Mark and Bob probably got more out of this paper than I did. However, this article from Physics Web about "Negative resistance" in a 2D electron gas may answer one question (about how growing impedance is avoided in spinplasmonics)
http://www.intalek.com/Index/News/PhysicsWeb%20-%20Negative%20resistance%20found%20in%202D%20electron%20gas.htm Spinplasmonics, as I understand it, would be a 2D phenomenon which can force a 1D reaction. The detail that seems to be most applicable to a spinplasmonics explanation for LENR would be where there is IR semi-coherency in the reactor (instead of having a laser, as in the paper). We have called this "triple coherency" in the past although it is more like superradiance than real coherence. This would replace a laser with internal wave alignment of light (photons), magnetism (electron spin), and temperature (phonon excursion); where we seem to be setting the stage for gain with dense hydrogen as the exchange medium. The most feasible frequency that triple coherency can operate at is the tens of THz, since temperature is the defining limitation. The resultant gain could be nuclear, but it does not have to be if there is an easier route based on pushing formerly 3D particles into 1-space via triple coherency. If the particle is the DDL state of hydrogen, which has an effective magnetic field in the millions of Tesla, then spinplasmonics seems to accomplish this task elegantly via spin coupling. (which pleases the spin freaks :) -----Original Message----- From: Mark Jurich Bob Cook wrote: | I am about 2/3 through the paper you identified on the transmission of a | terahertz electric field wave form through Ni and Co particles in a static | magnetic field. ... Just to clarify, this is a reference that Jones cited and I just gave a link to it that wasn't behind a pay wall. Perhaps Jones may comment also to your questions... | Does the oscillating terahertz electric field produce a perpendicular | oscillating magnetic field? Or does that only happen with photon | propagation? Yes it does. The Terahertz Electromagnetic Field is a "photon field", and it will induce a magnetization. This is a very weak H Field compared to the applied static magnetic field, but the localized magnetic field strength would depend on any amplification produced by the generation of the Surface Plasmon-Polariton (SPP) or whatever quasi-particle coupling might occur... | Would a terahertz laser have a different effect? And would you see | a phase change in the transmission of the beam through the Ni and Co | particles? My guess is that a Terahertz (THz) Laser (being more intense) would increase the effect. The technique used in the paper is indeed sensitive to phase changes. The THz pulse-induced phase change of the probe beam is converted into an intensity modulation. They are using a Ti:sapphire Mode-Locked Laser to initially generate the pulse beam fed into the THz Emitter and the probe beam. I'm not sure I'm addressing your question, here. Perhaps you can elaborate... | If the changing electric field does in fact cause a changing magnetic field, | it would seem that it may introduce some impedence in the transfer of | the electric field and account for the slight unexplained phase change | reported with respect to the electric field wave form after passing through | the film of the particle assemblege. ... I'm not sure it's possible to disagree with your statements above. Can you possibly point to the unexplained phase shift that you are referring to, so that I may comment? I believe they see a phase shift for both uncoated and coated microparticles. Are you referring to all of the results, given? The THz Probe Pulse is 800 nm Wavelength and could be exciting SPPs, optically (vs. Terahertz) if I understand the setup correctly. Here is a link to Ref. 19 which describes the experimental setup (hopefully you can get to the paper): http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?uri=oe-17-8-6600 | Do you know what the "N metal film" is that the authors stated was applied | to the Ni and Co particles in discussing the experimental set-up? Should | that be "no metal film"? N-Metal Film in this case, refers to Nonmagnet Film (or Non-Ferromagnetic or Normal vs. Ferromagnetic, "F"). This can be very confusing because hard-core "Plasmonic" people sometimes refer to N-Metal Films as Noble Metal Films (which are extensively used in the paper), but if they were to mention it this way they would be very clear about it, unlike Spin Freaks (just kidding!). - Mark Jurich
