There is plenty of evidence down-conversion of gammas, but the problem is that it is never complete nor predictable conversion and it always happens in a few medium sized steps instead of large packets of energy going to tiny packet in one step. Proof to follow.
And seldom does gamma conversion go directly to phonons. It drops all the way to IR, first - and then to phonons. There is no coupling otherwise. Hagelstein has never been able to find a physical model for his contention, not even one which is remotely close - and it is amazing that he has not thrown in the towel on a losing battle. It simply does not happen in the real world. The charts embedded here show that every element in the periodic table downshifts gammas into x-rays first and the spectra are irregular. http://ie.lbl.gov/xray/mainpage.htm In no case is gamma radiation downshifted without an obvious x-ray signature. Curious story in these charts.... and a bona fide x-ray energy anomaly does turn up here. Look at the element Scandium (It is element 21Sc). Pay attention to the scale on the left of its chart. Then compare Sc with any, or all of the other secondary emitters in the periodic table. Incredible. Scandium is an x-ray multiplier of huge proportions, such that it appears to be OU for x-rays, in itself. This could be put to good use in LENR if there were gammas to multiply. From: Bob Higgins I believe Peter Hagelstein is excited about the Karabut result because he believes that Karabut demonstrates high energy x-ray photons being synthesized by a collective sum of much lower energy lattice phonons. If it is possible for this up-conversion to occur, then it lends credibility to his theory that the down-conversion of high energy photons to lattice phonons (fractionalization) can occur as he predicts with his theory. Bob H. Foks0904 wrote: I think Hagelstein draws on Karabuts work as well, but the relevance to his model is not readily apparent as Peter's work is hard to understand sometimes (for a layman like me), maybe other theorists have as well but I didn't understand how his observations were incorporated into their work.
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
