[Vo]:Rydberg matter formation.

[Axil Axil]

The five factors that might contribute to the formation of hydrogen Rydberg
matter (HRM) are as follows:

Electropositive catalytic activity (i.e. lithium, potassium, calcium oxide,
rare earth oxides),  The low work function of this material seems to be
important in HRM catalytic activity. This includes graphite (
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1501.05056v1.pdf)

In the Lugano report, there was a coating of rare earths on the nickel fuel
particles. This might be related to reducing the work functions of the
nickel particles as a result of rare earth oxides in the fuel.

High pressure produced by flaws in the crystal structure of metal (i.e.
nickel)

Electrostatic field produced by pointy nanostructures.

Hexagonal crystal structure that provides a quantum mechanical template for
HRM formation.

A long timeframe – this speaks to the fact that HRM is driven by
probability causation similar to radioactive decay.

Once HRM is formed, it remains active for a long time if it is kept inside
the reactor core using containment of a magnetic material.

[Vo]:Re: On Arxiv censorship

[Bob Cook]

I have always wondered what happened to the angular momentum of the 
particles and photons as they collapsed to a point associated with a black 
hole.  A point of energy can have no angular momentum associated with it. 
The idea that the energy turns into EM energy and circulates at the event 
horizon makes more sense since it provides a mechanism for conservation of 
angular momentum during the collapse of whatever energy into the "black 
hole".


Since angular momentum is + or - depending upon the direction of circulation 
of the mass--energy--I guess there could be a mechanism operating in a black 
hole collapse that that
provides angular momentum from the vacuum to cancel-out the positive angular 
momentum associated with the system that collapses.


This latter idea would suggest that there is no magnetic field associated 
with a black hole whose mass has become a point at a singularity.


However, if Eric is correct, one would expect to observe magnetic fields 
associated with EM circulating at an event horizon.


Bob Cook


-Original Message- 
From: mix...@bigpond.com

Sent: Monday, February 01, 2016 12:54 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

In reply to  Eric Walker's message of Sun, 31 Jan 2016 22:44:19 -0600:
Hi,
[snip]

On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 5:40 PM,  wrote:

BTW, as I have said before, black holes are empty. All matter is converted

to energy at or before the event horizon, and circulates as EM energy at
the event horizon, warping spacetime into a circle. ;)



What kind of energy?


Photons.



The notion of a singularity at the center of a black hole seems like a leap
of logic to me.  I wonder whether it's simply the case that the
mathematical model (from general relativity) is oversimplifying things
close to the black hole, resulting in the counterintuitive mathematical
result.


Bingo.


Eric

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[mixent]

In reply to  ChemE Stewart's message of Mon, 1 Feb 2016 15:55:57 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
>Entangled photons?


I doubt it.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:Evidence of LENR activity on Charon

[Stephen Cooke]

I wonder if they can detect isotope ratios from an analysis of water ice or 
atmosphere from Pluto and Charon. That could be interesting

Sent from my iPhone

> On 01 Feb 2016, at 22:27, Axil Axil  wrote:
> 
> PLUTO’S MOON CHARON SHOWS FRACTURED SURFACE, SIGNS OF RECENT ACTIVITY
> 
> A massive canyon borders a relatively crater-free plane.
> 
> by John Timmer - Oct 2, 2015 3:10pm EDT
> ShareTweetEmail
> The latest photos to come beaming down from New Horizons aren't focused on 
> Pluto; instead, they target the dwarf planet's largest moon, Charon. Charon 
> is the largest moon relative to its planet in the entire Solar System, but 
> that still means it's quite small, at about 1,200 kilometers across. So it's 
> even less likely than Pluto to have retained enough heat to be geologically 
> active.
> 
> And that's not just Ars saying that. Ross Beyer of NASA Ames Research Center 
> was quoted in a statement as saying, “We thought the probability of seeing 
> such interesting features on this satellite of a world at the far edge of our 
> Solar System was low.”
> 
> 
> 
> But Charon had a number of significant surprises in store. Chief among them: 
> a canyon/fracture system that stretches across the entire face of the moon 
> and presumably extends to the far side. That means it's easily in excess of 
> 1,200km long. NASA says that makes the system over four times as long as the 
> Grand Canyon, and it's twice as deep in spots. "It looks like the entire 
> crust of Charon has been split open,” said John Spencer of the Southwest 
> Research Institute.
> 
> South of the fracture, the terrain becomes relatively crater-poor, indicating 
> a recent remodeling of the surface there. That in turn implies some source of 
> internal heat in Charon, just as there appears to be in Pluto. The nature of 
> that source is undoubtedly the subject of intense speculation among planetary 
> scientists.
> 
> Higher resolution images of Charon, along with data on its composition, are 
> still sitting onboard New Horizons. So a clearer picture of the body will 
> quite literally emerge later this year or early next.
> 
> Listing image by NASA/JHUAPL/SwRI

