On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 6:26 PM, <pagnu...@htdconnect.com> wrote: > Joshua, > > I believe, Zawodny does explain the creation of ULM neutrons through the > plasmonic creation of heavy electrons. See (slide 16) of > > http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/36/2010-Zawodny-AviationUnleashed.pdf
That's not an explanation. That's jargon and an artist's conception. Energetic electrons should be expected to produce x-rays when they interact with matter, but there are none. These 780 keV electrons are basically traveling at the speed of light. It's pretty hard to imagine fields in a solid that can produce electrons like that without any clearly observable byproducts. The electrons are supposedly confined, but that in itself seems implausible. > > I am unsure as to whether Zawodny is correct, but page 9 of "INTENSE > FOCUSING OF LIGHT USING METALS" (-JB Pendry) -- > http://www.cmth.ph.ic.ac.uk/photonics/Newphotonics/pdf/pendry_crete.pdf > -- states that by super-focusing of E-M fields and "by confining electrons > to thin wires we have enhanced their mass by four orders of magnitude so > that they are now as heavy as nitrogen atoms!" > > This is far beyond 780 KeV - and even greater effective mass increases are > possible. For sure, though, these electron wave functions are > delocalized, but are you sure that such massive pseudo-particles (heavy > electrons) cannot donate some of their mass-energy to create ULM neutrons? > or possibly provide enhanced screening? > > Also see papers by Alexandrov and by Breed in vol.2 of Proc. ICCF-14 > http://www.iscmns.org/iccf14/ProcICCF14b.pdf > > > This may be the confusion WL were going for. The effective mass of fermions ordinarily referred to in solid state physics is not a relativistic mass; it usually refers to an effective mobility. In the paper you mention, the effective mass increases because of the self-inductance of the particular wire structure. They write: "any restoring force acting on the electrons will not only have to work against the rest mass of the electrons, but also against self-inductance of the wire structure". So, it is *as if* a free electron were heavier. The electrons do not have the relativistic energy associated with this effective mass, and so it will not enable electron capture, which requires actual 780 keV of energy. WL claim the electrons get the energy from collective proton oscillations, and seem to indicate the electron actually possesses increased energy, but it seems completely implausible, and more importantly, there is no evidence for it. The Alexandrov paper seems to suggest that increased (non-relativistic) "effective" mass in solid state can enable electron capture, but don't explain where the energy comes from. The Breed paper argues that increased effective mass can improve charge screening to enable fusion (like muon catalyzed fusion). That's more plausible, but it's not clear how increased effective mass in metal or semiconductor band structures can improve screening of hydrogen nuclei. In any case, they don't claim the effective mass can enable electron capture, as required by WL.
