The Bumpy Road.
The binding energy contained inside the nucleus is an uncertain thing; it goes up and down at the whim of quantum mechanics; it varies with the uncertainty principle. This energy is comprised of two parts: a real energy and a virtual energy. It is this virtual energy that can vary widely and is not constrained by the laws of energy and momentum. When constrained inside the nucleus and when this nuclear energy is composed of these two parts get strong enough, it spills over the top of the coulomb barrier and forms a real particle outside the nucleus. This is quantum mechanical tunneling. The virtual part of this spillover energy only lasts for the briefest of instants and immediately goes away and only the real part remains to congeal into the newly radiated particle that has tunneled through the barrier. This process is called radioactive decay (AKA tunneling through the coulomb barrier). After this nuclear relaxation process, if the energy level inside the nucleus has been lowed enough so that it can never again surmount the coulomb barrier no matter how much virtual energy may appear, the element is said to be stable. In regards to LENR, we can draw and amazing and informative conclusion from this behavior of the nuclear reaction. The fact that no radioactive isotopes are found in the ash of the cold fusion reaction is unequivocal proof that LENR is caused by the lowering of the coulomb barrier and NOT a fusion process. That is, when the coulomb barrier is very low during the LENR moment, the energy in the nucleus is stabilized at the lowest barrier level in relation to the lowered coulomb barrier. Now when the barrier neutralization is removed and the barrier springs back to full power, the binding energy contained in the newly formed nucleus is completely relaxed in regards to the newly recovered strength of the coulomb barrier. Here is an analog from the real world to explain this principle. If you take a glass of water filled to the brim on a car trip over a bumpy road, the water will splash over the brim until water reaches a maximum level to where the water does not slash anymore. Now suppose you could magically reduce the sides of the glass to a low level when the bumpy trip first starts and the water level reaches this maximum no spill level, now you magically raise the sides of the glass very high again. No water will ever spill out no matter how bumpy the road gets. The water level in the glass is now forever stable. Cheers: Axil On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 12:22 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: > I have been attempting to improve my understanding of nuclear reactions > and have reached some interesting conclusions. It has been known for many > decades that the motion of a charged particle such as an electron or proton > results in the emission of electromagnetic radiation. The smooth non > accelerated movement of this type of particle does not cause radiation to > be emitted. Only when the charge undergoes accelerated motion does energy > spread out into open space. And, on occasions it is possible to have an > accelerated charged particle that does not emit radiation if a proper > structure exists that results in a balance by other particles. An example > of the later is when a ring of charged particles such as electrons are > rotating in a circle in a direct current fashion. Each individual electron > would radiate energy as it is accelerated around the circle, but the > contribution of the others results in a net balance of the radiated far > field and we have a steady magnetic field. I believe that a similar > process occurs in electron orbital shapes and field distributions which > results in a steady state non radiative condition. > > The Mills theory seems to build upon this basic concept and arrives at > some interesting conclusions. Geometry and charge field motion might hold > clues to LENR which we need to be open to. > > My main reason for this thread is to uncover the emission of energy by the > charge neutral particles associated with nuclear reactions. At this point > in my research I have been unsuccessful in locating a mechanism that allows > neutrons and the like to emit energy associated with the binding of a > nucleus. The only effect that I have observed thus far is through beta > decay. In this case I refer to either beta plus or minus decay and the > neutrino type associated with each. I am not aware of any reported > radiated electromagnetic energy which usually occurs when a charged > particle is accelerated. I do expect to see a minor amount of radiation > due to the release of the positron or electron at the moment that the > neutron transforms into a proton or vice versa during the process since > this would likely result in the acceleration of the charges. The > separation of the positive charge and the negative charge must show up in > the far field as a pulse of radiated energy unless some form of magic field > shape as suggested above occurs. > > The strong force only acts over a very tiny distance so it should not be > capable of allowing binding energy to escape into free space. These > conditions imply that there are most likely only two ways for binding > energy to be freed during a nuclear reaction. The first is by > electromagnetic radiation as in gamma rays and the second is by ejection > of energetic particles such as neutrinos, protons, neutrons, electrons or > etc. Perhaps the list should include very high energy reactions as those > associated with accelerators but I am most interested in the processes that > occur in normal environments such as LENR devices. > > Should the release of phonon energy just be considered another way of > viewing the ejection of particles that are quickly retarded by the adjacent > atoms? > > Also, is the coupling of entangled nearby protons just another type of > electromagnetic interaction? I think that a process associated with this > action might be the key reason that high energy gammas are not seen in LENR > as the energy could be spread over a large number of protons instead of > radiated. I have seen a remarkable difference in the behavior of near > field versus far field electromagnetic devices. Near field effects can > extend for a relatively long distance, but still not result in significant > radiation of energy into free space. > > If anyone is aware of a mechanism that allows charge neutral particles to > emit nuclear binding energy please direct me to the effect. Thanks in > advance. > > Dave >
