CFRL English News No.12 (May 10, 2000)

 Cold Fusion Research Laboratory     Prof. Hideo Kozima.

 

   This is CFRL News (in English) No.12 translated and edited from Japanese version published for friend researchers of Cold Fusion Research Laboratory directed by Dr. H. Kozima.

In this issue, there awe following items.

1)   From Program of ICCF8,

2)   On the neutron affinity of a nucleus,

3)   Evolution of a Model, An essay on CF

 “A Message to the Cold Fusion” by Prof. T. Sawada (Tsukuba Univ.) published in Japanese version of News No. 12 will be published in a forthcoming issue by his translation into English.

The next issue No.13 will be published in July after ICCF8 with its achievements.

 

1)   ICCF8 (Lerici, Villa Marigola, May 21-26, 2000)

We have received ICCF8 Program by e-mail several weeks ago. The time schedule is essentially paper presentation for 4 days from May 22 and a half-day concluding ceremony on May 26. We have long siesta from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. according to the custom in Latin countries. We remind an accident in Rome we suffered 10 years ago and a following trouble at a police station due to the siesta.

   In the program there are listed 81 papers as a whole presented at the Conference including 20 Oral presentations of 35 min., 7 Oral presentations of 20 min. and .54 Poster presentations which have 3 min. oral explanation each. We can look in the Web page for its details while presentations by Japanese researchers are summarized below:

PLAN OF THE CONFERENCE

ORAL SESSIONS

22, Monday: 11:50 - 12:25 Y. Iwamura

23, Tuesday: 09:35 - 10:10 J. Kasagi

24, Wednesday: 09:00 - 09:35 Y. Arata 11: 50 - 12:25 T. Mizuno

25, Thursday: 09:35 - 10:10 Y. Isobe

  12:25 - 12:45 H. Kozima, “TNCF Model --- A Phenomenological Approach”

 

POSTER SESSIONS

Monday, May 22: 076. T. Hanawa

  044. H. Kozima, “The Cold Fusion Phenomenon and Physics of Neutrons in Solids”

  012. A. Takahashi

Tuesday, May 23: 020. Y. Arata; 013. M. Ohta;

  045. K. Arai, “Nuclear Transmutation in Solids Explained by TNCF Model”

  036. R. Notoya

Thursday, May 25: 005. K. Kamada; 060. N. Kubota; 090. K. Ota; 043. H. Yamada

Conference Web site http://www.frascati.enea.it/ICCF8

   From this program, we can guess a phase of policy of ICCF8. The opening presentation (not written above) is presented by M. Fleischmann who opened the door to solid state-nuclear physics in 1989 by the observation of anomalous events in electrolytic system Pd-D-Li.

   The final oral presentation is by H. Kozima on May 25 as written above. My presentation will open a new stage of CF investigation where seems confusion in methodology of how to promote research and to develop application. The complicated phenomenon as CFP occurring in complex systems should be attacked by intentional use of various methods including the phenomenological and fundamental approached.

   It is my pleasure if my presentation contributes to CF society to have a common recognition about nature of CFP, which can be also shared with scientific world as a whole.

 

2)   On the Neutron Affinity

   The electron affinity is a well-known concept in chemistry but Neutron Affinity proposed in our paper and described in the book “Discovery of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon” is not always popular even if it seems very effective to understand CFP. It will be helpful for researchers to summarize the meaning of the Neutron Affinity in relation with CFP.

   It will be better to confirm the meaning of the electron affinity of an atom first. We cite here a brief and compact definition from Encyclopedia Britannic:

   “Electron affinity, in chemistry, the amount of energy liberated when an electron is added to a neutral atom to form a negatively charged ion. The electron affinities of atoms are difficult to measure; hence values are available for only a few chemical elements, chiefly the halogens. These values were obtained from measurements of heats of formation and lattice energies of ionic compounds of the elements. The electron affinity of an element is a measure of that element's tendency to act as an oxidizing agent (an electron acceptor) and is generally related to the nature of the chemical bonds the element forms with other elements. “

   On the other hand, the neutron affinity of a nucleus is defined as follows according to the definition of the electron affinity as follows (”Discovery of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon” p.279

   “Let us assume that the neutron Bloch wave transforms into a proton Bloch wave when it suffers aβ-decay. Furthermore, let us estimate the stability of the neutron wave interacting with a nucleus AZM with a neutron affinity <iita> defined by a following relation;

   <iita> = -(A+1ZM -A+1Z+1M)c2.

