Hello Kevin – very perceptive about solar gravity, and of course as to this factor being the most difficult property to simulate on Earth, in an effort to frame a working hypothesis for P+P which is similar to the solar model.
This subject of “effective pressure” leads to the Casimir cavity, and to matrix confinement as part of the larger theory – which was not covered in my original post, since much of it can be gathered from Fran Roarty’s blog. In 1989 Pons & Fleischmann argued initially that real fusion was taking place at low temperature because the "effective" confinement pressure which exists in a D-loaded Pd matrix, and which they claimed was equivalent to D2 gas pressures of about 8x10^26 atm. They were attempting to frame in an alternative to what is known as the “Lawson criteria” for hot fusion. The hydrogen loading in a proton conductor is called “overpotential” and it has equivalent pressure that has proved to be contentious, with some experts denying the high numbers. Celani, in his early work, has gone to great lengths to equate actual pressure with overpotential - and he estimates that 1:1 gas loading is the indeed the "real equivalent" of 22,000 atm. His argument is convincing. At any rate, either number is considerably higher than the sun’s gravity, at its surface (~28 times higher than earth). BTW – the citation I have for this quote from Celani is now a dead link and I don’t have time to track it down: http://www.memex.it/Fusione/Celani.htm From: [email protected] One thing your theory does not seem to cover is why the original Proton + Proton fusion happened in the first place. On the sun, it's because there's so much gravity holding the protons together. In a lattice, presumably it's due to the metallic atoms caging the protons close enough together to experience a probability of a Coulomb barrier depletion. From: Jones Beene Subject: RE: [Vo]:Nanomagnetism, QCD & Goldstone bosons (part 1) Well – yes – the theory is falsifiable in exactly this way, but of course - you only do mass spectrometry on the hydrogen fill not the entire device. And yes – at least I have heard that SRI has an instrument sensitive enough to do this kind of measurement on hydrogen – but for whatever reason, it is not in use as of this date. It would indeed take a very sophisticated piece of equipment - as the proton mass on average will not go down by more than a fractional percent following a long gainful run, like the 50 hours of Celani. From: [email protected] <http://us.mc1630.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> Energy comes from proton mass depletion So... the way to test this theory is to weigh the thing before & after the experiment? Does any LENR researcher have equipment sensitive enough to detect the difference in proton mass depletion?
