Vortex must be holding up some posts. I am seeing posts in out of
time order, and quotes of posts not yet reaching me.
In response to Mark, I think resonant tunneling concepts may not
provide the simplest interpretation of what is happening. Foremost,
they do not account for the lack of energetic signatures, especially
in heavy element LENR. All forms of cold fusion can only be
described to Ockham's satisfaction by an electron at least
momentarily in the newly fused nucleus. My theory:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/CFnuclearReactions.pdf
accounts for this electron being present in heavy nuclei, along with
the tunneling hydrogen nucleus, due to a joint tunneling of the
electron and hydrogen nucleus, even though they never have above
ground state binding energy.
The initial nucleus resulting from the hypothesized joint tunneling
event is highly de-energized by the presence of an electron that
tunnels with the hydrogen nucleus. The electron in the case of many
reactions does not have enough energy post fusion to escape.
Further, the relativistic mass increase of the electron to
accommodate the preceding deflated state I think must make W-
formation more likely. The most common tunneling event may actually
tend to involve a W- in the ensemble. In any case, it is clear there
is a greatly increased probability of a post fusion weak reaction,
due to the trapped electron post fusion, trapped by the energy
deficit I quantitatively describe in my papers.
There are two modes of fusion in my theory: (1) ordinary hydrogen
nuclei tunneling through the lattice in a normal fashion tunnel to a
location in which the hydrogen is momentarily "cloaked", i.e. in
deflated state, and (2) hydrogen tunneling occurs in the deflated
state (which is cloaked, effectively neutral) to a normal nucleus.
The first is hydrogen fusion, because the *target* nucleus is always
hydrogen. The second case is almost always a heavier lattice
nucleus, simply because they are typically closer, except in the case
where a dense hydrogen cluster is involved. It is the second type of
deflated state tunneling that accommodates the modes that differ
from ordinary D-D fusion. This second type of tunneling is largely
magnetically induced, especially magnetic gradient induced, i.e. made
energetically feasible by spin coupling.
In the case of some other theorists, the difficult parts of the
application of electroweak theory, and the least credible parts in my
opinion, are the descriptions of how electrons are tightly bound to
the hydrogen nuclei pre-fusion, or how actual neutrons are formed pre-
fusion. In the case of deflation fusion there is almost nothing to
understand, because the weak reactions *follow*, are post fusion. A
weak reaction therefore can be understood as an immediate *follow-on*
weak sub-reaction within the newly fused nucleus, of the form:
e + p -> n + neutrino
This of course even further de-energizes the newly formed nucleus,
and the energy from such reactions. No x-rays or auger electrons
result when this happens to a heavy nucleus. This I think is why
heavy element transmutations have been observed in such large
proportions without any energetic signatures or even excess heat.
I provided detailed calculations of the energy deficits expected to
result from hundreds of prospective strong force reactions. The
reaction energy plus deficit energy is shown in brackets for each
reaction:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/dfRpt
Every reaction where the energy shown in brackets is negative has an
energy deficit that initially traps the electron, and thus makes
immediate follow-on weak reactions more likely. I have not published
the candidate weak reaction sets. However, the initial energy deficit
is much larger if deflated quarks are involved, and I have not
quantified that additional deficit in the above reports either.
I would point out that hyper-dense hydrogen is not necessary to
initiate fusion by the deflation fusion model . However, if it can
form or is a BEC, then I have suggested, in 1996, a different
mechanism that may apply:
http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/BoseHyp.pdf
This essay is perhaps more important for the description I give of
tunneling. I have a perhaps unusual view or interpretation (unusual
these days anyway) of what tunneling is. This centers on my view of
what the quantum wavefunction actually portrays in reality. I think
charge is distributed in the wavefunction. More precisely, virtual
photons are emitted from small volumes within the wavefunction with a
probability equal to the probability of charge being found in those
volumes. In other terms, charge is distributed throughout the
wavefunction, in reality. This could happen if charges are strings,
and it is actually string brownian motion which provides particle
deBroglie wavelengths. Alternatively, particle strings could be
attached to longer strings capable of superluminal motion and which
restrict the particle brownian motion, and which are involved in
particle-wave interference. The brownian motion of such strings
would have to be vastly superluminal. Wavefunction collapse is then
easy to understand. It is the interaction of two particle strings
which momentarily stops the brownian motion of both strings,
concomitant with any interaction in which the the strings engage.
