Thanks for the additional explanation and the reference to the 2002 paper.
I'll take the time to read what you've already said about this a bit
more carefully before I post any further comment <blush>
Horace Heffner wrote:
On Jan 5, 2006, at 11:43 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
I don't know if I go along with the fusion speculation, though.
Well, the formation low energy D or 3He by electron catalysis in light
water is to me far more palatable than a proton reaction with potassium
or other highly charged nucleus. If experimental evidence proves heavy
element reaction with hydrogen then we have to accept that (not that I
think it is yet conclusive and thus must be accepted.) However, if we
can accept that possibility, then it seems almost trivial to accept the
formation of D and He3 in light water, or in heavy water T or a neutral
4He* (which is essentially a de- energized quadraneutron) that can form
helium or create mass 4 changes without strong signatures.
The degree of de-enrgization at the moment of fusion depends on just
how small the de-energized fused particle is upon initial waveform
collapse. Given that it can be string sized, essentially all the
energy of the reactants is then returned to the vacuum, followed by a
permanent energy borrowing to "expand" the strings quantum waveforms to
normal size. We thus not only have ZPE fueled atomic expansion, we
have ZPE fueled nuclear expansion, followed by atomic expansion of the
leptons.
The most plausible possible mechanism you mentioned for the blue glow
seemed to me to be the last one, in which the insulating layer, in
combination with the solution itself, is said to form a semiconductor
LED.
True, but the possibility of *both* types of glow is not excluded either.
If I understood it, you're suggesting that the insulator+solution
might form the equivalent of _two_ reversed diodes in parallel (_not_
series), and the one with the higher resistance and higher forward
voltage drop is the one associated with the blue glow.
I suggest that the insulator + solution forms a single diode when the
insulator is properly "conditioned". Given two properly conditioned
electrodes in an AC cell, they act like back-to-back diodes, and thus
act like a capacitor - though one with a bit of a bypass resistor.
Given one conditioned electrode and one electrode with no conditioned
insulator, the cell acts like a diode. In that case the conditioned
electrode is a cathode when conducting, an anode when it opposes
current flow. This effect I attributed to low anion mobility in the
interphase. Proton mobility is comparatively high everywhere in the cell.
So, the glow shows when the high-drop diode is _forward_ biased, as
we would expect from solid state LED experience. (A first glance at
this situation, before reading your paper, made it seem like the glow
was associated with a _reverse_ biased diode, which seemed harder to
understand.)
Er ... at least, I think that's what you said?
No, just the opposite. A conditioned electrode produces the glow when
it is reverse biased, i.e. when it is an *anode* in the cell. It is
accepting electrons from the electrolyte. It is creating free protons
in an extraordinarily strong electrostatic field at its surface. The
experimental evidence for this was all carefully described in
<http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/BlueAEH.pdf> and in the related
posts here on vortex around Feb. 2002.
I hope that is helpful - it is not easy to describe these concepts.
Horace Heffner
