Grimer wrote:
Well, "For unknown reasons, the addition of a small amount
of noble gas (such as helium, argon, or xenon) to the gas
in the bubble increases the intensity of the emitted light
dramatically."
Since the reasons are unknown one might justifiably infer
that the researchers who discovered this effect
"...were amazed to find that" the intensity of the emitted
light increased dramatically.
This suggests that the noble gas atoms are behaving as
cavity resonators for visible light in the same way as
Boot and Randall's cavities behave for microwaves.
If this explanation is correct then the reason for
the dramatic increase in the intensity of emitted light
is unknown no longer. <g>
Cheers,
Frank Grimer
Moin Frank,
Well, maybe, but probably not. At least, not with this given set of
data. The noble gases are most generally used in light generating tubes
at low atmospheres because they ionize easily enough, and then return
to their original molecular state unchanged. In other words, they are
very difficult gases to contaminate with other substances. That is why
we call them Noble Gases. If the electrons produced by the collapse of
the bubble are sufficient to cause the gas inside the bubble to ionize,
then what you are looking at is the light emitted from a straight
forward plasma reaction, and nothing more. At least, this is the most
commonly accepted explanation offered up by the current researchers, and
I find it quite plausible.
If you use water or another non conducting liquid laced with radon gas,
which is also a noble gas, and you get a higher than background neutron
count, then you are looking at a controlled, tabletop nuclear reaction.
I would not be particularly surprised or excited about this. If you
can do this with a magnetron, then you don't need the water, and you
might be getting us a little closer to understanding this concept of
beta atmosphere or whatever it is.
I have to admit not having the time to go back over your writings on
this subject, but the idea does look interesting, and to date, I haven't
seen enough discussion about the idea that would shoot it down, either.
As far as I am concerned, your flag is still waving, and I hope to
understand things better as time permits. If you really think that you
can prove or clearly explain that there is a common media between
cavitation in a liquid, and cavitation in a microwave, then I think that
this would be a great contribution to Science - one that could be
engineered to do many useful things.
Knuke
