Re: [Vo]:Electron-mediated alpha decay in quasi-stable isotopes

[Eric Walker]

I wrote:

If he knew our trick, one of these naturally occurring isotopes might
> have done the trick:
>

Since tungsten is in the list, and in our day to day experience it does not
decay under alpha decay when we excited it with electrons, I'm guessing the
Q value has to be above a certain threshold in order for the effect to be
obvious (if such an effect exists).  Here is a shorter version of the
previous list, with tungsten left at the end as an impractical lower bound:

e- + 234U => e- + 4He + 230Th + 4858 keV
e- + 235U => e- + 4He + 231Th + 4678 keV
e- + 238U => e- + 4He + 234Th + 4270 keV
e- + 232Th => e- + 4He + 228Ra + 4082 keV
e- + 190Pt => e- + 4He + 186Os + 3252 keV
e- + 209Bi => e- + 4He + 205Tl + 3137 keV
e- + 184Os => e- + 4He + 180W + 2957 keV
e- + 186Os => e- + 4He + 182W + 2820 keV
e- + 187Os => e- + 4He + 183W + 2721 keV
e- + 180W => e- + 4He + 176Hf + 2515 keV

Of these, only 190Pt was in the earlier list of impurities found in
palladium.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Electron-mediated alpha decay in quasi-stable isotopes

[Eric Walker]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:30 PM,   wrote:

> I doubt there was enough of it (but I'm just guessing).

If he knew our trick, one of these naturally occurring isotopes might
have done the trick:

142Ce   143Nd   144Nd   145Nd   146Nd   147Sm
148Nd   148Sm   149Sm   150Sm   152Gd   152Sm
154Gd   156Dy   158Dy   160Dy   161Dy   162Dy
162Er   164Er   165Ho   166Er   167Er   168Er
168Yb   169Tm   170Er   170Yb   171Yb   172Yb
174Hf   174Yb   176Hf   177Hf   178Hf   179Hf
180Hf   180Ta   180W181Ta   182W183W
184Os   184W185Re   186Os   186W187Os
187Re   188Os   189Os   190Os   190Pt   191Ir
192Os   192Pt   193Ir   194Pt   195Pt   196Hg
196Pt   197Au   198Hg   198Pt   199Hg   200Hg
201Hg   202Hg   203Tl   204Pb   205Tl   206Pb
207Pb   208Pb   209Bi   232Th   234U235U
238U

In this list I see tungsten, mercury, lead, platinum, gold and
depleted uranium.  There's an interesting cost/benefit analysis that
could be done of the cost of the bulk element versus the fraction of
relevant isotope.

Eric

[Vo]:What causes overunity

[Axil Axil]

http://phys.org/news/2015-10-quantum-thermodynamics.html

What is quantum in quantum thermodynamics?

A new study shows that overunity is a quantum effect that is based on
coherence and entanglement.

Quote:

"One important implication of the new results is that quantum effects may
significantly increase the performance of engines at the quantum level.
While the current work deals with single-particle engines, the researchers
expect that quantum effects may also emerge in multi-particle engines,
where quantum entanglement between particles may play a role similar to
that of coherence."

RE: [Vo]:OT: Interesting interactive graphics depicting who is buying the 2016 presidential race

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Steven

Please explain this statement.

"To repeat myself, to endlessly reinterpret what I have said before lies
madness. I'm content to leave my "rants" as-is."

I honestly do not know why you said this. and if I'm not able to communicate
my point of view clearly, then perhaps this is an opportunity to learn.  Can
you show me what I said to make you think I was reinterpreting what you
wrote, or that I was somehow asking you to change your OT postings? 

-mark

 

From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 3:22 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:OT: Interesting interactive graphics depicting who is
buying the 2016 presidential race

 

Hello again Mark,

 

I stand by what I have said before. To repeat myself, to endlessly
reinterpret what I have said before lies madness. I'm content to leave my
"rants" as-is.

 

It's probably time to close up shop on this particular discussion. 

 

At least we seem to agree on the fact that something must be done about
PACs. If we had both had been elected officials serving our respective
constituents I have the feeling that you and I together would try to find
common ground in order to move forward. Granted it might be difficult at
times, but if we remain capable of acknowledging to each other the fact that
we both ended up having to sacrifice certain principals dear to our hearts
in equal proportions... messy as democracy is, things tend to get done.

 

I wish someone was capable of explaining that very messy principle to the
Tea Party. IMO, not being capable of understanding what compromise is all
about... that also leads to madness.

 

B'well back.

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

OrionWorks.com

zazzle.com/orionworks

 

 

From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 1:21 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:OT: Interesting interactive graphics depicting who is
buying the 2016 presidential race

 

Good morning Steven,

 

I think you are referring to this statement of mine:

". I believe you are the one who has, by far, pontificated at length about
political/religious issues;"

 

That is the only reference I made which you could interpret as referring to
a 'rant' (your term, not mine).  It was NOT a reference to something in your
original email, but to a history of having to vent on this forum as to your
OT postings you've done over the years about your disagreements with
Wisconsin politics.  Could that be the reason behind why I wrote what I did?
You imply there was some derogatory or hurtful meaning in my original
response to your posting, and I was trying to provide an explanation as to
why that was not the case.  I was simply trying to explain to you why I
expressed my thoughts the way I did. that's all.

 

I did read the article you linked to, and feel it's of interest to all
concerned about events in this country. we do agree on that.  

When you write things like this,

"Do the links I submit for the Vort Collective's consumption scare you that
much?"

Is it any wonder why someone might respond the way they do?? You are
concluding that I'm scared by some article you posted. how in the world do
you conclude that?  Just because I try to point out to the forum that one
has to read multiple sources to get a total picture of a given issue is NOT
an indication that one is scared.  Don't paint me as being something I'm
not. 

 

I tend to be more socially liberal and fiscally conservative.

 

"At least we can agree on the fact that PACs are not necessarily a good
thing for our political system. If you feel close, though not necessarily
exactly the same way as I may feel about them, I'm content to leave it at
that."

Agreed!

 

B Well Always,

-mark

 

From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 8:53 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:OT: Interesting interactive graphics depicting who is
buying the 2016 presidential race

 

Hi Mark,

 

I must ask: where was the alleged "rant" in my original post? I pointed to a
link that showed some interesting graphics about where political money is
coming from. In your mind, does pointing to a link now constitute another
"rant" coming from me? Do the links I submit for the Vort Collective's
consumption scare you that much? Ok.so you disagree with those findings, and
perhaps you also disagree with some of my expressed liberal tendencies. I
can live with that. But another link supplied by me now constitutes another
"rant"?

 

It seems to me that you show your conservative colors just as much as paint
me to be a liberal. But yes, I believe you have outed me. It would appear
these days that I possess liberalistic tendencies, which perhaps from a
ultra-conservative's POV would imply I must be a bleating hearted liberal
democrat whose primary concern is to make sure that subversive gays and
lesbians get the same insurance protecti

Re: [Vo]:Electron-mediated alpha decay in quasi-stable isotopes

[mixent]

In reply to  Eric Walker's message of Mon, 12 Oct 2015 21:17:34 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
>On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:03 PM,   wrote:
>
>> The real question is where did the energy come from to create the plasma?
>
>In the scenario we're considering here, the energy came from the
>induced decay of an alpha emitter that was introduced into the Papp
>engine.
>
>Eric

I doubt there was enough of it (but I'm just guessing).

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

RE: [Vo]:New research describes newly-identified electron spin-coupling with angular electromagnetic moments

[Bob Cook]

Well it looks like the spin people are finally getting on the right track.  
Thank goodness.
 
