Re: [Vo]:Measuring Spin

[Nigel Dyer]

Bob

I followed up the lead to Phillip Hatt's ideas.   I find these various 
grand unified ideas that individuals have put together fascinating.  I 
encountered one myself many years ago which I posted up on my website 
and I think mentioned on vortex-l some years ago


http://thedyers.org.uk/nigel/alfred-claude-jessup/

I suspect that a lot could be learnt by soing a careful study of all of 
these ideas and attempt some kind of meta synthesis.  There must be a 
genetic component to this in that my son has come up with his own GUT of 
a kind, but unfortunately it has got stuck in a pre-publication loop.   
When it has managed to leave the loop, vortex-l will be one of the first 
places to know.  What it does do is show the very clear relationship 
between the fundemental particles, quarks, electrons and neutrinos and 
certainly leaves me in no doubts of the reality of quarks.


Nigel

On 28/05/2017 18:59, bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote:


Nigel—


Philippe Hatt’s theory of the composition  and parameters of neutrons 
and protons—charge, mass and magnetic moment---as a system of positons 
and electrons is instructive.  His predictions of these parameters is 
“dead nuts on” with respect to existing experimental accuracy.  (No 
quarks involved or other virtual particles, only real particles.)


Bob Cook

RE: [Vo]:Measuring Spin

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Nigel—

Spin, angular momentum and magnetic moment are closely related in particles and 
entire coherent systems of particles IMO.  Angular momentum is a vector 
quantity and can be aligned in a specific direction, if there is a magnetic 
moment associated with the entity with the angular momentum.  Electrons are 
identical examples of such an entity.

Regarding the experiment that destroyed the spin in a non-measured axis, it 
would seem to me that the manipulation of the subject (measured) particle 
depended upon its magnetic moment being aligned with a magnetic field and 
associated angular momentum such that there was no way to determine spin along 
the other axes.

Philippe Hatt’s theory of the composition  and parameters of neutrons and 
protons—charge, mass and magnetic moment---as a system of positons and 
electrons is instructive.  His predictions of these parameters is “dead nuts 
on” with respect to existing experimental accuracy.  (No quarks involved or 
other virtual particles, only real particles.)

Bob Cook



Spin Of particles Nigel Dyer<mailto:l...@thedyers.org.uk>
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 7:16 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: [Vo]:Measuring Spin

I have been musing about spin and Leonard Susskinds lectures and books
have got me thinking in a slightly different way:  There is very much
LENR related, but I will start with a 'simple' question
In the Stern Gerlach experiment the act of 'measuring' the spin of the
particle has an effect on the spin, in that the information about the
spin in the non-measured axis has been destroyed.  In what sense has the
state of the particles spin been changed and what mediates the change.
Can it be thought of as in terms of a virtual photon exchange?.  I
assume that overall there must be conservation of spin, so in what sense
has the spin state of the rest of the system been changed?
Nigel

Re: [Vo]:Measuring Spin

[Terry Blanton]

Ouch!  That Sprained my brain.

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> What a memory!
>
> Speaking of which...  'Fonly the big-spinner had been a big-evaporator...
> we wouldn't be worrying about balancing the Czech-book.
>
> http://revolution-green.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/magnetic-motor.jpg
>
> Terry Blanton wrote:
>
>
> I touched on the idea back in '07
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg16952.html
>
> As I recall, someone objected to the use of 'evaporate' when applied to
> Dirac's sea.  :-)
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Measuring Spin

[Jones Beene]

What a memory!

