RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Once, in about every 10^20 reversible fusion events, there is a beta decay in the short time before the reversal can complete. It is one of the rarest events in physics - but without it, our sun produces no heat. On earth, because of this rarity - an experimenter could run an LENR cell for a thousand years and never see a single proton-proton fusion proceed to deuterium From: Harry Veeder It seems a bit more logical to suggest that the lack of gammas can be better explained by the lack of the kind of nuclear reaction that produces gammas. The most prevalent nuclear reaction in the Universe, reversible proton fusion, produces no gammas. Shouldn't we be taking a closer look at RPF? Wikipedia says proton-proton fusion produces a neutrino and a positron. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton%E2%80%93proton_chain_reaction Won't this result in an electron-positron anihilation and two gamma rays? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron%E2%80%93positron_annihilation Harry
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
In reply to David Roberson's message of Thu, 4 Apr 2013 19:51:27 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] Gamma rays are normally absorbed to some extent in normal matter. When such an event occurs, the energy of the gamma mostly goes into ionizing an atom and giving kinetic energy to the freed electron. Presumably the remaining ion shares the momentum with the electron, IOW the ion gets a little kick as well. The energetic electron can then go on to ionize thousands of other atoms. Because it is a charged particle, the electron interacts strongly with other electrons. In this way, the energy of the gamma is thermalized. That is my fear Jones. A photon has a large energy to momentum ratio as compared to an electron. I would expect to see Compton reflection of the high energy gamma as it collides with electrons. It is very presumptuous to assume that the gammas will be absorbed quickly. Does anyone see how both energy and momentum can be conserved during a collision between a high energy gamma and any number of electrons? I suppose that one can look back at the point of origin of the gamma and mentally reverse the process. In that case the nucleus recoiled with much less energy than the gamma while it by definition had to conserve momentum. Perhaps a large cloud of coupled electrons that scattered in every direction carrying off portions of the energy might be able to absorb the total energy. The random directions of the dispersion cloud of electrons could balance the momentum portion of the equation if a miracle occurred. Now I know I am a heretic with an overactive imagination! Dave -Original Message- From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Apr 4, 2013 7:04 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! The problem with such ahigh energy gamma hitting an electron is that the total mass-energy of thetarget is only 2-3% of the mass-energy of the driver. This slight impediment doesnot even slow the gamma down very much. There could possibly be pair-productionbut to imagine that the re-emission was all infrared would probably mean thatmomentum could not be conserved. How could it? From:David Roberson Has anyone looked to see that momentum is conserved in theseprocesses? Dave -OriginalMessage- From: mixent More disinformation. There is no possibility of nano-sized sites stopping gamma radiation. This requires thick lead shielding. ..I have often wondered if an electron that is within the wavelength of a gamma (i.e. a near field energy transfer) might absorb the energy as kinetic energy. For a 23.8 MeV gamma the wavelength is 52 fm. For a Mills' Hydrino this is too small for even the smallest Hydrino, however if my version is correct, then it should be possible for f/H with a p 32. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
MIT Prof. Peter L. Hagelstein stated in an interview as follows: So after a lot of years of work on it, about 10 years ago we found a model that actually did something like that. It's remarkable! It turns out in the physics literature, there's a model called the 'Spin-Boson Model' that's basically a fundamental quantum mechanics model, so you have a harmonic oscillator and you hook it up to what's called a two level system — that's just an idealisation, it's a little bit of physics having to do with two of the energy levels in a more complicated system. But it makes the math really simple, so the resulting model is one you can analyze to death. People have studied that model now for between 40-60 years, depending on how you count them. This model predicts the 30 or 50 fold, or the ability to break up a two level system quantum into, for example, into nearly 30 individual quanta. Axil says: Let us now address another quantum optics model describing polaritons: The Jaynes–Cummings model. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaynes%E2%80%93Cummings_model Starting at the very bottom, the most basic underlying model that teaches us how waves/particles can resonate is the Jaynes–Cummings model (JCM). It describes the system of a two-level atom interacting with a quantized mode of an optical cavity, with or without the presence of light (in the form of a bath of electromagnetic radiation that can cause spontaneous emission and absorption). MIT Prof. Peter L. Hagelstein continues in the interview as follows: What we found is the way that the model does it, it can do it, but it's hindered. There's a destructive interference effect that goes on, that makes the effect relatively weak. What we found, is that if you added a weird kind of loss to the model— a loss that you would expect in the cold fusion scenario. The new model, with loss, is much more relevant to the physical situation called fusion than otherwise. But this weird kind of loss, it breaks the destructive interference, and it makes this energy exchange go orders of magnitude faster. And instead of being a relatively weak effect, it's now a very strong, it's a dominant effect. This model is exactly what you need! It's a microscopic engine to take big quanta and chop it up into little tiny quanta. So that's what we've found. Axil says: This is Fano interference active in an optical cavity to localize EMF radiation to the near field by eliminated far field emissions. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:40 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: * MIT Prof. Peter L. Hagelstein stated in an interview as follows: * So there are no significant amount of neutrons, there's no fast electrons, there's no gamma rays. There's nothing you might expect if it were a more normal nuclear reaction process. The basic statement here is that — if it's real and if it's nuclear... the argument for it being nuclear is that there's 4He (helium-4) observed in experiments, roughly one 4He for every 24 MeV of energy that's created. So what you need in the way of a theoretical model, basically a new kind of mechanism that doesn't work like the old Rutherford reaction picture that nuclear physics is based on. So that's the basic problem that I've been working on for a great many years. The big problem is one that has to do with the quantum mechanics issue. The nuclear energy comes in a big energy quantum, and if it didn't get broken up, then the big energy quantum would get expressed as energetic particles, as normally happens in nuclear reactions. So the approach we've taken is that we've said the only conceivable route for making sense of these observations at all, is that the big energy quanta have to get sliced and diced up into a very very large number if much smaller energy quanta. The much larger number is on the order of several hundred million. In NMR physics and optical physics, people are familiar with breaking up a large quantum into perhaps 30 smaller pieces, you could argue that there are some experiments where you could argue that maybe that numbers as high as 100 or so. It's unprecedented that you could take an MeV quantum and chop it up into bite sized pieces that are 10s of meV. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:15 AM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.comwrote: If a bunch of low energy photons is equivalent to the energy of 1 high energy gamma photon, why can't a particular nuclear reaction sometimes produce a mountain of infrared photons instead one gamma photon? According to conservation of energy this is possible, so why is it considered impossible? harry On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 1:06 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote: ** ** Dave stated: “… and that the energy from the reactions is shared among the atoms surrounding it. I have been looking for evidence that fusion can take place in the compact environment of a cold fusion NAE in a manner that is very different from that occurring within a plasma.” ** **
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. Jones ***This is an elegant aspect of the theory, it obeys Occham's Razor.
RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
There seems to be two different overlapping threads going on here, since Mark's original suggestion relating to subatomic quark resonance was hijacked (by moi) in favor of another related subject: lack of gammas in LENR. Apologies for that. However, in regard to the latter, the take-away message should be that MeV quanta (gamma radiation) once emitted, can only be downshifted in steps - going down to 100s of keV, 10s of keV, hundreds of eV (EUV), 10s of eV (UV light), visible light and then to IR light, etc. All of this must be accomplished in dozens or hundreds of distinct steps involving millions of target atoms. Lewis Larsen wants to tell the world of physics that no, it is possible to do it all in one step, in one particle. The reason this claim of W-L theory is ludicrous can be seen every day by looking up. Our sun makes gamma radiation as its prime energy product - yet x-rays, ultraviolet, visible, infrared, microwave, and radio waves are all emitted - and the proportion of IR is well-understood. Of course this is not LENR, but it is the model for gamma downshifting, and if you want to assert two distinct miracles - then it is wise to show some other evidence than the very phenomenon you wish to explain - with your outrageous claim. In the sun, gammas cannot escape without colliding with protons and electrons and losing a small portion of their energy on every collision - over and over and over. The same should be true on earth IF gammas are actually emitted. Moreover, a gamma ray typically spends 30,000 years colliding with atomic particles and re-emitting energy at a slightly lower energy level on the sun, until it finally escapes. That is a lot of downshifting, and to assert that it can all be avoided, because we need to make gammas do that, in order to make our theory work is essentially what the rest of science is being asked to believe. Don't ask me to explain the calculations that provided this million-day solar gamma lag time - but it is part of the standard model. Hagelstein - at least, suggests another pathway (phonon collective vibrations) that spreads the MeV radiation out over trillions of atoms in the metal lattice, unlike W-L which suggest a single particle downshifting. Almost no one in physics believes Hagelstein is correct on this, but he is far closer to making a case for lack of gammas than W-L. It seems a bit more logical to suggest that the lack of gammas can be better explained by the lack of the kind of nuclear reaction that produces gammas. The most prevalent nuclear reaction in the Universe, reversible proton fusion, produces no gammas. Shouldn't we be taking a closer look at RPF? From: Axil MIT Prof. Peter L. Hagelstein stated in an interview as follows: So there are no significant amount of neutrons, there's no fast electrons, there's no gamma rays. There's nothing you might expect if it were a more normal nuclear reaction process. The basic statement here is that - if it's real and if it's nuclear... the argument for it being nuclear is that there's 4He (helium-4) observed in experiments, roughly one 4He for every 24 MeV of energy that's created. So what you need in the way of a theoretical model, basically a new kind of mechanism that doesn't work like the old Rutherford reaction picture that nuclear physics is based on. So that's the basic problem that I've been working on for a great many years. The big problem is one that has to do with the quantum mechanics issue. The nuclear energy comes in a big energy quantum, and if it didn't get broken up, then the big energy quantum would get expressed as energetic particles, as normally happens in nuclear reactions. So the approach we've taken is that we've said the only conceivable route for making sense of these observations at all, is that the big energy quanta have to get sliced and diced up into a very very large number if much smaller energy quanta. The much larger number is on the order of several hundred million. In NMR physics and optical physics, people are familiar with breaking up a large quantum into perhaps 30 smaller pieces, you could argue that there are some experiments where you could argue that maybe that numbers as high as 100 or so. It's unprecedented that you could take an MeV quantum and chop it up into bite sized pieces that are 10s of meV. Harry Veeder wrote: If a bunch of low energy photons is equivalent to the energy of 1 high energy gamma photon, why can't a particular nuclear reaction sometimes produce a mountain of infrared photons instead one gamma photon? According to conservation of energy this is possible, so why is it considered impossible? harry MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Dave stated: ... and that the energy from the reactions is shared among the atoms surrounding it.