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[Eric Walker]

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 3:32 PM,  wrote:

It time flows forward outside a black hole, and stops altogether at the
> event
> horizon, does it flow backwards inside the black hole, or is it just
> constant at
> zero?
>

Here's another thought: a black hole might be a special tunnel that extends
very far.  From any direction around the black hole, it is as though one
was looking down a long hallway. Objects that approach the black hole never
make it to the event horizon because that would be equivalent to reaching
the end of the hallway.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[Axil Axil]

A black hole is an object that radiates energy via Hawking's radiation no
matter how small it is. An polariton soliton could be considered a black
hole if it is found to be a Hawking radiator.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyMYcqxuZ_I

Prof. Daniele Faccio found that a glass sphere radiates hawking radiation
when illuminated with a laser.

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 4:28 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  David Roberson's message of Mon, 1 Feb 2016 13:09:56 -0500:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >OK, if we assume that Hawking is correct and that black holes loose mass
> by radiation, why does this not eventually lead to the black hole having
> less mass than is required in order to remain a black hole?
>
> Previous message posted before I read this. :)
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[mixent]

In reply to  David Roberson's message of Mon, 1 Feb 2016 13:09:56 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
>OK, if we assume that Hawking is correct and that black holes loose mass by 
>radiation, why does this not eventually lead to the black hole having less 
>mass than is required in order to remain a black hole?
>
>I suppose that if it is assumed that the black hole only contains energy once 
>formed the effective mass would not be relevant from that time forth.   At 
>least until it evaporates completely.  

BTW, as far as I know, Hawking radiation is created at the event horizon, so I'm
not sure how it is supposed to effect the content of the black hole.

Here's another question:-

It time flows forward outside a black hole, and stops altogether at the event
horizon, does it flow backwards inside the black hole, or is it just constant at
zero?

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[mixent]

In reply to  David Roberson's message of Mon, 1 Feb 2016 11:48:25 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
>A thought.  Before the star becomes a black hole it has plenty of mass located 
>at the center that can be measured just like in the case of our sun.  Why 
>would this original mass be converted into energy in such a manner as to leave 
>the entire black hole empty of all mass?

An excellent point! I hadn't given it any thought. However I suspect that the
very nature of space-time itself changes within the event horizon, so I'm not
sure that matter is still viable. (I'm making this up as I go along. ;)

>
>At the very least I would expect the original matter to be retained.  
>
>Would it be interesting to be an observer at the very moment that the mass of 
>a star becomes adequate to form a black hole?  I can visualize that the 
>process is not smoothly carried out throughout the system.  

If I am right about the nature of black holes, then there has to be an instant
at which the curvature of space becomes sufficient to force photons to follow a
circular path. Before that instant, it's just a heavy star, after that instant,
it suddenly turns black.
[snip]

Here's another brain teaser for you:- 

If the radius of a black hole is determined by it's mass, and it can have any
radius, why can't even small amounts of mass collapse into black holes?
(Something which obviously doesn't happen.)

