To illustrate this concept of power concentration, take the example of the big laser based inertial confinement fusion effort at the National Ignition Facility. On the one hand, by marshaling huge amounts of electrical energy… an amount of power that can easily light all the worlds electrical equipment many times over all be it in an incredibly brief timeframe and concentrating it to a focus onto a minuscule volume, inertial confinement fusion (ICF) is a process where nuclear fusion reactions are initiated by heating and compressing a fuel target, typically in the form of a pellet that most often contains a mixture of deuterium and tritium hydrogen isotopes. To compress and heat this stellar fuel, energy is delivered to the outer most layer of the target using high-energy beams of focused laser light, electrons or ions, although for a variety of reasons, almost all ICF devices to date have used lasers. The heated outer layer of gas explodes in a shower of x-rays outward, producing a reaction force against the remainder of the target, accelerating the ionized gas and radiation inwards, compressing the target. This process may also create shock waves that travel inward through the target. A sufficiently powerful set of shock waves can compress and heat the fuel at the center so much that fusion reactions occur. On the other hand in counterpoint, the release of violent energy is not the proper way of LENR. The hot spot might well produce energy in another and more elegant utilitarian way, well controlled and subtle, and ironically in a way that is in opposition to the brutishness of the internal fusion confinement process (ICF). Confusion in equating these two diametrically opposed methods toward the activation of fusion is where experts in one approach unjustly malign the reputation and good name of the other. Hot spots genially cool the atoms in a sub nano-sized region whose dimensional scale is so small it makes the gas pellets used in ICF look like the Hindenburg dirigible by comparison. This cooling involves the removal of the coulomb barrier that protects the nucleus from penetration of and escape from this atomic core from and by other subatomic particles in graduated levels from slight to total. In this comparison lies the difference between the methods of power concentration, where one method tries to blindly batter down the walls of the nucleus with extreme and frenzied levels of power, and the other method succeeds in removing these protective walls through the elimination of its repulsive potential so that subatomic particles can come and go with ease and comfort. One of the big conceptual hang-ups about fusion is how most people confuse the principles in which the coulomb barrier is penetrated. To achieve fusion, one method uses brute and unconstrained power, the other with cunning stealth, like the harmonies and resonances of a great cosmic symphony one instrument building on the themes and rhythms of others to lull the nucleus into slumber where it relaxes its eternal guard allowing humankind to gently work our will on the most basic and protected forms of nature itself.
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > As for the time and dimensions of that energy density, it would take some > time to digest the paper, and some of the citations, but it seems to me > that the time scale is sub-picosecond which gives energy in the eV range on > the atomic dimension scale. That's consistent with the statement that > "TW/cm^2 may be enough to trigger ionization effects" (eV range), and that > is far too low to trigger nuclear effects. > > > > Take the time to understand this paper even if the processes involved are > not optimal. > > > > > > > > Coherent anti-stokes Raman shattering is a far more powerful power > concentration mechanism. The observation of Bose-Einstein condensation in > these nano-mirrors points to this coherent energy concentration mechanism. > > > > And the great part of this mechanism is that the stigma of cold fusion > will not stop the fascination of science about what is happing in these hot > spots. It’s only a matter of time before orthodox science will uncover LENR > in these hot spots. > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Joshua Cude <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> National Ignition Facility made history with record 500 terawatt shot, >>> but the pulse duration is just a few picoseconds. >>> >>> >>> No it's about 4 ns. That corresponds to about 1.8 MJ of energy. It's not >> that hard to look these things up. >> >> >> >>> The power produced by a nanoantenna is almost as powerful as that >>> generated by the National Ignition Facility, but that power level is >>> maintained for an extended period of time and might even be constant. >>> >>> >>> That's a complicated paper, but you could at least get the dimensions >> and the units right. What they claim is TW/cm^2. The NIF laser produces 500 >> TW. Apples and oranges. Or apples and apples per acre. >> >> >> As for the time and dimensions of that energy density, it would take some >> time to digest the paper, and some of the citations, but it seems to me >> that the time scale is sub-picosecond which gives energy in the eV range on >> the atomic dimension scale. That's consistent with the statement that >> "TW/cm^2 may be enough to trigger ionization effects" (eV range), and that >> is far too low to trigger nuclear effects. >> >> >> >>> The ability of a nanoantenna to concentrate power in the terawatt range >>> should be used to explore the effects of intense power concentration on >>> nuclear matter. >>> >>> >>> Even Joshua Cude should back this LENR effort. >>> >> I'd need to understand what they're claiming first, but if my superficial >> reading is right, then no. >> >> >
