Here is a quantum mechanical experiment that supports some of the theroretical components put forth in the proton pair conjecture:
Seeing quantum mechanics with the naked eye http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-01-quantum-mechanics-naked-eye.html This is of interest to me regarding a possible connection with the Rossi effect: Building microscopic cavities which tightly trap light into the vicinity of electrons within the chip, they produced new particles called ‘polaritons’ which weigh very little, encouraging them to roam widely. And this: “These polaritons overwhelmingly prefer to march in step with each other, entangling themselves quantum mechanically.” This experiment shows that a robust quantum mechanical condensate of quasi-particles can be formed at high temperatures; one of the major requirements of the Rossi reaction. I speculate that a phonon-proton quasi-biparticles is established that derives its coherence from phonon coherence transfer from the hot metal lattice. The strong polarization of a pair of protons nails this cooper pair to the nickel lattice localizing it. This strong particle lattice coupling leads to immediate coherence transferred between the phonons in the lattice and the proton quasi-particles. In a nutshell, it is this formation of a condensate of Bipolarons which will eventually produce proton pairs that enter into the nickel nucleus when the superposition of Bipolaron quantum states is eventually broken. Note the micro-cavities in this experiment aids in the coherence transfer process. On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 2:35 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Where N can be 1 to very many, N identical waves are said to be coherent. > These many waves have the same waveform; they are all in fact the same > wave. Since particles are matter waves, N particles that are identical and > indistinguishable are coherent. These matter waves can be made identical > by any number of resonance interactions. > > > > These resonance interactions come from the crystal structure of metal > lattices and the quantum phonons that vibrate through the lattice at just > the right temperature. It also comes from certain chemical bound > configurations involving hydrogen. And these resonance reactions may even > come from the dust in cold plasmas formed by Rossi’s magic sauce. > > > > These coherent waves are just potentials of reactions that could happen > when these waves are disturbed at some time in the future by the outside > world impinging on the system in which these waves were synchronized. This > disturbance from the outside world is called decoherence. > > These waves are like a set of dice that are thrown in a craps game. What > comes out of this gamble is directed by probability and energy potentials > together with other intrinsic quantum mechanical characteristics. > > > > A few coherent protons who are members of an entangled ensemble of a > billion identical proton clones can find themselves inside a nickel nucleus > because space and time are not important to the sea in which these coherent > matter waves roll. > > > > Only when the outside world disturbs this nickel nucleus does the > probability become reality. > > > > A cooper pair(s) of protons could be one proton or it could be 1 billion > identical entangled protons counted by twos paired by their spin. Yes that > is not an error; a single proton can be entangled with itself and be > NON-LOCAL. > > > > But until the world intrudes on their indistinct and nebulous existence > (decoherence), they are all identical and spread throughout space and time > even if many of them find themselves inside the confines of multiple nickel > nuclei. > > > > Quantum mechanics is best seen as waves that we cannot know about until > the outside world touches them in some way. > > > > Then anything can happen; even a few erstwhile coherent protons can > transmute nickel into copper. > > > > > > > > . > > On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint < > zeropo...@charter.net> wrote: > >> Jones: >> Thanks for your diplomatic comments on my late night posting... I will >> reread and think about them. >> >> Trying to up the SNR a notch or two... >> >> RE: Cooper pairs... >> This is one of my pet peeves about the old, simplistic atomic models. We >> were taught the following in school/college: >> - opposite charges attract, like repel >> - e- have negative charge, p+ positive charge >> >> So how can two e- or two p+ 'pair up' (Cooper pairs; rhetorical Q, no need >> to answer)? According to the old model, which is still taught, likes >> repel! >> Obviously, the old 'point-particle with charge' model is just too >> simplistic, and should be thrown on the scrap heap! :-) Its simplicity is >> likely due to the limited instrument capabilities back when the atom was >> being 'discovered'. >> >> I'd