-----Original Message----- From: mix...@bigpond.com In reply to Bob Higgins's message:
>> Isn't the problem with this scenario that the ground state H/D atom must GIVE UP energy to enter the DDL state. > RvS: Actually this may not be so far from the truth. Consider a situation where lots of Hydrinos/Deuterinos as forming and giving up energy as they do, resulting in a large population of shrunken atoms. If the occasional fusion reaction happens and the energy is used to inflate a few thousand of the millions of Hydrinos that are present, then no one would notice the fusion reaction. JB: The dynamics of gain could happen either way. Exotherm on shrinkage to DDL, followed by endotherm on forced expansion is one way; but endotherm to DDL followed by exotherm on expansion works as well. In either event the "fusion" reaction, which would be novel and not mainstream fusion, and it would "balance the books" in the sense of providing the net exotherm but not by a hot photon. This allows LENR to merge with CQM in a unique way which can be molded to meet all of the reported results - especially when it happens with Ni58 +D → Ni60. > RvS: The only problem I have with this scenario is the time factor, i.e. the distance from the nuclear reaction to the Hydrinos, and the speed of light. IOW how would such a reaction be able to compete with gamma emission? JB: The revise mechanics of the gammaless reaction is what is answered more elegantly by Hagelstein in his latest suggestion. According to Ahern, who attended the most recent Swartz/Hagelstein presentation at MIT, PH now proposes that the reaction does not really happen until the excess energy is already dissipated. That "time reversed" delay is what makes the underlying reaction novel. In effect, this is actually NOT gamma fractionalization at all. It is a QM book balancing act. There never is or never was a gamma to deal with. ≫ RvS: I guess the answer depends on the gamma emission time. If it's order E-17 seconds, then light can travel about 3 nm in that time. So thousands of Hydrinos would need to be packed into a sphere with a radius of less than 3 nm. This doesn't seem very likely to me, unless they are magnetically bound together in a huge cluster (not impossible, the magnetic binding energy could be significant, and on the order of chemical binding energies). JB: As mentioned, the time factor doesn't matter if the gamma reaction never happens. A substituted QM reaction does not really involve the same dynamics. This type of QM explanation works best with the "deep" species - DDL, for the reasons mentioned in the original post, which is going all the way to phonons is too large a ratio, even for QM. Mills' formula actually does not predict this DDL species, since his value for dark matter comes up on the low side of the actual value. Naudts' value does work. ≫ RvS: BTW, IRH would also appear to fill the bill in this scenario. JB: Yes, I have been equating IRH with DDL, but there is one big difference. ≫ RvS: This notion has one other point in its favor: The fusion reaction wouldn't happen in the first place unless the cluster is present... In this regard IRH *may* be more likely than Hydrino clusters. JB: Exactly. When there is this kind of pseudo-fusion reaction, nothing dramatic happens until after the energy has already been dissipated, and then what we have is only the QM balancing act… which is to say a novel form of quantum mechanics where a new isotope appears without a gamma at all. This is NOT related to thermonuclear fusion ! and there is no gamma, ever. But of course the mass to be converted to energy has to be the same in both cases. You seem to favoring the terminology of "IRH" over "DDL" and that is fine with me, however, DDL invokes Dirac, which is wise - and also it is not necessarily limited to two dimensions as is IRH which means the reaction can occur in a fully loaded quantum dot, which is fully entangled to begin with. The quantum dot at 10 nm can have the correct number of deuterons to make it all happen. But this also implies 3D instead of 2D, so that is another reason to use DDL instead of IRH or hydrino. Better yet, "Df/D" is a designation which would refer to deep fractional deuterium, and we can define it from the start to match results (hopefully from Mizuno in November. Jones
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
