Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[H LV]

Never mind. If the cell is storing energy then the temperature has to fall
since there is less energy that can be dissipated as heat.
Also the input power would have to increase to prevent the temperature from
falling but it was constant so this another reason to reject the storage
hypothesis.

Harry


On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 5:01 PM, H LV  wrote:

> I'm confused.  The third paragraph on page 2 says the cell is intended to
> operate with constant input power. Wouldn't that tend prevent the
> temperature from spontaneously falling (due to energy storage) and only
> permit a spontaneous rise in temperature?
>
> Harry
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 10:23 PM, H LV  wrote:
>
>> Ok, the numbers in this paper rule out the possibility of energy storage
>> during the experiment.
>> .
>> However, as I recall there is a story floating around that a certain
>> batch of Pd from the supplier seemed to work best.
>> If that is true then the energy storage might have happened prior to the
>> experiment when the Pd was processed
>> by the supplier.
>>
>>
>> Harry
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 8:43 PM, Jed Rothwell 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Please review the numbers in the paper, which is here:
>>>
>>> http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RouletteTresultsofi.pdf
>>>
>>> For experiment 4, the excess heat lasted 70 days. The total experiment
>>> duration was 123 days. If there was a storage phase, it lasted 53 days.
>>> This would show up as an endothermic reaction, which would reduce power
>>> output by much more than the exothermic reaction that followed, because it
>>> would be shorter. Any calorimeter that can measure a positive exothermic
>>> reaction of X watts can measure an endothermic reaction of -X watts equally
>>> well.
>>>
>>> Energy storage is ruled out.
>>>
>>> - Jed
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[H LV]

I'm confused.  The third paragraph on page 2 says the cell is intended to
operate with constant input power. Wouldn't that tend prevent the
temperature from spontaneously falling (due to energy storage) and only
permit a spontaneous rise in temperature?

Harry



On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 10:23 PM, H LV  wrote:

> Ok, the numbers in this paper rule out the possibility of energy storage
> during the experiment.
> .
> However, as I recall there is a story floating around that a certain batch
> of Pd from the supplier seemed to work best.
> If that is true then the energy storage might have happened prior to the
> experiment when the Pd was processed
> by the supplier.
>
>
> Harry
>
> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 8:43 PM, Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
>
>> Please review the numbers in the paper, which is here:
>>
>> http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RouletteTresultsofi.pdf
>>
>> For experiment 4, the excess heat lasted 70 days. The total experiment
>> duration was 123 days. If there was a storage phase, it lasted 53 days.
>> This would show up as an endothermic reaction, which would reduce power
>> output by much more than the exothermic reaction that followed, because it
>> would be shorter. Any calorimeter that can measure a positive exothermic
>> reaction of X watts can measure an endothermic reaction of -X watts equally
>> well.
>>
>> Energy storage is ruled out.
>>
>> - Jed
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[CB Sites]

Pretty interesting Axil.   Still reading.   I did find a more up-to-date
paper on the magnetic susceptibility of PdH & PdD but this time with a
larger range of loading C > 0.8 H per Pd.   Yes, funny you should mention
Superconductivity...   I'll let the title of the article speak for itself.


"Magnetic and Transport Properties of PdH: Intriguing Superconductive
Observations" Paolo Tripodi1 , Daniele Di Gioacchino, and Jenny Darja Vinko
Brazilian Journal of Physics, vol. 34, no. 3B, September, 2004.
http://www.scielo.br/pdf/bjp/v34n3b/a07v343b.pdf

Could the diamegetic signal from the from the 1974 magnetic susceptibility
measurements be an indication of the onset of superconductivity.   Would
superconductivity indicate the formation of a H/D BEC held by the lattice.
Inquiring minds want to know.


On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 9:16 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> More details...
>
> *The* *Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya Interaction produces magnetic knots under
> the influence of an unbalanced magnetic field.*
>
> I need to read this paper to see how this all works.
>
>
> *http://web.science.uu.nl/itf/Teaching/2014/2014vanDijk.pdf
> *
>
>
>
> *Skyrmions and the Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya  InteractionComputing the
> Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction for small and large spin-orbit couplings*
> This mechanism will produce pseudo particles through spin orbit couplings.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 9:02 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> More details...
>>
>> The function of the electromagnetic shock is to change the state of the
>> magnetic system so that the spin of that system is converted to anisotropic.
>>
>> The magnetism inherent to a system like the Golden balls by Cravins is
>> already anisotropic. There might be other magnetic systems that are
>> inherently anisotropic.
>>
>> Anisotropic magnetism is required to instantiate instantons inside the
>> proton.
>>
>>
>> https://www.nature.com/articles/srep16184
>>
>>
>> *Topological, non-topological and instanton droplets driven by
>> spin-transfer torque in materials with perpendicular magnetic anisotropy
>> and Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya Interaction*
>>
>>
>> This article explains how a unbalanced magnetic field can produce an
>> instanton.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> I would value an example or two that will support this assertion.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Jed Rothwell 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Axil Axil  wrote:


> To the best of my understanding, the LENR reaction is a two step
> process. First, the heat of the system must be turned into an amplified
> spin system. Then this spin system us TRIGGED by the application of a
> strong EMP pulse that could be either light as in a laser pulse or an
> electrostatic pulse as in a spark, This trigger uses the KERR effect to
> change the state of the system.
>

 There is a problem with this theory. Cold fusion often starts without
 the triggers you describe.

 - Jed


>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

More details...

*The* *Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya Interaction produces magnetic knots under the
influence of an unbalanced magnetic field.*

I need to read this paper to see how this all works.


*http://web.science.uu.nl/itf/Teaching/2014/2014vanDijk.pdf
*



*Skyrmions and the Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya  InteractionComputing the
Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction for small and large spin-orbit couplings*
This mechanism will produce pseudo particles through spin orbit couplings.





On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 9:02 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> More details...
>
> The function of the electromagnetic shock is to change the state of the
> magnetic system so that the spin of that system is converted to anisotropic.
>
> The magnetism inherent to a system like the Golden balls by Cravins is
> already anisotropic. There might be other magnetic systems that are
> inherently anisotropic.
>
> Anisotropic magnetism is required to instantiate instantons inside the
> proton.
>
>
> https://www.nature.com/articles/srep16184
>
>
> *Topological, non-topological and instanton droplets driven by
> spin-transfer torque in materials with perpendicular magnetic anisotropy
> and Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya Interaction*
>
>
> This article explains how a unbalanced magnetic field can produce an
> instanton.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> I would value an example or two that will support this assertion.
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Jed Rothwell 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Axil Axil  wrote:
>>>
>>>
 To the best of my understanding, the LENR reaction is a two step
 process. First, the heat of the system must be turned into an amplified
 spin system. Then this spin system us TRIGGED by the application of a
 strong EMP pulse that could be either light as in a laser pulse or an
 electrostatic pulse as in a spark, This trigger uses the KERR effect to
 change the state of the system.

>>>
>>> There is a problem with this theory. Cold fusion often starts without
>>> the triggers you describe.
>>>
>>> - Jed
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

More details...

The function of the electromagnetic shock is to change the state of the
magnetic system so that the spin of that system is converted to anisotropic.

The magnetism inherent to a system like the Golden balls by Cravins is
already anisotropic. There might be other magnetic systems that are
inherently anisotropic.

Anisotropic magnetism is required to instantiate instantons inside the
proton.


https://www.nature.com/articles/srep16184


*Topological, non-topological and instanton droplets driven by
spin-transfer torque in materials with perpendicular magnetic anisotropy
and Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya Interaction*


This article explains how a unbalanced magnetic field can produce an
instanton.



On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> I would value an example or two that will support this assertion.
>
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
>
>> Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>
>>> To the best of my understanding, the LENR reaction is a two step
>>> process. First, the heat of the system must be turned into an amplified
>>> spin system. Then this spin system us TRIGGED by the application of a
>>> strong EMP pulse that could be either light as in a laser pulse or an
>>> electrostatic pulse as in a spark, This trigger uses the KERR effect to
>>> change the state of the system.
>>>
>>
>> There is a problem with this theory. Cold fusion often starts without the
>> triggers you describe.
>>
>> - Jed
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

I would value an example or two that will support this assertion.

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>
>> To the best of my understanding, the LENR reaction is a two step process.
>> First, the heat of the system must be turned into an amplified spin system.
>> Then this spin system us TRIGGED by the application of a strong EMP pulse
>> that could be either light as in a laser pulse or an electrostatic pulse as
>> in a spark, This trigger uses the KERR effect to change the state of the
>> system.
>>
>
> There is a problem with this theory. Cold fusion often starts without the
> triggers you describe.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jed Rothwell]

Axil Axil  wrote:


> To the best of my understanding, the LENR reaction is a two step process.
> First, the heat of the system must be turned into an amplified spin system.
> Then this spin system us TRIGGED by the application of a strong EMP pulse
> that could be either light as in a laser pulse or an electrostatic pulse as
> in a spark, This trigger uses the KERR effect to change the state of the
> system.
>

There is a problem with this theory. Cold fusion often starts without the
triggers you describe.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

To the best of my understanding, the LENR reaction is a two step process.
First, the heat of the system must be turned into an amplified spin system.
Then this spin system us TRIGGED by the application of a strong EMP pulse
that could be either light as in a laser pulse or an electrostatic pulse as
in a spark, This trigger uses the KERR effect to change the state of the
system.

For more detail as follows:

Magnetism usually produces photons that travel from one pole to another
symmetrically.

http://www.ece.neu.edu/fac-ece/nian/mom/img/How%20Magnets%20Work/magneticFieldLines1.gif

Magnetism becomes special when those photons don’t make it back from the
pole that it came from to the other pole. This type of magnetic field is
called anisotropic or unbalanced. This type of magnetism produces particles
inside the proton that messes up the inner working of the proton that keep
it together.

I cover this process of how the magnetic fields produced by heat become
anisotropic in this post

http://www.e-catworld.com/2017/04/14/symmetry-breaking-is-the-trigger-in-lenr-axil-axil/#comment-3256673715

and also

http://www.e-catworld.com/2017/04/14/the-process-by-which-the-proton-decays-in-lenr-axil-axil/#comment-3276572289

When symmetries are broken, this process disrupts the physical laws that
keep things working.

But there are many other ways in which this special magnetic field can form
including the formation of rare earth magnets.

See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_anisotropy

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 6:47 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Where?  Does the superconductivity increase even if there is no excess
> heat?
>
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> There is research that shows superconductivity that increases in
>> proportion to hydrogen loading in LENR systems.
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 6:05 PM, CB Sites <cbsit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Bob,  you got me to thinking how to measure any changes in spin
>>> coupling or the how to detect a BEC in solid and so I began to wonder if
>>> measuring magnetic susceptibility in PdH and PdD would show anything.  I
>>> found an interesting old paper by H C Jamieson and F D Manchester "The
>>> magnetic susceptibility of Pd, PdH and PdD between 4 and 300 K" 1972 J.
>>> Phys. F: Met. Phys. 2 323 http://iopscience.iop.org/0305-4608/2/2/023.
>>>
>>> This was from back in the 70s so take it as you may.   What I found
>>> interesting is in the beta phase of Pd (H) was tending to be diamagnetic
>>> (repels) and nearly independent of temperature.  That would seem to
>>> indicate that the H are becoming spin aligned and could hint at the
>>> formation of a BEC system.  I also see a trend that D is also heading
>>> towards diamagenetic (negative susceptibility) with increasing  D loading.
>>>
>>> So does someone have a newer paper on the subject?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 1:37 PM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
>>> bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> CD Sites—
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have for some time been of the mind that nuclear potential energy
>>>> tied up in a lattice of coherent (entangled) particles is transfered to the
>>>> lattice electrons in the form of spin orbital momentum—phonic energy during
>>>> LENR.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In the Pd system with D at high loading a small BEC of D nuclei  could
>>>> form and then fuse to He g iven the correct  conditions involving EM
>>>> coupling to link neutron and proton magnetic moments with magnetic moments
>>>> of the Pd lattice electrons.  In this regard I consider it takes a
>>>> relatively strong local B field to accomplish the necessary coupling with
>>>> the neutron and proton making up a D nucleus.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The BEC status of D’s within the lattice would allow their close
>>>> approach during a reaction forming a He nucleus.  The potential energy
>>>> released would not result in energetic particles or EM radiation, but only
>>>> phonic (spin) energy spread across the entire lattice.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> With proper resonant coupling and many BEC within a single lattice a
>>>> larger, more energetic, reaction occurs releasing enough phonic energy to
>>>> destroy the lattice or to create a bosenova.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The reactions

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

SUPERNOVA CONDITIONS READILY CREATED IN A TEST TUBE

admin  / January 6, 2015

/ Comments
Off on Supernova Conditions Readily Created In A Test Tube / Business News
, Get Your Geek
On 

http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2015/01/06/supernova-conditions-readily-created/
Hidetsuga Ikegami, one of Japan’s great physicists describes cold fusion as
being pycnonuclear (star-like) in nature
[image: Hidetsugu Ikegami is a Japanese physicist. He is professor emeritus
of Nuclear Physics at Osaka University, where he has been director of the
Research Center for Nuclear Physics]


Hidetsugu Ikegami is a Japanese physicist. He is professor emeritus of
Nuclear Physics at Osaka University, where he has been director of the
Research Center for Nuclear Physics. He’s also a professor at Uppsala
University in Sweden.

Ikegami’s paper (October 2012)  on what he
calls chemonuclear and pycnonuclear fusion is jam-packed with pertinent
insight and mathematics. He describes how his lifetime of nuclear science
and more than ten years of recent research within the conventional high
energy physics world studies of chemo-pycno-fusion have defined and
demonstrated the bridge between the two camps of Hot and Cold Fusion. His
work has languished unknown but to a few.

Ikegami points out through both experimental and mathematical rigorous
proofs that conditions inside the metal(s) and methods common to cold
fusion conditions are produced equivalent states of matter to those found
inside stars including the most exotic white dwarfs and supernova. Here on
Earth though that supernova matter is more like supernova ice – almost as
exotic as Vonnegut’s ice nine [image: ]
Condensed Cold Micro Supernova Matter

These micro supernova conditions yield energy at a density that Ikegami’s
math shows is a million times more than that found inside of typical stars
and physical evidence in experiments in the form of alpha particles and
helium.
[image: Lithium + hydrogen fusion producing 2 helium nuclei sans neutrons.]


Lithium + hydrogen fusion producing 2 helium nuclei sans neutrons.

He chronicles conditions that exist when hydrogen enters into metals where
it changes from its molecular (H2) to atomic (H) form and beyond. Inside
the realm of the metal  and its powerful influence hydrogen atoms and their
lone electrons can condense and that condensed matter is super dense.

Pools of this dense condensed hydrogen achieve conditions of density like
those in super dense stars like white dwarfs, even supernova, and in that
condition fusion is virtually certain to take place. Very conventional
stellar mathematics show that density supplants temperature as the defining
requirement for fusion – cold fusion.

In the condensed matter, electrons act to screen the Coulomb repulsion
between the atomic nuclei and this screening effect becomes so remarkable
that rates of reactions at low temperatures are almost independent of the
temperature and mostly depend on the density of the matter.

While spill over condensing hydrogen
 is the key,
atoms of other elements can and do become part of, spill over into, the
puddle of super dense hydrogen. The lower mass small atoms like lithium and
beryllium are highly favoured to participate in the fusions but other
heavier atoms like nickel and palladium can and do participate as well.
[image: Red Hot E-CAT 2]


Red Hot E-CAT of Rossi

Ikegami’s work describes the exotic plasma conditions for fusion includes
dense plasmas that are in the form of Bose Einstein Condensates. While in
free space such condensed matter requires very challenging efforts to
create as hydrogen seeps into the cracks and crevices inside metals and
between larger atoms such condensed matter forms in very simple
environments. Examples of this are seen in the electrochemical loading of
hydrogen into metal as reported by Fleischmann and Pons in 1989. Or more
recently by those pursuing Nickel Hydrogen energy where the application of
high temperatures (~800-1000°C) helps the hydrogen to dissolve into the
metal. The HOT CATS of Rossi, Piantelli, Parkhomov… and more.

Lithium Experiment
[image: Ion_implanter2]


Typical ion 

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

Where?  Does the superconductivity increase even if there is no excess heat?

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

> There is research that shows superconductivity that increases in
> proportion to hydrogen loading in LENR systems.
>
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 6:05 PM, CB Sites <cbsit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Bob,  you got me to thinking how to measure any changes in spin
>> coupling or the how to detect a BEC in solid and so I began to wonder if
>> measuring magnetic susceptibility in PdH and PdD would show anything.  I
>> found an interesting old paper by H C Jamieson and F D Manchester "The
>> magnetic susceptibility of Pd, PdH and PdD between 4 and 300 K" 1972 J.
>> Phys. F: Met. Phys. 2 323 http://iopscience.iop.org/0305-4608/2/2/023.
>>
>> This was from back in the 70s so take it as you may.   What I found
>> interesting is in the beta phase of Pd (H) was tending to be diamagnetic
>> (repels) and nearly independent of temperature.  That would seem to
>> indicate that the H are becoming spin aligned and could hint at the
>> formation of a BEC system.  I also see a trend that D is also heading
>> towards diamagenetic (negative susceptibility) with increasing  D loading.
>>
>> So does someone have a newer paper on the subject?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 1:37 PM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
>> bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> CD Sites—
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I have for some time been of the mind that nuclear potential energy tied
>>> up in a lattice of coherent (entangled) particles is transfered to the
>>> lattice electrons in the form of spin orbital momentum—phonic energy during
>>> LENR.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In the Pd system with D at high loading a small BEC of D nuclei  could
>>> form and then fuse to He g iven the correct  conditions involving EM
>>> coupling to link neutron and proton magnetic moments with magnetic moments
>>> of the Pd lattice electrons.  In this regard I consider it takes a
>>> relatively strong local B field to accomplish the necessary coupling with
>>> the neutron and proton making up a D nucleus.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The BEC status of D’s within the lattice would allow their close
>>> approach during a reaction forming a He nucleus.  The potential energy
>>> released would not result in energetic particles or EM radiation, but only
>>> phonic (spin) energy spread across the entire lattice.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> With proper resonant coupling and many BEC within a single lattice a
>>> larger, more energetic, reaction occurs releasing enough phonic energy to
>>> destroy the lattice or to create a bosenova.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The reactions suggested above seem to fit observations from Pd system
>>> LENR testing IMHO.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bob Cook.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From: *CB Sites <cbsit...@gmail.com>
>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, June 13, 2017 3:49 PM
>>> *To: *vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>>> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm kind of late on this, but would spin conservation do what Ed Storm
>>> asked?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "However, why would only a few hydrons fuse leaving just enough
>>> unreacted hydrons available to carry all the energy without it producing
>>>
>>> energetic radiation? I would expect occasionally,many hydrons would fuse
>>> leaving too few unreacted hydrons so that the dissipated energy
>>>
>>> would have to be very energetic and easily detected."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   If I remember, Steve and Talbot Chubbs had proposed that bose band
>>> states could distribute the energy over many nucleons
>>>
>>> in the band state.  In a 1D kronig-penny model of a periodic potential,
>>> H and D form bands and their band energy levels are separated by a
>>>
>>> 0.2eV, which means when 20MeV is spread across the band, the spectrum
>>> would be 20MeV / (n * 0.2eV) where n are the number of hyrons
>>>
>>> making up the band.  That's just back of the envelope using a 2D
>>> kronig-penny period potential.  And all of that photon energy spread over
>>>
>>> n-hydrons gets dumped right back into t

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

Measuring magnetic susceptibility is what led to bosenovas.

>From upthread:

  It is hard to form a stable BEC of more than 100 atoms, and seeing what's
going on in condensates so small is very difficult. The recent discovery of
a particular mode in rubidium-85 called a 'Feshbach resonance' increased
the maximum condensate size to several tens of thousands of atoms -- but
only at just two billionths of a degree above absolute zero. "Damn cold by
anyone's standards," as Wieman says.

Nonetheless, the new technique gave researchers a tool rather like a pair
of *magnetic pliers* to manipulate the condensates. Their results have them
scratching their heads.

When compressed quickly enough, a condensate explodes, blasting off the
outer atoms and leaving a cold, collapsed remnant. The effect has been
dubbed a 'bosenova' because of its similarity to a supernova (an exploding
star).


On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 3:05 PM, CB Sites <cbsit...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Bob,  you got me to thinking how to measure any changes in spin
> coupling or the how to detect a BEC in solid and so I began to wonder if
> measuring magnetic susceptibility in PdH and PdD would show anything.  I
> found an interesting old paper by H C Jamieson and F D Manchester "The
> magnetic susceptibility of Pd, PdH and PdD between 4 and 300 K" 1972 J.
> Phys. F: Met. Phys. 2 323 http://iopscience.iop.org/0305-4608/2/2/023.
>
> This was from back in the 70s so take it as you may.   What I found
> interesting is in the beta phase of Pd (H) was tending to be diamagnetic
> (repels) and nearly independent of temperature.  That would seem to
> indicate that the H are becoming spin aligned and could hint at the
> formation of a BEC system.  I also see a trend that D is also heading
> towards diamagenetic (negative susceptibility) with increasing  D loading.
>
> So does someone have a newer paper on the subject?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 1:37 PM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
> bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> CD Sites—
>>
>>
>>
>> I have for some time been of the mind that nuclear potential energy tied
>> up in a lattice of coherent (entangled) particles is transfered to the
>> lattice electrons in the form of spin orbital momentum—phonic energy during
>> LENR.
>>
>>
>>
>> In the Pd system with D at high loading a small BEC of D nuclei  could
>> form and then fuse to He g iven the correct  conditions involving EM
>> coupling to link neutron and proton magnetic moments with magnetic moments
>> of the Pd lattice electrons.  In this regard I consider it takes a
>> relatively strong local B field to accomplish the necessary coupling with
>> the neutron and proton making up a D nucleus.
>>
>>
>>
>> The BEC status of D’s within the lattice would allow their close approach
>> during a reaction forming a He nucleus.  The potential energy released
>> would not result in energetic particles or EM radiation, but only phonic
>> (spin) energy spread across the entire lattice.
>>
>>
>>
>> With proper resonant coupling and many BEC within a single lattice a
>> larger, more energetic, reaction occurs releasing enough phonic energy to
>> destroy the lattice or to create a bosenova.
>>
>>
>>
>> The reactions suggested above seem to fit observations from Pd system
>> LENR testing IMHO.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob Cook.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *CB Sites <cbsit...@gmail.com>
>> *Sent: *Tuesday, June 13, 2017 3:49 PM
>> *To: *vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm kind of late on this, but would spin conservation do what Ed Storm
>> asked?
>>
>>
>>
>> "However, why would only a few hydrons fuse leaving just enough unreacted
>> hydrons available to carry all the energy without it producing
>>
>> energetic radiation? I would expect occasionally,many hydrons would fuse
>> leaving too few unreacted hydrons so that the dissipated energy
>>
>> would have to be very energetic and easily detected."
>>
>>
>>
>>   If I remember, Steve and Talbot Chubbs had proposed that bose band
>> states could distribute the energy over many nucleons
>>
>> in the band state.  In a 1D kronig-penny model of a periodic potential, H
>> and D form bands and their band energy levels are separated by a
>>
>> 0.2eV, which means when 20MeV is spread across the band, the spectrum
>> would be 20MeV / (n * 0.2eV) where n are the number of hyrons
>>
>> making

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

There is research that shows superconductivity that increases in proportion
to hydrogen loading in LENR systems.

