Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Roarty, Francis X]

Axil, OK, I am glad you see this as being “sent” into the temporal axis which 
is key to what I am saying because it unbalances COE. Normal random motion 
cannot be harnessed to power a Maxwellian demon because the random motion of 
gas always cancels in 3d…. In 4d it becomes possible and this is what is 
happening when you have different fractional values of hydrogen forming 
molecules while randomly walking through a tapestry of quantum geometry 
[Casimir geometry] the molecular bond is weakened by the change in inertial 
frame/ Casimir geometry whenever the level of vacuum suppression changes[DCE]… 
if the vacuum density changes enough then the molecule will disassociate from 
just the local ambient heat EVEN if the threshold is lower than the level where 
the molecule originally formed [OU].. sooo get the reactor/gas molecules near 
threshold temp and then let random motion walk them through a tapestry of DCE 
and you can have runaway reactions… provided the lattice is fully packed with 
fractional hydrogen which is the fuel preparation you have noted… and why I 
mentioned Lyons furnace and the MAHG. It is certainly more complicated than 
that to keep from exhausting or runaway scenarios ..probably some control over 
the h1/h2 populations and currents not yet studied.
Fran

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 3:51 PM
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

The vacuum may well be involved. When a meson is produced, a negative energy 
version of the meson must also be produced via a closed time loop. But this 
negative energy version(or anti particle) is sent back in time via the vacuum. 
This particle in the past must be discarded to preserve causality. So the 
vacuum act like a trash can to take care of the bad stuff produced by the LENR 
reaction.

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Bob Cook 
<frobertc...@hotmail.com<mailto:frobertc...@hotmail.com>> wrote:
Fran and Jones--

Thanks for those explanations.

However, I would bet that the US Patent Office would not agree with such an 
invention, if zero point energy were mentioned.  They would classify in the 
same category as perpetual motion machines.

Nevertheless, I understand from Fran’s comment that the positive kinetic energy 
“motion” of virtual particles in the vacuum are harnessed to provide potential 
energy to make heavy hydrogen, which in turn decays to a lower energy state via 
real EM radiation.  If the heavy hydrogen increased its size by increasing the 
kinetic energy of its electron, it would be an endothermic reaction I think and 
not what we are talking about.  Is this correct?

The endless reversible reaction Fran suggested would not seem to entail the 
release of EM radiation to heat the real surroundings, if energy is conserved 
between the vacuum and the real surroundings in a reversible reaction.

One other thought/question considering this thread—what dense hydrogen energy 
levels are involved in the reaction?  The lowest energy state and the highest 
one? or are there transitions between any of the dense hydrogen states?  If it 
were transitions between various energy states, one might expect to see a 
spectrum of EM  radiation from the Holmlid setup.

Bob Cook

From: Roarty, Francis X<mailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 12:08 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[snip] But in effect, if the hydrogen does not escape, the energy which can be 
extracted by chemistry is endless (if the source is the quantum vacuum).[/snip] 
which is why I tend to call it zero point energy since it is effectively 
harnessing random motion to move the hydrogen between the DCE regions that 
allow this endless chemical reversible reaction. Still very similar to the 
original premise behind Lyne atomic furnace and the MAHG..

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>]
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 2:53 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

From: Bob Cook

>

>  Fran and Jones suggested that the source of the excess energy described  by 
> Holmlid is of a chemical origin (electronic potential chemical energy of 
> dense hydrogen) and not nuclear potential energy long ago stored in the 
> reactants.

First part of answer: The Dynamical Casimir Effect was first observed in 2010. 
It is real, but that does not necessarily provide all the answers. The 
following is paraphrased from various sources.

The basic concept for LENR, is that the electronic chemical energy of dense 
hydrogen, with mass-energy in the range of 630 eV per H atom, is created by 
DCE. One way this can happen is when SPP interact with a Casimir cavity or pit. 
The electron becomes delocalized and possibly relativistic.

However, it is als

RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Roarty, Francis X]

This also fits reports of life after death lab explosions

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 3:10 PM
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

A comment on the THE FLEISCHMANN SINGULARITY as a clue to LERN reproducibility.

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-fleischmann-singularity.html#comment-form

Ed Storms can test materials until the cows come home withoul LENR responce 
because the key to LENR reproducibility is time.

It took the singuarity months to build up enough potential energy to become 
LENR active.

No replicator could get the the various types of LENR applictions to  work 
because of the tricky requirement for fuel preparation. We know now that the 
fuel used in LENR in all its forms must be prepared in a time intensive 
process. This preparation takes a lot of time and a lot of energy. The solitons 
that produce the LENR reaction hold a huge amount of energy.

The situation is like a car with a battery the size of a building. It takes a 
long time to pump power into that energy storage device before it becomes 
active enough to produce high grade power with a high enough “voltage”. This is 
what Holmlid tells us. He says that it takes weeks of applying Laser power 
before the catalyst he uses becomes active.

Lasers and dipoles don’t talk well together. Lasers produce plain waves at a 
single frequency and dipoles don’t take kindly to that type of EMF. An electron 
and a photon must have the same energy level to join together to become a 
polariton. That marriage needs a common energy level. Only a meager number of 
dipoles finely tuned to the exact frequency of the laser will become entangled. 
If there is lots of bumps and nanocavities, then the Laser light will become 
decoherent.

Decoherent light( from an arc that R. Mills uses in the Suncell) is best so 
that dipoles at any stage of development will become polaritons. A scattered 
shot cloud from a shotgun is better at downing a clay pigeon than a 22 is.

LENR replicators do not preprocess the fuel that they use and they don’t wait 
long enough for the LENR reaction to take hold. No one wants to invest the time 
and energy to properly prepare the fuel.

This is a lessen that we can draw from Joe Papp. No one understood the reason 
why he invented a fuel preparation process. If the Papp fuel was not 
preprocessed, the Papp engine would need to crank for a week before it kicked 
over. Papp knew he had to load a lot of energy into that fuel before it became 
active.


The various ways to inject energy into that fuel have differing power loading 
potential. Heat is the least effective method. Lasers seem to be somewhat more 
powerful but a few weeks to get the Holmlid fuel up to speed indicates to us 
that Laser power is marginal. Spark discharge and cavitation seem to be the 
most powerful method of power injection.

We can determine how long cavitation takes to charge up the LENR fuel by seeing 
how long it takes for gammas to appear after the pump is turned on in the 
LeClair reactor.

DGT could start their reaction in a few hours because an electric arc is a 
powerful source of incoherent EMF power.

Holmlid’s effect is difficult to duplicate because most replicators don’t have 
the patience to wait for weeks to see positive results.

The choice before the replicator is plainly stated; he can use a powerful 
source of incoherent energy or he could just wait for weeks while energy 
trickles into his power hungry fuel.

That said see the next post...


On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Stephen Cooke 
<stephen_coo...@hotmail.com<mailto:stephen_coo...@hotmail.com>> wrote:
It's a nice process you are describing, but I'm curious how it can generate the 
mesons reported by Holmlid? Is there some mechanism based on this idea where 
mesons are produced or can they only generated by very high energy interactions 
with nucleons and require much higher energies than you are describing here?
On 29 okt. 2015, at 19:53, Jones Beene 
<jone...@pacbell.net<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>> wrote:
From: Bob Cook

>

>  Fran and Jones suggested that the source of the excess energy described  by 
> Holmlid is of a chemical origin (electronic potential chemical energy of 
> dense hydrogen) and not nuclear potential energy long ago stored in the 
> reactants.

First part of answer: The Dynamical Casimir Effect was first observed in 2010. 
It is real, but that does not necessarily provide all the answers. The 
following is paraphrased from various sources.

The basic concept for LENR, is that the electronic chemical energy of dense 
hydrogen, with mass-energy in the range of 630 eV per H atom, is created by 
DCE. One way this can happen is when SPP interact with a Casimir cavity or pit. 
The electron becomes delocalized and possibly relativistic.

However, it is also demonstrated by Holmlid that dense hydrogen ca

[Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Bob Cook]

Bob-

I had the same question in mind about the Rydberg matter and DDL H or D that 
Jones was implying.  My neck is not as long as yours.  

That’s nice analysis--

The same drawing-together that you describe for D’s happens with any particle 
with none-integral spin as I know.  It is called Cooper Paring and is magnetic 
in its attraction.  I have long considered that D’s
pair up as Cooper Pairs in the Pd and or Ni FCC lattice structure.  They may 
act like a He nucleus and assemble in a BEC as a coherent mass in Holmlid’s 
“plasma” experiment.  The circulation that Holmlid describes carries with it 
angular momentum which can only change in small quanta of h/2pi.  However, if 
the electrons in the neighborhood of the circulating batch of D’s are coupled 
in a common magnetic field and are able to absorb small quanta on angular 
momentum—spin—they may act as a catalyst to remove potential energy from the 
system to form real He particles with their more stable configuration compared 
to the D Cooper Pairs.  

In effect there are electron capture reactions happening in the circulating 
mass with no high energy EM being emitted.   The reaction is fast, occurring in 
a coherent system, and is dependent upon appropriate resonant conditions, 
reflecting the FACT the whole BEC (circulating mass—”snow flake”) does not blow 
up. 

Without an effective catalyst in appropriate resonance, large quanta of angular 
momentum can not be exchanged, and, thus, a major high energy reaction is not 
possible in the coherent system.  

(Sometimes Nature may be nice to us.)

