On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> … these papers would relate to gamma ray “thermalization” how, Axil?**** > > ** ** > > Remember:**** > > **1) **A Josephson junction (JJ) is an effect of superconductor and of > nano-layering to form the junction**** > > **2) **The highest temperature superconductor operates at minus ~150 C. > **** > > **3) **A Josephson junction requires lower temperature than the > superconductor > >From the reference: "A bosonic analog is the so called Bosonic Josephson junction (BJJ) where two macroscopic populations of bosons are trapped in a double well geometry." Note the word "analog". This word means that the BJJ is not a Josephson junction as found in a cold superconductor, it is an ANALOG that just behaves like a Josephson junction. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1208.2349v1 Finite temperature effects in two-mode bosonic Josephson junctions “We have pointed out that the thermal effects can increase the coherence visibility and reduce the on-site number fluctuation when the interatomic interaction is suitably tuned. We have explained the coherence thermal enhancement by analyzing the coherence visibility of the thermally populated excited states.” http://arxiv.org/pdf/1208.2349v1 *Finite temperature effects in two-mode bosonic Josephson junctions* “We have pointed out that the thermal effects can increase the coherence visibility and reduce the on-site number fluctuation when the interatomic interaction is suitably tuned. We have explained the coherence thermal enhancement by analyzing the coherence visibility of the thermally populated excited states.” http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CEkQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftel.archives-ouvertes.fr%2Fdocs%2F00%2F63%2F21%2F51%2FPDF%2FPavlovic-G-2010.pdf&ei=ZKdhUaa1HeXM0wGBx4HoBA&usg=AFQjCNGH7SNuCCFy1haY_3OwssKZgu6vCQ&sig2=zBZVRVWV4v9L5hydiTgjEA *Exciton-Polaritons in Low-Dimensional Structures* "Contrary to atoms, polaritons are quasiparticles of ultrasmall effective mass: compared to atoms, their mass is typically eight orders of magnitude smaller. Such a light mass leads to high temperatures at which polaritons condense in the Bose-Einstein sense." **** > > **4) **If the JJ should somehow manage to thermalize a gamma, which > is technically impossible in classical physics due to conservation of > momentum, it would still lose its superconductivity due to the many billion > degree heat of the gamma > If you read the reference, the entanglement only lasts for a few picoseconds. then it is immediately reestablished. This is ideal for a EMF down conversion mechanism. > **** > > **5) **If the junction only works once, what value is it? > Each time it works, it is instantly reestablished for the next energy transfer. > **** > > **6) **If by some convergence of six or seven miracles, the LENR > experimenter stumbles on a design in which a) LENR cold fusion occurs, * > *** > > **b) **Gamma radiation is released proportional to the excess energy > but at a low proportion say 10% **** > > **c) **The metal matrix acts as an extremely high temperature > superconductor – 350 C. > The low mass of the polariton will enable condensation to temperatures up to 2600k. > **** > > **d) **In addition, the superconductor is perfectly layered as a JJ, > without gaps in coverage > Quantum tunneling happens between nano-pillars to keep the condenstate going. > **** > > **e) **All gamma radiation (99.999%) is absorbed in the layers, so > long as it remains superconductive**** > > **f) **And 10 watts of excess power is being produced by the cell **** > > **g) **The experimenter still dies within the first minute of > operation, since the enormous heat of a gamma ray is deposited in a > nanometer layer, melting any metals or ceramics instantly - and destroying > the JJ effect. > Is this what your dreams are made of? > **** > > ** ** > > I cannot see any remote possibility that this suggestion – that an array > of Josephson junctions is capable of thermalizing gammas, relates to > reality – or to anything more than a dilettante’s exercise in futility. ** > ** > > ** ** > > Thermalization of gammas does not happen in LENR simply because it is > unnecessary - there are almost no gamma rays in LENR to thermalize. Sure, > there is a paper out there where a few hundred gammas are seen over several > days of high excess heat operation – a few dozen per hour, but that is > essentially NO GAMMAs. **** > > ** ** > > Here is a useful round number to use for this kind of LENR cell: 1000 MeV > / sec = 1.6 x 10^-10 watts. **** > > ** ** > > If the gamma is 1 MeV and 10 watts of excess thermal power is coming from > the cell and 10% of the energy is seen in gammas, then you should see > 10,000,000,000 gammas per second, and not a few hundred per day. It is > unimaginable that this kind of gamma output is easily thermalized.