http://www.projectworldawareness.com/2010/10/terrifying-scientific-discovery-strange-emissions-by-sun-are-suddenly-mutating-matter/
I believe that the variability of nuclear decay rates is the driving principle behind LENR. This decay rate variability is showing up through a strange correlation between solar activity and the rate of radioactive decay. One aspect of the correlation is centered on the sun’s core and its rotational rate. Another solar correlation is centered on the occurrence of solar flares. And yet another correlation is centered of seasonal variations in the radioactive decay rates. http://science.slashdot.org/story/10/08/24/0155229/the-strange-case-of-solar-flares-and-radioactive-decay-rates?sdsrc=rel *Current models for radioactive decay have been challenged by, of all sources, the sun. According to the article, 'On Dec 13, 2006, the sun itself provided a crucial clue, when a solar flare sent a stream of particles and radiation toward Earth. Purdue nuclear engineer Jere Jenkins, while measuring the decay rate of manganese-54, a short-lived isotope used in medical diagnostics, noticed that the rate dropped slightly during the flare, a decrease that started about a day and a half before the flare.' This is important because the rate of decay is very important not just for antique dating, but also for cancer treatment, time keeping, and the generation of random numbers. This isn't a onetime measurement, either. 'Checking data collected at Brookhaven National Laboratory on Long Island and the Federal Physical and Technical Institute in Germany, they came across something even more surprising: long-term observation of the decay rate of silicon-32 and radium-226 seemed to show a small seasonal variation. The decay rate was ever so slightly faster in winter than in summer.'"* Since the sun’s core is known to blast out continuous streams of particles called neutrinos, some scientists are attempting to find evidence that neutrinos are the culprits behind the mutation of matter. There’s a problem with that hypothesis, however, as neutrinos are like ghost particles. They’re extremely difficult to detect. Normally, neutrinos pass through the Earth without any interaction at all. To a neutrino, it’s as if the Earth doesn’t exist. But a recent experiment discounts neutrinos as the source of the correlation. http://science.slashdot.org/story/10/09/25/0254219/Scientists-Confirm-Nuclear-Decay-Rate-Constancy "Scientists at the US National Institute of Standards and Technology and Purdue University have ruled out neutrino flux as a cause of previously observed fluctuations in nuclear decay rates. From the article: 'Researchers ... tested this by comparing radioactive gold-198 in two shapes, spheres and thin foils, with the same mass and activity. Gold-198 releases neutrinos as it decays. The team reasoned that if neutrinos are affecting the decay rate, the atoms in the spheres should decay more slowly than the atoms in the foil because the neutrinos emitted by the atoms in the spheres would have a greater chance of interacting with their neighboring atoms. The maximum neutrino flux in the sample in their experiments was several times greater than the flux of neutrinos from the sun. The researchers followed the gamma-ray emission rate of each source for several weeks and found no difference between the decay rate of the spheres and the corresponding foils.' The paper can be found here on arXiv. Slashdot has previously covered the original announcement and followed up with the skepticism of other scientists." Here is a collection of papers collected by mit on this subject http://web.mit.edu/redingtn/www/netadv/XperDecRat.html IMHO, Variability of nuclear decay rates is caused my magnetism. This ability for magnetism to affect nuclear processes is the driving force behind LENR. On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:18 AM, ChemE Stewart <[email protected]> wrote: > I can see where you are coming from, which implies nature operates off > a vacuum at her most basic level, which I agree with. > > For me the question is how much energy is pumped into that vacuum and > is it isotropic and smooth or actually forming strings and > multidimensional branes depending upon how much vacuum energy that is > pumped into it in the local space. > > I see what I think is a tremendous amount of lensing and bending of > electromagnetic radiation (light and Doppler) during storms on Earth, > which I think is high energy vacuum inflation and decay. > > In a typical gas, when you pump energy into it it expands and/or gets > hot. In our atmosphere, the highest energy storms have severe cold > fronts associated with them and the lowest pressures along a very thin > line of condensing, completely opposite what one would expect. It > think along this line you will find strings of vacuum, probably with a > BEC surrounding them and ionized plasma. > > Like I have said before, IMHO our weather is really our decaying > quantum gravity field inflating above us and condensing everything > around it. > > I think inflating vacuum sucks you in and then spits you out releasing > entropy, like a tornado. > > Stewart > > > > On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 7:48 AM, Roarty, Francis X > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Stewart, > > > > I think part of the confusion is the way we consider time and gravity at > a > > macro scale with an isotropy where time is constant in an inertial frame > and > > gravity only changes at the square of distance, gravity has a constant / > > slow to change spatial vector at macro scale while at a nano