On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Edmund Storms <[email protected]>wrote:
> > On May 27, 2013, at 12:17 AM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > > > On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 10:30 AM, Edmund Storms <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> On May 24, 2013, at 10:38 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: >> >> >> >> >> The process you have described has the characteristics of >> a ratchet. Curiously, Jones used the ratchet metaphor in another post where >> he characterised the effect of modulating the input on the cell. >> >> >> Yes Harry, this can be called a ratchet. All kinds of ratchets exist in >> Nature. The challenge is to find the cause. In this case, the nuclei have >> to communicate before they have fused into a single nuclei. The form of >> htat communication is unknown, but very important. Once discovered, this >> will get someone the Nobel prize. >> >> Imagine the following sequence. The nuclei are held apart by an electron >> bond, which is normally the case. Once formed, this structure starts to >> resonate so that the two nuclei get periodically closer together. As they >> approach each other, information is exchanged between the nuclei that tells >> them they have too much mass -energy for being this close. After all, if >> they were in contact, the excess mass-energy would be 24 MeV if the nuclei >> were deuterons. But they are not in contact yet, so that the excess >> mass-energy is less than the maximum. Nevertheless, this excess must be >> dissipated, which each nuclei does by emitting a photon having 1/2 of the >> excess energy for the distance achieved. After the photons are emitted, the >> resonance moves the two nuclei apart, but this time not as far as >> previously the case. The next resonance cycle again brings the nuclei >> close, but this time they come closer than before, again with emission of >> two photons. This cycle repeats until all energy has been dissipated and >> the two nuclei are in contact. The intervening electron, that was necessary >> to the process, is sucked into the final nucleus. Because very little >> energy is released by entry of the electron, the neutrino, if it is emitted >> at all, has very little energy available to carry away. >> >> This process, I suggest, is the unique and previously unknown phenomenon >> that CF has revealed. >> >> > > > Ed, > Typically we associate quantization with attractive forces as is the case > with an electron and a proton in a hydrogen atom, but your system involves > quantization with repulsive forces. > > > Like charges repel and unlike charges attract. Quantization is always a > balance between attraction and repulsion. Consequently, I do not understand > your point. > > In a hydrogen atom quantisation is present but there is only the attraction between unlike charges, i.e. a electron and a proton. So as a general rule quantisation does not require a balance between attraction and repulsion. > Resonance occurs when an object can alternate between between attraction > and repulsion. This combination results in forces that can move an object > between these two extremes as long as energy is supplied. > > Yes, but the attractive forces are the bonds between the Pd or Ni atoms and the repulsive forces between the hydrogen nuclei and the Pd or Ni nuclei. The bonds between the atoms allow the big nuclei to coral hydrogen nuclei by mutual repulsion. The presence of an electron inside the coral acts a site of least repulsion where hydrogen nuclei are most likely to converge as they are gradually brought together through emission of a photon and resonance with the surrounding web of big nuclei. > > If pushing an electron and proton apart can happen in steps through the > absorption of photons, I guess it follows that pushing together of > protons can happen in steps through the emission of photons. > > > Your description is not correct. Photon emission only occurs when the > electron RETURNS to its original energy level. > > I said If pushing an electron and proton apart can happen in steps through the *absorption* of photons, I guess it follows that pushing together of protons can happen in steps through the emission of photons. > I'm not suggesting the electron has an role in emitting a photon. I'm > proposing that a photon is emitted FROM THE NUCLEUS when two nuclei get too > close to each other. Nuclei can not normally get this close. Consequently, > the process is not normally possible. The conditions in the NAE make this > possible. > > I think the electron does play a role. It serves to discharge a build of a quantum of electrostatic energy that exists between the nuclei. Since the state of repulsion is quantized the nuclei stay at that distance until the next vibration from the matrix pushes them closer together. > However, in the former situation "the pushing apart" is the effect but > the absorption of the photons is the cause, whereas in the latter situation > the pushing together is the cause, and the emission of photons is > effect....or is it? ;-) > > > The protons try to get close, but this is not possible because of the > Coulomb barrier. Nevertheless, at a critical distance, they discover that > if they gave off a little energy they could get closer. This is like an > explosive suddenly discovering that if it rearranged the atoms, it could > give off energy. In the case of the protons, the resonance process > intervenes and stops the energy release before it can be complete. As a > result, only a photon having low energy can be released. But then resonance > again brings the two protons close and another photon is emitted from each > proton. This process repeats until all energy is removed and the final > nucleus is formed. > As I suggested above I think the electron does play a role in the emission of the photon, and it explains how it is possible for the two nuclei to "overcome" the coulomb barrier. What do you think? Harry > > Ed Storms > > > If it is the cause, then the emission of photons serves to pull the > protons together. > > Harry > PS. Wikipedia says the fractional quantum hall effect also involves > quantized states of repulsion although they are between electrons rather > than protons and deuterons. > > > > > > >
