He did mention that he was thinking of direct generation of electricity by this newly seen field, but I have not hear anything lately about it. Did you see any discussion of magnetic field levels by Rossi?
But 1.6 Tesla at 20 centimeters away from the box? That should have shown up with Mats' testing when he used a loop from the center pin of his scope to the ground. Of course, I suspect that Mats was moving the loop in space which would find the steady field. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Axil Axil <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Thu, Aug 1, 2013 7:47 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:NiH NAE Synopsis? Remember that Rossi also saw some extreme electromagnetic behavior in his core. Does that count as some validation of what DGT is claiming? On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 7:44 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: You are right, the energy associated with a 1.6 Tesla magnetic field of the spatial extent suggested by DGT would be awesome. It would be a good exercise for someone in the vortex to calculate the energy contained within a field of their hypothesized level and extent. If they speak the facts, it appears as though much of the energy released by their device might go toward supplying the magnetic field. That would be a great way to get around the issue of high energy radiation! :) I remain skeptical about the field levels suggested and need much additional evidence to eventually accept the levels stated. Could DGT have used the term Tesla when Gauss was the actual level measured? It might be that simple. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Axil Axil <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Thu, Aug 1, 2013 7:27 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:NiH NAE Synopsis? The Nanoplasmoic electrochemists havebe trying to understand hot spots for decades and are looking for something thesehot stops are good for. For example, they are trying to build a polariton laseror quantum computer with them. When their Nanoplasmoic probe chemicalsthey use to measure the power of the hot spot burn up, they just give up onthose powerful nanoantenna configurations. This places a limit on the power ofthe solitons that they can study. We understand that the solitons can grow verypowerful almost without limit. The 1.6 tesla power level revealed by DGT is anindication of this extreme power level. On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 7:07 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: I agree that a resonant condition occurs at the size and temperatures that you point out, but it is less clear that any exact dimension will be important to the operation of the reactors. Spheres in open space will exhibit a resonance that is mathematically well defined and no doubt can be adjusted to 137 C in the ideal case. But, when you pack these together is close proximity, it is doubtful that the same frequency of resonance occurs. Electric or magnetic coupling between the nearby particles must interact to some great degree. And, metallic connections at random locations has to reap havoc with the resonances. For these reasons, I have a difficult time believing that this effect is important in these devices. The Curie temperature, on the other hand, appears to be fairly well established. This sets up a particular temperature point where magnetic behavior changes rapidly. And, if what DGT says is correct about the enormous magnetic fields (?) they have seen, then something magnetic in nature must be important. I can not emphasize enough how important the large field will be toward understanding the system behavior if it in fact exists. This possibility must wait until further proof is obtained since it seems beyond belief. DGT owes us some evidence which I hope is coming soon. Speaking of DGT, has anyone seen a schedule that defines when DGT will release the data stored during the latest public demonstration? I have some important questions that it might help answer. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Axil Axil <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Thu, Aug 1, 2013 6:46 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:NiH NAE Synopsis? In physics, Planck's law describes theamount of energy emitted by a black body in radiation of a certain wavelength(i.e. the spectral radiance of a black body). The law is named after MaxPlanck, who originally proposed it in 1900. The law was the first to accuratelydescribe black body radiation, and resolved the ultraviolet catastrophe. It isa pioneer result of modern physics and quantum theory. For agiven black body temperature, the wavelength at the peak of the Planck curve iscalled maximum lambda. Thisvalue gives a fell for the minimum relative size that an radiating object mustbe to optimally support photons associated with a give temperature. Like andantenna, a particle of nickel will best support the photons at a giventemperature if the particle size is the adjusted to the ideal size. For atemperature of 700k or about 400C, the Lambda(max) must be 4.14 microns. This iswhy Rossi uses very large micro sized nickel particles in his reactor. Nanosized particles will not properly support the ideal photon wavelength needed toforce protons into quantum mechanical coherence. Rossiundoubtedly found