Dave--

Your  analysis of my comment is close.  I would add that the alphas are 
short-lived virtual particles that have a lifetime to short to measure, and 
that their high spin energy is dealt out in small quanta during their virtual 
lifetime  to real particles and nuclei that are also aligned and anti-aligned 
with the local magnetic field and accept one or more quanta of spin energy 
(spin) as the virtual alphas become real alphas.  This all happens in a supra 
QM system like that suggested by Axil.


As discussed several months ago, I believe the coupled QM system is larger than 
normal in the hot fusion context and different, unknown or unappreciated 
,quantum effects and coupling is occurring, made possible by the nano system 
engineering and magnetic controls on the Pd-H(D) lattice.  I consider the 
grains of Pd-H(D) form large QM coupled systems.  The spectrum of phonic 
(vibrations) energy levels in the crystal structure make the spin transfers 
possible.  Too hot the coupling does not occur, too cold is also a negative 
condition.  


Bob























 






Sent from Windows Mail





From: David Roberson
Sent: ‎Saturday‎, ‎July‎ ‎12‎, ‎2014 ‎9‎:‎16‎ ‎AM
To: [email protected]




Interestingconcept Bob.

Are you taking into account that the angular momentum can balance out to zero 
by a pair of alphas but that the angular energy still remains?   At least that 
is true with classic systems.

Dave
 






-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Cook <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Sat, Jul 12, 2014 2:32 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dynamic nuclear polarization





Dave--




You noted the following:




>>Plenty of energy can be deposited by alpha radiation into the structure.  
>>Keeping that under control without generating gammas is quite a trick.  And, 
>>what other nuclear ash should we be seeing?<<




If the alphas are formed two at a time at an excited state of high angular 
momentum spin energy, each with its J vector pointing in the opposite direction 
in the ambient magnetic field and within the same NAE or super QM system, it 
would seem to be possible to collapse to a ground state of 0 spin and angular 
momentum.  The reaction would  conserveangular momentum on the way to 0 with 
small quanta transfers to other particles in the super QM system--electrons and 
protons--with subsequent decay of each via phonon coupling to the lattice. T




he excited spin state of each alpha would be such as to match the mass 
decrement associated with the D,D “fusion” reaction.  The thermal spectrum 
would be such as to provide resonance for the spin phonon coupling.  
Transitions would occur at an energy quanta associated with one spin quanta.  
The number of particles taking part in the NAE would be large--2x the J quantum 
number of an excited a[pha particle.  




If the temperature was to high the phonon coupling would not be possible.  Too 
cold would not work either.  This could be called the Goldilocks spin dance 
effect.




Bob










Sent from Windows Mail





From: David Roberson
Sent: ‎Friday‎, ‎July‎ ‎11‎, ‎2014 ‎11‎:‎31‎ ‎AM
To: [email protected]




When I take a step back I realize that it appears like a miracle for the energy 
to always come out in small fractions of the total available.  I have to ask 
whether or not this unusual situation may be related to the conditions upon 
which the reaction occurs.  Is anyone aware of an experiment that actually 
involves fusion of D x D at low temperatures while the radiation is monitored?  
 We do have data describing what is released at very high kinetic energies, but 
is there a threshold below which our preferred path may be exclusive?

I suppose the closest analogy would be muon fusion.  If I recall, that pretty 
much matches what is emitted under hot fusion conditions.  Perhaps your point 
is valid and there is zero chance that D x D fusion is taking place directly.  
If true, some sneak path is being followed and it is common for alpha radiation 
to be generated in nuclear reactions.

Plenty of energy can be deposited by alpha radiation into the structure.  
Keeping that under control without generating gammas is quite a trick.  And, 
what other nuclear ash should we be seeing?

I hope that Rossi and the future report from the long term experiment will help 
to answer many of our questions.

Dave
 









-----Original Message-----
From: Jones Beene <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Fri, Jul 11, 2014 2:19 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dynamic nuclear polarization






From: David Roberson 

 

I think Bob is hoping that energy can be taken away in smaller chunks and that 
is what I would want to see as well….Has anyone identified exactly where the 
large MeV energy from a D x D fusion is stored?  It remains in place for a 
short duration until released.  Perhaps it can be taken in many portions 
instead of one dangerous gamma.  

 

Dave,

 

Once again, the relevant question is not whether energy can be released 
piecemeal, in many small undetectable portions. We can assume that it can.

 

The relevant question is this: can a new and previously unknown mechanism 
accomplish this incredible feat 100% of the time, to the complete exclusion of 
the known mechanism?

 

Clearly – that is most unlikely.

 

The 23 MeV would need to come out in packets of no more than about 6 keV each. 
Anything above this level would show up on the kind of meters which have been 
used for many years, and which have already proved that strong radiation above 
background level is seldom seen.

 

Think about it. That lack of any radiation signature in most experiments of 
this kind means the large amount of energy (from the formative alpha particle) 
comes out in at least 4,000 individual packets, none of which can ever be 
larger than what is detectable. And furthermore, never ever do we see the 
“known release mechanism” of standard physics. If true, this proposition is 
moving towards an “intelligent” release of radiation, in which packets must be 
monitored and rejected if they are too energetic. 

 

That kind of control is absurd, of course, but it highlights the larger 
absurdity of suggesting that this reaction must involve the fusion of deuterons 
to helium with no gamma signature. There are better alternatives.

 

Jones

Reply via email to