Ed, I can't speak for Francis, but in my posting, there is no 2nd Law violation - merely a conversion of field momentum to mechanical momentum. No reduction of entropy. No unphysical concentration of energy.
I see only bread-and-butter physics taken directly from the Feynman Lecture reference. As far as observable behavior, I cite the literature claiming transmutation in arcing phenomena. I cannot vouch for its validity. Scattering calculations from these 'slow' collisions are problematic. I cannot find references that do not involve particle accelerators, which are not relevant to this case. -- Lou Pagnucco > Would you not expect this process to produce observable behavior if it > could occur spontaneously in a material? The local energy would be > expected to cause various effects such as local chemical reactions, X- > radiation, and local heating would it not? Such effects are not > observed even though many different materials have been examined by > science very carefully. And, why do you ignore the Second Law of > Thermodynamics, which says energy does not spontaneously concentrate > in local regions in a material? > > Ed Storms > > > On May 15, 2013, at 6:09 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: > >> Lou, we are now on exactly the same page! My posit remains that >> relativistic effects are exactly what "suppression" does. When >> longer wavelengths can't fit between the casimir geometry it becomes >> negative to us in exactly the same way we appear to suppress longer >> wavelengths to an object approaching "C". This is a quantum effect >> of the nickel geometry that alters the space time which the gas >> between the plates occupies. I do believe the transition is >> "transparent" to the gas atoms [tiny local observer] and will remain >> symmetrical as suppression increases and decreases. There won't be >> an energy gain unless reactions are synchronized to occur at >> different suppression levels such that this change in equivalent >> energy can be used to discount the "restore" side of the reaction. I >> think this may happen in nature but runaway quickly destroys the >> geometry and it will only be with careful heat sinking, material >> choices and control of the geometry that we will be able to retain >> the properties long enough to learn more about them and how to >> exploit. >> Fran >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 3:04 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:'Slow' arcing electrons can gain >> relativistic mass >> >> >> Widom-Larsen, Brillouin (and some others) propose that electrons >> acquire >> 782 KeV mass/energy and overcome the electroweak barrier to combine >> with >> protons, deuterons or tritons to produce low momentum neutrons. >> >> Storms notes [1] that an electron must reach relativistic speeds to >> gain >> 782 KeV in a lattice, - seemingly a very tall order, due to >> collisions. >> Others, e.g. Hagelstein, et al[2], doubt that field strengths in LENR >> experiments provide this extra energy ("renormalized" mass). >> >> I think both objections may overlook collective effects. >> >> In an arc, colliding electron-proton(deuteron) wave packet pairs are >> strongly squeezed together by equal, opposite magnetic forces. >> >> Even when the composite packet has velocity zero (lab frame), the >> packets >> continue absorbing field energy by becoming more oscillatory, >> localized and >> overlapping as spectra shift to high mass/energy eigenstates. In >> pictures: >> >> >> TIME Low resolution ASCII graphic of >> | e-p collision with (lab) velocity ~ 0 >> | >> V PROTON ELECTRON >> | -----> <----- Decreasing >> | _____________ _____________ Magnetic >> | / \ / \ Vector Potential >> | / PROTON \ / ELECTRON \ >> | / 'p' \ / 'e' \ A >> | -------------------+--------------------- -------------> >> | >> V |\ 'HEAVIER' | >> | | \ ELECTRON | >> | _____________ | \ /\ | >> | | \| \ / \ V >> | | | \/ \ /\ /\ | >> | | | \/ \/ \ A | >> | -------------------+--------------------\ -------> | >> | V >> | | A-field >> | |\ transfering >> | | \ | 'HEAVY' momentum >> | | \ |\ ELECTRON to e-p pair >> | ___________|___\ | \ | | >> | | | |\| \|\ | >> | | | | | | | | >> | | /\| | \ \ \ A | >> | -------------/------+-------\-\---------- ---> V >> V significant e-p electron wave packet >> wave packet overlap becomes squeezed, more >> localized, oscillatory, >> - spectrum shift to high >> mass/energy eigenstates >> >> >> Electron velocities in arcs are usually far below relativistic, but >> the arc >> magnetic field stores huge energy and momentum that is transferred >> to/from >> colliding particles when the arc current rises, falls, or is >> interrupted. >> >> To gain 782Kev in energy, an electron can equivalently acquire (see >> [6]) >> >> momentum = 6.3480 * 10^-22 [N*sec] -- where [N] = newtons >> >> The following example