this optimal size through trial and error but science iseasier. For a Planckfunction Infrared Radiance Calculatorsee the following: https://www.sensiac.org/external/resources/calculators/infrared_radiance_calculator.jsf%3bjsessionid=D08873244D6904EE654DBCDF0391F95E 137C = 410.15 Kelvins. Putting this number into the temperature field of the calculator, weget a resonance particle size of 7.07 um. If the raw particle size is 5 um, if we add a nanowire cover withwires about 1 micron in length, then we are at the blackbody resonance particlesize. This is the maximum size of all the nickel micro powder. As the temperature of the nickel powder increases, the smaller particleswill reach blackbody resonance. To start the Ni/H reactor up, we need some very big micro powder toget it going. PS: I will bet you that a Ni/H reactor thatcontains only Nano powder will not work well. On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 6:15 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: Don't the particle sizes and shapes vary all over the map in a normal mass of the material? This would defeat any process that depends upon the size being exact. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Axil Axil <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Thu, Aug 1, 2013 4:55 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:NiH NAE Synopsis? This resonance must be related to maximum size of the nickel micro-particles as related to blackbody resonance. On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: 137C must be an experimentally well measured parameter. It must also correspond to a sharp resonance condition. On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 4:44 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: Axil, I suspect that you are reading too much into the temperature measurement. The motion of the individual atoms varies over quite a range at a given temperature. For this reason, I am inclined to believe that Curie temperature might be important if magnetic effects are a key, but any special resonance at 137C seems to be a long stretch. It is not entirely evident that the Debye temperature matters in this situation. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Axil Axil <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Thu, Aug 1, 2013 1:49 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:NiH NAE Synopsis? The magnetic nature of nickelwould interfere with the production of nano-vortex anapole fields. The ability of nickel to affectnano-magnetism must be removed by getting nickel above the Curie temperature. Dipole oscillations are thepowerhouse that feeds energy into vortex current production. The stronger theDipole oscillations become, the stronger that the vortex currents will become. Through the application of heat,the nickel micro particles power the LENR process through stimulating Dipole oscillations. This heat energy is transferred to the dipolesmost efficiently at or above the Debye temperature. Also, 137C is the blackbody resonantfrequency for micro-particles at about 6 microns. I bet when Defkalion and Rossiadd the nanowire covering to the 5 micron nickel micro-powder, the size of thoseprocessed particles will be ideal for a 137C blackbody resonance. On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:28 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: Does that favor the Debye temperature or Curie point view of the NAE? Given your prior posting of this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqFc4wriBvE It would seem to point to the Debye temperature. On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: At the heart of the Nanoplasmonictheory of LENR, hot spots produce nano-sized magnetic vortexes that disruptnuclear structure. On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 12:29 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 8:28 AM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: To put things into perspective, the Curie point and not the Debye temperature of nickel seems to be the most important parameter for gain in Ni-H. OK, so now we have: Nickel nanomagnetic scale (sub 10nm) particles heated at least to Ni's Debye temperature, if not its Curie point, and infused with hydrogen -- the mixture being triggered to a NAE by ionizing the hydrogen. Areas of clarification needed: Should "hydrogen" read "protium (ie: Hydrogen-1)"? Should there be some characteristic of the ionizing energy specified so that the "infused" "hydrogen" is properly ionized? On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 11:20 AM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 7:38 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: Erratum: Debay -> Debye On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 7:38 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: Nickel nanoparticles heated to Ni's Debay temperature and infused with hydrogen -- the mixture being triggered to a NAE by ionizing the hydrogen. Areas of clarification needed:... Is there a technical name that can be given to the geometry of the "nanoparticles" that would, for example, tell us where in the "nano" range the size of these particles should sit? "Nanomagnetic scale" (sub 10nm) is a term that may qualify. See pages 14-16 of: http://ecatsite.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/energy-localization-no8-11_n3.pdf
