On
cold nuclear synthesis
V.K.Ignatovich
ISINN XXIII Dubna
29.05.2015
1
I'm not sure that cold fusion exists
May be activity in this direction is based on the desire to get
money from Venture capital or hedge funds.
2
But do not forget that only enthusiasts do develop the science
Let’s allow ourselves to doubt our teachers, who reject
miracles, simply because they do not fit within the
scope of their acquired knowledge.
“Truth is born on Earth as a heresy, and dies
as delusion” (Hegel)
Can you ignore a river just because it is not on the map?
Cold fusion has been difficult to replicate.
Hot fusion has been difficult to be make useful.
With this talk I would like to inspire the neutron community to
check some experiments, where observation of a huge isotope
transformation is declared
3
He made a reactor, which produces
5 times more power than consumes
A real device E-cat by Andrea Rossi
4
Last year it was repeated in MSU by Parkhomov
5
6
7
8
9
Oct. 23, 2014 - “The most
important news of the year,
the results of a new
investigation of the Rossi
reactor over a 32-day
period. The report not only
confirms output power far
in excess of anything
possible by chemical
reaction, but also gives a
clear indication that a
nuclear reaction is
occurring, on the basis of a
substantial change in the
isotopic proportions of
Li and Ni over the period
of the run. ...
Brian Josephson”
10
11
A sample of the fuel was carefully examined with respect to its
isotopic composition before the run and after the run,
using several standard methods:
XPS(photoelectron), EDS(energy-dispersive x-rays), SIMS,
ICP-MS (plasma-mass) and ICP-AES.
The isotope composition
in Lithium and Nickel was found to agree with the
natural composition before the run,
while after the run it was found to
have changed substantially.
Nuclear reactions are therefore
indicated to be present in the run process, which
however is hard to reconcile with the fact that no
radioactivity was detected
outside the reactor during the run.
12
Analysis of isotopes composition change in the Rossi reactor
13
My idea of pico hydrogen formation
 d2 2 d
1 
2
 2 
 2   k   0
r dr r
r
 dr

 (k , r )
  (k , r )

u
r
 r
Has two complex
conjugated solutions
In free space they are
1 ikr

 (k , r )  e  H 0(1) (kr)
r
1 ikr
 (k , r )  e  H 0( 2) (kr)
r

The regular in origin solution is
   (k , r )  (k , r )

In free space it is

1
(k , r )  sin(kr)  J 0 (kr)
r
14
The idea is to consider a singular state
 d2 2 d
1 
2
 2 
 2   k   0
r dr r
r
 dr

Nonsingular solution is
 (k , r )
  (k , r )

u
 r
r
    (k , r )   (k , r )
However there is also a singular
but normalizable solution
    ( k , r )   ( k , r )
In free space it is
1
(k , r )  cos(kr)  N 0 (kr)
r
15
The technical details
 2
e2 
 
    E
r 
 2m
a0   me
2
  2r na0
The main
equation
Common
solution
A singular
solution
2
(r)   L (r )Y ( ,  )
M
L
E0  e a0
2
L0
 2E E0  1 n
 (r )  e
 2
2
w(  )
 d2

d
  2  2   
 (1  n) w  0
d
 d

w0  F (a, b,  )  F (1  n,2,  )  1 | 0
Confluent hypergeometrical function
ws (  )  U (1  n,2,  )  1  | 0
16
u
U (1  n,2,  )
C exp  q  Rw 
uw
In solid state the confined
atom can have eigen
states with singular wave
function
r
Eb
Rw
( k  1   )  k
1
U (1   ,2,  )  


k 0 k!(k  1)!(k  1   )

Ens  En 0
Its ground state can be lower than the
standard one
Probability to have the screened proton – pico hydrogen atom is
W    s (  )  d  10
2
N
2
7
17
It was impossible to publish in regular journals,
even in ArXiv. Scientific censorship is enormous 18
SUMMARY
Experimental results exist.
They are real and reproducible.
They are not explained yet, but they are very interesting.
I urge you to apply your experimental skills to repeat
the experiments in controlled environment,
and to look for missed details.
neutron beam
Rossi reactor

n
D
It is important to see the change of isotope composition
during the work of the Rossi reactor. Let’s do that.
19
H. Poincaré said a hundred years ago: Science is build
up of facts, as a house is built of stones; but an
accumulation of facts is no more a science than a heap
of stones is a house.
Is it not the time to check stones and to build a house
to meet the dawn of physics?
Thank you
20