The problem with the phonon is that its wavelength is extremely short. The attenuation coefficient for waves, in general, is typically quoted in dB/wavelength; and nature abhors a too small value for such a number. Hence you only have to propagate a limited number of wavelengths and the energy in the wave dissipates. Also, the greatest amount of energy is deposited closest to where the wave originated. If phonons were being generated as the LENR energy output, the energy would dissipate close to where the phonons were being created. If the NAE was of limited size, how could the phonons provide any significant heat to the whole reactor without the NAE being so hot it would long before evaporate? Peter Hagelstein's answer to this is that there is no NAE - the reaction is completely distributed to start with. Because the hypothetical LENR phonons would be generated in a distributed fashion, the heat becomes distributed. Thus, if you are presuming the heat carrier is phonon, then you are simultaneously rejecting the notion of the pointillistic NAEs.
Sometimes the tiny volcano eruption is seen in the surface of a LENR producing host metal, where it appears that evaporation has occurred. Yet, the heat energy contribution from one such micro-eruption is small, and for the LENR energies being observed, the surface would have to be truly covered with these features afterwards - they would appear to be an obvious smoking gun (a pun). With the rarity of these observed micro-eruptions, one would have to believe that if LENR occurs in small point-like NAEs, the heat produced must be deferred to regions somewhat remote from the source. The micro-eruptions tend to support the idea of a small NAE, but the fact that the surface doesn't become completely covered with micro-eruptions suggests a heat carrier capable of delivering the heat to the greater apparatus. On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > In nuclear fission, the active particle which propagates the reaction is > of course the neutron. The identity crisis that we have dealt with in LENR > from the start becomes evident when we try to single out the active > particle or pseudo-particle, which is the most basic agent that propagates > and continues the reaction (in a situation such as "heat-after-death" or > the thermal runaway). > > If nuclear fusion was indeed the source of energy of a runaway or meltdown > reaction (and close to a dozen have been reported) then we should be able > to identify an anomalous agent of some kind, but it is not gamma radiation > or neutrons, so we look for something completely new. Beta particles (fast > electrons) and alpha particle can also be ruled out due to proportionate > lack of secondary radiation (bremsstrahlung). Yes, there appears to be a > tiny amount of all, or any, of the above in LENR at various times, but not > coming close to accounting for the emergent thermal gain of a runaway. This > is gain far above chemical and far below nuclear, which can cause a large > amount of stainless steel to melt, as happened at Thermacore but with no > residual radiation. > > Thus the choices for the active agent in LENR are narrowed primarily to > the phonon, for those who follow some version of the Hagelstein theory, or > to EUV photons for those who follow Mills, or both. Holmlid has not had a > runaway so we can possibly eliminate the more exotic candidates. Obviously, > one parameter which distinguishes the runaway reaction is strong Infrared > light, also seen in Parkhomov "glow tube" and replications. > > This brings up the field of optomechanics and more specifically "cavity > optomechanics" which studies the interaction between light and mechanical > movement. This also brings up the suggestion that with resonance and > coherence, both the photon and phonon can be merged together into a hybrid > or pseudo-particle. The "SPP" or surface plasmon polariton has been a > candidate for LENR active modality - which has been talked about the most, > but the SPP does NOT fit the circumstances precisely. Actually it is a poor > fit. > > The plasmon, a quantum of plasma oscillation, does not really fit in the > circumstance of a condensed lattice reaction since there is technically no > plasma. The polariton does model strong coupling of electromagnetic waves > with an electric dipole, which can be present in the runaway but "surface" > does not model the a lattice effect. Thus SPP is one out of three accuracy. > > Moreover, phonons need to be included since mechanical vibration is more > fundamental to LENR than optics. Perhaps LENR needs its own specific > pseudo-particle, which vaguely resembles the SPP but only when combined > with the phonon and eliminating the "surface" feature. > > Can we label this pseudo-particle as the PPP (phonon-plasmon-polariton) > instead of SPP? > > As fate would have it, something like this PPP pseudo-particle has been > proposed, if not witnessed by generation of single phonons at gigahertz > frequencies in optoelectronics, where the single phonon has been triggered > by single photons in the near infrared. See: > > http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.234301 > > It would be intriguing to imagine that a pseudo-particle found in an > unrelated field has broader applicability and can function as the active > mediator in LENR ... either real or as metaphor. > > As a real particle, we can probably model "dense hydrogen" as having all > the properties of a real PPP - functioning as a hybrid of all three > constituents: phonon, plasmon and polariton, reduced to the quantized state. > > >
