*I am still struggling with the putative process and the result,, which should give off gamma rays, neutrons and locally vaporise the lattice*
In many solid lattice LENR systems, all that negative behavior does happen and those static systems only work for a short time before they deteriorate. But in dynamically rebuild nano-particle systems, the nuclear active areas are constantly reworked by a spark or a heat pulse. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 4:36 AM, John Franks <[email protected]> wrote: > Really, the MB distribution should allow for these outliers then CF would > be happening with a non-vanishing probability. The electrons obey FD > statistics but contribute a small amount to the heat capacity. So there > again I cannot see a mechanism, even if they were to switch between MB and > FD. > > I am still struggling with the putative process and the result,, which > should give off gamma rays, neutrons and locally vaporise the lattice. > > > On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 1:59 AM, David Roberson <[email protected]>wrote: > >> This concept is going to take a while to develop. The first question >> that comes to mind is whether or not repulsive forces that vary as 1/R^2 >> work in a similar fashion to attractive ones. This will take some >> simulation. In the case of planets, all of the interacting bodies attract >> each other. Wiki has an interesting article concerning "gravity assist" >> that is worth reading. It reveals how the process works with space ships. >> >> The other issue that has long escaped my understanding is the >> photoelectric effect that Einstein explained to get his Nobel prize. He >> used this phenomena to more or less prove that photons of light behave as >> particles. Each particle resulted in the emission of one electron instead >> of sharing the energy among a multitude of them residing on the surface of >> the metal. >> >> The wavelength of the incoming light is far larger than the size of a >> single electron yet only one receives the photon energy and is ejected. I >> still do not understand why this is so. >> >> Is it possible that other many body reactions exist that can give a large >> quantity of the shared energy to one member? If this is true, then one >> might expect the inverse reaction to also occur which would be able to >> explain why the fusion energy is released into the larger body of particles >> instead of having to be emitted as one energetic gamma. Perhaps it is time >> to look into the emission of gamma rays from nickel nuclei to see if there >> is anything suspicious occurring. >> >> This exercise will likely lead to a dead end, but it could offer some >> helpful insight. >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: John Franks <[email protected]> >> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> >> Sent: Sat, Dec 21, 2013 8:31 pm >> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Collective Phenomena >> >> So if that little guy is a proton against the 10^8 -10^9 collective of >> other protons with thermal energy 25meV or so, that gets you in the ball >> park... >> >> What are the conditions to make this so - H2 loading, cracks, a lattice >> over say a liquid (no-one uses Hg). Any other pointers? >> >> Still having trouble with what happens after the reaction because of >> the femto level it is free space compared to the lattice on the 0.1nm level >> and the thermal wavelength of the heavy nuclei can't be making them overlap >> to behave collectively. >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 1:13 AM, David Roberson <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> ... >> >> When one of the bodies is much smaller than the other two, the little guy >>> can be sent packing in a hurry. >>> >>> Dave >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: John Franks <[email protected]> >>> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Sat, Dec 21, 2013 11:43 am >>> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Collective Phenomena >>> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_drift >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Eric Walker <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Hi :) >>>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 8:05 AM, John Franks <[email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>>> I was thinking about your desire to have quasi-particles, which are >>>>> low energy collective phenomena operating over several 10s of nm, somehow >>>>> do the impossible and behave like a real particle with reduced charge etc. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Personally, I think the quasi-particle lead is a red herring when it >>>> comes to explaining LENR. I understand that quasi-particles are only very >>>> weakly bound -- the binding energy being much less than an eV. I also am >>>> not impressed by coherent-motion theories. (As a physics dilettante, I >>>> have no basis for not being impressed. I'm just not.) >>>> >>>> >>>>> I was looking at the wandering planets thread and probably the >>>>> reason for the observed ejection is a phenomena called "digital energy >>>>> drift" (wiki it). >>>>> >>>> >>>> This sounds a little like a rogue wave phenomenon [1]; Jones >>>> mentioned something similar sometime back [2]. I'm personally guessing the >>>> planets in the simulation are being ejected because of a gradual floating >>>> point error (I think James Bowery alluded to this) or just insufficiently >>>> sophisticated handling of the startup of the system. >>>> >>>> Eric >>>> >>>> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_wave >>>> [2] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg22649.html >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