Bob Cook   


From: Bob Higgins 
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 9:11 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

Jones, I hate to stick my neck out here, but, I will say that the Holmlid 
Rydberg matter is the opposite of DDL.  DDL has the electron in an ultra-tight 
orbit around the nucleus, making it appear like a tiny composite neutral 
particle.  In Rydberg matter the electron is in a very large circular orbit 
(and by circular, I mean that the orbital is planar).  Here is a little of my 
understanding of Holmlid's Rydberg matter that I recently posted to an MFMP 
discussion site: 

I am still reading about Rydberg clusters and Holmlid technology.  What wasn't 
clear to me earlier was that the Rydberg matter that is created in the catalyst 
is a 6-fold symmetric planar cluster - sort of like a snowflake of atoms.  It 
is somewhere between a solid and a gas.  How many atoms does it take to leave 
the domain of molecule and become a solid powder particle dispersed to move 
like a gas?  It is said that once formed, these snowflake Rydberg clusters of 
atoms are quite robust and long-lived.  So, Holmlid's accumulation of D(0) on a 
surface probably comes from a self-assembling monolayer of the snowflakes over 
time.  I don't think the bonding for snowflake-on-top-of-snowflake is nearly as 
strong as a monolayer surface assemblage of snowflakes at the edges - they just 
become bigger snowflakes (all still hypothetical) like a puzzle with all 
hexagonal pieces.  I thought Winterberg's paper was wrong - he proposed it 
would only assemble in columns of snowflakes.
It appears that the evidence for the Rydberg clusters is detection of 
rotational spectra matching predictions from the modeled structure of the 
Rydberg cluster.  This is sort of funny (just to me) because I was doing 
microwave spectroscopy in my university physics lab at age 18 in 1973.  I was a 
lab assistant for my physics professor who was doing just what Holmlid 
describes - modeling molecular geometry, computing their rotational spectra, 
and then optimizing the model to match the real measured spectra.  Only, he was 
doing it for much smaller molecules and the spectrum is in the microwave bands, 
not around 100 MHz as Holmlid describes for the H(1) and D(1).  The frequency 
is lower because the rotational moments are huge compared to a small molecule.
So, as I am beginning to understand it, the hexagonal Rydberg clusters form on 
the catalyst, and they like to form on an oxide surface with magnetic 
properties (on an Fe2O3 surface for example).  Then they are sort of blown off 
into the rarefied gas/vacuum, and randomly self-assemble on the surface of a 
metal oxide to form a monolayer film whose lateral dimensions grow with time.  
Note that creation of the Rydberg clusters should be exothermic because the 
reason the monatomic H/D form into a cluster is that it is a lower energy state 
for the group of atoms as a whole to form the cluster - as compared to 
remaining monatomic.  The catalyst provides H2 splitting and an environment 
where the planar cluster favorably forms around it.  The catalyst must also be 
able to remove the heat of formation of the cluster.


It is strange to talk about "density" of atoms with something that I believe 
will only form a monolayer.  What I am describing is the H(1) and D(1) state.  
In this state, the atoms

[Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Bob Cook]

Robin--

Search for Time Variation of the Fine Structure Constant
John K. Webb, Victor V. Flambaum, Christopher W. Churchill, Michael J. 
Drinkwater, and John D. Barrow

Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 884 – Published 1 February 1999

This item suggests that the fine constant varies with time.  It may be that 
relativistic conditions and time contraction cause small changes in the 
constant effective for any coherent system.


Bob Cook

-Original Message- 
From: mix...@bigpond.com

Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 11:36 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Thu, 29 Oct 2015 18:34:31 -0700:
Hi Jones,

I'm not sure I really have a premise. Basically, I'm just juggling numbers 
to
see what happens. However in the back of my mind is the relationship between 
the

fundamental particles of the particle zoo that seems to turn on the fine
structure constant (recently referenced here, but I forget which paper).
The coincidence is just too great. The value of the fine structure constant 
has
to come from a fundamental property of the space time continuum, and I can't 
but
help get the feeling that if we understood it properly many things would 
fall

into place.


-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com

The binding energy of the H2 molecule is 4.519 eV. Divide this by the fine
structure constant and you get 619.236 eV. Add some due to the increased
binding energy of magnetic attraction between the nuclei at close quarters.

Hi Robin,

It's not clear whether the hydrogen molecule would shrink as a unit, which
seems to be your premise - with both electrons acting together ... or
alternatively, each monatomic atom is reduced individually. My impression 
is

that it is an individual action, not the molecule. Later, the dense atoms
collect into clusters - but 2 is not a favored cluster size.

My mental image is clouded by 25 years of following Mills theory, which is
quite different in the details. However, one wonders if the two can be
reconciled somehow. And also- does anyone know if Meulenberg has tried to
reconcile Holmlid's species with the DDL ? These concepts are all similar,
and all well thought-out and vetted to some degree - but Holmlid is the
relative newcomer - now getting all of the attention.

The long-hidden model with all the answers to the LENR conundrum seems like
it is trying to come out into the open. Hopefully we can expedite that by
cherry-picking the best details without giving deference to anyone (except
perhaps Dirac). Perhaps you are already trying to reconcile all of these.




Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Stephen Cooke]

That was strange my phone sent that before I finished writing. 

If Holmlid's results are not a measurement error then I'm not sure if cosmic 
mouns could explain the quantity mesons generated together.

I'm not really fixed on any particular ideas I like reading all of them, and 
have plenty more to learn. I still have not really understood R Mills Hydrinos 
for example. I suspect and think evidence is pointing to a particular blend of 
chemical, material, condensed matter, nano particle effects, phonon resonance, 
entanglement, SPP, EM, nucleus and even sub nucleon effects. Possibly even 
more. An unusual blend of even simple effects seems more likely to me than one 
complex idea. If it took a common blend of conditions and processes we would 
see it more commonly around us. 

Could it be there are several layers to LENR, and once the first one is 
fulfilled more complex or energetic versions become possible. Once we have 
sufficient loading of Hydrogen and the Ultra dense material produced, and once 
a sufficient and appropriate resonance is set up for example. Perhaps your idea 
of energy from the vacuum is an initial process that already produces 
noticeable effects from relatively low energy. Could the energy generated in 
such a system feed Axil type SPP on the surface of the UDD which at some level 
produce more energetic LENR effects that themselves feed back in to the process 
that eventually have sufficient energy to produce very energetic effects such 
as Phi Meson Production leading to Kaons through nucleon interactions or 
Hadronisation effects and cause nuclear disintegration reported by Holmlid. 
Which liberates enough energy to sustain the reaction in some cases. Leading to 
the very high temperature burn out events that have been reported. 

Perhaps there are other and better combinations of increasing energy effects 
each lower energy effect opening the door to the next more energetic one.

> On 30 Oct 2015, at 14:26, Stephen Cooke  wrote:
> 
> I did mention cosmic muons but I also be remember reading that they have been 
> mentioned elsewhere in the past i
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On 29 Oct 2015, at 21:25, Jones Beene  wrote:
>> 
>> From: Stephen Cooke
>>  
>> Ø  It's a nice process you are describing, but I'm curious how it can 
>> generate the mesons reported by Holmlid? Is there some mechanism based on 
>> this idea where mesons are produced or can they only generated by very high 
>> energy interactions with nucleons and require much higher energies than you 
>> are describing here?
>> 
>> I am somewhat in Eric’s camp on the mesons, kaons and so on, which could be 
>> misidentified and/or have other explanations. The important detail in 
>> Holmlid’s work seems to be the clusters of dense hydrogen, and how to make 
>> them… That and the elegance of finding a way to make clusters of hydrogen on 
>> an inexpensive catalyst, with very high chemical binding energy.
>> 
>> The mesons etc. which are claimed to be present could be related to cosmic 
>> rays – and/or to a hidden feature of dense hydrogen, such as having a large 
>> capture cross-section for muons, neutrinos or other exotica. Didn’t you 
>> mention that ? Plus – the sharpness of the laser pulse can cause the 
>> occasional nuclear reaction in normal deuterium, even if there was no dense 
>> RM. Certainly the dense clusters would seem to make an ideal target for ICF 
>> fusion. I am quite happy to leave all of that to the National Labs, in favor 
>> of focusing on the low end. That would mean gamma free.
>> 
>> All of the high energy results, if accurate, are icing on the cake. The 
>> “cake” in this metaphor, would be … finally … a valid explanation for the 
>> “real LENR,” with emphasis on “low energy.” If the thermal gain can be 
>> understood as chemical, with no gamma and little transmutation – then that 
>> is the huge benefit of Holmlid’s work.
>> 
>>  
>>  

Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Stephen Cooke]

I did mention cosmic muons but I also be remember reading that they have been 
mentioned elsewhere in the past i
Sent from my iPhone

> On 29 Oct 2015, at 21:25, Jones Beene  wrote:
> 
> From: Stephen Cooke
>  
> Ø  It's a nice process you are describing, but I'm curious how it can 
> generate the mesons reported by Holmlid? Is there some mechanism based on 
> this idea where mesons are produced or can they only generated by very high 
> energy interactions with nucleons and require much higher energies than you 
> are describing here?
> 
> I am somewhat in Eric’s camp on the mesons, kaons and so on, which could be 
> misidentified and/or have other explanations. The important detail in 
> Holmlid’s work seems to be the clusters of dense hydrogen, and how to make 
> them… That and the elegance of finding a way to make clusters of hydrogen on 
> an inexpensive catalyst, with very high chemical binding energy.
> 
> The mesons etc. which are claimed to be present could be related to cosmic 
> rays – and/or to a hidden feature of dense hydrogen, such as having a large 
> capture cross-section for muons, neutrinos or other exotica. Didn’t you 
> mention that ? Plus – the sharpness of the laser pulse can cause the 
> occasional nuclear reaction in normal deuterium, even if there was no dense 
> RM. Certainly the dense clusters would seem to make an ideal target for ICF 
> fusion. I am quite happy to leave all of that to the National Labs, in favor 
> of focusing on the low end. That would mean gamma free.
> 
> All of the high energy results, if accurate, are icing on the cake. The 
> “cake” in this metaphor, would be … finally … a valid explanation for the 
> “real LENR,” with emphasis on “low energy.” If the thermal gain can be 
> understood as chemical, with no gamma and little transmutation – then that is 
> the huge benefit of Holmlid’s work.
> 
>  
>  

[Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Bob Cook]

Could there  be  Cooper pairs of H's that form a molecule made up of two
such pairs?   It would be something like an incipient He-4 nucleus which
appears  upon capture of two electrons.   The mechanism for the release of
the excess energy without hot EM radiation is a question.   It seems the
energy  must occur in small EM increments with resonant capture or phonic
absorption by the metal lattice or the plasma in the Holmlid experiment.
Magnetic fields coordinated with the directionality of the lasers in the
Holmlid experiment may be important in resonant coupling, whatever the
mechanism is.

