Axil, Axil,
Thanks, that is a good paper. I am in the quantum dark/vacuum energy camp and I think we have strings of it decaying in our jet streams. I think the Sun is curling the energy up and sending it our way in the solar wind. These strings ionize the troposphere, charging it up as well as ionizing the oxygen molecules, which combine with the H+ decay from these strings to form water vapor. If the water vapor condenses, it rains and pulls a vacuum and lowers the pressure and temperature creating the "cold fronts" we experience. In hot climates the water vapor stays gaseous and relative humidity and pressure increases and you get high pressure areas. We are immersed in this quantum field. String theory says that these strings can interact, kink up and break off creating smaller closed strings as they all decay, which I believe can create ball lightning. String theory also explains gravity as possibly "leaking" from one brane(dimension) to another, which is why I believe our Sun and the Earth are multi-dimensional black branes at their cores, with firewalls that prevent them from collapsing their surroundings. We just reside on the baryonic, LENR and beta decay crust of one of those branes and we are caught in the quantum crossfire of the Sun's leaking quantum gravity field, decaying in our gaseous atmosphere and creating our "weather" phenomena, including ball lightning. Water on Earth did not originate from "comets", it originates daily from our decaying quantum gravity field in our atmosphere. Which is why I believe we are all decaying and not really getting older. Stewart On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 8:54 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > *…more* > > * * > > * * > > *Figure 7 in the reference* > > * * > > *http://www.foia.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-091008-049.pdf* > > * * > > *This cavity is produced by a magnetic monopole (Micro ball lightning or > if you prefer, a vortex current plasmoid)generated by electric > discharge. It is the same vortex current produced by Leclair in cavitation > bubble collapse and by Ken Shoulders In his EV experiments,* > > * * > > * * > > * * > > * * > > * * > > * * > > * * > > > On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> What is happening in lightning both natural and artificial has been >> produced in the Proton-21 experiments for years now. >> >> >> >> The gamma and neutron emissions from Proton 21 point to the occurrence of >> the primary LENR reaction. The secondary LENR reaction involving >> Bose-Einstein condensation does not occur in Lightning and in Proton-21 >> spark discharge. >> >> >> >> BEC production is a product of SPASER(*surface plasmon amplification by >> stimulated emission of radiation - *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaser) >> formation that is produced in a lattice or dusty plasma. >> >> >> >> When LENR occurs in bare electric discharge, BEC does not form and >> therefore gamma and neutron radiation is produced. >> >> >> >> The same is true for cavitation. Ed Storms says that the Leclair reaction >> is hot fusion. Not So. >> >> >> >> Leclair is producing vortex currents in cavitation bubble collapse which >> are un-remediated by BEC formation. >> >> >> >> >> >> Remember this post as follows: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&shva=1#search/pro/13fab5525862e0d0 >> >> >> >> >> >> * Reference:* >> >> * * >> >> *http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-331/aflb331m632.pdf* >> >> * * >> >> *Experimental observation and analysis of action of light magnetic >> monopoles on multilayer surfaces* >> >> * * >> >> * * >> >> *I am interested in the similarities between the electromagnetic >> anomalies that have been reported by the Proton-21 experiment with those >> reported by LeClair in his cavitation experiments.* >> >> * * >> >> * * >> >> *This “particle” could well be a magnetic vortex current that is mobile >> well beyond its location of creation. Like a nano-sized ball lightning, >> this vortex current is attracted to a solid surface where it induces >> nuclear reactions as a result of its unique electromagnetic nature.* >> >> * * >> >> * * >> >> *LeClair may have erroneously connected the water crystal that he sees >> with the action of this magnetic vortex current.* >> >> * * >> >> * * >> >> *Like ball lightning, If this current is large enough, this vortex >> currents may well be capable of passing though solid obstructions such as >> reactor walls as has been reported by LeClair and with ball lightning. * >> >> * * >> >> * * >> >> *The referenced paper shows that these vortexes can travel a >> considerable distance from there points of creation and are very light in >> mass and may well be massless. * >> >> * * >> >> * * >> >> *LeClair has presented clear experimental evidence showing the action >> and mobility of these vortexes and so have STANISLAV V. ADAMENKO and >> VLADIMIR I. VYSOTSKII in the above reference.