And perhaps it is the translation from normal 2d to Casimir type 3d by change in conductivity and spacing of the mirror layers that is at work, where locally the gas atoms perceive the spatial distance between the boundaries varying rapidly while from our perspective it is only the mirror conductivity or slight change in orientation to each other that is in play. Fran
_____________________________________________ From: Jones Beene [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2011 9:17 PM To: [email protected] Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:LENR & 'Proliferation' was: US DOE alters it's stance on LENR and Rossi? -----Original Message----- From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> >>> As I pointed out on this list a few weeks back (though it may not have been >>> noticed in the deluge), this doesn't work because "close" is much smaller >>> than atomic dimensions, which means that there is no (Lawandy) surface to >>> speak of. >> You are making a false assumption there. The assumption is three dimensions. >> Lawandy and Holmlid are 2D. Things are very different in 2D. >That's the problem. The real world is 3D. There is no problem here. 2D is inclusive in 3D, so the real world is also 2D. >There are no ideal surfaces. So what? There are no ideal gases either but the applicable "Laws" (generalizations) are usually correct. > And on even the most even real surface the smallest features are still individual atoms separated by Angstrom distances. Yes, and that is why - by convention - one atom of thickness is treated as 2D. Were you not aware of that? In the abstract, an atom thickness may not be "true" 2D, but it always works out that way with high precision, both in the math and in experiment, to be an acceptable approximation of "how 3-space and 2-space are connected" in the real world. Jones