This is a good mechanism to get mass energy of the nucleus to the energy of the 
electrons orbital energy states.  This leaves a short jump to phonic energy of 
the lattice.  There is no high energy EM or daughter particles.  
 
Bob Cook
 
From: vortex-h...@e2ke.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 09:02:57 -0700
Subject: [Vo]:New research describes newly-identified electron spin-coupling 
with angular electromagnetic moments

 Dear Vorticians, I just came across this reference to some new research 
showing previously-undescribed electron spin-coupling modes that I thought 
folks here might find interesting.  I don’t have access to the full article 
yet, but I did find some related work by the first author. Newest paper:  
http://phys.org/news/2015-10-physicists-electromagnetic-interaction-dirac-equation.htmlPrevious
 work: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1504.07915.pdf Best wishes,-Bob 
 

Re: [Vo]:Electron-mediated alpha decay in quasi-stable isotopes

[Eric Walker]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:03 PM,   wrote:

> The real question is where did the energy come from to create the plasma?

In the scenario we're considering here, the energy came from the
induced decay of an alpha emitter that was introduced into the Papp
engine.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Electron-mediated alpha decay in quasi-stable isotopes

[mixent]

In reply to  Eric Walker's message of Mon, 12 Oct 2015 12:13:40 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
>One thought here is that the prompt alpha particles partially ionized
>the noble gasses, and that the excited electrons relaxed back into
>levels above the ground state, causing the size of the atoms to be
>larger.  

You don't need to make them larger to get an increase in pressure. The mere act
of ionizing them will do the trick. Remove an electron from an atom, and you
suddenly have two particle where you originally only had one. When the plasma
recombines, the pressure drops again. 

The real question is where did the energy come from to create the plasma?
[snip]
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

RE: [Vo]:OT: Interesting interactive graphics depicting who is buying the 2016 presidential race

[Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

Hello again Mark,

 

I stand by what I have said before. To repeat myself, to endlessly
reinterpret what I have said before lies madness. I'm content to leave my
"rants" as-is.

 

It's probably time to close up shop on this particular discussion. 

 

At least we seem to agree on the fact that something must be done about
PACs. If we had both had been elected officials serving our respective
constituents I have the feeling that you and I together would try to find
common ground in order to move forward. Granted it might be difficult at
times, but if we remain capable of acknowledging to each other the fact that
we both ended up having to sacrifice certain principals dear to our hearts
in equal proportions... messy as democracy is, things tend to get done.

 

I wish someone was capable of explaining that very messy principle to the
Tea Party. IMO, not being capable of understanding what compromise is all
about... that also leads to madness.

 

B'well back.

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

OrionWorks.com

zazzle.com/orionworks

 

 

From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 1:21 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:OT: Interesting interactive graphics depicting who is
buying the 2016 presidential race

 

Good morning Steven,

 

I think you are referring to this statement of mine:

". I believe you are the one who has, by far, pontificated at length about
political/religious issues;"

 

That is the only reference I made which you could interpret as referring to
a 'rant' (your term, not mine).  It was NOT a reference to something in your
original email, but to a history of having to vent on this forum as to your
OT postings you've done over the years about your disagreements with
Wisconsin politics.  Could that be the reason behind why I wrote what I did?
You imply there was some derogatory or hurtful meaning in my original
response to your posting, and I was trying to provide an explanation as to
why that was not the case.  I was simply trying to explain to you why I
expressed my thoughts the way I did. that's all.

 

I did read the article you linked to, and feel it's of interest to all
concerned about events in this country. we do agree on that.  

When you write things like this,

"Do the links I submit for the Vort Collective's consumption scare you that
much?"

Is it any wonder why someone might respond the way they do?? You are
concluding that I'm scared by some article you posted. how in the world do
you conclude that?  Just because I try to point out to the forum that one
has to read multiple sources to get a total picture of a given issue is NOT
an indication that one is scared.  Don't paint me as being something I'm
not. 

 

I tend to be more socially liberal and fiscally conservative.

 

"At least we can agree on the fact that PACs are not necessarily a good
thing for our political system. If you feel close, though not necessarily
exactly the same way as I may feel about them, I'm content to leave it at
that."

Agreed!

 

B Well Always,

-mark

 

From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 8:53 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com  
Subject: RE: [Vo]:OT: Interesting interactive graphics depicting who is
buying the 2016 presidential race

 

Hi Mark,

 

I must ask: where was the alleged "rant" in my original post? I pointed to a
link that showed some interesting graphics about where political money is
coming from. In your mind, does pointing to a link now constitute another
"rant" coming from me? Do the links I submit for the Vort Collective's
consumption scare you that much? Ok.so you disagree with those findings, and
perhaps you also disagree with some of my expressed liberal tendencies. I
can live with that. But another link supplied by me now constitutes another
"rant"?

 

It seems to me that you show your conservative colors just as much as paint
me to be a liberal. But yes, I believe you have outed me. It would appear
these days that I possess liberalistic tendencies, which perhaps from a
ultra-conservative's POV would imply I must be a bleating hearted liberal
democrat whose primary concern is to make sure that subversive gays and
lesbians get the same insurance protections as some god fearing homophobic
Christians believe they should own exclusive rights to today. Be damned
about the economy. Let's just print up more money to pay for all those needy
welfare queens - and be damned about the economy After all, Brad must be
able to marry Bart if I'm going to be able to sleep tonight! 

 

But that would be misleading. I used to be a republican. I must confess: I
voted for Reagan. Back in the 1980s it was during the reign of Reagan that I
was forced to witness to my absolute dismay what was happening to the
republican party as staunch ultra conservatives and religious factions
slowly and methodically started to infest what used to be a more reason

Re: [Vo]:NEW LIVE Steorn Webinars Announced - Product Demonstrations

[Esa Ruoho]

I wish they would just roll out pre-orders. I mean, I'm ready to save up
for the Steorn Orbo and the ADGEX Tachyon - if either of them charge an
iPhone, an iPad or a MacBookPro, I'm super-ultra-keen. Just really need to
finally get my mittens on something that does something, instead of full of
hot-air PDFs and promises and soon-comes of 10kw this and 500kw that and
2mw the other.

"Just do useful work". Charging an iPhone is useful work. If it's done via
free energy then that's awesome. LENR/CANR, even better. Anything. H2Elec .
Just a simple product, you know? Too much to ask for, I guess..


On 12 October 2015 at 17:52, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson <
orionwo...@charter.net> wrote:

> Hi Esa,
>
>
>
> I'm sure many Vorts remain curious about the further adventures of Steorn
> and Mr. McCarthy. I confess, I still am one of the curious.
>
>
>
> While I remain suitably cautious, and perhaps just a tad suspicions as
> well, I look forward to further developments. How will they "spin" the ORBO
> this time around. ;-)
>
>
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> *From:* esa ruoho [mailto:esaru...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, October 12, 2015 2:57 AM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* RE: [Vo]:NEW LIVE Steorn Webinars Announced - Product
> Demonstrations
>
>
>
> Hi Craig + list..
>
>
>
> Anyone tuning into this webinar? I know I'll be there with bells on. I
> have not heard back from Orbo/Shaun McCarthy re: what it actually sounds
> like when it charges. Been trying to reach out to them. I hope it's not
> loud.
>
>
>
> >Bit of News for you...
>
> >Steorn will conduct a series of LIVE interactive Webinars beginning on
> October 28th.
>
> >The webinars are an introduction to their free energy technology Orbo
> Powercube.
>
> >They will demo the tech, explain how the components work and field
> questions.
>
> >Link to register for the FREE Live webinar is in the article.
>
> >
> http://freeenergy.news/steorn/exclusive-live-steorn-webinars-on-orbo-powercube/
>
>
>
> ---
>
> http://lackluster.bandcamp.com | http://lackluster.org |
> http://esaruoho.tumblr.com | iPhone: +358403703659
>
>
>



-- 

---
http://twitter.com/esaruoho
http://lackluster.bandcamp.com

Re: [Vo]:MMDD .... Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration

[Bob Higgins]

It takes many TeV to show the Higgs - not TeraWatts.  A 1.0 TeV particle
only has 1.6e-7 joules of kinetic energy, but that energy is in a single
particle and can create a TeV event in a collision.

