At 8:13 AM 2/15/5, Frederick Sparber wrote:
>Horace Heffner wrote:
[snip]
>>For example, if an
>> electron can be confined to a 1 angstrom range then there is an
>uncertainty
>> of 1.06x10^-24 kg-m/s on the momentum and thus 6.1x10^-19 J or 3.8 eV
>> uncertainty on energy.
>>
>Does this mean that Bridgman's high pressure squeezing of water/ice dumped
>energy,
>then ZPE "pumped in enough energy to allow it to "explode" when the
>pressure was released?
I don't think this kind of brief squeezing and release indicates or creates
a substantial ou effect, but may cause some effect. You can apply the
supplied formulas and, based on time of compression and a sampling rate
(collision rate) compute the ZPF energy released. Compression of electrons
should be met with an increasing and opposing force due to higher kinetic
energy in the compressed waveform. This is what keeps matter from
collapsing. They key to obtaining free energy from the ZPF is *repeated
sampling* of the waveform while it remains compressed/confined. If, by
sampling, energy can be drawn off the particle (electron) according to the
expected (mean) kinetic energy distribution, which is elevated by ZPE, then
energy is obtained from nowhere because the ZPF will *maintain* that
elevated mean kinetic energy. Simply releasing the pressure does not do
much in the way of obatinaing free energy. A lattice designed expressly
for maintaining pressure on free electrons to less than an angstrom seems
to me to be the ticket to a free ride. The sampling is accomplished
automatically by phonons.
>>
>> However, since delta KE = (delta m) * c^2
>>
>> delta m = h^2 /[(8 Pi^2 m c^2) (delta x)^2]
>>
>> so incremental mass due to ZPE increases as the inverse square of the
>> confinement radius.
>>
>Does that square with the mass defect binding energy release of nucleons,
>or quarks in a proton, as well as the atomic binding energy in molecules?
This of course is not a trivial question to answer. Uncertainty does have
an effect on binding energy because the energy involved in the ZPF
maintained momentum uncertainty sustains a very high heat in the nucleus,
and, as shown above, that heat has a corresponding mass. This little mass
offset does indeed somewhat affect the curve of binding energy. There is
an increase of mass as well a decrease in apparent (mean) biding energy due
to the ZPF supplied kinetic energy of the nuclear constituants. The larger
the nucleus the less this apprent increase in mass and the less the ZPF
sustained kinetic energy (heat). This is due to the fact the atomic radius
R can be approximated by:
R = (1.2x10^-15 m)*A^(1/3)
where A is the atomic mass number. The constant (1.2x10^-15 m) is rough,
and is given by some sources as (1.4x10^-15 m). We thus see the more
massive the nucleaus the more room it has and thus the lower the ZPF
supplied heat. It will be interesting to see if this inverse cube
relationship or nuclear heat to atomic radius is sustained by experiment.
(See article appended below.) This relationsip implies that deuterium has
the highest ZPF sustained heat, and thus the largest probability of
tunneling long distances. However, deuterium is not a little sphere but
rather dumbell shaped, so the above relation falls down when it comes to
deuterium. Still, deuterium should have a wider standard deviation of
radius due to ZPF supplied heat due to the complexities of flexible dumbell
mechanics.
It is also of interest that ZPF supplied nuclear heat does not follow
Steffan-Boltzmann law. No radiation occurs unless the nucleus is "sampled"
- by interaction with another particle (or unless it is unstable, in which
case its half-life is affected by the nuclear temperature. However, this
effect is already rolled in to the measured half-lives, as is the mass
asscoiated with nuclear heat already rolled into the measured nuclear
mass.)
Gaining free energy from the ZPF via nuclei it is a matter of causing as
many nuclear collisions as possible. Possibly nuclei can be stimulated to
emit thermal gammas by photon stimulation as well. From this discussion
one has to wonder if neutron stars radiate gammas largely due to energy
extracted from the ZPF.
>
>Or the 1/R^4 attractive force between the plates in the Casimir Effect?
This pressure effect is not directly related to the effect to which I
refer. The Casimir effect is caused by ZPF virtual photon pressure casued
by exclusion of some of the ZPF from a cavity, while the effect I suggest
is due to the maintenance of quantum uncertainty with regard to momentum
and postition. Both are suggested by some (e.g. Puthoff et al) to be
caused by the ZPF, but that is the extent of the relationship.
>
>http://www.edpsciences.org/articles/epl/abs/1999/08/46222/46222.html
>
>"Inclusions embedded in fluctuating fluid membranes have been shown to
>experience membrane mediated forces decaying as 1/R4. Modeling the
>inclusions as local constraints on the membrane curvature tensor, we show
>that the presence of external torques (mechanical or field-induced)
>strongly enhances and increases the range of the interactions. Repulsive
>mean-field contributions and attractive fluctuation (Casimir) contributions
>of range 1/R2 or longer are found, which may combine to yield equilibrium
>distances."
I don't see that the above is related to the suggested sustained effect of
continuous energy production while maintaining a static state.
Following is an interesting article about the actual measurement of nuclear
heat:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE
>The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News
>Number 443 August 16, 1999 by Phillip F. Schewe and Ben
>Stein
>
>NUCLEAR THERMOMETER. How hot is it inside the nucleus
>of a dysprosium atom (element 62, abbreviated Dy)? Temperature
>is a statistical concept that normally applies to an ensemble of
>many particles, such as air molecules or a gas of atoms kept in a
>bottle. Inside a heavy nucleus, swarming with protons and
>neutrons (collectively called nucleons) it's not so easy to define
>temperature, owing to the many pairing and other inter-nucleon
>interactions that take place, but it can be done. The nuclear
>environment can be sampled by colliding nuclei together and then
>carefully measuring the photons that fly out: high energy gamma
>rays, in this case, rather than the visible and infrared photons that
>come out of heated-up atomic gases. In this way, physicists at the
>University of Oslo have deduced the temperature inside a Dy
>nucleus (in effect, a gas of 162 nucleons) to be 6 billion K. It can
>be said, therefore, that even in winter parts of Norway (very small
>parts) remain quite warm. This is the first time a nuclear
>temperature has been measured strictly on the basis of the spectrum
>of gammas emitted. (E. Melby et al., Physical Review Letters,
>tent. 30 August 1999; contact Magne Guttormsen,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED], 011-47-2285-6460.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Regards,
Horace Heffner