Speaking of which...  'Fonly the big-spinner had been a 
big-evaporator... we wouldn't be worrying about balancing the Czech-book.


http://revolution-green.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/magnetic-motor.jpg


Terry Blanton wrote:


I touched on the idea back in '07

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg16952.html

As I recall, someone objected to the use of 'evaporate' when applied 
to Dirac's sea.  :-)

Re: [Vo]:Measuring Spin

[Axil Axil]

It is turning out that the Surface Plasmon Polariton (SPP) is not LENR
capable after it has been created. Initially, it is composed of two counter
rotating currents of confined electron entangled light wave forms that work
against each other to mitigate the SPPs ability to convert light into a
strong magnetic beam projecting outward normal to the plane of the
circulation of the light currents. To make the SPP LENR capable, an
electrostatic field (the patented Rossi electrostatic stimulus) is applied
(the Kerr effect) to the Whispering Gallery Wave (WGW). This electrostatic
field induces a coupling between these two counter rotating light waveforms
within the WGW so that these two waveforms combine into a very much
strengthened and organized current of light.


When the WGW reaches LENR activation levels where protons decay, the energy
produced by that decay in the form of photons is transferred from the
nucleus during proton disintegration. The additional extracted light energy
initiates a gainful positive feedback loop that makes self-sustain mode in
LENR possible. From the researchers as follows:


http://english.pku.edu.cn/news_events/news/research/5335.htm


“These researchers in China have observed spontaneous symmetry breaking in
an optical whispering gallery microcavity. The whispering gallery modes are
analogous to the acoustic resonances in the whispering gallery in St. Paul
Cathedral in London and the echo wall in the Temple of Heaven in Beijing.
Due to the low propagation loss and the small size of such microcavities,
where photons can circulate inside for up to millions of times,
light-matter interactions are thus dramatically enhanced. Importantly, such
a whispering gallery micro-resonator possesses the intrinsic rotation
symmetry, and supports two degenerate propagating-wave modes: clockwise
(CW) and counterclockwise (CCW) waves, manifesting the symmetry of this
system.


[image: 20170119174546739132.jpg]


Figure 2: Mode patterns before and after the spontaneous symmetry breaking.


It is spontaneous CPT symmetry breaking that catalyzes proton decay.


In this work, the physicists apply the optical Kerr effect of the resonator
to induce the spontaneous symmetry breaking, where the change of the
refractive index is proportional to the intensity of light. “The Kerr
effect provides a nonlinear coupling between the CW and CCW waves, which
depends on the input power,” said Heming Wang, who was an undergraduate at
Peking University and now is a Ph.D. student at California Institute of
Technology. “When the power reaches a threshold, the total coupling
strength of the two propagating waves is modulated to zero due to the
coherent nonlinear cross-mode effects, so that the original state with
balanced CW and CCW components becomes unstable and then spontaneously
transfers to the symmetry-breaking regime.”

*Interestingly, there exists a huge light to magnetic conversion
amplification process involved in this circulating enclosed electron
entangled light. Each time the photon aggregation that the WGW encloses
make a complete rotation of the WGW, the combined magnetic spins projected
by those photons in the aggregation is doubled. So if the photons which are
confined for many millions of orbits, these orbital rotations will multiply
the photon spins projected by the WGW by that total cumulative rotation
count.*

On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 3:46 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Ken Shoulders misunderstood the nature of the EVO. The EVO is a cluster of
> polaritons. The optical cavity contains photons that are confined inside
> the cavity and orbit inside its. These photons are ENTANGLED with electrons
> of the same energy that are in dipole motion on the surface of the metal.
> Entanglement is not sensitive or care about position in space so the light
> and electrons can be in different places but still connected.
>
> Because the polaritons are bosons, they can accumulating in
> extreme densities in a bose condinsate with their collective spins oriented
> axially out of BOTH the north and south pole of the optical cavity. The
> photons obit in both directions to produce the dual axial spins.
>
> https://phys.org/news/2017-01-physicists-spontaneous-
> symmetry-optical-microcavity.html
>
>
> Physicists have observed spontaneous symmetry breaking in an optical
> microcavity, they have demonstrated experimentally the emergence of 
> spontaneous
> symmetry breaking  in
> an ultrahigh-Q whispering-gallery microresonator. The Optical whispering
> gallery (WGW) microcavity is the structural form that the Surface Plasmon
> Polariton BEC assumed in LENR. . These whispering gallery modes
>  are analogous to the
> acoustic resonances in the whispering gallery in St. Paul Cathedral in
> London.
>
>
> A critical clue to the role of symmetry breaking in LENR is the
> observation that the application of an 