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 6:05 PM, CB Sites <cbsit...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Bob,  you got me to thinking how to measure any changes in spin
> coupling or the how to detect a BEC in solid and so I began to wonder if
> measuring magnetic susceptibility in PdH and PdD would show anything.  I
> found an interesting old paper by H C Jamieson and F D Manchester "The
> magnetic susceptibility of Pd, PdH and PdD between 4 and 300 K" 1972 J.
> Phys. F: Met. Phys. 2 323 http://iopscience.iop.org/0305-4608/2/2/023.
>
> This was from back in the 70s so take it as you may.   What I found
> interesting is in the beta phase of Pd (H) was tending to be diamagnetic
> (repels) and nearly independent of temperature.  That would seem to
> indicate that the H are becoming spin aligned and could hint at the
> formation of a BEC system.  I also see a trend that D is also heading
> towards diamagenetic (negative susceptibility) with increasing  D loading.
>
> So does someone have a newer paper on the subject?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 1:37 PM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
> bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> CD Sites—
>>
>>
>>
>> I have for some time been of the mind that nuclear potential energy tied
>> up in a lattice of coherent (entangled) particles is transfered to the
>> lattice electrons in the form of spin orbital momentum—phonic energy during
>> LENR.
>>
>>
>>
>> In the Pd system with D at high loading a small BEC of D nuclei  could
>> form and then fuse to He g iven the correct  conditions involving EM
>> coupling to link neutron and proton magnetic moments with magnetic moments
>> of the Pd lattice electrons.  In this regard I consider it takes a
>> relatively strong local B field to accomplish the necessary coupling with
>> the neutron and proton making up a D nucleus.
>>
>>
>>
>> The BEC status of D’s within the lattice would allow their close approach
>> during a reaction forming a He nucleus.  The potential energy released
>> would not result in energetic particles or EM radiation, but only phonic
>> (spin) energy spread across the entire lattice.
>>
>>
>>
>> With proper resonant coupling and many BEC within a single lattice a
>> larger, more energetic, reaction occurs releasing enough phonic energy to
>> destroy the lattice or to create a bosenova.
>>
>>
>>
>> The reactions suggested above seem to fit observations from Pd system
>> LENR testing IMHO.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob Cook.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *CB Sites <cbsit...@gmail.com>
>> *Sent: *Tuesday, June 13, 2017 3:49 PM
>> *To: *vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm kind of late on this, but would spin conservation do what Ed Storm
>> asked?
>>
>>
>>
>> "However, why would only a few hydrons fuse leaving just enough unreacted
>> hydrons available to carry all the energy without it producing
>>
>> energetic radiation? I would expect occasionally,many hydrons would fuse
>> leaving too few unreacted hydrons so that the dissipated energy
>>
>> would have to be very energetic and easily detected."
>>
>>
>>
>>   If I remember, Steve and Talbot Chubbs had proposed that bose band
>> states could distribute the energy over many nucleons
>>
>> in the band state.  In a 1D kronig-penny model of a periodic potential, H
>> and D form bands and their band energy levels are separated by a
>>
>> 0.2eV, which means when 20MeV is spread across the band, the spectrum
>> would be 20MeV / (n * 0.2eV) where n are the number of hyrons
>>
>> making up the band.  That's just back of the envelope using a 2D
>> kronig-penny period potential.  And all of that photon energy spread over
>>
>> n-hydrons gets dumped right back into the lattice.  Similar in a sense to
>> the Mossbauer effect.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2017/jun/12/superfl
>> uid-polaritons-seen-at-room-temperature
>>
>>
>> Superfluid polaritons seen at room temperature
>>
>>
>>
>> the polaritons behave like a fluid that can flow without friction around
>> obstacles, which were f

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[CB Sites]

Hi Bob,  you got me to thinking how to measure any changes in spin coupling
or the how to detect a BEC in solid and so I began to wonder if measuring
magnetic susceptibility in PdH and PdD would show anything.  I found an
interesting old paper by H C Jamieson and F D Manchester "The magnetic
susceptibility of Pd, PdH and PdD between 4 and 300 K" 1972 J. Phys. F:
Met. Phys. 2 323 http://iopscience.iop.org/0305-4608/2/2/023.

This was from back in the 70s so take it as you may.   What I found
interesting is in the beta phase of Pd (H) was tending to be diamagnetic
(repels) and nearly independent of temperature.  That would seem to
indicate that the H are becoming spin aligned and could hint at the
formation of a BEC system.  I also see a trend that D is also heading
towards diamagenetic (negative susceptibility) with increasing  D loading.

So does someone have a newer paper on the subject?





On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 1:37 PM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> CD Sites—
>
>
>
> I have for some time been of the mind that nuclear potential energy tied
> up in a lattice of coherent (entangled) particles is transfered to the
> lattice electrons in the form of spin orbital momentum—phonic energy during
> LENR.
>
>
>
> In the Pd system with D at high loading a small BEC of D nuclei  could
> form and then fuse to He g iven the correct  conditions involving EM
> coupling to link neutron and proton magnetic moments with magnetic moments
> of the Pd lattice electrons.  In this regard I consider it takes a
> relatively strong local B field to accomplish the necessary coupling with
> the neutron and proton making up a D nucleus.
>
>
>
> The BEC status of D’s within the lattice would allow their close approach
> during a reaction forming a He nucleus.  The potential energy released
> would not result in energetic particles or EM radiation, but only phonic
> (spin) energy spread across the entire lattice.
>
>
>
> With proper resonant coupling and many BEC within a single lattice a
> larger, more energetic, reaction occurs releasing enough phonic energy to
> destroy the lattice or to create a bosenova.
>
>
>
> The reactions suggested above seem to fit observations from Pd system LENR
> testing IMHO.
>
>
>
> Bob Cook.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *CB Sites <cbsit...@gmail.com>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, June 13, 2017 3:49 PM
> *To: *vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature
>
>
>
> I'm kind of late on this, but would spin conservation do what Ed Storm
> asked?
>
>
>
> "However, why would only a few hydrons fuse leaving just enough unreacted
> hydrons available to carry all the energy without it producing
>
> energetic radiation? I would expect occasionally,many hydrons would fuse
> leaving too few unreacted hydrons so that the dissipated energy
>
> would have to be very energetic and easily detected."
>
>
>
>   If I remember, Steve and Talbot Chubbs had proposed that bose band
> states could distribute the energy over many nucleons
>
> in the band state.  In a 1D kronig-penny model of a periodic potential, H
> and D form bands and their band energy levels are separated by a
>
> 0.2eV, which means when 20MeV is spread across the band, the spectrum
> would be 20MeV / (n * 0.2eV) where n are the number of hyrons
>
> making up the band.  That's just back of the envelope using a 2D
> kronig-penny period potential.  And all of that photon energy spread over
>
> n-hydrons gets dumped right back into the lattice.  Similar in a sense to
> the Mossbauer effect.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2017/jun/12/
> superfluid-polaritons-seen-at-room-temperature
>
>
> Superfluid polaritons seen at room temperature
>
>
>
> the polaritons behave like a fluid that can flow without friction around
> obstacles, which were formed by using a laser to burn small holes in the
> organic material. This is interpreted by the researchers as being a
> signature of the superfluid behaviour.
>
>
>
> there might be some sort of link between a superfluid and a Bose–Einstein
> condensate (BEC) – the latter being a state of matter in which all
> constituent particles have condensed into a single quantum state. He was
> proved right in 1995 when superfluidity was observed in BECs made from
> ultracold atoms
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> A Bose condinsate brings super radiance and super absorption into play.
>

RE: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

CD Sites—

I have for some time been of the mind that nuclear potential energy tied up in 
a lattice of coherent (entangled) particles is transfered to the lattice 
electrons in the form of spin orbital momentum—phonic energy during LENR.

In the Pd system with D at high loading a small BEC of D nuclei  could form and 
then fuse to He g iven the correct  conditions involving EM coupling to link 
neutron and proton magnetic moments with magnetic moments of the Pd lattice 
electrons.  In this regard I consider it takes a relatively strong local B 
field to accomplish the necessary coupling with the neutron and proton making 
up a D nucleus.

The BEC status of D’s within the lattice would allow their close approach 
during a reaction forming a He nucleus.  The potential energy released would 
not result in energetic particles or EM radiation, but only phonic (spin) 
energy spread across the entire lattice.

With proper resonant coupling and many BEC within a single lattice a larger, 
more energetic, reaction occurs releasing enough phonic energy to destroy the 
lattice or to create a bosenova.

The reactions suggested above seem to fit observations from Pd system LENR 
testing IMHO.

Bob Cook.


From: CB Sites<mailto:cbsit...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 3:49 PM
To: vortex-l<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

I'm kind of late on this, but would spin conservation do what Ed Storm asked?

"However, why would only a few hydrons fuse leaving just enough unreacted 
hydrons available to carry all the energy without it producing
energetic radiation? I would expect occasionally,many hydrons would fuse 
leaving too few unreacted hydrons so that the dissipated energy
would have to be very energetic and easily detected."

  If I remember, Steve and Talbot Chubbs had proposed that bose band states 
could distribute the energy over many nucleons
in the band state.  In a 1D kronig-penny model of a periodic potential, H and D 
form bands and their band energy levels are separated by a
0.2eV, which means when 20MeV is spread across the band, the spectrum would be 
20MeV / (n * 0.2eV) where n are the number of hyrons
making up the band.  That's just back of the envelope using a 2D kronig-penny 
period potential.  And all of that photon energy spread over
n-hydrons gets dumped right back into the lattice.  Similar in a sense to the 
Mossbauer effect.





On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Axil Axil 
<janap...@gmail.com<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>> wrote:
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2017/jun/12/superfluid-polaritons-seen-at-room-temperature

Superfluid polaritons seen at room temperature

the polaritons behave like a fluid that can flow without friction around 
obstacles, which were formed by using a laser to burn small holes in the 
organic material. This is interpreted by the researchers as being a signature 
of the superfluid behaviour.

there might be some sort of link between a superfluid and a Bose–Einstein 
condensate (BEC) – the latter being a state of matter in which all constituent 
particles have condensed into a single quantum state. He was proved right in 
1995 when superfluidity was observed in BECs made from ultracold atoms



On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Axil Axil 
<janap...@gmail.com<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>> wrote:
A Bose condinsate brings super radiance and super absorption into play. These 
mechanisms produce concentration, storage,  and amplification of low level 
energy and goes as "N", the number of items in the condinsate.

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Frank Znidarsic 
<fznidar...@aol.com<mailto:fznidar...@aol.com>> wrote:
Why is a Bose Condensate needed?  Its a matter of size and energy.  The smaller 
the size of something we want to see the more energy it takes.  Using low 
energy radar you will never be able to read something as small as this text.  
You need to go to UV energies to study atoms.  Higher ionizing energies are 
needed to study the nuclear forces.  Really high energy accelerator energies 
are required to look at subatomic particles.

The common complaint physicists have with cold fusion is that the energy levels 
are to low to induce any type of nuclear reaction.  They never, however, 
considered the energy levels of a large hundreds of atoms wide condensed 
nano-particle.  Its energy levels are quite low.  Warm thermal vibrations 
appear to the nano particle as a high energy excitation.  This again is a 
matter of its size.  It's not cracks, or shrunken atoms at work.  It is the 
thermal excitation of a nano particle that yields the required energy.

Again the simulation induces a velocity of one million meters per second.

Frank Z

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

LENR theorists have been looking for the special particle that can absorb
high energy from a nuclear reaction for years.  That particle has been
given many names over the year, but for me that special particle is the
polariton, a particle made of light.

On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 8:04 PM, CB Sites  wrote:

> Y.E. Kim also has an interesting theory paper that demonstrates the
> possibility of a high temperature BEC for the hydrons.  I think it was
> constrained in a lattice as well.
> I always thought that would be an excellent research topic, the formation
> of hydron BECS in solids, there detection and measurement.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 7:49 PM, CB Sites  wrote:
>
>> I'm kind of late on this, but would spin conservation do what Ed Storm
>> asked?
>>
>> "However, why would only a few hydrons fuse leaving just enough unreacted
>> hydrons available to carry all the energy without it producing
>> energetic radiation? I would expect occasionally,many hydrons would fuse
>> leaving too few unreacted hydrons so that the dissipated energy
>> would have to be very energetic and easily detected."
>>
>>   If I remember, Steve and Talbot Chubbs had proposed that bose band
>> states could distribute the energy over many nucleons
>> in the band state.  In a 1D kronig-penny model of a periodic potential, H
>> and D form bands and their band energy levels are separated by a
>> 0.2eV, which means when 20MeV is spread across the band, the spectrum
>> would be 20MeV / (n * 0.2eV) where n are the number of hyrons
>> making up the band.  That's just back of the envelope using a 2D
>> kronig-penny period potential.  And all of that photon energy spread over
>> n-hydrons gets dumped right back into the lattice.  Similar in a sense to
>> the Mossbauer effect.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2017/jun/12/superfl
>>> uid-polaritons-seen-at-room-temperature
>>>
>>> Superfluid polaritons seen at room temperature
>>>
>>> the polaritons behave like a fluid that can flow without friction around
>>> obstacles, which were formed by using a laser to burn small holes in the
>>> organic material. This is interpreted by the researchers as being a
>>> signature of the superfluid behaviour.
>>>
>>> there might be some sort of link between a superfluid and a
>>> Bose–Einstein condensate (BEC) – the latter being a state of matter in
>>> which all constituent particles have condensed into a single quantum state.
>>> He was proved right in 1995 when superfluidity was observed in BECs made
>>> from ultracold atoms
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>>
 A Bose condinsate brings super radiance and super absorption into play.
 These mechanisms produce concentration, storage,  and amplification of low
 level energy and goes as "N", the number of items in the condinsate.

 On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Frank Znidarsic 
 wrote:

> Why is a Bose Condensate needed?  Its a matter of size and energy.
> The smaller the size of something we want to see the more energy it takes.
> Using low energy radar you will never be able to read something as small 
> as
> this text.  You need to go to UV energies to study atoms.  Higher ionizing
> energies are needed to study the nuclear forces.  Really high energy
> accelerator energies are required to look at subatomic particles.
>
> The common complaint physicists have with cold fusion is that the
> energy levels are to low to induce any type of nuclear reaction.  They
> never, however, considered the energy levels of a large hundreds of atoms
> wide condensed nano-particle.  Its energy levels are quite low.  Warm
> thermal vibrations appear to the nano particle as a high energy
> excitation.  This again is a matter of its size.  It's not cracks, or
> shrunken atoms at work.  It is the thermal excitation of a nano particle
> that yields the required energy.
>
> Again the simulation induces a velocity of one million meters per
> second.
>
> Frank Z
>
>
>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[CB Sites]

Y.E. Kim also has an interesting theory paper that demonstrates the
possibility of a high temperature BEC for the hydrons.  I think it was
constrained in a lattice as well.
I always thought that would be an excellent research topic, the formation
of hydron BECS in solids, there detection and measurement.






On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 7:49 PM, CB Sites  wrote:

> I'm kind of late on this, but would spin conservation do what Ed Storm
> asked?
>
> "However, why would only a few hydrons fuse leaving just enough unreacted
> hydrons available to carry all the energy without it producing
> energetic radiation? I would expect occasionally,many hydrons would fuse
> leaving too few unreacted hydrons so that the dissipated energy
> would have to be very energetic and easily detected."
>
>   If I remember, Steve and Talbot Chubbs had proposed that bose band
> states could distribute the energy over many nucleons
> in the band state.  In a 1D kronig-penny model of a periodic potential, H
> and D form bands and their band energy levels are separated by a
> 0.2eV, which means when 20MeV is spread across the band, the spectrum
> would be 20MeV / (n * 0.2eV) where n are the number of hyrons
> making up the band.  That's just back of the envelope using a 2D
> kronig-penny period potential.  And all of that photon energy spread over
> n-hydrons gets dumped right back into the lattice.  Similar in a sense to
> the Mossbauer effect.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2017/jun/12/superfl
>> uid-polaritons-seen-at-room-temperature
>>
>> Superfluid polaritons seen at room temperature
>>
>> the polaritons behave like a fluid that can flow without friction around
>> obstacles, which were formed by using a laser to burn small holes in the
>> organic material. This is interpreted by the researchers as being a
>> signature of the superfluid behaviour.
>>
>> there might be some sort of link between a superfluid and a Bose–Einstein
>> condensate (BEC) – the latter being a state of matter in which all
>> constituent particles have condensed into a single quantum state. He was
>> proved right in 1995 when superfluidity was observed in BECs made from
>> ultracold atoms
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> A Bose condinsate brings super radiance and super absorption into play.
>>> These mechanisms produce concentration, storage,  and amplification of low
>>> level energy and goes as "N", the number of items in the condinsate.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Frank Znidarsic 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Why is a Bose Condensate needed?  Its a matter of size and energy.  The
 smaller the size of something we want to see the more energy it takes.
 Using low energy radar you will never be able to read something as small as
 this text.  You need to go to UV energies to study atoms.  Higher ionizing
 energies are needed to study the nuclear forces.  Really high energy
 accelerator energies are required to look at subatomic particles.

 The common complaint physicists have with cold fusion is that the
 energy levels are to low to induce any type of nuclear reaction.  They
 never, however, considered the energy levels of a large hundreds of atoms
 wide condensed nano-particle.  Its energy levels are quite low.  Warm
 thermal vibrations appear to the nano particle as a high energy
 excitation.  This again is a matter of its size.  It's not cracks, or
 shrunken atoms at work.  It is the thermal excitation of a nano particle
 that yields the required energy.

 Again the simulation induces a velocity of one million meters per
 second.

 Frank Z




>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[CB Sites]

I'm kind of late on this, but would spin conservation do what Ed Storm
asked?

"However, why would only a few hydrons fuse leaving just enough unreacted
hydrons available to carry all the energy without it producing
energetic radiation? I would expect occasionally,many hydrons would fuse
leaving too few unreacted hydrons so that the dissipated energy
would have to be very energetic and easily detected."

  If I remember, Steve and Talbot Chubbs had proposed that bose band states
could distribute the energy over many nucleons
in the band state.  In a 1D kronig-penny model of a periodic potential, H
and D form bands and their band energy levels are separated by a
0.2eV, which means when 20MeV is spread across the band, the spectrum would
be 20MeV / (n * 0.2eV) where n are the number of hyrons
making up the band.  That's just back of the envelope using a 2D
kronig-penny period potential.  And all of that photon energy spread over
n-hydrons gets dumped right back into the lattice.  Similar in a sense to
the Mossbauer effect.





On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2017/jun/12/
> superfluid-polaritons-seen-at-room-temperature
>
> Superfluid polaritons seen at room temperature
>
> the polaritons behave like a fluid that can flow without friction around
> obstacles, which were formed by using a laser to burn small holes in the
> organic material. This is interpreted by the researchers as being a
> signature of the superfluid behaviour.
>
> there might be some sort of link between a superfluid and a Bose–Einstein
> condensate (BEC) – the latter being a state of matter in which all
> constituent particles have condensed into a single quantum state. He was
> proved right in 1995 when superfluidity was observed in BECs made from
> ultracold atoms
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> A Bose condinsate brings super radiance and super absorption into play.
>> These mechanisms produce concentration, storage,  and amplification of low
>> level energy and goes as "N", the number of items in the condinsate.
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Frank Znidarsic 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Why is a Bose Condensate needed?  Its a matter of size and energy.  The
>>> smaller the size of something we want to see the more energy it takes.
>>> Using low energy radar you will never be able to read something as small as
>>> this text.  You need to go to UV energies to study atoms.  Higher ionizing
>>> energies are needed to study the nuclear forces.  Really high energy
>>> accelerator energies are required to look at subatomic particles.
>>>
>>> The common complaint physicists have with cold fusion is that the energy
>>> levels are to low to induce any type of nuclear reaction.  They never,
>>> however, considered the energy levels of a large hundreds of atoms wide
>>> condensed nano-particle.  Its energy levels are quite low.  Warm thermal
>>> vibrations appear to the nano particle as a high energy excitation.  This
>>> again is a matter of its size.  It's not cracks, or shrunken atoms at
>>> work.  It is the thermal excitation of a nano particle that yields the
>>> required energy.
>>>
>>> Again the simulation induces a velocity of one million meters per second.
>>>
>>> Frank Z
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

Magnetic-monopole transformation seen in ultracold gas
[image: Artist's impression of the monopole transition]

Poles apart: artist's impression of the monopole transition


The transformation of a quantum monopole into a Dirac monopole has been
observed for the first time by physicists at Amherst College in the US and
Aalto University in Finland. Magnetic monopoles – entities that possess
only a north or a south magnetic pole – were predicted 80 years ago by Paul
Dirac. While isolated monopoles have never been seen, physicists have been
able to create several different collective excitations in condensed-matter
systems that resemble monopoles. Now, a team led by David Hall
 and Mikko Möttönen
 has used a Bose–Einstein
condensate (BEC) of ultracold rubidium atoms to first create an excitation
called a quantum monopole, which takes the form of a topological point
defect. The quantum monopole exists in a non-magnetized state of the BEC,
but then the team applies a magnetic field to the BEC, causing it to become
magnetized. This causes the destruction of the quantum monopole, which is
then reborn as a Dirac monopole – an excitation that more closely resembles
Dirac's original particle. "I was jumping in the air when I saw for the
first time that we get a Dirac monopole from the decay," says Möttönen.
"This discovery nicely ties together the monopoles we have been producing
over the years." The research is described in *Physical Review X*
.

On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2017/jun/12/
> superfluid-polaritons-seen-at-room-temperature
>
> Superfluid polaritons seen at room temperature
>
> the polaritons behave like a fluid that can flow without friction around
> obstacles, which were formed by using a laser to burn small holes in the
> organic material. This is interpreted by the researchers as being a
> signature of the superfluid behaviour.
>
> there might be some sort of link between a superfluid and a Bose–Einstein
> condensate (BEC) – the latter being a state of matter in which all
> constituent particles have condensed into a single quantum state. He was
> proved right in 1995 when superfluidity was observed in BECs made from
> ultracold atoms
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> A Bose condinsate brings super radiance and super absorption into play.
>> These mechanisms produce concentration, storage,  and amplification of low
>> level energy and goes as "N", the number of items in the condinsate.
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Frank Znidarsic 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Why is a Bose Condensate needed?  Its a matter of size and energy.  The
>>> smaller the size of something we want to see the more energy it takes.
>>> Using low energy radar you will never be able to read something as small as
>>> this text.  You need to go to UV energies to study atoms.  Higher ionizing
>>> energies are needed to study the nuclear forces.  Really high energy
>>> accelerator energies are required to look at subatomic particles.
>>>
>>> The common complaint physicists have with cold fusion is that the energy
>>> levels are to low to induce any type of nuclear reaction.  They never,
>>> however, considered the energy levels of a large hundreds of atoms wide
>>> condensed nano-particle.  Its energy levels are quite low.  Warm thermal
>>> vibrations appear to the nano particle as a high energy excitation.  This
>>> again is a matter of its size.  It's not cracks, or shrunken atoms at
>>> work.  It is the thermal excitation of a nano particle that yields the
>>> required energy.
>>>
>>> Again the simulation induces a velocity of one million meters per second.
>>>
>>> Frank Z
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2017/jun/12/superfluid-polaritons-seen-at-room-temperature

Superfluid polaritons seen at room temperature

the polaritons behave like a fluid that can flow without friction around
obstacles, which were formed by using a laser to burn small holes in the
organic material. This is interpreted by the researchers as being a
signature of the superfluid behaviour.

there might be some sort of link between a superfluid and a Bose–Einstein
condensate (BEC) – the latter being a state of matter in which all
constituent particles have condensed into a single quantum state. He was
proved right in 1995 when superfluidity was observed in BECs made from
ultracold atoms



On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> A Bose condinsate brings super radiance and super absorption into play.
> These mechanisms produce concentration, storage,  and amplification of low
> level energy and goes as "N", the number of items in the condinsate.
>
> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Frank Znidarsic 
> wrote:
>
>> Why is a Bose Condensate needed?  Its a matter of size and energy.  The
>> smaller the size of something we want to see the more energy it takes.
>> Using low energy radar you will never be able to read something as small as
>> this text.  You need to go to UV energies to study atoms.  Higher ionizing
>> energies are needed to study the nuclear forces.  Really high energy
>> accelerator energies are required to look at subatomic particles.
>>
>> The common complaint physicists have with cold fusion is that the energy
>> levels are to low to induce any type of nuclear reaction.  They never,
>> however, considered the energy levels of a large hundreds of atoms wide
>> condensed nano-particle.  Its energy levels are quite low.  Warm thermal
>> vibrations appear to the nano particle as a high energy excitation.  This
>> again is a matter of its size.  It's not cracks, or shrunken atoms at
>> work.  It is the thermal excitation of a nano particle that yields the
>> required energy.
>>
>> Again the simulation induces a velocity of one million meters per second.
>>
>> Frank Z
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

That paper is gone from Y.E. Kim's faculty page at Purdue.   I found it on
lenr-forum.com



Theoretical Analysis and Reaction Mechanisms for
Experimental Results of Hydrogen-Nickel Systems

https://www.lenr-forum.com/attachment/391-iccf-18-jcmns-kh-pre-1-pdf/



Purdue Nuclear and Many-Body Theory Group (PNMBTG) Preprint- PNMBTG-10-2013
(October 2013)
Invited paper presented at the 18th International Conference on Cold Fusion
(ICCF-18), University of
Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, July 21-27, 2013, to be published in the
ICCF-18 Proceedings.
Theoretical Analysis and Reaction Mechanisms for


Experimental Results of Hydrogen-Nickel Systems

Yeong E. Kim1 and John Hadjichristos 2


1Department of Physics, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907,
USA, ye...@purdue.edu
2Defkalion Green Technologies Corporation, 1140 Homer Street, Suite 250,
Vancouver BC V682X6, Canada



Abstract—Experimental results for anomalous heat effect and super magnetic
field observed for hydrogen-Nickel systems
are described. Theoretical analysis and reaction mechanisms are presented
using theory of Boson cluster state nuclear fusion
(BCSNF) based on the optical theorem formulation. Observed excess heat
generation and anomalously large magnetic field
are explained by theoretical descriptions based on nano-scale explosions
(“Bosenova”) and proton supper currents.
Index Terms—Hydrogen fusion in metals, Boson cluster state nuclear fusion,
excess heat generation, anomalous super
magnetic field.