Here, c is the light speed in vacuum, AZM, in this case, is the mass of the nucleus with a mass number A and an atomic number Z composing the lattice nuclei.

   This definition tells us that the neutron affinity is a quantity expressing an energy difference of two nuclear states, one with an extra neutron and the other with an extra proton. The positive value ofη means the former is in lower energy state than the latter and is more stable.”

   This definition is given in about 1997 to treat lifetime elongation of neutrons in CF materials. However, the concept of neutron band has been worked out and it has been shown possibilities of local coherence of neutron Bloch waves, accumulation of neutrons and formation of neutron drops in surface layers. The neutrons in the neutron drop will be stable and now the neutron drop bears stability of neutrons first attributed to the neutron affinity.

   The neutron affinity, therefore, should be redefined to bear another role in formation of the neutron band in solids, a key concept to explain CFP on the TNCF model. The new definition of the neutron affinity <iita> is completely parallel to that of the electron affinity:

   <iita> = -(AZM + Mn - A+1ZM) c2

   Then, the interaction potential of a thermal neutron by a lattice nucleus is proportional to <iita> and structure of a neutron band is determined by it: the larger the neutron affinity, the lower the neutron band. As our preliminary calculation had shown, the lowest neutron band sink into negative energy sea according to the strength of the interaction potential and the second lowest in vacuum becomes the lowest band above zero for an appropriate strength of the potential, e.g. for that corresponding to the well with width of 10-13 cm and depth 8 MeV as shown in the paper appeared in J. Phys. Soc. Japan. In situations with this band structure, there will be local coherence of the neutron Bloch waves and there are formed the neutron drops which realize CFP.

   Which concept is effective to use <iita> or <iita>* is determined not a priori but by comparison with experimental data in accordance with general nature of a model. A model evolves with conversations with experimental data.

 

3)   Evolution of the TNCF Model1993-2000

The TNCF model was proposed at ICCF4 held in Hawaii in October 1993. In the first version of the Model, the trapped thermal neutrons are assumed just to exist in solids as an ideal gas in a box used in the calculation of Maxwell distribution of velocity.

 Interaction of the neutron with lattice nuclei was assumed the same as that in vacuum.

   Later, the experimental data of NT and He-4 showing the surface nature of CFP forced the model to take the instability factor of neutrons <xi> to treat it: <xi> was assumed as 1 in the surface layer and 0.01 in volume in terms of experimental data. (“Introduction” p.143, Premise 2)  The adjustable parameter nn has been determined having its original meaning of the density of the thermal neutrons in solids.

   The development of our investigation about nature of neutrons in solids revealed possible formation of neutron drops in the surface layer where have been observed nuclear products of CFP. Then, the meaning of the parameter nn should be reconsidered from an innovated point of view in terms of the neutron drops. It will be a density of neutrons in the neutron drop if the interaction cross-section is the same as that in vacuum.

   This is an example of evolution of a model common to any model succeeded to open new sight in science. Simple illustration will be seen in the evolution of the atomic model in 20th century. The evolution of the atomic model will be divided in three steps: 1) As well known, N. Bohr assumed stationary states in which the angular momentum of the lowest state is given by h/2pai. 2) A. Sommerfeld generalized quantization condition to a general orbit, as its action integral is an integral multiple of h, Planck’s constant. 3) W. Pauli imposed electrons in an atom the exclusion principle to reconcile the model with spectroscopic data.

   We learn in Colleges an established course of science where winding passages of development of a science are entirely cut off for convenience of education. I have pointed out an episode about Maxwell’s equations told by J.W.N. Sullivan (“Discovery” p.295), which is accepted as a matter of course in school physics now but has been an assumption in reality. We have to rely on Principles of the day established by severe tests of years as far as they are not declared their fail by new facts even if its judgment depends on individuals.