https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ce3vqlIGxvk
The Water Crystal At 34:00 into this video show, Mark LeClair, the president and driving force behind Nanospire begins his presentation describing the production of fusion using cavitation. I contend that insight can be gleaned from the work, ideas and theory that LeClair conveys. His explanations seek to unveil some of the most astounding mysteries revolving around rydberg matter and what gives rydberg matter its LENR capabilities. It seems to me that the multi-segmented structure of the graphite like hexagonal plates or cells connected in a long unicellular line is what is imported to collect and store large amounts of polariton energy. The water crystal that LeClair talks about is comprised of the same plate like ensemble as rydberg matter but with a hydroxyl radical (OH) forming the plates instead of just Hydrogen. Unlike Rydberg matter where quantum mechanical processes produce the unique hexagonal crystal layout, the formation of the water crystal is based on the tremendous pressures that exist at the end of the collapse of the cavitation bubble. LeClair states that he has seen the water crystal undergoing tremendous stress but these crystals seem to be protected by a Bose Condensate based protective shield that absorbs and distributes all the energy that it generates through nuclear reactions. This shield keeps the crystal together under crushing accelerations as it eats through and digests material. What this speaks toward is that the EMF that covers the water crystal must be comprised of bosons: this means Surface Plasmon Polaritons (SPP) are involved in the condensate and not only electrons. The Water Crystal is attracted electrostatically to sharp edged holes and sharp edges. They track along the electrostatic field lines that these sharp edges produce. This could be why the nickel micro particles used in the E-Cat LENR fuel requires the surface be pitted with large amounts of nano cracks generated in fuel reprocessing. LeClair also states that the water crystal produces pressures some 10000 times greater than the center of the sun and yet the water crystal stays intact to eat through meters of material. LeClair reaches into sci fi (UFO propulsion)to explain this near frictionless travel with tremendous acceleration through the substrate without regard for inertia, and stellar levels of pressure and heat. It must be a warp bubble LeClair proclaims.(1) The polariton shield is in deed resistant to cosmological levels of heat and pressure more that any material that ITER can ever deploy. Such resistance to hellish extremes in both pressures and temperatures must be a result of the mysterious monopole magnetic forces that we know that a polariton soliton can generate. The quantum effects that these forces generate are largely unknown to science and subject to the exotic rules laid down by a new type of undeveloped and extremely complex quantum science called Nonassociative Quantum Mechanics. This Polariton shield must also protects Holmlid's Rydberg matter when he produces his nuclear effects since his Rydberg matter persists over many laser shots. How can a flimsy collection of atoms that form Rydberg matter stay together inside Holmlid's nuclear malstrom? In LeClair's case, the water crystal producing the shock wave only being made up of hydrogen and oxygen would erode in short order under the pressure and forces generated by the collision of the water crystal with the steel substrate at speeds moving at some appreciable factor of light. The protective electromagnetic shield must be favoring the survival of the water crystal over the substance of steel. Even more amazing, the jet formed by the cavitation bubble can vaporize diamond as witnessed by craters formed in that substrate produced by exploding gas. This new concept that LeClair has now generously donated to our growing collection of LENR miracles can be added to our treasure trove. Now known, it now can be joyously placed into my LENR bag of dreams, our toolkit of the future, as a impenetrable shield that protects LENR starships as it passes through stars, planets, and comets at light speed in a warp bubble unaffected and unafraid as if those cosmic obstructions were not even there. To awaken from these dreams and back to our analysis, Holmlid states that is takes weeks of laser irradiation to make Rydberg matter active. He does not see that his concept about only the physical structure of the rydberg matter itself produces Hot Fusion effects is illogical. If only shape and/or the crystals dimensionality causes hot fusion were true, then rydberg matter would produce fusion immediately after the first shot of the laser when Holmlid's reactor started up. Topology never changes no matter how long that you shine a laser on it. Something must be added over time to make Rydberg matter come alive. The laser must pump energy into the Rydberg crystal for weeks to develop that bose condensate EMF based polariton cover that makes the rydberg matter active. And the reaction is LENR and not hot fusion. LeClair gets that power level up on the first shot because of the huge power production potential generated by the cavitation bubble. The polariton soliton must remain connected to the water crystal when it is confined inside the reactor. But the polariton shield can disconnect and uncloak from the water crystal somehow and be able to pass through the walls of the reactor, float free, and exist on its own, sustained on it own energy stores. This free floating soliton might be an instance of dark matter. This Exotic Neutral Particle(ENP) behavior is illustrated when LeClair relates how a clear plastic dish that was stored in a desk drawer under the experiment about a foot away. The steel and wood desktop would have shielded the dish from charged particles, alpha particles and low level radiation. Neutrons would get through the desktop but the weird tracks etched into the plastic look like the tracks produced by the ENP generated in other LENR experiments. We know what neutrons look like when they pit CR-39 particle detection strips. They look like craters, not like long wavy filamentary tracks. LeClair also remarks about the tremendous amounts of magnetic signatures that even the non magnetic material retains after transmutation.(1) At the end of his presentation, LeClair takes a shot at the Lattice theory of LENR. One of his experiments produced fusion with just water. Because of the liquid only environment, he then rejects all theories for LENR that are based on lattice production of LENR effects such as W&L theory. LeClair seems to be of split mind between Hot and Cold nuclear processes in his reaction. Sometimes he says that he is producing hot fusion and sometimes he thinks he is doing LENR. It could be that his process is a combined hot and cold fusion mechanism with LENR providing the tools that make hot fusion possible. 1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brnx1I4Jyi8 at 1:26:15 On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Ludwik Kowalski < [email protected]> wrote: > P.S. Wikipedia's definition (in blue below) is consistent with what I > remember. > > > A *catalyst* is a substance that speeds up a *chemical* reaction, but is > not consumed by the reaction; hence a *catalyst* can be recovered > chemically unchanged at the end of the reaction it has been used to speed > up, or catalyze. > > > > On Nov 26, 2015, at 2:13 PM, Ludwik Kowalski wrote: > > I also responded to Peter G, essentially at the same time. Bot my reply > bounced back. I wrote: > > 1) Peter wrote (see his egoout below ): ... "I have a cult for catalysis, > met it professionally in many forms and have developed a kind of philosophy > of it ... . > > *I have a cult for catalysis, met it professionally in many forms and have > developed a kind of philosophy of it.* > > * - I claim a "catalytic" surface consists of nano-cracks. "* > > 2) I am not a chemist. But I would say that a catalytic surface is a > surface covered with one or more catalysts (chemical compounds). Such > compounds can participate in reactions but are not consumed by these > reactions). Some chemical reactions would be very rare, if catalysts were > not available. > > 3) Does my definition conflict with Peter's nano-cracks definition? > Probably not; Peter probably thinks that some catalysts are present in > nano-cracks. Which compounds does he have in mind, in our CMNS context? > > Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia). > > > > > > On Nov 26, 2015, at 2:05 PM, Edmund Storms wrote: > > *a) Continuing discussion with Ed Storms* > > * Yesterday Ed has promptly answered to my catalysis in LENR questions, > but has forgot to answer to this question "caused "by the unique PdD et > classic paper of JCF-16 so I repeat it:* > > *- what do you think about paper of Numata- No.15 at JCF- see the list? > I have spoken more times about nano-vortices as NAE to you, in this is > something like that* > > > *Ed: I will be pleased to comment once the paper becomes available. If > you you have a copy, please send it.* > *Ed's answer, my comments * > > > *To answer your questions, we need to know what the words mean. The word > catalyst describes a general concept, there being hundreds of different > kinds of catalyst. One kind does not take the place of another. Simply > saying a catalytic surface is required is too trivial. What is worse, the > concept of catalyst was only applied to a chemical reaction, never to a > nuclear reaction, until LENR was discovered. We need to know what the word > means when it describes a nuclear process. A catalyst can reasonably be > understood to lower a barrier by a few eV but what allows a barrier of > several MeV to be lowered?* > > *ANSWER * > *Please, please read my essay here:* > *http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/12/the-most-fundamental-question-about-lenr.html > <http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/12/the-most-fundamental-question-about-lenr.html> > * > *I have a cult for catalysis, met it professionally in many forms and have > developed a kind of philosophy of it.* > > *Ed: I read your comment but I do not understand how it applies to our > problem. A catalyst is a concept applied when the rate of a chemical > reaction can be increased by operation of another chemical condition. To be > useful, the chemical condition needs to be identified. This requires > identification of the chemical state causing the rate of LENR to increase. > In addition, we are faced with the need to increase a reaction rate having > a barrier of MeV. You have not answered my question. How can this be done?* > > * - I claim a "catalytic" surface consists of nano-cracks. These cracks > are created by stress relief. Many ways exist to create the stress and the > resulting crack formation depends on the property of the surface. Stress > generation and crack formation are influence by many variables. We will not > understand these variables until they are study for the purpose of causing > LENR. So, simply saying a catalyst is necessary without showing the form > of the catalyst is useless. Also, complaining about lack of knowledge > about the process without showing what needs to be studied is also > useless. I'm attempting to show exactly what needs to be studied and what > will be found when that study is undertaken. I see no one else doing this. > Instead, we are provided with guesses and speculation based on what Rossi > might wish to reveal. * > > *ANSWER* > *As far I