Such directional coupling is necessary in NMR reactions  to achieve the
small energy transitions that occur.

Bob Cook

-Original Message- 
From: Jones Beene

Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 6:34 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com

The binding energy of the H2 molecule is 4.519 eV. Divide this by the fine
structure constant and you get 619.236 eV. Add some due to the increased
binding energy of magnetic attraction between the nuclei at close quarters.

Hi Robin,

It's not clear whether the hydrogen molecule would shrink as a unit, which
seems to be your premise - with both electrons acting together ... or
alternatively, each monatomic atom is reduced individually. My impression is
that it is an individual action, not the molecule. Later, the dense atoms
collect into clusters - but 2 is not a favored cluster size.

My mental image is clouded by 25 years of following Mills theory, which is
quite different in the details. However, one wonders if the two can be
reconciled somehow. And also- does anyone know if Meulenberg has tried to
reconcile Holmlid's species with the DDL ? These concepts are all similar,
and all well thought-out and vetted to some degree - but Holmlid is the
relative newcomer - now getting all of the attention.

The long-hidden model with all the answers to the LENR conundrum seems like
it is trying to come out into the open. Hopefully we can expedite that by
cherry-picking the best details without giving deference to anyone (except
perhaps Dirac). Perhaps you are already trying to reconcile all of these.

[Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Bob Cook]

Eric-- I response to your Friday, October 30, 2015 11:44 AM comment:

One would think that as space expands the permittivity or the magnetic 
permeability it exhibits could also change assuming something is changing 
dimensionally.   The idea that space only expands between galaxies and not 
within galaxies seems strange.  So in a thought experiment performed in between 
galaxies one might expect to see normally stable atoms give up energy as the 
distances between their charges expand. However, I do not think this has been 
observed in inter galactic space dust.  At what set of conditions the expansion 
of space stops as a galaxy is approached is not clear to me.  

No change in the electric or magnetic properties of free space would suggest 
that the parameter involved in the expansion of space does not effect electric 
and magnetic properties.  Considering  the particle nature of photons, with 
their alternating, locally orthogonal  electric and magnetic fields, would not 
be bothered by the expanding space.

Bob Cook
   



From: Eric Walker 
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2015 11:44 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote:


  This item suggests that the fine constant varies with time.  It may be that 
relativistic conditions and time contraction cause small changes in the 
constant effective for any coherent system.


If the fine structure constant is eventually found to vary in time, perhaps the 
first order in the variation goes back to a single component.  Here are 
different versions of the fine structure constant:




Here is a breakdown of the components from Wikipedia (translated to ascii for 
those with old email clients):


  e is the elementary charge;
  h_bar = h/2π is the reduced Planck constant;
  c is the speed of light in vacuum;
  e0 is the electric constant or permittivity of free space;
  u0 is the magnetic constant or permeability of free space;
  ke is the Coulomb constant;
  RK is the von Klitzing constant.

I've long wondered whether the speed of light might not be constant.  I see 
that what the study reported were limits on the possible variation, although 
the abstract said that their limits were consistent with a variation.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Eric Walker]

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Bob Cook  wrote:

This item suggests that the fine constant varies with time.  It may be that
> relativistic conditions and time contraction cause small changes in the
> constant effective for any coherent system.
>

If the fine structure constant is eventually found to vary in time, perhaps
the first order in the variation goes back to a single component.  Here are
different versions of the fine structure constant:

[image: Inline image 1]

Here is a breakdown of the components from Wikipedia (translated to ascii
for those with old email clients):

e is the elementary charge;
h_bar = h/2π is the reduced Planck constant;
c is the speed of light in vacuum;
e0 is the electric constant or permittivity of free space;
u0 is the magnetic constant or permeability of free space;
ke is the Coulomb constant;
RK is the von Klitzing constant.


I've long wondered whether the speed of light might not be constant.  I see
that what the study reported were limits on the possible variation,
although the abstract said that their limits were consistent with a
variation.

Eric

[Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Bob Cook]

Casimir, ZPE and HolmlidFran and Jones--

Jones has suggested that the source of the excess energy described  by Holmlid 
is of a chemical origin (electronic potential chemical energy of dense 
hydrogen) and not nuclear potential energy long ago stored in the reactants.   

Is the assumption that the laser pre-conditioning of the materials in the 
Holmlid setup allowed the increase in potential energy of the reactants which 
then is later released as EM radiation and hence heat?

I ask this question not fully understanding the ultimate source of the thermal 
energy coming from the Holmlid experiment.  

Maybe one of you could explain the energy balance,  i.e., where the excess 
energy comes from?

Bob Cook

From: Roarty, Francis X 
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 5:37 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

Jones, I’ve never thought that the underlying force would be otherwise.  Still 
suspect everyone underrates the energy potential of vacuum engineering. The 
window you mention of 2 to 12 nm may be where the most energy exchange occurs 
but I am convinced that fractional hydrogen can continue to shrink far below 
this scale via relativistic inertial frames where it continues to disassociate 
and re-associate normally from it’s perspective but as a quantum function of 
ever decreasing surrounding geometry..a sort of nested Casimir effect where 
groups of already fractional atoms align to induce the Casimir effect on even 
more fractional hydrogen.. if I am correct about Casimir effect being 
relativistic then the effect is unaware of the nesting.. it is just the Casimir 
effect again from the perspective of a different inertial frame formed by the 
initial Casimir effect. Mills self catalyzing hydrogen?

Fran

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 8:37 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

 

As most vorticians appreciate (since this value simplifies many calculations) 
the mass-energy of a photon at a unit wavelength = 1nm =1240 eV. The Casimir 
force anomaly operates at a geometry between 2 and 12 nm. There is a severe 
drop-off in the effect at either end of that range, so we can be fairly sure of 
the origins of anomalous energy signatures which fall within it.

This indicates that the most intense photon which can be derived from the 
Casimir force (which would operate as a boost in energy on a trapped photon) in 
a Casimir cavity of the optimum size for DCE (Dynamical Casimir Effect) is 
about 620 eV – a soft x-ray.

As fate would have it, Holmlid believes and has published that the densest form 
of dense hydrogen which fits within his experiments, appears to be bound at 630 
eV, which is well within the margin of error for the maximum from DCE 
(Dynamical Casimir Effect) at 620. This could indicate a surprising avenue for 
finding the source of the anomaly – which even Holmlid does not now recognize.

And furthermore, this leave open the strong possibility that the thermal gain 
in LENR – in fact 100% of the claimed thermal gain, can be realized from 
chemical energy alone. This conclusion intentionally disregards experiments 
with laser input, or with disintegration of nucleons, or with nuclear fusion 
evidenced by gamma rays. IOW, all of the gain in LENR where no gamma is seen as 
evidence of the reaction, can be solely attributable to a known non-nuclear 
physical phenomenon – which is the dynamical version of the Casimir force.

630 eV and 620 eV… hmmm… Coincidence, or no ??

Dunno for sure… and it is just an observation, for now… but I do suspect: it is 
too close not to consider the implications of a chemical gain nexus, which is 
due to dense hydrogen chemical bonds being manipulate for net gain by the 
Casimir effect.

Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Stephen Cooke]

So if the SPP is able to accumulate sufficient energy it is able to generate 
neutral mesons or signed meson pairs, for example if more than 1 GeV it may 
generate a Phi meson with conserved states which then quickly decays to the 
kaons and then the other mesons seen by Holmlid? 

Would it generate these mesons directly from the SPP or indirectly by 
stimulating nucleon resonance through the magnetic beam anapole you mentioned 
recently?

