Cold fusion/Theory/Cluster fusion

Critique

The issue with cluster theories is that the clusters have to get close enough for the strong force to become significant, which requires MeV's of energies if a heavy nucleus is involved, and KeV's of energies for 2 deuterons. At normal chemistry distances, no cluster effect matters, because the probability of more than 2 particles being close enough to have something nuclear happen is miniscule. (This comment was added to the section on Takahashi theory by an IP editor.. -- explanation added by Abd (discuss • contribs) 01:45, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

While this is a general critique of cluster fusion theories, it was added to the Takahashi section. Takahashi is a hot fusion physicist, unusually knowledgeable about quantum field theory, and his theory specifically addresses the fusion process. Essentially, the claim that no cluster effect could lead to fusion is based on certain assumptions, that were the very assumptions that Pons and Fleischmann were testing in their research, starting in about 1984. Takahashi's work is remarkable precisely because he *calculates* a fusion rate of 100% within a femtosecond, from a starting condition that is not far from what might actually happen somewhere in these experiments. He originally focused on the lattice, he has begun to move his studies to the surface. Calculating the actual fusion rates involves extremely complex conditions that are not well understood, and that it is also true with Kim theory, we don't know the velocity distribution of deuterons in metal hydrides, and those would be critical.

Basically, what Takahashi uses is a "condensation motion," which is related to, but not the same as, a Bose-Einstein condensation. He begins with a low-relative-momentum state of *two deuterium molecules in confinement.* He then looks at what will happen, applying what appears to be standard quantum field theory. He predicts fusion to Be-8. The theory is quite incomplete, but the standard response that the IP editor gave is simply not accurate, from the point of view of theory. What the IP editor wrote is just the same argument as was used to claim that all cold fusion is impossible. It's the so-called "first miracle." Takahashi's theory, in fact, explains the first, second, and third miracles, because his theory leads to Be-8, which fissions only to helium, with no gamma rays.

That's not enough, we now know much more about cold fusion. There is now an additional consideration to meet: there is no significant charged particle radiation above 20 keV.

So to continue with his theory, Takahashi has been forced to consider the possibility of nuclear isomers or halo nuclei, that might delay the fission long enough for the highly excited Be-8 to decay through what Takahashi calls a BOLEP, or Burst of Low-Energy Photons. There would *still* be a problem, because the ground state of Be-8 would decays into two 45 keV alphas, so it's still edgy.

I consider myself unqualified to review Takahashi in detail. Few are. But his work has been published under peer review.

As to the general objection to clusters, Kim's cluster theory was published in Naturwissenschaften as well.. It is rather obvious that the theory cannot be dismissed through a shallow understanding. Kim is, after, all, a professor of physics at Purdue. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 01:45, 13 September 2013 (UTC)