RE: [Vo]:Ahern's ILENRS-12 Presentation - Energy Localization
On Wednesday, September 05, 2012 4:43 PM Jones Beene said [snip] However, it is during a local excursion that a secondary reaction can occur, which does indeed violate CoE, to the extent it is gainful in itself.[/snip] Agreed, and nature being what it is you would also expect an equal loss for excursions in the opposite direction where reactions that should have occurred at nominal are instead delayed. My posit being that Casimir geometry and lattices perform double duty when gas atoms are introduced, In addition to segregating the pressure / breaking the isotropy they also confine the gas molecules in a biased manner to one of these segregated regions as compared to the other. I think this is why we have claims of both accelerated radioactive decay and delayed radioactive decay based on the gas and metals used. Fran performing double duty by scaling and segregating these normally unexploitable forces from below the Planck scale and also exhibiting confinement properties toward diffusing gas molecules such that reactions occurring in these balanced zones do not simply cancel out. I sometimes wonder if time dilation introduces another option to the standard mass to energy consideration where energy is obtained via accelerated aging of the gas atoms? Would the spontaneous emissions of an atom over an epoch be able to pile up on a temporally Fran -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 4:43 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Ahern's ILENRS-12 Presentation - Energy Localization Ahern under-emphasizes the super-radiance and sub-radiance balance in this paper. If he had made DPSR clear, then there is no primary violation. DPSR - Dicke-Preparata super-radiance - proposes that certain spatial areas can undergo intense semi-coherent energy excursions (localized energy extremes) which are nominally perfectly balanced against adjoining areas, where kinetics are correspondingly muted. At this primary level there is no gain. However, it is during a local excursion that a secondary reaction can occur, which does indeed violate CoE, to the extent it is gainful in itself. -Original Message- From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com His example of spring coupled point masses seems to circumvent the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, by focusing rather than diffusing kinetic energy. As in endothermic chemical reactions, this is (probably) just an apparent violation of the 2nd Law, except occurring at nuclear/particle scales.
Re: [Vo]:Ahern's ILENRS-12 Presentation - Energy Localization
I have seen many instances where the instantaneous value of a noisy system can be many times larger than the average or RMS. Thermal noise is a perfect example. I suspect that rogue ocean waves are in this category. The amount of time during which the extreme amplitude excursion occurs falls off rapidly as the peak amplitude increases. It is possible to focus waves into a large peak by carefully timing many small sources. A parabolic reflector accomplishes this function with electromagnetic waves. The same feature can be had with ultrasonic sources. Phased array systems do this quite nicely as well. Perhaps the occurrence of wave functions automatically results in peaks and valleys as the various signals interfere. These activities do not result in breaking of any conservation laws that I am aware of. Dave -Original Message- From: pagnucco pagnu...@htdconnect.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Sep 5, 2012 3:12 pm Subject: [Vo]:Ahern's ILENRS-12 Presentation - Energy Localization Jed Rothwell just posted ILENRS-12 presentations at: http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=1097 Brian Ahern's presentation Energy Localization proposes that Fermi acceleration (F-A) can intensely concentrate energy on the nanoscale. His example of spring coupled point masses seems to circumvent the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, by focusing rather than diffusing kinetic energy. As in endothermic chemical reactions, this is (probably) just an apparent violation of the 2nd Law, except occurring at nuclear/particle scales. F-A appears in many contexts involving elastic and conservative energy exchanges, and can result in extremely large, highly localized energy exchanges. It can be driven by internal or external stimuli - mechanical, acoustic or electromagnetic. It breaks down when energy leaks from a closed system by dissipation or inelastic collisions. If the inelastic collisions that stop F-A involve particle or nuclear reactions, then maybe some LENR results - perhaps explaining electron-capture, some fissions or fusions? Some of the reported successful LENR experiments, e.g., Brillouin, Energetics, seem to conform to the F-A model. If so, they could be very sensitive to shapes and spectra of the the stimuli. Opinions/criticisms welcome. -- Lou Pagnucco
RE: [Vo]:Ahern's ILENRS-12 Presentation - Energy Localization
Ahern under-emphasizes the super-radiance and sub-radiance balance in this paper. If he had made DPSR clear, then there is no primary violation. DPSR - Dicke-Preparata super-radiance - proposes that certain spatial areas can undergo intense semi-coherent energy excursions (localized energy extremes) which are nominally perfectly balanced against adjoining areas, where kinetics are correspondingly muted. At this primary level there is no gain. However, it is during a local excursion that a secondary reaction can occur, which does indeed violate CoE, to the extent it is gainful in itself. -Original Message- From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com His example of spring coupled point masses seems to circumvent the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, by focusing rather than diffusing kinetic energy. As in endothermic chemical reactions, this is (probably) just an apparent violation of the 2nd Law, except occurring at nuclear/particle scales.
