Re: Triple coherency experiment

2004-12-07 Thread thomas malloy
Jones Beene Posted;
The following is an evolution of ideas towards the
design of a state-of-the-art LENR experiment. The
purpose here is to explain an enhancement called
ìtriple coherency,

You raise a number of issues that I don't understand Jones.

It is hoped and suspected that this ìtriple coherencyî
(overlapping coherency between photon, phonon, and
conduction electrons)
I assume that conduction electrons are the outer most of the 
electron. I'm wondering what photon and phonon electrons are.

will give the same kind of
paradigm shift that arises in light itself, once it
becomes phase locked, as in a laser.
paradigm shift? I though that was something that happened in mind 
when I understood a new way of explaining a phenomena.

coherency would work, one should understand the
interplay of kinetic vibration with mass: and the
I've enjoyed the various posts on the nature of the electrons cloud 
particularly the pancaking effect and the Frenkel defects. I 
downloaded a paper on the subject. It showed circles which I assume 
were the nucleus and curved triangles extending outward from them. 
The triangles intersected, and there was a note that the electron 
positions weren't centered over either nucleus, I assume that this is 
were the Frenkel defects occur in a crystal. I assume that as you 
increase the speed of an atom the electron cloud flattens out, is 
this correct?

The other thing that interests me is tunneling. I assume that this is 
the quantum tunneling that the webmaster of Singularity Technologies 
was talking about. The question I have is how is this initiated? I 
assume that it is more difficult than two particles having the same 
De Borglie wave length.



Triple coherency experiment

2004-11-18 Thread Jones Beene
The following is an evolution of ideas towards the
design of a state-of-the-art LENR experiment. The
purpose here is to explain an enhancement called
“triple coherency,” and secondly to provide a setup 
that should be attractive to younger researchers and
college-level physics projects. The device will be
rather small in size, does not require calorimetry,
and is not particularly complicated, except for the
availability of the light source.

The most general goal of the proposed experiment,
which is currently being designed by myself (and any
volunteers who wish to supply input), is to look for
charged particles being emitted from a tiny LENR
cathode which will be irradiated with light of a
particular frequency matching both phonon vibration
(by virtue of exactly the same temperature equivalent)
and also matched to the AC modulation (by coherent
light) of a DC bias current. 

It is hoped and suspected that this “triple coherency”
(overlapping coherency between photon, phonon, and
conduction electrons) will give the same kind of
paradigm shift that arises in light itself, once it
becomes phase locked, as in a laser. This appears to
be a novel concept, and despite having some potential
for IP value, it is being put into the public domain
to encourage faster implementation by anyone who can
be convinced of the potential advantages of this
methodology for achieving BEC-like “condensation”,
leading perhaps to a robust new kind of LENR.

To do this correctly, the experimenter must employ a
cathode-membrane, which can be described as “two-way”.
The reason for this will become apparent, but
basically the cathode (which is a proton membrane
similar to a fuel cell membrane) must itself form part
of the wall of the cell into which deuterium gas is
fed. This way, energetic charged particles can be
expelled - external to the cell, where they can be
captured and analyzed. It is so simple an idea, one is
led to wonder why it isn’t in more general use, but
then again, gas-phase LENR is rare enough, not to
mention “cold gas phase”. BTW It doesn’t matter if
only a few of the energetic particles escape, because
billions are expected to be created, based on similar
work. If they are really derived from fusion events,
then even a few will “stick out like a sore thumb”.

To backtrack a little and to try to explain how triple
coherency would work, one should understand the
interplay of kinetic vibration with mass: and the
importance of the electronvolt (symbol: eV) which is
the amount of energy gained by a single unbound
electron when it falls through an electrostatic
potential difference of one volt. This is a very small
amount of energy but with a mass, and a frequency, and
a wavelength equivalent. Mass equivalent:
1 eV/c = 1.783 x 10^-36 kg.

For comparison, the typical atmospheric O2 molecule
has a kinetic energy of about 0.03 eV. To convert a
particle's energy in electronvolts into its
temperature in Kelvin, multiply by 11,605. Another
important correlation of the electron volt is with
wavelength and frequency:
1 eV/hc = 806.6 mm-1  
1 eV/h = 241.8 Thz terahertz. 

