Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor
Magnetism is largely I’ll understood The molecular orbitals supporting ferromagnetism are in dispute Sent from my iPhone On Mar 3, 2019, at 5:28 PM, "bobcook39...@hotmail.com<mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com>" mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com>> wrote: Andrew— You point out: “Point charge is only a mathematical convenience,” What you say begs the question: Is there any physical significance to a charge by it self? The next question of course is: Is the illusion of charge really a localized dynamic magnetic field? It seems there should be some primary physics text that addresses the physics of magnetic fields other than associate them with the illusion of charge. I am pretty sure I must be confused. Bob From: Andrew Meulenberg mailto:mules...@gmail.com>> Sent: Saturday, March 2, 2019 10:59:04 AM To: bobcook39...@hotmail.com<mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com>; VORTEX; Andrew Meulenberg Subject: Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor Dear Bob, Point charge is only a mathematical convenience, valid for isotropic sources or conductors when measured beyond any of their charge distribution. We are taught in freshman physics how to treat the static fields inside a charge distribution. That said, the problem gets more difficult when dynamics are considered, and even more so for relativistic dynamics (where Jean-Luc has been working), and even further when the test region has a strong influence on the source distribution and fields. If I remember correctly, Feynman, in his Lectures, stated that the 1/r Coulomb potential was valid up to the nuclear radius. I might agree down to about 10 fm. Below that, I might argue with him unless he limits the statement to static, spinless, charges. Because of our interest in the deep-electron orbits, we are presently exploring the real nuclear region in our papers. Nevertheless, we are still using approximations, valid for large distances as initial approximations and then applying corrections for relativistic and proximity effects as we see them. There is little to no useful literature for such corrections in this region. Further in, it was easier to start from scratch and nuclear physics took over when spin-spin effects became stronger than spin-orbit effects. Cold fusion and the deep-orbits are caught in the quagmire region between atomic and nuclear physics. I doubt that there will be any easy answers. I still ask the question "when do two fermions combine to become a boson?" We look at the H atom, positronium, and deuteron as bosons; but, the neutron is a fermion (because a neutrino is added or subtracted?). What is the femto-H atom? Andrew _ _ _ On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 12:03 PM bobcook39...@hotmail.com<mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com> mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com>> wrote: I think the relativistic considerations eliminate the reality of a “point charge” assumption for electrons, particularly in the nuclear dimensional zones and smaller. Andrew—If this is correct you might identify the range (distance) over which your theory applies and, otherwise, clarify the question of “point charge” assumptions. Bob Cook Sent from Mail<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgo.microsoft.com%2Ffwlink%2F%3FLinkId%3D550986&data=02%7C01%7C%7C477130a442fd42d75f3d08d6a0278b3b%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636872489034883132&sdata=LThjMrxaZ8HbgUExNOqwlrKuiLTJrQPe2KOnCJh%2FZ38%3D&reserved=0> for Windows 10 From: Andrew Meulenberg mailto:mules...@gmail.com>> Sent: Friday, March 1, 2019 10:01:01 PM To: VORTEX; Andrew Meulenberg Subject: Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor Dear Jones, Thanks for asking about our work. We have published this since JCMNS -Vol 24. J-L Paillet, Andrew Meulenberg, "Deepening Questions about Electron Deep Orbits of the Hydrogen Atom," J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci. 26 (2017) 54–68, http://coldfusioncommunity.net/pdf/jcmns/v26/54_JCMNS-Vol26.pdf<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcoldfusioncommunity.net%2Fpdf%2Fjcmns%2Fv26%2F54_JCMNS-Vol26.pdf&data=02%7C01%7C%7C477130a442fd42d75f3d08d6a0278b3b%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636872489034893131&sdata=0gfFTGgt5%2BnHwR4SPmlnB%2F%2Foqc9%2BLjlqzdF70RM0TBc%3D&reserved=0> and are continuing to publish (from ICCF-21 presentations) 1. J-L Paillet, A. Meulenberg, "On highly relativistic deep electrons," ICCF-21, 21st International Conference for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, 3 - 8 June, 2018, Fort Collins, CO USA, to be published in JCMNS, 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxPrXqfNS5Q&feature=youtube<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D
RE: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor
Andrew— You point out: “Point charge is only a mathematical convenience,” What you say begs the question: Is there any physical significance to a charge by it self? The next question of course is: Is the illusion of charge really a localized dynamic magnetic field? It seems there should be some primary physics text that addresses the physics of magnetic fields other than associate them with the illusion of charge. I am pretty sure I must be confused. Bob From: Andrew Meulenberg Sent: Saturday, March 2, 2019 10:59:04 AM To: bobcook39...@hotmail.com; VORTEX; Andrew Meulenberg Subject: Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor Dear Bob, Point charge is only a mathematical convenience, valid for isotropic sources or conductors when measured beyond any of their charge distribution. We are taught in freshman physics how to treat the static fields inside a charge distribution. That said, the problem gets more difficult when dynamics are considered, and even more so for relativistic dynamics (where Jean-Luc has been working), and even further when the test region has a strong influence on the source distribution and fields. If I remember correctly, Feynman, in his Lectures, stated that the 1/r Coulomb potential was valid up to the nuclear radius. I might agree down to about 10 fm. Below that, I might argue with him unless he limits the statement to static, spinless, charges. Because of our interest in the deep-electron orbits, we are presently exploring the real nuclear region in our papers. Nevertheless, we are still using approximations, valid for large distances as initial approximations and then applying corrections for relativistic and proximity effects as we see them. There is little to no useful literature for such corrections in this region. Further in, it was easier to start from scratch and nuclear physics took over when spin-spin effects became stronger than spin-orbit effects. Cold fusion and the deep-orbits are caught in the quagmire region between atomic and nuclear physics. I doubt that there will be any easy answers. I still ask the question "when do two fermions combine to become a boson?" We look at the H atom, positronium, and deuteron as bosons; but, the neutron is a fermion (because a neutrino is added or subtracted?). What is the femto-H atom? Andrew _ _ _ On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 12:03 PM bobcook39...@hotmail.com<mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com> mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com>> wrote: I think the relativistic considerations eliminate the reality of a “point charge” assumption for electrons, particularly in the nuclear dimensional zones and smaller. Andrew—If this is correct you might identify the range (distance) over which your theory applies and, otherwise, clarify the question of “point charge” assumptions. Bob Cook Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10 From: Andrew Meulenberg mailto:mules...@gmail.com>> Sent: Friday, March 1, 2019 10:01:01 PM To: VORTEX; Andrew Meulenberg Subject: Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor Dear Jones, Thanks for asking about our work. We have published this since JCMNS -Vol 24. J-L Paillet, Andrew Meulenberg, "Deepening Questions about Electron Deep Orbits of the Hydrogen Atom," J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci. 26 (2017) 54–68, http://coldfusioncommunity.net/pdf/jcmns/v26/54_JCMNS-Vol26.pdf and are continuing to publish (from ICCF-21 presentations) 1. J-L Paillet, A. Meulenberg, "On highly relativistic deep electrons," ICCF-21, 21st International Conference for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, 3 - 8 June, 2018, Fort Collins, CO USA, to be published in JCMNS, 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxPrXqfNS5Q&feature=youtube http://viXra.org/abs/1902.0398 2. A. Meulenberg, J. L. Paillet, "Nuclear-waste remediation with femto-atoms and femto-molecules," ICCF-21, 21st International Conference for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, 3 - 8 June, 2018, Fort Collins, CO USA, to be published in JCMNS, 2019, if I have time to get it finished. and to-be-published papers from two workshops and a chapter in a book. We have not published anything on the other models; although I did include a variation on Ed Storms' "crack" model as the basis for: A. Meulenberg, K.P. Sinha, “Composite model for LENR in linear defects of a lattice,” ICCF-18, 18th Int. Conf. on Cond. Matter Nuclear Science, Columbia, Missouri, 25/07/2013, Presentation slides at http://hdl.handle.net/10355/36818, video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcTSUJUCRHE I have been too busy looking at the Deep Dirac Levels with J-L Paillet since ICCF-18 to even write up this important paper, much less examine in detail models, which look at bound levels between the atomic ground-s
Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor
Dear Bob, Point charge is only a mathematical convenience, valid for isotropic sources or conductors when measured beyond any of their charge distribution. We are taught in freshman physics how to treat the static fields inside a charge distribution. That said, the problem gets more difficult when dynamics are considered, and even more so for relativistic dynamics (where Jean-Luc has been working), and even further when the test region has a strong influence on the source distribution and fields. If I remember correctly, Feynman, in his Lectures, stated that the 1/r Coulomb potential was valid up to the nuclear radius. I might agree down to about 10 fm. Below that, I might argue with him unless he limits the statement to static, spinless, charges. Because of our interest in the deep-electron orbits, we are presently exploring the real nuclear region in our papers. Nevertheless, we are still using approximations, valid for large distances as initial approximations and then applying corrections for relativistic and proximity effects as we see them. There is little to no useful literature for such corrections in this region. Further in, it was easier to start from scratch and nuclear physics took over when spin-spin effects became stronger than spin-orbit effects. Cold fusion and the deep-orbits are caught in the quagmire region between atomic and nuclear physics. I doubt that there will be any easy answers. I still ask the question "when do two fermions combine to become a boson?" We look at the H atom, positronium, and deuteron as bosons; but, the neutron is a fermion (because a neutrino is added or subtracted?). What is the femto-H atom? Andrew _ _ _ On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 12:03 PM bobcook39...@hotmail.com < bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote: > I think the relativistic considerations eliminate the reality of a “point > charge” assumption for electrons, particularly in the nuclear dimensional > zones and smaller. > > > > Andrew—If this is correct you might identify the range (distance) over > which your theory applies and, otherwise, clarify the question of “point > charge” assumptions. > > > > Bob Cook > > > > > > > > Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for > Windows 10 > > > -- > *From:* Andrew Meulenberg > *Sent:* Friday, March 1, 2019 10:01:01 PM > *To:* VORTEX; Andrew Meulenberg > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an > LENR reactor > > Dear Jones, > > Thanks for asking about our work. We have published this since JCMNS -Vol > 24. > > J-L Paillet, Andrew Meulenberg, "Deepening Questions about Electron Deep > Orbits of the Hydrogen Atom," J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci. *26* (2017) > 54–68, http://coldfusioncommunity.net/pdf/jcmns/v26/54_JCMNS-Vol26.pdf > > and are continuing to publish (from ICCF-21 presentations) > > 1. J-L Paillet, A. Meulenberg, "On highly relativistic deep > electrons," ICCF-21, 21st International Conference for Condensed Matter > Nuclear Science, 3 - 8 June, 2018, Fort Collins, CO USA, to be published > in JCMNS, 2019, > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxPrXqfNS5Q&feature=youtube > http://viXra.org/abs/1902.0398 > > 2. A. Meulenberg, J. L. Paillet, "Nuclear-waste remediation with > femto-atoms and femto-molecules," ICCF-21, 21st International Conference > for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, 3 - 8 June, 2018, Fort Collins, CO > USA, to be published in JCMNS, 2019, if I have time to get it finished. > and to-be-published papers from two workshops and a chapter in a book. > > We have not published anything on the other models; although I did include > a variation on Ed Storms' "crack" model as the basis for: > > A. Meulenberg, K.P. Sinha, “Composite model for LENR in linear defects of > a lattice,” ICCF-18, 18th Int. Conf. on Cond. Matter Nuclear Science, > Columbia, Missouri, 25/07/2013, Presentation slides at > http://hdl.handle.net/10355/36818, video at > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcTSUJUCRHE > I have been too busy looking at the Deep Dirac Levels with J-L Paillet > since ICCF-18 to even write up this important paper, much less examine in > detail models, which look at bound levels between the atomic ground-states > and the relativistic deep levels. We are presently pursuing the > relativistic deep-orbit electrons, which Jean-Luc has described so well, > and their interaction with the nucleus. At least I will also be looking at > the possibility that the relativistic-electron effects could lead to > intra-nuclear components and interactions. > > Before 1995, I did derive (classically) the "fractional" orbits below the > atomic ground state, but did not think these 1/
RE: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor
I think the relativistic considerations eliminate the reality of a “point charge” assumption for electrons, particularly in the nuclear dimensional zones and smaller. Andrew—If this is correct you might identify the range (distance) over which your theory applies and, otherwise, clarify the question of “point charge” assumptions. Bob Cook Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10 From: Andrew Meulenberg Sent: Friday, March 1, 2019 10:01:01 PM To: VORTEX; Andrew Meulenberg Subject: Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor Dear Jones, Thanks for asking about our work. We have published this since JCMNS -Vol 24. J-L Paillet, Andrew Meulenberg, "Deepening Questions about Electron Deep Orbits of the Hydrogen Atom," J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci. 26 (2017) 54–68, http://coldfusioncommunity.net/pdf/jcmns/v26/54_JCMNS-Vol26.pdf and are continuing to publish (from ICCF-21 presentations) 1. J-L Paillet, A. Meulenberg, "On highly relativistic deep electrons," ICCF-21, 21st International Conference for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, 3 - 8 June, 2018, Fort Collins, CO USA, to be published in JCMNS, 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxPrXqfNS5Q&feature=youtube http://viXra.org/abs/1902.0398 2. A. Meulenberg, J. L. Paillet, "Nuclear-waste remediation with femto-atoms and femto-molecules," ICCF-21, 21st International Conference for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, 3 - 8 June, 2018, Fort Collins, CO USA, to be published in JCMNS, 2019, if I have time to get it finished. and to-be-published papers from two workshops and a chapter in a book. We have not published anything on the other models; although I did include a variation on Ed Storms' "crack" model as the basis for: A. Meulenberg, K.P. Sinha, “Composite model for LENR in linear defects of a lattice,” ICCF-18, 18th Int. Conf. on Cond. Matter Nuclear Science, Columbia, Missouri, 25/07/2013, Presentation slides at http://hdl.handle.net/10355/36818, video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcTSUJUCRHE I have been too busy looking at the Deep Dirac Levels with J-L Paillet since ICCF-18 to even write up this important paper, much less examine in detail models, which look at bound levels between the atomic ground-states and the relativistic deep levels. We are presently pursuing the relativistic deep-orbit electrons, which Jean-Luc has described so well, and their interaction with the nucleus. At least I will also be looking at the possibility that the relativistic-electron effects could lead to intra-nuclear components and interactions. Before 1995, I did derive (classically) the "fractional" orbits below the atomic ground state, but did not think these 1/n states to be important because they could not be reached by photonic processes. When I later found out what Mills had been doing, I emailed him my warning about these levels having too little angular momentum to form photons. He never responded, so he may have figured that out for himself and, much to his credit, he chose other approaches, which I considered a big step. However, I thought that he made a mistake going for plasma rather than solid state as a base. (If he were to use a UV light source or other means to invert the lowest hydrogen atomic levels and "seed" the mixture with annihilation radiation for stimulated emission, he might get a significant deep-level (not a fractional-level) population. However, without mirrors at that energy, the system is unlikely to lase.) I did not think much of the non-photonic options for my own CF models until I had looked more closely at cold fusion products (late in 2008). Andrew _ _ _ On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 9:00 AM Jones Beene mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>> wrote: Question for Andrew. The citation that comes up on Google for your most recent paper seems to be: http://coldfusioncommunity.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/230_JCMNS-Vol24.pdf Excellent, but it does not try to integrate similar concepts which are floating around, such as those of Holmlid, Arata and Mills. Have you published anything which takes a look at the entire spectrum of "deep electrons" ? Jones Andrew Meulenberg wrote: > It takes something more to make relativistic electrons. That is where the > deep-electron orbits enter the picture. They can have binding energies in the > hundreds of keV and kinetic energies in the 100s of MeV. This would not give > hot-fusion type results. Strangely enough, the deep orbits are long predicted > by relativistic quantum mechanics. They just were not believed because nobody > had seen them, or their results. With cold fusion, we can now see their > results. Andrew
Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor
Dear Jones, Thanks for asking about our work. We have published this since JCMNS -Vol 24. J-L Paillet, Andrew Meulenberg, "Deepening Questions about Electron Deep Orbits of the Hydrogen Atom," J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci. *26* (2017) 54–68, http://coldfusioncommunity.net/pdf/jcmns/v26/54_JCMNS-Vol26.pdf and are continuing to publish (from ICCF-21 presentations) 1. J-L Paillet, A. Meulenberg, "On highly relativistic deep electrons," ICCF-21, 21st International Conference for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, 3 - 8 June, 2018, Fort Collins, CO USA, to be published in JCMNS, 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxPrXqfNS5Q&feature=youtube http://viXra.org/abs/1902.0398 2. A. Meulenberg, J. L. Paillet, "Nuclear-waste remediation with femto-atoms and femto-molecules," ICCF-21, 21st International Conference for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, 3 - 8 June, 2018, Fort Collins, CO USA, to be published in JCMNS, 2019, if I have time to get it finished. and to-be-published papers from two workshops and a chapter in a book. We have not published anything on the other models; although I did include a variation on Ed Storms' "crack" model as the basis for: A. Meulenberg, K.P. Sinha, “Composite model for LENR in linear defects of a lattice,” ICCF-18, 18th Int. Conf. on Cond. Matter Nuclear Science, Columbia, Missouri, 25/07/2013, Presentation slides at http://hdl.handle.net/10355/36818, video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcTSUJUCRHE I have been too busy looking at the Deep Dirac Levels with J-L Paillet since ICCF-18 to even write up this important paper, much less examine in detail models, which look at bound levels between the atomic ground-states and the relativistic deep levels. We are presently pursuing the relativistic deep-orbit electrons, which Jean-Luc has described so well, and their interaction with the nucleus. At least I will also be looking at the possibility that the relativistic-electron effects could lead to intra-nuclear components and interactions. Before 1995, I did derive (classically) the "fractional" orbits below the atomic ground state, but did not think these 1/n states to be important because they could not be reached by photonic processes. When I later found out what Mills had been doing, I emailed him my warning about these levels having too little angular momentum to form photons. He never responded, so he may have figured that out for himself and, much to his credit, he chose other approaches, which I considered a big step. However, I thought that he made a mistake going for plasma rather than solid state as a base. (If he were to use a UV light source or other means to invert the lowest hydrogen atomic levels and "seed" the mixture with annihilation radiation for stimulated emission, he might get a significant deep-level (not a fractional-level) population. However, without mirrors at that energy, the system is unlikely to lase.) I did not think much of the non-photonic options for my own CF models until I had looked more closely at cold fusion products (late in 2008). Andrew _ _ _ On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 9:00 AM Jones Beene wrote: > Question for Andrew. The citation that comes up on Google for your most > recent paper seems to be: > > http://coldfusioncommunity.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/230_JCMNS-Vol24.pdf > > Excellent, but it does not try to integrate similar concepts which are > floating around, such as those of Holmlid, Arata and Mills. > > Have you published anything which takes a look at the entire spectrum of > "deep electrons" ? > > Jones > > > Andrew Meulenberg wrote: > > > It takes something more to make relativistic electrons. That is where > the deep-electron orbits enter the picture. They can have binding energies > in the hundreds of keV and kinetic energies in the 100s of MeV. This would > *not > *give hot-fusion type results. Strangely enough, the deep orbits are long > predicted by relativistic quantum mechanics. They just were not believed > because nobody had seen them, or their results. With cold fusion, we can > now see their results. > > Andrew > >
RE: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor
Robin and Jones— IMHO the use of the term pycno hydrogen refered to a dense lattice of hydrogen –a metallic like crystalline lattice. Arata etal were not referring to a dense hydrogen atom as Mills and Holmlid are. As Robin suggested, I wound not compare Holmlid and Arata theory. Bob Cook From: Jones Beene<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net> Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2019 11:42 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor mix...@bigpond.com wrote: > Did you mean Takahashi rather than Arata? Hi Robin, Arata and Zhang had a version of dense hydrogen called "pycno" which means "dense"... http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ArataYdevelopmena.pdf Supposedly it would load into Pd at an atomic ratio of 3:1 compared to 1:1 form normal hydrogen...
Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor
mix...@bigpond.com wrote: > Did you mean Takahashi rather than Arata? Hi Robin, Arata and Zhang had a version of dense hydrogen called "pycno" which means "dense"... http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ArataYdevelopmena.pdf Supposedly it would load into Pd at an atomic ratio of 3:1 compared to 1:1 form normal hydrogen...
Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 28 Feb 2019 13:59:42 + (UTC): Hi, [snip] > Question for Andrew. The citation that comes up on Google for your most > recent paper seems to > be:http://coldfusioncommunity.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/230_JCMNS-Vol24.pdf > >Excellent, but it does not try to integrate similar concepts which are >floating around, such as those of Holmlid, Arata and Mills. Did you mean Takahashi rather than Arata? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk local asymmetry = temporary success
Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor
Question for Andrew. The citation that comes up on Google for your most recent paper seems to be:http://coldfusioncommunity.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/230_JCMNS-Vol24.pdf Excellent, but it does not try to integrate similar concepts which are floating around, such as those of Holmlid, Arata and Mills. Have you published anything which takes a look at the entire spectrum of "deep electrons" ? Jones Andrew Meulenberg wrote: > It takes something more to make relativistic electrons. That is where the > deep-electron orbits enter the picture. They can have binding energies in the > hundreds of keV and kinetic energies in the 100s of MeV. This would not give > hot-fusion type results. Strangely enough, the deep orbits are long predicted > by relativistic quantum mechanics. They just were not believed because nobody > had seen them, or their results. With cold fusion, we can now see their > results. Andrew
RE: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor
Two obvious questions avoided by the paper: 1. What is the theory—a reference would normally be included. 1. What is the “/Coating layer/ on the cathode satisfying some special requirements;?” This information is likely a University/researcher trade secret or part of a patent being prepared—more likely a trade secret IMHO. I would guess the coating is a compound that reduces the work function for absorption of H and D into the crystal lattice of the cathode. And that the cathode lattice is composed of atoms heavy enough to entail “heavy electrons” in their atomic electronic structure closest to their nucleus. Electrons that are too heavy will not work to produce LENR, because of a lack of the appropriate energy to allow conservation of energy and angular momentum in one reaction. TOO BAD—SO GOES OPEN SCIENCE. Bob Cook --- From: Andrew Meulenberg<mailto:mules...@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 7:46 PM To: VORTEX<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor I have rejected the common concept of "heavy" electrons as applicable to LENR by simple reasoning. The definition of electron and hole effective mass in a semiconductor refers to the acceleration in that material from a force applied, m = F/a). This mass increase does not apply within a confinement site and, particularly, not at the nuclear level. Nevertheless, spatial confinement can significantly distort atomic orbital shapes and energy levels and this could lead to unusual effects. Also, confinement allows an increase in electron kinetic-energy levels and thus a decrease in average proximity of the electron to a nucleus. Nevertheless, the increased energy levels are on the eV level, not even at the 10s of eV level. On the other hand, such confinement, while not as great as that produced by the higher mass of a muon, can have a significant effect (nearly an order-of-magnitude) on the number of interactions per second with, and on the tunneling probability of atomic electrons into, nuclei in the confinement region. Unfortunately, any nuclear reaction induced by such electrons will be limited and of the "hot" fusion type. It takes something more to make relativistic electrons. That is where the deep-electron orbits enter the picture. They can have binding energies in the hundreds of keV and kinetic energies in the 100s of MeV. This would not give hot-fusion type results. Strangely enough, the deep orbits are long predicted by relativistic quantum mechanics. They just were not believed because nobody had seen them, or their results. With cold fusion, we can now see their results. Andrew _ _ _ On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:08 PM bobcook39...