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: . . . there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. I know little of theory, but that has long been my gut feeling. Some cold fusion cells to produce gamma rays but I think this is a secondary effect, or something completely unrelated such as fracto fusion. I have heard many theory presentations in which the author speculates that some complex mechanism manages to catch nearly all -- but not quite all! -- of the gammas before they come out of the lattice. This seems extremely unlikely to me. How could the mechanism be so exquisitely tuned to make it work 99.99% of the time but not the last faction of times? Here is something that often happens in science and technology. People discover X, and then later on they discover Y. Because they happen to find X first, they assume that Y is a variant or subset of X. They assume that X sets the general rule and Y must be something along similar lines which follows the same rules and where there is a variation that variation must be explained separately as a special case. It often turns out that Y is the general case, and X was a variation. Or it turns out that the two of them are unrelated. We naturally assume that cold fusion is some sort of variation of plasma fusion, because we discovered plasma fusion first. For all anyone can say, it might turn out that plasma fusion is an unusual high-temperature variety of cold fusion. In the case of technology, we develop a method of doing something and then when new and better machines are developed we bring along the old method out of force of habit. We assume that this is how you should do things so let's continue doing it that way, even though the circumstances have changed. This is why newly invented machines look quaint were oddly out of kilter a few years later. The early automobiles looked like horseless carriages because they were, in the literal sense. A carriage for a horse can be built high off the road. Making automobiles that way is a bad idea because they travel much faster and they are blown around. Model T Fords driven in windy conditions or high speed blew all over the road. It took 20 or 30 years before people began to make automobiles streamlined and low to the road. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Jones, I forgive you for hijacking the original thread since I was an accomplice. I would like to understand the RPF reaction better if possible and to determine why it does not emit a gamma as you point out. If the collisions between the protons are elastic, then the energy could be conserved by recoil behavior. A great deal depends upon how long the two protons are under the influence of the strong force once the collision occurs. It might be difficult to make a determination of the amount of time during which the protons are in close proximity. I would expect the pair to be highly excited in this situation with plenty of energy available to emit. But, the energy available is also the amount required to break apart the reacting protons as well and that seems to be what ultimately occurs. I guess one must attempt to understand why the energy is not emitted as a gamma leaving the protons connected which is the question at hand. Is there proof that the gamma emission does not occur? In the center of the sun one might encounter an enormous flux of gammas of this binding energy and more due to excess kinetic energy among the reacting protons. Perhaps the bath of high energy gammas continue to encounter the proton pairs and supply enough energy to break them apart as it becomes absorbed. We do know that occasionally a proton pair becomes a deuterium nucleus and the process continues to supply heat to the solar system. I believe that the energy required to break apart the deuterium nuclei is not available in large enough quantities so many of them remain intact. Is it well understood why the pair of excited protons does not emit a gamma to lower their energy? Is there proof that this does not occur only to be restored by the vast flood of gammas from other similar processes? I ask these questions because I do not know the answers and would like to understand why certain behavior is observed. Dave -Original Message- From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Apr 4, 2013 9:39 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! There seems to be two different overlapping threads going on here, since Mark's original suggestion relating to subatomic quark resonance was hijacked (by moi) in favor of another related subject: lack of gammas in LENR. Apologies for that. However, in regard to the latter, the take-away message should be that MeV quanta (gamma radiation) once emitted, can only be downshifted in steps - going down to 100s of keV, 10s of keV, hundreds of eV (EUV), 10s of eV (UV light), visible light and then to IR light, etc. All of this must be accomplished in dozens or hundreds of distinct steps involving millions of target atoms. Lewis Larsen wants to tell the world of physics that no, it is possible to do it all in one step, in one particle. The reason this claim of W-L theory is ludicrous can be seen every day by looking up. Our sun makes gamma radiation as its prime energy product - yet x-rays, ultraviolet, visible, infrared, microwave, and radio waves are all emitted - and the proportion of IR is well-understood. Of course this is not LENR, but it is the model for gamma downshifting, and if you want to assert two distinct miracles - then it is wise to show some other evidence than the very phenomenon you wish to explain - with your outrageous claim. In the sun, gammas cannot escape without colliding with protons and electrons and losing a small portion of their energy on every collision - over and over and over. The same should be true on earth IF gammas are actually emitted. Moreover, a gamma ray typically spends 30,000 years colliding with atomic particles and re-emitting energy at a slightly lower energy level on the sun, until it finally escapes. That is a lot of downshifting, and to assert that it can all be avoided, because we need to make gammas do that, in order to make our theory work is essentially what the rest of science is being asked to believe. Don't ask me to explain the calculations that provided this million-day solar gamma lag time - but it is part of the standard model. Hagelstein - at least, suggests another pathway (phonon collective vibrations) that spreads the MeV radiation out over trillions of atoms in the metal lattice, unlike W-L which suggest a single particle downshifting. Almost no one in physics believes Hagelstein is correct on this, but he is far closer to making a case for lack of gammas than W-L. It seems a bit more logical to suggest that the lack of gammas can be better explained by the lack of the kind of nuclear reaction that produces gammas. The most prevalent nuclear reaction in the Universe, reversible proton fusion, produces no gammas. Shouldn't we be taking a closer look at RPF? From: Axil MIT Prof. Peter L. Hagelstein stated in an interview as follows: So there are no significant amount
RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
So, out of all the erudite Vorts, no one can answer the following simple questions: Why are the UP-spin quarks on OPPOSITE sides of the proton from the DOWN-spin quarks??? Why do... All spin directions collapse on one or the OPPOSITE direction depending on the measured photon polarization. ??? Why, in some nuclear interactions, do two gammas go shooting off in OPPOSITE directions??? Where is the physical model that explains the REASON for these basic observations??? Why is the magnetic field PERPENDICULAR to the E-field??? It's all related... -Mark (the reluctant hijackee) Iverson _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 6:39 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! There seems to be two different overlapping threads going on here, since Mark's original suggestion relating to subatomic quark resonance was hijacked (by moi) in favor of another related subject: lack of gammas in LENR. Apologies for that. deleted hijacker's msg since it's not answering my question :-) attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
It might be possible to develop realistic models which explain these things if CoE is demoted from a law to a convention or should a law always take precedence over intelligibility and experience? Harry On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:33 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote: So, out of all the erudite Vorts, no one can answer the following simple questions: Why are the UP-spin quarks on OPPOSITE sides of the proton from the DOWN-spin quarks??? Why do... All spin directions collapse on one or the OPPOSITE direction depending on the measured photon polarization. ??? Why, in some nuclear interactions, do two gammas go shooting off in OPPOSITE directions??? Where is the physical model that explains the REASON for these basic observations??? Why is the magnetic field PERPENDICULAR to the E-field??? It's all related... -Mark (the reluctant hijackee) Iverson _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 6:39 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! There seems to be two different overlapping threads going on here, since Mark's original suggestion relating to subatomic quark resonance was hijacked (by moi) in favor of another related subject: lack of gammas in LENR. Apologies for that. deleted hijacker's msg since it's not answering my question :-)
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
*The reason this claim of W-L theory is ludicrous --- Of course this is not LENR, but it is the model for gamma downshifting, and if you want to assert two distinct miracles - then it is wise to show some other evidence than the very phenomenon you wish to explain - with your outrageous claim. * Gamma suppression does not cause LENR; it is accidental to the LENR reaction. However, it is still very important. It is the principle demarcation line between LENR and LENR+. The LENR reaction emits gammas and this energy release destroys the nuclear active sites. The LENR reactions will soon stop as the NAE are blown apart and cratered. On the other hand, LENR+ thermalizes the energy that is produced in the NAE as a secondary mechanism, but this thermalization of the reaction allows the LENR+ reaction to occur over and over again from the same NAE for months on end. When all this is considered, gamma thermalization is far more puzzling than we think; it is connected to the LENR reaction but not required by it. This type of mechanism is not supported by the WL theory. Electrons produce both the reaction and the gamma thermalization. Electrons cannot do both jobs simultaneously. There must be a second optional mechanism that these elections undergo to cause suppress the gammas. I believe that that mechanism is Bose-Einstein condensation; a ubiquitous condition in the lattice that is readily and continuously restored and refreshed as the LENR+ reaction occurs. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: There seems to be two different overlapping threads going on here, since Mark's original suggestion relating to subatomic quark resonance was hijacked (by moi) in favor of another related subject: lack of gammas in LENR. Apologies for that. However, in regard to the latter, the take-away message should be that MeV quanta (gamma radiation) once emitted, can only be downshifted in steps - going down to 100s of keV, 10s of keV, hundreds of eV (EUV), 10s of eV (UV light), visible light and then to IR light, etc. All of this must be accomplished in dozens or hundreds of distinct steps involving millions of target atoms. Lewis Larsen wants to tell the world of physics that no, it is possible to do it all in one step, in one particle. The reason this claim of W-L theory is ludicrous can be seen every day by looking up. Our sun makes gamma radiation as its prime energy product - yet x-rays, ultraviolet, visible, infrared, microwave, and radio waves are all emitted - and the proportion of IR is well-understood. Of course this is not LENR, but it is the model for gamma downshifting, and if you want to assert two distinct miracles - then it is wise to show some other evidence than the very phenomenon you wish to explain - with your outrageous claim. In the sun, gammas cannot escape without colliding with protons and electrons and losing a small portion of their energy on every collision - over and over and over. The same should be true on earth IF gammas are actually emitted. Moreover, a gamma ray typically spends 30,000 years colliding with atomic particles and re-emitting energy at a slightly lower energy level on the sun, until it finally escapes. That is a lot of downshifting, and to assert that it can all be avoided, because we need to make gammas do that, in order to make our theory work is essentially what the rest of science is being asked to believe. Don't ask me to explain the calculations that provided this million-day solar gamma lag time - but it is part of the standard model. Hagelstein - at least, suggests another pathway (phonon collective vibrations) that spreads the MeV radiation out over trillions of atoms in the metal lattice, unlike W-L which suggest a single particle downshifting. Almost no one in physics believes Hagelstein is correct on this, but he is far closer to making a case for lack of gammas than W-L. It seems a bit more logical to suggest that the lack of gammas can be better explained by the lack of the kind of nuclear reaction that produces gammas. The most prevalent nuclear reaction in the Universe, reversible proton fusion, produces no gammas. Shouldn't we be taking a closer look at RPF? From: Axil MIT Prof. Peter L. Hagelstein stated in an interview as follows: So there are no significant amount of neutrons, there's no fast electrons, there's no gamma rays. There's nothing you might expect if it were a more normal nuclear reaction process. The basic statement here is that - if it's real and if it's nuclear... the argument for it being nuclear is that there's 4He (helium-4) observed in experiments, roughly one 4He for every 24 MeV of energy that's created. So what you need in the way of a theoretical model, basically a new kind of mechanism that doesn't work like the old Rutherford reaction picture that nuclear physics is based on. So that's
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Harry, I am ok with COE remaining a law but the convention that HUP can never be tapped needs to be stricken. My point is that the random forces normally cancelled in the macro world become organized by casimir geometry and can provide an exploitable bias from zero point energy. Fran From: Harry Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 2:48 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! It might be possible to develop realistic models which explain these things if CoE is demoted from a law to a convention or should a law always take precedence over intelligibility and experience? Harry On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:33 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netmailto:zeropo...@charter.net wrote: So, out of all the erudite Vorts, no one can answer the following simple questions: Why are the UP-spin quarks on OPPOSITE sides of the proton from the DOWN-spin quarks??? Why do... All spin directions collapse on one or the OPPOSITE direction depending on the measured photon polarization. ??? Why, in some nuclear interactions, do two gammas go shooting off in OPPOSITE directions??? Where is the physical model that explains the REASON for these basic observations??? Why is the magnetic field PERPENDICULAR to the E-field??? It's all related... -Mark (the reluctant hijackee) Iverson _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.netmailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 6:39 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! There seems to be two different overlapping threads going on here, since Mark's original suggestion relating to subatomic quark resonance was hijacked (by moi) in favor of another related subject: lack of gammas in LENR. Apologies for that. deleted hijacker's msg since it's not answering my question :-)
RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
From: Axil Axil The reason this claim of W-L theory is ludicrous --- Of course this is not LENR, but it is the model for gamma downshifting, and if you want to assert two distinct miracles - then it is wise to show some other evidence than the very phenomenon you wish to explain - with your outrageous claim. Gamma suppression does not cause LENR; it is accidental to the LENR reaction. However, it is still very important. It is the principle demarcation line between LENR and LENR+. Nonsense. There is no such thing as gamma suppression . It is a complete fabrication of W-L without a shred of evidence AFAIK. if you have the evidence, please show it The LENR reaction emits gammas and this energy release destroys the nuclear active sites. The LENR reactions will soon stop as the NAE are blown apart and cratered. More disinformation. There is no possibility of nano-sized sites stopping gamma radiation. This requires thick lead shielding. On the other hand, LENR+ thermalizes the energy that is produced in the NAE as a secondary mechanism, but this thermalization of the reaction allows the LENR+ reaction to occur over and over again from the same NAE for months on end. There is no evidence for this.
RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
_ From: MarkI-ZeroPoint So, out of all the erudite Vorts, no one can answer the following simple questions: Why are the UP-spin quarks on OPPOSITE sides of the proton from the DOWN-spin quarks??? Short answer: erudition eroded... alternatively: not simple. Long answer. A proton is composed of two up quarks and one down quark, so they logically cannot be arranged as opposites. A handy visualization is Borromean rings and a more technical version is the Efimov state. Why, in some nuclear interactions, do two gammas go shooting off in OPPOSITE directions??? That one appears to be conservation of momentum, but the connection to quark spin, if there is one, is not clear. Wiki sez: In classical mechanics, linear momentum or translational momentum is the product of the mass and velocity of an object Linear momentum is a conserved quantity and the gamma has equivalent mass, even if the rest mass is zero. Why is the magnetic field PERPENDICULAR to the E-field??? This is also related to momentum in a way (if one is trying to find a connection) - since the EM wave moves forward by transferring energy back and forth between the two fields, and that momentum is conserved. As one field collapses the other field builds, so the waves must be at right angles to each other, since at any other angle there would be inequality in the transfer. Jones attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
* Evidence of electromagnetic radiation from Ni-H Systems * http://www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=sfrm=1source=webcd=2cad=rjasqi=2ved=0CDsQFjABurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnewenergytimes.com%2Fv2%2Flibrary%2F2004%2F2004Focardi-EvidenceOfElectromagneticRadiation.pdfei=-NpdUemSBITB4AP364CYBAusg=AFQjCNHu3w5dimV_JIaouNutOQePoXu2Pgsig2=ZCZ6WnU2Vjiyx3rrr9DHFQ I have posted this about a half dozen times so far, but you seem to have a block to it. This experiment shows the reaction with and without gamma radiation On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: ** ** ** ** *From:* Axil Axil ** ** *The reason this claim of W-L theory is ludicrous --- Of course this is not LENR, but it is the model for gamma downshifting, and if you want to assert two distinct miracles - then it is wise to show some other evidence than the very phenomenon you wish to explain - with your outrageous claim. * Gamma suppression does not cause LENR; it is accidental to the LENR reaction. However, it is still very important. It is the principle demarcation line between LENR and LENR+. ** ** Nonsense. There is no such thing as “gamma suppression” … It is a complete fabrication of W-L without a shred of evidence AFAIK… if you have the evidence, please show it The LENR reaction emits gammas and this energy release destroys the nuclear active sites. The LENR reactions will soon stop as the NAE are blown apart and cratered. ** ** More disinformation. There is no possibility of nano-sized sites stopping gamma radiation. This requires thick lead shielding. On the other hand, LENR+ thermalizes the energy that is produced in the NAE as a secondary mechanism, but this thermalization of the reaction allows the LENR+ reaction to occur over and over again from the same NAE for months on end. ** ** There is no evidence for this. ** **
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
In reply to Eric Walker's message of Wed, 3 Apr 2013 20:20:58 -0700: Hi, [snip] An example of a new branch would be: d + d ? 4He + M, where M is a nearby nucleus that shares the energy of the reaction as a spectator (all of this should be familiar as Ron Maimon's idea). This conserves momentum somehow. The spectator nucleus goes in one direction, the 4He goes in the opposite direction. In the center of mass frame (which is also the frame of all the nuclei at the moment of fusion), the momentum of each product is equal in magnitude and opposite in sign, hence net zero. This means that the energy of the reaction is divided up such that the lighter nucleus gets the lion's share of the energy (because m * V = M * -v), and the energy of each particle = (momentum^2)/(2*mass) ). E.g. D + D + 106Pd = 106Pd + 0.865 MeV + 4He + 22.935 MeV (Total energy is 23.8 MeV) To put it in simple terms, the presence of the spectator nucleus provides the 4He, something to push off against, like a swimmer pushing off against the end of the pool. The spectator nucleus also gets some of the kinetic energy, IOW it moves away a little when pushed. In hot fusion, the newly formed excited 4He nucleus has nothing to push off against, and hence has no option other than to fission again, into either He3 + n or T + p. Very occasionally in hot fusion you get 4He + gamma. Once again, with each of the two particles having equal and opposite momentum. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
You can't be serious. These are extraordinarily low radiation counts over long periods. 35 megajoules of excess heat over 22 days and what? . a few hundred counts. LOL This is strong evidence against a direct correlation of radiation to heat - not evidence for a correlation. Yes, there is evidence of QM reaction, but no one doubts that excess heat will come with QM side effects. From: Axil Axil Evidence of electromagnetic radiation from Ni-H Systems http://www.google.com/url?sa=t http://www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=sfrm=1source=webcd=2cad=rj asqi=2ved=0CDsQFjABurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnewenergytimes.com%2Fv2%2Flibrary%2F2 004%2F2004Focardi-EvidenceOfElectromagneticRadiation.pdfei=-NpdUemSBITB4AP3 64CYBAusg=AFQjCNHu3w5dimV_JIaouNutOQePoXu2Pgsig2=ZCZ6WnU2Vjiyx3rrr9DHFQ rct=jq=esrc=sfrm=1source=webcd=2cad=rjasqi=2ved=0CDsQFjABurl=http% 3A%2F%2Fnewenergytimes.com%2Fv2%2Flibrary%2F2004%2F2004Focardi-EvidenceOfEle ctromagneticRadiation.pdfei=-NpdUemSBITB4AP364CYBAusg=AFQjCNHu3w5dimV_JIao uNutOQePoXu2Pgsig2=ZCZ6WnU2Vjiyx3rrr9DHFQ I have posted this about a half dozen times so far, but you seem to have a block to it. This experiment shows the reaction with and without gamma radiation On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: From: Axil Axil The reason this claim of W-L theory is ludicrous --- Of course this is not LENR, but it is the model for gamma downshifting, and if you want to assert two distinct miracles - then it is wise to show some other evidence than the very phenomenon you wish to explain - with your outrageous claim. Gamma suppression does not cause LENR; it is accidental to the LENR reaction. However, it is still very important. It is the principle demarcation line between LENR and LENR+. Nonsense. There is no such thing as gamma suppression . It is a complete fabrication of W-L without a shred of evidence AFAIK. if you have the evidence, please show it The LENR reaction emits gammas and this energy release destroys the nuclear active sites. The LENR reactions will soon stop as the NAE are blown apart and cratered. More disinformation. There is no possibility of nano-sized sites stopping gamma radiation. This requires thick lead shielding. On the other hand, LENR+ thermalizes the energy that is produced in the NAE as a secondary mechanism, but this thermalization of the reaction allows the LENR+ reaction to occur over and over again from the same NAE for months on end. There is no evidence for this.
