Axil:
SM people never could measure a strong force ( all forces are EM
forces..) and a unification with gravity of something inexistent - to
enable LENR - is nonsense (gravity is a very tiny residual EM force see
NPP 2.1.7) . Please stop producing childish noise by mixing everything
you hear/read and claiming it could/would be a solution.
Because loss free atomic=magnetic orbits are involved in LENR this of
course looks like SC. Also a BEC like situation inside a cavity can
easily be shown and explained.
On nuclear level there is no continuous space time. In the best case you
can say that time has a period of 2pi. Further: The relativistic proton
radius given by the NPP2.0 SO(4) model is the time horizon of dense
mass. It allows to calculate all forces and their dependencies.
If you once would sit down and do a real study may be you too could be
able to develop a "real" theory.
Bob:
Building up a nucleus from other particles than n,p,e makes no sense as
we never see the others upon decay. The so called neutrino given in
decay formulas simply is an excuse (never measured!!) as nobody
understands how else the energy can be transported and of course the SM
fails.
The proton can be modeled by a 3x3 wave structure but this only works
for the external 3D coupling but not for the internal forces and mass
build-up. The newest modeling is confirming that the internal charge of
the proton is doing 5 rotations and the relativistic mass does 4 and the
perturbative mass 3 on top of the 2x2 core structure.
Thus it is easily to predict that all SM like approaches will fail to
give an adequate picture of any particle.
But one thing is correct: The muon mass can be given as a resonance of
the proton.
Jürg
Am 14.07.19 um 23:01 schrieb Axil Axil:
/The unification of the /electromagnetic
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetism>, weak
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_interaction>, and strong
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_interaction> interactions
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_interaction> could explain
where the process of transmutation of elements is coming from in LENR.
The environment in and around the EMF singularity could be where the
strong force unification reverts the evolution of matter formation
back to the conditions that were prevalent at the earliest epochs in
the evolution of infant universe. //
On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 4:42 PM Axil Axil <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
It is generally recognized in grand unification theories that the
electroweak force (EMF) and the force of gravity were combined
when the universe was just starting out. This is why science
believes that the unification of gravity and EMF can occur at high
energies.
If there is enough gravity concentrated at one point in
space-time, then an event horizon will form. The same event
horizon formation process must be true for the concentration of
EMF at a point is Space-time since gravity and EMF are basically
the same force.
LENR is a result of the condensation of EMF into a state of
extreme condensation at a singular point in space-time. All the
theory and experimental observations that apply to horizon
formation in gravity also apply to the condensation of EMF at a
singular point in space-time.
Since this EMF concentration is mostly related to the
concentration of light, the resulting EMF horizon also takes on
the complicating quantum mechanical properties of superposition.
This quantum mechanical complicating property is not present for
gravity.
Time dilation is a critical property that makes the LENR virtually
impervious to human understanding. We humans do not experience
time dilation in the world we live in. Adding in superposition
into our everyday world puts the complicated interactions between
time dilation and superposition that occurs in the LENR reaction
outside of the understanding of just about everybody. It is going
to take a lot of time and effort to educate people about what the
LENR reaction is all about.
On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 3:33 PM Axil Axil <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
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 <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> 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
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
*From: *Jed Rothwell <mailto:[email protected]>
* 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
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr.22
8910 Affoltern a.A.
044 760 14 18
079 246 36 06