Re: [Vo]:Measuring Spin

[Axil Axil]

Ken Shoulders misunderstood the nature of the EVO. The EVO is a cluster of
polaritons. The optical cavity contains photons that are confined inside
the cavity and orbit inside its. These photons are ENTANGLED with electrons
of the same energy that are in dipole motion on the surface of the metal.
Entanglement is not sensitive or care about position in space so the light
and electrons can be in different places but still connected.

Because the polaritons are bosons, they can accumulating in
extreme densities in a bose condinsate with their collective spins oriented
axially out of BOTH the north and south pole of the optical cavity. The
photons obit in both directions to produce the dual axial spins.

https://phys.org/news/2017-01-physicists-spontaneous-symmetry-optical-microcavity.html


Physicists have observed spontaneous symmetry breaking in an optical
microcavity, they have demonstrated experimentally the emergence of spontaneous
symmetry breaking  in
an ultrahigh-Q whispering-gallery microresonator. The Optical whispering
gallery (WGW) microcavity is the structural form that the Surface Plasmon
Polariton BEC assumed in LENR. . These whispering gallery modes
 are analogous to the
acoustic resonances in the whispering gallery in St. Paul Cathedral in
London.


A critical clue to the role of symmetry breaking in LENR is the observation
that the application of an electrostatic field catalyzes spontaneous
symmetry breaking in the WGW via the Kerr effect.


[image: 1-physicistsob.jpg]

The application of an very high voltage * electrostatic* field has been
listed as a trigger of the LENR reaction in Rossi's patent. When this
electrostatic field is applied, the WGW produces symmetry breaking which
induces a energy transfer between a proton and a simultaneous decay in that
proton via a symmetry breaking based entangled interface.


The Kerr effect converts the optical cavity into a polariton based monopole
produced when  all the polaritons orbit in the same direction.


On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Nigel Dyer wrote:
>
> I have been musing about spin and Leonard Susskinds lectures and books
>> have got me thinking in a slightly different way:  There is very much LENR
>> related, but I will start with a 'simple' question  In the Stern
>> Gerlach experiment the act of 'measuring' the spin of the particle has an
>> effect on the spin, in that the information about the spin in the
>> non-measured axis has been destroyed...
>>
>
> Not only has the "information" been destroyed but in addition, the actual
> property itself can be destroyed or at least divorced/nullified. Here is an
> older article that helps to explain a feature of electrons, which is often
> ignored.
>
> https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090730141607.htm
>
> As for a LENR connection: Electrons can be modeled as having three
> separate components: spin, charge and orbit. Electrons in solids under
> self-compression (such as dense hydrogen) are actually able to split-off
> and nullify one or two of these components in a process called spin–charge
> separation. In the case of UDH the lost property is orbit but it can be
> charge or spin in other circumstances.
>
> This weird phenomenon normally only happens close to absolute zero ... and
> LENR - at least the Holmlid variety - could represent the case where
> properties are separated at higher temperature under laser compression. (or
> else laser cooling has lowed the effective temperature to near zero). Wiki
> has an entry on spin-charge separation.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin%E2%80%93charge_separation
>
> The late Ken Shoulders was able to produce and document pulses of bound
> electrons he called EVOs in which the charge component was effectively
> separated in order to allow "charge clusters" to form despite mutual
> repulsion. This was a small scale version of so-called "ball lightning".
> Here is an article on Ken.
>
> http://www.infinite-energy.com/iemagazine/issue61/chargeclusters.html
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Measuring Spin

[Jones Beene]

Nigel Dyer wrote:

I have been musing about spin and Leonard Susskinds lectures and books 
have got me thinking in a slightly different way:  There is very much 
LENR related, but I will start with a 'simple' question  In the 
Stern Gerlach experiment the act of 'measuring' the spin of the 
particle has an effect on the spin, in that the information about the 
spin in the non-measured axis has been destroyed...


