[Vo]:A palladium, heavy water, radio frequency experiment was conducted
I was struck by how close the Fermi velocity is to your MHz-m, and wondered if there might be a connection? My velocity is 1/2 the velocity of the ground state of hydrogen. The darn thing about my velocity is that I can compute the energy levels of the hydrogen atom, the energy of the photon, and the intensity of the atomic spectrum without the use of Planck's constant. _http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapterb.html_ (http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapterb.html) The bad thing about my velocity is that I can't seem to produce any anomalous energy from experiment. I'm running another today with nickel wire, potash, and light water. So far after 10 hrs of electrolysis I have no excess energy. I have tried palladium and heavy water, and nickel and tungsten and light water. The tungsten was obtained from the filament in an electron tube. The experiment looks like this. _http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/mmexperiment.html_ (http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/mmexperiment.html) Frank Z **Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/ 2050827?NCID=aolcmp0030002598)
[Vo]:A palladium, heavy water, radio frequency experiment was conducted
I believe that the coherence length is equal to the downshifted Compton wavelength. Do you have a formula for this, and how does it differ from the definition of the De Broglie wavelength? BTW, did you notice the Fermi velocity? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The Fermi velocities are quite high. Electrons in the condution band travel at thermal velocites which are quite a bit lower. I not sure of the velocity distribution in a superconductive band. As far as the coherience lenght goes, there are may ways of looking at this. We can look at the individual pairs of electrons, as you do. I tend to look at the entire condensed state. In this state the electrons are Indistinguishable. They are part of the whole collective state. It the ground frequency of this collective state is what I am interested in. I would also like to know the velocity distribution of the protons in a proton conductor. I believe that they travel at low thermal velocities. These could also act as a plasma with the velocity proportionate to The density of the state. The velocity of the state should not affect the strength of the phonons that bind the state. This binding force is not a function of the deBroglie wavelength. It is a function of spin pairing. I'm not sure of all of the parameters involved with spin pairing. Cooling lowers the momentum MV of the electrons. This momentum tends to break the bonds of the binding. I have used cooling and vibrations of a certain frequency to increase the strength of the phonos that bind the condensate. I need to know much more about these things. Frank Znidarsic **Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/ 2050827?NCID=aolcmp0030002598)
Re: [Vo]:A palladium, heavy water, radio frequency experiment was conducted
In reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s message of Wed, 27 Feb 2008 11:39:41 EST: Hi Frank, [snip] BTW, did you notice the Fermi velocity? [snip] The Fermi velocities are quite high. I was struck by how close the Fermi velocity is to your MHz-m, and wondered if there might be a connection? [snip] I not sure of the velocity distribution in a superconductive band. As far as the coherience lenght goes, there are may ways of looking at this. We can look at the individual pairs of electrons, as you do. I tend to look at the entire condensed state. In this state the electrons are Indistinguishable. They are part of the whole collective state. It the ground frequency of this collective state is what I am interested in. I suspect that the velocities will be different depending on your point of view. If one looks at individual electrons, then one is looking at the speed of that electron, however when looking at the collective state, one is perhaps looking at the speed of signal transmission within the collective. I would also like to know the velocity distribution of the protons in a proton conductor. I believe that they travel at low thermal velocities. These could also act as a plasma with the velocity proportionate to The density of the state. There is another velocity possible in these systems too, and that is the average velocity when tunneling is the means of transport, or is this the signal velocity? The velocity of the state should not affect the strength of the phonons that bind the state. This binding force is not a function of the deBroglie wavelength. It is a function of spin pairing. I'm not sure of all of the parameters involved with spin pairing. Cooling lowers the momentum MV of the electrons. I think some of the confusion arises from a lack of clarity in exactly what is cohering. [snip] I need to know much more about these things. [snip] Me too. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
[Vo]:A palladium, heavy water, radio frequency experiment was conducted
Bose Condensate? , AFAIK, they form just above absolute zero. Why were you expecting one to form? Good comment. A Bose condensate of electrons only forms at low temperatures. I was attempting to form a Bose condensate of protons (also known as an inverse condensate). The thermal velocity of protons is much less that the thermal velocity of electrons at room temperature. This lower velocity is a result of the increased mass of the protons. The distribution of the kinetic energy of particles with differing masses is the same. I even tried helium in a past experiments in an attempt to obtain an even lower thermal velocity. I believe that protons in a proton conductor may be forced to condense through external stimulation. The required stimulation depends on the coherence length. The product of the length of coherence and frequency is 1.094 meghertz-meters. If your intent is to increase the strength of the phonons, why not use sound for the stimulation, i.e. attach an ultra-sound generator to the wire, and stimulate it at the desired frequency? It may be easier to tailor the length of the wire to the frequency of the generator than the other way around. (start with wire that is a little too long, then