Sent from my iPad

> On 29 okt. 2015, at 20:18, Axil Axil  wrote:
> 
> There is a SPP condensate involved. When UV kight is absorbed by the 
> condensate, all the photons are concentrated to a few SPPs who form it into a 
> meson. When there are more photons as provided in a laser shot, more SPPs can 
> form particles from the  "SHARED" energy. The condensate is an energy 
> concentration device using super absorption where incoming photons produce 
> particles via specific SPP members of the condensate. This is how a laser 
> works.
> 
>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>> A comment on the THE FLEISCHMANN SINGULARITY as a clue to LERN 
>> reproducibility.
>> 
>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-fleischmann-singularity.html#comment-form
>> 
>> Ed Storms can test materials until the cows come home withoul LENR responce 
>> because the key to LENR reproducibility is time.
>> 
>> It took the singuarity months to build up enough potential energy to become 
>> LENR active.
>> 
>> No replicator could get the the various types of LENR applictions to  work 
>> because of the tricky requirement for fuel preparation. We know now that the 
>> fuel used in LENR in all its forms must be prepared in a time intensive 
>> process. This preparation takes a lot of time and a lot of energy. The 
>> solitons that produce the LENR reaction hold a huge amount of energy.
>> 
>> The situation is like a car with a battery the size of a building. It takes 
>> a long time to pump power into that energy storage device before it becomes 
>> active enough to produce high grade power with a high enough “voltage”. This 
>> is what Holmlid tells us. He says that it takes weeks of applying Laser 
>> power before the catalyst he uses becomes active.
>> 
>> Lasers and dipoles don’t talk well together. Lasers produce plain waves at a 
>> single frequency and dipoles don’t take kindly to that type of EMF. An 
>> electron and a photon must have the same energy level to join together to 
>> become a polariton. That marriage needs a common energy level. Only a meager 
>> number of dipoles finely tuned to the exact frequency of the laser will 
>> become entangled. If there is lots of bumps and nanocavities, then the Laser 
>> light will become decoherent.
>> 
>> Decoherent light( from an arc that R. Mills uses in the Suncell) is best so 
>> that dipoles at any stage of development will become polaritons. A scattered 
>> shot cloud from a shotgun is better at downing a clay pigeon than a 22 is.
>> 
>> LENR replicators do not preprocess the fuel that they use and they don’t 
>> wait long enough for the LENR reaction to take hold. No one wants to invest 
>> the time and energy to properly prepare the fuel.
>> 
>> This is a lessen that we can draw from Joe Papp. No one understood the 
>> reason why he invented a fuel preparation process. If the Papp fuel was not 
>> preprocessed, the Papp engine would need to crank for a week before it 
>> kicked over. Papp knew he had to load a lot of energy into that fuel before 
>> it became active.
>> 
>> 
>> The various ways to inject energy into that fuel have differing power 
>> loading potential. Heat is the least effective method. Lasers seem to be 
>> somewhat more powerful but a few weeks to get the Holmlid fuel up to speed 
>> indicates to us that Laser power is marginal. Spark discharge and cavitation 
>> seem to be the most powerful method of power injection.
>> 
>> We can determine how long cavitation takes to charge up the LENR fuel by 
>> seeing how long it takes for gammas to appear after the pump is turned on in 
>> the LeClair reactor.
>> 
>> DGT could start their reaction in a few hours because an electric arc is a 
>> powerful source of incoherent EMF power.
>> 
>> Holmlid’s effect is difficult to duplicate because most replicators don’t 
>> have the patience to wait for weeks to see positive results.
>> 
>> The choice before the replicator is plainly stated; he can use a powerful 
>> source of incoherent energy or he could just wait for weeks while energy 
>> trickles into his power hungry fuel.
>> 
>> That said see the next post...
>> 
>> 
>>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Stephen Cooke  
>>> wrote:
>>> It's a nice process you are describing, but I'm curious how it can generate 
>>> the mesons reported by Holmlid? Is there some mechanism based on this idea 
>>> where mesons are produced or can they only generated by very high energy 
>>> interactions with 

Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Axil Axil]

Holmlid said that a brief exposure of the catalyst to room light produces a
limited number of mesons. So it sounds like all the photons from the room
light are concentrated to only a few SPPs.

SPPs produce particles like Hawking radiation. It is called hadronization.

See page 8 in this article

http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0507219v3.pdf

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Stephen Cooke 
wrote:

> So if the SPP is able to accumulate sufficient energy it is able to
> generate neutral mesons or signed meson pairs, for example if more than 1
> GeV it may generate a Phi meson with conserved states which then quickly
> decays to the kaons and then the other mesons seen by Holmlid?
>
> Would it generate these mesons directly from the SPP or indirectly by
> stimulating nucleon resonance through the magnetic beam anapole you
> mentioned recently?
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 29 okt. 2015, at 20:18, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
> There is a SPP condensate involved. When UV kight is absorbed by the
> condensate, all the photons are concentrated to a few SPPs who form it into
> a meson. When there are more photons as provided in a laser shot, more SPPs
> can form particles from the  "SHARED" energy. The condensate is an energy
> concentration device using super absorption where incoming photons produce
> particles via specific SPP members of the condensate. This is how a laser
> works.
>
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> A comment on the THE FLEISCHMANN SINGULARITY as a clue to LERN
>> reproducibility.
>>
>>
>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-fleischmann-singularity.html#comment-form
>>
>> Ed Storms can test materials until the cows come home withoul LENR
>> responce because the key to LENR reproducibility is time.
>>
>> It took the singuarity months to build up enough potential energy to
>> become LENR active.
>>
>> No replicator could get the the various types of LENR applictions to
>>  work because of the tricky requirement for fuel preparation. We know now
>> that the fuel used in LENR in all its forms must be prepared in a time
>> intensive process. This preparation takes a lot of time and a lot of
>> energy. The solitons that produce the LENR reaction hold a huge amount of
>> energy.
>>
>> The situation is like a car with a battery the size of a building. It
>> takes a long time to pump power into that energy storage device before it
>> becomes active enough to produce high grade power with a high enough
>> “voltage”. This is what Holmlid tells us. He says that it takes weeks of
>> applying Laser power before the catalyst he uses becomes active.
>>
>> Lasers and dipoles don’t talk well together. Lasers produce plain waves
>> at a single frequency and dipoles don’t take kindly to that type of EMF. An
>> electron and a photon must have the same energy level to join together to
>> become a polariton. That marriage needs a common energy level. Only a
>> meager number of dipoles finely tuned to the exact frequency of the laser
>> will become entangled. If there is lots of bumps and nanocavities, then the
>> Laser light will become decoherent.
>>
>> Decoherent light( from an arc that R. Mills uses in the Suncell) is best
>> so that dipoles at any stage of development will become polaritons. A
>> scattered shot cloud from a shotgun is better at downing a clay pigeon than
>> a 22 is.
>>
>> LENR replicators do not preprocess the fuel that they use and they don’t
>> wait long enough for the LENR reaction to take hold. No one wants to invest
>> the time and energy to properly prepare the fuel.
>>
>> This is a lessen that we can draw from Joe Papp. No one understood the
>> reason why he invented a fuel preparation process. If the Papp fuel was not
>> preprocessed, the Papp engine would need to crank for a week before it
>> kicked over. Papp knew he had to load a lot of energy into that fuel before
>> it became active.
>>
>>
>> The various ways to inject energy into that fuel have differing power
>> loading potential. Heat is the least effective method. Lasers seem to be
>> somewhat more powerful but a few weeks to get the Holmlid fuel up to speed
>> indicates to us that Laser power is marginal. Spark discharge and
>> cavitation seem to be the most powerful method of power injection.
>>
>> We can determine how long cavitation takes to charge up the LENR fuel by
>> seeing how long it takes for gammas to appear after the pump is turned on
>> in the LeClair reactor.
>>
>> DGT could start their reaction in a few hours because an electric arc is
>> a powerful source of incoherent EMF power.
>>
>> Holmlid’s effect is difficult to duplicate because most replicators don’t
>> have the patience to wait for weeks to see positive results.
>>
>> The choice before the replicator is plainly stated; he can use a powerful
>> source of incoherent energy or he could just wait for weeks while energy
>> trickles into his power hungry fuel.
>>
>> That 

Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Axil Axil]

"one might expect to see a spectrum of EM  radiation from the Holmlid
setup."

All the mesons produce will be identically the same. This is seen in the
Holmlid meson decay timing. All the mesons hit the detector at the same
instant.

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The vacuum may well be involved. When a meson is produced, a negative
> energy version of the meson must also be produced via a closed time loop.
> But this negative energy version(or anti particle) is sent back in time via
> the vacuum. This particle in the past must be discarded to preserve
> causality. So the vacuum act like a trash can to take care of the bad stuff
> produced by the LENR reaction.
>
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Fran and Jones--
>>
>> Thanks for those explanations.
>>
>> However, I would bet that the US Patent Office would not agree with such
>> an invention, if zero point energy were mentioned.  They would classify in
>> the same category as perpetual motion machines.
>>
>> Nevertheless, I understand from Fran’s comment that the positive kinetic
>> energy “motion” of virtual particles in the vacuum are harnessed to provide
>> potential energy to make heavy hydrogen, which in turn decays to a lower
>> energy state via real EM radiation.  If the heavy hydrogen increased its
>> size by increasing the kinetic energy of its electron, it would be an
>> endothermic reaction I think and not what we are talking about.  Is this
>> correct?
>>
>> The endless reversible reaction Fran suggested would not seem to entail
>> the release of EM radiation to heat the real surroundings, if energy is
>> conserved between the vacuum and the real surroundings in a reversible
>> reaction.
>>
>> One other thought/question considering this thread—what dense hydrogen
>> energy levels are involved in the reaction?  The lowest energy state and
>> the highest one? or are there transitions between any of the dense hydrogen
>> states?  If it were transitions between various energy states, one might
>> expect to see a spectrum of EM  radiation from the Holmlid setup.
>>
>> Bob Cook
>>
>> *From:* Roarty, Francis X <francis.x.roa...@lmco.com>
>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 29, 2015 12:08 PM
>> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> *Subject:* RE: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid
>>
>>
>> [snip] But in effect, if the hydrogen does not escape, the energy which
>> can be extracted by chemistry is endless (if the source is the quantum
>> vacuum).[/snip] which is why I tend to call it zero point energy since it
>> is effectively harnessing random motion to move the hydrogen between the
>> DCE regions that allow this endless chemical reversible reaction. Still
>> very similar to the original premise behind Lyne atomic furnace and the
>> MAHG..
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 29, 2015 2:53 PM
>> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> *Subject:* EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Bob Cook
>>
>> Ø
>>
>> Ø  Fran and Jones suggested that the source of the excess energy
>> described  by Holmlid is of a chemical origin (electronic potential
>> chemical energy of dense hydrogen) and not nuclear potential energy long
>> ago stored in the reactants.
>>
>>
>>
>> First part of answer: The Dynamical Casimir Effect was first observed in
>> 2010. It is real, but that does not necessarily provide all the answers.
>> The following is paraphrased from various sources.
>>
>>
>>
>> The basic concept for LENR, is that the electronic chemical energy of
>> dense hydrogen, with mass-energy in the range of 630 eV per H atom, is
>> created by DCE. One way this can happen is when SPP interact with a Casimir
>> cavity or pit. The electron becomes delocalized and possibly relativistic.
>>
>>
>>
>> However, it is also demonstrated by Holmlid that dense hydrogen can
>> produce strong nuclear or sub-nuclear gain in other circumstances, aside
>> from chemistry. Whenever gamma radiation is seen in an experiment, it is a
>> good indication of the “other circumstances”. The DCE modality only applies
>> to gain from chemistry and electron manipulation. The soft x-rays are easy
>> to miss.
>>
>>
>>
>> One of the predictions of modern quantum theory is that the vacuum of
>> space is not empty. In fact, quantum theory predicts that it teems with
>> virtual par

Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Stephen Cooke]

It's a nice process you are describing, but I'm curious how it can generate the 
mesons reported by Holmlid? Is there some mechanism based on this idea where 
mesons are produced or can they only generated by very high energy interactions 
with nucleons and require much higher energies than you are describing here?

