Re: [Vo]: Type A palladium from JM... was Bose Einstein Condensate

[CB Sites]

I wanted to toss a couple of thoughts in on BEC's in solid state.  If you
have never read Scott and Talbot Chubb's papers, I highly recommend them.
Also Y.E. Kim's BEC theory works fits in all of this. They are all in Jed's
library.  Y.E. Kim has a great body of work on BEC formations in solids,
and the Chubb's had some excellent solids state band models that would
describe well BEC formation in solids. A Kronig-Penny model of a periodic
potential demonstrates that H in metals will form band states that follows
Pauli exclusion or D bands that follow a Bose-Einstein model.   It's
obvious how fragile the metallurgy is for crystal structure and period
potential as it will impact the formation of band states and the BEC in
solids.

That said, I think the BEC theories Chubb, Kim, etc.  can really open the
doors on CF realizations.



On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 11:14 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 13:21:41 -0700:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >It should be noted that several researchers are convinced that the
> >silver addition is also a reactant in some undefined nuclear way. Both
> >palladium, silver and nickel are catalysts for the Mills version of
> >dense hydrogen/deuterium - and that is not likely to coincidental.
> >
> The odd numbered elements tend to be less stable than even numbered
> elements,
> because they have an unpaired proton. That's why you see the odd numbered
> elements usually only having one or two stable isotopes.
> It also makes them prime candidates for a reaction where a proton is added
> and
> an alpha particle is ejected, because both the alpha & the remaining
> nucleus are
> both even numbered, and hence quite stable.
>
> Silver is element number 47, and hence odd, so the reactions:-
>
> 1H+107Ag => 104Pd + 4He + 5.852 MeV
>
> &
>
> 1H+109Ag => 106Pd + 4He + 6.043 MeV
>
> may well be "easy". (...and the Pd is worth more than the Ag too, bonus
> point!)
>
> By the same reasoning I would expect Cu to work too.
>
> However in order for such a reaction to occur it may be necessary for
> there to
> be plenty of atomic H on hand, which in turn implies that they are most
> likely
> to occur when the Ag/Cu is in the presence of a spillover catalyst, such
> as Pd
> or Ni.
> Nano particle Cu/Ni alloy might be an interesting place to start, or a
> thorough
> mixture of Cu & Ni nano particles.
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]: Type A palladium from JM... was Bose Einstein Condensate

[mixent]

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 13:21:41 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>It should be noted that several researchers are convinced that the 
>silver addition is also a reactant in some undefined nuclear way. Both 
>palladium, silver and nickel are catalysts for the Mills version of 
>dense hydrogen/deuterium - and that is not likely to coincidental.
>
The odd numbered elements tend to be less stable than even numbered elements,
because they have an unpaired proton. That's why you see the odd numbered
elements usually only having one or two stable isotopes. 
It also makes them prime candidates for a reaction where a proton is added and
an alpha particle is ejected, because both the alpha & the remaining nucleus are
both even numbered, and hence quite stable.

Silver is element number 47, and hence odd, so the reactions:-

1H+107Ag => 104Pd + 4He + 5.852 MeV

&

1H+109Ag => 106Pd + 4He + 6.043 MeV

may well be "easy". (...and the Pd is worth more than the Ag too, bonus point!)

By the same reasoning I would expect Cu to work too.

However in order for such a reaction to occur it may be necessary for there to
be plenty of atomic H on hand, which in turn implies that they are most likely
to occur when the Ag/Cu is in the presence of a spillover catalyst, such as Pd
or Ni.
Nano particle Cu/Ni alloy might be an interesting place to start, or a thorough
mixture of Cu & Ni nano particles.
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Re: [Vo]: Type A palladium from JM... was Bose Einstein Condensate

[Brian Ahern]

From: Jones Beene 
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 4:21 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Type A palladium from JM... was Bose Einstein Condensate

In response to:

 > "However, as I recall there is a story floating around that a certain
batch of Pd from the supplier seemed to work best.  If that is true then
the energy storage might have happened prior to the experiment when the
Pd was processed by the supplier.”

This subject comes up periodically. Here is a compiled answer from past
posts, many by Jed:

Type A Palladium alloy from Johnson Matthey (JM) was designed for
hydrogen gas purification since it essentially acts like porous membrane
for hydrogen only. The Pd75Ag25 alloy is used for this purpose because
it does not crack or distort upon absorption of hydrogen. The alloy is
also treated with ammonia to partially load hydrogen from the start and
then annealed.

This alloy was designed to have structural integrity under high loading
for hydrogen filters and this level of robustness happens to be the
quality needed for cold fusion. A main reason that cold fusion is
difficult to reproduce is because when bulk palladium without the silver
loads with deuterium, it cracks, bends, distorts and it will not load
above a certain level . . .

Note: the details about avoiding cracks can actually argue against the
theory of Storms about the need for cracks but there is a way to
rationalize both. You can find it in Storms book.

Fleischmann wrote: Most of our own investigations have been carried out
with a material which we have described as Johnson Matthey Material Type
A. This  is prepared by melting under a blanket gas of cracked ammonia
so that the concentrations of five key classes of impurities are being
controlled. Electrodes are then produced by a succession of steps of
square rolling, round rolling and, finally, drawing with appropriate
annealing steps in the  production cycle. [M. Fleischmann, Proc. ICCF-7,
p. 121].

Note: rolling and drawing also reduces cracks.

The ammonia atmosphere leaves a population of hydrogen in the palladium
which controls recrystallization. Unfortunately, this material is now
very difficult to acquire and there is practically none left in the
world, because Johnson Matthey stopped making it several years ago.
Palladium for diffusion tubes (filter tubes) is now made using a
different process in which the palladium is melted under argon.

Material made with the newer technique might also work satisfactorily in
cold fusion experiments, but Fleischmann never had  an opportunity to
test it, so he did not advocate this. Johnson Matthey has offered to
make more of the older style Type A for use in cold fusion experiments.
They will reportedly charge ~$50,000 per ingot...

It should be noted that several researchers are convinced that the
silver addition is also a reactant in some undefined nuclear way. Both
palladium, silver and nickel are catalysts for the Mills version of
dense hydrogen/deuterium - and that is not likely to coincidental.

Re: [Vo]: Type A palladium from JM... was Bose Einstein Condensate

[Jed Rothwell]

Thanks for bringing this up. I think it is important. Table 10 from Miles
is the most dramatic proof that so-called Type A Pd is particularly
effective. It is easier to see this in my version (which has a link to the
original), p. 6:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJlessonsfro.pdf

Jones Beene  wrote:


> A main reason that cold fusion is difficult to reproduce is because when
> bulk palladium without the silver loads with deuterium, it cracks, bends,
> distorts and it will not load above a certain level . . .
>
> Note: the details about avoiding cracks can actually argue against the
> theory of Storms about the need for cracks but there is a way to
> rationalize both. You can find it in Storms book.
>

Ed wants SMALL cracks. Microscopic cracks. The ones that form in bad
palladium are macroscopic, or nearly macroscopic. When the cathode is
deloading, you can see a line of large bubbles form at one of these cracks.
Also, a Pd rod may visibly bend.

Materials that distorts, pillows up, or bends probably will not work. See:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEhowtoprodu.pdf

See also this paper I translated the other day, which is not about cold
fusion *per se*:

http://lenr-canr.org/Collections/JungDamagemechanism.pdf

(I uploaded the text from the first Jung paper here.)



> The ammonia atmosphere leaves a population of hydrogen in the palladium
> which controls recrystallization. Unfortunately, this material is now very
> difficult to acquire and there is practically none left in the world,
> because Johnson Matthey stopped making it several years ago. Palladium for
> diffusion tubes (filter tubes) is now made using a different process in
> which the palladium is melted under argon.
>

That material might work. It works as a filter just as well as the old
material did. Martin did not know if it would work or not. McKubre told me
they tried some and it worked well. He did not describe the details.



> Johnson Matthey has offered to make more of the older style Type A for use
> in cold fusion experiments. They will reportedly charge ~$50,000 per
> ingot...
>

Years ago that is what they quoted to Martin. I think he was a special
friend of JM and they were giving him a special price.

I doubt they could even make a batch of the original material now. The
equipment must be scrapped by now, and the people Martin knew there are
long gone.

I heard that the new method wastes less Pd and it is safer. I suppose the
purity is same or better. Martin told me the original material and method
was developed back in the 1930s.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]: Type A palladium from JM... was Bose Einstein Condensate

[Jones Beene]

In response to:

> "However, as I recall there is a story floating around that a certain 
batch of Pd from the supplier seemed to work best.  If that is true then 
the energy storage might have happened prior to the experiment when the 
Pd was processed by the supplier.”


This subject comes up periodically. Here is a compiled answer from past 
posts, many by Jed:


Type A Palladium alloy from Johnson Matthey (JM) was designed for 
hydrogen gas purification since it essentially acts like porous membrane 
for hydrogen only. The Pd75Ag25 alloy is used for this purpose because 
it does not crack or distort upon absorption of hydrogen. The alloy is 
also treated with ammonia to partially load hydrogen from the start and 
then annealed.


This alloy was designed to have structural integrity under high loading 
for hydrogen filters and this level of robustness happens to be the 
quality needed for cold fusion. A main reason that cold fusion is 
difficult to reproduce is because when bulk palladium without the silver 
loads with deuterium, it cracks, bends, distorts and it will not load 
above a certain level . . .


Note: the details about avoiding cracks can actually argue against the 
theory of Storms about the need for cracks but there is a way to 
rationalize both. You can find it in Storms book.


Fleischmann wrote: Most of our own investigations have been carried out 
with a material which we have described as Johnson Matthey Material Type 
A. This  is prepared by melting under a blanket gas of cracked ammonia 
so that the concentrations of five key classes of impurities are being 
controlled. Electrodes are then produced by a succession of steps of 
square rolling, round rolling and, finally, drawing with appropriate 
annealing steps in the  production cycle. [M. Fleischmann, Proc. ICCF-7, 
p. 121].


Note: rolling and drawing also reduces cracks.

The ammonia atmosphere leaves a population of hydrogen in the palladium 
which controls recrystallization. Unfortunately, this material is now 
very difficult to acquire and there is practically none left in the 
world, because Johnson Matthey stopped making it several years ago. 
Palladium for diffusion tubes (filter tubes) is now made using a 
different process in which the palladium is melted under argon.


Material made with the newer technique might also work satisfactorily in 
cold fusion experiments, but Fleischmann never had  an opportunity to 
test it, so he did not advocate this. Johnson Matthey has offered to 
make more of the older style Type A for use in cold fusion experiments. 
They will reportedly charge ~$50,000 per ingot...


It should be noted that several researchers are convinced that the 
silver addition is also a reactant in some undefined nuclear way. Both 
palladium, silver and nickel are catalysts for the Mills version of 
dense hydrogen/deuterium - and that is not likely to coincidental.

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

Explaining complex ideas in a simple way takes real talent in writing and
requires lots of practice. Thanks for the opportunity to benefit from that
practice.

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 3:59 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 15:52:08 -0400:
> Hi,
>
> This explanation makes a lot more sense than what you originally said.
>
> [snip]
> >Two particles do not pass through each other, they become identical and
> >their wave functions combine in constructive interference.
> >
> >The process is as follows:
> >
> >Two different particles come to share all charctoristics,
> >
> >These two particles become on superparticle.
> >
> >Over time, this superparticle breaks apart when one or more of these
> >particle characteristics diverge.
> >
> >On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 3:43 PM,  wrote:
> >
> >> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 01:25:05 -0400:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> My point was that if particles could pass through one another like
> >> superposing
> >> waves do, then the particles of your head should be able to pass through
> >> the
> >> particles in the wall without resistance. You stated that particles were
> >> waves,
> >> and drew a picture of them passing through one another like superposing
> >> waves.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >We were talking about a particle passing through a wall not
> superposition.
> >> >
> >> >Particles can pass through a wall lock stock and barrel via tunneling.
> >> >
> >> >See
> >> >
> >> >https://www.livescience.com/20380-particles-quantum-
> tunneling-timing.html
> >> >
> >> >SKIP
> >> >
> >> >Sometimes, particles can pass through walls.
> >> >
> >> >Though it sounds like science fiction, the phenomenon is well
> documented
> >> >and even understood under the bizarre rules that govern the microscopic
> >> >world called quantum mechanics.
> >> >
> >> >Now, scientists have measured the timing of this passing-through-walls
> >> trick
> >> > >> communications-message.html>
> >> >more
> >> >accurately than ever before, and report their results in today's (May
> 17)
> >> >issue of the journal Nature.
> >> >
> >> >On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:11 AM,  wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:40:58 -0400:
> >> >> Hi,
> >> >> [snip]
> >> >> >You are correct. This concept is called tunneling.
> >> >>
> >> >> That's not what you drew. What you drew was superposition of waves.
> That
> >> >> happens
> >> >> all the time on a macroscopic scale. Most obviously in the sea on a
> >> windy
> >> >> day.
> >> >> Also with waves in air, both sound and EM. However particles don't
> seem
> >> to
> >> >> like
> >> >> doing that (witness the bump on your head. ;)
> >> >> Note also that mechanical waves are only possible precisely because
> the
> >> >> particles don't pass through one another, but pass their kinetic
> energy
> >> and
> >> >> momentum on from one to another (actually via EM fields at the atomic
> >> >> scale).
> >> >> [snip]
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards,
> >> >>
> >> >> Robin van Spaandonk
> >> >>
> >> >> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Robin van Spaandonk
> >>
> >> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
> >>
> >>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 15:52:08 -0400:
Hi,

This explanation makes a lot more sense than what you originally said.

[snip]
>Two particles do not pass through each other, they become identical and
>their wave functions combine in constructive interference.
>
>The process is as follows:
>
>Two different particles come to share all charctoristics,
>
>These two particles become on superparticle.
>
>Over time, this superparticle breaks apart when one or more of these
>particle characteristics diverge.
>
>On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 3:43 PM,  wrote:
>
>> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 01:25:05 -0400:
>> Hi,
>>
>> My point was that if particles could pass through one another like
>> superposing
>> waves do, then the particles of your head should be able to pass through
>> the
>> particles in the wall without resistance. You stated that particles were
>> waves,
>> and drew a picture of them passing through one another like superposing
>> waves.
>>
>>
>>
>> >We were talking about a particle passing through a wall not superposition.
>> >
>> >Particles can pass through a wall lock stock and barrel via tunneling.
>> >
>> >See
>> >
>> >https://www.livescience.com/20380-particles-quantum-tunneling-timing.html
>> >
>> >SKIP
>> >
>> >Sometimes, particles can pass through walls.
>> >
>> >Though it sounds like science fiction, the phenomenon is well documented
>> >and even understood under the bizarre rules that govern the microscopic
>> >world called quantum mechanics.
>> >
>> >Now, scientists have measured the timing of this passing-through-walls
>> trick
>> >> communications-message.html>
>> >more
>> >accurately than ever before, and report their results in today's (May 17)
>> >issue of the journal Nature.
>> >
>> >On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:11 AM,  wrote:
>> >
>> >> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:40:58 -0400:
>> >> Hi,
>> >> [snip]
>> >> >You are correct. This concept is called tunneling.
>> >>
>> >> That's not what you drew. What you drew was superposition of waves. That
>> >> happens
>> >> all the time on a macroscopic scale. Most obviously in the sea on a
>> windy
>> >> day.
>> >> Also with waves in air, both sound and EM. However particles don't seem
>> to
>> >> like
>> >> doing that (witness the bump on your head. ;)
>> >> Note also that mechanical waves are only possible precisely because the
>> >> particles don't pass through one another, but pass their kinetic energy
>> and
>> >> momentum on from one to another (actually via EM fields at the atomic
>> >> scale).
>> >> [snip]
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >>
>> >> Robin van Spaandonk
>> >>
>> >> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>> >>
>> >>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robin van Spaandonk
>>
>> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>>
>>
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

Two particles do not pass through each other, they become identical and
their wave functions combine in constructive interference.

The process is as follows:

Two different particles come to share all charctoristics,

These two particles become on superparticle.

Over time, this superparticle breaks apart when one or more of these
particle characteristics diverge.

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 3:43 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 01:25:05 -0400:
> Hi,
>
> My point was that if particles could pass through one another like
> superposing
> waves do, then the particles of your head should be able to pass through
> the
> particles in the wall without resistance. You stated that particles were
> waves,
> and drew a picture of them passing through one another like superposing
> waves.
>
>
>
> >We were talking about a particle passing through a wall not superposition.
> >
> >Particles can pass through a wall lock stock and barrel via tunneling.
> >
> >See
> >
> >https://www.livescience.com/20380-particles-quantum-tunneling-timing.html
> >
> >SKIP
> >
> >Sometimes, particles can pass through walls.
> >
> >Though it sounds like science fiction, the phenomenon is well documented
> >and even understood under the bizarre rules that govern the microscopic
> >world called quantum mechanics.
> >
> >Now, scientists have measured the timing of this passing-through-walls
> trick
> > communications-message.html>
> >more
> >accurately than ever before, and report their results in today's (May 17)
> >issue of the journal Nature.
> >
> >On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:11 AM,  wrote:
> >
> >> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:40:58 -0400:
> >> Hi,
> >> [snip]
> >> >You are correct. This concept is called tunneling.
> >>
> >> That's not what you drew. What you drew was superposition of waves. That
> >> happens
> >> all the time on a macroscopic scale. Most obviously in the sea on a
> windy
> >> day.
> >> Also with waves in air, both sound and EM. However particles don't seem
> to
> >> like
> >> doing that (witness the bump on your head. ;)
> >> Note also that mechanical waves are only possible precisely because the
> >> particles don't pass through one another, but pass their kinetic energy
> and
> >> momentum on from one to another (actually via EM fields at the atomic
> >> scale).
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Robin van Spaandonk
> >>
> >> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
> >>
> >>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 01:25:05 -0400:
Hi,

My point was that if particles could pass through one another like superposing
waves do, then the particles of your head should be able to pass through the
particles in the wall without resistance. You stated that particles were waves,
and drew a picture of them passing through one another like superposing waves.



>We were talking about a particle passing through a wall not superposition.
>
>Particles can pass through a wall lock stock and barrel via tunneling.
>
>See
>
>https://www.livescience.com/20380-particles-quantum-tunneling-timing.html
>
>SKIP
>
>Sometimes, particles can pass through walls.
>
>Though it sounds like science fiction, the phenomenon is well documented
>and even understood under the bizarre rules that govern the microscopic
>world called quantum mechanics.
>
>Now, scientists have measured the timing of this passing-through-walls trick
>
>more
>accurately than ever before, and report their results in today's (May 17)
>issue of the journal Nature.
>
>On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:11 AM,  wrote:
>
>> In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:40:58 -0400:
>> Hi,
>> [snip]
>> >You are correct. This concept is called tunneling.
>>
>> That's not what you drew. What you drew was superposition of waves. That
>> happens
>> all the time on a macroscopic scale. Most obviously in the sea on a windy
>> day.
>> Also with waves in air, both sound and EM. However particles don't seem to
>> like
>> doing that (witness the bump on your head. ;)
>> Note also that mechanical waves are only possible precisely because the
>> particles don't pass through one another, but pass their kinetic energy and
>> momentum on from one to another (actually via EM fields at the atomic
>> scale).
>> [snip]
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robin van Spaandonk
>>
>> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>>
>>
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Re: [Vo]:The process by which the proton decays in LENR

[Axil Axil]

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep16184


*Topological, non-topological and instanton droplets driven by
spin-transfer torque in materials with perpendicular magnetic anisotropy
and Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya Interaction*


This article explains how a unbalanced magnetic field can produce an
instanton.

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> http://inspirehep.net/record/1119586/plots
>
>
> [image: monopole-pair-instanton.png]
>
>
> An instanton is critical in the decay of the proton. An instanton is a
> pseudo particle that is produced as a condinsate of magnetic force.
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instanton
>
>
> Monopole flux lines will interconnect connect as shown above in the figure
> to form a pseudo particle. These instantons form inside the proton in the
> presence of monopole field lines. These instantons destabilize the actions
> of the quarks inside the proton and the proton decays.
>
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>>
>>1. The process by which the proton decays in LENR.
>>
>>Some esoteric process is causing the proton to decay in LENR. This
>>process is the root source for the production of energy and sub atomic
>>particles in LENR.
>>
>>
>>Whatever is causing the proton to decay into strange matter is a new
>>unrecognized if not unknown process in physics. This cause is not part of
>>current standard model theory. This makes LENR theory doubly hard and
>>mysterious. Not only do we need to explain the characteristics of LENR, 
>> but
>>also LENR thinking gets involved in unrecognized physics that is itself
>>ill-defined and speculative and rooted in solving the hardest and still
>>unexplained issues in physics. As we go through this string of dots, you
>>will get a feel for why LENR theory will not be fully understood for
>>another century.
>>
>>Gathering the dots together.
>>
>>Before we attempt to connect the dots relegated to proton decay, we
>>must define them and gather them together.
>>
>>https://phys.org/news/2017-04-insight-math-million-dollar-pr
>>oblem-riemann.html
>>
>>Solving the Riemann hypothesis
>>
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_hypothesis
>>
>>
>>In mathematics, the Riemann hypothesis is a conjecture that the
>>Riemann zeta function has its zeros only at the negative even integers and
>>complex numbers with real part 1/2. It was proposed by Bernhard Riemann,
>>after whom it is named. The name is also used for some closely related
>>analogues, such as the Riemann hypothesis for curves over finite fields.
>>
>>The Riemann hypothesis implies results about the distribution of
>>prime numbers. Along with suitable generalizations, some mathematicians
>>consider it the most important unresolved problem in pure mathematics.
>>
>>The complex number system on which this conjecture is based was
>>thought to have no meaning or application to any physical property in
>>reality. But this feeling has turned out to be wrong.
>>
>>In 1999, it was suggested by David Hilbert and George Pólya that in
>>the nontrivial zeros form a set of real and discrete numbers in the 
>> Riemann
>>zeta function are just like the eigenvalues of another function called a
>>differential operator, which is widely used in physics.
>>
>>This special newly discovered operator has close ties with quantum
>>physics. The special operator in quantum physics is not Parity / Time (PT)
>>symmetric in the complex number domain. If it can be shown that the PT
>>symmetry is broken for the imaginary part of the operator, then it would
>>follow that the eigenvalues are all real numbers, which would finally
>>constitute the long-awaited proof of the Riemann hypothesis.
>>
>>
>>One of the pivotal dots to be connected in proton decay is Parity /
>>Time (PT) symmetry breaking.
>>
>>http://www.europhysicsnews.org/articles/epn/pdf/2016/02/epn2
>>016472p17.pdf
>>
>>PT-symmetric quantum mechanics is an extension of conventional
>>quantum mechanics into the complex domain. (PT symmetry is not in conflict
>>with conventional quantum theory but is merely a complex generalization of
>>it.) PT-symmetric quantum mechanics was originally considered to be an
>>interesting mathematical discovery but with little or no hope of practical
>>application, but beginning in 2007 it became a hot area of experimental
>>physics.
>>
>>
>>The connection between PT symmetry, LENR, Proton decay is whispering
>>gallery waves.
>>
>>
>>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4830925/
>>
>>Because of their complex number based quantum behavior, whispering
>>gallery waves (WGW) have mysterious properties that are seen in LENR. In
>>whispering gallery waves, the complex number system relates to the index 
>> of
>>refraction of the light 

RE: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Harry-

You noted the following:

Monday, June 5, 2017 6:23 PM—

“However, as I recall there is a story floating around that a certain batch of 
Pd from the supplier seemed to work best.  If that is true then the energy 
storage might have happened prior to the experiment when the Pd was processed 
by the supplier.”


Pd manufacturing may well involve various grain sizes as well as their 
orientation with respect
Crystalline axis orientations.  Strong ambient magnetic fields during hot 
processing (hot rolling for example) with rapid quenching are what I have in 
mind.

Nickel may also respond like the Pd does during processing or subqequent 
processing.

I would guess that Pd nano particles may act in a similar manner to Ni nano 
particles in a LENR+ reactor.  Surprisingly, I have not heard of LENR 
experiments using Pd nano particles.  However, I m,at just be in the dark.

Bob Cook




From: H LV
Sent: Monday, June 5, 2017 6:23 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

Ok, the numbers in this paper rule out the possibility of energy storage during 
the experiment.
.
However, as I recall there is a story floating around that a certain batch of 
Pd from the supplier seemed to work best.
If that is true then the energy storage might have happened prior to the 
experiment when the Pd was processed
by the supplier.


Harry

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 8:43 PM, Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
Please review the numbers in the paper, which is here:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RouletteTresultsofi.pdf

For experiment 4, the excess heat lasted 70 days. The total experiment duration 
was 123 days. If there was a storage phase, it lasted 53 days. This would show 
up as an endothermic reaction, which would reduce power output by much more 
than the exothermic reaction that followed, because it would be shorter. Any 
calorimeter that can measure a positive exothermic reaction of X watts can 
measure an endothermic reaction of -X watts equally well.

Energy storage is ruled out.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[ChemE Stewart]

50% chance of emerging entropic branes bringing rain today...

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> The standard model is wrong. Gravity fits into a LENR based theory where
> ALL the forces of nature are Entropic. All the fundamental forces
> including gravity are not fundamental but instead they all emerge like
> gravity from entanglement.
>
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 11:49 AM, CB Sites  wrote:
>
>> You know what Axil.  The Entropic Gravity theory was one of the few
>> theories that made me step back and made me do a double take and change my
>> view of how gravity works.   It's not a coincidence that gravity just
>> doesn't fit into standard model.  If gravity is due to entropic forces of
>> an occupied space partition, it makes sense that gravity is not part of the
>> standard model.  There is no need for gravitinos or mediators.  Relativity
>> and space-time curvature all fit nicely into that model.
>>
>> If you do physics and have never read the papers on Entropic Gravity, I
>> highly recommend you do.  It may very well change your whole view on the
>> universe.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> Here is the description of entropic force and why there is not dark
>>> matter particle,,,hydrino.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropic_gravity
>>>
>>> LENR will prove this theory and change science and cosmology.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>>
 When particles are entangled, they are connected to each other by a
 wormhole that circumvents normal space time correlations.

 see

 https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/new-einstein-equati
 on-wormholes-quantum-gravity

 Space time is now believed to be connected through long range
 entanglement. The forces of nature are emergent from entanglement.  This is
 why BECs are important in LENR because the nature of these fundamental
 forces are affected by the BEC. These forces are called entropic forces.

 Without a BEC, LENR produces radioactive isotopes. With a BEC, LENR
 produces stable isotopes. The BEC increases the activity of the electroweak
 force.

 On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:49 AM,  wrote:

> In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017
> 00:19:54
> +:
> Hi Bob,
> [snip]
> >Robin—
> >It’s the last sentence in the introduction that is pertinent.  It
> makes the point that the BEC
> >Can be described by a wave function as if it were a single particle.
>
> Not exactly "as if". You missed the word "parallel". IOW the two wave
> functions
> share some properties in common, but not necessarily all. In fact he
> says
> "collective" properties, IOW those properties which can be shared by a
> collection. That doesn't include position.
> [snip]
> >You suggest that a coherent system state as described by a wave
> function does include a specification of probable . relative location of
> charge centers and/or magnetic dipole centers.  What  are the parameters 
> of
> the system state that you believe the paper considers are pertinent?
>
> For that I would have to read the whole paper, and I am not so
> inclined at the
> moment. But if you find something to support your position, and post
> it here,
> I'll be happy to discuss it with you.
> [snip]
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[Axil Axil]

The standard model is wrong. Gravity fits into a LENR based theory where
ALL the forces of nature are Entropic. All the fundamental forces including
gravity are not fundamental but instead they all emerge like gravity from
entanglement.

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 11:49 AM, CB Sites  wrote:

> You know what Axil.  The Entropic Gravity theory was one of the few
> theories that made me step back and made me do a double take and change my
> view of how gravity works.   It's not a coincidence that gravity just
> doesn't fit into standard model.  If gravity is due to entropic forces of
> an occupied space partition, it makes sense that gravity is not part of the
> standard model.  There is no need for gravitinos or mediators.  Relativity
> and space-time curvature all fit nicely into that model.
>
> If you do physics and have never read the papers on Entropic Gravity, I
> highly recommend you do.  It may very well change your whole view on the
> universe.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> Here is the description of entropic force and why there is not dark
>> matter particle,,,hydrino.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropic_gravity
>>
>> LENR will prove this theory and change science and cosmology.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> When particles are entangled, they are connected to each other by a
>>> wormhole that circumvents normal space time correlations.
>>>
>>> see
>>>
>>> https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/new-einstein-equati
>>> on-wormholes-quantum-gravity
>>>
>>> Space time is now believed to be connected through long range
>>> entanglement. The forces of nature are emergent from entanglement.  This is
>>> why BECs are important in LENR because the nature of these fundamental
>>> forces are affected by the BEC. These forces are called entropic forces.
>>>
>>> Without a BEC, LENR produces radioactive isotopes. With a BEC, LENR
>>> produces stable isotopes. The BEC increases the activity of the electroweak
>>> force.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:49 AM,  wrote:
>>>
 In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017
 00:19:54
 +:
 Hi Bob,
 [snip]
 >Robin—
 >It’s the last sentence in the introduction that is pertinent.  It
 makes the point that the BEC
 >Can be described by a wave function as if it were a single particle.

 Not exactly "as if". You missed the word "parallel". IOW the two wave
 functions
 share some properties in common, but not necessarily all. In fact he
 says
 "collective" properties, IOW those properties which can be shared by a
 collection. That doesn't include position.
 [snip]
 >You suggest that a coherent system state as described by a wave
 function does include a specification of probable . relative location of
 charge centers and/or magnetic dipole centers.  What  are the parameters of
 the system state that you believe the paper considers are pertinent?

 For that I would have to read the whole paper, and I am not so inclined
 at the
 moment. But if you find something to support your position, and post it
 here,
 I'll be happy to discuss it with you.
 [snip]
 Regards,

 Robin van Spaandonk

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


>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[H LV]

Verlinde's new theory of gravity passes first test
December 16, 2016
https://phys.org/news/2016-12-verlinde-theory-gravity.html

More information: Margot M. Brouwer et al. First test of Verlinde's theory
of Emergent Gravity using Weak Gravitational Lensing measurements, Monthly
Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (2016). DOI:
10.1093/mnras/stw3192 , On Arxiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.03034


Harry

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 11:49 AM, CB Sites  wrote:

> You know what Axil.  The Entropic Gravity theory was one of the few
> theories that made me step back and made me do a double take and change my
> view of how gravity works.   It's not a coincidence that gravity just
> doesn't fit into standard model.  If gravity is due to entropic forces of
> an occupied space partition, it makes sense that gravity is not part of the
> standard model.  There is no need for gravitinos or mediators.  Relativity
> and space-time curvature all fit nicely into that model.
>
> If you do physics and have never read the papers on Entropic Gravity, I
> highly recommend you do.  It may very well change your whole view on the
> universe.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> Here is the description of entropic force and why there is not dark
>> matter particle,,,hydrino.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropic_gravity
>>
>> LENR will prove this theory and change science and cosmology.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> When particles are entangled, they are connected to each other by a
>>> wormhole that circumvents normal space time correlations.
>>>
>>> see
>>>
>>> https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/new-einstein-equati
>>> on-wormholes-quantum-gravity
>>>
>>> Space time is now believed to be connected through long range
>>> entanglement. The forces of nature are emergent from entanglement.  This is
>>> why BECs are important in LENR because the nature of these fundamental
>>> forces are affected by the BEC. These forces are called entropic forces.
>>>
>>> Without a BEC, LENR produces radioactive isotopes. With a BEC, LENR
>>> produces stable isotopes. The BEC increases the activity of the electroweak
>>> force.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:49 AM,  wrote:
>>>
 In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017
 00:19:54
 +:
 Hi Bob,
 [snip]
 >Robin—
 >It’s the last sentence in the introduction that is pertinent.  It
 makes the point that the BEC
 >Can be described by a wave function as if it were a single particle.

 Not exactly "as if". You missed the word "parallel". IOW the two wave
 functions
 share some properties in common, but not necessarily all. In fact he
 says
 "collective" properties, IOW those properties which can be shared by a
 collection. That doesn't include position.
 [snip]
 >You suggest that a coherent system state as described by a wave
 function does include a specification of probable . relative location of
 charge centers and/or magnetic dipole centers.  What  are the parameters of
 the system state that you believe the paper considers are pertinent?

 For that I would have to read the whole paper, and I am not so inclined
 at the
 moment. But if you find something to support your position, and post it
 here,
 I'll be happy to discuss it with you.
 [snip]
 Regards,

 Robin van Spaandonk

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


>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

[CB Sites]

You know what Axil.  The Entropic Gravity theory was one of the few
theories that made me step back and made me do a double take and change my
view of how gravity works.   It's not a coincidence that gravity just
doesn't fit into standard model.  If gravity is due to entropic forces of
an occupied space partition, it makes sense that gravity is not part of the
standard model.  There is no need for gravitinos or mediators.  Relativity
and space-time curvature all fit nicely into that model.

If you do physics and have never read the papers on Entropic Gravity, I
highly recommend you do.  It may very well change your whole view on the
universe.


On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Here is the description of entropic force and why there is not dark matter
> particle,,,hydrino.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropic_gravity
>
> LENR will prove this theory and change science and cosmology.
>
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> When particles are entangled, they are connected to each other by a
>> wormhole that circumvents normal space time correlations.
>>
>> see
>>
>> https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/new-einstein-equati
>> on-wormholes-quantum-gravity
>>
>> Space time is now believed to be connected through long range
>> entanglement. The forces of nature are emergent from entanglement.  This is
>> why BECs are important in LENR because the nature of these fundamental
>> forces are affected by the BEC. These forces are called entropic forces.
>>
>> Without a BEC, LENR produces radioactive isotopes. With a BEC, LENR
>> produces stable isotopes. The BEC increases the activity of the electroweak
>> force.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:49 AM,  wrote:
>>
>>> In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017
>>> 00:19:54
>>> +:
>>> Hi Bob,
>>> [snip]
>>> >Robin—
>>> >It’s the last sentence in the introduction that is pertinent.  It makes
>>> the point that the BEC
>>> >Can be described by a wave function as if it were a single particle.
>>>
>>> Not exactly "as if". You missed the word "parallel". IOW the two wave
>>> functions
>>> share some properties in common, but not necessarily all. In fact he says
>>> "collective" properties, IOW those properties which can be shared by a
>>> collection. That doesn't include position.
>>> [snip]
>>> >You suggest that a coherent system state as described by a wave
>>> function does include a specification of probable . relative location of
>>> charge centers and/or magnetic dipole centers.  What  are the parameters of
>>> the system state that you believe the paper considers are pertinent?
>>>
>>> For that I would have to read the whole paper, and I am not so inclined
>>> at the
>>> moment. But if you find something to support your position, and post it
>>> here,
>>> I'll be happy to discuss it with you.
>>> [snip]
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Robin van Spaandonk
>>>
>>> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>>>
>>>
>>
>