Jones, Don't be so anal. ;-) Harry
On 29/9/2007 9:39 AM, Jones Beene wrote: > Ha! "sphincter propulsion" Luv it... > > ... don't think anyone has evoked that exact wording before, but lest > the skeptics out there latch-onto to something derogatory like > "toilet-fizzix", can we just call it "venturi propulsion" or something a > little less organic? > > Jones > > Michel Jullian wrote: >> (#CF = DIESECF Desorbing-Incident Excess Surface Electron Catalyzed Fusion, # >> being "dièse" in French) >> >> As I suggested to someone in a private message a few weeks ago, I think the >> desorbing deuteron must have more energy than that due to its free fall in >> the electron layer's electric field, in the form of a "sphincter contraction" >> like expulsion energy (sorry for the gruesome image). This would be due to >> the elastic nature of the Pd crystal which could be expected to re-contract >> locally with the participation of a large number of surface Pd atoms after >> the deuteron's passage. This kinetic energy could be a welcome complement to >> the electron layer's screening effect. >> >> This complementary effect could explain why CF occurs with Pd and D, with Ni >> (tighter lattice) and H (protium), but not (or less) e.g. with Pd and H, >> because the smaller protium would flow "too easily" (with less sphincter >> propulsion) out of the relatively roomy Pd lattice. >> >> Hope this makes some sense. Do let me know anyone if this sphincter aspect of >> hydrogen nuclei expulsion has been evoked before and/or quantified. >> >> Michel >> >> P.S. Of course the whole hypothesis, which I have presented in essentially >> classical terms (my apologies to "real" theoreticians for that), will have to >> be translated to quantum physics language and quantified before it can be >> considered a proper theory. This will be done IF --big if-- it is confirmed >> experimentally, there being obviously little point in theorizing further if >> it is proved wrong. >> >> >
