THE ATOMIC EXPANSION HYPOTHESIS
by Horace Heffner 12/30/1996
STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESIS AND BACKGROUND ASSUMPTIONS
The Atomic Expansion Hypothesis (AEH) is the idea that atomic expansion
(AE), the increase in the size of an ionized atom or molecule, like H+,
which occurs when it takes on an orbital electron, can perform work on the
surroundings of the ion, and that the amount of energy released can be
greater than the initial ionization energy, provided the ion is in a
sufficiently confined space when the expansion occurs. This is an idea
that leads to various possible experiments and, if correct, may provide a
basis for the design of over unity devices. If correct, the AEH also
explains various previously observed results.
This hypothesis is another expression among many of the idea that the
excess heat from cold fusion devices does not come from fusion, or
transmutation, but from extraction of energy from the zero point energy
(ZPE) sea, the zero point field (ZPF). This is not to say that
transmutation or conventional fusion does not occur in cold fusion
experiments, only that the heat producing source of cold fusion (CF)
devices is primarily ZPE. It is an assumption of this hypothesis that ZPF
energy is what keeps atoms from collapsing and is part of the glue that
holds atoms together without radiation. There have been various
publications referencing ZPE, especially by Dr. H. E. Puthoff [1 - 6]
Atoms, more particularly orbitals, though quantized in energy, can be
deformed, both in shape and electron probability distribution. These
deformations can occur as a result of external stress on the orbitals due
to collisions or pressure, or because of electromagnetic fields. The
deformations are capable of storing energy, converting kinetic energy into
potential energy, and back. With the exception of the occasional resulting
photon emissions, such collisions are perfectly elastic, which is why the
gas laws and thermodynamics work so well. It is true that collision and
pressure deformations of orbitals are also electromagnetic in origin, but
differ from purely field generated deformations in that the
collision/deformation caused fields (or field distortions) are highly
localized and mostly cancel at a distance, and in the fact that the field
distortions convert kinetic energy into potential energy at a high energy
density.
HOW MUCH ENERGY AND POWER IS AVAILABLE FROM ZPE?
John Wheeler and Richard Feynman, when first examining the possibility of
vacuum energy, calculated that there is enough energy in the vacuum of a
light bulb to boil all the seas. The problem is designing a mechanism to
effectively extract this energy. The energy available is dependent upon
the method used to extract it, be that polarization of the vacuum, the
Casimir Effect, etc. The atomic expansion method depends upon the amount
of orbital deformation achievable per transaction, and the transaction
repeat rate per volume achievable. It does appear the two goals, high
repeat rate, and high confinement, typically oppose each other.
The ZP energy fills every vacuum. If there is not a cutoff frequency, that
energy is infinite. Assuming a cutoff frequency of near the Plank
frequency (wavelength) of about 10^-33 cm, the energy density is on the
order of 10^94 g/cm^3. Multiply by c^2 and you have an enormous energy
density - which does not have to remain constant, but can replenish itself
from the ZPE sea if tapped.
The energy density rho(w) is characterized by H. E. Puthoff (Ref. 7) by:
rho(w) dw = [w^2/pi^2*c^3]/[hw/2] dw
= (hw^3) / (2*pi^2*c^3) dw joules/m^3
Rearranging we have:
rho(w) dw = (h/(2*pi^2*c^3)) w^3 dw joules/m^3
rho(w) dw = K w^3 dw, where K = (h/(2*pi^2*c^3)) joules/m^3
Integrating over w=0 to w=B to get cumulative energy density f(B) to cutoff
frequency B:
f(B) = K/4 B^4
This indicates that the total energy density of the vacuum (though not
constant if tapped) is proportional to the fourth power of the cutoff
frequency being tapped. The big problem is figuring out how to tap this
energy. If a method of tapping ZPE energy is found, conservation of energy
is not violated, the second law of thermodynamics is violated, as the
replacement energy ultimately flows from elsewhere in the universe.
Of interest is that most of the ZP energy is in the top frequencies of the
ZP spectrum tapped. The bottom 98 percent of the frequency distribution
tapped contains (.98)^4 or 92 percent of the energy. The top two percent
contains about 8 percent of the energy. This implies it is best to utilize
the smallest possible wavelengths in a ZPE extracting mechanism, and
therefore, most likely, the smallest possible structures. This leaves
atomic structures as the most likely regime to get good results.