There must be a point at which the gravitational force exceeds the repulsive
forces that keep matter stable, which implies a minimum size for a black hole to
form. If Hawking radiation can shrink a black hole, then does that mean that
once it shrinks below that critical size, it suddenly reverts to normal matter
again? (Just thinking out loud.)

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[mixent]

In reply to  David Roberson's message of Mon, 1 Feb 2016 13:09:56 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
>OK, if we assume that Hawking is correct and that black holes loose mass by 
>radiation, why does this not eventually lead to the black hole having less 
>mass than is required in order to remain a black hole?

Previous message posted before I read this. :)
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

[Vo]:Evidence of LENR activity on Charon

[Axil Axil]

Pluto’s moon Charon shows fractured surface, signs of recent activity
A massive canyon borders a relatively crater-free plane.

by John Timmer  - Oct 2, 2015
3:10pm EDT

   - Share
   

   - Tweet
   

   - Email 

The latest photos to come beaming down from New Horizons aren't focused on
Pluto; instead, they target the dwarf planet's largest moon, Charon. Charon
is the largest moon relative to its planet in the entire Solar System, but
that still means it's quite small, at about 1,200 kilometers across.
So it's even less likely than Pluto to have retained enough heat to be
geologically active.

And that's not just Ars saying that. Ross Beyer of NASA Ames Research
Center was quoted in a statement as saying, “We thought the probability of
seeing such interesting features on this satellite of a world at the far
edge of our Solar System was low.”


   1.
   

   2.
   

   3.
   


But Charon had a number of significant surprises in store. Chief among
them: a canyon/fracture system that stretches across the entire face of the
moon and presumably extends to the far side. That means it's easily in
excess of 1,200km long. NASA says that makes the system over four times as
long as the Grand Canyon, and it's twice as deep in spots. "It looks like
the entire crust of Charon has been split open,” said John Spencer of the
Southwest Research Institute.

South of the fracture, the terrain becomes relatively crater-poor,
indicating a recent remodeling of the surface there. That in turn implies
some source of internal heat in Charon, just as there appears to be in
Pluto. The nature of that source is undoubtedly the subject of intense
speculation among planetary scientists.

Higher resolution images of Charon, along with data on its composition, are
still sitting onboard New Horizons. So a clearer picture of the body will
quite literally emerge later this year or early next.

*Listing image by NASA/JHUAPL/SwRI
*

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[Axil Axil]

http://phys.org/news/2015-01-black-holes-space-theory.html#nRlv

Black holes do not exist where space and time do not exist, says new theory

"If we restrict our description to scales at which space and time exist,
then the apparent paradoxes associated with black holes seem to naturally
resolve," Ali said. "For example, as the information paradox depends on the
existence of the event horizon, and an event horizon like all objects does
not exist below a certain length and time interval, then there is no
absolute information paradox in gravity's rainbow. The absence of an
effective horizon means that there is nothing absolutely stopping
information from going out of the black hole."

"The most important lesson from this paper is that space and time exist
only beyond a certain scale," Ali concluded. "There is no space and time
below that scale. Hence, it is meaningless to define particles, matter, or
any object, including black holes , that
exist in space and time below that scale. Thus, as long as we keep
ourselves confined to the scales at which both space and time exist, we get
sensible physical answers. However, when we try to ask questions at length
and time intervals that are below the scales at which space and time
 exist, we end up getting paradoxes and
problems."



On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 3:52 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Eric Walker's message of Sun, 31 Jan 2016 21:17:08 -0600:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >>Ian Durham, a quantum physicist at Saint Anselm College in New Hampshire,
> >> agrees that the black-hole paper is wrong but should have been accepted
> by
> >> arXiv, so that the students could be exposed to community feedback.
> [snip]
> BTW, in case it wasn't clear from my previous post, I think the paper was
> actually right. It isn't possible to fall into a black hole, however for a
> different reason than that given.
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[ChemE Stewart]

Entangled photons?

