subject:"Re\: \[Vo\]\:BEC transforms photon frequency"

No, I took it as a compliment and it really is a good thread..just a simple 
misunderstanding on Kevin's part, so easy to mix threads here lately as they 
seem to be converging that confusion is to be expected :_)
Fran

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 7:35 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 12:53 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote:

 My apologies if any other Vorts took offense to my comment about trolls...

Seasoned members know your intent.  Shinny up to the Dime Box bar and
I'll buy a round for the house.

RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Guys,
I think the  redundant ground states make a big difference to temperature when 
gas loads heavily into these confined regions, the clusters that form in these 
cavities exist in a region where longer vacuum wavelengths are excluded. This 
is exactly opposite to gas atoms with near luminal velocity appearing to slow 
down time from our perspective because these atoms are traveling along the 
hypotenuse between time and space from our stationary perspective. In the same 
way time is occurring must faster for these gas atoms inside the casimir 
cavity. They are physically confined to tiny spatial velocities but unlike 
other confinement mediums Casimir geometry reduces longer vacuum wavelengths 
..instead of slowing time along the hypotenuse as in the typical relativistic 
scenario, this “shielding”  accelerates time by reducing the average length of 
these virtual pairs.  If the unit time is reduced while at the same time the 
atom motion is physically confined into a cluster then temperature may be much 
lower from our perspective, related to these fractional values. IMHO this is 
what Naudt’s meant in his paper framing the hydrino as relativistic hydrogen 
–not the near luminal hydrogen ejected from the suns corona but rather the 
negative, shielded hydrogen provided by nano geometry.
Fran




From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net]
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 5:29 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Dave:
Yes, the process of forming a BEC requires that atoms either shed quanta of 
energy, and/or, the more energetic atoms bounce out of the ‘trap’, leaving only 
the cooler ones… the walls of the trap can be lowered a little at a time to 
repeat this process until only the coldest atoms remain.

“But temperature is defined by kinetic energy relative to an observer…”

Well, perhaps that is one way that temperature is described, however, I don’t 
think it applies here… let me explain another view.
When you shrink oneself down to the size of a single atom, isolated from 
everything else can still be

Let’s start with a *single* atom at *0K*, isolated from anything else;  i.e., 
in a perfect vacuum chamber.  This atom will be pretty much still, and only a 
very minor tendency to move, but NOT due to any *internal* energy;  but due to 
its being jostled around by the vacuum (zero-point energy).  For our 
discussion, it could be considered motionless.  Why?  Because when one removes 
all thermal energy from an atom, the harmonic relationships between its 
constituent subatomic particles are in perfect balance; all its internal 
oscillators are in harmonious resonance (geez, that sounds s newage 
wooo-wooo), thus, all momentum vectors (forces) of those oscillators are 
balanced so the atom is pretty much motionless.  ADD just a single quantum of 
heat, and that quantum gets absorbed into only ONE internal oscillator at a 
time, causing momentum imbalance, and that is what causes the atom to begin 
vibrating.  The more heat quanta added, the more the internal oscillators are 
out of balance and the more the atom vibrates.

The idea that an atom at any temperature above 0K MUST have a 
linear/translational velocity is NOT always the case… it is possible to 
restrain an atom and add heat quanta to it without it shooting off in a given 
direction… add enough heat to it and yes, it will break away from what’s 
restraining it (E or B fields) and go shooting off… but again, we’re talking 
the near perfect chamber (~0K) condition.

Add heat to Ed’s linear arrangement of hydrotons in that elongated vacuum 
chamber, and the entire ensemble will begin to oscillate along whatever axis 
represents the least resistance – most likely the longest axis of the chamber.

-Mark Iverson


From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 12:59 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

If a perfect vacuum is defined as an area of space that has no particles of the 
normal types such as atoms, protons, neutrons or electrons then you appear to 
have found one.   I believe that BECs also require that the temperature be very 
nearly zero K among the interacting particles.  But temperature is defined by 
kinetic energy relative to an observer and so a single particle is at rest when 
watched by a frame moving in the same manner.  So, the first piece of the BEC 
is fine, but when the second particle and following ones are added, you would 
need to find a way to eliminate their relative velocities which generally 
requires very precise cooling.

In our environment, there are at least a couple of serious problems to overcome 
in order for a BEC to operate.  First, I am not confident that enough space is 
available to cram more than a few Ds into the NAE.  Second, even if you were 
able to cool the Ds by some means they would be banged around by the metal 
crystal atoms

RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

2013-06-13 Thread MarkI-ZeroPoint

Terry's buyin' a round, wooo whooo!!!

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 4:35 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 12:53 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
wrote:

 My apologies if any other Vorts took offense to my comment about 
 trolls.

Seasoned members know your intent.  Shinny up to the Dime Box bar and I'll
buy a round for the house.

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:57 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
zeropo...@charter.netmailto:zeropo...@charter.net wrote: This assumes that 
the NAE are all less than a few atom diameters in size... I reject that.  Why 
couldn't they be 10s or 100s of atoms across?  In addition, there MUST be a 
physical/size limit to the extent ('excursion') of the electron 'clouds' of the 
wall atoms.  Beyond that, there would only be E/B-fields, and as far as I know, 
E/B fields do not have a temperature; do not absorb and emit photons.  It sure 
is dark way down in this wabbit hole!  Somebody care to shed some visible 
wavelength photons on this thought experiment?

Hi Mark,
This gets back to arguments I had initially with Horace 
regarding how the fields form between the cavity walls to suppress wavelengths. 
I remain of the opinion that fractional values can pack down far deeper into a 
cavity then their physical diameter should allow for the confined volume. My 
posit is that the fractional values are relativistic, the redundant orbitals 
are formed by Lorentzian contraction where the gas atoms are displaced on the 
temporal axis at the expense of aging faster .. which is also why we see these 
claims for half-life anomalous decays.  The atoms must stay away from close 
proximity with the cavity walls where the quantum effect of the wall atoms 
deteriorate.
Fran

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

2013-06-13 Thread David Roberson


I realize now that it is not proper to separate the various forms of energy 
that an atom can harbor into categories when figuring temperature.  My thoughts 
have been directed toward divide and conquer where motion was the kinetic 
portion and elevated orbitals the stored part of the whole atom energy budget.  
I did this because it is possible for the atom to radiate the extra internal 
energy in the form of a photon to reach nearly absolute zero when at rest to an 
observer without having to interact with other forces or matter.  Actually, a 
single atom can radiate a photon or several and end up stationary provided the 
observer takes into account the kick due to the emissions in his choice of 
observational frame.

But as you say, energy is energy and has to be taken into consideration.  My 
understanding of Casimir effects and how they modify local time behavior is 
lacking so I punt on that one.  And zero point energy does not result in any 
net motion since that would lead to a violation of COE or COM.  I still 
question the existence of zero point energy but might be convinced otherwise 
with the proper experimental example.

Dave


-Original Message-
From: Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thu, Jun 13, 2013 10:13 am
Subject: RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency



Guys,
I think the  redundant ground states make a big difference to temperature when 
gas loads heavily into these confined regions, the clusters that form in these 
cavities exist in a region where longer vacuum wavelengths are excluded. This 
is exactly opposite to gas atoms with near luminal velocity appearing to slow 
down time from our perspective because these atoms are traveling along the 
hypotenuse between time and space from our stationary perspective. In the same 
way time is occurring must faster for these gas atoms inside the casimir 
cavity. They are physically confined to tiny spatial velocities but unlike 
other confinement mediums Casimir geometry reduces longer vacuum wavelengths 
..instead of slowing time along the hypotenuse as in the typical relativistic 
scenario, this “shielding”  accelerates time by reducing the average length of 
these virtual pairs.  If the unit time is reduced while at the same time the 
atom motion is physically confined into a cluster then temperature may be much 
lower from our perspective, related to these fractional values. IMHO this is 
what Naudt’s meant in his paper framing the hydrino as relativistic hydrogen 
–not the near luminal hydrogen ejected from the suns corona but rather the 
negative, shielded hydrogen provided by nano geometry.
Fran
 
 
 
 

From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net]
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 5:29 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

 
Dave:
Yes, the process of forming a BEC requires that atoms either shed quanta of 
energy, and/or, the more energetic atoms bounce out of the ‘trap’, leaving only 
the cooler ones… the walls of the trap can be lowered a little at a time to 
repeat this process until only the coldest atoms remain. 
 
“But temperature is defined by kinetic energy relative to an observer…”
 
Well, perhaps that is one way that temperature is described, however, I don’t 
think it applies here… let me explain another view.
When you shrink oneself down to the size of a single atom, isolated from 
everything else can still be
 
Let’s start with a *single* atom at *0K*, isolated from anything else;  i.e., 
in a perfect vacuum chamber.  This atom will be pretty much still, and only a 
very minor tendency to move, but NOT due to any *internal* energy;  but due to 
its being jostled around by the vacuum (zero-point energy).  For our 
discussion, it could be considered motionless.  Why?  Because when one removes 
all thermal energy from an atom, the harmonic relationships between its 
constituent subatomic particles are in perfect balance; all its internal 
oscillators are in harmonious resonance (geez, that sounds s newage 
wooo-wooo), thus, all momentum vectors (forces) of those oscillators are 
balanced so the atom is pretty much motionless.  ADD just a single quantum of 
heat, and that quantum gets absorbed into only ONE internal oscillator at a 
time, causing momentum imbalance, and that is what causes the atom to begin 
vibrating.  The more heat quanta added, the more the internal oscillators are 
out of balance and the more the atom vibrates. 
 
The idea that an atom at any temperature above 0K MUST have a 
linear/translational velocity is NOT always the case… it is possible to 
restrain an atom and add heat quanta to it without it shooting off in a given 
direction… add enough heat to it and yes, it will break away from what’s 
restraining it (E or B fields) and go shooting off… but again, we’re talking 
the near perfect chamber (~0K) condition.
 
Add heat to Ed’s linear arrangement of hydrotons in that elongated

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

2013-06-13 Thread Axil Axil

“the BECs around it don't go away when 24 MeV are released into the world.”

The BEC does go away, because any energy transfer destroys coherence. But
the BEC comes back fast.

Think of the BEC as a flickering candle, and not a light bulb. Just some
selected parts of the BEC go away for a short time.

A polariton lifespan is just a few picoseconds, but that short lifetime
timeframe can support the operation of a laser beam.

A global cause of LENR like BEC is too blunt a tool to produce LENR. It may
only support one of the LENR miracles; gamma thermalization.

The real cause of LENR must be sensitive to the spin and configuration of
the nucleons in the nucleus of the atom.

Only spin 0 nuclei with even numbers of nucleons produce a LENR reaction.
Figure this into your theories of LENR, please.

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:04 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

Polaritons are not real matter. That these are only an abstraction
should be obvious to all … but apparently, it has not registered with a few
of us that polaritons are imaginary “quasiparticles” - and although they
may be useful as descriptive aids for how collective systems operate in
practice, including LENR – they are fictitious.

Apparently quasiparticles are pretty delicate, too. At one point I had
entertained ideas in connection with a so-called dipolariton and neutron
capture. I thought the dipolariton might be able to cause an electron
bound with a photon to become sufficiently neutral to combine with a nearby
proton. I raised the question on physics.stackexchange.com [1], without
alluding explicitly to my cold fusion purposes. What was pointed out to me
was that quasiparticles are easily disrupted, and that the energy needed to
reverse the weak interaction and produce an electron capture (on the order
of GeV, I believe) would blow away the typical quasiparticle interaction.
The analogy used in the comments to my question was that of trying to
catch a cannonball with spiderwebs.

I suppose something very similar applies to BECs. In my own case I think
at the time I was just caught up on the keywords -- boson, neutral,
etc. I assume that Takahashi and Kim do not try to claim gamma emission or
interception for their BECs, and that they probably propose that photons
are somehow emitted incrementally. In their case that just leaves the
question of how you get a BEC at 300 C and how it and all of the BECs
around it don't go away when 24 MeV are released into the world.

Eric

[1]
http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/23640/what-interactions-would-take-place-between-a-free-proton-and-a-dipolariton

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

2013-06-13 Thread Axil Axil

How does this theory select nickel with and even number of protons and an
even number of neutrons as the feedstock for LENR?



On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:

  Guys,

 I think the  redundant ground states make a big difference to temperature
 when gas loads heavily into these confined regions, the clusters that form
 in these cavities exist in a region where longer vacuum wavelengths are
 excluded. This is exactly opposite to gas atoms with near luminal velocity
 appearing to slow down time from our perspective because these atoms are
 traveling along the hypotenuse between time and space from our stationary
 perspective. In the same way time is occurring must faster for these gas
 atoms inside the casimir cavity. They are physically confined to tiny
 spatial velocities but unlike other confinement mediums Casimir geometry
 reduces longer vacuum wavelengths ..instead of slowing time along the
 hypotenuse as in the typical relativistic scenario, this “shielding”
  accelerates time by reducing the average length of these virtual pairs.
 If the unit time is reduced while at the same time the atom motion is
 physically confined into a cluster then temperature may be much lower from
 our perspective, related to these fractional values. IMHO this is what
 Naudt’s meant in his paper framing the hydrino as relativistic hydrogen
 –not the near luminal hydrogen ejected from the suns corona but rather the
 negative, shielded hydrogen provided by nano geometry. 

 Fran

 ** **

 ** **

 ** **

 ** **

 *From:* MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net]
 *Sent:* Wednesday, June 12, 2013 5:29 PM
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

 ** **

 Dave:

 Yes, the process of forming a BEC requires that atoms either shed quanta
 of energy, and/or, the more energetic atoms bounce out of the ‘trap’,
 leaving only the cooler ones… the walls of the trap can be lowered a little
 at a time to repeat this process until only the coldest atoms remain.  ***
 *

 ** **

 “But temperature is defined by kinetic energy relative to an observer…”***
 *

 ** **

 Well, perhaps that is one way that temperature is described, however, I
 don’t think it applies here… let me explain another view.

 When you shrink oneself down to the size of a single atom, isolated from
 everything else can still be

 ** **

 Let’s start with a **single** atom at **0K**, isolated from anything
 else;  i.e., in a perfect vacuum chamber.  This atom will be pretty much
 still, and only a very minor tendency to move, but NOT due to any **
 internal** energy;  but due to its being jostled around by the vacuum
 (zero-point energy).  For our discussion, it could be considered
 motionless.  Why?  Because when one removes all thermal energy from an
 atom, the harmonic relationships between its constituent subatomic
 particles are in perfect balance; all its internal oscillators are in
 harmonious resonance (geez, that sounds s newage wooo-wooo), thus, all
 momentum vectors (forces) of those oscillators are balanced so the atom is
 pretty much motionless.  ADD just a single quantum of heat, and that
 quantum gets absorbed into only ONE internal oscillator at a time, causing
 momentum imbalance, and that is what causes the atom to begin vibrating.
 The more heat quanta added, the more the internal oscillators are out of
 balance and the more the atom vibrates.  

 ** **

 The idea that an atom at any temperature above 0K MUST have a
 linear/translational velocity is NOT always the case… it is possible to
 restrain an atom and add heat quanta to it without it shooting off in a
 given direction… add enough heat to it and yes, it will break away from
 what’s restraining it (E or B fields) and go shooting off… but again, we’re
 talking the near perfect chamber (~0K) condition.