A TW laser will not really help.  The individual laser photons are only eV
level, and a TW laser would simply apply a lot of photons in approx. the
same place at approx. the same time.  If the probability of a photon
interaction is X, where X is less than 1, then the probability of a
simultaneous interaction with 2 photons is on the order of X^2.  The
probability of simultaneous interaction with 10^9 photons is on the order
of X^10^9 - a really small number.  If  you had a condensate and
simultaneously absorbed something like 10^9 photons you may get somewhere,
but the problem is that before that happens you have probably already
absorbed 10^6 photons and have completely destroyed your condensate.
Actually the condensate may be completely destroyed by having absorbed a
much smaller number of photons.

I am more likely to explain muons seen by Holmlid as having been a mistaken
ID.  But I haven't concluded that yet - I am still digesting his papers.
It is a long chain of experimental evidence.

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Bob,
>
>
>
> Good analysis. Subnuclear binding energy is significantly higher than
> nuclear binding energy, in general. As we know, it takes many terawatts to
> show evidence of the Higgs boson. After that, we must bootstrap power into
> energy to make this happen.
>
>
>
> Fortunately – terawatt pulses are (or will be) available with moderately
> costly lasers. Here is a story on a 10 terawatt laser for the well-equipped
> garage lab …
>
>
>
> http://www.slashgear.com/10-terawatt-laser-fits-on-a-desktop-04300268/
>
>
>
> You need high power to start things. After a high power laser pulse starts
> a reaction, the energy in play for the next round (for MMDD to work in this
> circumstance) – is limited to 24 MeV per incidence. That level is
> significant, but it may not be enough - without some kind of follow-on
> process, like a limited chain reaction, to add continuity.
>
>
>
> I’m trying to find further support for this alternative, but basically –
> if one can show that a 24 MeV photon can dislodge a quark in a situation
> where the strong force can be harnessed to do the rest, then maybe the
> concept will go somewhere.
>
>
>
> Otherwise – how do we explain the muons seen by Holmlid? My fear is that
> they are measurement error, but until that is determined, this suggestion
> of muon chain reaction –MMDD - is a an alternative to consider.
>
>
>
> *From:* Bob Higgins
>
>
>
> While this is interesting speculation, I have come to assess probabilities
> of of heretofore unknown reactions based inversely on binding energy.  If
> we look at molecular binding energy, it is less than atomic binding.
> Nuclear binding energy is greater than atomic binding.  Sub-nucleon binding
> would have to be even higher energy than nuclear.  Between each of these,
> there seems to be a factor of somewhere between 10^3 and 10^6 in binding
> energy.  With nuclear binding in the MeV range, sub-nucleon binding would
> be in the GeV-TeV range.  These binding characteristics are part of the
> nature of the stable universe.
>
>
>
> So, to me, the probability of LENR being related to shenanigans in
> sub-nucleonic physics is something like 10^3-10^6 less likely than
> something happening in nuclear physics.
>
>
>
> With sub-nucleonic binding in the GeV-TeV range, how can something like a
> laser with photons in the eV range have an effect?
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:25 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:
>
> MMPD  Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration
>
> The work of Leif Holmlid and others has opened up the possibility of 
> understanding
> what appears to be a new kind of nuclear reaction – a limited type of chain
> reaction which is not fusion nor fission. The result of this reaction is
> the complete disintegration of deuteron into quarks -- and then into muons.
> The continuing reaction is propagated and catalyzed by muons before they
> decay. Most of the net energy of the reaction is lost in the form of
> neutrinos, but the fraction which is thermalized is still significant.
>
> This nuclear reaction is dependent on the prior formation of a population
> of “ultra-dense deuterium” which is an isomer of hydrogen which forms as
> a 2D (two dimensional) layer on selected surfaces. The densification
> process has been recognized for many years and rigorously described in the
> important paper from 2009 of Nabil Lawandy entitled “Interactions of
> Charged Particles on Surfaces.”
>
> www.*lenr*-*canr*.org/acrobat/LawandyNMinteractio.pdf
> 
>
> Individual deuterons are bosons which can occupy the same quantum state,
> so long as their electrons are delocalized. This delocalization of
> electrons is the key feature of ultra-dense deuterium,

RE: [Vo]:OT: Interesting interactive graphics depicting who is buying the 2016 presidential race

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Good morning Steven,

 

I think you are referring to this statement of mine:

". I believe you are the one who has, by far, pontificated at length about
political/religious issues;"

 

That is the only reference I made which you could interpret as referring to
a 'rant' (your term, not mine).  It was NOT a reference to something in your
original email, but to a history of having to vent on this forum as to your
OT postings you've done over the years about your disagreements with
Wisconsin politics.  Could that be the reason behind why I wrote what I did?
You imply there was some derogatory or hurtful meaning in my original
response to your posting, and I was trying to provide an explanation as to
why that was not the case.  I was simply trying to explain to you why I
expressed my thoughts the way I did. that's all.

 

I did read the article you linked to, and feel it's of interest to all
concerned about events in this country. we do agree on that.  

When you write things like this,

"Do the links I submit for the Vort Collective's consumption scare you that
much?"

Is it any wonder why someone might respond the way they do?? You are
concluding that I'm scared by some article you posted. how in the world do
you conclude that?  Just because I try to point out to the forum that one
has to read multiple sources to get a total picture of a given issue is NOT
an indication that one is scared.  Don't paint me as being something I'm
not. 

 

I tend to be more socially liberal and fiscally conservative.

 

"At least we can agree on the fact that PACs are not necessarily a good
thing for our political system. If you feel close, though not necessarily
exactly the same way as I may feel about them, I'm content to leave it at
that."

Agreed!

 

B Well Always,

-mark

 

From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 8:53 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:OT: Interesting interactive graphics depicting who is
buying the 2016 presidential race

 

Hi Mark,

 

I must ask: where was the alleged "rant" in my original post? I pointed to a
link that showed some interesting graphics about where political money is
coming from. In your mind, does pointing to a link now constitute another
"rant" coming from me? Do the links I submit for the Vort Collective's
consumption scare you that much? Ok.so you disagree with those findings, and
perhaps you also disagree with some of my expressed liberal tendencies. I
can live with that. But another link supplied by me now constitutes another
"rant"?

 

It seems to me that you show your conservative colors just as much as paint
me to be a liberal. But yes, I believe you have outed me. It would appear
these days that I possess liberalistic tendencies, which perhaps from a
ultra-conservative's POV would imply I must be a bleating hearted liberal
democrat whose primary concern is to make sure that subversive gays and
lesbians get the same insurance protections as some god fearing homophobic
Christians believe they should own exclusive rights to today. Be damned
about the economy. Let's just print up more money to pay for all those needy
welfare queens - and be damned about the economy After all, Brad must be
able to marry Bart if I'm going to be able to sleep tonight! 

 

But that would be misleading. I used to be a republican. I must confess: I
voted for Reagan. Back in the 1980s it was during the reign of Reagan that I
was forced to witness to my absolute dismay what was happening to the
republican party as staunch ultra conservatives and religious factions
slowly and methodically started to infest what used to be a more reasonable
oriented centrist party philosophy - a party that was still willing to
negotiate with the enemy in order to get things done. Over the decades it's
only gotten worse. 