Re: [Vo]:Ahern's ILENRS-12 Presentation - Energy Localization
Dave, Yes, a lot of stationary random processes will result in arbitrarily large deviations from the mean, given unlimited time. I think the Fermi(-Ulam) acceleration Ahern cites is different. Given the proper system parameters, acceleration can be certain and (almost) monotonically increasing. One particularly interesting case is given in - Phase Space Interpretation of Exponential Fermi Acceleration http://arxiv.org/pdf/1107.3509.pdf - where a table of length 'L' is enclosed by elastic walls, and has a rigid bar of length L/2 oscillating in a parallel motion parallel to the long side of the table, while an elastic billiard ball 'B' bounces chaotically, (pseudo-)randomly from the walls to the bar, i.e., ++ | /\ | |/ \^ | | /\ | | | //=+= | |// =+= | |\ / | | | \ /v | | B | ++ The ball 'B' will accelerate exponentially under certain circumstances. The ball extracts energy from the bar in an apparent (but not real) violation of the 2nd Law. In the real world, something will break the acceleration. -- Lou Pagnucco David Roberson wrote: I have seen many instances where the instantaneous value of a noisy system can be many times larger than the average or RMS. Thermal noise is a perfect example. I suspect that rogue ocean waves are in this category. The amount of time during which the extreme amplitude excursion occurs falls off rapidly as the peak amplitude increases. It is possible to focus waves into a large peak by carefully timing many small sources. A parabolic reflector accomplishes this function with electromagnetic waves. The same feature can be had with ultrasonic sources. Phased array systems do this quite nicely as well. Perhaps the occurrence of wave functions automatically results in peaks and valleys as the various signals interfere. These activities do not result in breaking of any conservation laws that I am aware of. Dave -Original Message- From: pagnucco pagnu...@htdconnect.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Sep 5, 2012 3:12 pm Subject: [Vo]:Ahern's ILENRS-12 Presentation - Energy Localization Jed Rothwell just posted ILENRS-12 presentations at: http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=1097 Brian Ahern's presentation Energy Localization proposes that Fermi acceleration (F-A) can intensely concentrate energy on the nanoscale. His example of spring coupled point masses seems to circumvent the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, by focusing rather than diffusing kinetic energy. As in endothermic chemical reactions, this is (probably) just an apparent violation of the 2nd Law, except occurring at nuclear/particle scales. F-A appears in many contexts involving elastic and conservative energy exchanges, and can result in extremely large, highly localized energy exchanges. It can be driven by internal or external stimuli - mechanical, acoustic or electromagnetic. It breaks down when energy leaks from a closed system by dissipation or inelastic collisions. If the inelastic collisions that stop F-A involve particle or nuclear reactions, then maybe some LENR results - perhaps explaining electron-capture, some fissions or fusions? Some of the reported successful LENR experiments, e.g., Brillouin, Energetics, seem to conform to the F-A model. If so, they could be very sensitive to shapes and spectra of the the stimuli. Opinions/criticisms welcome. -- Lou Pagnucco
RE: [Vo]:Ahern's ILENRS-12 Presentation - Energy Localization
Jones, I read his patent months ago. He may address this there. I need to re-read it. LP Jones Beene wrote: Ahern under-emphasizes the super-radiance and sub-radiance balance in this paper. If he had made DPSR clear, then there is no primary violation. DPSR - Dicke-Preparata super-radiance - proposes that certain spatial areas can undergo intense semi-coherent energy excursions (localized energy extremes) which are nominally perfectly balanced against adjoining areas, where kinetics are correspondingly muted. At this primary level there is no gain. However, it is during a local excursion that a secondary reaction can occur, which does indeed violate CoE, to the extent it is gainful in itself. -Original Message- From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com His example of spring coupled point masses seems to circumvent the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, by focusing rather than diffusing kinetic energy. As in endothermic chemical reactions, this is (probably) just an apparent violation of the 2nd Law, except occurring at nuclear/particle scales.
