At the root of the Plasmon is the strong coupling between light and matter. This matter includes electrons and ions in a dipole. The synchronized vibrations of many dipoles in thermal equilibrium will provide a coherent and entangled environment for this strong coupling.
It is reasonable to expect that this strong coherent and entangled coupling can occur between photons, electrons and quarks. If a resonance condition is properly established, then transformations between these elements should be expected as happens between matter and light. Cheers: Axil On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 4:24 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi Dave,**** > > Realize that I’m only trying to apply a physical, 3-dimentional/geometry, > to atoms and subatomic particles in a QUALitative way to explain COMMON > observations that don’t have an explanation in QM or Classical models… I > have not tried to bring any QUANTitative elements in, which is probably > above my pay-grade… but think that would be fun and fruitful. If my model > sparks some thoughts by those more mathematically talented, that would be > great…**** > > ** ** > > In a plasma, the kinetic E of the individual particles is so high that one > has to look at it as totally UNcorrelated movement; nothing is IN-phase. A > veritable free-for-all with things flying around in all directions and > random collisions … if enough heat (kinetic E) is present, then collisions > occur with enough force to result in fusion events. This is the > brute-force fusion process that we all are taught, and likely goes on in > stars.**** > > ** ** > > Now, if you applied an E-field (and perhaps perpendicular B-field) > throughout the plasma, then you might be able to get the plasma > constituents to align and oscillate in sync, AND, if you then fire a > particle (neutron or proton) into that ‘swarm’ of aligned particles, and > perpendicular to its oscillation, fusion might be a whole lot easier…**** > > ** ** > > My guess is that it would take an extremely strong E/B field to overcome > the kinetic energy that has been imparted to the ions/e- that make up the > plasma. All atoms (or are we talking just electrons?) want to shed any > heat quanta so they are in perfect balance, but they can’t simply shed it > to the vacuum… this shedding process MUST involve some kind of coupling to > something else (another atom or photon). The situation just prior to > formation of the plasma is that, because you’ve added so much energy to > each atom, that as soon as one atom sheds a quantum of heat, it immediately > gets another quantum from a neighbor… and all the atoms are so > ‘out-of-balance’ due to the multiple quantums of heat that each has, that > they literally shake themselves apart… voila… plasma.**** > > ** ** > > The articles I referenced in my original posting indicate that not only > electrons, but quarks (which make up nuclear particles) as well could be > dipolar oscillations, only the quarks are oscillating orders of magnitude > smaller distance (thus, much smaller nuclear diameter compared to atomic > diameter) **** > > but orders of magnitude higher frequency. Have you ever played > ping-pong/table-tennis? Take a ping-pong ball and drop it on the table, > and then take your paddle and quickly restrict the balls vertical movement > closer and closer to the tabletop. What happens? The oscillations of the > ball speed up.**** > > ** ** > > My guess is that if you take the frequency of oscillation of say the H 1s > electron, and the diameter of the H-atom (i.e., the physical extent of that > oscillation), over a 1 second span of time, it would be a constant. That > constant will be somehow harmonically related to the same constant > calculated for a quark… much smaller physical distance (diam of nucleus) > but much higher frequency. And the speed of light in a vacuum is somehow > part of these constants. Could this model be a physical explanation for > E=hv???**** > > ** ** > > -Mark**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > *From:* David Roberson [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 03, 2013 11:18 AM > > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!**** > > ** ** > > Mark, **** > > ** ** > > I like the idea of many individual oscillators being able to take the > energy if that is possible. Each of these would have to be at a frequency > that is far lower than is normally emitted if a highly energetic gamma is > to be replaced. Low frequency oscillators tend to operate a lower speeds > by definition and I wonder how quickly the normal high frequency photon > would be emitted. Do you have any idea as to why the atom would be coaxed > into the slower response than usual?**** > > ** ** > > The only way I can understand an operation of this type is to assume that > the nuclei are connected electro magnetically to a strong degree. Maybe > entangled would work, but the coupling would need to be strong. And if > entangled, a very large number of resonators would need this coupling to > share the load adequately.**** > > ** ** > > I need a better understanding of how a large amount of energy contained > within an excited nucleus can find alternate paths of escape. The gammas > tend to dominate escape from plasmas. A metal matrix is far different than > a plasma cloud.**** > > ** ** > > Dave > > **** > > -----Original Message----- > From: MarkI-ZeroPoint <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Wed, Apr 3, 2013 1:06 pm > Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!**** > > **** > > Dave stated:**** > > “… and that the energy from the reactions is shared among the atoms > surrounding it. I have been looking for evidence that fusion can take > place in the compact environment of a cold fusion NAE in a manner that is > very different from that occurring within a plasma.”