Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Q's
From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com I've got the following official links to Storms' NAE 2012 Paper : http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEanapproach.pdf Feb 2013 Kick-off post : http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg77023.html I have a strong forgettery feeling that I'm missing one. Yes Alan, you are missing several papers, but this is a good start. The papers I remembered the existence of were the two in: http://www.iscmns.org/CMNS/JCMNS-Vol11.pdf
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:40 AM, francis froarty...@comcast.net wrote: On Thursday June 6th Harry said Ok, I realise why we diverge in our approaches to your model. I don't start with the assumption that the lattice is in a state of thermal equilibrium. I assume the presence of thermal fluxes and perhaps other energy fluxes*** * as well which can do small amounts of work on the hydrotons. If these local fluxes are sporadic excess heat production will be sporadic as well. ** ** Harry, I share your position and think this is also due to the quantum effect of the geometry. I think the suppression concentrated in the NAE must be balanced by a “diluted” region outside the cavity walls that responsible for this “segregation” of vacuum pressure… although vacuum wavelengths appear much shorter inside a cavity they must, IMHO, appear slightly longer spread over the atoms behind the cavity to avoid a COE violation..you aren’t getting something for nothing..the geometry is simply segregating pressure like Chicago city scape separates wind. This by itself won’t give us any source of energy since it is just a hill to run up and roll down but there has always been an energy source associated with gas motion.. you have temperature which will fall when harnessed and then you also have HUP which keeps helium from freezing solid even at 0 kelvin that can never be exhausted. We are told HUP which is responsible for the random motion of gas is unusable energy that can’t be considered under conservation of energy –They say a Maxwellian demon to separate hot from cold is impossible to implement at OU. I disagree, I think the NAE pits different forces of nature against each other to create heat and cold via a back door method. You have physical confinement and axial alignment of H2, you have supplied ambient heat forcing motion to initiate the process, You have Ed’s energy sink due to opposing charges on either side of the cavity where resonance causes the nucleus to emit energy as photons, or, my model of near disassociation f/h molecules getting the threshold discounted by the force trying to change the fractional value which only gives of a single photon upon reassociatio at the new f/h level.. Granted both forces go back to the same initial source..virtual particle pairs but they are on vastly different scales where one is very fast comparable to ac current moving gas atoms while the other is a locally accumulated pressure – a small gravity hill with a concentrated peak in the cavity and a wide valley extending out from the cavity walls that segregates the pressure we consider isotropic out here in the macro world. Anomalous cooling and retarded radioactive decay of gases are harder to detect but have both been reported..just not as concentrated or as frequently as anomalous heat and accelerated decay. My posit is that beyond diffusion the random motion of gas is harnessed to keep Ed’s hydrotron resonanting or pushing my near disassociation f/h over the threshold so it can form another molecule. *** * Fran Would you agree that a violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics is equivalent to violating conservation of momentum while still obeying conservation of energy? Harry Harry
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On Sat 6/8/13 Harry said: Would you agree that a violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics is equivalent to violating conservation of momentum while still obeying conservation of energy? Harry, I am saying there IS an energy source, That the NAE taps zerp point energy to perform work, since COE assumes no usable work can be extracted from random gas motion, ZPE is already in violation of COE, that is to say without a cooler reservoir to transfer heat to, the thermal energy is quickly exhausted. I would posit that my fractional H2 or Ed's hydroton do not produce photons or even exist outside the Ni suppression geometry. It is the quantum Ni geometry that provides abrupt changes to the negative equivalent velocity of the hydrogen, breaking the isotropy into a tapestry of different values, seemingly in violation of gravity's square law based more on the inverse cube law of Casimir geometry. Interestingly it is the same virtual particle pairs responsible for gas motion and prevention of certain gases from forming solids at 0 k that will accumulate segregated regions of larger and smaller particles when Casimr geometry is present, but at vastly different scales, The random motion of gas is caused by interaction with these virtual pairs growing into existence and then shrinking out in totally random directions inside and surrounding the gas atoms and does not change from the gas atom perspective inside the NAE, what does change is the unit time based on this segregation of virtual particle pairs and this is why The Naudt's paper redefined the hydrino as relativistic hydrogen. Suddenly these gas atoms have different equivalent velocities from our perspective depending on diffusion and how fractional their orbital state becomes.. but because this is relativistic hydrogen I am positing no differences can be observed by the atoms locally and except for radioactive gas the dilation would likely go unnoticed. What does occur is that the random motion suddenly has the potential to do useful work.. the tapestry establishes a self assembled framework that can be utilized to extract useful energy from random motion. It still needs a reversible reaction that can be carefully cycled above and below a threshold to generate heat without self destruction. The violation of gravity's square law by Casimir's inverse cube may be the real enabler here because we know that the random motion of gas will not accomplish this feat in the macro/isotropic world, but inside the Casimir tapestry these atoms are exposed to dynamic changes in Casimir effect, their momentum is being modified by abrupt changes in equivalent velocity due to changes in the unit time, in effect they are actually moving on the time axis when they appear fractional to us. Reversible Chemical reactions can be a diode to extract energy from these relativistic changes where molecules and atoms have different affinities for changes in this tapestry allowing us to create asymmetry. My posit is that any difference between how atoms and molecules react to changes in Casimir force is exploitable - If the atoms or molecules are allowed to migrate between different regions in a symmetrical manner they will simply translate to different fractional values and then translate back upon return without benefit..but moving a fractional molecule and then disassociating before allowing return it is asymmetrical, even if the molecule immediately reforms it will be at a different fractional value based on the local geometry. Fran From wiki. One classification of perpetual motion machines refers to the particular law of thermodynamics the machines purport to violate:[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion#cite_note-4 * A perpetual motion machine of the first kind produces work http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_%28thermodynamics%29 without the input of energy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy . It thus violates the first law of thermodynamics: the law of conservation of energy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_conservation_of_energy . * A perpetual motion machine of the second kind is a machine which spontaneously converts thermal energy into mechanical work. When the thermal energy is equivalent to the work done, this does not violate the law of conservation of energy. However it does violate the more subtle second law of thermodynamics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics (see also entropy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy ). The signature of a perpetual motion machine of the second kind is that there is only one heat reservoir involved, which is being spontaneously cooled without involving a transfer of heat to a cooler reservoir. This conversion of heat into useful work, without any side effect, is impossible, according to the second law of thermodynamics.
RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On Thursday June 6th Harry said Ok, I realise why we diverge in our approaches to your model. I don't start with the assumption that the lattice is in a state of thermal equilibrium. I assume the presence of thermal fluxes and perhaps other energy fluxes as well which can do small amounts of work on the hydrotons. If these local fluxes are sporadic excess heat production will be sporadic as well. Harry, I share your position and think this is also due to the quantum effect of the geometry. I think the suppression concentrated in the NAE must be balanced by a diluted region outside the cavity walls that responsible for this segregation of vacuum pressure. although vacuum wavelengths appear much shorter inside a cavity they must, IMHO, appear slightly longer spread over the atoms behind the cavity to avoid a COE violation..you aren't getting something for nothing..the geometry is simply segregating pressure like Chicago city scape separates wind. This by itself won't give us any source of energy since it is just a hill to run up and roll down but there has always been an energy source associated with gas motion.. you have temperature which will fall when harnessed and then you also have HUP which keeps helium from freezing solid even at 0 kelvin that can never be exhausted. We are told HUP which is responsible for the random motion of gas is unusable energy that can't be considered under conservation of energy -They say a Maxwellian demon to separate hot from cold is impossible to implement at OU. I disagree, I think the NAE pits different forces of nature against each other to create heat and cold via a back door method. You have physical confinement and axial alignment of H2, you have supplied ambient heat forcing motion to initiate the process, You have Ed's energy sink due to opposing charges on either side of the cavity where resonance causes the nucleus to emit energy as photons, or, my model of near disassociation f/h molecules getting the threshold discounted by the force trying to change the fractional value which only gives of a single photon upon reassociatio at the new f/h level.. Granted both forces go back to the same initial source..virtual particle pairs but they are on vastly different scales where one is very fast comparable to ac current moving gas atoms while the other is a locally accumulated pressure - a small gravity hill with a concentrated peak in the cavity and a wide valley extending out from the cavity walls that segregates the pressure we consider isotropic out here in the macro world. Anomalous cooling and retarded radioactive decay of gases are harder to detect but have both been reported..just not as concentrated or as frequently as anomalous heat and accelerated decay. My posit is that beyond diffusion the random motion of gas is harnessed to keep Ed's hydrotron resonanting or pushing my near disassociation f/h over the threshold so it can form another molecule. Fran
RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Lou, I also think the frequency of photons emitted in an NAE are going to be frequency shifted proportional to their contracted state. In my old animation circa 2010 I show a red photon for H2 disassociation outside casimir plates while f/H2 photons emitted inside plates are blue where the moving plates represent different values of Casimir geometry. http://byzipp.com/finished1.swf Fran From: francis [mailto:froarty...@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 8:41 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... On Thursday June 6th Harry said Ok, I realise why we diverge in our approaches to your model. I don't start with the assumption that the lattice is in a state of thermal equilibrium. I assume the presence of thermal fluxes and perhaps other energy fluxes as well which can do small amounts of work on the hydrotons. If these local fluxes are sporadic excess heat production will be sporadic as well. Harry, I share your position and think this is also due to the quantum effect of the geometry. I think the suppression concentrated in the NAE must be balanced by a diluted region outside the cavity walls that responsible for this segregation of vacuum pressure... although vacuum wavelengths appear much shorter inside a cavity they must, IMHO, appear slightly longer spread over the atoms behind the cavity to avoid a COE violation..you aren't getting something for nothing..the geometry is simply segregating pressure like Chicago city scape separates wind. This by itself won't give us any source of energy since it is just a hill to run up and roll down but there has always been an energy source associated with gas motion.. you have temperature which will fall when harnessed and then you also have HUP which keeps helium from freezing solid even at 0 kelvin that can never be exhausted. We are told HUP which is responsible for the random motion of gas is unusable energy that can't be considered under conservation of energy -They say a Maxwellian demon to separate hot from cold is impossible to implement at OU. I disagree, I think the NAE pits different forces of nature against each other to create heat and cold via a back door method. You have physical confinement and axial alignment of H2, you have supplied ambient heat forcing motion to initiate the process, You have Ed's energy sink due to opposing charges on either side of the cavity where resonance causes the nucleus to emit energy as photons, or, my model of near disassociation f/h molecules getting the threshold discounted by the force trying to change the fractional value which only gives of a single photon upon reassociatio at the new f/h level.. Granted both forces go back to the same initial source..virtual particle pairs but they are on vastly different scales where one is very fast comparable to ac current moving gas atoms while the other is a locally accumulated pressure - a small gravity hill with a concentrated peak in the cavity and a wide valley extending out from the cavity walls that segregates the pressure we consider isotropic out here in the macro world. Anomalous cooling and retarded radioactive decay of gases are harder to detect but have both been reported..just not as concentrated or as frequently as anomalous heat and accelerated decay. My posit is that beyond diffusion the random motion of gas is harnessed to keep Ed's hydrotron resonanting or pushing my near disassociation f/h over the threshold so it can form another molecule. Fran
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Not only do the photons and dipoles couple very strongly in the lattice, they also couple to the quantum vacuum as evidenced by the appearance of *vacuum Rabi splitting *in the spectroscopic analysis of the associated EMF photon radiation.The appearance of virtual dipoles drive the dipoles in the lattice. Other photons add to the energy of the dipoles over what is provided by vacuum energy. On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: Lou, I also think the frequency of photons emitted in an NAE are going to be frequency shifted proportional to their contracted state. In my old animation circa 2010 I show a red photon for H2 disassociation outside casimir plates while f/H2 photons emitted inside plates are blue where the moving plates represent different values of Casimir geometry. http://byzipp.com/finished1.swf ** ** Fran ** ** *From:* francis [mailto:froarty...@comcast.net] *Sent:* Friday, June 07, 2013 8:41 AM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... ** ** On Thursday June 6th Harry said Ok, I realise why we diverge in our approaches to your model. I don't start with the assumption that the lattice is in a state of thermal equilibrium. I assume the presence of thermal fluxes and perhaps other energy fluxes*** * as well which can do small amounts of work on the hydrotons. If these local fluxes are sporadic excess heat production will be sporadic as well. ** ** Harry, I share your position and think this is also due to the quantum effect of the geometry. I think the suppression concentrated in the NAE must be balanced by a “diluted” region outside the cavity walls that responsible for this “segregation” of vacuum pressure… although vacuum wavelengths appear much shorter inside a cavity they must, IMHO, appear slightly longer spread over the atoms behind the cavity to avoid a COE violation..you aren’t getting something for nothing..the geometry is simply segregating pressure like Chicago city scape separates wind. This by itself won’t give us any source of energy since it is just a hill to run up and roll down but there has always been an energy source associated with gas motion.. you have temperature which will fall when harnessed and then you also have HUP which keeps helium from freezing solid even at 0 kelvin that can never be exhausted. We are told HUP which is responsible for the random motion of gas is unusable energy that can’t be considered under conservation of energy –They say a Maxwellian demon to separate hot from cold is impossible to implement at OU. I disagree, I think the NAE pits different forces of nature against each other to create heat and cold via a back door method. You have physical confinement and axial alignment of H2, you have supplied ambient heat forcing motion to initiate the process, You have Ed’s energy sink due to opposing charges on either side of the cavity where resonance causes the nucleus to emit energy as photons, or, my model of near disassociation f/h molecules getting the threshold discounted by the force trying to change the fractional value which only gives of a single photon upon reassociatio at the new f/h level.. Granted both forces go back to the same initial source..virtual particle pairs but they are on vastly different scales where one is very fast comparable to ac current moving gas atoms while the other is a locally accumulated pressure – a small gravity hill with a concentrated peak in the cavity and a wide valley extending out from the cavity walls that segregates the pressure we consider isotropic out here in the macro world. Anomalous cooling and retarded radioactive decay of gases are harder to detect but have both been reported..just not as concentrated or as frequently as anomalous heat and accelerated decay. My posit is that beyond diffusion the random motion of gas is harnessed to keep Ed’s hydrotron resonanting or pushing my near disassociation f/h over the threshold so it can form another molecule. *** * Fran
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Axil, I agree there is coupling to the vacuum, and more importantly it is not the standard coupling already encompassed by our physical laws and reflected in the periodic chart. IMHO most energy transactions between the vacuum plane and physical plane occur far below the subatomic particle scale where particle pairs grow into existence and then contract back out. I would posit these VP drive all physical manifestations where their incursion stirs up waveforms of optimal geometry to persist in our plane -a neo WSM- Lorentzian ether perspective only because I point to this VP stream as the ether , it is 90 degrees from any spatial axis and it also explains the lack of spatial bias in the Michelson - Morley experiment. I am convinced that quantum geometry can unbalance these rules by segregating the vacuum pressure on scales large enough to where we can introduce physical matter in the form of gas atoms into segregated pressure regions that would otherwise require time and energy to occur at the macro scale. This then permits a self assembly of an HUP or Maxwellian demon to exploit these geometry driven changes in pressure. I also think this coupling can be reversed and we will someday drive hydrogen gas forcefully through NAE to produce reactionless propulsion. Clawing our way through the ether. Fran From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 3:37 PM To: vortex-l Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Not only do the photons and dipoles couple very strongly in the lattice, they also couple to the quantum vacuum as evidenced by the appearance of vacuum Rabi splitting in the spectroscopic analysis of the associated EMF photon radiation. The appearance of virtual dipoles drive the dipoles in the lattice. Other photons add to the energy of the dipoles over what is provided by vacuum energy. On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.commailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: Lou, I also think the frequency of photons emitted in an NAE are going to be frequency shifted proportional to their contracted state. In my old animation circa 2010 I show a red photon for H2 disassociation outside casimir plates while f/H2 photons emitted inside plates are blue where the moving plates represent different values of Casimir geometry. http://byzipp.com/finished1.swf Fran From: francis [mailto:froarty...@comcast.netmailto:froarty...@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 8:41 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... On Thursday June 6th Harry said Ok, I realise why we diverge in our approaches to your model. I don't start with the assumption that the lattice is in a state of thermal equilibrium. I assume the presence of thermal fluxes and perhaps other energy fluxes as well which can do small amounts of work on the hydrotons. If these local fluxes are sporadic excess heat production will be sporadic as well. Harry, I share your position and think this is also due to the quantum effect of the geometry. I think the suppression concentrated in the NAE must be balanced by a diluted region outside the cavity walls that responsible for this segregation of vacuum pressure... although vacuum wavelengths appear much shorter inside a cavity they must, IMHO, appear slightly longer spread over the atoms behind the cavity to avoid a COE violation..you aren't getting something for nothing..the geometry is simply segregating pressure like Chicago city scape separates wind. This by itself won't give us any source of energy since it is just a hill to run up and roll down but there has always been an energy source associated with gas motion.. you have temperature which will fall when harnessed and then you also have HUP which keeps helium from freezing solid even at 0 kelvin that can never be exhausted. We are told HUP which is responsible for the random motion of gas is unusable energy that can't be considered under conservation of energy -They say a Maxwellian demon to separate hot from cold is impossible to implement at OU. I disagree, I think the NAE pits different forces of nature against each other to create heat and cold via a back door method. You have physical confinement and axial alignment of H2, you have supplied ambient heat forcing motion to initiate the process, You have Ed's energy sink due to opposing charges on either side of the cavity where resonance causes the nucleus to emit energy as photons, or, my model of near disassociation f/h molecules getting the threshold discounted by the force trying to change the fractional value which only gives of a single photon upon reassociatio at the new f/h level.. Granted both forces go back to the same initial source..virtual particle pairs but they are on vastly different scales where one is very fast comparable to ac current moving gas atoms while the other
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Ed, On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: On Jun 4, 2013, at 11:11 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: Ed, On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: On Jun 2, 2013, at 12:15 AM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: On May 30, 2013, at 11:39 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Harry, imagine balls held in line by springs. If the end ball is pull away with a force and let go, a resonance wave will pass down the line. Each ball will alternately move away and then toward its neighbor. If outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well understood. In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior. The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers the energy of the system. Ed, With each cycle energy of the system is only lowered if the energy of the emitted photon is greater than the work done by the random vibration of atoms on the system. NO Harry! Ed, I am trying to help you understand your model. I am not trying to tear it down. I know and I appreciate the effort. However, I want you to accurately understand what I'm proposing. Only then can you add a new insight. You are not accurately describing what I proposing. There is no work done by the random vibrations. These are the result of normal temperature. The photon is emitted from the nucleus and carries with it the excess mass-energy of the nucleus. Let us return to your ball and spring model of the hydroton and assume an ideal spring which doesn't dissipate energy by getting warm during compressions. If heat energy is the vibration of atoms in the lattice, then the spring is compressed by atoms from the lattice pushing on the spring. As the spring is compressed work is done on the spring, however, the spring will eventually bounce back to its original length so no net work is done on the spring in the course of one oscillation. The oscillations will repeat indefinitely with the same amplitude as long as the temperature remains constant. However, in your model the spring does not return to its original length. Now for sake argument assume no photon is emitted. This means some work has been performed on the spring, which means the spring has effectively turned a little thermal energy into potential energy and thereby slightly cooled the lattice. Now assume a photon is emitted. The subsequent temperature of the lattice will depend on the energy of this emitted photon. If the energy of the photon is less than the work done (W) then the temperature of the lattice will not return to the initial the temperature. The cycle can repeat until the protons fuse but the temperature will gradually decline and the end result can aptly be described as cold fusion! On the other hand if the energy of the photon is greater than W then the temperature of the lattice will be greater after fusion. No analogy is perfect and you are extending my effort to get one idea understood and applying it to a different idea, which is not correct. The vibration is like a periodic switch acting on the nucleus. The vibration itself does not release energy. It has no friction. Energy is totally conserved during the vibration. However, the vibration causes the nuclei to emit a proton because the vibration periodically causes them to get within a critical distance of each other. Getting closer _and_ staying closer means work has been done on the system since there is a mutual force of repulsion keeping them apart. The kinetic energy of the lattice is transformed into potential energy of repulsion according to the principle of CoE. Whether the temperature of the environment cools, stays constant or warms depends on whether the energy of the emitted photon is less than / equal to / greater than the work done. Your model at the present time is silent on these possibilities. Harry, you don't seem to understand the concept of work. Consider that atoms in a lattice are held together by a force. They vibrate and this vibration contains energy as the heat capacity. Is a piece of salt doing
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Q's
I've been too busy with analysing the latest Rossi test to follow this. I've got the following official links to Storms' NAE 2012 Paper : http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEanapproach.pdf Feb 2013 Kick-off post : http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg77023.html I have a strong forgettery feeling that I'm missing one. What's the present state of the temperature-dependent aspects: 1. At what temperature does it start ? (Lower limit: when the metal hydride source activates, typically 200C) 2. Is there a temperature at which it stops? (Upper limit, Ni melting point) 3. Is it linear in-between? 4 What's the estimated SIZE for a NAE (eg assuming a crack) --- Sure LOOKS like cracks! http://lenr.qumbu.com/web_hotcat_pics/passi_nato_huber_P1070423.png (My new policy -- when I steal/ borrow a picture I annotate where I got it) Except that the cracks look about 1um wide (If I read '5000x 1u' correctly) .. and Rossi's powder is in the 1u range : a 1u crack won't fit!!?? Also, I don't see any more detail IN the SKINR cracks. And the reaction (let's use p+p+e = D + 1.4MEV for discussion purposes) 5. Is one NAE destroyed by the reaction, never to fire again? Or is it poisoned and recovers? eg a chain of H-H-H-H will resonate and is active at T1, but H-D-H won't resonate, so the NAE is poisoned. D diffuses away, two H diffuse in : then it's ready again? 6. If so, what is the typical time between firing? (ns,us,ms,sec,minutes?)