 

FWIW, and just to set the record straight, I'm not necessarily happy with a
lot of democratic positions taken today. However, I do seem to possess far
more criticisms aimed against ultra conservative factions than against the
so-called liberal democratic platform. It's a matter of prioritization. The
squeakiest wheel tends to get the most oiling. I'm also try to be pragmatic.
Just so you know, I'd prefer B. Sanders (a decades in the making battle
worthy candidate), but I try to be realistic in accepting the fact that
Hillary, warts and all, will most likely be the democratic pick. It seems to
me that none of us get out of this mess without at some time feeling just a
tad like a prostitute.

 

At least we can agree on the fact that PACs are not necessarily a good thing
for our political system. If you feel close, though not necessarily exactly
the same way as I may feel about them, I'm content to leave it at that.

 

The continuing debate over what constitutes an artificial person in
corporate land is no doubt a protracted discussion that should be left for
another time and date when CF news becomes temporarily lean. Bu

RE: [Vo]:New research describes newly-identified electron spin-coupling with angular electromagnetic moments

[Jones Beene]

From: Robert Ellefson 

I just came across this reference to some new research showing
previously-undescribed electron spin-coupling modes that I thought folks
here might find interesting.  I don't have access to the full article yet,
but I did find some related work by the first author.

*   Newest paper:
http://phys.org/news/2015-10-physicists-electromagnetic-interaction-dirac-eq
uation.html   Previous work: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1504.07915.pdf



Bob Cook should be pleased (and the rest of us as well, including Mills).

They prose that the angular momentum of an electromagnetic field can
directly couple to the spin of an electron to produce energy. This direct
coupling . "predicts effects that have not yet been experimentally
observed."

(except in LENR ??)

Re: [Vo]:MMDD .... Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration

[Eric Walker]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 12:15 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> According to the HRM, the process develops in
> three steps: a photon (in this case, the 24 MeV internalized photon) knocks
> a quark from the nucleon; the struck quark rescatters off a quark from
> another nucleon; then the energetic quarks recombine into two outgoing
> baryons which have large transverse momenta.

If we go with this explanation, I think we have to set aside color
confinement, unless there is no period of time during which the quark
is by itself.

Eric

RE: [Vo]:MMDD .... Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration

[Jones Beene]

Bob,

 

Good analysis. Subnuclear binding energy is significantly higher than nuclear 
binding energy, in general. As we know, it takes many terawatts to show 
evidence of the Higgs boson. After that, we must bootstrap power into energy to 
make this happen.

 

Fortunately – terawatt pulses are (or will be) available with moderately costly 
lasers. Here is a story on a 10 terawatt laser for the well-equipped garage lab 
…

 

http://www.slashgear.com/10-terawatt-laser-fits-on-a-desktop-04300268/

 

You need high power to start things. After a high power laser pulse starts a 
reaction, the energy in play for the next round (for MMDD to work in this 
circumstance) – is limited to 24 MeV per incidence. That level is significant, 
but it may not be enough - without some kind of follow-on process, like a 
limited chain reaction, to add continuity. 

 

I’m trying to find further support for this alternative, but basically – if one 
can show that a 24 MeV photon can dislodge a quark in a situation where the 
strong force can be harnessed to do the rest, then maybe the concept will go 
somewhere. 

 

Otherwise – how do we explain the muons seen by Holmlid? My fear is that they 
are measurement error, but until that is determined, this suggestion of muon 
chain reaction –MMDD - is a an alternative to consider.

 

From: Bob Higgins 

 

While this is interesting speculation, I have come to assess probabilities of 
of heretofore unknown reactions based inversely on binding energy.  If we look 
at molecular binding energy, it is less than atomic binding.  Nuclear binding 
energy is greater than atomic binding.  Sub-nucleon binding would have to be 
even higher energy than nuclear.  Between each of these, there seems to be a 
factor of somewhere between 10^3 and 10^6 in binding energy.  With nuclear 
binding in the MeV range, sub-nucleon binding would be in the GeV-TeV range.  
These binding characteristics are part of the nature of the stable universe.  

 

So, to me, the probability of LENR being related to shenanigans in 
sub-nucleonic physics is something like 10^3-10^6 less likely than something 
happening in nuclear physics.  

 

With sub-nucleonic binding in the GeV-TeV range, how can something like a laser 
with photons in the eV range have an effect?

 

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:25 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

MMPD  Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration

The work of Leif Holmlid and others has opened up the possibility of 
understanding what appears to be a new kind of nuclear reaction – a limited 
type of chain reaction which is not fusion nor fission. The result of this 
reaction is the complete disintegration of deuteron into quarks -- and then 
into muons. The continuing reaction is propagated and catalyzed by muons before 
they decay. Most of the net energy of the reaction is lost in the form of 
neutrinos, but the fraction which is thermalized is still significant.

This nuclear reaction is dependent on the prior formation of a population of 
“ultra-dense deuterium” which is an isomer of hydrogen which forms as a 2D (two 
dimensional) layer on selected surfaces. The densification process has been 
recognized for many years and rigorously described in the important paper from 
2009 of Nabil Lawandy entitled “Interactions of Charged Particles on Surfaces.”

  
www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LawandyNMinteractio.pdf

Individual deuterons are bosons which can occupy the same quantum state, so 
long as their electrons are delocalized. This delocalization of electrons is 
the key feature of ultra-dense deuterium, which becomes a condensate at 
elevated temperature, thus allowing this novel reaction. 

Upon application of a laser pulse which irradiates the condensate, a few muons 
will be emitted which then proceed as a limited chain-reaction to catalyze 
further reactions. In this reaction of relatively cold deuterons, gamma 
emission cannot proceed, and fusion to deuterium is suppressed in favor of 
complete disintegration of protons and neutrons into quarks. 

The excess energy which would normally be expressed as very energetic gammas is 
internalized to dislocate quarks from the bound state. Almost immediately, 
quarks decay into muons – which have a greatly increased lifetime (but still 
short) and muons are capable of catalyzing and  propagating the further 
continuity of the reaction in a way reminiscent of nuclear fission of uranium 
(in which neutrons are the mediator). Most of the net energy of this reaction 
is lost to neutrino formation - but thermal gain is still possible.

More details to follow…

Jones

 

RE: [Vo]:MMDD .... Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration

[Jones Beene]

Correction
*   
*   In this reaction of relatively cold deuterons, gamma emission cannot
proceed, and fusion to deuterium is suppressed in favor of complete
disintegration of protons and neutrons into quarks. 
. should read: "gamma emission cannot proceed, and fusion of deuterium to
helium is suppressed in favor of complete disintegration of protons and
neutrons into quarks."
BTW - there is some support for this view - showing up in a paper by
Granados on the photodisintegration of deuterium the within the QCD hard
rescattering model (HRM). According to the HRM, the process develops in
three steps: a photon (in this case, the 24 MeV internalized photon) knocks
a quark from the nucleon; the struck quark rescatters off a quark from
another nucleon; then the energetic quarks recombine into two outgoing
baryons which have large transverse momenta. 
This is a stretch. of course . if it were not, someone would certainly have
suggested it before now.
Jones

Re: [Vo]:Electron-mediated alpha decay in quasi-stable isotopes

[Eric Walker]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 11:37 AM, David Roberson  wrote:

> Normal gasoline engines operate on the high pressure gases that are
> generated when the fuel burns causing an increase to its temperature.