> On 29 okt. 2015, at 19:53, Jones Beene  wrote:
> 
> From: Bob Cook
> Ø 
> Ø  Fran and Jones suggested that the source of the excess energy described  
> by Holmlid is of a chemical origin (electronic potential chemical energy of 
> dense hydrogen) and not nuclear potential energy long ago stored in the 
> reactants.  
>  
> First part of answer: The Dynamical Casimir Effect was first observed in 
> 2010. It is real, but that does not necessarily provide all the answers. The 
> following is paraphrased from various sources.
>  
> The basic concept for LENR, is that the electronic chemical energy of dense 
> hydrogen, with mass-energy in the range of 630 eV per H atom, is created by 
> DCE. One way this can happen is when SPP interact with a Casimir cavity or 
> pit. The electron becomes delocalized and possibly relativistic.
>  
> However, it is also demonstrated by Holmlid that dense hydrogen can produce 
> strong nuclear or sub-nuclear gain in other circumstances, aside from 
> chemistry. Whenever gamma radiation is seen in an experiment, it is a good 
> indication of the “other circumstances”. The DCE modality only applies to 
> gain from chemistry and electron manipulation. The soft x-rays are easy to 
> miss.
>  
> One of the predictions of modern quantum theory is that the vacuum of space 
> is not empty. In fact, quantum theory predicts that it teems with virtual 
> particles foaming in and out of existence. While initially a curiosity, it 
> was quickly realized that vacuum fluctuations had measurable consequences, 
> for instance producing the Lamb shift and modifying the magnetic moment for 
> the electron… and in Casimir force.
>  
> This type of renormalization due to vacuum fluctuations is now central to our 
> understanding of nature….From early on, it was believed that it might be 
> possible to more directly observe the virtual particles that compose the 
> quantum vacuum, or convert them to real particles. 40 years ago, Moore 
> suggested that a mirror undergoing relativistic motion could convert virtual 
> photons into directly observable real photons. This effect was later named 
> the dynamical Casimir effect (DCE)…. we have observed the DCE experimentally 
> for the first time in 2011…. In addition to observing the creation of real 
> photons, the discoverers found two-mode squeezing of the emitted radiation, 
> which is a signature of the quantum character of the generation process. End 
> of paraphrase.
> Ø 
> Ø  Is the assumption that the laser pre-conditioning of the materials in the 
> Holmlid setup allowed the increase in potential energy of the reactants which 
> then is later released as EM radiation and hence heat?
>  
> Yes. Most likely there would be a multi-stage process where the laser (or 
> another light source) creates SPPs over time, which then interact with 
> hydrogen in a Casimir cavity of 2-12 nm in dimensions. As it turns out, Shell 
> 105 catalyst is extraordinarily nanoporous. Like a zeolite, but 
> ferromagnetic. Curiously, Holmlid fails to realize this porosity connection.
>  
> The net effect is that the electron which once had ionization potential of 
> 13.6 eV in the ground state has been boosted to 630 eV of binding energy by 
> the DCE. This is an energy increase of about 46:1 per atom and it is 
> chemical. But in effect, if the hydrogen does not escape, the energy which 
> can be extracted by chemistry is endless (if the source is the quantum 
> vacuum).
>  
>  

RE: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Roarty, Francis X]

[snip] But in effect, if the hydrogen does not escape, the energy which can be 
extracted by chemistry is endless (if the source is the quantum vacuum).[/snip] 
which is why I tend to call it zero point energy since it is effectively 
harnessing random motion to move the hydrogen between the DCE regions that 
allow this endless chemical reversible reaction. Still very similar to the 
original premise behind Lyne atomic furnace and the MAHG..

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 2:53 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

From: Bob Cook

Ø

Ø  Fran and Jones suggested that the source of the excess energy described  by 
Holmlid is of a chemical origin (electronic potential chemical energy of dense 
hydrogen) and not nuclear potential energy long ago stored in the reactants.

First part of answer: The Dynamical Casimir Effect was first observed in 2010. 
It is real, but that does not necessarily provide all the answers. The 
following is paraphrased from various sources.

The basic concept for LENR, is that the electronic chemical energy of dense 
hydrogen, with mass-energy in the range of 630 eV per H atom, is created by 
DCE. One way this can happen is when SPP interact with a Casimir cavity or pit. 
The electron becomes delocalized and possibly relativistic.

However, it is also demonstrated by Holmlid that dense hydrogen can produce 
strong nuclear or sub-nuclear gain in other circumstances, aside from 
chemistry. Whenever gamma radiation is seen in an experiment, it is a good 
indication of the “other circumstances”. The DCE modality only applies to gain 
from chemistry and electron manipulation. The soft x-rays are easy to miss.

One of the predictions of modern quantum theory is that the vacuum of space is 
not empty. In fact, quantum theory predicts that it teems with virtual 
particles foaming in and out of existence. While initially a curiosity, it was 
quickly realized that vacuum fluctuations had measurable consequences, for 
instance producing the Lamb shift and modifying the magnetic moment for the 
electron… and in Casimir force.

This type of renormalization due to vacuum fluctuations is now central to our 
understanding of nature….From early on, it was believed that it might be 
possible to more directly observe the virtual particles that compose the 
quantum vacuum, or convert them to real particles. 40 years ago, Moore 
suggested that a mirror undergoing relativistic motion could convert virtual 
photons into directly observable real photons. This effect was later named the 
dynamical Casimir effect (DCE)…. we have observed the DCE experimentally for 
the first time in 2011…. In addition to observing the creation of real photons, 
the discoverers found two-mode squeezing of the emitted radiation, which is a 
signature of the quantum character of the generation process. End of paraphrase.

Ø

Ø  Is the assumption that the laser pre-conditioning of the materials in the 
Holmlid setup allowed the increase in potential energy of the reactants which 
then is later released as EM radiation and hence heat?

Yes. Most likely there would be a multi-stage process where the laser (or 
another light source) creates SPPs over time, which then interact with hydrogen 
in a Casimir cavity of 2-12 nm in dimensions. As it turns out, Shell 105 
catalyst is extraordinarily nanoporous. Like a zeolite, but ferromagnetic. 
Curiously, Holmlid fails to realize this porosity connection.

The net effect is that the electron which once had ionization potential of 13.6 
eV in the ground state has been boosted to 630 eV of binding energy by the DCE. 
This is an energy increase of about 46:1 per atom and it is chemical. But in 
effect, if the hydrogen does not escape, the energy which can be extracted by 
chemistry is endless (if the source is the quantum vacuum).

Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Axil Axil]

There is a SPP condensate involved. When UV kight is absorbed by the
condensate, all the photons are concentrated to a few SPPs who form it into
a meson. When there are more photons as provided in a laser shot, more SPPs
can form particles from the  "SHARED" energy. The condensate is an energy
concentration device using super absorption where incoming photons produce
particles via specific SPP members of the condensate. This is how a laser
works.

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> A comment on the THE FLEISCHMANN SINGULARITY as a clue to LERN
> reproducibility.
>
>
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-fleischmann-singularity.html#comment-form
>
> Ed Storms can test materials until the cows come home withoul LENR
> responce because the key to LENR reproducibility is time.
>
> It took the singuarity months to build up enough potential energy to
> become LENR active.
>
> No replicator could get the the various types of LENR applictions to  work
> because of the tricky requirement for fuel preparation. We know now that
> the fuel used in LENR in all its forms must be prepared in a time intensive
> process. This preparation takes a lot of time and a lot of energy. The
> solitons that produce the LENR reaction hold a huge amount of energy.
>
> The situation is like a car with a battery the size of a building. It
> takes a long time to pump power into that energy storage device before it
> becomes active enough to produce high grade power with a high enough
> “voltage”. This is what Holmlid tells us. He says that it takes weeks of
> applying Laser power before the catalyst he uses becomes active.
>
> Lasers and dipoles don’t talk well together. Lasers produce plain waves at
> a single frequency and dipoles don’t take kindly to that type of EMF. An
> electron and a photon must have the same energy level to join together to
> become a polariton. That marriage needs a common energy level. Only a
> meager number of dipoles finely tuned to the exact frequency of the laser
> will become entangled. If there is lots of bumps and nanocavities, then the
> Laser light will become decoherent.
>
> Decoherent light( from an arc that R. Mills uses in the Suncell) is best
> so that dipoles at any stage of development will become polaritons. A
> scattered shot cloud from a shotgun is better at downing a clay pigeon than
> a 22 is.
>
> LENR replicators do not preprocess the fuel that they use and they don’t
> wait long enough for the LENR reaction to take hold. No one wants to invest
> the time and energy to properly prepare the fuel.
>
> This is a lessen that we can draw from Joe Papp. No one understood the
> reason why he invented a fuel preparation process. If the Papp fuel was not
> preprocessed, the Papp engine would need to crank for a week before it
> kicked over. Papp knew he had to load a lot of energy into that fuel before
> it became active.
>
>
> The various ways to inject energy into that fuel have differing power
> loading potential. Heat is the least effective method. Lasers seem to be
> somewhat more powerful but a few weeks to get the Holmlid fuel up to speed
> indicates to us that Laser power is marginal. Spark discharge and
> cavitation seem to be the most powerful method of power injection.
>
> We can determine how long cavitation takes to charge up the LENR fuel by
> seeing how long it takes for gammas to appear after the pump is turned on
> in the LeClair reactor.
>
> DGT could start their reaction in a few hours because an electric arc is a
> powerful source of incoherent EMF power.
>
> Holmlid’s effect is difficult to duplicate because most replicators don’t
> have the patience to wait for weeks to see positive results.
>
> The choice before the replicator is plainly stated; he can use a powerful
> source of incoherent energy or he could just wait for weeks while energy
> trickles into his power hungry fuel.
>
> That said see the next post...
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Stephen Cooke  > wrote:
>
>> It's a nice process you are describing, but I'm curious how it can
>> generate the mesons reported by Holmlid? Is there some mechanism based on
>> this idea where mesons are produced or can they only generated by very high
>> energy interactions with nucleons and require much higher energies than you
>> are describing here?
>>
>> On 29 okt. 2015, at 19:53, Jones Beene  wrote:
>>
>> *From:* Bob Cook
>>
>> Ø
>>
>> Ø  Fran and Jones suggested that the source of the excess energy
>> described  by Holmlid is of a chemical origin (electronic potential
>> chemical energy of dense hydrogen) and not nuclear potential energy long
>> ago stored in the reactants.
>>
>>
>>
>> First part of answer: The Dynamical Casimir Effect was first observed in
>> 2010. It is real, but that does not necessarily provide all the answers.
>> The following is paraphrased from various sources.
>>
>>
>>
>> The basic concept for LENR, 