Not only has the "information" been destroyed but in addition, the 
actual property itself can be destroyed or at least divorced/nullified. 
Here is an older article that helps to explain a feature of electrons, 
which is often ignored.


https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090730141607.htm

As for a LENR connection: Electrons can be modeled as having three 
separate components: spin, charge and orbit. Electrons in solids under 
self-compression (such as dense hydrogen) are actually able to split-off 
and nullify one or two of these components in a process called 
spin–charge separation. In the case of UDH the lost property is orbit 
but it can be charge or spin in other circumstances.


This weird phenomenon normally only happens close to absolute zero ... 
and LENR - at least the Holmlid variety - could represent the case where 
properties are separated at higher temperature under laser compression. 
(or else laser cooling has lowed the effective temperature to near 
zero). Wiki has an entry on spin-charge separation.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin%E2%80%93charge_separation

The late Ken Shoulders was able to produce and document pulses of bound 
electrons he called EVOs in which the charge component was effectively 
separated in order to allow "charge clusters" to form despite mutual 
repulsion. This was a small scale version of so-called "ball lightning". 
Here is an article on Ken.


http://www.infinite-energy.com/iemagazine/issue61/chargeclusters.html

Re: [Vo]:Measuring Spin

[Terry Blanton]

I touched on the idea back in '07

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg16952.html

As I recall, someone objected to the use of 'evaporate' when applied to
Dirac's sea.  :-)

Re: [Vo]:Measuring Spin

[Jones Beene]

Nigel Dyer wrote:


I have been musing about spin and Leonard Susskinds lectures and books
have got me thinking in a slightly different way:  There is very much
LENR related, but I will start with a 'simple' question  In the
Stern Gerlach experiment the act of 'measuring' the spin of the
particle has an effect on the spin, in that the information about the
spin in the non-measured axis has been destroyed...


This simply means that at quantum scale measurement is reactive ... and 
not only has unmeasured "information" been destroyed but the actual 
property itself can disappear or be altered. Here is an older article 
that helps to explain a feature of electrons which is often ignored but 
would be relevant to hydrogen in LENR.


https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090730141607.htm

As for the LENR connection: Electrons can be modeled as having three 
separate and distinct components: spin, charge and orbit. Electrons in 
solids under self-compression (such as dense hydrogen) are actually able 
to split-off and nullify one or two of these 3 intrinsic components in a 
process called spin–charge separation. In the case of UDH the lost 
property is orbit but it can be charge or spin in other circumstances.


This weird QM phenomenon normally only happens close to absolute zero 
... but in LENR - at least the Holmlid variety - it could represent the 
case where properties are separated at higher temperature under laser 
compression. (or alternatively, laser cooling has lowed the effective 
temperature to near zero). Wiki has an entry on spin-charge separation.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin%E2%80%93charge_separation

The late Ken Shoulders was able to produce and document (via SEM) pulses 
of bound electrons he called EVOs in which the charge component was 
effectively nullified in order to allow "charge clusters" to form 
despite mutual repulsion. This was a small scale version of so-called 
"ball lightning". Here is an article on Ken.


http://www.infinite-energy.com/iemagazine/issue61/chargeclusters.html

[Vo]:Measuring Spin

[Nigel Dyer]

I have been musing about spin and Leonard Susskinds lectures and books 
have got me thinking in a slightly different way:  There is very much 
LENR related, but I will start with a 'simple' question
In the Stern Gerlach experiment the act of 'measuring' the spin of the 
particle has an effect on the spin, in that the information about the 
spin in the non-measured axis has been destroyed.  In what sense has the 
state of the particles spin been changed and what mediates the change. 
Can it be thought of as in terms of a virtual photon exchange?.  I 
assume that overall there must be conservation of spin, so in what sense 
has the spin state of the rest of the system been changed?

Nigel