Like us on Facebook and Follow us on Twitter


Article:Cold Fusion and Gamow's Paradox

Lasted edited by Andrew Munsey, updated on June 15, 2016 at 1:00 am.

  • One error has been found on this page. Administrator will correct this soon.
  • This page has been imported from the old peswiki website. This message will be removed once updated.
Image:AAAfig6-GAMOWparadox 95x95.gif

'Wladimir Guglinski provides an additional argument for the need for new foundations for nuclear fusion physics, saying that the existing theories are unable to explain the alpha decay of U238 ("unsatisfactorily explained by Gamow’s theory").'


An alpha particle leaves out a nucleus 92U238 with energy 4,2MeV, in spite of the Coulombic barrier is 8,8MeV.

Nuclear theorists consider that such paradox was solved by Gamow.

That’s why in Quantum Ring Theory the emission of alpha particle by 92U238 is named Gamow’s paradox.

However Gamow solved the paradox by introducing other new unacceptable paradoxes, as shown in Critique to the Models of Nuclear Physics, which is the paper number 10 of the book Quantum Ring Theory( 1 ).

Gamow’s theory is analized between the pages 129 and 132 of the book.

Therefore Gamow’s theory actually is unacceptable, and so the paradox concering the emission of particles 2He4 by the nucleus 92U238 actually is not explained in current Nuclear Physics.

The most nuclear theorists believe that Gamow’s theory is satisfactory. They believe it because it is confortable to them, since it’s hard to confess that current Nuclear Physics has not satisfactory answers for conventional nuclear phenomena.

And so the nuclear theorista actually bamboozle themselves by believing that Gamow’s theory solved the paradox of the alpha decay.

Cold fusion and Gamow’s paradox

In the Wikipedia’s article on Cold fusion it is writen the following:

Cold fusion's most significant problem in the eyes of many scientists is that current theories describing conventional hot nuclear fusion cannot explain how a cold fusion reaction could occur at relatively low temperatures, and that there is currently no accepted theory to explain cold fusion.[27][28] The 1989 DoE panel said: 'Nuclear fusion at room temperature, of the type discussed in this report, would be contrary to all understanding gained of nuclear reactions in the last half century it would require the invention of an entirely new nuclear process". Current understanding of conventional hot nuclear fusion shows that the following explanations are not adequate:'''

(There is a long list following this sentence).

Nevertheless we can also to write the following:

''' 1- There is currently no accepted theory to explain Gamow’s paradox

2- Current understanding of conventional nuclear phenomena shows that Gamow’s explanation is not adequate to explain the alpha decay'''

According to John G. Cramer, some consequences of the Gamow's paradox have been noted by Eugene Wigner and Leonard Eisenbud in 1955.

In his paper Tunneling through the Lightspeed Barrier( 2 ) Cramer writes:

"One interesting question not addressed in Gamow's work, however, is how long the alpha particle, or its equivalent, spends in leaking through a barrier. This question was finally addressed in 1955 by Eugene Wigner and his student Leonard Eisenbud, who calculated the time required for the peak of the wave packet to pass trough the barrier. Their conclusion was very strange. They found that under certain circumstances, this transit time reaches a constant value that is independent of the width of the barrier. For a wide barrier and a constant time the corresponding transit velocity, i.e., distance divided by time, can easily become faster than the velocity of light."

Wigner and Eisenbud conclusion is similar of that pointed out in the book Quantum Ring Theory, where in the page 131 it is written, concerning the attempt of an alpha particle to leave out the uranium nucleus:

"Gamow's paradox: although the success of the enterprise depends on the numbers of attempts, according to his theory the attempts are not the most important cause that offers to the interprise the possibility of success... Gamow has tried to explain a paradox by the introduction of another paradox..."


Since current understanding of current conventional nuclear phenomena

is unable to explaind Gamow’s paradox,

there is no reason why we have to expect that such current understandig

be able to explain cold fusion occurrence'''

The alpha decay according to QRT

The Figure 1 shows the model of a fermion acording to QRT (in that figure it is shown the electron)


where we see:

1- A body ring

2- The rotation of the body ring induces a flux of gravitons (the red field that crosses withing the body ring). In QRT it is named principal field Sp(e) . The flux of gravitons is named flux n(o). It agglutinates electric particles of the aether, in order that the principal field Sp(e) is surrounded by an electric field.

3- The rotation of the principal field constituted by gravitons induces the secondary field constituted by a flux of particles electrically charged (the blue field in the figure). It is named Sn(e) in QRT. As it’s constituted by particles electrically charged, such field captures magnetic particles of the aether, and so the field Sn(e) is a Coulombic field.

The proton is similar. It has a principal field Sp(p), and a secondary feld Sn(p).

The neutron is composed by proton+electron, and so the secondary field Sn(N) of a neutron is neutral, because it is formed by the overlap between the fields Sn(p) of proton and Sn(e) of electron.

However it is impossible to have the overlap between the fields Sp(p) and Sp(e) in the structure of a neutron. That’s why it’s impossible to have a nucleon 0n2 in nature, because there is repulsion between the principal fields Sp(N) of two neutrons. As is known, Heisenberg tried to explain it from the concept of isospin.

But the isospin is a mere pure abstract concept, and it does not point out to us the CAUSE why two neutrons are not agglutinated in nature (the isospin is only a mathematical concept that describes what happens, but it does not tell us why it happens (because as two neutrons have not repulstion, then two neutrons agglutinated by the strong force would never separate after they get together, according to current Nuclear Physics).

From such a model of fermion we calculate the binding energy of light nuclei (it’s impossible to calculate from the current Nuclear Physics).

The theoretical calculation of binding energy of light nuclei from the nuclear model of QRT is possible because there are three sort of energy involved in the process of packing.

The figure 2 shows them


The nuclei are formed when the fluxes n(o) of a nucleon 2He4 captures protons and neutrons. The figure 3 shows the formation of the 3Li6, where we see that the fluxes f-1 and f-2 of the central 2H34 (green) has captured a nucleon 1H2 (red).


As we realize from the formation of the 3Li6, when a nucleus X is formed by several protons and neutrons, the secondary field Sn( X ) is formed by the overlap of the many fields Sn(p) and Sn(N) of protons and neutrons.

The sequence of nucleons capture by the central 2He4 gives the levels of energy in each nucleus. The Figure 4 shows the sequence of capture in the formation of 5B10 , 6C12, and 7N14.


The Figure 5 shows the nucleus 8O16, with its central 2He4, surrounded by its secondary field Sn(8O16).


Among the paradoxes of Gamow theory, we have to mention the fact that his theory is unable to explain why the alpha particles are always emitted under the following condition:



1- The particles alpha are emitted with null angular moment

2- They leave out the nucleus starting from the nuclear “center?,

that is, it leaves through a radial direction

3- At once they are expelled from the nucleus, they move outside by a linear trajectory

4- The trajectory is basically unidimensional.


As the nucleus has a spin, we had to expect that, according to current Nuclear Physics, when a particle 2He4 crosses the Coulombic barrier it woud have to leave out it by:


A) a tangential direction

B) and with no null angular moment

C) and not from the nuclear center



1- As the 2He4 has a charge

2- As it has to cross a charge (the Coulombic barrier)

3- As the nucleus has a spin

4- Then the 2He4 must be arrasted by the Coulombic barrier when it crosse it

5- And so the 2He4 must leave out by the tangent.

Only a neutron could leave out the nucleus in a radial direction (starting from the nuclear center).

But we can realize why the 2He4 leaves out along a radial direction by looking at the Figure 6, where we see the alpha decay according to the nuclear model of QRT:


Of course the protons and neutrons have oscillation within the nuclei, due to repulsions and zero point energy of the particles. And we realize that the central 2He4 has an oscillatory motion within the nuclei ALONG THE Z-AXIS DIRECTION AS SHOWN IN THE FIG. 6, because the oscillation along the z-axis direction is imposed by the structure of the nucleus (because protons and neutrons are distributed in hexagonal floors along the z-axis direction).

That’s why the 2He4 leaves out the nucleus by fulfilling the conditions of alpha particles emission, quoted above.

Also, we see that the 2He4 does not perfurate the secondary field Sn(U238) of the nucleus 92U238. The 2He4 actually leaves out the nucleus by crossing the lack (“hole?) in the field Sn(U238), as we see in the Figure 6.

And as the secondary field Sn(U238) is responsible for the Coulombic repulsion, we realize that the alpha particle does not need an energy 8,8MeV for escaping from inside the nucleus. That’s why the 2He4 can scape from within the 92U238 with only 4,2MeV of energy.

But as the 2He4 can leave out the a nucleus without perforating the Coulombic secondary field Sn(92U) of the uranium, then probably a particle can penetrate within a nucleus by that hole in the secondary field, with no need to perforate the Coulombic field too .

Sure that there is need of special conditions for a particle to penetrate within a nucleus through that hole. It is not a question of supplying a great energy, as happens in the case of hot fusion, when the particles need to perfurate the secondary field.

In cold fusion a particle can penetrate within a nucleus through the hole in the secondary field only from a process of resonance.

For instance, suppose that a deuteron will be captured by a nucleus Pd. Earlier its capture, the deuteron’s oscillation (due to its zero point energy) must be aligned with the oscillation of the central 2He4 of the Pd, along the z-axis direction.

The accordion-effect can help the resonance.

The importance of a conceptual theory

Ahead it's exhibited a message sent by email to Dr. George Weiss, Editorial Manager of the There was an error working with the wiki: Code[1].

From: Wladimir Guglinski (

Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 5:07:45 AM

To: ibr (

Dear Dr. Weiss

As you know, Faraday discovered the laws of the electromagnetism, and later Maxwell has developed a mathematical formalism for the Faraday’s laws.

Faraday theory was conceptual.

But suppose that Faraday would not have discovered the laws of the electromagnetism, that is, suppose that he would not have developed a conceptual theory of the electromagnetism.

Please answer to me: would Maxwell be able to develop a mathematical formalism of a electrodynamic theory ?

In another words: without the conceptual foundations discovered by Faraday would be possible to develop an electrodynamic theory, as made by Maxwell ?

In Quantum Ring Theory it is proposed the structure for the aether, in which a current of gravitons induce a current of electric particles of the aether.

As you know, Maxwell applied a Lagrangean to the motion of electrons, and obtained the equation of Faraday’s law of induction.

In the same way, from the conceptual foundation of QuantumRing Theory, it is possible to apply a Lagrangean to the motion of gravitons and electric particles of the aether, in order to obtain the equations concerning the structure of the aether.

Of course that it’s a task very harder than that undertaken by Maxwell (because we cannot make experiments with the aether, in order to get parameters, like Faraday made in the case of the electromagnetism).

As you know, Faraday obtained his conceptual theory of the electromagnetism by perfoming several experiments.

So, you could reply: but you, Guglinski, you could not make experiments with the aether, in order to discover its structure, as proposed in Quantum Ring Theory. Therefore, how could you discover the conceptual foundation of structure of the aether?

Response: Yes, indeed I did not make experiments with the aether, like Faraday made with the electromagnetism. So, I had to use the LOGIC.

I discovered the structure of the aether from the analysis of my new nuclear model. In that a model the fermions are crossed by a flux of gravitons, and such flux induces a flux of electric particles of the aether (those electric particles produce the Coulombic electric fields of protons and electrons).

In a former email, you invited me to send a paper to Hadronic Journal, Dr. Weiss.

Unfortunatelly, it makes no sense for a reader to read only one paper of Quantum Ring Theory, because there is an interconnection between the papers. For instance, in order to understand the structure of the aether, the reader needs to read the papers concerning the new nuclear model and also the paper regarding to the new hydrogen atom.

There are several mathematical tools in Modern Physics, but several of them have not a physical meaning. For instance, nobody knows what is the physical meaning of the Hilbert space. The mathematical formalism of Hilbert space has been proposed because he did not know some properties of the aether, as for instance the dilation of the space due to the repulsive gravity.

In Quantum Ring Theory the aether is formed by fluxes of gravitons produced by the nuclei. These fluxes are like strings (strings formed by gravitons in motion)

An Euclidian space is the region of the space where the distance between the strings is constant.

When the repulsive gravity changes the distance between the strings, the Euclidian space suffers a distortion, as happens within the electrosphere of the hydrogen atom, as shown in Quantum Ring Theory.

There is not in Modern Physics a conceptual theory on the aether, capable for instance to explain the nuclear properties of the nuclei (as it is proposed in Quantum Ring Theory).

Well, if Faraday would not have discovered his conceptual theory on the electromagnetism, nobody could develop a mathematical theory on the electrodynamics.

In the same way, as today Modern Physics has not a conceptual theory on the aether, it’s impossible to develop a satisfactory mathematical theory capable to explain phenomena as existing in Don Borghi’s experiment.




1- W. Guglinski, Quantum Ring Theory - foundations for cold fusion, Bauu Press, 2006

2- J. G. Cramer, Tunneling through the Lightspeed Barrier,

See also

Quantum Ring Theory

Don Borghi's experiment

Cold fusion theories

Directory:Cold Fusion


- Articles

- Main Page