like to propose how a Cooper pair can form, but not mathematically. >> One >> must start with a physical model of reality and if it can explain the >> observations from a qualitative point of view, then one can try to >> describe >> the physical model quantitatively (with mathematics)... all >> criticisms/comments are welcome. >> >> An electron 'hole' (e-hole) is described as a 'vacancy' when a valence >> band >> e- gets enough energy to jump the band-gap into the conduction band, and >> that that e-hole has a *positive* charge equal to the negative charge of >> the >> e-. Since the valence band is nearly, or is, filled (with e-), and filled >> bands (shells) always have an *even* number of electrons (which are in a >> sense 'paired'?), what if that e-hole is the *other half* of the remaining >> e- that is still in the valence band???? >> >> I.e., what we have been perceiving as the 'electron', is actually composed >> of the e- and its e-hole, perhaps as a kind of dipolar oscillation. To >> help >> one visualize the physical model, let's think in terms of the vacuum of >> space being under significant 'pressure' (deep in the ocean, pressure is >> so >> hi it would crush a modern submarine like a tin can!). Then what we have >> been calling the e- is a region of slightly higher pressure, and the >> e-hole >> is a region of equal but lower pressure (than ambient vacuum). Together, >> they form what is a *true* (complete) electron. And I don't think that >> they >> are separable; the high pressure region only exists because there is its >> opposite (low pressure region) on the opposite side of the nucleus; >> oscillations between the high/low occur at, say, 10^21 per second. Now it >> is easy to see that two 'true' electrons which are 180degs out of phase >> would be attracted to each other and form a cooper-pair. High pressure >> region of one seeks the low pressure region of the other... qualitatively, >> it *naturally* and *physically* explains the pairing of 'like charges'; no >> need for special mathematical machinations. >> >> Finally, how does one detect a 'hole' anyway???? Were the instruments >> back >> then that were used to 'detect' and 'prove' the existence of an electron, >> even capable of detecting an electron hole??? Can we do that even today, >> or >> are 'holes' just postulated or assumed to exist to make the mathematics >> work >> out? >> >> -Mark >> _____________________________________________ >> From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] >> Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 10:27 AM >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >> Subject: [Vo]:Cooper pairing of protons >> >> "Cooper pairing" is a quantum effect of protons which has been mentioned >> by >> Axil and others wrt Rossi. Cooper pairing is possible in all Fermions, not >> just electrons. This terminology is a bit confusing, and it is too bad we >> do >> not have a different name for it with protons - since Leon Cooper did not >> go >> that far. >> >> This paper from Leinson relates to a cooling effect seen in neutron stars, >> claimed to be due to Cooper pairing of protons. I was not aware that >> substantial numbers of protons even existed in neutron stars. >> >> http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-ph/pdf/0009/0009050v2.pdf >> >> Anyway, the cooling mechanism consists of shedding of neutrinos from >> paired >> protons. If the phenomenon exists in neutron stars on a massive scale, >> then >> perhaps it exists in "dense clusters" or IRH (inverted Rydberg hydrogen) >> on >> a lesser scale. >> >> But it is a cooling effect ! >> >> This is extremely important for a little known reason (except to a few >> vorticians). In Brian Ahern's work on the "Arata effect", which is >> probably >> the same thing as the "Thermacore/Piantelli/Rossi/Ni-H effect" - but is >> NOT >> the F-P effect - Ahern has found both anomalous heating and anomalous >> COOLING. The only thing which changes is interatomic spacing . >> >> The cross-connection of these temperature anomalies to BCS >> superconductivity >> is curious in light of Cooper pairing at temperatures which are not near >> absolute zero. I do not place a lot of faith in Leinson's paper yet, for >> several reason, and Ahern's report to EPRI has not been released for >> publication yet. But when it is - perhaps we will be able to tie a lattice >> cooling effecting with dense hydrogen (pycno or IRH) into a range of >> expected and predictable phenomena - along with Romanowski. It is all >> about >> interatomic geometry in the 1-3 Angstrom range (Figures 1,2,3 in the >> Romanowski paper). >> >> But a cooling effect is so extremely surprising - especially in similar >> circumstances to where anomalous heating is seen - that we should take >> special note of it all - especially with the missing ingredient : >> "compreture". >> >> Jones >> >> >
