You mention that a BEC can absorb gammas and recast them with frequencies of 1/N. I would consider this suggestive that energy released by one of these BEC fusion reactions taking place would be in that form instead of the more energetic and penetrating gammas.
I have also explored the concept of a large collection of entangled protons behaving together in an effort to avoid the single large gamma emission. It is not clear how coupled resonators can share the energy more or less equally over a long time span instead of having one of the number emit the large energy rapidly. What mechanism could encourage one of the number to hold off its emission? Then we have to consider how the Ps or Ds can be closely connected throughout the metal structure when surrounded by that same structure. In radio design of high Q filters you find that the required coupling coefficient approaches zero as the individual resonator Q approaches infinity. Thinking along this line I am reminded of the mechanical toy recently shown where many pendulums become synchronized after sufficient time provided they share a mechanical coupling through the bases. I have a strong suspicion that had only one resonator been given a large initial energy store that eventually all of them would share an equal amount proportional to 1/N as well. There appears to be an important difference between these two models. All of the toy pendulums are at the same resonant frequency and of high Q. I find it difficult to establish the resonant frequencies of the protons in their specific environments. Unless something about the metal crystal forces them to be closely resonant, why would they tightly couple? The Ds might be easier to couple since the nuclei have two particles which could trap gamma level energies of a narrow frequency band. And, I have to wonder when the energy sharing takes place throughout the BEC. I have generally been of the opinion that the strong force dominates the determination of how much energy must be released during a fusion event. The coulomb interactions come first and then the strong force finishes with a bang. While the coulomb forces dominate the Ds interaction it seems possible that many of these might couple due to high Q resonances. But, once the helium comes into existence, I would expect the new type of atom to behave as a different animal. If most of the energy is released at that event, then why would it share with other atoms that are unlike itself? Does a BEC composed of Ds include a lone helium among its group? There are many questions to consider if one is to think of these reactions as due to BEC behavior. Perhaps classical physics does a better job of handling the interactions. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Wed, Jun 12, 2013 2:41 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:19 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: Kevin, Are saying that a BEC which is composed of two Ds will always fuse? ***No way. The BEC would be composed of thousands of atoms, only 2 of which are so stuck that they fuse. Just like a crowd of 2 people won't get trampled, but a crowd of 20,000 might trample a couple of people if they were confined to a conference room for ICCF18. What is the criteria that you use to determine under what conditions the fusion occurs? ***I do not have such a criteria. But, working backwards from this finding that N atoms in a BEC absorbed 1/N frequency, I might be able to develop a criteria of how large a BEC must form for it to be able to squeeze 2 atoms together, similar to how large a crowd must form for 2 people to get trampled. What evidence of this behavior is demonstrated in other system? ***Well, we've been discussing it on various Vortex threads. Here's the latest: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg82949.html It seems unlikely that gamma rays of that energy would all become absorbed, ***Well, maybe we should all re-read this paper and find out exactly what 1/N atoms means? This paper itself seems straightforward, but its implications could be immense. Kinda like LENR. particularly any that are released at the first layer beneath the surface of the crystal. Even if a tiny probability of escape is available they would be easy to detect outside the metal. ***Yes, If a fusion event occurs near the edge of the BEC, then it is like a stick of dynamite going off out in the garage rather than the center of the house. Normally, the house would absorb the dynamite (gamma) in almost every direction, with quite a bit of energy escaping, but not enough to kill a man 50 feet away. But, take away the house, and that man is dead, from 50 feet with nothing between him & the blast. If the explosion occurs on one side of the house, then you have a partially preserved house (BEC) but large energy released in the other direction (detectable energy release, possibly even transmutation). I suspect that you would be ahead to assume that there is a fusion energy release process that does not involve high energy gammas. *** I like that assumption as well. It is a clean assumption. But then how do you account for the very few gammas that appear to be present once in a while? Ed has a hypothesis that allows the energy to be released into a long series of photons to solve that problem. ***There's also phonons, and Ron Maimon's theory, and perhaps several others. But the difference here is this is an EXPERIMENTAL finding. Experiment trumps theory ~Richard Feynman ----Original Message----- From: Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Wed, Jun 12, 2013 1:56 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency Now, wait a second. After responding to this and seeing your lack of response, then repeating the same thing on another thread it leads me to re-examine what you wrote. Perhaps you are saying here that near-zero BECs have formed in Metal Hydrides? If so, then how can you say on the other thread Why invoke a structure that is known not to form at high temperature? http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg82949.html Then that means BECs have been known to form in metal hydrides, or you are pretending like we never had this conversation about BECs forming at high temperatures. Which is it? Or perhaps there's an in-between thing I'm overlooking, that no doubt would save face for one or both of us? On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Edmund Storms <[email protected]> wrote: Kevin, I see no evidence in the link for the actual existence of a BEC forming between hydrons at room temperature. People have proposed but not demonstrated. Ed Storms On May 27, 2013, at 4:53 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Edmund Storms <[email protected]> wrote: The BEC is known from experience and theory to only form near absolute zero. ***How quickly you forget having logged onto this thread: Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg76596.html And this thread was greeted with a yawn: [Vo]:Re: Superheated Bose-Einstein condensate exists above critical temperature http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg78827.html