1. Introduction
 Recently, the experimental results of excess heat generation with
hydrogen-Nickel systems have been reported [1].
Over the past twenty four years, there have been many publications
reporting experimental observations of excess heat
generation and anomalous nuclear reactions occurring in metals at ultra-low
energies, now known as the FleischmannPons
effect [2, 3] which include both electrolysis and gas loading experiments
[3-5] and also include experiments
involving deuterium-metals [2-5] and hydrogen-metals [1,6-9]. Theoretical
explanations of the Fleischmann-Pons effect
[2,3] and the low energy nuclear phenomena [2-5] have been described based
on the theory of Bose-Einstein
condensation nuclear fusion (BECNF) or theory of Boson cluster state
nuclear fusion (BCSNF), occurring in
micro/nano-scale traps/metal particles [10-24].
 In this paper, we describe the results of the earlier experimental work
[1] as well as the more recent results of
experiments with hydrogen-Nickel systems, including the observation of
generation of anomalously large magnetic field
(“super magnetic field”). After reporting the experimental results, we
describe theoretical analysis and reaction
mechanisms for the observed experimental results of hydrogen-Nickel systems
based on the BCSNF theory [10-24].



snip


8. Summary and Future Prospects
 Defkalion’s Hyperion R-5 reactor has been demonstrated to be a reliable
working device producing excess heat at
sufficiently high level with reliable control and high reproducibility for
further scientific investigations and for practical
applications. The experimental results obtained with the HyperionR-5
reactor are described in some details.
 For theoretical analysis of the experimental data generated by the
Hyperion R-5 reactor, the theory of the Boson
cluster state nuclear fusion (BCSNF) is used. The BCSNF is a generalization
of the optical theorem formulation to low
energy nuclear reactions occurring in deuterium/hydrogen loaded metal
systems.
 It is shown that the BCSNF theory is capable of explaining qualitatively
or quantitatively most of the experimental
results and observations reported from experiments with the Hyperion R-5
reactor. In particular, the observed timecorrelation
between the super magnetic field and the excess heat generations can be
explained by the BCSNF theory
involving nano-explosions (“Bosenova”), which create the super current and
the super magnetic field as well as the
excess power generation. The observed super magnetic field is a new
phenomenon and a new scientific discovery. It
opens up a possibility of direct conversion of excess heat generation to
electric power utilizing the super magnetic field.
 Defkalion has recently acquired new two on-line real-time mass
spectrometers [27] which will be integrated with
Hyperion R-6 reactors. These integrated experimental systems are expected
to generate the experimental data for the
reaction products which are urgently needed for theoretical and scientific
understanding of nuclear-reaction dynamics in
this emerging field.
 So far, the theoretical reaction-rate formulae, (Eq. (11), etc.) were
based on analytical solutions of the approximate
time-independent Schrödinger equations for many-body systems using the
Hartree-Fock theory with correlation effects.
This corresponds to time-independent non-liner (TINL) dynamics. Such
analytical formulae for reaction rates are
extremely useful for initial qualitative analysis of the 

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

And now, bringing Bosenovas back to BECs, LENR, Y.E. Kim

http://www.physics.purdue.edu/people/faculty/yekim/ICCF-18-JCMNS-KH-Pre-1.pdf

Här är några utdrag:

Abstract*—Experimental results for anomalous heat effect and super magnetic
field observed for hydrogen-Nickel systems are described. Theoretical
analysis and reaction mechanisms are presented using theory of Boson
cluster state nuclear fusion (BCSNF) based on *the optical theorem
formulation. Observed excess heat generation and anomalously large magnetic
field are explained by theoretical descriptions based on nano-scale
explosions (“Bosenova”) and proton supper currents.

…



…

Defkalion’s Hyperion R-5 reactor has been demonstrated to be a reliable
working device producing excess heat at sufficiently high level with
reliable control and high reproducibility for further scientific
investigations and for practical applications. The experimental results
obtained with the HyperionR-5 reactor are described in some details.



On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Kevin O'Malley  wrote:

> Researchers have the bosenova blues
>
> A technique that brings the quantum world up to everyday sizeshas
> physicists scratching their heads.
>
> Jeremy Thomson
>
>
>
> http://www.nature.com/news/2001/010319/full/news010322-3.html
> [image: lbert Einstein postulated the existence of BECs in 1924]lbert
> Einstein postulated the existence of BECs in 1924
>
> Some clusters of very cold atoms have physicists foxed, the American
> Physical Society's March meeting heard this week in Seattle. Bose-Einstein
> condensates, the bizarre form of matter that bridges the tiny, topsy-turvy
> world of quantum mechanics and the everyday world, are pulling dramatic
> tricks with which today's theories just can't cope.
>
> Ordinary matter comes in five forms. Three -- solids, liquids and gases --
> are familiar. The fourth, plasmas, are found in high-temperature systems
> such as flames and fluorescent tubes. You could be forgiven for having
> never heard of the fifth: the Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC).
>
> Christened in honour of Albert Einstein, who postulated their existence in
> 1924 based on the work of Satyendra Bose, the first BECs were produced by
> Eric Cornell and Carl Wieman at the University of Colorado in 1995.
>
> These curious entities never occur naturally, can exist only at
> temperatures a few ten-billionths of a degree above absolute zero (-273
> degrees Celsius) and until recently could contain only a few hundred atoms.
> Even so, they fascinate physicists keen to deepen their understanding of
> quantum phenomena.
>
> As an atom cools, it moves increasingly slowly, causing its wavefunction
> (roughly speaking, the area in which it might be found) to grow.
> Eventually, the wavefunctions from neighbouring atoms overlap and the whole
> condensate starts to behave as a single quantum-mechanical object.
>
> It is hard to form a stable BEC of more than 100 atoms, and seeing what's
> going on in condensates so small is very difficult. The recent discovery of
> a particular mode in rubidium-85 called a 'Feshbach resonance' increased
> the maximum condensate size to several tens of thousands of atoms -- but
> only at just two billionths of a degree above absolute zero. "Damn cold by
> anyone's standards," as Wieman says.
>
> Nonetheless, the new technique gave researchers a tool rather like a pair
> of magnetic pliers to manipulate the condensates. Their results have them
> scratching their heads.
>
> When compressed quickly enough, a condensate explodes, blasting off the
> outer atoms and leaving a cold, collapsed remnant. The effect has been
> dubbed a 'bosenova' because of its similarity to a supernova (an exploding
> star).
>
> Unsurprisingly, the size of the remnant left when the condensate does a
> bosenova depends on the energy of the explosion. But, strangely, the number
> of atoms blasted off does not change. This is a real surprise, particularly
> as researchers currently have no idea what happens to the remaining atoms.
>
> Unexplained jets have also been observed projecting from the mass of atoms
> just before it collapses. And the more egg-shaped the initial condensate
> (physicists call this anisotropic), the rounder the remnant -- entirely
> contrary to expectations. Charles W. Clark of the National Institute of
> Standards and Technology in Boulder, Colorado, has even observed curious
> smoke-ring formations within a BEC1
> .
>
> "These are not complicated crystals with many degrees of freedom and
> complex interactions we are talking about; they are just atoms. We
> understand atoms, right?" Wieman jokes. "Basic physics is missing to
> explain these effects."
>
>- References
>   1. Anderson, B. P., Haljan, P. C., Regal, C. A., Feder, D. L.,
>   Collins, L. A., Clark, C. W. & Cornell, E. A. 

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

Researchers have the bosenova blues

A technique that brings the quantum world up to everyday sizeshas
physicists scratching their heads.

Jeremy Thomson



http://www.nature.com/news/2001/010319/full/news010322-3.html
[image: lbert Einstein postulated the existence of BECs in 1924]lbert
Einstein postulated the existence of BECs in 1924

Some clusters of very cold atoms have physicists foxed, the American
Physical Society's March meeting heard this week in Seattle. Bose-Einstein
condensates, the bizarre form of matter that bridges the tiny, topsy-turvy
world of quantum mechanics and the everyday world, are pulling dramatic
tricks with which today's theories just can't cope.

Ordinary matter comes in five forms. Three -- solids, liquids and gases --
are familiar. The fourth, plasmas, are found in high-temperature systems
such as flames and fluorescent tubes. You could be forgiven for having
never heard of the fifth: the Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC).

Christened in honour of Albert Einstein, who postulated their existence in
1924 based on the work of Satyendra Bose, the first BECs were produced by
Eric Cornell and Carl Wieman at the University of Colorado in 1995.

These curious entities never occur naturally, can exist only at
temperatures a few ten-billionths of a degree above absolute zero (-273
degrees Celsius) and until recently could contain only a few hundred atoms.
Even so, they fascinate physicists keen to deepen their understanding of
quantum phenomena.

As an atom cools, it moves increasingly slowly, causing its wavefunction
(roughly speaking, the area in which it might be found) to grow.
Eventually, the wavefunctions from neighbouring atoms overlap and the whole
condensate starts to behave as a single quantum-mechanical object.

It is hard to form a stable BEC of more than 100 atoms, and seeing what's
going on in condensates so small is very difficult. The recent discovery of
a particular mode in rubidium-85 called a 'Feshbach resonance' increased
the maximum condensate size to several tens of thousands of atoms -- but
only at just two billionths of a degree above absolute zero. "Damn cold by
anyone's standards," as Wieman says.

Nonetheless, the new technique gave researchers a tool rather like a pair
of magnetic pliers to manipulate the condensates. Their results have them
scratching their heads.

When compressed quickly enough, a condensate explodes, blasting off the
outer atoms and leaving a cold, collapsed remnant. The effect has been
dubbed a 'bosenova' because of its similarity to a supernova (an exploding
star).

Unsurprisingly, the size of the remnant left when the condensate does a
bosenova depends on the energy of the explosion. But, strangely, the number
of atoms blasted off does not change. This is a real surprise, particularly
as researchers currently have no idea what happens to the remaining atoms.

Unexplained jets have also been observed projecting from the mass of atoms
just before it collapses. And the more egg-shaped the initial condensate
(physicists call this anisotropic), the rounder the remnant -- entirely
contrary to expectations. Charles W. Clark of the National Institute of
Standards and Technology in Boulder, Colorado, has even observed curious
smoke-ring formations within a BEC1
.

"These are not complicated crystals with many degrees of freedom and
complex interactions we are talking about; they are just atoms. We
understand atoms, right?" Wieman jokes. "Basic physics is missing to
explain these effects."

   - References
  1. Anderson, B. P., Haljan, P. C., Regal, C. A., Feder, D. L.,
  Collins, L. A., Clark, C. W. & Cornell, E. A. Watching dark
solitons decay
  into vortex rings in a Bose-Einstein condensate. *Physics Review
  Letters* (in press).


On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 1:10 PM, Kevin O'Malley  wrote:

> I like where this is headed, especially when looking at it in a 1
> dimensional viewpoint.
> The bosenova 'explosion' has been witnessed but no one really knows what
> caused it nor where the energy came from to drive all that matter away.
> Seems like 1 or 2 fusion events might be enough energy to do it.
>
>
> Atoms don't dance the 'Bose Nova'September 3, 2009
> [image: Atoms don't dance the 'Bose Nova']
> 
> With two laser beams the researchers generate an optical lattice, where
> the atoms are confined to vertical one-dimensional structures (red) with up
> to 15 atoms aligned in each tube.
>
> (PhysOrg.com) -- Hanns-Christoph Naegerl's research group at the Institute
> for Experimental Physics, Austria, has investigated how ultracold quantum
> gases behave in lower spatial dimensions. They successfully realized an
> exotic state, where, due to the laws of quantum mechanics, atoms align
> along a one-dimensional structure. A stable many-body phase with new
> quantum mechanical 

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

I like where this is headed, especially when looking at it in a 1
dimensional viewpoint.
The bosenova 'explosion' has been witnessed but no one really knows what
caused it nor where the energy came from to drive all that matter away.
Seems like 1 or 2 fusion events might be enough energy to do it.


Atoms don't dance the 'Bose Nova'September 3, 2009
[image: Atoms don't dance the 'Bose Nova']

With two laser beams the researchers generate an optical lattice, where the
atoms are confined to vertical one-dimensional structures (red) with up to
15 atoms aligned in each tube.

(PhysOrg.com) -- Hanns-Christoph Naegerl's research group at the Institute
for Experimental Physics, Austria, has investigated how ultracold quantum
gases behave in lower spatial dimensions. They successfully realized an
exotic state, where, due to the laws of quantum mechanics, atoms align
along a one-dimensional structure. A stable many-body phase with new
quantum mechanical states is thereby produced even though the atoms are
usually strongly attracted which would cause the system to collapse. The
scientists report on their findings in the leading scientific journal
*Science*.

Interactions are considerably more drastic in low-dimensional systems than
in three-dimensional ones. Thus, physicists take a special interest in
these systems. In physics zero-dimensional quantum dots
, two-dimensional quantum wells and
also one-dimensional quantum wires are known. The latter are spatial
potential structures, where carriers can move only one-dimensionally.

Whereas quantum dots and wells can be realized and analyzed relatively
easily, it is much harder to investigate quantum wires in solid-state
bodies. Hanns-Christoph Naegerl’s research group of the Institute for
Experimental Physics of the University of Innsbruck has now tried something
totally different: In a cloud of ultracold atoms they realized
one-dimensional structures and thoroughly analyzed their properties.

*Surprising observation*

In a vacuum chamber  the physicists
produced a Bose-Einstein condensate
 with approx. 40,000
ultracold cesium atoms. With two laser beams they generated an optical
lattice, where the atoms were confined to vertical one-dimensional
structures with up to 15 atoms aligned in each tube. The laser beams
prevent the atoms from breaking ranks or changing place with each other.
[image: Atoms don't dance the 'Bose Nova']

A stable many-body phase with new quantum mechanical states is produced
(front) even though the atoms are usually strongly attracted which would
cause the system to collapse (back).

Using a magnetic field, the scientists could tune the interaction between
the atoms: “By increasing the interaction energy between the atoms
(attraction interaction), the atoms start coming together and the structure
quickly decays,“ Naegerl explains what is called among experts the
"Bosenova" effect.

"By minimizing the interaction energy, the atoms repel each other
(repulsive interaction), align vertically and regularly along a
one-dimensional structure and the system is stable." If the interactions
are switched from strongly repulsive to strongly attractive, a surprising
effect can be observed. "We thereby achieve an exotic, gas-like phase,
where the atoms are excited and correlated but do not come together and a
'Bosenova' effect is absent," Naegerl says. The phase was diagnosed by
compressing the quantum gas and measuring its stiffness. "However, this
excited many-body phase can only be realized by a detour via repulsive
interaction. This phase was predicted four years ago and we have now been
able to realize it experimentally for the first time," Elmar Haller says.
He is first author of the research paper, which is now published in the
renowned scientific journal *Science*. Currently, research on
low-dimensional structures receives a lot of attention internationally and
it may help to better understand the functioning of high-temperature
superconductors.

*Cold atoms as an ideal field of experimentation*

"Ultracold quantum gases offer a big advantage: They can be isolated
against the environment quite well," Naegerl explains. "Moreover, in our
experiment we can practically rule out defects we often find in solid-state
bodies." With this successful experiment the Innsbruck quantum physicists
found an ideal experimental setup to further study the properties of
quantum wires. Naegerl’s team of scientists clearly benefits from the long
standing and successful research on ultracold atoms and molecules by
another Innsbruck group of physicists: the research group led by
Wittgenstein laureate Prof. Rudolf Grimm, which has already assumed a
leading role internationally.

In 

RE: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Kevin—

Thanks for that instructive review.

It seems that Storms was worried about a fast reaction of the BEC’s.

Ball lightening or Bosenovas may in fact be a reaction close to what Storms was 
worried about in the thread of 2013 you have found.  The following link 
addresses the possibility of bosenovas.

https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2001/03/implosion-and-explosion-bose-einstein-condensate-bosenova

Various LENR researchers have witnessed what they report as bosenovas.

Bob Cook

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

I found it.   This is the thread also where Ed Storms and I went a few
rounds.


[Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency
Inbox
x
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com via
 eskimo.com
5/27/13
to vortex-l

This paper verifies that a photon eradiated Bose-Einstein condensate will
cut the frequency of incoming photons by dividing that frequency between N
numbers of atoms.



http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.1261v1.pdf



Rydberg excitation of a Bose-Einstein condensate



 “The results of theoretical simulations are represented by the continuous
lines.



According to the super-atom picture the collective Rabi frequency for the
coherent excitation of N atoms is



frequency (collective) = square root(number of atoms) X frequency(single);



Where the single-particle Rabi frequency (single) is app 2 pi x 200 kHz for
our experimental parameters.”
Kevin O'Malley 
5/27/13
to vortex-l
Then is that an explanation of why Gamma rays are not observed in LENR?  If
2 of the atoms inside a multi-atom BEC fuse together, the incoming
radiation  (to the rest of the BEC) gets subdivided based upon how many
atoms have formed the BEC.  Right?
Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com via
 eskimo.com
5/27/13
to vortex-l
That is the idea. However, why would only a few hydrons fuse leaving just
enough unreacted hydrons available to carry all the energy without it
producing energetic radiation? I would expect occasionally, many hydrons
would fuse leaving too few unreacted hydrons so that the dissipated energy
would have to be very energetic and easily detected.  Also, how is this
mass-energy coupled to the unreacted hydrons? The BEC is not stable at high
temperatures, which would be present inside the BEC when mass-energy was
released. I would expect this release would destroy the BEC, leaving the
fused hydrons to dissipate energy by the normal hot fusion method.  The
concept appears to have many logical flaws.

Ed Storms
Kevin O'Malley 
5/27/13
to vortex-l
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:03 AM, Edmund Storms 
 wrote:

> That is the idea. However, why would only a few hydrons fuse leaving just
> enough unreacted hydrons available to carry all the energy without it
> producing energetic radiation? I would expect occasionally, many hydrons
> would fuse leaving too few unreacted hydrons so that the dissipated energy
> would have to be very energetic and easily detected
>
***That would account for the very occasional neutron being observed,
right?  And it also would account for how few of them get observed as
well.  They only happen when a multiple-fusion event takes place inside the
BEC and there isn't enough BEC infrastructure to absorb the energy.



> .  Also, how is this mass-energy coupled to the unreacted hydrons? The BEC
> is not stable at high temperatures, which would be present inside the BEC
> when mass-energy was released. I would expect this release would destroy
> the BEC, leaving the fused hydrons to dissipate energy by the normal hot
> fusion method.
>
***I would expect it as well.  Like an explosion taking place inside a
house, the structure blocks much of the energy while it is momentarily in
place.  And then another BEC forms, 2 atoms fuse, and the reaction goes on
& on.




>  The concept appears to have many logical flaws.
>
> Ed Storms
>
> On May 27, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:
>
> Then is that an explanation of why Gamma rays are not observed in LENR?
> If 2 of the atoms inside a multi-atom BEC fuse together, the incoming
> radiation  (to the rest of the BEC) gets subdivided based upon how many
> atoms have formed the BEC.  Right?
>
>
> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:49 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> This paper verifies that a photon eradiated Bose-Einstein condensate will
>> cut the frequency of incoming photons by dividing that frequency between N
>> numbers of atoms.
>>
>>
>> http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.1261v1.pdf
>>
>>
>> Rydberg excitation of a Bose-Einstein condensate
>>
>>
>>  “The results of theoretical simulations are represented by the
>> continuous lines.
>>
>>
>> According to the super-atom picture the collective Rabi frequency for the
>> coherent excitation of N atoms is
>>
>>
>> frequency (collective) = square root(number of atoms) X frequency(single);
>>
>>
>> Where the single-particle Rabi frequency (single) is app 2 pi x 200 kHz
>> for our experimental parameters.”
>>
>
>
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 3:18 AM, Kevin O'Malley  wrote:

> This might be the reference but I'm not certain.
>
>
>
> Axil Axil 
> 2/9/14
> to vortex-l
> regarding
> MIT Cold Fusion IAP 2014 Friday January 31, 2014 (Full Lecture)
>
> A lot of time was spent looking for a two level receiver that can split up
> a gamma photon into many low energy photons.
>
> A electron photon pair was not considered for some reason. I see the 

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

This might be the reference but I'm not certain.



Axil Axil 
2/9/14
to vortex-l
regarding
MIT Cold Fusion IAP 2014 Friday January 31, 2014 (Full Lecture)

A lot of time was spent looking for a two level receiver that can split up
a gamma photon into many low energy photons.

A electron photon pair was not considered for some reason. I see the NAE as
a EMF Cuisinart that slices, dices and blends all the photons that dare to
enter it. The NAE  must have a resonance frequency in the soft x-ray range. A
one to two nanometer NAE size will  put its  resonance photon frequency
into the soft x-ray range,

So whatever photon that enters into the optical based NAE will be chopped
up and rebuilt into soft x-rays.

When these x-rays are released from the NAE upon its destruction, it is
thermalized by absorption through additional  photoluminescence
processes.

This optical NAE process may be the reason that Mills sees XUV in his
reactions.

On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 2:50 AM, Kevin O'Malley  wrote:

> That super absorption sounds familiar.   There was a study done with
> lattices that thermalized gamma rays and broke them down into X-rays
> according to the number "N" of the items in the lattice.   I'll try to find
> it.
>
> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> A Bose condinsate brings super radiance and super absorption into play.
>> These mechanisms produce concentration, storage,  and amplification of low
>> level energy and goes as "N", the number of items in the condinsate.
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Frank Znidarsic 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Why is a Bose Condensate needed?  Its a matter of size and energy.  The
>>> smaller the size of something we want to see the more energy it takes.
>>> Using low energy radar you will never be able to read something as small as
>>> this text.  You need to go to UV energies to study atoms.  Higher ionizing
>>> energies are needed to study the nuclear forces.  Really high energy
>>> accelerator energies are required to look at subatomic particles.
>>>
>>> The common complaint physicists have with cold fusion is that the energy
>>> levels are to low to induce any type of nuclear reaction.  They never,
>>> however, considered the energy levels of a large hundreds of atoms wide
>>> condensed nano-particle.  Its energy levels are quite low.  Warm thermal
>>> vibrations appear to the nano particle as a high energy excitation.  This
>>> again is a matter of its size.  It's not cracks, or shrunken atoms at
>>> work.  It is the thermal excitation of a nano particle that yields the
>>> required energy.
>>>
>>> Again the simulation induces a velocity of one million meters per second.
>>>
>>> Frank Z
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

Water can shove its head through a rock by dripping on it relentlessly.
And softer materials can wear down harder materials if given time.   On the
nanoparticle scale, perhaps all that's needed is a few billion iterations
to get tunneling, and that can happen in a matter of milliseconds or maybe
picoseconds.

