Ed, I have been looking at the craters that have formed upon the surface of some of the earlier active experiments. Also, Axil supplied a fine link that demonstrated hot spots being formed upon the surface of another system. I can run down the picture reference if you wish, but I suspect that you are aware of these from previous studies. Let me know.
The big question is whether or not a single fusion event is capable of doing this degree of damage and creating the relatively large heating associated with hot spots. It is well established that temperature does effect the LENR systems in a positive manner. Elevated metal temperature is required to obtain any significant LENR and it is apparent that the higher the temperature of a device such as the ECAT, the more heat is produced. My hypothesis can be proven wrong if it can be shown that there is no change in the quantity of energy released per larger event regardless of the density of NAE that are active in the material. So, if all of the craters can be formed by one or at most a couple of simultaneous fusion reactions, or the amount of heat appearing at the hot spots is only due to one, then each is unrelated. Here I refer to a fusion reaction as being due to the formation of one ash product instead of a chain of events due to the heating. Does this suggest that you now accept the coupling hypothesis? I recall that earlier you stated that each fusion event proceeded to completion and was not related to the others. When I first mentioned this idea you did not express a positive opinion of its merits. It is good that we can now agree that this might be happening and should be an addition to the original theory. One thing that needs to be clarified is that I am not speaking of the average temperature of the metal matrix in this description. That might be what you refer to as local. I am addressing the instantaneous large spike that occurs and which diffuses into the average background temperature with time. There is a large difference between the two. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Cc: Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> Sent: Sun, Feb 24, 2013 4:34 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Explaining Cold fusion -IV Dave, what behavior of LENR can only be explained by proposing coupling between the NAE sites? Of course, coupling is expected based on local temperature and a photon flux. What more do you propose? Ed On Feb 24, 2013, at 2:26 PM, David Roberson wrote: Robin, The net energy released by a single fusion reaction is measured in the MeV, not eV. That is why I believe that there is a mutual interaction between individual NAE. The local heat energy release is large and can not escape the area except through diffusion which is a slow process compared to the reaction time associated with nuclear effects. This should behave much like raising the local temperature by many degrees Kelvin which should encourage reactions by nearby NAEs if we assume a positive temperature coefficient for LENR. Ed's theory handles activity at a single NAE that he states will continue until completion. My suggested addition is a system level coupling that will now explain other observations. When an addition improves a theory, it should be incorporated into an improved one. Now we can consider the behavior of a device exhibiting LENR as being composed of two different type of responses. The first is the original one where NAE generate copious amounts of energy as the elements within fuse. The addition explains craters and hot spots which are hypothesized to be associated with the density of the NAE sites. So far there has been no evidence that coupling does not exist between NAE and a couple of good examples that suggest that this is happening. We should seek out unusual behavior that does not meet expected performance and attempt to explain the discrepancy. Do you know of any evidence that coupling between active regions does not exist? Dave -----Original Message----- From: mixent <mix...@bigpond.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Sun, Feb 24, 2013 1:59 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Explaining Cold fusion -IV In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 24 Feb 2013 11:26:37 -0700: Hi, [snip] >You ask several questions at the same time. The LENR process requires >energy to overcome a slight energy barrier present within the overall >process. Consequently, it has a positive temperature effect. In other >words, some energy is required to initiate each fusion event. Once >initiated, each fusion reaction goes on without any more help and >releases its energy. Consequently, the initiation reaction will >become faster, the more energy that is applied in any form. This >energy can take the form of increased temperature, laser light, RF or >any other source that can couple to the rate limiting reaction. The >important information comes from identifying the rate limiting step so >that the extra energy can be applied more effectively. This requires a >theory. At the temperature increases common in LENR experiments, the amount of heat energy added is only a tiny fraction of an eV. The theory that best matches this is Hydrinos, because a tiny fraction of an eV is all that is needed to match the difference in energy between the "energy hole" of Hydrinos, and the "energy hole" provided by many common catalysts. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
