Hi Dave! Hope all is well in Robersonville…
Now to answer your questions… “are you thinking of the protons (in the case of hydrogen) as being waves instead of particles? If so, would not protons be extremely tiny wave packets due to their large mass? In my estimation this would tend to localize them so that they look more like particles or the billiard balls that you mention.” Yes, some kind of oscillatory entity or medium with a much smaller physical extent than electrons, and thus a much higher frequency of oscillation; orders of magnitude faster oscillations. Ever play ping-pong? Take the ping-pong ball, drop it on the table, and then take the paddle and restrict the balls upper bounce to a smaller and smaller height. What happens??? The frequency of the ball’s bounce increases. Can this analogy be applied to what we are seeing in the difference in oscillatory frequencies between electrons and protons. Something is restricting the physical extent of the oscillating medium/fluid/aether, resulting in a much higher freq’y of oscillation for protons compared to electrons. The range of frequencies at which protons or electrons are oscillating also determines what energy range photons can be absorbed/emitted by those oscillators. Gamma rays pass right thru the electrons as if they weren’t there, to finally interact with the nucleus… IR/visible/UV level photons (much slower frequencies than gamma) interact with electrons. >From outside the nucleus, protons most likely *appear* to behave more particle-like, however, I would posit that at their scale, its’ more like superfluid oscillators with some element of coupling between them which we call the strong force. “I also wonder about how they would shed the thermal energy when viewed as a packet. In what form does this energy leave the atom?” I would think that protons, having a much higher frequency of oscillation, do not interact with heat (IR photons); or at least only under very specific conditions (the emission spectrum of hydrogen is the simplest, is it not?). The energy level of photons is a function of their frequency, and IR/Vis/UV photons are *much* more likely to interact with electrons, since there is a close harmonic relationship between them. Is the absorption/emission spectrum of Hydrogen that of hydrogen atom, or the hydrogen ion? If it’s the H-atom, then I would be curious as to whether a proton (i.e., a H ion which has lost its single electron), can interact with IR/Vis/UV light at all… if so, is that interaction direct interaction, or is there something mediating the transfer of energy between the much lower frequency photons and much higher frequency proton oscillator??? “How do you take into account that there is repulsion between a number of protons trapped inside a void? I would think that the forces pushing the protons apart would prevent them from having an opportunity to merge their waveforms due to the relatively large distances maintained.” In a system where atoms OR ions have been cooled down to near 0K, the normal repulsion of like-charges no longer applies, and the BEC forms. A BEC happens spontaneously when the atoms reach a certain temperature. IIRC, one of the articles I referenced in a previous post states that the BEC is formed using Cesium IONS! Thus, once a collection of atoms OR IONS have shed all their heat quanta, the concept of ‘charge’ and attraction/repulsion no longer apply. At least if the atoms/ions are all the same flavor. I’d be curious to see what would happen in a similar experiment using 50 Cs ions and 50 He ions! Would it form two separate BEC ‘globs’, and what kind of interaction would be present between them? I think it safe to say that one has to view the BEC as an oscillating fluid, NOT as billiard balls. I.e., the particle-like nature of the wave-particle duality is no longer operating/present when all heat quanta have been removed from a collection of atoms. I can also see a very simple explanation as to why that is… again involving resonance/discordance. Discordance between two colliding atoms manifests in more billiard-ball like (particle-like) behavior. Thus, it is very unlikely to couple energy from one atom INTO the other atom. Instead, there is a TRANSFER of momentum from one atom to the other, typical of the analogy used in basic physics classes of two billiard balls on a pool table… ****But transfer of energy from one atom INTO the INTERNAL oscillators of another atom requires at least a close resonant/harmonic relationship.**** This also may tie in with Frank’s concept of velocity of sound in the nucleus and ‘matching impedances’ and all that. When one considers that any atom higher in the chart than H, is an increasing complexity of internal oscillators, with varying coupling between them, and quanta of energy being absorbed and shed depending on what the instant state of those oscillators happens to be, the best one could hope for in trying to explain or predict their behavior REQUIRES resorting to probabilities – thus, why quantum mechanics is much more accurate than classical physics when it comes to explaining interactions at that level. -mark From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2014 11:40 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:FYI: Strong light–matter coupling in two-dimensional atomic crystals Mark, I see that I was not on the same page as you in this manner. Sorry if I confused your concept. I want to understand what you are referring to by asking a couple of questions. One, are you thinking of the protons(in the case of hydrogen) as being waves instead of particles? If so, would not protons be extremely tiny wave packets due to their large mass? In my estimation this would tend to localize them so that they look more like particles or the billiard balls that you mention. I also wonder about how they would shed the thermal energy when viewed as a packet. In what form does this energy leave the atom? Kinetic energy and momentum can easily be shed to adjacent atoms if particles are involved. How do you take into account that there is repulsion between a number of protons trapped inside a void? I would think that the forces pushing the protons apart would prevent them from having an opportunity to merge their waveforms due to the relatively large distances maintained. Dave -----Original Message----- From: MarkI-ZeroPoint <zeropo...