Re: <http://forum.hydrino.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=235&sid=dd8499e03bf9df3620a17b ea94a9e34c&start=50#p6745> Alternate Theory of Pycnodeuterium
<http://forum.hydrino.org/viewtopic.php?p=6745&sid=dd8499e03bf9df3620a17bea9 4a9e34c#p6745> Postby meulenberg <http://forum.hydrino.org/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=118&sid=dd8499e0 3bf9df3620a17bea94a9e34c> on February 17th, 2010, 3:18 pm froarty wrote:Andrew, I hope you don't mind I posted your reply on Vortex where this topic was initiated by Jones Beene. I don't mind at all. I got this reply - Jones Beene said on Wed, 17 Feb 2010 07:37:59 -0800 Enquiring minds want to know: 1) How does a Lochon differ from a Cooper pair ? 2) Is the formation of Lochons enhanced at cryogenic temperatures ? 3) Is the Lochon "deflated" ? 1) A cooper pair is paired in momentum space. A lochon is paired in 3-space (and/or perhaps in angular-momentum space). 2) Most lochons are simply paired s-electrons in normal orbitals. However, some are induced by local fields or high Fermi levels. The last are temperature dependent. The density of lochons of interest to LENR may be reduced at cryogenic temperatures. 3) A deflated lochon may be what we seek in LENR. However, an electron pair at sub-nuclear distances (deflation) is only for a small portion of the generally much-larger orbit. Although, for brief periods (a few cycles?) the orbits may shrink to that level. The mechanism of orbit shrinking is critical to the success of fusion processes. Getting to the naught orbit is simplified by the conversion of potential energy into relativistic mass rather than radiating it away. Being in a naught orbit doesn't guarantee deflation. At these dimensions, l=0 allows circular orbits that don't get within a 100 fm of the nucleus. ----------------------------------------------------- Now for my reply... Andrew, [snip] RE the Naudts orbit: The main argument against it is that it does not apply to fermions. However, I do not believe that anyone else has mentioned the fact that the 1s electron pair is a boson [/snip] I was unaware 1s pairs are considered bosons but it does make an interesting point. I think the equations by Naudts and Bourgoin are only valid in a catalytic environment. I am convinced that all catalytic action is based on a change in Casimir force and that Casimir force needs to be interperted relativisticlly. My point is the equations are only valid when quantifying the reactions from outside the cavity allowing the electrons to occupy the same "spatial " positions from the our perspective outside the cavity. Naudts equations describe a single solution many magnitudes beyond the fractional values solved for by Bourgoin. It is the fractional values that provide an intermediate energy source oscillating between atomic and diatomic states powered by sudden change in Casimir force. This may assist the more energetic case your paper describes and attainment of fusion artifacts reported by some researchers. Getting thru the low and intermediate range is a necessary step to reach the naught orbit. That is why I am interested in your model. Even in the catalytic environment, I believed that it takes a 3 or 4 body situation to be successful. You may have provided another path. However, I think that it takes examination of the Casimir effect at the atomic level to get it right. If fractional orbits help along the way, so much the better. However, unless the energy is extracted from the environment, they are only temporary. With l=0, normal means of such extraction (via photons or phonons) are not probable. I have posited that just the increased time flow would concentrate the background incidence of these occurrences; but you seem to be making an additional case for spatial confinement where the orbital proximity is even closer than just the relativistic effect. In my theory the orbital never really changes in the local frame of the atom, but you appear to be leapfrogging me by a whole new scale taking Casimir force down into the nuclei.. between neutrons? between the nuclei and the orbital where the orbital cloud represents one of the plates? I believe that the orbit actually shrinks (how else to obtain the energy from the Coulomb field). On the other hand, as the orbit shrinks to the naught level, the lochon (electron pair) becomes relativistic. Your model may be the best way to describe that situation. [The idea of the nuclear force being Casimir came from a back-of-the-envelope calculation that I performed 1.5 years ago that gave the correct orders of magnitude. Therefore, it is easy for me to accept your "atomic" Casimir effect. We need to look beyond the concept of "plates." Electrons are the primary reflectors at the atomic level; protons and electrons transiting the nucleus at the nuclear level. Even neutrons have electric quadrupole moments & evanescent waves, which can provide the Casimir force.] I have always felt the nuclei and orbital are both permeated by "something" traveling on the time axis that pass through our "spatial " axis and confers upon us our ability to sense time. If the rate were to change on average we would be unaware all else being unchanged the rate defines our concept of C. I believe this "something" whether ether or virtual particles or whatever, is what Puthoff refers to as restoring energy to keep the orbital from decaying or what Tesla was referring to regarding the sun "eating" more energy than it disburses. I think all material have a different level of opposition to this flow reflected in the periodic chart but conductive material exhibiting Casimir force has the ability to sum this opposition beyond the atomic level into the mesoscopic scale where we can exploit it. I have described earlier my opinion that the Maxwellian "nonphotonic" radiation performs that task admirably. I suspect that this nonphotonic radiation is the source of dark energy (zero-point energy) and its interaction with matter (similar to a sub-atomic Brownian-motion operating on bound electrons) is a source of the photonic galactic background radiation. AndrewM meulenberg <http://forum.hydrino.org/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=118&sid=dd8499e0 3bf9df3620a17bea94a9e34c> Posts: 75 Joined: December 18th, 2008, 8:20 am View of GUT-CP: Fence-Sitter
<<image001.gif>>
