http://www.beilstein-journals.org/bjnano/single/articleFullText.htm?publicId=2190-4286-3-97
This is how you can build nanowires Cheers: Axil On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Edmund Storms <[email protected]>wrote: > > 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 >> >> >> > >
