Fran and Axil-- Maybe there are degrees of entanglement, much like quanta of energy or angular momentum in QM. The higher degrees invoke greater mass, the lower and negative levels invoke lower or negative mass.
For example, semi conductors and molecules have low entanglement, crystals somewhat higher, and subatomic particles even greater entanglement. The universe is at the bottom end of entanglement and galaxies somewhat greater, creating dark mass associated with their entanglement. Spin coupling between particles (for example, Cooper pairs) has its own degree of entanglement (and associated mass) somewhere between that of a nucleon and an atom---BEC’s yet another degree of entanglement. The mass associated with entangled entities considers the total mass of each constituent. As suggested in this thread and by others, the degree of entanglement may be inversely proportional to a change or rate of change (if time enters as a real parameter within an entangled entity) of the gravitational field intensity, with intensity being the key parameter controlling entanglement. The limit on gravitation intensity is reached at the Planck scale at the low dimensional end. (Black hole structure may involve this limit and massive particles just above that.) The effect of Li in some of the LENR reactions is to create intermediate entanglement between the degree of entanglement of nuclear and atomic structures. Thus, when the wetting of the nano Ni occurs by Li in the Rossi reactor, one would expect to see a change in mass on a macro basis that may be measurable. Since charge and magnetic effects happen, they may be involved in most entities with mass, they may be a secondary (feed back type influence) on the degree of entanglement of any entity with mass or negative mass. This may be Rossi’s way of controlling entanglement in his reactor design. All this is food for thought and experimental instrument design ideas to test for entanglement as it relates to mass. Bob Cook From: Roarty, Francis X Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2015 4:00 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Single-catalyst water splitter from Stanford produces clean-burning hydrogen 24/7 Axil, If either or both entangled particles are part of a bulk material it will be too subtle to detect because they will cancel with other pairs having opposite vectors. IMHO you need to group/orient quantities of entangled particles to accumulate a measurement detectable on our macro scale. The scale test I have been promoting for the Rossi or Mills device requires an intentional misbalance with an over sized counter weight while a battery powered reactor is operated in the weight pan [compared to a run with the reactor unpowered]. If your entanglement theory, or my ether linkage theory, is correct we should see a detectable delay in balance when the reactor is active. IOW we can group these linkages that would otherwise mostly cancel out gravitationally in different directions to instead create an easy to detect drag that exceeds the normal inertia for it’s mass. Balancing of the beam should be measurably slower when the reactor is on. Will need non ferrous scale to convince skeptics not a magnetic field effect. In think this is what Defore- et al should have been seeking with their stacked cavity papers [early 2k in Italy] and is why they measured no gravitational effects because they were performing a lower powered version of the test you describe. If your entanglement theory is correct I wonder what effect an active reactor has compared to unpowered… does inactivity act like a brake on the tether between particles limiting spooky interactions? Then an active reactor lets the entangled particles pull.. and is the “tether” analogy correct or would it be a rod able to both push and pull? Fran nal to t From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, June 26, 2015 11:50 PM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Single-catalyst water splitter from Stanford produces clean-burning hydrogen 24/7 http://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.3716v2.pdf Gravitational Dynamics From Entanglement “Thermodynamics” I reference this paper to show that there is a movement in physics to attribute gravity as an emergent property of quantum entanglement. Entangled matter may not weight the same as ordinary matter. This might be where dark matter comes from. To experimentally explore this reasoning, the E-CAT is entangled and coherent in the LENR state. Its weight should change when the LENR reaction sets in. Put a Hot-cat on a scale and check for a change in weight. It might be good for a Nobel prize, if something weird shows up. On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 7:12 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.1069 On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: My post was wrong, according to the Penrose_interpretation, Gravity maintains superposition, entanglement and coherence. On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 6:34 PM, <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote: In reply to Axil Axil's message of Thu, 25 Jun 2015 18:56:15 -0400: Hi, [snip] >Gravity delays the transition between entrangles and decoherent states. It >is this destrution of coherence that results in the arrow of time. In a BEC >time stands still. When a BEC is detroyed, time accelerates. Time is inherent in the concept of delay. This is a circular definition. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
