Robin,
I have always maintained that Casimir geometry can form between the
"grains" of metal powders but the present thread is making a good point
regarding the shape of these "grains". Perhaps even the term tubercles is still
too rounded or organic sounding when we should be considering a reversed
pincushion with closely spaced sharp protrusions. I would predict a nominal
geometry similar to sticker burrs - growing up on a farm I can recall times
where they would pile up 3 and 4 deep just walking through the weeds and time
spent trying to carefully remove them without sticking myself. A micro version
of "nickel burrs" would have spiked protrusions relative to the protrusions of
neighboring burrs easily on the nano scale and be made even smaller and more
rigid by stiction force pulling them together. They would also have the added
benefit of abrupt changes in dimensions/ Casimir force since their thickness
and vectors are determined by different burrs. http://byzipp.com/burrs.jpg I am
also of the opinion that catalytic force derives from rapid changes in Casimir
geometry and that this entire field could be considered a study of "super
catalytic" effects on gas law leading to anomalous heat.
Regards
Fran
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 12:24 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2
In reply to Mark Iverson's message of Thu, 14 Jul 2011 16:02:26 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>But Robin, how about the 2nd half of that excerpt, where the optimal
>grain-size is more than a
>micrometer, not nanometers... I would think that a 'tubercle', which is likely
>composed of numerous
>'grains', would be larger than its constituent parts (i.e. a grain)!
>
>"Rossi tells that he worked every waking hour for six months straight, trying
>dozens of combinations
>to find the optimal powder size for the Energy Catalyzer, or E-Cat. He further
>stresses that
>specific data about the final optimal grain size cannot be revealed, but can
>tell us that the most
>efficient grain size is more in the micrometer range rather than the nanometer
>range."
>
>-Mark
Misunderstanding on my part, however I would have expected the tubules to be on
the grains, not composed of grains, so a micron size would have provided lots of
room for tubules.
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