On Monday, February 1, 2016,  wrote:

> In reply to  Eric Walker's message of Sun, 31 Jan 2016 22:44:19 -0600:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 5:40 PM, >
> wrote:
> >
> >BTW, as I have said before, black holes are empty. All matter is converted
> >> to energy at or before the event horizon, and circulates as EM energy at
> >> the event horizon, warping spacetime into a circle. ;)
> >
> >
> >What kind of energy?
>
> Photons.
>
> >
> >The notion of a singularity at the center of a black hole seems like a
> leap
> >of logic to me.  I wonder whether it's simply the case that the
> >mathematical model (from general relativity) is oversimplifying things
> >close to the black hole, resulting in the counterintuitive mathematical
> >result.
>
> Bingo.
> >
> >Eric
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[mixent]

In reply to  Eric Walker's message of Sun, 31 Jan 2016 22:44:19 -0600:
Hi,
[snip]
>On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 5:40 PM,  wrote:
>
>BTW, as I have said before, black holes are empty. All matter is converted
>> to energy at or before the event horizon, and circulates as EM energy at
>> the event horizon, warping spacetime into a circle. ;)
>
>
>What kind of energy?

Photons.

>
>The notion of a singularity at the center of a black hole seems like a leap
>of logic to me.  I wonder whether it's simply the case that the
>mathematical model (from general relativity) is oversimplifying things
>close to the black hole, resulting in the counterintuitive mathematical
>result.

Bingo.
>
>Eric
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[mixent]

In reply to  Eric Walker's message of Sun, 31 Jan 2016 21:17:08 -0600:
Hi,
[snip]
>>Ian Durham, a quantum physicist at Saint Anselm College in New Hampshire,
>> agrees that the black-hole paper is wrong but should have been accepted by
>> arXiv, so that the students could be exposed to community feedback.
[snip]
BTW, in case it wasn't clear from my previous post, I think the paper was
actually right. It isn't possible to fall into a black hole, however for a
different reason than that given.
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[H Veeder]

Personally I doubt the integrity of the bridge so I won't be exploring it.
;-)

Harry


On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Black hole science is supposed to be the bridge between general relativity
> and quantum mechanics. Exploring this connection is the beat sort of
> science.
>
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 12:34 PM, H Veeder  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Alain Sepeda 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> For those who noticed
>>> - the message of Brian Josephson whistleblowing some exchange between
>>> moderator to block Ferara tests
>>> - the effective blocking of lugano test
>>>
>>> there is an article by Nicolas Gisin (an insider of science, not a rebel)
>>> http://www.iqoqi-vienna.at/nicolas-gisin/
>>>
>>> Nature try to reframe the debate
>>>
>>> http://www.nature.com/news/arxiv-rejections-lead-to-spat-over-screening-process-1.19267
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> ​From the Nature link​:
>> "Sabine Hossenfelder, an expert on quantum gravity at the Frankfurt
>> Institute for Advanced Studies in Germany, says that the black-hole paper
>> is scientific and clearly argued, but is wrong because it uses an equation
>> in a slightly different regime to that in which it should be applied. She
>> calls this a “common and understandable mistake”.
>>
>> Instead of being wrong the conclusion should be seen as a reductio ad
>> absurdum demonstration of the incompatibility of quantum mechanics and
>> general relativity.  Without a quantum theory of gravity the entire field
>> of black hole physics is based on discretion rather than logic.
>>
>> Harry
>>
>> ​​
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rubidium-87 as an ideal alkali for LENR

[Eric Walker]

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

LOL! Well, in a game of “who do you trust” follow the buck, and it is
> looking like someone with strong motivation was knee-deep in deception; and
> sadly that hasn’t changed… kinda like the “public demo (by invitation
> only)” nonsense of last week.


I worry that large amounts of capital obtained in connection with a certain
explanation of things over a period of years would make it difficult to go
back and systematically investigate alternative explanations, especially if
one is of the type to not want to be seen to backtrack.

Eric

RE: [Vo]:Rubidium-87 as an ideal alkali for LENR

[Jones Beene]

From: Eric Walker 

Here is the paper I was looking for, also by Bush and Eagleton:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/EPRIproceedinga.pdf#page=198 
 

It seems that, unlike Bush and Eagleton, Mills did not detect calcium.  But 
Bush and Eagleton suggest that the amount would have been below Mills's 
threshold of detection by an order of magnitude.

Eric,

LOL! Well, in a game of “who do you trust” follow the buck, and it is looking 
like someone with strong motivation was knee-deep in deception; and sadly that 
hasn’t changed… kinda like the “public demo (by invitation only)” nonsense of 
last week. 

Chances are, they feared the truth about alkali transmutation so much that 
shoddy technique was a necessity. Transmutation of the electrolyte invalidates 
many of Mills’ important claims – by showing that the excess energy is nuclear. 
Did “someone” deliberately choose a measurement instrument which could not have 
detected the transmutation evidence… which they knew from Bush’s earlier claim, 
would be present?
 

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[David Roberson]

OK, if we assume that Hawking is correct and that black holes loose mass by 
radiation, why does this not eventually lead to the black hole having less mass 
than is required in order to remain a black hole?

I suppose that if it is assumed that the black hole only contains energy once 
formed the effective mass would not be relevant from that time forth.   At 
least until it evaporates completely.  

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Axil Axil 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Mon, Feb 1, 2016 12:09 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship



Black holes loss mass due to Hawking's radiation. Multi particle entanglement 
is required to produce this process. But quantum mechanics only allows single 
particle entanglement. As they say, entanglement is monogamous. 


http://quantumfrontiers.com/2013/06/07/entanglement-wormholes/



Due to Hawking's radiation and wormholes, black holes are the only exception. 
The mechanism for cluster fusion in LENR is evidence that black hole processes 
are at play in LENR.



On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 11:48 AM, David Roberson  wrote:

A thought.  Before the star becomes a black hole it has plenty of mass located 
at the center that can be measured just like in the case of our sun.  Why would 
this original mass be converted into energy in such a manner as to leave the 
entire black hole empty of all mass?

At the very least I would expect the original matter to be retained.  

Would it be interesting to be an observer at the very moment that the mass of a 
star becomes adequate to form a black hole?  I can visualize that the process 
is not smoothly carried out throughout the system.  Perhaps the black surface 
begins at one location and then proceeds to engulf the entire structure in an 
interesting sequence.  If true, one might expect the rotation of the star to 
keep certain surfaces "normal" for an extended time period while others turn 
"black".

The above thought experiment brings to mind an interesting possibility.  Can a 
black hole have a non black entry and exit path especially during its formation 
process?

Dave


 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Eric Walker 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Sun, Jan 31, 2016 11:44 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship



On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 5:40 PM,  wrote:


BTW, as I have said before, black holes are empty. All matter is converted to 
energy at or before the event horizon, and circulates as EM energy at the event 
horizon, warping spacetime into a circle. ;)


What kind of energy?


The notion of a singularity at the center of a black hole seems like a leap of 
logic to me.  I wonder whether it's simply the case that the mathematical model 
(from general relativity) is oversimplifying things close to the black hole, 
resulting in the counterintuitive mathematical result.


Eric

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[Axil Axil]

Black hole science is supposed to be the bridge between general relativity
and quantum mechanics. Exploring this connection is the beat sort of
science.

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 12:34 PM, H Veeder  wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Alain Sepeda 
> wrote:
>
>> For those who noticed
>> - the message of Brian Josephson whistleblowing some exchange between
>> moderator to block Ferara tests
>> - the effective blocking of lugano test
>>
>> there is an article by Nicolas Gisin (an insider of science, not a rebel)
>> http://www.iqoqi-vienna.at/nicolas-gisin/
>>
>> Nature try to reframe the debate
>>
>> http://www.nature.com/news/arxiv-rejections-lead-to-spat-over-screening-process-1.19267
>>
>>
>>
> ​From the Nature link​:
> "Sabine Hossenfelder, an expert on quantum gravity at the Frankfurt
> Institute for Advanced Studies in Germany, says that the black-hole paper
> is scientific and clearly argued, but is wrong because it uses an equation
> in a slightly different regime to that in which it should be applied. She
> calls this a “common and understandable mistake”.
>
> Instead of being wrong the conclusion should be seen as a reductio ad
> absurdum demonstration of the incompatibility of quantum mechanics and
> general relativity.  Without a quantum theory of gravity the entire field
> of black hole physics is based on discretion rather than logic.
>
> Harry
>
> ​​
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Heavy fermions and superconductivity

[Axil Axil]

There is a relationship between the speed of a particle and its mass. When
a particle moves at the speed of light, it is massless: I.E. the dirac
electron. When a photon is slowed below the speed of light, it acquires
mass. These heavy electrons must be slowed down.

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 12:32 PM, CB Sites  wrote:

> There is an interesting article at
>
>
> http://www.rdmag.com/news/2016/01/heavy-fermions-get-nuclear-boost-way-superconductivity
>
> The question it sparks in my mind is, if heavy fermions act as if they
> have a large mass electrons, could they behave similar to Muon's and cause
> fusion of the host material is deuterated?
>
> I recall one paper that discussed the effective mass of electrons in metal
> potentially altering the electron screening potential.   Could large
> effective mass of heavy fermions improve the expected fusion rates for
> deuterated metals?
>
> It could be fun to work out.
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[H Veeder]

On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Alain Sepeda 
wrote:

> For those who noticed
> - the message of Brian Josephson whistleblowing some exchange between
> moderator to block Ferara tests
> - the effective blocking of lugano test
>
> there is an article by Nicolas Gisin (an insider of science, not a rebel)
> http://www.iqoqi-vienna.at/nicolas-gisin/
>
> Nature try to reframe the debate
>
> http://www.nature.com/news/arxiv-rejections-lead-to-spat-over-screening-process-1.19267
>
>
>
​From the Nature link​:
"Sabine Hossenfelder, an expert on quantum gravity at the Frankfurt
Institute for Advanced Studies in Germany, says that the black-hole paper
is scientific and clearly argued, but is wrong because it uses an equation
in a slightly different regime to that in which it should be applied. She
calls this a “common and understandable mistake”.

Instead of being wrong the conclusion should be seen as a reductio ad
absurdum demonstration of the incompatibility of quantum mechanics and
general relativity.  Without a quantum theory of gravity the entire field
of black hole physics is based on discretion rather than logic.

Harry

​​

[Vo]:Heavy fermions and superconductivity

[CB Sites]

There is an interesting article at

http://www.rdmag.com/news/2016/01/heavy-fermions-get-nuclear-boost-way-superconductivity

The question it sparks in my mind is, if heavy fermions act as if they have
a large mass electrons, could they behave similar to Muon's and cause
fusion of the host material is deuterated?

I recall one paper that discussed the effective mass of electrons in metal
potentially altering the electron screening potential.   Could large
effective mass of heavy fermions improve the expected fusion rates for
deuterated metals?

It could be fun to work out.

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[Axil Axil]

Black holes loss mass due to Hawking's radiation. Multi particle
entanglement is required to produce this process. But quantum mechanics
only allows single particle entanglement. As they say, entanglement is
monogamous.

http://quantumfrontiers.com/2013/06/07/entanglement-wormholes/

Due to Hawking's radiation and wormholes, black holes are the only
exception. The mechanism for cluster fusion in LENR is evidence that black
hole processes are at play in LENR.

