https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAsceiIMY2I
The question is "how can microorganisms produce enough power to transmute elements". The answer to this question could involve a global Bose condensate (BEC) that forms throughout the entire extent of the bug colony. This BEC connects each bug through quantum mechanical entanglement into a network where any single bug can tap into the total power potential of the entire colony through a process called superradience. As the transmutation of elements takes place, the LENR reaction does not expose the fradual bodies of the individual bugs to the destructive radiation, energy, and particles produced by the transmutation process. But the entangled connectivity provided by the BEC can distribute the transmuted elements to each bug as required. We have seen this sharing of transmuted elements between LENR active agents in the LION reactor experiments. The bugs aquire the elements they need to sustain their life cycle but LENR hides the destructive potential that this life sustaining transmutation of elements engenders. On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 11:14 AM JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > *“The *energy release per atom would be useful, to narrow down the > possibilities.” > > > > Yes. No doubt this detail would be very useful to know, but is it even > possible to know? > > Probably NOT as of now – since it makes a fundamental assumption which is > not proved. > > That fundamental assumption is that energy release happens only once per > atom – as in fusion. At first this seems to be a logical assumption, but > fusion is not yet proved. If atoms produce lesser energy sequentially > (still giving up mass) then the energy per atom would not be relevant > since any atom could radiate excess energy several times or several million > times during the run. > > At this point we do no need to be specific about the details of the > alternative mechanism to show the logical error, but there are several > recognized possibilities that actually make as much sense as fusion > including a version of the Hotson theory. > > One particular operative mechanism which could change perceptions is > related to the experimental findings which have been provided by Hora, > Miley, Winterberg and Holmlid, et al. going back many years, which involve > Bose-Einstein clustering. There is no apparent limitation on how many times > an individual atom can give up mass-energy in the Coulomb explosion if and > when they occur sequentially. > > To complicated matters – these experts suggest that the BEC cluster can > act as an extremely efficient fusion target to be imploded with a laser. In > that case the energy release per atom in the cluster would be less than the > fusion of two deuterons – on average but the helium is thereafter > unreactive so energy per atom would be useful to know. > > There are other alternative mechanisms for gain not involving fusion. > These researchers also suggest or imply that clustering “alone” can > produce significant excess energy with no fusion and/or a delayed nucleon > annihilation event. Here, we find the sequential Coulomb explosion where > atoms can participate many times. > > Moreover, the Coulomb explosion is presently a proved mechanism with a > signature emission which has been documented via experiment. In contrast > there is no documented fusion evidence from the Mizuno breakthrough - as of > now. It is a mistake to assume that this proof is just around the corner. > It may not happen. I predict it will not. > > If one is firmly convinced that deuterium fusion must be happening in the > new Mizuno breakthrough due to the robustness of the output or their own > per theory or patent - be prepared to jump- ship since there is NO report > of helium which is an absolute requirement to prove that particular > mechanism . > > Until that time that substantial helium-4 is detected – the only gainful > outcomes we know of now from the published record are non-fusion and one > of them relates to the ~630 eV emission from Coulomb explosions. This gain > is probably nuclear related but also probably not related to nuclear > fusion, unless fusion is time-shifted in the QM sense so as to replace a > deficit. > > Jones > > > >
