At 09:20 am 19/08/2005 +0200, Knuke wrote:
>Grimer wrote:
>
>> Now since the bubble is a very high pF (low Beta-
>> atmosphere pressure) cavity, it occurred to me that
>> one could see it as miniature cavity magnetron.
>>
>> Th combination of its small size and it low B-a
>> pressure [high tension if one will insist on using
>> an anthropomorphic datum ;-) ] suggests that it will
>> be transmitting EM radiation at very short wave
>> lengths and high frequencies.
> It is not a bad suggestion, Frank. This crossed my mind many years ago
> while looking at a magnetron diagram. The main reason I haven't offered
> it up myself was because I am still trying to conceptualize the
> differences in the media.
Now there you have put your finger on the real problem, i.e
the difficulty of conceptualizing the difference in the media.
> Walter Bauke is the father of an old friend of mine, Lee Bauke. Walter
> worked for the lab in Berlin that developed the magnetron. After being
> caught up and spit out of the blender known as World War 2, Walter, a
> young German engineer, found himself married to an English woman, and
> was wanted by the governments of the various winning countries for his
> knowledge of the magnetron. He ran. His tale of the events following
> the war was pretty funny considering the circumstances, but to keep this
> short, Walter ended up spending the latter part of his career working
> for NASA in New Mexico.
>
> Walter tried explaining to me how a magnetron worked in Seattle, but I
> wasn't getting it until I saw a diagram. I looked at it, and announced,
> "This Is Cavitating!". He said "Exactly!" But cavitating what, neither
> one of us could explain very well. My machine cavitates liquids. His
> cavitates free electrons in air. What is the connection? Is there a
> connection?
Look at it this way. View the air molecules (the Alpha-atmosphere [A-a])
as dissolved in the Beta-atmosphere [B-a] which consists of particles of
neutral mass and neutral charge. Thus A-a pressure (15 psi) is only a tiny
fraction of the B-a pressure (100,000 psi, say).
There is plenty of evidence for the existence of the Beta-atmosphere
providing one is prepared to slaughter a few sacred cows. 8-)
The magnetron is not cavitating the air [A-a], it is cavitating the much
stiffer Beta-atmosphere. Now the equation of state for water,
PV^6 = a constant (see http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/strange.html)
gives some feeling for the order of things we are dealing with.
In fact the water used in sonoluminescence may be considered as a
physical manifestation of the very stiff Beta-atmosphere. It is
significant that in our high pressure tests on concrete we used water
and air pressures to successfully simulate increases in Beta-atmosphere
pressure.
If you can get your head around all that then you can see that the medium
being cavitated in the magnetron ain't a whole lot different from the
medium being cavitated in the sonoluminescence apparatus. It's just that.
for us, one medium is very tangible and the other ain't.
>My feeling is that the liquid cavitation phenomena do produce enough
>free electrons through friction at the final moments of bubble collapse
>that a mini-plasma forms on the inside of the bubble walls. This is
>facilitated when a fluid is used that has a high dielectric constant.
>The combination of these circumstances, (high vacuum inside the bubble,
But your concept of a vacuum fizzles out at -15 psi, i.e. at the exhaustion
of Alpha-atmosphere partial pressure, whereas my concept of a vacuum carries
on to - -100,000 psi, say. That is the crucial difference.
>plenty of free electrons, rapidly decreasing dimensions of the bubble,
>and possible microwaving) are what is driving the various chemical and
>nuclear reactions that are being observed.
>
>It could well be that similar results could be made possible in a gas
>using a magnetron ...
- or even the Beta-atmosphere using a magnetron, eh! ;-) -
> ... Has anyone tried microwaving Radon, for example, and
> taking a neutron count? Could the dimensions of the magnetron cavities
> be optimized for various gases as compared to the magnetrons we have in
> microwave ovens? They don't look all that difficult to build, and it
> certainly seems worth a try considering the price tag of ITER.
Unfortunately, a rather large Gestalt switch is needed before anyone could
visualize the relevance of such experiments. Still, you seem to have caught
a glimmer of luminescence 8-) - so maybe there's hope yet.
Cheers,
Frank Grimer
