Dewey
July 13, 2019 at 1:13 PM
Dr Rossi,
I return to the comment of Neri Accornero: can you give a hint, not
superficial, but not too difficult, about what can happen if your effect is
not fusion, not fission, not chemical reaction?

Andrea Rossi
July 13, 2019 at 1:33 PM
Dewey:
Please go to
http://www.researchgate.net...
<http://disq.us/url?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F330601653_E-Cat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions%3ApM-CL2aCuIKpxKUPSz62Br5gd7w&cuid=2168707>
All the references cited here are the same reported in the above mentioned
paper.
In [13] a fundamental connection between Aharonov-Bohm equations and an
electron model is proposed, starting from a geometric interpretation of the
electron wave-function complex phase [6,8,1].
This approach suggests the possibility of efficiently creating electron
condensates exploiting the Aharonov-Bohm effect, a phenomenon that shows
the dependence of electron wave-function phase from electromagnetic
potentials [9].
Warm Regards,
A.R.
------------------------

Aharonov-Bohm effect
https://disq.us/url?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FAharonov%25E2%2580%2593Bohm_effect%3ALTnbbRNmquXoFpfvayH973nqFc4&cuid=2168707

Rossi is looking for a quantum mechanical mechanism that enables an
ensemble of electrons to convert from a fermion to a boson so that those
electrons can form a Bose condensate(BC). A BC is the means by which
electrons can form a meta-stable ensemble that can hold together in a long
lived plasmoid configuration which is connected to ultra dense matter: what
Rossi calls "Neutral pico-metric aggregates".

The intent of this posit is very close to what is really going on in the
LENR reaction. Rossi has not yet stumbled upon the correct quantum
mechanical mechanism that enables electrons to change their fermionic
nature into bosons.

The correct mechanism involves the entanglement of phonons, excitons or
plasmons polaritons with electrons. There is a ton of nanophotonic theory
and experimental evidence that covers this subject.

On the theory of three types of polaritons (phonon, exciton and plasmon
polaritons)
https://iopscience.iop.org/...
<https://disq.us/url?url=https%3A%2F%2Fiopscience.iop.org%2Farticle%2F10.1088%2F1742-6596%2F865%2F1%2F012007%2Fpdf%3A6LAiwWADHXv-S5ZnbWfDvcD-rKQ&cuid=2168707>

The rabbit hole that this subject engenders is as big as all outdoors. This
subject matter is currently a very hot subject is optics. In my opinion,
optics is a very difficult area of physics to get our heads around. This
subject also leads to many other subjects that a truly mind boggling and
beyond current science to explain.

It is also apparent that Rossi must be getting competent professional help
in formulating his theory... Rossi is not working alone. It is fair to say
based on the very advanced state of his theory of LENR that Rossi also must
have something substantial that is working and close to if not currently
functional.

On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 3:19 PM Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

> First, PP fusion is not possible on earth. It can only occur deep inside
> the cores of stars where the mass of protium reactants is huge.
>
> The roll of hydrogen in the LENR reaction is to promote the nanoplasmonic
> reaction enabled by a irregular micro surface such as cracks, pits and
> holes.
>
> Fusion and fission of elements does happen in the LENR reaction as
> witnessed by the evidence of transmutation. But any energy that is produced
> by these nuclear reactions is hidden from reality because of time dilation.
>
> https://youtu.be/Bg9MVRQYmBQ
>
> time dilation is a result of general relativity, The flow of time inside
> the LENR reaction almost always produces stable nuclear reactants in ash
> while it is hiding that energy and particle so produced from reality. Only
> when the LENR reaction is terminated is energy released by the LENR
> reaction.
>
> Sometimes rarely, only when a polariton Bose condensate is not formed in a
> very weak LENR reaction when the density of polariton formation is very low
> will gamma, neutrons and other particles emirate from the LENR reaction.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 2:46 PM JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>> *From: *Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>    - I assume there is one fundamental cause of cold fusion in all
>>    systems. It is the same thing in all cases. This is similar to saying that
>>    fission is the same in reactors and bombs, although it looks and acts 
>> quite
>>    different.
>>
>>
>>
>> This “one fundamental cause” could be the problem – you are tied to an
>> assumption which is not proved. The fission analogy is not useful.
>>
>>
>>
>> Of course such a basic logical error would hinder anyone’s ability to
>> look beyond the limitations of the P&F effect – aka “cold fusion”. In fact
>> in the earlier Mizuno work with nickel at higher pressure - cited in an
>> older thread here -  where Mizuno  uses both protium and deuterium in
>> different comparative runs at higher pressure  -  he gets actually better
>> results (more excess heat) from  protium than with deuterium. You cannot
>> deny this result.
>>
>>
>>
>> To me this is solid evidence direct from Mizuno that there is more than
>> “one fundamental cause” to excess heat – one being fusion and the other
>> being very different; and thus all future devices must recognize that
>> nuclear fusion is not required for excess heat. This is actually highly
>>  desirable as "fusion” alone opens the regulatory doors for all kinds of
>> unnecessary government intrusion.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bottom line is that at least two fundamental causes of excess heat
>> exist.  Possibly more. One is nuclear fusion seen in electrolysis where
>> typically lithium and high loading play a role.  Another cause is a
>> non-fusion reaction with nickel as the reactant, low loading is desirable,
>> and no lithium is needed.
>>
>>
>>
>> A third possible reaction also acknowledged by Mizuno (and by Ed Storms)
>> is sequential cluster formation with its signature radiation of 630 eV.
>> That third one alone could be used for excess heat without the other two.
>>
>>
>>
>> The nickel reaction works with either hydrogen or deuterium and to
>> confuse things it is probably based on a “nuclear coupling” of some kind -
>> (mass converted into energy) but it is not “nuclear fusion.”
>>
>>
>>
>> It is pretty clear that both or all three fundamental causes for gain are
>> valid over a thirty year history, and very different from each other - and
>> no one knows this more clearly than Mizuno as it stands out prominently
>> from his earlier papers.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jones
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to