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Q's
7. Where is the thermalization? I think it's on the inner steel cylinder, not in the Nickel If that's so, then (based on my thermal model) the December COP=6 had an outside temperature of 500C and a central temperature of 750C
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Q's
On Jun 6, 2013, at 2:11 PM, Alan Fletcher wrote: I've been too busy with analysing the latest Rossi test to follow this. I've got the following official links to Storms' NAE 2012 Paper : http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEanapproach.pdf Feb 2013 Kick-off post : http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg77023.html I have a strong forgettery feeling that I'm missing one. Yes Alan, you are missing several papers, but this is a good start. What's the present state of the temperature-dependent aspects: 1. At what temperature does it start ? (Lower limit: when the metal hydride source activates, typically 200C) According to my theory, the rate is totally controlled by how fast the hydrogen can get to the NAE. This rate is determined by temperature and concentration of hydrogen in the surrounding metal. If the heat detector is sufficiently sensitive, the effect could be detected at room temperature. 2. Is there a temperature at which it stops? (Upper limit, Ni melting point) The upper limit is unknown, but the NAE is certainly destroyed at the melting point. \ 3. Is it linear in-between? Rate=A*C*exp (B/T), where A is proportional to the concentration of NAE , C is the concentration of hydrogen isotope in the metal, and B is related to the matertial in which the NAE forms. T is the average temperature of the material in which the NAE forms. 4 What's the estimated SIZE for a NAE (eg assuming a crack) --- Sure LOOKS like cracks! The size is unknown but less than a nm. http://lenr.qumbu.com/web_hotcat_pics/passi_nato_huber_P1070423.png (My new policy -- when I steal/ borrow a picture I annotate where I got it) Except that the cracks look about 1um wide (If I read '5000x 1u' correctly) .. and Rossi's powder is in the 1u range : a 1u crack won't fit!!?? Also, I don't see any more detail IN the SKINR cracks. A crack that is visible on an SEM is too big to be active. However, where large cracks are present, small cracks are surely present also. And the reaction (let's use p+p+e = D + 1.4MEV for discussion purposes) 5. Is one NAE destroyed by the reaction, never to fire again? Or is it poisoned and recovers? I believe the NAE (nano gap), once it forms, is very stable and is the host of many Hydrotons, with each forming, fusing, and reforming. eg a chain of H-H-H-H will resonate and is active at T1, but H- D-H won't resonate, so the NAE is poisoned. The -H-e-D-e- etc makes tritium. The NAE is not poisoned, but simply creates a different nuclear product. That is why I want Rossi to look for tritium. He makes D that than fuses with H to make tritium. D diffuses away, two H diffuse in : then it's ready again? 6. If so, what is the typical time between firing? (ns,us,ms,sec,minutes?) I would guess that once a Hydroton forms and starts to resonate, the fusion process in that one Hydroton is finished in a few ns. However, thousands of Hydrotons are going through their life cycle at the same time. Ed Storms
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Q's
Alan, The Rossi tubules are on the 1u scale but are bumpy with protrusions that must form much smaller geometry between the grains as the bulk powder is contained..My posit for Rossi is that his NAE geometry is between these grains and protrusions. It is a reverse of a skeletal catalyst where Al is leached of the Ni-Al alloy leaving pits in the bulk. Fran On Jun 6, 2013, at 2:11 PM, Alan Fletcher wrote: I've been too busy with analysing the latest Rossi test to follow this. I've got the following official links to Storms' NAE 2012 Paper : http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEanapproach.pdf Feb 2013 Kick-off post : http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg77023.html I have a strong forgettery feeling that I'm missing one. Yes Alan, you are missing several papers, but this is a good start. What's the present state of the temperature-dependent aspects: 1. At what temperature does it start ? (Lower limit: when the metal hydride source activates, typically 200C) According to my theory, the rate is totally controlled by how fast the hydrogen can get to the NAE. This rate is determined by temperature and concentration of hydrogen in the surrounding metal. If the heat detector is sufficiently sensitive, the effect could be detected at room temperature. 2. Is there a temperature at which it stops? (Upper limit, Ni melting point) The upper limit is unknown, but the NAE is certainly destroyed at the melting point. \ 3. Is it linear in-between? Rate=A*C*exp (B/T), where A is proportional to the concentration of NAE , C is the concentration of hydrogen isotope in the metal, and B is related to the matertial in which the NAE forms. T is the average temperature of the material in which the NAE forms. 4 What's the estimated SIZE for a NAE (eg assuming a crack) --- Sure LOOKS like cracks! The size is unknown but less than a nm. http://lenr.qumbu.com/web_hotcat_pics/passi_nato_huber_P1070423.png (My new policy -- when I steal/ borrow a picture I annotate where I got it) Except that the cracks look about 1um wide (If I read '5000x 1u' correctly) .. and Rossi's powder is in the 1u range : a 1u crack won't fit!!?? Also, I don't see any more detail IN the SKINR cracks. A crack that is visible on an SEM is too big to be active. However, where large cracks are present, small cracks are surely present also. And the reaction (let's use p+p+e = D + 1.4MEV for discussion purposes) 5. Is one NAE destroyed by the reaction, never to fire again? Or is it poisoned and recovers? I believe the NAE (nano gap), once it forms, is very stable and is the host of many Hydrotons, with each forming, fusing, and reforming. eg a chain of H-H-H-H will resonate and is active at T1, but H- D-H won't resonate, so the NAE is poisoned. The -H-e-D-e- etc makes tritium. The NAE is not poisoned, but simply creates a different nuclear product. That is why I want Rossi to look for tritium. He makes D that than fuses with H to make tritium. D diffuses away, two H diffuse in : then it's ready again? 6. If so, what is the typical time between firing? (ns,us,ms,sec,minutes?) I would guess that once a Hydroton forms and starts to resonate, the fusion process in that one Hydroton is finished in a few ns. However, thousands of Hydrotons are going through their life cycle at the same time. Ed Storms
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Q's
In reply to Alan Fletcher's message of Thu, 6 Jun 2013 13:30:02 -0700 (PDT): Hi, [snip] 7. Where is the thermalization? I think it's on the inner steel cylinder, not in the Nickel If that's so, then (based on my thermal model) the December COP=6 had an outside temperature of 500C and a central temperature of 750C You left out a possibility:- The gas. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Q's
From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2013 1:37:55 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Thanks. (Not necessarily the answer I was hoping for !!!)
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Q's
What answer were you hoping for? Ed Storms On Jun 6, 2013, at 3:29 PM, Alan Fletcher wrote: From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2013 1:37:55 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Thanks. (Not necessarily the answer I was hoping for !!!)
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Q's
From: mix...@bigpond.com Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2013 2:20:29 PM You left out a possibility:- The gas. I suspect it's pretty thin, relatively speaking , both as a target for futon absorption (a technical term, laymen don't have to use it [note 1]) and heat capacity (specific heat * mass). I think it's NAE-to-steel by futon, and then steel-to-nickel by radiation. I'm not sure that NAE-to-H by futon, and H-to-Ni by conduction would be much different. It's a constant-temperature thermal bath either way. A peek into the tube of the Penon version is equivalent to looking into the central cavity, which is in thermal equilibrium. I think that NAE-futon-Ni will make the Ni to hot. It may happen accidentally (OCCASIONAL craters seen on SEM's) but it's not the norm. ps I misread my own plot -- a 500C output has a 510C center --- except that I think that my thermal resistivity for ceramic is WAY too low -- The Penon picture shows the center red hot and the outside black. (Could be an emissivity difference too). [note 1] : From an ABC weatherperson. It's my current favorite phrase.
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Q's
From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com What answer were you hoping for? Ten minutes =8-(
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Q's
I assume you hit send before you were finished. Otherwise, this makes no sense. Ed Storms On Jun 6, 2013, at 3:44 PM, Alan Fletcher wrote: From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com What answer were you hoping for? Ten minutes =8-(
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On Jun 6, 2013, at 1:30 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: Ed, On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: On Jun 4, 2013, at 11:11 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: Ed, On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: On Jun 2, 2013, at 12:15 AM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: On May 30, 2013, at 11:39 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Harry, imagine balls held in line by springs. If the end ball is pull away with a force and let go, a resonance wave will pass down the line. Each ball will alternately move away and then toward its neighbor. If outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well understood. In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior. The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers the energy of the system. Ed, With each cycle energy of the system is only lowered if the energy of the emitted photon is greater than the work done by the random vibration of atoms on the system. NO Harry! Ed, I am trying to help you understand your model. I am not trying to tear it down. I know and I appreciate the effort. However, I want you to accurately understand what I'm proposing. Only then can you add a new insight. You are not accurately describing what I proposing. There is no work done by the random vibrations. These are the result of normal temperature. The photon is emitted from the nucleus and carries with it the excess mass-energy of the nucleus. Let us return to your ball and spring model of the hydroton and assume an ideal spring which doesn't dissipate energy by getting warm during compressions. If heat energy is the vibration of atoms in the lattice, then the spring is compressed by atoms from the lattice pushing on the spring. As the spring is compressed work is done on the spring, however, the spring will eventually bounce back to its original length so no net work is done on the spring in the course of one oscillation. The oscillations will repeat indefinitely with the same amplitude as long as the temperature remains constant. However, in your model the spring does not return to its original length. Now for sake argument assume no photon is emitted. This means some work has been performed on the spring, which means the spring has effectively turned a little thermal energy into potential energy and thereby slightly cooled the lattice. Now assume a photon is emitted. The subsequent temperature of the lattice will depend on the energy of this emitted photon. If the energy of the photon is less than the work done (W) then the temperature of the lattice will not return to the initial the temperature. The cycle can repeat until the protons fuse but the temperature will gradually decline and the end result can aptly be described as cold fusion! On the other hand if the energy of the photon is greater than W then the temperature of the lattice will be greater after fusion. No analogy is perfect and you are extending my effort to get one idea understood and applying it to a different idea, which is not correct. The vibration is like a periodic switch acting on the nucleus. The vibration itself does not release energy. It has no friction. Energy is totally conserved during the vibration. However, the vibration causes the nuclei to emit a proton because the vibration periodically causes them to get within a critical distance of each other. Getting closer _and_ staying closer means work has been done on the system since there is a mutual force of repulsion keeping them apart. The kinetic energy of the lattice is transformed into potential energy of repulsion according to the principle of CoE. Whether the temperature of the environment cools, stays constant or warms depends on whether the energy of the emitted photon is less than / equal to / greater than the work done. Your model at the present time is silent on these possibilities. Harry, you don't seem to understand the concept of work. Consider that atoms in a lattice are held together
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Harry, you don't seem to understand the concept of work. Consider that atoms in a lattice are held together by a force. They vibrate and this vibration contains energy as the heat capacity. Is a piece of salt doing work as it sits in the salt shaker? No, the material is doing no work even though a force is present and atoms are vibrating. Steady-state conditions, of which this is an example, do not involve work. Work is based on a net change in position as result of applied force. The salt sits still. It does not move. There is no net change in position of the atoms. If they move in one direction, they immediately move just as much in the opposite direction. If you want to imagine work being done during the first motion, it is immediately undone by the second motion. No net change has resulted. The system is fixed in space and it is not doing work. Ok, I realise why we diverge in our approaches to your model. I don't start with the assumption that the lattice is in a state of thermal equilibrium. I assume the presence of thermal fluxes and perhaps other energy fluxes as well which can do small amounts of work on the hydrotons. If these local fluxes are sporadic excess heat production will be sporadic as well. Harry
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Is there some way to be a part of this that does not involve dozens of email messages per waking day to my account? Is there not some way to make an online forum? --- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin --- On Thu, 6/6/13, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Date: Thursday, June 6, 2013, 7:22 PM On Jun 6, 2013, at 1:30 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: Ed, On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: On Jun 4, 2013, at 11:11 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: Ed, On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: On Jun 2, 2013, at 12:15 AM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: On May 30, 2013, at 11:39 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Harry, imagine balls held in line by springs. If the end ball is pull away with a force and let go, a resonance wave will pass down the line. Each ball will alternately move away and then toward its neighbor. If outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well understood. In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior. The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers the energy of the system. Ed, With each cycle energy of the system is only lowered if the energy of the emitted photon is greater than the work done by the random vibration of atoms on the system. NO Harry! Ed, I am trying to help you understand your model. I am not trying to tear it down. I know and I appreciate the effort. However, I want you to accurately understand what I'm proposing. Only then can you add a new insight. You are not accurately describing what I proposing. There is no work done by the random vibrations. These are the result of normal temperature. The photon is emitted from the nucleus and carries with it the excess mass-energy of the nucleus. Let us return to your ball and spring model of the hydroton and assume an ideal spring which doesn't dissipate energy by getting warm during compressions. If heat energy is the vibration of atoms in the lattice, then the spring is compressed by atoms from the lattice pushing on the spring. As the spring is compressed work is done on the spring, however, the spring will eventually bounce back to its original length so no net work is done on the spring in the course of one oscillation. The oscillations will repeat indefinitely with the same amplitude as long as the temperature remains constant. However, in your model the spring does not return to its original length. Now for sake argument assume no photon is emitted. This means some work has been performed on the spring, which means the spring has effectively turned a little thermal energy into potential energy and thereby slightly cooled the lattice. Now assume a photon is emitted. The subsequent temperature of the lattice will depend on the energy of this emitted photon. If the energy of the photon is less than the work done (W) then the temperature of the lattice will not return to the initial the temperature. The cycle can repeat until the protons fuse but the temperature will gradually decline and the end result can aptly be described as cold fusion! On the other hand if the energy of the photon is greater than W then the temperature of the lattice will be greater after fusion. No analogy is perfect and you are extending my effort to get one idea understood and applying it to a different idea, which is not correct. The vibration is like a periodic switch acting on the nucleus. The vibration itself does not release energy. It has no friction. Energy is totally conserved during the vibration. However, the vibration causes the nuclei to emit a proton because the vibration periodically causes them to get within a critical distance of each other. Getting closer _and_ staying closer means work has been done on the system since there is a mutual force of repulsion keeping them apart. The kinetic energy of the lattice
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Danny Ross Lunsford antimatte...@yahoo.comwrote: Is there some way to be a part of this that does not involve dozens of email messages per waking day to my account? Is there not some way to make an online forum? It would be very difficult to deal with Vortex emails going to one's inbox, given the volume of traffic here. In a Gmail account, it is possible to set up a filter that routes Vortex emails to a subfolder (label) and bypass the inbox entirely. There may be something comparable with Yahoo! mail. If Yahoo! does not give you a way to do this, you might set up a Gmail account specifically for mailing list traffic. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
http://help.yahoo.com/tutorials/mmail/mmail/mm_filter1.html (although, as a new Google employee, I guess I really should be encouraging you to switch to gmail :-) On 6/6/2013 7:46 PM, Eric Walker wrote: On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Danny Ross Lunsford antimatte...@yahoo.com mailto:antimatte...@yahoo.com wrote: Is there some way to be a part of this that does not involve dozens of email messages per waking day to my account? Is there not some way to make an online forum? It would be very difficult to deal with Vortex emails going to one's inbox, given the volume of traffic here. In a Gmail account, it is possible to set up a filter that routes Vortex emails to a subfolder (label) and bypass the inbox entirely. There may be something comparable with Yahoo! mail. If Yahoo! does not give you a way to do this, you might set up a Gmail account specifically for mailing list traffic. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: On Jun 6, 2013, at 1:30 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: Ed, On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Harry, you don't seem to understand the concept of work. Consider that atoms in a lattice are held together by a force. They vibrate and this vibration contains energy as the heat capacity. Is a piece of salt doing work as it sits in the salt shaker? No, the material is doing no work even though a force is present and atoms are vibrating. Steady-state conditions, of which this is an example, do not involve work. Work is based on a net change in position as result of applied force. The salt sits still. It does not move. There is no net change in position of the atoms. If they move in one direction, they immediately move just as much in the opposite direction. If you want to imagine work being done during the first motion, it is immediately undone by the second motion. No net change has resulted. The system is fixed in space and it is not doing work. I agree this the case when the average separation distance between the protons is steady. Consequently, the NiH or PdD are doing no work by simply existing. On the other hand, if the NAE forms, then energy can be released from the nucleus as an emitted photon. This energy was trapped before the photon was released. Once photons are released, they are gradually absorbed by the surrounding material as they pass through, thereby causing local heating. This heating can be made to do work. No work was done before this heating occurred. Hypothetically speaking, do you agree that if the protons were to gradually get closer without photon emission that the lattice would tend to cool ? Protons can not get closer for no reason. You have to ask what is causing the reduction in distance. The distance can be reduced by applying pressure, which causes the temperature to increase because work is being done on the system. The distance can be reduced by cooling, but in this case, the cooling is a cause rather than a result. A phase change can be caused, which will release energy. Events only occur spontaneously in a system because energy is released. Any event that would actually happen to bring the protons closer MUST release energy. Otherwise, it will not happen. Ed, Logically speaking, if spontaneous emission is a sufficient cause and work is not a necessary cause, then the hydroton could be chilled to absolute zero and gradually shrink by spontaneously emitting photons. On the other hand if spontaneous emission is essential but not sufficient then some work is necessary. Spontaneous emission in this regard would serve to maintain the distance reduced through work. It would be like climbing an icy slope without the need to expend energy to maintain traction. If the latter is true then hot fusion and cold fusion do not differ in absolute terms. It is not that cold fusion depends on spontaneity and hot fusion doesn't. In the case of hot fusion, although a great deal of work is performed, work is not a sufficient cause since one big spontaneous emission is required to achieve fusion. The difference between hot and cold fusion is in the mix of time, work and spontaneity. Harry Harry
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On Jun 4, 2013, at 11:11 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: Ed, On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: On Jun 2, 2013, at 12:15 AM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: On May 30, 2013, at 11:39 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Harry, imagine balls held in line by springs. If the end ball is pull away with a force and let go, a resonance wave will pass down the line. Each ball will alternately move away and then toward its neighbor. If outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well understood. In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior. The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers the energy of the system. Ed, With each cycle energy of the system is only lowered if the energy of the emitted photon is greater than the work done by the random vibration of atoms on the system. NO Harry! Ed, I am trying to help you understand your model. I am not trying to tear it down. I know and I appreciate the effort. However, I want you to accurately understand what I'm proposing. Only then can you add a new insight. You are not accurately describing what I proposing. There is no work done by the random vibrations. These are the result of normal temperature. The photon is emitted from the nucleus and carries with it the excess mass-energy of the nucleus. Let us return to your ball and spring model of the hydroton and assume an ideal spring which doesn't dissipate energy by getting warm during compressions. If heat energy is the vibration of atoms in the lattice, then the spring is compressed by atoms from the lattice pushing on the spring. As the spring is compressed work is done on the spring, however, the spring will eventually bounce back to its original length so no net work is done on the spring in the course of one oscillation. The oscillations will repeat indefinitely with the same amplitude as long as the temperature remains constant. However, in your model the spring does not return to its original length. Now for sake argument assume no photon is emitted. This means some work has been performed on the spring, which means the spring has effectively turned a little thermal energy into potential energy and thereby slightly cooled the lattice. Now assume a photon is emitted. The subsequent temperature of the lattice will depend on the energy of this emitted photon. If the energy of the photon is less than the work done (W) then the temperature of the lattice will not return to the initial the temperature. The cycle can repeat until the protons fuse but the temperature will gradually decline and the end result can aptly be described as cold fusion! On the other hand if the energy of the photon is greater than W then the temperature of the lattice will be greater after fusion. No analogy is perfect and you are extending my effort to get one idea understood and applying it to a different idea, which is not correct. The vibration is like a periodic switch acting on the nucleus. The vibration itself does not release energy. It has no friction. Energy is totally conserved during the vibration. However, the vibration causes the nuclei to emit a proton because the vibration periodically causes them to get within a critical distance of each other. Getting closer _and_ staying closer means work has been done on the system since there is a mutual force of repulsion keeping them apart. The kinetic energy of the lattice is transformed into potential energy of repulsion according to the principle of CoE. Whether the temperature of the environment cools, stays constant or warms depends on whether the energy of the emitted photon is less than / equal to / greater than the work done. Your model at the present time is silent on these possibilities. Harry, you don't seem to understand the concept of work. Consider that atoms in a lattice are held together by a force. They vibrate and this vibration contains energy as the heat capacity. Is a piece of salt doing work as it sits in the salt
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Ed, On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: On Jun 2, 2013, at 12:15 AM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: On May 30, 2013, at 11:39 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Harry, imagine balls held in line by springs. If the end ball is pull away with a force and let go, a resonance wave will pass down the line. Each ball will alternately move away and then toward its neighbor. If outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well understood. In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior. The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers the energy of the system. Ed, With each cycle energy of the system is only lowered if the energy of the emitted photon is greater than the work done by the random vibration of atoms on the system. NO Harry! Ed, I am trying to help you understand your model. I am not trying to tear it down. I know and I appreciate the effort. However, I want you to accurately understand what I'm proposing. Only then can you add a new insight. You are not accurately describing what I proposing. There is no work done by the random vibrations. These are the result of normal temperature. The photon is emitted from the nucleus and carries with it the excess mass-energy of the nucleus. Let us return to your ball and spring model of the hydroton and assume an ideal spring which doesn't dissipate energy by getting warm during compressions. If heat energy is the vibration of atoms in the lattice, then the spring is compressed by atoms from the lattice pushing on the spring. As the spring is compressed work is done on the spring, however, the spring will eventually bounce back to its original length so no net work is done on the spring in the course of one oscillation. The oscillations will repeat indefinitely with the same amplitude as long as the temperature remains constant. However, in your model the spring does not return to its original length. Now for sake argument assume no photon is emitted. This means some work has been performed on the spring, which means the spring has effectively turned a little thermal energy into potential energy and thereby slightly cooled the lattice. Now assume a photon is emitted. The subsequent temperature of the lattice will depend on the energy of this emitted photon. If the energy of the photon is less than the work done (W) then the temperature of the lattice will not return to the initial the temperature. The cycle can repeat until the protons fuse but the temperature will gradually decline and the end result can aptly be described as cold fusion! On the other hand if the energy of the photon is greater than W then the temperature of the lattice will be greater after fusion. No analogy is perfect and you are extending my effort to get one idea understood and applying it to a different idea, which is not correct. The vibration is like a periodic switch acting on the nucleus. The vibration itself does not release energy. It has no friction. Energy is totally conserved during the vibration. However, the vibration causes the nuclei to emit a proton because the vibration periodically causes them to get within a critical distance of each other. Getting closer _and_ staying closer means work has been done on the system since there is a mutual force of repulsion keeping them apart. The kinetic energy of the lattice is transformed into potential energy of repulsion according to the principle of CoE. Whether the temperature of the environment cools, stays constant or warms depends on whether the energy of the emitted photon is less than / equal to / greater than the work done. Your model at the present time is silent on these possibilities. All atoms vibrate, but normally in random ways. The Hydroton forces this vibration into a particular direction. In fact all chemical bonds do this. For example, in the water molecule, the H-O-H bond vibrates and causes the molecule to periodically gets slightly longer and shorter, and cause the angle to change. This process does not cause a nuclear reaction
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: On May 30, 2013, at 11:39 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Harry, imagine balls held in line by springs. If the end ball is pull away with a force and let go, a resonance wave will pass down the line. Each ball will alternately move away and then toward its neighbor. If outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well understood. In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior. The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers the energy of the system. Ed, With each cycle energy of the system is only lowered if the energy of the emitted photon is greater than the work done by the random vibration of atoms on the system. NO Harry! Ed, I am trying to help you understand your model. I am not trying to tear it down. There is no work done by the random vibrations. These are the result of normal temperature. The photon is emitted from the nucleus and carries with it the excess mass-energy of the nucleus. Let us return to your ball and spring model of the hydroton and assume an ideal spring which doesn't dissipate energy by getting warm during compressions. If heat energy is the vibration of atoms in the lattice, then the spring is compressed by atoms from the lattice pushing on the spring. As the spring is compressed work is done on the spring, however, the spring will eventually bounce back to its original length so no net work is done on the spring in the course of one oscillation. The oscillations will repeat indefinitely with the same amplitude as long as the temperature remains constant. However, in your model the spring does not return to its original length. Now for sake argument assume no photon is emitted. This means some work has been performed on the spring, which means the spring has effectively turned a little thermal energy into potential energy and thereby slightly cooled the lattice. Now assume a photon is emitted. The subsequent temperature of the lattice will depend on the energy of this emitted photon. If the energy of the photon is less than the work done (W) then the temperature of the lattice will not return to the initial the temperature. The cycle can repeat until the protons fuse but the temperature will gradually decline and the end result can aptly be described as cold fusion! On the other hand if the energy of the photon is greater than W then the temperature of the lattice will be greater after fusion. The change is analogous to an exothermic chemical reaction which requires some activation energy to initiate but the reaction products are in a lower energy state. Because of the shape of the coulomb hill the hill can only be climbed if the energy emitted increases with each cycle. No! The hill height is reduced by an intervening negative charge. As a result, the hill height is reduced so that it can be surmounted by the vibrations occuring in the Hydroton. Normally, the hill is too high for such small vibrations to have any effect. The hill is reduced in height as a result of the Hydroton forming. As a result, it is the unique condition required to make CF work. All the theories use something similar, but without a clear description. The barrier is reduced by the electron but I think the net effect only reduces the force of repulsion by 1/2. However, this is not a problem since you have theoretically enlarged the total energy of a p-e-p association (or molecule as you call it) to include all the excess mass-energy as well as the electrostatic energy of the association. Therefore the p-e-p association can shrink in size by entering a lower energy through the conversion of mass into a photon. This is like a ball rolling between two hills. It rolls down the side of one hill, through the valley and up the other side. In the process, it picks up a little energy from the surroundings (temperature in this case) to reach the top, where it throws a switch and turns on a light for a brief time. Immediately, it starts to roll back down and returns to the first hill where it again reaches the top and turns on a light for a brief time. This back and forth continues
