The nature of N.A.E. is a problem of vital importance for the future of LENR and I hope that what I will say now, will not be ignored as my poisoning hypothesis continues to be.
Actually, the present paper is a continuation in part of:
that had a rather low impact 250 readers and only 3 friendly comments by my friends Axil, Abd and Doug. That paper has included a metaphor for the poisoning hypothesis and, most remarkable. the idea of Defkalion that the reactor itself is the true nuclear active environment, including the active sites...
The problem of NAE has been recently discussed vividly on our forums and the refrain remained the same: N.A.E is lowly cracks,
an idea I cannot accept. N.A.E is derived from catalytic (chemical) active sites based on “special things take place in special sites” developed a step further: “extraordinary things take place in very special places”- see please my old paper in http://coldfusionnow.org/1994-cold-fusion-sourcebook-dedicated-to-children-of-chernobyl/ at page 86.
Cracks are voids, badly defined, of many possible sizes and forms, unstructured, uncontrollable. They really do not seem able to trigger such unexpected events as nuclear reactions and/or nuclear interactions.
Cracking is by definition a destructive and auto destructive process
that cannot last (except if/when) by some contrary process of rebuilding the metal lattice. This auto destruction is contradicted
by many cases/forms of LENR that have functioned well for long times at intensities of
Watts (Piantelli, Arata, Ahern)
or kilowatts (Rossi, Defkalion). Cracks are technologically hopeless.
The idea of cracks is simplistic and in direct contradiction with the experience regarding he elaborate structures of the chemical active sites in catalysis
The idea of NAE being just cracks is retrograde in opposition to the trend of using smart, ever smarter complex nanostructures in LENR please re-read what Piantelli says about this on my blog but this is only an example of many. Cracks would be an anti-complex solution.
The idea of NAE being cracks does not support my poisoning theory i.e. the great sensitivity of the heat release to the presence of alien (no hydrogen) gases on the active surfaces. And then the essential role of deep degassing as shown here http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/08/why-pd-d-lenr-will-never-work.html is not more justified.
Cracks as NAE do not works with advanced nanotechnology in its static variant but it is also incompatible with the highly dynamic nanoplasmonics –the science-technology that defines LENR+
Eventually if this form of new energy really comes from cracks, then we cannot distinguish between, low intensity, static, transient LENR classic and high intensity, dynamic high density NAE, enhanced excess heat LENR +. A crack is a crack is a crack, As shown I believe cracks have no positive role in LENR, this concept tells me less than nothing in this case. I think N.A.E are very sophisticated high tech structures not simply nano-voids.
I have never observed the people with whom I am discussing now this cracks non-issue, in flagranti of changing an opinion. Therefore, especially for them, the title of this essay is “Why I hope that NAE are NOT cracks.” Let them accuse me of wishful thinking and technological reality of being anti-scientific and hostile to poor cracks.