Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
http://physik.uni-graz.at/~dk-user/talks/Chernodub_25112013.pdf search for slides starting at The Chiral Magnetic Effect (CME) An electric super current is induced in the quarks because the direction of their momentums are changed by the magnetic field line. In the slide titled: The CME in heavy-ion collisions (II) Note that the Up quarks are flowing in a current in the opposite direction from the Down quarks because the momentum vectors are flipped by the magnetic field line. These various quark types are separated and moving in a group, This effect is shown with regards to quark plasma, but CME must be the same in stable subatomic particles in LENR because The Chiral Magnetic Effect (CME) acts on quarks in the same way as a universally applicable electrical process(without exception).
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
More: It looks like the magnetic field drives the quark in the same direction as its spin. This makes sense because two magnets will attract or repel each other along a line axial to the magnet pair. On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://physik.uni-graz.at/~dk-user/talks/Chernodub_25112013.pdf search for slides starting at The Chiral Magnetic Effect (CME) An electric super current is induced in the quarks because the direction of their momentums are changed by the magnetic field line. In the slide titled: The CME in heavy-ion collisions (II) Note that the Up quarks are flowing in a current in the opposite direction from the Down quarks because the momentum vectors are flipped by the magnetic field line. These various quark types are separated and moving in a group, This effect is shown with regards to quark plasma, but CME must be the same in stable subatomic particles in LENR because The Chiral Magnetic Effect (CME) acts on quarks in the same way as a universally applicable electrical process(without exception).
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
I did not think quarks were meant to exist in such separation? On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: More: It looks like the magnetic field drives the quark in the same direction as its spin. This makes sense because two magnets will attract or repel each other along a line axial to the magnet pair. On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://physik.uni-graz.at/~dk-user/talks/Chernodub_25112013.pdf search for slides starting at The Chiral Magnetic Effect (CME) An electric super current is induced in the quarks because the direction of their momentums are changed by the magnetic field line. In the slide titled: The CME in heavy-ion collisions (II) Note that the Up quarks are flowing in a current in the opposite direction from the Down quarks because the momentum vectors are flipped by the magnetic field line. These various quark types are separated and moving in a group, This effect is shown with regards to quark plasma, but CME must be the same in stable subatomic particles in LENR because The Chiral Magnetic Effect (CME) acts on quarks in the same way as a universally applicable electrical process(without exception).
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
Quark separation causes a quark plasma. When two heavy ions of lead atoms collide in a ion collision, a quark plasma is produced. If the collision is off center, a strong magnetic field is generated from the vortex motion induced in the quark plasma. The results of these kinds of collisions are studied at the large hadron collider(LRC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALICE:_A_Large_Ion_Collider_Experiment ALICE is optimized to study heavy-ion (Pb-Pbhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead nuclei http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_nucleus) collisions at a centre of mass http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_of_mass energy of 2.76 TeVhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TeVper nucleon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleon pair. The resulting temperature and energy density are expected to be high enough to produce quark–gluon plasma http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark%E2%80%93gluon_plasma, a state of matter wherein quarks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark and gluonshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluonare freed. Similar conditions are believed to existed a fraction of the second after the Big Bang before quarks and gluons bound together to form hadrons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadrons and heavier particles. ALICE is focusing on the physics of strongly interacting matter at extreme energy densities. The existence of the quark–gluon plasmahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark%E2%80%93gluon_plasmaand its properties are key issues in Quantum Chromodynamics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Chromodynamics for understanding Color confinementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_confinementand Chiral symmetry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiral_symmetry restoration. Recreating this primordial form of matter and understanding how it evolves is expected to shed light on questions about how matter is organized, the mechanism that confines quarks and gluons and the nature of strong interactions and how they result in generating the bulk of the mass of ordinary matter. Quantum chromodynamics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_chromodynamics(QCD) predicts that at sufficiently high energy densities there will be a phase transition from conventional hadronic matter, where quarks are locked inside nuclear particles, to a plasma of deconfined quarks and gluons. The reverse of this transition is believed to have taken place when the universe was just 10−6 sec old, and may still play a role today in the hearts of collapsing neutron stars or other astrophysical objects What is amazing is that Letts and Cravens have shown that a magnetic field can produce nuclear disruption at very low levels of magnetic fields. Letts has produced a empirical theory that relates the amount of excess heat produced in LENR to the strength of the magnetic field applied even if that field is relatively weak. In quantum mechanics, their is a probability that anything including the Chiral Magnetic Effect (CME) can happen even if the effect is very small and its probability is very low. On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 6:48 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote: I did not think quarks were meant to exist in such separation? On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: More: It looks like the magnetic field drives the quark in the same direction as its spin. This makes sense because two magnets will attract or repel each other along a line axial to the magnet pair. On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://physik.uni-graz.at/~dk-user/talks/Chernodub_25112013.pdf search for slides starting at The Chiral Magnetic Effect (CME) An electric super current is induced in the quarks because the direction of their momentums are changed by the magnetic field line. In the slide titled: The CME in heavy-ion collisions (II) Note that the Up quarks are flowing in a current in the opposite direction from the Down quarks because the momentum vectors are flipped by the magnetic field line. These various quark types are separated and moving in a group, This effect is shown with regards to quark plasma, but CME must be the same in stable subatomic particles in LENR because The Chiral Magnetic Effect (CME) acts on quarks in the same way as a universally applicable electrical process(without exception).
