Yes, Lou's freight train analogy is nice, unfortunately, it is not a very
accurate analogy.
In the train example, we expect the energy of the 100 cars behind the lead
car to impart all its energy to the lead car. This only becomes true when
the lead car can "absorb", "Store" and "concentrate" energy - in this case
all the kinetic energy of the 100 cars behind it in an elastic collision.
As Ed correctly pointed out, the electron is a fundamental particle that CAN
NOT "store" energy from it's neighbors. If a mechanism can be found that
can do this and concentrate 7,000,000 times the energy into one electron,
and do it at a rate consistent with the energy release rate obversed, then
find a mechanism that can create ULMN at the correct rates, then W&L might
become a viable explanation.
One of the major objections to W&L is that the 'reaction rates" are all
inconsistent. It's one thing to imagine a plausible mechanism, it's another
thing for that mechansim to occur at rates sufficient to explain the
phenomenom. It's all a question of probability and rates.
This argument applies to all other neutron creation ideas brought up in this
thread - ie. cosmic rays, stray gammas, nanoantennas etc. While these
mechanisms are probable, it just is not occuring at the correct rates to
explain the phenomenom.
BTW: the 0.1eV is the surrounding energy. Ed's point is that 0.76MeV must
be harvested from a chemical sea of energy whose average is less than 0.1
eV. Hence a concentration of over 7,000,000 times. Ed does bring up a very
good point. Whatever mechanism we propose, it must be consistent with known
mechanisms known to operate in a known chemical environment. Lou's
explanation appears to be inconsistent with what we generally know about the
behavior in such chemical environment.
But as always; I am all ears to any corrections to my understanding, and I
am willing to be wrong.
Jojo
----- Original Message -----
From: "Harry Veeder" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 1:51 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ed Storms' new Theory/Model
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 12:59 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
Surface plasmons provide good examples of coherent charge currents.
The electric field can also provide analogous coupling.
A mechanical analog
- One uncoupled freight train car traveling 50 km/h cannot climb a 10m
hill
- but the lead car coupled to 100 others moving at 50 km/h can easily
Nice analogy.