**** > > **** > > When one looks at subatomic particles as dipolar oscillations, and within > the NAE, all those oscillations being aligned and IN-PHASE, they will serve > as energy sinks for a specific wavelength of energy. Thus, the amount of > energy that would have been emitted in a gamma is distributed as smaller > packets amongst the large number of IN-phase oscillators. **** > > **** > > This all reminds me of a PhysOrg article I mentioned a few years ago where > the scientists had isolated two atoms, side by side, and cooled to near 0K… > they could watch as one of the atoms remained completely still, while the > other would wiggle, because it had a quantum of heat energy and thus, [my > conclusion] the internal oscillators were out-of-balance, which causes the > entire atom to ‘shake’. What was interesting is that they could do > something (don’t remember what) that would cause that quantum of heat to > xfer from the shaking atom to the still one and, you guessed it, the one > that was still was now shaking and the former holder of the quantum of heat > was now still.**** > > **** > > Back to Dave’s statement…**** > > Does the gamma get emitted, but then immediately absorbed by the > ‘Collective’ oscillations, or is it a direct xfer of quanta of energy as > explained above? In either case, whatever the exact conditions that are > required, it would seem that those conditions result in BOTH new low-energy > nuclear processes AND an energy sink which (almost entirely) favors > coupling into lattice vibrations instead of emission of energetic particles. > **** > > **** > > -mark**** > > **** > > **** > > *From:* David Roberson [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]?>] > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 03, 2013 8:07 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!**** > > **** > > >In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear**** > > engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack**** > > of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all.**** > > I agree with you Jones. The only way to explain this process is to assume > that the gammas are not emitted at any time and that the energy from the > reactions is shared among the atoms surrounding it. I have been looking > for evidence that fusion can take place in the compact environment of a > cold fusion NAE in a manner that is very different from that occurring > within a plasma. The system difference is evident and I have not seem > papers describing known fusion events recorded within a metal matrix where > gammas are emitted at the expected levels. **** > > **** > > I proposed an experiment where a palladium cube loaded with deuterium is > subjected to a flux of muons as a way to induce conditions that are known > to result in fusion. If this does not result in the release of a number of > gammas, then evidence is obtained that fusion within a metal matrix is > different than that occurring within a gas. Of course, muon induced fusion > might behave differently than normal LENR activity. The more clues that we > obtain about the behavior of LENR, the faster we can understand the > mechanism.**** > > **** > > Dave**** > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jones Beene <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Wed, Apr 3, 2013 10:33 am > Subject: RE: [Vo]:A pile of clues... should be obvious by now!**** > > Mark,**** > > **** > > Some of us only see a duck as a "downer" (cough, cough)**** > > **** > > Anyway, and from one fringe-of-the-fringe LENR perspective, this has > "strong**** > > force interaction" written all over it, whether it is obvious to W-L**** > > proponents or not.**** > > **** > > RPF(reversible proton fusion) would certainly interact with its surrounds**** > > via spin (magnons) and would shuttle from one state (Helium-2) to another**** > > (two protons) with only quark interactions to show for the experience. The**** > > net energy deposited (or removed) is small per event, but happens at the**** > > rate of blackbody phonon vibration (mid terahertz).**** > > **** > > Thus even micro(eV) energy change per event can get amplified rapidly, if**** > > and when asymmetry is engineered into the reaction.**** > > **** > > ... hmmm... I'm now thinking of calling "quark color-change" as seen in > RPF**** > > as the "quark-quack" reaction ... nothing there but spin, so to speak...**** > > thus giving detractors the satisfaction of calling the theory as**** > > quack-derived ... yet all the while, the other LENR theories are falling**** > > like ducks ... simply due to the obvious: not being able to adequately**** > > explain lack of gammas. **** > > **** > > In the end, it should be crystal clear to anyone who understands nuclear**** > > engineering - that there is no possible way to adequately explain the lack**** > > of gammas in LENR - other than that they never happened at all.**** > > **** > > Jones**** > > **** > > From: MarkI-ZeroPoint **** > > **** > > The evidence is piling up that subatomic 'particles' are**** > > dipole-like structures, and likely a type of dipole oscillation...**** > > Looks, sounds, feels and quacks just like one...**** > > ;-)**** > > HTSITYS,**** > > -Mark**** > > [darn pics made msg too large so had to delete the piccys]**** > > ---------------------------**** > > **** > > Researchers suggest one can affect an atom's spin by**** > > adjusting the way it is measured**** > > http://phys.org/news/2013-03-affect-atom-adjusting.html**** > > **** > > [GO to website to see picture]**** > > **** > >