 ** **

 Add heat to Ed’s linear arrangement of hydrotons in that elongated vacuum
 chamber, and the entire ensemble will begin to oscillate along whatever
 axis represents the least resistance – most likely the longest axis of the
 chamber.

 ** **

 -Mark Iverson

 ** **

 ** **

 *From:* David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com dlrober...@aol.com]
 *Sent:* Wednesday, June 12, 2013 12:59 PM
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

 ** **

 If a perfect vacuum is defined as an area of space that has no particles
 of the normal types such as atoms, protons, neutrons or electrons then you
 appear to have found one.   I believe that BECs also require that the
 temperature be very nearly zero K among the interacting particles.  But
 temperature is defined by kinetic energy relative to an observer and so a
 single particle is at rest when watched by a frame moving in the same
 manner.  So, the first piece of the BEC is fine, but when the
 second particle and following ones are added, you would need to find

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Axil,
It doesn't! it  merely provides the environment where these 
other theories can exist. It provides a potential energy source that doesn't 
exist at the macro scale. In this relativistic interpretation of Casimir effect 
 local gas atoms remain unaware of their inertial frame and react normally.  
Gas atoms and molecules  diffuse between a host of different inertial frames 
inside the tapestry of the cavity without any external energy applied, they 
ride currents between  the square law derived isotropic pressure  and locally 
suppressed values derived on the inverse cube of the spacing geometry.. as long 
as the cavity is equal to or smaller than the Casimir threshold the macro 
isotropy is broken and there is, IMHO, a persistent pressure differential 
/current  between the various regions. My posit is that this opposition between 
the isotropic square law and the Casimir inverse cube law can be exploited by 
confined gases to produce usable energy. I think that the lock stepped motion 
of heavily loaded gas in a lattice and the redundant orbitals of gas in the 
cavities should be considered a resonant circuit based on the 20% entanglement 
principle. The lockstep motion in the lattice is initially random but as it 
links to fractional hydrogen inside the cavities it starts to synchronize 
changes between the fractional values in the cavity. These fractional orbitals 
then become the metronomes that synchronize through the platform of loaded 
gas in the lattice, eventually causing the lockstep motion and synchronizing 
the change of state of these fractional atoms/molecules between different 
fractional values across the bulk of the powder.
Fran


From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 12:19 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

How does this theory select nickel with and even number of protons and an even 
number of neutrons as the feedstock for LENR?


On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
francis.x.roa...@lmco.commailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:
Guys,
I think the  redundant ground states make a big difference to temperature when 
gas loads heavily into these confined regions, the clusters that form in these 
cavities exist in a region where longer vacuum wavelengths are excluded. This 
is exactly opposite to gas atoms with near luminal velocity appearing to slow 
down time from our perspective because these atoms are traveling along the 
hypotenuse between time and space from our stationary perspective. In the same 
way time is occurring must faster for these gas atoms inside the casimir 
cavity. They are physically confined to tiny spatial velocities but unlike 
other confinement mediums Casimir geometry reduces longer vacuum wavelengths 
..instead of slowing time along the hypotenuse as in the typical relativistic 
scenario, this shielding  accelerates time by reducing the average length of 
these virtual pairs.  If the unit time is reduced while at the same time the 
atom motion is physically confined into a cluster then temperature may be much 
lower from our perspective, related to these fractional values. IMHO this is 
what Naudt's meant in his paper framing the hydrino as relativistic hydrogen 
-not the near luminal hydrogen ejected from the suns corona but rather the 
negative, shielded hydrogen provided by nano geometry.
Fran




From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 
[mailto:zeropo...@charter.netmailto:zeropo...@charter.net]
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 5:29 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Dave:
Yes, the process of forming a BEC requires that atoms either shed quanta of 
energy, and/or, the more energetic atoms bounce out of the 'trap', leaving only 
the cooler ones... the walls of the trap can be lowered a little at a time to 
repeat this process until only the coldest atoms remain.

But temperature is defined by kinetic energy relative to an observer...

Well, perhaps that is one way that temperature is described, however, I don't 
think it applies here... let me explain another view.
When you shrink oneself down to the size of a single atom, isolated from 
everything else can still be

Let's start with a *single* atom at *0K*, isolated from anything else;  i.e., 
in a perfect vacuum chamber.  This atom will be pretty much still, and only a 
very minor tendency to move, but NOT due to any *internal* energy;  but due to 
its being jostled around by the vacuum (zero-point energy).  For our 
discussion, it could be considered motionless.  Why?  Because when one removes 
all thermal energy from an atom, the harmonic relationships between its 
constituent subatomic particles are in perfect balance; all its internal 
oscillators are in harmonious resonance (geez, that sounds s newage 
wooo-wooo), thus, all momentum vectors (forces) of those oscillators are 
balanced so the atom is pretty much motionless.  ADD

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

2013-06-13 Thread Eric Walker

On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 4:34 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:

On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 12:53 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
 wrote:

  My apologies if any other Vorts took offense to my comment about trolls…

 Seasoned members know your intent.  Shinny up to the Dime Box bar and
 I'll buy a round for the house.


The only troll on the list right now is Bill Beaty [1].

Eric

[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg75222.html

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 11:38 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 Axil,

 Please clarify something for me concerning BEC behavior.  Are you
 convinced that a BEC will always lead to fusion when it is formed?

***No.  A BEC is like a Crowd.  Crowds form quite often.  A fusion event is
like a trampling of an individual member of that crowd.  It only happens on
rare occasions.



 Would a BEC produced at near absolute zero be expected to fuse?

***If it had the right elements.  Just like a crowd forming on an ice
skating rink would have different elements of probability for trampling of
an individual member than a crowd forming in a disco when someone yells
fire.



 If not, what is the push required to make it happen?

***The push for BECs to form fusion, i would think, is if the BEC is large
enough such that its interstitial forces overwhelm the individual
atom's force (namely, the Coulomb Barrier) and the crowd overwhelms the
individual.  That could happen as the larger the crowd forms within a
confined space, the folks most likely to get trampled are on the innermost
section where their freedom of movement is very restricted, rather than on
the edges of the crowd where they can flee.  Similarly, in a BEC the forces
on those atoms overwhelms their freedom of movement and repulsion power and
squeezing in too tight has huge consequences.


 I assume we are speaking of a BEC composed of Ds, but would these behave
 differently than those made of Ps?

***I would think so.  The lattice represents the fence that keeps the crowd
confined.  A plastic fence isn't as strong as a wooden fence, which isn't
as strong as a metal fence.  So, with H1/Nickel, it's a plastic fence, and
there are more fusion events (or crowd tramplings, if you will).  With
D2/Pd it's a wooden fence, so there's less fusion events but it's a bit
more orderly and relatively easier to study.  With H2/Nickel, it's a chain
link fence and there are very few fusion events, to the point that people
get bored even looking for them.

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

2013-06-12 Thread David Roberson


Kevin,

Are saying that a BEC which is composed of two Ds will always fuse?   What is 
the criteria that you use to determine under what conditions the fusion occurs? 
 What evidence of this behavior is demonstrated in other system? 

It seems unlikely that gamma rays of that energy would all become absorbed, 
particularly any that are released at the first layer beneath the surface of 
the crystal.  Even if a tiny probability of escape is available they would be 
easy to detect outside the metal.

I suspect that you would be ahead to assume that there is a fusion energy 
release process that does not involve high energy gammas.  Ed has a hypothesis 
that allows the energy to be released into a long series of photons to solve 
that problem.

Dave


-Original Message-
From: Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Jun 12, 2013 1:56 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency



Now, wait a second.  After responding to this and seeing your lack of response, 
then repeating the same thing on another thread it leads me to re-examine what 
you wrote.  Perhaps you are saying here that near-zero BECs have formed in 
Metal Hydrides?  If so, then how can you say on the other thread 
 
Why invoke a structure that is known not to form at high temperature? 
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg82949.html
 
Then that means BECs have been known to form in metal hydrides, or you are 
pretending like we never had this conversation about BECs forming at high 
temperatures.  Which is it?  Or perhaps there's an in-between thing I'm 
overlooking, that no doubt would save face for one or both of us?  


On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:

Kevin, I see no evidence in the link for the actual existence of a BEC forming 
between hydrons at room temperature. People have proposed but not demonstrated. 


Ed Storms


On May 27, 2013, at 4:53 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:





On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
 

 
The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form near absolute zero.
***How quickly you forget having logged onto this thread: 
 
Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature
 
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg76596.html
 
And this thread was greeted with a yawn: 
[Vo]:Re: Superheated Bose-Einstein condensate exists above critical temperature
 
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:19 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 Kevin,

 Are saying that a BEC which is composed of two Ds will always fuse?

***No way.  The BEC would be composed of thousands of atoms, only 2 of
which are so stuck that they fuse.  Just like a crowd of 2 people won't get
trampled, but a crowd of 20,000 might trample a couple of people if they
were confined to a conference room for ICCF18.




 What is the criteria that you use to determine under what conditions the
 fusion occurs?

***I do not have such a criteria.  But, working backwards from this finding
that N atoms in a BEC absorbed 1/N frequency, I might be able to develop a
criteria of how large a BEC must form for it to be able to squeeze 2 atoms
together, similar to how large a crowd must form for 2 people to get
trampled.




 What evidence of this behavior is demonstrated in other system?

***Well, we've been discussing it on various Vortex threads.  Here's the
latest:
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg82949.html



 It seems unlikely that gamma rays of that energy would all become
 absorbed,

***Well, maybe we should all re-read this paper and find out exactly what
1/N atoms means?  This paper itself seems straightforward, but its
implications could be immense.  Kinda like LENR.

particularly any that are released at the first layer beneath the surface
of the crystal. Even if a tiny probability of escape is available they
would be easy to detect outside the metal.
***Yes, If a fusion event occurs near the edge of the BEC, then it is like
a stick of dynamite going off out in the garage rather than the center of
the house.  Normally, the house would absorb the dynamite (gamma) in almost
every direction, with quite a bit of energy escaping, but not enough to
kill a man 50 feet away.  But, take away the house, and that man is dead,
from 50 feet with nothing between him  the blast.  If the explosion occurs
on one side of the house, then you have a partially preserved house (BEC)
but large energy released in the other direction (detectable energy
release, possibly even transmutation).




 I suspect that you would be ahead to assume that there is a fusion energy
 release process that does not involve high energy gammas.

*** I like that assumption as well.  It is a clean assumption.  But then
how do you account for the very few gammas that appear to be present once
in a while?





 Ed has a hypothesis that allows the energy to be released into a long
 series of photons to solve that problem.

***There's also phonons, and Ron Maimon's theory, and perhaps several
others.  But the difference here is this is an EXPERIMENTAL finding.
Experiment trumps theory  ~Richard Feynman



Original Message-
From: Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Jun 12, 2013 1:56 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

 Now, wait a second.  After responding to this and seeing your lack of
 response, then repeating the same thing on another thread it leads me to
 re-examine what you wrote.  Perhaps you are saying here that near-zero BECs
 have formed in Metal Hydrides?  If so, then how can you say on the other
 thread

 Why invoke a structure that is known not to form at high temperature?
 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg82949.html

 Then that means BECs have been known to form in metal hydrides, or you are
 pretending like we never had this conversation about BECs forming at high
 temperatures.  Which is it?  Or perhaps there's an in-between thing I'm
 overlooking, that no doubt would save face for one or both of us?

  On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

 Kevin, I see no evidence in the link for the actual existence of a BEC
 forming between hydrons at room temperature. People have proposed but not
 demonstrated.

  Ed Storms

  On May 27, 2013, at 4:53 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:


 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

 The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form near absolute
 zero.
 ***How quickly you forget having logged onto this thread:

 Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room 
 Temperaturehttp://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=subject:%22Re%3A+%5BVo%5D%3ABose+Einstein+Condensate+formed+at+Room+Temperature%22
 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg76596.html

 And this thread was greeted with a yawn:
 [Vo]:Re: Superheated Bose-Einstein condensate exists above critical
 temperaturehttp://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=subject:%22%5BVo%5D%3ARe%3A+Superheated+Bose-Einstein+condensate+exists+above+critical+temperature%22
 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

2013-06-12 Thread Edmund Storms

I'm saying that BEC is known to form near absolute zero but has not  
been shown to form BETWEEN ATOMS at higher temperatures. People have  
PROPOSED BEC formation at high temperature between energy states but  
this has not been fully demonstrated or shown to apply to atoms.


My approach is to ask what would be the consequence if we ASSUME the  
BEC actually forms in PdD.  The consequence leads to logical conflict,  
which has not been resolved. I'm asking you or someone to resolve this  
conflict.


Ed I'm
On Jun 11, 2013, at 11:56 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:

Now, wait a second.  After responding to this and seeing your lack  
of response, then repeating the same thing on another thread it  
leads me to re-examine what you wrote.  Perhaps you are saying here  
that near-zero BECs have formed in Metal Hydrides?  If so, then how  
can you say on the other thread


Why invoke a structure that is known not to form at high temperature?
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg82949.html

Then that means BECs have been known to form in metal hydrides, or  
you are pretending like we never had this conversation about BECs  
forming at high temperatures.  Which is it?  Or perhaps there's an  
in-between thing I'm overlooking, that no doubt would save face for  
one or both of us?


On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Edmund Storms  
stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Kevin, I see no evidence in the link for the actual existence of a  
BEC forming between hydrons at room temperature. People have  
proposed but not demonstrated.


Ed Storms

On May 27, 2013, at 4:53 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:



On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com 
 wrote:


The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form near  
absolute zero.

***How quickly you forget having logged onto this thread:

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg76596.html

And this thread was greeted with a yawn:
[Vo]:Re: Superheated Bose-Einstein condensate exists above critical  
temperature

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

2013-06-12 Thread David Roberson

You mention that a BEC can absorb gammas and recast them with frequencies of 
1/N.  I would consider this suggestive that energy released by one of these BEC 
fusion reactions taking place would be in that form instead of the more 
energetic and penetrating gammas.


I have also explored the concept of a large collection of entangled protons 
behaving together in an effort to avoid the single large gamma emission.  It is 
not clear how coupled resonators can share the energy more or less equally over 
a long time span instead of having one of the number emit the large energy 
rapidly.  What mechanism could encourage one of the number to hold off its 
emission?


Then we have to consider how the Ps or Ds can be closely connected throughout 
the metal structure when surrounded by that same structure.  In radio design of 
high Q filters you find that the required coupling coefficient approaches zero 
as the individual resonator Q approaches infinity.  Thinking along this line I 
am reminded of the mechanical toy recently shown where many pendulums become 
synchronized after sufficient time provided they share a mechanical coupling 
through the bases.  I have a strong suspicion that had only one resonator been 
given a large initial energy store that eventually all of them would share an 
equal amount proportional to 1/N as well.


There appears to be an important difference between these two models.  All of 
the toy pendulums are at the same resonant frequency and of high Q.  I find it 
difficult to establish the resonant frequencies of the protons in their 
specific environments.  Unless something about the metal crystal forces them to 
be closely resonant, why would they tightly couple?   The Ds might be easier to 
couple since the nuclei have two particles which could trap gamma level 
energies of a narrow frequency band.


