What I have understood is that momentum conservation is a shortcut, uncounscious to "free space" physicists. It mean "gamma" as one particle to compensate momentum.
In lattice, momentum can be dissipated in many way, moreover particles are so bound to other particle that the allowed change/excitation, involving many real particle, make some pseudo-particle emerge as "excitation of the system"... like phonons, polaritons, hole, virtual mass electrons. what I've understood, is such: in fact particles don't exist as object, but are allowed excitation of the fields... In a lattice the field are so much coupled, glued, tightened, that the pseudo-particle are the only allowed excitation of the field, but this excitation involve many fields, and many what are usually independent excitation (particle)... imagine that you see people in a train station exchange hall... each passenger have his trajectory, and move interacting with others. For pani prediction in public place IBM have modeled them as lone particles reacting at 2m by collision avoidance. imagine now a couple with kids? a virtual particle appear... you cannot break it, or it will create new uncommon interaction, like separating quarks. In a crowded metro, you can see very funny pseudo particle, like holes, compression, some virtual mass, viscosity and rigidity... add a familly, luggage, and you will see many pseudo-particles, bigger than individual. Applying free-space physics, and momentum conservation to LENr is like applying ballistic and IBM model of travelers, to a crowded metro cart in fire. I imagine physicist can find a better way to explain it... this way to explain is how I understand it. What I take from that explanation is mostly modesty about lattice QM, like one should have in closed place crowd prediction. 2013/6/9 Harry Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> > Another thing I find puzzling is why Kim appends the phrase "in free > space" to momentum conservation. > I thought conservation of momentum was a universal law, which > means it suppose to apply everywhere under any circumstances. > For example James Clerk Maxwell made sure his theory of > electromagnetism did not violate the conservation of momentum. > > Harry > > > On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Alain Sepeda <alain.sep...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> are'nt gamma the way to compensate momentum ? >> and neutron the expected nuclear products? >> >> by the way I appreciate the way yeong kim explain why lattice is not free >> space : >> "even though I clearly recognized that the conventional nuclear >> scattering theory at positive energies cannot directly be applied to >> nuclear reactions involving deuterons bound in a metal, which is a >> negative-energy bound-state problem. Quantum scattering theory describing >> the Coulomb barrier problem is applicable to scattering experiments with >> nuclear beams." >> >> a much more sexy explanation than my microelectronic experience that QM >> in solid is ... strange... ( ;-) ) >> >> >> >> 2013/6/7 Harry Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> >> >>> Peter, >>> >>> Kim says Huizenga's three miracles are: >>> (1) suppression of the DD Coulomb repulsion (Gamow factor) * * >>> (2) no production of nuclear products (D+D → n+ 3He, etc.) >>> (3) the violation of the momentum conservation in free space >>> >>> In other places I have seen Huizenga three miracles written like this : >>> (1) the mystery of how the Coulomb barrier is penetrated >>> (2) the lack of strong neutron emissions >>> (3) the lack of strong emission of gamma or x-rays >>> see for example >>> http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/Chubb93Editorial.pdf >>> http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/Theories/LiTheory.shtml#miracles >>> >>> >>> The second set does not mention of violation of momentum conservation >>> in free space. >>> Which set is correct? >>> >>> Harry >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 11:14 PM, Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> *Prof. Yeong Kim interviewed*: a veteran finally gets optimistic following >>>> a technological breakthrough. >>>> Please see: >>>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/06/a-veterans-voice.html >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Dr. Peter Gluck >>>> Cluj, Romania >>>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >>>> >>> >>> >> >