Further evaluating f(B) for dimensionless frequency B (in Hz) we get:
f(B) = [1.556 x 10^-61 joules/m^3] B^4
Now, considering radiation on an atomic scale, i.e. wavelength of 1
angstrom, or 10^-10 m, we get B ~ [3 x 10^17 Hz.] so:
f(B) = [1.556 x 10^-61 joules/m^3] [3 x 10^17 Hz.]^4
f(B) = 1.26 x 10^9 joules/m^3
f(B) = 1260 joules/cm^3
If only the top 2 percent of the accessible ZPE frequency band is utilized,
we get an energy density of about 1260/8 ~ 100 joules per cm^3.
Now, to consider power tapping capabilities, and some pretty big guesses.
Given the extreme ZPE energy density at high frequencies, it is reasonable
to assume that the tapped energy, i.e. energy removed from the imaginary
cm^3 can be replaced at nearly the speed of light, or about 10^-10 second
to replenish the cm^3. Given a collection of atomic sized devices located
in the cm^3, we could use the macro size of 1 cm instead of 1 angstrom as
the distance from which the replenishing energy must come, even though the
higher ZPE wavelengths within the angstrom dimension micro structure volume
could resupply the volume initially, with the minor resulting deficit at
all ZPE frequencies spreading like a wave throughout the universe. This
conservative choice gives an event cycle rate maximum of 10^10 event cycles
per second, each cycle taking at most some fraction of the 100 joules
residing in the imaginary cm^3. If we can somehow extract 1/10,000 the ZPE
energy in the cm^3, we would be able to extract 10^5 joules / cm^3 / sec.,
or 10,000 W/cm^3. If there are only 1 out of 10,000 sites active per
cycle, and we could extract 1/10,000 the ZPE energy in each site per
cycle, we would get 1 W/cm^3.
However, since we are using such a small part of the ZPE spectrum,
replenishment might be able to happen from the locality as fast as 10^-20
second per cell, so would not be a practical limitation in any sense. Such
a local replenishment would depend upon the existence of a mechanism for
the energy of higher ZPE frequencies being converted to and replenishing
the frequency band being tapped. The potential energy release is unlimited
from any reasonable standpoint. The real limitations are event density and
event repetition rate, and these are strictly design parameters that depend
upon the ingenuity of the designer and choice of medium.
This is not to say that finding a method of extracting any net energy is
easy. Though the ZPE sea abounds, it is very difficult to extract the
energy from it. This is possibly the main value to the AE concept. If
there is any truth to the idea that ZPE provides the support for orbitals,
then ZPE does interact with our environment in a big way continuously.
Massive energy exchanges occur in springs, sonic devices, etc., simply from
orbital deformation. Enormous forces can be involved and enormous energies,
even in the compression and expansion of relatively cold systems, like
metal lattices. The intended method of extracting energy from the massive
ZPE sea is to cause orbital expansion to occur in a confined space, thus
creating extreme orbital deformation without supplying the deforming energy
to the process. This is like manufacturing watch springs that are already
wound.
A PROPOSED MECHANISM FOR PRODUCING HEAT IN A METAL LATTICE
1) An ion, e.g. H+ or He++, is injected into a metal lattice. This can be
accomplished via high energy ion acceleration or via electrolysis.
2) As the ion comes to a halt in the lattice, any kinetic energy initially
imparted to the ion is given up to the lattice.
3) The ion takes up an electron from an adjacent atom or conduction band.
If from an adjacent atom, that atom may momentarily shrink (or lose a bond
and expand), but will quickly return to size by obtaining an electron from
a conduction band. The net result is an electron from the locality is
taken up by the ion.
4) An orbital is formed about the ion, increasing the size of the ion.
5) As the electron occupies the orbital, quantized EM energy (e.g. a
photon), equivalent to the original ionization energy, is released -
heating the local environment.
6) As the small ion and acquired electron(s) expands from nuclear
dimensions to atomic dimensions, at some point force is applied in all
directions to the lattice provided the interstitial sites do not
accommodate the size of the de-ionized product. Further expansion of the
de-ionized product to it's final size results in work being performed on
the lattice. The energy thus produced has no antecedent. It is derived
solely from the force that keeps atoms from collapsing. However, unlike a
collision, no initial compressive kinetic energy was supplied. The energy
is supplied from the ZPE sea.
ENERGY DERIVED FROM ATOMIC EXPANSION IN LIQUID OR GAS PHASES
Energy might be similarly obtained in a gas or liquid phase, though not
with the efficiency of a metal lattice. A conducting liquid, like mercury,
would behave similarly to the metal lattice, but the force resisting the AE
would be almost entirely inertial, thus much smaller than the resisting
force of a molecular bond. The force resisting the AE would still be
exerted over a slightly sub-atomic distance, so the excess energy produced
per atomic expansion would almost entirely be proportional to the AE
resisting force.