On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 9:27 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Sun, 11 Jun 2017 16:53:59 -0400:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >Entanglement is not subject to space time. A particle is a wave function
> that can combine with another identical wave function copies to produce a
> new wave function that is double the magnitude of each original identical
> wave functions.
> >The addition of wave functions is true for any BEC on "N" particles. The
> composite wave function is singular but N times the magnitude of each
> member of the BEC aggregate.
> >Particles are not billiard balls; they are waves.
>
> Since your head is made of particles (sorry waves), and the wall is made of
> particles (sorry waves), then you shouldn't have any difficulty shoving
> your
> head through the wall, now should you?
>
> (Somehow I doubt you will try this though.)
>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

There is experimental evidence in the form of Luttinger Liquids.   Those
are "real" and established laboratory particle exchanges.   Basically it
means that liquids form at temperatures much higher than previously thought
when they are 1 dimensional.

On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

>  Axil Axil wrote:
>
> The polariton is the exception to Jones' conjecture. The polariton is of
> boson not subject to the Pauli principle and can form a BEC at
> any temperature.
>
>
> But the polariton is a quasi-particle, meaning "less than real" if not
> imaginary.
>
> Nevertheless, the argument is alluring.
>
> We need to see evidence that quasi-particles can undergo the same
> reactions that real particles undergo.
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

 (reduce the
>>> possible locations and energy states) the coherent system “allows” for its
>>> constituent particles.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This may  make it more likely that the wave function of 2Bose particles
>>> over lap and promote a system reaction involving no immediate loss of
>>> energy, only a change in the coherent system’s configuration of constituent
>>> particles with greater kinetic energy and less potential energy tied up in
>>> force fields.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The new kinetic energy is spin angular momentum, exhibited as phonic
>>> energy (thermal energy) of the entire coherent system—the nickel lattice.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The nickel latticed is cooled by some mechanism or mechanisms.  IMHO Li
>>> vapor and hydrogen gas or Cooper pairs of hydrogen are part of a convective
>>> cooling medium surrounding each nano- particle or clumps of particles.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The complex engineering of the coherent systems, the control system
>>> which changes the probability of a reaction, anti-clumping conditions, and
>>> the cooling system suggested by the above conceptual reactor design  is the
>>> reason why LENR+ has taken so long for folks with small budgets to succeed.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bob Cook
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From: *Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
>>> *Sent: *Thursday, June 8, 2017 9:54 AM
>>> *To: *vortexallows for-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>>> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A Bose condinsate brings super radiance and super absorption into play.
>>> These mechanisms produce concentration, storage,  and amplification of low
>>> level energy and goes as "N", the number of items in the condinsate.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Frank Znidarsic <fznidar...@aol.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Why is a Bose Condensate needed?  Its a matter of size and energy.  The
>>> smaller the size of something we want to see the more energy it takes.
>>> Using low energy radar you will never be able to read something as small as
>>> this text.  You need to go to UV energies to study atoms.  Higher ionizing
>>> energies are needed to study the nuclear forces.  Really high energy
>>> accelerator energies are required to look at subatomic particles.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The common complaint physicists have with cold fusion is that the energy
>>> levels are to low to induce any type of nuclear reaction.  They never,
>>> however, considered the energy levels of a large hundreds of atoms wide
>>> condensed nano-particle.  Its energy levels are quite low.  Warm thermal
>>> vibrations appear to the nano particle as a high energy excitation.  This
>>> again is a matter of its size.  It's not cracks, or shrunken atoms at
>>> work.  It is the thermal excitation of a nano particle that yields the
>>> required energy.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Again the simulation induces a velocity of one million meters per second.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Frank Z
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

That super absorption sounds familiar.   There was a study done with
lattices that thermalized gamma rays and broke them down into X-rays
according to the number "N" of the items in the lattice.   I'll try to find
it.

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> A Bose condinsate brings super radiance and super absorption into play.
> These mechanisms produce concentration, storage,  and amplification of low
> level energy and goes as "N", the number of items in the condinsate.
>
> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Frank Znidarsic 
> wrote:
>
>> Why is a Bose Condensate needed?  Its a matter of size and energy.  The
>> smaller the size of something we want to see the more energy it takes.
>> Using low energy radar you will never be able to read something as small as
>> this text.  You need to go to UV energies to study atoms.  Higher ionizing
>> energies are needed to study the nuclear forces.  Really high energy
>> accelerator energies are required to look at subatomic particles.
>>
>> The common complaint physicists have with cold fusion is that the energy
>> levels are to low to induce any type of nuclear reaction.  They never,
>> however, considered the energy levels of a large hundreds of atoms wide
>> condensed nano-particle.  Its energy levels are quite low.  Warm thermal
>> vibrations appear to the nano particle as a high energy excitation.  This
>> again is a matter of its size.  It's not cracks, or shrunken atoms at
>> work.  It is the thermal excitation of a nano particle that yields the
>> required energy.
>>
>> Again the simulation induces a velocity of one million meters per second.
>>
>> Frank Z
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

Frank, those vibrations could be inducing a 1 dimensional Luttinger Liquid
which becomes a 1 dimensional vibrating BEC.   That is my V1DLLBEC
hypothesis.
V1DLLBEC -- Vibrating 1 Dimensional Luttinger Liquid Bose Einstein
Condensate.

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 7:02 AM, Frank Znidarsic <fznidar...@aol.com> wrote:

> From my book.  current revision.
>
> Low energy vibrations have a high energy effect at the scale
> of a condensed nano-domain. A universal dia-force-field,
> condition emerges as a consequence of the vibration. The
> dynamic magnetic fields (electromagnetic, gravitomagnetic,
> nuclear spin orbit, and weak) are driven to the surface of the
> particle. These magnetic forces, acting from a macroscopic
> surface, trigger the chemically assisted nuclear reactions.
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Frank Znidarsic <fznidar...@aol.com>
> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
> Sent: Thu, Jun 8, 2017 9:46 am
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature
>
> Why is a Bose Condensate needed?  Its a matter of size and energy.  The
> smaller the size of something we want to see the more energy it takes.
> Using low energy radar you will never be able to read something as small as
> this text.  You need to go to UV energies to study atoms.  Higher ionizing
> energies are needed to study the nuclear forces.  Really high energy
> accelerator energies are required to look at subatomic particles.
>
> The common complaint physicists have with cold fusion is that the energy
> levels are to low to induce any type of nuclear reaction.  They never,
> however, considered the energy levels of a large hundreds of atoms wide
> condensed nano-particle.  Its energy levels are quite low.  Warm thermal
> vibrations appear to the nano particle as a high energy excitation.  This
> again is a matter of its size.  It's not cracks, or shrunken atoms at
> work.  It is the thermal excitation of a nano particle that yields the
> required energy.
>
> Again the simulation induces a velocity of one million meters per second.
>
> Frank Z
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

Explaining complex ideas in a simple way takes real talent in writing and
requires lots of practice. Thanks for the opportunity to benefit from that
practice.

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 3:59 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 15:52:08 -0400:
> Hi,
>
> This explanation makes a lot more sense than what you originally said.
>
> [snip]
> >Two particles do not pass through each other, they become identical and
> >their wave functions combine in constructive interference.
> >
> >The process is as follows:
> >
> >Two different particles come to share all charctoristics,
> >
> >These two particles become on superparticle.
> >
> >Over time, this superparticle breaks apart when one or more of these
> >particle characteristics diverge.
> >
> >On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 3:43 PM,  wrote:
> >
> >> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 01:25:05 -0400:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> My point was that if particles could pass through one another like
> >> superposing
> >> waves do, then the particles of your head should be able to pass through
> >> the
> >> particles in the wall without resistance. You stated that particles were
> >> waves,
> >> and drew a picture of them passing through one another like superposing
> >> waves.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >We were talking about a particle passing through a wall not
> superposition.
> >> >
> >> >Particles can pass through a wall lock stock and barrel via tunneling.
> >> >
> >> >See
> >> >
> >> >https://www.livescience.com/20380-particles-quantum-
> tunneling-timing.html
> >> >
> >> >SKIP
> >> >
> >> >Sometimes, particles can pass through walls.
> >> >
> >> >Though it sounds like science fiction, the phenomenon is well
> documented
> >> >and even understood under the bizarre rules that govern the microscopic
> >> >world called quantum mechanics.
> >> >
> >> >Now, scientists have measured the timing of this passing-through-walls
> >> trick
> >> > >> communications-message.html>
> >> >more
> >> >accurately than ever before, and report their results in today's (May
> 17)
> >> >issue of the journal Nature.
> >> >
> >> >On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:11 AM,  wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:40:58 -0400:
> >> >> Hi,
> >> >> [snip]
> >> >> >You are correct. This concept is called tunneling.
> >> >>
> >> >> That's not what you drew. What you drew was superposition of waves.
> That
> >> >> happens
> >> >> all the time on a macroscopic scale. Most obviously in the sea on a
> >> windy
> >> >> day.
> >> >> Also with waves in air, both sound and EM. However particles don't
> seem
> >> to
> >> >> like
> >> >> doing that (witness the bump on your head. ;)
> >> >> Note also that mechanical waves are only possible precisely because
> the
> >> >> particles don't pass through one another, but pass their kinetic
> energy
> >> and
> >> >> momentum on from one to another (actually via EM fields at the atomic
> >> >> scale).
> >> >> [snip]
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards,
> >> >>
> >> >> Robin van Spaandonk
> >> >>
> >> >> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Robin van Spaandonk
> >>
> >> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
> >>
> >>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 15:52:08 -0400:
Hi,

This explanation makes a lot more sense than what you originally said.

[snip]
>Two particles do not pass through each other, they become identical and
>their wave functions combine in constructive interference.
>
>The process is as follows:
>
>Two different particles come to share all charctoristics,
>
>These two particles become on superparticle.
>
>Over time, this superparticle breaks apart when one or more of these
>particle characteristics diverge.
>
>On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 3:43 PM,  wrote:
>
>> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 01:25:05 -0400:
>> Hi,
>>
>> My point was that if particles could pass through one another like
>> superposing
>> waves do, then the particles of your head should be able to pass through
>> the
>> particles in the wall without resistance. You stated that particles were
>> waves,
>> and drew a picture of them passing through one another like superposing
>> waves.
>>
>>
>>
>> >We were talking about a particle passing through a wall not superposition.
>> >
>> >Particles can pass through a wall lock stock and barrel via tunneling.
>> >
>> >See
>> >
>> >https://www.livescience.com/20380-particles-quantum-tunneling-timing.html
>> >
>> >SKIP
>> >
>> >Sometimes, particles can pass through walls.
>> >
>> >Though it sounds like science fiction, the phenomenon is well documented
>> >and even understood under the bizarre rules that govern the microscopic
>> >world called quantum mechanics.
>> >
>> >Now, scientists have measured the timing of this passing-through-walls
>> trick
>> >> communications-message.html>
>> >more
>> >accurately than ever before, and report their results in today's (May 17)
>> >issue of the journal Nature.
>> >
>> >On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:11 AM,  wrote:
>> >
>> >> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:40:58 -0400:
>> >> Hi,
>> >> [snip]
>> >> >You are correct. This concept is called tunneling.
>> >>
>> >> That's not what you drew. What you drew was superposition of waves. That
>> >> happens
>> >> all the time on a macroscopic scale. Most obviously in the sea on a
>> windy
>> >> day.
>> >> Also with waves in air, both sound and EM. However particles don't seem
>> to
>> >> like
>> >> doing that (witness the bump on your head. ;)
>> >> Note also that mechanical waves are only possible precisely because the
>> >> particles don't pass through one another, but pass their kinetic energy
>> and
>> >> momentum on from one to another (actually via EM fields at the atomic
>> >> scale).
>> >> [snip]
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >>
>> >> Robin van Spaandonk
>> >>
>> >> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>> >>
>> >>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robin van Spaandonk
>>
>> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>>
>>
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

Two particles do not pass through each other, they become identical and
their wave functions combine in constructive interference.

The process is as follows:

Two different particles come to share all charctoristics,

These two particles become on superparticle.

Over time, this superparticle breaks apart when one or more of these
particle characteristics diverge.

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 3:43 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 01:25:05 -0400:
> Hi,
>
> My point was that if particles could pass through one another like
> superposing
> waves do, then the particles of your head should be able to pass through
> the
> particles in the wall without resistance. You stated that particles were
> waves,
> and drew a picture of them passing through one another like superposing
> waves.
>
>
>
> >We were talking about a particle passing through a wall not superposition.
> >
> >Particles can pass through a wall lock stock and barrel via tunneling.
> >
> >See
> >
> >https://www.livescience.com/20380-particles-quantum-tunneling-timing.html
> >
> >SKIP
> >
> >Sometimes, particles can pass through walls.
> >
> >Though it sounds like science fiction, the phenomenon is well documented
> >and even understood under the bizarre rules that govern the microscopic
> >world called quantum mechanics.
> >
> >Now, scientists have measured the timing of this passing-through-walls
> trick
> > communications-message.html>
> >more
> >accurately than ever before, and report their results in today's (May 17)
> >issue of the journal Nature.
> >
> >On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:11 AM,  wrote:
> >
> >> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:40:58 -0400:
> >> Hi,
> >> [snip]
> >> >You are correct. This concept is called tunneling.
> >>
> >> That's not what you drew. What you drew was superposition of waves. That
> >> happens
> >> all the time on a macroscopic scale. Most obviously in the sea on a
> windy
> >> day.
> >> Also with waves in air, both sound and EM. However particles don't seem
> to
> >> like
> >> doing that (witness the bump on your head. ;)
> >> Note also that mechanical waves are only possible precisely because the
> >> particles don't pass through one another, but pass their kinetic energy
> and
> >> momentum on from one to another (actually via EM fields at the atomic
> >> scale).
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Robin van Spaandonk
> >>
> >> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
> >>
> >>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 01:25:05 -0400:
Hi,

My point was that if particles could pass through one another like superposing
waves do, then the particles of your head should be able to pass through the
particles in the wall without resistance. You stated that particles were waves,
and drew a picture of them passing through one another like superposing waves.



>We were talking about a particle passing through a wall not superposition.
>
>Particles can pass through a wall lock stock and barrel via tunneling.
>
>See
>
>https://www.livescience.com/20380-particles-quantum-tunneling-timing.html
>
>SKIP
>
>Sometimes, particles can pass through walls.
>
>Though it sounds like science fiction, the phenomenon is well documented
>and even understood under the bizarre rules that govern the microscopic
>world called quantum mechanics.
>
>Now, scientists have measured the timing of this passing-through-walls trick
>
>more
>accurately than ever before, and report their results in today's (May 17)
>issue of the journal Nature.
>
>On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:11 AM,  wrote:
>
>> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:40:58 -0400:
>> Hi,
>> [snip]
>> >You are correct. This concept is called tunneling.
>>
>> That's not what you drew. What you drew was superposition of waves. That
>> happens
>> all the time on a macroscopic scale. Most obviously in the sea on a windy
>> day.
>> Also with waves in air, both sound and EM. However particles don't seem to
>> like
>> doing that (witness the bump on your head. ;)
>> Note also that mechanical waves are only possible precisely because the
>> particles don't pass through one another, but pass their kinetic energy and
>> momentum on from one to another (actually via EM fields at the atomic
>> scale).
>> [snip]
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robin van Spaandonk
>>
>> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>>
>>
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

RE: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Harry-

You noted the following:

Monday, June 5, 2017 6:23 PM—

“However, as I recall there is a story floating around that a certain batch of 
Pd from the supplier seemed to work best.  If that is true then the energy 
storage might have happened prior to the experiment when the Pd was processed 
by the supplier.”


Pd manufacturing may well involve various grain sizes as well as their 
orientation with respect
Crystalline axis orientations.  Strong ambient magnetic fields during hot 
processing (hot rolling for example) with rapid quenching are what I have in 
mind.

Nickel may also respond like the Pd does during processing or subqequent 
processing.

I would guess that Pd nano particles may act in a similar manner to Ni nano 
particles in a LENR+ reactor.  Surprisingly, I have not heard of LENR 
experiments using Pd nano particles.  However, I m,at just be in the dark.

Bob Cook




From: H LV<mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, June 5, 2017 6:23 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

Ok, the numbers in this paper rule out the possibility of energy storage during 
the experiment.
.
However, as I recall there is a story floating around that a certain batch of 
Pd from the supplier seemed to work best.
If that is true then the energy storage might have happened prior to the 
experiment when the Pd was processed
by the supplier.


Harry

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 8:43 PM, Jed Rothwell 
<jedrothw...@gmail.com<mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Please review the numbers in the paper, which is here:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RouletteTresultsofi.pdf

For experiment 4, the excess heat lasted 70 days. The total experiment duration 
was 123 days. If there was a storage phase, it lasted 53 days. This would show 
up as an endothermic reaction, which would reduce power output by much more 
than the exothermic reaction that followed, because it would be shorter. Any 
calorimeter that can measure a positive exothermic reaction of X watts can 
measure an endothermic reaction of -X watts equally well.

Energy storage is ruled out.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[ChemE Stewart]

50% chance of emerging entropic branes bringing rain today...

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> The standard model is wrong. Gravity fits into a LENR based theory where
> ALL the forces of nature are Entropic. All the fundamental forces
> including gravity are not fundamental but instead they all emerge like
> gravity from entanglement.
>
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 11:49 AM, CB Sites  wrote:
>
>> You know what Axil.  The Entropic Gravity theory was one of the few
>> theories that made me step back and made me do a double take and change my
>> view of how gravity works.   It's not a coincidence that gravity just
>> doesn't fit into standard model.  If gravity is due to entropic forces of
>> an occupied space partition, it makes sense that gravity is not part of the
>> standard model.  There is no need for gravitinos or mediators.  Relativity
>> and space-time curvature all fit nicely into that model.
>>
>> If you do physics and have never read the papers on Entropic Gravity, I
>> highly recommend you do.  It may very well change your whole view on the
>> universe.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> Here is the description of entropic force and why there is not dark
>>> matter particle,,,hydrino.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropic_gravity
>>>
>>> LENR will prove this theory and change science and cosmology.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>>
 When particles are entangled, they are connected to each other by a
 wormhole that circumvents normal space time correlations.

 see

 https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/new-einstein-equati
 on-wormholes-quantum-gravity

 Space time is now believed to be connected through long range
 entanglement. The forces of nature are emergent from entanglement.  This is
 why BECs are important in LENR because the nature of these fundamental
 forces are affected by the BEC. These forces are called entropic forces.

 Without a BEC, LENR produces radioactive isotopes. With a BEC, LENR
 produces stable isotopes. The BEC increases the activity of the electroweak
 force.

 On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:49 AM,  wrote:

> In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017
> 00:19:54
> +:
> Hi Bob,
> [snip]
> >Robin—
> >It’s the last sentence in the introduction that is pertinent.  It
> makes the point that the BEC
> >Can be described by a wave function as if it were a single particle.
>
> Not exactly "as if". You missed the word "parallel". IOW the two wave
> functions
> share some properties in common, but not necessarily all. In fact he
> says
> "collective" properties, IOW those properties which can be shared by a
> collection. That doesn't include position.
> [snip]
> >You suggest that a coherent system state as described by a wave
> function does include a specification of probable . relative location of
> charge centers and/or magnetic dipole centers.  What  are the parameters 
> of
> the system state that you believe the paper considers are pertinent?
>
> For that I would have to read the whole paper, and I am not so
> inclined at the
> moment. But if you find something to support your position, and post
> it here,
> I'll be happy to discuss it with you.
> [snip]
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

The standard model is wrong. Gravity fits into a LENR based theory where
ALL the forces of nature are Entropic. All the fundamental forces including
gravity are not fundamental but instead they all emerge like gravity from
entanglement.

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 11:49 AM, CB Sites  wrote:

> You know what Axil.  The Entropic Gravity theory was one of the few
> theories that made me step back and made me do a double take and change my
> view of how gravity works.   It's not a coincidence that gravity just
> doesn't fit into standard model.  If gravity is due to entropic forces of
> an occupied space partition, it makes sense that gravity is not part of the
> standard model.  There is no need for gravitinos or mediators.  Relativity
> and space-time curvature all fit nicely into that model.
>
> If you do physics and have never read the papers on Entropic Gravity, I
> highly recommend you do.  It may very well change your whole view on the
> universe.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> Here is the description of entropic force and why there is not dark
>> matter particle,,,hydrino.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropic_gravity
>>
>> LENR will prove this theory and change science and cosmology.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> When particles are entangled, they are connected to each other by a
>>> wormhole that circumvents normal space time correlations.
>>>
>>> see
>>>
>>> https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/new-einstein-equati
>>> on-wormholes-quantum-gravity
>>>
>>> Space time is now believed to be connected through long range
>>> entanglement. The forces of nature are emergent from entanglement.  This is
>>> why BECs are important in LENR because the nature of these fundamental
>>> forces are affected by the BEC. These forces are called entropic forces.
>>>
>>> Without a BEC, LENR produces radioactive isotopes. With a BEC, LENR
>>> produces stable isotopes. The BEC increases the activity of the electroweak
>>> force.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:49 AM,  wrote:
>>>
 In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017
 00:19:54
 +:
 Hi Bob,
 [snip]
 >Robin—
 >It’s the last sentence in the introduction that is pertinent.  It
 makes the point that the BEC
 >Can be described by a wave function as if it were a single particle.

 Not exactly "as if". You missed the word "parallel". IOW the two wave
 functions
 share some properties in common, but not necessarily all. In fact he
 says
 "collective" properties, IOW those properties which can be shared by a
 collection. That doesn't include position.
 [snip]
 >You suggest that a coherent system state as described by a wave
 function does include a specification of probable . relative location of
 charge centers and/or magnetic dipole centers.  What  are the parameters of
 the system state that you believe the paper considers are pertinent?

 For that I would have to read the whole paper, and I am not so inclined
 at the
 moment. But if you find something to support your position, and post it
 here,
 I'll be happy to discuss it with you.
 [snip]
 Regards,

 Robin van Spaandonk

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


>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[H LV]

Verlinde's new theory of gravity passes first test
December 16, 2016
https://phys.org/news/2016-12-verlinde-theory-gravity.html

More information: Margot M. Brouwer et al. First test of Verlinde's theory
of Emergent Gravity using Weak Gravitational Lensing measurements, Monthly
Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (2016). DOI:
10.1093/mnras/stw3192 , On Arxiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.03034


Harry

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 11:49 AM, CB Sites  wrote:

> You know what Axil.  The Entropic Gravity theory was one of the few
> theories that made me step back and made me do a double take and change my
> view of how gravity works.   It's not a coincidence that gravity just
> doesn't fit into standard model.  If gravity is due to entropic forces of
> an occupied space partition, it makes sense that gravity is not part of the
> standard model.  There is no need for gravitinos or mediators.  Relativity
> and space-time curvature all fit nicely into that model.
>
> If you do physics and have never read the papers on Entropic Gravity, I
> highly recommend you do.  It may very well change your whole view on the
> universe.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> Here is the description of entropic force and why there is not dark
>> matter particle,,,hydrino.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropic_gravity
>>
>> LENR will prove this theory and change science and cosmology.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> When particles are entangled, they are connected to each other by a
>>> wormhole that circumvents normal space time correlations.
>>>
>>> see
>>>
>>> https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/new-einstein-equati
>>> on-wormholes-quantum-gravity
>>>
>>> Space time is now believed to be connected through long range
>>> entanglement. The forces of nature are emergent from entanglement.  This is
>>> why BECs are important in LENR because the nature of these fundamental
>>> forces are affected by the BEC. These forces are called entropic forces.
>>>
>>> Without a BEC, LENR produces radioactive isotopes. With a BEC, LENR
>>> produces stable isotopes. The BEC increases the activity of the electroweak
>>> force.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:49 AM,  wrote:
>>>
 In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017
 00:19:54
 +:
 Hi Bob,
 [snip]
 >Robin—
 >It’s the last sentence in the introduction that is pertinent.  It
 makes the point that the BEC
 >Can be described by a wave function as if it were a single particle.