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On Jun 2, 2013, at 12:15 AM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: On May 30, 2013, at 11:39 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Harry, imagine balls held in line by springs. If the end ball is pull away with a force and let go, a resonance wave will pass down the line. Each ball will alternately move away and then toward its neighbor. If outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well understood. In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior. The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers the energy of the system. Ed, With each cycle energy of the system is only lowered if the energy of the emitted photon is greater than the work done by the random vibration of atoms on the system. NO Harry! Ed, I am trying to help you understand your model. I am not trying to tear it down. I know and I appreciate the effort. However, I want you to accurately understand what I'm proposing. Only then can you add a new insight. You are not accurately describing what I proposing. There is no work done by the random vibrations. These are the result of normal temperature. The photon is emitted from the nucleus and carries with it the excess mass-energy of the nucleus. Let us return to your ball and spring model of the hydroton and assume an ideal spring which doesn't dissipate energy by getting warm during compressions. If heat energy is the vibration of atoms in the lattice, then the spring is compressed by atoms from the lattice pushing on the spring. As the spring is compressed work is done on the spring, however, the spring will eventually bounce back to its original length so no net work is done on the spring in the course of one oscillation. The oscillations will repeat indefinitely with the same amplitude as long as the temperature remains constant. However, in your model the spring does not return to its original length. Now for sake argument assume no photon is emitted. This means some work has been performed on the spring, which means the spring has effectively turned a little thermal energy into potential energy and thereby slightly cooled the lattice. Now assume a photon is emitted. The subsequent temperature of the lattice will depend on the energy of this emitted photon. If the energy of the photon is less than the work done (W) then the temperature of the lattice will not return to the initial the temperature. The cycle can repeat until the protons fuse but the temperature will gradually decline and the end result can aptly be described as cold fusion! On the other hand if the energy of the photon is greater than W then the temperature of the lattice will be greater after fusion. No analogy is perfect and you are extending my effort to get one idea understood and applying it to a different idea, which is not correct. The vibration is like a periodic switch acting on the nucleus. The vibration itself does not release energy. It has no friction. Energy is totally conserved during the vibration. However, the vibration causes the nuclei to emit a proton because the vibration periodically causes them to get within a critical distance of each other. All atoms vibrate, but normally in random ways. The Hydroton forces this vibration into a particular direction. In fact all chemical bonds do this. For example, in the water molecule, the H-O-H bond vibrates and causes the molecule to periodically gets slightly longer and shorter, and cause the angle to change. This process does not cause a nuclear reaction because the H and O are too far apart. In contrast, the H in the hydroton are close enough that this vibration periodically causes the nuclei to release mass-energy. This ability of a bond to do this is very rare. Nevertheless, I suspect it can happen when the bond with or between H or D is especially strong. The conditions producing the Hydroton just happen to be so efficient at producing the rare condition that the effect is easily detectable, and now has enough attention to be acknowledged when it is detected.
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
What is a Hydroton? I googled the term and all I could find were references
to a clay-based plant growing medium much prized by marijuana growers ...
[mg]
On Thursday, May 30, 2013, Harry Veeder wrote:
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edmund Storms
stor...@ix.netcom.comjavascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'stor...@ix.netcom.com');
wrote:
Harry, imagine balls held in line by springs. If the end ball is pull
away with a force and let go, a resonance wave will pass down the line.
Each ball will alternately move away and then toward its neighbor. If
outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will
damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well
understood.
In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The
temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the
length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior.
The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical
distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less
than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of
negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The
barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance
to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The
response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers
the energy of the system.
Ed,
With each cycle energy of the system is only lowered if the energy of the
emitted photon is greater than the work done by the random vibration of
atoms on the system. The change is analogous to an exothermic chemical
reaction which requires some activation energy to initiate but the reaction
products are in a lower energy state. Because of the shape of the coulomb
hill the hill can only be climbed if the energy emitted increases with
each cycle.
The Hydroton allows the Coulomb barrier to be reduced enough for the
nuclei to respond and emit excess energy. Because the resonance immediately
increases the distance, the ability or need to lose energy is lost before
all the extra energy can be emitted. If the distance did not increased, hot
fusion would result. The distance is again reduced, and another small burst
of energy is emitted. This process continues until ALL energy is emitted
and the intervening electron is sucked into the final product.
In your model, the coulomb barrier appears to be like a hill in a uniform
gravitational field. It is possible to climb such a barrier in steps by
emitting the same amount of energy with each cycle, but this barrier does
not correspond with the actual barrier that exists between protons.
Climbing a genuine coulomb barrier requires more energy with each cycle, so
that requires more energy be emitted with each cycle. The extra energy
emitted heats the lattice even more and produces more powerful vibrations
of the lattice which can push the protons even closer together.
I might add, all theories require a similar process. All theories require
a group of hydron be assembled, which requires emission of Gibbs energy.
Once assembled, the fusion process must take place in stages to avoid the
hot fusion result, as happens when the nuclei get close using a muon and
without the ability to limit the process. Unfortunately, the other theories
ignore these requirements.
The proton has nothing to do with the work done at each step. This work
comes from the temperature. The photon results because the assembly has too
much mass-energy for the distance between the nuclei. If the nuclei
touched, the assembly would have 24 MeV of excess mass-energy if they were
deuterons. If they are close but not touching, the stable mass-energy
would be less. At a critical distance short of actually touching, the
nuclei can know that they have too much mass energy. How they know this
is the magic that CF has revealed.
Here is the magic: they share an electron and it is through this common
ground that they know. If they don't share an electron they won't give up
any excess mass-energy until they are touching at which point they give it
up all at once which is what happens in hot fusion.
Harry
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
I asked Ed to try to find another keyword for precisely that reason. On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 1:10 AM, Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote: What is a Hydroton? I googled the term and all I could find were references to a clay-based plant growing medium much prized by marijuana growers ... [mg] On Thursday, May 30, 2013, Harry Veeder wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Harry, imagine balls held in line by springs. If the end ball is pull away with a force and let go, a resonance wave will pass down the line. Each ball will alternately move away and then toward its neighbor. If outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well understood. In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior. The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers the energy of the system. Ed, With each cycle energy of the system is only lowered if the energy of the emitted photon is greater than the work done by the random vibration of atoms on the system. The change is analogous to an exothermic chemical reaction which requires some activation energy to initiate but the reaction products are in a lower energy state. Because of the shape of the coulomb hill the hill can only be climbed if the energy emitted increases with each cycle. The Hydroton allows the Coulomb barrier to be reduced enough for the nuclei to respond and emit excess energy. Because the resonance immediately increases the distance, the ability or need to lose energy is lost before all the extra energy can be emitted. If the distance did not increased, hot fusion would result. The distance is again reduced, and another small burst of energy is emitted. This process continues until ALL energy is emitted and the intervening electron is sucked into the final product. In your model, the coulomb barrier appears to be like a hill in a uniform gravitational field. It is possible to climb such a barrier in steps by emitting the same amount of energy with each cycle, but this barrier does not correspond with the actual barrier that exists between protons. Climbing a genuine coulomb barrier requires more energy with each cycle, so that requires more energy be emitted with each cycle. The extra energy emitted heats the lattice even more and produces more powerful vibrations of the lattice which can push the protons even closer together. I might add, all theories require a similar process. All theories require a group of hydron be assembled, which requires emission of Gibbs energy. Once assembled, the fusion process must take place in stages to avoid the hot fusion result, as happens when the nuclei get close using a muon and without the ability to limit the process. Unfortunately, the other theories ignore these requirements. The proton has nothing to do with the work done at each step. This work comes from the temperature. The photon results because the assembly has too much mass-energy for the distance between the nuclei. If the nuclei touched, the assembly would have 24 MeV of excess mass-energy if they were deuterons. If they are close but not touching, the stable mass-energy would be less. At a critical distance short of actually touching, the nuclei can know that they have too much mass energy. How they know this is the magic that CF has revealed. Here is the magic: they share an electron and it is through this common ground that they know. If they don't share an electron they won't give up any excess mass-energy until they are touching at which point they give it up all at once which is what happens in hot fusion. Harry
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On May 30, 2013, at 11:39 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Harry, imagine balls held in line by springs. If the end ball is pull away with a force and let go, a resonance wave will pass down the line. Each ball will alternately move away and then toward its neighbor. If outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well understood. In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior. The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers the energy of the system. Ed, With each cycle energy of the system is only lowered if the energy of the emitted photon is greater than the work done by the random vibration of atoms on the system. NO Harry! There is no work done by the random vibrations. These are the result of normal temperature. The photon is emitted from the nucleus and carries with it the excess mass-energy of the nucleus. The change is analogous to an exothermic chemical reaction which requires some activation energy to initiate but the reaction products are in a lower energy state. Because of the shape of the coulomb hill the hill can only be climbed if the energy emitted increases with each cycle. No! The hill height is reduced by an intervening negative charge. As a result, the hill height is reduced so that it can be surmounted by the vibrations occuring in the Hydroton. Normally, the hill is too high for such small vibrations to have any effect. The hill is reduced in height as a result of the Hydroton forming. As a result, it is the unique condition required to make CF work. All the theories use something similar, but without a clear description. This is like a ball rolling between two hills. It rolls down the side of one hill, through the valley and up the other side. In the process, it picks up a little energy from the surroundings (temperature in this case) to reach the top, where it throws a switch and turns on a light for a brief time. Immediately, it starts to roll back down and returns to the first hill where it again reaches the top and turns on a light for a brief time. This back and forth continues until the battery powering the light is exhausted and the hills disappear. The light has no relationship to the motion of the ball. The ball only throws the switch. The Hydroton allows the Coulomb barrier to be reduced enough for the nuclei to respond and emit excess energy. Because the resonance immediately increases the distance, the ability or need to lose energy is lost before all the extra energy can be emitted. If the distance did not increased, hot fusion would result. The distance is again reduced, and another small burst of energy is emitted. This process continues until ALL energy is emitted and the intervening electron is sucked into the final product. In your model, the coulomb barrier appears to be like a hill in a uniform gravitational field. Yes, see above It is possible to climb such a barrier in steps by emitting the same amount of energy with each cycle, but this barrier does not correspond with the actual barrier that exists between protons. Climbing a genuine coulomb barrier requires more energy with each cycle, so that requires more energy be emitted with each cycle. The extra energy emitted heats the lattice even more and produces more powerful vibrations of the lattice which can push the protons even closer together. No, the Coulomb barrier is slowly reduced in height as mass-energy is lost, thereby allowing the nuclei to get closer each time the cycle repeats. Finally, the Coulomb barrier disappears and the two nuclei fuse, but very little excess mass-energy is present when this happens. Consequently, when the electron is absorbed, the resulting neutrino has very little energy to carry away. I might add, all theories require a similar process. All theories require a group of hydron be assembled, which requires emission of Gibbs energy. Once assembled, the fusion process must take place in stages to avoid the hot fusion result, as happens when the nuclei get close using a muon and without the ability to limit the process.
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Mark, the word Hydroton is a word I applied to the structure required to cause fusion between hydrogen isotopes. It consists of a linear molecule of hydrogen, deuterium or tritium nuclei held together by 2p bonding of electrons. It can only form in a gap in a solid material having a critically small size, which I call the NAE for this process. I suggest you read my papers and current e-mails that describe the process. Too bad marijuana got to the word first. Unfortunately, many words used in this field of study have several definitions. Ed Storms On May 31, 2013, at 12:10 AM, Mark Gibbs wrote: What is a Hydroton? I googled the term and all I could find were references to a clay-based plant growing medium much prized by marijuana growers ... [mg] On Thursday, May 30, 2013, Harry Veeder wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Harry, imagine balls held in line by springs. If the end ball is pull away with a force and let go, a resonance wave will pass down the line. Each ball will alternately move away and then toward its neighbor. If outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well understood. In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior. The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers the energy of the system. Ed, With each cycle energy of the system is only lowered if the energy of the emitted photon is greater than the work done by the random vibration of atoms on the system. The change is analogous to an exothermic chemical reaction which requires some activation energy to initiate but the reaction products are in a lower energy state. Because of the shape of the coulomb hill the hill can only be climbed if the energy emitted increases with each cycle. The Hydroton allows the Coulomb barrier to be reduced enough for the nuclei to respond and emit excess energy. Because the resonance immediately increases the distance, the ability or need to lose energy is lost before all the extra energy can be emitted. If the distance did not increased, hot fusion would result. The distance is again reduced, and another small burst of energy is emitted. This process continues until ALL energy is emitted and the intervening electron is sucked into the final product. In your model, the coulomb barrier appears to be like a hill in a uniform gravitational field. It is possible to climb such a barrier in steps by emitting the same amount of energy with each cycle, but this barrier does not correspond with the actual barrier that exists between protons. Climbing a genuine coulomb barrier requires more energy with each cycle, so that requires more energy be emitted with each cycle. The extra energy emitted heats the lattice even more and produces more powerful vibrations of the lattice which can push the protons even closer together. I might add, all theories require a similar process. All theories require a group of hydron be assembled, which requires emission of Gibbs energy. Once assembled, the fusion process must take place in stages to avoid the hot fusion result, as happens when the nuclei get close using a muon and without the ability to limit the process. Unfortunately, the other theories ignore these requirements. The proton has nothing to do with the work done at each step. This work comes from the temperature. The photon results because the assembly has too much mass-energy for the distance between the nuclei. If the nuclei touched, the assembly would have 24 MeV of excess mass-energy if they were deuterons. If they are close but not touching, the stable mass-energy would be less. At a critical distance short of actually touching, the nuclei can know that they have too much mass energy. How they know this is the magic that CF has revealed. Here is the magic: they share an electron and it is through this common ground that they know. If they don't share an electron they won't give up any excess mass-energy until they are touching at which point they give it up all at once which is what happens in hot fusion. Harry
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Ed, I still think this strange behavior you mention is in violation of our present definition of COE.. the resonance should dampen out before doing any useful work if powered by temperature - random motion of atoms.. if you are saying the tight confinement of the cavity is allowing this random motion to be focused along the linear molecule then you are positing an HUP trap.. Even the energy sink would be considered a zero point source if it somehow changed attraction levels after photon emission because it is a quantum effect of the geometry. I don't disagree with your results but I think you are denying the underlying cause. I would also posit your photon emission is due to re-association where the Hydroton atoms briefly disassociate, fall further into the sink and then immediately reform your molecule emitting a spectrum shifted photon... similar to Mills hydrino or Jones fractional hydrogen. It is plausible that these emissions could lower the columb barrier to the point of fusion but I have to consider photon emission as useful work and don't see the COE to account for it. Fran From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 9:11 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... On May 30, 2013, at 11:39 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.commailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Harry, imagine balls held in line by springs. If the end ball is pull away with a force and let go, a resonance wave will pass down the line. Each ball will alternately move away and then toward its neighbor. If outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well understood. In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior. The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers the energy of the system. Ed, With each cycle energy of the system is only lowered if the energy of the emitted photon is greater than the work done by the random vibration of atoms on the system. NO Harry! There is no work done by the random vibrations. These are the result of normal temperature. The photon is emitted from the nucleus and carries with it the excess mass-energy of the nucleus. The change is analogous to an exothermic chemical reaction which requires some activation energy to initiate but the reaction products are in a lower energy state. Because of the shape of the coulomb hill the hill can only be climbed if the energy emitted increases with each cycle. No! The hill height is reduced by an intervening negative charge. As a result, the hill height is reduced so that it can be surmounted by the vibrations occuring in the Hydroton. Normally, the hill is too high for such small vibrations to have any effect. The hill is reduced in height as a result of the Hydroton forming. As a result, it is the unique condition required to make CF work. All the theories use something similar, but without a clear description. This is like a ball rolling between two hills. It rolls down the side of one hill, through the valley and up the other side. In the process, it picks up a little energy from the surroundings (temperature in this case) to reach the top, where it throws a switch and turns on a light for a brief time. Immediately, it starts to roll back down and returns to the first hill where it again reaches the top and turns on a light for a brief time. This back and forth continues until the battery powering the light is exhausted and the hills disappear. The light has no relationship to the motion of the ball. The ball only throws the switch. The Hydroton allows the Coulomb barrier to be reduced enough for the nuclei to respond and emit excess energy. Because the resonance immediately increases the distance, the ability or need to lose energy is lost before all the extra energy can be emitted. If the distance did not increased, hot fusion would result. The distance is again reduced, and another small burst of energy is emitted. This process continues until ALL energy is emitted and the intervening electron is sucked into the final product. In your model, the coulomb barrier appears to be like a hill in a uniform
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Fran, I don't know how to explain this process any more clearly. The resonance is not using energy or emitting energy. It simply occurs as a result of the ambient energy, i.e. temperature. All chemical structures vibrate and resonate. This behavior is not visible unless something happens that can be detected. The detected photons in this case come from the nucleus, not from the resonance. They get their energy from the mass-energy of the nucleus. The resonance ONLlY allows the two nuclei to get close enough to create a condition that requires release of mass-energy for a brief time. You keep making the process more complicated than it is. This is a VERY SIMPLE effect. The only unique aspect is how the nuclei get information needed to cause the release of photons in order to reduce their mass energy. If you want to propose your own theory, that is ok, but please do not make it part of what I'm proposing. Please try to understand EXACTLY what I'm proposing before proposing your own ideas. As this mass-energy is reduced, the Coulomb barrier is lowered further, permitting the two nuclei to get closer at each cycle. Once the nuclei fuse, the Hydroton ceases to exist and instead nuclei of D are present if the original nuclei in the Hydroton were H, the final nuclei is He if D made the Hydroton, and the final nuclei is tritium if H+D were in the Hydroton. The He diffuses away while the tritium and D can enter other Hydrotons that continuously form. This is a contineous process limited ONLY by how fast the hydrogen isotopes can get into the gap. There is no such thing as a Hydroton atom. The Hydroton is a MOLECULE made up of atoms. Please read what I write carefully so that I do not have to keep explaining. Ed Storms On May 31, 2013, at 8:49 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: Ed, I still think this strange behavior you mention is in violation of our present definition of COE.. the resonance should dampen out before doing any useful work if powered by temperature - random motion of atoms.. if you are saying the tight confinement of the cavity is allowing this random motion to be “focused” along the linear molecule then you are positing an HUP trap.. Even the energy sink would be considered a zero point source if it somehow changed attraction levels after photon emission because it is a quantum effect of the geometry. I don’t disagree with your results but I think you are denying the underlying cause. I would also posit your photon emission is due to re-association where the Hydroton atoms briefly disassociate, fall further into the sink and then immediately reform your molecule emitting a spectrum shifted photon… similar to Mills hydrino or Jones fractional hydrogen. It is plausible that these emissions could lower the columb barrier to the point of fusion but I have to consider photon emission as useful work and don’t see the COE to account for it. Fran From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 9:11 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... On May 30, 2013, at 11:39 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Harry, imagine balls held in line by springs. If the end ball is pull away with a force and let go, a resonance wave will pass down the line. Each ball will alternately move away and then toward its neighbor. If outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well understood. In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior. The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers the energy of the system. Ed, With each cycle energy of the system is only lowered if the energy of the emitted photon is greater than the work done by the random vibration of atoms on the system. NO Harry! There is no work done by the random vibrations. These are the result of normal temperature. The photon is emitted from the nucleus and carries with it the excess mass-energy of the nucleus. The change is analogous to an exothermic chemical reaction which requires some activation energy to initiate
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
I do not see a direct violation of the COE with Ed's theory. It is somewhat kin to what happens when an electron and proton are far removed from each other. The electron comes into a tighter orbital as energy is released. If you make a classical model with two protons separated by an electron between, it can be shown that the group of particles would be attracted to each other. The repulsive field from the remote proton generates a force that must be less than the attractive force associated with the closer electron between them. As these components begin a dance that periodically closes the total gaps, it is entirely possible that radiation is emitted during this process. I see the difficult trick in how to handle the electron once the spacing become very tiny. Ed proposes that it gets sucked into one of the protons as far as I understand his theory and that will force some of the energy which would be released by fusion into converting the proton-electron pair into a neutron and neutrino. This is an interesting concept. The net energy released can certainly be shown positive. Dave -Original Message- From: Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, May 31, 2013 10:50 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Ed, I still think this strange behavior you mention is in violation of our present definition of COE.. the resonance should dampen out before doing any useful work if powered by temperature - random motion of atoms.. if you are saying the tight confinement of the cavity is allowing this random motion to be “focused” along the linear molecule then you are positing an HUP trap.. Even the energy sink would be considered a zero point source if it somehow changed attraction levels after photon emission because it is a quantum effect of the geometry. I don’t disagree with your results but I think you are denying the underlying cause. I would also posit your photon emission is due to re-association where the Hydroton atoms briefly disassociate, fall further into the sink and then immediately reform your molecule emitting a spectrum shifted photon… similar to Mills hydrino or Jones fractional hydrogen. It is plausible that these emissions could lower the columb barrier to the point of fusion but I have to consider photon emission as useful work and don’t see the COE to account for it. Fran From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 9:11 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... On May 30, 2013, at 11:39 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Harry, imagine balls held in line by springs. If the end ball is pull away with a force and let go, a resonance wave will pass down the line. Each ball will alternately move away and then toward its neighbor. If outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well understood. In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior. The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers the energy of the system. Ed, With each cycle energy of the system is only lowered if the energy of the emitted photon is greater than the work done by the random vibration of atoms on the system. NO Harry! There is no work done by the random vibrations. These are the result of normal temperature. The photon is emitted from the nucleus and carries with it the excess mass-energy of the nucleus. The change is analogous to an exothermic chemical reaction which requires some activation energy to initiate but the reaction products are in a lower energy state. Because of the shape of the coulomb hill the hill can only be climbed if the energy emitted increases with each cycle. No! The hill height is reduced by an intervening negative charge. As a result, the hill height is reduced so that it can be surmounted by the vibrations occuring in the Hydroton. Normally, the hill is too high for such small vibrations to have any effect. The hill is reduced in height as a result of the Hydroton forming. As a result, it is the unique condition
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Dear Dr. Storms, Yours is a fascinating theory, but I don't understand the mechanism you propose of slowly reducing the Coulomb barrier by photon emissions from the nucleus. The Coulomb barrier, as I understand it, is the proton-proton electric field repulsion between the hydron elements of the Hydroton molecule. Each proton has a unit quantized positive charge, so I presume the coulomb barrier reduction is not coming from reduction in the charge of the proton (you are not proposing fractionating the unit charge, or are you?). I gather the electron orbitals in the Hydroton are screening the charge on the neighboring protons. If the Coulomb barrier is being reduced, I can imagine screening of the charge of the protons by a change in electron orbitals. This is now sounding a little like Mills-ian fractional Rydberg change in the orbital, allowing the electron wave function to shrink closer to the proton which provides a screening until protons are closer together. Perhaps the electron orbital becomes squashed like a disk where it orbits very closely along the hydroton axis around the proton and extends way out into the walls of the NAE crack. However, if this were the case, then the photons corresponding to the Coulomb barrier reduction would be coming from orbital transitions of the electron and not from the nucleus. Are you instead suggesting some kind of proton valence quark oscillation that would make the proton appear like a neutron for some fraction of the time? (A naive guess on my part I am sure.) Can you provide additional insight into your proposition? Regards, Bob Higgins On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: As this mass-energy is reduced, the Coulomb barrier is lowered further, permitting the two nuclei to get closer at each cycle. Once the nuclei fuse, the Hydroton ceases to exist and instead nuclei of D are present if the original nuclei in the Hydroton were H, the final nuclei is He if D made the Hydroton, and the final nuclei is tritium if H+D were in the Hydroton. The He diffuses away while the tritium and D can enter other Hydrotons that continuously form. This is a contineous process limited ONLY by how fast the hydrogen isotopes can get into the gap. No, the Coulomb barrier is slowly reduced in height as mass-energy is lost, thereby allowing the nuclei to get closer each time the cycle repeats. Finally, the Coulomb barrier disappears and the two nuclei fuse, but very little excess mass-energy is present when this happens. Consequently, when the electron is absorbed, the resulting neutrino has very little energy to carry away.
