IMHO the issue of superconductivity is fuzzy because there is a fuzzy 
definition of the system of materials over which the alleged superconductivity 
extends. The fuzzy question is: Is the transfer of charge between coherent 
systems or within a coherent system?

Within a coherent system the location of charge is a blur over time—uncertain; 
therefore, assigning the label of superconductivity to a coherent system IMHO 
is not warranted.

I do consider that the magnetic coupling described in the paper by Kawashima 
may allow nuclear transmutations and/or “fusion” of nucleons within the 
graphine+ coherent system.

An earlier report  regarding many-body coupling is also pertinent:

and this one regarding  a number of papers discussing multi-body coupling:

>From the amount of research identified above, many folks are doing LENR 
>theory.  As I have indicated before, IMHO the magnetic coupling related to 
>spin energy changes within coherent systems is what happens in LENR. 
>consistent with the observation of little or no high energy radiation during 

Bob Cook

From: JonesBeene
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2018 7:53 AM
Subject: [Vo]:Superconductive carbon (MLG)


  1.  Previous century - Pyrolytic carbon shown to exhibit Meissner effect 
(diamagnetism). Note: the interpretation of diamagnetism as a form of 
superconductivity is controversial.
  2.  2015 - Lithium layer on graphene shown to be superconductive at 2 degrees 
  3.  2016 - Calcium layer between layers of  graphene shown to be 
superconductive at 4 degrees K
  4.  2018 – Kawashima observes RTSC and Meissner effect in graphene (alkane 
wetted) for 50 days at ambient temperature (new paper)

The question becomes – is diamagnetism itself a type of “local 
superconductivity”? There are arguments on both sides of this issue.

Diamagnetism is usually a weak effect such as seen in elements like bismuth. 
There is only one moderately strong diamagnetic material in nature – carbon, 
when  in the form denoted as “pyrolytic”. Pyrolytic carbon at one time 
exhibited the strongest diamagnetic effect at room temperature of any known 
substance (until recently). It is a form of graphite in which some covalent 
bonds are formed between the graphene sheets.

IMHO, the diamagnetic  form of magnetic repulsion should be recognized and 
denoted as local superconductivity or nano-ring-current unless there are strong 
reasons not to do so.

Electrons circulate around the 6 carbon atoms of a graphite/graphene ring which 
is not fully populated in the valence field – and without loss. But in so doing 
they lose the ability to conduct without loss  in a linear vector. They still 
exhibit good normal conductivity. This dynamic (ring current) works only with a 
structured  array instead of an elemental atom or crystal.

Bottom line- a structured diamagnetic material can have a magnetic permeability 
far less than that of free space, and hence it expels external magnetic fields, 
creating a repulsive field in response to an imposed field -  and this is 
essentially the same mechanism involved in the Meissner effect. In fact, 
structured carbon appears to be a high temperature superconductor due to ring 
current. This has applicability to LENR. (Chris Cooper patent and claims) since 
the linear vector can be engineered into tubular form.

Another amazing form of carbon is called MLG – or “multilayered graphene” 
(graphene itself is technically 2D - only one atom in thickness). A relevant 
prediction is that we will see a form of patterned MLG exhibit a strong 
Meissner effect at ambient temperature this year, which result is the natural 
progression of the Kawashima work.

You heard it first on Vortex…. BTW the last paper below is the announcement by 
Kawashima of Tokai University.


Reply via email to