Ed --
I find that I agree with Axil this time. The Pauli Exclusion Principle is a
key theory of physics ----and chemistry. Without it matter would be unstable.
Electrons would collapse to the attraction of the protons and there would be no
electronic structure of a molecule--no molecules period.
Spin is a characteristic of primary particles and the quarks that make up
compound particles. Particles with zero spin seem to have a certain
characteristic--they have no potential energy associated with angular
momentum. Photons have positive spin and angular momentum pointing in the
direction of their motion. Reactions of photons with other particles must
conserve angular momentum. I think this is a key restriction on various
chemical reactions that are light sensitive.
I do not agree that it is warranted to disregard a key parameter of particles
in the consideration of LENR unless of course there are experiments that
indicate the parameter is not real. It is like saying electrons do not have a
charge or mass or that electrons are not real even though much evidence
supports their reality.
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: Axil Axil
To: vortex-l
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:"Christopher H. Cooper"
I do not see how the concept of spin has any relevance to the discussion.
Both Rossi and DGT state that nickel isotopes of zero spin will react and
nickel isotopes with non zero spins do not. This is both experimental data and
an engineering requirement.
The theory that purports to describe LENR must account for this spin based
characterization.
I will not accept a theory that does not explain spin as a factor in the LENR
reaction.
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
Bob, let me see if I can simplify the issue. For fusion to occur, two D
must get close enough for the two nuclei to combine. This process is prevented
by the Coulomb barrier, which requires energy to overcome. A static magnetic
field does not supply energy.
Once the two nuclei combine, the mass-energy must be dissipated. This can
be done by fragmentation of the resulting nucleus, i.e. hot fusion, or by
release of energy as many photons. Observation places a limit on the energy
the photons can have.
You bring spin into the discussion. The spin state has a limit to how much
energy it can hold. In addition, if spin is accepted as an actual rotation
about an axis, creating this spin requires the law of conservation of momentum
be considered and a process needs to be identified that can apply a force to
the particle such that it spins rather than moves in a line. I see no way for
this to happen in your description.
If spin is viewed only as another variable in equations to allow them to
fit data, then I do not know how to evaluate your claim. We know that all
energy that is emitted with the alpha particle eventually appears as heat and
the helium ends up with its normal spin state. Therefore, energy imagined to
exist as spin acts exactly like translational energy in the real world.
Therefore, I do not see how the concept of spin has any relevance to the
discussion.
Ed Storms
On Mar 6, 2014, at 12:19 PM, Bob Cook wrote:
Ed--The ionic bonds of a host lattice are not the issue when it comes to
the transfer of energy in small bits. Its whether or not the small bits can
find a host in another nucleus of the QM system or in the spin state of an
electron in that lattice.
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: Edmund Storms
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:"Christopher H. Cooper"
Bob, you fail to take into account the known and well documented
bonding energy that can exist in a chemical system. This bonding is limited to
no more than about 10 eV, yet you propose to require this bonding to share and
dissipate energy at the MeV level within a cluster of atoms. Only in the
nucleus itself is this level of bonding and interaction available. Atoms are
not attached to each other with the necessary force to share and transmit this
level of energy.
In addition, for nuclear interaction to take place, the Coulomb barrier
must be overcome. This barrier is real and its magnitude is well known and far
in excess of any source of energy available in a chemical system. LENR requires
a new and so far unknown process to do this. I see no effort to effectively
identify this process. Simply applying IF statements is not a solution.
Simply applying QM using equations containing arbitrary assumptions
does not change how chemical systems are known to behave. The people
discussing these issues on Vortex seem to be in a different reality than the
one I have occupied for over 60 years of scientific study of LENR, chemistry,
and physics. Any imagined or assumed process described in the modern literature
seems to be as important as what has been observed and accepted in science for
the last 100 years. Any new observation in physics seems to be fair game as an
explanation of LENR whether it has any real world support of not. In fact, many
of the papers used as justification for the proposals are simply based on more
theory and assumptions.
Ed Storms
On Mar 6, 2014, at 8:54 AM, Bob Cook wrote:
Ed
You said:
>You must assume that a nuclear energy state can form between a large
number of atoms in a chemical system.<
Yes I do assume that. Crystals like in Pd metal I would consider to
be one QM system as long as long as the ionic chemical bonds hold the atoms
together. The nuclear magnetic moments of a crystal clearly couple with the
electrons in the system. Nano particles, although not as large as a crystals,
are also probably a QM system with many atoms. All molecules are QM systems
and when close together may have various coupling mechanisms although not of
any practical intensity.
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: Edmund Storms
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 6:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:"Christopher H. Cooper"
On Mar 5, 2014, at 11:10 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Edmund Storms
<stor...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
When alpha particles pass through material, a series of nuclear
reactions can occur that emit radiation. In addition, bremsstrahlung radiation
is emitted as the alpha slows down. Hagelstrin describes these processes in the
papers I attached previously. I suggest you read them.
If an alpha is born from a [dd]* resonance in which the mass
energy is fractionated among a large number of sinks (e.g., nearby electrons
and ion cores), the 4He daughter would have no or almost no energy. There
would be the bath of photons from the fractionation, the nearly stationary 4He
daughter, and no Bremsstrahlung from collisions by a fast particle.
Yes, that is the assumption. The issue is whether that assumption
is valid. Can a large number of sinks participate in what is a random process
such that they can share mass-energy? Can this collection remain intact for the
time required for the process to go to completion. You must assume that
a nuclear energy state can form between a large number of atoms in a chemical
system. This concept is in conflict with the laws of thermodynamics.
Ed Storms
Eric
