On May 28, 2013, at 11:00 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote:
Ed,
It may only be semantics or interpretation of what
catalytic action really is but what you are calling an energy sink
that an H+ ion can fall into by forming a hydroton is also defying
COE..
Fran, formation of Hydroton is totally a conventional chemical
reaction. It occurs because Gibbs energy is created by forming a bond
having more energy than the bonds holding the H+ in the lattice. This
is pure normal chemistry. It just happens that the structure allows a
nuclear interaction, which only occurs after the structure forms. This
nuclear consequence is simply a lucky break. The structure allows the
nuclear interaction because it causes the nuclei to get closer than is
normally possible because of the high concentration of negative charge
located between the nuclei. This charge reduces the barrier enough to
allow the distance between the nuclei to reach a critical distance.
Once this distance is reached, the nuclei MUST reduce their mass-
energy to be in equilibrium with the distance.
I have no idea how the Casimir effect applies and I see no reason to
apply an idea that has ambiguous behavior. Nevertheless, I would be
interested to see how you can use this proposed phenomenon.
Ed Storms
particularly if it has to repeat this endless reaction many times to
dissipate the barrier enough to allow fusion.. how many photons have
to be generated before the barrier falls? My particular posit may
not be accurate but I remain convinced change in casimir effect as
the hydron passes through the balance point is opposing natural
random motion to “power” the anomalous action in these cavities.. it
may be the engine behind your resonance between covalent and
monatomic states –forming the energy sink while opposing the motion
of one state through the sink much more than the other encouraging
disassociation and subsequent photon emission as the hydrotron
reforms.
Fran
From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 11:25 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
OK Fran, we are getting closer to a mutual understanding. Let me go
into more detail.
The gap creates a separation of charge because the electron charge
on the metal atoms on each wall are not being offset by nearby
atoms, as is the case in the lattice. Consequently, like all clean
surfaces, an effective negative charge is present on both walls.
However, unlike a normal surface, the opposite wall is close enough
to create a balanced charge at the midline between the two walls.
This conditions causes an energy sink to form into which any H+ in
the metal lattice can fall by forming the Hydroton. Because this
reaction is exothermic, the Hydroton gets hot and starts to
oscillate. This process has the ability to bring two H nuclei close
enough that a nuclear interaction can start. Because of the
oscillation, this close distance lasts only for a brief time, a time
too short for the nuclear interaction to be completed.
Consequently, a brief loss of mass-energy occurs, which is small
compared to what can be released once the two nuclei make full
contact. This process is repeated until all mass-energy is lost and
the two nuclei are in contact, thereby fusing into the final nucleus.
There is no need to introduce the concept of Maxwellian demon or any
other novel idea. This is a very simple process. The only novel
feature is just how the two nuclei "know" that they have too much
mass-energy for the distance between them.
Ed Storms
On May 28, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote:
Ed,
I am fine with the hydron covalent ion you suggest and the resonant
theory leading to photon emission but not so on the build up of
negative charge or the physical - electrical confinement you suggest
are responsible for the configuration inside a gap that is at least
tens of atoms wide.. The negative charge and Gibbs energy still
obeys COE and the reversible reaction - resonance will soon damp out
unless the NAE and hydron work together to source energy . I would
point out that catalytic action in a nanotube only occurs at
openenings and defects and therefore your NAE likely represents this
same sudden changes in geometry supported by a standard “pressure”
for a certain local volume of Ni geometry that continually feeds
this change. I posit we are looking at a new level of catalytic
action and physical confinement that work against each other to form
a Heisenburg trap / a form of Maxwellian demon that discounts the
disassociation level of your Hydron when it forms a bond at one
threshold but then moves to a different pressure through the same
random motion of gas we have been indoctrinated to believe can not
impart usable energy.. I think we have found an exception with DCE.
Fran
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 3:59 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
Ed replied:
“Yes, the void is very different from the lattice. That is the whole
point to the idea behind the NAE. A nuclear reaction cannot take
place in a normal lattice. A change must take place. This change
produces a different condition I call the NAE. In my model, this NAE
is a gap created by stress relief. Other models imagine a different
condition. Regardless of the condition, it MUST contain hydrons
because that is what experiences fusion, which is the essential
result of cold fusion.”
