An off-list question is worth posting relative to the HotCat design and Bob's comment.
Why does the HotCat need the stainless steel "capsule" to be inside a SiC
containment tube and then to be surrounded by the resistance heater, and how
does active hydrogen get out of the capsule so that it can interact with
plasmons?
There are two reasons for this structural arrangement IMO - the first is to
create the proper plasmonic interface.
>From the Zhang Berkeley paper: "Just as the energy in waves of light is
carried through space in discrete or quantized particle-like units called
photons, so, too, is the energy in waves of charged gas (plasma) carried in
quantized particle-like packets called plasmons, as they travel along
metallic surfaces. When photons excite the collective electron oscillations
at the interfaces between metal and dielectric (insulator) materials, they
can form yet another quasi-particle called a surface plasmon
polariton(SPP)." END
The second use of the steel capsule (and it may be inadvertent on Rossi's
part) is for the slow release of f/H. The SS is grade 310 is notably
nonmagnetic as it must be since f/H has extreme magnetic susceptibility.
This steel is also nonporous for hydrogen, resists embrittlement and is NOT
a proton conductor at all. However, SS-310 will permit f/H to slowly filter
through its grain structure due to the much more compact dimensions of this
hydrogen species (8x less effective volume than hydrogen and the perfect
size to slowly diffuse through the steel).
Therefore - what we end up with in the HotCat appears to be f/H
catalytically forming inside the steel capsule, due to interaction with a
catalyst which could be potassium - and then slowly migrating outwards
through the steel walls, as if it the tube was a proton conductor which it
isn't, and outward to the interface with the SiC which is heated to
temperature where there is superradiance at what appears to be 10 micron
wavelength. This very strong electric field then interacts with the f/H due
to magnetic susceptibility.
The gainful reaction is open to further discussion...
_____________________________________________
In the category of chemical reactions - "vicinal" chemistry
(from Latin vicinus = neighbor) relates to functional groups bonded to
adjacent atoms in a molecule to form isomers with markedly different
properties . These functional groups, which can consist of a single proton
or a bound pair of protons in a reduced orbital have a characteristics of
"extropy" (anti-entropy). The groups have freedom of movement whereas the
underlying substrate has comparative little freedom.
If you consult Wiki, their entry is way behind on this niche
of chemistry - since the term applies to more than carbon (as Wiki states)
and is about to reach a tipping point due to graphene. In fact the vicinal
chemistry of silicon, carbon and even silicon carbide are all inter-related
- and most interesting at the nano-geometry because surfaces
"auto-organize". This term "auto-organize" is suggestive in itself of a
violation of CoE. It is especially relevant to elements that have four
bonding sites and "prefer" to form hexagonal crystals.
FRET - or Forster resonant energy transfer is also a key to
understanding a related facet of vicinal chemistry from the biological
perspective. FRET has ZPE written all over it, so to speak. The FRET niche
and vicinal chemistry overlap in MRI - so there is a magnetic component to
all of this as well. And then there is Rossi.
It is looking to me like one key to understanding the
dynamics of the HotCat device is the surface chemistry of silicon carbide
when heated and exposed to fractional hydrogen (dense hydrogen) at
temperatures where plasmons form. The gainful reaction that derives from
this interaction may not be nuclear... cough, cough... and it may not be
Millsean either. Let me state that conclusion differently: there can be
nuclear side-effects in the HotCat, and fractional hydrogen must be involved
- but the bulk of the gain in the Rossi device probably comes from
"elsewhere" ... meaning the zero point field.
If gain is shown to related to dynamical Casimir
interactions and to the zero point field, instead of nuclear - then entire
technological base of LENR will be thrown into disarray - and the old
proponents of cold fusion, going back to P&F, will probably be as skeptical
of the new findings as present cold fusion skeptics are skeptical of what is
perceived to be the low energy nuclear reaction.
Almost everyone is out of step but Hal.
Although Hal Puthoff is the best known proponent of ZPE as a
usable energy source, the most active person on the zero point scene today
appears to be his associate Bernard Haisch - who is involved with a startup
called Jovion in a commercial venture to capture ZPE.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Haisch
The relevant patent is
http://www.calphysics.org/Patent7379286.pdf
My bet is that the HotCat of Rossi is better understood from
the perspective of a zero point converter than from LENR, but it relies on
several other overlapping areas besides these two.
Another twist of the story, however, is that Jovion
apparently did have a device constructed, which was largely a
disappointment. There is nothing public on this detail, so it may not be
true. But the most confusing part of the emerging story of this relates to
the HotCat, and therein may reside the detail of what Jovion "forgot to do",
and what Rossi "did do" (but inadvertently)... and that third critical
detail which is/was to also incorporate the findings of Randell Mills on f/H
- fractional hydrogen.
ZPE may work effectively using the smaller geometry of f/H
and not very well with hydrogen. The bottom line is that the Jovion device -
or one like it (if there really is a device at all) - only needs to employ
f/H and the correct temperature (for plasmon formation) to work in a better
way than the HotCat works.
Looking ahead, it this speculation is correct - it could
turn out to be a mess at the patent office or in court unless one strong
company moves to the front and manages to pull in everything under on
umbrella.
A few years ago, I would have said that Google is the one
and only company with the foresight and deep pockets to do that, but alas,
they seem to have fallen prey to their own success.
Jones
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
