On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 7:10 AM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote:
> Whereas Hagelstein’s model, when all is said and done, is an invention > created to match an experimental outcome (which it does) but with no > precedent in physical reality. > I think such models are called "phenomenological models" -- my impression is that the idea is to try to accurately capture the behavior you're seeing at the macro-level and then go from there. This seems like a solid approach, provided you don't jump to conclusions about what is going on under the hood. My possible issues with Hagelstein's models are not that they're phenomenological, it's that they don't seem to be very good, phenomenologically speaking. He wants to use a harmonic oscillator, and what I see in the experimental data is chaotic behavior, with large transients here and there and then longer quiescent periods. Has anyone followed Hagelstein's recent papers who can describe the behavior one would expect to see from his models? Perhaps they are chaotic now. In one of his abstracts he offers a motivation for his general approach, which is to try to subdivide a large (24 MeV) quantum into tiny pieces using a "coherent energy exchange": "excess heat is thought to have a nuclear origin due to the amount of energy produced, yet there are no commensurate energetic particles". Ed has also said that the fast particles are not commensurate with what one would expect for excess heat. I would like to know more about the basis for this conclusion. There are obviously few neutrons. But when you look at the CR-39 experiments, there are fast protons and alphas. And occasionally there is a "hamburger" exposure, where the chip is filled with pits. Abd wants to set aside those instances as unreliable data points, but I think he's setting aside evidence in doing so. Obviously when you have a system contained within a glass or metal housing, whether the system is electrolytic or gas phase, the fast particles are not going to escape. So the evidence one way or the other on whether there are fast particles commensurate with excess heat seems to hinge upon two points, as far as I can tell -- (1) the equivocal CR-39 experiments, and (2) insufficient brehmstrahlung and hot-fusion neutrons that one might expect as side channels. Can someone elaborate on anything I've missed here or gotten mixed up? Eric