RE: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Jones Beene]

From: Bob Cook 

Ø 

Ø  Fran and Jones suggested that the source of the excess energy described  by 
Holmlid is of a chemical origin (electronic potential chemical energy of dense 
hydrogen) and not nuclear potential energy long ago stored in the reactants.   

 

First part of answer: The Dynamical Casimir Effect was first observed in 2010. 
It is real, but that does not necessarily provide all the answers. The 
following is paraphrased from various sources. 

 

The basic concept for LENR, is that the electronic chemical energy of dense 
hydrogen, with mass-energy in the range of 630 eV per H atom, is created by 
DCE. One way this can happen is when SPP interact with a Casimir cavity or pit. 
The electron becomes delocalized and possibly relativistic.

 

However, it is also demonstrated by Holmlid that dense hydrogen can produce 
strong nuclear or sub-nuclear gain in other circumstances, aside from 
chemistry. Whenever gamma radiation is seen in an experiment, it is a good 
indication of the “other circumstances”. The DCE modality only applies to gain 
from chemistry and electron manipulation. The soft x-rays are easy to miss.

 

One of the predictions of modern quantum theory is that the vacuum of space is 
not empty. In fact, quantum theory predicts that it teems with virtual 
particles foaming in and out of existence. While initially a curiosity, it was 
quickly realized that vacuum fluctuations had measurable consequences, for 
instance producing the Lamb shift and modifying the magnetic moment for the 
electron… and in Casimir force.

 

This type of renormalization due to vacuum fluctuations is now central to our 
understanding of nature….From early on, it was believed that it might be 
possible to more directly observe the virtual particles that compose the 
quantum vacuum, or convert them to real particles. 40 years ago, Moore 
suggested that a mirror undergoing relativistic motion could convert virtual 
photons into directly observable real photons. This effect was later named the 
dynamical Casimir effect (DCE)…. we have observed the DCE experimentally for 
the first time in 2011…. In addition to observing the creation of real photons, 
the discoverers found two-mode squeezing of the emitted radiation, which is a 
signature of the quantum character of the generation process. End of paraphrase.

Ø 

Ø  Is the assumption that the laser pre-conditioning of the materials in the 
Holmlid setup allowed the increase in potential energy of the reactants which 
then is later released as EM radiation and hence heat?

 

Yes. Most likely there would be a multi-stage process where the laser (or 
another light source) creates SPPs over time, which then interact with hydrogen 
in a Casimir cavity of 2-12 nm in dimensions. As it turns out, Shell 105 
catalyst is extraordinarily nanoporous. Like a zeolite, but ferromagnetic. 
Curiously, Holmlid fails to realize this porosity connection.

 

The net effect is that the electron which once had ionization potential of 13.6 
eV in the ground state has been boosted to 630 eV of binding energy by the DCE. 
This is an energy increase of about 46:1 per atom and it is chemical. But in 
effect, if the hydrogen does not escape, the energy which can be extracted by 
chemistry is endless (if the source is the quantum vacuum). 

 

 

Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Axil Axil]

A comment on the THE FLEISCHMANN SINGULARITY as a clue to LERN
reproducibility.

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-fleischmann-singularity.html#comment-form

Ed Storms can test materials until the cows come home withoul LENR responce
because the key to LENR reproducibility is time.

It took the singuarity months to build up enough potential energy to become
LENR active.

No replicator could get the the various types of LENR applictions to  work
because of the tricky requirement for fuel preparation. We know now that
the fuel used in LENR in all its forms must be prepared in a time intensive
process. This preparation takes a lot of time and a lot of energy. The
solitons that produce the LENR reaction hold a huge amount of energy.

The situation is like a car with a battery the size of a building. It takes
a long time to pump power into that energy storage device before it becomes
active enough to produce high grade power with a high enough “voltage”.
This is what Holmlid tells us. He says that it takes weeks of applying
Laser power before the catalyst he uses becomes active.

Lasers and dipoles don’t talk well together. Lasers produce plain waves at
a single frequency and dipoles don’t take kindly to that type of EMF. An
electron and a photon must have the same energy level to join together to
become a polariton. That marriage needs a common energy level. Only a
meager number of dipoles finely tuned to the exact frequency of the laser
will become entangled. If there is lots of bumps and nanocavities, then the
Laser light will become decoherent.

Decoherent light( from an arc that R. Mills uses in the Suncell) is best so
that dipoles at any stage of development will become polaritons. A
scattered shot cloud from a shotgun is better at downing a clay pigeon than
a 22 is.

LENR replicators do not preprocess the fuel that they use and they don’t
wait long enough for the LENR reaction to take hold. No one wants to invest
the time and energy to properly prepare the fuel.

This is a lessen that we can draw from Joe Papp. No one understood the
reason why he invented a fuel preparation process. If the Papp fuel was not
preprocessed, the Papp engine would need to crank for a week before it
kicked over. Papp knew he had to load a lot of energy into that fuel before
it became active.


The various ways to inject energy into that fuel have differing power
loading potential. Heat is the least effective method. Lasers seem to be
somewhat more powerful but a few weeks to get the Holmlid fuel up to speed
indicates to us that Laser power is marginal. Spark discharge and
cavitation seem to be the most powerful method of power injection.

We can determine how long cavitation takes to charge up the LENR fuel by
seeing how long it takes for gammas to appear after the pump is turned on
in the LeClair reactor.

DGT could start their reaction in a few hours because an electric arc is a
powerful source of incoherent EMF power.

Holmlid’s effect is difficult to duplicate because most replicators don’t
have the patience to wait for weeks to see positive results.

The choice before the replicator is plainly stated; he can use a powerful
source of incoherent energy or he could just wait for weeks while energy
trickles into his power hungry fuel.

That said see the next post...


On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Stephen Cooke 
wrote:

> It's a nice process you are describing, but I'm curious how it can
> generate the mesons reported by Holmlid? Is there some mechanism based on
> this idea where mesons are produced or can they only generated by very high
> energy interactions with nucleons and require much higher energies than you
> are describing here?
>
> On 29 okt. 2015, at 19:53, Jones Beene  wrote:
>
> *From:* Bob Cook
>
> Ø
>
> Ø  Fran and Jones suggested that the source of the excess energy
> described  by Holmlid is of a chemical origin (electronic potential
> chemical energy of dense hydrogen) and not nuclear potential energy long
> ago stored in the reactants.
>
>
>
> First part of answer: The Dynamical Casimir Effect was first observed in
> 2010. It is real, but that does not necessarily provide all the answers.
> The following is paraphrased from various sources.
>
>
>
> The basic concept for LENR, is that the electronic chemical energy of
> dense hydrogen, with mass-energy in the range of 630 eV per H atom, is
> created by DCE. One way this can happen is when SPP interact with a Casimir
> cavity or pit. The electron becomes delocalized and possibly relativistic.
>
>
>
> However, it is also demonstrated by Holmlid that dense hydrogen can
> produce strong nuclear or sub-nuclear gain in other circumstances, aside
> from chemistry. Whenever gamma radiation is seen in an experiment, it is a
> good indication of the “other circumstances”. The DCE modality only applies
> to gain from chemistry and electron manipulation. The soft x-rays are easy
> to miss.
>
>
>
> One of 

[Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Bob Cook]

Casimir, ZPE and HolmlidFran and Jones--

Thanks for those explanations. 

However, I would bet that the US Patent Office would not agree with such an 
invention, if zero point energy were mentioned.  They would classify in the 
same category as perpetual motion machines.  

Nevertheless, I understand from Fran’s comment that the positive kinetic energy 
“motion” of virtual particles in the vacuum are harnessed to provide potential 
energy to make heavy hydrogen, which in turn decays to a lower energy state via 
real EM radiation.  If the heavy hydrogen increased its size by increasing the 
kinetic energy of its electron, it would be an endothermic reaction I think and 
not what we are talking about.  Is this correct? 

The endless reversible reaction Fran suggested would not seem to entail the 
release of EM radiation to heat the real surroundings, if energy is conserved 
between the vacuum and the real surroundings in a reversible reaction.  

