How does this theory select nickel with and even number of protons and an even number of neutrons as the feedstock for LENR?
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Roarty, Francis X < [email protected]> wrote: > Guys,**** > > I think the redundant ground states make a big difference to temperature > when gas loads heavily into these confined regions, the clusters that form > in these cavities exist in a region where longer vacuum wavelengths are > excluded. This is exactly opposite to gas atoms with near luminal velocity > appearing to slow down time from our perspective because these atoms are > traveling along the hypotenuse between time and space from our stationary > perspective. In the same way time is occurring must faster for these gas > atoms inside the casimir cavity. They are physically confined to tiny > spatial velocities but unlike other confinement mediums Casimir geometry > reduces longer vacuum wavelengths ..instead of slowing time along the > hypotenuse as in the typical relativistic scenario, this “shielding” > accelerates time by reducing the average length of these virtual pairs. > If the unit time is reduced while at the same time the atom motion is > physically confined into a cluster then temperature may be much lower from > our perspective, related to these fractional values. IMHO this is what > Naudt’s meant in his paper framing the hydrino as relativistic hydrogen > –not the near luminal hydrogen ejected from the suns corona but rather the > negative, shielded hydrogen provided by nano geometry. **** > > Fran**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > *From:* MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Wednesday, June 12, 2013 5:29 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency**** > > ** ** > > Dave:**** > > Yes, the process of forming a BEC requires that atoms either shed quanta > of energy, and/or, the more energetic atoms bounce out of the ‘trap’, > leaving only the cooler ones… the walls of the trap can be lowered a little > at a time to repeat this process until only the coldest atoms remain. *** > * > > ** ** > > “But temperature is defined by kinetic energy relative to an observer…”*** > * > > ** ** > > Well, perhaps that is one way that temperature is described, however, I > don’t think it applies here… let me explain another view.**** > > When you shrink oneself down to the size of a single atom, isolated from > everything else can still be**** > > ** ** > > Let’s start with a **single** atom at **0K**, isolated from anything > else; i.e., in a perfect vacuum chamber. This atom will be pretty much > still, and only a very minor tendency to move, but NOT due to any ** > internal** energy; but due to its being jostled around by the vacuum > (zero-point energy). For our discussion, it could be considered > motionless. Why? Because when one removes all thermal energy from an > atom, the harmonic relationships between its constituent subatomic > particles are in perfect balance; all its internal oscillators are in > harmonious resonance (geez, that sounds soooo newage wooo-wooo), thus, all > momentum vectors (forces) of those oscillators are balanced so the atom is > pretty much motionless. ADD just a single quantum of heat, and that > quantum gets absorbed into only ONE internal oscillator at a time, causing > momentum imbalance, and that is what causes the atom to begin vibrating. > The more heat quanta added, the more the internal oscillators are out of > balance and the more the atom vibrates. **** > > ** ** > > The idea that an atom at any temperature above 0K MUST have a > linear/translational velocity is NOT always the case… it is possible to > restrain an atom and add heat quanta to it without it shooting off in a > given direction… add enough heat to it and yes, it will break away from > what’s restraining it (E or B fields) and go shooting off… but again, we’re > talking the near perfect chamber (~0K) condition.**** > > ** ** > > Add heat to Ed’s linear arrangement of hydrotons in that elongated vacuum > chamber, and the entire ensemble will begin to oscillate along whatever > axis represents the least resistance – most likely the longest axis of the > chamber.**** > > ** ** > > -Mark Iverson**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > *From:* David Roberson [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Wednesday, June 12, 2013 12:59 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency**** > > ** ** > > If a perfect vacuum is defined as an area of space that has no particles > of the normal types such as atoms, protons, neutrons or electrons then you > appear to have found one. I believe that BECs also require that the > temperature be very nearly zero K among the interacting particles. But > temperature is defined by kinetic energy relative to an observer and so a > single particle is at rest when watched by a frame moving in the same > manner. So, the first piece of the BEC is fine, but when the > second particle and following ones are added, you would need to find a way > to eliminate their relative velocities which generally requires very > precise cooling.**** > > **** > > In our environment, there are at least a couple of serious problems > to overcome in order for a BEC to operate. First, I am not confident that > enough space is available to cram more than a few Ds into the NAE. Second, > even if you were able to cool the Ds by some means they would be banged > around by the metal crystal atoms continuously and hence reheated. If I > recall many of the observations used to prove that they were formed could > only be made at near absolute zero. Motion destroyed the wave nature of > the BEC system.