Ed's theory requires peer review. The soliton theory of LENR is incompatible with Ed's theory as it stands now but with a little adjustment Ed could be promulgating the correct LENR doctrinaire. Ed is a prominent voice in the LENR community, if Ed can be converted to the truth, then others may follow.
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 1:38 AM, Foks0904 . <foks0...@gmail.com> wrote: > And you seem to have some strange chip on your shoulder regarding Ed > Storms and his theory. If a plasmoid EVO is producing excess heat and > transmutation, all fusion theories are wrong, not just Ed's. I don't > understand your rant in the slightest. > > > On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 1:16 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Anyone who references a plasmoid structure cannot take the theory of Ed >> Storms seriously. >> >> A plasmoid projects the causation of the reaction at a distant from the >> plasmoid. That negates the premise of Ed's theory because Ed's theory is >> one where the action of causation is directed inward within the crack. >> >> Remote LENR reactions are seen all the time in LENR experimentation. Any >> such experiment will disprove Eds theory. >> >> The plasmoid will project as anapole magnetic field axially in a >> direction normal to its direction of current rotation. >> >> Action at a distance is a key that indicates the reaction causation in >> projected magnetism. This is a simple concept not a extremely outlandish >> and completely unsubstantiated ideas, It has been seen in many experiments >> that I can reference *ad nauseam.* >> >> http://www.uf.narod.ru/public/recom_e11.pdf >> >> * LOW-ENERGY NUCLEAR REACTIONS AND THE LEPTONIC MONOPOLE * >> Snip >> >> Doctor Ivoilov will present in his report some very interesting results >> for the >> >> traces.8 Here are some conclusions based on the presented experimental >> data. >> >> (1) The particle, which left the trace in the nuclear emulsion is >> charged, as >> >> nuclear emulsions are insensitive to neutrons. >> >> (2) The particle cannot have electric charge, as otherwise it could not >> be able to >> >> pass through *two meters of atmospheric air and two layers of black >> paper.* >> >> (3) The particle does not have high energy, as no delta electrons are >> observed. >> >> (4) The mechanism of the interaction between the particle and the >> photosensitive >> >> layer is not clear. Assuming the Coulomb mechanism, the absorbed >> >> energy estimated using the darkening area equals around 1 GeV. >> >> (5) The radiation is of nuclear origin; it interacts with magnetic fields. >> . >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:37 AM, Foks0904 . <foks0...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> *it is in these domains of the nano-material that these coherent >>>> structures can become stable * >>>> >>>> There are only a few particles that stay together for an extended >>>> period of time, only the proton really. The neutron will stay around within >>>> the context of the proton, but will decay when isolated on its own. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Solitons can stay stable in the context of the BEC for as long as the >>>> BEC endures but will decay when isolated on its own. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The application of energy to air will catalyze a polariton soliton, but >>>> that vortex will rapidly decay. A high energy electron produced by beta >>>> decay might produce a polariton soliton, when the emitted electron releases >>>> its energy in a collision with a nitrogen molecule. But that soliton does >>>> not stay around very long, it decays in Picoseconds. The same is true for >>>> spark discharge in air. However, if the spark vaporizes material, say an >>>> aluminum sheet, a cooling plasma of aluminum will supply nano and micro >>>> particles together with the electrons and the photons in the spark >>>> discharge within a contextual medium to catalyze a polariton soliton BEC. >>>> The energy of the discharge is great enough to form a BEC. With the support >>>> of this polariton BEC, this soliton ensemble persists and is localized for >>>> long enough to transmute the surrounding material through the projection of >>>> a coherent anapole magnetic field (a monopole field). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Ken Shoulders saw this whole process unfold in this research, but he >>>> never added the polariton and the associated BEC context to his >>>> experimental explanations. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 6:02 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> picking up and displacing very "fine grained" material and >>>>> re-depositing it elsewhere >>>>> >>>>> With all respect, this is some conceptual junk that you pick up along >>>>> the way as an inappropriate analogy. >>>>> >>>>> The key is that the magnetic field has an effect on the vacuum which >>>>> results in a complicated set of results. Spin flipping (the Higgs >>>>> mechanism) cannot be described in any context with the sedimentation of >>>>> material. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Foks0904 . <foks0...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I'm not so sure one needs to posit Higgs Field interactions -- maybe. >>>>>> I see it in a very basic way without too much esoterica. In over-unity >>>>>> electrical systems (possibly cold fusion) we initiate non-linear coupling >>>>>> between appropriate materials. This non-linear coupling produces these >>>>>> collective anharmonic modes. Moray B. King calls them "ion acoustical >>>>>> modes", T. Henry Moray was one of the first to propose this mechanism was >>>>>> at play in his plasma tubes. Harold Aspden eventually arrived at the same >>>>>> conclusion while attempting to explain the Correa PAGD -- which both he >>>>>> and >>>>>> Mallove believed was legitimate. >>>>>> >>>>>> So once the non-linear mode is setup, if all the conditions for >>>>>> material requirements and proper integration are met, the system will set >>>>>> up these nano-vortices -- usually magnetic -- which, like any other >>>>>> vortex, >>>>>> is quite good at picking up and displacing very "fine grained" material >>>>>> and >>>>>> re-depositing it elsewhere -- in this case from the "Aether" into >>>>>> our 3D-space (Higgs field, ZPF, or whatever) (think of a longitudinal >>>>>> wave >>>>>> in a riverbed). We know ball-lightning solitons result from >>>>>> fracto-emissions -- perhaps it is in these domains of the nano-material >>>>>> that these coherent structures can become stable and setup resonance with >>>>>> the vacuum. >>>>>> >>>>>> All speculation of course. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Another area that Ahern needs to look into is the way the Higgs >>>>>>> field seems to connect together magnetism and quantum >>>>>>> chromodynamics (QCD), which is the theory of quark-gluon >>>>>>> interactions. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> When Ahern is postulating that nanomagnitism is effecting the >>>>>>> vacuum, he may mean to address how the Higgs field and nanomagnitism >>>>>>> interact, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Most scientists are constrained in their focus by their >>>>>>>> specialization to a limited field of study. To understand a system >>>>>>>> fully, >>>>>>>> many fields of study must be considered to put all the pieces together. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> One obvious area of inquiry that Ahern never pursued is to >>>>>>>> understand how magnetism affects the vacuum and/or nuclear stability. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Another important piece of the puzzle that Ahern neglects in the >>>>>>>> critical role of quantum mechanics plays as a powerful amplification >>>>>>>> mechanism toward powering up Nanomagnetism to huge levels. When the >>>>>>>> dimensions of the lattice get below 100 nm, quantum effects >>>>>>>> predominate. To >>>>>>>> understand Nanomagnetism, quantum mechanics is the sole factor that >>>>>>>> reveals >>>>>>>> all the facts in the story of the nano system >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Furthermore, Ahern never mentions the pivotal role the spin plays >>>>>>>> in Nanomagnetism, including what defeats Nanomagnetism and what >>>>>>>> supports it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Foks0904 . <foks0...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yeah he's pretty dismissive of the Heat/Helium work, which I >>>>>>>>> disagree with for PdD at least, and we're still waiting on reliable >>>>>>>>> ash >>>>>>>>> measurements from NiH, but he's of course entitled to his opinion and >>>>>>>>> I >>>>>>>>> still have a lot of respect for his views. I think, like he said, his >>>>>>>>> theory applies better to mysterious electromagnetic "free energy" >>>>>>>>> systems >>>>>>>>> than it does to LENR, but he thinks the same phenomenon is at play in >>>>>>>>> both. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think non-linear anharmonic modes may indeed be at play here. As >>>>>>>>> I think I mentioned in the interview, on a personal level, I like the >>>>>>>>> analogy of loaded hydride in a wet or gaseous system as a >>>>>>>>> non-equilibrium, >>>>>>>>> non-linear, open system of sorts -- so I think energy concentration >>>>>>>>> (in >>>>>>>>> "violation" of the second law) may indeed be at play. But on the flip >>>>>>>>> side >>>>>>>>> I can't totally dismiss Storms' point of view that doesn't think any >>>>>>>>> sort >>>>>>>>> of abnormal energy concentration is necessary -- that linear >>>>>>>>> reaction-diffusion can get H/D to the NAE efficiently enough without >>>>>>>>> needing to invoke non-linear dynamics. It's hard to say. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm hoping the ash analysis being carried out by ELFORSK can shed >>>>>>>>> some light on what's going on (i.e. fusion or not fusion). I'm >>>>>>>>> banking on >>>>>>>>> that, because I don't really have a lot of faith DGT will be >>>>>>>>> releasing a >>>>>>>>> wealth of mass spectrometer work anytime soon, even though they >>>>>>>>> promised to >>>>>>>>> at last years ICCF. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>> John >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net >>>>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This is an excellent interview. Have not finished yet, but >>>>>>>>>> there are a few things to add. Ahern is strongly impressed with a >>>>>>>>>> magnetic >>>>>>>>>> invention (Manelas device) since he did the 8 day test - and which >>>>>>>>>> device >>>>>>>>>> others have belittled. It is similar to the Floyd Sweet device (for >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> historians of overunity). The cross-connection to LENR is not easy to >>>>>>>>>> explain but is there. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It can be noted up front that Ahern does not believe that there >>>>>>>>>> is any evidence whatsoever for nuclear fusion in LENR. That includes >>>>>>>>>> deuterium fusion to helium and especially Ni-H. He thinks it is all >>>>>>>>>> nanomagnetic. Nanomagnetism is roughly equivalent to a combination of >>>>>>>>>> superferromagnetism and superparamagnetism. They are two are >>>>>>>>>> extremes of >>>>>>>>>> the same phenomenon. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> He believes that the helium seen in Pd-D is basically measurement >>>>>>>>>> error - noise. Krivit is probably pleased with that assessment. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *From:* Alan Fletcher >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Foks0904 wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm sure many of you know of Brian Ahern from his EPRI report, >>>>>>>>>> his MIT colloquium appearance earlier this year, and now his >>>>>>>>>> collaboration >>>>>>>>>> with MFMP. Even if you're not aware of him, I think this >>>>>>>>>> conversation has >>>>>>>>>> enough for 3-4 threads worth of topics. We even flirt with the >>>>>>>>>> ever-so-dangerous & taboo possibility of "perpetual motion". Titled: >>>>>>>>>> "Nanomagnetism, Cooperative Modes, & Non-Linear LENR". Hope you >>>>>>>>>> guys/gals >>>>>>>>>> enjoy: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_kID_E-3tY >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> An outline can be found here: >>>>>>>>>> http://jmag0904.wordpress.com/2014/07/25/dr-brian-ahern-nanomagnetism-cooperative-modes-non-linear-lenr/ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> That's a MUST-LISTEN link. (And I'm only half-way through!) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Goes into some of the history of anharmonic modes (related to >>>>>>>>>> discrete breathers, Quodons we've discussed recently). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> At about 19minutes he says superconductivity and >>>>>>>>>> (super?)-ferro-magnetism are closely related (and that the latter >>>>>>>>>> persists >>>>>>>>>> up to a thousand degrees.). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Then I *think* he says that LENR could be a localized >>>>>>>>>> ferromagnetic effect tapping into vacuum energy. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Needs a transcript. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