One other thought/question considering this thread—what dense hydrogen energy 
levels are involved in the reaction?  The lowest energy state and the highest 
one? or are there transitions between any of the dense hydrogen states?  If it 
were transitions between various energy states, one might expect to see a 
spectrum of EM  radiation from the Holmlid setup. 

Bob Cook

From: Roarty, Francis X 
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 12:08 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[snip] But in effect, if the hydrogen does not escape, the energy which can be 
extracted by chemistry is endless (if the source is the quantum vacuum).[/snip] 
which is why I tend to call it zero point energy since it is effectively 
harnessing random motion to move the hydrogen between the DCE regions that 
allow this endless chemical reversible reaction. Still very similar to the 
original premise behind Lyne atomic furnace and the MAHG.. 

 

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 2:53 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

 

From: Bob Cook 

Ø

Ø  Fran and Jones suggested that the source of the excess energy described  by 
Holmlid is of a chemical origin (electronic potential chemical energy of dense 
hydrogen) and not nuclear potential energy long ago stored in the reactants.   

 

First part of answer: The Dynamical Casimir Effect was first observed in 2010. 
It is real, but that does not necessarily provide all the answers. The 
following is paraphrased from various sources. 

 

The basic concept for LENR, is that the electronic chemical energy of dense 
hydrogen, with mass-energy in the range of 630 eV per H atom, is created by 
DCE. One way this can happen is when SPP interact with a Casimir cavity or pit. 
The electron becomes delocalized and possibly relativistic.

 

However, it is also demonstrated by Holmlid that dense hydrogen can produce 
strong nuclear or sub-nuclear gain in other circumstances, aside from 
chemistry. Whenever gamma radiation is seen in an experiment, it is a good 
indication of the “other circumstances”. The DCE modality only applies to gain 
from chemistry and electron manipulation. The soft x-rays are easy to miss.

 

One of the predictions of modern quantum theory is that the vacuum of space is 
not empty. In fact, quantum theory predicts that it teems with virtual 
particles foaming in and out of existence. While initially a curiosity, it was 
quickly realized that vacuum fluctuations had measurable consequences, for 
instance producing the Lamb shift and modifying the magnetic moment for the 
electron… and in Casimir force.

 

This type of renormalization due to vacuum fluctuations is now central to our 
understanding of nature….From early on, it was believed that it might be 
possible to more directly observe the virtual particles that compose the 
quantum vacuum, or convert them to real particles. 40 years ago, Moore 
suggested that a mirror undergoing relativistic motion could convert virtual 
photons into directly observable real photons. This effect was later named the 
dynamical Casimir effect (DCE)…. we have observed the DCE experimentally for 
the first time in 2011…. In addition to observing the creation of real photons, 
the discoverers found two-mode squeezing of the emitted radiation, which is a 
signature of the quantum character of the generation process. End of paraphrase.

Ø

Ø  Is the assumption that the laser pre-conditioning of the materials in the 
Holmlid setup allowed the increase in potential energy of the reactants which 
then is later released as EM radiation and hence heat?

 

Yes. Most likely there would be a multi-stage process where the laser (or 
another light source) creates SPPs over time, which then interact with hydrogen 
in a Casimir cavity of 2-12 nm in dimensions. As it turns out, Shell 105 
catalyst is extraordinarily nanoporous. Like a zeolite, but ferromagnetic. 
Curiously

Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Axil Axil]

All the mesons produce will be identically the same. This is seen in the
Holmlid meson decay timing. All the mesons hit the detector at the same
instant.

Should read

All the mesons produce will be identically the same. This is seen in the
Holmlid meson decay timing. All the mesons *decay products* hit the
detector at the same instant.

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

> "one might expect to see a spectrum of EM  radiation from the Holmlid
> setup."
>
> All the mesons produce will be identically the same. This is seen in the
> Holmlid meson decay timing. All the mesons hit the detector at the same
> instant.
>
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The vacuum may well be involved. When a meson is produced, a negative
>> energy version of the meson must also be produced via a closed time loop.
>> But this negative energy version(or anti particle) is sent back in time via
>> the vacuum. This particle in the past must be discarded to preserve
>> causality. So the vacuum act like a trash can to take care of the bad stuff
>> produced by the LENR reaction.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Fran and Jones--
>>>
>>> Thanks for those explanations.
>>>
>>> However, I would bet that the US Patent Office would not agree with such
>>> an invention, if zero point energy were mentioned.  They would classify in
>>> the same category as perpetual motion machines.
>>>
>>> Nevertheless, I understand from Fran’s comment that the positive kinetic
>>> energy “motion” of virtual particles in the vacuum are harnessed to provide
>>> potential energy to make heavy hydrogen, which in turn decays to a lower
>>> energy state via real EM radiation.  If the heavy hydrogen increased its
>>> size by increasing the kinetic energy of its electron, it would be an
>>> endothermic reaction I think and not what we are talking about.  Is this
>>> correct?
>>>
>>> The endless reversible reaction Fran suggested would not seem to entail
>>> the release of EM radiation to heat the real surroundings, if energy is
>>> conserved between the vacuum and the real surroundings in a reversible
>>> reaction.
>>>
>>> One other thought/question considering this thread—what dense hydrogen
>>> energy levels are involved in the reaction?  The lowest energy state and
>>> the highest one? or are there transitions between any of the dense hydrogen
>>> states?  If it were transitions between various energy states, one might
>>> expect to see a spectrum of EM  radiation from the Holmlid setup.
>>>
>>> Bob Cook
>>>
>>> *From:* Roarty, Francis X <francis.x.roa...@lmco.com>
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 29, 2015 12:08 PM
>>> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
>>> *Subject:* RE: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid
>>>
>>>
>>> [snip] But in effect, if the hydrogen does not escape, the energy which
>>> can be extracted by chemistry is endless (if the source is the quantum
>>> vacuum).[/snip] which is why I tend to call it zero point energy since it
>>> is effectively harnessing random motion to move the hydrogen between the
>>> DCE regions that allow this endless chemical reversible reaction. Still
>>> very similar to the original premise behind Lyne atomic furnace and the
>>> MAHG..
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 29, 2015 2:53 PM
>>> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
>>> *Subject:* EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Bob Cook
>>>
>>> Ø
>>>
>>> Ø  Fran and Jones suggested that the source of the excess energy
>>> described  by Holmlid is of a chemical origin (electronic potential
>>> chemical energy of dense hydrogen) and not nuclear potential energy long
>>> ago stored in the reactants.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> First part of answer: The Dynamical Casimir Effect was first observed in
>>> 2010. It is real, but that does not necessarily provide all the answers.
>>> The following is paraphrased from various sources.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The basic concept for LENR, is that the electronic chemical energy of
>>> dense hydrogen, with mass-energy in the range of 630 eV per H atom, is
>>> created by DCE. One way this c

Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Axil Axil]

The vacuum may well be involved. When a meson is produced, a negative
energy version of the meson must also be produced via a closed time loop.
But this negative energy version(or anti particle) is sent back in time via
the vacuum. This particle in the past must be discarded to preserve
causality. So the vacuum act like a trash can to take care of the bad stuff
produced by the LENR reaction.

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Fran and Jones--
>
> Thanks for those explanations.
>
> However, I would bet that the US Patent Office would not agree with such
> an invention, if zero point energy were mentioned.  They would classify in
> the same category as perpetual motion machines.
>
> Nevertheless, I understand from Fran’s comment that the positive kinetic
> energy “motion” of virtual particles in the vacuum are harnessed to provide
> potential energy to make heavy hydrogen, which in turn decays to a lower
> energy state via real EM radiation.  If the heavy hydrogen increased its
> size by increasing the kinetic energy of its electron, it would be an
> endothermic reaction I think and not what we are talking about.  Is this
> correct?
>
> The endless reversible reaction Fran suggested would not seem to entail
> the release of EM radiation to heat the real surroundings, if energy is
> conserved between the vacuum and the real surroundings in a reversible
> reaction.
>
> One other thought/question considering this thread—what dense hydrogen
> energy levels are involved in the reaction?  The lowest energy state and
> the highest one? or are there transitions between any of the dense hydrogen
> states?  If it were transitions between various energy states, one might
> expect to see a spectrum of EM  radiation from the Holmlid setup.
>
> Bob Cook
>
> *From:* Roarty, Francis X <francis.x.roa...@lmco.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 29, 2015 12:08 PM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* RE: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid
>
>
> [snip] But in effect, if the hydrogen does not escape, the energy which
> can be extracted by chemistry is endless (if the source is the quantum
> vacuum).[/snip] which is why I tend to call it zero point energy since it
> is effectively harnessing random motion to move the hydrogen between the
> DCE regions that allow this endless chemical reversible reaction. Still
> very similar to the original premise behind Lyne atomic furnace and the
> MAHG..
>
>
>
> *From:* Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 29, 2015 2:53 PM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid
>
>
>
> *From:* Bob Cook
>
> Ø
>
> Ø  Fran and Jones suggested that the source of the excess energy
> described  by Holmlid is of a chemical origin (electronic potential
> chemical energy of dense hydrogen) and not nuclear potential energy long
> ago stored in the reactants.
>
>
>
> First part of answer: The Dynamical Casimir Effect was first observed in
> 2010. It is real, but that does not necessarily provide all the answers.
> The following is paraphrased from various sources.
>
>
>
> The basic concept for LENR, is that the electronic chemical energy of
> dense hydrogen, with mass-energy in the range of 630 eV per H atom, is
> created by DCE. One way this can happen is when SPP interact with a Casimir
> cavity or pit. The electron becomes delocalized and possibly relativistic.
>
>
>
> However, it is also demonstrated by Holmlid that dense hydrogen can
> produce strong nuclear or sub-nuclear gain in other circumstances, aside
> from chemistry. Whenever gamma radiation is seen in an experiment, it is a
> good indication of the “other circumstances”. The DCE modality only applies
> to gain from chemistry and electron manipulation. The soft x-rays are easy
> to miss.
>
>
>
> One of the predictions of modern quantum theory is that the vacuum of
> space is not empty. In fact, quantum theory predicts that it teems with
> virtual particles foaming in and out of existence. While initially a
> curiosity, it was quickly realized that vacuum fluctuations had measurable
> consequences, for instance producing the Lamb shift and modifying the
> magnetic moment for the electron… and in Casimir force.
>
>
>
> This type of renormalization due to vacuum fluctuations is now central to
> our understanding of nature….From early on, it was believed that it might
> be possible to more directly observe the virtual particles that compose the
> quantum vacuum, or convert them to real particles. 40 years ago, Moore
> suggested that a mirror undergoing relativistic motion could convert
> virtual photons into directly observable r

Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Axil Axil]

The Holmlid effect is common throughout LERN as stated by the AIRBUS guy.

See how 8 different LENR systems produce  the same tell tail indications on
photos, Even Pd/D

http://restframe.com/rf/home.html





On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> *From:* Stephen Cooke
>
>
>
> Ø  It's a nice process you are describing, but I'm curious how it can
> generate the mesons reported by Holmlid? Is there some mechanism based on
> this idea where mesons are produced or can they only generated by very high
> energy interactions with nucleons and require much higher energies than you
> are describing here?
>
> I am somewhat in Eric’s camp on the mesons, kaons and so on, which could
> be misidentified and/or have other explanations. The important detail in
> Holmlid’s work seems to be the clusters of dense hydrogen, and how to make
> them… That and the elegance of finding a way to make clusters of hydrogen
> on an inexpensive catalyst, with very high chemical binding energy.
>
> The mesons etc. which are claimed to be present could be related to cosmic
> rays – and/or to a hidden feature of dense hydrogen, such as having a large
> capture cross-section for muons, neutrinos or other exotica. Didn’t you
> mention that ? Plus – the sharpness of the laser pulse can cause the
> occasional nuclear reaction in normal deuterium, even if there was no dense
> RM. Certainly the dense clusters would seem to make an ideal target for ICF
> fusion. I am quite happy to leave all of that to the National Labs, in
> favor of focusing on the low end. That would mean gamma free.
>
> All of the high energy results, if accurate, are icing on the cake. The
> “cake” in this metaphor, would be … finally … a valid explanation for the
> “real LENR,” with emphasis on “low energy.” If the thermal gain can be
> understood as chemical, with no gamma and little transmutation – then that
> is the huge benefit of Holmlid’s work.
>
>
>
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Jones Beene]

From: Stephen Cooke 

 

Ø  It's a nice process you are describing, but I'm curious how it can generate 
the mesons reported by Holmlid? Is there some mechanism based on this idea 
where mesons are produced or can they only generated by very high energy 
interactions with nucleons and require much higher energies than you are 
describing here?

I am somewhat in Eric’s camp on the mesons, kaons and so on, which could be 
misidentified and/or have other explanations. The important detail in Holmlid’s 
work seems to be the clusters of dense hydrogen, and how to make them… That and 
the elegance of finding a way to make clusters of hydrogen on an inexpensive 
catalyst, with very high chemical binding energy.

The mesons etc. which are claimed to be present could be related to cosmic rays 
– and/or to a hidden feature of dense hydrogen, such as having a large capture 
cross-section for muons, neutrinos or other exotica. Didn’t you mention that ? 
Plus – the sharpness of the laser pulse can cause the occasional nuclear 
reaction in normal deuterium, even if there was no dense RM. Certainly the 
dense clusters would seem to make an ideal target for ICF fusion. I am quite 
happy to leave all of that to the National Labs, in favor of focusing on the 
low end. That would mean gamma free.

All of the high energy results, if accurate, are icing on the cake. The “cake” 
in this metaphor, would be … finally … a valid explanation for the “real LENR,” 
with emphasis on “low energy.” If the thermal gain can be understood as 
chemical, with no gamma and little transmutation – then that is the huge 
benefit of Holmlid’s work.

 

 

Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Axil Axil]

See how causality is protected in LENR

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_timelike_curve

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

> All the mesons produce will be identically the same. This is seen in the
> Holmlid meson decay timing. All the mesons hit the detector at the same
> instant.
>
> Should read
>
> All the mesons produce will be identically the same. This is seen in the
> Holmlid meson decay timing. All the mesons *decay products* hit the
> detector at the same instant.
>
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "one might expect to see a spectrum of EM  radiation from the Holmlid
>> setup."
>>
>> All the mesons produce will be identically the same. This is seen in the
>> Holmlid meson decay timing. All the mesons hit the detector at the same
>> instant.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The vacuum may well be involved. When a meson is produced, a negative
>>> energy version of the meson must also be produced via a closed time loop.
>>> But this negative energy version(or anti particle) is sent back in time via
>>> the vacuum. This particle in the past must be discarded to preserve
>>> causality. So the vacuum act like a trash can to take care of the bad stuff
>>> produced by the LENR reaction.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Fran and Jones--
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for those explanations.
>>>>
>>>> However, I would bet that the US Patent Office would not agree with
>>>> such an invention, if zero point energy were mentioned.  They would
>>>> classify in the same category as perpetual motion machines.
>>>>
>>>> Nevertheless, I understand from Fran’s comment that the positive
>>>> kinetic energy “motion” of virtual particles in the vacuum are harnessed to
>>>> provide potential energy to make heavy hydrogen, which in turn decays to a
>>>> lower energy state via real EM radiation.  If the heavy hydrogen increased
>>>> its size by increasing the kinetic energy of its electron, it would be an
>>>> endothermic reaction I think and not what we are talking about.  Is this
>>>> correct?
>>>>
>>>> The endless reversible reaction Fran suggested would not seem to entail
>>>> the release of EM radiation to heat the real surroundings, if energy is
>>>> conserved between the vacuum and the real surroundings in a reversible
>>>> reaction.
>>>>
>>>> One other thought/question considering this thread—what dense hydrogen
>>>> energy levels are involved in the reaction?  The lowest energy state and
>>>> the highest one? or are there transitions between any of the dense hydrogen
>>>> states?  If it were transitions between various energy states, one might
>>>> expect to see a spectrum of EM  radiation from the Holmlid setup.
>>>>
>>>> Bob Cook
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Roarty, Francis X <francis.x.roa...@lmco.com>
>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 29, 2015 12:08 PM
>>>> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
>>>> *Subject:* RE: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [snip] But in effect, if the hydrogen does not escape, the energy
>>>> which can be extracted by chemistry is endless (if the source is the
>>>> quantum vacuum).[/snip] which is why I tend to call it zero point energy
>>>> since it is effectively harnessing random motion to move the hydrogen
>>>> between the DCE regions that allow this endless chemical reversible
>>>> reaction. Still very similar to the original premise behind Lyne atomic
>>>> furnace and the MAHG..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 29, 2015 2:53 PM
>>>> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
>>>> *Subject:* EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Bob Cook
>>>>
>>>> Ø
>>>>
>>>> Ø  Fran and Jones suggested that the source of the excess energy
>>>> described  by Holmlid is of a chemical origin (electronic potential
>>>> chemical energy of dense hydrogen) and not nuclear potential energy long
>>>> ago stored

Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Axil Axil]

Keep these items(dots to connect) in mind

Two different sources for producing H(0) have been used
for this study. They are similar to a source described in a
previous publication.28 Potassium-doped iron oxide catalyst
samples (cylindric pellets)32,33 in the sources produce the ultradense
H(0) from hydrogen or deuterium gas flow at pressures
of 10−5–100 mbars. The sources give a slowly decaying muon
signal for several hours and days after being used for producing
H(0). They can be triggered to increase the muon production
by laser irradiation inside the chambers or sometimes even by
turning on the fluorescent lamps in the laboratory for a short
time

Note that energy for muon production is stored for "several hours and days
after being used for producing H(0)."

They can be triggered to increase the muon production... sometimes even by
turning on the fluorescent lamps in the laboratory for a short time

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> The Holmlid effect is common throughout LERN as stated by the AIRBUS guy.
>
> See how 8 different LENR systems produce  the same tell tail indications
> on photos, Even Pd/D
>
> http://restframe.com/rf/home.html
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
>
>> *From:* Stephen Cooke
>>
>>
>>
>> Ø  It's a nice process you are describing, but I'm curious how it can
>> generate the mesons reported by Holmlid? Is there some mechanism based on
>> this idea where mesons are produced or can they only generated by very high
>> energy interactions with nucleons and require much higher energies than you
>> are describing here?
>>
>> I am somewhat in Eric’s camp on the mesons, kaons and so on, which could
>> be misidentified and/or have other explanations. The important detail in
>> Holmlid’s work seems to be the clusters of dense hydrogen, and how to make
>> them… That and the elegance of finding a way to make clusters of hydrogen
>> on an inexpensive catalyst, with very high chemical binding energy.
>>
>> The mesons etc. which are claimed to be present could be related to
>> cosmic rays – and/or to a hidden feature of dense hydrogen, such as having
>> a large capture cross-section for muons, neutrinos or other exotica. Didn’t
>> you mention that ? Plus – the sharpness of the laser pulse can cause the
>> occasional nuclear reaction in normal deuterium, even if there was no dense
>> RM. Certainly the dense clusters would seem to make an ideal target for ICF
>> fusion. I am quite happy to leave all of that to the National Labs, in
>> favor of focusing on the low end. That would mean gamma free.
>>
>> All of the high energy results, if accurate, are icing on the cake. The
>> “cake” in this metaphor, would be … finally … a valid explanation for the
>> “real LENR,” with emphasis on “low energy.” If the thermal gain can be
>> understood as chemical, with no gamma and little transmutation – then that
>> is the huge benefit of Holmlid’s work.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>