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 > >