**** > > **** > > For these and other reasons mentioned recently by Ed, I suspect that BEC > activity is not a main contributor to what we are seeing. The jury is > still out concerning other coupling behavior such as by entanglement. I > have been searching for some process that allows energy to be shared among > many during one fusion reaction. This might work both ways....operating > together the coulomb barrier may be much lower to a group of Ps or Ds.**** > > **** > > Dave**** > > -----Original Message----- > From: MarkI-ZeroPoint <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Wed, Jun 12, 2013 2:28 pm > Subject: RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency**** > > Jones,**** > > You may not have followed the thread I started, ‘Of NAEs and Nothingness’… > **** > > It was like pulling teeth, but I think Ed and I established some common > ground that when a ‘dislocation’ or void forms in the host material, and * > *before** any H or D diffuses into this void, it is a (near perfect) > vacuum. There could be E or B fields present, but those are not ‘matter’, > so the NAE is essentially a ‘vacuum chamber’ at 0K, and likely better than > anything that our hi-tech vacuum pumps can produce. Is this not the kind > of ‘chamber’ which could support the formation of BECs???**** > > **** > > Let’s continue on with that line of reasoning…**** > > When any atom enters the NAE, the only energy it has is what it brings > with it. The E or B fields within would likely cause the atom to align > itself with those fields to reach a minimal energy orientation. If the > fields serve to (physically?) restrict atomic motion or size or shape, then > that could initiate photon emission of some of the thermal energy which the > atom had when it entered the NAE… If enough thermal energy is shed, and > this happens to a number of such atoms in the NAE, they would spontaneously > form a BEC.**** > > **** > > In the BEC experiments that I’ve read, they use laser and/or **magnetic** > evaporative cooling to reduce the temp of the atoms until, at some > threshold temp (in the nanoKelvins), they coalesce into the BEC. > Condensation of magnons has occurred at 14K (see excerpt below), which is > orders of magnitude higher than with the usual BEC setup (atomic gases).** > ** > > **** > > Here is an excerpt from the Wikipedia entry on BECs:**** > > “The Bose–Einstein condensation also applies to quasiparticles in solids. > A magnon in an antiferromagnet carries spin 1 and thus obeys Bose–Einstein > statistics. The density of magnons is controlled by an external magnetic > field, which plays the role of the magnon chemical potential. This > technique provides access to a wide range of boson densities from the limit > of a dilute Bose gas to that of a strongly interacting Bose liquid. > [EMPHASIS] A magnetic ordering observed at the point of condensation is > the analog of superfluidity. In 1999 Bose condensation of magnons was > demonstrated in the antiferromagnet TlCuCl3.[18] The condensation was > observed at **temperatures as large as 14 K**. Such a high transition > temperature (relative to that of atomic gases) is due to the greater > density achievable with magnons and the smaller mass (roughly equal to the > mass of an electron). In 2006, condensation of magnons in ferromagnets was > even shown at room temperature,[19][20] where the authors used pumping > techniques.”**** > > **** > > Still haven’t found the bottom of the rabbit hole…**** > > ;-)**** > > **** > > Relevant links:**** > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bose–Einstein_condensate**** > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_evaporative_cooling**** > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_cooling**** > > **** > > -Mark Iverson**** > > **** > > *From:* Jones Beene [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]?>] > *Sent:* Wednesday, June 12, 2013 8:53 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* RE: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency**** > > **** > > **** > > *From:* Edmund Storms **** > > **** > > I'm saying that BEC is known to form near absolute zero but has not been > shown to form BETWEEN ATOMS at higher temperatures. People have PROPOSED > BEC formation at high temperature between energy states but this has not > been fully demonstrated or shown to apply to atoms. **** > > **** > > I will go further than Ed on this one. The BEC simply CANNOT form at > higher than absolute zero in real matter- and certainly not at several > hundred degrees C. There is a pretty good thread on Slashdot on this > subject, and it is almost by definition.**** > > **** > > Polaritons are not real matter. That these are only an abstraction should > be obvious to all … but apparently, it has not registered with a few of us > that polaritons are imaginary “quasiparticles” - and although they may be > useful as descriptive aids for how collective systems operate in practice, > including LENR – they are fictitious.**** > > **** > > You do not need a physics text to understand the implications of higher > temperature BECs in real matter – a “Cat’s Cradle” will suffice, thanks to > a fabulous old metaphor.**** > > **** > > So - even if you can find a paper on room temperature BECs in polaritons > or magnons (my favorite quasiparticle for LENR), there are no paper for BEC > real matter significantly above absolute zero. At least none that I know > of - and in general, it should be obvious that if this kind of condensation > could happen with real particles in real-world situations, then we > (humanity) would be in trouble. **** > > **** > > Common sense should tell you – if this could happen easily – it is the > proto-typical “Ice-nine” syndrome… **** > > **** > > On the one hand, Ice-nine is what would put the “cold” back into cold > fusion, but thankfully or sadly, depending on your PoV, quasiparticles are > not particles.**** > > **** > > Jones**** >
