Fran,
* There was a previous thread regarding Casimir effect near slab edges which don’t believe maintain any containment like a cavity and the isotropy should immediately be restored just as abruptly as it was broken by the plates. In this model the small percentage of dilation and large fractions of C required are replaced by plate geometry (sails) and the size of the cavity (hole). Yes, but that is another reason why I think that this Arata scenario is something beyond time dilation, because- for one thing it does indeed look an edge effect. The Casimir cavity dilation effect could still be involved however, if we have a two step process: a non-nuclear (“Millsean-like”) first step – which is followed by a nuclear second step. Remember the image of the nanoparticles in the Takahashi ACS report? The scenario, based on that image, which is unfolding from my perspective of trying to merge all relevant research (including BLP) is that in step one – there is a Casimir cavity effect, and it is within the nanoparticles of Ni-Pd which are embedded in the large sphere of zirconia. This Casimir cavity effect is the one which you have modeled in your animations – and it results in a population of deuterium clusters or “pycno” (‘pycno’ is a ‘placeholder’ term which may include the other possible descriptors- deuterium-clusters, deuterinos, Rydberg matter, f/H, deflated deuterium, polyneutrons, virtual neutrons, or whatever the active ingredient is proved to be, in the end). They all have common features of diminished size below the Bohr radius, increased density, and charge-diminution. In step two, after a population of pycno has accumulated, the stage is set so that there can now be ‘real’ nuclear reactions of some kind, at increased probability - but the nuclear reaction may or may not need an additional Casimir cavity effect. If we look at it as two steps, then we can now look for nuclear reactions that can happen with very little external input. In Arata’s case there is essentially no power added after heat triggering. This means that we need to look for, and evaluate, nuclear decay reactions first since they would seemingly be more likely without added power. In double beta decay of Zr-96, it could be the case that pycno can get close enough inside the valence shells of zirconium to alter or disrupt the nuclear charge stability of an already unstable nucleus. This leads to increased-probability decay with excess energy, and without a gamma signature. Other nuclear reactions could also happen including deuterium fusion – in step 2 but perhaps this is the only one. By the way, it should be remembered than in double beta decay, most of the excess energy is carried away by two neutrinos, and the betas are in the 20+keV range of mass-energy. The problem for explaining Arata with other theories that invoke ‘real’ fusion is how does the reaction avoid secondary gammas? That is assuming you can answer the Coulomb barrier problem by invoking the transitory BEC. Must we then invent a non-physical crutch to make it all work (i.e. magic phonons)? Let’s hope not. A least in this hypothesis – the “invention” is pycno and it has a rather substantial amount of published evidence (in Mills work). It is immaterial to me that the main proponents of LENR scoff at Mills. His laboratory work is well above anyone in cold fusion – as well it should be for having been able to spend a minimum of $60 million and probably closer to $100 million. An especially good feature of this hypothesis for Arata experiments is emerging: falsifiability. It is clear that 96-Zr has been enriched for testing, in the past. This would be towards the main use for zirconium – which is cladding for nuclear fuel. No supplier of the isotope has turned up however. A supply of the 96-Zr isotope, even in less than full enrichment – if run in an Arata type of experiment, showing more energy output than the natural metal - should provide the needed indication - whether the hypothesis of double beta decay is valid, or not. Jones
