Bob- I had the same question in mind about the Rydberg matter and DDL H or D that Jones was implying. My neck is not as long as yours.
That’s nice analysis-- The same drawing-together that you describe for D’s happens with any particle with none-integral spin as I know. It is called Cooper Paring and is magnetic in its attraction. I have long considered that D’s pair up as Cooper Pairs in the Pd and or Ni FCC lattice structure. They may act like a He nucleus and assemble in a BEC as a coherent mass in Holmlid’s “plasma” experiment. The circulation that Holmlid describes carries with it angular momentum which can only change in small quanta of h/2pi. However, if the electrons in the neighborhood of the circulating batch of D’s are coupled in a common magnetic field and are able to absorb small quanta on angular momentum—spin—they may act as a catalyst to remove potential energy from the system to form real He particles with their more stable configuration compared to the D Cooper Pairs. In effect there are electron capture reactions happening in the circulating mass with no high energy EM being emitted. The reaction is fast, occurring in a coherent system, and is dependent upon appropriate resonant conditions, reflecting the FACT the whole BEC (circulating mass—”snow flake”) does not blow up. Without an effective catalyst in appropriate resonance, large quanta of angular momentum can not be exchanged, and, thus, a major high energy reaction is not possible in the coherent system. (Sometimes Nature may be nice to us.) Bob Cook From: Bob Higgins Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 9:11 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vo]:Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid Jones, I hate to stick my neck out here, but, I will say that the Holmlid Rydberg matter is the opposite of DDL. DDL has the electron in an ultra-tight orbit around the nucleus, making it appear like a tiny composite neutral particle. In Rydberg matter the electron is in a very large circular orbit (and by circular, I mean that the orbital is planar). Here is a little of my understanding of Holmlid's Rydberg matter that I recently posted to an MFMP discussion site: I am still reading about Rydberg clusters and Holmlid technology. What wasn't clear to me earlier was that the Rydberg matter that is created in the catalyst is a 6-fold symmetric planar cluster - sort of like a snowflake of atoms. It is somewhere between a solid and a gas. How many atoms does it take to leave the domain of molecule and become a solid powder particle dispersed to move like a gas? It is said that once formed, these snowflake Rydberg clusters of atoms are quite robust and long-lived. So, Holmlid's accumulation of D(0) on a surface probably comes from a self-assembling monolayer of the snowflakes over time. I don't think the bonding for snowflake-on-top-of-snowflake is nearly as strong as a monolayer surface assemblage of snowflakes at the edges - they just become bigger snowflakes (all still hypothetical) like a puzzle with all hexagonal pieces. I thought Winterberg's paper was wrong - he proposed it would only assemble in columns of snowflakes. It appears that the evidence for the Rydberg clusters is detection of rotational spectra matching predictions from the modeled structure of the Rydberg cluster. This is sort of funny (just to me) because I was doing microwave spectroscopy in my university physics lab at age 18 in 1973. I was a lab assistant for my physics professor who was doing just what Holmlid describes - modeling molecular geometry, computing their rotational spectra, and then optimizing the model to match the real measured spectra. Only, he was doing it for much smaller molecules and the spectrum is in the microwave bands, not around 100 MHz as Holmlid describes for the H(1) and D(1). The frequency is lower because the rotational moments are huge compared to a small molecule. So, as I am beginning to understand it, the hexagonal Rydberg clusters form on the catalyst, and they like to form on an oxide surface with magnetic properties (on an Fe2O3 surface for example). Then they are sort of blown off into the rarefied gas/vacuum, and randomly self-assemble on the surface of a metal oxide to form a monolayer film whose lateral dimensions grow with time. Note that creation of the Rydberg clusters should be exothermic because the reason the monatomic H/D form into a cluster is that it is a lower energy state for the group of atoms as a whole to form the cluster - as compared to remaining monatomic. The catalyst provides H2 splitting and an environment where the planar cluster favorably forms around it. The catalyst must also be able to remove the heat of formation of the cluster. It is strange to talk about "density" of atoms with something that I believe will only form a monolayer. What I am describing is the H(1) and D(1) state. In this state, the atoms are drawn together by the strong magnetic moments of the Rydberg electrons. The switch to the ultra-dense form is not clear to me. I have a hypothesis that the H(1) cannot form the ultra-dense H(-1) [or H(0) depending on who is naming it] - only the D(1) can form the ultra-dense state. The reason is that because the D nucleus has a neutron, its nucleus has a strong magnetic moment (think of it like a bar magnet). How do two bar magnets attract each other? They do so by aligning in anti-parallel. At close distances the pull from the anti-parallel magnetic moments is very strong. The Coulomb repulsion falls off much more slowly with distance. So, there could be a short distance where the anti-parallel magnetic nuclear moments of the D atoms become so strong that it draws the atoms closer together than normal. This is just a hypothesis. It could be that this could only occur on a surface and not in free space, because it might so distort the planar cluster that it would destroy itself. Like a molecule, the Rydberg matter behaves with one quantum state. So, is it a very large molecule or a room temperature BEC? I am not sure of the distinction. Bob Higgins On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] The binding energy of the H2 molecule is 4.519 eV. Divide this by the fine structure constant and you get 619.236 eV. Add some due to the increased binding energy of magnetic attraction between the nuclei at close quarters. Hi Robin, It's not clear whether the hydrogen molecule would shrink as a unit, which seems to be your premise - with both electrons acting together ... or alternatively, each monatomic atom is reduced individually. My impression is that it is an individual action, not the molecule. Later, the dense atoms collect into clusters - but 2 is not a favored cluster size. My mental image is clouded by 25 years of following Mills theory, which is quite different in the details. However, one wonders if the two can be reconciled somehow. And also- does anyone know if Meulenberg has tried tot and all well thought-out and vetted to some degree - but Holmlid is the relative newcomer - now getting all of the attention. The long-hidden model with all the answers to the LENR conundrum seems like it is trying to come out into the open. Hopefully we can expedite that by cherry-picking the best details without giving deference to anyone (except perhaps Dirac). Perhaps you are already trying to reconcile all of these.
