Jones--nice work--

This is not to much different from my original guess as to the reaction of d-d in Pd matrix. Only I guessed the resulting He nucleus was excited in a high spin state and fractioned the energy by spin coupling to the other particles in the system.

I did not know about quantum gravity ideas nor the Lamb shift.

However, I assume the Lamb shift would be obse rvedwith D as well as H.

Maybe Axil knows.

Bob
-----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 8:09 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Curious paper from SLAC

To add a few more details into the mix for future reference,
here are some slides with most of the basic mathematical formalities.


http://moriond.in2p3.fr/QCD/2011/FridayAfternoon/Pachucki.pdf

The overriding proposition is this: Essentially, quantum
gravity facilitates two protons coming together in a metal matrix in LENR.
Of course, protons cannot fuse permanently- thus the nearly instantaneous
reversal of the diproton back to two protons follows, with the emphasis on
"nearly".

The "extra energy" of LENR would come from the strong force
during the short diproton lifetime, and be expressed via Lamb shift
asymmetry from spin coupling to the diprotons, the nickel lattice or both -
so the energy gain remains nuclear, but without the indicia. Mass is
converted to energy.

Now we have a succinct theory which provides more than a
hint at Lamb shift asymmetry as the working dynamic of LENR - via
gravitoweak unification and spin coupling. In fact, at the low THz level,
the a sequential Lamb shift can easily provide the gain seen in the Rossi
HotCat and much more.

The Lamb shift energy is tiny, in the range of 10^-25 J, and
inherent asymmetry would be a faction of that. But, this low energy is "per
reaction" "per proton pair" ... therefore, even if the asymmetry is a small
fraction of a very low initial energy - the transaction rate is THZ ... and
with a gram of hydrogen adsorbed into nickel, we are feasting on Lamb
Bar-B-Q courtesy of the HotCat.

Jones




Reply via email to