scale it is > > more like the winds of Chicago with changes in direction and pressure > > occurring based on proximity and size of buildings that obstruct the > flow. > > The slow to change temporal dilation via near C velocities imposes a > false > > impression upon us about how difficult it is to change this vacuum > pressure > > because we are in competition with C – trying to make a difference in a > > Pythagorean relationship on that scale is necessary in normal > space..BUT.. > > in a lattice or other conductive geometries you can modify vacuum > pressure > > in the opposite direction without use of energy or velocity because we > are > > instead using geometry to “impede” the native flow.. meaning that you can > > actually go slower than “stop” from a 4D perspective –and it is we that > > appear to “SLOW” [in a Paradox twin sense] from the perspective of these > > hydrogen atoms sheltered from the pressure in these umbrella like Casimir > > cavities/nano geometries.. IMHO the Paradox Twin phenomena can be > achieved > > very easily by impeding virtual particle flow with nano geometry as > > compared to trying to accelerate it with near C motion. I posit that, > which > > we consider catalytic action, is actually based on a combination of this > > same relativistic dilation and sudden changes in the rate of this > dilation > > brought on by the changes in chemical geometry of catalysts in a > reaction > > relative to moving reactants – even just adding liquids together in water > > and observing sudden color changes could be explained by chemical > geometries > > of the catalysts WRT the reactants AND would go far in my mind to > explain > > why catalysts are said to not participate or get used up in a > > reaction..they are too busy forming the nano umbrellas which vary the > vacuum > > pressure and give the non catalysts in the reaction a free white water > ride > > thru these CHANGES in VP pressure which I believe discount energy > > threshold requirements for reactions allowing them to occur much more > > rapidly – I am not saying the dilation is so acute that the reactions are > > happening at their normal rate from their own local perspective [although > > there has to be some level of dilation present] but rather it is the > rapid > > tearing at an inverse cube rate in opposition to the normal inverse > square > > law of the macro isotropy that accelerates the reaction time by > discounting > > the energy needed. I posit that catalytic action is already a form of ZPE > > that has been rolled into the COE but which fails to take into account > the > > possibility of larger dilation factors of the nano powders and skeletal > cats > > cited in most of these anomalous heat claims. > > > > Fran > > > > > > > > From: ChemE Stewart [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:59 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:magnetism, does it effect space and time? > > > > > > > > Yes, more magnetic flux more decay. Oscillating magnetic fields induce > > electrical currents which can cause decay. > > > > > > > > I think gravity(quantum vacuum) and magnetic fields are related. I've > tried > > to fit it to M Theory and relate it to what you and Jones and Ed and Fran > > are all sharing. > > > > > > > > I think our gravitational fields are made up of closed strings of quantum > > vacuum (extra dimension curled up, i.e plasmoids) streaming between our > > solar brane and earth brane in the solar wind, which warp space slightly > > around them. > > > > > > > > The strings inflate and decay in our atmosphere and power our jet streams > > and weather(through condensing of the atmosphere) and cause geomagnetic > and > > electromagnetic upsets, which are worse after CME's which can also > trigger > > accelerated decay and Earthquakes, etc. > > > > > > > > I think the Earth's magnetic fields are triggering inflation of quantum > > vacuum from the solar wind in a similar way that magnetic fields are > > interacting with the vacuum in LENR and that microwave drive NASA is > > testing. > > > > > > > > I think we are living in the inflation phase of our "local" universe. We > > live in slight vacuum all of the time and this vacuum energy is > > variable(weather disturbances) and therefore so is "Time". That is why > > background radiation goes up many times during storms. > > > > > > > > Once we learn to control this vacuum "inflation" (which I think is Dark > > Energy) we will be on our way. > > > > > > > > Stewart > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 12, 2014, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > More gravitational flux, more decay. > > > > > > > > Don't you mean more magnetic flux, more decay? > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 8:16 PM, ChemE Stewart <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Everything is decaying faster around pulsed microwave radar towers, I am > > convinced of that. As I mentioned before, I think "time" is really a > rate > > of decay. More gravitational flux, more decay. "Time is really the > decay > > it takes to go from one place to the other", which varies. > > > > > > > > Just my take on it. > > > > > > > > Stewart > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 12, 2014, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > It looks to me like magnetism speeds up the march of time by straitening > > out the curved space imposed by matter on space/time. The larger that the > > density of matter is, the greater is the effects of magnetism to > accelerate > > time. > > > > > > > > Does anybody has an opinion one way or the other? > > > > > >
