I consider the Craven ball system an excellent vehicle to study. It reminds me of the heating of a radium sample from the past which seemed to defy the current physics models. Nuclear reactions were not understood at that time and the conservation of energy appeared violated.
The question that I want answered is whether or not some form of critical mass is required before a major amount of energy is released as with Rossi's device. Must a chain reaction occur before the heat closes the gap between what Craven sees and what Rossi claims? How linear is the Craven effect? My thoughts as of this time are that magnetic coupling of some nature must exist before useful energy can be extracted. Spin coupling is a good candidate for this mechanism so far, but many measurements must be conducted before this can be established. How the coupling is able to exhibit positive feedback remains out of reach at the moment. Perhaps the coupling is a complex combination of sonic motion, magnetic coupling and heat interacting in some fashion. One day it will become obvious and we will all wonder why it took so long for us to figure it out. I suspect that we need to step back and think more of the system aspects of the reactions as opposed to concentrating upon a tiny local atomic reaction. How small can a device be constructed which exhibits LENR? Is there some threshold size that is between atomic dimensions and 5 micrometers below which nothing happens? How about the very large scale? Remember that U235 appears like a normal radioactive metal until it reaches a critical mass. And, P&F had their lab destroying reaction when they were using a cube of material that was a centimeter on a side. What would have happened had they been using one several centimeters along each side? I do not think these questions have been answered adequately. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Tue, Jul 8, 2014 1:31 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:"Breaking Symmetry" "What a Waste" and "yes-ether" One of the most amazing LENR systems of them all is the Cravens golden ball system. It is so energy weak, relatively cool, small scale, and gentle that it is hard to imagine its energy is derived from nuclear processes. I believe that this system shows the probabilistic quantum mechanical nature of the LENR nuclear reaction. Low heat level implies a minuscule nuclear reaction rate in the Craven’s ball. This shows that a LENR system does not need to achieve a high transition point to produce energy. If a tipping point is occurring, it is localized down at the nano-level of even the at the nuclear level. The magnetic field that drives the Craven system is produced by magnet dust. This field strength is very weak and could be found ubiquitously in everyday life. The LENR reaction behaves probabilistically like quantum mechanical tunneling where LENR is always possible even when the energy involved is very feeble and well below any possibly expected threshold. On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: "Symmetry breaking" is a theoretical phenomenon where there are small fluctuations acting on a formative system crossing into a critical "tipping point." The often-invisible influences will decide the whole system's fate by determining which branch of a bifurcation is taken. Symmetry breaking can be a critical factor for LENR theory in the context of CoE - even if the bifurcation is hidden and even if the branch which is taken is the one of extreme low probability. Moreover, the "fluctuation" which is responsible can look like "noise." In fact, the term "butterfly effect" of Chaos theory, is related to this phenomenon. One of the most unusual and counter-productive chapters of LENR history relates to "Breaking Symmetry" the movie by Keith Johnson, who was a brilliant MIT researcher before somehow believing that he was a budding Howard Hughes film impresario. The film was a complete failure, and a gigantic waste of resources in the context of LENR... except for the title ... which deserves more comment in the context of Noether. It is hard to rationalize this as anything but silly. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1437885/ The symmetry breaking process for LENR comes into focus when the small transitions, the "noise" of the system, is effectively nonrandom, but looks random. The directed noise will transition a large conservative system from a disorderly state into an ordered states with anomalous energy in some cases. It is a very complex situation, and part of the understanding, or lack thereof, goes back to Noether's theory undermining Conservation of Energy; and to what is really the inverse of this theory. For name-phreaks, Noether is a most curious surname - being "no-ether" in a naïve and incorrect way, since the correct German pronunciation is completely unrelated to the written associations, which developed later with the concept of ether/aether. More on this curious chapter of LENR later. We can call it the "yes-ether" theory (Yaether ?), to the extent that Dirac's sea is the ether and the gateway to it involves breaking symmetry, possibly through application of nanomagnetism. Jones