@hotmail.com<mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com> mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com>> wrote: Several leading questions about “heavy electrons”: * Do heavy electrons fit in the standard Model? * If so, what is their relativistic KE? * If relativistic. What keeps them from leaving the semi conductor surface? Bob Cook From: Jones Beene mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 6:28:44 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor Interesting. Alexandrov's concept of providing "heavy electrons" as apparently are seen in semiconductor technology - in order to catalyze the fusion of hydrogen and deuterium sounds a lot like muon catalyzed fusion. In fact the muon is sometimes referred to as a "heavy electron" since it is a heavy lepton. Curious that he does not emphasize that connection as it would add to the credibility of his concept. Muon catalyzed fusion was proved over fifty years ago beyond any doubt. However, muon catalyzed fusion is "hot". This has no gammas. Is this something in between ? Jones Jed Rothwell wrote: See: http://canadiancor.com/proposal-for-the-development-of-an-lenr-reactor/ QUOTE Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor Introduction: Canadian researcher, Dr. Dimiter Alexandrov, Lakehead University, in his semiconductor research laboratory, performed successful replicable LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reaction) experiments considering interactions of both deuterium and hydrogen gases with certain metals in a vacuum chamber. The products of these LENR experiments were helium (both stable isotopes He-3 and He-4) and heat. No radiation above the normal background was detected during the experiments. He also developed a theory explaining the observed experimental outcomes. Based on this early work he has prepared the following proposal to develop a LENR reactor which is being submitted for the next stage of his R&D. . . .
Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor
I have rejected the common concept of "heavy" electrons as applicable to LENR by simple reasoning. The definition of electron and hole effective mass in a semiconductor refers to the acceleration in that material from a force applied, m =* F/a*). This mass increase does not apply *within* a confinement site and, particularly, not at the nuclear level. Nevertheless, spatial confinement can significantly distort atomic orbital shapes and energy levels and this could lead to unusual effects. Also, confinement allows an increase in electron kinetic-energy levels and thus a decrease in average proximity of the electron to a nucleus. Nevertheless, the increased energy levels are on the eV level, not even at the 10s of eV level. On the other hand, such confinement, while not as great as that produced by the higher mass of a muon, can have a significant effect (nearly an order-of-magnitude) on the number of interactions per second with, and on the tunneling probability of atomic electrons into, nuclei in the confinement region. Unfortunately, any nuclear reaction induced by such electrons will be limited and of the "hot" fusion type. It takes something more to make relativistic electrons. That is where the deep-electron orbits enter the picture. They can have binding energies in the hundreds of keV and kinetic energies in the 100s of MeV. This would *not *give hot-fusion type results. Strangely enough, the deep orbits are long predicted by relativistic quantum mechanics. They just were not believed because nobody had seen them, or their results. With cold fusion, we can now see their results. Andrew _ _ _ On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:08 PM bobcook39...@hotmail.com < bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Several leading questions about “heavy electrons”: > > > >- Do heavy electrons fit in the standard Model? >- If so, what is their relativistic KE? >- If relativistic. What keeps them from leaving the semi conductor >surface? > > > > Bob Cook > > > > > -- > *From:* Jones Beene > *Sent:* Monday, February 25, 2019 6:28:44 PM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an > LENR reactor > > Interesting. > > Alexandrov's concept of providing "heavy electrons" as apparently are seen > in semiconductor technology - in order to catalyze the fusion of hydrogen > and deuterium sounds a lot like muon catalyzed fusion. > > In fact the muon is sometimes referred to as a "heavy electron" since it > is a heavy lepton. Curious that he does not emphasize that connection as it > would add to the credibility of his concept. Muon catalyzed fusion was > proved over fifty years ago beyond any doubt. > > However, muon catalyzed fusion is "hot". This has no gammas. Is this > something in between ? > > Jones > > > Jed Rothwell wrote: > > > See: > > http://canadiancor.com/proposal-for-the-development-of-an-lenr-reactor/ > > QUOTE > > Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor > > Introduction: > > Canadian researcher, Dr. Dimiter Alexandrov, Lakehead University, in his > semiconductor research laboratory, performed successful replicable LENR > (Low Energy Nuclear Reaction) experiments considering interactions of both > deuterium and hydrogen gases with certain metals in a vacuum chamber. The > products of these LENR experiments were helium (both stable isotopes He-3 > and He-4) and heat. No radiation above the normal background was detected > during the experiments. He also developed a theory explaining the observed > experimental outcomes. Based on this early work he has prepared the > following proposal to develop a LENR reactor which is being submitted for > the next stage of his R&D. . . . > >
RE: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor
Several leading questions about “heavy electrons”: * Do heavy electrons fit in the standard Model? * If so, what is their relativistic KE? * If relativistic. What keeps them from leaving the semi conductor surface? Bob Cook From: Jones Beene Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 6:28:44 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor Interesting. Alexandrov's concept of providing "heavy electrons" as apparently are seen in semiconductor technology - in order to catalyze the fusion of hydrogen and deuterium sounds a lot like muon catalyzed fusion. In fact the muon is sometimes referred to as a "heavy electron" since it is a heavy lepton. Curious that he does not emphasize that connection as it would add to the credibility of his concept. Muon catalyzed fusion was proved over fifty years ago beyond any doubt. However, muon catalyzed fusion is "hot". This has no gammas. Is this something in between ? Jones Jed Rothwell wrote: See: http://canadiancor.com/proposal-for-the-development-of-an-lenr-reactor/ QUOTE Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor Introduction: Canadian researcher, Dr. Dimiter Alexandrov, Lakehead University, in his semiconductor research laboratory, performed successful replicable LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reaction) experiments considering interactions of both deuterium and hydrogen gases with certain metals in a vacuum chamber. The products of these LENR experiments were helium (both stable isotopes He-3 and He-4) and heat. No radiation above the normal background was detected during the experiments. He also developed a theory explaining the observed experimental outcomes. Based on this early work he has prepared the following proposal to develop a LENR reactor which is being submitted for the next stage of his R&D. . . .
Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor
Interesting. Alexandrov's concept of providing "heavy electrons" as apparently are seen in semiconductor technology - in order to catalyze the fusion of hydrogen and deuterium sounds a lot like muon catalyzed fusion. In fact the muon is sometimes referred to as a "heavy electron" since it is a heavy lepton. Curious that he does not emphasize that connection as it would add to the credibility of his concept. Muon catalyzed fusion was proved over fifty years ago beyond any doubt. However, muon catalyzed fusion is "hot". This has no gammas. Is this something in between ? Jones Jed Rothwell wrote: See: http://canadiancor.com/proposal-for-the-development-of-an-lenr-reactor/ QUOTE Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor Introduction: Canadian researcher, Dr. Dimiter Alexandrov, Lakehead University, in his semiconductor research laboratory, performed successful replicable LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reaction) experiments considering interactions of both deuterium and hydrogen gases with certain metals in a vacuum chamber. The products of these LENR experiments were helium (both stable isotopes He-3 and He-4) and heat. No radiation above the normal background was detected during the experiments. He also developed a theory explaining the observed experimental outcomes. Based on this early work he has prepared the following proposal to develop a LENR reactor which is being submitted for the next stage of his R&D. . . .
Re: [Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor
See: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Alexandrovheavyelect.pdf
[Vo]:D. Alexandrov, Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor
See: http://canadiancor.com/proposal-for-the-development-of-an-lenr-reactor/ QUOTE Proposal for the development of an LENR reactor Introduction: Canadian researcher, Dr. Dimiter Alexandrov, Lakehead University, in his semiconductor research laboratory, performed successful replicable LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reaction) experiments considering interactions of both deuterium and hydrogen gases with certain metals in a vacuum chamber. The products of these LENR experiments were helium (both stable isotopes He-3 and He-4) and heat. No radiation above the normal background was detected during the experiments. He also developed a theory explaining the observed experimental outcomes. Based on this early work he has prepared the following proposal to develop a LENR reactor which is being submitted for the next stage of his R&D. . . .
