and their gamma activity was measured every seven days using a high-precision detector.
Over one hundred days of the experiment in the control cuvette containing no microorganisms, the activity of cesium-137 decreased by 0.6%. In a cuvette additionally containing potassium salt - by 1%. The activity decreased most rapidly in the cuvette additionally containing a calcium salt. Here, gamma activity decreased by 24%, which is equivalent to reducing the half-life of cesium by 12 times!
The authors hypothesized that as a result of the vital activity of microorganisms, 137Cs is converted into 138Ba, a biochemical analogue of potassium. If there is little potassium in the nutrient medium, then the transformation of cesium into barium occurs rapidly; if there is a lot, then the transformation process is blocked. As for the role of calcium, it is simple. Thanks to its presence in the nutrient medium, the population of microorganisms grows rapidly and, therefore, consumes more potassium or its biochemical analogue - barium, that is, it pushes the transformation of cesium into barium.
What about reproducibility?
The question of the reproducibility of the experiments described above requires some clarification. The E-Cat reactor, captivating in its simplicity, is being reproduced by hundreds, if not thousands of enthusiastic inventors around the world. There are even special forums on the Internet where “replicators” exchange experiences and demonstrate their achievements (http://www.lenr-forum.com/). The Russian inventor Alexander Georgievich Parkhomov has achieved some success in this direction. He managed to design a heat generator operating on a mixture of nickel powder and lithium aluminum hydride, which provides an excess amount of energy (A.G. Parkhomov, Test results of a new version of an analogue of a high-temperature heat generator in Russia. “Journal of Emerging Directions of Science”, 2015, 8, 34- 39). However, unlike Rossi’s experiments, no distortions in the isotopic composition in the spent fuel could be detected.
Experiments on the electric explosion of tungsten wires, as well as on laser acceleration of the decay of radioactive elements, are much more complex with technical point vision and can only be reproduced in serious scientific laboratories. In this regard, the question of the reproducibility of the experiment is replaced by the question of its repeatability. For experiments on low-energy nuclear reactions, a typical situation is when, under identical experimental conditions, the effect is either present or not. The fact is that it is not possible to control all the parameters of the process, including, apparently, the main one - which has not yet been identified. The search for the necessary modes is almost blind and takes many months and even years. Experimenters more than once had to change schematic diagram settings in the process of searching for a control parameter - that “knob” that needs to be “twisted” in order to achieve satisfactory repeatability. At the moment, the repeatability in the experiments described above is approximately 30%, that is, a positive result is obtained in every third experiment. Whether this is a lot or a little is for the reader to judge. One thing is clear: without creating an adequate theoretical model of the phenomena under study, it is unlikely that it will be possible to radically improve this parameter.
An attempt at interpretation
Despite convincing experimental results confirming the possibility of nuclear transformations of stable chemical elements, as well as acceleration of the decay of radioactive substances, the physical mechanisms of these processes are still unknown.
The main mystery of low-energy nuclear reactions is how positively charged nuclei, when approaching each other, overcome repulsive forces, the so-called Coulomb barrier. This typically requires temperatures of millions of degrees Celsius. It is obvious that in the experiments considered such temperatures are not achieved. Nevertheless, there is a non-zero probability that a particle that does not have sufficient kinetic energy to overcome the repulsive forces will nevertheless end up close to the nucleus and enter into a nuclear reaction with it.
This effect, called the tunnel effect, has a purely quantum nature and is closely related to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. According to this principle, a quantum particle (for example, an atomic nucleus) cannot have precisely specified coordinates and momentum at the same time. The product of uncertainties (irremovable random deviations from the exact value) of the coordinate and momentum is limited from below by a value proportional to Planck’s constant h. The same product determines the probability of tunneling through a potential barrier: the greater the product of the uncertainties of the particle’s position and momentum, the higher this probability.
The works of Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor Vladimir Ivanovich Manko and co-authors show that in certain states of a quantum particle (the so-called coherent correlated states), the product of uncertainties can exceed Planck’s constant by several orders of magnitude. Consequently, for quantum particles in such states the probability of overcoming the Coulomb barrier will increase (V.V. Dodonov, V.I. Manko, Invariants and evolution of non-stationary quantum systems. “Proceedings of the Lebedev Physical Institute. Moscow: Nauka, 1987, v. 183, p. 286)".
If several nuclei of different chemical elements simultaneously find themselves in a coherent correlated state, then in this case some collective process may occur, leading to the redistribution of protons and neutrons between them. The probability of such a process will be greater, the smaller the difference in energies between the initial and final states of the ensemble of nuclei. It is this circumstance that apparently determines the intermediate position of low-energy nuclear reactions between chemical and “ordinary” nuclear reactions.
How are coherent correlated states formed? What causes nuclei to unite into ensembles and exchange nucleons? Which nuclei can and cannot participate in this process? There are no answers to these and many other questions yet. Theorists are only taking the first steps towards solving this interesting problem.
Therefore, at this stage, the main role in research into low-energy nuclear reactions should belong to experimenters and inventors. Systematic experimental and theoretical studies of this amazing phenomenon, a comprehensive analysis of the data obtained, and broad expert discussion are needed.
Understanding and mastering the mechanisms of low-energy nuclear reactions will help us in solving a variety of applied problems - creating cheap autonomous power plants, highly efficient technologies for the decontamination of nuclear waste and the transformation of chemical elements.