 Not exactly "as if". You missed the word "parallel". IOW the two wave
 functions
 share some properties in common, but not necessarily all. In fact he
 says
 "collective" properties, IOW those properties which can be shared by a
 collection. That doesn't include position.
 [snip]
 >You suggest that a coherent system state as described by a wave
 function does include a specification of probable . relative location of
 charge centers and/or magnetic dipole centers.  What  are the parameters of
 the system state that you believe the paper considers are pertinent?

 For that I would have to read the whole paper, and I am not so inclined
 at the
 moment. But if you find something to support your position, and post it
 here,
 I'll be happy to discuss it with you.
 [snip]
 Regards,

 Robin van Spaandonk

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


>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[CB Sites]

You know what Axil.  The Entropic Gravity theory was one of the few
theories that made me step back and made me do a double take and change my
view of how gravity works.   It's not a coincidence that gravity just
doesn't fit into standard model.  If gravity is due to entropic forces of
an occupied space partition, it makes sense that gravity is not part of the
standard model.  There is no need for gravitinos or mediators.  Relativity
and space-time curvature all fit nicely into that model.

If you do physics and have never read the papers on Entropic Gravity, I
highly recommend you do.  It may very well change your whole view on the
universe.


On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Here is the description of entropic force and why there is not dark matter
> particle,,,hydrino.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropic_gravity
>
> LENR will prove this theory and change science and cosmology.
>
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> When particles are entangled, they are connected to each other by a
>> wormhole that circumvents normal space time correlations.
>>
>> see
>>
>> https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/new-einstein-equati
>> on-wormholes-quantum-gravity
>>
>> Space time is now believed to be connected through long range
>> entanglement. The forces of nature are emergent from entanglement.  This is
>> why BECs are important in LENR because the nature of these fundamental
>> forces are affected by the BEC. These forces are called entropic forces.
>>
>> Without a BEC, LENR produces radioactive isotopes. With a BEC, LENR
>> produces stable isotopes. The BEC increases the activity of the electroweak
>> force.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:49 AM,  wrote:
>>
>>> In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017
>>> 00:19:54
>>> +:
>>> Hi Bob,
>>> [snip]
>>> >Robin—
>>> >It’s the last sentence in the introduction that is pertinent.  It makes
>>> the point that the BEC
>>> >Can be described by a wave function as if it were a single particle.
>>>
>>> Not exactly "as if". You missed the word "parallel". IOW the two wave
>>> functions
>>> share some properties in common, but not necessarily all. In fact he says
>>> "collective" properties, IOW those properties which can be shared by a
>>> collection. That doesn't include position.
>>> [snip]
>>> >You suggest that a coherent system state as described by a wave
>>> function does include a specification of probable . relative location of
>>> charge centers and/or magnetic dipole centers.  What  are the parameters of
>>> the system state that you believe the paper considers are pertinent?
>>>
>>> For that I would have to read the whole paper, and I am not so inclined
>>> at the
>>> moment. But if you find something to support your position, and post it
>>> here,
>>> I'll be happy to discuss it with you.
>>> [snip]
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Robin van Spaandonk
>>>
>>> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

Here is the description of entropic force and why there is not dark matter
particle,,,hydrino.

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

LENR will prove this theory and change science and cosmology.

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> When particles are entangled, they are connected to each other by a
> wormhole that circumvents normal space time correlations.
>
> see
>
> https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/new-einstein-
> equation-wormholes-quantum-gravity
>
> Space time is now believed to be connected through long range
> entanglement. The forces of nature are emergent from entanglement.  This is
> why BECs are important in LENR because the nature of these fundamental
> forces are affected by the BEC. These forces are called entropic forces.
>
> Without a BEC, LENR produces radioactive isotopes. With a BEC, LENR
> produces stable isotopes. The BEC increases the activity of the electroweak
> force.
>
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:49 AM,  wrote:
>
>> In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017
>> 00:19:54
>> +:
>> Hi Bob,
>> [snip]
>> >Robin—
>> >It’s the last sentence in the introduction that is pertinent.  It makes
>> the point that the BEC
>> >Can be described by a wave function as if it were a single particle.
>>
>> Not exactly "as if". You missed the word "parallel". IOW the two wave
>> functions
>> share some properties in common, but not necessarily all. In fact he says
>> "collective" properties, IOW those properties which can be shared by a
>> collection. That doesn't include position.
>> [snip]
>> >You suggest that a coherent system state as described by a wave function
>> does include a specification of probable . relative location of charge
>> centers and/or magnetic dipole centers.  What  are the parameters of the
>> system state that you believe the paper considers are pertinent?
>>
>> For that I would have to read the whole paper, and I am not so inclined
>> at the
>> moment. But if you find something to support your position, and post it
>> here,
>> I'll be happy to discuss it with you.
>> [snip]
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robin van Spaandonk
>>
>> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

We were talking about a particle passing through a wall not superposition.

Particles can pass through a wall lock stock and barrel via tunneling.

See

https://www.livescience.com/20380-particles-quantum-tunneling-timing.html

SKIP

Sometimes, particles can pass through walls.

Though it sounds like science fiction, the phenomenon is well documented
and even understood under the bizarre rules that govern the microscopic
world called quantum mechanics.

Now, scientists have measured the timing of this passing-through-walls trick

more
accurately than ever before, and report their results in today's (May 17)
issue of the journal Nature.

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:11 AM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:40:58 -0400:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >You are correct. This concept is called tunneling.
>
> That's not what you drew. What you drew was superposition of waves. That
> happens
> all the time on a macroscopic scale. Most obviously in the sea on a windy
> day.
> Also with waves in air, both sound and EM. However particles don't seem to
> like
> doing that (witness the bump on your head. ;)
> Note also that mechanical waves are only possible precisely because the
> particles don't pass through one another, but pass their kinetic energy and
> momentum on from one to another (actually via EM fields at the atomic
> scale).
> [snip]
>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:40:58 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>You are correct. This concept is called tunneling. 

That's not what you drew. What you drew was superposition of waves. That happens
all the time on a macroscopic scale. Most obviously in the sea on a windy day.
Also with waves in air, both sound and EM. However particles don't seem to like
doing that (witness the bump on your head. ;)
Note also that mechanical waves are only possible precisely because the
particles don't pass through one another, but pass their kinetic energy and
momentum on from one to another (actually via EM fields at the atomic scale).
[snip]

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

When particles are entangled, they are connected to each other by a
wormhole that circumvents normal space time correlations.

see

https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/new-einstein-equation-wormholes-quantum-gravity

Space time is now believed to be connected through long range entanglement.
The forces of nature are emergent from entanglement.  This is why BECs are
important in LENR because the nature of these fundamental forces are
affected by the BEC. These forces are called entropic forces.

Without a BEC, LENR produces radioactive isotopes. With a BEC, LENR
produces stable isotopes. The BEC increases the activity of the electroweak
force.

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:49 AM,  wrote:

> In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017
> 00:19:54
> +:
> Hi Bob,
> [snip]
> >Robin—
> >It’s the last sentence in the introduction that is pertinent.  It makes
> the point that the BEC
> >Can be described by a wave function as if it were a single particle.
>
> Not exactly "as if". You missed the word "parallel". IOW the two wave
> functions
> share some properties in common, but not necessarily all. In fact he says
> "collective" properties, IOW those properties which can be shared by a
> collection. That doesn't include position.
> [snip]
> >You suggest that a coherent system state as described by a wave function
> does include a specification of probable . relative location of charge
> centers and/or magnetic dipole centers.  What  are the parameters of the
> system state that you believe the paper considers are pertinent?
>
> For that I would have to read the whole paper, and I am not so inclined at
> the
> moment. But if you find something to support your position, and post it
> here,
> I'll be happy to discuss it with you.
> [snip]
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:19:54
+:
Hi Bob,
[snip]
>Robin—
>It’s the last sentence in the introduction that is pertinent.  It makes the 
>point that the BEC
>Can be described by a wave function as if it were a single particle.  

Not exactly "as if". You missed the word "parallel". IOW the two wave functions
share some properties in common, but not necessarily all. In fact he says
"collective" properties, IOW those properties which can be shared by a
collection. That doesn't include position.
[snip]
>You suggest that a coherent system state as described by a wave function does 
>include a specification of probable . relative location of charge centers 
>and/or magnetic dipole centers.  What  are the parameters of the system state 
>that you believe the paper considers are pertinent?

For that I would have to read the whole paper, and I am not so inclined at the
moment. But if you find something to support your position, and post it here,
I'll be happy to discuss it with you.
[snip]
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

You are correct. This concept is called tunneling. There is alway some
probability that you can pass through a wall. That probability does down as
a function of the number of particles in your body but that probability is
always non zero.

A single particle has a good chance of tunneling through a wall.

See

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

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:27 AM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Sun, 11 Jun 2017 16:53:59 -0400:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >Entanglement is not subject to space time. A particle is a wave function
> that can combine with another identical wave function copies to produce a
> new wave function that is double the magnitude of each original identical
> wave functions.
> >The addition of wave functions is true for any BEC on "N" particles. The
> composite wave function is singular but N times the magnitude of each
> member of the BEC aggregate.
> >Particles are not billiard balls; they are waves.
>
> Since your head is made of particles (sorry waves), and the wall is made of
> particles (sorry waves), then you shouldn't have any difficulty shoving
> your
> head through the wall, now should you?
>
> (Somehow I doubt you will try this though.)
>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Sun, 11 Jun 2017 16:53:59 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>Entanglement is not subject to space time. A particle is a wave function that 
>can combine with another identical wave function copies to produce a new wave 
>function that is double the magnitude of each original identical wave 
>functions.
>The addition of wave functions is true for any BEC on "N" particles. The 
>composite wave function is singular but N times the magnitude of each member 
>of the BEC aggregate.
>Particles are not billiard balls; they are waves.

Since your head is made of particles (sorry waves), and the wall is made of
particles (sorry waves), then you shouldn't have any difficulty shoving your
head through the wall, now should you?

(Somehow I doubt you will try this though.)

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

RE: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

The mechanics of Bosenovas, which seem to entail a fast release of EM energy 
that exceeds the energy associated with single nuclear reactions suggests a 
larger system of reacting particles.

Bob Cook

Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

From: Jones Beene<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>
Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 1:49 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature


 Axil Axil wrote:
The polariton is the exception to Jones' conjecture. The polariton is of boson 
not subject to the Pauli principle and can form a BEC at any temperature.

But the polariton is a quasi-particle, meaning "less than real" if not 
imaginary.

Nevertheless, the argument is alluring.

We need to see evidence that quasi-particles can undergo the same reactions 
that real particles undergo.

RE: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Jones—
I believe wave functions specify a probability of a particle being at 
coordinates of a continuous special system function of continuous time.  I do 
not think that uncertainty principle comes into play in wave functions in a 
secondary manner.

Bob Cook


Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

From: Jones Beene<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>
Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 1:17 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

Gents,

A different and maybe clearer wording of what Robin is saying is that
the collective quantum "state" in a packed palladium matrix, which could
lead to an overlap of location if it were perfect, is never really
localized in 3 space, due to macro movement of earth in orbit around a
Sun in orbit around the Milky Way, etc. etc ...

And since the state itself of any two particles cannot have exactly zero
momentum (in the real world of a Universe in motion) in fact not even
close -  then the Heisenberg principle ALWAYS puts a lower limit on the
degree to which localized packing of particles can be densified when
they are composite bosons. And it is always far from perfect - usually
no different from high mechanical pressure.

If the bosons in question are composite bosons, such as deuterium in
LENR, and they have non-zero momentum due to rapidly changing position
in 3-space, and the "state" of each must the include the constituent
parts - which are moving relative to each other (Fermionic parts like
the electrons) and which are never in complete alignment due to macro
movement. The fermionic bits of each atom are then are REQUIRED to obey
the Pauli principle as if they were independent and not bosonic. If this
were not so, then a flawless diamond could occasionally disappear when
brought to near zero k.

Consequently, and despite the allure of an easy route to fusion, a BEC
can never really be condensed down to an extremely dense accumulation,
leading to easy fusion.

As a practical matter, composite bosons must be treated as fermions when
it comes to ultimate packing ratios. This is not the easy route which
proponents of LENR first imagined.

Jones

mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
> In reply to bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message:
>
> My suggestion about allowable locations for Bose particles reflects the 
> Introduction below form The following document noted by Axil:
>
> ‘Disorder, synchronization and phase locking in
> non-equilibrium Bose-Einstein condensates’
>
> BY:  Paul R. Eastham, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland and
> Bernd Rosenow University of Leipzig, 04009 Leipzig, Germany
>
> “INTRODUCTION
> It is twenty years  weakly-interacting ultracold gas. In other settings,
> namely superconductivity (which we understand in terms of a Bose-Einstein
> condensate of Cooper pairs), Bose-Einstein condensates have been available
> in laboratories for over a century. Yet their behaviour is still startling.
> Because the many particles of the condensate occupy the same quantum
> state, collective properties become described by a macroscopic wavefunction,
> with an interpretation parallel to that of the single-particle wavefunction
> of Schrodinger's equation
> [snip]
> Note that he says "state", not "place"/"location".
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Robin—
It’s the last sentence in the introduction that is pertinent.  It makes the 
point that the BEC
Can be described by a wave function as if it were a single particle.  The wave 
function would include spacial parameters relative to its charge center or with 
respect to its axis in a magnetic field.

You suggest that a coherent system state as described by a wave function does 
include a specification of probable . relative location of charge centers 
and/or magnetic dipole centers.  What  are the parameters of the system state 
that you believe the paper considers are pertinent?

Bob Cook








mix...@bigpond.com<mailto:mix...@bigpond.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 12:29 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Sat, 10 Jun 2017 22:47:12
+:
Hi,
[snip]
>Robin—
>
>
>In reply to your message of  Fri, 9 Jun 2017 16:15:51
>
>
>My suggestion about allowable locations for Bose particles reflects the 
>Introduction below form
>The following document noted by Axil:
>
>‘Disorder, synchronization and phase locking in
>non-equilibrium Bose-Einstein condensates’
>
>BY:  Paul R. Eastham, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland and
>Bernd Rosenow University of Leipzig, 04009 Leipzig, Germany
>
>“INTRODUCTION
>It is twenty years  weakly-interacting ultracold gas. In other settings,
>namely superconductivity (which we understand in terms of a Bose-Einstein
>condensate of Cooper pairs), Bose-Einstein condensates have been available
>in laboratories for over a century. Yet their behaviour is still startling.
>Because the many particles of the condensate occupy the same quantum
>state, collective properties become described by a macroscopic wavefunction,
>with an interpretation parallel to that of the single-particle wavefunction
>of Schrodinger's equation
[snip]
Note that he says "state", not "place"/"location".


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jones Beene]

 Axil Axil wrote:

The polariton is the exception to Jones' conjecture. The polariton is 
of boson not subject to the Pauli principle and can form a BEC at 
any temperature.


But the polariton is a quasi-particle, meaning "less than real" if not 
imaginary.


Nevertheless, the argument is alluring.

We need to see evidence that quasi-particles can undergo the same 
reactions that real particles undergo.

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

The polariton is the exception to Jones' conjecture. The polariton is of
boson not subject to the Pauli principle and can form a BEC at
any temperature. The electons that are part of the polariton are all
syntonized in a dipole oscillation and the photons are contained in a
whispering gallery wave based soliton where INTERFERENCE coordinates their
entanglement thus guaranteeing absolute coherence where position in space
does not matter.

On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 5:17 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Gents,
>
> A different and maybe clearer wording of what Robin is saying is that the
> collective quantum "state" in a packed palladium matrix, which could lead
> to an overlap of location if it were perfect, is never really localized in
> 3 space, due to macro movement of earth in orbit around a Sun in orbit
> around the Milky Way, etc. etc ...
>
> And since the state itself of any two particles cannot have exactly zero
> momentum (in the real world of a Universe in motion) in fact not even close
> -  then the Heisenberg principle ALWAYS puts a lower limit on the degree to
> which localized packing of particles can be densified when they are
> composite bosons. And it is always far from perfect - usually no different
> from high mechanical pressure.
>
> If the bosons in question are composite bosons, such as deuterium in LENR,
> and they have non-zero momentum due to rapidly changing position in
> 3-space, and the "state" of each must the include the constituent parts -
> which are moving relative to each other (Fermionic parts like the
> electrons) and which are never in complete alignment due to macro movement.
> The fermionic bits of each atom are then are REQUIRED to obey the Pauli
> principle as if they were independent and not bosonic. If this were not so,
> then a flawless diamond could occasionally disappear when brought to near
> zero k.
>
> Consequently, and despite the allure of an easy route to fusion, a BEC can
> never really be condensed down to an extremely dense accumulation, leading
> to easy fusion.
>
> As a practical matter, composite bosons must be treated as fermions when
> it comes to ultimate packing ratios. This is not the easy route which
> proponents of LENR first imagined.
>
> Jones
>
> mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
>
>> In reply to bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message:
>>
>> My suggestion about allowable locations for Bose particles reflects the
>> Introduction below form The following document noted by Axil:
>>
>> ‘Disorder, synchronization and phase locking in
>> non-equilibrium Bose-Einstein condensates’
>>
>> BY:  Paul R. Eastham, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland and
>> Bernd Rosenow University of Leipzig, 04009 Leipzig, Germany
>>
>> “INTRODUCTION
>> It is twenty years  weakly-interacting ultracold gas. In other settings,
>> namely superconductivity (which we understand in terms of a Bose-Einstein
>> condensate of Cooper pairs), Bose-Einstein condensates have been available
>> in laboratories for over a century. Yet their behaviour is still
>> startling.
>> Because the many particles of the condensate occupy the same quantum
>> state, collective properties become described by a macroscopic
>> wavefunction,
>> with an interpretation parallel to that of the single-particle
>> wavefunction
>> of Schr odinger's equation
>> [snip]
>> Note that he says "state", not "place"/"location".
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robin van Spaandonk
>>
>> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jones Beene]

Gents,

A different and maybe clearer wording of what Robin is saying is that 
the collective quantum "state" in a packed palladium matrix, which could 
lead to an overlap of location if it were perfect, is never really 
localized in 3 space, due to macro movement of earth in orbit around a 
Sun in orbit around the Milky Way, etc. etc ...


And since the state itself of any two particles cannot have exactly zero 
momentum (in the real world of a Universe in motion) in fact not even 
close -  then the Heisenberg principle ALWAYS puts a lower limit on the 
degree to which localized packing of particles can be densified when 
they are composite bosons. And it is always far from perfect - usually 
no different from high mechanical pressure.


If the bosons in question are composite bosons, such as deuterium in 
LENR, and they have non-zero momentum due to rapidly changing position 
in 3-space, and the "state" of each must the include the constituent 
parts - which are moving relative to each other (Fermionic parts like 
the electrons) and which are never in complete alignment due to macro 
movement. The fermionic bits of each atom are then are REQUIRED to obey 
the Pauli principle as if they were independent and not bosonic. If this 
were not so, then a flawless diamond could occasionally disappear when 
brought to near zero k.


Consequently, and despite the allure of an easy route to fusion, a BEC 
can never really be condensed down to an extremely dense accumulation, 
leading to easy fusion.


As a practical matter, composite bosons must be treated as fermions when 
it comes to ultimate packing ratios. This is not the easy route which 
proponents of LENR first imagined.


Jones

mix...@bigpond.com wrote:

In reply to bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message:

My suggestion about allowable locations for Bose particles reflects the 
Introduction below form The following document noted by Axil:

‘Disorder, synchronization and phase locking in
non-equilibrium Bose-Einstein condensates’

BY:  Paul R. Eastham, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland and
Bernd Rosenow University of Leipzig, 04009 Leipzig, Germany

“INTRODUCTION
It is twenty years  weakly-interacting ultracold gas. In other settings,
namely superconductivity (which we understand in terms of a Bose-Einstein
condensate of Cooper pairs), Bose-Einstein condensates have been available
in laboratories for over a century. Yet their behaviour is still startling.
Because the many particles of the condensate occupy the same quantum
state, collective properties become described by a macroscopic wavefunction,
with an interpretation parallel to that of the single-particle wavefunction
of Schrodinger's equation
[snip]
Note that he says "state", not "place"/"location".


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

Entanglement is not subject to space time. A particle is a wave function
that can combine with another identical wave function copies to produce a
new wave function that is double the magnitude of each original identical
wave functions.

The addition of wave functions is true for any BEC on "N" particles. The
composite wave function is singular but N times the magnitude of each
member of the BEC aggregate.

Particles are not billiard balls; they are waves.

[image: Inline image 1]

On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 4:28 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Sat, 10 Jun 2017
> 22:47:12
> +:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >Robin—
> >
> >
> >In reply to your message of  Fri, 9 Jun 2017 16:15:51
> >
> >
> >My suggestion about allowable locations for Bose particles reflects the
> Introduction below form
> >The following document noted by Axil:
> >
> >‘Disorder, synchronization and phase locking in
> >non-equilibrium Bose-Einstein condensates’
> >
> >BY:  Paul R. Eastham, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland and
> >Bernd Rosenow University of Leipzig, 04009 Leipzig, Germany
> >
> >“INTRODUCTION
> >It is twenty years  weakly-interacting ultracold gas. In other settings,
> >namely superconductivity (which we understand in terms of a Bose-Einstein
> >condensate of Cooper pairs), Bose-Einstein condensates have been available
> >in laboratories for over a century. Yet their behaviour is still
> startling.
> >Because the many particles of the condensate occupy the same quantum
> >state, collective properties become described by a macroscopic
> wavefunction,
> >with an interpretation parallel to that of the single-particle
> wavefunction
> >of Schr odinger's equation
> [snip]
> Note that he says "state", not "place"/"location".
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Sat, 10 Jun 2017 22:47:12
+:
Hi,
[snip]
>Robin—
>
>
>In reply to your message of  Fri, 9 Jun 2017 16:15:51
>
>
>My suggestion about allowable locations for Bose particles reflects the 
>Introduction below form
>The following document noted by Axil:
>
>‘Disorder, synchronization and phase locking in
>non-equilibrium Bose-Einstein condensates’
>
>BY:  Paul R. Eastham, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland and
>Bernd Rosenow University of Leipzig, 04009 Leipzig, Germany
>
>“INTRODUCTION
>It is twenty years  weakly-interacting ultracold gas. In other settings,
>namely superconductivity (which we understand in terms of a Bose-Einstein
>condensate of Cooper pairs), Bose-Einstein condensates have been available
>in laboratories for over a century. Yet their behaviour is still startling.
>Because the many particles of the condensate occupy the same quantum
>state, collective properties become described by a macroscopic wavefunction,
>with an interpretation parallel to that of the single-particle wavefunction
>of Schrodinger's equation
[snip]
Note that he says "state", not "place"/"location".


