The gainful reaction(s) of the HotCat is open to further
discussion... here is a start to that.

This issue was left open from the previous post, since we do not have
adequate data. There are a number of possibilities which involve plasmonics
to some degree.

1)      The f/H could fuse via plasmon electric-field interaction -> most
likely into deuterium (a hybrid version of the Storm's theory) without gamma
radiation.
2)      Some of the gain could derive from the initial f/H Millsean reaction
inside the tube with further shrinkage gain due to plasmonics outside the
tube.
3)      Some of the gain could relate to ZPE coherence, dynamical Casimir
forces and relativistic effects, as Fran suggests.
4)      Most likely, all of the above pathways for gain are contributory to
varying degrees. 

Due to the small amount of initial hydrogen available inside the steel
capsule, it would appear that each proton must be giving up energy in the
tens of keV to hundreds of keV over a long run. It would be helpful to know
how much net energy is available from how much hydrogen. 

Of course, if ZPE were to responsible for most of the gain, then there would
essentially be limitless energy available from very little initial hydrogen.
Most of us are uncomfortable with the ZPE explanation due to lack of a prior
real model to base things on.

We could probably figure out the exact mechanism for gain with more reliable
information.

                _____________________________________________
                
                An off-list question is worth posting relative to the HotCat
design and Bob's comment. 

                Why does the HotCat need the stainless steel "capsule" to be
inside a SiC containment tube and then to be surrounded by the resistance
heater, and how does active hydrogen get out of the capsule so that it can
interact with plasmons?

                There are two reasons for this structural arrangement IMO -
the first is to create the proper plasmonic interface.

                From the Zhang Berkeley paper: "Just as the energy in waves
of light is carried through space in discrete or quantized particle-like
units called photons, so, too, is the energy in waves of charged gas
(plasma) carried in quantized particle-like packets called plasmons, as they
travel along metallic surfaces. When photons excite the collective electron
oscillations at the interfaces between metal and dielectric (insulator)
materials, they can form yet another quasi-particle called a surface plasmon
polariton(SPP)." END

                The second use of the steel capsule (and it may be
inadvertent on Rossi's part) is for the slow release of f/H. The SS is grade
310 is notably nonmagnetic as it must be since f/H has extreme magnetic
susceptibility. This steel is also nonporous for hydrogen, resists
embrittlement and is NOT a proton conductor at all. However, SS-310 will
permit f/H to slowly filter through its grain structure due to the much more
compact dimensions of this hydrogen species (8x less effective volume than
hydrogen and the perfect size to slowly diffuse through the steel). 

                Therefore - what we end up with in the HotCat appears to be
f/H catalytically forming inside the steel capsule, due to interaction with
a catalyst which could be potassium - and then slowly migrating outwards
through the steel walls, as if it the tube was a proton conductor which it
isn't, and outward to the interface with the SiC which is heated to
temperature where there is superradiance at what appears to be 10 micron
wavelength. This very strong electric field then interacts with the f/H due
to magnetic susceptibility.

                The gainful reaction is open to further discussion...

        
_____________________________________________
                                
                                In the category of chemical reactions -
"vicinal" chemistry (from Latin vicinus = neighbor) relates to functional
groups bonded to adjacent atoms in a molecule to form isomers with markedly
different properties . These functional groups, which can consist of a
single proton or a bound pair of protons in a reduced orbital have a
characteristics of "extropy" (anti-entropy). The groups have freedom of
movement whereas the underlying substrate has comparative little freedom.

                                If you consult Wiki, their entry is way
behind on this niche of chemistry - since the term applies to more than
carbon (as Wiki states) and is about to reach a tipping point due to
graphene. In fact the vicinal chemistry of silicon, carbon and even silicon
carbide are all inter-related - and most interesting at the nano-geometry
because surfaces "auto-organize".  This term "auto-organize" is suggestive
in itself of a violation of CoE. It is especially relevant to elements that
have four bonding sites and "prefer" to form hexagonal crystals.

                                FRET - or Forster resonant energy transfer
is also a key to understanding a related facet of vicinal chemistry from the
biological perspective. FRET has ZPE written all over it, so to speak. The
FRET niche and vicinal chemistry overlap in MRI - so there is a magnetic
component to all of this as well. And then there is Rossi.

                                It is looking to me like one key to
understanding the dynamics of the HotCat device is the surface chemistry of
silicon carbide when heated and exposed to fractional hydrogen (dense
hydrogen) at temperatures where plasmons form. The gainful reaction that
derives from this interaction may not be nuclear... cough, cough... and it
may not be Millsean either. Let me state that conclusion differently: there
can be nuclear side-effects in the HotCat, and fractional hydrogen must be
involved - but the bulk of the gain in the Rossi device probably comes from
"elsewhere" ... meaning the zero point field.
                                
                                If gain is shown to related to dynamical
Casimir interactions and to the zero point field, instead of nuclear - then
entire technological base of LENR will be thrown into disarray - and the old
proponents of cold fusion, going back to P&F, will probably be as skeptical
of the new findings as present cold fusion skeptics are skeptical of what is
perceived to be the low energy nuclear reaction. 

                                Almost everyone is out of step but Hal.

                                Although Hal Puthoff is the best known
proponent of ZPE as a usable energy source, the most active person on the
zero point scene today appears to be his associate Bernard Haisch - who is
involved with a startup called Jovion in a commercial venture to capture
ZPE.
                                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Haisch

                                The relevant patent is 
                                http://www.calphysics.org/Patent7379286.pdf

                                My bet is that the HotCat of Rossi is better
understood from the perspective of a zero point converter than from LENR,
but it relies on several other overlapping areas besides these two.

                                Another twist of the story, however, is that
Jovion apparently did have a device constructed, which was largely a
disappointment. There is nothing public on this detail, so it may not be
true.  But the most confusing part of the emerging story of this relates to
the HotCat, and therein may reside the detail of what Jovion "forgot to do",
and what Rossi "did do" (but inadvertently)...  and that third critical
detail which is/was to also incorporate the findings of Randell Mills on f/H
- fractional hydrogen. 

                                ZPE may work effectively using the smaller
geometry of f/H and not very well with hydrogen. The bottom line is that the
Jovion device - or one like it (if there really is a device at all) - only
needs to employ f/H and the correct temperature (for plasmon formation) to
work in a better way than the HotCat works.

                                Looking ahead, it this speculation is
correct - it could turn out to be a mess at the patent office or in court
unless one strong company moves to the front and manages to pull in
everything under on umbrella. 

                                A few years ago, I would have said that
Google is the one and only company with the foresight and deep pockets to do
that, but alas, they seem to have fallen prey to their own success.

                                Jones



                                

<<attachment: winmail.dat>>

Reply via email to