The central dilemma at the very heart of LENR is what causes nuclear reactions at low energy levels.
What causes the nuclei of most elements to fall apart and reassemble their subatomic parts in new ways? Two new papers dealing with the nature and workings of the vacuum lend insight into the LENR question. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1302.6165.pdf The quantum vacuum as the origin of the speed of light http://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.3923v1.pdf A sum rule for charged elementary particles These papers suggest that the nature of the vacuum is defined by electromagnetic mechanisms revolving around the action of the constant creation and destruction of virtual dipoles. The nature of radioactive decay is also driven off the action of the virtual particle life cycle and its electromagnetic consequences. These papers also suggest that the nature of space/time can be changed and controlled by augmentation of this virtual dipole mechanism. It is generally recognized that the Fine Structure constant is not a really a constant at all and can vary. If this FSC can be changed by as little as 4% ether more or less, the delicate balance between the strong force and the electromagnetic force will fatally disrupt the forces inside the nucleus. A successful LENR system will setup a positive feedback loop that produces enhanced dipole production caused by enhanced electron tunneling. If the proper dipole production topology is created, dipole production begets enhanced electron tunneling and vice versa. In this way, an extreme dipole EMF field can be concentrated is a localized volume of space. The extreme dipole EMF fields thus produced gets so strong that the fabric of the vacuum within this nanoscopic localized volume is distorted to the point that the nuclei of atoms in that volume become unbalanced. The greatly enhanced and increased dipole EMF counteracts the actions of the strong force and the nuclei inside the localized volume will fall apart. The control of this process is possible. Through the control of how the way that the dipole production topology is setup, the amount of nuclear disruption is proportional to the strength of the dipole field, from slight to extreme. On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > Did you see this recent post as follows: > > =============================== > > > If you remember this thread as follows: > > * * > > Entangled proton pairs show enhanced tunneling – 1/31/12 > > > > > > Why do entangled proton pairs pass through the coulomb barrier of a heavy > element nucleus with high probability in collisions with energies well > below those required to breach this barrier? > > > > This curiosity has been observed is heavy low energy ion collision studies. > > > > http://arxiv.org/pdf/1101.1393.pdf > > > > This letter presents evidence that (1) 2p transfer (and > > not _-particle transfer) is the dominant transfer process > > leading to _Z = 2 events in the reaction 16O+208Pb at > > energies well below the fusion barrier, and (2) 2p transfer > > is significantly enhanced compared to predictions assum- > > ing the sequential transfer of uncorrelated protons, with > > absolute probabilities as high as those of 1p transfer at > > energies near the fusion barrier. > > > > Measurements of transfer probabilities in various reac- > > tions and at energies near the fusion barrier have there- > > fore been utilized to investigate the role of pairing corre- > > lations between the transferred nucleons. Pairing effects > > are believed to lead to a significant enhancement of pair > > and multi-pair transfer probabilities [2, 4{7]. Closely re- > > lated to the phenomenon of pairing correlations is the > > nuclear Josephson effect [8], which is understood as the > > tunneling of nucleon pairs (i.e. nuclear Cooper-pairs) > > through a time-dependent barrier at energies near but be- > > low the fusion barrier. This effect is believed to be similar > > to that of a supercurrent between two superconductors > > separated by an insulator. An enhancement of the trans- > > fer probability at sub-barrier energies is therefore com- > > monly related to the tunneling of (multi-)Cooper-pairs > > from one superfluid nucleus to the other [2]. > > > > > > Following up on this thread as follows: > > > > There has been a new type of Klein tunneling proposed where a > high-potential barrier can be made transparent. > > > > Even though the barrier is impenetrable for single particles, it becomes > transparent when the two particles cross the energy barrier together. > > > > Coupled particles cross energy wall > > > > > http://www.springer.com/about+springer/media/springer+select?SGWID=0-11001-6-1421254-0 > > > On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 1:51 PM, <pagnu...@htdconnect.com> wrote: > >> Axil, >> >> I missed that post. Can you repost the reference. >> >> Does it have any relationship with the following arxiv.org paper that >> might be relevant in plasmons? >> >> "New Enhanced Tunneling in Nuclear Processes" >> http://arxiv.org/abs/nucl-th/0307012 >> >> ABSTRACT: >> The small sub-barrier tunneling probability of nuclear processes can be >> dramatically enhanced by collision with incident charged particles. >> Semiclassical methods of theory of complex trajectories have been applied >> to nuclear tunneling, and conditions for the effects have been obtained. >> We demonstrate the enhancement of alpha particle decay by incident proton >> with energy of about 0.25 MeV. We show that the general features of this >> process are common for other sub-barrier nuclear processes and can be >> applied to nuclear fission. >> >> -- Lou Pagnucco >> >> >> >> Axil^2 wrote: >> > I showed Joshua Cude an experiment using Nanoplasmonic processes that >> > changed the alpha particle emission half-life of U232 form 69 years to 6 >> > microseconds. >> > [...] >> >> >