you can slowly reduce it to the correct size - perhaps even using an adjustable clamp to change the natural frequency - as with a violin or guitar). Another good comment: I like this idea. In general, applying shock to a Bose condensate of protons is what I want to do. The required frequencies for the lengths of wire I am working with are in the 10 megahertz range. I have no way to mechanically stimulate a proton conductor at 10 megahertz. I would like to do this. It would take one tight guitar string. I am hoping the electrical stimulation works because the result may be the production of RF electrical energy. Russ George was mechanically stimulating proton conductors. I have not received word on any working device at D2 Fusion. The device at Gardner Watts appears to be generating RF energy. Perhaps this is due only to sparking. I would like to know more about this. I have just ordered some more nickel wire. I want to try nickel and light water again, perhaps with helium. I lost my full time job at Pelelec about 10 years ago due in part to my activities with new energy. I am currently a contractor with Alstom Power. I start up power plants. The money is better, however, the job requires extensive travel. I'll be going to Pittsburgh and living in a hotel for the next 8 weeks. After that I will return to Charlotte, NC. This travel puts a crimp on my cold fusion experiments. My equipment is in Pennsylvania. Frank Znidarsic **Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/ 2050827?NCID=aolcmp0030002598)
Re: [Vo]:A palladium, heavy water, radio frequency experiment was conducted
In reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s message of Sat, 23 Feb 2008 11:34:12 EST: Hi Frank, [snip] Bose Condensate? , AFAIK, they form just above absolute zero. Why were you expecting one to form? Good comment. A Bose condensate of electrons only forms at low temperatures. I was attempting to form a Bose condensate of protons (also known as an inverse condensate). The thermal velocity of protons is much less that the thermal velocity of electrons at room temperature. This lower velocity is a result of the increased mass of the protons. The distribution of the kinetic energy of particles with differing masses is the same. I even tried helium in a past experiments in an attempt to obtain an even lower thermal velocity. I believe that protons in a proton conductor may be forced to condense through external stimulation. The required stimulation depends on the coherence length. The product of the length of coherence and frequency is 1.094 meghertz-meters. Assuming your coherence length is at least proportional to the De Broglie wavelength (L_DB) and L_DB = h/p and p = sqrt(2*m*E) where E = kinetic energy, we get L_DB = h/(sqrt(2*m*E)) . Since, as you state above, the energy is the same irrespective of type of particle, we see that L_DB is in fact shorter for heavy particles than it is for light ones (the mass is in the denominator). IOW I would expect the coherence length of electrons to be sqrt(1836) ~= 43 times greater than that of protons. IOW I think your quest for heavier particles may be misguided. If your intent is to increase the strength of the phonons, why not use sound for the stimulation, i.e. attach an ultra-sound generator to the wire, and stimulate it at the desired frequency? It may be easier to tailor the length of the wire to the frequency of the generator than the other way around. (start with wire that is a little too long, then you can slowly reduce it to the correct size - perhaps even using an adjustable clamp to change the natural frequency - as with a violin or guitar). Another good comment: I like this idea. In general, applying shock to a Bose condensate of protons is what I want to do. The required frequencies for the lengths of wire I am working with are in the 10 megahertz range. I have no way to mechanically stimulate a proton conductor at 10 megahertz. Piezo-electric crystals have been used in the past, to achieve sonic frequencies in a solid on the order of 10 GHz (in the most extreme case of which I am aware), so I think 10 MHz should be well within the realm of possibility. I would like to do this. It would take one tight guitar string. In my previous post I suggested that the natural resonant frequency was significant, which isn't necessarily so. It would be difficult to achieve, since this is determined by the speed of sound in the material in question, whereas the frequency you are striving for is determined by your 1 MHz-m product, which as I have pointed out before, is actually a velocity (about 1E6 m/s). The speed of sound in most metals is on the order of 4000 m/s, so there is an implicit mismatch here. If you really want to resonate the wire at a natural resonant frequency of the wire, then perhaps you can find a metal-temperature combination where 1E6 m/s is a whole multiple of the speed of sound in the metal. This may be a matter of slowly heating the wire (passing a current through it?), until the right sound velocity in the wire is reached. (Assuming that there is some temperature dependence of sound velocity in a metal.) [snip] BTW, while researching this response, I came across a reference to the Fermi velocity of electrons (see http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/FermiVelocity.html), which I note is very close to your 1 MHz-m product. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:A palladium, heavy water, radio frequency experiment was conducted
Assuming your coherence length is at least proportional to the De Broglie wavelength (L_DB) and L_DB = h/p and p = sqrt(2*m*E) where E = kinetic energy, we get L_DB = h/(sqrt(2*m*E)) . Since, as you state above, the energy is the same irrespective of type of particle, we see that L_DB is in fact shorter for heavy particles than it is for light ones (the mass is in the denominator). IOW I would expect the coherence length of electrons to be sqrt(1836) ~= 43 times greater than that of protons. IOW I think your quest for heavier particles may be misguided. I believe that you are way off using the deBroglie wavelength as the coherence length. In superconductors the state of the electron can equal the length of the superconductor. This is much longer than the deBroglie waveleigth. I believe that the coherence length is equal to the downshifted Compton wavelength. Frank Z **Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/ 2050827?NCID=aolcmp0030002598)
Re: [Vo]:A palladium, heavy water, radio frequency experiment was conducted
In reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s message of Sat, 23 Feb 2008 18:16:41 EST: Hi Frank, [snip] Assuming your coherence length is at least proportional to the De Broglie wavelength (L_DB) and L_DB = h/p and p = sqrt(2*m*E) where E = kinetic energy, we get L_DB = h/(sqrt(2*m*E)) . Since, as you state above, the energy is the same irrespective of type of particle, we see that L_DB is in fact shorter for heavy particles than it is for light ones (the mass is in the denominator). IOW I would expect the coherence length of electrons to be sqrt(1836) ~= 43 times greater than that of protons. IOW I think your quest for heavier particles may be misguided. I believe that you are way off using the deBroglie wavelength as the coherence length. In superconductors the state of the electron can equal the length of the superconductor. Do you have a reference for this? All those, that I could find, mentioned the coherence length in superconductors as exceeding the distance between the electrons in a pair (not difficult). This is much longer than the deBroglie waveleigth. The De Broglie wavelength at 4 K is about 66 nm, which seems about right, if the inter electron pair distance is to be less than this. I believe that the coherence length is equal to the downshifted Compton wavelength. Do you have a formula for this, and how does it differ from the definition of the De Broglie wavelength? BTW, did you notice the Fermi velocity? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:A palladium, heavy water, radio frequency experiment was conducted
Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s message of Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:34:05 EST: Hi Frank, [snip] The intent of the experiment was to form a Bose condensate of deuterons by increasing the strength of the phonons that bind the condensate. I believe that my 1.094 megahertz-meter relationship describes the frequency of the binding phonons. [snip] If your intent is to increase the strength of the phonons, why not use sound for the stimulation, i.e. attach an ultra-sound generator to the wire, and stimulate it at the desired frequency? It may be easier to tailor the length of the wire to the frequency of the generator than the other way around. (start with wire that is a little too long, then you can slowly reduce it to the correct size - perhaps even using an adjustable clamp to change the natural frequency - as with a violin or guitar). Dale Pond of www.svpvril.com , agrees with you. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! ---
[Vo]:A palladium, heavy water, radio frequency experiment was conducted
I am home on a short break between contracts. I have conducted another experiment. I placed a 26 gauge palladium wire in a heavy water electrolysis cell (the wire was from surperpure chemicals Inc.) The anode was a nickel wire (which dissolved and was replaced ). I applied 9 volts across the cell for 3 days. I stopped the experiment when the heavy water was depleted (The heavy water was obtained from United Nuclear) The palladium cathode wire was connected in series with a radio frequency tuning capacitor. This capacitor was salvaged from an old radio years ago. The RF tank circuit was stimulated by injecting sparks into it. The oscillations in the RF circuit were observed on an oscilloscope. After each spark the tank circuit oscillated and the oscillations died away in about 15 cycles. The tuning capacitor has a turndown ration of about 4 to 1. Four sections on the capacitor were ganged in and out to obtain a the range of 1 to 60 megahertz. The experiment was designed to employ my megahertz-meter relationships. The palladium wire was about 1/10 of a meter long. The stimulation frequency was varied from 2 to 60 megahertz using the tuning capacitor. No anomaly was observed at 10 megahertz. No anomalous electrical energy was ever detected. The intent of the experiment was to form a Bose condensate of deuterons by increasing the strength of the phonons that bind the condensate. I believe that my 1.094 megahertz-meter relationship describes the frequency of the binding phonons. I believe that the experiment failed to produced anomalous energy because I could not obtain the required D2 loading. Cold fusion is hard. Controlling the natural forces is even harder. I have at this point done all I could do. As I packed up I got the feeling that I was putting my equipment away for life. Frank Znidarsic **Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/ 2050827?NCID=aolcmp0030002598)
Re: [Vo]:A palladium, heavy water, radio frequency experiment was conducted
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The intent of the experiment was to form a Bose condensate of deuterons by increasing the strength of the phonons that bind the condensate. I believe that my 1.094 megahertz-meter relationship describes the frequency of the binding phonons. Bose Condensate? , AFAIK, they form just above absolute zero. Why were you expecting one to form? --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! ---
Re: [Vo]:A palladium, heavy water, radio frequency experiment was conducted
In reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s message of Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:34:05 EST: Hi Frank, [snip] The intent of the experiment was to form a Bose condensate of deuterons by increasing the strength of the phonons that bind the condensate. I believe that my 1.094 megahertz-meter relationship describes the frequency of the binding phonons. [snip] If your intent is to increase the strength of the phonons, why not use sound for the stimulation, i.e. attach an ultra-sound generator to the wire, and stimulate it at the desired frequency? It may be easier to tailor the length of the wire to the frequency of the generator than the other way around. (start with wire that is a little too long, then you can slowly reduce it to the correct size - perhaps even using an adjustable clamp to change the natural frequency - as with a violin or guitar). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
