My theory is not about neutrons. Its about the non-conservation of the magnetic forces. In the nuclear case its the non-conservation of the spin orbit force in vibrating Bose condensate. This is beyond the scope of the simple paper.
-----Original Message----- From: Frank Znidarsic <fznidar...@aol.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Thu, Dec 11, 2014 5:17 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:published in a peer review I don't know anything of Gullstrom. What is omitted from the paper is "when the stimulation becomes strong enough the probability of nuclear transition increases". -----Original Message----- From: Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Thu, Dec 11, 2014 2:52 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:published in a peer review Frank-- Nice work. I assume you know about the latest theory regarding tunneling concepts associated with nuclear reactions proposed by Gullstrom at Uppsala. It seems to explain the Lugano results fairly well. Your summary--"The energy of a propagating light appears as a wave. Points of matching impedance appear within this continuum. These points are characterized by a match in the velocity of the interacting partners. Light promptly interacts with matter at these points. Light behaves, at these points, as a particle. Planck’s constant emerged naturally from the analysis. Einstein’s photo electric effect was produced as effect of a prompt, impedance matched condition."--may dovetail well with this new theory of LENR. Gullstrom's idea of tunneling may be another concept of impedance matching with the objective of nature to reduce the free energy of a coherent system. What's your assessment? Bob Cook ----- Original Message ----- From: Frank Znidarsic To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 10:29 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:published in a peer review Thanks Mark, I will. I have all sent it out to many organizations. The velocity in the paper 1,094,000 meters per second comes from my cold fusion work. I don't mention that in the paper because I want the work to get out as far as possible. I also mention the 1.36 fermi dimension in the paper. After publication I found this (linked below). I may make a brief modification to the paper in light of this discovery. Once again the methods produced results that were unknown by me but known to the wider scientific community. I did not know about the tetrahedron at the time of publication. http://applet-magic.com/He4nuclide.htm I kept the paper short and limited the results to a classical explaining of the quantum condition. You know, however, that the analysis leads to cold fusion and antigravity. -----Original Message----- From: MarkI-ZeroPoint <zeropo...@charter.net> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Thu, Dec 11, 2014 11:42 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:published in a peer review Congrats Frank! Please keep us informed as to responses or reviews by the scientific community… -mark From: Frank Znidarsic [mailto:fznidar...@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 5:53 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:published in a peer review Please help me by fwd the article to as wide of an audience as possible. http://benthamopen.com/journal/render-volume.php?volumeID=CHEMISTRY-V1 Frank Znidarsic