And, I have to wonder when the energy sharing takes place throughout the BEC.  
I have generally been of the opinion that the strong force dominates the 
determination of how much energy must be released during a fusion event.  The 
coulomb interactions come first and then the strong force finishes with a bang. 
 While the coulomb forces dominate the Ds interaction it seems possible that 
many of these might couple due to high Q resonances.  But, once the helium 
comes into existence, I would expect the new type of atom to behave as a 
different animal.  If most of the energy is released at that event, then why 
would it share with other atoms that are unlike itself?  Does a BEC composed of 
Ds include a lone helium among its group?


There are many questions to consider if one is to think of these reactions as 
due to BEC behavior.  Perhaps classical physics does a better job of handling 
the interactions.


Dave



-Original Message-
From: Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Jun 12, 2013 2:41 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency






On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:19 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

Kevin,
 
Are saying that a BEC which is composed of two Ds will always fuse?   

***No way.  The BEC would be composed of thousands of atoms, only 2 of which 
are so stuck that they fuse.  Just like a crowd of 2 people won't get trampled, 
but a crowd of 20,000 might trample a couple of people if they were confined to 
a conference room for ICCF18.  
 
 
 

What is the criteria that you use to determine under what conditions the fusion 
occurs?  

***I do not have such a criteria.  But, working backwards from this finding 
that N atoms in a BEC absorbed 1/N frequency, I might be able to develop a 
criteria of how large a BEC must form for it to be able to squeeze 2 atoms 
together, similar to how large a crowd must form for 2 people to get trampled.  
 
 
 

What evidence of this behavior is demonstrated in other system? 

***Well, we've been discussing it on various Vortex threads.  Here's the 
latest:
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg82949.html
 

 
It seems unlikely that gamma rays of that energy would all become absorbed, 

***Well, maybe we should all re-read this paper and find out exactly what 1/N 
atoms means?  This paper itself seems straightforward, but its implications 
could be immense.  Kinda like LENR.  
 
particularly any that are released at the first layer beneath the surface of 
the crystal.  Even if a tiny probability of escape is available they would be 
easy to detect outside the metal.
***Yes, If a fusion event occurs near the edge of the BEC, then it is like a 
stick of dynamite going off out in the garage rather than the center of the 
house.  Normally, the house would absorb the dynamite (gamma) in almost every 
direction, with quite a bit of energy escaping, but not enough to kill a man 50 
feet away.  But, take away the house, and that man is dead, from 50 feet with 
nothing between him  the blast.  If the explosion occurs on one side of the 
house, then you have

RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

 

From: Edmund Storms 

 

I'm saying that BEC is known to form near absolute zero but has not been
shown to form BETWEEN ATOMS at higher temperatures. People have PROPOSED BEC
formation at high temperature between energy states but this has not been
fully demonstrated or shown to apply to atoms.   

 

I will go further than Ed on this one. The BEC simply CANNOT form at higher
than absolute zero in real matter- and certainly not at several hundred
degrees C. There is a pretty good thread on Slashdot on this subject, and it
is almost by definition.

 

Polaritons are not real matter. That these are only an abstraction should be
obvious to all . but apparently, it has not registered with a few of us that
polaritons are imaginary quasiparticles - and although they may be useful
as descriptive aids for how collective systems operate in practice,
including LENR - they are fictitious.

 

You do not need a physics text to understand the implications of higher
temperature BECs in real matter - a Cat's Cradle will suffice, thanks to a
fabulous old metaphor.

 

So - even if you can find a paper on room temperature BECs in polaritons or
magnons (my favorite quasiparticle for LENR), there are no paper for BEC
real matter significantly above absolute zero.  At least none that I know of
- and in general, it should be obvious that if this kind of condensation
could happen with real particles in real-world situations, then we
(humanity) would be in trouble. 

 

Common sense should tell you - if this could happen easily - it is the
proto-typical Ice-nine syndrome. 

 

On the one hand, Ice-nine is what would put the cold back into cold
fusion, but thankfully or sadly, depending on your PoV, quasiparticles are
not particles.

 

Jones

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

 I'm saying that BEC is known to form near absolute zero but has not been
 shown to form BETWEEN ATOMS at higher temperatures.

***Is an optically trapped potassium-39 gas somehow not formed of ATOMS?
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html




 People have PROPOSED BEC formation at high temperature between energy
 states but this has not been fully demonstrated or shown to apply to atoms.


 My approach is to ask what would be the consequence if we ASSUME the BEC
 actually forms in PdD.  The consequence leads to logical conflict, which
 has not been resolved. I'm asking you or someone to resolve this conflict.

 Ed I'm

 On Jun 11, 2013, at 11:56 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:

 Now, wait a second.  After responding to this and seeing your lack of
 response, then repeating the same thing on another thread it leads me to
 re-examine what you wrote.  Perhaps you are saying here that near-zero BECs
 have formed in Metal Hydrides?  If so, then how can you say on the other
 thread

 Why invoke a structure that is known not to form at high temperature?
 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg82949.html

 Then that means BECs have been known to form in metal hydrides, or you are
 pretending like we never had this conversation about BECs forming at high
 temperatures.  Which is it?  Or perhaps there's an in-between thing I'm
 overlooking, that no doubt would save face for one or both of us?

 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

 Kevin, I see no evidence in the link for the actual existence of a BEC
 forming between hydrons at room temperature. People have proposed but not
 demonstrated.

 Ed Storms

 On May 27, 2013, at 4:53 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:


 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

 The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form near absolute
 zero.
 ***How quickly you forget having logged onto this thread:

 Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room 
 Temperaturehttp://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=subject:%22Re%3A+%5BVo%5D%3ABose+Einstein+Condensate+formed+at+Room+Temperature%22
 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg76596.html

 And this thread was greeted with a yawn:
 [Vo]:Re: Superheated Bose-Einstein condensate exists above critical
 temperaturehttp://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=subject:%22%5BVo%5D%3ARe%3A+Superheated+Bose-Einstein+condensate+exists+above+critical+temperature%22
 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 8:06 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 You mention that a BEC can absorb gammas and recast them with frequencies
 of 1/N.  I would consider this suggestive that energy released by one of
 these BEC fusion reactions taking place would be in that form instead of
 the more energetic and penetrating gammas.

***That is exactly what I've been suggesting.


  I have also explored the concept of a large collection of entangled
 protons behaving together in an effort to avoid the single large gamma
 emission.  It is not clear how coupled resonators can share the energy more
 or less equally over a long time span instead of having one of the number
 emit the large energy rapidly.

***I'm afraid I don't understand what you're saying here.



 What mechanism could encourage one of the number to hold off its emission?

***Since I don't understand your premise, I can't answer this question.





  There appears to be an important difference between these two models.
  All of the toy pendulums are at the same resonant frequency and of high Q.
  I find it difficult to establish the resonant frequencies of the protons
 in their specific environments.  Unless something about the metal crystal
 forces them to be closely resonant, why would they tightly couple?

**Something in the metal crystal would be what I'm comfortable with...







  But, once the helium comes into existence, I would expect the new type of
 atom to behave as a different animal.  If most of the energy is released at
 that event, then why would it share with other atoms that are unlike
 itself?

***I would suggest that this is the reason why helium gets expelled from
the lattice bulk and gets evacuated to the surface, like a bubble in water.



 Does a BEC composed of Ds include a lone helium among its group?

***This sounds highly doubtful.



  There are many questions to consider if one is to think of these
 reactions as due to BEC behavior.  Perhaps classical physics does a better
 job of handling the interactions.

  Dave


 -Original Message-
 From: Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Wed, Jun 12, 2013 2:41 am
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency



 On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:19 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote:

 Kevin,

 Are saying that a BEC which is composed of two Ds will always fuse?

 ***No way.  The BEC would be composed of thousands of atoms, only 2 of
 which are so stuck that they fuse.  Just like a crowd of 2 people won't get
 trampled, but a crowd of 20,000 might trample a couple of people if they
 were confined to a conference room for ICCF18.




  What is the criteria that you use to determine under what conditions the
 fusion occurs?

 ***I do not have such a criteria.  But, working backwards from this
 finding that N atoms in a BEC absorbed 1/N frequency, I might be able to
 develop a criteria of how large a BEC must form for it to be able to
 squeeze 2 atoms together, similar to how large a crowd must form for 2
 people to get trampled.




  What evidence of this behavior is demonstrated in other system?

 ***Well, we've been discussing it on various Vortex threads.  Here's the
 latest:
 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg82949.html



 It seems unlikely that gamma rays of that energy would all become
 absorbed,

 ***Well, maybe we should all re-read this paper and find out exactly what
 1/N atoms means?  This paper itself seems straightforward, but its
 implications could be immense.  Kinda like LENR.

 particularly any that are released at the first layer beneath the surface
 of the crystal. Even if a tiny probability of escape is available they
 would be easy to detect outside the metal.
 ***Yes, If a fusion event occurs near the edge of the BEC, then it is like
 a stick of dynamite going off out in the garage rather than the center of
 the house.  Normally, the house would absorb the dynamite (gamma) in almost
 every direction, with quite a bit of energy escaping, but not enough to
 kill a man 50 feet away.  But, take away the house, and that man is dead,
 from 50 feet with nothing between him  the blast.  If the explosion occurs
 on one side of the house, then you have a partially preserved house (BEC)
 but large energy released in the other direction (detectable energy
 release, possibly even transmutation).




 I suspect that you would be ahead to assume that there is a fusion energy
 release process that does not involve high energy gammas.

 *** I like that assumption as well.  It is a clean assumption.  But then
 how do you account for the very few gammas that appear to be present once
 in a while?





  Ed has a hypothesis that allows the energy to be released into a long
 series of photons to solve that problem.

 ***There's also phonons, and Ron Maimon's theory, and perhaps several
 others.  But the difference here is this is an EXPERIMENTAL finding.
 Experiment trumps theory  ~Richard

RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Did you read the paper cited in the post, Kevin?

 

If so, then what temperature are we talking about?

 

Is that temperature not near absolute zero as Ed states?

 

QED

 

From: Kevin O'Malley 

 

Edmund Storms wrote:

I'm saying that BEC is known to form near absolute zero but has not been
shown to form BETWEEN ATOMS at higher temperatures.

 

***Is an optically trapped potassium-39 gas somehow not formed of ATOMS?  

 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

No I did not read it because you have to pay money for it.

http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v9/n5/full/nphys2587.html

I do have to admit that I misread the article,  there's a graph showing
-10, 0 , +10 and +30 in what appears to be a temperature axis, but its
labelling is quizzical.  I had thought when I read it that this meant room
temperature, i.e. in degrees celsius.  Now I don't know what is intended
for that axis.


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

  Did you read the paper cited in the post, Kevin?

 ** **

 If so, then what temperature are we talking about?

 ** **

 Is that temperature not “near absolute zero” as Ed states?

 ** **

 QED

 ** **

 *From:* Kevin O'Malley 

 ** **

 Edmund Storms wrote:

 I'm saying that BEC is known to form near absolute zero but has not been
 shown to form BETWEEN ATOMS at higher temperatures.

 ** **

 ***Is an optically trapped potassium-39 gas somehow not formed of ATOMS?
 

 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html

  

** **

  ** **

RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

 

Here is a copy for free. Often Paywall articles, or the predecessor version
- are available on arXiv or the University site or elsewhere on the net (for
free) if you dig around.

 

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1212.5833v1.pdf

 

We can only wish that you and Axil, in particular, would try to find and
read these articles first, before commenting - since this is a very
important point in the big picture; and he especially tends to cite articles
from abstracts, which only partially apply to the point being made - and
often without having read the details. 

 

In fact the details often support the opposite conclusion being proposed. In
this case superheated is still very, very cold and this is one of the
poorest written scientific papers I have ever seen. It is almost written
specifically to deceive.

 

Of course --- if you want to argue that 1.5 degrees K is not near absolute
zero - then have at it but even then it would not relate to gamma
suppression.

 

I think you owe Ed an apology. He is exactly correct - and this article
proves, not disproves, his contention.

 

Let's be clear - polaritons can possibly transform photon frequency in the
IR spectrum, but in NO WAY do they absorb or thermalize gamma radiation. 

 

That point is ludicrous, yet the BEC keeps coming up here on vortex from
time to time - as if there were some evidence for an ability to absorb gamma
radiation. There is none.

 

From: Kevin O'Malley 

 

No I did not read it because you have to pay money for it. 

 

http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v9/n5/full/nphys2587.html

 

I do have to admit that I misread the article,  there's a graph showing -10,
0 , +10 and +30 in what appears to be a temperature axis, but its labeling
is quizzical.  I had thought when I read it that this meant room
temperature, i.e. in degrees Celsius.  Now I don't know what is intended for
that axis.

 

Jones Beene wrote:

Did you read the paper cited in the post, Kevin? 

If so, then what temperature are we talking about? 

Is that temperature not near absolute zero as Ed states? 

QED 

From: Kevin O'Malley  

Edmund Storms wrote:

I'm saying that BEC is known to form near absolute zero but has not been
shown to form BETWEEN ATOMS at higher temperatures.

***Is an optically trapped potassium-39 gas somehow not formed of ATOMS?  

 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html

RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Jones,

You may not have followed the thread I started, 'Of NAEs and Nothingness'.

It was like pulling teeth, but I think Ed and I established some common
ground that when a 'dislocation' or void forms in the host material, and
*before* any H or D diffuses into this void, it is a (near perfect) vacuum.
There could be E or B fields present, but those are not 'matter', so the NAE
is essentially a 'vacuum chamber' at 0K, and likely better than anything
that our hi-tech vacuum pumps can produce.  Is this not the kind of
'chamber' which could support the formation of BECs???

 

Let's continue on with that line of reasoning.

When any atom enters the NAE, the only energy it has is what it brings with
it.  The E or B fields within would likely cause the atom to align itself
with those fields to reach a minimal energy orientation.  If the fields
serve to (physically?) restrict atomic motion or size or shape, then that
could initiate photon emission of some of the thermal energy which the atom
had when it entered the NAE. If enough thermal energy is shed, and this
happens to a number of such atoms in the NAE, they would spontaneously form
a BEC.

 

In the BEC experiments that I've read, they use laser and/or *magnetic*
evaporative cooling to reduce the temp of the atoms until, at some threshold
temp (in the  nanoKelvins), they coalesce into the BEC.  Condensation of
magnons has occurred at 14K (see excerpt below), which is orders of
magnitude higher than with the usual BEC setup (atomic gases).

 

Here is an excerpt from the Wikipedia entry on BECs:

The Bose-Einstein condensation also applies to quasiparticles in solids. A
magnon in an antiferromagnet carries spin 1 and thus obeys Bose-Einstein
statistics. The density of magnons is controlled by an external magnetic
field, which plays the role of the magnon chemical potential. This technique
provides access to a wide range of boson densities from the limit of a
dilute Bose gas to that of a strongly interacting Bose liquid.   [EMPHASIS]
A magnetic ordering observed at the point of condensation is the analog of
superfluidity. In 1999 Bose condensation of magnons was demonstrated in the
antiferromagnet TlCuCl3.[18] The condensation was observed at *temperatures
as large as 14 K*. Such a high transition temperature (relative to that of
atomic gases) is due to the greater density achievable with magnons and the
smaller mass (roughly equal to the mass of an electron). In 2006,
condensation of magnons in ferromagnets was even shown at room
temperature,[19][20] where the authors used pumping techniques.

 

Still haven't found the bottom of the rabbit hole.

;-)

 

Relevant links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bose
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bose-Einstein_condensate -Einstein_condensate

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_evaporative_cooling

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_cooling

 

-Mark Iverson

 

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 8:53 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

 

 

From: Edmund Storms 

 

I'm saying that BEC is known to form near absolute zero but has not been
shown to form BETWEEN ATOMS at higher temperatures. People have PROPOSED BEC
formation at high temperature between energy states but this has not been
fully demonstrated or shown to apply to atoms.   

 

I will go further than Ed on this one. The BEC simply CANNOT form at higher
than absolute zero in real matter- and certainly not at several hundred
degrees C. There is a pretty good thread on Slashdot on this subject, and it
is almost by definition.

 

Polaritons are not real matter. That these are only an abstraction should be
obvious to all . but apparently, it has not registered with a few of us that
polaritons are imaginary quasiparticles - and although they may be useful
as descriptive aids for how collective systems operate in practice,
including LENR - they are fictitious.

 

You do not need a physics text to understand the implications of higher
temperature BECs in real matter - a Cat's Cradle will suffice, thanks to a
fabulous old metaphor.

 

So - even if you can find a paper on room temperature BECs in polaritons or
magnons (my favorite quasiparticle for LENR), there are no paper for BEC
real matter significantly above absolute zero.  At least none that I know of
- and in general, it should be obvious that if this kind of condensation
could happen with real particles in real-world situations, then we
(humanity) would be in trouble. 

 

Common sense should tell you - if this could happen easily - it is the
proto-typical Ice-nine syndrome. 

 

On the one hand, Ice-nine is what would put the cold back into cold
fusion, but thankfully or sadly, depending on your PoV, quasiparticles are
not particles.

 

Jones

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Why should I apologize? Will I be getting an apology from Y E Kim for his
direct comment agreeing that this gives his theory a leg up? You yourself
said that this is a poorly written article almost seemingly intended to
deceive. You found a way around the paywall, and I thank you for setting
me straight. But couldn't Ed have done the same thing? You expect
Vorticians to find ways around paywalls before commenting while those who
obviously are within the paywalls are withholding the kind of critical
information you just posted? Do all Vorticians uphold this supposed
standard? Because I see it nowhere in the rules, and if it were to be
posted, Vortex-L might lose the great majority of its membership. When
that happens, I imagine you would be the one apologizing.

No, there will be no apology coming. But again I thank you for setting the
record straight, I value that kind of factual input even though it is
personally painful.

Re: [Vo]:Re: Superheated Bose-Einstein condensate exists above critical
temperaturehttp://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=subject:%22Re%3A+%5BVo%5D%3ARe%3A+Superheated+Bose-Einstein+condensate+exists+above+critical+temperature%22

Kevin
O'Malleyhttp://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=from:%22Kevin+O%27Malley%22Mon,
15 Apr 2013 13:47:51
-0700http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=date:20130415

In a personal correspondence, Y.E. Kim confirms that this BEC development
gives his theory yet another leg up.

Yes, high temperature BEC (HT-BEC) is possible with interacting Bosons
which is capable of forming a BEC cluster.

The arguments for requiring the very low T to form a BEC are valid only for
non-interacting or weakly interacting Bosons (as observed by Cornell,
Wieman, Ketterle, and others) for which the temperature is determined by
the tail of the MB velocity distribution. The MB velocity distribution is
appropriate for an ideal gas of non-interacting Bosons, but it is not
applicable to the interacting Bosons.

Some (or many) people still do not the understand this !

I expect that many of LENR phenomena at room temperatures and also at
higher temperatures can be explained by BEC clusters formation by the
interacting Bosons.

Yeong

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

** **

Here is a copy for free. Often Paywall articles, or the predecessor
version - are available on arXiv or the University site or elsewhere on the
net (for free) if you dig around.

** **

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1212.5833v1.pdf

** **

We can only wish that you and Axil, in particular, would try to find and
read these articles first, before commenting - since this is a very
important point in the big picture; and he especially tends to cite
articles from abstracts, which only partially apply to the point being made
– and often without having read the details.

** **

In fact the details often support the opposite conclusion being proposed.
In this case “superheated” is still very, very cold and this is one of the
poorest written scientific papers I have ever seen. It is almost written
specifically to deceive.

** **

Of course --- if you want to argue that 1.5 degrees K is not “near”
absolute zero – then have at it but even then it would not relate to gamma
suppression.

** **

I think you owe Ed an apology. He is exactly correct - and this article
proves, not disproves, his contention.

** **

Let’s be clear – polaritons can possibly transform photon frequency in the
IR spectrum, but in NO WAY do they absorb or thermalize gamma radiation. *
***

** **

That point is ludicrous, yet the BEC keeps coming up here on vortex from
time to time - as if there were some evidence for an ability to absorb
gamma radiation. There is none.

** **

*From:* Kevin O'Malley

** **

No I did not read it because you have to pay money for it.

http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v9/n5/full/nphys2587.html

I do have to admit that I misread the article, there's a graph showing
-10, 0 , +10 and +30 in what appears to be a temperature axis, but its
labeling is quizzical. I had thought when I read it that this meant room
temperature, i.e. in degrees Celsius. Now I don't know what is intended
for that axis.

** **

Jones Beene wrote:

Did you read the paper cited in the post, Kevin?

If so, then what temperature are we talking about?

Is that temperature not “near absolute zero” as Ed states?

QED

*From:* Kevin O'Malley

Edmund Storms wrote:

I'm saying that BEC is known to form near absolute zero but has not been
shown to form BETWEEN ATOMS at higher temperatures.

***Is an optically trapped potassium-39 gas somehow not formed of ATOMS?

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html

** **

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

2013-06-12 Thread ChemE Stewart

Mark,

I agree with the thinking, I see it as

ionize---condense--collapse---vacuum
also maybe
ionize---collide--collapse---vacuum

This is what I think the Sun is doing, spewing quantum vacuum energy at us
as part of our quantum gravity field. It slowly evaporates on the trip to
Earth into photons,etc and what's left shows up as our weather
disturbances, which are all signatures of vacuum condensing, vacuum
evaporation and electromagnetic disturbances. It is all the missing 95%
dark/vacuum energy the way I see it.  We live in low levels of it all of
the time and routinely get hit with the big stuff (tornadoes,
hurricanes,floods, etc) from an overactive Sun.

Stewart
darkmattersalot.com



On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:28 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote:

 Jones,

 You may not have followed the thread I started, ‘Of NAEs and Nothingness’…
 

 It was like pulling teeth, but I think Ed and I established some common
 ground that when a ‘dislocation’ or void forms in the host material, and *
 *before** any H or D diffuses into this void, it is a (near perfect)
 vacuum.  There could be E or B fields present, but those are not ‘matter’,
 so the NAE is essentially a ‘vacuum chamber’ at 0K, and likely better than
 anything that our hi-tech vacuum pumps can produce.  Is this not the kind
 of ‘chamber’ which could support the formation of BECs???

 ** **

 Let’s continue on with that line of reasoning…

 When any atom enters the NAE, the only energy it has is what it brings
 with it.  The E or B fields within would likely cause the atom to align
 itself with those fields to reach a minimal energy orientation.  If the
 fields serve to (physically?) restrict atomic motion or size or shape, then
 that could initiate photon emission of some of the thermal energy which the
 atom had when it entered the NAE… If enough thermal energy is shed, and
 this happens to a number of such atoms in the NAE, they would spontaneously
 form a BEC.

 ** **

 In the BEC experiments that I’ve read, they use laser and/or **magnetic**
 evaporative cooling to reduce the temp of the atoms until, at some
 threshold temp (in the  nanoKelvins), they coalesce into the BEC.
 Condensation of magnons has occurred at 14K (see excerpt below), which is
 orders of magnitude higher than with the usual BEC setup (atomic gases).**
 **

 ** **

 Here is an excerpt from the Wikipedia entry on BECs:

 “The Bose–Einstein condensation also applies to quasiparticles in solids.
 A magnon in an antiferromagnet carries spin 1 and thus obeys Bose–Einstein
 statistics. The density of magnons is controlled by an external magnetic
 field, which plays the role of the magnon chemical potential. This
 technique provides access to a wide range of boson densities from the limit
 of a dilute Bose gas to that of a strongly interacting Bose liquid.
   [EMPHASIS] A magnetic ordering observed at the point of condensation is
 the analog of superfluidity. In 1999 Bose condensation of magnons was
 demonstrated in the antiferromagnet TlCuCl3.[18] The condensation was
 observed at **temperatures as large as 14 K**. Such a high transition
 temperature (relative to that of atomic gases) is due to the greater
 density achievable with magnons and the smaller mass (roughly equal to the
 mass of an electron). In 2006, condensation of magnons in ferromagnets was
 even shown at room temperature,[19][20] where the authors used pumping
 techniques.”

 ** **

 Still haven’t found the bottom of the rabbit hole…

 ;-)

 ** **

 Relevant links:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bose–Einstein_condensate

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_evaporative_cooling

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_cooling

 ** **

 -Mark Iverson

 ** **

 *From:* Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
 *Sent:* Wednesday, June 12, 2013 8:53 AM
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

 ** **

 ** **

 *From:* Edmund Storms 

 ** **

 I'm saying that BEC is known to form near absolute zero but has not been
 shown to form BETWEEN ATOMS at higher temperatures. People have PROPOSED
 BEC formation at high temperature between energy states but this has not
 been fully demonstrated or shown to apply to atoms.   

 ** **

 I will go further than Ed on this one. The BEC simply CANNOT form at
 higher than absolute zero in real matter- and certainly not at several
 hundred degrees C. There is a pretty good thread on Slashdot on this
 subject, and it is almost by definition.

 ** **

 Polaritons are not real matter. That these are only an abstraction should
 be obvious to all … but apparently, it has not registered with a few of us
 that polaritons are imaginary “quasiparticles” - and although they may be
 useful as descriptive aids for how collective systems operate in practice,
 including LENR – they are fictitious.

 ** **

 You do not need a physics text to understand the implications of higher

RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

 

From: Kevin O'Malley 

 

Why should I apologize?  Will I be getting an apology from Y E Kim for his
direct comment agreeing that this gives his theory a leg up?  

 

You shouldn't . but if Kim thinks this article helps his theory - he must
know something that is not apparent to the rest of us. or else he must not
have paid close attention to other details either.

 

But to add another layer of complication to this general subject - there is
the BEC of Dirac via Don Hotson, which is another name for the Dirac epo or
sea of negative energy and essentially another name for ZPE. Hotson has
published several relevant articles to Infinite Energy.

 

This Dirac BEC has more theoretical validity than anything proposed by Kim,
IMHO because it covers everything in LENR - not just deuterium. Hotson's
interpretation of Dirac is that there is a background field composed of
electrons and positrons - virtual positronium - existing in 4-space which
forms a foundation for 3-space. Everything builds on that.

 

This makes more sense than a hot BEC of any particular boson or composite
boson in our 3-space. Polaritons too may be real in 4-space. Substantial
heat is a local phenomenon incompatible with Bose-Einstein statistics, and
Dirac's math has stood the test of time; therefore, since the appropriate
bosonic interpretation may not exist in 3-space at all. But the worst part
of Kim's theory is that it fails with the Rossi effect. Why should anyone
who wants to see this technology pushed to commercialization soon waste time
with a 3-space BEC if it offers no insight into the major device out there
at present - the HotCat ? 

 

If you want an appropriate BEC theory then the Dirac epo/BEC version can
provide more understanding with less baggage... as long as one is open to a
fourth spatial dimension.

RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

 

 

From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 

 

You may not have followed the thread I started, 'Of NAEs and Nothingness'.

It was like pulling teeth, but I think Ed and I established some common
ground that when a 'dislocation' or void forms in the host material, and
*before* any H or D diffuses into this void, it is a (near perfect) vacuum.
There could be E or B fields present, but those are not 'matter', so the NAE
is essentially a 'vacuum chamber' at 0K, and likely better than anything
that our hi-tech vacuum pumps can produce.  Is this not the kind of
'chamber' which could support the formation of BECs???

 

Hmmm. This is the kind of chamber which may be a gateway into 4-space.
Perhaps that is what Cavity QED is all about anyway. Since the walls of this
chamber are vibrating at 500 K, then there is really no distinct chamber
available in 3-space that can exclude some kind of physical interaction .
since the excursion of the walls is greater than the enclosed volume. 

 

I always end up regretting it when Hotson's Dirac interpretation enters the
discussion . not just because it is surely as close to correct as anything
out there, but also because it is so difficult to explain that in the end.
everyone walks away frustrated.

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

2013-06-12 Thread David Roberson


If a perfect vacuum is defined as an area of space that has no particles of the 
normal types such as atoms, protons, neutrons or electrons then you appear to 
have found one.   I believe that BECs also require that the temperature be very 
nearly zero K among the interacting particles.  But temperature is defined by 
kinetic energy relative to an observer and so a single particle is at rest when 
watched by a frame moving in the same manner.  So, the first piece of the BEC 
is fine, but when the second particle and following ones are added, you would 
need to find a way to eliminate their relative velocities which generally 
requires very precise cooling.

In our environment, there are at least a couple of serious problems to overcome 
in order for a BEC to operate.  First, I am not confident that enough space is 
available to cram more than a few Ds into the NAE.  Second, even if you were 
able to cool the Ds by some means they would be banged around by the metal 
crystal atoms continuously and hence reheated.  If I recall many of the 
observations used to prove that they were formed could only be made at near 
absolute zero.  Motion destroyed the wave nature of the BEC system.

For these and other reasons mentioned recently by Ed, I suspect that BEC 
activity is not a main contributor to what we are seeing.  The jury is still 
out concerning other coupling behavior such as by entanglement.  I have been 
searching for some process that allows energy to be shared among many during 
one fusion reaction.  This might work both waysoperating together the 
coulomb barrier may be much lower to a group of Ps or Ds.

Dave

-Original Message-
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Jun 12, 2013 2:28 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency



Jones,
You may not have followed the thread I started, ‘Of NAEs and Nothingness’…
It was like pulling teeth, but I think Ed and I established some common ground 
that when a ‘dislocation’ or void forms in the host material, and *before* any 
H or D diffuses into this void, it is a (near perfect) vacuum.  There could be 
E or B fields present, but those are not ‘matter’, so the NAE is essentially a 
‘vacuum chamber’ at 0K, and likely better than anything that our hi-tech vacuum 
pumps can produce.  Is this not the kind of ‘chamber’ which could support the 
formation of BECs???
 
Let’s continue on with that line of reasoning…
When any atom enters the NAE, the only energy it has is what it brings with it. 
 The E or B fields within would likely cause the atom to align itself with 
those fields to reach a minimal energy orientation.  If the fields serve to 
(physically?) restrict atomic motion or size or shape, then that could initiate 
photon emission of some of the thermal energy which the atom had when it 
entered the NAE… If enough thermal energy is shed, and this happens to a number 
of such atoms in the NAE, they would spontaneously form a BEC.
 
In the BEC experiments that I’ve read, they use laser and/or *magnetic* 
evaporative cooling to reduce the temp of the atoms until, at some threshold 
temp (in the  nanoKelvins), they coalesce into the BEC.  Condensation of 
magnons has occurred at 14K (see excerpt below), which is orders of magnitude 
higher than with the usual BEC setup (atomic gases).
 
Here is an excerpt from the Wikipedia entry on BECs:
“The Bose–Einstein condensation also applies to quasiparticles in solids. A 
magnon in an antiferromagnet carries spin 1 and thus obeys Bose–Einstein 
statistics. The density of magnons is controlled by an external magnetic field, 
which plays the role of the magnon chemical potential. This technique provides 
access to a wide range of boson densities from the limit of a dilute Bose gas 
to that of a strongly interacting Bose liquid.   [EMPHASIS] A magnetic ordering 
observed at the point of condensation is the analog of superfluidity. In 1999 
Bose condensation of magnons was demonstrated in the antiferromagnet 
TlCuCl3.[18] The condensation was observed at *temperatures as large as 14 K*. 
Such a high transition temperature (relative to that of atomic gases) is due to 
the greater density achievable with magnons and the smaller mass (roughly equal 
to the mass of an electron). In 2006, condensation of magnons in ferromagnets 
was even shown at room temperature,[19][20] where the authors used pumping 
techniques.”
 
Still haven’t found the bottom of the rabbit hole…
;-)
 
Relevant links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bose–Einstein_condensate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_evaporative_cooling
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_cooling
 
-Mark Iverson
 

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 8:53 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

 
 
From: Edmund Storms 
 
I'm saying that BEC is known to form near absolute zero but has not been shown 
to form BETWEEN ATOMS at higher

RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Hi Jones!

Great discussions going on now that the bar has been cleared of any trolls!
J

Just wish I had more time to have a drink with fellow Vorts.

 

Since the walls of this chamber are vibrating at 500 K, then there is
really no distinct chamber available in 3-space that can exclude some kind
of physical interaction. since the excursion of the walls is greater than
the enclosed volume.

 

Not sure I understand that statement. pls clarify?

 

. since the excursion of the walls is greater than the enclosed volume.

 

This assumes that the NAE are all less than a few atom diameters in size. I
reject that.  Why couldn't they be 10s or 100s of atoms across?  In
addition, there MUST be a physical/size limit to the extent ('excursion') of
the electron 'clouds' of the wall atoms.  Beyond that, there would only be
E/B-fields, and as far as I know, E/B fields do not have a temperature; do
not absorb and emit photons.  It sure is dark way down in this wabbit hole!
Somebody care to shed some visible wavelength photons on this thought
experiment? 

 

Could the wall atoms emit thermal (IR) photons (hell, any photons for that
matter) which fly across the NAE only to be absorbed by the opposite wall???
I imagine its possible, however, my sense is that the heat quanta of the
wall atoms have a much lower resistance path to their neighboring lattice
atoms than emitting photons into the voids.  Thus, *IF* the void's physical
size is more than a few atom diameters, it does present a perfect vacuum
chamber at 0K; and Ed's model posits that there is some mid-point area where
the wall atom electron E-flds will balance so any H+ diffusing into the NAE
ends up at this central locale. resulting in a more or less a linear
arrangement of hydrotons.

 

If the NAE is only a few atoms across and elongated, then we end up with
Ed's model. I think I've got that right.

However, if it is more than a few atoms across and more or less
oval/spherical, then there may be room for 2D or 3D clusters of H+.

Can both facilitate LENR effects, or just one?

 

-Mark Iverson 

 

 

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 12:46 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

 

 

 

From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 

 

You may not have followed the thread I started, 'Of NAEs and Nothingness'.

It was like pulling teeth, but I think Ed and I established some common
ground that when a 'dislocation' or void forms in the host material, and
*before* any H or D diffuses into this void, it is a (near perfect) vacuum.
There could be E or B fields present, but those are not 'matter', so the NAE
is essentially a 'vacuum chamber' at 0K, and likely better than anything
that our hi-tech vacuum pumps can produce.  Is this not the kind of
'chamber' which could support the formation of BECs???

 

Hmmm. This is the kind of chamber which may be a gateway into 4-space.
Perhaps that is what Cavity QED is all about anyway. Since the walls of this
chamber are vibrating at 500 K, then there is really no distinct chamber
available in 3-space that can exclude some kind of physical interaction .
since the excursion of the walls is greater than the enclosed volume. 

 

I always end up regretting it when Hotson's Dirac interpretation enters the
discussion . not just because it is surely as close to correct as anything
out there, but also because it is so difficult to explain that in the end.
everyone walks away frustrated.

RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Dave:

Yes, the process of forming a BEC requires that atoms either shed quanta of 
energy, and/or, the more energetic atoms bounce out of the ‘trap’, leaving only 
the cooler ones… the walls of the trap can be lowered a little at a time to 
repeat this process until only the coldest atoms remain.  

 

“But temperature is defined by kinetic energy relative to an observer…”

 

Well, perhaps that is one way that temperature is described, however, I don’t 
think it applies here… let me explain another view.

When you shrink oneself down to the size of a single atom, isolated from 
everything else can still be

 

Let’s start with a *single* atom at *0K*, isolated from anything else;  i.e., 
in a perfect vacuum chamber.  This atom will be pretty much still, and only a 
very minor tendency to move, but NOT due to any *internal* energy;  but due to 
its being jostled around by the vacuum (zero-point energy).  For our 
discussion, it could be considered motionless.  Why?  Because when one removes 
all thermal energy from an atom, the harmonic relationships between its 
constituent subatomic particles are in perfect balance; all its internal 
oscillators are in harmonious resonance (geez, that sounds s newage 
wooo-wooo), thus, all momentum vectors (forces) of those oscillators are 
balanced so the atom is pretty much motionless.  ADD just a single quantum of 
heat, and that quantum gets absorbed into only ONE internal oscillator at a 
time, causing momentum imbalance, and that is what causes the atom to begin 
vibrating.  The more heat quanta added, the more the internal oscillators are 
out of balance and the more the atom vibrates.  

 

The idea that an atom at any temperature above 0K MUST have a 
linear/translational velocity is NOT always the case… it is possible to 
restrain an atom and add heat quanta to it without it shooting off in a given 
direction… add enough heat to it and yes, it will break away from what’s 
restraining it (E or B fields) and go shooting off… but again, we’re talking 
the near perfect chamber (~0K) condition.

 

Add heat to Ed’s linear arrangement of hydrotons in that elongated vacuum 
chamber, and the entire ensemble will begin to oscillate along whatever axis 
represents the least resistance – most likely the longest axis of the chamber.

 

-Mark Iverson

 

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 12:59 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

 

If a perfect vacuum is defined as an area of space that has no particles of the 
normal types such as atoms, protons, neutrons or electrons then you appear to 
have found one.   I believe that BECs also require that the temperature be very 
nearly zero K among the interacting particles.  But temperature is defined by 
kinetic energy relative to an observer and so a single particle is at rest when 
watched by a frame moving in the same manner.  So, the first piece of the BEC 
is fine, but when the second particle and following ones are added, you would 
need to find a way to eliminate their relative velocities which generally 
requires very precise cooling.

 

In our environment, there are at least a couple of serious problems to overcome 
in order for a BEC to operate.  First, I am not confident that enough space is 
available to cram more than a few Ds into the NAE.  Second, even if you were 
able to cool the Ds by some means they would be banged around by the metal 
crystal atoms continuously and hence reheated.  If I recall many of the 
observations used to prove that they were formed could only be made at near 
absolute zero.  Motion destroyed the wave nature of the BEC system.

 

For these and other reasons mentioned recently by Ed, I suspect that BEC 
activity is not a main contributor to what we are seeing.  The jury is still 
out concerning other coupling behavior such as by entanglement.  I have been 
searching for some process that allows energy to be shared among many during 
one fusion reaction.  This might work both waysoperating together the 
coulomb barrier may be much lower to a group of Ps or Ds.

 

Dave

-Original Message-
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Jun 12, 2013 2:28 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Jones,

You may not have followed the thread I started, ‘Of NAEs and Nothingness’…

It was like pulling teeth, but I think Ed and I established some common ground 
that when a ‘dislocation’ or void forms in the host material, and *before* any 
H or D diffuses into this void, it is a (near perfect) vacuum.  There could be 
E or B fields present, but those are not ‘matter’, so the NAE is essentially a 
‘vacuum chamber’ at 0K, and likely better than anything that our hi-tech vacuum 
pumps can produce.  Is this not the kind of ‘chamber’ which could support the 
formation of BECs???

 

Let’s continue on with that line of reasoning…

When any

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

2013-06-12 Thread Eric Walker

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

Eric

[1]
http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/23640/what-interactions-would-take-place-between-a-free-proton-and-a-dipolariton

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Mark:

What an incredibly unkind remark!  Does it represent Vorts, or just your
own viewpoint?  And if it was so incredibly easy to see the answer, why
didn't you post it before now?


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:57 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote:

 Hi Jones!

 Great discussions going on now that the bar has been cleared of any
 trolls!  J

 Just wish I had more time to have a drink with fellow Vorts…

 ** **

 “Since the walls of this chamber are vibrating at 500 K, then there is
 really no distinct “chamber” available in 3-space that can exclude some
 kind of physical interaction… since the excursion of the walls is
 greater than the enclosed volume.”

 ** **

 Not sure I understand that statement… pls clarify?

 ** **

 “… since the excursion of the walls is greater than the enclosed volume.”*
 ***

 ** **

 This assumes that the NAE are all less than a few atom diameters in size…
 I reject that.  Why couldn’t they be 10s or 100s of atoms across?  In
 addition, there MUST be a physical/size limit to the extent (‘excursion’)
 of the electron ‘clouds’ of the wall atoms.  Beyond that, there would only
 be E/B-fields, and as far as I know, E/B fields do not have a temperature;
 do not absorb and emit photons.  It sure is dark way down in this wabbit
 hole!  Somebody care to shed some visible wavelength photons on this
 thought experiment? 

 ** **

 Could the wall atoms emit thermal (IR) photons (hell, any photons for that
 matter) which fly across the NAE only to be absorbed by the opposite
 wall???  I imagine its possible, however, my sense is that the heat quanta
 of the wall atoms have a much lower resistance path to their neighboring
 lattice atoms than emitting photons into the voids.  Thus, **IF** the
 void’s physical size is more than a few atom diameters, it does present a
 perfect vacuum chamber at 0K; and Ed’s model posits that there is some
 mid-point area where the wall atom electron E-flds will balance so any H+
 diffusing into the NAE ends up at this central locale… resulting in a more
 or less a linear arrangement of hydrotons.

 ** **

 If the NAE is only a few atoms across and elongated, then we end up with
 Ed’s model… I think I‘ve got that right.

 However, if it is more than a few atoms across and more or less
 oval/spherical, then there may be room for 2D or 3D clusters of H+.

 Can both facilitate LENR effects, or just one?

 ** **

 -Mark Iverson 

 ** **

 ** **

 *From:* Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
 *Sent:* Wednesday, June 12, 2013 12:46 PM

 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

 ** **

 ** **

 ** **

 *From:* MarkI-ZeroPoint 

 ** **

 You may not have followed the thread I started, ‘Of NAEs and Nothingness’…
 

 It was like pulling teeth, but I think Ed and I established some common
 ground that when a ‘dislocation’ or void forms in the host material, and *
 *before** any H or D diffuses into this void, it is a (near perfect)
 vacuum.  There could be E or B fields present, but those are not ‘matter’,
 so the NAE is essentially a ‘vacuum chamber’ at 0K, and likely better than
 anything that our hi-tech vacuum pumps can produce.  Is this not the kind
 of ‘chamber’ which could support the formation of BECs???

 ** **

 Hmmm… This is the kind of chamber which may be a gateway into 4-space.
 Perhaps that is what Cavity QED is all about anyway. Since the walls of
 this chamber are vibrating at 500 K, then there is really no distinct
 “chamber” available in 3-space that can exclude some kind of physical
 interaction … since the excursion of the walls is greater than the enclosed
 volume. 

 ** **

 I always end up regretting it when Hotson’s Dirac interpretation enters
 the discussion … not just because it is surely as close to correct as
 anything out there, but also because it is so difficult to explain that in
 the end… everyone walks away frustrated.

 ** **

RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

I'm pretty sure Mark was referring to Joshua Cude . aka Schroeder

 

 

From: Kevin O'Malley 

 

Mark:

 

What an incredibly unkind remark!  Does it represent Vorts, or just your own
viewpoint?  And if it was so incredibly easy to see the answer, why didn't
you post it before now?

RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Thx for clarifying that Jones.

 

Kevin, I was referring to JC, and a year or so ago I would have been
referring to MaryYugo.  The disruption caused by JC and MY's repetitive
diatribes on this forum far outweighed their useful discourse.  Please
explain how our discussion about the environment inside a NAE could have
been interpreted as some kind of derogatory remark on Vorts.  I'm at a loss
to understand how you came to that interpretation given that the focus of
this thread is *purely technical*.  In fact, my statement,

  GREAT discussions going on now that.   and wish I had more time to
have a drink with fellow Vorts

is a COMPLEMENT to the current participants and topics of discussion on this
forum!

 

My apologies if any other Vorts took offense to my comment about trolls.

 

-Mark

 

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 7:45 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

 

I'm pretty sure Mark was referring to Joshua Cude . aka Schroeder

 

 

From: Kevin O'Malley 

 

Mark:

 

What an incredibly unkind remark!  Does it represent Vorts, or just your own
viewpoint?  And if it was so incredibly easy to see the answer, why didn't
you post it before now?

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

2013-06-11 Thread Kevin O'Malley

Now, wait a second.  After responding to this and seeing your lack of
response, then repeating the same thing on another thread it leads me to
re-examine what you wrote.  Perhaps you are saying here that near-zero BECs
have formed in Metal Hydrides?  If so, then how can you say on the other
thread

Why invoke a structure that is known not to form at high temperature?
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg82949.html

Then that means BECs have been known to form in metal hydrides, or you are
pretending like we never had this conversation about BECs forming at high
temperatures.  Which is it?  Or perhaps there's an in-between thing I'm
overlooking, that no doubt would save face for one or both of us?

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

 Kevin, I see no evidence in the link for the actual existence of a BEC
 forming between hydrons at room temperature. People have proposed but not
 demonstrated.

 Ed Storms

 On May 27, 2013, at 4:53 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:


 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

 The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form near absolute
 zero.
 ***How quickly you forget having logged onto this thread:

 Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room 
 Temperaturehttp://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=subject:%22Re%3A+%5BVo%5D%3ABose+Einstein+Condensate+formed+at+Room+Temperature%22
 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg76596.html

 And this thread was greeted with a yawn:
 [Vo]:Re: Superheated Bose-Einstein condensate exists above critical
 temperaturehttp://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=subject:%22%5BVo%5D%3ARe%3A+Superheated+Bose-Einstein+condensate+exists+above+critical+temperature%22
 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:43 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

Let us take an example…A crack with two faces or two nano-particles
separated by a few nano-meters can separate charge through dipole vibration
with electrons gathering on one side of the crack or nano-particle and
electrons on the other face of the crack or the other nano-particle.
***Does this mean for your polariton hypothesis to be true that it is a
surface phenomenon rather than a bulk phenomenon?  I would think that BECs
are a bulk phenomenon, with the EFFECTs of the nuclear reactions getting
pushed out to the surface like a river washes a landslide  a bunch of
trees to a chokepoint.  You notice the backed up river at the chokepoint
but that isn't where the actual phenomenon took place.

