Yes, Ed it sounds strange but my position has always been based on a caveat to COE that says random motion of gas can never be exploited.. IMHO these gas atoms are translated via the Ni geometry and will normally return to ground state unexploited as their local geometry changes with random motion, the caveat I am suggesting becomes an option when we heavily load the Ni geometry with gas such that the fractional h atoms exiting the geometry do not have the room to return to normal ground state which by itself still gains you nothing but which opens the door for all these different theories by accumulating these fractional atoms seeking to return to ground state. I am keeping an open mind to ALL the various theories for energy creation but my reason for promoting Arto's theory was wrt his perspective on Casimir geometry and the way he illustrates the field turning to propel the gas atoms down into these smaller regions where they appear to be lower than ground state.. although not using the same language as I it appears he is coming to the same conclusions as to the originating source of the energy.. I am not too fond of the "neutral atoms" he is suggesting but I think he has a better handle than most on what is setting the stage. Fran From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 12:06 PM To: [email protected] Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Higgs and LENR
Fran, do you realize how strange this explanation sounds? The H has to climb over a Coulomb barrier having a charge of 28. We know how hard getting over a change of 1 is, so how is this barrier overcome so easily? Second, each Ni nucleus in the sea of Ni would have to experience the role of the so called catalyst. This magic catalyst would have to move from Ni to Ni as each was converted to Cu because apparently the magic catalyst is not able to add H to copper or apparently to any thing else. Each small particle of Ni would have to contain the magic catalyst and a large fraction of the Ni would have to be converted to Cu in order to account for the energy being claimed. Common sense is violated! Can people please consider the obvious and necessary consequences before applying pure imagination? In addition, we have no evidence that Cu is produced. Rossi even has withdrawn this claim. Ed Storms On Jan 31, 2014, at 9:43 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: Just saw this: http://ecatsuomi.wordpress.com/2014/01/30/arto-lauri-i-will-take-on-how-the-e-cat-works/ pix http://ecatsuomi.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/arto_lauri_proposal1.png I think Arto is very close if not exactly on target with this theory for the ecat.. IMHO he defines the fractional hydrogen as neutral wrt the Ni atom where I would say they are relativistic and held this way by the bulk of loaded gas occupying the unrelativistic space that prevents the fractional hydrogen from translating back to normal as the suppressing geometry is left behind via random motion ..this pressure then discounts the barrier and allows the dilated atom to slip "behind" the Ni atom on temporal coordinate and may be why this effect requires heavy loading such that the fractional atom doesn't have opportunity to slip back into normal ground state anywhere in the surrounding region... accumulating hydrinos that are denied the opportunity to return to normal after having left the geometry that caused their condition. Fran
