Recapitulating your famous quote as follows” “Many explanations have been proposed that are based on imagined ways energy could accumulate in sufficient amount in the chemical lattice to overcome the Coulomb barrier, either directly or as result of neutron formation. These processes also occasionally involve accumulation of extra electrons between the hydrogen nuclei as another way to hide the barrier. These suggestions ignore the severe limitations a chemical lattice imposes on energy accumulation and electron structure. Some proposed processes even ignore obvious conflicts with what has been observed. Consequently, none have been useful in directing future research or have achieved universal acceptance.”
Recent work in nanoplasmonics have demonstrated an electromagnetic field amplification of 700 times in enhancement. This amplification can be amplified through the strengthening of negative charge accumulated in the lattice as well as particle size resonance matching with the ambient heat of the system. Ed you basic assumptions about charge accumulation are now proven to be incorrect. Will you adjust your theory to reflect these new factors? These nanoplasmonic experimental techniques can be adapted directly to LENR research, Are you willing to run such experiments? On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Edmund Storms <[email protected]>wrote: > Dave, what behavior of LENR can only be explained by proposing coupling > between the NAE sites? Of course, coupling is expected based on local > temperature and a photon flux. What more do you propose? > > Ed > > On Feb 24, 2013, at 2:26 PM, David Roberson wrote: > > Robin, > > The net energy released by a single fusion reaction is measured in the > MeV, not eV. That is why I believe that there is a mutual interaction > between individual NAE. The local heat energy release is large and can not > escape the area except through diffusion which is a slow process compared > to the reaction time associated with nuclear effects. > > This should behave much like raising the local temperature by many > degrees Kelvin which should encourage reactions by nearby NAEs if we assume > a positive temperature coefficient for LENR. > > Ed's theory handles activity at a single NAE that he states will > continue until completion. My suggested addition is a system level > coupling that will now explain other observations. When an addition > improves a theory, it should be incorporated into an improved one. Now we > can consider the behavior of a device exhibiting LENR as being composed of > two different type of responses. The first is the original one where NAE > generate copious amounts of energy as the elements within fuse. The > addition explains craters and hot spots which are hypothesized to be > associated with the density of the NAE sites. > > So far there has been no evidence that coupling does not exist between > NAE and a couple of good examples that suggest that this is happening. We > should seek out unusual behavior that does not meet expected performance > and attempt to explain the discrepancy. Do you know of any evidence that > coupling between active regions does not exist? > > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > From: mixent <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Sun, Feb 24, 2013 1:59 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Explaining Cold fusion -IV > > In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 24 Feb 2013 11:26:37 -0700: > Hi, > [snip] > >You ask several questions at the same time. The LENR process requires > >energy to overcome a slight energy barrier present within the overall > >process. Consequently, it has a positive temperature effect. In other > >words, some energy is required to initiate each fusion event. Once > >initiated, each fusion reaction goes on without any more help and > >releases its energy. Consequently, the initiation reaction will > >become faster, the more energy that is applied in any form. This > >energy can take the form of increased temperature, laser light, RF or > >any other source that can couple to the rate limiting reaction. The > >important information comes from identifying the rate limiting step so > >that the extra energy can be applied more effectively. This requires a > >theory. > > At the temperature increases common in LENR experiments, the amount of heat > energy added is only a tiny fraction of an eV. The theory that best matches > this > is Hydrinos, because a tiny fraction of an eV is all that is needed to match > the > difference in energy between the "energy hole" of Hydrinos, and the "energy > hole" provided by many common catalysts. > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html > > >
