Axil: My responses are embedded within your email designated by 3 asterisks ***.
On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote In the field of topological materials, superconductivity is produced by confinement of electrons to a tight path. ***such a thing sound eminently plausible in the field of LENR. > Electrons seem to jump over defec* > ***Ed storms says in this interview that they are bound by some chemical bind. I'm not aware of such a chemical bond. Are you? How would such a binded group of atoms jump over a defect? In my view, they wouldn't. They would split, forming 2 chemical strings that could, as Storms put it, "resonate against each other". A collision of 2 trains of atoms could overcome the Coulomb barrier and generate a fusion event. > > > > that would usually cause them to demonstrate resistance. > ***Which leads me to ask about negative resistance... > Reconsidering, > ***Wait.... WTF? What causes you to reconsider? Are you reconsidering your own position? Storms's position? My theory? What are you reconsidering? > One dimensional topology does not require a BEC to form to produce zero > resistance. > ***Atain, wait... WTF??? What are you saying, that the OVSErVED behavior of one-diimensional topologies of Luttinger Liquids cannot lead to 1D BECs forming at higher temperatures and zero resistance? Because, if that is the case, you are micrometers away from OBSERVEd effects and KiloMeters away from theoretical effects. > > On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 9:15 PM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I have been in correspondence over the past with Ed Storms over BEC >> theories. He has very low regard for them. Primarily, he thinks they >> can't happen at anything close to the temperatures that LENR operates. And >> to be candid, when I see that there is evidence that LENR effects increase >> as the temperature increases... that leads me to suspect that BECs aren't >> the right answer. But if a plasma is generated, then all bets are off >> because plasma physics is so far estranged from condensed matter physics. >> >> If Miley measured zero resistance, it begs the question of how far back >> his OhmMeter goes. Because if there was NEGATIVE resistance, it would >> measure as zero resistance. There are no "negative resistance" meters on >> the market. >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_resistance >> It would mean that Miley generated a circuit with tunneling diodes or >> Gunn diodes and measured it in parallel with a known zero-resistance >> circuit. I doubt he did that. >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Miley has measures zero resistance in the Nano cavity that holds the >>> hydrogen, So the hydrogen is superconducting. That has to be a BEC. How >>> does this experimental finding impact Ed Storms theory? Has Ed included >>> this dot in his collection? >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Maybe instead of metallic 1D hydrogen, it's a Vibrational 1D Luttinger >>>> Liquid BEC forming. A V1DLLBEC. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Alain Sepeda <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> maybe some connexions, but Hydroton is a 1D object, constrained in a >>>>> lattice defect... metallic 1D hydrogen... >>>>> >>>>> Rydberg states is rather talking of excitation of the electrons.. >>>>> maybe is rydberg state of atoms in a coherent 1D chain of metallic >>>>> hydrogen... >>>>> >>>>> maybe is is a 1D rydberg matter... need more data >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2014-07-20 21:22 GMT+02:00 Axil Axil <[email protected]>: >>>>> >>>>> Why is the hydroton different from Rydberg hydrogen crystals(aka >>>>>> matter)? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks. Good interview. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The main complaint from the non-specialists - which will insure that >>>>>>> it gets few viewers - is lack of graphics. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Which is unrealistic of course, since who (especially among >>>>>>> volunteers) has the resources for a graphics artist these days? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I was going to suggest looping parts of an existing video, without >>>>>>> the sound, like this one >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VD4hj2PmkoY >>>>>>> >>>>>>> They are supposedly a for-profit company who might agree - for a >>>>>>> little joint PR. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Anyway - If anything needs to be cleared up it is the “hydroton”. >>>>>>> Everything in the Storms theory pretty much depends on this hybrid >>>>>>> concept. >>>>>>> It is a hypothetical “chemical structure” without any precedence in >>>>>>> chemistry or physics. To me, it looks like a strained attempt to >>>>>>> shoehorn >>>>>>> Hagelstein’s ideas about lack of gammas into fractofusion, together with >>>>>>> something vaguely related to Mills. Ed has expressed before that he does >>>>>>> not like his concept being referred to as fractofusion…. but he has this >>>>>>> love/hate thing with trying to draw the line between hot and cold >>>>>>> fusion is >>>>>>> a peculiar way that probably cannot be valid. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My response is that if walks like a duck and quacks like a duck …. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well, anyway - we ought to start a new thread on the hydroton when >>>>>>> enough readers have gotten hold of the book. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jones >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *From:* Foks0904 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For anyone who has 50 minutes and an interest in cold fusion theory. >>>>>>> We discuss both Ed's theory specifically and the theory landscape >>>>>>> generally >>>>>>> -- and get into a number of other topics in between. Thanks for >>>>>>> listening: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://coldfusionnow.org/interview-with-dr-edmund-storms-on-lenr-theory/ >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