OK, so you are positing that as soon as the dislocation or gap
forms, hydrons IMMEDIATELY diffuse into it? Even if the electrode
hasn’t even been immersed in the electrolyte yet (if we’re talking
electrolytic type experiments); or before hydrogen gas is introduced
if we’re dealing with a NiH system? I don’t think so…
-Mark
From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 11:24 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...
On May 19, 2013, at 11:55 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote:
To which Ed answered, mainly expressing what his view is inside this
void:
“The answer depends on which theory you accept. In my case, the void
consists initially of a strong negative charge created by the
electrons in the wall that are associated with the metal atoms
making up the wall. The charge is strong because it is now unbalance
as a result of the walls being too far apart for the electron orbits
(waves) to be properly balanced. This condition attracts hydrons
(hydrogen ions), which enter the gap by releasing Gibbs energy. In
so doing, they create a tightly bonded covalent structure in the
form of a string. The hydrons in this string are closer together
than is normally possible because the electron concentration between
them is higher than normal. When this structure resonates, the
hydrons get even closer together periodically, depending on the
frequency of vibration. Each time they get to within a critical
distance, energy is emitted from each hydron as a photon. Once
enough energy has been emitted as a series of weak photons, the
fusion process is completed by the intervening electron being sucked
into the final nuclear product. The details of how this process
works will be described later.”
The temperature is very high, but not high enough to melt the
surrounding material. As a result, some energy is lost from the gap
as phonons. The photon/phonon ratio is still unknown. Nevertheless,
the rate of photon emission is large enough to be detected outside
of the apparatus when H is used.
To which I respond:
But if the void is tens of ‘atom-diameters’ across, you are way
beyond the influence of any electrons, unless they are ‘free’
electrons flying around in that void. Restrict your viewpoint to
only the interior of the void…
Mark, you are making assumptions that do not need to be made.
Regardless of what you imagine might be the case, hydrons MUST
assemble because otherwise they can not fuse. The entire process
hinges on hydrons assembling in an unconventional way. That
requirement is basic. The challenge is to discover how this is
possible without violating the laws of thermodynamics. Of course, if
you keep making assumptions, the process can either be rejected or
justified, your choice. I make the assumptions I think can be
justified and try to find where they lead. In my case, they lead to
a model that can explain ALL behavior without making additional
assumptions. While this might be a wild goose chase, it does provide
a useful path, which other theories have not done.
*For the sake of argument*, assume that there are NO free atoms, sub-
atomic particles or photons flying around in the void… in that case,
do you not have a *perfect vacuum*? And as to my second question,
what’s the temperature of a perfect vacuum? Would it not be
0.00000000000K in temperature?
I have no idea how the concept of vacuum applies. The NAE is a
chemical state within a material. As H enters the state, they
generate Gibbs energy, which is dissipated as heat (phonons). As a
result, the region gets hot. The hydrons would not assemble if this
energy were not generated, thereby producing heat. That is the basic
nature of a chemical process.
Ed is positing that the NAE are essential to LENR, and I am positing
that the VOIDs are a major element in the NAE, AND that the
conditions in the VOIDs are NOT those of the bulk, surrounding
matter; in fact, they are very different. To understand the NAE
requires an understanding of EXACTLY what the conditions are INSIDE
the voids.
Yes, the void is very different from the lattice. That is the whole
point to the idea behind the NAE. A nuclear reaction cannot take
place in a normal lattice. A change must take place. This change
produces a different condition I call the NAE. In my model, this NAE
is a gap created by stress relief. Other models imagine a different
condition. Regardless of the condition, it MUST contain hydrons
because that is what experiences fusion, which is the essential
result of cold fusion.
Ed, perhaps you could summarize what the various viewpoints are as
to the physical environment inside these voids.
The different theories use various features. Hagelstein uses metal
atom vacancies, Miley uses dislocations, Takahashi uses special
sites on the surface, and Kim assumes a BEC can form within the
lattice. Each of these conditions are used to justify formation of a
group of hydrons that fuse by some mysterious process. Other
theories (Chubb for example) assume the process can occur whenever
the lattice gets fully saturated with hydrons without a cluster
being required.
Ed Storms
-Mark Iverson
