Hi Mark, My reply is below --
MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: > Hi Lou, > No, I do not know of any simulation tools, but didn't the article refer to > Schrödinger's equation? I take it that is not enough, but the paper would > likely explain the mathematics. Yes - in theory, a simulation of the multibody Schroedinger is possible, but since computer time and memory requirements go up exponentially with particle number, only simple, few-particle simulations are possible. The quantum chemists have a lot of tricks to reduce the simulation requirements, but I don't know much about them. > The other thought that comes to mind when looking at the pics of the > charge > distribution inside the nucleus, is orientation; and I've mentioned this > before in relation to electrons. I.e., if you could fire a particle (e, p > or n) at an individual nucleus, would the orientation of the line of fire > and the arrangement of nucleons (which in some cases takes in the look of > a > crystal lattice), would the probability of interaction be highly different > (towards MORE likely to interact) if the line of fire was oriented > perpendicular to what appears to be the nucleon lattice... or edge-on? > There is a reason WHY the E and B fields are perpendicular (and don't say > because of Maxwell!); there is a reason why when certain decay occurs the > ejecta fly off in opposite directions, etc. There most certainly is > geometry and specific orientations involved in atomic structure. The > problem is just colliding two beams, or various other methods of > investigation are dealing with a collection of atoms and thus, the > orientation of collisions is random, which leads to probabilistic > outcomes. Yes. It must get really complicated when all of the orientation and fine-structure nuclear variables are taken into account. I am not sure, but I'd guess that some experiments induce a collective spin in the targets to at least reduce that dimension. For sure, the decays you mention respect momentum and energy conservation, and indicate some kinds of symmetries and orientations in the nucleus. I wish I knew more about this. > > RE: orientation and electrons... > As I've mentioned in 'FYI' postings to the Collective over the last year, > there are several groups now that are able to hold a single atom in > laser/magnet 'traps' and perform very specific tests or imaging which > involve orientation, so I think we're getting close to some significant > new > insights about atomic physics. > > -Mark > > -----Original Message----- > From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com [mailto:pagnu...@htdconnect.com] > Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2012 11:14 AM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: RE: [Vo]: Coupled Protons and Directional Stability > > Thanks, Mark > > This is an interesting way to model the nucleus. > > I wonder if there are any simulation tools that approximate charged > paricle > collisions with nuclei (or atoms) that run on PCs rather than > super-computers. Probably, the task is too computationally intensive, but > maybe a moderately accurate simulation may be possible. > If you know of any, let me know. > > -- Lou Pagnucco > > MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: >> Lou and DaveR: >> You might want to take a look at this article: >> " The atomic nucleus: fissile liquid or molecule of life?" >> http://phys.org/news/2012-07-atomic-nucleus-fissile-liquid-molecule.ht >> ml >> >> -Mark >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com [mailto:pagnu...@htdconnect.com] >> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 9:34 PM >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Coupled Protons and Directional Stability >> >> David, >> >> Good questions. >> (However, to make your posts more readable, I suggest limiting your >> text lines to 75 characters, and using a paragraph format.) >> >> I believe that protons (or electrons) may move in coherent waves in >> nanostructures (or beams) that are strongly coupled permitting single >> particles to surmount much higher potential barriers than might be >> expected if one assumes that the particle can only use its kinetic >> energy to climb a potential hill - i.e., it behaves the same as in a > vacuum. >> >> For example, I believe a single proton in the vacuum with velocity v, >> e.g., >> v >> <--- p >> >> cannot surmount a barrier as high as the lead proton in a coherent, >> coupled proton row, all moving at the same velocity (v), e.g., >> v v v v v >> <--- p <--- p <--- p <--- .... <--- p >> >> (A 3-dimensional funnel formation would deliver even more energy.) >> >> I am trying to work out some simple examples assuming just classical >> physics, with densities and velocities attainable in nanowires. >> It is not clear to me that this kind of analysis applies when >> translated to quantum field theory, but at least it gives some hints >> about what may be possible. >> >> I find it also interesting that axial collisions between proton and >> electron pairs may be "head-on" collisions since magnetic and coulomb >> forces will be 180 degrees opposite each other. >> >> Maybe, too, captures of inner (K-shell) electrons by protons in a >> nucleus could be analyzed by classical physics as a cross check for >> whether electron capture could be responsible for transmutations which >> may move atoms downward toward smaller atomic numbers. >> >> -- Lou Pagnucco >> >> >> David Roberson wrote: >>> I asked the question in a previous post about thedirectional >>> stability of a group of coupled protons but did not get >>> sufficientresponse so I am attempting to rephrase. The stability of >>> the directional characteristic of these nucleons is ofparamount > importance if confirmed. >>> There is a suggestion that many protons can work as a unit >>> whenconfined to a nickel or similar crystal. If this is true, then >>> perhaps an external or internal magnetic fieldmight be capable of >>> modifying the direction of the entire group resulting inthe collision >>> of one or more protons with nearby nickel nuclei. In this case >>> fusion might occur when the LENRdevice sees a change in the field > direction. >>> This seems to be consistent with the observation that movement >>> ofhydrogen protons by diffusion into the nickel crystal appears to >>> enhance energyproduction. The motion of theseparticles would result >>> in the modification of the instantaneous magnetic field. >>> It has also been reported that LENR does not occur until acertain >>> minimum temperature is reached. This quite possibly may be when the >>> internal magnetic properties of thenickel degrade and external lines >>> of force take over. A process such as this would tend to bedifficult >>> to predict unless understood and hence we would interpret this as >>> atough process to reproduce. >>> So the big question is: how strong is the coupling effectwith regard >>> to the maintenance of the motion vector of the protons that groupand >>> how much force can one proton be given as it attempts to breech the >>> coulombbarrier? >>> Does anyone know of where thistype of information might be obtained? >>> Is there an experiment that can be performed that demonstrates >>> thesephenomena? >>> The question about directional stiffness can be broken downinto one >>> major effect. Do coupled protonshave a very strong tendency to keep >>> moving in the same direction as dictated bythe group? For example, >>> if the group ofprotons is moving in the X direction, will it take a >>> very large force to makeone of these acquire a Y or Z component to >>> its motion? Likewise, can one of these protons overcomethe coulomb >>> barrier by borrowing propulsion from its partners? >>> I am considering protons that are ââ¬Ådressedââ¬Â in a >>> mannersimilar to the electrons that are activated by an energy source >>> such as alaser. >>> The electron coupling wasmentioned earlier in the vortex. >>> Dave >>> P.S. I am hoping to direct some energy toward a new subject. The >>> climate change discussion is absorbing all of the bandwidth. >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > > >
