Am 06.05.19 um 17:41 schrieb Andrew Meulenberg:
Dear Jones,
I suspect that it will take a convergence of ideas to solve the CF
problem. I haven't the time, presently, to come up to speed on Jurg's
model (I may have to make the time at some point).
I was unaware that spintronics can increase the effective mass of
electrons. However, I suspect that is in the context of a lattice; if
so, such an increase would not be surprising. Just as charged
particles are trapped in the Van Allen belts by "mirroring" in the
Earth's mag field gradient, this could happen to conduction electrons
within a lattice. This would certainly add to the increase in
effective mass from the E-field barriers of the lattice.
Right now, I am toying with Jean-Luc Paillet's concept of ~100 MeV
relativistic electrons in deep orbits to act as muons and pions and a
potential source of nuclear forces. As a consequence of deep-orbit
interactions (e.g., spin-spin interaction between nucleons, quarks,
and electrons), we may be able to understand the additional SS
interactions, if a second such electron (or a positron) is present (as
I suspect may be the case in the structure of neutrons - or even quarks).
This is exactly what I show in the NPP2.1.7 exact neutron model. There
are two relativistic electron masses that join to form an SO(4) orbit,
what makes a neutron. Details see paper.
Jürg
I would not be surprised if Holmlid's work (and spintronics) can
contribute to new (or, at least, modified) models of nuclear and
atomic physics.
Andrew
_ _ _
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 9:20 AM JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net
<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>> wrote:
*From: *Andrew Meulenberg <mailto:mules...@gmail.com>
* A possible weakness in the ICCF-14 model is the assumption
that the increased effective mass of a lattice electron would
be valid for atomic-hydrogen spacings (dimensions) below that
of the lattice.
Andrew,
There is an interesting and possibly unplanned convergence of your
thinking with that of Jürg Wyttenbach relative to electron
effective mass and spin… which curiously also turns up at the
basis of “spintronics”. Perhaps LENR will move in that direction.
After all, the “effective mass” of electrons is a well studied
detail in that context.
In the case of Holmlid -- and taken to the extreme (far extreme) -
the large change in electron "effective mass" which can be
engineered in spintronics may point to the origin of what Holmlid
detects as “muons”. After all, the strongest objection to his work
is the actual annihilation of hydrogen, supposedly into muons.
It may not be completely out of the question to suggest that he is
somehow seeing the scattering of transitory remnants from
massively increased (effective mass), rather than annihilation.
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr.22
8910 Affoltern a.A.
044 760 14 18
079 246 36 06
