Mark--
I intended that "Instantaneously" is the same time frame that a BEC would
respond to a signal--however long it takes for the wave function to
change--probably 10^-33 sec, or whatever a nuclear reaction time frame is,
maybe 10^-15 sec or less.
I have never seen a time frame expressed for the Pauli Exclusion Principle to
act. Its a time frame associated with the creation of a new wave function for
the system affected. I do not think it has to do with the dimensions of the
system and the speed of light. Particles with spin and no charge are managed
by whatever causes the PEP to act.
At one point I read a glossy item on a quantum theory of gravity. It indicated
that the foam that made of the universe responded to changes throughout the
universe at about
10^-35 sec intervals, in a sense that time is quantized and the Uncertainty
Principle exists.
(I tend to think that time may be quantized. Length and other dimensions seem
to be. I have no basis to think time is continuous to 0.)
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: MarkI-Zeropoint
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 3:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:FYI: System Coherency
Hi Bob,
No time to answer at length now, but will later this eve...
My initial thought is that even a semiconductor is not what I would call a
coherent system...
Perhaps the junction is, but I would need more details to determine if that
is so.
RE: your statement that,
"If one electron leaves the system, all change their energy at the same time,
responding instantaneously."
What exactly is their definition of 'instantaneously"???
Has this been definitively established with a resolution of 10^-15 seconds???
I seriously doubt it...
-Mark
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Bob Cook wrote:
Mark--
I have an additional question for you regarding your definition of coherent
regarding a semi-conductor.
Semi- conductors depend upon electrons that flow in the semi-conductor to
respond to voltages and that all the electrons in the semi-conductor occupy
separate energy levels since they obey Fermi statistics and are in the same QM
system. If one electron leaves the system, all change their energy at the
same time, responding instantaneously. I think this description of a
semi-conductor and response of electrons is accepted theory.
Why would not the semi-conductor meet your definition of a coherent system?
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: MarkI-Zeropoint
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 12:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:FYI: Extraordinary momentum and spin discovered in
evanescent light waves
Bob:
Of the several possibilites which you presented, only a BEC would meet my
definition of coherent.
Any assemblage of 2 or more atoms above a few degrees K are very likely
NOT coherent; or if coherency happens to occur in a localized region of
condensed matter, it won't last long enough to violate the laws of
physics/chemistry which have been developed based on the UNcoherent behavior
which defines bulk condensed matter.
I've posted numerous FYIs about peer-reviewed research over the years
which support a physical model I have in mind.
There was one that is particularly relevent to this topic of coherency...
This research took two identical atoms and cooled them down to near-K. I
believe they then introduced a quantum of heat. That quantum was absorbed
by one of the atoms, causing it to begin shaking. They could do something
to the system which caused the quantum of heat to transfer to the other
atom, which began shaking, and the first became still.
You must look at all atoms as oscillators which have a fundamental
frequency which they want to get to; this may or may not be the same thing
as the 'lowest energy state' used by the mainstream. When you remove all
heat quanta from an assemblage of like atoms (oscillators), they will
oscillate at the same frequency and will be in a state of coherency (which
we call a BEC, "all wavefunctions overlapped). Add just ONE quantum of heat
into that assemblage and it will combine with only one of the atoms, causing
it to oscillate at a slightly different frequency, and it will be
'out-of-balance' so to speak and begin shaking... it wants to shed that
quantum to get back to its fundamental freq, and if it does shed it, that
quantum will get absorbed into another atom. So one can look at heat as
individual packets of energy which are being absorbed and shed in extremely
small time intervals by the atoms making up the bulk matter. Heat quanta are
the 'hot-potatoes' of the atomic world getting caught and tossed constantly.
To complicate matters further, throw in phonons and SPPs, possibly even
'spin', which potentially represent oscillators of a different 'flavor', and
we now have a very very complicated system of potentially interacting
oscillators. A further complication is that quanta of energy can ONLY be
transferred between the different 'flavors' of oscillators if conditions are
right. This may involve FrankZ's concept of a type of impedance-matching
between the different types of oscillators.
Given the above picture, is it any wonder that the probability of
achieving even a small region of what I call coherency, for any significant
length of time, in bulk matter is virtually nonexistent... and that would be
the 'universe' which is explained by current laws of physics and chemistry.
It also explains why LENR is so difficult to reproduce.
Try shrinking yourself down to the size of a proton and enter a NAE...
what would you see? One of the threads I started in the last year dealt
with the inside of the NAE... It took awhile, but I think Ed finally
acknowledged the fact that if the NAE (dislocation or 'micro-crack') was
large enough, and no atoms entered it, it would be a perfect vacuum at 0K.
