Dave, I personally believe the Casimir does not exist. Its effects are
logically inconsistent with what is observed, as you note as one of
many examples. I believe the force attributed to Casimir is poorly
understood chemical interaction. Physics keeps it alive only because
it fits a theory. Consequently, it has no relationship to LENR.
Ed Storms
On Jan 31, 2014, at 12:24 PM, David Roberson wrote:
I have a question regarding the Casimir effect that someone might be
able to assist me in answering. There is discussion of how this
effect is able to squeeze the hydrogen atom into one of the
fractional states and I wonder why this same force does not push
apart the atoms or whatever else may be generating that force.
Please offer an explanation as to why the hydrogen is squeezed but
the surrounding atoms are not pushed back in an equal and opposite
manner.
Are we to believe that the Casimir force acts in only one direction
and in violation to Newton's laws?
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Roarty, Francis X <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Fri, Jan 31, 2014 12:55 pm
Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Higgs and LENR
Also if each Ni nucleus in the sea of Ni would have to experience
the role of the so called catalyst it would be as part of “casimir”
group not individually - and as the tapestry changes wrt a moving
gas atom it will experience changes in this field – dynamic casimir
effect. I am not even sure that transmutation would effect that
field as long as the element remains metal and does not
significantly change the local geometry the casimir force should
remain unchanged.. IMHO it is a difference of scales where the same
HUP responsible for the random motion of the gas atoms at the lower
scale can be unbalanced and accumulated at a higher scale by the Ni.
[1/plate spacing ^3] to form regions with different values of
casimir force.
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