**** > > ** ** > > Once again, Axil – repeat after me: there are NO GAMMAs in LENR to > thermalize**** > > ** ** > > **Peter Hagelstein: "Lets take a step backwards. I apologize, but in > order to make any sense of it we need to go back to experiment for a > moment. So in the experiments, a huge amount of energy is seen, so much > energy that it could not conceivably be of chemical origin. Plus, there's > no chemistry that's observed going on in the experiments that has anything > remotely to do with the observations of the power and total energy > production. The second piece of it is that basically no energetic particle > are observed commensurate with the energy. So there are no significant > amount of neutrons, there's no fast electrons, there's no gamma rays. > There's nothing you might expect if it were a more normal nuclear reaction > process. The basic statement here is that — if it's real and if it's > nuclear... the argument for it being nuclear is that there's 4He (helium-4) > observed in experiments, roughly one 4He for every 24 MeV of energy that's > created. So what you need in the way of a theoretical model, basically a > new kind of mechanism that doesn't work like the old Rutherford reaction > picture that nuclear physics is based on. So that's the basic problem that > I've been working on for a great many years." > Peter Hagelstein has spent his whole life looking at this issue, How can you be arrogant enough to say that it is not real. > related **** > ***1. ***Nonequilibrium Josephson oscillations in Bose-Einstein > ...<http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.5459> > **** > > **2. **** ** > > **3. ***arxiv.org › cond-mat <http://arxiv.org/list/cond-mat/recent>* > Cached<http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:0h9Xk0UudFEJ:arxiv.org/abs/0903.5459+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us> > Share**** > > Shared on Google+. View the post.**** > > **4. **You +1'd this publicly. Undo <https://www.google.com/>**** > > **5. **by MT Martinez - 2009 > > Mar 31, 2009 – *Nonequilibrium Josephson oscillations in Bose-Einstein > condensates without dissipation*. Mauricio Trujillo Martinez, Anna > Posazhennikova, *...***** > > ***6. ***Nonequilibrium Josephson Oscillations in > Bose-Einstein...<http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.105302> > **** > > *link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.105302*Share**** > > Shared on Google+. View the post.**** > > You +1'd this publicly. Undo <https://www.google.com/>**** > > by M Trujillo-Martinez - 2009 - Cited by > 18<http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&cites=6587423569196030866&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&ei=ah9hUZ3TAYTmiwKUi4CQDA&sqi=2&ved=0CEUQzgIwAQ>- > Related > articles<http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=related:khv3otU6a1sJ:scholar.google.com/&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&ei=ah9hUZ3TAYTmiwKUi4CQDA&sqi=2&ved=0CEYQzwIwAQ> > Sep 4, 2009 – *Nonequilibrium Josephson Oscillations in Bose-Einstein > Condensates without Dissipation*. Mauricio Trujillo-Martinez,1 Anna > Posazhennikova *...***** > > **1. **· **** > ***2. ***Nonequilibrium Josephson oscillations in Bose-Einstein > ...<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19792326> > **** > > **3. **** ** > > **4. ***www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19792326*Share**** > > Shared on Google+. View the post.**** > > **5. **You +1'd this publicly. Undo <https://www.google.com/>**** > > **1. **by M Trujillo-Martinez - 2009 - Cited by > 18<http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&cites=6587423569196030866&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&ei=ah9hUZ3TAYTmiwKUi4CQDA&sqi=2&ved=0CE8QzgIwAg>- > Related > articles<http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=related:khv3otU6a1sJ:scholar.google.com/&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&ei=ah9hUZ3TAYTmiwKUi4CQDA&sqi=2&ved=0CFAQzwIwAg> > > Sep 4, 2009 – *Nonequilibrium Josephson oscillations in Bose-Einstein > condensates without dissipation*. Trujillo-Martinez M, Posazhennikova A, > Kroha J.**** > > ** ** > > On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:**** > > **** > > Coherent Oscillations in an Exciton-Polariton Josephson Junction **** > > arxiv.org/pdf/1004.2216**** > > **** >