* >> >> * * >> >> * * >> >> * * >> >> * * >> >> * * >> >> * * >> >> * * >> >> >> On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> http://physics.aps.org/synopsis-for/10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.115003 >>>> >>>> Neutron Bursts in Lab Lightning [... snip ... ] >>>> >>> We here at vortex know that LENR is an electromagnetic based reaction. >>>> >>> >>> There have been complaints here and elsewhere that observing 10 MeV >>> neutrons emitted in bursts from a lightning discharge is in no wise LENR. >>> Complaints made here have been expressed with moderation, and ones >>> elsewhere have been made with great self-assurance. I have seen two >>> reasons given that such a phenomenon (assuming it exists) is not LENR: >>> >>> - LENR is understood to be a low-energy phenomenon, and the >>> GeV-levels of energy to which particles in a lightning discharge are >>> accelerated are more than enough to account for fusion of the hot plasma >>> variety. The complaint here amounts to the idea that the most likely >>> explanation in this instance can be found in decades-old textbooks -- >>> we're >>> just looking at old-time fusion. >>> - Another complaint is that one of the main observables are 10 MeV >>> neutrons, and >>> - neutrons are not generally seen in LENR, >>> - and the ones that have been seen are well below 10 MeV. >>> >>> My point here is not to dispute these complaints or say they are >>> incorrect; on one level they are very reasonable. My point is to urge some >>> caution and humility. We cannot simply choose willy-nilly to enforce a >>> demarcation around an empirical phenomenon such as LENR and exclude what >>> might well be a secondary effect, one that might be made possible only by >>> the main process going on. Doing so would imply detailed knowledge of what >>> is behind LENR, which we do not yet have. A similar note of caution can be >>> made in connection with the D2O cluster impact fusion experiments carried >>> out by Beuhler, Freidlander, and Friedman at Brookhaven National Laboratory >>> in 1989 and after. They accelerated clusters of D2O ions up to 225-300 keV >>> at TiD and TiH foils and saw 3 MeV protons coming off of the TiD foils at >>> rates implying dd fusion that are anomalous for the level of energy to >>> which the ion clusters were accelerated. (Recall that the energy of >>> individual d's in the cluster are a fraction of the total energy for the >>> cluster, which were made up of 10s to 100s of D2O molecules.) These >>> observations of Beuhler et al. caused some difficulties, because existing >>> models of hot fusion could not account for the rates of fusion that they >>> were seeing. Nonetheless there are people who will say with great >>> confidence that this is just hot fusion and, therefore, it is not >>> interesting. >>> >>> This assertion may be correct, and it may be incorrect. It is quite >>> possible and perhaps even likely that Beuhler et al.'s findings fall into >>> the category of hot fusion, that they are not something novel, and that >>> they are not at any rate due to LENR. My point here is only that they >>> *might* be interesting and that they *might* be due to LENR. Without an >>> adequate theory to link together all of the different pieces of the puzzle >>> into a clean conceptual model, we are somewhat at a loss to say what is hot >>> fusion and what is LENR. We can describe the situation in broad terms -- >>> what you see in a nuclear reactor is fission. What you see in a hydrogen >>> bomb is hot fusion and fission. And what you see going on in the sun is >>> hot fusion and probably does not include LENR (although on this point I >>> sometimes wonder). And also, on the other side -- what you see in the F&P >>> effect is LENR. And what we're seeing with Rossi's and Defkalion's devices >>> give every reason to think that it is LENR. And when you have LENR going >>> on, you do not see prompt radiation at any levels commensurate with the >>> heat that is evolved. >>> >>> But, sometimes in LENR experiments, you see fast particles at very low >>> levels. And sometimes you do see neutrons at very low levels. And >>> sometimes you see other things. And sometimes what is seen may not be >>> readily explicable by existing models of hot fusion. It is an act of pure >>> volition, and not of one of logical or scientific reasoning, to push such >>> observations into the corner of hot fusion. People do it because they want >>> to do it, because they have a heuristic that they like for deciding a >>> priori what is LENR, and not because we understand sufficiently what is >>> going on to say that these things are just hot fusion. >>> >>> It is a similar act of pure volition to say that complex structures in a >>> metal lattice are a requirement for LENR. What we can conclude is that >>> complex structures in a metal lattice seem to make LENR possible. But that >>> is different than saying that LENR requires such an environment -- that's a >>> much harder proposition to support. You must go around and find all of the >>> other environments in the universe, and then show how LENR cannot occur in >>> them. Absent a suitable and compelling theory, we're out of our depth >>> trying to draw such a conclusion. It would be similar to asserting that >>> LENR requires electrolysis, deuterium and palladium. We know that LENR >>> seems to arise in such an environment given the right conditions. But if >>> we hewed to that observation as final truth, we would have to exclude the >>> possibility of LENR occurring in NiH, which would obviously be a silly >>> thing to do. >>> >>> About the GeV levels of energy in the lightning discharge -- note that >>> neutrons are also seen in arc discharges at much smaller energies, so the >>> GeV and MeV levels of energy may not be pertinent to the neutron bursts >>> observed by the Russian group. About the 10 MeV neutrons, note that such >>> neutrons are going to be the *product* of some reaction, and the kinetic >>> energy of the neutrons will be a function of the resulting mass deficit and >>> not the initial energy of the reactants. >>> >>> Eric >>> >>> >> >
