[Vo]:entangled proton pairs show enhanced tunneling
Why do entangled proton pairs pass through the coulomb barrier of a heavy
element nucleus with high probability in collisions with energies well
below those required to breach this barrier?
This curiosity has been observed is heavy low energy ion collision studies.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1101.1393.pdf
This letter presents evidence that (1) 2p transfer (and
not _-particle transfer) is the dominant transfer process
leading to _Z = 2 events in the reaction 16O+208Pb at
energies well below the fusion barrier, and (2) 2p transfer
is significantly enhanced compared to predictions assum-
ing the sequential transfer of uncorrelated protons, with
absolute probabilities as high as those of 1p transfer at
energies near the fusion barrier.
Measurements of transfer probabilities in various reac-
tions and at energies near the fusion barrier have there-
fore been utilized to investigate the role of pairing corre-
lations between the transferred nucleons. Pairing effects
are believed to lead to a significant enhancement of pair
and multi-pair transfer probabilities [2, 4{7]. Closely re-
lated to the phenomenon of pairing correlations is the
nuclear Josephson effect [8], which is understood as the
tunneling of nucleon pairs (i.e. nuclear Cooper-pairs)
through a time-dependent barrier at energies near but be-
low the fusion barrier. This effect is believed to be similar
to that of a supercurrent between two superconductors
separated by an insulator. An enhancement of the trans-
fer probability at sub-barrier energies is therefore com-
monly related to the tunneling of (multi-)Cooper-pairs
from one superfluid nucleus to the other [2].
NOTE: this experiment was done with both nuclei being doubly-magic with a
closed shell of protons and neutrons…just like nickel.
RE: [Vo]:entangled proton pairs show enhanced tunneling
Wow, this is a provocative paper Axil - but can it be relevant to Ni-H,
given the energies involved?
That is the $64 question. In short, do oxygen atoms accelerated to 10s of
MeV indicate that anything similar will happen when 10 million times less
energy is employed, such as in LENR?
In this paper - the beam used is almost 80 MeV which is considered low
energy in accelerator physics, but is a factor of 10^8 more than the
'thermal triggering' of Rossi in the 350C range. That is one problem of
quoting the authors mention of the phrase low energy out of context.
Surprisingly, the answer could still be yes - in the sense that QM is
probability driven as opposed to thermodynamically driven. Yet, it is not
black-and-white comparison in this case, since there is only the one paper
standing on its own. But still, enhanced tunneling of nuclear pairs is a
most intriguing hypothesis, and moreover, is more easily falsifiable in
LENR, than in hot physics.
However, another relevance to a nickel-based reactor, found in this
particular paper - where oxygen is the active reactant - could involve
oxygen pairing in nickel-oxide instead of, or in addition to, proton pairing
!
There is a double relevance, and that part too is falsifiable. But the
larger problem is that there is little indication that Rossi (or DGT) use
NiO nanometric powder (as opposed to Ni unoxidized). And Piantelli - who
is inaccurate about his pronouncements on so many issues (like argon), says
over and over oxygen in a no-no! He could NOT BE MORE WRONG!
In fact, several of us have read the soon-to-be published report - mentioned
by Brian Ahern to another group - where NiO nanopowder, which is
commercially available at 10 nm (from QSI) is extraordinarily active for
thermal gain. In fact it is the most active nanopowder ever tested in this
line of RD !
But caveat: it is far from Rossi's claimed results in terms of
watts-per-gram of reactant. And yet Piantelli, who is going sideways on many
issues, says that the reactor must be thorough purged many times to get rid
of nickel oxide! IOW - he wants to eliminate the most active ingredient.
What does it all mean? Do we see a hint of entanglement of one species
(proton pairs) bleeding over into entanglement of another (oxygen pairs)?
That is most provocative!
Side note, does that kind of double entanglement violate conservation of
miracles? g
In fact, given the implications of a QM probability field affecting a
spatial domain, it would seem at first like this kind of cross-entanglement
is conceptually possible - although to be honest, a quick googling turns up
nothing.
This is one more detail where a thorough isotopic analysis (from Sweden)
would solve many lingering issues. If nothing else, I hope that this
particular thread will convince Rossi that he can benefit from public
disclosure of this analysis ! Ask yourself this (Andrea, or Sven, or Hanno)
would you have recognized the significance of 18O if it should turns up in
your analysis?
I think not. Nor would anyone else prior to today likely notice of this
arcane detail, other than the few dozen specialist in Ivory-Towers somewhere
who have read the paper. It seems on its surface to have little relevance to
anything practical and who would have thought that paired protons tunnel far
easier than alphas?
The bottom line: None of us is as smart as all of us and it is extremely
doubtful that this important connection to Rossi/DGT/Thermacore, if it does
turn up in a thorough isotopic analysis, would even have been noticed
without direct access to this paper.
So thanks again Axil (even if you were right for the wrong reason :-))
Jones
From: Axil
Why do entangled proton pairs pass through the coulomb barrier of a heavy
element nucleus with high probability in collisions with energies well below
those required to breach this barrier?
This curiosity has been observed is heavy low energy ion collision studies.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1101.1393.pdf
This letter presents evidence that (1) 2p transfer (and
not _-particle transfer) is the dominant transfer process
leading to _Z = 2 events in the reaction 16O+208Pb at
energies well below the fusion barrier, and (2) 2p transfer
is significantly enhanced compared to predictions assum-
ing the sequential transfer of uncorrelated protons, with
absolute probabilities as high as those of 1p transfer at
energies near the fusion barrier.
Measurements of transfer probabilities in various reac-
tions and at energies near the fusion barrier have there-
fore been utilized to investigate the role of pairing corre-
lations between the transferred nucleons. Pairing effects
are believed to lead to a significant enhancement of pair
and multi-pair transfer probabilities [2, 4{7]. Closely re-
lated to the phenomenon of pairing correlations is the
nuclear Josephson effect [8], which is understood as the
tunneling of nucleon pairs (i.e. nuclear Cooper-pairs)
through a time-dependent barrier at energies near
RE: [Vo]:entangled proton pairs show enhanced tunneling
Let me address one issue that is muddled from prior posting - the significance of 18O ... (should it turn up in analysis) since the verbal description was a bit confused (my apology as I get up very early and it takes a while for the caffeine to take effect). * This is one more detail where a thorough isotopic analysis (from Sweden) would solve many lingering issues. If nothing else, I hope that this particular thread will convince Rossi that he can benefit from public disclosure of this analysis ! Ask yourself this (Andrea, or Sven, or Hanno) would you have recognized the significance of 18O if it should turns up in your analysis? OK, First of all there is no indication that Rossi uses NiO at all, so it is unlikely that 18O or 16O will be found in any analysis other than as an assumed contaminant, and even then - before either isotope could be characterized, the researcher must be aware that this is an issue and look at the oxygen isotopes specifically. The natural assumption is that any oxygen seen would be a contaminant so it would be ignored. If and when oxygen is analyzed: the natural ratio of 18O to16O is about ~2 parts per thousand, and if it were found to be significantly different in a sample of used nickel - then it could indicate one of several possible reactions. There is one reaction in particular that could leave little trace in terms of radioactive ash. Specifically - and extrapolating from the paper in the previous thread, we might find a scenario where paired oxygen ions tunnel into the nickel electron cloud, and then towards the nucleus, via the Coulomb well of the heavy 64Ni - and only one of the two oxygen nuclei gets a slingshot boost towards a point where it can take away two neutrons from the anomalously heavy nickel halo nucleus, leaving 62Ni and 18O. This is the only ash. It is not radioactive. The reaction can be endothermic on paper and still produce excess heat since the tunneling is free and mass is converted. The reason that only 64Ni would work for this scenario is negation of some of the normal Coulomb repulsion (positive charge) of the nucleus, in that the near-field would be partially shielded due to the extra neutrons (two of which are eventually shed). As mentioned, this particular isotope 64Ni is a singularity in the periodic table, having the highest percentage of excess neutron mass of any metal (using the criterion of ratio of excess mass of the isotope, compared to the mass of the most stable isotope of that element). Yes, this reaction is beyond bizarre, on the scale of things in hot physics - and the probability of it happening is remote (to the mainstream). You will not find it mentioned anywhere else. But the probability of this happening is not quite as remote as the probability of achieving many month (or even days) of robust thermal gain from an E-Cat... (not yet proved MY). Jones To answer a lingering question raised previously: No, the nucleus that is tunneling (usually protons but here we mention oxygen nuclei) does not know how to find the heavy nucleon (i.e. 64 Ni). In fact, sequential and rapid (but unsuccessful) tunneling occurs in all isotopes, all the time. Nuclear tunneling where any net gain or loss is noticed is extremely low probability normally. Electron tunneling is commonplace. The two can work together. Tunneling of both varieties is a continuous background reaction; and it has no net effect unless the reactant can occasionally get close enough for QCD probabilities to materialize due to quark alignment. This only happens with 64Ni (in this hypothesis) and no other nickel isotope, due to the excess mass singularity. attachment: winmail.dat
RE: [Vo]:entangled proton pairs show enhanced tunneling
Jones, I still share some of Piantelli's fear of oxidizing the reactants instead of oscillating back and forth between molecular and atomic forms of hydrogen like Moller and Lyne proscribe. I can understand that other endless reactions including oxygen may be possible that still harness these same changes in geometry and dispersion forces. If the reaction is clean and reversible without adversely affecting the surrounding geometry or Casimir quality factor then I can accept oxygen as beneficial to the process. The fear was that the oxides would plate out as a solid and not be able to migrate as a gas between changing values of geometry to reverse the reaction. [snip] who would have thought that paired protons tunnel far easier than alphas?[/snip] I never went so far as to suggest that hydrinos are entangled but my relativistic interpretation of Casimir effect [based on Naudts paper on the hydrino as relativistic hydrogen] did lead me to suggest that the fractional orbits were displaced on the time axis and that the columb barrier might be reduced between hydrogen with different fractional values. I suspect that the molecular bond of fractional h2 can temporarily maintain the fractional value of h2 even when the relativistic value induced by the local Ni geometry changes. This then would allow for a fractional h1 that translates instantly to reflect the local geometry to collide with a fractional h2 of a different fractional value [a temporal axis displacement]. It is this temporal displacement that I believe allowed Naudts to use math normally reserved for photons that can occupy the same state because from our perspective they occupy the same spatial coordinates only displaced on the time axis. This time axis displacement is also what I posit reduces the columb barrier where the protons displacement beach other is both spatial and temporal allowing the spatial displacement to fall much lower than normal without opposition. Regards Fran _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 9:41 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:entangled proton pairs show enhanced tunneling Wow, this is a provocative paper Axil - but can it be relevant to Ni-H, given the energies involved? That is the $64 question. In short, do oxygen atoms accelerated to 10s of MeV indicate that anything similar will happen when 10 million times less energy is employed, such as in LENR? In this paper - the beam used is almost 80 MeV which is considered low energy in accelerator physics, but is a factor of 10^8 more than the 'thermal triggering' of Rossi in the 350C range. That is one problem of quoting the authors mention of the phrase low energy out of context. Surprisingly, the answer could still be yes - in the sense that QM is probability driven as opposed to thermodynamically driven. Yet, it is not black-and-white comparison in this case, since there is only the one paper standing on its own. But still, enhanced tunneling of nuclear pairs is a most intriguing hypothesis, and moreover, is more easily falsifiable in LENR, than in hot physics. However, another relevance to a nickel-based reactor, found in this particular paper - where oxygen is the active reactant - could involve oxygen pairing in nickel-oxide instead of, or in addition to, proton pairing ! There is a double relevance, and that part too is falsifiable. But the larger problem is that there is little indication that Rossi (or DGT) use NiO nanometric powder (as opposed to Ni unoxidized). And Piantelli - who is inaccurate about his pronouncements on so many issues (like argon), says over and over oxygen in a no-no! He could NOT BE MORE WRONG! In fact, several of us have read the soon-to-be published report - mentioned by Brian Ahern to another group - where NiO nanopowder, which is commercially available at 10 nm (from QSI) is extraordinarily active for thermal gain. In fact it is the most active nanopowder ever tested in this line of RD ! But caveat: it is far from Rossi's claimed results in terms of watts-per-gram of reactant. And yet Piantelli, who is going sideways on many issues, says that the reactor must be thorough purged many times to get rid of nickel oxide! IOW - he wants to eliminate the most active ingredient. What does it all mean? Do we see a hint of entanglement of one species (proton pairs) bleeding over into entanglement of another (oxygen pairs)? That is most provocative! Side note, does that kind of double entanglement violate conservation of miracles? g In fact, given the implications of a QM probability field affecting a spatial domain, it would seem at first like this kind of cross-entanglement is conceptually possible - although to be honest, a quick googling turns up nothing. This is one more detail where a thorough isotopic analysis (from Sweden) would solve many lingering
Re: [Vo]:entangled proton pairs show enhanced tunneling
Wow, this is a provocative paper Axil - but can it be relevant to Ni-H, given the energies involved? The paper we are discussing indicates to me that superconductive processes exist even at many millions of degrees in temperature. IOW, Quantum mechanical tunneling can exist in super-hot places. This tunneling process may even exist inside the sun where it makes nuclear reactions that should not happen…proceed with great vigor. LENR may well be a kind of superconductivity, where proton pair formation and associated tunneling is a key causative agent. If tunneling through the coulomb barrier happens at extreme temperatures, then it is logical to suspect that this superconductive quantum mechanical process will become even more productive and probable as the temperatures fall. In a nutshell, quantum theory tells us that two entangled particles behave as a single physical object, no matter how far apart they are. This effect leads to quantum nonlocality. To make a long story short, it is as if quantum particles live outside space-time – and experiments confirm this. It seems to me that the ability of entangled protons to tunnel is increased in proportion as the numbers of pairs join an increasingly huge and growing macro-entangled assemblage. This does not happen at extreme temperatures but will happen at “Rossi reactor operating temperatures” This new theory informs us about how some perplexing and puzzling processes happen in a NiH reactor. In my mind, one of the important and mysterious unanswered questions in the behavior of the NiH reactor is how a NiH reactor meltdown occurs. More specifically this story may well go as follows: the increased power produced in a Ni-H reaction as the temperature increases beyond a critical limit even to and beyond the meltdown threshold may well be caused by the increase in collision speed between the given proton pair and the increasing blackbody vibrational speed of the nickel atom confined in the lattice. There may well be a large reservoir of entangled proton pairs formed by the micro powder that will cause a high temperature reaction beyond the melting point of nickel. In other words, the micro powder creates a supply of proton pairs stored in an abundant backlog to such an extended level that once ignited will cause the destruction of the powder that produced it. This example illustrates what may happen. First a billion proton pairs are formed in and around the micro-powder. In steady state operation, the Brownian motion in the nickel lattice produces a steady state fusion level in which the NiH reactor produces power at a constant rate. For some reason...say operator error, a temperature rise increases the collision rate between the proton pairs and the nickel atoms in the lattice. The reaction reinforces itself because more heat begets more collision based fusions which produce even more heat. The powder will melt, at 700C but the reaction does not depend on the powder to continue; it uses the backlog of proton pairs that have built up over time. The reaction continues up to the melting point of bulk nickel and continues until the backlog of proton pairs are reduced below the reaction threshold. So the job of the Micro powder is to produce proton pairs in abundance and not to cause the fusion reaction. This temperature based reaction will happen even when the nickel is reduced to the bulk state. In addition, the effect of the Radio frequency generator may well be to magnetically stabilize the vibrational rate of the proton pair ensemble whose constant EM frequency affects a steadying of the rate of fusion reactions thus discouraging a meltdown runaway. On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Wow, this is a provocative paper Axil - but can it be relevant to Ni-H, given the energies involved? That is the $64 question. In short, do oxygen atoms accelerated to 10s of MeV indicate that anything similar will happen when 10 million times less energy is employed, such as in LENR? In this paper - the beam used is almost 80 MeV which is considered low energy in accelerator physics, but is a factor of 10^8 more than the 'thermal triggering' of Rossi in the 350C range. That is one problem of quoting the authors mention of the phrase low energy out of context. Surprisingly, the answer could still be yes - in the sense that QM is probability driven as opposed to thermodynamically driven. Yet, it is not black-and-white comparison in this case, since there is only the one paper standing on its own. But still, enhanced tunneling of nuclear pairs is a most intriguing hypothesis, and moreover, is more easily falsifiable in LENR, than in hot physics. However, another relevance to a nickel-based reactor, found in this particular paper - where oxygen is the active reactant - could involve oxygen pairing in nickel-oxide instead of, or in addition to, proton pairing ! There is
Re: [Vo]:entangled proton pairs show enhanced tunneling
A few more items if you please… Rossi said that once his reaction was going out of control, Levi injected Nitrogen to stop the reaction. Piantelli used deuterium and later Nitrogen. I think Argon will serve this function as well. The reason these gases will stop the reaction is because they short circuit and destroy the coherence of the proton pairs. Also, this is the reason why DGT must flush the hydrogen envelop periodically. Nitrogen, oxygen, argon and other trace amount of gases will eventually poison the reaction by suppressing the proton pair formation process. In the DGT maintenance procedure, the powder also must be cleaned by vacuum cleaned of trace gases regularly to keep the powder fresh in terms of quantum mechanical proton pair coherence formation capability. On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Wow, this is a provocative paper Axil - but can it be relevant to Ni-H, given the energies involved? The paper we are discussing indicates to me that superconductive processes exist even at many millions of degrees in temperature. IOW, Quantum mechanical tunneling can exist in super-hot places. This tunneling process may even exist inside the sun where it makes nuclear reactions that should not happen…proceed with great vigor. LENR may well be a kind of superconductivity, where proton pair formation and associated tunneling is a key causative agent. If tunneling through the coulomb barrier happens at extreme temperatures, then it is logical to suspect that this superconductive quantum mechanical process will become even more productive and probable as the temperatures fall. In a nutshell, quantum theory tells us that two entangled particles behave as a single physical object, no matter how far apart they are. This effect leads to quantum nonlocality. To make a long story short, it is as if quantum particles live outside space-time – and experiments confirm this. It seems to me that the ability of entangled protons to tunnel is increased in proportion as the numbers of pairs join an increasingly huge and growing macro-entangled assemblage. This does not happen at extreme temperatures but will happen at “Rossi reactor operating temperatures” This new theory informs us about how some perplexing and puzzling processes happen in a NiH reactor. In my mind, one of the important and mysterious unanswered questions in the behavior of the NiH reactor is how a NiH reactor meltdown occurs. More specifically this story may well go as follows: the increased power produced in a Ni-H reaction as the temperature increases beyond a critical limit even to and beyond the meltdown threshold may well be caused by the increase in collision speed between the given proton pair and the increasing blackbody vibrational speed of the nickel atom confined in the lattice. There may well be a large reservoir of entangled proton pairs formed by the micro powder that will cause a high temperature reaction beyond the melting point of nickel. In other words, the micro powder creates a supply of proton pairs stored in an abundant backlog to such an extended level that once ignited will cause the destruction of the powder that produced it. This example illustrates what may happen. First a billion proton pairs are formed in and around the micro-powder. In steady state operation, the Brownian motion in the nickel lattice produces a steady state fusion level in which the NiH reactor produces power at a constant rate. For some reason...say operator error, a temperature rise increases the collision rate between the proton pairs and the nickel atoms in the lattice. The reaction reinforces itself because more heat begets more collision based fusions which produce even more heat. The powder will melt, at 700C but the reaction does not depend on the powder to continue; it uses the backlog of proton pairs that have built up over time. The reaction continues up to the melting point of bulk nickel and continues until the backlog of proton pairs are reduced below the reaction threshold. So the job of the Micro powder is to produce proton pairs in abundance and not to cause the fusion reaction. This temperature based reaction will happen even when the nickel is reduced to the bulk state. In addition, the effect of the Radio frequency generator may well be to magnetically stabilize the vibrational rate of the proton pair ensemble whose constant EM frequency affects a steadying of the rate of fusion reactions thus discouraging a meltdown runaway. On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Wow, this is a provocative paper Axil - but can it be relevant to Ni-H, given the energies involved? That is the $64 question. In short, do oxygen atoms accelerated to 10s of MeV indicate that anything similar will happen when 10 million times less energy is employed, such
Re: [Vo]:entangled proton pairs show enhanced tunneling
How would you explain the double pulse in the DGT video? T
Re: [Vo]:entangled proton pairs show enhanced tunneling
In the context of the theory we are discussing and as a speculation, the temperature of the proton pairs is directly proportional to the rate of fusion with nickel. Accordingly, the temperature (Brownian vibration frequency) of the proton pairs can be adjusted using an increased (higher) frequency output from the frequency generator. An upward adjustment of this frequency will produce an increased probability of tunneling and an associated increase in the fusion rate. The purpose of this DGT experiment may well be to see how responsively the NiH reaction can follow adjustments in the frequency generators output in terms of increased frequency output. This is important to quantify as it is an important input to the computerized control system software setup. On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: How would you explain the double pulse in the DGT video? T
Re: [Vo]:entangled proton pairs show enhanced tunneling
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The purpose of this DGT experiment may well be to see how responsively the NiH reaction can follow adjustments in the frequency generators output in terms of increased frequency output. But, they claim they use no RFG and none was evident in the video. T
Re: [Vo]:entangled proton pairs show enhanced tunneling
Some excitant caused a temperature spike, and a temperature based excitation would be very gradual and not quenched. This leads to the assumption that the excitant is fast acting an easily quenched; one that can be turned off and on quickly. The excitant most probably is a electrical based one, magnetic, electrostatic, spark discharge, photonic or the like. I still think that the FR is a possibility. What one person in an organization said yesterday does not apply to what another one may be doing today. On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The purpose of this DGT experiment may well be to see how responsively the NiH reaction can follow adjustments in the frequency generators output in terms of increased frequency output. But, they claim they use no RFG and none was evident in the video. T
