Mark, Just to comment on your comments to the "Bulk".
"it obviously is quite different than the bulk, or else there would be a big hole in the earth,instead of the tabletop! " We do get lots of large holes in the bulk, we call them "sinkholes" some are very large and strange. I have been tracking approx. 120 along with the weather patterns. Here is an interesting one from 2011 http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/sinkhole-found-under-guatemalan-womans-bed/2011/07/21/gIQAw3ThRI_blog.html "Processes in the bulk can be considered random and disordered, and therefore one must use QM and probabilities to predict behaviors" Our weather patterns on Earth are not random and disordered, in fact when nature creates waterspouts, tornadoes, hurricanes and severe cold fronts from originally a random and disordered gas she is showing us her ability to organize random gasseous environment into a thermodynamic and electromagnetic marvel. "bulk's physics of chaotic randomness does NOT support this concentration of energy" *Air + Water Vapor = 9.6 Megatons* (600 Hiroshima Bombs) from the latest Oklahoma tornado mentioned by scientists here<http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/tornado-powerful-hiroshima-bomb-article-1.1351054> *Snowball + Empty Space >= 1 Megaton* (Greater than Million times Nuclear Brightness Magnitude Increase) from Comet Holmes mentioned by Scientists here<http://www.today.ucla.edu/portal/ut/PRN-astronomers-witness-comet-s-death-102658.aspx> and researched to be from “exotic ice” here <http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20527483.800-suns-warmth-blows-comets-icy-heart-apart.html>(that research must have been dreamt up while smoking something exotic) *Rock/Metal + Air = 30 Megaton*s (Tunguska<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event>), unfortunately they can’t find the pieces, just a lake and some sinkholes *Rock/Metal + Air =480 Kilotons* (Chelyabinsk<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelyabinsk_meteor>), Unfortunately they are mostly left with a large hole in the ice and some itty bitty pieces. *Air + Water Vapor = 95.6 Megatons* (Annual Total of lightning striking Earth) from here<http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2012/05/could-we-harness-lightning-as-an-energy-source.html>, you can check my conversion here<http://www.unitconversion.org/energy/joules-to-kilotons-conversion.html> *Air + Water Vapor = 12428 MEGATONS* (Energy Released DAILY FROM A HURRICANE). You can find it here<http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/D7.html> *Rock + Rock = 2390 Megatons* (Annual Energy from Earthquakes – 23 ergs). You can find it here<http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/176199/earthquake/59570/Earthquake-magnitude> In summary, I'm not sure I agree with your interpretation of the "bulk" unless you just limit it to the physics of a local area of spacetime. Stewart darkmattersalot.com On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 2:22 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint <zeropo...@charter.net>wrote: > Mornin' Jones! > > NAE might imply to some 'nuclear', but I qualified it with , "..in or > around > the NAE, *whatever they turn out to be*," > > I use the term NAE more in a general sense to refer to the localized areas > that are conducive to the reaction/process... it obviously is quite > different than the bulk, or else there would be a big hole in the earth, > instead of the tabletop! > ;-) > > Processes in the bulk can be considered random and disordered, and > therefore > one must use QM and probabilities to predict behaviors. I would bet that > once we understand what is going on in NAEs (generally speaking), it will > NOT be random, and will be modeled in a more classical manner. > > I see much discussion about the conditions necessary to overcome the > coulomb > barrier. In trying to think their way thru it, they apply some scientific > 'rules' so as to propose something that is at least reasonable, and > rightfully so. However, the 'rules' seem to me to be taken from what's > expected of the bulk properties, and I take issue with that. The concept > of > resonances and coherent (or in-phase) oscillatory systems can cause > long-term localized regions which concentrate energy; the bulk's physics of > chaotic randomness does NOT support this concentration of energy. For the > localized areas (NAEs), is the concentration of energy enough to overcome > the coulomb barrier? Time will tell. Tesla was generating potentials of > tens of millions of volts in his secondary from only a few hundred volts in > his primary, so amplification factors of 4 to 6 orders of magnitude are > perfectly reasonable... > > -Mark > _____________________________________________ > From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] > Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 9:54 AM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: RE: [Vo]:Water Window, Hexavalency, Bergius and Rossi > > > Mark, > > Yes - the "energy localization" aspect of Ahern/Dicke/Preparata and the > superradiance modality could apply to any secondary reaction which benefits > from local mechanical pressure at the nm geometry. > > However, the "NAE" implies a nuclear reaction, which may not be necessary. > > The absence of gamma radiation presents the prima facie case that no > traditional nuclear reaction takes place. The is no good reason to propose > a > known nuclear reaction, if good alternatives exist, which is the case. > > Ahern and others, including Mitchell Swartz seem to be leaning towards an > explanation where thermal gain is QM-based and mediated by spin dynamics - > which involves the "magnon". > > The source for energy mediated by magnons can itself be nuclear or > non-nuclear. This is where semantics enters the picture - but one is on > firmer theoretical ground using QM magnons as an operative modality - > rather > than LENR "cold fusion". > > The magnon is a "Goldstone boson" (wiki has an entry) and can turn up in > both magnetic anomalies and nuclear anomalies. It is spin based. The magnon > can be said to be the quantum of spin. > > Actually "subnuclear" is the preferred semantics for the ultimate energy > source for magnons since pions are themselves pseudo-Goldstone bosons, at a > minimum and there are no other "nuclear" indicia. > > When the nucleus is involved via a magnon modality, mass will be converted > into energy in smaller packets, and without a change in the identity of the > nucleon. That is the key semantic difference between "subnuclear" and > "nuclear". > > Thus, we can propose using the term "subnuclear energy" to describe magnon > mediated conversion, instead of "nuclear energy" since the later almost > always implies an identity change in the nucleus (and larger packets of > energy). > > _____________________________________________ > From: MarkI-ZeroPoint > > If this sort of thing is happening in or around the NAE, > whatever they turn out to be, then it could very well explain how the > Coulomb barrier is overcome... > > _____________________________________________ > From: Jones Beene > > In pursuit of more evidence for the ~300 eV photon - in the > sense of it being the active energy transfer particle for the Rossi effect, > another curiosity turns up - the water window. This is a favorable scaling > region at the border of EUV and x-radiation for near-coherency and > transparency. The wavelength is around 4 nm in the spectral region between > the Carbon and Oxygen K shell absorption edges. > > The Rossi effect does not employ planned coherency it would > seem, unless AR is cleverer than anyone imagines. However, from the > earliest > days, Dicke superradiance was thought to be involved in LENR in a causative > way, even if inadvertent. Preparata expanded on this - and it was called > DPSR or Dicke-Preparata Superradiance. Ahern calls it "energy > localization".... > >
