If two BEC’s are close together, they will sync up through tunneling no matter what the temperature of the substrate is.
This is a property of the BEC and not temperature. On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > > http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/02/bose-einstein-condensate-created-at-room-temperature/ > > *Bose-Einstein condensate created at room temperature* > > the electronic properties of the material itself replaced the need for > cooling, allowing the quasiparticles to gather and condense into a BEC. The > experimenters confirmed this effect by detecting the telltale light > emission. > > This experiment marked the first room-temperature BEC ever observed in the > laboratory. While the authors didn't suggest any practical application, the > potential for studying BECs directly is obvious. Without the need for > cryogenic temperatures or the sorts of optical and magnetic traps that > accompany atomic BECs, many aspects of Bose-Einstein condensation can > potentially be probed far less expensively than before. > > > On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > >> Axil, >> >> LOL - once again - you have perfectly illustrated the fact that you do not >> understand how to read scientific papers, since what you posted actually >> contradicts the point you want to make. You have done this over and over >> again. A superfluid, even if it had been seen at room-temperature - is >> not a >> BJJ which still only occurs at ultracold. >> >> Apparently you want us to conflate two quantum phenomena in hopes of >> proving >> an unrelated capability. But sorry, these two are not the same. >> >> From: Axil Axil >> >> Seeing macroscopic quantum states directly remains an >> elusive >> goal. Particles with boson symmetry can condense into >> quantum >> fluids, producing rich physical phenomena as well as >> proven potential for interferometric devices1-10. However, >> direct imaging of such quantum states is only fleetingly >> possible >> in high-vacuum ultracold atomic condensates, and not >> in superconductors. Recent condensation of solid-state >> polariton >> quasiparticles, built from mixing semiconductor excitons >> with microcavity photons, offers monolithic devices >> capable >> of supporting room-temperature quantum states that exhibit >> superfluid behavior. >> >> But you failed to read the important fact: this is >> superfluidity - and speculative, and these are still condensates and so >> they >> have gone from ultracold gases to condensates, which are very cold but not >> absolute zero ! Amazing that you cite this when it illustrates another >> point >> than the one you want to make. A superfluid is not a BJJ and a superfluid >> cannot thermalize gammas in any event. >> >> And you do the very same thing with PH >> >> "Anyway, that's sort of the essence of the model that >> we've >> been studying. It's been a tough physics problem for a lot of reasons, >> recently we've had some luck in obtaining analytical and numerical results >> on these models, so that we can quantify them. We're actually able, these >> days now, suppose you want to start out with a 23 MeV quantum, and chop it >> up into 50 meV quanta, how long does it take to do that? How many nuclei >> do >> you need to do it? How much excitation do you need to do it? We can ask >> these questions of these models, and the models can give us quantative >> answers. As a result, within the framework of these models we can begin to >> develop answers to some of these questions. >> >> For example, it's pretty sure from these models that you >> don't go directly from a 24 MeV quantum down to the optical phonons. What >> you'd prefer to do is to downshift from 24 MeV to some sort of >> intermediary >> stopping point, maybe 2.25 MeV or so, and then try to downshift to the >> optical phonon loads. The models say that that works vastly better than >> starting with a larger energy quantum. Anyway, those are the kinds of >> things >> that the basic model does." >> But sorry Axil, P.H. NEVER says that there is a gamma emission, which is >> what you have been implying. >> Do you really not understand the difference between gamma radiation and 50 >> meV quanta? >> Jones Beene wrote: >> Axil, >> Analog or not - the BJJ only occurs in ultracold gases - >> even colder than the JJ. >> Do you never read the papers you cite? Where is your >> reference to any BJJ at the operating temperature of LENR? >> And PLEASE do not misquote Hagelstein again. He is not >> claiming gammas are captured by phonons, which would support your lame >> theory, but instead that gammas are NOT emitted and the energy coupling is >> direct to phonons. This is completely contrary to a theory where gammas >> are >> emitted and then captured. >> Anyone else you would like to misquote today? >> From: 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. >> >> >> >