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
In simple terms, I now understand how a magnetic field can produce subatomic particles out of the vacuum. When virtual particles are produced by uncertainty from the vacuum, they are created in a particle and antiparticle set to conserve vacuum energy. The Chiral Magnetic Effect (CME) changes the nature of the quarks in that particle/antiparticle set through quark disruption within that set to favor either the particle or the antiparticle. The original pair can no longer annihilate each other to give back the energy that they borrowed from the vacuum. And the distorted pair produced by CME stays in existence since particle/antiparticle paring is broken by CME. As in Letts theory, the probability that a disrupted mismatched particle pair will be produced is directly proportional to the strength of the magnetic field applied to the vacuum. On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Quark separation causes a quark plasma. When two heavy ions of lead atoms collide in a ion collision, a quark plasma is produced. If the collision is off center, a strong magnetic field is generated from the vortex motion induced in the quark plasma. The results of these kinds of collisions are studied at the large hadron collider(LRC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALICE:_A_Large_Ion_Collider_Experiment ALICE is optimized to study heavy-ion (Pb-Pbhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead nuclei http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_nucleus) collisions at a centre of mass http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_of_mass energy of 2.76 TeVhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TeVper nucleon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleon pair. The resulting temperature and energy density are expected to be high enough to produce quark–gluon plasma http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark%E2%80%93gluon_plasma, a state of matter wherein quarks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark and gluonshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluonare freed. Similar conditions are believed to existed a fraction of the second after the Big Bang before quarks and gluons bound together to form hadrons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadrons and heavier particles. ALICE is focusing on the physics of strongly interacting matter at extreme energy densities. The existence of the quark–gluon plasmahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark%E2%80%93gluon_plasmaand its properties are key issues in Quantum Chromodynamics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Chromodynamics for understanding Color confinementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_confinementand Chiral symmetry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiral_symmetry restoration. Recreating this primordial form of matter and understanding how it evolves is expected to shed light on questions about how matter is organized, the mechanism that confines quarks and gluons and the nature of strong interactions and how they result in generating the bulk of the mass of ordinary matter. Quantum chromodynamicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_chromodynamics(QCD) predicts that at sufficiently high energy densities there will be a phase transition from conventional hadronic matter, where quarks are locked inside nuclear particles, to a plasma of deconfined quarks and gluons. The reverse of this transition is believed to have taken place when the universe was just 10−6 sec old, and may still play a role today in the hearts of collapsing neutron stars or other astrophysical objects What is amazing is that Letts and Cravens have shown that a magnetic field can produce nuclear disruption at very low levels of magnetic fields. Letts has produced a empirical theory that relates the amount of excess heat produced in LENR to the strength of the magnetic field applied even if that field is relatively weak. In quantum mechanics, their is a probability that anything including the Chiral Magnetic Effect (CME) can happen even if the effect is very small and its probability is very low. On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 6:48 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote: I did not think quarks were meant to exist in such separation? On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: More: It looks like the magnetic field drives the quark in the same direction as its spin. This makes sense because two magnets will attract or repel each other along a line axial to the magnet pair. On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://physik.uni-graz.at/~dk-user/talks/Chernodub_25112013.pdf search for slides starting at The Chiral Magnetic Effect (CME) An electric super current is induced in the quarks because the direction of their momentums are changed by the magnetic field line. In the slide titled: The CME in heavy-ion collisions (II) Note that the Up quarks are flowing in a current in the opposite direction from the Down quarks because the momentum vectors are flipped by the magnetic field line. These various quark types are separated
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
Axil-- That's a much better presentation than the other one. I now understand the charge separation in the quark soup along a line. In the solid state, the local effects of the magnetic fields that result from SPP AND SP conditions would seem to cause CME also at the location. With quarks coming loose and superconductivity who know what reactions may be taking place in Rossi Ni lattice. Bob - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2014 12:01 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! More: It looks like the magnetic field drives the quark in the same direction as its spin. This makes sense because two magnets will attract or repel each other along a line axial to the magnet pair. On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://physik.uni-graz.at/~dk-user/talks/Chernodub_25112013.pdf search for slides starting at The Chiral Magnetic Effect (CME) An electric super current is induced in the quarks because the direction of their momentums are changed by the magnetic field line. In the slide titled: The CME in heavy-ion collisions (II) Note that the Up quarks are flowing in a current in the opposite direction from the Down quarks because the momentum vectors are flipped by the magnetic field line. These various quark types are separated and moving in a group, This effect is shown with regards to quark plasma, but CME must be the same in stable subatomic particles in LENR because The Chiral Magnetic Effect (CME) acts on quarks in the same way as a universally applicable electrical process(without exception).