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On May 31, 2013, at 12:11 PM, Bob Higgins wrote: Dear Dr. Storms, Yours is a fascinating theory, but I don't understand the mechanism you propose of slowly reducing the Coulomb barrier by photon emissions from the nucleus. We start with two protons each having a charge of 1. We end with single deuteron having a charge of 1. Consequently, a charge of 1 has to disappear, which it does by reacting with the intervening electron. In addition, we start with a mass excess, which has to be converted to energy. I'm proposing that the unit charge is retained. Because the two protons have to combine into a single nucleus at the end of this process, the distance HAS to be reduced to zero at some time during the process. I prefer to believe this reduction is gradual as mass-energy is lost. For this to happen, I propose the effective barrier is reduced as mass is converted to energy of photons. The protons gradually get closer only because the barrier is reduced, not because the unit charge is changed. I agree, the details can get complex. My first goal is to get the basic process understood. Then we can discuss details. I'm sure the details will cause some changes in the description, but the basic approach I think is important and needs to be understood. I'm glad you find it fascinating, Bob. That is the first step. Ed Storms The Coulomb barrier, as I understand it, is the proton-proton electric field repulsion between the hydron elements of the Hydroton molecule. Each proton has a unit quantized positive charge, so I presume the coulomb barrier reduction is not coming from reduction in the charge of the proton (you are not proposing fractionating the unit charge, or are you?). I gather the electron orbitals in the Hydroton are screening the charge on the neighboring protons. If the Coulomb barrier is being reduced, I can imagine screening of the charge of the protons by a change in electron orbitals. This is now sounding a little like Mills-ian fractional Rydberg change in the orbital, allowing the electron wave function to shrink closer to the proton which provides a screening until protons are closer together. Perhaps the electron orbital becomes squashed like a disk where it orbits very closely along the hydroton axis around the proton and extends way out into the walls of the NAE crack. However, if this were the case, then the photons corresponding to the Coulomb barrier reduction would be coming from orbital transitions of the electron and not from the nucleus. Are you instead suggesting some kind of proton valence quark oscillation that would make the proton appear like a neutron for some fraction of the time? (A naive guess on my part I am sure.) Can you provide additional insight into your proposition? Regards, Bob Higgins On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: As this mass-energy is reduced, the Coulomb barrier is lowered further, permitting the two nuclei to get closer at each cycle. Once the nuclei fuse, the Hydroton ceases to exist and instead nuclei of D are present if the original nuclei in the Hydroton were H, the final nuclei is He if D made the Hydroton, and the final nuclei is tritium if H+D were in the Hydroton. The He diffuses away while the tritium and D can enter other Hydrotons that continuously form. This is a contineous process limited ONLY by how fast the hydrogen isotopes can get into the gap. No, the Coulomb barrier is slowly reduced in height as mass-energy is lost, thereby allowing the nuclei to get closer each time the cycle repeats. Finally, the Coulomb barrier disappears and the two nuclei fuse, but very little excess mass-energy is present when this happens. Consequently, when the electron is absorbed, the resulting neutrino has very little energy to carry away.
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
that determines whether it will be a NAE. Once the gap has grown too big, it no longer allows formation of the Hydroton and, instead, normal H2 forms. It can grow too big if the stress that made the gap in the first place continues to increase. I suggest this is why most successful production of excess energy eventually stops. The Hydroton acts like a superconductor because the electron is free to move within the structure because it is not bound to a single nucleus. The gap itself is not superconducting. The effect of nano-structures on concentrating energy (aka Axil) is an entirely different phenomenon that has no relationship to LENR according to my model. Axil obviously has a different model. Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 6:22 PM, David Roberson wrote: I believe that I see what you are describing Ed. This effect must go away at some size when the metal begins to have conductivity on the inside surfaces of the cavities. Could this be the mechanism that limits how large the NAE can become? Does anyone know how large a metallic structure has to be before it looks like a resistor? Perhaps I am stretching it to assume that a structure which only has a small number of associated atoms behaves like a superconductor. If not, what mechanism determines the resistive parameter? If a small collection of atoms behaves like a superconductor then that would explain why the field generated by tiny Axil antennas can become of great magnitude. Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 6:16 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, you are describing a large container. The gap is not a large container. It consists of two surfaces with a gap that is on the atomic scale. Start by imagining what a lattice consist of. It is created by a regular arrangement of electron shells, each surrounding a nucleus. These atoms are at a distance determined by a symmetrical electron interaction between each neighbor . Now move the atoms apart along a line. Immediately, the electron cloud surrounding each atom in the wall is unbalanced. The electron cloud of each atom pushed into the gap. This same effect happens on a clean surface and accounts for the surface energy that attracts absorbed atoms. Is this clearer? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:53 PM, David Roberson wrote: Ed, I recall the Van de Graaff generators which had a vacuum or just air inside and a conductive outside. One of the demonstrations that I saw was that there is no electric field within the shielding outer surface. Why does this not happen within the NAE? It looks a lot like one of those devices since a metallic conductor surrounds the cavity. Am I missing something about the shape? Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 5:38 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, when the gap initially forms, nothing is present. It is a void, a space without substance, a vacuum if you wish. However, it contains strong negative fields and it contains electrons. Does a vacuum contain electrons? The gap is too small for a gas molecule to enter. It can accommodate only hydron ions, which when they enter, react with each other. At this point in the discussion, I'm describing pure chemical conditions that can be calculated using conventional theory. Does this answer your question? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:07 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed: Thanks for the additional explanation, but it wasn’t necessary… Obviously, there’s a disconnect as to what my point was in this thread, and how you interpreted it. I do not take issue with your hypothesis; I follow the reasoning and steps of how you think LENR occurs. It sounds very straightforward, and I trust your vast knowledge of the field to have taken all the empirical data to heart when formulating the hypothesis. I sincerely hope that you are able to convince some LENR researchers to test your hypothesis and get some empirical support… The point of my posting the thread is to understand the precise environment of these dislocations in the lattice… if they are the site where LENR processes occur, and I think that is the likely scenario, then it is *essential* to have an *accurate* understanding of what constitutes a dislocation. Your contributions to this thread have certainly described how you view them, however, you did NOT answer my question as to what is in the voids when nothing has ‘diffused’ into them!! The purpose for my first set of questions was to simply ascertain whether or not we have a (perfect?) vacuum on the inside of the dislocation immediately after it forms and before anything
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
There seems to be some convergence between Ed's theory and Hagelstein's proposal of lossy resonance as a way to get energy out of the fused nuclei in smaller quanta. Hagelstein also has a significant patent for a phonon laser (US7411445) that may have some relevance to hydroton behavior. A working phonon laser device was recently announced by NTT: http://phys.org/news/2013-03-fully-mechanical-phonon-laser.html Ed Storms wrote: If outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well understood. In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior. The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers the energy of the system. The Hydroton allows the Coulomb barrier to be reduced enough for the nuclei to respond and emit excess energy. Because the resonance immediately increases the distance, the ability or need to lose energy is lost before all the extra energy can be emitted. If the distance did not increased, hot fusion would result. The distance is again reduced, and another small burst of energy is emitted. This process continues until ALL energy is emitted and the intervening electron is sucked into the final product.
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
No Alan, no relationship exist between my model and the one proposed by Peter. You need to read the two ideas more carefully. I wish a relationship existed, but sadly it does not. The cluster Peter proposes to form does not occur in the same place in the material as the Hydroton, it does not form by the same kind of process, and the energy is not released by photons. In addition, he does not propose the electron is sucked into the final nucleus, which causes his model to predict different nuclear products than mine. Ed Storms On May 30, 2013, at 11:23 AM, Alan Goldwater wrote: There seems to be some convergence between Ed's theory and Hagelstein's proposal of lossy resonance as a way to get energy out of the fused nuclei in smaller quanta. Hagelstein also has a significant patent for a phonon laser (US7411445) that may have some relevance to hydroton behavior. A working phonon laser device was recently announced by NTT: http://phys.org/news/2013-03-fully-mechanical-phonon-laser.html Ed Storms wrote: If outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well understood. In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior. The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers the energy of the system. The Hydroton allows the Coulomb barrier to be reduced enough for the nuclei to respond and emit excess energy. Because the resonance immediately increases the distance, the ability or need to lose energy is lost before all the extra energy can be emitted. If the distance did not increased, hot fusion would result. The distance is again reduced, and another small burst of energy is emitted. This process continues until ALL energy is emitted and the intervening electron is sucked into the final product.
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Harry, imagine balls held in line by springs. If the end ball is pull away with a force and let go, a resonance wave will pass down the line. Each ball will alternately move away and then toward its neighbor. If outside energy is supplied, this resonance will continue. If not, it will damp out. At this stage, this is a purely mechanical action that is well understood. In the case of the Hydroton, the outside energy is temperature. The temperature creates random vibration of atoms, which is focused along the length of the molecule. Again, this is normal and well understood behavior. The strange behavior starts once the nuclei can get within a critical distance of each other as a result of the resonance. This distance is less than is possible in any other material because of the high concentration of negative charge that can exist in this structure and environment. The barrier is not eliminated. It is only reduced enough to allow the distance to become small enough so that the two nuclei can see and respond. The response is to emit a photon from each nuclei because this process lowers the energy of the system. Ed, With each cycle energy of the system is only lowered if the energy of the emitted photon is greater than the work done by the random vibration of atoms on the system. The change is analogous to an exothermic chemical reaction which requires some activation energy to initiate but the reaction products are in a lower energy state. Because of the shape of the coulomb hill the hill can only be climbed if the energy emitted increases with each cycle. The Hydroton allows the Coulomb barrier to be reduced enough for the nuclei to respond and emit excess energy. Because the resonance immediately increases the distance, the ability or need to lose energy is lost before all the extra energy can be emitted. If the distance did not increased, hot fusion would result. The distance is again reduced, and another small burst of energy is emitted. This process continues until ALL energy is emitted and the intervening electron is sucked into the final product. In your model, the coulomb barrier appears to be like a hill in a uniform gravitational field. It is possible to climb such a barrier in steps by emitting the same amount of energy with each cycle, but this barrier does not correspond with the actual barrier that exists between protons. Climbing a genuine coulomb barrier requires more energy with each cycle, so that requires more energy be emitted with each cycle. The extra energy emitted heats the lattice even more and produces more powerful vibrations of the lattice which can push the protons even closer together. I might add, all theories require a similar process. All theories require a group of hydron be assembled, which requires emission of Gibbs energy. Once assembled, the fusion process must take place in stages to avoid the hot fusion result, as happens when the nuclei get close using a muon and without the ability to limit the process. Unfortunately, the other theories ignore these requirements. The proton has nothing to do with the work done at each step. This work comes from the temperature. The photon results because the assembly has too much mass-energy for the distance between the nuclei. If the nuclei touched, the assembly would have 24 MeV of excess mass-energy if they were deuterons. If they are close but not touching, the stable mass-energy would be less. At a critical distance short of actually touching, the nuclei can know that they have too much mass energy. How they know this is the magic that CF has revealed. Here is the magic: they share an electron and it is through this common ground that they know. If they don't share an electron they won't give up any excess mass-energy until they are touching at which point they give it up all at once which is what happens in hot fusion. Harry
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Harry, you need to examine the situation as a chemical problem. The protons are normally in the metal lattice as H+ ions. These would go into the gap ONLY if Gibbs energy were created. In other words, the protons MUST be in a lower energy state in the gap compared to the lattice for them to move into the gap. Once in the gap, the protons are held there by this bonding energy. The bonding energy is created by electrons forming a 2p electron state with the protons to form a covalent structure. This bonding state is only stable because of the large negative charge in the gap. The electrons are part of this structure and are also trapped. Nevertheless, the electrons can move freely within each Hydroton, thereby acting as if the Hydroton were superconducting. Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 10:23 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: Ed, do you agree that what primarily keeps the protons in the gap is their repulsion with the lattice nuclei and what primarily keeps electrons in the gap is their repulsion with the electron shells around the lattice nuclei? harry On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:40 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Dave, you are adding ideas that have no relationship to what I'm describing. Conductivity has no relationship to the the gap, its role, or its lifetime. The gap width is the ONLY variable that determines whether it will be a NAE. Once the gap has grown too big, it no longer allows formation of the Hydroton and, instead, normal H2 forms. It can grow too big if the stress that made the gap in the first place continues to increase. I suggest this is why most successful production of excess energy eventually stops. The Hydroton acts like a superconductor because the electron is free to move within the structure because it is not bound to a single nucleus. The gap itself is not superconducting. The effect of nano-structures on concentrating energy (aka Axil) is an entirely different phenomenon that has no relationship to LENR according to my model. Axil obviously has a different model. Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 6:22 PM, David Roberson wrote: I believe that I see what you are describing Ed. This effect must go away at some size when the metal begins to have conductivity on the inside surfaces of the cavities. Could this be the mechanism that limits how large the NAE can become? Does anyone know how large a metallic structure has to be before it looks like a resistor? Perhaps I am stretching it to assume that a structure which only has a small number of associated atoms behaves like a superconductor. If not, what mechanism determines the resistive parameter? If a small collection of atoms behaves like a superconductor then that would explain why the field generated by tiny Axil antennas can become of great magnitude. Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 6:16 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, you are describing a large container. The gap is not a large container. It consists of two surfaces with a gap that is on the atomic scale. Start by imagining what a lattice consist of. It is created by a regular arrangement of electron shells, each surrounding a nucleus. These atoms are at a distance determined by a symmetrical electron interaction between each neighbor . Now move the atoms apart along a line. Immediately, the electron cloud surrounding each atom in the wall is unbalanced. The electron cloud of each atom pushed into the gap. This same effect happens on a clean surface and accounts for the surface energy that attracts absorbed atoms. Is this clearer? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:53 PM, David Roberson wrote: Ed, I recall the Van de Graaff generators which had a vacuum or just air inside and a conductive outside. One of the demonstrations that I saw was that there is no electric field within the shielding outer surface. Why does this not happen within the NAE? It looks a lot like one of those devices since a metallic conductor surrounds the cavity. Am I missing something about the shape? Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 5:38 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, when the gap initially forms, nothing is present. It is a void, a space without substance, a vacuum if you wish. However, it contains strong negative fields and it contains electrons. Does a vacuum contain electrons? The gap is too small for a gas molecule to enter. It can accommodate only hydron ions, which when they enter, react with each other. At this point in the discussion, I'm describing pure chemical conditions that can be calculated using conventional theory
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Ed, the chemistry is way beyond me so I can't judge if the configuration is plausible. I bow to your expertise in this area. What really interests me is the resonance model you proposed to explain the missing gamma. If the protons are progressively forced together in steps, the work required with each step rises geometrically. However, it seems to me that fusion is unlikely to result from this model unless the energy of the emitted photon exceeds the work done at each step. I haven't seen this point expressed in your posts but perhaps I just don't understand your model. Anyway, I think the coulomb barrier problem is fundamentally more important then the missing gamma issue, in the sense that a cogent solution to the first problem will yield a cogent solution to the second problem. harry On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Harry, you need to examine the situation as a chemical problem. The protons are normally in the metal lattice as H+ ions. These would go into the gap ONLY if Gibbs energy were created. In other words, the protons MUST be in a lower energy state in the gap compared to the lattice for them to move into the gap. Once in the gap, the protons are held there by this bonding energy. The bonding energy is created by electrons forming a 2p electron state with the protons to form a covalent structure. This bonding state is only stable because of the large negative charge in the gap. The electrons are part of this structure and are also trapped. Nevertheless, the electrons can move freely within each Hydroton, thereby acting as if the Hydroton were superconducting. Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 10:23 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: Ed, do you agree that what primarily keeps the protons in the gap is their repulsion with the lattice nuclei and what primarily keeps electrons in the gap is their repulsion with the electron shells around the lattice nuclei? harry On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:40 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Dave, you are adding ideas that have no relationship to what I'm describing. Conductivity has no relationship to the the gap, its role, or its lifetime. The gap width is the ONLY variable that determines whether it will be a NAE. Once the gap has grown too big, it no longer allows formation of the Hydroton and, instead, normal H2 forms. It can grow too big if the stress that made the gap in the first place continues to increase. I suggest this is why most successful production of excess energy eventually stops. The Hydroton acts like a superconductor because the electron is free to move within the structure because it is not bound to a single nucleus. The gap itself is not superconducting. The effect of nano-structures on concentrating energy (aka Axil) is an entirely different phenomenon that has no relationship to LENR according to my model. Axil obviously has a different model. Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 6:22 PM, David Roberson wrote: I believe that I see what you are describing Ed. This effect must go away at some size when the metal begins to have conductivity on the inside surfaces of the cavities. Could this be the mechanism that limits how large the NAE can become? Does anyone know how large a metallic structure has to be before it looks like a resistor? Perhaps I am stretching it to assume that a structure which only has a small number of associated atoms behaves like a superconductor. If not, what mechanism determines the resistive parameter? If a small collection of atoms behaves like a superconductor then that would explain why the field generated by tiny Axil antennas can become of great magnitude. Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 6:16 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, you are describing a large container. The gap is not a large container. It consists of two surfaces with a gap that is on the atomic scale. Start by imagining what a lattice consist of. It is created by a regular arrangement of electron shells, each surrounding a nucleus. These atoms are at a distance determined by a symmetrical electron interaction between each neighbor . Now move the atoms apart along a line. Immediately, the electron cloud surrounding each atom in the wall is unbalanced. The electron cloud of each atom pushed into the gap. This same effect happens on a clean surface and accounts for the surface energy that attracts absorbed atoms. Is this clearer? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:53 PM, David Roberson wrote: Ed, I recall the Van de Graaff generators which had a vacuum or just air inside and a conductive outside. One of the demonstrations that I saw was that there is no electric field within the shielding outer surface. Why does this not happen within the NAE? It looks
RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Ed replied: Yes, the void is very different from the lattice. That is the whole point to the idea behind the NAE. A nuclear reaction cannot take place in a normal lattice. A change must take place. This change produces a different condition I call the NAE. In my model, this NAE is a gap created by stress relief. Other models imagine a different condition. Regardless of the condition, it MUST contain hydrons because that is what experiences fusion, which is the essential result of cold fusion. OK, so you are positing that as soon as the dislocation or gap forms, hydrons IMMEDIATELY diffuse into it? Even if the electrode hasn't even been immersed in the electrolyte yet (if we're talking electrolytic type experiments); or before hydrogen gas is introduced if we're dealing with a NiH system? I don't think so. -Mark From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 11:24 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... On May 19, 2013, at 11:55 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: To which Ed answered, mainly expressing what his view is inside this void: The answer depends on which theory you accept. In my case, the void consists initially of a strong negative charge created by the electrons in the wall that are associated with the metal atoms making up the wall. The charge is strong because it is now unbalance as a result of the walls being too far apart for the electron orbits (waves) to be properly balanced. This condition attracts hydrons (hydrogen ions), which enter the gap by releasing Gibbs energy. In so doing, they create a tightly bonded covalent structure in the form of a string. The hydrons in this string are closer together than is normally possible because the electron concentration between them is higher than normal. When this structure resonates, the hydrons get even closer together periodically, depending on the frequency of vibration. Each time they get to within a critical distance, energy is emitted from each hydron as a photon. Once enough energy has been emitted as a series of weak photons, the fusion process is completed by the intervening electron being sucked into the final nuclear product. The details of how this process works will be described later. The temperature is very high, but not high enough to melt the surrounding material. As a result, some energy is lost from the gap as phonons. The photon/phonon ratio is still unknown. Nevertheless, the rate of photon emission is large enough to be detected outside of the apparatus when H is used. To which I respond: But if the void is tens of 'atom-diameters' across, you are way beyond the influence of any electrons, unless they are 'free' electrons flying around in that void. Restrict your viewpoint to only the interior of the void. Mark, you are making assumptions that do not need to be made. Regardless of what you imagine might be the case, hydrons MUST assemble because otherwise they can not fuse. The entire process hinges on hydrons assembling in an unconventional way. That requirement is basic. The challenge is to discover how this is possible without violating the laws of thermodynamics. Of course, if you keep making assumptions, the process can either be rejected or justified, your choice. I make the assumptions I think can be justified and try to find where they lead. In my case, they lead to a model that can explain ALL behavior without making additional assumptions. While this might be a wild goose chase, it does provide a useful path, which other theories have not done. *For the sake of argument*, assume that there are NO free atoms, sub-atomic particles or photons flying around in the void. in that case, do you not have a *perfect vacuum*? And as to my second question, what's the temperature of a perfect vacuum? Would it not be 0.000K in temperature? I have no idea how the concept of vacuum applies. The NAE is a chemical state within a material. As H enters the state, they generate Gibbs energy, which is dissipated as heat (phonons). As a result, the region gets hot. The hydrons would not assemble if this energy were not generated, thereby producing heat. That is the basic nature of a chemical process. Ed is positing that the NAE are essential to LENR, and I am positing that the VOIDs are a major element in the NAE, AND that the conditions in the VOIDs are NOT those of the bulk, surrounding matter; in fact, they are very different. To understand the NAE requires an understanding of EXACTLY what the conditions are INSIDE the voids. Yes, the void is very different from the lattice. That is the whole point to the idea behind the NAE. A nuclear reaction cannot take place in a normal lattice. A change must take place. This change produces a different condition I call the NAE. In my model, this NAE is a gap created by stress relief. Other models imagine a different condition. Regardless
RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Ed, I am fine with the hydron covalent ion you suggest and the resonant theory leading to photon emission but not so on the build up of negative charge or the physical - electrical confinement you suggest are responsible for the configuration inside a gap that is at least tens of atoms wide.. The negative charge and Gibbs energy still obeys COE and the reversible reaction - resonance will soon damp out unless the NAE and hydron work together to source energy . I would point out that catalytic action in a nanotube only occurs at openenings and defects and therefore your NAE likely represents this same sudden changes in geometry supported by a standard pressure for a certain local volume of Ni geometry that continually feeds this change. I posit we are looking at a new level of catalytic action and physical confinement that work against each other to form a Heisenburg trap / a form of Maxwellian demon that discounts the disassociation level of your Hydron when it forms a bond at one threshold but then moves to a different pressure through the same random motion of gas we have been indoctrinated to believe can not impart usable energy.. I think we have found an exception with DCE. Fran From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 3:59 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Ed replied: Yes, the void is very different from the lattice. That is the whole point to the idea behind the NAE. A nuclear reaction cannot take place in a normal lattice. A change must take place. This change produces a different condition I call the NAE. In my model, this NAE is a gap created by stress relief. Other models imagine a different condition. Regardless of the condition, it MUST contain hydrons because that is what experiences fusion, which is the essential result of cold fusion. OK, so you are positing that as soon as the dislocation or gap forms, hydrons IMMEDIATELY diffuse into it? Even if the electrode hasn't even been immersed in the electrolyte yet (if we're talking electrolytic type experiments); or before hydrogen gas is introduced if we're dealing with a NiH system? I don't think so... -Mark From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 11:24 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... On May 19, 2013, at 11:55 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: To which Ed answered, mainly expressing what his view is inside this void: The answer depends on which theory you accept. In my case, the void consists initially of a strong negative charge created by the electrons in the wall that are associated with the metal atoms making up the wall. The charge is strong because it is now unbalance as a result of the walls being too far apart for the electron orbits (waves) to be properly balanced. This condition attracts hydrons (hydrogen ions), which enter the gap by releasing Gibbs energy. In so doing, they create a tightly bonded covalent structure in the form of a string. The hydrons in this string are closer together than is normally possible because the electron concentration between them is higher than normal. When this structure resonates, the hydrons get even closer together periodically, depending on the frequency of vibration. Each time they get to within a critical distance, energy is emitted from each hydron as a photon. Once enough energy has been emitted as a series of weak photons, the fusion process is completed by the intervening electron being sucked into the final nuclear product. The details of how this process works will be described later. The temperature is very high, but not high enough to melt the surrounding material. As a result, some energy is lost from the gap as phonons. The photon/phonon ratio is still unknown. Nevertheless, the rate of photon emission is large enough to be detected outside of the apparatus when H is used. To which I respond: But if the void is tens of 'atom-diameters' across, you are way beyond the influence of any electrons, unless they are 'free' electrons flying around in that void. Restrict your viewpoint to only the interior of the void... Mark, you are making assumptions that do not need to be made. Regardless of what you imagine might be the case, hydrons MUST assemble because otherwise they can not fuse. The entire process hinges on hydrons assembling in an unconventional way. That requirement is basic. The challenge is to discover how this is possible without violating the laws of thermodynamics. Of course, if you keep making assumptions, the process can either be rejected or justified, your choice. I make the assumptions I think can be justified and try to find where they lead. In my case, they lead to a model that can explain ALL behavior without making additional assumptions. While this might be a wild goose chase, it does provide
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On May 28, 2013, at 1:58 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed replied: “Yes, the void is very different from the lattice. That is the whole point to the idea behind the NAE. A nuclear reaction cannot take place in a normal lattice. A change must take place. This change produces a different condition I call the NAE. In my model, this NAE is a gap created by stress relief. Other models imagine a different condition. Regardless of the condition, it MUST contain hydrons because that is what experiences fusion, which is the essential result of cold fusion.” OK, so you are positing that as soon as the dislocation or gap forms, hydrons IMMEDIATELY diffuse into it? Even if the electrode hasn’t even been immersed in the electrolyte yet (if we’re talking electrolytic type experiments); or before hydrogen gas is introduced if we’re dealing with a NiH system? I don’t think so… Mark, of course a source of H+ or D+ must be present. Let me make the process as clear as possible. First a gap forms as a result of stress relief. Then any hydrons present in the surrounding material diffuse into the gap and react to form the Hydroton. If no hydrons are present in the material, nothing happens. Once the Hydroton forms, this structure starts to oscillate and mass energy is emitted as photons. Two essential conditions are required for LENR to occur - (1) a gap of critical size must form and (2) hydrogen isotopes must dissolve in the material forming the gap. The gaps can be created first, as is the case with the Rossi method, or they can be created while hydrogen loading takes place, which happens during electrolysis. In the Rossi method, the nickel is reacted with something to form the gaps. It is then placed in the E-Cat where it is reacted with hydrogen. Once the hydrogen has entered the Ni metal as a dissolved ion, it finds a gap and proceeds to make deuterium and heat. The rate of reaction is determined by how rapidly the H+ can find a gap. This rate is determined by temperature and concentration of H+ in the Ni. The concentration is determined by temperature and the activity of H in the surrounding gas. Because this process has a positive temperature effect, Rossi must work to limit the effect of temperature, which he does by controlling temperature using an external source of energy. Using these variables, the behavior of the reactor can be modeled very accurately once the the variables are known. They are not public knowledge at the present time. Nevertheless, the reported behavior of the e-Cat and the Hot-cat are totally consistent with this description. That is my story and I sticking to it.:-) I hope this is clear. -Mark From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 11:24 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... On May 19, 2013, at 11:55 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: To which Ed answered, mainly expressing what his view is inside this void: “The answer depends on which theory you accept. In my case, the void consists initially of a strong negative charge created by the electrons in the wall that are associated with the metal atoms making up the wall. The charge is strong because it is now unbalance as a result of the walls being too far apart for the electron orbits (waves) to be properly balanced. This condition attracts hydrons (hydrogen ions), which enter the gap by releasing Gibbs energy. In so doing, they create a tightly bonded covalent structure in the form of a string. The hydrons in this string are closer together than is normally possible because the electron concentration between them is higher than normal. When this structure resonates, the hydrons get even closer together periodically, depending on the frequency of vibration. Each time they get to within a critical distance, energy is emitted from each hydron as a photon. Once enough energy has been emitted as a series of weak photons, the fusion process is completed by the intervening electron being sucked into the final nuclear product. The details of how this process works will be described later.” The temperature is very high, but not high enough to melt the surrounding material. As a result, some energy is lost from the gap as phonons. The photon/phonon ratio is still unknown. Nevertheless, the rate of photon emission is large enough to be detected outside of the apparatus when H is used. To which I respond: But if the void is tens of ‘atom-diameters’ across, you are way beyond the influence of any electrons, unless they are ‘free’ electrons flying around in that void. Restrict your viewpoint to only the interior of the void… The gap size is unknown but sufficient to cause the proposed process. You only need to agree such a process might be possible in principle without having to know the exact conditions. Ed Storms
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
OK Fran, we are getting closer to a mutual understanding. Let me go into more detail. The gap creates a separation of charge because the electron charge on the metal atoms on each wall are not being offset by nearby atoms, as is the case in the lattice. Consequently, like all clean surfaces, an effective negative charge is present on both walls. However, unlike a normal surface, the opposite wall is close enough to create a balanced charge at the midline between the two walls. This conditions causes an energy sink to form into which any H+ in the metal lattice can fall by forming the Hydroton. Because this reaction is exothermic, the Hydroton gets hot and starts to oscillate. This process has the ability to bring two H nuclei close enough that a nuclear interaction can start. Because of the oscillation, this close distance lasts only for a brief time, a time too short for the nuclear interaction to be completed. Consequently, a brief loss of mass-energy occurs, which is small compared to what can be released once the two nuclei make full contact. This process is repeated until all mass-energy is lost and the two nuclei are in contact, thereby fusing into the final nucleus. There is no need to introduce the concept of Maxwellian demon or any other novel idea. This is a very simple process. The only novel feature is just how the two nuclei know that they have too much mass- energy for the distance between them. Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: Ed, I am fine with the hydron covalent ion you suggest and the resonant theory leading to photon emission but not so on the build up of negative charge or the physical - electrical confinement you suggest are responsible for the configuration inside a gap that is at least tens of atoms wide.. The negative charge and Gibbs energy still obeys COE and the reversible reaction - resonance will soon damp out unless the NAE and hydron work together to source energy . I would point out that catalytic action in a nanotube only occurs at openenings and defects and therefore your NAE likely represents this same sudden changes in geometry supported by a standard “pressure” for a certain local volume of Ni geometry that continually feeds this change. I posit we are looking at a new level of catalytic action and physical confinement that work against each other to form a Heisenburg trap / a form of Maxwellian demon that discounts the disassociation level of your Hydron when it forms a bond at one threshold but then moves to a different pressure through the same random motion of gas we have been indoctrinated to believe can not impart usable energy.. I think we have found an exception with DCE. Fran From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 3:59 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Ed replied: “Yes, the void is very different from the lattice. That is the whole point to the idea behind the NAE. A nuclear reaction cannot take place in a normal lattice. A change must take place. This change produces a different condition I call the NAE. In my model, this NAE is a gap created by stress relief. Other models imagine a different condition. Regardless of the condition, it MUST contain hydrons because that is what experiences fusion, which is the essential result of cold fusion.” OK, so you are positing that as soon as the dislocation or gap forms, hydrons IMMEDIATELY diffuse into it? Even if the electrode hasn’t even been immersed in the electrolyte yet (if we’re talking electrolytic type experiments); or before hydrogen gas is introduced if we’re dealing with a NiH system? I don’t think so… -Mark From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 11:24 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... On May 19, 2013, at 11:55 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: To which Ed answered, mainly expressing what his view is inside this void: “The answer depends on which theory you accept. In my case, the void consists initially of a strong negative charge created by the electrons in the wall that are associated with the metal atoms making up the wall. The charge is strong because it is now unbalance as a result of the walls being too far apart for the electron orbits (waves) to be properly balanced. This condition attracts hydrons (hydrogen ions), which enter the gap by releasing Gibbs energy. In so doing, they create a tightly bonded covalent structure in the form of a string. The hydrons in this string are closer together than is normally possible because the electron concentration between them is higher than normal. When this structure resonates, the hydrons get even closer together periodically, depending on the frequency of vibration. Each time they get to within
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Ed, It may only be semantics or interpretation of what catalytic action really is but what you are calling an energy sink that an H+ ion can fall into by forming a hydroton is also defying COE.. particularly if it has to repeat this endless reaction many times to dissipate the barrier enough to allow fusion.. how many photons have to be generated before the barrier falls? My particular posit may not be accurate but I remain convinced change in casimir effect as the hydron passes through the balance point is opposing natural random motion to power the anomalous action in these cavities.. it may be the engine behind your resonance between covalent and monatomic states -forming the energy sink while opposing the motion of one state through the sink much more than the other encouraging disassociation and subsequent photon emission as the hydrotron reforms. Fran From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 11:25 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... OK Fran, we are getting closer to a mutual understanding. Let me go into more detail. The gap creates a separation of charge because the electron charge on the metal atoms on each wall are not being offset by nearby atoms, as is the case in the lattice. Consequently, like all clean surfaces, an effective negative charge is present on both walls. However, unlike a normal surface, the opposite wall is close enough to create a balanced charge at the midline between the two walls. This conditions causes an energy sink to form into which any H+ in the metal lattice can fall by forming the Hydroton. Because this reaction is exothermic, the Hydroton gets hot and starts to oscillate. This process has the ability to bring two H nuclei close enough that a nuclear interaction can start. Because of the oscillation, this close distance lasts only for a brief time, a time too short for the nuclear interaction to be completed. Consequently, a brief loss of mass-energy occurs, which is small compared to what can be released once the two nuclei make full contact. This process is repeated until all mass-energy is lost and the two nuclei are in contact, thereby fusing into the final nucleus. There is no need to introduce the concept of Maxwellian demon or any other novel idea. This is a very simple process. The only novel feature is just how the two nuclei know that they have too much mass-energy for the distance between them. Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: Ed, I am fine with the hydron covalent ion you suggest and the resonant theory leading to photon emission but not so on the build up of negative charge or the physical - electrical confinement you suggest are responsible for the configuration inside a gap that is at least tens of atoms wide.. The negative charge and Gibbs energy still obeys COE and the reversible reaction - resonance will soon damp out unless the NAE and hydron work together to source energy . I would point out that catalytic action in a nanotube only occurs at openenings and defects and therefore your NAE likely represents this same sudden changes in geometry supported by a standard pressure for a certain local volume of Ni geometry that continually feeds this change. I posit we are looking at a new level of catalytic action and physical confinement that work against each other to form a Heisenburg trap / a form of Maxwellian demon that discounts the disassociation level of your Hydron when it forms a bond at one threshold but then moves to a different pressure through the same random motion of gas we have been indoctrinated to believe can not impart usable energy.. I think we have found an exception with DCE. Fran From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 3:59 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Ed replied: Yes, the void is very different from the lattice. That is the whole point to the idea behind the NAE. A nuclear reaction cannot take place in a normal lattice. A change must take place. This change produces a different condition I call the NAE. In my model, this NAE is a gap created by stress relief. Other models imagine a different condition. Regardless of the condition, it MUST contain hydrons because that is what experiences fusion, which is the essential result of cold fusion. OK, so you are positing that as soon as the dislocation or gap forms, hydrons IMMEDIATELY diffuse into it? Even if the electrode hasn't even been immersed in the electrolyte yet (if we're talking electrolytic type experiments); or before hydrogen gas is introduced if we're dealing with a NiH system? I don't think so... -Mark From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 11:24 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On May 28, 2013, at 11:00 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: Ed, It may only be semantics or interpretation of what catalytic action really is but what you are calling an energy sink that an H+ ion can fall into by forming a hydroton is also defying COE.. Fran, formation of Hydroton is totally a conventional chemical reaction. It occurs because Gibbs energy is created by forming a bond having more energy than the bonds holding the H+ in the lattice. This is pure normal chemistry. It just happens that the structure allows a nuclear interaction, which only occurs after the structure forms. This nuclear consequence is simply a lucky break. The structure allows the nuclear interaction because it causes the nuclei to get closer than is normally possible because of the high concentration of negative charge located between the nuclei. This charge reduces the barrier enough to allow the distance between the nuclei to reach a critical distance. Once this distance is reached, the nuclei MUST reduce their mass- energy to be in equilibrium with the distance. I have no idea how the Casimir effect applies and I see no reason to apply an idea that has ambiguous behavior. Nevertheless, I would be interested to see how you can use this proposed phenomenon. Ed Storms particularly if it has to repeat this endless reaction many times to dissipate the barrier enough to allow fusion.. how many photons have to be generated before the barrier falls? My particular posit may not be accurate but I remain convinced change in casimir effect as the hydron passes through the balance point is opposing natural random motion to “power” the anomalous action in these cavities.. it may be the engine behind your resonance between covalent and monatomic states –forming the energy sink while opposing the motion of one state through the sink much more than the other encouraging disassociation and subsequent photon emission as the hydrotron reforms. Fran From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 11:25 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... OK Fran, we are getting closer to a mutual understanding. Let me go into more detail. The gap creates a separation of charge because the electron charge on the metal atoms on each wall are not being offset by nearby atoms, as is the case in the lattice. Consequently, like all clean surfaces, an effective negative charge is present on both walls. However, unlike a normal surface, the opposite wall is close enough to create a balanced charge at the midline between the two walls. This conditions causes an energy sink to form into which any H+ in the metal lattice can fall by forming the Hydroton. Because this reaction is exothermic, the Hydroton gets hot and starts to oscillate. This process has the ability to bring two H nuclei close enough that a nuclear interaction can start. Because of the oscillation, this close distance lasts only for a brief time, a time too short for the nuclear interaction to be completed. Consequently, a brief loss of mass-energy occurs, which is small compared to what can be released once the two nuclei make full contact. This process is repeated until all mass-energy is lost and the two nuclei are in contact, thereby fusing into the final nucleus. There is no need to introduce the concept of Maxwellian demon or any other novel idea. This is a very simple process. The only novel feature is just how the two nuclei know that they have too much mass-energy for the distance between them. Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: Ed, I am fine with the hydron covalent ion you suggest and the resonant theory leading to photon emission but not so on the build up of negative charge or the physical - electrical confinement you suggest are responsible for the configuration inside a gap that is at least tens of atoms wide.. The negative charge and Gibbs energy still obeys COE and the reversible reaction - resonance will soon damp out unless the NAE and hydron work together to source energy . I would point out that catalytic action in a nanotube only occurs at openenings and defects and therefore your NAE likely represents this same sudden changes in geometry supported by a standard “pressure” for a certain local volume of Ni geometry that continually feeds this change. I posit we are looking at a new level of catalytic action and physical confinement that work against each other to form a Heisenburg trap / a form of Maxwellian demon that discounts the disassociation level of your Hydron when it forms a bond at one threshold but then moves to a different pressure through the same random motion of gas we have been indoctrinated to believe can not impart usable energy.. I think we have found an exception with DCE
RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Ed: Thanks for the additional explanation, but it wasn't necessary. Obviously, there's a disconnect as to what my point was in this thread, and how you interpreted it. I do not take issue with your hypothesis; I follow the reasoning and steps of how you think LENR occurs. It sounds very straightforward, and I trust your vast knowledge of the field to have taken all the empirical data to heart when formulating the hypothesis. I sincerely hope that you are able to convince some LENR researchers to test your hypothesis and get some empirical support. The point of my posting the thread is to understand the precise environment of these dislocations in the lattice. if they are the site where LENR processes occur, and I think that is the likely scenario, then it is *essential* to have an *accurate* understanding of what constitutes a dislocation. Your contributions to this thread have certainly described how you view them, however, you did NOT answer my question as to what is in the voids when nothing has 'diffused' into them!! The purpose for my first set of questions was to simply ascertain whether or not we have a (perfect?) vacuum on the inside of the dislocation immediately after it forms and before anything happens to diffuse into them. I think I prefaced my questions to focus on that situation. Can we agree that we are dealing with a vacuum, at least initially? -Mark Iverson From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 7:54 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... On May 28, 2013, at 1:58 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed replied: Yes, the void is very different from the lattice. That is the whole point to the idea behind the NAE. A nuclear reaction cannot take place in a normal lattice. A change must take place. This change produces a different condition I call the NAE. In my model, this NAE is a gap created by stress relief. Other models imagine a different condition. Regardless of the condition, it MUST contain hydrons because that is what experiences fusion, which is the essential result of cold fusion. OK, so you are positing that as soon as the dislocation or gap forms, hydrons IMMEDIATELY diffuse into it? Even if the electrode hasn't even been immersed in the electrolyte yet (if we're talking electrolytic type experiments); or before hydrogen gas is introduced if we're dealing with a NiH system? I don't think so. Mark, of course a source of H+ or D+ must be present. Let me make the process as clear as possible. First a gap forms as a result of stress relief. Then any hydrons present in the surrounding material diffuse into the gap and react to form the Hydroton. If no hydrons are present in the material, nothing happens. Once the Hydroton forms, this structure starts to oscillate and mass energy is emitted as photons. Two essential conditions are required for LENR to occur - (1) a gap of critical size must form and (2) hydrogen isotopes must dissolve in the material forming the gap. The gaps can be created first, as is the case with the Rossi method, or they can be created while hydrogen loading takes place, which happens during electrolysis. In the Rossi method, the nickel is reacted with something to form the gaps. It is then placed in the E-Cat where it is reacted with hydrogen. Once the hydrogen has entered the Ni metal as a dissolved ion, it finds a gap and proceeds to make deuterium and heat. The rate of reaction is determined by how rapidly the H+ can find a gap. This rate is determined by temperature and concentration of H+ in the Ni. The concentration is determined by temperature and the activity of H in the surrounding gas. Because this process has a positive temperature effect, Rossi must work to limit the effect of temperature, which he does by controlling temperature using an external source of energy. Using these variables, the behavior of the reactor can be modeled very accurately once the the variables are known. They are not public knowledge at the present time. Nevertheless, the reported behavior of the e-Cat and the Hot-cat are totally consistent with this description. That is my story and I sticking to it.:-) I hope this is clear. -Mark From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 11:24 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... On May 19, 2013, at 11:55 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: To which Ed answered, mainly expressing what his view is inside this void: The answer depends on which theory you accept. In my case, the void consists initially of a strong negative charge created by the electrons in the wall that are associated with the metal atoms making up the wall. The charge is strong because it is now unbalance as a result of the walls being too far apart for the electron orbits (waves) to be properly balanced. This condition