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 11:48 AM, David Roberson  wrote:

> A thought.  Before the star becomes a black hole it has plenty of mass
> located at the center that can be measured just like in the case of our
> sun.  Why would this original mass be converted into energy in such a
> manner as to leave the entire black hole empty of all mass?
>
> At the very least I would expect the original matter to be retained.
>
> Would it be interesting to be an observer at the very moment that the mass
> of a star becomes adequate to form a black hole?  I can visualize that the
> process is not smoothly carried out throughout the system.  Perhaps the
> black surface begins at one location and then proceeds to engulf the entire
> structure in an interesting sequence.  If true, one might expect the
> rotation of the star to keep certain surfaces "normal" for an extended time
> period while others turn "black".
>
> The above thought experiment brings to mind an interesting possibility.
> Can a black hole have a non black entry and exit path especially during its
> formation process?
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Walker 
> To: vortex-l 
> Sent: Sun, Jan 31, 2016 11:44 pm
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship
>
> On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 5:40 PM,  wrote:
>
> BTW, as I have said before, black holes are empty. All matter is converted
>> to energy at or before the event horizon, and circulates as EM energy at
>> the event horizon, warping spacetime into a circle. ;)
>
>
> What kind of energy?
>
> The notion of a singularity at the center of a black hole seems like a
> leap of logic to me.  I wonder whether it's simply the case that the
> mathematical model (from general relativity) is oversimplifying things
> close to the black hole, resulting in the counterintuitive mathematical
> result.
>
> Eric
>
>

[Vo]:For Feb 1, 2016- very short note and INFO

[Peter Gluck]

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/02/01-feb-2016-lenr-success-actionable.html

Do not miss the Richtopia paper on Darden, next year this time you will
call it typical for the Press

Peter

-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:Rubidium-87 as an ideal alkali for LENR

[Eric Walker]

Hi Jones,

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> R. T. BUSH and R. D. EAGLETON, “Experiments Supporting the Transmission 
> Resonance
> Model for Cold Fusion in Light Water: I. Correlation of Isotopic and Elemental
> Evidence with Excess Heat,” Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Cold Fusion, Nagoya, Japan,
> 1992, p. 405, Universal Academy Press.
>
> R. T. BUSH, “A Light Water Excess Heat Reaction Suggests that ‘Cold
> Fusion’ May Be ‘Alkali-Hydrogen’ Fusion,” Fusion Technol., 22, 301 (1992).
>
> Here is the paper I was looking for, also by Bush and Eagleton:

http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/EPRIproceedinga.pdf#page=198

It seems that, unlike Bush and Eagleton, Mills did not detect calcium.  But
Bush and Eagleton suggest that the amount would have been below Mills's
threshold of detection by an order of magnitude.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[David Roberson]

A thought.  Before the star becomes a black hole it has plenty of mass located 
at the center that can be measured just like in the case of our sun.  Why would 
this original mass be converted into energy in such a manner as to leave the 
entire black hole empty of all mass?

At the very least I would expect the original matter to be retained.  

Would it be interesting to be an observer at the very moment that the mass of a 
star becomes adequate to form a black hole?  I can visualize that the process 
is not smoothly carried out throughout the system.  Perhaps the black surface 
begins at one location and then proceeds to engulf the entire structure in an 
interesting sequence.  If true, one might expect the rotation of the star to 
keep certain surfaces "normal" for an extended time period while others turn 
"black".

The above thought experiment brings to mind an interesting possibility.  Can a 
black hole have a non black entry and exit path especially during its formation 
process?

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Eric Walker 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Sun, Jan 31, 2016 11:44 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship



On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 5:40 PM,  wrote:


BTW, as I have said before, black holes are empty. All matter is converted to 
energy at or before the event horizon, and circulates as EM energy at the event 
horizon, warping spacetime into a circle. ;)


What kind of energy?


The notion of a singularity at the center of a black hole seems like a leap of 
logic to me.  I wonder whether it's simply the case that the mathematical model 
(from general relativity) is oversimplifying things close to the black hole, 
resulting in the counterintuitive mathematical result.


Eric

RE: [Vo]:Rubidium-87 as an ideal alkali for LENR

[Jones Beene]

From: Eric Walker 

*   I don't know whether Mills is avoiding disclosing testing done with 
rubidium or not. But I suspect that if he is still using potassium, he is 
seeing induced beta decay of the potassium, and that it is not more complex 
than this.

*   There was an interesting paper from the early 1990's, if I remember 
correctly, in which a group was doing light water electrolysis with potassium 
and finding calcium.  They noted that the experiment was similar to one of 
Mills or perhaps Thermacore.  The group proposed proton capture in their own 
case, but I suspect the calcium came from induced beta decay of the potassium.

Eric,

Bush and Eagleton reported that calcium and strontium atoms are produced from K 
and Rb ions, respectively, in the electrolysis of light water with a nickel 
cathode. They used both SIMS and ICPMS. Both these papers should be in the 
LENR/CANR database.  

These are both very strong papers, however, I agree that induced beta decay is 
more likely than fusion, and Bush/Eagleton missed that important detail. This 
is especially true if UDH is being created. Long before the UDH would fuse, it 
would approach the alkali nucleus and disrupt an already unstable isotope, 
resulting in beta decay. The disruption is most likely magnetic – not 
electrostatic. (see http://link.aps.org/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevC.27.1199
http://arxiv.org/abs/1011.3776 
and others. 

The near field of UDH is in the kilo-Tesla range. Here are the old papers on 
alkali transmutation:
R. T. BUSH and R. D. EAGLETON, “Experiments Supporting the Transmission 
Resonance Model for Cold Fusion in Light Water: I. Correlation of Isotopic and 
Elemental Evidence with Excess Heat,” Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Cold Fusion, Nagoya, 
Japan, 1992, p. 405, Universal Academy Press.

R. T. BUSH, “A Light Water Excess Heat Reaction Suggests that ‘Cold Fusion’ May 
Be ‘Alkali-Hydrogen’ Fusion,” Fusion Technol., 22, 301 (1992).

Re: [Vo]:On Arxiv censorship

[Alain Sepeda]

There is recently an article highlighted

one promote failure
http://www.psmag.com/nature-and-technology/science-needs-to-fail
(Zepelin argument is well known to engineers. One only learn from i's
failures. Success give you confidence, but too much give you unjustified
confidence).

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0065263

it explains that editors should not pursue excellence but diversity

this follow the Blackswan notion, that great things have much more impact
than their real-world (not-so) improbability

see too
http://www.euroscientist.com/evaluation-dogma-of-excellence-replaced-by-scientific-diversity/
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/diversity-in-science-why-it-is-essential-for-excellence/
http://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2015/12/15/10219330/elite-scientists-hold-back-progress


2016-02-01 0:40 GMT+01:00 :

> In reply to  Alain Sepeda's message of Sun, 31 Jan 2016 23:24:33 +0100:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >For those who noticed
> >- the message of Brian Josephson whistleblowing some exchange between
> >moderator to block Ferara tests
> >- the effective blocking of lugano test
> >
> >there is an article by Nicolas Gisin (an insider of science, not a rebel)
> >http://www.iqoqi-vienna.at/nicolas-gisin/
> >
> >Nature try to reframe the debate
> >
> http://www.nature.com/news/arxiv-rejections-lead-to-spat-over-screening-process-1.19267
>
> "ArXiv.org founder Paul Ginsparg, a quantum physicist at Cornell
> University, in
> Ithaca, New York, who was not involved in the moderation in this case,
> adds that
> arXiv moderators are also now sensitive to the fact that the site is
> checked
> daily by the news media. This gives moderators another reason to avoid
> posting
> “manifestly outlandish” claims that might confuse the public, he says."
>
> Once again, ALL real breakthroughs are initially "manifestly outlandish".
> Hence
> nothing really valuable will ever get published. Consequently arXiv has now
> proven that it is worthless, as it apparently will only accept incremental
> "improvements". If this mental straight-jacket becomes the norm, then
> science
> has no future.
>
> Furthermore it is evidence of the fact that certain people are trying to
> ensure
> that "the public" shares their myopic view of reality.
>
> BTW, as I have said before, black holes are empty. All matter is converted
> to
> energy at or before the event horizon, and circulates as EM energy at the
> event
> horizon, warping spacetime into a circle. ;)
>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>