Similar arguments can be made for the collision of an ion with a non-ion in
a gas. The main difference here is the lack of an electron source to bring
the net charge to zero, and thus the cost of extracting the electron from
the neutral atom to fill the ion's orbital. A negative balance in
ionization potentials (e.g. H+ hits He) must be overcome using the kinetic
energy of the collision.
Similar arguments can also be made for gas/metal interfaces where low
energy ions strike metal electrodes, but do not penetrate. Here again, the
AE is only inertially confined, and results in the ion product being
accelerated upon its rebound from the plate.
EXAMPLE OF POSSIBLE MECHANISM FOR PRODUCING HEAT IN A GAS
1) Hydrogen is ionized to create H+ in a mixture of H2 and Rn (radon gas).
This might be accomplished in an arc, a point or wire discharge, or via
RF, x-ray, or other indirect excitement.
2) The H+ ion comes into contact with a Rn atom, stripping an electron
from the Rn atom producing a H atom and Rn+ ion. In the event one of the
other noble gasses is used in place of Rn, some of the H+ kinetic energy is
required to strip the electron, and the post collision noble gas atom may
still ultimately retain the electron even though a momentary H orbital
forms during the collision.
3) An orbital is formed about the H+ ion, suddenly increasing the size of
the ion. The expansion, fueled by ZPE, imparts "free" energy to the atoms
in the form of potential, then kinetic, energy as the collision progresses.
4) As the electron occupies the H orbital, quantized EM energy (e.g. one
or more photons), equivalent to the original ionization energy less the Rn
ionizing energy, is released - heating the local environment.
5) The initial momentums and energies of the H and Rn nuclei gets applied
to their shells, distorting them, and are returned to the environment via
the normal elastic collision mechanism.
6) Eventually the Rn+ is reconstituted to Rn and a photon is released,
gaining back the complete energy of ionization of the H atom initially.
The net energy gained is the energy of expansion (AE energy) of the H+
orbital in close proximity to the Rn+ ion - thus imparting additional
kinetic energy to both.
WHAT DOES THE AEH EXPLAIN?
The AEH provides a possible explanation for the varied effectiveness of the
alpha, beta, and gamma phases of CF loading. I suggest that in the initial
loading phase the adsorbed hydrogen is, as suggested by others, alternately
in H and H+ form, but primarily in H+ form. It is primarily ionically
bound to the lattice, especially when in motion. An H atom almost fits
inside a tetrahedral lattice cell, but not through the triangular portals
between cells. In the beta phase, many of the cells are occupied by H
molecules, and in such a state, diffusion between cells requires
displacement of some H molecules, the diffusion paths tend to be blocked,
and the continued diffusion requires the ionization of a path blocking H or
its tunneling out of the way. Some degree of H confinement upon the
reconversion from an H+ to H would occur, thus some small AE excess energy
might be produced in beta phase. In the gamma phase, H loading would be
to the point that additional loading would force the formation of H2
molecules in the tetrahedral sites and in the face holes. In looking at the
geometry of the Ni lattice and H2 molecules, it appears such a formation is
possible with only a deformation of the lattice of about 2 percent. This
would, however, imply extreme confinement and local pressure, which would
dramatically increase the work done by ZPE in supporting the H2 formation,
or "expansion".
Some numbers regarding H2 molecules and the face centered cubic geometry of
the Ni lattice:
H atomic radius: .79 �
H covalent radius .32 �
H2 bond length .7414 �
Ni atomic radius 1.62 �
Ni covalent radius 1.15 �
Ni bond length 2.4916 �
>From this it is determined that the face hole will pass a sphere of radius
0.2885 � and the tetrahedral space will accommodate a sphere of radius
0.6118 �. However, an H2 molecule can be placed across one axis of the
tetrahedron with each atom partway through a face hole. In fact, the H2
atom could pass through the face holes with only an expansion of the bond
length of 2*(.3200 -.2885) = .063 �. This is an increase in bond length of
about 2.5 percent. Less expansion is sufficient to fit the H2 into the
tetrahedron. Note that it is also possible, when there is sufficient heat,
to trap or form an H2 molecule in the face hole and that the three Ni atoms
can act like two hammers and an anvil, or a tri-jawed anvil - popping the
H2 atom apart, each atom then expanding in separate tetrahedral spaces.
Such an expansion is at least inertially constrained, thus AE energy could
result. Note that each half of the H2 "dumbbell" resides in a different
tetrahedral space. These spaces can act as pistons, i.e the vacuum will
accumulate zero point energy. This energy may assist the cracking of the
H2 by the anvil by exerting a Casimir force on the expanding H orbital
surface. Further, when the orbitals of the expanding H and the boundary
metal atoms make contact, a kind of orbital "blow through" may occur,
creating free electrons that further heat the lattice. The H nucleus would
be accelerated in the direction of the center of its tetrahedral site by
the expanding H orbital. This momentum could carry the H nucleus on into
the next tetrahedral site, thus ZPE may help facilitate the H diffusion.
Sufficient energy might momentarily create an H "supermolecule," two H
nuclei orbited by two electrons. Such events would increase the
likelihood of fusion, if only a small amount. Maximizing the ZPE
extraction via these means would mean loading the lattice at a (or
eventually heating it to a) temperature near the melting point of the Ni in
order to permit maximum occupation of the triangular face holes by H2
atoms. Similar arguments apply to the Pd-D system.
The following chart of FCC elements shows possible candidates for such a
mechanism:
Elem. Bond Covalent Atomic Face Hole Tetrahedral
Length Radius Radius Radius Space Radius
(A) (A) (A) (A) (A)
Ge 2.4498 1.22 1.52 0.1944 0.5123
Pt 2.7460 1.30 1.83 0.2854 0.6417
Ni 2.4916 1.15 1.62 0.2885 0.6118
Cu 2.5560 1.17 1.57 0.3057 0.6373
Pd 2.7511 1.28 1.79 0.3083 0.6653
Au 2.8841 1.34 1.79 0.3251 0.6993
Ag 2.8894 1.34 1.75 0.3282 0.7031
Al 2.8630 1.25 1.82 0.4030 0.7744
Ce 3.6500 1.65 2.70 0.4573 0.9309
Yb 3.8800 1.74 2.40 0.5001 1.0035
Ca 3.9470 1.74 2.23 0.5388 1.0509
Pb 3.5003 1.47 1.81 0.5509 1.0051
Sr 4.3020 1.91 2.45 0.5738 1.1319
Since hydrogen has a covalent radius of 0.32 A, it appears superficially
that Pd, Cu, Ni, and Pt are the only reasonable candidates for the
suggested anvil/piston mechanism. However, this table is only an
approximation, and a detailed analysis of the crystal structure, utilizing
the Schroedinger Equation, is required. It is especially noteworthy that
Pt, Cu, and Au are relatively impervious to hydrogen adsorption at standard
temperatures. The best candidates capable of both trapping the H2 in a
face hole and also being capable of anvil pressure on the bond appear to be
Nu, Cu, and Pd, but again, detailed analysis is required. Also, the more
impervious elements might become active at a high temperature, especially
Pt and Cu. Note also that above Al in the table, the H atom, having a
radius of 0.79 �, appears to readily fit into the tetrahedral space without
orbital deformation. This would greatly diminish the free energy
generating potential.
The AEH model also may explain why various discharge tubes, especially
those containing H2 or He, appear to produce excess energy. The ions are
injected into the metal lattice where they are confined prior to atomic
expansion. A repetitive ion oscillation may produce a kind of synchronized
shock wave in the metal surface causing it to rebound and add energy to the
impinging and reflecting particles at the surface. The source of the AE
energy may be primarily in the electrodes, especially cathodes, but to some
degree may occur in the gas as well, or at the electrode surface due to AE
surface effect expansion.
The AEH may also explain the mechanism by which cavitation devices produce
excess heat - namely that some of the H2O is ionized in the cavitation
bubbles and the collapsing bubble results in the ions being injected into
the the high pressure water wall where the ions reconstitute and expand,
undergo AE, adding pressure, thus kinetic energy, to the collapsing
pressure wall.
The AEH may also explain the over unity performance of an arc in producing
water gas in that collision of H+ with C, or CO or CO2 could potentially
create AE energy.
Here are some ionization potentials of interest:
H 13.598
C 11.260
CO 14.014
CO2 13.773
Note that no kinetic energy is required to trigger the AE reaction between
H+ and C and that little is required for CO or CO2. Note that the AE
reaction might possibly push the chemical equilibrium in the arc toward the
production of CO by supplying the excess energy required to split the
second O from the CO2. Two things are bothersome about this concept
though. One is that if the AE effect exists it should have been observed
in chemistry long ago. Another is that, unlike the case where H+ and a
noble gas are used, a bond can form between the H and the reactant, so the
kinetic energy would end up in molecular vibration, or in reducing the
probability of such a bond. The main difficulty, though, is that the
shared orbital, the bond, creates an attractive force instead of a
repulsive force. AE excess energy is based upon repulsion, not attraction.
