Are we talking about the bulk of theoretical physics? If so, then it's simply 
everything that's not on the brane. I like to conceptualise it as an embedding 
space of higher dimension than the brane we inhabit.

Andrew
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: ChemE Stewart 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 4:11 PM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Water Window, Hexavalency, Bergius and Rossi


  Mark,


  Just to comment on your comments to the "Bulk".  


   "it obviously is quite different than the bulk, or else there would be a big 
hole in the earth,instead of the tabletop! "


  We do get lots of large holes in the bulk, we call them "sinkholes"  some are 
very large and strange.  I have been tracking approx. 120 along with the 
weather patterns.  Here is an interesting one from 2011
  
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/sinkhole-found-under-guatemalan-womans-bed/2011/07/21/gIQAw3ThRI_blog.html



  "Processes in the bulk can be considered random and disordered, and therefore 
one must use QM and probabilities to predict behaviors"



  Our weather patterns on Earth are not random and disordered, in fact when 
nature creates waterspouts, tornadoes, hurricanes and severe cold fronts from 
originally a random and disordered gas she is showing us her ability to 
organize random gasseous environment into a thermodynamic and electromagnetic 
marvel.


  "bulk's physics of chaotic randomness does NOT support this concentration of 
energy"



  Air + Water Vapor = 9.6 Megatons (600 Hiroshima Bombs) from the latest 
Oklahoma tornado mentioned by scientists here

  Snowball +  Empty Space >= 1 Megaton (Greater than Million times Nuclear 
Brightness Magnitude Increase) from Comet Holmes mentioned by Scientists here 
and researched to be from “exotic ice” here (that research must have been 
dreamt up while smoking something exotic)

  Rock/Metal + Air = 30 Megatons (Tunguska), unfortunately they can’t find the 
pieces, just a lake and some sinkholes

  Rock/Metal + Air =480 Kilotons (Chelyabinsk), Unfortunately they are mostly 
left with a large hole in the ice and some itty bitty pieces.

  Air + Water Vapor = 95.6 Megatons (Annual Total of lightning striking Earth) 
from here, you can check my conversion here

  Air + Water Vapor = 12428 MEGATONS (Energy Released DAILY FROM A HURRICANE).  
You can find it here

  Rock + Rock = 2390 Megatons (Annual Energy from Earthquakes – 23 ergs). You 
can find it here

  In summary, I'm not sure I agree with your interpretation of the "bulk" 
unless you just limit it to the physics of a local area of spacetime.

  Stewart
  darkmattersalot.com





  On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 2:22 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint <zeropo...@charter.net> 
wrote:

    Mornin' Jones!

    NAE might imply to some 'nuclear', but I qualified it with , "..in or around
    the NAE, *whatever they turn out to be*,"

    I use the term NAE more in a general sense to refer to the localized areas
    that are conducive to the reaction/process... it obviously is quite
    different than the bulk, or else there would be a big hole in the earth,
    instead of the tabletop!
    ;-)

    Processes in the bulk can be considered random and disordered, and therefore
    one must use QM and probabilities to predict behaviors.   I would bet that
    once we understand what is going on in NAEs (generally speaking), it will
    NOT be random, and will be modeled in a more classical manner.

    I see much discussion about the conditions necessary to overcome the coulomb
    barrier.  In trying to think their way thru it, they apply some scientific
    'rules' so as to propose something that is at least reasonable, and
    rightfully so.  However, the 'rules' seem to me to be taken from what's
    expected of the bulk properties, and I take issue with that.  The concept of
    resonances and coherent (or in-phase) oscillatory systems can cause
    long-term localized regions which concentrate energy; the bulk's physics of
    chaotic randomness does NOT support this concentration of energy.  For the
    localized areas (NAEs), is the concentration of energy enough to overcome
    the coulomb barrier?  Time will tell.  Tesla was generating potentials of
    tens of millions of volts in his secondary from only a few hundred volts in
    his primary, so amplification factors of 4 to 6 orders of magnitude are
    perfectly reasonable...


    -Mark
    _____________________________________________
    From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]

    Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 9:54 AM
    To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
    Subject: RE: [Vo]:Water Window, Hexavalency, Bergius and Rossi



    Mark,

    Yes - the "energy localization" aspect of Ahern/Dicke/Preparata and the
    superradiance modality could apply to any secondary reaction which benefits
    from local mechanical pressure at the nm geometry.

    However, the "NAE" implies a nuclear reaction, which may not be necessary.

    The absence of gamma radiation presents the prima facie case that no
    traditional nuclear reaction takes place. The is no good reason to propose a
    known nuclear reaction, if good alternatives exist, which is the case.

    Ahern and others, including Mitchell Swartz seem to be leaning towards an
    explanation where thermal gain is QM-based and mediated by spin dynamics -
    which involves the "magnon".

    The source for energy mediated by magnons can itself be nuclear or
    non-nuclear. This is where semantics enters the picture - but one is on
    firmer theoretical ground using QM magnons as an operative modality - rather
    than LENR "cold fusion".

    The magnon is a "Goldstone boson" (wiki has an entry) and can turn up in
    both magnetic anomalies and nuclear anomalies. It is spin based. The magnon
    can be said to be the quantum of spin.

    Actually "subnuclear" is the preferred semantics for the ultimate energy
    source for magnons since pions are themselves pseudo-Goldstone bosons, at a
    minimum and there are no other "nuclear" indicia.

    When the nucleus is involved via a magnon modality, mass will be converted
    into energy in smaller packets, and without a change in the identity of the
    nucleon. That is the key semantic difference between "subnuclear" and
    "nuclear".

    Thus, we can propose using the term "subnuclear energy" to describe magnon
    mediated conversion, instead of "nuclear energy" since the later almost
    always implies an identity change in the nucleus (and larger packets of
    energy).

                    _____________________________________________
                    From: MarkI-ZeroPoint

                    If this sort of thing is happening in or around the NAE,
    whatever they turn out to be, then it could very well explain how the
    Coulomb barrier is overcome...

                    _____________________________________________
                    From: Jones Beene

                    In pursuit of more evidence for the ~300 eV photon - in the
    sense of it being the active energy transfer particle for the Rossi effect,
    another curiosity turns up - the water window. This is a favorable scaling
    region at the border of EUV and x-radiation for near-coherency and
    transparency. The wavelength is around 4 nm in the spectral region between
    the Carbon and Oxygen K shell absorption edges.

                    The Rossi effect does not employ planned coherency it would
    seem, unless AR is cleverer than anyone imagines. However, from the earliest
    days, Dicke superradiance was thought to be involved in LENR in a causative
    way, even if inadvertent. Preparata expanded on this - and it was called
    DPSR or Dicke-Preparata Superradiance. Ahern calls it "energy
    localization"....



Reply via email to