
Originally Posted by
nav2010
Think about what you are trying to do. Turning Lead into Gold at the melting point of Lead would break every law in the book regarding thermodynamics. For it to turn to Gold and retain the melting point of Gold would need a significant rise in temperature from the melting point of Lead. This would mean a 400% increase in energy would be needed to attain the melting point of gold from the melting point of lead.
Some simple guidelines to follow: If you are transmuting Silver into Gold, get the Silver to the melting point of Gold first so that no increase in energy is required during the cold fusion transmutation. Another rule of thumb is this: any transmutation attempted will use donor atoms from either Carbon or Oxygen or both simultaneously. We know from work done in Japan that they started the experiment with Carbon which has a Proton/Electron arrangement of 6 respectively with 2-4 in the Electron valance. From the experiment they found that the Electron valance went to 2-8-16-2, which is that of Nickel and the conclusions were the donors were 2 Oxygen to form the 16 valance and 1 Carbon to form half of the 8 valance and the other 2 valance. Unfortunately, the Nickel had an half life of milliseconds because there appeared to be an unbalance and they lost 2 Protons and Electrons ending up with Iron + some heat. But the Iron wasn't normal and didn't rust. From the data we can conclude thus: Silver with a valance of 2,8,18,18,1 is missing 32 protons and 32 electrons to form that of Gold which is 2,8,18,32,18,1. In order to transmutate Silver to Gold the donor particle is Oxygen, 4 Oxygen atoms in fact and a little bit of magic concerning the Neutrons. Because the Neutrons is the part that Pons and Fleischmann didn't even fully understand. It may well be that the Neutrons are mere subatomic particles that can be formed either from donor particles such as Oxygen and Carbon but it is not quite yet understood where the numbers disappear to in none common denominator calculations. For example Gold has 79 electrons, 79 Protons and 118 Neutrons, if Oxygen donates 4 atoms to Silver which is 32 Protons, 32 Electrons and 32 Neutrons, Gold is still short of 25 Neutrons. It could be possible that 1 Oxygen atom donates this by converting 8+8+8 into 24 Neutrons or it may well be a rule of nature that in transmutation only an exact amount of atoms can be converted plus a little heat exchange as noted by both Pons and Fleischmann and the Japanese although Pons and Fleischmann were working with Palladium/Nickel and the Japanese were working with Carbon and Oxygen. It still isn't understood how Neutrons fall into the fray.
Back to our Silver to Gold discussion, we can be quite certain that Oxygen in this case is the donor particle and assuming you have the donor in the correct configuration to willfully accept what you ask of it then it would be quite rude of you to ask the Silver which has a melting point of 961c to assume the melting point of Gold which is 1064c. The Silver needs to be 1064c too otherwise not only does it need to transmute, it will also need to gain energy from nowhere. As for expecting Lead to turn to Gold, then your projection powder is not longer providing donor atoms but it must receive donor Atoms from the Lead which is a very different ball game. As a point of interest from the Japanese research, it would be of value to researchers to note that Potassium Carbonate (K2CO3) does not have an high enough Oxygen content to donate to silver. Potassium Phosphate K3O4P however, does. It is also of interest to know that during the process of making the stone that it may be of a certain advantage to include Phosphorus during the distilling process so that when you come to the firing process, the things that we see in the chemistry of Phosphorus and are well known about also appear in your own processes. You never know, you could end up with a compound that has a chemical formula of K4P2O7. Then the Neutron common denominator problem kindly disappears.
Bookmarks