On Feb 24, 2013, at 2:45 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
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?
Perhaps when I agree with your conclusion I will make a change.
However, I do not agree and the charge accumulation is not important
to the present level.. As for running experiments, I have done this
for years but now I trying to understand what the experiments mean. I
have concluded that effective experiments will require equipment I do
not have. I'm looking for ways to get access to such equipment.
Ed
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
