Sometimes the emails do get crossed up with the number of responses. In this particular case I think that my input helped to clarify the problem to many others who may be following this discussion. My choice of observation locations proves that there are two bodies or body equivalents that must exit the reaction. Now it is plain for all to see that it is not possible for an alpha particle to be the only result since I have demonstrated that the conservation of momentum would be violated it this were to happen.
Before my mental example, it was just a statement that was difficult to defend. Now we can more readily understand the type of reaction that must take place in this form of fusion. For one, it is not possible for an alpha with that total energy to be released. If we could get a measure of the energy of the alphas that actually are emitted, then that information can be directly used to calculate the transferred momentum and energy which is received by the matrix. Now, I have shown that some reactionary force is required through which the energy and momentum is transferred to the system. This is an important observation in my opinion. It is good that the members of vortex-l can discuss issues of this nature since much is not known about the reactions that take place. Sometimes a small spark of incite at the correct moment will lead to added knowledge. Perhaps others now will realize that what I have written here is educational. The next time, they might use my ideal observation location or something of a similar nature to understand other physics problems. Had I written a paper, it is likely that I would have overlooked this particular tidbit of knowledge and left out a major issue that should have been considered. So, I suggest that we continue to engage in similar discussions within vortex and enlarge our knowledge base since no one person is required to be the holder of all that is important. Knowledge is always advancing as more minds are engaged. I vote for open discussion within vortex. And, my post was not a waste of anybodies time. Proof of this assertion will be from this point forth since most of those engaged in the current discussion will now understand the issue of energy and momentum requirements. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Edmund Storms <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Cc: Edmund Storms <[email protected]> Sent: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 12:12 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Chemonuclear Transitions The problem with such exchanges is that the messages to different people cross so that I have to explain the same thing several times, which is a waste of time. That is why I write papers so that everyone can study the same explanation. On Jan 25, 2013, at 9:51 AM, David Roberson wrote: Ed, I am confused by your statement that cold fusion is a 2-body to 1 body reaction. I see two reaction components unless I am missing something. One is the alpha particle and the other appears in the form of mass released as energy into the surrounding structure. The energy release must result from emission of something. Normally in hot fusion, the release results from emission of a strong gamma when He4 forms. This gamma is not present when He4 forms during cold fusion. Why not? The mechanism of energy transfer is obviously not conventional, yet it must be consistent with the law of conservation of momentum. I try to solve this problem in my theory. Most people ignore the issue. Ed Every observer must see that the laws of physics apply to what he sees. My favorite point is to be located precisely between the two protons as they head toward each other with exactly the same energy. In this location an observer sees that a finite amount of kinetic energy is measured for the two particles and that there is exactly zero momentum for the equal velocity pair. When they collide together, there is no motion required for the resulting alpha particle until it releases the excess energy. When that energy is finally emitted in some form, then a reaction force would result in relative motion of the alpha particle. In this manner, both conservation of energy as well as conservation of momentum is shown. In my experience, when these laws are seen by any one observer, then they are true for all of the others. Do you see a hole in this argument? How are the laws true for others but not for the one ideally located? Dave -----Original Message----- From: Edmund Storms <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Cc: Edmund Storms <[email protected]> Sent: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 10:38 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Chemonuclear Transitions The human mind is able to imagine endless possibilities. In order to make any progress, a triage must be done by eliminating the ideas that are so improbable or so illogical that they have very little chance of being correct. That is what I'm attempting to do. In any case, several basic rules MUST be considered. Hot fusion is a conventional 2 body-2 body reaction as is required to carry away the energy and momentum. Cold fusion is a 2-body to 1 body reaction that violates this condition. That violation MUST be acknowledged and explained. People are not free to imaginary any thing. Certain rules are known to apply. These rules are so basic that they MUST not be ignored. Ed Storms On Jan 25, 2013, at 8:22 AM, Daniel Rocha wrote: d+d=n+He3 and d+d=t+p What about d+d+...+d=? We don't know. This is what many many particle models ends up being. Theyare hot fusion. The only difference it is that there are many, more than 2>, incoming nuclei to fuse. You cannot do that in experiments using colliders, it is too unlikely. So, you cannot say that cold fusion is any different than hot fusion that easily. 2013/1/25 Edmund Storms <[email protected]> Yes, people try to explain LENR using the behavior described in the paper. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ [email protected]