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

it is a surface phenomenon rather than a bulk phenomenon


On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:43 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 Let us take an example…A crack with two faces or two nano-particles
 separated by a few nano-meters can separate charge through dipole vibration
 with electrons gathering on one side of the crack or nano-particle and
 electrons on the other face of the crack or the other nano-particle.
 ***Does this mean for your polariton hypothesis to be true that it is a
 surface phenomenon rather than a bulk phenomenon?  I would think that BECs
 are a bulk phenomenon, with the EFFECTs of the nuclear reactions getting
 pushed out to the surface like a river washes a landslide  a bunch of
 trees to a chokepoint.  You notice the backed up river at the chokepoint
 but that isn't where the actual phenomenon took place.

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Then  I ask you to visit this thread and comment.   No one had anything
else to say after I talked about PF's meltdown.

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg77082.html

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 it is a surface phenomenon rather than a bulk phenomenon


 On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.comwrote:

 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:43 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 Let us take an example…A crack with two faces or two nano-particles
 separated by a few nano-meters can separate charge through dipole
 vibration
 with electrons gathering on one side of the crack or nano-particle and
 electrons on the other face of the crack or the other nano-particle.
 ***Does this mean for your polariton hypothesis to be true that it is a
 surface phenomenon rather than a bulk phenomenon?  I would think that BECs
 are a bulk phenomenon, with the EFFECTs of the nuclear reactions getting
 pushed out to the surface like a river washes a landslide  a bunch of
 trees to a chokepoint.  You notice the backed up river at the chokepoint
 but that isn't where the actual phenomenon took place.

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

I believe that this type of meltdown occurs when nano-particles become
dense enough and suspended in the hydrogen gas or another dielectric to
support dipole formation and charge separation.



In the Pons  Fleishmann incident, the dielectric could have been glass or
concrete.



I suppose that  if you mix nano-particles in a solid dielectric like glass,
the LENR reaction might take hold.



If you remember, there was a report that DGT put some glass in their
reactor and the glass melted. It may have happened that nano-particles
melted into the glass and the reaction took off.


On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 2:34 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:

 Then  I ask you to visit this thread and comment.   No one had anything
 else to say after I talked about PF's meltdown.

 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg77082.html

 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 it is a surface phenomenon rather than a bulk phenomenon


 On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.comwrote:

 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:43 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 Let us take an example…A crack with two faces or two nano-particles
 separated by a few nano-meters can separate charge through dipole
 vibration
 with electrons gathering on one side of the crack or nano-particle and
 electrons on the other face of the crack or the other nano-particle.
 ***Does this mean for your polariton hypothesis to be true that it is a
 surface phenomenon rather than a bulk phenomenon?  I would think that BECs
 are a bulk phenomenon, with the EFFECTs of the nuclear reactions getting
 pushed out to the surface like a river washes a landslide  a bunch of
 trees to a chokepoint.  You notice the backed up river at the chokepoint
 but that isn't where the actual phenomenon took place.

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Ummm, the surface area was not increased by very much, but the bulk was
increased significantly and P-F saw a meltdown result.  It points to a bulk
effect rather than a surface effect.


On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 I believe that this type of meltdown occurs when nano-particles become
 dense enough and suspended in the hydrogen gas or another dielectric to
 support dipole formation and charge separation.



 In the Pons  Fleishmann incident, the dielectric could have been glass
 or concrete.



 I suppose that  if you mix nano-particles in a solid dielectric like
 glass, the LENR reaction might take hold.



 If you remember, there was a report that DGT put some glass in their
 reactor and the glass melted. It may have happened that nano-particles
 melted into the glass and the reaction took off.


 On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 2:34 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.comwrote:

 Then  I ask you to visit this thread and comment.   No one had anything
 else to say after I talked about PF's meltdown.

 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg77082.html

 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 it is a surface phenomenon rather than a bulk phenomenon


 On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.comwrote:

 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:43 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 Let us take an example…A crack with two faces or two nano-particles
 separated by a few nano-meters can separate charge through dipole
 vibration
 with electrons gathering on one side of the crack or nano-particle and
 electrons on the other face of the crack or the other nano-particle.
 ***Does this mean for your polariton hypothesis to be true that it is a
 surface phenomenon rather than a bulk phenomenon?  I would think that BECs
 are a bulk phenomenon, with the EFFECTs of the nuclear reactions getting
 pushed out to the surface like a river washes a landslide  a bunch of
 trees to a chokepoint.  You notice the backed up river at the chokepoint
 but that isn't where the actual phenomenon took place.

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:





 If you remember, there was a report that DGT put some glass in their
 reactor and the glass melted. It may have happened that nano-particles
 melted into the glass and the reaction took off.



***Nope, unfortunately I do not remember.  It does not ring a bell.

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

If you look at the referenced slide show I supplied, you will see the range
of election-hole systems depicted.

Look at page titled:


*Speculative phase diagram of electron-hole system *

**

*Solids are included. But the Ni/H system is a surface dipole based effect.*


On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 3:49 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:



 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:





 If you remember, there was a report that DGT put some glass in their
 reactor and the glass melted. It may have happened that nano-particles
 melted into the glass and the reaction took off.



 ***Nope, unfortunately I do not remember.  It does not ring a bell.

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

2013-05-28 Thread Edmund Storms



On May 27, 2013, at 10:16 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:




On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Edmund Storms  
stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:




Kevin, did you actually read this paper (
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.1261v1.pdf)?
***I'm still making my way through it.  It is not one of the links I  
posted.


It is a link I extracted from your e-mail. What links are you  
referring to? I read too many papers to know who sent which. If the  
paper does not describe a BEC based on an isotope of hydrogen in a  
metal lattice at room temperature, then it has no relationship to this  
discussion. Of course a BEC might be created under a variety  
conditions based on things other than an atomic nucleus, but that is  
not relevant to the problem we are discussing here.



The conditions have no relationship to those in PdD at room  
temperature.

***I never said they did.


But then we are not talking about the same thing. I'm discussing the  
conditions required to initiate a nuclear reaction in a material at  
room temperature and while using isotopes of hydrogen. What are you  
talking about?




The BEC is created in vacuum at low temperatures using Rb atoms.
***Yup.  And the BEC absorbed photons.  That's what started this  
discussion.


So what? This has no relationship to LENR.









If you think these statements are not important,
***I did not say that they are unimportant, I said they didn't stand  
out.


What does not stand out mean?




than you understand nothing about materials science or BEC.
***Now you're in insult mode.  Try to add more bran to your diet.


It is only an insult if it is not true. You need to decide if it is  
true or not. In any case, I was responding to the ambiguous statement  
above, which you now say does not mean what it appears to mean.  
Nevertheless, I did not mean to insult, only to point out that you  
might not know what you think you know. People point out my  
limitations all the time, which while annoying is not an insult.



 Creation of an assembly of atoms requires energy to compensate for  
the entropy change. This is basic thermodynamics. This energy is not  
sufficient in the formation of a BEC for it to occur much above  
absolute zero, where the entropy energy is small. This means a BEC  
cannot form between atoms much above absolute zero.
***And yet, those 2 links I posted have BECs forming at room  
temperature and even high temperature.Perhaps it is time to talk  
about how much you know about BECs, seein' as how you started the  
insults flying in that sandbox.


Again, you are not describing what the papers actually said.  In any  
case, are we to believe the laws of thermodynamics or the ambiguous  
claims based on an unproven application of BEC theory?






Formation of a BEC does not supply much energy, as theory shows.
***But Y E Kim's theory shows that the formation of a BEC could  
generate fusion, which does supply much energy.


Kim only has a theory based on the assumption that a BEC can form.  
He has shown no proof that the assumption is correct.
***Not proof yet, but evidence nonetheless.  First you say as  
theory shows, then you say he has shown no proof.  Those are 2  
entirely different things.  You yourself have not shown proof that  
your theory is correct.  Obviously.  Otherwise we'd all be having a  
LENR party because of such a giant breakthrough.


A theory proves nothing, neither mine nor Kim's. A theory only shows  
where to look for information. If the theory is wrong, the looking  
becomes a waste of time. Because money and time are scarce, testing a  
theory having a good chance of being right is important. That is why I  
have examined all the theories. I need to know which is worth testing.  
I have tested some and rejected others. None look plausible. That is  
why I proposed by own, which I will test soon. For me, this is not an  
intellectual game. The result has practical importance to everyone.   
Society needs this energy and the sooner the source is mastered the  
better.





His theory does not fit the facts.  With more time, I can list the  
conflicts if you are interested.
***I'm not that interested if you're gonna go all tribal and start  
throwing insults around.  You should get in touch with Dr. Kim and  
have a discussion right here on Vortex.  All of us would benefit,  
including you.


An amazingly arrogant response. I see no insult here. I'm simply  
stating a fact, which I presume is permitted.  What makes you think I  
have not already talked to Kim about my theory and suggest such a  
public discussion? What makes you think he would agree, which he did  
not? In addition, Vortex is not the only discussion group. If you want  
to learn about theory, I suggest you attend ICCF-18 and contact Kim  
yourself.



Yes, some theories conflict with more facts and observations than  
others. At this stage in the process, you can choose what you want  
to believe. Nevertheless, after reading all the theories, most

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

*Apparently you believe a BEC will form without causing LENR and its
presence can be detected by shining laser light on the material.  Is this
what you propose?*





It is just amazing, but it looks like LENR in the Ni/H is an optical based
reaction. A laser is not required to supply the photons to activate the
reaction, the infrared photons in a hot Ni/H reactor is what drives the
formation of the BEC in that system.





There seems to be a direct relationship between the intensity of the
infrared photon flux in an Ni/H reactor and the power and extent of BEC
formation.





This photon based BEC mechanism is and established physical reality,
universally recognized throughout science. It is a waste of time to dispute
its existence. The professors are teaching it in class.





 This reference indicates how it all works:





Reference:





http://www.umich.edu/~mctp/SciPrgPgs/events/2010/MQSS10/Talks/Littlewood_Michigan_PBL.pdf





This reference shows the metronome demo which illustrates the BEC
principle. This slideshow seems to be a tutorial on BEC caused by excitonic
matter.





I don’t understand it all, but I think I have the gist of it.





On page 6, the slideshow introduces the metronome idea.





Terry Blanton posted this video which illustrates the mechanism of
coherence development using a collection of metronomes:





http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embeddedv=JWToUATLGzs





Increase in electron tunneling forced by the photons forces a positive
feedback loop for charge separation.





It is also amazing, how strong that the charge separation can get.  As I
posted before, terawatt power level concentrations can be produced.





We have some more research to do, to properly understand this power
accumulation process, but I think we are on the right scent.





This stuff is most strange, new, and unusual and feel free to pose
questions that will help us all make progress in understanding LENR.





If you want to oppose this theory, feel free to sharpen your arguments
against it here in the minor leagues before Kim get this theory well off
the ground.





I feel certain that this idea is what Dr. Kim needs to complete his BEC
theory of LENR.




On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:


 On May 27, 2013, at 10:16 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:



 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:




 Kevin, did you actually read this paper (

 http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.1261v1.pdf)?

 ***I'm still making my way through it.  It is not one of the links I
 posted.


 It is a link I extracted from your e-mail. What links are you referring
 to? I read too many papers to know who sent which. If the paper does not
 describe a BEC based on an isotope of hydrogen in a metal lattice at room
 temperature, then it has no relationship to this discussion. Of course a
 BEC might be created under a variety conditions based on things other than
 an atomic nucleus, but that is not relevant to the problem we are
 discussing here.




 The conditions have no relationship to those in PdD at room temperature.

 ***I never said they did.


 But then we are not talking about the same thing. I'm discussing the
 conditions required to initiate a nuclear reaction in a material at room
 temperature and while using isotopes of hydrogen. What are you talking
 about?





 The BEC is created in vacuum at low temperatures using Rb atoms.

 ***Yup.  And the BEC absorbed photons.  That's what started this
 discussion.


 So what? This has no relationship to LENR.









 If you think these statements are not important,

 ***I did not say that they are unimportant, I said they didn't stand out.


 What does not stand out mean?





  than you understand nothing about materials science or BEC.

 ***Now you're in insult mode.  Try to add more bran to your diet.


 It is only an insult if it is not true. You need to decide if it is true
 or not. In any case, I was responding to the ambiguous statement above,
 which you now say does not mean what it appears to mean. Nevertheless, I
 did not mean to insult, only to point out that you might not know what you
 think you know. People point out my limitations all the time, which while
 annoying is not an insult.




  Creation of an assembly of atoms requires energy to compensate for the
 entropy change. This is basic thermodynamics. This energy is not sufficient
 in the formation of a BEC for it to occur much above absolute zero, where
 the entropy energy is small. This means a BEC cannot form between atoms
 much above absolute zero.

 ***And yet, those 2 links I posted have BECs forming at room temperature
 and even high temperature.Perhaps it is time to talk about how much you
 know about BECs, seein' as how you started the insults flying in that
 sandbox.


 Again, you are not describing what the papers actually said.  In any case,
 are we to believe the laws of thermodynamics or the ambiguous

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

2013-05-28 Thread David Roberson


Axil,

Please clarify something for me concerning BEC behavior.  Are you convinced 
that a BEC will always lead to fusion when it is formed?

Would a BEC produced at near absolute zero be expected to fuse?  If not, what 
is the push required to make it happen?

I assume we are speaking of a BEC composed of Ds, but would these behave 
differently than those made of Ps?

Dave

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Infrared photons are required to produce charge separation. That means that
low temperature *BEC *is not applicable. The temperature of the metal must
be high enough for the BEC to form.

Any atoms or combination will atoms will form Dipole based holes. I guess
that nickel makes forming dipoles easier than would other materials.

The role of hydrogen is dielectric enhancement between metal surfaces,
IMHO. I would be interested if helium might work also or is helium a LENR
poison?


On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 2:38 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 Axil,

 Please clarify something for me concerning BEC behavior.  Are you
 convinced that a BEC will always lead to fusion when it is formed?

 Would a BEC produced at near absolute zero be expected to fuse?  If not,
 what is the push required to make it happen?

 I assume we are speaking of a BEC composed of Ds, but would these behave
 differently than those made of Ps?

 Dave

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Then is that an explanation of why Gamma rays are not observed in LENR?  If
2 of the atoms inside a multi-atom BEC fuse together, the incoming
radiation  (to the rest of the BEC) gets subdivided based upon how many
atoms have formed the BEC.  Right?


On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:49 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 This paper verifies that a photon eradiated Bose-Einstein condensate will
 cut the frequency of incoming photons by dividing that frequency between N
 numbers of atoms.



 http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.1261v1.pdf



 Rydberg excitation of a Bose-Einstein condensate



  “The results of theoretical simulations are represented by the
 continuous lines.



