1. Steven N. Karels July 2, 2019 at 4:31 AM <http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892&cpage=434#comment-1375785>
Dear Andrea, I have difficulty with your limited answer and I suspect others might also have questions and/or are experiencing confusion. I understand there are two primary ways of deriving energy from the nucleus – fission and fusion. I suspect you are concerned with protecting your confidential business secrets and that is fine and understandable. But the implication that I would draw from your comment is that the reaction is fission which cannot be the correct answer because of the low atomic number of the ingredients. Confused, Steve 2. Translate Andrea Rossi July 2, 2019 at 8:21 AM <http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892&cpage=434#comment-1375841> Steven N. Karels: There are other nuclear interactions, besides fusion and fission. See also http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_E-Cat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions Warm Regards, A.R. On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 1:43 PM Jürg Wyttenbach <[email protected]> wrote: > The connection missing since decades was the fact that super-conduction is > spin-current and not electron flux and not copper pair flux. > Hirsch first found the connection between spin current and SC when he > could improve the description of the Meissner effect. After the latest > experiments by Holmlid and the work of H. Esat Kondakci 1,2 & Ayman F. > Abouraddy1 > about group velocity > 60c it is clear that the orbit of light inside > matter is a spin orbit. > From my work it is clear that the metric of SO(4) allows to explain the > acceleration of the group velocity. The 3D/4D flux, that couples with > matter, makes 8 rotations before getting back to origin this allows for an > about 27 times shorter path (radius = 1/2!) for light = its mass (use > mass orbit relation) moving along an SO(4) orbit. > The connections people did talk about seems to be the true orbit of > photons inside matter, that can be modeled by 3 rotations. > > BEC is key for the formation of larger coupled spin orbits. The classic > electron of Hydrogen/Deuterium mostly runs in one plane equivalent orbit. > The electron pair of 4-He runs on a SO(4) orbit. This first condensation > step of an electron allows to get rid of about 10.8 eV, what leads to a > reduction of the orbit radius. This amount of energy 10.8 eV is also the > "optical energy" such a bond can temporary store in the energy-hole left > behind. > > If larger orbits form out the number of possible pairs does increase and > also the total sum of energy increases. The critical energy to trigger a > "proton magnetic moment relaxation" is 1001eV. If this counter mass rotates > along a proton spin orbit the proton can get rid of 2002eV what leads to > 2.15pm radius state Holmlid reports. In this process two condensed > (paired) deuterium nuclei release the so called dark matter signal energy > of around 3.5keV. > The 1001eV resonance energy of the proton has been found in three > different experiments. > > BEC at room temperature and up to several hundred degrees is allowed by > classic theory already if you lower the pressure (as Holmlid does) and use > a cavity = hole in surface, that reduces the degrees of freedom for moving > mass from 3 to 1 then 3/2kt becomes 0.5kt. > > For me the LENR picture is almost complete. One thing I would like to add. > According to my calculations > the 61-Ni magnetic state that couples in the Mizuno reaction, induces a > magnetic energy equivalent of the H/D orbit magnetic energy what tells us > that the final LENR energy release process is thermalizing using the base > electron orbit of hydrogen/deuterium. > > Jürg Wyttenbach > > Am 02.07.19 um 16:03 schrieb JonesBeene: > > > > Is there a strong connection between computer design and LENR? The > connection may be non-obvious for now, but in a few months it may be state > of the art, right Axil? > > > > Here is a News story from yesterday which may explain Axil’s recent > observation of a novel QM connection between the Mizuno setup to the > emerging architecture of the quantum computer. > > > > At least the research is novel to me, and since is on a different end > use with different parameters, the connection may end up being “ by > analogy” or not. I seem to have lost the original message but the Wang > research on supercurrents is here > > > > > https://phys.org/news/2019-07-physicists-supercurrents-enable-ultrafast-quantum.html > > > https://phys.org/news/2018-06-physicists-terahertz-uncover-state-hidden.html > > Wang et al from Iowa State University claim “light-induced > superconductivity without energy gap.” That seems to be right on target for > a Mizuno explanation too especially if the supercurrent is related to a > palladium nanoparticle only and NOT the bulk structure. > > IOW we have “local superconductivity” of palladium hydride at 400° F with > extreme and self-contained supercurrents within in the nanoparticle. Wang > mentions terahertz oscillation and symmetry breaking – which is another > clue about the nature of gain. > > Photons are the only elementary particles which routinely form into > condensates (BEC) at high temperature, setting the stage for a “proximity” > effect as in the Mizuno reactor. > > https://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/PT.4.0888/full/ > > Since Palladium hydride is itself a superconductor at low temperature it > may function to retain that state at much higher temperature when in close > proximity to another superconductor (the photon BEC). Perhaps the > combination of the two results in superconductivity at elevated temperature > within the dimensions of a nanoparticle via the known proximity effect but > limited to the nanoparticle (or Qubit/exciton structure) > > In the Weitz study cited above the photon wavelength is not the same as > the palladium optical anomaly but it is close enough to considered an > identical situation. He does not limit the effect to a single wavelength. > > This all fits together rather elegantly. That does not make it correct, > but it makes infinitely more sense than actual nuclear fusion to explain > anomalous heat. > > > > ---------------------------------- > > > > Moving forward – this month of July could be unusually hot, to speak… > Energy Independence Day could be upon us. > > > > Several top researchers are now committed to a Mizuno replication and > underway already. Even more are thinking seriously about parts of it - and > there are literally dozens of crafty amateurs who want to make a big > splash. Who knows what will happen by Fall? The only thing missing, sadly, > is participation from DOE and the big labs (with the possible exception of > Lawrence Berkeley.) > > > > Few of the researchers want to be identified at this time by name - but > the explosion of interest in this experiment is like nothing we have seen > in the field since the early days of the Rossi debacle. If this turns out > to be another false alarm – LENR may never recover. > > > > Most of the pundits on this forum are willing to give benefit of the doubt > to Mizuno, and take a wait-and-see attitude, despite similar claims from > him in the past which did not pan out. Some of that tolerance is because of > a realizable hope for an increase in the basic understanding of LENR even > if the effect is not as robust as claimed. In contrast, Rossi disappeared > from relevance with negative, decreased understanding. > > > > To that end, the one old lesson which is standing-out comes from a > reanalysis of the original Widom Larsen work of 14 years ago. Admittedly, > the big thing they got wrong was the ultra low momentum neutron but not the > rest of it. That species now seems both imaginary and useless, but the two > valuable insights which they got right are the surface plasmon interaction > with protons and the need for framing a multi-step reaction to take the > place of deuterium fusion. It is clear from Mizuno that his technique works > with both protium and deuterium with no neutron activation, even after long > runs at high power. Nuclear fusion is most unlikely, but not another kind > of nuclear reaction. > > > > IMHO, the main thing which W&L overlooked is the “cluster” of many atoms > as being the key to the multi-step process – and not some mysterious cold > neutron. The cluster of many atoms bound together with borrowed electron > energy can resonate with surface plasmons whereas the atoms themselves are > much too small to couple. The energy which is released in a subsequent > “Coulomb explosion” is then a type of nuclear binding energy modeled on QCD > and the strong force. > > > > But at least nailing the surface plasmon step by W&L was a major advance… > which was never capitalized on, and which Mizuno seems to have stumbled on > in his experiment serendipitously. > > > > As they say in Sapporo (or was that Paris) “chance favors the prepared > mind.” > > > > If this pre-analysis is even half-way on target, Mizuno switched from glow > discharge to incandescent photon input power pretty much by trial and > error, or even by accident or desperation; and he may not have realized at > the time the importance of the palladium absorption anomaly in the red > spectrum. > > > > I’m anticipating a red hot July … > > > > > -- > Jürg Wyttenbach > Bifangstr.22 > 8910 Affoltern a.A. > 044 760 14 18 > 079 246 36 06 > >
