To summarize: Is Lorentz contraction at the bottom of a dynamical Casimir effect in LENR?
There is no proof of that but it is a provocative question. Given the analogy to the free-electron laser, and the presence of nickel which is ferro magnetic we can now connect some dots... and AFAIK - this has never been suggested before today as a complete package, along with SPP - so this thread may have introduced something new into the mix. There are practical implications. Casimir amplification via DCE is all about nano-geometry, near-fields, and free electrons in magnetic cavities (and possibly magnons). There is probably no other reason that this geometry is useful in LENR other than as an amplification mechanism for ZPE, applied to electrons. There could also be a connection to two overlapping geometries - the particle size, which is tens of microns, in which nanoparticles are arranged seems to be important. Thus there could be a connection to SPP as well. "Nano" was essentially absent from LENR as an essential parameter from 1989 until Arata and the Santoku nanopowders circa 2008, which powders were improved by Ahern with the help of Ames Labs and most recently demo-ed by Cravens. A brief history is found in Celani's CERN presentation page 14,15 and the grid which outlines nanoparticle gain in LENR. https://indico.cern.ch/event/177379/material/slides/3 Nanocavities of a Casimir predicted geometry, 2-12 nm, can be described as an effective lens for ZPE which can sometimes produce a dynamical effect DCE especially if they are held within a larger particle around 10-50 microns which is resonant with IR photons of about the same wavelength. The Arata gain in small, but it is now validated by many, and it bears repeating that a plausible power input for Arata type experiments is DCE. Therefore, the significance of Arata's "no P-in" experiments to the larger field, in which he achieved infinite COP with no apparent power input is the real value of Nano and DCE, but it should not stop there. It is more complex when SPP are added into the mix - but QM is never simple. How can this geometry for gain (with no added power) not be important to other experiments where external power is added?
