These vortexes are problematical. Both the LeClair and Proton-21 vortexes a
stable for a very long time; like ball lightning. A Polaritron
vortex lasts only 20 to 30 picoseconds due to coulomb repulsion. So these
long lived EMF vortexes must be without charge to be stable for so long: so
they must be photon based vortexes.
How photon based vortexes can form from nanoplasmonic processes is not
clear to me.
What is inside those solitons?
On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Nigel Dyer <l...@thedyers.org.uk> wrote:
> When I had a look at the tracks that were present on the samples that
> Mark showed us, I was left with the clear impression that what was going on
> was not simply ballistic. It did not look as if the cavitation bubble shot
> out a lump of something that gouged its way along the surface of the metal,
> the tracks were too even across the length. It was almost as if the
> cavitation bubble initiated some kind of LENR event that continued as the
> vortex (or whatever) passed along the surface, giving it a continuing and
> consistent source of energy. The vortex theory may possibly support
> this. It seemed unlikely that it was a highly columnated source of
> energetic particles/radiation from the bubble because many of the tracks
> are not straight, which also suggests that it was not a simple ballistic
> On 09/11/2013 22:14, Axil Axil wrote:
> LeClair’s experimental descriptions mostly rings true with my
> understanding of LENR in cavatation.
> The *Key* to LENR is optical vortexes (AKA solitons). Nanoplasmonics
> mechanisms load light into nano-sized optical resonators in unlimited
> amounts. These solitons produce hugely powerful tightly focused atomic
> scale magnetic beams. The power of these beams may get up to 10 to the 16th
> power tesla.
> In the Ni/H reactor, these solitons are entangled and form a Bose-Einstein
> condensate (BEC). Therefore no gamma radiation is emitted from the BEC
> because of EMF superatom frequency leveling.
> However, in the LeClair system it is too cold for a BEC to form so gamma
> radiation will not be converted to heat.
> In this theory, the cavatation bubble forms an optical resonator. The
> power that has formed the bubble is converted to light by Nanoplasmonic
> mechanisms and the light is compressed in frequency to near X-Ray levels by
> whispering gallery resonance processes (AKA FANO resonance).
> In sonoluminescence, the dark mode cavity confinement of the polariton
> plasmoid (aka soliton) breaks down and energy from the plasmoid escapes to
> the far field (it glows) as ultra- violet and deep blue light as the
> cavatation bubble collapses.
> However, when the dark mode is maintained (light tight) in the cavatation
> bubble, the huge magnetic field produce by light in the polariton plasmid
> vortex stays together long enough to affect the atoms on the surface of the
> solid material being eroded.
> In cavatation, the soliton can grow especially strong because vortex
> structures likes to combine together. Many solitons can combine into one
> huge monster. In the Ni/H reactor, consolidation of solitons may not occur
> which makes for a Ni/H reaction weaker.
> LeClair may have erroneously connected the water crystal that he sees with
> the action of these magnetic vortex solitons.
> These nanostructures may play a role in the production of the solitons.
> His belief in hypersonic water crystal collision is not correct,
> LeClair states that something - a vortex (my belief) made a 2 meter spiral
> trench in a copper rod.
> Proton-21 has seen a vortex track for maximum distance of 61 centimeters
> in a photograph/
> *Experimental observation and analysis of action of light magnetic
> monopoles on multilayer surfaces*
> On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Nigel Dyer <l...@thedyers.org.uk> wrote:
>> The bits of the results that I think are true are that he has managed to
>> get fairly spectacular damage using cavitation bubbles and that there was
>> something more interesting going on than just bubble collapse. The answer
>> to why comes from having spent something like four hours with Mark during
>> which we had extensive and often completely surreal discussions, and also
>> from knowing someone else who appears in part to have managed to repeat the
>> On 09/11/2013 14:54, Mark Gibbs wrote:
>> Which aspects of the 'results' do you think are true and why?
>> On Saturday, November 9, 2013, Nigel Dyer wrote:
>>> I am not sure that a translation would be of much help. With LeClair
>>> I think you need to try and separate out the hypothesies as to the
>>> mechanism from the observations of what happened. Too often LeClair
>>> confuses the two. There is a lot to be said for the
>>> 'Method/Results/Discussion' format of presenting information.
>>> If we are convinced that at least some aspects of the 'results' are real
>>> (I am), I tend to feel you need to start again from first principles on the
>>> 'discussion' section.
>>> On 08/11/2013 23:13, Axil Axil wrote:
>>> LeClair said as follows:
>>> “The experiment gave off powerful crested cnoid de Broglie Matter wave
>>> soliton wave packages that were doubly periodic and followed the Jacobi
>>> Elliptic functions exactly, mostly in the form of large doubly-periodic
>>> vortices. Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are
>>> permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab”.
>>> What could it all mean - a translation.
>>> IMHO, this is a misspelling of Conoid
>>> In geometry <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometry>, a *conoid* is a Catalan
>>> surface <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_surface> all of whose
>>> rulings intersect a fixed
>>> called the *axis* of the conoid. If all its rulings are perpendicular
>>> to its axis, then the conoid is called a right