Fran-- Don't thank me. Axil identified the reference about a month ago. I just happened to download it, read it, and understand some of it. I thought it was a very well written paper with nice data.
It seems to me that there should be some good Nobel class research going on in this area of dimensional control and its effect on particle interactions. In my high energy physics courses back in the early 1960's I do not recall any discussion of this effect. Solid state physics was just beginning to be respected. However, as we know the high energy boys seemed to get more money for their research here in the USA, and the rest of the world for the most part went along with this trend. Oh well that's water over the dam. The French, bless their soul, still like to think in their own language. Of course they are competing with the nearby Italians. Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: Roarty, Francis X To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 4:56 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Re: Progress to date Bob, thanks for the refs – apparently Axil was correct that a magnetic field can increase production – at least in one dimension along the magnetic field, I had assumed this to be only directing the existing pairs but I stand corrected. You know I posit a relativistic explanation of Casimir effect based on Naudts 2005 paper regarding the hydrino as relativistic hydrogen. I don’t believe the longer vacuum wavelengths are actually displaced from the cavity but rather that they reshape space time where time occurs faster to give the particles the “space” they need to exist full size from their local perspective…and that this is the root cause of catalytic action – when different geometries exist in closer quarters than the square law should allow in violation of the isotropy trumped by the inverse cube of boundary spacing. I think we will someday discover the geometry and conductivity of very active skeletal catalysts is mimicked to lesser degrees by all catalysts and that this dynamic suppression of larger virtual particles is the underlying cause for all catalytic action.. I guess my primary objection to Axils point is that he understated the importance of the geometry and the interaction to the magnetic field. Fran From: Bob Cook [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 6:13 PM To: [email protected] Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Re: Progress to date Fran and Axil-- Don’t forget the Chiral effect http://physik.uni-graz.at/~dk-user/talks/Chernodub_25112013.pdf a quote from the previous link: “In strong magnetic field quarks and antiquarks pair more effectively! S.P. Klevansky and R. H. Lemmer ('89); H. Suganuma and T. Tatsumi ('91) - effective models V. P. Gusynin, V. A. Miransky and I. A. Shovkovy ('94, '95, '96,...) → real QCDxQED Enhancement of the chiral symmetry breaking at strong B 1) Dimensional reduction (3+1)D → (1+1)D: In a very strong magnetic field the dynamics of electrically charged particles (quarks, in our case) becomes effectively one-dimensional, because the particles tend to move along the magnetic field only. 2) Quarks interact stronger in one spatial dimension: In (1+1)D an arbitrarily weakest interaction between two objects leads to pair formation. This fact: (i) follows from Quantum Mechanics; (ii) is known as a “Cooper theorem” in solid state physics.” and the Lamb effect. The Chirl Effect depends on the dimensions acting --1, vs 2, vs 3, vs 4, vs 5 etc. Bob From: Roarty, Francis X Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 1:06 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [Vo]:Progress to date Axil, I am in total agreement with your first 5 paragraphs and I agree with where you are going but disagree that magnetism will increase or decrease particle production… even used in conjunction with nano geometry which restricts larger virtual particles in a casimir like manner the magnetism is only segregating the virtual particles between regions of various suppression.. I can see this providing a spatial bias to virtual particles that would unbalance the normal cancelation of random uncertainty.. perhaps a self assembled maxwellian demon of sorts. Would like to see if you can still put your theory forward without relying on a breach of the isotropy or at least stipulating that the breach is a function of the geometry which your magnetism is leveraging somehow. Regards Fran From: Axil Axil [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 3:04 PM To: vortex-l Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Progress to date The following post is a synthesis of a number of individual and disjointed posts that I have produced in recent months to make sense of a complicated issue. That issue is the confusion incipient in the vast differences and contradictions seen in a wide variety of LENR systems. From system to system, LENR is subject to a variation of strength. To my way of thinking, this variability in the characterization of the unique mix and match LENR processes instantiated in each LENR system are directly based on the strengths of magnetic fields inherent in each LENR system. Magnetic fields interact with the vacuum and produce a number of different breakdown mechanisms as a function of that field’s strength. To start this detailing, virtual particle production in the vacuum is one of the sources of the uncertainty in quantum mechanics as particles come randomly into and out of existence. Tunneling and radioactivity is a result of this vacuum based uncertainty. Magnetic fields interact with the vacuum to produce particles in a deterministic way. As the strength of the magnetic fields increase, the probability that the vacuum will generate particles will also increase. This increase particle production in the vacuum increases the rates of tunneling and radioactivity. As the magnetic field gains strength to intermediate levels, the vacuum produces composite particles from fermions. The magnetic field interacts with the various types of fermions to catalyze virtual charge carrying quasi-particle pairs that are bound to the fermions as the fermions attempts to minimize its particular energy level. As the magnetic field reaches it maximum strength, this field produces mesons out of the vacuum which effectively guaranties nuclear disruption in terms of charge screening, cluster fusion, fission, and isotope and radioactivity stabilization In summary, a single primary magnetic field based causation produces strength based mix and match results centered on a hierarchy of magnetically catalyzed vacuum based particle production mechanisms.