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[H LV]

This parrellel circuit model is a better way to model my hypothetical
fluid, although to reiterate the spring does not spontaneously relax after
the load is removed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9emsMcG8cc

Harry

On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 1:41 PM, H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote:

> My spring and water system was intended more as model of a hypothetical
> fluid on which work is performed.
>
> It bears some similarity with models of viscoelasticity:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVK1qVkXfC4
>
> but in my model the spring doesn't spontaneously relax after the load is
> removed and the permanent deflection of the dashpot would represent the
> heat produced.
>
>
>
> Harry
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 1:15 AM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
> bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Harry—
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>>
>> Your thought experiment IMHO clearly swapped potential energy of the
>> gravitational system of earth mass and weight mass to an electrically
>> coupled system of atoms in the spring as well as heating the water with
>> added phonic energy in the form of increased linear kinetic energy of water
>> molecules as well as an increase in the average of their spin energy in the
>> form of angular momentum.
>>
>>
>>
>> It’s a good example of a macroscopic system changing potential energy
>> into kinetic, in accordance with the second law of thermodynamics and
>> reflecting what happens in coherent systems involved in LENR.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob Cook
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
>> Windows 10
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com>
>> *Sent: *Friday, June 9, 2017 7:47 PM
>> *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 1:07 AM, H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> animation explaining Joule's apparatus and his calculations.
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yOhSIAIPRE
>>
>> Harry
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 11:43 PM, H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Joule's apparatus used a spindle with paddles which was turned by a
>> falling weight outside the calorimeter. The motion of the falling weight
>> did not result in the generation of potential energy. It only resulted in
>> the warming of the water inside calorimeter. However, if the falling of the
>> weight were to wind up a spring in addition to turning of the paddle then
>> the same energy input - in the form gravitational potential energy (i.e.
>> the weight time the height through which the weight falls) would warm the
>> water AND store energy in the spring. According to Joule the amount of heat
>> generated is only a function of how far the weight falls. It is not a
>> function of how quickly it falls, so even if the spring slows the descent
>> of the weight the calorimeter will read the same rise in temperature with
>> or without the spring attached.
>>
>> ​
>> This thought experiment demonstrates how two systems can have the same
>> energy input and generate the same temperatures but one can store energy
>> and the other can't.
>>
>> t
>>
>>
>>
>> ​
>> What I said above is not correct. In my thought experiment where I add a
>> spring to Joule's original experiment (described in the video link given
>> above) the amount of heat generated will be reduced because the weight will
>> fall more slowly as it has to overcome both the resistance of the water and
>> the spring.  What needs to be emphasized is that Joule's original
>> experiment implicitly assumes that the water does not store energy because
>> the the amount of heat generated is claimed to be only dependent on the
>> height the weight falls. Another way of stating this assumption is that all
>> the resistance experienced by the falling weight is converted into thermal
>> energy and none of it is stored energy.
>>
>>
>> Harry​
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[H LV]

My spring and water system was intended more as model of a hypothetical
fluid on which work is performed.

It bears some similarity with models of viscoelasticity:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVK1qVkXfC4

but in my model the spring doesn't spontaneously relax after the load is
removed and the permanent deflection of the dashpot would represent the
heat produced.



Harry



On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 1:15 AM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Harry—
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> Your thought experiment IMHO clearly swapped potential energy of the
> gravitational system of earth mass and weight mass to an electrically
> coupled system of atoms in the spring as well as heating the water with
> added phonic energy in the form of increased linear kinetic energy of water
> molecules as well as an increase in the average of their spin energy in the
> form of angular momentum.
>
>
>
> It’s a good example of a macroscopic system changing potential energy into
> kinetic, in accordance with the second law of thermodynamics and reflecting
> what happens in coherent systems involved in LENR.
>
>
>
> Bob Cook
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
> Windows 10
>
>
>
> *From: *H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com>
> *Sent: *Friday, June 9, 2017 7:47 PM
> *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 1:07 AM, H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> animation explaining Joule's apparatus and his calculations.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yOhSIAIPRE
>
> Harry
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 11:43 PM, H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Joule's apparatus used a spindle with paddles which was turned by a
> falling weight outside the calorimeter. The motion of the falling weight
> did not result in the generation of potential energy. It only resulted in
> the warming of the water inside calorimeter. However, if the falling of the
> weight were to wind up a spring in addition to turning of the paddle then
> the same energy input - in the form gravitational potential energy (i.e.
> the weight time the height through which the weight falls) would warm the
> water AND store energy in the spring. According to Joule the amount of heat
> generated is only a function of how far the weight falls. It is not a
> function of how quickly it falls, so even if the spring slows the descent
> of the weight the calorimeter will read the same rise in temperature with
> or without the spring attached.
>
> ​
> This thought experiment demonstrates how two systems can have the same
> energy input and generate the same temperatures but one can store energy
> and the other can't.
>
> t
>
>
>
> ​
> What I said above is not correct. In my thought experiment where I add a
> spring to Joule's original experiment (described in the video link given
> above) the amount of heat generated will be reduced because the weight will
> fall more slowly as it has to overcome both the resistance of the water and
> the spring.  What needs to be emphasized is that Joule's original
> experiment implicitly assumes that the water does not store energy because
> the the amount of heat generated is claimed to be only dependent on the
> height the weight falls. Another way of stating this assumption is that all
> the resistance experienced by the falling weight is converted into thermal
> energy and none of it is stored energy.
>
>
> Harry​
>
>
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Harry—

Thanks.

Your thought experiment IMHO clearly swapped potential energy of the 
gravitational system of earth mass and weight mass to an electrically coupled 
system of atoms in the spring as well as heating the water with added phonic 
energy in the form of increased linear kinetic energy of water molecules as 
well as an increase in the average of their spin energy in the form of angular 
momentum.

It’s a good example of a macroscopic system changing potential energy into 
kinetic, in accordance with the second law of thermodynamics and reflecting 
what happens in coherent systems involved in LENR.

Bob Cook



Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

From: H LV<mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, June 9, 2017 7:47 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature



On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 1:07 AM, H LV 
<hveeder...@gmail.com<mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com>> wrote:
animation explaining Joule's apparatus and his calculations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yOhSIAIPRE

Harry

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 11:43 PM, H LV 
<hveeder...@gmail.com<mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Joule's apparatus used a spindle with paddles which was turned by a falling 
weight outside the calorimeter. The motion of the falling weight did not result 
in the generation of potential energy. It only resulted in the warming of the 
water inside calorimeter. However, if the falling of the weight were to wind up 
a spring in addition to turning of the paddle then the same energy input - in 
the form gravitational potential energy (i.e. the weight time the height 
through which the weight falls) would warm the water AND store energy in the 
spring. According to Joule the amount of heat generated is only a function of 
how far the weight falls. It is not a function of how quickly it falls, so even 
if the spring slows the descent of the weight the calorimeter will read the 
same rise in temperature with or without the spring attached.
​
This thought experiment demonstrates how two systems can have the same energy 
input and generate the same temperatures but one can store energy and the other 
can't.
t

​
What I said above is not correct. In my thought experiment where I add a spring 
to Joule's original experiment (described in the video link given above) the 
amount of heat generated will be reduced because the weight will fall more 
slowly as it has to overcome both the resistance of the water and the spring.  
What needs to be emphasized is that Joule's original experiment implicitly 
assumes that the water does not store energy because the the amount of heat 
generated is claimed to be only dependent on the height the weight falls. 
Another way of stating this assumption is that all the resistance experienced 
by the falling weight is converted into thermal energy and none of it is stored 
energy.

Harry​

RE: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Robin—


In reply to your message of  Fri, 9 Jun 2017 16:15:51


My suggestion about allowable locations for Bose particles reflects the 
Introduction below form
The following document noted by Axil:

‘Disorder, synchronization and phase locking in
non-equilibrium Bose-Einstein condensates’

BY:  Paul R. Eastham, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland and
Bernd Rosenow University of Leipzig, 04009 Leipzig, Germany

“INTRODUCTION
It is twenty years  weakly-interacting ultracold gas. In other settings,
namely superconductivity (which we understand in terms of a Bose-Einstein
condensate of Cooper pairs), Bose-Einstein condensates have been available
in laboratories for over a century. Yet their behaviour is still startling.
Because the many particles of the condensate occupy the same quantum
state, collective properties become described by a macroscopic wavefunction,
with an interpretation parallel to that of the single-particle wavefunction
of Schrodinger's equation. Thus, many of the phenomena of single-particle
quantum mechanics appear as behaviours of the condensate.”

Bosenovas are uncontrolled  reactions of a BEC resulting in resulting in the 
release of EM radiation in  lieu of phonic energy IMHO.  A spectrum analysis of 
the Bosenova would tell much about the BEC coherent system allowable energy 
transitions.

Bob Cook



From: mix...@bigpond.com<mailto:mix...@bigpond.com>
Sent: Friday, June 9, 2017 2:05 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Fri, 9 Jun 2017 16:15:51
+:
Hi,
[snip]
>To  add to Axil’s comments, it is my understanding that Bose particles (0 or 
>+/- integral intrinsic spin) can occupy the same energy states in  a coherent 
>system.  This implies that that it is possible for two particles to be at the 
>same location at the same time.

No, it doesn't.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[H LV]

On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 1:07 AM, H LV  wrote:

> animation explaining Joule's apparatus and his calculations.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yOhSIAIPRE
>
> Harry
>
> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 11:43 PM, H LV  wrote:
>>
>>
>> Joule's apparatus used a spindle with paddles which was turned by a
>> falling weight outside the calorimeter. The motion of the falling weight
>> did not result in the generation of potential energy. It only resulted in
>> the warming of the water inside calorimeter. However, if the falling of the
>> weight were to wind up a spring in addition to turning of the paddle then
>> the same energy input - in the form gravitational potential energy (i.e.
>> the weight time the height through which the weight falls) would warm the
>> water AND store energy in the spring. According to Joule the amount of heat
>> generated is only a function of how far the weight falls. It is not a
>> function of how quickly it falls, so even if the spring slows the descent
>> of the weight the calorimeter will read the same rise in temperature with
>> or without the spring attached.
>> ​
>> This thought experiment demonstrates how two systems can have the same
>> energy input and generate the same temperatures but one can store energy
>> and the other can't.
>>
>> t
>
>
​
What I said above is not correct. In my thought experiment where I add a
spring to Joule's original experiment (described in the video link given
above) the amount of heat generated will be reduced because the weight will
fall more slowly as it has to overcome both the resistance of the water and
the spring.  What needs to be emphasized is that Joule's original
experiment implicitly assumes that the water does not store energy because
the the amount of heat generated is claimed to be only dependent on the
height the weight falls. Another way of stating this assumption is that all
the resistance experienced by the falling weight is converted into thermal
energy and none of it is stored energy.

Harry​

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

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

https://phys.org/news/2015-01-atoms.html

Atoms can be in two places at the same time

One atom can also interfere with itself.

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/62343/can-an-electron-interact-with-itself-to-create-interference

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:04 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Fri, 9 Jun 2017
> 16:15:51
> +:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >To  add to Axil’s comments, it is my understanding that Bose particles (0
> or +/- integral intrinsic spin) can occupy the same energy states in  a
> coherent system.  This implies that that it is possible for two particles
> to be at the same location at the same time.
>
> No, it doesn't.
>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Fri, 9 Jun 2017 16:15:51
+:
Hi,
[snip]
>To  add to Axil’s comments, it is my understanding that Bose particles (0 or 
>+/- integral intrinsic spin) can occupy the same energy states in  a coherent 
>system.  This implies that that it is possible for two particles to be at the 
>same location at the same time. 

No, it doesn't.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

g of the coherent systems, the control system which
>> changes the probability of a reaction, anti-clumping conditions, and the
>> cooling system suggested by the above conceptual reactor design  is the
>> reason why LENR+ has taken so long for folks with small budgets to succeed.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob Cook
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
>> *Sent: *Thursday, June 8, 2017 9:54 AM
>> *To: *vortexallows for-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature
>>
>>
>>
>> A Bose condinsate brings super radiance and super absorption into play.
>> These mechanisms produce concentration, storage,  and amplification of low
>> level energy and goes as "N", the number of items in the condinsate.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Frank Znidarsic <fznidar...@aol.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Why is a Bose Condensate needed?  Its a matter of size and energy.  The
>> smaller the size of something we want to see the more energy it takes.
>> Using low energy radar you will never be able to read something as small as
>> this text.  You need to go to UV energies to study atoms.  Higher ionizing
>> energies are needed to study the nuclear forces.  Really high energy
>> accelerator energies are required to look at subatomic particles.
>>
>>
>>
>> The common complaint physicists have with cold fusion is that the energy
>> levels are to low to induce any type of nuclear reaction.  They never,
>> however, considered the energy levels of a large hundreds of atoms wide
>> condensed nano-particle.  Its energy levels are quite low.  Warm thermal
>> vibrations appear to the nano particle as a high energy excitation.  This
>> again is a matter of its size.  It's not cracks, or shrunken atoms at
>> work.  It is the thermal excitation of a nano particle that yields the
>> required energy.
>>
>>
>>
>> Again the simulation induces a velocity of one million meters per second.
>>
>>
>>
>> Frank Z
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1509.05264

Disorder, synchronization and phase locking in non-equilibrium
Bose-Einstein condensates

There is a kind of Bose condinsation that can exist at any temperature and
applies to polaritons.

To draw an analogy, consider an array of funnels that are each being
filled at a different rate. But the funnels are entangled in a condinsate.
These funnels are losing liquid at the same rate but are being filled at
different rates. We would expect that there would be some funnels that
would overflow, but all the funnels maintain the same liquid level. All the
funnels share liquid between each other to maintain the same level of
fluid. The liquid that would have overflowed is shared between the funnels
through and entangled liquid transfer interface. Any funnel that has a low
level of liquid input would maintain its level through the additional
entangled transfer of liquid with and between other funnels with a more
that average liquid filling rates.

This is how a collection of "N" polaritons act like one huge single
polariton with N members. This huge single polariton can store a
huge amount of energy in its condinsate. It can absorb a huge amount of
energy (super-absorption) but most importantly, any single polariton can
access  all the energy stored in the condinsate (super-radiance) and can
use that energy to disrupt nuclear functions in a single nucleus.

This Bose condinsate condition can exist at ANY temperature and depends
only on the special nature of polaritons to exist.

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:15 PM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Ftrank—
>
>
>
> To  add to Axil’s comments, it is my understanding that Bose particles (0
> or +/- integral intrinsic spin) can occupy the same energy states in  a
> coherent system.  This implies that that it is possible for two particles
> to be at the same location at the same time.  For Bose particles with a
> magnetic moment—non-0 spin—a magnetic field will degenerate (reduce the
> possible locations and energy states) the coherent system “allows” for its
> constituent particles.
>
>
>
> This may  make it more likely that the wave function of 2Bose particles
> over lap and promote a system reaction involving no immediate loss of
> energy, only a change in the coherent system’s configuration of constituent
> particles with greater kinetic energy and less potential energy tied up in
> force fields.
>
>
>
> The new kinetic energy is spin angular momentum, exhibited as phonic
> energy (thermal energy) of the entire coherent system—the nickel lattice.
>
>
>
> The nickel latticed is cooled by some mechanism or mechanisms.  IMHO Li
> vapor and hydrogen gas or Cooper pairs of hydrogen are part of a convective
> cooling medium surrounding each nano- particle or clumps of particles.
>
>
>
> The complex engineering of the coherent systems, the control system which
> changes the probability of a reaction, anti-clumping conditions, and the
> cooling system suggested by the above conceptual reactor design  is the
> reason why LENR+ has taken so long for folks with small budgets to succeed.
>
>
>
> Bob Cook
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
> *Sent: *Thursday, June 8, 2017 9:54 AM
> *To: *vortexallows for-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature
>
>
>
> A Bose condinsate brings super radiance and super absorption into play.
> These mechanisms produce concentration, storage,  and amplification of low
> level energy and goes as "N", the number of items in the condinsate.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Frank Znidarsic <fznidar...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
> Why is a Bose Condensate needed?  Its a matter of size and energy.  The
> smaller the size of something we want to see the more energy it takes.
> Using low energy radar you will never be able to read something as small as
> this text.  You need to go to UV energies to study atoms.  Higher ionizing
> energies are needed to study the nuclear forces.  Really high energy
> accelerator energies are required to look at subatomic particles.
>
>
>
> The common complaint physicists have with cold fusion is that the energy
> levels are to low to induce any type of nuclear reaction.  They never,
> however, considered the energy levels of a large hundreds of atoms wide
> condensed nano-particle.  Its energy levels are quite low.  Warm thermal
> vibrations appear to the nano particle as a high energy excitation.  This
> again is a matter of its size.  It's not cracks, or shrunken atoms at
> work.  It is the thermal excitation of a nano particle that yields the
> required energy.
>
>
>
> Again the simulation induces a velocity of one million meters per second.
>
>
>
> Frank Z
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Ftrank—

To  add to Axil’s comments, it is my understanding that Bose particles (0 or 
+/- integral intrinsic spin) can occupy the same energy states in  a coherent 
system.  This implies that that it is possible for two particles to be at the 
same location at the same time.  For Bose particles with a magnetic 
moment—non-0 spin—a magnetic field will degenerate (reduce the possible 
locations and energy states) the coherent system “allows” for its constituent 
particles.

This may  make it more likely that the wave function of 2Bose particles over 
lap and promote a system reaction involving no immediate loss of energy, only a 
change in the coherent system’s configuration of constituent particles with 
greater kinetic energy and less potential energy tied up in force fields.

The new kinetic energy is spin angular momentum, exhibited as phonic energy 
(thermal energy) of the entire coherent system—the nickel lattice.

The nickel latticed is cooled by some mechanism or mechanisms.  IMHO Li  vapor 
and hydrogen gas or Cooper pairs of hydrogen are part of a convective cooling 
medium surrounding each nano- particle or clumps of particles.

The complex engineering of the coherent systems, the control system which 
changes the probability of a reaction, anti-clumping conditions, and the 
cooling system suggested by the above conceptual reactor design  is the reason 
why LENR+ has taken so long for folks with small budgets to succeed.

Bob Cook


From: Axil Axil<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2017 9:54 AM
To: vortexallows for-l<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

A Bose condinsate brings super radiance and super absorption into play. These 
mechanisms produce concentration, storage,  and amplification of low level 
energy and goes as "N", the number of items in the condinsate.

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Frank Znidarsic 
<fznidar...@aol.com<mailto:fznidar...@aol.com>> wrote:
Why is a Bose Condensate needed?  Its a matter of size and energy.  The smaller 
the size of something we want to see the more energy it takes.  Using low 
energy radar you will never be able to read something as small as this text.  
You need to go to UV energies to study atoms.  Higher ionizing energies are 
needed to study the nuclear forces.  Really high energy accelerator energies 
are required to look at subatomic particles.

The common complaint physicists have with cold fusion is that the energy levels 
are to low to induce any type of nuclear reaction.  They never, however, 
considered the energy levels of a large hundreds of atoms wide condensed 
nano-particle.  Its energy levels are quite low.  Warm thermal vibrations 
appear to the nano particle as a high energy excitation.  This again is a 
matter of its size.  It's not cracks, or shrunken atoms at work.  It is the 
thermal excitation of a nano particle that yields the required energy.

Again the simulation induces a velocity of one million meters per second.

Frank Z

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[H LV]

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:42 AM, H LV  wrote:

>
> On Jun 7, 2017 10:06 AM, "Jed Rothwell"  wrote:
> >
> > H LV  wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Joule's apparatus used a spindle with paddles which was turned by a
> falling weight outside the calorimeter. The motion of the falling weight
> did not result in the generation of potential energy.
> >
> >
> > That was a different experiment. I was referring to one in which he
> wound a spring inside a calorimeter.
> >
> > - Jed
> >
>
> The passage you cite mentions that Joule is concerned that when a spring
> is wound it does not produce heat. If a gas behaved like a spring in
> addition to heating up when compressed then it would be incorrect to infer
> the  heat energy of the gas from its temperature.
>
> Harry
>
​
Developing this idea further...

​Take gas Z and apply some special treatment to it and call it gas Z*.
Perform some mechanical work on gas Z* by compressing.  it. As expected the
temperature of gas Z* rises with the compression, but curiously the
temperature sometimes rises again long after the compression has occurred.

One approach to explaining this behaviour is to hypothesize that gas Z*
consists of a difficult to understand structure which is capable of storing
energy from compression and then releasing it at a later time under
circumstances which are poorly understood.

As a test of the hypothesis, the same mechanical work is performed on the
untreated gas Z in the hope that it will exhibit a greater temperature rise
under compression which would indicate that gas Z* stored energy during
compression. Unfortunately the test reveals no difference so it appears the
storage hypothesis is untenable. However, this interpretation rests on the
assumption that the gases should differ in their capacity to store energy.
On the other hand, there is another valid interpretation which says both
gases store energy but only the treated gas has the capacity to release of
energy.

Harry

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

A Bose condinsate brings super radiance and super absorption into play.
These mechanisms produce concentration, storage,  and amplification of low
level energy and goes as "N", the number of items in the condinsate.

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Frank Znidarsic  wrote:

> Why is a Bose Condensate needed?  Its a matter of size and energy.  The
> smaller the size of something we want to see the more energy it takes.
> Using low energy radar you will never be able to read something as small as
> this text.  You need to go to UV energies to study atoms.  Higher ionizing
> energies are needed to study the nuclear forces.  Really high energy
> accelerator energies are required to look at subatomic particles.
>
> The common complaint physicists have with cold fusion is that the energy
> levels are to low to induce any type of nuclear reaction.  They never,
> however, considered the energy levels of a large hundreds of atoms wide
> condensed nano-particle.  Its energy levels are quite low.  Warm thermal
> vibrations appear to the nano particle as a high energy excitation.  This
> again is a matter of its size.  It's not cracks, or shrunken atoms at
> work.  It is the thermal excitation of a nano particle that yields the
> required energy.
>
> Again the simulation induces a velocity of one million meters per second.
>
> Frank Z
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Frank Znidarsic]

Why is a Bose Condensate needed?  Its a matter of size and energy.  The smaller 
the size of something we want to see the more energy it takes.  Using low 
energy radar you will never be able to read something as small as this text.  
You need to go to UV energies to study atoms.  Higher ionizing energies are 
needed to study the nuclear forces.  Really high energy accelerator energies 
are required to look at subatomic particles.


The common complaint physicists have with cold fusion is that the energy levels 
are to low to induce any type of nuclear reaction.  They never, however, 
considered the energy levels of a large hundreds of atoms wide condensed 
nano-particle.  Its energy levels are quite low.  Warm thermal vibrations 
appear to the nano particle as a high energy excitation.  This again is a 
matter of its size.  It's not cracks, or shrunken atoms at work.  It is the 
thermal excitation of a nano particle that yields the required energy.


Again the simulation induces a velocity of one million meters per second.


Frank Z

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[H LV]

On Jun 7, 2017 10:06 AM, "Jed Rothwell"  wrote:
>
> H LV  wrote:
>
>>
>> Joule's apparatus used a spindle with paddles which was turned by a
falling weight outside the calorimeter. The motion of the falling weight
did not result in the generation of potential energy.
>
>
> That was a different experiment. I was referring to one in which he wound
a spring inside a calorimeter.
>
> - Jed
>

The passage you cite mentions that Joule is concerned that when a spring is
wound it does not produce heat. If a gas behaved like a spring in addition
to heating up when compressed then it would be incorrect to infer the  heat
energy of the gas from its temperature.

