It is possible that I have a great contribution to the misunderstndings. If you indeed agree with the non-uniformity of yje internal part of the cracks: *I do not think a crack is equally active along its length.* * * perhaps this can be included in your model. Success!
Peter On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com>wrote: > Peter, I'm simply telling you what your comments mean to me. I'm not > thinking in your place. If I have gotten the wrong understanding from what > you have written, than you are free to tell me and to correct your writings > so that other people do not also get the wrong impression, which is clearly > the case. > > I do not think a crack is equally active along its length. I'm only > proposing that somewhere in the gap, the fusion reaction is possible. I > have described ALL aspects of the model. I'm only giving the broad > requirements. Once these are accepted, you will be told more details. I > see no reason to waste my time if the basic claim is rejected. I would > rather spend my time using the model to make the effect work. > > Ed > On Aug 23, 2013, at 9:53 AM, Peter Gluck wrote: > > Dear Ed. > > I would ask you to not think in my place, I really don't like it.It is > typical for dictatures and I had enough from it starting with :"Der Fuhrer > denkt fur uns alle" and ending with Ceausescu's omniscience. I have the > right to think independently. > Citing you: > *you are assuming that D+Pd involves a different mechanism, a different > NAE, and different nuclear products. * > Clearly the products of reaction are different for Pd and Ni H simply > because > the reactants are different. I have NOT told that the mechanism of reaction > are different. > A question for you- a crack however beautiful is inherently very asymmetric > do you think a crack nanometers broad but microns or even millimeters long > is equally active along its entire lengths? Isn't it more plausible that > inside > this labyrinthic formation there are some even more preferential short > areas > where the activity is focused? And are you convinced that thse short areas > are so different from a nanostructure? Couldn't be the things a bit more > complicated but actually more unitary- as you otherwise also suggest? > > I think it is not possible to decide now sitting at our PC's if Nature uses > only one soltion or more for creating excess energy. It is more useful > to find new ways to force Nature to give us what we need and want > and not care so much if she is whining a bit for that. > > Peter > > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com>wrote: > >> >> On Aug 23, 2013, at 9:03 AM, Peter Gluck wrote: >> >> Dear Bob, >> >> Thank you for the idea of cracks' aesthetics! I know it well, I think >> you have remarked the second Motto by Leonard Cohen based >> on this idea.. >> It happens that very early in my professional career I learned about the >> beauty and variety of cracks -when working at the Civil Engineering >> Faculy of the Timisoara- Polytechnics, Chair of Concrete. It is a world >> of cracks in concrete see e.g. >> http://indecorativeconcrete.com/idcn/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Why-Concrete-Cracks.pdf >> Mistery and beauty are different from function. Let's admit the possible >> role >> cracks in Pd in the FPCell, is this something good for the results? >> However Paintelli's process is based on very smart and beautiful >> nanostructures more sophisticated and educated as cracks, and LENR+ uses >> the high art of nanoplasmonics. >> >> >> How do you know this Peter? Besides, you are assuming that D+Pd involves >> a different mechanism, a different NAE, and different nuclear products. >> Consequently, the number of miracles is squared rather than reduced. Do you >> really want to go down that path? What happens the effect occurs using Ti? >> Does this involve an additional method and mechanism? What how is tritium >> formed? Is this reaction different in Ni compared to Pd? >> >> I believe the phenomenon is so rare and unusual that only one condition >> and mechanism would be able to cause it. You take the opposite view, that >> every material and isotope requires a different method and NAE. This gives >> people a choice. I wonder how the vote would go? >> >> Ed >> >> >> Peter >> >> , >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> Recently, Peter published in his blog his reasons for hoping that the >>> NAE aren’t cracks. After considering it, I believe he misses the >>> uniqueness, durability, and beauty of the cracks that are being considered. >>> **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> To the uniqueness point… Consider that a crack is different than just >>> two surfaces in close proximity. A crack is like a horn with a throat of >>> minimum gap: the lattice spacing. Imagine the throat at x=0 with the crack >>> surface spacing widening as x increases. The crack provides a unique >>> environment in its smallest regions. Near x=0, the environment for a >>> hydron asymptotically approaches that of the lattice. In this region, >>> electron orbitals extend across or at least into the crack. Perhaps in >>> this near-lattice spacing there is only room for an H+ ion (the case for >>> Ni, but for Pd there is room at the lattice spacing for a neutral monatomic >>> hydron). As x increases, the crack surface spacing (the gap) increases >>> allowing room for neutral monatomic hydrons. At greater x, the crack >>> spacing would support neutral H2 molecules, and beyond this, the crack is >>> probably uninteresting. This unique gradient of hydron boundary conditions >>> always exists in the crack near it throat (near x=0), even if the crack >>> were to begin zipping itself open.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> To the durability point… In my past I had occasion to work with MEMS >>> structures. When I first saw MEMS cantilever beams being used for switches >>> and other functions, my first thought was, “Those are going to break!” >>> What I learned was that a structure’s strength is inversely proportional to >>> its size. So a building scaled twice as large will be half as strong. >>> This is why you can drop an ant from as high as you wish and he will hit >>> the ground running. Compare a 3 meter diving board (cantilever) to a 3 >>> micron cantilever – the 3 micron cantilever will be a million times more >>> robust. The cracks being considered for NAE are nanoscale cracks, but our >>> natural experience is with cracks having dimensions of ~1cm. A 10nm crack, >>> will be a million times more mechanically robust than a 1cm crack. At the >>> nanoscale, the two split apart surfaces will be very stiff and behind the >>> throat of the crack (x<0) there will be compression forces trying to >>> restore the crack to its closed position. The surfaces may also experience >>> a Casimir closing force. A nanoscale crack will have strong forces trying >>> to heal itself.**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> If nanocracks can heal, then how would the nanocrack form in the first >>> place and what could keep the surfaces apart? I believe a wedge of atom(s) >>> or molecule(s) is needed in the gap to keep the crack open, and perhaps to >>> form it in the first place. That is why I am using nanoparticles that will >>> alloy with Ni and then I am oxidizing the structure. I use iron oxide >>> nanoparticles. I put down the oxide nanoparticles disposed all across the >>> Ni micro-powder surface, reduce (or partly reduce) the surface so the iron >>> nanoparticles can alloy with the Ni, and then go back and strongly oxidize >>> the metals. When the iron oxidizes, it grows in volume and I hypothesize >>> that it will wedge open a nanocrack. If the iron is then partly reduced it >>> becomes an H2 splitting catalyst, right at the site of the crack.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> What a beautiful structure I imagine that to be – a nanocrack with a >>> sweep of hydron boundary conditions with an H2 splitting catalyst at its >>> mouth.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Bob**** >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Dr. Peter Gluck >> Cluj, Romania >> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >> >> >> > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com > > > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