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Mark, when the gap initially forms, nothing is present. It is a void, a space without substance, a vacuum if you wish. However, it contains strong negative fields and it contains electrons. Does a vacuum contain electrons? The gap is too small for a gas molecule to enter. It can accommodate only hydron ions, which when they enter, react with each other. At this point in the discussion, I'm describing pure chemical conditions that can be calculated using conventional theory. Does this answer your question? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:07 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed: Thanks for the additional explanation, but it wasn’t necessary… Obviously, there’s a disconnect as to what my point was in this thread, and how you interpreted it. I do not take issue with your hypothesis; I follow the reasoning and steps of how you think LENR occurs. It sounds very straightforward, and I trust your vast knowledge of the field to have taken all the empirical data to heart when formulating the hypothesis. I sincerely hope that you are able to convince some LENR researchers to test your hypothesis and get some empirical support… The point of my posting the thread is to understand the precise environment of these dislocations in the lattice… if they are the site where LENR processes occur, and I think that is the likely scenario, then it is *essential* to have an *accurate* understanding of what constitutes a dislocation. Your contributions to this thread have certainly described how you view them, however, you did NOT answer my question as to what is in the voids when nothing has ‘diffused’ into them!! The purpose for my first set of questions was to simply ascertain whether or not we have a (perfect?) vacuum on the inside of the dislocation immediately after it forms and before anything happens to diffuse into them… I think I prefaced my questions to focus on that situation. Can we agree that we are dealing with a vacuum, at least initially? -Mark Iverson From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 7:54 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... On May 28, 2013, at 1:58 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed replied: “Yes, the void is very different from the lattice. That is the whole point to the idea behind the NAE. A nuclear reaction cannot take place in a normal lattice. A change must take place. This change produces a different condition I call the NAE. In my model, this NAE is a gap created by stress relief. Other models imagine a different condition. Regardless of the condition, it MUST contain hydrons because that is what experiences fusion, which is the essential result of cold fusion.” OK, so you are positing that as soon as the dislocation or gap forms, hydrons IMMEDIATELY diffuse into it? Even if the electrode hasn’t even been immersed in the electrolyte yet (if we’re talking electrolytic type experiments); or before hydrogen gas is introduced if we’re dealing with a NiH system? I don’t think so… Mark, of course a source of H+ or D+ must be present. Let me make the process as clear as possible. First a gap forms as a result of stress relief. Then any hydrons present in the surrounding material diffuse into the gap and react to form the Hydroton. If no hydrons are present in the material, nothing happens. Once the Hydroton forms, this structure starts to oscillate and mass energy is emitted as photons. Two essential conditions are required for LENR to occur - (1) a gap of critical size must form and (2) hydrogen isotopes must dissolve in the material forming the gap. The gaps can be created first, as is the case with the Rossi method, or they can be created while hydrogen loading takes place, which happens during electrolysis. In the Rossi method, the nickel is reacted with something to form the gaps. It is then placed in the E-Cat where it is reacted with hydrogen. Once the hydrogen has entered the Ni metal as a dissolved ion, it finds a gap and proceeds to make deuterium and heat. The rate of reaction is determined by how rapidly the H+ can find a gap. This rate is determined by temperature and concentration of H+ in the Ni. The concentration is determined by temperature and the activity of H in the surrounding gas. Because this process has a positive temperature effect, Rossi must work to limit the effect of temperature, which he does by controlling temperature using an external source of energy. Using these variables, the behavior of the reactor can be modeled very accurately once the the variables are known. They are not public knowledge at the present time. Nevertheless, the reported behavior of the e-Cat and the Hot-cat are totally consistent with this description. That is my story and I sticking to it.:-) I hope this is clear. -Mark From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Ed, I recall the Van de Graaff generators which had a vacuum or just air inside and a conductive outside. One of the demonstrations that I saw was that there is no electric field within the shielding outer surface. Why does this not happen within the NAE? It looks a lot like one of those devices since a metallic conductor surrounds the cavity. Am I missing something about the shape? Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 5:38 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, when the gap initially forms, nothing is present. It is a void, a space without substance, a vacuum if you wish. However, it contains strong negative fields and it contains electrons. Does a vacuum contain electrons? The gap is too small for a gas molecule to enter. It can accommodate only hydron ions, which when they enter, react with each other. At this point in the discussion, I'm describing pure chemical conditions that can be calculated using conventional theory. Does this answer your question? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:07 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed: Thanks for the additional explanation, but it wasn’t necessary… Obviously, there’s a disconnect as to what my point was in this thread, and how you interpreted it. I do not take issue with your hypothesis; I follow the reasoning and steps of how you think LENR occurs. It sounds very straightforward, and I trust your vast knowledge of the field to have taken all the empirical data to heart when formulating the hypothesis. I sincerely hope that you are able to convince some LENR researchers to test your hypothesis and get some empirical support… The point of my posting the thread is to understand the precise environment of these dislocations in the lattice… if they are the site where LENR processes occur, and I think that is the likely scenario, then it is *essential* to have an *accurate* understanding of what constitutes a dislocation. Your contributions to this thread have certainly described how you view them, however, you did NOT answer my question as to what is in the voids when nothing has ‘diffused’ into them!! The purpose for my first set of questions was to simply ascertain whether or not we have a (perfect?) vacuum on the inside of the dislocation immediately after it forms and before anything happens to diffuse into them… I think I prefaced my questions to focus on that situation. Can we agree that we are dealing with a vacuum, at least initially? -Mark Iverson From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 7:54 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... On May 28, 2013, at 1:58 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed replied: “Yes, the void is very different from the lattice. That is the whole point to the idea behind the NAE. A nuclear reaction cannot take place in a normal lattice. A change must take place. This change produces a different condition I call the NAE. In my model, this NAE is a gap created by stress relief. Other models imagine a different condition. Regardless of the condition, it MUST contain hydrons because that is what experiences fusion, which is the essential result of cold fusion.” OK, so you are positing that as soon as the dislocation or gap forms, hydrons IMMEDIATELY diffuse into it? Even if the electrode hasn’t even been immersed in the electrolyte yet (if we’re talking electrolytic type experiments); or before hydrogen gas is introduced if we’re dealing with a NiH system? I don’t think so… Mark, of course a source of H+ or D+ must be present. Let me make the process as clear as possible. First a gap forms as a result of stress relief. Then any hydrons present in the surrounding material diffuse into the gap and react to form the Hydroton. If no hydrons are present in the material, nothing happens. Once the Hydroton forms, this structure starts to oscillate and mass energy is emitted as photons. Two essential conditions are required for LENR to occur - (1) a gap of critical size must form and (2) hydrogen isotopes must dissolve in the material forming the gap. The gaps can be created first, as is the case with the Rossi method, or they can be created while hydrogen loading takes place, which happens during electrolysis. In the Rossi method, the nickel is reacted with something to form the gaps. It is then placed in the E-Cat where it is reacted with hydrogen. Once the hydrogen has entered the Ni metal as a dissolved ion, it finds a gap and proceeds to make deuterium and heat. The rate of reaction is determined by how rapidly the H+ can find a gap. This rate is determined by temperature and concentration of H+ in the Ni. The concentration is determined by temperature and the activity of H in the surrounding gas
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Mark, you are describing a large container. The gap is not a large container. It consists of two surfaces with a gap that is on the atomic scale. Start by imagining what a lattice consist of. It is created by a regular arrangement of electron shells, each surrounding a nucleus. These atoms are at a distance determined by a symmetrical electron interaction between each neighbor . Now move the atoms apart along a line. Immediately, the electron cloud surrounding each atom in the wall is unbalanced. The electron cloud of each atom pushed into the gap. This same effect happens on a clean surface and accounts for the surface energy that attracts absorbed atoms. Is this clearer? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:53 PM, David Roberson wrote: Ed, I recall the Van de Graaff generators which had a vacuum or just air inside and a conductive outside. One of the demonstrations that I saw was that there is no electric field within the shielding outer surface. Why does this not happen within the NAE? It looks a lot like one of those devices since a metallic conductor surrounds the cavity. Am I missing something about the shape? Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 5:38 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, when the gap initially forms, nothing is present. It is a void, a space without substance, a vacuum if you wish. However, it contains strong negative fields and it contains electrons. Does a vacuum contain electrons? The gap is too small for a gas molecule to enter. It can accommodate only hydron ions, which when they enter, react with each other. At this point in the discussion, I'm describing pure chemical conditions that can be calculated using conventional theory. Does this answer your question? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:07 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed: Thanks for the additional explanation, but it wasn’t necessary… Obviously, there’s a disconnect as to what my point was in this thread, and how you interpreted it. I do not take issue with your hypothesis; I follow the reasoning and steps of how you think LENR occurs. It sounds very straightforward, and I trust your vast knowledge of the field to have taken all the empirical data to heart when formulating the hypothesis. I sincerely hope that you are able to convince some LENR researchers to test your hypothesis and get some empirical support… The point of my posting the thread is to understand the precise environment of these dislocations in the lattice… if they are the site where LENR processes occur, and I think that is the likely scenario, then it is *essential* to have an *accurate* understanding of what constitutes a dislocation. Your contributions to this thread have certainly described how you view them, however, you did NOT answer my question as to what is in the voids when nothing has ‘diffused’ into them!! The purpose for my first set of questions was to simply ascertain whether or not we have a (perfect?) vacuum on the inside of the dislocation immediately after it forms and before anything happens to diffuse into them… I think I prefaced my questions to focus on that situation. Can we agree that we are dealing with a vacuum, at least initially? -Mark Iverson From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 7:54 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... On May 28, 2013, at 1:58 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed replied: “Yes, the void is very different from the lattice. That is the whole point to the idea behind the NAE. A nuclear reaction cannot take place in a normal lattice. A change must take place. This change produces a different condition I call the NAE. In my model, this NAE is a gap created by stress relief. Other models imagine a different condition. Regardless of the condition, it MUST contain hydrons because that is what experiences fusion, which is the essential result of cold fusion.” OK, so you are positing that as soon as the dislocation or gap forms, hydrons IMMEDIATELY diffuse into it? Even if the electrode hasn’t even been immersed in the electrolyte yet (if we’re talking electrolytic type experiments); or before hydrogen gas is introduced if we’re dealing with a NiH system? I don’t think so… Mark, of course a source of H+ or D+ must be present. Let me make the process as clear as possible. First a gap forms as a result of stress relief. Then any hydrons present in the surrounding material diffuse into the gap and react to form the Hydroton. If no hydrons are present in the material, nothing happens. Once the Hydroton forms, this structure starts to oscillate and mass energy is emitted as photons. Two essential conditions are required for LENR
RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Ed: Yes, it does answer question #1. So we have liftoff (a vacuum)! J Thank you. Question #2: What's the temperature of this void/vacuum? Obviously, 0, or close to it. Perhaps cosmic microwave background (CMB)? The energy/temperature of any particles/atoms that enter the void is only what they carry in with them??? And possibly imparted to them by the E-fields. Question #3: Are there any E or B fields present? You say yes, 'strong negative fields'. I'm good with that, since the boundary of the void is likely lined with the electrons making up the lattice atoms surrounding the voids; that seems reasonable. Those negative fields will basically force any charged particle to the location where opposing field vectors balance. If you consider the simplified 2D situation, you have same polarity field vectors pointing at each other from opposite sides of the void, and if equal, will balance somewhere in the center of the void. All this is quite reasonable. and I got it from the beginning. However, if the dimensions of the void are large enough, the influence of the electron fields will drop off to 0??? You say that 'electrons are present'. do you mean free electrons, flying around the void's interior? Or as described above in Q3? Question #4: what is the mean free path of a free electron or proton in that void? If it's the only particle in the void, then I don't think this question makes sense. -Mark Iverson From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 2:38 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, when the gap initially forms, nothing is present. It is a void, a space without substance, a vacuum if you wish. However, it contains strong negative fields and it contains electrons. Does a vacuum contain electrons? The gap is too small for a gas molecule to enter. It can accommodate only hydron ions, which when they enter, react with each other. At this point in the discussion, I'm describing pure chemical conditions that can be calculated using conventional theory. Does this answer your question? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:07 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed: Thanks for the additional explanation, but it wasn't necessary. Obviously, there's a disconnect as to what my point was in this thread, and how you interpreted it. I do not take issue with your hypothesis; I follow the reasoning and steps of how you think LENR occurs. It sounds very straightforward, and I trust your vast knowledge of the field to have taken all the empirical data to heart when formulating the hypothesis. I sincerely hope that you are able to convince some LENR researchers to test your hypothesis and get some empirical support. The point of my posting the thread is to understand the precise environment of these dislocations in the lattice. if they are the site where LENR processes occur, and I think that is the likely scenario, then it is *essential* to have an *accurate* understanding of what constitutes a dislocation. Your contributions to this thread have certainly described how you view them, however, you did NOT answer my question as to what is in the voids when nothing has 'diffused' into them!! The purpose for my first set of questions was to simply ascertain whether or not we have a (perfect?) vacuum on the inside of the dislocation immediately after it forms and before anything happens to diffuse into them. I think I prefaced my questions to focus on that situation. Can we agree that we are dealing with a vacuum, at least initially? -Mark Iverson From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 7:54 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... On May 28, 2013, at 1:58 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed replied: Yes, the void is very different from the lattice. That is the whole point to the idea behind the NAE. A nuclear reaction cannot take place in a normal lattice. A change must take place. This change produces a different condition I call the NAE. In my model, this NAE is a gap created by stress relief. Other models imagine a different condition. Regardless of the condition, it MUST contain hydrons because that is what experiences fusion, which is the essential result of cold fusion. OK, so you are positing that as soon as the dislocation or gap forms, hydrons IMMEDIATELY diffuse into it? Even if the electrode hasn't even been immersed in the electrolyte yet (if we're talking electrolytic type experiments); or before hydrogen gas is introduced if we're dealing with a NiH system? I don't think so. Mark, of course a source of H+ or D+ must be present. Let me make the process as clear as possible. First a gap forms as a result of stress relief. Then any hydrons present in the surrounding material diffuse into the gap and react to form the Hydroton
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
I believe that I see what you are describing Ed. This effect must go away at some size when the metal begins to have conductivity on the inside surfaces of the cavities. Could this be the mechanism that limits how large the NAE can become? Does anyone know how large a metallic structure has to be before it looks like a resistor? Perhaps I am stretching it to assume that a structure which only has a small number of associated atoms behaves like a superconductor. If not, what mechanism determines the resistive parameter? If a small collection of atoms behaves like a superconductor then that would explain why the field generated by tiny Axil antennas can become of great magnitude. Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 6:16 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, you are describing a large container. The gap is not a large container. It consists of two surfaces with a gap that is on the atomic scale. Start by imagining what a lattice consist of. It is created by a regular arrangement of electron shells, each surrounding a nucleus. These atoms are at a distance determined by a symmetrical electron interaction between each neighbor . Now move the atoms apart along a line. Immediately, the electron cloud surrounding each atom in the wall is unbalanced. The electron cloud of each atom pushed into the gap. This same effect happens on a clean surface and accounts for the surface energy that attracts absorbed atoms. Is this clearer? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:53 PM, David Roberson wrote: Ed, I recall the Van de Graaff generators which had a vacuum or just air inside and a conductive outside. One of the demonstrations that I saw was that there is no electric field within the shielding outer surface. Why does this not happen within the NAE? It looks a lot like one of those devices since a metallic conductor surrounds the cavity. Am I missing something about the shape? Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 5:38 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, when the gap initially forms, nothing is present. It is a void, a space without substance, a vacuum if you wish. However, it contains strong negative fields and it contains electrons. Does a vacuum contain electrons? The gap is too small for a gas molecule to enter. It can accommodate only hydron ions, which when they enter, react with each other. At this point in the discussion, I'm describing pure chemical conditions that can be calculated using conventional theory. Does this answer your question? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:07 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed: Thanks for the additional explanation, but it wasn’t necessary… Obviously, there’s a disconnect as to what my point was in this thread, and how you interpreted it. I do not take issue with your hypothesis; I follow the reasoning and steps of how you think LENR occurs. It sounds very straightforward, and I trust your vast knowledge of the field to have taken all the empirical data to heart when formulating the hypothesis. I sincerely hope that you are able to convince some LENR researchers to test your hypothesis and get some empirical support… The point of my posting the thread is to understand the precise environment of these dislocations in the lattice… if they are the site where LENR processes occur, and I think that is the likely scenario, then it is *essential* to have an *accurate* understanding of what constitutes a dislocation. Your contributions to this thread have certainly described how you view them, however, you did NOT answer my question as to what is in the voids when nothing has ‘diffused’ into them!! The purpose for my first set of questions was to simply ascertain whether or not we have a (perfect?) vacuum on the inside of the dislocation immediately after it forms and before anything happens to diffuse into them… I think I prefaced my questions to focus on that situation. Can we agree that we are dealing with a vacuum, at least initially? -Mark Iverson From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 7:54 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... On May 28, 2013, at 1:58 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed replied: “Yes, the void is very different from the lattice. That is the whole point to the idea behind the NAE. A nuclear reaction cannot take place in a normal lattice. A change must take place. This change produces a different condition I call the NAE. In my model, this NAE is a gap created by stress relief. Other
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Dave, you are adding ideas that have no relationship to what I'm describing. Conductivity has no relationship to the the gap, its role, or its lifetime. The gap width is the ONLY variable that determines whether it will be a NAE. Once the gap has grown too big, it no longer allows formation of the Hydroton and, instead, normal H2 forms. It can grow too big if the stress that made the gap in the first place continues to increase. I suggest this is why most successful production of excess energy eventually stops. The Hydroton acts like a superconductor because the electron is free to move within the structure because it is not bound to a single nucleus. The gap itself is not superconducting. The effect of nano-structures on concentrating energy (aka Axil) is an entirely different phenomenon that has no relationship to LENR according to my model. Axil obviously has a different model. Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 6:22 PM, David Roberson wrote: I believe that I see what you are describing Ed. This effect must go away at some size when the metal begins to have conductivity on the inside surfaces of the cavities. Could this be the mechanism that limits how large the NAE can become? Does anyone know how large a metallic structure has to be before it looks like a resistor? Perhaps I am stretching it to assume that a structure which only has a small number of associated atoms behaves like a superconductor. If not, what mechanism determines the resistive parameter? If a small collection of atoms behaves like a superconductor then that would explain why the field generated by tiny Axil antennas can become of great magnitude. Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 6:16 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, you are describing a large container. The gap is not a large container. It consists of two surfaces with a gap that is on the atomic scale. Start by imagining what a lattice consist of. It is created by a regular arrangement of electron shells, each surrounding a nucleus. These atoms are at a distance determined by a symmetrical electron interaction between each neighbor . Now move the atoms apart along a line. Immediately, the electron cloud surrounding each atom in the wall is unbalanced. The electron cloud of each atom pushed into the gap. This same effect happens on a clean surface and accounts for the surface energy that attracts absorbed atoms. Is this clearer? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:53 PM, David Roberson wrote: Ed, I recall the Van de Graaff generators which had a vacuum or just air inside and a conductive outside. One of the demonstrations that I saw was that there is no electric field within the shielding outer surface. Why does this not happen within the NAE? It looks a lot like one of those devices since a metallic conductor surrounds the cavity. Am I missing something about the shape? Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 5:38 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, when the gap initially forms, nothing is present. It is a void, a space without substance, a vacuum if you wish. However, it contains strong negative fields and it contains electrons. Does a vacuum contain electrons? The gap is too small for a gas molecule to enter. It can accommodate only hydron ions, which when they enter, react with each other. At this point in the discussion, I'm describing pure chemical conditions that can be calculated using conventional theory. Does this answer your question? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:07 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed: Thanks for the additional explanation, but it wasn’t necessary… Obviously, there’s a disconnect as to what my point was in this thread, and how you interpreted it. I do not take issue with your hypothesis; I follow the reasoning and steps of how you think LENR occurs. It sounds very straightforward, and I trust your vast knowledge of the field to have taken all the empirical data to heart when formulating the hypothesis. I sincerely hope that you are able to convince some LENR researchers to test your hypothesis and get some empirical support… The point of my posting the thread is to understand the precise environment of these dislocations in the lattice… if they are the site where LENR processes occur, and I think that is the likely scenario, then it is *essential* to have an *accurate* understanding of what constitutes a dislocation. Your contributions to this thread have certainly described how you view them, however, you did NOT answer my question as to what is in the voids when nothing has ‘diffused’ into them