Perhaps one difficulty answers the other. In any event, He++ would make a
more logical AE generator than H+ in this application. The He would act as
an energy booster, and thereby as a kind of catalyst, in cracking the H2O
and CO2 bonds. Such a process may work best at very low voltages and high
frequencies, especially in a manner similar to that suggested by Puharich
(Ref. 8) for cracking water. His method adapted to a steam/CO2
environment, catalyzed by He, could assist in the production of water gas.
Such a gas could be used, within a sealed glass envelope containing both
discharges, to feed oscillations (due to operation in the negative
resistance range) of a higher voltage arc or electric discharge, to produce
electrical energy directly, without mechanical devices.
SO WHAT ABOUT DESIGN CRITERIA?
This model results in some concrete design suggestions:
1) Produce ions (especially H+ or H++) in as large a quantity and as
efficiently as possible.
2) Accelerate or transport the ions into a confining and preferably
conducting medium where they are deionized under pressure.
3) Utilize the increased pressure and heat in the confining medium.
4) Make the confining medium as gas recycling as possible, preferably
extracting energy from the higher pressure and temperature post-AE gas
before repeating the cycle.
SOME APPLICATION AND EXPERIMENTATION THOUGHTS
1) Mercury, though not as confining as a lattice, may make a good medium
for ion injection as it would expel the gasses quickly. Mercury also
conducts electricity well. Other metals could be used at higher
temperatures; however, electron emission from hot cathodes would not be
good as it would increase the power demand. The increased power would have
to be utilized to result in more ionizations. The simplest possible test
device may be a small sealed glass tube of H2 or He with a point anode at
the top and mercury cathode at the bottom, activated with high frequency
high voltage pulsed DC current. An improvement might be to use two anode
electrodes, isolated from the cathode, with a lower voltage discharge
between the anodes to do the ionization.
2) Hot anodes are fine as they will increase ionization and kinetic energy
of the gas. An arc created by an isolation transformer may make a very
good anode.
3) It may be possible to use water as a cathode. The atomic expansion may
assist in boiling the water at the surface. The water could provide it's
own H2 from the evolved steam which migrates to an arc anode. It might be
good to use a helium atmosphere to get safe recombination. An electrolyte
would, of course, increase the cathode conductivity.
4) Electrolysis (or arcs) under water may produce usable energy if done
under extreme pressure. Simply use the evolved high pressure gas to move
pistons. Additional process stages could be added for recombination and
heat recovery. Some of the energy of compression, by the AEH model, would
come from the ZPE sea.
5) As suggested earlier, a closed tube with an electrically excited
mixture of H2 and a noble gas, especially radon, may produce some over
unity results.
6) The process of producing water gas, i.e. burning carbon in an arc under
water to produce CO and H2, may be improved by avoiding the use carbon rods
altogether. This might be done by recycling the CO2 and H2O (as steam)
into an arc and driving its equilibrium to a mixture of H2O, CO2, CO, and
H2 in the arc. The AE energy would assist in driving the reaction in
reverse in the arc and would be the energy derived from the recycling
process. This process might be assisted by adding He to the atmosphere as
the He has a much higher ionization potential (24.587 volts) than CO or
CO2, and will not bond with it.
REFERENCES
1. H. E. Puthoff, "Everything for Nothing," New. Sci., vol. 127, p. 52 (28
July 1990).
2. H. E. Puthoff, "Ground State of Hydrogen as a
Zero-Point-Fluctuation-Determined State," Phys. Rev. D, vol. 35, p. 3266
(1987).
3. D. C. Cole and H. E. Puthoff, "Extracting Energy and Heat from the
Vacuum," Phys. Rev. E, vol. 48, p. 1562 (1993).
4. H. E. Puthoff, "The Energetic Vacuum: Implications for Energy
Research," Spec. in Sci. and Tech., vol. 13, p. 247 (1990).
5. Timothy Boyer, "The Classical Vacuum," Scientific American, p. 70,
August 1985
6. Walter Greiner and Joseph Hamilton, "Is the Vacuum Really Empty?",
American Scientist, March-April 1980, p. 154
7. H. E. Puthoff, "The Energetic Vacuum: Implications for Energy
Research", Speculations in Science and Technology, vol. 13, no. 4, pp.
247-257, 1990.
8. US Patent 4,394,230, "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SPLITTING WATER
MOLECULES," Henry K. Puharich, Attorney, Agent, or Firm - Mandeville and
Schweitzer
Regards,
Horace Heffner