Harry

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jed Rothwell]

H LV  wrote:


> Joule's apparatus used a spindle with paddles which was turned by a
> falling weight outside the calorimeter. The motion of the falling weight
> did not result in the generation of potential energy.
>

That was a different experiment. I was referring to one in which he wound a
spring inside a calorimeter.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

I think I found the reference to the endothermic process,  Y E Kim was
using it in some discussions. ...
https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg65963.html

Endothermic Alpha Capture

On Tuesday, June 6, 2017, Kevin O'Malley  wrote:

> Jones,  isn't there an endothermic reaction with d-d that releases a gamma
> ray?
>
> On Tuesday, June 6, 2017, Jones Beene  > wrote:
>
>> Jed Rothwell wrote:
>>
>>  I suppose the cathode might have been storing and releasing heat at the
>> same time, but how could you tell with a calorimeter?
>>
>>
>> One expected effect of an experiment which is both storing and releasing
>> excess heat at the same time would be a period of so-called
>> heat-after-death following shut-down.
>>
>> Aside from that kind of direct proof, no one understands the mechanism
>> for storage of nuclear changes but a good candidate would be a mechanism
>> which results in "dense hydrogen".  (technically this is not nuclear, but
>> it is closer to nuclear than to chemistry)
>>
>> If we had a rock-solid experiment which was clearly able to show
>> heat-after-death, then perhaps efforts could be made to collect and
>> characterize dense hydrogen.
>>
>> The problem of course is that there is no rock solid experiment capable
>> of showing heat-after-death.
>>
>>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

It could also mean that one way to get LENR reactions started is with the
endothermic alpha capture process.

On Monday, June 5, 2017, Axil Axil  wrote:

> MORE...
>
> In this Focardi
> 
>  experiment,
> when gamma radiation was generated, excess was not generated. This leads to
> the observation that the Polariton BEC is the mechanism that transforms the
> nuclear energy produced in the LENR reaction into heat.
>
> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Axil Axil  > wrote:
>
>> Gamma radiation does appear when a BEC is not formed between the SPPs
>> involved in a LENR reaction. Yes, the LENR reaction can produce gamma
>> radiation when the SPPs are not pumped to a level sufficient to establish a
>> Polariton BEC. This is why a cold LENR reaction will produce Gamma
>> radiation and a Hot LENR reaction will not produce Gamma radiation.
>>
>> See
>>
>> http://newenergytimes.com/v2/library/2004/2004Focardi-Eviden
>> ceOfElectromagneticRadiation.pdf
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Jones Beene > > wrote:
>>
>>> Harry, You seem to be suggesting that the experiments in France could be
>>> operating by (inadvertently) storing applied energy in nuclei for later
>>> release - at least as an alternate explanation for the two runs which
>>> showed gain after months of what looks very much like a battery being
>>> charged.
>>>
>>> As unlikely as this possibility may sound at first to a proponent of
>>> cold fusion - the mechanism has not been eliminated. In fact, it may be
>>> more physical than suggesting nuclear fusion without radiation, since it
>>> involves "one less miracle."
>>>
>>> For instance, the weak nuclear force has two poorly understood
>>> properties - weak hypercharge and weak isospin -- either of which (or both)
>>> arguably could be boosted or pumped up by electrical current flow (in
>>> palladium electrolysis) over time and then the accumulated energy released
>>> later.
>>>
>>> In fact, the weak force could even supply helium (which does not come
>>> from fusion but from alpha decay of the heavier palladium isotope after
>>> months of "hypercharging" ;-)
>>>
>>> This "weak force pumping" rationale, having its main validity based on
>>> our lack of understanding of the weak force - indicates how little is known
>>> about the underlying mechanisms for the unpredictable gain of cold fusion.
>>> There could be many. The appearance of helium should never lead to the
>>> reflexive conclusion of fusion, that is- when gamma radiation is absent.
>>>
>>> BTW - In terms of defining an anomaly such as the one in question,
>>> "average" gain may not be as meaningful as peak intermittent gain, but in
>>> terms of a parameter which is leading towards commercialization - it is
>>> really the only meaningful metric. Is there any indication anywhere that
>>> LENR is closer to commercialization than it was in 1989 ?
>>>  H LV wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>  Jed Rothwell wrote:
>>>
 Jones Beene wrote:

 The intractable problem in cold fusion is that this "hero effort" - the
> very best result to have occurred in 28 years was itself little more than 
> a
> yawner. People tend to forget that this result (almost 300 MJ of gain) was
> statistically very close to a null result in total (as an average) and it
> did not point the way to a useful device.


 "Average" is not meaningful in this context. The experiment produced no
 heat for a while, then it turned on and produced ~100 W for 30 days in one
 test and 70 days in another. Computing the average including the time
 before it turned on would be like computing the average speed of an
 airplane including the time it is sitting at the gate and the time waiting
 in line to take off.

 There is no energy storage during the time before it turns on. We know
 there is none because the energy balance is zero, and because you cannot
 store that much energy.

 - Jed


>>>
>>> "​You cannot store that much energy"​ is working hypothesis.
>>> ​That much energy could be stored in nuclei.
>>> Is it such a leap to go from speculating about how energy can leave the
>>> nucleus by imaging the nucleus as coupled to the lattice, to speculating
>>> how energy can enter the nucleus by imagining another coupling mechanism?
>>> Imagine a pendulum clock designed to work in reverse where externally
>>> driven oscillations of the pendulum from outside the clock serve to wind
>>> the clock up.
>>>
>>> Harry​
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

Even Ed Storms admitted there was SOME radiation in LENR cells, just a
thousand or million times too little.

On Monday, June 5, 2017,  wrote:

> In reply to  Kevin O'Malley's message of Mon, 5 Jun 2017 02:01:26 -0700:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >Yes it can.   When 2 d's fuse and emit a gamma ray, that energy is
> absorbed
> >by the lattice.   Such energy absorption sometimes generates fission
> >products.I do not know the nuclear equation, but it would be gamma +
> Ni
> >---> decay products + heat
>
> If the energy of the original reaction is distributed to the lattice, then
> there
> are no gammas. If there are gammas, then you can't count on all of them
> being
> absorbed by nuclei. Ordinary radioactive isotopes prove that.
> In short, if there were gammas they would be detectable externally with
> ordinary
> detectors.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

Jones,  isn't there an endothermic reaction with d-d that releases a gamma
ray?

On Tuesday, June 6, 2017, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
>  I suppose the cathode might have been storing and releasing heat at the
> same time, but how could you tell with a calorimeter?
>
>
> One expected effect of an experiment which is both storing and releasing
> excess heat at the same time would be a period of so-called
> heat-after-death following shut-down.
>
> Aside from that kind of direct proof, no one understands the mechanism for
> storage of nuclear changes but a good candidate would be a mechanism which
> results in "dense hydrogen".  (technically this is not nuclear, but it is
> closer to nuclear than to chemistry)
>
> If we had a rock-solid experiment which was clearly able to show
> heat-after-death, then perhaps efforts could be made to collect and
> characterize dense hydrogen.
>
> The problem of course is that there is no rock solid experiment capable of
> showing heat-after-death.
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Kevin O'Malley]

Jones,  isn't "stored nuclear energy " a new concept?  If you fission/split
an atom, are you releasing its stored energy? And hence, aren't all the
modes of storing nuke energy known?


On Tuesday, June 6, 2017, Jones Beene  wrote:

> No, your conclusion is both wrong and short-sighted - and apparently you
> forgot to actually look at the data and go on memory.
>
> The data in the last Table shows that in run 2, 5.5 MJ of input was
> unaccounted for and could have been stored. You clearly missed that, but it
> is the tip of the  iceberg.
>
> The data says nothing about ongoing nuclear changes which could have
> reduced the apparent gain in those runs with apparent gain - therefore in
> all seven runs, there could have been both exotherm and endotherm taking
> place in the same electrode, such that stored nuclear changes were
> absorbing some of the gain which was occurring with a delay from prior
> stored changes.
>
> I assume you had read this report years ago but please try reread the
> papers again before making unjustified conclusions. But you main error is
> the assumption that the entire electrode is either in an endothermic phase
> or exothermic, when it is much more complicated and both phases can take
> place simultaneously, with only the net effect being recorded.
>
> Jones
>
> On 6/6/2017 8:02 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
> Jones Beene wrote:
>
>> Any calorimeter that can measure a positive exothermic reaction of X
>> watts can measure an endothermic reaction of -X watts equally well.
>>
>> Energy storage is ruled out.
>>
>>
>> Not really ruled out. Let's be exact: energy storage by the conventional
>> chemical redox reaction is and always has been ruled out - OK - we can go
>> that far.
>>
>
> You are missing the point. Energy storage is ruled out because *the data
> shows that no energy was stored*. The balance was zero. There was no
> endothermic phase. There would have to be such a phase if energy was
> stored. It would have to show up in the calorimeter data. The negative
> signal would be stronger than the positive signal that followed during the
> exothermic phase, because the endothermic phase would be shorter.
>
> - Jed
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[H LV]

animation explaining Joule's apparatus and his calculations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yOhSIAIPRE

Harry

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 11:43 PM, H LV  wrote:
>
>
> Joule's apparatus used a spindle with paddles which was turned by a
> falling weight outside the calorimeter. The motion of the falling weight
> did not result in the generation of potential energy. It only resulted in
> the warming of the water inside calorimeter. However, if the falling of the
> weight were to wind up a spring in addition to turning of the paddle then
> the same energy input - in the form gravitational potential energy (i.e.
> the weight time the height through which the weight falls) would warm the
> water AND store energy in the spring. According to Joule the amount of heat
> generated is only a function of how far the weight falls. It is not a
> function of how quickly it falls, so even if the spring slows the descent
> of the weight the calorimeter will read the same rise in temperature with
> or without the spring attached.
> ​
> This thought experiment demonstrates how two systems can have the same
> energy input and generate the same temperatures but one can store energy
> and the other can't.
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[H LV]

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 9:44 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Jones Beene  wrote:
>
> No ! You seem to be confusing chemistry with nuclear reactions. Heat is
>> not being stored but altered reactants are.
>>
>
> Incorrect. Any method of storing energy -- chemical, mechanical,
> electrical or nuclear -- must result in a heat deficit. All energy converts
> to heat. Whether the heat sources is chemical or nuclear, all of the energy
> in the end converts to heat, and only heat leaves the calorimeter.
>
> Obviously, the heat itself is not stored. I did not say that, and I did
> not mean it.
>
> When you load a hydride, chemical energy is stored -- not heat itself.
> More energy goes in than comes out. There is an energy deficit, and when
> the hydride is inside calorimeter, that shows up as a heat deficit.
>
> When you charge a battery, electricity is stored as a chemical change.
> Tota energy leaving the cell is less than energy going in. Because heat is
> the only form of energy a calorimeter can detect, and because all sources
> and all forms of energy must eventually degrade into heat, the calorimeter
> sees a deficit. Other instruments will show the stored energy in other
> forms. An electric power meter attached to the battery will show the stored
> energy as increased potential electricity (voltage or specific gravity),
> but a calorimeter can only measure it as a heat deficit while the battery
> is charged.
>
> Mechanically winding up a spring inside a calorimeter will show a complete
> heat deficit. That is to say, you put work into the spring, but no heat is
> produced. This was a classic 19th century experiment performed by J. P.
> Joule. This would violate the First Law if the energy were not stored in
> the spring, by changing the internal structure of the spring.
>
>

Joule's apparatus used a spindle with paddles which was turned by a falling
weight outside the calorimeter. The motion of the falling weight did not
result in the generation of potential energy. It only resulted in the
warming of the water inside calorimeter. However, if the falling of the
weight were to wind up a spring in addition to turning of the paddle then
the same energy input - in the form gravitational potential energy (i.e.
the weight time the height through which the weight falls) would warm the
water AND store energy in the spring. According to Joule the amount of heat
generated is only a function of how far the weight falls. It is not a
function of how quickly it falls, so even if the spring slows the descent
of the weight the calorimeter will read the same rise in temperature with
or without the spring attached.
​
This thought experiment demonstrates how two systems can have the same
energy input and generate the same temperatures but one can store energy
and the other can't.

Harry




> https://books.google.com/books?id=oxQ2i23IiMsC=PT67;
> lpg=PT67=winding+up+a+spring+in+a+calorimeter&
> source=bl=LkyLjbUQbX=sAFyzKgdgWBLUFo-jKXTQy_TQGs=en=X=
> 0ahUKEwjhg5uCy6rUAhVG4SYKHWysARMQ6AEIKjAC#v=onepage=
> winding%20up%20a%20spring%20in%20a%20calorimeter=false
>
> What you are describing would be a violation of the First Law. You cannot
> store energy into a system and not reduce the amount of energy that comes
> out of the system.
>
>
>
>> The dense deuterium which is created and stored using some of the heat of
>> the ongoing reaction can and does react after power is cut.
>>
>
> If dense deuterium is created, and this stores energy, less energy
> degrades into heat, and there is a heat deficit. This does not happen.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jed Rothwell]

Jones Beene  wrote:


> You are intentionally obfuscating. When hydrogen or deuterium are
> densified by giving up angular momentum of the electron orbital - heat is
> released. That heat shows up in the excess heat of the reaction along with
> nuclear heat, if there is any.
>

If that is true, it is not energy storage. It has nothing to do with energy
storage. Like all forms of energy, it decreases the mass of the hydrogen or
deuterium. If it were energy storage, it would increase the mass.

You said earlier that the energy is stored: "This dynamic only happens when
the stored energy is nuclear, not chemical."

If the reactants are altered to have higher potential energy, then energy
is being stored. Mass is increased (which is too small to measure), and
there has to be an energy deficit in the system (which is easily measured).
If the system is a calorimeter, this has to show up as a heat deficit. It
makes no difference whether the higher potential energy is in atoms
(nuclear energy) or molecules (chemical energy) or the internal structure
of a spring (mechanical energy). Every joule of stored energy will produce
exactly the same heat deficit, and will increase the mass exactly the same
amount in all three system.

If the atoms are being altered to release energy, like atoms that fission
or molecules that burn, that's not energy storage. That's a material being
altered in a way that releases energy.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jones Beene]

 Jed Rothwell wrote:



No ! You seem to be confusing chemistry with nuclear reactions.
Heat is not being stored but altered reactants are.


Incorrect. Any method of storing energy -- chemical, mechanical, 
electrical or nuclear -- must result in a heat deficit.


You are intentionally obfuscating. When hydrogen or deuterium are 
densified by giving up angular momentum of the electron orbital - heat 
is released. That heat shows up in the excess heat of the reaction along 
with nuclear heat, if there is any.


This is NOT a deficit. The dense hydrogen actually becomes easier to 
fuse than before so it is win-win and not a balancing act as with 
chemical reactions.


It appears you are trying to cover up the fact that you do not 
understand or accept the dynamics of dense hydrogen.

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jed Rothwell]

Jones Beene  wrote:

No ! You seem to be confusing chemistry with nuclear reactions. Heat is not
> being stored but altered reactants are.
>

Incorrect. Any method of storing energy -- chemical, mechanical, electrical
or nuclear -- must result in a heat deficit. All energy converts to heat.
Whether the heat sources is chemical or nuclear, all of the energy in the
end converts to heat, and only heat leaves the calorimeter.

Obviously, the heat itself is not stored. I did not say that, and I did not
mean it.

When you load a hydride, chemical energy is stored -- not heat itself. More
energy goes in than comes out. There is an energy deficit, and when the
hydride is inside calorimeter, that shows up as a heat deficit.

When you charge a battery, electricity is stored as a chemical change.
Total energy leaving the cell is less than energy going in. Because heat is
the only form of energy a calorimeter can detect, and because all sources
and all forms of energy must eventually degrade into heat, the calorimeter
sees a deficit. Other instruments will show the stored energy in other
forms. An electric power meter attached to the battery will show the stored
energy as increased potential electricity (voltage or specific gravity),
but a calorimeter can only measure it as a heat deficit while the battery
is charged.

Mechanically winding up a spring inside a calorimeter will show a complete
heat deficit. That is to say, you put work into the spring, but no heat is
produced. This was a classic 19th century experiment performed by J. P.
Joule. This would violate the First Law if the energy were not stored in
the spring, by changing the internal structure of the spring.

https://books.google.com/books?id=oxQ2i23IiMsC=PT67=PT67=winding+up+a+spring+in+a+calorimeter=bl=LkyLjbUQbX=sAFyzKgdgWBLUFo-jKXTQy_TQGs=en=X=0ahUKEwjhg5uCy6rUAhVG4SYKHWysARMQ6AEIKjAC#v=onepage=winding%20up%20a%20spring%20in%20a%20calorimeter=false

What you are describing would be a violation of the First Law. You cannot
store energy into a system and not reduce the amount of energy that comes
out of the system.



> The dense deuterium which is created and stored using some of the heat of
> the ongoing reaction can and does react after power is cut.
>

If dense deuterium is created, and this stores energy, less energy degrades
into heat, and there is a heat deficit. This does not happen.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jones Beene]

Jed Rothwell wrote:


One expected effect of an experiment which is both storing and
releasing excess heat at the same time would be a period of
so-called heat-after-death following shut-down.


That would only be true if the experiment stored more heat than it 
releases. That never happens.


No ! You seem to be confusing chemistry with nuclear reactions. Heat is 
not being stored but altered reactants are. The dense deuterium which is 
created and stored using some of the heat of the ongoing reaction can 
and does react after power is cut. Holmlid has proved this. He has shown 
us how heat-after-death operates.


This is not speculation. If you do not accept Holmlid's results, and 
cannot see the obvious connection to other types of LENR then that is 
your problem, no mine.

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jones Beene]

Axil Axil wrote:

Holmlid needs to pump energy into the ultra dense hydrogen for weeks 
before mesons begin to be detected. But after that energy was loaded, 
exposure to lab lights were enough to feed meson production.


Now that you mention it - there is a good chance that Holmlid could 
almost single-highhandedly rescue LENR from the doldrums. A few changes 
in his present setup should suffice.


He is using a catalyst which does not store deuterium the way that 
palladium can. And he is not getting much fusion - mostly muons.


If Holmlid were to integrate palladium into his system for increased 
storage, it is possible that he could could achieve the robust on-demand 
type of gain which has long eluded others.


The path Holmlid is on now seems to based on the Shell catalyst because 
it works as an efficient spillover catalyst and is ferromagnetic and 
inexpensive. The Letts/Cravens effect indicates that laser irradiation 
works far better in a magnetic field.


If palladium could be added into the mix, then much more UDD could be 
stored than in his present setup. Palladium in not ferromagnetic, so 
consequently he would need both catalysts. As of now, Holmlid sees some 
fusion but far more muons -- and muons are not easily converted into 
heat. His results would arguably be much better in terms of excess heat 
if he could alter his setup to see more deuterium fusion and fewer 
muons. An easy way to do that seems to be to mix palladium powder with 
the Shell 105.


This would not be hard to pull off ... and the upside is significant.

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jed Rothwell]

Jones Beene  wrote:


> One expected effect of an experiment which is both storing and releasing
> excess heat at the same time would be a period of so-called
> heat-after-death following shut-down.
>

That would only be true if the experiment stored more heat than it
releases. That never happens. There is not a single experiment in the
literature in which as significant amount of heat was stored, at any phase
in the experiment. Not at the beginning, or the middle or the end. It NEVER
HAPPENS.



> Aside from that kind of direct proof . . .
>

That direct proof does not exist, as I said. If it did exist, you would
have point, but it does not.



> , no one understands the mechanism for storage of nuclear changes but a
> good candidate would be a mechanism which results in "dense hydrogen".
>

Why are you speculating about a mechanism for an event that has never
occurred?

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

I seem to remember Jones remarking how difficult that replicating Holmlid's
experiment was because Holmlid needs to pump energy into the ultra dense
hydrogen for weeks before mesons begin to be detected. But after that
energy was loaded, exposure to lab lights were enough to feed meson
production.

Is my memory true regarding the requirement for  large scale energy storage
in ultra dense hydrogen activation?

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> No, your conclusion is both wrong and short-sighted - and apparently you
> forgot to actually look at the data and go on memory.
>
> The data in the last Table shows that in run 2, 5.5 MJ of input was
> unaccounted for and could have been stored. You clearly missed that, but it
> is the tip of the  iceberg.
>
> The data says nothing about ongoing nuclear changes which could have
> reduced the apparent gain in those runs with apparent gain - therefore in
> all seven runs, there could have been both exotherm and endotherm taking
> place in the same electrode, such that stored nuclear changes were
> absorbing some of the gain which was occurring with a delay from prior
> stored changes.
>
> I assume you had read this report years ago but please try reread the
> papers again before making unjustified conclusions. But you main error is
> the assumption that the entire electrode is either in an endothermic phase
> or exothermic, when it is much more complicated and both phases can take
> place simultaneously, with only the net effect being recorded.
>
> Jones
>
> On 6/6/2017 8:02 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
> Jones Beene wrote:
>
>> Any calorimeter that can measure a positive exothermic reaction of X
>> watts can measure an endothermic reaction of -X watts equally well.
>>
>> Energy storage is ruled out.
>>
>>
>> Not really ruled out. Let's be exact: energy storage by the conventional
>> chemical redox reaction is and always has been ruled out - OK - we can go
>> that far.
>>
>
> You are missing the point. Energy storage is ruled out because *the data
> shows that no energy was stored*. The balance was zero. There was no
> endothermic phase. There would have to be such a phase if energy was
> stored. It would have to show up in the calorimeter data. The negative
> signal would be stronger than the positive signal that followed during the
> exothermic phase, because the endothermic phase would be shorter.
>
> - Jed
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jones Beene]

Jed Rothwell wrote:

 I suppose the cathode might have been storing and releasing heat at 
the same time, but how could you tell with a calorimeter?


One expected effect of an experiment which is both storing and releasing 
excess heat at the same time would be a period of so-called 
heat-after-death following shut-down.


Aside from that kind of direct proof, no one understands the mechanism 
for storage of nuclear changes but a good candidate would be a mechanism 
which results in "dense hydrogen".  (technically this is not nuclear, 
but it is closer to nuclear than to chemistry)


If we had a rock-solid experiment which was clearly able to show 
heat-after-death, then perhaps efforts could be made to collect and 
characterize dense hydrogen.


The problem of course is that there is no rock solid experiment capable 
of showing heat-after-death.

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jed Rothwell]

Jones Beene  wrote:


> Yes... but you still do not get the logical error you are making.
>
> In any run where there is net gain, there can be regions of heat deficit
> which are masked by the overall gain. You cannot assume a homogeneous
> electrode.
>

If there were regions of deficit that exceeded the gain, the balance would
be negative. There was no significant negative balance in any experiment.
There was no net energy storage. Not in regions of the cathode, and not
over time either.

Again, looking at the time dimension, successful experiments produced heat
longer than they showed a zero balance. So, the negative heat deficit
(negative power) would have to be larger than the positive power. Assuming
they took place at different times. If they took place at the same time but
in different locations in the cathode -- as you suggest here -- then the
net effect must have been zero, as I said. A heat balance. I suppose the
cathode might have been storing and releasing heat at the same time, but
how could you tell with a calorimeter? This would look exactly the same as
a cathode that is doing nothing.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jones Beene]

Jed Rothwell wrote:


The data says nothing about ongoing nuclear changes which could
have reduced the apparent gain in those runs with apparent gain . . .

Any nuclear or chemical change must result in a heat deficit. There is 
no significant heat deficit.


Yes... but you still do not get the logical error you are making.

In any run where there is net gain, there can be regions of heat deficit 
which are masked by the overall gain. You cannot assume a homogeneous 
electrode.


The real gain of ~300 MJ could have been higher than reported. This 
dynamic only happens when the stored energy is nuclear, not chemical. If 
it were only chemical energy that we are concerned with, then yes, 
storage would result in deficit but with nuclear there can be both gain 
and storage happening at the same time.


Jones

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jed Rothwell]

Jones Beene  wrote:

No, your conclusion is both wrong and short-sighted - and apparently you
> forgot to actually look at the data and go on memory.
>
> The data in the last Table shows that in run 2, 5.5 MJ of input was
> unaccounted for and could have been stored. You clearly missed that, but it
> is the tip of the  iceberg.
>
I did not miss it. It is in the margin of error. More to the point, a 5.5
MJ deficit in one experiment cannot explain a 294 MJ excess in one
experiment, and a 102 MJ excess in another. 5.5 is much smaller than
294+102. This is also impossible because they used a different cathode in
each test. Even if 5.5 MJ were stored in one cathode, it would not transfer
to the other two.

The data says nothing about ongoing nuclear changes which could have
> reduced the apparent gain in those runs with apparent gain . . .
>
Any nuclear or chemical change must result in a heat deficit. There is no
significant heat deficit.

- therefore in all seven runs, there could have been both exotherm and
> endotherm taking place in the same electrode . . .
>
Different electrodes. In any case the total unaccounted-for negative energy
is far less than the excess, as I said.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jones Beene]

No, your conclusion is both wrong and short-sighted - and apparently you 
forgot to actually look at the data and go on memory.


The data in the last Table shows that in run 2, 5.5 MJ of input was 
unaccounted for and could have been stored. You clearly missed that, but 
it is the tip of the  iceberg.


The data says nothing about ongoing nuclear changes which could have 
reduced the apparent gain in those runs with apparent gain - therefore 
in all seven runs, there could have been both exotherm and endotherm 
taking place in the same electrode, such that stored nuclear changes 
were absorbing some of the gain which was occurring with a delay from 
prior stored changes.


I assume you had read this report years ago but please try reread the 
papers again before making unjustified conclusions. But you main error 
is the assumption that the entire electrode is either in an endothermic 
phase or exothermic, when it is much more complicated and both phases 
can take place simultaneously, with only the net effect being recorded.


Jones


On 6/6/2017 8:02 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Jones Beenewrote:


Any calorimeter that can measure a positive exothermic reaction
of X watts can measure an endothermic reaction of -X watts
equally well.

Energy storage is ruled out.


Not really ruled out. Let's be exact: energy storage by the
conventional chemical redox reaction is and always has been ruled
out - OK - we can go that far.


You are missing the point. Energy storage is ruled out because _the 
data shows that no energy was stored_. The balance was zero. There was 
no endothermic phase. There would have to be such a phase if energy 
was stored. It would have to show up in the calorimeter data. The 
negative signal would be stronger than the positive signal that 
followed during the exothermic phase, because the endothermic phase 
would be shorter.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jed Rothwell]

I wrote:


> Energy storage is ruled out because *the data shows that no energy was
> stored*. The balance was zero. There was no endothermic phase. There
> would have to be such a phase if energy was stored.
>

You see this with any kind of energy storage, because all energy converts
to heat. For example, Scott Little once showed data from a rechargable
battery placed in a calorimeter. While the battery charged up, there was a
heat deficit. The battery was then connected to resistance heater inside
the calorimeter. The total energy from heat it produced was very close to
the deficit during the endothermic phase.

Even if there was some exotic storage mechanism, "based on nuclear
boosting/storage of some kind - such as weak force hypercharge pumping" or
what-have-you, it would show up as a heat deficit. Because all energy
always ends up as heat.

The only other situation (not an exception, per se) would be a heat deficit
caused by particles escaping undetected from the calorimeter. That would be
dangerous! It would not result in energy storage.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jed Rothwell]

Jones Beene  wrote:

> Any calorimeter that can measure a positive exothermic reaction of X watts
> can measure an endothermic reaction of -X watts equally well.
>
> Energy storage is ruled out.
>
>
> Not really ruled out. Let's be exact: energy storage by the conventional
> chemical redox reaction is and always has been ruled out - OK - we can go
> that far.
>

You are missing the point. Energy storage is ruled out because *the data
shows that no energy was stored*. The balance was zero. There was no
endothermic phase. There would have to be such a phase if energy was
stored. It would have to show up in the calorimeter data. The negative
signal would be stronger than the positive signal that followed during the
exothermic phase, because the endothermic phase would be shorter.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[mixent]

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Mon, 5 Jun 2017 15:24:45 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>Hi Robin,
>
>Yes but your Geiger counter is covering a wide spectrum, and the 1000 
>counts are mostly at the low end... whereas the Focardi peak was fairly 
>sharp at 1.5 MeV if memory serves.
>
>That is an anomaly for sure, but a tiny one.
>
>However, maybe the Aussies are getting more rads than the rest of us. 
>Isn't there an ozone hole down under?

Sometimes, but not this far North (last time I checked). Furthermore the
background level varies quite a bit based on location. I suspect it has more to
do with radiation from the ground than from the air.

Particular isotopes in some areas (Radon?) could produce a weak peak in some
places.
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[H LV]

Ok, the numbers in this paper rule out the possibility of energy storage
during the experiment.
.
However, as I recall there is a story floating around that a certain batch
of Pd from the supplier seemed to work best.
If that is true then the energy storage might have happened prior to the
experiment when the Pd was processed
by the supplier.


Harry

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 8:43 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Please review the numbers in the paper, which is here:
>
> http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RouletteTresultsofi.pdf
>
> For experiment 4, the excess heat lasted 70 days. The total experiment
> duration was 123 days. If there was a storage phase, it lasted 53 days.
> This would show up as an endothermic reaction, which would reduce power
> output by much more than the exothermic reaction that followed, because it
> would be shorter. Any calorimeter that can measure a positive exothermic
> reaction of X watts can measure an endothermic reaction of -X watts equally
> well.
>
> Energy storage is ruled out.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jones Beene]

Jed Rothwell wrote

For experiment 4, the excess heat lasted 70 days. The total experiment 
duration was 123 days. If there was a storage phase, it lasted 53 
days. This would show up as an endothermic reaction, which would 
reduce power output by much more than the exothermic reaction that 
followed, because it would be shorter. Any calorimeter that can 
measure a positive exothermic reaction of X watts can measure an 
endothermic reaction of -X watts equally well.


Energy storage is ruled out.


Not really ruled out. Let's be exact: energy storage by the conventional 
chemical redox reaction is and always has been ruled out - OK - we can 
go that far.


However, if the storage mechanism is based on nuclear boosting/storage 
of some kind - such as weak force hypercharge pumping, then the delayed 
output can be greater than the input by a ratio of over a million to 
one. The gain is still delayed but also multiplied, when released.


This is especially true with palladium electrodes with a percentage of 
silver, since there is the well-known isotopic gap between 108Pd and 
110Pd. Both isotopes are plentiful and stable yet 109Pd is mysteriously 
not stable in Pd, with a puzzling short half-life AND with a strong 
gamma emission line in the vicinity of what is seen in the Focardi paper.


When one goes to investigate the underlying question of why 109Pd is not 
stable and in fact is exceedingly unstable - when the adjoining isotopes 
on either side (in amu) are very stable, then silver - and the weak 
force dynamics come into focus - and physics simply does not understand 
this yet. Not to mention the fifth force


https://news.uci.edu/research/uci-physicists-confirm-possible-discovery-of-fifth-force-of-nature/

There could easily be electroweak parameters which favor the silver 
isotope, 109Ag going into an unstable state when alloyed with Pd (it is 
nearly half of all silver). Or there could be internal dynamics which 
work to maintain an unknown isotopic balance when too little silver is 
present. This dynamic may favor a cathode composed of an alloy of 
palladium and silver. Of course, this could relate to the well known 
membrane alloy of JM. The two elements are like twins, found together in 
nature... and the weak force is the one factor which keeps them apart.


In conclusion, energy storage via weak force pumping is an alternative 
mechanism for delayed gain which has not been ruled out. Of course, many 
mechanisms have not been ruled out. Many experimenters have particularly 
espoused silver as being a necessary ingredient, including Russ 
George... but the bottom line is that no one knows and to confuse things 
even more, a fifth force seems to operate between the weak and strong.


Hi-yo silver ! [fade to The William Tell Overture]

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jed Rothwell]

Please review the numbers in the paper, which is here:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RouletteTresultsofi.pdf

For experiment 4, the excess heat lasted 70 days. The total experiment
duration was 123 days. If there was a storage phase, it lasted 53 days.
This would show up as an endothermic reaction, which would reduce power
output by much more than the exothermic reaction that followed, because it
would be shorter. Any calorimeter that can measure a positive exothermic
reaction of X watts can measure an endothermic reaction of -X watts equally
well.

Energy storage is ruled out.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Jones Beene]

To be realistic, if the output heat was consistently showing up as say 
85% of input electrical power, then naturally the experimenter must 
"recalibrate" to show it as roughly even... 


After all, the accepted assumption is that input energy can't disappear 
or be stored, right?



H LV wrote:
Yes, but how to square this with the fact that the input energy 
balanced the output energy during the prep time. Could the combined 
margin error in both the input and output measurements allow for the 
storage of enough energy during the prep time?


harry

Jones Beenewrote:

Harry, You seem to be suggesting that the experiments in France
could be operating by (inadvertently) storing applied energy in
nuclei for later release - at least as an alternate explanation
for the two runs which showed gain after months of what looks very
much like a battery being charged.

As unlikely as this possibility may sound at first to a proponent
of cold fusion - the mechanism has not been eliminated. In fact,
it may be more physical than suggesting nuclear fusion without
radiation, since it involves "one less miracle."

For instance, the weak nuclear force has two poorly understood
properties - weak hypercharge and weak isospin -- either of which
(or both) arguably could be boosted or pumped up by electrical
current flow (in palladium electrolysis) over time and then the
accumulated energy released later.

In fact, the weak force could even supply helium (which does not
come from fusion but from alpha decay of the heavier palladium
isotope after months of "hypercharging" ;-)

This "weak force pumping" rationale, having its main validity
based on our lack of understanding of the weak force - indicates
how little is known about the underlying mechanisms for the
unpredictable gain of cold fusion. There could be many. The
appearance of helium should never lead to the reflexive conclusion
of fusion, that is- when gamma radiation is absent.

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Brian Ahern]

Good discussion Bob.


I have had a decade long experience with electron orbital degeneracy. It may 
come as a small surprise to the LENR community that all phase changes involve 
near approaches (in energy) of the LUMO and HOMO.


This includes magnetic transitions.


The transitions need not be static as materials can coexist in a state of 
fluctuations between two phases.  This is amply demonstrated in Perovskite 
minerals such as ferrites.


I am hereby advancing the concept that LENR is related to magnetic transitions 
interrogating the vacuum.

The weak energy output from Palladium and nickel may simply indicate that they 
are sub optimal magnetic hosts.

From: bobcook39...@hotmail.com <bobcook39...@hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, June 5, 2017 1:47 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature


Degeneracy is a major factor in all the LENR reactions, since it reduces the  
allowable space for all charged particles of a coherent system such as a 
crystal lattice  commonly found in LENR phenomena.



The odds of 2 or more particles in the same general location such that their 
electric charge fields interact is improved.  Strong magnetic fields can cause 
degeneracy in a crystal.



IMHO fission or fusion can occur in a coherent system as long as the potential 
energy (binding energy) can be distributed through all or some of the coherent 
system as kinetic energy---vibrations in the Chubb theory as in the Mossbauer 
Effect.  This kinetic energy is also called phonic energy of the lattice.  It 
is the result of higher orbital spin states of many electrons making up the 
lattice (crystal).  .



The beauty of the engineering of such a system is in the planning to allow 
hadron particle changes with a modified positive charge center with causing a 
major weakening of the lattice  with respect to

remaining in tact at high temperatures.



A range of lattice dimensions for the various nano-particles will alter the  
phonic resonances the various particles have, such that as degeneracy happens 
with changing ambient conditions all nano-particles do not react at the same 
time to sinter the particles together.



Cooling the particles IMHO depends upon convective heat transfer by Li vapor or 
Hydrogen gas to the reactor walls.  Maintaining the fuel—nanoparticles-- near 
the center of the reactor vessel with good mixing is also an engineering feat 
that relies on the thermal activity of the heat transfer agent and magnetic the 
ambient magnetic field—probably a field that varies in magnitude significantly 
above 0.



Bob Cook

















From: Axil Axil<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 4, 2017 11:20 PM
To: vortex-l<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature



The problem with this fusion idea is that it does not explain the subset of 
LENR experiments that show fission is occurring. Can this theory explain 
fission in LENR? I don't think so.



On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 3:13 AM, Kevin O'Malley 
<kevmol...@gmail.com<mailto:kevmol...@gmail.com>> wrote:

In particular, this paragraph seems to support my Balloon analogy for absorbing 
most of the high energy emissions into the lattice.







"...as in the Mossbauer effect, through a real effect, implicit in the 
symmetry associated with rigid lattice translations that preserve periodic 
order, it is possible for a lattice to “recoil” elastically, as a whole, in 
response to a collision at a point. In the generalization of band theory [19] 
to many-body, finite systems, the same symmetry is invoked and leads to a huge 
degeneracy. Because indistinguishable particles are involved in these systems, 
implicitly, additional degeneracies are also present. The combined effects 
provide a means for particles to have appreciable overlap at many, periodically 
displaced “points” (as discussed below), simultaneously, for finite periods of 
time, in a manner that can result in new forms of collisions in which momentum 
is transferred from the locations where overlap can occur, rigidly to the 
lattice as a whole. When these idealized forms of motion are initiated by 
collisions resulting from the overlap between d’s in IBS’s, they can result in 
forms of coupling that can cause nuclear fusion to take place in which small 
amounts of momentum and energy from many different locations are transferred 
coherently to the solid as a whole and subsequently transferred to many 
different particles in a cooperative fashion. As a consequence, in agreement 
with experiment, the associated nuclear energy is predicted to be released 
without high-energy particles. "



On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Kevin O'Malley 
<kevmol...@gmail.com<mailto:kevmol...@gmail.com>> wrote:

In this old thread, we discussed BECs with Edmund Storms.   He unsubscribed 
from Vortex soon after this intera

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[H LV]

Yes, but how to square this with the fact that the input energy balanced
the output energy during the prep time. Could the combined margin error in
both the input and output measurements allow for the storage of enough
energy during the prep time?

harry

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Harry, You seem to be suggesting that the experiments in France could be
> operating by (inadvertently) storing applied energy in nuclei for later
> release - at least as an alternate explanation for the two runs which
> showed gain after months of what looks very much like a battery being
> charged.
>
> As unlikely as this possibility may sound at first to a proponent of cold
> fusion - the mechanism has not been eliminated. In fact, it may be more
> physical than suggesting nuclear fusion without radiation, since it
> involves "one less miracle."
>
> For instance, the weak nuclear force has two poorly understood properties
> - weak hypercharge and weak isospin -- either of which (or both) arguably
> could be boosted or pumped up by electrical current flow (in palladium
> electrolysis) over time and then the accumulated energy released later.
>
> In fact, the weak force could even supply helium (which does not come from
> fusion but from alpha decay of the heavier palladium isotope after months
> of "hypercharging" ;-)
>
> This "weak force pumping" rationale, having its main validity based on our
> lack of understanding of the weak force - indicates how little is known
> about the underlying mechanisms for the unpredictable gain of cold fusion.
> There could be many. The appearance of helium should never lead to the
> reflexive conclusion of fusion, that is- when gamma radiation is absent.
>
> BTW - In terms of defining an anomaly such as the one in question,
> "average" gain may not be as meaningful as peak intermittent gain, but in
> terms of a parameter which is leading towards commercialization - it is
> really the only meaningful metric. Is there any indication anywhere that
> LENR is closer to commercialization than it was in 1989 ?
>  H LV wrote:
>
>
>  Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
>> Jones Beene wrote:
>>
>> The intractable problem in cold fusion is that this "hero effort" - the
>>> very best result to have occurred in 28 years was itself little more than a
>>> yawner. People tend to forget that this result (almost 300 MJ of gain) was
>>> statistically very close to a null result in total (as an average) and it
>>> did not point the way to a useful device.
>>
>>
>> "Average" is not meaningful in this context. The experiment produced no
>> heat for a while, then it turned on and produced ~100 W for 30 days in one
>> test and 70 days in another. Computing the average including the time
>> before it turned on would be like computing the average speed of an
>> airplane including the time it is sitting at the gate and the time waiting
>> in line to take off.
>>
>> There is no energy storage during the time before it turns on. We know
>> there is none because the energy balance is zero, and because you cannot
>> store that much energy.
>>
>> - Jed
>>
>>
>
> "​You cannot store that much energy"​ is working hypothesis.
> ​That much energy could be stored in nuclei.
> Is it such a leap to go from speculating about how energy can leave the
> nucleus by imaging the nucleus as coupled to the lattice, to speculating
> how energy can enter the nucleus by imagining another coupling mechanism?
> Imagine a pendulum clock designed to work in reverse where externally
> driven oscillations of the pendulum from outside the clock serve to wind
> the clock up.
>
> Harry​
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

More on gamma from LENR from Ed Storms

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/ba21/eab904a52374a7fd9a10a498bcff62f82552.pdf

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 6:47 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> More on gamma from LENR
>
> http://coldfusion3.com/blog/smoking-gun-of-lenr-
> fleischmann-project-results-duplicated-in-one-day-celani-
> cell-verified-as-lenr-device
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 6:40 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> In an experimental series performed by Piantelli, he observed the
>> production of either heat or gamma radiation but not both at the same time,
>> if memory serves.
>>
>>
>>
>> From the demo of the first one liter Rossi reactor during the time at
>> startup when the lattice was cold, a massive radiation burst appeared
>> for a second or two. From this, I deduce that the energy production
>> mechanism will generate large amounts of radiation if the lattice is cold
>> and the phonons present in the lattice are not energetic enough.
>>
>>
>>
>> One problem of that early design was the generation of bursts of
>> radiation during startup and shutdown. I assume that the lattice was
>> cold at those times.
>>
>>
>>
>> Rossi was greatly concerned by these radiation bursts, and changed his
>> design so that an external heater warmed the nickel lattice before the
>> reaction begins.
>>
>>
>>
>>  This tells me that there is a second quantum mechanical reaction that
>> converts the radiation generated in the metal atom’s nucleus to thermal
>> energy within the lattice.
>>
>>
>>
>> The lack of radioactive decay products after the Rossi reactor is shut
>> down also speaks to a radiation thermalization mechanism rather than a
>> radiation suppression mechanism.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 5:10 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> MORE...
>>>
>>> In this Focardi
>>> 
>>>  experiment,
>>> when gamma radiation was generated, excess was not generated. This leads to
>>> the observation that the Polariton BEC is the mechanism that transforms the
>>> nuclear energy produced in the LENR reaction into heat.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>>
 Gamma radiation does appear when a BEC is not formed between the SPPs
 involved in a LENR reaction. Yes, the LENR reaction can produce gamma
 radiation when the SPPs are not pumped to a level sufficient to establish a
 Polariton BEC. This is why a cold LENR reaction will produce Gamma
 radiation and a Hot LENR reaction will not produce Gamma radiation.

 See

 http://newenergytimes.com/v2/library/2004/2004Focardi-Eviden
 ceOfElectromagneticRadiation.pdf

 On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Jones Beene 
 wrote:

> Harry, You seem to be suggesting that the experiments in France could
> be operating by (inadvertently) storing applied energy in nuclei for later
> release - at least as an alternate explanation for the two runs which
> showed gain after months of what looks very much like a battery being
> charged.
>
> As unlikely as this possibility may sound at first to a proponent of
> cold fusion - the mechanism has not been eliminated. In fact, it may be
> more physical than suggesting nuclear fusion without radiation, since it
> involves "one less miracle."
>
> For instance, the weak nuclear force has two poorly understood
> properties - weak hypercharge and weak isospin -- either of which (or 
> both)
> arguably could be boosted or pumped up by electrical current flow (in
> palladium electrolysis) over time and then the accumulated energy released
> later.
>
> In fact, the weak force could even supply helium (which does not come
> from fusion but from alpha decay of the heavier palladium isotope after
> months of "hypercharging" ;-)
>
> This "weak force pumping" rationale, having its main validity based on
> our lack of understanding of the weak force - indicates how little is 
> known
> about the underlying mechanisms for the unpredictable gain of cold fusion.
> There could be many. The appearance of helium should never lead to the
> reflexive conclusion of fusion, that is- when gamma radiation is absent.
>
> BTW - In terms of defining an anomaly such as the one in question,
> "average" gain may not be as meaningful as peak intermittent gain, but in
> terms of a parameter which is leading towards commercialization - it is
> really the only meaningful metric. Is there any indication anywhere that
> LENR is closer to commercialization than it was in 1989 ?
>  H LV wrote:
>
>
>  Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
>> Jones Beene wrote:
>>
>> The intractable problem in cold fusion is that this "hero effort" -
>>> the very best result to have occurred in 28 years was itself 

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

More on gamma from LENR

http://coldfusion3.com/blog/smoking-gun-of-lenr-fleischmann-project-results-duplicated-in-one-day-celani-cell-verified-as-lenr-device



On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 6:40 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> In an experimental series performed by Piantelli, he observed the
> production of either heat or gamma radiation but not both at the same time,
> if memory serves.
>
>
>
> From the demo of the first one liter Rossi reactor during the time at
> startup when the lattice was cold, a massive radiation burst appeared for
> a second or two. From this, I deduce that the energy production mechanism
> will generate large amounts of radiation if the lattice is cold and the
> phonons present in the lattice are not energetic enough.
>
>
>
> One problem of that early design was the generation of bursts of radiation
> during startup and shutdown. I assume that the lattice was cold at those
> times.
>
>
>
> Rossi was greatly concerned by these radiation bursts, and changed his
> design so that an external heater warmed the nickel lattice before the
> reaction begins.
>
>
>
>  This tells me that there is a second quantum mechanical reaction that
> converts the radiation generated in the metal atom’s nucleus to thermal
> energy within the lattice.
>
>
>
> The lack of radioactive decay products after the Rossi reactor is shut
> down also speaks to a radiation thermalization mechanism rather than a
> radiation suppression mechanism.
>
> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 5:10 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> MORE...
>>
>> In this Focardi
>> 
>>  experiment,
>> when gamma radiation was generated, excess was not generated. This leads to
>> the observation that the Polariton BEC is the mechanism that transforms the
>> nuclear energy produced in the LENR reaction into heat.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> Gamma radiation does appear when a BEC is not formed between the SPPs
>>> involved in a LENR reaction. Yes, the LENR reaction can produce gamma
>>> radiation when the SPPs are not pumped to a level sufficient to establish a
>>> Polariton BEC. This is why a cold LENR reaction will produce Gamma
>>> radiation and a Hot LENR reaction will not produce Gamma radiation.
>>>
>>> See
>>>
>>> http://newenergytimes.com/v2/library/2004/2004Focardi-Eviden
>>> ceOfElectromagneticRadiation.pdf
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
>>>
 Harry, You seem to be suggesting that the experiments in France could
 be operating by (inadvertently) storing applied energy in nuclei for later
 release - at least as an alternate explanation for the two runs which
 showed gain after months of what looks very much like a battery being
 charged.

 As unlikely as this possibility may sound at first to a proponent of
 cold fusion - the mechanism has not been eliminated. In fact, it may be
 more physical than suggesting nuclear fusion without radiation, since it
 involves "one less miracle."

 For instance, the weak nuclear force has two poorly understood
 properties - weak hypercharge and weak isospin -- either of which (or both)
 arguably could be boosted or pumped up by electrical current flow (in
 palladium electrolysis) over time and then the accumulated energy released
 later.

 In fact, the weak force could even supply helium (which does not come
 from fusion but from alpha decay of the heavier palladium isotope after
 months of "hypercharging" ;-)

 This "weak force pumping" rationale, having its main validity based on
 our lack of understanding of the weak force - indicates how little is known
 about the underlying mechanisms for the unpredictable gain of cold fusion.
 There could be many. The appearance of helium should never lead to the
 reflexive conclusion of fusion, that is- when gamma radiation is absent.

 BTW - In terms of defining an anomaly such as the one in question,
 "average" gain may not be as meaningful as peak intermittent gain, but in
 terms of a parameter which is leading towards commercialization - it is
 really the only meaningful metric. Is there any indication anywhere that
 LENR is closer to commercialization than it was in 1989 ?
  H LV wrote:


  Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Jones Beene wrote:
>
> The intractable problem in cold fusion is that this "hero effort" -
>> the very best result to have occurred in 28 years was itself little more
>> than a yawner. People tend to forget that this result (almost 300 MJ of
>> gain) was statistically very close to a null result in total (as an
>> average) and it did not point the way to a useful device.
>
>
> "Average" is not meaningful in this context. The experiment produced
> no heat