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
In reply to Eric Walker's message of Wed, 3 Apr 2013 20:20:58 -0700: Hi, [snip] [1] http://phys.org/news/2013-04-quarks-dictate-proton.html BTW, compare this to:- http://checkerboard.dnsalias.net/ Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Wed, 3 Apr 2013 23:38:46 -0400: Hi, [snip] The higher the energy, the smaller the body, going down from outer electron shells to individual nucleons and, presumably, quarks. But as the size decreases, the probability of an interaction will no doubt go down in corresponding measure, because the size of the targets decreases as well. So by the time you get to gammas, they will largely pass through a region of interest. For photons of high enough energy, the mean free path generally goes up, meaning they travel farther and farther through the material. Once we're at gammas, I believe a typical metal will be largely transparent to them. This is a false assumption. Nanoplasmoics show strong coupling between light and electrons at 10 to the minus 8 power of the wavelength of light. This same ability to couple gammas to electrons external to the nucleus is probable. The ability of gammas to penetrate various elements can be calculated using a similar approach to that which I recently suggested in regard to neutrons. The appropriate constants are tabularized here:- http://www.nist.gov/pml/data/xraycoef/index.cfm Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Thu, 4 Apr 2013 16:02:17 -0400: Hi, [snip] * Evidence of electromagnetic radiation from Ni-H Systems * http://www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=sfrm=1source=webcd=2cad=rjasqi=2ved=0CDsQFjABurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnewenergytimes.com%2Fv2%2Flibrary%2F2004%2F2004Focardi-EvidenceOfElectromagneticRadiation.pdfei=-NpdUemSBITB4AP364CYBAusg=AFQjCNHu3w5dimV_JIaouNutOQePoXu2Pgsig2=ZCZ6WnU2Vjiyx3rrr9DHFQ I have posted this about a half dozen times so far, but you seem to have a block to it. This experiment shows the reaction with and without gamma radiation BTW there is obviously an error in the legend of Fig. 3. Apparently it should be the same as the legend in Fig. 4, which is correct. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 4 Apr 2013 12:29:42 -0700: Hi, [snip] More disinformation. There is no possibility of nano-sized sites stopping gamma radiation. This requires thick lead shielding. ..I have often wondered if an electron that is within the wavelength of a gamma (i.e. a near field energy transfer) might absorb the energy as kinetic energy. For a 23.8 MeV gamma the wavelength is 52 fm. For a Mills' Hydrino this is too small for even the smallest Hydrino, however if my version is correct, then it should be possible for f/H with a p 32. (This probably won't stand up to much scrutiny, so don't look too hard. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
In reply to Roarty, Francis X's message of Thu, 4 Apr 2013 18:58:33 +: Hi, [snip] Harry, I am ok with COE remaining a law but the convention that HUP can never be tapped needs to be stricken. My point is that the random forces normally cancelled in the macro world become organized by casimir geometry and can provide an exploitable bias from zero point energy. Fran ...organized forces seems to imply a net force acting on the object. You may just have invented Cavorite. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Has anyone looked to see that momentum is conserved in these processes? Dave -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Apr 4, 2013 5:45 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 4 Apr 2013 12:29:42 -0700: Hi, [snip] More disinformation. There is no possibility of nano-sized sites stopping gamma radiation. This requires thick lead shielding. ..I have often wondered if an electron that is within the wavelength of a gamma (i.e. a near field energy transfer) might absorb the energy as kinetic energy. For a 23.8 MeV gamma the wavelength is 52 fm. For a Mills' Hydrino this is too small for even the smallest Hydrino, however if my version is correct, then it should be possible for f/H with a p 32. (This probably won't stand up to much scrutiny, so don't look too hard. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Your inexactitude in thinking is hard to overcome. Let us try another piece of info as follows: When Rossi first stated his demonstrations and the public comments about them, his first few shows were marred by a troublesome condition during startup and shutdown where significant gamma radiation was produced. If you remember, Celani said about the January 14 demo as follows: After various vicissitudes, because the reactor was having major problems, some inner resistors had broken down; Mr. Rossi came out of the room delighted: The reactor has started. Before he came out, a few minutes before, I had independently measured that both the gamma detector and the mini Geiger had hit the top of the scale, whereas the two detectors of electromagnetic interference were not showing anything. This meant that a short but intense emission of gamma radiation had taken place. But while the reactor was in operation, at the demonstration on January 14, no measurable nuclear radiation was detected. Villa wrote: The energy power input and output and gamma radiations were measured before, during and after the active phase of the system, as well as the hydrogen consumption. While a net energy output was observed, no γ excess (with energy above 200 keV has been measured above the natural background level (180 Hz rate in single mode, compared to an expected rate largely in excess of 1 MHz). Rossi eventually fixed this problem by getting his reactor up to operating temperature before startup by using a secondary heater. It was also suspected that Rossi's early reactors would cease to function after 48 hours. This failure was suspected to have caused the DGT-Rossi breakup. This peculiar reactor behavior suggests a separation between the mechanism that causes the LENR reaction and the mechanism that down-shifts the gamma radiation to heat. This behavior leads to the conclusion that there exist two separate and distinct LENR reaction mechanisms that are simultaneously active within the nuclear active zone. Recapitulating, one mechanism drives the LENR reaction and another mitigates the resultant gamma radiation. These two mechanisms may be symbiotic and reinforcing but the gamma mitigation mechanism is not required to startup or maintain the reaction. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: You can't be serious. ** ** These are extraordinarily low radiation counts over long periods. ** ** 35 megajoules of excess heat over 22 days and what? ... a few hundred counts. LOL ** ** This is strong evidence against a direct correlation of radiation to heat - not evidence for a correlation. ** ** Yes, there is evidence of QM reaction, but no one doubts that excess heat will come with QM side effects. ** ** ** ** *From:* Axil Axil ** ** *Evidence of electromagnetic radiation from Ni-H Systems* http://www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=sfrm=1source=webcd=2cad=rjasqi=2ved=0CDsQFjABurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnewenergytimes.com%2Fv2%2Flibrary%2F2004%2F2004Focardi-EvidenceOfElectromagneticRadiation.pdfei=-NpdUemSBITB4AP364CYBAusg=AFQjCNHu3w5dimV_JIaouNutOQePoXu2Pgsig2=ZCZ6WnU2Vjiyx3rrr9DHFQ I have posted this about a half dozen times so far, but you seem to have a block to it. This experiment shows the reaction with and without gamma radiation ** ** On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:** ** *From:* Axil Axil *The reason this claim of W-L theory is ludicrous --- Of course this is not LENR, but it is the model for gamma downshifting, and if you want to assert two distinct miracles - then it is wise to show some other evidence than the very phenomenon you wish to explain - with your outrageous claim. * Gamma suppression does not cause LENR; it is accidental to the LENR reaction. However, it is still very important. It is the principle demarcation line between LENR and LENR+. Nonsense. There is no such thing as gamma suppression ... It is a complete fabrication of W-L without a shred of evidence AFAIK... if you have the evidence, please show it The LENR reaction emits gammas and this energy release destroys the nuclear active sites. The LENR reactions will soon stop as the NAE are blown apart and cratered. More disinformation. There is no possibility of nano-sized sites stopping gamma radiation. This requires thick lead shielding. On the other hand, LENR+ thermalizes the energy that is produced in the NAE as a secondary mechanism, but this thermalization of the reaction allows the LENR+ reaction to occur over and over again from the same NAE for months on end. There is no evidence for this. ** **
RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
From: Axil Your inexactitude in thinking is hard to overcome. Let us try another piece of info as follows: When Rossi first stated his demonstrations and the public comments about them, his first few shows were marred by a troublesome condition during startup and shutdown where significant gamma radiation was produced. If you remember, Celani said about the January 14 demo. The simplest explanation is that Rossi used a radioactive trigger for startup - and then put it back in its cask. No one was allowed to witness Rossi's startup, and the employment of an easily identified radioactive starter like radium - could explain why. At no other time AFAIK - in the later tests, was any radioactivity witnessed. Tests run in Sweden reported no radioactivity in the ash. I would say that it is your gullibility that is hard to overcome. It is incredulous that such a reaction could be a nuclear transmutation of nickel to copper - and yet not leave radioactive ash.
RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
The problem with such a high energy gamma hitting an electron is that the total mass-energy of the target is only 2-3% of the mass-energy of the driver. This slight impediment does not even slow the gamma down very much. There could possibly be pair-production but to imagine that the re-emission was all infrared would probably mean that momentum could not be conserved. How could it? From: David Roberson Has anyone looked to see that momentum is conserved in these processes? Dave -Original Message- From: mixent More disinformation. There is no possibility of nano-sized sites stopping gamma radiation. This requires thick lead shielding. ..I have often wondered if an electron that is within the wavelength of a gamma (i.e. a near field energy transfer) might absorb the energy as kinetic energy. For a 23.8 MeV gamma the wavelength is 52 fm. For a Mills' Hydrino this is too small for even the smallest Hydrino, however if my version is correct, then it should be possible for f/H with a p 32.
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
That is my fear Jones. A photon has a large energy to momentum ratio as compared to an electron. I would expect to see Compton reflection of the high energy gamma as it collides with electrons. It is very presumptuous to assume that the gammas will be absorbed quickly. Does anyone see how both energy and momentum can be conserved during a collision between a high energy gamma and any number of electrons? I suppose that one can look back at the point of origin of the gamma and mentally reverse the process. In that case the nucleus recoiled with much less energy than the gamma while it by definition had to conserve momentum. Perhaps a large cloud of coupled electrons that scattered in every direction carrying off portions of the energy might be able to absorb the total energy. The random directions of the dispersion cloud of electrons could balance the momentum portion of the equation if a miracle occurred. Now I know I am a heretic with an overactive imagination! Dave -Original Message- From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Apr 4, 2013 7:04 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! The problem with such ahigh energy gamma hitting an electron is that the total mass-energy of thetarget is only 2-3% of the mass-energy of the driver. This slight impediment doesnot even slow the gamma down very much. There could possibly be pair-productionbut to imagine that the re-emission was all infrared would probably mean thatmomentum could not be conserved. How could it? From:David Roberson Has anyone looked to see that momentum is conserved in theseprocesses? Dave -OriginalMessage- From: mixent More disinformation. There is no possibility of nano-sized sites stopping gamma radiation. This requires thick lead shielding. ..I have often wondered if an electron that is within the wavelength of a gamma (i.e. a near field energy transfer) might absorb the energy as kinetic energy. For a 23.8 MeV gamma the wavelength is 52 fm. For a Mills' Hydrino this is too small for even the smallest Hydrino, however if my version is correct, then it should be possible for f/H with a p 32.
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
The recent inventions of Rossi do not have enough shielding to stop gammas at 511 keV. I also have not seen him mention that this is a problem anymore and I hope that they are not emitted in large numbers since that would make home use of his device problematic. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Apr 4, 2013 7:16 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! Rossi has consistently refused to provide details of what is going on inside the E-Cat reactor, but he has mentioned that gamma rays have been detected. In a video interview when asked about whether the E-Cat was a ‘cold fusion’ technology he said, “we have found traces of fusion because we have found 511 kev gamma rays at the output, which is the emission of a positron and an electron, and a positron is the product of a proton turning into a neutron, so we have some kind of fusion inside, but I do not think this is the main energy source.” Exactly how these gamma rays are shielded is not clear, but Rossi has mentioned in the past that lead is used. I think you should dream up another source for occasional gamma emissions to support your illusion other than radium. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 6:59 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: From:Axil Your inexactitudein thinking is hard to overcome. Let us try another piece of info as follows: When Rossi first stated his demonstrations and thepublic comments about them, his first few shows were marred by a troublesomecondition during startup and shutdown where significant gamma radiation wasproduced… Ifyou remember, Celani said about the January 14 demo… The simplest explanationis that Rossi used a radioactive trigger for startup - and then put it back inits cask. No one was allowed towitness Rossi’s startup, and the employment of an easily identified radioactivestarter like radium - could explain why. At no other time AFAIK -in the later tests, was any radioactivity witnessed. Tests run in Swedenreported no radioactivity in the ash. I would say that it isyour gullibility that is hard to overcome. It is incredulous that sucha reaction could be a nuclear transmutation of nickel to copper - and yet not leaveradioactive ash.
