Jones,
This is parallel to my conjecture regarding Puthoff atomic model of
the elements and vacuum pressure being modified by quantum geometry such
that the elements exposed to the change
Are able to achieve new ground states but which the Naudt's paper
interprets as relativistic. I remain convinced that fractional hydrogen from
½ to 1/137 is actually more energetic than ground state and we should be
using the anomalous radioactive decay claims as a yard stick to estimate
just how energetic these relativistic atoms become. My point is that the
decay rate becomes far more pronounced when you consider how down averaged
the reading becomes relative to the small fraction of measured gas that
actually became fractionalized by the geometry. It is that small fraction of
gas atoms that aged perhaps thousands or millions of years from our
perspective because their vacuum density relative to ours was equivalent to
our density relative to a black hole. So from our perspective these hydrinos
look smaller / Lorentz contracted but are actually aging much faster while
from their perspective they are existing in normal space and time - without
interaction the translation by itself would not result in anomalous heat but
any asymmetrical reactions occurring during this accelerated lifetime
transitioning between different fractional values becomes compounded. Just
the difference in inertia between atomic and molecular forms of hydrogen may
be enough to react differently to changes in geometry opposing the
translation for one more than the other and taking on the role of a
Maxwellian "sort" inside the tapestry of geometries. The end result could be
much older but faster moving hydrogen of different fractional values
occurring closer together even the same spatial coordinates from our
perspective.
Fran
_____________________________________________
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2013 2:16 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Worth a look, relativity speaking
Yes this is a classic paper, Peter.
Another interesting conjecture wrt LENR - and to the activity in the host
metal which could promote a transfer of energy (in some unknown way) when
loaded with hydrogen - is to analyze the list of elements by density, but
correlated to atomic weight.
There are a number of metals that are "out of place" in this listing - in
being much denser than they should be based on AMU - with the implication of
having a higher % of anomalously heavy electrons per unit of atomic wt
(AMU).
The top three are Ruthenium, Rhodium and Palladium (in that order) but they
are close to each other and all way out of place -being denser than lead
while much lower in AMU.
If this parameter (which we can call "highest proportion of relativist
electrons per AMU") was to be found accurate for LENR gain, especially with
deuterium instead of protium, then Ruthenium should be superior than
Palladium... unless another physical property figures into the equation -
which is probably the case.
That parameter would probably be "deuteron conductivity," which is superior
for Palladium... but could be possibly improved in Ruthenium by alloying...
perhaps.
From: Peter Gluck
The clasaic 20+ years old paper about this is
in the Journal of Chemical Education, onr of my favprite
papers: http://voh.chem.ucla.edu/vohtar/fall02/classes/172/pdf/172rpint.pdf
Till now, as far I remember mercury has not played a role in
LENR. I have once suggested it could be used
to create active sites, by blowing hydrogen charged with
mercury vapors over a metal by forming very local
amalgam islands and these can be processed further.
Just an idea, it was never tested. I have worked with
mercury in electrolysis plants and once even as heat
transfer agent in a cyclohexanol to cyclohexanone plant.
Nasty stuff- to be avoided if possible. The evil stuff kills my pet metal
aluminum.
Peter
Poser of the Day: Why is the element mercury a dense liquid?
- there have been prior (incomplete) explanations, but it
turns out that
relativity is the culprit.
The inner electrons of Hg become much heavier than normal
electrons because
they are moving very near lightspeed - thus the higher
density of the metal
is NOT due to the nucleus but instead is due to electrons.
IOW - it is not
an issue of atomic weight, per se (mercury is denser than
lead which is to
the right of it in the periodic table).
This could have implications for LENR (to be explained in
later post).
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/anie.201302742/abstract
but this video makes it clearer (please ignore the 'bad
hair' day)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtnsHtYYKf0
As for one of the possible LENR connections to very heavy
electrons - check
out Fig 12 and 13
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CirilloDtransmutat.pdf
Notice that two transmutation elements of remarkable high
density turn up.
Osmium is the densest of all elements and Rhenium is very
close. Both would
have an excess of very heavy electrons.
However, this begs the question of cause and effect.
--
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
