Check out neutron star densities.

Dave



-----Original Message-----
From: Axil Axil <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Wed, Mar 27, 2013 2:37 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Low Energy Neutrons and Local Temperature


You can pack a "zillion" protons into a tiny space. 
No, protons need to pair with neutrons to get close; that is how they form 
nuclei.
Hydrogen will form metal hybrid chemically. But then they are not mobile 
anymore.
All the above does not apply to neutrons. Neutrons cannot be packed by the 
zillions into a tiny space.


 
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 1:20 AM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote:

If you are dealing with hydrogen in an NAE, is it necessary to consider it as 
being the size of a hydrogen atom in free space or can you treat it as a far 
smaller proton?  You can pack a "zillion" protons into a tiny space.


I would expect hydrogen to be different than any other element when contained 
within a metal matrix.  It only has one electron in orbit and it just seems 
likely that this single electron could be "lost" within the metal atoms 
surrounding the nucleus.  It is not hard to imagine that the proton charge 
would be neutralized or shielded by the activity of many electrons from the 
adjacent metal atoms.  If this happens, then why not expect more protons to be 
able to occupy a region closer than normal to each other when so confined and 
shielded.  I guess the trick would be associated with the interaction of the 
metal electrons.


Dave



-----Original Message-----
From: Axil Axil <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>


Sent: Tue, Mar 26, 2013 10:08 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Low Energy Neutrons and Local Temperature


There is a basic falsity in the LENR+ particle argument be it neutron or 
protons.
You cannot pack the volume of particles needed to produce the energy 
demonstrated in the LENR+ systems into those small NAE cavities at the volumes 
needed because of the Pauli Exclusion Principle.
It is like packing 10 lbs. of crap into a one oz. bag.
LENR cannot be based on particles entering into a nucleus. 
For those who want to play with numbers, run a calculation that determines the 
maximum density of protons or neutron that are allowed by the PEP into the NAE 
and then determine the number of NAE that are required to produce 10 kilowatts 
per second.
You will find that the numbers just don’t add up.
 
Cheers:   Axil


On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 9:26 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote:

I agree with the first order of business you state.


The second one could depend upon how quickly a reaction takes place since the 
vibration is a mechanical response to the temperature of the metal.  The 
kinetic energy of a nucleus should be something that can be calculated and I 
would suspect that its rate of movement is determined by the forcing function 
which is a relatively slow process.  I believe that a quantum mechanical action 
occurs so fast that the slow motion vibration of the nucleus is not important.  
I compare this to taking a snap shot of the instantaneous position and velocity 
of the nucleus.


My visualization is that the quantum mechanical formula defining the behavior 
takes a quick look at the nucleus and nearby neutron and acts when they are in 
the best proper condition relative to each other.  Of course if this process is 
slow, then my concept would not be valid and something in line with your second 
order would be appropriate.  Has the time frame for quantum mechanical 
activities of this nature been determined?  Another question: has the time 
frame for any quantum mechanical coupling been measured?  That is the first 
question.  I have read that entangled particles react at speeds in excess of 
light or considered instantaneous at great distances.  Would this behavior be 
considered typical?


Dave



-----Original Message-----
From: James Bowery <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>

Sent: Tue, Mar 26, 2013 7:55 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Low Energy Neutrons and Local Temperature






On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 5:29 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote:

I have to question how one is able to have stationary neutrons.   I assume that 
you refer to neutrons that are stationary relative to our frame of observation.

Relative to the statistical position of the mass of which they are a part.
 


One question that I keep asking is how quickly does a quantum mechanical effect 
take place?


The first order of business is:  What is the formula for the nuclear strong 
force vs distance between a nickel nucleus and a neutron?

The second order of business is:  When a nickel nucleus is vibrating in solid 
nickel, what is its spatial probability density function?



 



 




 

Reply via email to