Much of the science that underlies the Ni/H reactor is just at the publication stage. For example, I was just reading this newly released paper:
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1404/1404.3764.pdf *Magneto-photonic phenomena at terahertz frequencies* This paper has some tidbits of insights about how heat produces strong magnetic fields. First, light at terahertz frequencies are resonant with the magnetic fields that it induces, so light and the induced resultant magnetic fields are about the same frequency. This terahertz frequency timeframe is also the same as the lifetimes of induced SPP’s. Also, the intensity of the plasma pulse that produces the terahertz pulse is proportional to the light that the pulse produces. This says that the spark (as per DGT design) that produces the plasma that generates the terahertz light should contain as much INSTATANOUS power as possible. A glow plug emitting constant heat will produce an associated weak terahertz pulse because its instantaneous power level is proportionately very low (as per Rossi design) On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Peter Gluck <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Jones, > thank you for this very interesting paper. Howeve, can you please > explain/justify this assertion: "it looked like things were becoming > clearer in LENR theory" I think exactly the contrary is true, cold fusion > needs more theories combined, not one. > Peter > > > On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 6:00 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Just when it looked like things were becoming clearer in LENR theory, they >> seem to have become more complicated. Ockham fails again – no surprise >> really, since “parsimony” always fails miserably when QM enters the >> picture. >> >> SPP was the “catch-phrase” of the day for understanding LENR, due to the >> influence of NASA and Larsen, but a similar effect called spinplasmonics >> (SP) fits many experimental circumstances better than does SPP. This is >> because SP happens in a metal, without need of a dielectric, and has a >> magnetic component. Here is a mainstream paper that touches on the SP >> phenomenon but does not mention LENR. >> http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/jap/112/10/10.1063/1.4765028 >> >> There was a time when the two, SPP and SP, were considered to be part of >> the >> same general phenomenon, but on closer differentiation - if a choice needs >> to be made, the merits of each should be considered relative to precise >> details in any experiment. Yet both effects can be active in the same >> experiment, and that is not necessarily a bad thing. In short, if the >> active >> region is conductive and ferromagnetic (or strongly paramagnetic) with no >> dielectric, then spinplasmonics fits better. When the active region has a >> metal-dielectric interface and is indifferent to magnetism, then SPP fits >> better. >> >> Is this being unnecessarily pedantic? Only if one wants to marginalize, >> rather than emphasize, the role of magnetism. If magnetism is highly >> important, then one more detail about a Mu metal connection (following >> Claytor’s revelation at MIT). >> >> When photon upconversion was first discovered by François Auzel, he >> thought >> there was net gain. Of course, his peers cautioned him about publishing >> such >> “nonsense” as overunity. His patent has been expired for decades >> (http://patents.justia.com/inventor/francois-f-auzel) and never was >> commercially important. An example is the upconversion of infrared light >> into visible light, which would be important for either SPP or >> spinplasmonics which ostensibly need optical photons. Here is the big >> surprise. Nickel may be important for upconversion of photons – more so >> than >> any other physical property. The prime materials for photon upconversion >> are >> luminescent ions Ni2+ and Mo3+ both of which elements are found in Mu >> metal. >> Surface ionization makes them active. >> >> That may not be coincidental, since optics and magnetics may be intimately >> entwined in Mu metals, which are a starting point for LENR ….Which then >> are >> activated by spinplasmonics….Which then create a continuing supply of DDL >> (deep Dirac layer) dense hydrogen….Which then disrupts the Dirac “sea” >> ….Which then yield binding energy photons of 6.8 eV….Which then thermalize >> into heat, finally providing thermal gain. >> >> And yes, Ockham fails again and “parsimony” always looks like a silly >> rule-of-thumb when QM enters the picture. >> >> Jones >> >> > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >