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
With quarks coming loose and superconductivity who know what reactions may be taking place in Rossi Ni lattice. One reason why LENR is go confusing is the vast number of nuclear reactions that can occur when the strong force that holds matter together is disrupted. There is also a vast number of LENR reactor types that can be configured to produce power. This is why it is important to understand the ultimate underling cause of LENR to understand what is happing in each LENR systems on a individual basis.
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
The patent pub (see the link below) that Alain sent through has a number of reactions listed that make up the vast number you are talking about. Its an interesting document. http://www.google.com/patents/US20140098917 Bob - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2014 12:02 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! With quarks coming loose and superconductivity who know what reactions may be taking place in Rossi Ni lattice. One reason why LENR is go confusing is the vast number of nuclear reactions that can occur when the strong force that holds matter together is disrupted. There is also a vast number of LENR reactor types that can be configured to produce power. This is why it is important to understand the ultimate underling cause of LENR to understand what is happing in each LENR systems on a individual basis.
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 10:13 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Hotson’s essays move around. Most of my old links are dead. I have combined all three of Hotson's papers into a single .pdf file. The link provided here is for list members' use only: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8mt4mJOTGvBNEg4T25LS0FQM3c/edit?usp=sharing
RE: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
Mark, I totally agree and believe the virtual particles winking into and out of existence are the constituents of this river flowing 90 degrees to our physical dimensions between the future and the past. While the water molecules of a physical river persist in our physical dimension this flow of virtual particles does not, making even the semantics of pressure and time depend on perspective. Water may be an emergent property but as such it emerges from quantum behavior of still physical atoms and molecules.. space time is the emergent property of a sea of VIRTUAL particles that do not follow classical behavior. IMHO they continue to exert pressure upon each other in an infinite reservoir of time separated by a bladder we call the “Present” that contains our physical dimensions. The virtual particles only exist for us as the resivoir seeps thru the bladder. We normally get away with ignoring the quantum gravity and assume an isotropy because these effects are normally averaged out below the Planck scale and natural formation of geometry that would unbalance these effects is opposed by nature – stiction and Casimir effect being 2 macro world examples, this is why the geometry of these powders and skeletal cats is so difficult to achieve and maintain in that it reaches down below the planck scale to segregate these forces into physical scale regions capable of breaking the isotropy and interacting selectively with physical matter. Fran From: MarkI-Zeropoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 6:51 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! Some of the ol' time Vorts will remember how I've been ranting for years on how the vacuum is a near fricionless fluid under extreme pressure... well, the theorists are finally coming around... they got the nearly frictionless part in, now all that's left is to add some 'pressure', and voila! -Mark Iverson Liquid spacetime: A very slippery superfluid, that's what spacetime could be like http://phys.org/news/2014-04-liquid-spacetime-slippery-superfluid.html If spacetime is a kind of fluid, then we must also take into account its viscosity and other dissipative effects, which had never been considered in detail. Liberati and Maccione catalogued these effects and showed that viscosity tends to rapidly dissipate photons and other particles along their path, And yet we can see photons travelling from astrophysical objects located millions of light years away! he continues. If spacetime is a fluid, then according to our calculations it must necessarily be a superfluid. This means that its viscosity value is extremely low, close to zero. http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.151301
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
I don't know about that but I am back in the top 20 in sales of my book and making progress slowly. I have followed my own path. http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/digital-text/159789011/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_kstore_1_6_last Frank Z -Original Message- From: Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Apr 25, 2014 8:44 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! Mark, I totally agree and believe the virtual particles winking into and out of existence are the constituents of this river flowing 90 degrees to our physical dimensions between the future and the past. While the water molecules of a physical river persist in our physical dimension this flow of virtual particles does not, making even the semantics of pressure and time depend on perspective. Water may be an emergent property but as such it emerges from quantum behavior of still physical atoms and molecules.. space time is the emergent property of a sea of VIRTUAL particles that do not follow classical behavior. IMHO they continue to exert pressure upon each other in an infinite reservoir of time separated by a bladder we call the “Present” that contains our physical dimensions. The virtual particles only exist for us as the resivoir seeps thru the bladder. We normally get away with ignoring the quantum gravity and assume an isotropy because these effects are normally averaged out below the Planck scale and natural formation of geometry that would unbalance these effects is opposed by nature – stiction and Casimir effect being 2 macro world examples, this is why the geometry of these powders and skeletal cats is so difficult to achieve and maintain in that it reaches down below the planck scale to segregate these forces into physical scale regions capable of breaking the isotropy and interacting selectively with physical matter. Fran From: MarkI-Zeropoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 6:51 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! Some of the ol' time Vorts will remember how I've been ranting for years on how the vacuum is a near fricionless fluid under extreme pressure... well, the theorists are finally coming around... they got the nearly frictionless part in, now all that's left is to add some 'pressure', and voila! -Mark Iverson Liquid spacetime: A very slippery superfluid, that's what spacetime could be like http://phys.org/news/2014-04-liquid-spacetime-slippery-superfluid.html If spacetime is a kind of fluid, then we must also take into account its viscosity and other dissipative effects, which had never been considered in detail. Liberati and Maccione catalogued these effects and showed that viscosity tends to rapidly dissipate photons and other particles along their path, And yet we can see photons travelling from astrophysical objects located millions of light years away! he continues. If spacetime is a fluid, then according to our calculations it must necessarily be a superfluid. This means that its viscosity value is extremely low, close to zero. http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.151301
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
Thanks Terry-- I could not find any. Bob - Original Message - From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 5:20 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 10:13 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Hotson’s essays move around. Most of my old links are dead. I have combined all three of Hotson's papers into a single .pdf file. The link provided here is for list members' use only: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8mt4mJOTGvBNEg4T25LS0FQM3c/edit?usp=sharing
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
This is an interesting paper. It is good reading for those of us that wonder if current theory is flawed. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Apr 25, 2014 11:19 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! Thanks Terry-- I could not find any. Bob - Original Message - From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 5:20 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 10:13 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Hotson’s essays move around. Most of my old links are dead. I have combined all three of Hotson's papers into a single .pdf file. The link provided here is for list members' use only: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8mt4mJOTGvBNEg4T25LS0FQM3c/edit?usp=sharing
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
Dave, Mark and Jones-- Hotson's reason for leaving physics for French identifies a real glitch in my mind. (See the item about the author at the beginning of the first paper.) This may be the issue behind the lack of consideration of angular momentum and spin as being energy as we know it, and why the standing physics community shuns the consideration of spin coupling in nuclear processes and hence lenr. Spin energy consideration opens a can of worms for them. From the beginning (1989) in the case of D fusion I thought that the reaction to form He was that He started out in a highly energetic spin state and decayed to a lower energy ground state distributing its excess energy to the lattice via spin coupling. Now I wonder what the spin energy of two protons is? Hotson indicated that the spin energy of the electron is much greater than the .511 Mev we associate with its creation. It may be that a .511 Mev photon actually carries much more energy in the form of angular momentum than is generally associated with the linear momentum particle model and Einstein's photo electric effect. I did not realize that the angular momentum of the electron and positron amounted to so much energy. This is an interesting observation of Hotson, if it is valid which it seems to be. I wonder what school Hotson was at when they silenced him? Bob Cook - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 8:22 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! This is an interesting paper. It is good reading for those of us that wonder if current theory is flawed. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Apr 25, 2014 11:19 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! Thanks Terry-- I could not find any. Bob - Original Message - From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 5:20 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 10:13 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Hotson’s essays move around. Most of my old links are dead. I have combined all three of Hotson's papers into a single .pdf file. The link provided here is for list members' use only: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8mt4mJOTGvBNEg4T25LS0FQM3c/edit?usp=sharing
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: I wonder what school Hotson was at when they silenced him? You my ask him if he is still around: Don Hotson P. O. Box 789 Green Mountain Falls, CO 80819 donhot...@yahoo.com I know he suffered a bout of bad health a while back and do not know the results.
