John, the other theories are in direct logical conflict with each other and are also in conflict with many observations. I predict the final theory will be nothing like what has been proposed.
Ed, I'm not proposing to throw all of them into a tumbler and hope a coherent theory emerges. But clearly certain theories are more analogous to one another than you believe. For example your theory and Meulenberg-Sinha Extended Lochon Model have striking similarities. And cluster theories like TSC are quite compatible with the idea of a Nano-NAE (whether crack or cavity). Your theory is perhaps the best at KISS, but you can't always indict someone for using "imagination", it is simply part of theoretical work. Even you have used "imagination" in developing the hydroton and its particular dynamics for example. And of course certain speculations go out on longer limbs than others, and that is when criticism can take center stage to bring stuff back to reality. Clearly there are differences between theories, I'm not attempting to whitewash the issue. But to say all of them are mutually exclusive is taking an absolutist position on a phenomenon that is, still in many ways, not well elucidated. There are still many experiments to do. You can't possibly think any theory, including yours, is the final word do you? Regards, John On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 9:19 PM, Edmund Storms <[email protected]>wrote: > > On Dec 20, 2013, at 7:06 PM, Foks0904 . wrote: > > Nice effort listing all the theories side by side Jones. Indeed it is >> quite a smorgasbord, and the final theory will likely being some >> unpredicted synthesis of two, three, or more. And that's only the main >> reaction pathway, which we can then add secondary or tertiary pathways to >> that involve stuff like hot fracto-fusion, Casmir cavitation, etc. >> > > John, the other theories are in direct logical conflict with each other > and are also in conflict with many observations. I predict the final theory > will be nothing like what has been proposed. > >> >> Regards, >> John >> > > Jones, this description has no relationship to my theory. My theory is not > evolved from fractofusion. Fractofusion results only as the crack is > formed, which generates a very brief high voltage across the gap. My > mechanism occurs after the crack had formed and has no relationship to high > voltages or to hot fusion. I propose a structure forms in a very narrow gap > that is able to dissipate the mass-energy gradually as photon emission. > The overall mechanism can explain all observations very logically, which > the other theories can not do. > > Ed Storms > > > > * The NASA effort (US 20110255645) suggests a method for producing >> "heavy electrons" as a fusion catalyst (screening). >> * The Yeong Kim (Zubarev) proposal of a BEC Bose-Einstein Condensate >> * The Takahashi tetrahedral TSC model is similar to the BEC. >> * The beta decay/ ultracold neutron mechanism popularized by >> Widom-Larsen which is similar to a Focardi/ Rossi/ Brillouin/ NASA >> explanation. >> * Polariton catalysis in general - which is a theory involving >> plasmons, surface phonons and photons. This is more of an "enabler" >> pathway. >> * Casimir dynamics, in general including a dynamical effect. This is >> also an "enabler" pathway as are other geometry constraints. >> * Accelerated nuclear decay. Some experiments benefit from >> long-lived >> but unstable isotopes like potassium-40. >> * RPF or reversible proton fusion, which is based on the strong >> force, >> QCD and a transient state, the diproton, deriving energy from quark or >> gluon >> mass. >> * The "nanomagnetism" ideas of Brian Ahern - which is a formative >> theory involving magnons and cyclical phase change around the Curie point >> of >> Ni. >> * Any combination or permutation of the above - since none of them >> is >> mutually exclusive and most experiments cannot be defined by a single >> hypothesis. >> >> There are many more, especially variations and refinements. Pardon me if I >> have overlooked your favorite, but this is a running effort and your >> favorite may appear on the next list. >> >> > > > >