 According to the super-atom picture the collective Rabi frequency for the
 coherent excitation of N atoms is



 frequency (collective) = square root(number of atoms) X frequency(single);



 Where the single-particle Rabi frequency (single) is app 2 pi x 200 kHz
 for our experimental parameters.”

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

That is the idea. However, why would only a few hydrons fuse leaving  
just enough unreacted hydrons available to carry all the energy  
without it producing energetic radiation? I would expect occasionally,  
many hydrons would fuse leaving too few unreacted hydrons so that the  
dissipated energy would have to be very energetic and easily  
detected.  Also, how is this mass-energy coupled to the unreacted  
hydrons? The BEC is not stable at high temperatures, which would be  
present inside the BEC when mass-energy was released. I would expect  
this release would destroy the BEC, leaving the fused hydrons to  
dissipate energy by the normal hot fusion method.  The concept appears  
to have many logical flaws.


Ed Storms
On May 27, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:

Then is that an explanation of why Gamma rays are not observed in  
LENR?  If 2 of the atoms inside a multi-atom BEC fuse together, the  
incoming radiation  (to the rest of the BEC) gets subdivided based  
upon how many atoms have formed the BEC.  Right?



On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:49 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com  
wrote:
This paper verifies that a photon eradiated Bose-Einstein condensate  
will cut the frequency of incoming photons by dividing that  
frequency between N numbers of atoms.


http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.1261v1.pdf

Rydberg excitation of a Bose-Einstein condensate

 “The results of theoretical simulations are represented by the  
continuous lines.


According to the super-atom picture the collective Rabi frequency  
for the coherent excitation of N atoms is


frequency (collective) = square root(number of atoms) X  
frequency(single);


Where the single-particle Rabi frequency (single) is app 2 pi x 200  
kHz for our experimental parameters.”

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:03 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

 That is the idea. However, why would only a few hydrons fuse leaving just
 enough unreacted hydrons available to carry all the energy without it
 producing energetic radiation? I would expect occasionally, many hydrons
 would fuse leaving too few unreacted hydrons so that the dissipated energy
 would have to be very energetic and easily detected

***That would account for the very occasional neutron being observed,
right?  And it also would account for how few of them get observed as
well.  They only happen when a multiple-fusion event takes place inside the
BEC and there isn't enough BEC infrastructure to absorb the energy.



 .  Also, how is this mass-energy coupled to the unreacted hydrons? The BEC
 is not stable at high temperatures, which would be present inside the BEC
 when mass-energy was released. I would expect this release would destroy
 the BEC, leaving the fused hydrons to dissipate energy by the normal hot
 fusion method.

***I would expect it as well.  Like an explosion taking place inside a
house, the structure blocks much of the energy while it is momentarily in
place.  And then another BEC forms, 2 atoms fuse, and the reaction goes on
 on.




  The concept appears to have many logical flaws.

 Ed Storms

 On May 27, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:

 Then is that an explanation of why Gamma rays are not observed in LENR?
 If 2 of the atoms inside a multi-atom BEC fuse together, the incoming
 radiation  (to the rest of the BEC) gets subdivided based upon how many
 atoms have formed the BEC.  Right?


 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:49 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

  This paper verifies that a photon eradiated Bose-Einstein condensate
 will cut the frequency of incoming photons by dividing that frequency
 between N numbers of atoms.


 http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.1261v1.pdf


 Rydberg excitation of a Bose-Einstein condensate


   “The results of theoretical simulations are represented by the
 continuous lines.


 According to the super-atom picture the collective Rabi frequency for the
 coherent excitation of N atoms is


 frequency (collective) = square root(number of atoms) X
 frequency(single);


 Where the single-particle Rabi frequency (single) is app 2 pi x 200 kHz
 for our experimental parameters.”

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Ed has hit upon the secret of LENR in a back handed way. BEC can form at
extreme temperatures; this miracle is the backbone of LENR.





Electrons can be broken apart into thier constituent components: charge,
angular momentum, and spin.





http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/04/electrons-like-gaul-come-in-three-parts/



http://www.physics.harvard.edu/Thesespdfs/tserkovnyak.pdf





In thin nanoantennas, charge is broken free of the electron and is free to
combine with light to form a polariton.





Since light can readily form condensates, AKS lasers, charge is taken along
for the ride. Extreme amounts of charge are accumulated and light/charge is
compressed into a dark photon singularity.





Ed must eventually understand the new science of topological materials and
the formation of quasiparticles.


On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

 That is the idea. However, why would only a few hydrons fuse leaving just
 enough unreacted hydrons available to carry all the energy without it
 producing energetic radiation? I would expect occasionally, many hydrons
 would fuse leaving too few unreacted hydrons so that the dissipated energy
 would have to be very energetic and easily detected.  Also, how is this
 mass-energy coupled to the unreacted hydrons? The BEC is not stable at high
 temperatures, which would be present inside the BEC when mass-energy was
 released. I would expect this release would destroy the BEC, leaving the
 fused hydrons to dissipate energy by the normal hot fusion method.  The
 concept appears to have many logical flaws.

 Ed Storms

 On May 27, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:

 Then is that an explanation of why Gamma rays are not observed in LENR?
 If 2 of the atoms inside a multi-atom BEC fuse together, the incoming
 radiation  (to the rest of the BEC) gets subdivided based upon how many
 atoms have formed the BEC.  Right?


 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:49 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

  This paper verifies that a photon eradiated Bose-Einstein condensate
 will cut the frequency of incoming photons by dividing that frequency
 between N numbers of atoms.


 http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.1261v1.pdf


 Rydberg excitation of a Bose-Einstein condensate


   “The results of theoretical simulations are represented by the
 continuous lines.


 According to the super-atom picture the collective Rabi frequency for the
 coherent excitation of N atoms is


 frequency (collective) = square root(number of atoms) X
 frequency(single);


 Where the single-particle Rabi frequency (single) is app 2 pi x 200 kHz
 for our experimental parameters.”

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Let me be clear, Axil. I have not hit on anything. Kim first suggested  
a BEC can form at high temperatures in a lattice. I do not believe  
this is possible. I DO NOT accept this as an explanation of LENR.


The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form near absolute  
zero. If a lattice is able to form a BEC based on hydrogen at room  
temperature and above, this by itself would be a Nobel Prize discovery  
if true.  I see no reason to apply an explanation that is so unique to  
explain CF. In addition, the behavior, as I note below, is not  
consistent with what is observed. This does not account for the few  
neutrons. The few neutrons are near background and can be more easily  
explained as a result of fractofusion.


Ed Storms



On May 27, 2013, at 11:44 AM, Axil Axil wrote:

Ed has hit upon the secret of LENR in a back handed way. BEC can  
form at extreme temperatures; this miracle is the backbone of LENR.



Electrons can be broken apart into thier constituent components:  
charge, angular momentum, and spin.



http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/04/electrons-like-gaul-come-in-three-parts/

http://www.physics.harvard.edu/Thesespdfs/tserkovnyak.pdf


In thin nanoantennas, charge is broken free of the electron and is  
free to combine with light to form a polariton.



Since light can readily form condensates, AKS lasers, charge is  
taken along for the ride. Extreme amounts of charge are accumulated  
and light/charge is compressed into a dark photon singularity.



Ed must eventually understand the new science of topological  
materials and the formation of quasiparticles.



On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Edmund Storms  
stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
That is the idea. However, why would only a few hydrons fuse leaving  
just enough unreacted hydrons available to carry all the energy  
without it producing energetic radiation? I would expect  
occasionally, many hydrons would fuse leaving too few unreacted  
hydrons so that the dissipated energy would have to be very  
energetic and easily detected.  Also, how is this mass-energy  
coupled to the unreacted hydrons? The BEC is not stable at high  
temperatures, which would be present inside the BEC when mass-energy  
was released. I would expect this release would destroy the BEC,  
leaving the fused hydrons to dissipate energy by the normal hot  
fusion method.  The concept appears to have many logical flaws.


Ed Storms

On May 27, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:

Then is that an explanation of why Gamma rays are not observed in  
LENR?  If 2 of the atoms inside a multi-atom BEC fuse together, the  
incoming radiation  (to the rest of the BEC) gets subdivided based  
upon how many atoms have formed the BEC.  Right?



On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:49 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com  
wrote:
This paper verifies that a photon eradiated Bose-Einstein  
condensate will cut the frequency of incoming photons by dividing  
that frequency between N numbers of atoms.


http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.1261v1.pdf

Rydberg excitation of a Bose-Einstein condensate

 “The results of theoretical simulations are represented by the  
continuous lines.


According to the super-atom picture the collective Rabi frequency  
for the coherent excitation of N atoms is


frequency (collective) = square root(number of atoms) X  
frequency(single);


Where the single-particle Rabi frequency (single) is app 2 pi x 200  
kHz for our experimental parameters.”

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

I posted this not long ago as follows:

http://phys.org/news/2013-05-physicists-revolutionary-low-power-polariton-
laser.html

*Physicists develop revolutionary low-power polariton laser*

LENR is like a polaritor laser turned in onto itself. Dark mode EMF is not
allowed to exit the lattice (nuclear active environment). The EMF just
builds and builds until the space and matter around it breaks apart. When
nuclear energy is released, the coherence is broken, and the EMF buildup
starts all over again, in an endless cycle

In nanopasmonics, they have named this polaritron laser Spaser


*arxiv.org/pdf/1210.7086*

*also see*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaser


From *Nature*:[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaser#cite_note-3

A spaser is the nanoplasmonic counterpart of a
laserhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser,
but it (ideally) does not emit photonshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photons.
It is analogous to the conventional laser, but in a spaser photons are
replaced by surface plasmons and the resonant cavity is replaced by a
nanoparticle, which supports the plasmonic modes. Similarly to a laser, the
energy source for the spasing mechanism is an active (gain) medium that is
excited externally. This excitation field may be optical and unrelated to
the spaser’s operating frequency; for instance, a spaser can operate in the
near-infrared http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared but the excitation of
the gain medium can be achieved using an
ultraviolethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultravioletpulse. The reason
that surface plasmons in a spaser can work analogously to
photons in a laser is that their relevant physical properties are the same.
First, surface plasmons are bosons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosons:
they are vector excitations and have
spinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_(physics)1, just as photons
do. Second, surface plasmons are electrically neutral
excitations. And third, surface plasmons are the most collective material
oscillations known in nature, which implies they are the most harmonic
(that is, they interact very weakly with one another). As such, surface
plasmons can undergo stimulated emission, accumulating in a single mode in
large numbers, which is the physical foundation of both the laser and the
spaser.

Spasers are no big thing, Ed. Just another day at the office for
nanoplasmonics.

https://www.google.com/#


On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

 Let me be clear, Axil. I have not hit on anything. Kim first suggested a
 BEC can form at high temperatures in a lattice. I do not believe this is
 possible. I DO NOT accept this as an explanation of LENR.

 The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form near absolute
 zero. If a lattice is able to form a BEC based on hydrogen at room
 temperature and above, this by itself would be a Nobel Prize discovery if
 true.  I see no reason to apply an explanation that is so unique to explain
 CF. In addition, the behavior, as I note below, is not consistent with what
 is observed. This does not account for the few neutrons. The few neutrons
 are near background and can be more easily explained as a result of
 fractofusion.

 Ed Storms



 On May 27, 2013, at 11:44 AM, Axil Axil wrote:

 Ed has hit upon the secret of LENR in a back handed way. BEC can form at
 extreme temperatures; this miracle is the backbone of LENR.




 Electrons can be broken apart into thier constituent components: charge,
 angular momentum, and spin.





 http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/04/electrons-like-gaul-come-in-three-parts/


 http://www.physics.harvard.edu/Thesespdfs/tserkovnyak.pdf




 In thin nanoantennas, charge is broken free of the electron and is free to
 combine with light to form a polariton.




 Since light can readily form condensates, AKS lasers, charge is taken
 along for the ride. Extreme amounts of charge are accumulated and
 light/charge is compressed into a dark photon singularity.




 Ed must eventually understand the new science of topological materials and
 the formation of quasiparticles.


 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

 That is the idea. However, why would only a few hydrons fuse leaving just
 enough unreacted hydrons available to carry all the energy without it
 producing energetic radiation? I would expect occasionally, many hydrons
 would fuse leaving too few unreacted hydrons so that the dissipated energy
 would have to be very energetic and easily detected.  Also, how is this
 mass-energy coupled to the unreacted hydrons? The BEC is not stable at high
 temperatures, which would be present inside the BEC when mass-energy was
 released. I would expect this release would destroy the BEC, leaving the
 fused hydrons to dissipate energy by the normal hot fusion method.  The
 concept appears to have many logical flaws.

 Ed Storms

 On May 27, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:

 Then is that an explanation of why Gamma rays are not observed in

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form near absolute zero.
***How quickly you forget having logged onto this thread:

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room
Temperaturehttp://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=subject:%22Re%3A+%5BVo%5D%3ABose+Einstein+Condensate+formed+at+Room+Temperature%22
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg76596.html

And this thread was greeted with a yawn:
[Vo]:Re: Superheated Bose-Einstein condensate exists above critical
temperaturehttp://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=subject:%22%5BVo%5D%3ARe%3A+Superheated+Bose-Einstein+condensate+exists+above+critical+temperature%22
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

Kevin, I see no evidence in the link for the actual existence of a BEC  
forming between hydrons at room temperature. People have proposed but  
not demonstrated.


Ed Storms
On May 27, 2013, at 4:53 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:



On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Edmund Storms  
stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:


The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form near  
absolute zero.

***How quickly you forget having logged onto this thread:

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg76596.html

And this thread was greeted with a yawn:
[Vo]:Re: Superheated Bose-Einstein condensate exists above critical  
temperature

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

 Kevin, I see no evidence in the link for the actual existence of a BEC
 forming between hydrons at room temperature. People have proposed but not
 demonstrated.

 Ed Storms

***That's because it would be difficult and expensive to demonstrate.  What
you said was The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form near
absolute zero.  But that is not the case.  So if BECs in other materials
can form at high temperature, it is not a tremendous supposition to suggest
they can in Nickel/H1 of Palladium/Deuterium.




 On May 27, 2013, at 4:53 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:


 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

 The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form near absolute
 zero.
 ***How quickly you forget having logged onto this thread:

 Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room 
 Temperaturehttp://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=subject:%22Re%3A+%5BVo%5D%3ABose+Einstein+Condensate+formed+at+Room+Temperature%22
 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg76596.html

 And this thread was greeted with a yawn:
 [Vo]:Re: Superheated Bose-Einstein condensate exists above critical
 temperaturehttp://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=subject:%22%5BVo%5D%3ARe%3A+Superheated+Bose-Einstein+condensate+exists+above+critical+temperature%22
 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

This paper verifies that a photon eradiated Bose-Einstein condensate will
cut the frequency of incoming photons by dividing that frequency between N
numbers of atoms.
***So if one assumes a gamma ray is emitted by a BEC cold fusion event,
eventually one could go backwards and measure the frequency generated to
see how many atoms formed the BEC, right?  And the average frequency would
give us the average # of atoms per BEC.  I wonder if anyone has ever
measured emitted frequencies of LENR experiments.