Since there was no exhaust outlet in the Papp engine, I wonder whether
a general increase in temperature might have defeated it, by raising
the overall pressure.  Its mechanism seemed to proceed in short bursts
of thrust, which, whatever it was, appears to have worked despite the
lack of an exhaust pathway.  (In retrospect, perhaps this should have
been a tipoff that something weird was going on.)

If you had a switch that could control the decay rate of an alpha
emitter with great reliability, so that it went crazy for a short
period of time while the switch was on, and you put the alpha emitter
in an inert gas, what might be expected to happen, without the benefit
of prior experimental knowledge of the system?

> Do you know of another mechanism that can cause the pressure to increase
> without the addition of heat?

One thought here is that the prompt alpha particles partially ionized
the noble gasses, and that the excited electrons relaxed back into
levels above the ground state, causing the size of the atoms to be
larger.  (These atomic states are sometimes referred to as "Rydberg"
states; the connection to Holmlid is not intentional, although this
process may be behind the "Coulomb explosions" that he has seen,
rather than the production of mesons and muons I have heard attributed
to him.)

> Could it be possible to break diatomic atoms into individuals, like N2 gas 
> into two N
> atoms, on a temporary basis?

I also like this idea, but I don't know enough about chemistry to know
what effect it would have.

> Of course, many
> vorts like myself are skeptical of the Papp engine itself.  There is no need
> to define something that does not actually exist.

I think skepticism of the Papp engine is justified.  I've just become
a little wary of explaining away a series of observations that seem to
have a systematic character.  I recall that Feynman's investigation
ended inconclusively (apart from the unfortunate accident).

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Electron-mediated alpha decay in quasi-stable isotopes

[David Roberson]

Eric, according to my understanding of gasses, volume expansion by itself does 
not produce heat, instead heat is absorbed as mechanical energy is produced.  I 
think of this as being the inverse of what is seen when a piston compresses a 
gas.  The gas has mechanical energy imparted into it and it gets warmer.  The 
higher temperature gas then allows heat to flow from it into the cooler 
surroundings.

Normal gasoline engines operate on the high pressure gases that are generated 
when the fuel burns causing an increase to its temperature.   Do you know of 
another mechanism that can cause the pressure to increase without the addition 
of heat?   The most obvious example is to multiply the number of individual gas 
particles contained within the cylinder.  Could it be possible to break 
diatomic atoms into individuals, like N2 gas into two N atoms, on a temporary 
basis?

The purpose of this posting is to crack open the thought processes of our 
vortex members.   There must be some physical process behind the operation of a 
Papp engine that is not normally encountered and perhaps a bit of speculation 
could offer an understanding of that process.  Of course, many vorts like 
myself are skeptical of the Papp engine itself.  There is no need to define 
something that does not actually exist.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Eric Walker 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2015 11:38 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Electron-mediated alpha decay in quasi-stable isotopes


I would like to draw an interesting cross-connection to the discussion below. 
There was a suggestion one time that Papp used an alpha emitter in his noble gas
fuel.  Perhaps his engine operated by stimulating he decay of this alpha
emitter, and any quasi-stable alpha emitters that might have been present as
well.

Would such a process be sufficient to explain what was going on --
volumetric expansion and little heat?

Eric

snip---
 

Re: [Vo]:MMDD .... Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration

[Bob Higgins]

Jones,

While this is interesting speculation, I have come to assess probabilities
of of heretofore unknown reactions based inversely on binding energy.  If
we look at molecular binding energy, it is less than atomic binding.
Nuclear binding energy is greater than atomic binding.  Sub-nucleon binding
would have to be even higher energy than nuclear.  Between each of these,
there seems to be a factor of somewhere between 10^3 and 10^6 in binding
energy.  With nuclear binding in the MeV range, sub-nucleon binding would
be in the GeV-TeV range.  These binding characteristics are part of the
nature of the stable universe.

So, to me, the probability of LENR being related to shenanigans in
sub-nucleonic physics is something like 10^3-10^6 less likely than
something happening in nuclear physics.

With sub-nucleonic binding in the GeV-TeV range, how can something like a
laser with photons in the eV range have an effect?

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:25 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> MMPD  Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration
>
> The work of Leif Holmlid and others has opened up the possibility of 
> understanding
> what appears to be a new kind of nuclear reaction – a limited type of chain
> reaction which is not fusion nor fission. The result of this reaction is
> the complete disintegration of deuteron into quarks -- and then into muons.
> The continuing reaction is propagated and catalyzed by muons before they
> decay. Most of the net energy of the reaction is lost in the form of
> neutrinos, but the fraction which is thermalized is still significant.
>
> This nuclear reaction is dependent on the prior formation of a population
> of “ultra-dense deuterium” which is an isomer of hydrogen which forms as
> a 2D (two dimensional) layer on selected surfaces. The densification
> process has been recognized for many years and rigorously described in
> the important paper from 2009 of Nabil Lawandy entitled “Interactions of C
> harged Particles on Surfaces.”
>
> *www.**lenr**-**canr**.org/acrobat/LawandyNMinteractio.pdf*
> 
>
> Individual deuterons are bosons which can occupy the same quantum state,
> so long as their electrons are delocalized. This delocalization of
> electrons is the key feature of ultra-dense deuterium, which becomes a
> condensate at elevated temperature, thus allowing this novel reaction.
>
> Upon application of a laser pulse which irradiates the condensate, a few
> muons will be emitted which then proceed as a limited chain-reaction to
> catalyze further reactions. In this reaction of relatively cold deuterons,
> gamma emission cannot proceed, and fusion to deuterium is suppressed in
> favor of complete disintegration of protons and neutrons into quarks.
>
> The excess energy which would normally be expressed as very energetic gamma
> s is internalized to dislocate quarks from the bound state. Almost
> immediately, quarks decay into muons – which have a greatly increased
> lifetime (but still short) and muons are capable of catalyzing and
> propagating the further continuity of the reaction in a way reminiscent
> of nuclear fission of uranium (in which neutrons are the mediator). Most
> of the net energy of this reaction is lost to neutrino formation - but thermal
> gain is still possible.
>
> More details to follow…
>
> Jones
>

[Vo]:a great LENR initiative, comments, info and a Russian blog paper translated

[Peter Gluck]

Here is all:
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/10/oct-12-2015-exemplary-lenr-initiative.html

LENR is moving faster, sometimes even in the good direction!

Peter

-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:Cross section reduction at lower energies

[Bob Higgins]

I presume that you guys are also integrating into your thought in this
thread, the paper written 13-July-1964 in Physical Review, Vol. 135, No.
1B, "Classically Radiationless Motions and Possible Implications for
Quantum Theory", by G. H. Goedecke from New Mexico State University.  My
understanding is that this paper was one of the foundations upon which
Mills built his GUTCP.

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 2:12 AM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe <
stefan.ita...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Eric walker said:
>
> > Is this your thinking, or does this go back to Mills?
> Mills is not participating in discussions of these questions as far as I
> know.
> I asked and got a few insights in what the nature of matter could be and
> then
> draw my own conclusions which I find logical.
>
> >Also, the standard geometrical interpretation of spherical harmonics in
> >quantum mechanics provides a ready understanding of electron >degeneracy
> levels (levels in which several electrons have nearly the same >energy and
> occupy the same shell).  This is because for shells such as p >and d, the
> different subshells are each orthogonal to one another.
>
> true
>
> >In the model of infinitesimally thin orbitspheres with a charge
> distribution >described by spherical harmonics, how does Mills account for
> electron >degeneracy levels?  Are they explained by having several
> orbitspheres >coexisting simultaneously at the same radius?  If the radius
> of each >orbitsphere is distinct, how are degeneracy levels explained?
>
> I do believe that the orthogonallity is behind Mills approach as well, the
> traped photons Is of the nature jl Ylm exp(iwt). then at the radius r, the
> bessel jl is zero and the outside has zero electrical potential due to a
> boundary condition of the form C*Ylm*exp(iwt) on  the sphere. So similarly
> to QM you get an orthogonality between the subshells due to Ylm is
> orthogonal for different m. GUTCP is very wage on these matters I would
> say. My linked pdf does the math behind my argument though. This indicates
> a more direct reason why you don't have radiation.
>
> I have not gotten to understand Mills calculation for higher order shells.
> I've only poked around it at a higher level enogh to find it interesting
> e.g. there is patterns that seam to give good estimates for ionisation
> energies. My conclusion though is that GUTCP may be over tinkered with -
> especially for the second p shell atoms and beond.
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Eric Walker 
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe <
>> stefan.ita...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> If you magnify it large enough I'm sure you will see some structure,
>>> maybe a thickness. But to a practical approximation I think a zero
>>> thickness is fine.
>>> I believe that what matter is is a singular artifact due to nonlinear
>>> behavior in space. A nonlinearity that needs to be added to Maxwell. How
>>> this nonlinearity behaves is unknown but what it does is to produce a
>>> crack or surface which can be sustained and stable under the right
>>> circumstances. Now if you want to add this singularity you need to add
>>> a distribution field as source terms on a surface to Maxwell and the most
>>> simple such distribution is a delta messure on the surface.
>>>
>>
>> Is this your thinking, or does this go back to Mills?
>>
>> Also, the standard geometrical interpretation of spherical harmonics in
>> quantum mechanics provides a ready understanding of electron degeneracy
>> levels (levels in which several electrons have nearly the same energy and
>> occupy the same shell).  This is because for shells such as p and d, the
>> different subshells are each orthogonal to one another.
>>
>> In the model of infinitesimally thin orbitspheres with a charge
>> distribution described by spherical harmonics, how does Mills account for
>> electron degeneracy levels?  Are they explained by having several
>> orbitspheres coexisting simultaneously at the same radius?  If the radius
>> of each orbitsphere is distinct, how are degeneracy levels explained?
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>

[Vo]:New research describes newly-identified electron spin-coupling with angular electromagnetic moments

[Robert Ellefson]

 

Dear Vorticians,

 

I just came across this reference to some new research showing
previously-undescribed electron spin-coupling modes that I thought folks
here might find interesting.  I don't have access to the full article yet,
but I did find some related work by the first author.

 

Newest paper:
http://phys.org/news/2015-10-physicists-electromagnetic-interaction-dirac-eq
uation.html

Previous work: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1504.07915.pdf

 

Best wishes,

-Bob

 

RE: [Vo]:OT: Interesting interactive graphics depicting who is buying the 2016 presidential race

[Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

Hi Mark,

 

I must ask: where was the alleged "rant" in my original post? I pointed to a
link that showed some interesting graphics about where political money is
coming from. In your mind, does pointing to a link now constitute another
"rant" coming from me? Do the links I submit for the Vort Collective's
consumption scare you that much? Ok.so you disagree with those findings, and
perhaps you also disagree with some of my expressed liberal tendencies. I
can live with that. But another link supplied by me now constitutes another
"rant"?

 

It seems to me that you show your conservative colors just as much as paint
me to be a liberal. But yes, I believe you have outed me. It would appear
these days that I possess liberalistic tendencies, which perhaps from a
ultra-conservative's POV would imply I must be a bleating hearted liberal
democrat whose primary concern is to make sure that subversive gays and
lesbians get the same insurance protections as some god fearing homophobic
Christians believe they should own exclusive rights to today. Be damned
about the economy. Let's just print up more money to pay for all those needy
welfare queens - and be damned about the economy After all, Brad must be
able to marry Bart if I'm going to be able to sleep tonight! 

 

But that would be misleading. I used to be a republican. I must confess: I
voted for Reagan. Back in the 1980s it was during the reign of Reagan that I
was forced to witness to my absolute dismay what was happening to the
republican party as staunch ultra conservatives and religious factions
slowly and methodically started to infest what used to be a more reasonable
oriented centrist party philosophy - a party that was still willing to
negotiate with the enemy in order to get things done. Over the decades it's
only gotten worse. 

 

FWIW, and just to set the record straight, I'm not necessarily happy with a
lot of democratic positions taken today. However, I do seem to possess far
more criticisms aimed against ultra conservative factions than against the
so-called liberal democratic platform. It's a matter of prioritization. The
squeakiest wheel tends to get the most oiling. I'm also try to be pragmatic.
Just so you know, I'd prefer B. Sanders (a decades in the making battle
worthy candidate), but I try to be realistic in accepting the fact that
Hillary, warts and all, will most likely be the democratic pick. It seems to
me that none of us get out of this mess without at some time feeling just a
tad like a prostitute.

 

At least we can agree on the fact that PACs are not necessarily a good thing
for our political system. If you feel close, though not necessarily exactly
the same way as I may feel about them, I'm content to leave it at that.

 

The continuing debate over what constitutes an artificial person in
corporate land is no doubt a protracted discussion that should be left for
another time and date when CF news becomes temporarily lean. But enuf for
now, wouldn't you say?

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

OrionWorks.com

zazzle.com/orionworks

 

Re: [Vo]:Electron-mediated alpha decay in quasi-stable isotopes

[Eric Walker]

I would like to draw an interesting cross-connection to the discussion below.  
There was a suggestion one time that Papp used an alpha emitter in his noble 
gas fuel.  Perhaps his engine operated by stimulating he decay of this alpha 
emitter, and any quasi-stable alpha emitters that might have been present as 
well.

Would such a process be sufficient to explain what was going on -- volumetric 
expansion and little heat?

