David, Yes, it is borrowing the energy from the red-shifted low energy radiation leaving the surface and focusing it with the blueshifted high energy radiation at the point of battle at the surface. Total energy stays the same, perfect conservation. Velocity of all particles stay the same, just cohesive shifts in frequency and lambda all maximizing energy at a point near the surface guided in by quantum gravity. No atom stands a chance.
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 1:23 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah, the group can defeat the guy soundly! I also believe that there is > some form of coordinated effort that overcomes the coulomb barrier. I am > merely searching for the lost energy that is required and attempting to see > from where it originates. My suspicion is that the surrounding atoms > become a bit cooler as the energy is borrowed from them. Once the fusion > occurs, all of the borrowed energy would of course be paid back. The net > effect is the same, but then there would be no free lunch. > > Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: Axil Axil <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Mon, Aug 20, 2012 12:48 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Analysis of W-L theory as applicable to Rossi device -- > Third paper > > If you can think of the coulomb barrier as a soldier, a very good and > strong one, this hero, can defeat any individual soldier of the opposing > army. Even if the opposing army attacks our hero one fighter at a time the > hero can resist the attack since the attack is uncoordinated. > But when the opposing army gets its act together and acts a cohesive unit > the hero is overcome by the combined and additive strength of the combined > and coordinated action of the army. > The bigger that the coordinated army is, the more soundly that the hero is > defeated. > > Since electrons and protons are waves also see: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_interference > > > Cheers: Axil > > > On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 11:01 AM, David Roberson <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Axil, perhaps there is something going on that results in the lowering of >> the barrier. I have to ask where the additional energy comes from to >> satisfy the actual energy needed? If it is taken from other particles that >> might make sense, otherwise it sounds like a free lunch. >> >> Dave >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Axil Axil <[email protected]> >> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> >> Sent: Mon, Aug 20, 2012 2:20 am >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Analysis of W-L theory as applicable to Rossi device -- >> Third paper >> >> The super-atom produced as a large collection of coherent and entangled >> particles can completely lowers the Coulomb barrier. This is how atomic >> clustering fits into the LENR+ process. >> >> see >> >> *www.iscmns.org/work10/VysotskiiVapplicatio.ppt* >> ** >> ** >> *Cheers: Axil* >> ** >> >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 2:04 AM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> According to this paper, clusters of atoms drop the coulomb barrier. >>> The paper you reference in thiis post sites this as a cause of coulomb >>> barrier lowering. >>> Cheers: Axil >>> >>> >>> http://newenergytimes.com/v2/conferences/2012/ICCF17/ICCF-17-Vysotskii-Features-and-Giant-Acceleration.pdf >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 6:51 PM, Jeff Berkowitz <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> I read it too. The work has also been published in an influential >>>> peer-reviewed journal, JETP (Journal of Experimental and Theoretical >>>> Physics), a leading Russian journal also published in English: >>>> >>>> http://www.springerlink.com/content/rup025083t105q83/ >>>> >>>> It is hard to know what to make of this. It says the Coulomb barrier >>>> drops away to low levels under conditions we can in principle control. If >>>> true, that would be ... big. >>>> >>>> Wouldn't it be amusing if the "uncontrolled variable" that accounts >>>> for variation of results over the last 23 years turned out to be the RFI >>>> background in the vicinity of the experiment? >>>> >>>> Jeff >>>> >>>> On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Alan Fletcher <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> > From: "Jeff Berkowitz" <[email protected]> >>>>> > Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2012 10:08:15 PM >>>>> > Subject: [Vo]:Analysis of W-L theory as applicable to Rossi device >>>>> > If you open this link: >>>>> > >>>>> http://newenergytimes.com/v2/conferences/2012/ICCF17/ICCF-17-Vysotskii-Stimulated-LENR-Paper.pdf >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > It turns out that the PDF contains three separate and unrelated LENR >>>>> > papers stuck together end to end. >>>>> >>>>> The third paper is worth reading ... Harmonic oscillator explains the >>>>> peaks in Hagelstein/Letts/Craven laser beat frequencies. >>>>> >>>>> Ni+p => Cu+v reaction rate goes from 10^-1000 to 10^-4 >>>>> >>>>> Says it explains Rossi-Focardi ... except that they don't use a RF >>>>> stimulator (any more?) >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