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:33 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote: Why, in some nuclear interactions, do two gammas go shooting off in OPPOSITE directions??? Where is the physical model that explains the REASON for these basic observations??? ***Here's the physical model I proposed here on Vortex when you look at a balloon popping in slow motion, it does not initially emit its energy in all directions at the first microsecond. Its release of energy goes in the direction that the penetration came from initially. If the balloon pop were due to 2 balloons banging together forcefully, the initial release would be right where the 2 balloons collided. Similarly, when 2 atoms collide and fuse, I think their energy release is not 360 degrees, but is perpendicular to the direction of the plane where the 2 atoms meet. It is initially in only 1 direction, not all directions. That release of energy will have a high degree of probability due to its geometry of initial direction, to be directly in the path of atoms on the lattice. But in hot fusion, those 50,000 balloons all slam into each other at varying different angles, leaving the impression that the initial energy release is initially 360 degrees rather than in one direction. http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg76597.html
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
In the case where a positron and electron annihilate each other the conservation of momentum requires that the two photons be emitted in exact opposition and with exactly the same energy. Perhaps it is possible to assume that if the two opposing photons are observed then a process of this type occurs. Dave -Original Message- From: Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Apr 4, 2013 8:07 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:33 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Why, in some nuclear interactions, do two gammas go shooting off in OPPOSITE directions??? Where is the physical model that explains the REASON for these basic observations??? ***Here's the physical model I proposed here on Vortex when you look at a balloon popping in slow motion, it does not initially emit its energy in all directions at the first microsecond. Its release of energy goes in the direction that the penetration came from initially. If the balloon pop were due to 2 balloons banging together forcefully, the initial release would be right where the 2 balloons collided. Similarly, when 2 atoms collide and fuse, I think their energy release is not 360 degrees, but is perpendicular to the direction of the plane where the 2 atoms meet. It is initially in only 1 direction, not all directions. That release of energy will have a high degree of probability due to its geometry of initial direction, to be directly in the path of atoms on the lattice. But in hot fusion, those 50,000 balloons all slam into each other at varying different angles, leaving the impression that the initial energy release is initially 360 degrees rather than in one direction. http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg76597.html
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 7:54 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The recent inventions of Rossi do not have enough shielding to stop gammas at 511 keV. I also have not seen him mention that this is a problem anymore and I hope that they are not emitted in large numbers since that would make home use of his device problematic. Dave Lately Rossi has been saying a home version of the Ecat is years away although he doesn't really say why. Harry
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Fran, I think this would require a violation of the second law of thermodynamics. Harry On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: Harry, I am ok with COE remaining a law but the “convention” that HUP can never be tapped needs to be stricken. My point is that the random forces normally cancelled in the macro world become organized by casimir geometry and can provide an exploitable bias from zero point energy. Fran ** ** *From:* Harry Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Thursday, April 04, 2013 2:48 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! ** ** It might be possible to develop realistic models which explain these things if CoE is demoted from a law to a convention or should a law always take precedence over intelligibility and experience? Harry ** ** On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:33 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: So, out of all the erudite Vorts, no one can answer the following simple questions: Why are the UP-spin quarks on OPPOSITE sides of the proton from the DOWN-spin quarks??? Why do... All spin directions collapse on one or the OPPOSITE direction depending on the measured photon polarization. ??? Why, in some nuclear interactions, do two gammas go shooting off in OPPOSITE directions??? Where is the physical model that explains the REASON for these basic observations??? Why is the magnetic field PERPENDICULAR to the E-field??? It's all related... -Mark (the reluctant hijackee) Iverson
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:54 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: To put it in simple terms, the presence of the spectator nucleus provides the 4He, something to push off against, like a swimmer pushing off against the end of the pool. The spectator nucleus also gets some of the kinetic energy, IOW it moves away a little when pushed. It reminds me of the action of a bullet against the rear part of the chamber of a gun. One implication appears to be that you would see 4He traveling twice as fast in a given direction near where a reaction has taken place than you would in normal d+d plasma fusion. It is easy to get an intuitive sense of how the fusion would play out and how there would be no gamma. I wonder why this lead is not pursued further. Eric
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: You can’t be serious. Yes, I think that's the point. I had a friend in high school who would say the most absurd things just to get a reaction out of people. Eric
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 8:00 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: One implication appears to be that you would see 4He traveling twice as fast in a given direction near where a reaction has taken place than you would in normal d+d plasma fusion. Let me emend that -- in d+d plasma fusion, you have the three branches: 1. d+d → 4He + ɣ (rare) 2. d+d → 3He + n (50 percent) 3. d+d → t + p (50 percent) In (1), there is a 4He, and it is not traveling very quickly. So the 4He in the proposed branch with the spectator, (4), say: 4. d+d + M → 4He + M, where M is on both sides of the reaction (and doesn't undergo a change), this 4He would be travelling much faster than the one in (1). It would be traveling on the order of twice as fast as the heavier particles in (2) or (3), in an approximate sense. Eric
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:00 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:54 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: To put it in simple terms, the presence of the spectator nucleus provides the 4He, something to push off against, like a swimmer pushing off against the end of the pool. The spectator nucleus also gets some of the kinetic energy, IOW it moves away a little when pushed. It reminds me of the action of a bullet against the rear part of the chamber of a gun. One implication appears to be that you would see 4He traveling twice as fast in a given direction near where a reaction has taken place than you would in normal d+d plasma fusion. It is easy to get an intuitive sense of how the fusion would play out and how there would be no gamma. I wonder why this lead is not pursued further. http://physics.aps.org/story/v24/st12 Published September 25, 2009 | Phys. Rev. Focus 24, 12 (2009) | DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevFocus.24.12 Researchers detected the recoil motion of a bead when fluorescent molecules on its surface began emitting photons. Radiation pressure-the force light exerts on matter-is so slight that it's usually evident only in the atomic world or in the vacuum of space. Now a pair of studies published in the 27 February Physical Review Letters and the October Physical Review E suggests that a common laser-and-microscope technique is sensitive enough to measure the recoil felt by a micron-sized silica bead emitting light from its surface. Researchers used lasers to trap a bead and measure the forces acting on it, while simultaneously recording the light generated by molecules coating the bead's surface. They report that the forces acting on the bead were correlated with the intensity of emitted light, as would be expected if emitted photons were nudging a bead back and forth like the exhaust from tiny thrusters. The experiments used a type of photonic force microscopy (PFM), which is used to measure forces acting on microscopic beads suspended in liquid. PFM specialists first isolate a bead in the focus of a laser beam, creating an optical trap. The bead then acts like a tethered buoy. Liquid molecules randomly nudge it, but the trapping laser exerts a spring-like force that draws the bead back to its starting point. By tracking the position of the bead using a separate laser, researchers can measure the size of the bead's jostling motions in the trap, which tells them the strength of the fluctuating forces acting on it. Some researchers have observed signs of radiation from the laser alone pressing on trapped beads, but those beads were absorbing light rather than emitting it. A team led by Dmitri Petrov of the Institute of Photonic Sciences in Barcelona, Spain, wanted to see if PFM was sensitive enough to pick up the recoil of beads trapped in a solution of photon-emitting molecules that adhere to a bead's surface. To maximize the rate of photon emission, the team dotted its beads with clusters of silver atoms, mimicking metal nano-spheres that have been found to enhance the glow of nearby dye molecules. For their first experiment, published in February, the researchers trapped two-micron-wide beads in a solution of the dye crystal violet. The dye molecules convert a small amount of incoming light energy into atomic vibrations and then emit light of slightly longer wavelength (Raman scattering). The correlation was clear: when the team switched on the pump laser to activate the dye, the bead's displacement, averaged over many fluctuations, increased, corresponding to forces of up to 240 femtonewtons (1 femtonewton = 10 -15 newtons). The researchers calculated the power of light emitted from the bead at 1 microwatt, which is quite amazing, says Satish Rao, a post-doctoral fellow in the Barcelona lab. No one else has been able to say how much light really comes off this material. In the follow-up experiment, Petrov and his colleagues tracked the bleaching, or gradual fading, of the fluorescent molecule rhodamine, which glows yellow under green light. In photobleacing, fluorescent molecules fade strongly after a few tens of seconds. Accordingly, when the team focused a green laser on the bead, it experienced a sudden force of about 300 femtonewtons, which quickly plummeted along with the fluorescent light intensity. On the face of it, it's pretty fantastic, says optical trapper David Grier of New York University. The recoil force of photons is the basis for laser cooling of atoms and molecules. Seeing it for a macroscopic object strikes me as something of a tour de force, he says. Rao says this type of PFM could offer a more precise way of measuring the efficiency and intensity of other light-emitting molecules, including the bleaching of fluorescent dyes. Lukas Novotny, a nano-optics researcher at Rochester University in New York state, doesn't see any immediate applications. For me the beauty is really the possibility of measuring light through a
RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
From: Eric Walker One implication appears to be that you would see 4He traveling twice as fast in a given direction near where a reaction has taken place than you would in normal d+d plasma fusion. Let me emend that -- in d+d plasma fusion, you have the three branches: 1. d+d → 4He + ɣ (rare) 2. d+d → 3He + n (50 percent) 3. d+d → t + p (50 percent) In (1), there is a 4He, and it is not traveling very quickly. One of the better hypotheses for deuterium reactions where helium-4 only is seen as ash is Takahashi’s tetrahedral condensate http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/Theories/TakahashiTheory.shtml Since you have two alphas carrying away the energy - and no gammas, this theory is cleaner than many of the others. As a condensate, he avoids the 4-particle reaction … kind of…
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Axil I didn't know that was the focus of Peter Hagelstein's work. However, he says he adds a weird kind of loss to his model. Any idea what he means? BTW, It occured to me that a failed model, i.e. a classically unstable model, could also produce a similar result, where a given amount of energy is emitted continuously over a certain range of frequencies instead of being emitted all at once as a gamma photon at one frequency. Harry On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:01 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: MIT Prof. Peter L. Hagelstein stated in an interview as follows: So after a lot of years of work on it, about 10 years ago we found a model that actually did something like that. It's remarkable! It turns out in the physics literature, there's a model called the 'Spin-Boson Model' that's basically a fundamental quantum mechanics model, so you have a harmonic oscillator and you hook it up to what's called a two level system — that's just an idealisation, it's a little bit of physics having to do with two of the energy levels in a more complicated system. But it makes the math really simple, so the resulting model is one you can analyze to death. People have studied that model now for between 40-60 years, depending on how you count them. This model predicts the 30 or 50 fold, or the ability to break up a two level system quantum into, for example, into nearly 30 individual quanta. Axil says: Let us now address another quantum optics model describing polaritons: The Jaynes–Cummings model. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaynes%E2%80%93Cummings_model Starting at the very bottom, the most basic underlying model that teaches us how waves/particles can resonate is the Jaynes–Cummings model (JCM). It describes the system of a two-level atom interacting with a quantized mode of an optical cavity, with or without the presence of light (in the form of a bath of electromagnetic radiation that can cause spontaneous emission and absorption). MIT Prof. Peter L. Hagelstein continues in the interview as follows: What we found is the way that the model does it, it can do it, but it's hindered. There's a destructive interference effect that goes on, that makes the effect relatively weak. What we found, is that if you added a weird kind of loss to the model— a loss that you would expect in the cold fusion scenario. The new model, with loss, is much more relevant to the physical situation called fusion than otherwise. But this weird kind of loss, it breaks the destructive interference, and it makes this energy exchange go orders of magnitude faster. And instead of being a relatively weak effect, it's now a very strong, it's a dominant effect. This model is exactly what you need! It's a microscopic engine to take big quanta and chop it up into little tiny quanta. So that's what we've found. Axil says: This is Fano interference active in an optical cavity to localize EMF radiation to the near field by eliminated far field emissions. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:40 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: * MIT Prof. Peter L. Hagelstein stated in an interview as follows: * So there are no significant amount of neutrons, there's no fast electrons, there's no gamma rays. There's nothing you might expect if it were a more normal nuclear reaction process. The basic statement here is that — if it's real and if it's nuclear... the argument for it being nuclear is that there's 4He (helium-4) observed in experiments, roughly one 4He for every 24 MeV of energy that's created. So what you need in the way of a theoretical model, basically a new kind of mechanism that doesn't work like the old Rutherford reaction picture that nuclear physics is based on. So that's the basic problem that I've been working on for a great many years. The big problem is one that has to do with the quantum mechanics issue. The nuclear energy comes in a big energy quantum, and if it didn't get broken up, then the big energy quantum would get expressed as energetic particles, as normally happens in nuclear reactions. So the approach we've taken is that we've said the only conceivable route for making sense of these observations at all, is that the big energy quanta have to get sliced and diced up into a very very large number if much smaller energy quanta. The much larger number is on the order of several hundred million. In NMR physics and optical physics, people are familiar with breaking up a large quantum into perhaps 30 smaller pieces, you could argue that there are some experiments where you could argue that maybe that numbers as high as 100 or so. It's unprecedented that you could take an MeV quantum and chop it up into bite sized pieces that are 10s of meV. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:15 AM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.comwrote: If a bunch of low energy photons is equivalent to the energy of 1 high energy gamma photon, why can't a particular nuclear reaction sometimes produce a
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: It seems a bit more logical to suggest that the lack of gammas can be better explained by the lack of the kind of nuclear reaction that produces gammas. The most prevalent nuclear reaction in the Universe, reversible proton fusion, produces no gammas. Shouldn't we be taking a closer look at RPF? Wikipedia says proton-proton fusion produces a neutrino and a positron. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton%E2%80%93proton_chain_reaction Won't this result in an electron-positron anihilation and two gamma rays? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron%E2%80%93positron_annihilation Harry
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
