The thought occurs - can we not redefine ferromagnetism (especially ferromagnetism in ferrites and rare earths) in such a way that it becomes a localized version of HTSC? (localized around the Bloch wall or magnetic domain) After all, ferromagnetism is a property of a materials crystalline structure and microscopic organization, in the context of its valence electrons.
I started to post on the subject of High Temperature Superconductivity (HTSC) in the context of LENR, only to find an excellent and nearly complete article had already been written on the subject, focused on Widom-Larsen, but with a couple of missing pieces. This seems like an excellent blog to me - from a multi-talented observer of all thing on the cutting edge named EM Smith. (which could be a pseudonym). <https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2015/05/24/widom-larsen-superconducting-hydri des-and-directed-speculation/> https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2015/05/24/widom-larsen-superconducting-hydrid es-and-directed-speculation/ Anyway, the details which would make this piece even more interesting are "hole superconductivity" (including ring-current) <http://physics.ucsd.edu/~jorge/hole.html> http://physics.ucsd.edu/~jorge/hole.html and "antiferromagnetism in the context of LENR" with the ultimate aim of showing that LENR is about "local HTSC" only - not a macro version. It is all but washed out on the scale where electron conductivity matters. The "smoking gun" which more fully ties LENR to HTSC is not yet found, but there are wisps of smoke turning up in a number of disparate corners. This quote sums up part of the problem "One of the perplexing things about superconductivity is that magnetic impurities destroy superconductivity in one form of superconductor, but the other form may actually depend on some kind of magnetic mechanism." <http://www2.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/probing-superconductivity.html > http://www2.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/probing-superconductivity.html Jones
