On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Ruby wrote:
... These heat-helium correlations do not come from only one person. To
> deny the correlation of heat-helium is essentially saying that not only is
> Melvin Miles incompetent, but so are the researchers from the numerous
> (16?) other studies conf
Fran,
You should use paragraph breaks. They would make your contributions easier
to read.
Eric
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 5:15 AM, Roarty, Francis X <
francis.x.roa...@lmco.com> wrote:
> [image: http://www.byzipp.com/gamma.png]
>
>
>
>
>
> Sorry in advance, this is a work in progress initiated
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Bob Higgins
wrote:
I stand by my remarks about the inability of his 1500V-2500V supply to be
> able to accelerate electrons or protons to 1.5-2.5 keV due to high pressure
> scattering collisions in his high density plasma.
>
An analogy I use for the discharge exp
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 4:31 PM, Bob Cook wrote:
>
> I remember that the SPAWAR experiments indicated He formed with the
> correct 24... Mev energy of a D-D fusion reaction.
>
In the SPAWAR experiments I recall ~ 10-15 MeV alphas -- I might have
missed a CR-39 paper that says the energy is more
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Has he looked for helium? That would be evidence for cold fusion. If he has
> "not detected any" because he refused to look, that proves nothing.
>
I'm pretty sure Mills isn't using a PdD system. That is the only system of
which I am aware th
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Jed Rothwell
wrote:
In other words excess heat produces significantly more than the background
> from diffusion, but much less than the atmospheric background.
>
For sure. It is not the absolute magnitude of the signal that matters (in
this case 4He), it is the
In the past, following the many statements compiled by Gary Wright of Rossi
saying that they were seeing significant amounts of copper, I have argued
in favor of a proton capture reaction in the NiH system. I argued this not
out of a strong conviction that this was the case, but out of a desire to
I wrote:
What is interesting for this particular model (photon transmission through
> 1cm of nickel) is that reaction channels (0)-(3), which are the deuteron
> capture reactions, are either not detected or barely detected (keep in mind
> there was a layer of lead shielding the E-Cat at one point)
I've had a chance to revisit the earlier model of photon transmission from
the E-Cat through various media and incorporate some new features. Now
decay half-lives and detector efficiency are factored in. Here is what I'm
seeing for 1cm of nickel:
Photons from a total of 7e+14 transitions per sec
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:09 AM, Kevin O'Malley
wrote:
*Thinking Big Is The Easy Part: My Weekend Dreaming Up The Next XPrize*
>
>
> http://www.fastcoexist.com/3030775/thinking-big-is-the-easy-part-my-weekend-dreaming-up-the-next-
> xprize
>
On E-Cat World there is a post about the Forbidden En
I wrote:
Except for deexcitation gammas arising from inelastic collisions with
> lattice sites, the fast proton will give rise to photons on the order of
> less than ~ 20 keV.
>
One exception to this is when the proton collides with another species with
sufficient energy to fuse. Then there may
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 7:09 AM, Bob Cook wrote:
How does a 6.-- Mev proton give up its energy without some gammas x-rays
> showing up?
>
When a proton ~ 10 MeV travels through a metal, it will interact with
electrons via the Coulomb interaction and, possibly, with lattice sites
through elastic
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Bob Cook wrote:
It is not to hard to imagine 2 D's or 2 H's inside a face centered cubic
> metal matrix reacting at the same time with Ni or Pd nuclei of the same
> cell they share.
>
Just an opinion, but I find it even more unlikely that d's or p's would
arrang
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 12:23 AM, wrote:
>
> In that case, why not get specific, and check what would be produced if a
> deuteron/neutron/proton were added to the starting material?
>
Yes, this is something I should do. There's enough data to make it a
little bit of a project, so it will be som
I wrote:
Yes -- I have no reason to disagree with this. I was addressing
> specifically the multiples of 2 D and 3 D that some believe have been
> identified in transmutations (i.e., Z=+4, Z=+6, Z=+8, but not Z=+2.).
>
Sorry -- that's supposed to be "M" (for mass number) rather than "Z" (for
pro
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 8:49 PM, wrote:
Bottom line: As far as nuclear reactions are concerned, I would expect D to
> produce mostly 4He, and H to produce mostly transmutation reactions.
>
Yes -- I have no reason to disagree with this. I was addressing
specifically the multiples of 2 D and 3 D
Why can't free energy companies be like other companies? I feel that the
amount of cloak and dagger and intrigue is overrepresented in this niche.
Eric
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Alain Sepeda
wrote:
it remind me the observation of Iwamura as noticed in the book of Ed
> Storms, that transmutation seems to be the fusion with an even number of
> deuteron (2-4-6), with preference to stable isotopes.
>
Ed draws the conclusion that the only way
I wrote:
About the beta-delayed gamma -- it's not clear that the 63Ni* gamma decay
> is a beta-delayed gamma in this instance (see the decay in [1]). But as
> you know beta-delayed gammas are a frequent occurrence. The half-life of
> the beta decay in this case is 100 years, so if there is beta-
t;
> I do not think the reaction of the d,p variety occurs. There are not
> 87,000 Ev gammas reported, which would be evident as you suggest. I do not
> think Ni-63 is involved in the production of Cu-63. Ni-62 removal would be
> expensive for Rossi.
>
> Bob
>
>
>
I wrote:
In a 62Ni(d,p)63Ni reaction, the 63Ni will beta- decay to 63Cu. The proton
> will have ~ 5 MeV and will excite 11 keV electrons, which can easily be
> shielded. There will be a delayed gamma emission after the beta- decay of
> Q=87 keV, however, which will not be fully shielded even by
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 6:14 PM, Bob Cook wrote:
I wonder if the new Cu is Cu-63? Rossi may be implying that Ni-62 goes to
> Cu-63, both of which are stable isotopes. Spin coupling to get rid of the
> 6.22Mev of excess mass may be the answer--there are no gammas apparently.
>
In a 62Ni(d,p)63Ni
Hi Bob,
Good comments. Replies inline.
Just to mention it again, the model is no more than a back-of-the-envelope
estimate. I'm guessing a rigorous treatment would do a lot of things
differently.
Eric
On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 2:23 AM, Bob Cook wrote:
The first reaction that produces Ni-59 w
On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 10:10 AM, H Veeder wrote:
http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/09/07/rossi-confirms-ihchinese-rd-operation/
>
Just a note to anyone from JASON who may be eavesdropping [1]. If LENR
goes bona fide live in the next few years, you may be rotated out for not
anticipating this one.
On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 8:25 AM, H Veeder wrote:
Btw, I don't think "rent seeking" is inherently bad. Everyone should be
> entitled to collect rent rather than be forced into wage labor and a basic
> income would give everybody a form of rental income.
>
I think "rent seeking" is economic-speak f
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Bob Higgins
wrote:
I posted drawings of these cross-sections. If you don't have them, I can
> post them again.
>
Yes, please, if you could.
Eric
I was curious what the numbers would look like for a range of possible
reactions in an NiH system if the only two assumptions that were made were
that nuclear reactions are the main show in NiH LENR and that somehow there
is a way to overcome Coulomb repulsion. Although I suspect this is not the
w
This is definitely an interesting argument. I'm agnostic at this point as
to whether Rossi has used a radioactive catalyst in the past. I suspect he
does not now, for the regulatory reasons you mention below.
About the H2 pressure and the mean free path of monoatomic hydrogen -- I'm
curious whet
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Bob Cook wrote:
Thus a low work function metal hydride with good magnetic properties would
> be ideal.
>
Note that an alpha or a beta emitter will also dissociate molecular
hydrogen into monoatomic hydrogen (and potentially Rydberg hydrogen at
that, which will mi
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 10:31 AM, H Veeder wrote:
someone's video response
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggN8wCWSIx4
>
3.5 minutes of effusive excitement about a not-too-distant future where one
does not need to work, followed by 1 minute of dwelling on the possible
dystopian near-term future
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
Is such a concept in the toolbox of the professionals that perform
> calorimetry? Are there any pitfalls in this idea? Is this idea an
> improvement over the demo procedures that have been done for the Ni/H
> reactors up to now?
I'm no one to giv
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 9:35 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
You still have not shown that Rossi ever reported gamma radiation in an
> operating E-Cat ! Please – put up or shut up.
>
Please read the interview.
Eric
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 9:17 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
You must be joking right?
>
>
>
> Only a fool makes a gamma measurement outside the lead.
>
Not true, even a little. There are very good reasons for taking gamma
measurements outside of lead, the primary one being to ensure that the
device can
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
> The material from 2004 is irrelevant wrt Rossi
>
Most obviously not.
> no radiation was observed at levels greater than natural radiation
> background. No radioactivity has been found also in the Nickel residual
> from the process.
>
Becau
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 7:13 PM, Bob Higgins
wrote:
Well, supper's done and I found the reference I was looking for ...
>
>- "A radio interview with Sergio Focardi, the father of 'Ni-H Cold
>Fusion'"; Radio Citta del Capo - Bologna - Italy.
>
> Excellent sources, Bob. I enjoyed reading al
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Axil Axil wrote:
http://www.umich.edu/~mctp/SciPrgPgs/events/2010/MQSS10/Talks/Littlewood_Michigan_PBL.pdf
>
Following are the rough specs of the polaritons described in these slides:
- Temperatures on the range of 0 - 16 K.
- Photon energies (of the photo
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Axil Axil wrote:
This is not correct.
>
> A polariton has a mass the is 10^-11 that of an electron. Because of this
> almost zero polariton mass, a polariton condensate are almost always
> produced at any temperature.
>
Could you point us to something credible tha
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Axil Axil wrote:
All these electron combining with proton theories violate the conservation
> of leptons. These reactions are forbidden.
>
Not if a neutrino is involved. (Not that I'm at all persuaded by the
proposed p-e-p reaction.)
Mesons in your approach prod
Three additional points to add:
* I'm still waiting for a careful writeup of Mizuno's latest NiH/NiD work.
What we've seen are some slides. It seems premature at this point to draw too
many conclusions.
* We know relatively little about nickel systems compared to palladium systems.
I assume t
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
My only excuse will be to say that if nuclear fusion ... is proved then it
> will consist of two simultaneous miracles.
Yes -- agreed.
> Yet in November, if Mizuno backtracks and sez… oops... we had a bad meter
> earlier - and there really w
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
The best explanation for lack of gammas – the only explanation needed – is
> lack of fusion.
I'm sooo tempted to collect statements from you along these lines for
future gloating. ;)
Eric
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Axil Axil wrote:
Hydrogen will most likely will preferably assume a metastable state in
> which a one dimensional crystalline form of Rydberg matter is surrounded
> by a cloud of many electrons in orbit around a long string like core of
> many protons.
>
Sound
I wrote:
Just one point of detail -- I read Va'vra as saying that if you sum all of
> the photon energies from a hydrogen atom going to DDL across a full solid
> angle, this will add up to 511 keV.
>
Looking at the 2013 paper again, that is just one of two possibilities.
One possibility is that
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 8:07 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
Another interesting possibility has come up (within the hour, actually) –
> which can be called “meta-states” of dark matter. These are accumulated
> meta-states in the sense that the 511 keV line comes not from a decay of
> any particle ...
Just a note to some of the newer Vorts who may be wondering how moderation
works in Vortex. Vortex is moderated, but only very lightly. The list
relies heavily upon the self-discipline of members to keep a courteous tone
and to moderate the amount of their own contributions. Ideally the tone of
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 12:51 PM, Jed Rothwell
wrote:
Some good quotes: after the Model T, people did not say: "There will be new
> jobs for horses we can't imagine!" There is not a rule that says, "better
> technology makes more better jobs for horses."
>
Pleasantly apocalyptic.
I like this on
c water lilies, and the other side thinks it's pixie dust, then do
> the forum rules apply to both sides? No sneering, that kind of thing? Or
> do the forum rules only apply to the unfavoured side.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Eric Walker
> wrote:
>
>&g
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Kevin O'Malley
wrote:
The topic of aliens is totally benign,
> ***I have not found that topic to be benign.
>
I'm not talking about in discussions about aliens in general, I'm talking
about discussions about them in the context of Vortex. I've seen exactly
zero
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 1:16 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:
***Then why do some Vorts say that the discussion is not for Vortex, even
> when the thread title is obviously [OT Off Topic]?
>
Just my personal view on this one. There are some off-topic discussions
that are benign and others that lead to
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 7:39 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson <
orionwo...@charter.net> wrote:
The point is, there is NO ONE on this planet that I know who doesn't
> possess a personal collection of faults for which they are trying to find a
> better way of juggling in a more elegant way.
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 3:28 AM, Jojo Iznart wrote:
It's a slow time. If something interesting occurs, I'm sure people will
> stop asking me questions and I will stop responding.
>
> You should not begrudge a few off-topic discussions. It helps while the
> time away. Besides, I am not startin
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Jojo Iznart wrote:
PS. Most of my responses are answers to queries. Carbon Dating is
> science (supposedly) and Darwinian Evolution is science (as Jed would
> claim) so what off topic flame are you referring to. Responses to
> religious questions to me have be
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Bob Higgins
wrote:
If you embed the electrodes reasonably well into the water, you may be able
> to avoid most of the error for the heat that goes into the electrodes.
>
Asking as someone who knows little about electronics, what are the hazards
of submerging the
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:47 AM, David Roberson wrote:
Lets put an end to this discussion since it is obvious that we will not
> come to a resolution that is acceptable to both of us. Everyone is
> entitled to their beliefs and that is good for science in the long run.
>
I actually don't think
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:36 PM, David Roberson wrote:
Eric, I have seen graphs of the predicted global temperatures from several
> different models and they all show a rapid increase during the questionable
> period. Not one of them indicate that a pause was conceivable.
The second statement
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 10:52 PM, David Roberson wrote:
Since the pause was 100% not predicted and instead should have been a more
> rapid rise, how much more in error could they be?
How confident are you of this assertion?
> How on earth could you or anybody else believe that they will be co
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:26 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:
I'm not all that interested in passing judgement on "the integrity of the
> majority of climate scientists". I'm interested in seeing if there's real
> science behind this constantly-changing thesis. My conclusion at this time
> is: NO. W
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 8:23 AM, Chris Zell wrote:
This doesn't mean that they need to be able to forecast tomorrow's lottery
> numbers ( in effect) but we should expect that they can create predictive
> graphs that follow emerging reality with a reasonable fit - and frankly,
> that's where the
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Jack Cole wrote:
> I can give that a try. What would you expect to see and how will we know
> if UV is emitted?
>
Be careful about fumes. I recall reading that chlorine can form some
pretty nasty compounds under the right conditions.
Eric
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Kevin O'Malley
wrote:
Eric, you don't seem to understand what the IPCC is. They are eXACTLY as
> called out -- REPRESENTATIVE of the anthropomorphic climate change thesis.
>
For the sake of argument, let's assume that it was not just selected
members of the IPP
On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 6:38 PM, David Roberson wrote:
You also probably realize that a polynomial fit to a high power order
> yields coefficients that vary depending upon the order of the polynomial
> chosen. Many combinations of coefficients will fit the input/output data
> over a restricted r
On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 12:43 PM, David Roberson wrote:
Eric, I suppose the difference between your beliefs and mine amounts to my
> expectation that the climate change scientists should be held to a high
> standard as is required of most other endeavors. You apparently are
> willing to give the
On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 12:15 AM, David Roberson wrote:
This is exactly why so many question the science. A good scientist should
> remain skeptical under these conditions and clearly the science is not
> settled as some seem to believe.
>
One doesn't need a fully worked out science to feel gr
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Bob Higgins
wrote:
Dr. Va'vra has a 2013 ArXiv paper (http://arxiv.org/pdf/1304.0833v3.pdf) -
> I think it is a fascinating fit to this thread. If someone else already
> cited this, I apologize for the duplication.
>
I had a moment to read this paper. Va'vra id
On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 8:23 AM, Ron Kita wrote:
Not sure IF this is news:
> http://phys.org/news/2014-08-scientists-splitter-ordinary-aaa-battery.html
>
This is an interesting article. It suggests nickel oxide has a relatively
low work function. I assume the water splitting occurs from electr
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 5:50 PM, CB Sites wrote:
Jed is write in my opinion between the deniers of global warming and the
> skeptic of cold fusion, in some aspects.
>
For anyone who may be new to the list, global warming is one of several
topics that perennially pop up during lulls. The most vo
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.5699.pdf
>
The paper you cite talks about the changing masses of ⍴ and A mesons under
strong magnetic fields. It does not talk about meson condensation. It
does mention some interesting points, however:
- "It is kn
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 7:45 AM, David Roberson wrote:
I personally think that the field is the net vector sum of a very large
> number of tiny sources and hence may not become as large as is suggested as
> we close in on those individual sources.
>
If we accept at face value Kim's repeating of
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 10:18 AM, David Roberson wrote:
An interesting case to speculate upon would be that the observed field is
> due to the combination of a very large multitude of individual active areas
> that are battling for supremacy. The fact that such a large net field is
> seen would
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 11:26 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
You have the word and reputation of Dr Kim, as good a researcher as exists
> in the field of LENR experimentation. When there is an explosion, how do
> you know the size of the reaction at time zero?
>
Perhaps you're referring to these slides?
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 10:55 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
There is an uncertainty of 200 microns in the origin of the bosenova
> because that reaction could occur anywhere inside the nickel foam.
I will answer my own question. There's little reason to think that a 1
Tesla field was localized to withi
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 10:54 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
DGT says that about 1 tesla is produced at 20 CMs in their reactor.
>
Yes, DGT was rumored to have said something along those lines.
> If the source of that field is localized to a few nanometers, that means
> that by the inverse square law or
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/08/fundamental-causation-mechanisms-of-lenr.html
>
> What is the issues with this line of thinking as a source of muons?
>
I am out of my element in this topic, but I will offer some feedback
nonetheless. Fi
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
He also says that a home unit will require some sort of statistical control
> approach. Developing these statistics has not been developed yet.
>
> He still has control problems.
>
If we now have self-driving cars, I do not think the problem of g
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Axil Axil wrote:
f/h and ddl may be a mistaken observation for muonionic atoms.
>
I kind of like the idea of f/H being a misidentification of muonic atoms.
I would put that in category (1), because it's definitely not f/H, and it
results in nuclear reactions. T
I wrote:
... There are many different ways to categorize possible explanations, but
> for the moment I'll put them in four categories:
>
>1. Explanations involving fusion of some kind without the catalysis of
>stable shrunken hydrogen (a.k.a. f/H, hydrinos, DDL hydrogen, etc.). ...
>
> I w
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 3:19 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
Another possibility is that there is no such thing as a field.
>
What would we do without fields? If there is no such thing, what replaces
them?
Eric
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 6:48 PM, Bob Cook wrote:
It occurred to me that the formation of a pair of DDL deuterium atoms may
> lead to the He with small releases of energy as the D molecule forms just
> before the fusion occurs.
As we wait for the TIP report (or TIP2 report, as it's sometimes bei
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:
Per Mr. Beene's request I have posted this on my google drive:
>
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8mt4mJOTGvBWjJXaWdjWTlTWGc/edit?usp=sharing
Va'vra was ahead of his time. To quote one of the last slides: "This is
conventionally explai
The signal to noise ratio has taken a nosedive. I'm sure this is just a
momentary thing, and the key individuals driving the noise will quickly
come to their senses.
I'm going to take the liberty of mixing lots of metaphors. Imagine we're
in a room at someone's home and it's at a party. The peo
I wrote:
On occasion I've looked for the Piantelli anecdote, which I read somewhere,
> but I haven't succeeded yet in tracking it down.
>
Apparently I didn't look too far. There are several references to his
using a cloud chamber. Here is a brief description from Steven Krivit
(search for "clou
On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Bob Higgins
wrote:
The problem is the noise. Noise affects the FWHM of the system and
> normally getting this noise low enough so that the FWHM is smaller than
> 1keV (to get some resolution of low keV photons) requires cooling the
> sensor to liquid nitrogen tem
I feel like Vortex would not be Vortex without the occasional religious
digression.
Eric
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 1:42 PM, wrote:
A metal is an environment where lots of charged bodies are closely packed
> together. I don't think an electron in such an environment can be truly
> seen as
> free. I.e. perhaps electrons in the conduction band actually migrate from
> one
> atom to the nex
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson <
orionwo...@charter.net> wrote:
* BLP is feeling embolden by the recent June and July SunCell
> demonstrations. While many skeptics continue to express a number of
> legitimate doubts... apparently BLP has none.
I respect your
See:
http://techcrunch.com/2014/08/14/y-combinator-and-mithril-invest-in-helion-a-nuclear-fusion-startup/
Some points to mention:
- Three years for them to get things going is considered a long time
(cf. BLP).
- They do not appear to be using d+t, and instead are using just
deuterium
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Bob Cook wrote:
As you can tell from my questions and comments I have a hard time
> understanding how an electron can become in effect heavier in an atom
> because of its circulation around a point with no evidence about the
> stability of the point itself.
T
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
However, this deep [f/H] orbital is only a few Fermi in distance from the
> nucleus. The electron is relativistic and heavy when it gets there.
>
It's interesting to note that the nuclear radius is not all that special
with regard to the orbit
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 7:11 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
BTW – it has been mentioned here before, that one way to overcome some of
> the objections to f/H is to view the reduced ground state as transitory,
> with a short but nontrivial lifetime, and with inherent asymmetry between
> the “shrinkage” an
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 3:05 PM, wrote:
However neither exist when an electron is freed from an atom, hence free
> electrons have no spin, and thus spin is not an intrinsic property of the
> electron. Prove me wrong! (please!) ;)
>
If we say that the s quantum number (aka "intrinsic spin") is co
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
Further, if the orbital electron gives up all spin momentum, it might not
> be freed but cease to exist entirely!
>
Then we have a charge conservation problem on our hands.
Eric
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 2:48 PM, wrote:
Why wouldn't the extra energy be lost again when the electron eventually
> returns
> to a higher orbital? (Since it would have to escape the strong force
> again.)
>
Electrons don't feel the strong force. (Although are affected by Coulomb
attraction.)
Er
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 1:47 PM, wrote:
The whole thing boils down to the stucture of the electron and photon. If
> the electron/photon are is described as a point particles
> no classical explanation can be given for the quantum entanglement.
>
Photons and electrons are described not as point
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 3:34 AM, Jojo Iznart wrote:
I am worried about the impending LENR technologies, especially the suncell.
>
Personally, I would not lose much sleep over the SunCell. I am hopeful,
even optimistic, however, about the possibility of a functioning LENR
system being made avai
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
A real muon may hang around for so long that it may produce a fusion
> explosion.
>
Yes -- if this thought experiment in any way models reality, perhaps you
could obtain a critical density of muons and then have a problem on your
hands (until the
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
Once the energy level of the magnetic field get up 140 MeV( the mass of the
> Meson) the meson is no longer virtual and will not decay.
>
> Less than 140 MeV, based on the energy/time uncertainty principle, the
> decay time of the virtual meson is
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Axil Axil wrote:
> In a very strong magnetic field, the virtual meson jumps out of the
> confinement box very often because the floor of the box is raised very
> high. Many mesons are produced that eventually decay to muons that catalyze
> hydrogen fusion.
>
This
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
Piantelli needs to lay out how all the conservation laws are maintained in
> his reaction.
>
It would also be nice if someone knowledgeable about hydrinos can explain
how an electron (spin=+/- 1/2) becomes a photon (spin=0) at the most
redundant
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Bob Cook wrote:
Regarding one of Dave’s questions yesterday regarding spin interactions, it
> has been my thought that orbital spin momentum can be changed into
> intrinsic spin angular momentum without any violation of spin conservation.
If you change the intri
On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
... the proton which will then constitute a normal proton again with 3
> quarks.
>
My recollection is that there are three "valence quarks" which contribute
to the charge and spin of the proton, together with a multitude of "sea
quarks" that do no
901 - 1000 of 2387 matches
Mail list logo