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
Bob, I was surprised to read that the angular energy was many times the mass of the electron according to Hotson. My first thought was-why does the mass to charge ratio of an electron appear to match that expected if the 511 keV mass is assumed. One would expect that the excess angular energy would result in additional mass for the electron which would be detected in experiments. I am still reading the document and perhaps this issue might be explained later. I remain convinced that magnetic interaction plays an important role in LENR. Maybe it is spin coupling that allows the transport of such a large quantity of energy from the nucleus without the gammas. And, the density of the metal matrix is far greater than the level the plasma guys work with. Any evidence of spin coupling they encounter will be overwhelmed by the majority of reactions where it is not likely to be demonstrated. We need proof that large quantities of energy can be exchanged by spin...either to one or to many receptors. Another possibility is that spin coupling is frequently available among atoms and acts as a common exchange method. Of course one must wonder how this process could have escaped detection for so long. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Apr 25, 2014 12:02 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! Dave, Mark and Jones-- Hotson's reason for leaving physics for French identifies a real glitch in my mind. (See the item about the author at the beginning of the first paper.) This may be the issue behind the lack of consideration of angular momentum and spin as being energy as we know it, and why the standing physics community shuns the consideration of spin coupling in nuclear processes and hence lenr. Spin energy consideration opens a can of worms for them. From the beginning (1989) in the case of D fusion I thought that the reaction to form He was that He started out in a highly energetic spin state and decayed to a lower energy ground state distributing its excess energy to the lattice via spin coupling. Now I wonder what the spin energy of two protons is? Hotson indicated that the spin energy of the electron is much greater than the .511 Mev we associate with its creation. It may be that a .511 Mev photon actually carries much more energy in the form of angular momentum than is generally associated with the linear momentum particle model and Einstein's photo electric effect. I did not realize that the angular momentum of the electron and positron amounted to so much energy. This is an interesting observation of Hotson, if it is valid which it seems to be. I wonder what school Hotson was at when they silenced him? Bob Cook - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 8:22 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! This is an interesting paper. It is good reading for those of us that wonder if current theory is flawed. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Apr 25, 2014 11:19 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! Thanks Terry-- I could not find any. Bob - Original Message - From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 5:20 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 10:13 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Hotson’s essays move around. Most of my old links are dead. I have combined all three of Hotson's papers into a single .pdf file. The link provided here is for list members' use only: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8mt4mJOTGvBNEg4T25LS0FQM3c/edit?usp=sharing
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
Dave-- Maybe the mass/ energy relation is different for quarks than it is for electrons, since the mass of each is a different animal. It seems from quark parameters that at least the charge is different for quarks and electrons. However, I think the quark spin comes in 1/2 integral values of Plank's constant h however just as an electron or positron. Of course the mass of a quark is only virtual and to my knowledge has not been measured. I do not know of anything that says the rest mass of an electron is based on the same reason as the rest mass of hadrons. The mass of each is not predicted by any theory TMK. Bob - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 11:55 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! Bob, I was surprised to read that the angular energy was many times the mass of the electron according to Hotson. My first thought was-why does the mass to charge ratio of an electron appear to match that expected if the 511 keV mass is assumed. One would expect that the excess angular energy would result in additional mass for the electron which would be detected in experiments. I am still reading the document and perhaps this issue might be explained later. I remain convinced that magnetic interaction plays an important role in LENR. Maybe it is spin coupling that allows the transport of such a large quantity of energy from the nucleus without the gammas. And, the density of the metal matrix is far greater than the level the plasma guys work with. Any evidence of spin coupling they encounter will be overwhelmed by the majority of reactions where it is not likely to be demonstrated. We need proof that large quantities of energy can be exchanged by spin...either to one or to many receptors. Another possibility is that spin coupling is frequently available among atoms and acts as a common exchange method. Of course one must wonder how this process could have escaped detection for so long. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Apr 25, 2014 12:02 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! Dave, Mark and Jones-- Hotson's reason for leaving physics for French identifies a real glitch in my mind. (See the item about the author at the beginning of the first paper.) This may be the issue behind the lack of consideration of angular momentum and spin as being energy as we know it, and why the standing physics community shuns the consideration of spin coupling in nuclear processes and hence lenr. Spin energy consideration opens a can of worms for them. From the beginning (1989) in the case of D fusion I thought that the reaction to form He was that He started out in a highly energetic spin state and decayed to a lower energy ground state distributing its excess energy to the lattice via spin coupling. Now I wonder what the spin energy of two protons is? Hotson indicated that the spin energy of the electron is much greater than the .511 Mev we associate with its creation. It may be that a .511 Mev photon actually carries much more energy in the form of angular momentum than is generally associated with the linear momentum particle model and Einstein's photo electric effect. I did not realize that the angular momentum of the electron and positron amounted to so much energy. This is an interesting observation of Hotson, if it is valid which it seems to be. I wonder what school Hotson was at when they silenced him? Bob Cook - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 8:22 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! This is an interesting paper. It is good reading for those of us that wonder if current theory is flawed. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Apr 25, 2014 11:19 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! Thanks Terry-- I could not find any. Bob - Original Message - From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 5:20 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 10:13 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Hotson’s essays move around. Most of my old links are dead. I have combined all three of Hotson's papers into a single .pdf file. The link provided here is for list members' use only: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8mt4mJOTGvBNEg4T25LS0FQM3c/edit?usp=sharing
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
http://hector.elte.hu/budapest14/slides/endrodi_0203_0204.pdf Search on the following to get to the referenced slide: *Chiral magnetic effect* A magnetic field will align the spins of the quarks that comprise a subatomic particle along the magnetic field line and this will cause charge separation. This makes quark spin one dimensional. Therefore the magnetic field will blow the subatomic particle apart since like quark charges repel each other.
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
Thanks for that, Terry. I wasn't previously aware of this and it looks interesting. Cheers, Andy. On 25/04/14 13:20, Terry Blanton wrote: On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 10:13 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Hotson’s essays move around. Most of my old links are dead. I have combined all three of Hotson's papers into a single .pdf file. The link provided here is for list members' use only: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8mt4mJOTGvBNEg4T25LS0FQM3c/edit?usp=sharing
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
To identify the slide, The slide has this verbiage as follows: • local CP-violation through domains with *Q*top 6= 0 ? • detect them through magnetic field *B *[Kharzeev et al. ’08] 1. quarks interact with *B*: spins aligned 2. quarks interact with topology: chiralities (helicities) “aligned” 3. result: charge separation QCD On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://hector.elte.hu/budapest14/slides/endrodi_0203_0204.pdf Search on the following to get to the referenced slide: *Chiral magnetic effect* A magnetic field will align the spins of the quarks that comprise a subatomic particle along the magnetic field line and this will cause charge separation. This makes quark spin one dimensional. Therefore the magnetic field will blow the subatomic particle apart since like quark charges repel each other.
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 4:31 PM, Andy Findlay andy_find...@orange.net wrote: Thanks for that, Terry. I wasn't previously aware of this and it looks interesting. You might enjoy this review of Hotson's papers: http://www.infinite-energy.com/iemagazine/issue86/hotson.html
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
Axil-- I vaguely agree with what you have identified is significant. However, the information presented is hard to follow--one needs to be familiar with the nomenclature and the theories to fully follow the slides. I did gather that there is a one dimensional control that occurs with a magnetic field affecting the quarks such that they become aligned by spin. I did not follow why the charge separation occurs in the population of quarks. It must be that the spin of a quark causes like charged quarks to come together in the one dimensional space and hence repel each other as the magnetic field is relaxed. But why are the charges not mixed to begin with and maintain an homogeneous mix even though spin alignment has occurred? Bob - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 1:33 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! To identify the slide, The slide has this verbiage as follows: • local CP-violation through domains with Qtop 6= 0 ? • detect them through magnetic field B [Kharzeev et al. ’08] 1. quarks interact with B: spins aligned 2. quarks interact with topology: chiralities (helicities) “aligned” 3. result: charge separation QCD On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://hector.elte.hu/budapest14/slides/endrodi_0203_0204.pdf Search on the following to get to the referenced slide: Chiral magnetic effect A magnetic field will align the spins of the quarks that comprise a subatomic particle along the magnetic field line and this will cause charge separation. This makes quark spin one dimensional. Therefore the magnetic field will blow the subatomic particle apart since like quark charges repel each other.
