On Tuesday Jones said[snip] The zero-point field could potentially supply mass-equivalence to a chemical reaction in a number of forms, including your favorite: spin energy[/snip] In a Puthoff sense physical mater only persists because of Zero point spin energy/Aether, which is rolled into our laws of physics and explains the periodic table. These anomalies only occur when certain conductive materials have certain confined geometries when loaded with certain gases. These occurrences are in conflict with the isotropy which will try to turn or close the breach such that isotropy is restored.
I think Axil’s post regarding grapheme is also related to this – where water permeates grapheme while hydrogen and oxygen can not. Water also flows more rapidly thru carbon nano tubes of the appropriate dimensions than can be explained making it of interest for desalination. The water molecule changes shape and IMHO becomes an engine when confined that harness HUP to drive the molecule thru the nano tube and similarily a single layer of water can slide between layers of graphene. Fran From: Jones Beene [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2015 11:27 AM To: [email protected] Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Right-on AGP Bob, Simply stated – we can suggest that we could be seeing a unique chemical reaction which gives more energy in formation than it requires to decompose back to the original reactants. Standard textbooks says NO WAY. Gibbs free energy is balanced. Nevertheless, if there was to be found such a reaction, and Parkhomov could provide the evidence, then it would still require the equivalent of mass loss. The zero-point field could potentially supply mass-equivalence to a chemical reaction in a number of forms, including your favorite: spin energy. Another way is ground state redundancy, which is also spin – in the form of angular momentum. From: Bob Cook To show my ignorance, what's a Gibbs energy vector? Can it point into negative energy? Zero point? I am not sure of all your inferences. A side note which should be mentioned re: Mark’s listing of citations, given the extreme energetics of lithium hydride… is whether we are looking at a subset of violation of parity. Or maybe it is the superset. A “near miracle” explanation for the Parkhomov anomaly can be called “asymmetric chemistry.” It involves a net energy deficit between thermal decomposition compared to the heat of formation. There could exist a small gap which then is cumulative via a serial process for net gain. Except for the Lamb shift, this kind of asymmetry is almost unknown in physics. The ultimate source of gain would be zero point. The alternative “miracle explanation” for gain, of course … is nuclear fusion, in the guise of LENR. BUT… if we want to talk about “conservation of miracles” the nuclear explanation requires 3 miracles to explain the Parkhomov effect. 1) Overcoming the coulomb barrier 2) Complete avoidance of gamma rays or bremsstrahlung 3) Complete avoidance of radioactive ash While Gibbs asymmetry, as we can call it - requires something less than a miracle, since it is hinted at already. Until 1947, physics assumed that all forces of nature were completely symmetric and did not distinguish between right and left, image and mirror-image or between Gibbs energy vectors. The discovery of violation of parity in 1956 was more than a sensation, it was a shocker since it went beyond QM: as the Lamb shift a decade earlier was both minimal and quantum. Both imply that the universe displays handedness, or chirality, and this is fundamentally asymmetric. “Enantioselective catalysis” took that a step further into thermodynamics … and now hydride chemistry could change everything that we assume about the necessity of symmetry in nature… and at high probability. From: Mark Jurich [4] The Thermal Decomposition of Lithium Aluminum Hydride, Block & Gray (1964) http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/ic50025a009 Page 1 –> http://pubs.acs.org/appl/literatum/publisher/achs/journals/content/inocaj/1965/inocaj.1965.4.issue-3/ic50025a009/production/ic50025a009.fp.png_v03 Page 2 –> http://www.tempid.altervista.org/Page2.png Here are my references, in chronological order: [1] The thermal decomposition of lithium aluminum hydride, Garner & Haycock (1951) http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/royprsa/211/1106/335.full.pdf [2] PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION OF LITHIUM HYDRIDE AS A HIGH-TEMPERATURE INTERNAL COOLANT, Modisette (1957) http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/reports/1957/naca-rm-l57f12a.pdf [3] INVESTIGATION OF LITHIUM HYDRIDE AND MAGNESIUM AS HIGH-TEMPERATURE INTERNAL COOLANTS WITH SEVERAL SKIN MATERIALS, Modisette (1958) http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc53069/m2/1/high_res_d/19660024045.pdf [4] The Thermal Decomposition of Lithium Aluminum Hydride, Block & Gray (1964) http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/ic50025a009 [5] Desorption of LiAlH4 with Ti- and V-based additives, Blanchard, Brinks, Hauback & Norby (2004) http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921510703005415 [6] Hydrogen, lithium, and lithium hydride production, US 20130047789 A1 (2013) http://www.google.com/patents/US20130047789 Notes - [1] is the classic paper (1951) everyone seems to refer to. - [2] is prelim of [3], with slightly different content, describing the reversible LiH decomposition reaction - [4] if this isn’t referenced in any paper regarding LiAlH4 Thermal Decomposition, the paper is suspect (1964, 2 pages, but unfortunately behind a pay wall, maybe if someone searches hard enough, they’ll find it; I’ll look after I post this. Has DSC Plots, breaking down the H2 Evolution at various temps, but at standard pressures) - [5] Behind a pay wall, but what you see on the page is good enough... The do NOT reference [4]! - [6] Some nice Vapor Pressure curves in here! - I also came across this book via the Internet (as well as Axil), but I do not have it (looks very useful): http://www.bookmantraa.com/thermophysical-properties-lithium-hydride-deuteride-tritide-their-solutions-with-lithium-book-72683.html
