What does a near-zero K temperature phenomenon have to do with LENR or the price of wheat?
You are talking about a BEC of Rydberg atoms. That BEC is very heavy and can only happen at low temperatures. A BEC of Zero mass or near zero mass bosons can exist at vey high temperatures. So your inbreed assumptions are not correct. On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 1:25 AM, Bob Cook <[email protected]> wrote: > Kivin-- > > My grasp is based on intuition--not existing theory. I happen to agree > with Don Hodson’s concern about basic physics teachings that do not account > for the energy associated with spin in the mass of the proton and other > particles. Spin energy has always been neglected in my opinion in nuclear > energy calculations. > > I think there is a lot of data that show spin energy is quantized and > associated with angular momentum, and maybe linear momentum as well--I do > not know. Plank’s constant connects spin angular momentum with linear > momentum of a particle via the particles wave function frequency. Most > people assume that momentum and kinetic energy are connected, even at > relativistic conditions. > > Bob > > > > Sent from Windows Mail > > *From:* Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 22, 2014 9:09 PM > *To:* [email protected] > > > > Bob: > > I think you have a good grasp on what in the end will have been considered > important to look at. Please see my comments embedded in your email as 3 > asterisks***. > > > On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 8:29 PM, Bob Cook <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Axil-- >> >> Axil, you are getting warm--changing spin energy--angular momentum--into >> EM and then heat energy is the key. >> > ***This is a great concept to pursue. If the Nuclear Reaction of LENR > turns out to be harnessing spin energy changes, then everyone wins. It > wasn't fusion, so the hot-fusion boys save face. But it was nuclear, so > pons&fleischmann were right after all. > > > > >> As we have discussed before, Cooper pairing is key to the reaction of >> changing spin energy to heat. >> > ***I have been avoiding coming up to speed on Cooper pairing because I do > not understand it. But you have changed my resolve. > > > >> >> >> Bob >> >> Chemical effects to modify the spin of hydrogen is a doorway through >> which the LENR reaction must pass before the LENR reaction can occur. >> Hydrogen is NMR active, its nuclear spin is non zero. A chemical reaction >> must occur before hydrogen can undergo fusion. The spin of hydrogen must be >> reduced to 0. >> The transformation of hydrogen into Rydberg matter is how the spin of >> hydrogen is made 0. >> > ***So, right here it would appear that you finally stepped off the curb > and said something quite controversial. > > > > > >> This is accomplished by the production of a hydrogen plasma and its >> subsequent cooling. >> > ***I have been noticing some of this in the literature. For instance, it > is possible that the first set of reactions of NiH are actually > ENDOthermic, cooling things down, and possibly encouraging the formation of > Luttinger Liquid > 1Dimensional BECs. You state plainly that a plasma is present. Plasma > physics change EVERYTHING. They are so complicated that basically no one > understands it. I have never met a single person who can understand a > flame to me, let alone the special case of a plasma flame. > > Now, another thing about cooling. Right here on Vortex, Ed Storms did not > realize that KP Sinha was using lasers to COOL the environment rather than > heat it up. Sinha was using laser cooling in a similar fashion as Dr. Hu, > who was Obama's Science Advisor for several years after getting his Nobel > Prize for creating the first BEC with laser cooling. It all sorta comes > together once you put on the endothermic laser cooling glasses. > > > >> A one dimensional crystal structure of hydrogen dust >> > ***ONE dimensional! Crystal structure! Hydrogen! Sounds like my > V1DLLBEC theory! > > > > >> will form in which the nuclear spin of hydrogen is reduced to zero >> through cooper pairing. >> > ***Damn you, you're gonna make me come up to speed on Cooper pairing. > > > >> It is cooper paired hydrogen that can be a reaction component in the >> LENR reaction. The LENR reaction will always accompany hydrogen plasma >> formation either through heat or arc discharge. >> > ***Here's another blinking red light: Arc Discharge. What do you think > of my associated theory? > > > Posted elsewhere > > > What do you think of my theory? > > To: *All; y'all; et al* > Here’s my theory. > On either side of a crack in the substrate material, you’ve got electrons > moving at different speeds, creating a microscopically small differential > capacitor. The vibrations push the differential charge “upward”, which is > to say from the smallest separation of the crack to the largest. When the > charge differential gets to a certain point, a spark is generated. This > spark is what creates the Nuclear Active Environment. But it is not due to > plasma physics, it is due to a force generated by a spark that goes across > the anode & cathode of a capacitor. In the below Quantum Potential article, > a propulsive force was found that matches these conditions (except that > we’re seeing it on a microscopic level). > > Asymmetric > Capacitor > Thrusterhttp://www.quantum-potential.com/ACT%20NASA.pdf > An earlier SBIR study commissioned by the Air Force reported a propulsive > force caused by a spark between ACT electrodes [3]. The study [3] also > focused on ACT thrust in high vacuum (10−5 to 10−7 Torr) and reports small > (on the order of 10 nN) thrust in vacuum under pulsed DC voltage > conditions. Furthermore, the study [3] reports observation of thrust when a > piezoelectric dielectric material such as lead titanate or lead zirconate > (high relative dielectric constants of k = 1750) was used between the ACT > electrodes. The thrust was apparently produced by slow pulsing > spark-‐initiated breakdown of the dielectric. The magnitude of the > propulsive force increases with the intensity of sparking across the > dielectric. The study [3] recommended further exploration of sparking > across dielectrics as a source of propulsive forces in ACTs. Unfortunately, > no such follow-‐up study was conducted. > I believe this Asymmetric Capacitor force has been previously described as > the Poynting Vector. I think it is enhanced by the advent of a spark across > the electrodes. But I might be mistaken. > http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/pft01.htm > During a charging process of a flat capacitor, the Poynting vector ( S=ExH > ) comes from outside the capacitor towards the wire connections, parallel > to the surface of the armatures inside the dielectric medium. There is an > energy flow directly proportional to ExB. This energy is not provided by > the wires but comes from the surrounding space around the capacitor. ( ref: > "The Feynman Lectures on Physics : Electromagnetism vol2, Chap: 27-5, fig > 27-3" by Addison-Wesley Publishing company. ) > > So, this Poynting Asymmetrical Capacitor Vector generates a unidirectional > force. Any protons within its path would be propelled into a nearby > Hydrogen atom which is trapped inside a Palladium matrix. This force is > enough to overcome the Coulomb Barrier. > > A couple of guesses: > There would have to be hundreds of thousands of these sparks every second, > constantly spitting matter or protons or electrons in one direction similar > to a Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) particle accelerator, where only 1 in 100k > particles actually collides with a nucleus of a hydrogen atom and fuses. > This force is proportional to the distance between electrodes, so the > effect would happen closer to the small vertex of the crack rather than the > large ends of the crack. > The transfer of energy of fused atoms is mostly heat because the > collision is unidirectional, and the gamma rays that are emitted only come > out > in certain geometrical probabilities, and most of those probabilities are > directly in line with host atoms on the palladium (or nickel) matrix. I > look > at it similar to a pellet gun hitting balloons -- most of the time the air > escapes the balloon in almost the same regions each time. These reactions > only > occur one atom at a time, so the geometrically restricted release of gamma > rays > is similarly restricted. The released energy is absorbed by the matrix one > atom-release at a time. > > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Some appetizers to hold you over > > > > http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2896450/posts > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> >> > >
