There seems to be two different overlapping threads going on here, since Mark's original suggestion relating to subatomic quark resonance was hijacked (by moi) in favor of another related subject: "lack of gammas" in LENR. Apologies for that.
However, in regard to the latter, the take-away message should be that MeV
quanta (gamma radiation) once emitted, can only be downshifted in steps -
going down to 100s of keV, 10s of keV, hundreds of eV (EUV), 10s of eV (UV
light), visible light and then to IR light, etc. All of this must be
accomplished in dozens or hundreds of distinct steps involving millions of
target atoms. Lewis Larsen wants to tell the world of physics that no, it is
possible to do it all in one step, in one particle.
The reason this claim of W-L theory is ludicrous can be seen every day by
looking up. Our sun makes gamma radiation as its prime energy product - yet
x-rays, ultraviolet, visible, infrared, microwave, and radio waves are all
emitted - and the proportion of IR is well-understood. Of course this is not
LENR, but it is the model for gamma downshifting, and if you want to assert
two distinct miracles - then it is wise to show some other evidence than the
very phenomenon you wish to explain - with your outrageous claim.
In the sun, gammas cannot escape without colliding with protons and
electrons and losing a small portion of their energy on every collision -
over and over and over. The same should be true on earth IF gammas are
actually emitted. Moreover, a gamma ray typically spends 30,000 years
colliding with atomic particles and re-emitting energy at a slightly lower
energy level on the sun, until it finally escapes. That is a lot of
downshifting, and to assert that it can all be avoided, because "we need to
make gammas do that, in order to make our theory work" is essentially what
the rest of science is being asked to believe.
Don't ask me to explain the calculations that provided this million-day
solar gamma lag time - but it is part of the standard model. Hagelstein - at
least, suggests another pathway (phonon collective vibrations) that spreads
the MeV radiation out over trillions of atoms in the metal lattice, unlike
W-L which suggest a single particle downshifting. Almost no one in physics
believes Hagelstein is correct on this, but he is far closer to making a
case for "lack of gammas" than W-L.
It seems a bit more logical to suggest that the lack of gammas can be better
explained by the lack of the kind of nuclear reaction that produces gammas.
The most prevalent nuclear reaction in the Universe, reversible proton
fusion, produces no gammas. Shouldn't we be taking a closer look at RPF?
From: Axil
MIT Prof. Peter L. Hagelstein stated in an interview as
follows:
So there are no significant amount of neutrons, there's no
fast electrons, there's no gamma rays. There's nothing you might expect if
it were a more normal nuclear reaction process. The basic statement here is
that - if it's real and if it's nuclear... the argument for it being nuclear
is that there's 4He (helium-4) observed in experiments, roughly one 4He for
every 24 MeV of energy that's created. So what you need in the way of a
theoretical model, basically a new kind of mechanism that doesn't work like
the old Rutherford reaction picture that nuclear physics is based on. So
that's the basic problem that I've been working on for a great many years.
The big problem is one that has to do with the quantum
mechanics issue. The nuclear energy comes in a big energy quantum, and if it
didn't get broken up, then the big energy quantum would get expressed as
energetic particles, as normally happens in nuclear reactions. So the
approach we've taken is that we've said "the only conceivable route for
making sense of these observations at all, is that the big energy quanta
have to get sliced and diced up into a very very large number if much
smaller energy quanta." The much larger number is on the order of several
hundred million. In NMR physics and optical physics, people are familiar
with breaking up a large quantum into perhaps 30 smaller pieces, you could
argue that there are some experiments where you could argue that maybe that
numbers as high as 100 or so. It's unprecedented that you could take an MeV
quantum and chop it up into bite sized pieces that are 10s of meV.
Harry Veeder wrote:
If a bunch of low energy photons is equivalent to the
energy of 1 high energy gamma photon, why can't a particular nuclear
reaction sometimes produce a mountain of infrared photons instead one gamma
photon? According to conservation of energy this is possible, so why is it
considered impossible?
harry
MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote:
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
>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.
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