shows that this does not require exotic lab >> equipment. >> >> Assume the electron is in an arc plasma uniformly distributed in a >> tube >> with radius=R, length=10*R, current=I aligned with the z-axis of 3- >> space. >> >> We want to compute how much field momentum can be transferred to a >> electron >> 'e' in a collision at a radial distance 'r' from the tube center. >> >> =============================== x-axis >> ^ e \ / >> | ^ <----- I[Amps] \ / >> | | r \ / >> 2R -------+------------------- <------x----- z-axis >> | / \ >> | / \ >> v / y-axis >> =============================== >> >> |<------ L = 10*R ------->| >> >> >> The (under-utilized) "magnetic vector potential" field (denoted A(r)) >> depends only on local currents. Very conveniently [3,4] -- >> >> q*A(r) = momentum impulse (as a vector) that a charge 'q' at point >> 'r' >> picks up if currents sourcing vector-field 'A' are shut off >> >> By ref[5], near the outer surface of the electron plasma tube (r = R), >> the momentum available to electrons, protons, or deuterons is >> >> [e]*|A(R)| = [e] * (u0/4*pi) * ln(2L/R) * I >> = (1.6*10^-19 [C]) * (10^-7 [N/Amp^2]) * ln(20) * I >> = 4.8 * 10^-26 [C] * [N/Amp^2] * I >> >> {Note that this only depends on the R and L ratio.} >> >> So, the minimum current which can provide a colliding electron (at a >> radial distance R) in this arc with 782 KeV is >> >> >> I = {6.348 * 10^-22 [N*sec]} / {4.8 * 10^-26 [C*N/Amp^2]} >> = 1.33 * 10^4 [Amp] >> >> >> -- [e] = electron charge = 1.6*10^-19 [C], [C] = coulomb >> u0 = permeability of free space = 4*pi*10^-7 [N/Amp^2] >> ln = natural log, ln(20) ~ 3 >> [Amp] = [C]/[sec] >> >> Much greater arc currents are routinely achieved [7]. >> >> >> NOTES - >> 1) Only electrons can acquire significant relativistic mass from >> a momentum "kick" in arcs due to their small mass. >> More massive protons, deuterons or tritons will not gain much mass. >> >> 2) The equation for |A(r)| is singular at r=0 (see [5]). >> This is not "unphysical" since volume integral is still finite. >> It shows that much smaller currents still can produce "heavy >> electrons" >> at the center of current flow, but less frequently. >> >> 3) It is not obvious whether inner K-shell electrons of an atom in an >> arc can be forced into the nucleus - resulting in "electron >> capture" >> >> 4) Perhaps a similar analysis applies to currents in emulsions of >> metal >> particles in dielectric fluids [8]. >> >> 5) Widom-Larsen also calculate the collective magnetic force using the >> "Darwin Lagrangian" which includes pairwise magnetic energy between >> electrons. >> >> REFERENCES - >> [1] (p. 29) "A Student's Guide to Cold Fusion" >> http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEastudentsg.pdf >> >> [2] "Electron mass shift in nonthermal systems" >> http://arxiv.org/pdf/0801.3810.pdf >> >> [3] "Feynman Lectures on Physics" Vol.3, Ch.21 (p.5) >> http://www.peaceone.net/basic/Feynman/V3%20Ch21.pdf >> >> [4] "On the Definition of 'Hidden' Momentum" (p.10 - note cgs units) >> http://hep.princeton.edu/~mcdonald/examples/hiddendef.pdf >> >> [5] UIUC Physics 435 EM Fields & Sources - LECTURE NOTES 16 (p. 8) >> http://web.hep.uiuc.edu/home/serrede/P435/Lecture_Notes/P435_Lect_16.pdf >> >> [6] Accelerating Voltage Calculator >> http://www.ou.edu/research/electron/bmz5364/calc-kv.html >> >> [7] "EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE CURRENT DENSITY AND THE HEAT- >> FLUX >> DENSITY IN THE CATHODE ARC SPOT" >> >> http://www.ifi.unicamp.br/~aruy/publicacoes/PDF/IfZh%20current%20density%20and%20U.pdf >> >> [8] AMPLIFICATION OF ENERGETIC REACTIONS - Brian Ahern >> United States Patent Application 20110233061 >> http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2011/0233061.html - EXCERPT: >> <<Ultrasonic amplification may have usefulness, but it is inferior to >> are discharges through nanocomposite solids due to a process called >> the >> "inverse skin effect." In ordinary metals, a rapid pulse of current >> remains close to an outer surface in a process referred to as the >> "skin effect." Typically, the electric current pulses flow on the >> outer >> surface of a conductor. Discharges through a dielectric embedded with >> metallic particles behave very differently. The nanoparticles act >> as a >> series of short circuit elements that confine the breakdown >> currents to >> very, very small internal discharge pathways. This inverse skin >> effect >> can have great implications for energy densification in composite >> materials. Energetic reactions described fully herein are amplified >> by an inverse skin effect. These very small discharge pathways are so >> narrow that the magnetic fields close to them are amplified to >> magnitudes unachievable by other methods >> >> >> >> Comments/criticisms are welcome. >> >> -- Lou Pagnucco >> >> >> >> >> > > >
