Mark,
It would not be a surprise if Holmlid et al - have gotten this detail (2.3 pm)
wrong, but it seems like a minor point in the big picture.
They could be sitting on the discovery of the century. IMO it is a waste of
time to dwell on that type of detail, when there is so much at stake on the
larger claim of MeV ions. If really there are MeV ions then why not use your
resources working on a foolproof method to show this, and let the large labs
worry about the spacing details sometime in the future?
It strikes me that they could be overlooking easy ways to demonstrate and
characterize the ions, because:
1) They are charged and high energy
2) Therefore they can be contained, steered and focused with magnetics
3) They are of sufficient strength to create spallation and secondary
reactions in many targets
4) The spallation signatures are known – neutrons are expected from simple
lead targets
5) Many, many ways are available to characterize a focused beam of MeV
ions.
6) I cannot help but label this as misguided - reminiscent of counting the
angels on the head of a pin…
Who cares about the exact spacing at this juncture. Prove the fast ions and
everyone will beat a path to your door !
From: Mark Jurich
A recent paper (article in press) has appeared (about a month ago?), submitted
just before the Olafsson talks in the SF Bay Area, a couple months ago:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360319915304687
In it, the authors attempt to address an argument posed by some that an
Inter-nuclear Distance of 2.3 pm in D(0) is unphysical, and I thought I would
open this up to comment/debate on Vortex-L (section of paper reproduced as best
as possible, below):
Contrary to expectation, the argument that the measured short distances in
D(0) (in general H(0)) are unphysical is sometimes met. The basic idea behind
this argument appears to be that the inter-nuclear Coulomb repulsion would
prevent the clusters to reach such small inter-nuclear distances. Amazingly,
the same argument is also put forward for the electrons, which are said to
repel each other strongly. In Ref. [1] these points are already answered: “A
pair D-D or p-p contains two electrons and two ions. No inner electrons of
course exist for hydrogen, and thus the ions are bare protons or deuterons, of
very small size relative to the pm sized interparticle distances. The
pair-wise interactions between the four particles, with the interaction
distances of similar size, are two repulsive terms (++ and --) and four
attractive terms (+-). Thus, such a pair increases its stability with shorter
distance scale as 1/r. At a typical inter-particle distance of 2.3 pm, the
total electrostatic energy is of the order of 1 keV thus a bound state. With
different spin states for the two electrons, they may fill the same space and
one of the repulsive terms (--) disappears effectively. Thus, the stability
of a pair of atoms in the ultra-dense form is increased by different electron
spin states.” Of course, the bound state energy of 1 keV is directly
calculable from the Coulomb energy terms.
To clear the thinking, consider that each positive nuclei in the D-D pair is
closer to its electron, thus giving two almost neutral entities. In that case,
there are no repulsive forces of importance at all, and the system can be
shrunk at will, always keeping the attractive (+-) distances smaller than the
repulsive distances. This means that there is no electrostatic problem to form
a D-D pair of pm size. Such a D-D pair can shrink transiently almost
indefinitely to a neutral particle of nuclear size. Since the deuterons are
bosons, and the electrons which are fermions pair with different spins in the
same volume, there is neither any quantum mechanical effects which prevent the
formation of a pair D-D in D(0). It must be remembered that the D(0) material
is not a plasma but a condensed material formed by pairs D-D attached together
in chain clusters [1]. Such clusters have the form D subscript(2N) with the
D-D pairs rotating around the central axis of the cluster [5]. A related
problem is the nature of the cluster bonding. It is apparent from the numerous
studies that D(0) is in a stationary state, since otherwise the bond distance
would vary strongly in the experiments. That D(0) is in a stationary state
means that the applicable Heisenberg uncertainty relation is (Delta E)(Delta t)
>= h-bar/2, with Delta t large (at least seconds - weeks [34]) and thus Delta E
small. Thus, there is no fundamental quantum mechanical effect which prevents
the formation of stable D(0) with its 2.3 pm bond distances.
[1] Holmlid L. Excitation levels in ultra-dense hydrogen p(1) and d(1)
clusters: structure of spin-based Rydberg Matter. Int J Mass Spectrom
2013;352:1-8.
[5] Holmlid L. Experimental studies and observations of clusters of Rydberg
matter and its extreme forms. J Clust Sci 2012;23:5-34.
[34] Badiei S, Andersson PU, Holmlid L. Production of ultra-dense deuterium, a
compact future fusion fuel. Appl Phys Lett 2010;96:124103.
Mark Jurich
