zhttps:// phys.org/news/2018-08-tiny-tunnels-garnets-result-microorganisms.html
*Tiny tunnels inside garnets appear to be the result of boring microorganisms* *-----------------------------------------------------* https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0200351 Intricate tunnels in garnets from soils and river sediments in Thailand – Possible endolithic microborings *IMO, the **phys.org <http://phys.org> article has interpreted the **ournals.plos.org <http://ournals.plos.org> article incorrectly.**The Tiny tunnels inside garnets could not have been produced by either biologic or abiologic causes. These tunnels could only have been produced by LENR active EVOs many millions of years ago.* *The case against abiologic causation.* *Garnets are relatively hard minerals (Hpyrope = 7.5) resistant to abrasion and chemical attack. A corresponding hardness ratio for the current garnets (Hpyrope = 7.5), would require a mineral millstone with a hardness of 9 or above to form ambient inclusion trails (AITs). Possible candidates would be corundum (Hcorondum = 9, including the varieties sapphire and ruby) or diamond (Hdiamaond = 10). Such extremely hard abrasive **minerals are absent in the river sediments and extremely rare in the residual soils. Besides, considering the number of tunnels in one single garnet (sometimes more than 100), an excess of such mineral grains would have been needed in these environments to form the garnet tunnels. That is simply not the case in any of the examined localities.* *The case against biologic causation* [image: journal.pone.0200351.g003] <https://www.lenr-forum.com/image-proxy/?key=1d1f3b1c763e6ac7faf0b60b74ab94868ce084275d6621852f5c1f949ee1cde7-aHR0cHM6Ly9qb3VybmFscy5wbG9zLm9yZy9wbG9zb25lL2FydGljbGUvZmlndXJlL2ltYWdlP3NpemU9bGFyZ2UmaWQ9aW5mbzpkb2kvMTAuMTM3MS9qb3VybmFsLnBvbmUuMDIwMDM1MS5nMDAz> In frame C, there are many hundreds of regularly spaced and totally straight non intersecting tunnels that all look to be formed simultaneously (see also frame D) and happen to turn at the same instant in their formation process. The tunneling displays a substantial range of appearance and morphological traits, from strictly organized palisades of parallel tunnels to irregularly branching and anastomosing networks. In the most organized variety, straight and strictly parallel tunnels form almost perfect rows (Fig A <https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0200351#pone-0200351-g003> above); more commonly the tunnels, although parallel, are not lined up but are more irregularly scattered (Fig B <https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0200351#pone-0200351-g003>). A recurring feature is a parallel, seemingly coordinated, curvature of the distal parts of each tunnel in such palisades (Fig C and D <https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0200351#pone-0200351-g003>). There may also be two or more sets of palisades within a crystal, where internally parallel tunnels in each set make distinctive angles to co-occurring sets projecting in other directions (Fig E <https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0200351#pone-0200351-g003> ). Formation of anastomosing(1,2) tunnels by biology would require some type of communication between separated organisms or at least organismal parts such as different hyphae of a fungal mycelium within a substrate. Such communication could be chemically controlled by fungi excreting molecules at the hyphal tip. Another mode of communication in a transparent substrate could be light. Natural bioluminescence is known among fungi to attract invertebrates for spore dispersal or as warning signals to repulse fungivores, but not for communicative purposes Without supporting observations among live species in controlled laboratory experiments fungal communication within a substrate is so far hypothetical. IMO, bugs cannot work so closely together because they do not have the ability to communicate second by second in such a timely way as to produce such well structured and identically formed tunnels. *1. *To open one structure into another directly or byconnecting channels, said of blood vessels,lymphatics, and hollow viscera; also incorrectly applied to nerves. *2. *To unite by means of an anastomosis, or connection between formerly separate structures. [image: journal.pone.0200351.g002] B) Tomographic reconstruction (volumetric rendering) showing the hexagonal cross section of multiple tubular structures. C) An orthoslice of a tomographic reconstruction showing the cross-sectional hexagons or rectangles of the tunnels. D) SEM image of a four-angled polygonal entrance hole. E) SEM image of a six-angled polygonal entrance hole that is filled. F) SEM image of a tubular structure that tapers off further into the mineral. Note how the tunnel have a polygonal shape at the mineral surface but further in gets more circular as it tapers off. G) Microphotograph of a tubular structure that tapers off and also starts with a polygonal shape at the mineral surface but gets more circular as it penetrates further into the mineral and tapers off. H) Microphotograph of tubular structures that tapers off. The branching of the tunnels results in offspring tunnels with less diameter than the originating tunnel. Chemical erosion by bugs cannot produce regularly sharply defined geometric contours as the bugs eat their way through super hard garnet. All the tunnels change their contorting profile as the tunneling comes to a close. Also chemical residue of bug remains cannot be offered as proof that the bugs produced the tunnels because the bugs could have populated the tunnels long after they were excavated. The case for EVO tunnel creation and what we can learn about the nature of the excavating EVOs from characterization of the tunnels. Entangled EVOs could have excavated the tunnels in a totally coordinated fashion. Many entangled EVOs can move as one excavating particle and produce N identical tunnels that are shaped identically in both their horizontal girth and geometric shape and vertical profiles. We have seen EVOs excavate tunnels through diamond in the LION fuel, so garnet penetration is no problem. As the EVOs lose power, the volume of their excavation shrinks to a point until their level of power production is to weak to continue with extending the excavation. The way that all the tunnels in the garnet devolve to a sharp needle like point simultaneously witness to a shared energy store held between and among all the excavating EVOs. The hexagonal tunnel shaped profiling is indicative of the structure of the molecule that is supporting the EVO and producing the excavating magnetic flux tube. Such shapes have been seen in the holes bored in the structure of the LION reactors. The flux tube that is doing the boring through the garnet is a monopole that extends straight forward and normal to the hexagonal Rydberg cross section of the EVO.