Post reaction, the brownian motion begins again, reconstructing the
new wavefunction.
Be all this as it may, the important thing is that entangled strings,
such as electron pairs in a superconductor, or hadrons and mesons in
a proton or a nucleus, can tunnel as an ensemble. This tunneling in
effect takes no time at all, because the strings involved are
actually "there" before the interaction begins. It is not really
teleporting per se. This "already there" aspect of wavefunction
collapse, and the fact it is only the EM field adjustment (virtual
photon retarded motion) that moves at the speed of light, are
perhaps key to understanding and applying the deflation fusion
concept. The electron and hydrogen nucleus tunnel as an ensemble
without any need for a highly energetic bond to overcome the Coulomb
barrier. This aspect of the theory, speculatively, has some bearing
on cluster fusion. If the elements of a hydrogen cluster are
energetically entangled, even by a small thermal energy amount, and
their wavefunctions overlapped, then a deflation fusion event
feasible by one member of the cluster could involve multiple members
of the cluster, namely all those members adjacent to and coupled with
the tunneling member could experience wavefuntion collapse on the
target nucleus.
In any case, as noted above, my theory predicts greatly enhanced
probabilities for weak reactions for those reactions I show to have
negative energy in brackets. Reactions involving more than one
hydrogen in the process have vastly larger initial deficits. In some
reactions an extra hydrogen can be involved in merely a catalytic
way, by making the initial energy deficit much larger, followed by
one hydrogen expelled post reaction.
I should note an exception to all the above, with regard to D+D ->
4He. In some reactions I propose as energetically feasible, the
heavy nucleus acts as a catalyst. Two deflated state deuterons
converge on a heavy nucleus, fuse, and then an alpha departs,
leaving the catalytic nucleus unchanged. The energy released by such
reactions is not the full energy of hydrogen fusion. The alpha is
slower, and the electrons are emitted as betas, causing orbital
electron dislocation and the associated x-rays. This is described in
the above referenced dfRpt report.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
On Feb 11, 2011, at 1:33 PM, Mark Iverson wrote:
Is it flies in Ockie's face, or just one big-ass, never-before-
seen, new-species type of fly!
:-) see below...
Jones wrote:
"He finds numerous channels for fusion, and by implication, there
are numerous possible nuclear reactions other than fusion, all at
the same time. All in the same experiment.
This flies in the face of Ockham, but Forsley is entirely correct
IMO, even if he did not go as far as he could at that time.
This field cannot be simplified into an either/or situation.
Ockham has no place in this field – LENR is inherently complex."
All this wreaks of some kind of resonance effect...
Mainstream fusion 'theories' have all been developed from brute-
force methods to overcome the coulomb barrier. The branching
ratios have all been developed from this brute-force method of
nuclear reactions. IF there is a way to interact with the nucleus
via resonant means, then there's a whole new set of branching
ratios -- we're talking a whole new chapter in the physics books
whose pages have yet to be fully elucidated and written. About the
ONLY theoretical dictum that can be carried over into this new
field of interaction would probably be the conservation of energy/
mass/momentum.
I've opined on this in the past, but if we look at the subatomic
particles as coupled oscillators, then braking the coupling between
them can be done in one of two ways:
1) brute force; hit it with such a strong force that you can brake
the coupling immediately,
or
2) hit it with a low amplitude, periodic supply or pulse of energy
at just the right frequency and phase, so the energy is 'absorbed'
by the oscillators, and after some time the resonant relationship
between the coupled oscillators will be disturbed enough to break
one or more of the couplings.
The reason subatomic particles 'couple' is because there is some
kind of resonant relationship between them. Let's take heat as an
example: adding heat (which is a low-grade energy) changes the
frequencies of oscillation slightly, and that leads to the
'vibration' of the entire assemblage of atomic particles/atoms
which science calls heat; more heat = stronger vibrations.
Stronger because the oscillators are further out of sync -- further
out of balance might be a better term since the oscillations have
momentum. At some point you reach a threshold where the amount of
heat put into the material causes the couplings to break (decouple)
and you get a phase change (solid --> liquid --> gas if electron
coupling is broken) or transmutation/fusion/fission if nuclear
couplings are broken. If you want to break the couplings faster,
use a stronger source of heat...
This is soooo much fun... I wish I could do it for a living!
-Mark