A Fano interference is an Interference between a background and a resonant scattering process that produces the asymmetric line-shape. In a lattice, the background frequency is infrared heat, the resonant scattering process is dipole hole/electron oscillation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fano_resonance Fano interference blocks EMF radiation out of the cavity, and redirects it inward to focus on the inside of the cavity. Fano resonance is a means to concentrate EMF into a sub-nanometer volume by imposing a dark mode into the EMF. The weird kind of loss is the loss of far field EMF radiation. This process produces EMF that are near or at the atomic scale in a ultra small volume Hot Spot - aka NAE. For more info see “Spaser” The BEC of the spaser is what thermalizes the gammas see *Jaynes-Cummings-Hubbard (JCH) model* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaynes%E2%80%93Cummings%E2%80%93Hubbard_model On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 12:43 AM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Axil I didn't know that was the focus of Peter Hagelstein's work. However, he says he adds a weird kind of loss to his model. Any idea what he means? BTW, It occured to me that a failed model, i.e. a classically unstable model, could also produce a similar result, where a given amount of energy is emitted continuously over a certain range of frequencies instead of being emitted all at once as a gamma photon at one frequency. Harry On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:01 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: MIT Prof. Peter L. Hagelstein stated in an interview as follows: So after a lot of years of work on it, about 10 years ago we found a model that actually did something like that. It's remarkable! It turns out in the physics literature, there's a model called the 'Spin-Boson Model' that's basically a fundamental quantum mechanics model, so you have a harmonic oscillator and you hook it up to what's called a two level system — that's just an idealisation, it's a little bit of physics having to do with two of the energy levels in a more complicated system. But it makes the math really simple, so the resulting model is one you can analyze to death. People have studied that model now for between 40-60 years, depending on how you count them. This model predicts the 30 or 50 fold, or the ability to break up a two level system quantum into, for example, into nearly 30 individual quanta. Axil says: Let us now address another quantum optics model describing polaritons: The Jaynes–Cummings model. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaynes%E2%80%93Cummings_model Starting at the very bottom, the most basic underlying model that teaches us how waves/particles can resonate is the Jaynes–Cummings model (JCM). It describes the system of a two-level atom interacting with a quantized mode of an optical cavity, with or without the presence of light (in the form of a bath of electromagnetic radiation that can cause spontaneous emission and absorption). MIT Prof. Peter L. Hagelstein continues in the interview as follows: What we found is the way that the model does it, it can do it, but it's hindered. There's a destructive interference effect that goes on, that makes the effect relatively weak. What we found, is that if you added a weird kind of loss to the model— a loss that you would expect in the cold fusion scenario. The new model, with loss, is much more relevant to the physical situation called fusion than otherwise. But this weird kind of loss, it breaks the destructive interference, and it makes this energy exchange go orders of magnitude faster. And instead of being a relatively weak effect, it's now a very strong, it's a dominant effect. This model is exactly what you need! It's a microscopic engine to take big quanta and chop it up into little tiny quanta. So that's what we've found. Axil says: This is Fano interference active in an optical cavity to localize EMF radiation to the near field by eliminated far field emissions. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:40 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: * MIT Prof. Peter L. Hagelstein stated in an interview as follows: * So there are no significant amount of neutrons, there's no fast electrons, there's no gamma rays. There's nothing you might expect if it were a more normal nuclear reaction process. The basic statement here is that — if it's real and if it's nuclear... the argument for it being nuclear is that there's 4He (helium-4) observed in experiments, roughly one 4He for every 24 MeV of energy that's created. So what you need in the way of a theoretical model, basically a new kind of mechanism that doesn't work like the old Rutherford reaction picture that nuclear physics is based on. So that's the basic problem that I've been working on for a great many years. The big problem is one that has to do with the quantum mechanics issue. The nuclear energy comes in a big energy quantum, and if it didn't get broken up, then the big energy
RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Mark, Some of us only see a duck as a downer (cough, cough) Anyway, and from one fringe-of-the-fringe LENR perspective, this has strong force interaction written all over it, whether it is obvious to W-L proponents or not. RPF(reversible proton fusion) would certainly interact with its surrounds via spin (magnons) and would shuttle from one state (Helium-2) to another (two protons) with only quark interactions to show for the experience. The net energy deposited (or removed) is small per event, but happens at the rate of blackbody phonon vibration (mid terahertz). Thus even micro(eV) energy change per event can get amplified rapidly, if and when asymmetry is engineered into the reaction. ... hmmm... I'm now thinking of calling quark color-change as seen in RPF as the quark-quack reaction ... nothing there but spin, so to speak... thus giving detractors the satisfaction of calling the theory as quack-derived ... yet all the while, the other LENR theories are falling like ducks ... simply due to the obvious: not being able to adequately explain lack of gammas. In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. Jones From: MarkI-ZeroPoint The evidence is piling up that subatomic 'particles' are dipole-like structures, and likely a type of dipole oscillation... Looks, sounds, feels and quacks just like one... ;-) HTSITYS, -Mark [darn pics made msg too large so had to delete the piccys] --- Researchers suggest one can affect an atom's spin by adjusting the way it is measured http://phys.org/news/2013-03-affect-atom-adjusting.html [GO to website to see picture] attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. I agree with you Jones. The only way to explain this process is to assume that the gammas are not emitted at any time and that the energy from the reactions is shared among the atoms surrounding it. I have been looking for evidence that fusion can take place in the compact environment of a cold fusion NAE in a manner that is very different from that occurring within a plasma. The system difference is evident and I have not seem papers describing known fusion events recorded within a metal matrix where gammas are emitted at the expected levels. I proposed an experiment where a palladium cube loaded with deuterium is subjected to a flux of muons as a way to induce conditions that are known to result in fusion. If this does not result in the release of a number of gammas, then evidence is obtained that fusion within a metal matrix is different than that occurring within a gas. Of course, muon induced fusion might behave differently than normal LENR activity. The more clues that we obtain about the behavior of LENR, the faster we can understand the mechanism. Dave -Original Message- From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Apr 3, 2013 10:33 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! Mark, Some of us only see a duck as a downer (cough, cough) Anyway, and from one fringe-of-the-fringe LENR perspective, this has strong force interaction written all over it, whether it is obvious to W-L proponents or not. RPF(reversible proton fusion) would certainly interact with its surrounds via spin (magnons) and would shuttle from one state (Helium-2) to another (two protons) with only quark interactions to show for the experience. The net energy deposited (or removed) is small per event, but happens at the rate of blackbody phonon vibration (mid terahertz). Thus even micro(eV) energy change per event can get amplified rapidly, if and when asymmetry is engineered into the reaction. ... hmmm... I'm now thinking of calling quark color-change as seen in RPF as the quark-quack reaction ... nothing there but spin, so to speak... thus giving detractors the satisfaction of calling the theory as quack-derived ... yet all the while, the other LENR theories are falling like ducks ... simply due to the obvious: not being able to adequately explain lack of gammas. In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. Jones From: MarkI-ZeroPoint The evidence is piling up that subatomic 'particles' are dipole-like structures, and likely a type of dipole oscillation... Looks, sounds, feels and quacks just like one... ;-) HTSITYS, -Mark [darn pics made msg too large so had to delete the piccys] --- Researchers suggest one can affect an atom's spin by adjusting the way it is measured http://phys.org/news/2013-03-affect-atom-adjusting.html [GO to website to see picture]
RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
From: David Roberson In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. I agree with you Jones. The only way to explain this process is to assume that the gammas are not emitted at any time and that the energy from the reactions is shared among the atoms surrounding it Then you will get a kick out of the story from Krivit. LOL - April 2nd. He was a day late and a dollar short on this one, but Larsen's attempt to answer questions about why deadly gamma radiation is not emitted in LENR is juvenile at best. The proponents of this BS should be ashamed. image001.png
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
David, Gammas that never happened might be hidden by relativistic effects.. how much Gamma radiation would the near C paradox twin see? Or more appropriately how much radiation would a twin standing on an event horizon see? What does time dilation do the radiation? The large displacement of an equivalent acceleration gravity well or the near luminal speeds of a spacecraft are needed to compress spacetime in a Haisch- Rueda type theory [car accelerating into rainfall].. the suppression afforded by the Casimir geometry subtracts from said Haisch-Rueda rainfall analogy making a much quicker cheaper way to create a difference in what Puthoff calls vacuum pressure[rainfall], [ether] ..it is the same Pythagorean relationship between time and space without the energy requirements but in a negative direction. The Pythagorean elationship also brings into argument the radiation path since the the spatial -temporal axis perceived by the relativistic protons are out of phase with the spatial- temporal axis we are experiencing here in the macro [unsupressed] world outside the NAE. Would the radiation propagate out away from a reaction forever trapped in that inertial frame shunted past us along what we perceive as the temporal axis or does the radiation experience a lorentzian translation as the compression mitigates with distance from the confinement? Fran From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 11:07 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. I agree with you Jones. The only way to explain this process is to assume that the gammas are not emitted at any time and that the energy from the reactions is shared among the atoms surrounding it. I have been looking for evidence that fusion can take place in the compact environment of a cold fusion NAE in a manner that is very different from that occurring within a plasma. The system difference is evident and I have not seem papers describing known fusion events recorded within a metal matrix where gammas are emitted at the expected levels. I proposed an experiment where a palladium cube loaded with deuterium is subjected to a flux of muons as a way to induce conditions that are known to result in fusion. If this does not result in the release of a number of gammas, then evidence is obtained that fusion within a metal matrix is different than that occurring within a gas. Of course, muon induced fusion might behave differently than normal LENR activity. The more clues that we obtain about the behavior of LENR, the faster we can understand the mechanism. Dave -Original Message- From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.netmailto:jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Apr 3, 2013 10:33 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! Mark, Some of us only see a duck as a downer (cough, cough) Anyway, and from one fringe-of-the-fringe LENR perspective, this has strong force interaction written all over it, whether it is obvious to W-L proponents or not. RPF(reversible proton fusion) would certainly interact with its surrounds via spin (magnons) and would shuttle from one state (Helium-2) to another (two protons) with only quark interactions to show for the experience. The net energy deposited (or removed) is small per event, but happens at the rate of blackbody phonon vibration (mid terahertz). Thus even micro(eV) energy change per event can get amplified rapidly, if and when asymmetry is engineered into the reaction. ... hmmm... I'm now thinking of calling quark color-change as seen in RPF as the quark-quack reaction ... nothing there but spin, so to speak... thus giving detractors the satisfaction of calling the theory as quack-derived ... yet all the while, the other LENR theories are falling like ducks ... simply due to the obvious: not being able to adequately explain lack of gammas. In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. Jones From: MarkI-ZeroPoint The evidence is piling up that subatomic 'particles' are dipole-like structures, and likely a type of dipole oscillation... Looks, sounds, feels and quacks just like one... ;-) HTSITYS, -Mark [darn pics made msg too large so had to delete the piccys] --- Researchers suggest one can affect an atom's spin by adjusting the way it is
RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
From: David Roberson . I proposed an experiment where a palladium cube loaded with deuterium is subjected to a flux of muons as a way to induce conditions that are known to result in fusion Note the date on this: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=vq=cache:mmABHsKpSakJ:www.fulviofrisone.c om/attachments/article/358/Reactor%2520Prospects%2520of%2520Deuterium%2520an d.pdf+hl=engl=uspid=blsrcid=ADGEEShgMKArI-c0HHn-qv3IHBYq1AK690ODqkoexzYt gkucApI4uZPwV4BgKDkjb2rmPQgch-1bRguh6YdXDPjiQRWFvwKrMbDdDcXDA6SpGOwmGNXNG2Bw Z24hck0ST43lkCF7FLBTsig=AHIEtbTU_zlQowEKT3l-Q9OPwWvA15Ve1Q q=cache:mmABHsKpSakJ:www.fulviofrisone.com/attachments/article/358/Reactor% 2520Prospects%2520of%2520Deuterium%2520and.pdf+hl=engl=uspid=blsrcid=ADG EEShgMKArI-c0HHn-qv3IHBYq1AK690ODqkoexzYtgkucApI4uZPwV4BgKDkjb2rmPQgch-1bRgu h6YdXDPjiQRWFvwKrMbDdDcXDA6SpGOwmGNXNG2BwZ24hck0ST43lkCF7FLBTsig=AHIEtbTU_z lQowEKT3l-Q9OPwWvA15Ve1Q
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Jones said: “In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all.” It has been observed that Gamma radiation occurs sometimes in a LENR reaction and under other conditions, it does not; gamma energy transfer is conditional in a LENR reaction. A condition in the LENR reaction affects the formation of gammas. Gamma formation or lack of it is not central to the cause of the LENR reaction, it is accidental to it. When Gamma radiation appears, the NAE is destroyed and the LENR reaction stops. When no Gammas are produced, the NAE is preserved as active. Cheers:Axil On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Mark, Some of us only see a duck as a downer (cough, cough) Anyway, and from one fringe-of-the-fringe LENR perspective, this has strong force interaction written all over it, whether it is obvious to W-L proponents or not. RPF(reversible proton fusion) would certainly interact with its surrounds via spin (magnons) and would shuttle from one state (Helium-2) to another (two protons) with only quark interactions to show for the experience. The net energy deposited (or removed) is small per event, but happens at the rate of blackbody phonon vibration (mid terahertz). Thus even micro(eV) energy change per event can get amplified rapidly, if and when asymmetry is engineered into the reaction. ... hmmm... I'm now thinking of calling quark color-change as seen in RPF as the quark-quack reaction ... nothing there but spin, so to speak... thus giving detractors the satisfaction of calling the theory as quack-derived ... yet all the while, the other LENR theories are falling like ducks ... simply due to the obvious: not being able to adequately explain lack of gammas. In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. Jones From: MarkI-ZeroPoint The evidence is piling up that subatomic 'particles' are dipole-like structures, and likely a type of dipole oscillation... Looks, sounds, feels and quacks just like one... ;-) HTSITYS, -Mark [darn pics made msg too large so had to delete the piccys] --- Researchers suggest one can affect an atom's spin by adjusting the way it is measured http://phys.org/news/2013-03-affect-atom-adjusting.html [GO to website to see picture]
RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Dave stated: . and that the energy from the reactions is shared among the atoms surrounding it. I have been looking for evidence that fusion can take place in the compact environment of a cold fusion NAE in a manner that is very different from that occurring within a plasma. When one looks at subatomic particles as dipolar oscillations, and within the NAE, all those oscillations being aligned and IN-PHASE, they will serve as energy sinks for a specific wavelength of energy. Thus, the amount of energy that would have been emitted in a gamma is distributed as smaller packets amongst the large number of IN-phase oscillators. This all reminds me of a PhysOrg article I mentioned a few years ago where the scientists had isolated two atoms, side by side, and cooled to near 0K. they could watch as one of the atoms remained completely still, while the other would wiggle, because it had a quantum of heat energy and thus, [my conclusion] the internal oscillators were out-of-balance, which causes the entire atom to 'shake'. What was interesting is that they could do something (don't remember what) that would cause that quantum of heat to xfer from the shaking atom to the still one and, you guessed it, the one that was still was now shaking and the former holder of the quantum of heat was now still. Back to Dave's statement. Does the gamma get emitted, but then immediately absorbed by the 'Collective' oscillations, or is it a direct xfer of quanta of energy as explained above? In either case, whatever the exact conditions that are required, it would seem that those conditions result in BOTH new low-energy nuclear processes AND an energy sink which (almost entirely) favors coupling into lattice vibrations instead of emission of energetic particles. -mark From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 8:07 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. I agree with you Jones. The only way to explain this process is to assume that the gammas are not emitted at any time and that the energy from the reactions is shared among the atoms surrounding it. I have been looking for evidence that fusion can take place in the compact environment of a cold fusion NAE in a manner that is very different from that occurring within a plasma. The system difference is evident and I have not seem papers describing known fusion events recorded within a metal matrix where gammas are emitted at the expected levels. I proposed an experiment where a palladium cube loaded with deuterium is subjected to a flux of muons as a way to induce conditions that are known to result in fusion. If this does not result in the release of a number of gammas, then evidence is obtained that fusion within a metal matrix is different than that occurring within a gas. Of course, muon induced fusion might behave differently than normal LENR activity. The more clues that we obtain about the behavior of LENR, the faster we can understand the mechanism. Dave -Original Message- From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Apr 3, 2013 10:33 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! Mark, Some of us only see a duck as a downer (cough, cough) Anyway, and from one fringe-of-the-fringe LENR perspective, this has strong force interaction written all over it, whether it is obvious to W-L proponents or not. RPF(reversible proton fusion) would certainly interact with its surrounds via spin (magnons) and would shuttle from one state (Helium-2) to another (two protons) with only quark interactions to show for the experience. The net energy deposited (or removed) is small per event, but happens at the rate of blackbody phonon vibration (mid terahertz). Thus even micro(eV) energy change per event can get amplified rapidly, if and when asymmetry is engineered into the reaction. ... hmmm... I'm now thinking of calling quark color-change as seen in RPF as the quark-quack reaction ... nothing there but spin, so to speak... thus giving detractors the satisfaction of calling the theory as quack-derived ... yet all the while, the other LENR theories are falling like ducks ... simply due to the obvious: not being able to adequately explain lack of gammas. In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. Jones From: MarkI-ZeroPoint The evidence is piling up that subatomic 'particles' are dipole-like structures, and likely a type of dipole oscillation...
RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Jones: I don't think you're seeing the significance of my posting... I guess I didn't do a good job of expressing my point. WHY OPPOSITE Why are the UP-spin quarks on OPPOSITE sides of the nucleus from the DOWN-spin quarks??? [ I would propose that both are a dipole-like oscillation, just 180deg out of phase] Why do... All spin directions collapse on one or the OPPOSITE direction depending on the measured photon polarization. ??? [this is the quote under one of the pics from the article] Why, in some nuclear interactions, do two gammas go shooting off in OPPOSITE directions Where is the physical model that explains the REASON why these observations involve OPPOSITEs Is antimatter everywhere (because it's simply the other HALF of the oscillation), but our measurement apparatus only detects one half of the oscillation and sees that as 'matter'? Why is the magnetic field PERPENDICULAR to the E-field??? It's all related... -Mark _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 7:33 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! Mark, Some of us only see a duck as a downer (cough, cough) Anyway, and from one fringe-of-the-fringe LENR perspective, this has strong force interaction written all over it, whether it is obvious to W-L proponents or not. RPF(reversible proton fusion) would certainly interact with its surrounds via spin (magnons) and would shuttle from one state (Helium-2) to another (two protons) with only quark interactions to show for the experience. The net energy deposited (or removed) is small per event, but happens at the rate of blackbody phonon vibration (mid terahertz). Thus even micro(eV) energy change per event can get amplified rapidly, if and when asymmetry is engineered into the reaction. ... hmmm... I'm now thinking of calling quark color-change as seen in RPF as the quark-quack reaction ... nothing there but spin, so to speak... thus giving detractors the satisfaction of calling the theory as quack-derived ... yet all the while, the other LENR theories are falling like ducks ... simply due to the obvious: not being able to adequately explain lack of gammas. In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. Jones From: MarkI-ZeroPoint The evidence is piling up that subatomic 'particles' are dipole-like structures, and likely a type of dipole oscillation... Looks, sounds, feels and quacks just like one... ;-) HTSITYS, -Mark [darn pics made msg too large so had to delete the piccys] --- Researchers suggest one can affect an atom's spin by adjusting the way it is measured http://phys.org/news/2013-03-affect-atom-adjusting.html [GO to website to see picture] attachment: winmail.dat
RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
correction: Why are the UP-spin quarks on OPPOSITE sides of the nucleus from the DOWN-spin quarks??? should be: Why are the UP-spin quarks on OPPOSITE sides of the PROTON from the DOWN-spin quarks??? -mark _ From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 10:19 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! Jones: I don't think you're seeing the significance of my posting... I guess I didn't do a good job of expressing my point. WHY OPPOSITE Why are the UP-spin quarks on OPPOSITE sides of the nucleus from the DOWN-spin quarks??? [ I would propose that both are a dipole-like oscillation, just 180deg out of phase] Why do... All spin directions collapse on one or the OPPOSITE direction depending on the measured photon polarization. ??? [this is the quote under one of the pics from the article] Why, in some nuclear interactions, do two gammas go shooting off in OPPOSITE directions Where is the physical model that explains the REASON why these observations involve OPPOSITEs Is antimatter everywhere (because it's simply the other HALF of the oscillation), but our measurement apparatus only detects one half of the oscillation and sees that as 'matter'? Why is the magnetic field PERPENDICULAR to the E-field??? It's all related... -Mark _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 7:33 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! Mark, Some of us only see a duck as a downer (cough, cough) Anyway, and from one fringe-of-the-fringe LENR perspective, this has strong force interaction written all over it, whether it is obvious to W-L proponents or not. RPF(reversible proton fusion) would certainly interact with its surrounds via spin (magnons) and would shuttle from one state (Helium-2) to another (two protons) with only quark interactions to show for the experience. The net energy deposited (or removed) is small per event, but happens at the rate of blackbody phonon vibration (mid terahertz). Thus even micro(eV) energy change per event can get amplified rapidly, if and when asymmetry is engineered into the reaction. ... hmmm... I'm now thinking of calling quark color-change as seen in RPF as the quark-quack reaction ... nothing there but spin, so to speak... thus giving detractors the satisfaction of calling the theory as quack-derived ... yet all the while, the other LENR theories are falling like ducks ... simply due to the obvious: not being able to adequately explain lack of gammas. In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. Jones From: MarkI-ZeroPoint The evidence is piling up that subatomic 'particles' are dipole-like structures, and likely a type of dipole oscillation... Looks, sounds, feels and quacks just like one... ;-) HTSITYS, -Mark [darn pics made msg too large so had to delete the piccys] --- Researchers suggest one can affect an atom's spin by adjusting the way it is measured http://phys.org/news/2013-03-affect-atom-adjusting.html [GO to website to see picture] attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Thanks. Dave -Original Message- From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Apr 3, 2013 12:06 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! From:David Roberson . I proposed an experiment where a palladium cube loaded withdeuterium is subjected to a flux of muons as a way to induce conditions thatare known to result in fusion Note thedate on this: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=vq=cache:mmABHsKpSakJ:www.fulviofrisone.com/attachments/article/358/Reactor%2520Prospects%2520of%2520Deuterium%2520and.pdf+hl=engl=uspid=blsrcid=ADGEEShgMKArI-c0HHn-qv3IHBYq1AK690ODqkoexzYtgkucApI4uZPwV4BgKDkjb2rmPQgch-1bRguh6YdXDPjiQRWFvwKrMbDdDcXDA6SpGOwmGNXNG2BwZ24hck0ST43lkCF7FLBTsig=AHIEtbTU_zlQowEKT3l-Q9OPwWvA15Ve1Q
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Have you heard about SPASERS yet? In order to explain the on again and off again nature of gamma radiation in LENR, the cause of the LENR reaction should include two states, one that mitigates gamma radiation and another state that can cause LENR and still produce gamma radiation. The Spaser (short for surface plasmon amplification by stimulated emission of radiation) may be such a dual mode mechanism. The Spaser is the nanoplasmonic analogs of lasers: instead of photons, spasers generate coherent surface plasmons (collective electron oscillations at the surface of a metal) in a resonant nanoparticle. It is a DIPOLE driven mechanism. Heralded as ideal sources of coherent optical fields at the nanoscale, in a lattice of a nanostructure, spasers combined with electronic density waves on the surface of the nanostructure(nanowire). A spaser pumped by these electrical currents, rather than by the bulkier lasers used thus far in Nanoplasmonics. But recent theoretical papers have argued that electrically driven nanospasers would require unrealistically high currents. Now, Dabing Li presents a theoretical proposal for a nanospaser device that is pumped electrically via a nanowire. This is what happens in LENR+ reactors where nanowires pump spasers to produce the LENR+ reaction. The spaser is an EMF reaction that has two modes. One mode produces intense EMF screening currents but not coherent local fields because the current pumping is either under or over saturated with significant current loss. The other mode is when coherent widespread radiation is established and gamma radiation is spread among many coherent and entangled spacers. By the way, WL think that spacers are causal in LENR but they just don’t know how. If they are looking into spasers, maybe so should you. cheers:Axil On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 1:18 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote: Jones: I don't think you're seeing the significance of my posting... I guess I didn't do a good job of expressing my point. WHY OPPOSITE Why are the UP-spin quarks on OPPOSITE sides of the nucleus from the DOWN-spin quarks??? [ I would propose that both are a dipole-like oscillation, just 180deg out of phase] Why do... All spin directions collapse on one or the OPPOSITE direction depending on the measured photon polarization. ??? [this is the quote under one of the pics from the article] Why, in some nuclear interactions, do two gammas go shooting off in OPPOSITE directions Where is the physical model that explains the REASON why these observations involve OPPOSITEs Is antimatter everywhere (because it's simply the other HALF of the oscillation), but our measurement apparatus only detects one half of the oscillation and sees that as 'matter'? Why is the magnetic field PERPENDICULAR to the E-field??? It's all related... -Mark _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 7:33 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! Mark, Some of us only see a duck as a downer (cough, cough) Anyway, and from one fringe-of-the-fringe LENR perspective, this has strong force interaction written all over it, whether it is obvious to W-L proponents or not. RPF(reversible proton fusion) would certainly interact with its surrounds via spin (magnons) and would shuttle from one state (Helium-2) to another (two protons) with only quark interactions to show for the experience. The net energy deposited (or removed) is small per event, but happens at the rate of blackbody phonon vibration (mid terahertz). Thus even micro(eV) energy change per event can get amplified rapidly, if and when asymmetry is engineered into the reaction. ... hmmm... I'm now thinking of calling quark color-change as seen in RPF as the quark-quack reaction ... nothing there but spin, so to speak... thus giving detractors the satisfaction of calling the theory as quack-derived ... yet all the while, the other LENR theories are falling like ducks ... simply due to the obvious: not being able to adequately explain lack of gammas. In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. Jones From: MarkI-ZeroPoint The evidence is piling up that subatomic 'particles' are dipole-like structures, and likely a type of dipole oscillation... Looks, sounds, feels and quacks just like one... ;-) HTSITYS, -Mark [darn pics made msg too large so had to delete the piccys] --- Researchers suggest one can affect an atom's spin by adjusting the way it is measured
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Mark, I like the idea of many individual oscillators being able to take the energy if that is possible. Each of these would have to be at a frequency that is far lower than is normally emitted if a highly energetic gamma is to be replaced. Low frequency oscillators tend to operate a lower speeds by definition and I wonder how quickly the normal high frequency photon would be emitted. Do you have any idea as to why the atom would be coaxed into the slower response than usual? The only way I can understand an operation of this type is to assume that the nuclei are connected electro magnetically to a strong degree. Maybe entangled would work, but the coupling would need to be strong. And if entangled, a very large number of resonators would need this coupling to share the load adequately. I need a better understanding of how a large amount of energy contained within an excited nucleus can find alternate paths of escape. The gammas tend to dominate escape from plasmas. A metal matrix is far different than a plasma cloud. Dave -Original Message- From: MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Apr 3, 2013 1:06 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! Dave stated: “… and that the energy from the reactions is shared among the atoms surrounding it. I have been looking for evidence that fusion can take place in the compact environment of a cold fusion NAE in a manner that is very different from that occurring within a plasma.” When one looks at subatomic particles as dipolar oscillations, and within the NAE, all those oscillations being aligned and IN-PHASE, they will serve as energy sinks for a specific wavelength of energy. Thus, the amount of energy that would have been emitted in a gamma is distributed as smaller packets amongst the large number of IN-phase oscillators. This all reminds me of a PhysOrg article I mentioned a few years ago where the scientists had isolated two atoms, side by side, and cooled to near 0K… they could watch as one of the atoms remained completely still, while the other would wiggle, because it had a quantum of heat energy and thus, [my conclusion] the internal oscillators were out-of-balance, which causes the entire atom to ‘shake’. What was interesting is that they could do something (don’t remember what) that would cause that quantum of heat to xfer from the shaking atom to the still one and, you guessed it, the one that was still was now shaking and the former holder of the quantum of heat was now still. Back to Dave’s statement… Does the gamma get emitted, but then immediately absorbed by the ‘Collective’ oscillations, or is it a direct xfer of quanta of energy as explained above? In either case, whatever the exact conditions that are required, it would seem that those conditions result in BOTH new low-energy nuclear processes AND an energy sink which (almost entirely) favors coupling into lattice vibrations instead of emission of energetic particles. -mark From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 8:07 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. I agree with you Jones. The only way to explain this process is to assume that the gammas are not emitted at any time and that the energy from the reactions is shared among the atoms surrounding it. I have been looking for evidence that fusion can take place in the compact environment of a cold fusion NAE in a manner that is very different from that occurring within a plasma. The system difference is evident and I have not seem papers describing known fusion events recorded within a metal matrix where gammas are emitted at the expected levels. I proposed an experiment where a palladium cube loaded with deuterium is subjected to a flux of muons as a way to induce conditions that are known to result in fusion. If this does not result in the release of a number of gammas, then evidence is obtained that fusion within a metal matrix is different than that occurring within a gas. Of course, muon induced fusion might behave differently than normal LENR activity. The more clues that we obtain about the behavior of LENR, the faster we can understand the mechanism. Dave -Original Message- From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Apr 3, 2013 10:33 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! Mark, Some of us only see a duck as a downer (cough, cough) Anyway, and from one fringe-of-the-fringe LENR perspective, this has strong force interaction written all over it, whether it is obvious to W-L proponents or
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
