Thanks for this answer! Peter On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote:
> From Peter Gluck’s blog > > *"Identifying the Problem is a crucial step"* > > There’s been discussion about resonance, coherence and cavity > oscillators in the context of the Hot-Cat. The related question is > whether the ceramic tube is required for some unknown reason, and if so – > can it can be optimized by geometry? Obviously, thermal stability is one > benefit of ceramics. Since Rossi has used at least three different form > factors with the Hot-Cat, and the claimed COP has gone down instead of up > - according to his own statements – he may have downplayed the issue of > resonance > (due to cavity oscillation) as being harder to control at high temperature > . > > But there could be a place for a resonant reactor design in a lower > temperature regime. One detail worth noting, in the design of any > hydrogen reactor when the goal is achieving resonance, is identifying the > kind of resonance. It would be a mistake to assume that only EM resonance is > the > answer to the problem. Phonon resonance is arguably more important in > LENR - the entire subfield of sonofusion is built on phonon resonance. > Magnetic > waves will be assumed to be a subset of phonon resonance. > > It would be ideal to match up the two– phonon (magnon) and photon > wavelengths – and arrive at a resonant standing wave design which is > mutually reinforcing. In fact, the general size of these reactors is one > of the few possible ranges where EM waves and sound waves can reasonably > share a common wavelength – and there is one candidate that stands out – 21 > cm. Larger and smaller geometries are harder to match. > > One way to think about this is by example. Let’s say we want to exploit a > known resonance level for hydrogen. The ultimate goal doesn’t need to be > fusion, necessarily, and we should assume that protons in resonance can > better achieve thermal gain in several different ways – such as through > manipulation of electron angular momentum, or the zero point field, or > sequential Lamb shift (QED), or QCD mass depletion of gluons, etc. (the > usual suspects). > > The most notable resonant wavelength for hydrogen is 21 cm- the Universe > is bathed in microwaves of this and similar frequencies – the CMB. With > this glaring fact all around us, it could be no accident that the axial > dimension of the E-Cats is in this range. Is that merely luck, or was it > planned that way? > > In the case of the Lugano device, we should be more likely to achieve EM > resonance for hydrogen if a larger diameter tube was to be implemented (say > quarter wavelength, or 5.25 cm.) The “pre-Lugano” hot cat was indeed in > this diameter range and also had a higher claimed COP. Why change? > (possible answer: going smaller to avoid runaway) > > > *http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-XuKgtxpqL9U/UYQSyPJP-OI/AAAAAAAAJYI/96mRUBJjs1w/s1600/hot-cat.JPG* > <http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-XuKgtxpqL9U/UYQSyPJP-OI/AAAAAAAAJYI/96mRUBJjs1w/s1600/hot-cat.JPG> > > This 21 cm wavelength corresponds to GHz photon radiation (1420 MHz) but > apparently > no one has seen this kind of radiation in the Lugano or other similar > experiments. > GHz radiation would promote the Lamb shift, which is one of several ways > that thermal gain could enter the system. Any competent research team > would have looked for GHz because of the negative health issues – and we > can be fairly certain none was seen or used, since at any rate, alumina > will not contain or reflect microwaves in this range. > > One of the most respected physicists to support cold fusion was Julian > Schwinger, whose name is associated with the Lamb Shift and QED. > Microwaves would be ideal to maximize a sequential Lamb shift spin-flip > reaction, in a hydrogen reactor, but curiously – have not been considered > relevant in the past, since the energy per “flip” is very low - and the > reverse reaction may not be asymmetric in a closed loop system. > > Few theorists have reasoned that a "ringing-Lamb-shift" which would be > happening at THz frequency and is asymmetric – powered by the zero point > field – is feasible, since it is a different beast from fusion – the > default assumption. However, the net energy derived spin-flipping could > be substantial - even larger than "normal" nuclear energy since there is > no dependence on the mass of reactants. Several prominent names turn up > in LENR history for past advocacy of a Lamb shift modality, instead of > fusion, but it is a definite minority view. > > In a future post, it will be shown that the same 21 cm wavelength for > hydrogen photon emission due to spin flipping can be achieved at an > ultrasonic frequency for phonons. This ultrasound would be in the 25kHz to > 50 KHz range (predicated by the speed of sound in the media). In the > simplest case, this frequency is available using SCRs… which can be seen in > many Rossi photos. Coincidental? > > All of this leads in to the question of the day for revisionist LENR > theory. If 21 cm radiation can be shown to stimulate an asymmetric Lamb > shift, can phonon (magnon) waves of the same wavelength do the same > stimulation with no photon component? Or alternatively, why not use a > steel sleeve and heat the reactor internally with low power 1420 MHz > radiation (tens of watts) looking for gain at a more modest temperature? > > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
