In LENR angular momentum can be converted back and forth to linear momentum many times before that energy is projected as magnetic force through EMF photons.
Metal refection converts spin to linear force to drive dipole motion of the electron hole pair. http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1308/1308.0547.pdf *Extraordinary momentum and spin in evanescent waves* Then the energy of the dipole is converted back to angular momentum by a surface boundary to form a magnetic soliton. Then the soliton converts angular momentum of the amplified spin to an anapole magnetic field that delivers energy at a distance to the nucleus. This is how the energy content of the spin of infrared photons are converted to energy that increases the mass of the proton to convert that proton into a neutron. On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Axil-- > > Note that the paper says the energy is angular momentum not kinetic energy > of the alphas. Angular momentum energy is spin energy. The alphas move > away with essentially no kinetic energy normally associated with non-solid > state or non-coherent systems. It is my conclusion from what Cook > claims, that the electronic cloud must shield the alphas as they are formed > from being repulsed from each other, or their charge does not materialize > until the spin energy is fractionated and their distance is sufficient so > as to impart only a small kinetic energy to each particle, if they have not > already become neutral He atoms. The Pauli Uncertainty Principle may come > into play to spread the wave function of the spin energy of the excited He* > to a large radius compared to the radius associated with a ground state He > nucleus. The enlarged wave function may also act to couple to the rest of > the particles in the locale (coherent system), including the electrons. > > Bob > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> > *To:* vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > *Sent:* Tuesday, April 07, 2015 10:52 AM > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:mainstream physics paper bout the Hot Cat, co-author > Andrea Rossi > > Figure 5 depicts the alpha creation process. See how the alpha particles > are moving away in opposite directions? > > Figure 5: The lowest-lying excited-state of 7 Li4 (A) has a lattice > structure to which an additional proton will produce a two-tetrahedron > structure, giving 8 Be4 (B). The double alpha lattice structure (C) can > then break into independent two alpha particles (D), which are released > with 17 MeV of angular momentum, but without gamma radiation. > > On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> Axil-- >> >> You said Cook said this: "Cook says that high energy alpha particles >> exit the NAE at high energy and deliver their energy to the far field at an >> some indeterminate distance from the NAE that produced the energy." >> >> I did not see this statement. Where was Cook's statement made? >> >> What I saw in the new paper was that the energy of the alphas from the >> Be-8 decay was in the form of 17 Mev of angular momentum (spin energy)--not >> kinetic energy. (The slowing-down of 17 MeV alphas would cause noticeable >> x-rays and other high energy EM radiation.) The alphas apparently stays >> put and transfers its excess energy via spin coupling, one spin quanta or >> so at a time. >> >> Bob Cook >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> >> *To:* vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 07, 2015 8:57 AM >> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:mainstream physics paper bout the Hot Cat, co-author >> Andrea Rossi >> >> Like so many LENR theories, the Cook theory of the LENR reaction is not >> fundamental. Like almost all other LENR theories, it deals with the >> emergent results of the fundamental LENR reaction without explaining the >> cause of the observed experimental results. >> >> If a theory cannot explain EVERY aspect of the experimental results in >> every dimension, it is not valid. >> In particular, the way energy of these high powered alpha particles are >> converted to heat is not addressed, even though that part of the LENR >> theory is central to how the energy of the nuclear reaction is converted to >> soft x-rays and extreme ultraviolet light. >> >> I have concluded from the experimental results derived from many LENR >> systems that the gamma suppression and the basic LENR nuclear reaction is >> tightly coupled together so that if a LENR based nuclear event occurs, *no >> gamma is ever seen* in a environment that has gotten hot enough (500C). >> >> Gamma suppression is an essential part of the LENR reaction. So Gamma >> suppression is an essential part of what is going on inside the Nuclear >> Active Environment. If energy is carried away from the NAE, it cannot be >> converted to its final moderated form (soft x-rays and extreme ultraviolet >> light.) by the LENR reaction. >> >> Cook says that high energy alpha particles exit the NAE at high energy >> and deliver their energy to the far field at an some indeterminate distance >> from the NAE that produced the energy. If this were true, there is always a >> slight chance that the alpha particle could exit the gas envelop and >> deposit its kinetic energy in the Alumina shell where a gamma ray would >> result. This gamma ray is never seen. So if an alpha particle is produced >> it must have little or no kinetic energy that is transferred to the far >> field. >> >> All the energy of the nuclear reaction is carried away from the NAE by >> the LENR reaction itself. The gamma emission is an intrinsic part of the >> LENR reaction energy transfer mechanism. >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 11:21 AM, a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> >> wrote: >> >>> Jones Beene writes. "this paper is cannot be taken seriously. A waste >>> of time." >>> >>> I wish you wouldn't just damn the paper out of hand but give some >>> reasons of just why it is wrong. I don't have the knowledge of nuclear >>> reactions that some others do here, but most of the theories seem far from >>> solid to me and this one is no worse. It should at least be considered. >>> >> >> >