Are there photons of heat constantly flying thru it? Who knows... perhaps
the NAE boundaries present a higher barrier to atoms shedding heat quanta so
the NAE remains pretty much a perfect vacuum until a H or D atom diffuses
into it. Does that H or D atom then shed any heat quanta it has to join any
others which have also entered the NAE. If so, then wouldn't they form,
spontaneously, a BEC?
-Mark
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Bob Cook wrote:
Mark--
One of the issues is what is the extent of Coherency--I have been calling
it coupling the material systems we know.
Are crystals coherent?, are nano particles coherent?,
are molecules coherent?, are BEC coherent?, are semiconductor resistors
coherent?
What in your experience defines the size of a coherent system?
Bob
rom: MarkI-ZeroPoint
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 11:11 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:FYI: Extraordinary momentum and spin discovered in
evanescent light waves
However, on the basis of an old calculation by Belinfante [Physica 6
887 (1939)], it can be shown that the spin may be regarded as an angular
momentum generated by a * circulating flow * of energy in the wave field
of the electron.
This is at least somewhat understandable if one considers the vacuum as
a near-frictionless fluid under extreme pressure
you cannot have flow
without a pressure differential.
the spin of the electrons is entirely analogous to the angular
momentum carried by a classical circularly polarized wave.
I commented on the importance of coherence in a posting several days
ago
well, coherence involves not only a frequency component, but a
polarization (or phase relationship) component. The bulk matter, or
chemistry that Dr. Storms has spent his life in, does NOT involve
coherency
the laws that he is intimately familiar with do not involve
systems where significant groups of atoms/electrons/SPP/??? are all
coherently interacting
LENR will require a new set of laws for these
regions of coherent entities.
-Mark Iverson
From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 9:08 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:FYI: Extraordinary momentum and spin discovered in
evanescent light waves
http://jayryablon.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/ohanian-what-is-spin.pdf
What is Spin? Am J. Phys. 54 (6) June 1986. The abstract is:
According to the prevailing belief, the spin of the electron or some other
particle is a mysterious internal angular momentum for which no concrete
physical picture is available, and for which there is no classical analog.
However, on the basis of an old calculation by Belinfante [Physica 6
887 (1939)], it can be shown that the spin may be regarded as an angular
momentum generated by a circulating flow of energy in the wave field of
the electron. Likewise, the magnetic moment may be regarded as generated
by a circulating flow of charge in the wave field. This provides an
intuitivelyl appealing picture and establishes that neither the spin nor
the magnetic moment are internal they are not associated with the
internal structure of the electron, but rather with the structure of the
field. Furthermore, a comparison between calculations of angular momentum
in the Dirac and electromagnetic fields shows that the spin of the
electrons is entirely analogous to the angular momentum carried by a
classical circularly polarized wave.
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 12:00 AM, Axil Axil < janap...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Regarding Belinfante spin momentum.
Belinfante worked out that the spin of the electron was produced as a
result of its wave function and not motion of forces within the
electron.
Now the same considerations show that spin comes from angular momentum
and the wave nature of photons.
That leans support to the concept that electrons and photons are
related if not identical.
On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 8:02 PM, Bob Cook < frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Jones--
It seems an answer to my original question for this blog--2 months
ago--about spin coupling is finally coming out. I hope Ed takes note and
decides to address the basic parameter, spin, in his theory for LENR..
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Cook
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 4:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:FYI: Extraordinary momentum and spin discovered in
evanescent light waves
Jones--
the rabbit hole just became more crowded.
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: Jones Beene
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 2:32 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:FYI: Extraordinary momentum and spin
discovered in evanescent light waves
These references tie into the thread on a dynamical Casimir effect
in LENR and to SPP.
That may be why they were sent, but in case the connection is not
obvious to everyone, here is an additional point.
Mie scattering and Mies solution to Maxwell - is the scattering
of electromagnetic radiation by a sphere. Generally a sphere makes a
good radiator but does not make a good antenna, but there are
exceptions. When the sphere is a micron-sized nickel powder,
loaded with hydrogen and with nanometer geometry in the surface
features (tubules), all of this becomes relevant to SPP.
On page 5 of the first link, they talk about SPP Recently, we
described such spin for surface plasmon polariton, and it was
shown that the imaginary longitudinal field component plays an
important role in optical coupling processes
From: Mark Jurich
Mark Iverson wrote:
| Extraordinary momentum and spin discovered in evanescent
light waves
|
http://phys.org/news/2014-03-extraordinary-momentum-evanescent.html
| Paper Ref:
|
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140306/ncomms4300/full/ncomms4300.html
FYI:
arXiv Preprint: http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1308/1308.0547.pdf
(arXiv Abstract: http://arxiv.org/abs/1308.0547)
- Mark Jurich