know/understand, the nanocracks are not a specific, quantifiable > feature of the metal (Pd, Ni) surface- **with concrete it would be > different. * > > *Ed: Peter, I'm amazed you would say this. The nano-crack is the initial > formation of a gap that, if allowed to grow larger, would be and is easily > seen. This is a well known and easily observed process. I'm not > suggesting a new condition. I'm only suggesting a new consequence of a > well-known condition. * > > > *It is difficult to explain- based on the density of nanocracks per > surface a thousand times increase of the heat release from PdD to NiH at > 1200 C- the best for you is to deny it temporarily- an 1000 times increase > of nanocracks density is not possible. We like it or not, cracking is a > destructive process. My alternative is the dynamic formation of the NAE > surfce nanostructures* > *due to the increased mobility and re-arrangements of surface atoms of the > metals, obviously increasing with temperature.* > > *Ed: What kind of nano-structures are able to initiate a nuclear reaction? > You need to be specific. What exactly needs to be created on the surface > to cause LENR and how can this be done? I have answered this question using > my theory. Can you give an answer using your understanding? Making general > comments is not useful at this stage. We need exact descriptions and > predictions.* > > *- Axil and others suggest treatments that would apply stress even though > he does not explain the process this way. However, no one has the money or > interest in setting up a complicated method without assurance that it has a > relationship to creating the required conditions. * > > *ANSWER * > *AXIL will explain this again, in more detail- please appreciate that AXIL > tries to develop a holistic understanding of the field that is indeed very > rich and varied.* > > *Ed: Yes, but Axil's approach is too rich and varied. It is like throwing > a collection of colored paint against the wall and hoping to form a picture > of something recognizable. I call this an abstract art form, not science. > We need to have exact descriptions that can be easily tested and related to > what is presently known.* > > *The essence of the problem is the lack of agreement about a NAE being > required. Without this agreement, no one even looks for the NAE or attempts > to identify it. I suggest a very plausible NAE, but this idea is ignored > because the basic need for a NAE of any form is not accepted. * > > *Dear Ed, have you seen this jCF-16- how does it consider NAE:* > *What is the "nuclear active environment" of the cold fusion Tetsuo Sawada* > *LENR poly-semantics.* > > *ANSWER* > > *As regarding me, I have pre-agreed with NAE much before even the > word/acronym was created by you just I called it "active sites" because > they are fisrt topological and and only then environmental. I don't think > they are nano-cracks in the surface but nanostructures on the surface. Is > this an essential difference? ok- void space vs structured nano-matter, in > the surface vs. the surface , static-preformed vs. dynamic, permanent vs. > transient, possibly usual nuclear two particles reaction vs. collective > transformation, fusion vs more complex nuclear interactions etc.* > > *Ed: You and other people do not understand what I mean when I use the > term NAE. It is not simply a site where LENR happens to take place, as you > define it. It is a special local condition that is created by a chemical > process BEFORE LENR can take place. Its eventual use as a site for a > nuclear reaction is not anticipated by Nature when the NAE is formed. The > nuclear reaction is an unusual and unexpected consequence. For reasons > having nothing to do with the eventual nuclear process, this condition > forms and allows something extraordinary to happen. This way of looking at > the problem forces an entirely different set of rules on how the process > works. You are free to reject my idea, but please understand what I > propose before you reject it. You and I are describing an entirely > different condition when we use the term NAE. I do not believe your > definition applies because I do not believe a process that can cause fusion > can take place in or on a normal material. A very unique and rare change > must take place. We need to identify this change in an exact way while > remaining consistent with known behavior.* > > *Further- is NAE a chemical structure and are you right as you say:* > *The chemical structure of a material has to be modified in a unusual way > before LENR can be initiated. * > *Or is it about dimensions first i.e. is it a nano-effect primarily.* > > *Ed: OK, that comment is the start of an agreement. As for your question, > I have no idea what you are asking. We know that no matter what happens, it > must take place at a nano scale. We have a very limited number of possible > changes that can take place in a material at this size level. Exactly what > kind of change do you propose?* > > * I forgot to ask- what arguments do you have for the existence of > hydrotons Are they active somewhere?* > > *Ed: In order to fuse, the hydrogen MUST occupy the same place at the same > time. For the sale of discussion, I use the word Hydroton to identify this > assembly of hydrogen. I propose how it forms so as to be consistent with > the rules of thermodynamics. I speculate that metallic hydrogen would have > the same ability to support a fusion reaction, hence could be called a > Hydroton. * > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "CMNS" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cmns. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "CMNS" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cmns. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > >
