On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Edmund Storms <[email protected]>wrote:
> Kevin, having given this more thought, if you want to apply the BEC > concept to the hydroton that I propose is the active structure in LENR, > I'm listening. We all agree that a method must be found to release > mass-energy without producing energetic particles or energetic radiation. > To do this, the D nuclei must form a relationship within a structure > (cluster) that is unique. Perhaps the BEC has the required properties, but > this is not obvious based on the arguments made so far. > ***Sounds good, other than the previously mentioned fact that I probably won't understand your theory. I did not think to apply the BEC concept to the hydroton because I'm not that familiar with the hydroton. I gather I'll need to spend that 100 hours on coming up to speed on your theory. We all agree that a method must be found to release mass-energy without producing energetic particles or energetic radiation. ***I see that Axil Axil found the Phonon reference for the absorption of nuclear emissions. It would seem that your Hydroton theory competes with that. Since this is all above my paygrade, perhaps it makes sense for Vortex to invite those authors of the phonon absorption thing to engage with you in a discussion here, so we could all learn? To do this, the D nuclei must form a relationship within a structure (cluster) that is unique. ***Why? Perhaps the BEC has the required properties, but this is not obvious based on the arguments made so far. ***I think it becomes more obvious when we see that KP Sinha used laser cooling to generate excess heat in his LENR environment. So where do we stand? We have YE Kim's theory that Deuteron BECs can form at higher temps than absolute zero. There is corresponding support for this position in the current paper being discussed where BECs were formed at higher temps. We have laser cooling to generate an active LENR environment as reported by KP Sinha and probably others. But KP Sinha doesn't seem to suggest that he formed a BEC, he generates an entirely different theory. And then we have the phonon absorption theory to account for the lack of emissions. That's basically 3 theories conglomerated into one. Your theory is more elegant in that it is only one theory to account for overcoming the Coulomb Barrier and then accounting for the reduced emissions. The trick to settling on the better theory is to look through experiments that might have already generated results that have bearing on these theories. Of course, that's the poor man's approach to settling it, because the real scientific approach is to test directly both theories in LENR environments with top notch personnel. Unfortunately, the current state of LENR is that we're the Wright brothers with garages, and Langley is the dude with all the money & top notch personnel. We can all take heart in noting who won that engagement. Again, it's above my pay grade but this current BEC experiment counts towards one side more than the other.