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
*The effect of nano-structures on concentrating energy (aka Axil) is an entirely different phenomenon that has no relationship to LENR according to my model. Axil obviously has a different model.* That is my story and I sticking to it.:-) On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:40 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Dave, you are adding ideas that have no relationship to what I'm describing. Conductivity has no relationship to the the gap, its role, or its lifetime. The gap width is the ONLY variable that determines whether it will be a NAE. Once the gap has grown too big, it no longer allows formation of the Hydroton and, instead, normal H2 forms. It can grow too big if the stress that made the gap in the first place continues to increase. I suggest this is why most successful production of excess energy eventually stops. The Hydroton acts like a superconductor because the electron is free to move within the structure because it is not bound to a single nucleus. The gap itself is not superconducting. The effect of nano-structures on concentrating energy (aka Axil) is an entirely different phenomenon that has no relationship to LENR according to my model. Axil obviously has a different model. Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 6:22 PM, David Roberson wrote: I believe that I see what you are describing Ed. This effect must go away at some size when the metal begins to have conductivity on the inside surfaces of the cavities. Could this be the mechanism that limits how large the NAE can become? Does anyone know how large a metallic structure has to be before it looks like a resistor? Perhaps I am stretching it to assume that a structure which only has a small number of associated atoms behaves like a superconductor. If not, what mechanism determines the resistive parameter? If a small collection of atoms behaves like a superconductor then that would explain why the field generated by tiny Axil antennas can become of great magnitude. Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 6:16 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, you are describing a large container. The gap is not a large container. It consists of two surfaces with a gap that is on the atomic scale. Start by imagining what a lattice consist of. It is created by a regular arrangement of electron shells, each surrounding a nucleus. These atoms are at a distance determined by a symmetrical electron interaction between each neighbor . Now move the atoms apart along a line. Immediately, the electron cloud surrounding each atom in the wall is unbalanced. The electron cloud of each atom pushed into the gap. This same effect happens on a clean surface and accounts for the surface energy that attracts absorbed atoms. Is this clearer? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:53 PM, David Roberson wrote: Ed, I recall the Van de Graaff generators which had a vacuum or just air inside and a conductive outside. One of the demonstrations that I saw was that there is no electric field within the shielding outer surface. Why does this not happen within the NAE? It looks a lot like one of those devices since a metallic conductor surrounds the cavity. Am I missing something about the shape? Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 5:38 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, when the gap initially forms, nothing is present. It is a void, a space without substance, a vacuum if you wish. However, it contains strong negative fields and it contains electrons. Does a vacuum contain electrons? The gap is too small for a gas molecule to enter. It can accommodate only hydron ions, which when they enter, react with each other. At this point in the discussion, I'm describing pure chemical conditions that can be calculated using conventional theory. Does this answer your question? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:07 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed: Thanks for the additional explanation, but it wasn’t necessary… Obviously, there’s a disconnect as to what my point was in this thread, and how you interpreted it. I do not take issue with your hypothesis; I follow the reasoning and steps of how you think LENR occurs. It sounds very straightforward, and I trust your vast knowledge of the field to have taken all the empirical data to heart when formulating the hypothesis. I sincerely hope that you are able to convince some LENR researchers to test your hypothesis and get some empirical support… The point of my posting the thread is to understand the precise environment of these dislocations in the lattice… if they are the site where LENR processes occur, and I think that is the likely
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Ed, do you agree that what primarily keeps the protons in the gap is their repulsion with the lattice nuclei and what primarily keeps electrons in the gap is their repulsion with the electron shells around the lattice nuclei? harry On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:40 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Dave, you are adding ideas that have no relationship to what I'm describing. Conductivity has no relationship to the the gap, its role, or its lifetime. The gap width is the ONLY variable that determines whether it will be a NAE. Once the gap has grown too big, it no longer allows formation of the Hydroton and, instead, normal H2 forms. It can grow too big if the stress that made the gap in the first place continues to increase. I suggest this is why most successful production of excess energy eventually stops. The Hydroton acts like a superconductor because the electron is free to move within the structure because it is not bound to a single nucleus. The gap itself is not superconducting. The effect of nano-structures on concentrating energy (aka Axil) is an entirely different phenomenon that has no relationship to LENR according to my model. Axil obviously has a different model. Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 6:22 PM, David Roberson wrote: I believe that I see what you are describing Ed. This effect must go away at some size when the metal begins to have conductivity on the inside surfaces of the cavities. Could this be the mechanism that limits how large the NAE can become? Does anyone know how large a metallic structure has to be before it looks like a resistor? Perhaps I am stretching it to assume that a structure which only has a small number of associated atoms behaves like a superconductor. If not, what mechanism determines the resistive parameter? If a small collection of atoms behaves like a superconductor then that would explain why the field generated by tiny Axil antennas can become of great magnitude. Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 6:16 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, you are describing a large container. The gap is not a large container. It consists of two surfaces with a gap that is on the atomic scale. Start by imagining what a lattice consist of. It is created by a regular arrangement of electron shells, each surrounding a nucleus. These atoms are at a distance determined by a symmetrical electron interaction between each neighbor . Now move the atoms apart along a line. Immediately, the electron cloud surrounding each atom in the wall is unbalanced. The electron cloud of each atom pushed into the gap. This same effect happens on a clean surface and accounts for the surface energy that attracts absorbed atoms. Is this clearer? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:53 PM, David Roberson wrote: Ed, I recall the Van de Graaff generators which had a vacuum or just air inside and a conductive outside. One of the demonstrations that I saw was that there is no electric field within the shielding outer surface. Why does this not happen within the NAE? It looks a lot like one of those devices since a metallic conductor surrounds the cavity. Am I missing something about the shape? Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 5:38 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, when the gap initially forms, nothing is present. It is a void, a space without substance, a vacuum if you wish. However, it contains strong negative fields and it contains electrons. Does a vacuum contain electrons? The gap is too small for a gas molecule to enter. It can accommodate only hydron ions, which when they enter, react with each other. At this point in the discussion, I'm describing pure chemical conditions that can be calculated using conventional theory. Does this answer your question? Ed Storms On May 28, 2013, at 3:07 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed: Thanks for the additional explanation, but it wasn’t necessary… Obviously, there’s a disconnect as to what my point was in this thread, and how you interpreted it. I do not take issue with your hypothesis; I follow the reasoning and steps of how you think LENR occurs. It sounds very straightforward, and I trust your vast knowledge of the field to have taken all the empirical data to heart when formulating the hypothesis. I sincerely hope that you are able to convince some LENR researchers to test your hypothesis and get some empirical support… The point of my posting the thread is to understand the precise environment of these dislocations in the lattice… if they are the site where LENR processes occur, and I think that is the likely scenario
[Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
I know Ed has expressed concern, and a bit of frustration, at how some of the Collective's discussions are too OOTB, or seemingly without much concern for basic physics principles, for a seasoned scientist's tastes. and he certainly has a valid point. However, many here do have a good grounding in science and engineering, and we at least try to apply the 'laws' of physics (and I use the term 'laws' carefully). but we also know that those laws have a LIMITED sphere of applicability; they do NOT apply everywhere! I have found it necessary in several Vort threads to remind the discussioneers that the Laws of Thermodynamics ONLY APPLY TO CLOSED SYSTEMS. Too often that minor point gets lost. When dimensions become small enough, or time scales fast enough, that quantum mechanical phenomena begin to influence things, those laws can either appear to be, or actually be, violated, in those instances. But I digress. back on point. In trying to reduce Ed's frustration level with the 'loose' conversations that fly around inside the Dime Box Saloon, I would like to drill down a little more into nothingness, and look inside a NAE. --- Assume we start out with a chunk of solid palladium with NO internal voids or 'cracks'. Stress that chunk of palladium so a crack/defect/void forms in the interior of it, removed from the outer surfaces. assume that this void is several hundred atoms long, and a few tens of atoms wide. Have Scotty miniaturize you, and beam you into the center of that void. Questions to contemplate: 1) what's inside that void? 2) what's the temperature in that void? 3) are there any fields (as in E or B fields) inside that void? 4) what is the mean free path of a free electron or proton in that void? -- Looking fwd to the Collective's thoughts. -Mark
[Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
I know Ed has expressed concern, and a bit of frustration, at how some of the Collective's discussions are too OOTB, or seemingly without much concern for basic physics principles, for a seasoned scientist's tastes. and he certainly has a valid point. However, many here do have a good grounding in science and engineering, and we at least try to apply the 'laws' of physics (and I use the term 'laws' carefully). but we also know that those laws have a LIMITED sphere of applicability; they do NOT apply everywhere! I have found it necessary in several Vort threads to remind the discussioneers that the Laws of Thermodynamics ONLY APPLY TO CLOSED SYSTEMS. Too often that minor point gets lost. When dimensions become small enough, or time scales fast enough, that quantum mechanical phenomena begin to influence things, those laws can either appear to be, or actually be, violated, in those instances. But I digress. back on point. In trying to reduce Ed's frustration level with the 'loose' conversations that fly around inside the Dime Box Saloon, I would like to drill down a little more into nothingness, and look inside a NAE. --- Assume we start out with a chunk of solid palladium with NO internal voids or 'cracks'. Stress that chunk of palladium so a crack/defect/void forms in the interior of it, removed from the outer surfaces. assume that this void is several hundred atoms long, and a few tens of atoms wide. Have Scotty miniaturize you, and beam you into the center of that void. Questions to contemplate: 1) what's inside that void? 2) what's the temperature in that void? 3) are there any fields (as in E or B fields) inside that void? 4) what is the mean free path of a free electron or proton in that void? -- Looking fwd to the Collective's thoughts. -Mark
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Mark, I agree that we do not know all we think we know and many rules can be violated when conditions change. Nevertheless, we do have a collection of observations that show how Nature behaves. Some of these behaviors have been described in ways we call laws because the descriptions always apply. Of course, a person has to understand what the law actually means. For example, I find that many people, even in science, do not understand what the Laws of Thermodynamics mean. This problem is especially notable in physicists. Also, I have observed that mathematicians can find a mathematical way to explain ANYTHING - just give them a few assumptions. This means that what we think we know is determined by the initial assumptions, not by the applied math itself. The math can be made to fit the observations and may even provide predictions that fit behavior. However, this does not mean the assumption is correct. Take the Big Bang theory as a perfect example. This is based on an assumption that cannot be tested. A complex collection of mathematical consequences are created that seem to fit most observations. Meanwhile the Steady State theory does the same thing and also generates math that fits observations. Which theory you believe depends on which conflict with observation you wish to ignore. This same problem occurs with cold fusion. Which theory you accept depends on which conflict with observation you wish to ignore. I'm trying to create a theory that ignores no observation and no accepted behavior of Nature. Meanwhile, people simply propose and discuss any imagined idea that comes into their head without any awareness of what is known about CF or about Nature in general. That is my frustration. New ideas are required, but not at the expense of ignoring all else. Science has come a long way and does not need to reinvent the wheel every time a new phenomenon is discovered. On May 18, 2013, at 8:10 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: I know Ed has expressed concern, and a bit of frustration, at how some of the Collective’s discussions are too OOTB, or seemingly without much concern for basic physics principles, for a seasoned scientist’s tastes… and he certainly has a valid point. However, many here do have a good grounding in science and engineering, and we at least try to apply the ‘laws’ of physics (and I use the term ‘laws’ carefully)… but we also know that those laws have a LIMITED sphere of applicability; they do NOT apply everywhere! I have found it necessary in several Vort threads to remind the discussioneers that the Laws of Thermodynamics ONLY APPLY TO CLOSED SYSTEMS. Too often that minor point gets lost… When dimensions become small enough, or time scales fast enough, that quantum mechanical phenomena begin to influence things, those laws can either appear to be, or actually be, violated, in those instances. But I digress… back on point. In trying to reduce Ed’s frustration level with the ‘loose’ conversations that fly around inside the Dime Box Saloon, I would like to drill down a little more into nothingness, and look inside a NAE… --- Assume we start out with a chunk of solid palladium with NO internal voids or ‘cracks’… Stress that chunk of palladium so a crack/defect/void forms in the interior of it, removed from the outer surfaces… assume that this void is several hundred atoms long, and a few tens of atoms wide. Have Scotty miniaturize you, and beam you into the center of that void… Questions to contemplate: 1) what’s inside that void? The answer depends on which theory you accept. In my case, the void consists initially of a strong negative charge created by the electrons in the wall that are associated with the metal atoms making up the wall. The charge is strong because it is now unbalance as a result of the walls being too far apart for the electron orbits (waves) to be properly balanced. This condition attracts hydrons (hydrogen ions), which enter the gap by releasing Gibbs energy. In so doing, they create a tightly bonded covalent structure in the form of a string. The hydrons in this string are closer together than is normally possible because the electron concentration between them is higher than normal. When this structure resonates, the hydrons get even closer together periodically, depending on the frequency of vibration. Each time they get to within a critical distance, energy is emitted from each hydron as a photon. Once enough energy has been emitted as a series of weak photons, the fusion process is completed by the intervening electron being sucked into the final nuclear product. The details of how this process works will be described later. 2) what’s the temperature in that void? The temperature is very high, but not high enough to melt the surrounding material. As a result, some energy is lost from the gap as
RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Ed said: Some of these behaviors have been described in ways we call laws because the descriptions always apply. I would add the following ending to that statement for it to be precise: .because the descriptions always apply when experimental parameters are within the ranges established across all the replications. If someone conducts an experiment, but cranks up parameter X to 1000 times what was used in all previous replications, there is no guarantee that the results will come out as expected. There are numerous examples where 'laws' failed when some parameter in the experiment was way beyond what had been tried before; where some critical threshold had been reached. I also have a problem with the use of the word 'always' in that statement; or in any statement for that matter. The now mature field of Chaos, Dissipative structures and Self-organizing systems, which grew out of Ilya Prigogine's work, has shown how coherence can spontaneously form in an otherwise incoherent system, and there are many examples in science, including in chemistry and physics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organizing_system I agree for the most part with your desire to diligently apply the 'laws' of physics, however, there are some aspects of LENR which *potentially* place it outside the realm/range established from historical empirical results. As has been mentioned numerous times by LENR researchers, the rules of plasma physics may not apply in the condensed matter world that is LENR. -Mark From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 7:54 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, I agree that we do not know all we think we know and many rules can be violated when conditions change. Nevertheless, we do have a collection of observations that show how Nature behaves. Some of these behaviors have been described in ways we call laws because the descriptions always apply. Of course, a person has to understand what the law actually means. For example, I find that many people, even in science, do not understand what the Laws of Thermodynamics mean. This problem is especially notable in physicists. Also, I have observed that mathematicians can find a mathematical way to explain ANYTHING - just give them a few assumptions. This means that what we think we know is determined by the initial assumptions, not by the applied math itself. The math can be made to fit the observations and may even provide predictions that fit behavior. However, this does not mean the assumption is correct. Take the Big Bang theory as a perfect example. This is based on an assumption that cannot be tested. A complex collection of mathematical consequences are created that seem to fit most observations. Meanwhile the Steady State theory does the same thing and also generates math that fits observations. Which theory you believe depends on which conflict with observation you wish to ignore. This same problem occurs with cold fusion. Which theory you accept depends on which conflict with observation you wish to ignore. I'm trying to create a theory that ignores no observation and no accepted behavior of Nature. Meanwhile, people simply propose and discuss any imagined idea that comes into their head without any awareness of what is known about CF or about Nature in general. That is my frustration. New ideas are required, but not at the expense of ignoring all else. Science has come a long way and does not need to reinvent the wheel every time a new phenomenon is discovered. On May 18, 2013, at 8:10 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: I know Ed has expressed concern, and a bit of frustration, at how some of the Collective's discussions are too OOTB, or seemingly without much concern for basic physics principles, for a seasoned scientist's tastes. and he certainly has a valid point. However, many here do have a good grounding in science and engineering, and we at least try to apply the 'laws' of physics (and I use the term 'laws' carefully). but we also know that those laws have a LIMITED sphere of applicability; they do NOT apply everywhere! I have found it necessary in several Vort threads to remind the discussioneers that the Laws of Thermodynamics ONLY APPLY TO CLOSED SYSTEMS. Too often that minor point gets lost. When dimensions become small enough, or time scales fast enough, that quantum mechanical phenomena begin to influence things, those laws can either appear to be, or actually be, violated, in those instances. But I digress. back on point. In trying to reduce Ed's frustration level with the 'loose' conversations that fly around inside the Dime Box Saloon, I would like to drill down a little more into nothingness, and look inside a NAE. --- Assume we start out with a chunk of solid palladium with NO internal voids or 'cracks'. Stress that chunk of palladium so a crack
RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Couldn't agree MORE with your statement that mathematicians can find a mathematical way to explain anything, given a few initial assumptions. case in point, quantum physics! ;-) And those pesky infinities.what to do with those? Let's just 'renormalize' them. I wonder if it as a physicist or a mathematician who came up with that? RE: renormalization in quantum physics. (from Wikipedia) Dirac's criticism was the most persistent.[7] As late as 1975, he was saying:[8] Most physicists are very satisfied with the situation. They say: 'Quantum electrodynamics is a good theory and we do not have to worry about it any more.' I must say that I am very dissatisfied with the situation, because this so-called 'good theory' does involve neglecting infinities which appear in its equations, neglecting them in an arbitrary way. This is just not sensible mathematics. Sensible mathematics involves neglecting a quantity when it is small - not neglecting it just because it is infinitely great and you do not want it! Another important critic was Feynman. Despite his crucial role in the development of quantum electrodynamics, he wrote the following in 1985:[9] The shell game that we play ... is technically called 'renormalization'. But no matter how clever the word, it is still what I would call a dippy process! Having to resort to such hocus-pocus has prevented us from proving that the theory of quantum electrodynamics is mathematically self-consistent. It's surprising that the theory still hasn't been proved self-consistent one way or the other by now; I suspect that renormalization is not mathematically legitimate. -mark From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 7:54 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... deleted for brevity Also, I have observed that mathematicians can find a mathematical way to explain ANYTHING - just give them a few assumptions. This means that what we think we know is determined by the initial assumptions, not by the applied math itself. The math can be made to fit the observations and may even provide predictions that fit behavior. However, this does not mean the assumption is correct. Take the Big Bang theory as a perfect example. This is based on an assumption that cannot be tested. A complex collection of mathematical consequences are created that seem to fit most observations. Meanwhile the Steady State theory does the same thing and also generates math that fits observations. Which theory you believe depends on which conflict with observation you wish to ignore. rest deleted for brevity
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
1) what’s inside that void? Reference concerning nano-particles: http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/conferences/2010/ARL/Pres/06aMiley-Transmutations.pdf *Transmutation Type LENR* * * George H. Miley Connection to nano-particle catalytic LENR studies -Our work attempts to nano-manufacture voids (pores: dislocation loops) for cluster formation, vs. voids created in nano-particle catalysis. -Objective = control of void dimensions, hence cluster formation and resulting reactions (per my 10 min comment presentation later) . -Consider A. Takahashi’s theory presented at recent ACS meeting to visualize the connection. (Thanks also to him for recent discussions of this and our cluster work.) The voids contain nano-particles called Rydberg matter of various species. 2) what’s the temperature in that void? Ambient temperature of the system because the system is superfluid. 3) are there any fields (as in E or B fields) inside that void? The E fields are huge, the B fields are minimal. The E fields are forms by a photonic BEC formed by the superconducting polaritons that the Rydberg matter based nano-particles generate. 4) what is the mean free path of a free electron or proton in that void? The electrons are delocalized from their negative electric charge. This charge is now carried by the infrared photons in the cavity. On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 10:10 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote: I know Ed has expressed concern, and a bit of frustration, at how some of the Collective’s discussions are too OOTB, or seemingly without much concern for basic physics principles, for a seasoned scientist’s tastes… and he certainly has a valid point. However, many here do have a good grounding in science and engineering, and we at least try to apply the ‘laws’ of physics (and I use the term ‘laws’ carefully)… but we also know that those laws have a LIMITED sphere of applicability; they do NOT apply everywhere! I have found it necessary in several Vort threads to remind the discussioneers that the Laws of Thermodynamics ONLY APPLY TO CLOSED SYSTEMS. Too often that minor point gets lost… When dimensions become small enough, or time scales fast enough, that quantum mechanical phenomena begin to influence things, those laws can either appear to be, or actually be, violated, in those instances. But I digress… back on point. ** ** In trying to reduce Ed’s frustration level with the ‘loose’ conversations that fly around inside the Dime Box Saloon, I would like to drill down a little more into nothingness, and look inside a NAE… ** ** --- Assume we start out with a chunk of solid palladium with NO internal voids or ‘cracks’… ** ** Stress that chunk of palladium so a crack/defect/void forms in the interior of it, removed from the outer surfaces… assume that this void is several hundred atoms long, and a few tens of atoms wide. ** ** Have Scotty miniaturize you, and beam you into the center of that void…*** * ** ** Questions to contemplate: 1) what’s inside that void? 2) what’s the temperature in that void? 3) are there any fields (as in E or B fields) inside that void? 4) what is the mean free path of a free electron or proton in that void?** ** -- ** ** Looking fwd to the Collective’s thoughts… -Mark ** **
RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
I have to stop getting distracted from the main point I wanted to discuss in this thread. I posited the following: I would like to drill down a little more into nothingness, and look inside a NAE. -- Assume we start out with a chunk of solid palladium with NO internal voids or 'cracks'. Stress that chunk of palladium so a crack/defect/void forms in the interior of it, removed from the outer surfaces. assume that this void is several hundred atoms long, and a few tens of atoms wide. Have Scotty miniaturize you, and beam you into the center of that void. 1) what's inside that void? 2) what's the temperature in that void? To which Ed answered, mainly expressing what his view is inside this void: The answer depends on which theory you accept. In my case, the void consists initially of a strong negative charge created by the electrons in the wall that are associated with the metal atoms making up the wall. The charge is strong because it is now unbalance as a result of the walls being too far apart for the electron orbits (waves) to be properly balanced. This condition attracts hydrons (hydrogen ions), which enter the gap by releasing Gibbs energy. In so doing, they create a tightly bonded covalent structure in the form of a string. The hydrons in this string are closer together than is normally possible because the electron concentration between them is higher than normal. When this structure resonates, the hydrons get even closer together periodically, depending on the frequency of vibration. Each time they get to within a critical distance, energy is emitted from each hydron as a photon. Once enough energy has been emitted as a series of weak photons, the fusion process is completed by the intervening electron being sucked into the final nuclear product. The details of how this process works will be described later. The temperature is very high, but not high enough to melt the surrounding material. As a result, some energy is lost from the gap as phonons. The photon/phonon ratio is still unknown. Nevertheless, the rate of photon emission is large enough to be detected outside of the apparatus when H is used. To which I respond: But if the void is tens of 'atom-diameters' across, you are way beyond the influence of any electrons, unless they are 'free' electrons flying around in that void. Restrict your viewpoint to only the interior of the void. *For the sake of argument*, assume that there are NO free atoms, sub-atomic particles or photons flying around in the void. in that case, do you not have a *perfect vacuum*? And as to my second question, what's the temperature of a perfect vacuum? Would it not be 0.000K in temperature? Ed is positing that the NAE are essential to LENR, and I am positing that the VOIDs are a major element in the NAE, AND that the conditions in the VOIDs are NOT those of the bulk, surrounding matter; in fact, they are very different. To understand the NAE requires an understanding of EXACTLY what the conditions are INSIDE the voids. Ed, perhaps you could summarize what the various viewpoints are as to the physical environment inside these voids. -Mark Iverson
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
I agree with what you say, Mark. The parameters have to be within range, but that range is generally not exceeded unless a real effort is made. Consequently, the laws usually apply and must not be ignored just because they may fail outside of an extreme range. On the other hand, I'm amused by people who apply processes that occur in the Sun to what might happen in a cathode on Earth. This is an example using conditions that are way out of range. I do not believe CF should be considered to be outside of physics just because the hot fusion behavior is not detected. This is the basic error made by skeptics. Cold fusion is a new phenomenon that occurs only at low energy, which has not been explored before. The behavior has opened a new window into Nature. No conflict exists and no law of physics is violated. Nevertheless, some insight is missing. We need to find that insight. After all, that is what we were taught science was all about,. Obviously, some people slept through that lecture. Ed Storms On May 19, 2013, at 10:16 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed said: “Some of these behaviors have been described in ways we call laws because the descriptions always apply.” I would add the following ending to that statement for it to be precise: “…because the descriptions always apply when experimental parameters are within the ranges established across all the replications.” If someone conducts an experiment, but cranks up parameter X to 1000 times what was used in all previous replications, there is no guarantee that the results will come out as expected. There are numerous examples where ‘laws’ failed when some parameter in the experiment was way beyond what had been tried before; where some critical threshold had been reached. I also have a problem with the use of the word ‘always’ in that statement; or in any statement for that matter. The now mature field of Chaos, Dissipative structures and Self-organizing systems, which grew out of Ilya Prigogine’s work, has shown how coherence can spontaneously form in an otherwise incoherent system, and there are many examples in science, including in chemistry and physics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organizing_system I agree for the most part with your desire to diligently apply the ‘laws’ of physics, however, there are some aspects of LENR which *potentially* place it outside the realm/range established from historical empirical results. As has been mentioned numerous times by LENR researchers, the rules of plasma physics may not apply in the condensed matter world that is LENR. -Mark From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 7:54 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, I agree that we do not know all we think we know and many rules can be violated when conditions change. Nevertheless, we do have a collection of observations that show how Nature behaves. Some of these behaviors have been described in ways we call laws because the descriptions always apply. Of course, a person has to understand what the law actually means. For example, I find that many people, even in science, do not understand what the Laws of Thermodynamics mean. This problem is especially notable in physicists. Also, I have observed that mathematicians can find a mathematical way to explain ANYTHING - just give them a few assumptions. This means that what we think we know is determined by the initial assumptions, not by the applied math itself. The math can be made to fit the observations and may even provide predictions that fit behavior. However, this does not mean the assumption is correct. Take the Big Bang theory as a perfect example. This is based on an assumption that cannot be tested. A complex collection of mathematical consequences are created that seem to fit most observations. Meanwhile the Steady State theory does the same thing and also generates math that fits observations. Which theory you believe depends on which conflict with observation you wish to ignore. This same problem occurs with cold fusion. Which theory you accept depends on which conflict with observation you wish to ignore. I'm trying to create a theory that ignores no observation and no accepted behavior of Nature. Meanwhile, people simply propose and discuss any imagined idea that comes into their head without any awareness of what is known about CF or about Nature in general. That is my frustration. New ideas are required, but not at the expense of ignoring all else. Science has come a long way and does not need to reinvent the wheel every time a new phenomenon is discovered. On May 18, 2013, at 8:10 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: I know Ed has expressed concern, and a bit of frustration, at how some of the Collective’s discussions are too OOTB, or seemingly without much
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
George H. Miley has experimentally found Rydberg matter in the cavities. End of story. On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: I agree with what you say, Mark. The parameters have to be within range, but that range is generally not exceeded unless a real effort is made. Consequently, the laws usually apply and must not be ignored just because they may fail outside of an extreme range. On the other hand, I'm amused by people who apply processes that occur in the Sun to what might happen in a cathode on Earth. This is an example using conditions that are way out of range. I do not believe CF should be considered to be outside of physics just because the hot fusion behavior is not detected. This is the basic error made by skeptics. Cold fusion is a new phenomenon that occurs only at low energy, which has not been explored before. The behavior has opened a new window into Nature. No conflict exists and no law of physics is violated. Nevertheless, some insight is missing. We need to find that insight. After all, that is what we were taught science was all about,. Obviously, some people slept through that lecture. Ed Storms On May 19, 2013, at 10:16 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed said: “*Some of these behaviors have been described in ways we call laws because the descriptions always apply.”* ** ** I would add the following ending to that statement for it to be precise:** ** ** ** “…because the descriptions always apply when experimental parameters are within the ranges established across all the replications.” ** ** If someone conducts an experiment, but cranks up parameter X to 1000 times what was used in all previous replications, there is no guarantee that the results will come out as expected. There are numerous examples where ‘laws’ failed when some parameter in the experiment was way beyond what had been tried before; where some critical threshold had been reached. I also have a problem with the use of the word ‘always’ in that statement; or in any statement for that matter. The now mature field of Chaos, Dissipative structures and Self-organizing systems, which grew out of Ilya Prigogine’s work, has shown how coherence can spontaneously form in an otherwise incoherent system, and there are many examples in science, including in chemistry and physics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organizing_system ** ** I agree for the most part with your desire to diligently apply the ‘laws’ of physics, however, there are some aspects of LENR which **potentially** place it outside the realm/range established from historical empirical results. As has been mentioned numerous times by LENR researchers, the rules of plasma physics may not apply in the condensed matter world that is LENR. ** ** -Mark ** ** *From:* Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.comstor...@ix.netcom.com ] *Sent:* Sunday, May 19, 2013 7:54 AM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Cc:* Edmund Storms *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... ** ** *Mark, I agree that we do not know all we think we know and many rules can be violated when conditions change. Nevertheless, we do have a collection of observations that show how Nature behaves. Some of these behaviors have been described in ways we call laws because the descriptions always apply. Of course, a person has to understand what the law actually means. For example, I find that many people, even in science, do not understand what the Laws of Thermodynamics mean. This problem is especially notable in physicists. * ** ** *Also, I have observed that mathematicians can find a mathematical way to explain ANYTHING - just give them a few assumptions. This means that what we think we know is determined by the initial assumptions, not by the applied math itself. The math can be made to fit the observations and may even provide predictions that fit behavior. However, this does not mean the assumption is correct. Take the Big Bang theory as a perfect example. This is based on an assumption that cannot be tested. A complex collection of mathematical consequences are created that seem to fit most observations. Meanwhile the Steady State theory does the same thing and also generates math that fits observations. Which theory you believe depends on which conflict with observation you wish to ignore. * ** ** *This same problem occurs with cold fusion. Which theory you accept depends on which conflict with observation you wish to ignore. I'm trying to create a theory that ignores no observation and no accepted behavior of Nature. Meanwhile, people simply propose and discuss any imagined idea that comes into their head without any awareness of what is known about CF or about Nature in general. That is my frustration. * ** ** *New ideas are required, but not at the expense of ignoring all else. Science has come a long way
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On May 19, 2013, at 11:55 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: To which Ed answered, mainly expressing what his view is inside this void: “The answer depends on which theory you accept. In my case, the void consists initially of a strong negative charge created by the electrons in the wall that are associated with the metal atoms making up the wall. The charge is strong because it is now unbalance as a result of the walls being too far apart for the electron orbits (waves) to be properly balanced. This condition attracts hydrons (hydrogen ions), which enter the gap by releasing Gibbs energy. In so doing, they create a tightly bonded covalent structure in the form of a string. The hydrons in this string are closer together than is normally possible because the electron concentration between them is higher than normal. When this structure resonates, the hydrons get even closer together periodically, depending on the frequency of vibration. Each time they get to within a critical distance, energy is emitted from each hydron as a photon. Once enough energy has been emitted as a series of weak photons, the fusion process is completed by the intervening electron being sucked into the final nuclear product. The details of how this process works will be described later.” The temperature is very high, but not high enough to melt the surrounding material. As a result, some energy is lost from the gap as phonons. The photon/phonon ratio is still unknown. Nevertheless, the rate of photon emission is large enough to be detected outside of the apparatus when H is used. To which I respond: But if the void is tens of ‘atom-diameters’ across, you are way beyond the influence of any electrons, unless they are ‘free’ electrons flying around in that void. Restrict your viewpoint to only the interior of the void… Mark, you are making assumptions that do not need to be made. Regardless of what you imagine might be the case, hydrons MUST assemble because otherwise they can not fuse. The entire process hinges on hydrons assembling in an unconventional way. That requirement is basic. The challenge is to discover how this is possible without violating the laws of thermodynamics. Of course, if you keep making assumptions, the process can either be rejected or justified, your choice. I make the assumptions I think can be justified and try to find where they lead. In my case, they lead to a model that can explain ALL behavior without making additional assumptions. While this might be a wild goose chase, it does provide a useful path, which other theories have not done. *For the sake of argument*, assume that there are NO free atoms, sub- atomic particles or photons flying around in the void… in that case, do you not have a *perfect vacuum*? And as to my second question, what’s the temperature of a perfect vacuum? Would it not be 0.000K in temperature? I have no idea how the concept of vacuum applies. The NAE is a chemical state within a material. As H enters the state, they generate Gibbs energy, which is dissipated as heat (phonons). As a result, the region gets hot. The hydrons would not assemble if this energy were not generated, thereby producing heat. That is the basic nature of a chemical process. Ed is positing that the NAE are essential to LENR, and I am positing that the VOIDs are a major element in the NAE, AND that the conditions in the VOIDs are NOT those of the bulk, surrounding matter; in fact, they are very different. To understand the NAE requires an understanding of EXACTLY what the conditions are INSIDE the voids. Yes, the void is very different from the lattice. That is the whole point to the idea behind the NAE. A nuclear reaction cannot take place in a normal lattice. A change must take place. This change produces a different condition I call the NAE. In my model, this NAE is a gap created by stress relief. Other models imagine a different condition. Regardless of the condition, it MUST contain hydrons because that is what experiences fusion, which is the essential result of cold fusion. Ed, perhaps you could summarize what the various viewpoints are as to the physical environment inside these voids. The different theories use various features. Hagelstein uses metal atom vacancies, Miley uses dislocations, Takahashi uses special sites on the surface, and Kim assumes a BEC can form within the lattice. Each of these conditions are used to justify formation of a group of hydrons that fuse by some mysterious process. Other theories (Chubb for example) assume the process can occur whenever the lattice gets fully saturated with hydrons without a cluster being required. Ed Storms -Mark Iverson
RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Axil: Were the voids he studied at the surface??? If so, then you failed to read my posting accurately. I am discussing voids which are formed internally, and completely isolated from the surface layers. How did Miley determine that? If he was looking at surface defects (voids), then that is completely different from the environment I am positing. If he was looking at SUB-surface voids, then how did he see thru numerous atomic layers in order to determine what was inside a void? How do you know that whatever process he used didn't cause the Rydberg matter in the first place? -Mark From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 11:13 AM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... George H. Miley has experimentally found Rydberg matter in the cavities. End of story. On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: I agree with what you say, Mark. The parameters have to be within range, but that range is generally not exceeded unless a real effort is made. Consequently, the laws usually apply and must not be ignored just because they may fail outside of an extreme range. On the other hand, I'm amused by people who apply processes that occur in the Sun to what might happen in a cathode on Earth. This is an example using conditions that are way out of range. I do not believe CF should be considered to be outside of physics just because the hot fusion behavior is not detected. This is the basic error made by skeptics. Cold fusion is a new phenomenon that occurs only at low energy, which has not been explored before. The behavior has opened a new window into Nature. No conflict exists and no law of physics is violated. Nevertheless, some insight is missing. We need to find that insight. After all, that is what we were taught science was all about,. Obviously, some people slept through that lecture. Ed Storms On May 19, 2013, at 10:16 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed said: Some of these behaviors have been described in ways we call laws because the descriptions always apply. I would add the following ending to that statement for it to be precise: .because the descriptions always apply when experimental parameters are within the ranges established across all the replications. If someone conducts an experiment, but cranks up parameter X to 1000 times what was used in all previous replications, there is no guarantee that the results will come out as expected. There are numerous examples where 'laws' failed when some parameter in the experiment was way beyond what had been tried before; where some critical threshold had been reached. I also have a problem with the use of the word 'always' in that statement; or in any statement for that matter. The now mature field of Chaos, Dissipative structures and Self-organizing systems, which grew out of Ilya Prigogine's work, has shown how coherence can spontaneously form in an otherwise incoherent system, and there are many examples in science, including in chemistry and physics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organizing_system I agree for the most part with your desire to diligently apply the 'laws' of physics, however, there are some aspects of LENR which *potentially* place it outside the realm/range established from historical empirical results. As has been mentioned numerous times by LENR researchers, the rules of plasma physics may not apply in the condensed matter world that is LENR. -Mark From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 7:54 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... Mark, I agree that we do not know all we think we know and many rules can be violated when conditions change. Nevertheless, we do have a collection of observations that show how Nature behaves. Some of these behaviors have been described in ways we call laws because the descriptions always apply. Of course, a person has to understand what the law actually means. For example, I find that many people, even in science, do not understand what the Laws of Thermodynamics mean. This problem is especially notable in physicists. Also, I have observed that mathematicians can find a mathematical way to explain ANYTHING - just give them a few assumptions. This means that what we think we know is determined by the initial assumptions, not by the applied math itself. The math can be made to fit the observations and may even provide predictions that fit behavior. However, this does not mean the assumption is correct. Take the Big Bang theory as a perfect example. This is based on an assumption that cannot be tested. A complex collection of mathematical consequences are created that seem to fit most observations. Meanwhile the Steady State theory does the same thing and also generates math that fits observations. Which theory you believe depends on which conflict
Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
If you looked at the reference I provided, you would have seen both internal and external voids filled with Rydberg matter through hydrogen loading. On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 2:31 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote: Axil: Were the voids he studied at the surface??? If so, then you failed to read my posting accurately. I am discussing voids which are formed internally, and completely isolated from the surface layers. ** ** How did Miley determine that? If he was looking at surface defects (voids), then that is completely different from the environment I am positing. If he was looking at SUB-surface voids, then how did he see thru numerous atomic layers in order to determine what was inside a void? How do you know that whatever process he used didn’t cause the Rydberg matter in the first place? ** ** -Mark ** ** *From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Sunday, May 19, 2013 11:13 AM *To:* vortex-l *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... ** ** George H. Miley has experimentally found Rydberg matter in the cavities. End of story. ** ** On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: I agree with what you say, Mark. The parameters have to be within range, but that range is generally not exceeded unless a real effort is made. Consequently, the laws usually apply and must not be ignored just because they may fail outside of an extreme range. On the other hand, I'm amused by people who apply processes that occur in the Sun to what might happen in a cathode on Earth. This is an example using conditions that are way out of range. ** ** I do not believe CF should be considered to be outside of physics just because the hot fusion behavior is not detected. This is the basic error made by skeptics. Cold fusion is a new phenomenon that occurs only at low energy, which has not been explored before. The behavior has opened a new window into Nature. No conflict exists and no law of physics is violated. Nevertheless, some insight is missing. We need to find that insight. After all, that is what we were taught science was all about,. Obviously, some people slept through that lecture. ** ** Ed Storms ** ** ** ** ** ** On May 19, 2013, at 10:16 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Ed said: “*Some of these behaviors have been described in ways we call laws because the descriptions always apply.”* I would add the following ending to that statement for it to be precise:** ** “…because the descriptions always apply when experimental parameters are within the ranges established across all the replications.” If someone conducts an experiment, but cranks up parameter X to 1000 times what was used in all previous replications, there is no guarantee that the results will come out as expected. There are numerous examples where ‘laws’ failed when some parameter in the experiment was way beyond what had been tried before; where some critical threshold had been reached. I also have a problem with the use of the word ‘always’ in that statement; or in any statement for that matter. The now mature field of Chaos, Dissipative structures and Self-organizing systems, which grew out of Ilya Prigogine’s work, has shown how coherence can spontaneously form in an otherwise incoherent system, and there are many examples in science, including in chemistry and physics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organizing_system I agree for the most part with your desire to diligently apply the ‘laws’ of physics, however, there are some aspects of LENR which **potentially** place it outside the realm/range established from historical empirical results. As has been mentioned numerous times by LENR researchers, the rules of plasma physics may not apply in the condensed matter world that is LENR. -Mark *From:* Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.comstor...@ix.netcom.com ] *Sent:* Sunday, May 19, 2013 7:54 AM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Cc:* Edmund Storms *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness... *Mark, I agree that we do not know all we think we know and many rules can be violated when conditions change. Nevertheless, we do have a collection of observations that show how Nature behaves. Some of these behaviors have been described in ways we call laws because the descriptions always apply. Of course, a person has to understand what the law actually means. For example, I find that many people, even in science, do not understand what the Laws of Thermodynamics mean. This problem is especially notable in physicists. * *Also, I have observed that mathematicians can find a mathematical way to explain ANYTHING - just give them a few assumptions. This means that what we think we know is determined by the initial assumptions