The transfer of energy to and from the nucleus must be done totally through EMF. Neutrons are not necessary to penetrate the nucleus, EMF will work just fine. This EMF full duplex pipeline is how energy goes back and forth between the nucleus and the lattice. Unless a coherent EMF connection into the nucleus is established, the gamma radiation will be emitted from the nucleus in a destructive and incoherent way. Jaynes-Cummings-Hubbard (JCH) model Next we move on to the Jaynes-Cummings-Hubbard (JCH) model. Because there are millions of these hot-spots where spasers develop covering the combined surfaces of all the micro-particles, the JCH model is a combination of the Jaynes–Cummings model and the coupled cavities. The one-dimensional JCH model consists of a chain of N-coupled single-mode cavities and each cavity contains two-level atoms. The tunneling effect comes from the junction between cavities which are an analogy of the Josephson Effect. The eigenstates of the JCH Hamiltonian in the two-excitation subspace for the N-cavity system are examined in current nano research. This research focuses on the existence of bound states as well as their features. It is interesting to note that two repulsive bosonic atoms can form a bound pair in an optical lattice. By analogy, the same will be true for polaritons. The JCH Hamiltonian also supports two-polariton bound states when the photon-atom interaction is sufficiently strong. In the LENR case, the coupling between photons and dipoles are very strong. In particular, the two polaritons associated with the bound states exhibit a strong correlation such that they stay close to each other in position space. The results discussed have been published in Two-polariton bound states in the Jaynes-Cummings-Hubbard model. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1101.1366v1 If you’re up to it, the analytic solution of the eigenvalues and eigenvectors in the strong coupling regime is also developed in this paper. The time evolution of such a system is also considered for the cases of different initial conditions. Now that we have justified the development of a generalized condition of Bose-Einstein condensation all over the surfaces of the micro-particles, we can now roll in Kim’s BEC theory of LENR. cheers: Axil On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 2:18 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Mark, I like the idea of many individual oscillators being able to take the energy if that is possible. Each of these would have to be at a frequency that is far lower than is normally emitted if a highly energetic gamma is to be replaced. Low frequency oscillators tend to operate a lower speeds by definition and I wonder how quickly the normal high frequency photon would be emitted. Do you have any idea as to why the atom would be coaxed into the slower response than usual? The only way I can understand an operation of this type is to assume that the nuclei are connected electro magnetically to a strong degree. Maybe entangled would work, but the coupling would need to be strong. And if entangled, a very large number of resonators would need this coupling to share the load adequately. I need a better understanding of how a large amount of energy contained within an excited nucleus can find alternate paths of escape. The gammas tend to dominate escape from plasmas. A metal matrix is far different than a plasma cloud. Dave -Original Message- From: MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Apr 3, 2013 1:06 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! Dave stated: “… and that the energy from the reactions is shared among the atoms surrounding it. I have been looking for evidence that fusion can take place in the compact environment of a cold fusion NAE in a manner that is very different from that occurring within a plasma.” When one looks at subatomic particles as dipolar oscillations, and within the NAE, all those oscillations being aligned and IN-PHASE, they will serve as energy sinks for a specific wavelength of energy. Thus, the amount of energy that would have been emitted in a gamma is distributed as smaller packets amongst the large number of IN-phase oscillators. This all reminds me of a PhysOrg article I mentioned a few years ago where the scientists had isolated two atoms, side by side, and cooled to near 0K… they could watch as one of the atoms remained completely still, while the other would wiggle, because it had a quantum of heat energy and thus, [my conclusion] the internal oscillators were out-of-balance, which causes the entire atom to ‘shake’. What was interesting is that they could do something (don’t remember what) that would cause that quantum of heat to xfer from the shaking atom to the still one and, you guessed it, the one that was still was now shaking and the former holder of the quantum of heat was now still. Back to Dave’s
RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Hi Dave, Realize that I’m only trying to apply a physical, 3-dimentional/geometry, to atoms and subatomic particles in a QUALitative way to explain COMMON observations that don’t have an explanation in QM or Classical models… I have not tried to bring any QUANTitative elements in, which is probably above my pay-grade… but think that would be fun and fruitful. If my model sparks some thoughts by those more mathematically talented, that would be great… In a plasma, the kinetic E of the individual particles is so high that one has to look at it as totally UNcorrelated movement; nothing is IN-phase. A veritable free-for-all with things flying around in all directions and random collisions … if enough heat (kinetic E) is present, then collisions occur with enough force to result in fusion events. This is the brute-force fusion process that we all are taught, and likely goes on in stars. Now, if you applied an E-field (and perhaps perpendicular B-field) throughout the plasma, then you might be able to get the plasma constituents to align and oscillate in sync, AND, if you then fire a particle (neutron or proton) into that ‘swarm’ of aligned particles, and perpendicular to its oscillation, fusion might be a whole lot easier… My guess is that it would take an extremely strong E/B field to overcome the kinetic energy that has been imparted to the ions/e- that make up the plasma. All atoms (or are we talking just electrons?) want to shed any heat quanta so they are in perfect balance, but they can’t simply shed it to the vacuum… this shedding process MUST involve some kind of coupling to something else (another atom or photon). The situation just prior to formation of the plasma is that, because you’ve added so much energy to each atom, that as soon as one atom sheds a quantum of heat, it immediately gets another quantum from a neighbor… and all the atoms are so ‘out-of-balance’ due to the multiple quantums of heat that each has, that they literally shake themselves apart… voila… plasma. The articles I referenced in my original posting indicate that not only electrons, but quarks (which make up nuclear particles) as well could be dipolar oscillations, only the quarks are oscillating orders of magnitude smaller distance (thus, much smaller nuclear diameter compared to atomic diameter) but orders of magnitude higher frequency. Have you ever played ping-pong/table-tennis? Take a ping-pong ball and drop it on the table, and then take your paddle and quickly restrict the balls vertical movement closer and closer to the tabletop. What happens? The oscillations of the ball speed up. My guess is that if you take the frequency of oscillation of say the H 1s electron, and the diameter of the H-atom (i.e., the physical extent of that oscillation), over a 1 second span of time, it would be a constant. That constant will be somehow harmonically related to the same constant calculated for a quark… much smaller physical distance (diam of nucleus) but much higher frequency. And the speed of light in a vacuum is somehow part of these constants. Could this model be a physical explanation for E=hv??? -Mark From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 11:18 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! Mark, I like the idea of many individual oscillators being able to take the energy if that is possible. Each of these would have to be at a frequency that is far lower than is normally emitted if a highly energetic gamma is to be replaced. Low frequency oscillators tend to operate a lower speeds by definition and I wonder how quickly the normal high frequency photon would be emitted. Do you have any idea as to why the atom would be coaxed into the slower response than usual? The only way I can understand an operation of this type is to assume that the nuclei are connected electro magnetically to a strong degree. Maybe entangled would work, but the coupling would need to be strong. And if entangled, a very large number of resonators would need this coupling to share the load adequately. I need a better understanding of how a large amount of energy contained within an excited nucleus can find alternate paths of escape. The gammas tend to dominate escape from plasmas. A metal matrix is far different than a plasma cloud. Dave -Original Message- From: MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Apr 3, 2013 1:06 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! Dave stated: “… and that the energy from the reactions is shared among the atoms surrounding it. I have been looking for evidence that fusion can take place in the compact environment of a cold fusion NAE in a manner that is very different from that occurring within a plasma.” When one looks at subatomic
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
At the root of the Plasmon is the strong coupling between light and matter. This matter includes electrons and ions in a dipole. The synchronized vibrations of many dipoles in thermal equilibrium will provide a coherent and entangled environment for this strong coupling. It is reasonable to expect that this strong coherent and entangled coupling can occur between photons, electrons and quarks. If a resonance condition is properly established, then transformations between these elements should be expected as happens between matter and light. Cheers: Axil On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 4:24 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote: Hi Dave, Realize that I’m only trying to apply a physical, 3-dimentional/geometry, to atoms and subatomic particles in a QUALitative way to explain COMMON observations that don’t have an explanation in QM or Classical models… I have not tried to bring any QUANTitative elements in, which is probably above my pay-grade… but think that would be fun and fruitful. If my model sparks some thoughts by those more mathematically talented, that would be great… ** ** In a plasma, the kinetic E of the individual particles is so high that one has to look at it as totally UNcorrelated movement; nothing is IN-phase. A veritable free-for-all with things flying around in all directions and random collisions … if enough heat (kinetic E) is present, then collisions occur with enough force to result in fusion events. This is the brute-force fusion process that we all are taught, and likely goes on in stars. ** ** Now, if you applied an E-field (and perhaps perpendicular B-field) throughout the plasma, then you might be able to get the plasma constituents to align and oscillate in sync, AND, if you then fire a particle (neutron or proton) into that ‘swarm’ of aligned particles, and perpendicular to its oscillation, fusion might be a whole lot easier… ** ** My guess is that it would take an extremely strong E/B field to overcome the kinetic energy that has been imparted to the ions/e- that make up the plasma. All atoms (or are we talking just electrons?) want to shed any heat quanta so they are in perfect balance, but they can’t simply shed it to the vacuum… this shedding process MUST involve some kind of coupling to something else (another atom or photon). The situation just prior to formation of the plasma is that, because you’ve added so much energy to each atom, that as soon as one atom sheds a quantum of heat, it immediately gets another quantum from a neighbor… and all the atoms are so ‘out-of-balance’ due to the multiple quantums of heat that each has, that they literally shake themselves apart… voila… plasma. ** ** The articles I referenced in my original posting indicate that not only electrons, but quarks (which make up nuclear particles) as well could be dipolar oscillations, only the quarks are oscillating orders of magnitude smaller distance (thus, much smaller nuclear diameter compared to atomic diameter) but orders of magnitude higher frequency. Have you ever played ping-pong/table-tennis? Take a ping-pong ball and drop it on the table, and then take your paddle and quickly restrict the balls vertical movement closer and closer to the tabletop. What happens? The oscillations of the ball speed up. ** ** My guess is that if you take the frequency of oscillation of say the H 1s electron, and the diameter of the H-atom (i.e., the physical extent of that oscillation), over a 1 second span of time, it would be a constant. That constant will be somehow harmonically related to the same constant calculated for a quark… much smaller physical distance (diam of nucleus) but much higher frequency. And the speed of light in a vacuum is somehow part of these constants. Could this model be a physical explanation for E=hv??? ** ** -Mark ** ** ** ** *From:* David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, April 03, 2013 11:18 AM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! ** ** Mark, ** ** I like the idea of many individual oscillators being able to take the energy if that is possible. Each of these would have to be at a frequency that is far lower than is normally emitted if a highly energetic gamma is to be replaced. Low frequency oscillators tend to operate a lower speeds by definition and I wonder how quickly the normal high frequency photon would be emitted. Do you have any idea as to why the atom would be coaxed into the slower response than usual? ** ** The only way I can understand an operation of this type is to assume that the nuclei are connected electro magnetically to a strong degree. Maybe entangled would work, but the coupling would need to be strong. And if entangled, a very large number of resonators would need this coupling to share the load
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:18 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The only way I can understand an operation of this type is to assume that the nuclei are connected electro magnetically to a strong degree. Maybe entangled would work, but the coupling would need to be strong. And if entangled, a very large number of resonators would need this coupling to share the load adequately. Dave, while we're taking bets, let me add in mine -- about gammas, my bet agrees largely with Jones's and yours. The important detail is that gammas only occur via secondary reactions. Here is the rationale. Photons at different energies have corresponding wavelengths, and the wavelengths determine what the photons are likely to interact with. Photons of long wavelength will interact with large bodies and photons of short wavelength will interact with increasingly smaller bodies. A similar thing appears to apply to electrons -- there is an exciting experiment where they think they're able to start putting together a 3D map of the internals of the proton (the location of the quarks and gluons) [1]. They do this with electrons in the GeV range. I think this means the de Broglie waves are very narrow, so the electrons can interact with something as small as a quark in a proton. For photons in the lattice of a metal, they will interact with different bodies according to their wavelength (and energy) as well. Photons in the eV will interact with outer shell metal lattice electrons and electrons orbiting hydrogen atoms, and photons in the keV will interact with metal inner shell electrons. A photon in the MeV or thereabouts (i.e., a gamma photon) will interact with nuclei and nucleons. At high enough energies you get photodisentigration, where a nucleon is knocked out of a nucleus, and so forth. The higher the energy, the smaller the body, going down from outer electron shells to individual nucleons and, presumably, quarks. But as the size decreases, the probability of an interaction will no doubt go down in corresponding measure, because the size of the targets decreases as well. So by the time you get to gammas, they will largely pass through a region of interest. For photons of high enough energy, the mean free path generally goes up, meaning they travel farther and farther through the material. Once we're at gammas, I believe a typical metal will be largely transparent to them. This is all basic stuff, and any physicists reading this will have encountered these ideas in the first year of their education. And I suspect that is a big reason they don't take LENR seriously -- they expect nuclear reactions to produce gammas, and common sense says that there can't be any gammas being produced when you look at what actually happens in the LENR experiments. On this point, it makes a lot of sense to me that they are correct. If there are no gammas, then (1) there is no fusion, except perhaps a trivial kind that doesn't really deserve to be called fusion, or (2) there is real fusion, and there is a modification of the branching ratios or perhaps entirely new branches. An example of a new branch would be: d + d → 4He + M, where M is a nearby nucleus that shares the energy of the reaction as a spectator (all of this should be familiar as Ron Maimon's idea). This conserves momentum somehow. Robin has proposed similar scenarios involving hydrinos, so I take the general idea seriously that branches involving gammas can be systematically suppressed under the right conditions. This would definitely be different than normal fusion. Eric [1] http://phys.org/news/2013-04-quarks-dictate-proton.html
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