On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:49 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 This paper verifies that a photon eradiated Bose-Einstein condensate will
 cut the frequency of incoming photons by dividing that frequency between N
 numbers of atoms.



 http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.1261v1.pdf



 Rydberg excitation of a Bose-Einstein condensate



  “The results of theoretical simulations are represented by the
 continuous lines.



 According to the super-atom picture the collective Rabi frequency for the
 coherent excitation of N atoms is



 frequency (collective) = square root(number of atoms) X frequency(single);



 Where the single-particle Rabi frequency (single) is app 2 pi x 200 kHz
 for our experimental parameters.”

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency



On May 27, 2013, at 7:29 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:




On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Edmund Storms  
stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Kevin, I see no evidence in the link for the actual existence of a  
BEC forming between hydrons at room temperature. People have  
proposed but not demonstrated.


Ed Storms
***That's because it would be difficult and expensive to  
demonstrate.  What you said was The BEC is known from experience  
and theory to only form near absolute zero.  But that is not the  
case.  So if BECs in other materials can form at high temperature,  
it is not a tremendous supposition to suggest they can in Nickel/H1  
of Palladium/Deuterium.


The essential question is, Does a BEC form in any material? Various  
applications of this concept have been applied, but not to hydron  
atoms.  In fact, when BEC are formed near absolute zero, they consist  
of neutral atoms in a vacuum. In the case of hydrons, they are ions  
located in stable sites in a structure. Moving these ions into a  
common site where a BEC might form takes energy. Formation of a BEC  
does not supply much energy, as theory shows. I do not see any  
advantage to pretending something might happen that conflicts with  
basic theory and experience unless this is the only possibility. This  
is not the only possibility. In fact, better ideas have been suggested.


Ed Storms




On May 27, 2013, at 4:53 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:



On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com 
 wrote:


The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form near  
absolute zero.

***How quickly you forget having logged onto this thread:

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg76596.html

And this thread was greeted with a yawn:
[Vo]:Re: Superheated Bose-Einstein condensate exists above critical  
temperature

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

The essential question is, Does a BEC form in any material?

***Yes, according to the 2 links I posted.

Various applications of this concept have been applied, but not to hydron
atoms.

***We both already agreed to that, so I don't understand the need to repeat
it. This hasn't been applied for H2 or H1 or D2 gas because it is
difficult and expensive. Oh, and there's that added wrinkle where LENR
starts to become active, really messing with scientists' heads... ;-)

In fact, when BEC are formed near absolute zero, they consist of neutral
atoms in a vacuum. In the case of hydrons, they are ions located in stable
sites in a structure. Moving these ions into a common site where a BEC
might form takes energy.

***Okay, nothing particularly standing out in these statements.

Formation of a BEC does not supply much energy, as theory shows.

***But Y E Kim's theory shows that the formation of a BEC could generate
fusion, which does supply much energy.

I do not see any advantage to pretending something might happen that
conflicts with basic theory

***Because Y E Kim's theory fits the facts pretty good right now. Anyone's
LENR theory will conflict with what's out there. Including yours.

and experience unless this is the only possibility.

***What a bizarre requirement. Where does it come from?

This is not the only possibility. In fact, better ideas have been
suggested.

***The best ideas are the ones immediately testable. Kim's theory doesn't
look all that superior to others in this respect, but recent developments
in BECs suggest that his theory is certainly worth looking into.

Ed Storms

On May 27, 2013, at 4:53 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form near absolute
zero.
***How quickly you forget having logged onto this thread:

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room
Temperaturehttp://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=subject:%22Re%3A+%5BVo%5D%3ABose+Einstein+Condensate+formed+at+Room+Temperature%22
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg76596.html

And this thread was greeted with a yawn:
[Vo]:Re: Superheated Bose-Einstein condensate exists above critical
temperaturehttp://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=subject:%22%5BVo%5D%3ARe%3A+Superheated+Bose-Einstein+condensate+exists+above+critical+temperature%22
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

The polariton is a PHOTON with a negative electric Charge. The polariton is
a boson with spin = 1.

The polariton forms the BEC, it concentrates negative electric charge, and
all this has all been experimentally demonstrated.

And the polariton generates the LENR reaction.

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

On May 27, 2013, at 7:29 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

Kevin, I see no evidence in the link for the actual existence of a BEC
forming between hydrons at room temperature. People have proposed but not
demonstrated.

Ed Storms

***That's because it would be difficult and expensive to demonstrate.
What you said was The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form
near absolute zero. But that is not the case. So if BECs in other
materials can form at high temperature, it is not a tremendous supposition
to suggest they can in Nickel/H1 of Palladium/Deuterium.

The essential question is, Does a BEC form in any material? Various
applications of this concept have been applied, but not to hydron atoms.
In fact, when BEC are formed near absolute zero, they consist of neutral
atoms in a vacuum. In the case of hydrons, they are ions located in stable
sites in a structure. Moving these ions into a common site where a BEC
might form takes energy. Formation of a BEC does not supply much energy, as
theory shows. I do not see any advantage to pretending something might
happen that conflicts with basic theory and experience unless this is the
only possibility. This is not the only possibility. In fact, better ideas
have been suggested.

Ed Storms

On May 27, 2013, at 4:53 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form near absolute
zero.
***How quickly you forget having logged onto this thread:

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 The polariton is a PHOTON with a negative electric Charge. The polariton
 is a boson with spin = 1.



 The polariton forms the BEC, it concentrates negative electric charge, and
 all this has all been experimentally demonstrated.


***In a metal hydride? With hydrons?This seems to be Ed's requirement.





 And the polariton generates the LENR reaction.

***It seems the theory is catching up.  Do you have some links?   I see
earlier you posted this

LENR is like a polaritor laser turned in onto itself.   Dark mode EMF is not
allowed to exit the lattice (nuclear active environment).

and other items elsewhere about polaritons.  But to be candid, I did not
understand them.

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

The cavity in the polariton laser is imperfect. It allows photons to  get
out of the nano-cavities.

If the nano-cavities are near perfect, the photons stay inside and aid the
electrons to concentrate.

See:

http://www.uni-wuerzburg.de/en/sonstiges/meldungen/detail/artikel/eine-neue-1/

I am trying to figure out this one which seems to describe how photons and
electrons are strongly coupled. It is an experimental study which means
that it is real.


http://www.np.phy.cam.ac.uk/uploads/2013/prb13-mcavbistability.pdf


On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:28 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.comwrote:



 On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 The polariton is a PHOTON with a negative electric Charge. The polariton
 is a boson with spin = 1.



 The polariton forms the BEC, it concentrates negative electric charge,
 and all this has all been experimentally demonstrated.


 ***In a metal hydride? With hydrons?This seems to be Ed's
 requirement.





 And the polariton generates the LENR reaction.

 ***It seems the theory is catching up.  Do you have some links?   I see
 earlier you posted this

 LENR is like a polaritor laser turned in onto itself.   Dark mode EMF is
 not
 allowed to exit the lattice (nuclear active environment).

 and other items elsewhere about polaritons.  But to be candid, I did not
 understand them.

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency



On May 27, 2013, at 8:12 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:




On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Edmund Storms  
stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:


The essential question is, Does a BEC form in any material?
***Yes, according to the 2 links I posted.


Kevin, did you actually read this paper (
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.1261v1.pdf)? The conditions have no  
relationship to those in PdD at room temperature.  The BEC is created  
in vacuum at low temperatures using Rb atoms.



Various applications of this concept have been applied, but not to  
hydron atoms.
***We both already agreed to that, so I don't understand the need to  
repeat it.  This hasn't been applied for H2 or H1 or D2 gas because  
it is difficult and expensive.   Oh, and there's that added wrinkle  
where LENR starts to become active, really messing with scientists'  
heads...  ;-)




 In fact, when BEC are formed near absolute zero, they consist of  
neutral atoms in a vacuum. In the case of hydrons, they are ions  
located in stable sites in a structure. Moving these ions into a  
common site where a BEC might form takes energy.

***Okay, nothing particularly standing out in these statements.


If you think these statements are not important, than you understand  
nothing about materials science or BEC.  Creation of an assembly of  
atoms requires energy to compensate for the entropy change. This is  
basic thermodynamics. This energy is not sufficient in the formation  
of a BEC for it to occur much above absolute zero, where the entropy  
energy is small. This means a BEC cannot form between atoms much above  
absolute zero.



Formation of a BEC does not supply much energy, as theory shows.
***But Y E Kim's theory shows that the formation of a BEC could  
generate fusion, which does supply much energy.


Kim only has a theory based on the assumption that a BEC can form. He  
has shown no proof that the assumption is correct.




I do not see any advantage to pretending something might happen that  
conflicts with basic theory
***Because Y E Kim's theory fits the facts pretty good right now.   
Anyone's LENR theory will conflict with what's out there.  Including  
yours.


His theory does not fit the facts.  With more time, I can list the  
conflicts if you are interested.


Yes, some theories conflict with more facts and observations than  
others. At this stage in the process, you can choose what you want to  
believe. Nevertheless, after reading all the theories, most of the  
published papers describing the behavior of CF, and applying my  
knowledge of materials science and nuclear physics, I choose to  
believe my theory. I have described exactly why I believe my theory  
and suggested many predictions that can be used to test it. That is  
all I or anyone can do. It is now up to the experimentalist to test  
the predictions and find out who is correct. Further discussion will  
not solve the problem.




and experience unless this is the only possibility.
***What a bizarre requirement.  Where does it come from?


This is not the only possibility. In fact, better ideas have been  
suggested.
***The best ideas are the ones immediately testable.  Kim's theory  
doesn't look all that superior to others in this respect, but recent  
developments in BECs suggest that his theory is certainly worth  
looking into.


How would you propose to test his theory?

Ed Storms




Ed Storms





On May 27, 2013, at 4:53 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:



On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com 
 wrote:


The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form near  
absolute zero.

***How quickly you forget having logged onto this thread:

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg76596.html

And this thread was greeted with a yawn:
[Vo]:Re: Superheated Bose-Einstein condensate exists above  
critical temperature

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg78827.html

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

2013-05-27 Thread David Roberson


Axil,

It is advantageous for the cavity to capture the photons for a reasonable 
amount of time.   This process leads to a high Q cavity with significant gain.

Dave


-Original Message-
From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, May 27, 2013 11:46 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency



The cavity in the polariton laser is imperfect. It allows photons to  get out 
of the nano-cavities.
 
If the nano-cavities are near perfect, the photons stay inside and aid the 
electrons to concentrate.
 
See:
 
http://www.uni-wuerzburg.de/en/sonstiges/meldungen/detail/artikel/eine-neue-1/
 
I am trying to figure out this one which seems to describe how photons and 
electrons are strongly coupled. It is an experimental study which means that it 
is real.
 

http://www.np.phy.cam.ac.uk/uploads/2013/prb13-mcavbistability.pdf




On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:28 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:





On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:


The polaritonis a PHOTON with a negative electric Charge. The polariton is a 
boson with spin= 1.
 
The polaritonforms the BEC, it concentrates negative electric charge, and all 
this has all been experimentally demonstrated.

 

***In a metal hydride? With hydrons?This seems to be Ed's requirement.  


 
 
And thepolariton generates the LENR reaction.


***It seems the theory is catching up.  Do you have some links?   I see earlier 
you posted this

 
LENR is like a polaritor laser turned in onto itself.   Dark mode EMF is not
allowed to exit the lattice (nuclear active environment).
 

and other items elsewhere about polaritons.  But to be candid, I did not 
understand them.

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:




 Kevin, did you actually read this paper (

 http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.1261v1.pdf)?

***I'm still making my way through it.  It is not one of the links I posted.



 The conditions have no relationship to those in PdD at room temperature.

***I never said they did.




 The BEC is created in vacuum at low temperatures using Rb atoms.

***Yup.  And the BEC absorbed photons.  That's what started this
discussion.








 If you think these statements are not important,

***I did not say that they are unimportant, I said they didn't stand out.




 than you understand nothing about materials science or BEC.

***Now you're in insult mode.  Try to add more bran to your diet.



  Creation of an assembly of atoms requires energy to compensate for the
 entropy change. This is basic thermodynamics. This energy is not sufficient
 in the formation of a BEC for it to occur much above absolute zero, where
 the entropy energy is small. This means a BEC cannot form between atoms
 much above absolute zero.

***And yet, those 2 links I posted have BECs forming at room temperature
and even high temperature.Perhaps it is time to talk about how much you
know about BECs, seein' as how you started the insults flying in that
sandbox.






  Formation of a BEC does not supply much energy, as theory shows.

 ***But Y E Kim's theory shows that the formation of a BEC could generate
 fusion, which does supply much energy.


 Kim only has a theory based on the assumption that a BEC can form. He has
 shown no proof that the assumption is correct.

***Not proof yet, but evidence nonetheless.  First you say as theory
shows, then you say he has shown no proof.  Those are 2 entirely different
things.  You yourself have not shown proof that your theory is correct.
Obviously.  Otherwise we'd all be having a LENR party because of such a
giant breakthrough.




 His theory does not fit the facts.  With more time, I can list the
 conflicts if you are interested.

***I'm not that interested if you're gonna go all tribal and start throwing
insults around.  You should get in touch with Dr. Kim and have a discussion
right here on Vortex.  All of us would benefit, including you.



 Yes, some theories conflict with more facts and observations than others.
 At this stage in the process, you can choose what you want to believe.
 Nevertheless, after reading all the theories, most of the published papers
 describing the behavior of CF, and applying my knowledge of materials
 science and nuclear physics, I choose to believe my theory. I have
 described exactly why I believe my theory and suggested many predictions
 that can be used to test it. That is all I or anyone can do. It is now up
 to the experimentalist to test the predictions and find out who is correct.
 Further discussion will not solve the problem.

***Further discussion is the purpose of Vortex-L




 How would you propose to test his theory?

***Well, the room temperature BEC paper suggested there was a telltale
signature for the formation of a BEC.  I would suggest going after the
telltale signatures and load up some Nickel/H1 or Palladium/Deuterium and
see if the signature presents itself.  How would you?

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

This is how this stuff looks to me now.

Reference:

http://www.umich.edu/~mctp/SciPrgPgs/events/2010/MQSS10/Talks/Littlewood_Michigan_PBL.pdf

Infrared photons cause the electrons in a dipole to tunnel across a
dielectric barrier. A separation of charge is produced with holes on one
side of the dielectric barrier and electrons on the other.

Let us take an example…A crack with two faces or two nano-particles
separated by a few nano-meters can separate charge through dipole vibration
with electrons gathering on one side of the crack or nano-particle and
electrons on the other face of the crack or the other nano-particle.


The dipole vibrations sync up with the waves of the infrared photons. More
electron tunneling happens than recombination of holes and electrons
because the infrared photons greatly increase electron tunneling across the
dielectric barrier. Charge separation happens very fast. The charge
separation becomes very large because of the massive electron tunneling
that is going on across the dielectric barrier; I guess that means high
voltage develops across the dielectric gap.

More infrared photons produce more tunneling and associated charge
separation.

But the dipoles are also made coherent by the infrared photons. This is how
ionized atoms (holes) can form a BEC at very high temperatures.

Extreme charge separation of the dipoles separated by a large dielectric
gap causes screening of the coulomb barrier in the holes (atoms mostly
stripped of their electrons by intense tunneling across the dielectric
barrier).

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency