Bob,

I do not understand your question.  I still believe that a large magnetic field 
is interacting with the individual small NAE in a manner that results in 
positive feedback among them.  The actual manner in which this interaction 
occurs is evading me.  As Frank indicated, a steady magnetic field should not 
be able to directly reduce the Coulomb barrier and hence I am exploring the 
concept of a time changing one.  He appears to have a concept that allows for 
the generation of an extremely large magnetic field and if that field changes 
with time, then the generated electric component might be the one I seek.

Do you have a concept that effectively results in the reduction of the Coulomb 
barrier that we normally discuss?  It seems that energy can be borrowed from 
the time changing magnetic field of sufficient magnitude to reduce the net 
barrier leading to LENR activity.  Once the reaction begins, that borrowed 
energy is replaced with interest.  And, I suspect that most of the released 
energy from the reaction enhances the original field.  The net effect is a 
growing field and energy release that work together.

One interesting feature of this mechanism would be the existence of a threshold 
effect.  Until sufficient coupling among the NEA is established very little 
energy would be released.  That could explain why it is so very difficult to 
replicate systems.   It may not be too difficult to get individual sites to 
react, but unless enough become involved, the total energy is too small to 
accurately measure.

Dave


-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Cook <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Tue, Mar 25, 2014 1:58 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Electromagnetic Barrier



Dave--
 
Is your concept of coherence changing?  Frank is providing a cause for expanded 
scope (size) of coherence in my mind.  
 
Thanks Frank.
 
Bob
  
----- Original Message ----- 
  
From:   David   Roberson 
  
To: [email protected] 
  
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 10:28   AM
  
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Electromagnetic   Barrier
  


  
I understand that a steady magnetic field   can not add energy to a charged 
particle.  It can redirect the velocity   vector of that particle but can not 
directly add energy to it somewhat like   the behavior of an electron beam that 
is bent by a magnetic field so that it   moves against a fixed electric field.  
The initial energy of the electron   allows it to move uphill against the 
electric force.
  
 
  
But, if the magnetic field located at the particle is changing in   magnitude 
or direction it generates an electric field that can impart   energy.   The 
enormous fields that you mention must begin as small   fields that change in 
time to become large ones and perhaps that is when the   additional energy is 
imparted.  I like the thought of a long range effect   since that offers an 
opportunity for coupling among a multitude of individual   particles.  This 
coupling could allow for the positive feedback mechanism   that reinforces both 
the field and the LENR activity.  Both can then grow   until some limiting 
factor arises.
  
 
  
IIRC DGT does suggest that the external magnetic field changes with time   as 
their reaction varies.  The question that arises is whether or not   that rate 
of change would be able to generate a sufficient electric   component.  I find 
it interesting that nickel has a strong magnetic   interaction that may well 
contribute to the rapid field changes.  And, of   course, the threshold in LENR 
occurring around the curie temperature of nickel   must has some significance.
  
 
  
Dave
  
  
  
-----Original   Message-----
From: fznidarsic <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l   <[email protected]>
Sent: Tue, Mar 25, 2014 12:37 pm
Subject:   Re: [Vo]:Electromagnetic Barrier

  
Thats a common mistake.  We cannot reduce the Coulomb   barrier.  The static 
force fields are conserved and cannot be reduced in   a two body problem.  The 
static force field can, however, be bypassed by   a force with longer range.
The magnetic component of the strong nuclear   force is called the spin orbit 
force. It is never considered by the hot fusion   people.  In the solid cold 
fusion environment the magnetic component can   be increased by a factor to 10 
to the 39 power.  Again I am not speaking   of the electromagnetic field, I am 
speaking of the magnetic component of the   strong nuclear force.  In short 
"The constants of the motion tend toward   the electromagnetic in a Bose 
condensate that is vibrated at a dimensional   frequency of  1.094 
megahertz-meters."   


  
Frank  Z
  
  
    
The Coulomb repulsion can be reduced by magnetic attraction according     to my 
thoughts and that would also explain magnetic interactions and low     
temperature operation of LENR devices.  Should we drop the reference to     
Coulomb barrier and replace it with reference to an Electromagnetic     Barrier?
    

Dave




  
-----Original   Message-----
From: David Roberson <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l   <[email protected]>
Sent:   Tue, Mar 25, 2014 11:39 am
Subject: [Vo]:Electromagnetic Barrier

  
  
We hear so much chatter about the Coulomb   barrier and how difficult it is to 
overcome for fusion events to occur.    Perhaps we should consider it as an 
electromagnetic barrier instead.    There is plenty of reason to suspect that a 
magnetic component of force is   active along with the electric component.
  

Some in this list believe that spin coupling has a large impact upon   the rate 
of LENR activity and there may well be other magnetic interactions   associated 
with nano particles and their large local magnetic fields.  I   tend to think 
that these couplings are a key concept that needs to be   understood in detail 
if an ultimate theory is to be developed.
  

The Coulomb repulsion can be reduced by magnetic attraction according   to my 
thoughts and that would also explain magnetic interactions and low   
temperature operation of LENR devices.  Should we drop the reference to   
Coulomb barrier and replace it with reference to an Electromagnetic   Barrier?
  

Dave




Reply via email to