RE: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
Mark, This is essentially why Don Hotson calls the Dirac “sea” the “BEC” instead of the epo field these days. … as in the “original BEC” which is of course a dense superfluid… From: MarkI-Zeropoint Some of the ol' time Vorts will remember how I've been ranting for years on how the vacuum is a near fricionless fluid under extreme pressure... well, the theorists are finally coming around... they got the nearly frictionless part in, now all that's left is to add some 'pressure', and voila! -Mark Iverson Liquid spacetime: A very slippery superfluid, that's what spacetime could be like http://phys.org/news/2014-04-liquid-spacetime-slippery-superfluid.html If spacetime is a kind of fluid, then we must also take into account its viscosity and other dissipative effects, which had never been considered in detail. Liberati and Maccione catalogued these effects and showed that viscosity tends to rapidly dissipate photons and other particles along their path, And yet we can see photons travelling from astrophysical objects located millions of light years away! he continues. If spacetime is a fluid, then according to our calculations it must necessarily be a superfluid. This means that its viscosity value is extremely low, close to zero. http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.151301
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
Jones-- What's an epo field? The same as the Dirac sea? What do the letter stand for? Bob - Original Message - From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 4:05 PM Subject: RE: [Vo]:They're finally catching up! Mark, This is essentially why Don Hotson calls the Dirac “sea” the “BEC” instead of the epo field these days. … as in the “original BEC” which is of course a dense superfluid… From: MarkI-Zeropoint Some of the ol' time Vorts will remember how I've been ranting for years on how the vacuum is a near fricionless fluid under extreme pressure... well, the theorists are finally coming around... they got the nearly frictionless part in, now all that's left is to add some 'pressure', and voila! -Mark Iverson Liquid spacetime: A very slippery superfluid, that's what spacetime could be like http://phys.org/news/2014-04-liquid-spacetime-slippery-superfluid.html If spacetime is a kind of fluid, then we must also take into account its viscosity and other dissipative effects, which had never been considered in detail. Liberati and Maccione catalogued these effects and showed that viscosity tends to rapidly dissipate photons and other particles along their path, And yet we can see photons travelling from astrophysical objects located millions of light years away! he continues. If spacetime is a fluid, then according to our calculations it must necessarily be a superfluid. This means that its viscosity value is extremely low, close to zero. http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.151301
Re: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 8:16 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Jones-- What's an epo field? The same as the Dirac sea? What do the letter stand for? http://archive.today/SGMFP
RE: [Vo]:They're finally catching up!
Hotson’s essays move around. Most of my old links are dead. Here is one site (which misspelled his name) http://issuu.com/scottjenson/docs/d._l._hoston_-_dirac_s_equation_and/1 From: Bob Cook What's an epo field? The same as the Dirac sea? What do the letter stand for? This is essentially why Don Hotson calls the Dirac “sea” the “BEC” instead of the epo field these days. … as in the “original BEC” which is of course a dense superfluid… From: MarkI-Zeropoint Some of the ol' time Vorts will remember how I've been ranting for years on how the vacuum is a near fricionless fluid under extreme pressure... well, the theorists are finally coming around... they got the nearly frictionless part in, now all that's left is to add some 'pressure', and voila! -Mark Iverson Liquid spacetime: A very slippery superfluid, that's what spacetime could be like http://phys.org/news/2014-04-liquid-spacetime-slippery-superfluid.html If spacetime is a kind of fluid, then we must also take into account its viscosity and other dissipative effects, which had never been considered in detail. Liberati and Maccione catalogued these effects and showed that viscosity tends to rapidly dissipate photons and other particles along their path, And yet we can see photons travelling from astrophysical objects located millions of light years away! he continues. If spacetime is a fluid, then according to our calculations it must necessarily be a superfluid. This means that its viscosity value is extremely low, close to zero. http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.151301