In this experiment we will use theory to chose a
desired temperature at which confined deuterium
should show markedly increased QM effects and then we
will try to tailor the experiment to that. IOW if we
should chose a temperature of minus 42 F or about .02
eV, then we will need a corresponding wavelength of
about 40 microns, and a coherent light frequency of
4.8 terahertz and we will cool the cell accordingly.
The chosen temperature will be based on the
microstructure of the cathode, so that this choice
assumes phonons of about one fourth the diameter
(quarter wavelength) or 10 micron diameter, which are
in effect, little antennae. The optimum parameters for
QM effects will vary considerably, based on the chosen
matrix, but appears to be near .02 eV, based upon
certain material-specific assumptions (using a PEM
fuel cell membrane, for instance, which is the
simplest choice), but this has not yet been pinpointed
from theory precisely for other cathodes.

Yes. Before you ask. This whole idea assumes that some
forms of LENR are, in effect, “enhanced” (higher
probability) QM reactions. But the beauty of the
design is that it can be successful, even without this
QM underpinning – so long as “hot” charged particles
are produced at all.

If in such an experiment, deuterium gas passes through
a cathode wall, and IF “only” an electrochemical
process were to be involved, deuterons will emerge
uncharged and not be particularly “hot” – no more than
a few eV at most. If a nuclear reaction has occurred,
some of the particles emerging from the cathode’s
“flip side” (those which do not suffer an inordinate
number of collisions on the way out) will emerge with
thousands or even millions of times more energy than
if only electrochemical reactions were involved. These
are easily witnessed in any number of ways, such as
the simplest: detecting cold fusion charge particles
with the 

Re: Triple coherency experiment

2004-11-18 Thread Horace Heffner
Just some minor notes:

At 9:26 AM 11/18/4, Jones Beene wrote:
 ...This is a very small
amount of energy but with a mass, and a frequency, and
a wavelength equivalent. Mass equivalent:
1 eV/c = 1.783 x 10^-36 kg.

The above is a typo and should be 1 eV/(c^2) = 1.783 x 10^-36 kg.


For comparison, the typical atmospheric O2 molecule
has a kinetic energy of about 0.03 eV. To convert a
particle's energy in electronvolts into its
temperature in Kelvin, multiply by 11,605. Another
important correlation of the electron volt is with
wavelength and frequency:
1 eV/hc = 806.6 mm-1


The above is neither a wavelength nor a frequency, and appears to be an
accidental inversion.

From Plank's law E = h*nu, we have frequency nu = E/h
  = (1 eV)/h = 2.418x10^14 Hz = 241.8 THz

1 eV/h = 241.8 Thz terahertz.

Right for frequency, but wavelength lambda is

   lambda = h/p = h/(E*c) = h*c/E = h*c/(1 eV) = 1.2398x10^-6 m

or, since we already know frequency nu, we can just say

   lambda = c/nu = 1.2398x10^-6 m.

Regards,

Horace Heffner  




Re: Triple coherency experiment

2004-11-18 Thread Jones Beene
HH:

1 eV/hc = 806.6 mm-1
 
 The above is neither a wavelength nor a frequency,
 and appears to be an accidental inversion.

Well, 806.6 per millimeter or .806 micron is a
wavelength, but thanks for pointing out that it is the
wrong wavelength. I thought it looked suspicious this
morning 

The easy formula: E (in eV) = 1240/wavelength in nm
or wavelength in nm = 1240/ E (in eV)
 
Which gives the correct Lambda of 1.24 microns and not
.806

Thanks for pointing this out... a few too many things
going on in my ancient brain today to keep them all
straight. Normally if I'm going to be off, it is by
considerably more than 50%... usually an order of
magnitute at least... Not that its any consolation...

Jones



Re: Triple coherency experiment

2004-11-18 Thread Horace Heffner
At 6:46 PM 11/18/4, Jones Beene wrote:
HH:

1 eV/hc = 806.6 mm-1

 The above is neither a wavelength nor a frequency,
 and appears to be an accidental inversion.

Well, 806.6 per millimeter or .806 micron is a
wavelength, but thanks for pointing out that it is the
wrong wavelength. I thought it looked suspicious this
morning 

The quantity 806.6 per millimeter is not 0.806 micron.  It is not a length
at all.  It is a linear density of 806.6 non-dimensional units per mm.  You
are having what I call a temporary brain check.  Don't worry about it - I
have them all the time and still survive as yet.  8^)  The term brain
check  I think it comes from the good old days when the CPU CHECK light
coming on sometimes meant very bad things for a computer.  Maybe yours is
due to the effects of Frank Grimer's tinkering with dimensional analysis.
8^)

Regards,

Horace Heffner