The most important unsolved problem in physics is arguably proton/quark spin dynamics. The superset of this problem is underappreciated – variability of proton mass.
It is a surprise to many scientists that quark mass is highly variable and apparently has been for billions of years … meaning that there could be gradual shifts over time. Quark mass cannot be accurately quantized; and because of that systemic problem in fundamental physics - proton mass is itself variable as a logical deduction. Protons, or at least a fraction on the distribution tail of any population, can therefore supply a great deal of energy without the need to fuse or undergo any change in identity. Quark spin and proton spin are, in one viewpoint, independent of each other, but they must be linked (as a logical deduction) which is another form of wave-particle duality. This is part of the larger so-called “proton spin crisis”. There are dozens if not hundreds of papers and scholarly articles trying to rationalize problems with the standard model of physics, based on quark mass variation going all the way back to Big Bang nucleosynthesis. Quark mass variation is a fact, and quark spin is a major feature of that mass. This is why any new model for LENR – based on mass depletion of reactants (mass-to-energy conversion) via spin coupling is on much firmer theoretical ground than a silly attempt to invent a way to completely hide gamma rays. Gamma rays are known to always be emitted when deuterium fuses to helium. It is almost brain-dead to suggest that they can be hidden with 100% success in any experiment where they should be seen. It is an embarrassment to the field of LENR when a scientist of the caliber of Ed Storms, goes on record as saying that nanomagnetism is “a distraction”. Distraction to what? one must ask: is it a distraction to promotion of a book, or a distraction to an erroneous suggestion that helium is found commensurate with excess heat in LENR? Or a distraction to the bogus idea that gamma rays can be hidden 100% of the time? That is the kind of distraction which is poised to become the new norm. ____________________________________ Thanks Peter and Bob. Here are a couple of additional thoughts on an emerging nanomagnetism hypothesis. Nanomagnetism can be operational parallel to other processes in any experiment, even a novel form of “fusion” if that exists. Nanomagnetism can be part of a dynamical Casimir effect as well. However, the thermal gain of nanomagnetism results from a direct conversion of mass-to-energy, where the mass lost is in the form of nuclear spin – possibly quark spin. There is no transmutation and no nuclear radiation. It is likely that there are two (or three) distinct temperature regimes for Ni-H. Nanomagnetism is involved most strongly in the lower regime which is seen in the Cravens demo. In this regime the Neel temperature is critical. We can note that Cravens adds samarium-cobalt to his active mix. This material is permanently magnetized. In a higher temperature version of nanomagnetism, the Curie point is critical. This would explain the noticeable threshold mentioned in several papers around 350 C. In the highest temperature regime (HotCat) permanent magnetism is not possible as an inherent feature, and an external field must be implemented. Thus, resistance wiring itself can be supplying the needed magnetic field alignment in the HotCat. Only a few hundred Gauss is required and it can be intermittent. At the core of the hot version, and possibly all versions, is a new kind of HTSC or high-temperature superconductivity which is local and happens only in quantum particles (quantum dots, or excitons). This form of “local HTSC” seen at the nanoscale only, is entering the mainstream as we speak, see: “Physicists unlock nature of high-temperature superconductivity” http://phys.org/news/2014-07-physicists-nature-high-temperature-superconductivity.html Summary: Magnetism is highly directional. "Knowing the directional dependence … we were able, for the first time, to quantitatively predict the material's superconducting properties using a series of mathematical equations… calculations showed that the gap possesses d-wave symmetry, implying that for certain directions the electrons were bound together very strongly, while they were not bound at all for other directions," This in effect is the spin-flip seen in the transition from superparamagnetism to superferromagnetism working in a repeating cycle with intermediate stages which are antiferromagnetic or ferrimagnetic around the Neel temperature, in one version - so in effect what we have in nanomagnetism is a “heat driven electrical transformer” where the heat is self-generated. __________________________________ In automotive engineering, there are several idealized energy transfer cycles which involve four clearly segmented stages of engine operation. For instance, the Otto cycle consists of: 1) Intake, Compression, Expansion, Exhaust which are further arranged as 2) Two isentropic processes - adiabatic and reversible and 3) Two isochoric processes - constant volume 4) As an "idealized" cycle, this never happens completely in practice, but it permits substantial gain in a ratchet-like way and substantial understanding of the process. 5) There are many other idealized cycles for combustion, such as the Stirling which is probably closer, as an analogy, to nanomagnetism In nanomagnetism, there is a corresponding strong metaphor involving a similar kind of 4 legged hysteresis curve, where we find 1) Antiferromagnetism, superparamagnetism, ferrimagnetism and superferromagnetism working in a repeating cycle 2) The remainder of the analogy is under development but there are two reversible processes involving field alignment, requiring two operative classes of reactants - one mobile and one stationary 3) Nanomagnetism requires a ferromagnetic nucleus which is nominally stationary. (yes, palladium and titanium alloy can be ferromagnetic) 4) Nanomagnetism requires a mobile medium, loaded or absorbed into the ferromagnet which has variable magnetic properties. 5) Hydrogen and its isotopes appears to be the exclusive mobile medium, which can oscillate between diamagnetic (as a molecule) and strongly paramagnetic (as an absorbed atom) 6) Spin coupling provides the transfer of energy from the ferromagnetic nucleus to the mobile nucleus in a method similar to induction. 7) Inverse square permits very strong effective fields for transfer of spin energy from nickel-62, for instance. 8) Nanomagnetism seems to boosted by the presence of an oxide of the ferromagnet - i.e. nickel with a small percentage of nickel oxide but the oxide is not required. This is an emerging hypothesis, the details of which are fluid, but... shall we say... "attractive" :-)