Eric

> On Oct 11, 2015, at 22:25, Eric Walker  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I typed up some notes that come from an email exchange between Robin
> and myself.  They are about the possibility of the forced "decay" of
> isotopes that do not normally undergo alpha decay (emission of a
> helium-4 nucleus).
> 
> Eric
> 
> 
> 
> This briefly describes a possible alpha decay channel in otherwise
> stable elements.  It is inspired by a recent paper by Urutskoev and
> Filippov [1], although, inconsistent with their pessimism that
> “transformations” are unlikely to produce much in the way of energy,
> the pathway proposed here might produce useful energy if it can be
> made to happen at scale.
> 
> Certain isotopes are unstable under alpha decay, for which, over a
> period of time, an alpha particle will be emitted.  Once the alpha
> particle has departed, the resulting daughter nucleus will have four
> less nucleons.  For example:
> 
> 187Re => 4He + 183Ta + 2 MeV (half-life ~ 41e9 years)
> 
> Here a rhenium-187 nucleus has been observed to alpha decay to
> tantalum-183 with a half-life of about 41 billion years.  There are
> other isotopes that are observed to be stable, but which, if an alpha
> particle could somehow be separated out, the reaction would be an
> exothermic one:
> 
> 192Pt => 4He + 188Os + 2422 keV (no observed half-life)
> 
> In this case, if a platinum-192 nucleus could be made to part with an
> alpha particle, the decay would be to osmium-188 and would produce 2.4
> MeV of energy.  Because there has been no observed half-life,
> platinum-192 is said to be “observationally stable.”
> 
> The line between isotopes that are stable and unstable under alpha
> decay is not a clear one.  There is a known relationship between the
> energy of the separation and the half-life.  All else being equal, the
> higher the energy of the separation of the alpha particle the shorter
> the half-life.  Typical half-lives of heavy even-even nuclei range
> from ~ 0.1 second, at ~ 10 MeV (thorium-218), to 1e18 seconds, at ~ 4
> MeV (thorium-232) [2].  The relationship is roughly logarithmic, so
> that if you go below 4 MeV, the half-lives get longer and longer.
> Presumably some isotopes are still unstable against alpha decay and we
> simply haven’t developed the methods to measure the decay rates
> because they are of such long duration.
> 
> One question is whether isotopes in which there is no observed
> half-life actually are unstable under alpha decay, and the half-life
> is simply too long for us to measure it.  If so, perhaps these
> long-lived isotopes are actually only “quasi-stable,” we can do
> something to the system to speed up their decay.
> 
> Assume for the moment that electrons can do the trick.  Here are some
> possible reactions that would result under a PdD electrolytic system
> with typical impurities in the palladium:
> 
> e- + 190Pt => e- + 4He + 186Os + 3252 keV
> e- + 192Pt => e- + 4He + 188Os + 2422 keV
> e- + 191Ir => e- + 4He + 187Re + 2083 keV
> e- + 204Pb => e- + 4He + 200Hg + 1969 keV
> e- + 194Pt => e- + 4He + 190Os + 1522 keV
> e- + 195Pt => e- + 4He + 191Os + 1176 keV
> e- + 206Pb => e- + 4He + 202Hg + 1135 keV
> e- + 193Ir => e- + 4He + 189Re + 1018 keV
> e- + 197Au => e- + 4He + 193Ir + 972 keV
> e- + 196Pt => e- + 4He + 192Os + 812 keV
> e- + 208Pb => e- + 4He + 204Hg + 517 keV
> e- + 207Pb => e- + 4He + 203Hg + 392 keV
> e- + 198Pt => e- + 4He + 194Os + 107 keV
> 
> 
> As can be seen, all of these reactions are energetically possible.  If
> the electron can somehow be made to decrease the half-life of what
> we’re calling “quasi-stable” isotopes, then the ones with more
> energetic alpha separation energies might start to decay at a rate
> that would be observable and possibly even sufficient for generating
> energy.  Since the above reactions are for impurities in palladium,
> they might be a source of the helium that has been seen in PdD LENR
> experiments.
> 
> What might cause electrons to decrease the half-life of quasi-stable
> isotopes, so that they decay at an appreciable rate?  Alpha decay is a
> quantum mechanical tunneling process in which an alpha particle
> tunnels through the width of the Coulomb barrier rather than crossing
> over the top.  A change in the charge density around the volume of the
> nucleus (e.g., under the agency a discharging arc of electrons passing
> through the volume) might modify the Coulomb barrier and possibly
> decrease its width.  With the decreased barrier width, decays that
> would have taken too long to measure might now proc

[Vo]:MMDD .... Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration

[Jones Beene]

MMPD  Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration

The work of Leif Holmlid and others has opened up the possibility of
understanding what appears to be a new kind of nuclear reaction - a limited
type of chain reaction which is not fusion nor fission. The result of this
reaction is the complete disintegration of deuteron into quarks -- and then
into muons. The continuing reaction is propagated and catalyzed by muons
before they decay. Most of the net energy of the reaction is lost in the
form of neutrinos, but the fraction which is thermalized is still
significant.

This nuclear reaction is dependent on the prior formation of a population of
"ultra-dense deuterium" which is an isomer of hydrogen which forms as a 2D
(two dimensional) layer on selected surfaces. The densification process has
been recognized for many years and rigorously described in the important
paper from 2009 of Nabil Lawandy entitled "Interactions of Charged Particles
on Surfaces."
www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LawandyNMinteractio.pdf

Individual deuterons are bosons which can occupy the same quantum state, so
long as their electrons are delocalized. This delocalization of electrons is
the key feature of ultra-dense deuterium, which becomes a condensate at
elevated temperature, thus allowing this novel reaction. 

Upon application of a laser pulse which irradiates the condensate, a few
muons will be emitted which then proceed as a limited chain-reaction to
catalyze further reactions. In this reaction of relatively cold deuterons,
gamma emission cannot proceed, and fusion to deuterium is suppressed in
favor of complete disintegration of protons and neutrons into quarks. 

The excess energy which would normally be expressed as very energetic gammas
is internalized to dislocate quarks from the bound state. Almost
immediately, quarks decay into muons - which have a greatly increased
lifetime (but still short) and muons are capable of catalyzing and
propagating the further continuity of the reaction in a way reminiscent of
nuclear fission of uranium (in which neutrons are the mediator). Most of the
net energy of this reaction is lost to neutrino formation - but thermal gain
is still possible.

More details to follow.

Jones

RE: [Vo]:NEW LIVE Steorn Webinars Announced - Product Demonstrations

[Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

Hi Esa,

 

I'm sure many Vorts remain curious about the further adventures of Steorn
and Mr. McCarthy. I confess, I still am one of the curious.

 

While I remain suitably cautious, and perhaps just a tad suspicions as well,
I look forward to further developments. How will they "spin" the ORBO this
time around. ;-)

 

Steve

 

From: esa ruoho [mailto:esaru...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 2:57 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:NEW LIVE Steorn Webinars Announced - Product
Demonstrations

 

Hi Craig + list..

 

Anyone tuning into this webinar? I know I'll be there with bells on. I have
not heard back from Orbo/Shaun McCarthy re: what it actually sounds like
when it charges. Been trying to reach out to them. I hope it's not loud.

 

>Bit of News for you...

>Steorn will conduct a series of LIVE interactive Webinars beginning on
October 28th.

>The webinars are an introduction to their free energy technology Orbo
Powercube.

>They will demo the tech, explain how the components work and field
questions.

>Link to register for the FREE Live webinar is in the article.

>http://freeenergy.news/steorn/exclusive-live-steorn-webinars-on-orbo-powerc
ube/

 

---

http://lackluster.bandcamp.com | http://lackluster.org |
http://esaruoho.tumblr.com | iPhone: +358403703659

 

Re: [Vo]:Cross section reduction at lower energies

[Stefan Israelsson Tampe]

Eric walker said:

> Is this your thinking, or does this go back to Mills?
Mills is not participating in discussions of these questions as far as I
know.
I asked and got a few insights in what the nature of matter could be and
then
draw my own conclusions which I find logical.

>Also, the standard geometrical interpretation of spherical harmonics in
>quantum mechanics provides a ready understanding of electron >degeneracy
levels (levels in which several electrons have nearly the same >energy and
occupy the same shell).  This is because for shells such as p >and d, the
different subshells are each orthogonal to one another.

true

>In the model of infinitesimally thin orbitspheres with a charge
distribution >described by spherical harmonics, how does Mills account for
electron >degeneracy levels?  Are they explained by having several
orbitspheres >coexisting simultaneously at the same radius?  If the radius
of each >orbitsphere is distinct, how are degeneracy levels explained?

I do believe that the orthogonallity is behind Mills approach as well, the
traped photons Is of the nature jl Ylm exp(iwt). then at the radius r, the
bessel jl is zero and the outside has zero electrical potential due to a
boundary condition of the form C*Ylm*exp(iwt) on  the sphere. So similarly
to QM you get an orthogonality between the subshells due to Ylm is
orthogonal for different m. GUTCP is very wage on these matters I would
say. My linked pdf does the math behind my argument though. This indicates
a more direct reason why you don't have radiation.

I have not gotten to understand Mills calculation for higher order shells.
I've only poked around it at a higher level enogh to find it interesting
e.g. there is patterns that seam to give good estimates for ionisation
energies. My conclusion though is that GUTCP may be over tinkered with -
especially for the second p shell atoms and beond.


On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Eric Walker  wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe <
> stefan.ita...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If you magnify it large enough I'm sure you will see some structure, maybe
>> a thickness. But to a practical approximation I think a zero thickness is
>> fine.
>> I believe that what matter is is a singular artifact due to nonlinear
>> behavior in space. A nonlinearity that needs to be added to Maxwell. How
>> this nonlinearity behaves is unknown but what it does is to produce a
>> crack or surface which can be sustained and stable under the right
>> circumstances. Now if you want to add this singularity you need to add a
>> distribution field as source terms on a surface to Maxwell and the most
>> simple such distribution is a delta messure on the surface.
>>
>
> Is this your thinking, or does this go back to Mills?
>
> Also, the standard geometrical interpretation of spherical harmonics in
> quantum mechanics provides a ready understanding of electron degeneracy
> levels (levels in which several electrons have nearly the same energy and
> occupy the same shell).  This is because for shells such as p and d, the
> different subshells are each orthogonal to one another.
>
> In the model of infinitesimally thin orbitspheres with a charge
> distribution described by spherical harmonics, how does Mills account for
> electron degeneracy levels?  Are they explained by having several
> orbitspheres coexisting simultaneously at the same radius?  If the radius
> of each orbitsphere is distinct, how are degeneracy levels explained?
>
> Eric
>
>

RE: [Vo]:NEW LIVE Steorn Webinars Announced - Product Demonstrations

[esa ruoho]

Hi Craig + list..

Anyone tuning into this webinar? I know I'll be there with bells on. I have not 
heard back from Orbo/Shaun McCarthy re: what it actually sounds like when it 
charges. Been trying to reach out to them. I hope it's not loud.

>Bit of News for you...
>Steorn will conduct a series of LIVE interactive Webinars beginning on October 
>28th.
>The webinars are an introduction to their free energy technology Orbo 
>Powercube.
>They will demo the tech, explain how the components work and field questions.
>Link to register for the FREE Live webinar is in the article.
>http://freeenergy.news/steorn/exclusive-live-steorn-webinars-on-orbo-powercube/

---
http://lackluster.bandcamp.com | http://lackluster.org | 
http://esaruoho.tumblr.com | iPhone: +358403703659

Re: [Vo]:Cross section reduction at lower energies

[Stefan Israelsson Tampe]

Yes I agree that non radiation is not the only thing and can have multiple
solutions - but it's a hint to narrow down the possibilities.

1. There is a photon traped inside that is kept there in a standing wave
and this is maintained with a time dependant sources in maxwell equatiions.
The only such sources, if we assume time dependance of exp(iwt), is sum
a(m,p)Ylm exp(piwt), p = +1 or -1 the radii of the sphere times |w| must
match a zero in spherical bessel j_l.

2. You need to be able to match meassured ionization energies

3. You need to nullify the electric field

4. the currents amd charge distribution needs to match the spin of the
electron - this will give you the nessesary current magnitude.

5. If you consider solid state objects a very normal deviation is cracks
and 2 dimensional interfaces - why not attribute a interface to matter.


On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 5:03 AM, David Roberson  wrote:

> There is no reason for the sphere to be infinitesimally thin if far field
> radiation null is the only driving force.   You can even have variation in
> the thickness at various locations throughout its volume.  It merely needs
> to be distributed so that no changing accumulation of charges over it
> surface occurs with time.
>
> I further propose that various regions of the spatially distributed charge
> can undergo differential acceleration provided that there is no change to
> the accumulation of charge allowed at any location.
>
> Dave
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Stefan Israelsson Tampe 
> To: vortex-l 
> Sent: Sun, Oct 11, 2015 4:40 pm
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Cross section reduction at lower energies
>
> Eric Walker said:
> "
> The orbitsphere is proposed to be an infinitesimally thin sphere of
> circulating current.  The overlaying of spherical harmonics on top of this
> sphere seems to imply one of:
>
>- The sphere is not infinitesimally thin and instead can vary in
>thickness, and the accumulation of charge results in a thicker segment of
>sphere.
>- The sphere is in fact infinitesimally thin, and the charge is
>represented by a vibration of the surface of the sphere in a standing mode
>(in which case the sphere is only approximately a sphere).
>- The sphere is in fact infinitesimally thin, and the charge
>accumulation occurs in a hidden dimension.
>
> Do you agree?
> "
> If you magnify it large enough I'm sure you will see some structure, maybe
> a thickness. But to a practical approximation I think a zero thickness is
> fine.
> I believe that what matter is is a singular artifact due to nonlinear
> behavior in space. A nonlinearity that needs to be added to Maxwell. How
> this nonlinearity
> behaves is unknown but what it does is to produce a crack or surface which
> can be sustained and stable under the right circumstances. Now if you want
> to
> add this singularity you need to add a distribution field as source terms
> on a surface to Maxwell and the most simple such distribution is a delta
> messure on the surface.
> What we know about this source term is that it does not radiate and from
> there MIlls produces GUTCP. Note that what it may be is just a mathematical
> correction
> that feels like a bunch of charges with mass etc is what we would like to
> visualize this as. But math is ruthless, nothing in the charge field or
> current fields could be
> attributed to physical quantities, it's just a mathematical correction
> with some properties, the result of this at a higher level creates our
> physical world where we get
> our intuition for, but that intuition may not return back to the basic
> building blocks - that's a circular argument. But sure the math also
> suggest that we actually have
> a thickness - just that it ain't certain. The only way to really know this
> is to actually find a model of the non linearities of the world and see
> what you get. Until then
> you may be right or you may be wrong.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 10:21 PM, Eric Walker 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 3:08 PM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe <
>> stefan.ita...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> No it is not arbritary. It is a simple matter to prove that these charge
>>> distribution would lead to non radiation for certain internal standing
>>> waves.
>>>
>>
>> The orbitsphere is proposed to be an infinitesimally thin sphere of
>> circulating current.  The overlaying of spherical harmonics on top of this
>> sphere seems to imply one of:
>>
>>- The sphere is not infinitesimally thin and instead can vary in
>>thickness, and the accumulation of charge results in a thicker segment of
>>sphere.
>>- The sphere is in fact infinitesimally thin, and the charge is
>>represented by a vibration of the surface of the sphere in a standing mode
>>(in which case the sphere is only approximately a sphere).
>>- The sphere is in fact infinitesimally thin, and the charge
>>accumulation occurs in a hidden dimension.
>>
>> Do you agree?
>>
>> Actual

RE: [Vo]:ADGEX Flashlight Creators Announce USB PowerBank

[esa ruoho]

Craig & list

The thing that caught my interest about ADGEX's Powerbank is that if you =
order an ADGEX ELFE for $99, you get 20% off the full price of their usb =
powerbank.

...That, and the mere possibility of maybe,, just maybe, being able to =
finally charge my MacBookPro from (supposed) free energy.

Tachyon? It even sounds cool! ;)
---
http://lackluster.bandcamp.com | http://lackluster.org | 
http://esaruoho.tumblr.com | iPhone: +358403703659

[Vo]:ADGEX ELFE Flashlight

[esa ruoho]

So.. has anyone received their ADGEX Elfe Flashlight yet? Just saw a notice 
that the first ones have started shipping out a few weeks or so ago.


I'm still 40E short of getting one, but will grab it and see if I can capture 
any audio out of it charging / discharging by using a LOM Instruments 
Elektrosluch 2 device to make electromagnetic fields audible. Who knows, maybe 
if it's rhythmic enough, it could result in a new track.


Yours, Esa
http://lackluster.bandcamp.com/ 
---
http://lackluster.bandcamp.com | http://lackluster.org | 
http://esaruoho.tumblr.com | iPhone: +358403703659