I wonder if a free atom in space exhibits a resonance of this nature? Look into the FANO resonance.
Cheers: Axil On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 4:44 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: > Because it is just wrong! Kidding Robin. Now I am confused a bit, are > you calculating that if I displaced an atom by a tiny amount and let go of > it that it would begin to vibrate at that frequency as the energy damped > out? Maybe so, I was not thinking of that process. I assumed that you > were figuring out the vibrations due to the temperature of the metal. If > what you calculated is accurate then an incoming photon of that frequency > would easily be absorbed by one of the atoms and start it vibrating in > place. Do you have any idea of how high the Q of the resonance would be? > You might find that energy is stolen away by the nearby atoms quickly. > > It would be interesting if you could calculate a similar resonant > frequency for the motion of just the nucleus. Displace it slightly and > allow it to wiggle back and forth within its electron cloud that is > somewhat confined by the atoms surrounding it. I wonder if a free atom in > space exhibits a resonance of this nature? One might think that in free > space that the electrons would compensate for the nucleus movement so > quickly that it would immediately radiate the energy. > > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > From: mixent <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Thu, Feb 28, 2013 3:05 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Explaining Cold fusion -IV > > In reply to David Roberson's message of Wed, 27 Feb 2013 20:31:29 -0500 > (EST): > Hi, > [snip] > >>I may have calculated incorrectly, but I get a base resonant frequency for > >>the > >Ni atom in it's lattice of something like 4E11 Hz. This is obviously way more > >than normal sound, but matches a photon frequency just below the bottom of > >the > >IR, meaning that THz frequency thermal photons should be able to excite it > >readily. > >[snip] > >Regards, > > > >Robin van Spaandonk > > > >http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html > >You must be off in that calculation for some reason. The kinetic energy due > >to > temperature should give you a direct measure of the velocity. > >Dave > > > > > What does the velocity due to thermal energy have to do with the resonant > frequency of atoms in the lattice? The atoms are in a rigid lattice. That > means > that at least for small deviations from their current location, they are > harmonic oscillators. I derived the spring constant from the energy required > to > cause the lattice to melt and the normal atomic spacing. Then I derived the > fundamental frequency from the spring constant and the mass of a Ni atom. The > frequency I got was 4E11 Hz. > > Why is this wrong? > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html > >
