Well Jones, I don't want to debate the possibility of "Excitronics", but your use of the Szpak paper is not the best evidence. They made two errors. They claimed the aluminum resulted from transmutation and they claimed that the deposited morphology resulted from an applied external electric field. I addressed the first earlier. In the second case, the applied field could have only had an indirect effect. The electrolyte is a good conductor. An external electric field can not penetrate a conductor. At the very least, the ions would follow the lines of electropotential in such a way as to neutralize the gradient. This would cause a change in convection currents within the cell and this would cause fluid to pass across the deposited surface. This change in fluid flow is the cause of the change in morphology. Simple mechanical stirring would have produced the same effect. In addition, the type of crystal growth depends on applied current and the ion concentration. Several different types of deposit are known and can be easily made by changing the "normal" conditions. I see nothing in this work that is anomalous or new.
Regards, Ed Jones Beene wrote: > Ref the recent paper: > > http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/SzpakSprecursors.pdf > > Recently (to what cannot be described as overwhelming > fanfare), I tried to introduce the concept of "Excitronics." > This is a concept being tossed around in other fields, which > the open-minded observer could think of as a possible "key" > to the type of LENR where BEC-like "condensation" occurs - > resulting eventually in nuclear reactions. These would most > likely be the kind of reactions where you get a lot of > transmutation but little excess energy. A good example may > be the Szpak paper, which fortunately even comes with some > *nice images* of excitons (see, I wasn't really pulling your > leg after all). > > When very high current density is captured in a small > effective circuit, electrons start to act collectively, and > form what can be called "an electron gas" with strange and > sometimes emergent properties, since many similar bosons can > also begin to act as if they "were one" under high pressure > (substituting for cold temperature), besides just the > electrons - IOW as if they were a BEC-like "condensate". > Thus, excitronics is similar to a QM effect but not of the > low-probability variety, which is normal for QM. > > >From the Szpak paper: > "This is illustrated in a series of SEM photographs taken > from various runs. In the absence of an electric field, the > electrode structure consists of globules, 3 - 7 microns in > diameter, arranged in short columns [looking somewhat like > grape clusters] Each of the individual globules is an > aggregate of much smaller, almost spherical units, having a > diameter in a sub-micron range. This structure is uniform > throughout the electrode." > > Often there is a preferred "size" for the excitronic circuit > structure, and often that size will coincide with what is > known as a "particulate" of the metal or alloy through which > the electrons would normally travel. For this experiment > the 3-7 micron grape-like structures which you see in Figure > 2.a)" the reference morphology" would be the Pd exciton > "particulate," but these excitons are also composed of > smaller nanoparticles. It is not stated what the ratio is > but I suspect that the particulate (or phonon) is > icosohedral - and may depend on the cross-interaction with > the nested nanoparticles. > > Perhaps the secret to why palladium works a matrix doe LENR > and not say, platinum, could be related to this geometric > ordering more so than due to any other property of the > metals. This gives hope that many alloys can be tailored to > work by adjusting their phonon structure and nested > nanostructure. > > Szpak used a strong electric field to get these results but > I would bet a dollar to a donut hole that *much better* > results would have come from using terahertz irradiation > instead of an electric field - which cannot be very > discriminating. > > This is a very important point. Exctitons are a derivative > of a precise geometric size and micro-structure, and might > have become a high temperature superconductor in other > parameters. If the same field intensity were to have been > created by a terahertz irradiation source, the results could > have been much more dramatic, IMHO. > > Many of these particulates share a common wavelength - lets > say the average diameter is >5 microns and the average > circumference is ~15 microns. Perhaps a third of all the > "grapes" will be close enough to become excitons. When we > make this 15 micron wavelength "coherent", such as by > temperature regulation and by an identical phase-lock in > applied frequency, then... voila: resonance - often leading > to local superconductivity around the particulate - is > poised to become an "emergent" property of the imposed > coherence. BTW the "effective" electric field of coherent > terahertz light could easily reach a billion watts even with > a fairly broad focal point. > > This is the cross-over point and shared characteristic > between LENR and HTSC (high temperature superconductivity). > Once that 15 micron particulate becomes locally > superconductive the inherent magnetic field will soar to > probably 10-15 tesla, and that is in addition to the already > high internal effective pressure due to overpotential and > high loading. > > Yes, this is too "far-out" and hypothetical for many > researchers to even consider. And I haven't even yet > broached the subject of all that electronium which could be > within the nano-particle itself ;-) So all I can say at > this point is that my hope is that Szpak et al. will at > least have a look into the possibility of terahertz > irradiation... (and I hope they observe the results from an > adjoing bunker...) > > Jones