@charter.net> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Tue, Dec 30, 2014 10:52 am Subject: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:FYI: Strong light–matter coupling in two-dimensional atomic crystals Dave: If my hypothesis is correct as to what the conditions are like in a void/microcavity, then looking at atoms in the void as ‘billiard balls’ colliding and rebounding as you describe, is I believe inaccurate; at least once the atoms shed their heat energy, their wave functions will overlap and become a BEC. I.e., the less heat energy, the less the atom behaves as a billiard ball and more like an oscillating fluid… Also, there will likely be some element of an E-field/B-field inside the void, and that will physically orient the motion of any atoms inside… Wish I could be a fly on the void wall! -mark From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com <mailto:dlrober...@aol.com?> ] Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 9:10 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:FYI: Strong light–matter coupling in two-dimensional atomic crystals I have considered what you are saying as being normal Mark. Relative motion of an atom to itself is zero, so it is at zero kelvin as far as it knows. When a second atom is added to the void, it becomes more complicated but the relative motion of the two must become zero many times per second as they collide and rebound within your assumed cavity. During these brief intervals we have two atoms that are at zero Kelvin from their reference frame. As you add more and more atoms to the mix the amount of time during which zero relative motion exists between them becomes smaller and less likely, but does occur. As long as you keep the number of atoms relatively small that are required to react in the process of your choice, it will have an opportunity to happen many times per second inside each cavity. Multiply that number by the number of possible active cavities within a large object and you get an enormous number of active sites that have the potential to react. If only 4 atoms are required at zero Kelvin in order to react as you may be considering, it seems obvious that this will occur so often that a large amount of heat will be released by a system of that type. When you realize that it seems to be very difficult to achieve an LENR device that generates lots of heat I suspect that the number of reacting atoms confined within the cavity is quite a bit greater than 4. How many do you believe are required in order to combine and in what form is the ash? On the other hand, if a reaction is virtually guaranteed once a modest number of atoms becomes confined inside the void, then the limiting factor might be that it becomes impossible to confine the required number under most conditions. If this situation is the limiting factor, then a higher temperature could well allow more atoms of the reactants to enter into a void of the necessary type as more space become available when the cavity walls open with additional motion. I am not convinced that this type of reaction is the cause of LENR, but at least it should be given proper consideration. Dave -----Original Message----- From: MarkI-ZeroPoint <zeropo...@charter.net> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Mon, Dec 29, 2014 10:54 pm Subject: [Vo]:FYI: Strong light–matter coupling in two-dimensional atomic crystals FYI: Article being referenced is at the bottom, however, I wanted to toss something out to The Collective first… One of the things that caught my eye in the article is the ‘room temperature’ condition… As we all know, atoms at room temp are vibrating like crazy since they contain the equivalent of 273degC of energy above their lowest state. Thus, ‘coherent’ states in condensed matter above absolute zero is almost never seen. The article’s experiment was done in material at room temp, so the observed behavior is a bit of a surprise. Perhaps what they have not yet thought about is that the ‘microcavities’ have no temperature, as I will explain below. This ties in with a point I tried to explain to Dr. Storms, and although I think he realizes my point had merit, he glossed right over it and went off on a different tangent. This was in a vortex discussion about 9 to 12 months ago. The point is this: The ‘temperature’ inside a ‘void’ in a crystal lattice is most likely that of the vacuum of space; i.e, absolute zero, or very close to it. Because, temperature is nothing more than excess energy imparted to atoms from neighboring atoms; atoms have temperature; space/vacuum does not. Without atoms (physical matter), you have no temperature. In a lattice void, if it is large enough (whatever that dimension is), there is NO ‘temperature’ inside since the void contains no atoms. If an atom diffuses into that void, it enters with whatever energy it had when it entered, so it has a temperature. At this time, I have not heard any discussion as to whether the atoms which make up the walls of the void shed IR photons which could get absorbed by an atom in the void and increase its temperature, however, would that atom want to immediately shed that photon to get back to its lowest energy level??? So voids in crystals likely provide an ideal environment for the formation of BECs. -mark iverson ARTICLE BEING REFERENCED Strong light–matter coupling in two-dimensional atomic crystals http://www.nature.com/nphoton/journal/v9/n1/full/nphoton.2014.304.html Abstract “Two-dimensional atomic crystals of graphene, as well as transition-metal dichalcogenides, have emerged as a class of materials that demonstrate strong interaction with light. This interaction can be further controlled by embedding such materials into optical microcavities. When the interaction rate is engineered to be faster than dissipation from the light and matter entities, one reaches the ‘strong coupling’ regime. This results in the formation of half-light, half-matter bosonic quasiparticles called microcavity polaritons. Here, we report evidence of strong light–matter coupling and the formation of microcavity polaritons in a two-dimensional atomic crystal of molybdenum disulphide (MoS2) embedded inside a dielectric microcavity at room temperature. A Rabi splitting of 46 ± 3 meV is observed in angle-resolved reflectivity and photoluminescence spectra due to coupling between the two-dimensional excitons and the cavity photons. Realizing strong coupling at room temperature in two-dimensional materials that offer a disorder-free potential landscape provides an attractive route for the development of practical polaritonic devices.”