The higher the energy, the smaller the body, going down from outer electron shells to individual nucleons and, presumably, quarks. But as the size decreases, the probability of an interaction will no doubt go down in corresponding measure, because the size of the targets decreases as well. So by the time you get to gammas, they will largely pass through a region of interest. For photons of high enough energy, the mean free path generally goes up, meaning they travel farther and farther through the material. Once we're at gammas, I believe a typical metal will be largely transparent to them. This is a false assumption. Nanoplasmoics show strong coupling between light and electrons at 10 to the minus 8 power of the wavelength of light. This same ability to couple gammas to electrons external to the nucleus is probable. On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:20 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:18 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: The only way I can understand an operation of this type is to assume that the nuclei are connected electro magnetically to a strong degree. Maybe entangled would work, but the coupling would need to be strong. And if entangled, a very large number of resonators would need this coupling to share the load adequately. Dave, while we're taking bets, let me add in mine -- about gammas, my bet agrees largely with Jones's and yours. The important detail is that gammas only occur via secondary reactions. Here is the rationale. Photons at different energies have corresponding wavelengths, and the wavelengths determine what the photons are likely to interact with. Photons of long wavelength will interact with large bodies and photons of short wavelength will interact with increasingly smaller bodies. A similar thing appears to apply to electrons -- there is an exciting experiment where they think they're able to start putting together a 3D map of the internals of the proton (the location of the quarks and gluons) [1]. They do this with electrons in the GeV range. I think this means the de Broglie waves are very narrow, so the electrons can interact with something as small as a quark in a proton. For photons in the lattice of a metal, they will interact with different bodies according to their wavelength (and energy) as well. Photons in the eV will interact with outer shell metal lattice electrons and electrons orbiting hydrogen atoms, and photons in the keV will interact with metal inner shell electrons. A photon in the MeV or thereabouts (i.e., a gamma photon) will interact with nuclei and nucleons. At high enough energies you get photodisentigration, where a nucleon is knocked out of a nucleus, and so forth. The higher the energy, the smaller the body, going down from outer electron shells to individual nucleons and, presumably, quarks. But as the size decreases, the probability of an interaction will no doubt go down in corresponding measure, because the size of the targets decreases as well. So by the time you get to gammas, they will largely pass through a region of interest. For photons of high enough energy, the mean free path generally goes up, meaning they travel farther and farther through the material. Once we're at gammas, I believe a typical metal will be largely transparent to them. This is all basic stuff, and any physicists reading this will have encountered these ideas in the first year of their education. And I suspect that is a big reason they don't take LENR seriously -- they expect nuclear reactions to produce gammas, and common sense says that there can't be any gammas being produced when you look at what actually happens in the LENR experiments. On this point, it makes a lot of sense to me that they are correct. If there are no gammas, then (1) there is no fusion, except perhaps a trivial kind that doesn't really deserve to be called fusion, or (2) there is real fusion, and there is a modification of the branching ratios or perhaps entirely new branches. An example of a new branch would be: d + d → 4He + M, where M is a nearby nucleus that shares the energy of the reaction as a spectator (all of this should be familiar as Ron Maimon's idea). This conserves momentum somehow. Robin has proposed similar scenarios involving hydrinos, so I take the general idea seriously that branches involving gammas can be systematically suppressed under the right conditions. This would definitely be different than normal fusion. Eric [1] http://phys.org/news/2013-04-quarks-dictate-proton.html
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 8:38 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: This is a false assumption. Nanoplasmoics show strong coupling between light and electrons at 10 to the minus 8 power of the wavelength of light. Yes -- to clarify my earlier point, photons of large wavelength can also interact with small bodies, as when you have antenna picking up radio waves. But I haven't seen an example of the reverse -- photons of very small wavelength having a high probability of interacting with large bodies (or bodies with large wavelengths, I should say). Eric
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
The size of the active region of the hot spot is between 500 picometers to 100 picometers. The wavelength of a gamma ray is 10 picometers. There is not much mismatch between these sizes. ** ** On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:42 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 8:38 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: This is a false assumption. Nanoplasmoics show strong coupling between light and electrons at 10 to the minus 8 power of the wavelength of light. Yes -- to clarify my earlier point, photons of large wavelength can also interact with small bodies, as when you have antenna picking up radio waves. But I haven't seen an example of the reverse -- photons of very small wavelength having a high probability of interacting with large bodies (or bodies with large wavelengths, I should say). Eric
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
If a bunch of low energy photons is equivalent to the energy of 1 high energy gamma photon, why can't a particular nuclear reaction sometimes produce a mountain of infrared photons instead one gamma photon? According to conservation of energy this is possible, so why is it considered impossible? harry On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 1:06 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote: ** ** Dave stated: “… and that the energy from the reactions is shared among the atoms surrounding it. I have been looking for evidence that fusion can take place in the compact environment of a cold fusion NAE in a manner that is very different from that occurring within a plasma.” ** ** When one looks at subatomic particles as dipolar oscillations, and within the NAE, all those oscillations being aligned and IN-PHASE, they will serve as energy sinks for a specific wavelength of energy. Thus, the amount of energy that would have been emitted in a gamma is distributed as smaller packets amongst the large number of IN-phase oscillators. ** ** This all reminds me of a PhysOrg article I mentioned a few years ago where the scientists had isolated two atoms, side by side, and cooled to near 0K… they could watch as one of the atoms remained completely still, while the other would wiggle, because it had a quantum of heat energy and thus, [my conclusion] the internal oscillators were out-of-balance, which causes the entire atom to ‘shake’. What was interesting is that they could do something (don’t remember what) that would cause that quantum of heat to xfer from the shaking atom to the still one and, you guessed it, the one that was still was now shaking and the former holder of the quantum of heat was now still. ** ** Back to Dave’s statement… Does the gamma get emitted, but then immediately absorbed by the ‘Collective’ oscillations, or is it a direct xfer of quanta of energy as explained above? In either case, whatever the exact conditions that are required, it would seem that those conditions result in BOTH new low-energy nuclear processes AND an energy sink which (almost entirely) favors coupling into lattice vibrations instead of emission of energetic particles. ** ** -mark ** ** ** ** *From:* David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, April 03, 2013 8:07 AM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! ** ** In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. I agree with you Jones. The only way to explain this process is to assume that the gammas are not emitted at any time and that the energy from the reactions is shared among the atoms surrounding it. I have been looking for evidence that fusion can take place in the compact environment of a cold fusion NAE in a manner that is very different from that occurring within a plasma. The system difference is evident and I have not seem papers describing known fusion events recorded within a metal matrix where gammas are emitted at the expected levels. ** ** I proposed an experiment where a palladium cube loaded with deuterium is subjected to a flux of muons as a way to induce conditions that are known to result in fusion. If this does not result in the release of a number of gammas, then evidence is obtained that fusion within a metal matrix is different than that occurring within a gas. Of course, muon induced fusion might behave differently than normal LENR activity. The more clues that we obtain about the behavior of LENR, the faster we can understand the mechanism. ** ** Dave -Original Message- From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Apr 3, 2013 10:33 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! Mark, ** ** Some of us only see a duck as a downer (cough, cough) ** ** Anyway, and from one fringe-of-the-fringe LENR perspective, this has strong force interaction written all over it, whether it is obvious to W-L proponents or not. ** ** RPF(reversible proton fusion) would certainly interact with its surrounds via spin (magnons) and would shuttle from one state (Helium-2) to another (two protons) with only quark interactions to show for the experience. The net energy deposited (or removed) is small per event, but happens at the rate of blackbody phonon vibration (mid terahertz). ** ** Thus even micro(eV) energy change per event can get amplified rapidly, if and when asymmetry is engineered into the reaction. ** ** ... hmmm... I'm now thinking of calling quark color-change as seen in RPF as the quark-quack reaction ... nothing there but spin,
RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Hi Eric: The article you reference http://phys.org/news/2013-04-quarks-dictate-proton.html was also included in my original posting… perhaps you should read the entire thread? I for one would be interested in hearing other more knowledgeable people’s opinions on the point of my posting, which is that what is lacking in modern/mainstream atomic/nuclear physics is a physical model… HOW does one explain WHY we see certain *specific* observations like I pointed out in the original posting… LENR is searching for a theoretical model, and it is not going to be found ‘inside the box’… -Mark Iverson From: Eric Walker [mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 8:21 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:18 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The only way I can understand an operation of this type is to assume that the nuclei are connected electro magnetically to a strong degree. Maybe entangled would work, but the coupling would need to be strong. And if entangled, a very large number of resonators would need this coupling to share the load adequately. Dave, while we're taking bets, let me add in mine -- about gammas, my bet agrees largely with Jones's and yours. The important detail is that gammas only occur via secondary reactions. deleted Eric [1] http://phys.org/news/2013-04-quarks-dictate-proton.html
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
Ha! Yes, it seems you linked to the article about the quarks far earlier than I did. My apologies for not reading your original post more closely. I think I saw it during lunch on my iPhone and didn't have time to give it the attention it deserved. Yes, chiming in from knowledgeable people would be good too. :) It is fun as an amateur to speculate, but not worth a whole lot in the big scheme of things. Eric On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 9:52 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote: Hi Eric: ** ** The article you reference http://phys.org/news/2013-04-quarks-dictate-proton.html was also included in my original posting… perhaps you should read the entire thread? ** ** I for one would be interested in hearing other more knowledgeable people’s opinions on the point of my posting, which is that what is lacking in modern/mainstream atomic/nuclear physics is a physical model… HOW does one explain WHY we see certain **specific** observations like I pointed out in the original posting… ** ** LENR is searching for a theoretical model, and it is not going to be found ‘inside the box’… ** ** -Mark Iverson
Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!
* MIT Prof. Peter L. Hagelstein stated in an interview as follows: * So there are no significant amount of neutrons, there's no fast electrons, there's no gamma rays. There's nothing you might expect if it were a more normal nuclear reaction process. The basic statement here is that — if it's real and if it's nuclear... the argument for it being nuclear is that there's 4He (helium-4) observed in experiments, roughly one 4He for every 24 MeV of energy that's created. So what you need in the way of a theoretical model, basically a new kind of mechanism that doesn't work like the old Rutherford reaction picture that nuclear physics is based on. So that's the basic problem that I've been working on for a great many years. The big problem is one that has to do with the quantum mechanics issue. The nuclear energy comes in a big energy quantum, and if it didn't get broken up, then the big energy quantum would get expressed as energetic particles, as normally happens in nuclear reactions. So the approach we've taken is that we've said the only conceivable route for making sense of these observations at all, is that the big energy quanta have to get sliced and diced up into a very very large number if much smaller energy quanta. The much larger number is on the order of several hundred million. In NMR physics and optical physics, people are familiar with breaking up a large quantum into perhaps 30 smaller pieces, you could argue that there are some experiments where you could argue that maybe that numbers as high as 100 or so. It's unprecedented that you could take an MeV quantum and chop it up into bite sized pieces that are 10s of meV. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:15 AM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: If a bunch of low energy photons is equivalent to the energy of 1 high energy gamma photon, why can't a particular nuclear reaction sometimes produce a mountain of infrared photons instead one gamma photon? According to conservation of energy this is possible, so why is it considered impossible? harry On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 1:06 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote: ** ** Dave stated: “… and that the energy from the reactions is shared among the atoms surrounding it. I have been looking for evidence that fusion can take place in the compact environment of a cold fusion NAE in a manner that is very different from that occurring within a plasma.” ** ** When one looks at subatomic particles as dipolar oscillations, and within the NAE, all those oscillations being aligned and IN-PHASE, they will serve as energy sinks for a specific wavelength of energy. Thus, the amount of energy that would have been emitted in a gamma is distributed as smaller packets amongst the large number of IN-phase oscillators. ** ** This all reminds me of a PhysOrg article I mentioned a few years ago where the scientists had isolated two atoms, side by side, and cooled to near 0K… they could watch as one of the atoms remained completely still, while the other would wiggle, because it had a quantum of heat energy and thus, [my conclusion] the internal oscillators were out-of-balance, which causes the entire atom to ‘shake’. What was interesting is that they could do something (don’t remember what) that would cause that quantum of heat to xfer from the shaking atom to the still one and, you guessed it, the one that was still was now shaking and the former holder of the quantum of heat was now still. ** ** Back to Dave’s statement… Does the gamma get emitted, but then immediately absorbed by the ‘Collective’ oscillations, or is it a direct xfer of quanta of energy as explained above? In either case, whatever the exact conditions that are required, it would seem that those conditions result in BOTH new low-energy nuclear processes AND an energy sink which (almost entirely) favors coupling into lattice vibrations instead of emission of energetic particles. ** ** -mark ** ** ** ** *From:* David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, April 03, 2013 8:07 AM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now! ** ** In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all. I agree with you Jones. The only way to explain this process is to assume that the gammas are not emitted at any time and that the energy from the reactions is shared among the atoms surrounding it. I have been looking for evidence that fusion can take place in the compact environment of a cold fusion NAE in a manner that is very different from that occurring within a plasma. The system difference is evident and I have not seem papers describing known fusion events recorded within a metal matrix where gammas are emitted