Peter,
I applaud your search for the truth. We all would like to see this field advance as quickly as possible since it will make an enormous difference in the lives of so many. I am carefully reading your latest blog post and the comments. Keep asking the right questions and eventually the correct answers will emerge. Currently I am working upon a hypothesis that I more or less stated in my last post to vortex. In this hypothesis I am seeking evidence that only the coordinated efforts of many individual NAE leads to measurable quantities of excess heat. The process for which I seek evidence would demonstrate itself if the excess energy is released in localize hot spots which are formed when individual triggers(random NAE events), that occur with a low probability and strong function of temperature, couple to nearby NAE and cause them to burn. The coupling might be accomplished by mechanical shock waves released by the recoiling nuclear ash or just highly localized energy releases. The instantaneous large temperature excursions within the active region would theoretically increase the probability of other NAE sites there reacting in approximate synchronization. This process would be a form of positive feedback. The net effect is that relatively minor triggers caused by improbable reactions of NAE lead to an overall release of energy many times that due to the raw NAE alone. Any attempt to measure excess heat generated by a material that does not exhibit this feedback would show an energy release that is far too small to accurately measure in most instances. This lack of measurable heat would theoretically be true even when the material is subject to temperatures of the metal melting point. In effect, I am proposing that the random reaction rates of LENR materials in the temperature range of interest is many orders of magnitude greater than expected by earlier physicists estimates. This is most likely a result of interactions within the metal environment which are not well understood when compared to plasma systems. Even though the new hypothetical single NAE reaction rates are much greater than normal, I suspect that they are still too small to measure with precision equipment. And, the fact that no radiation seems to exit LENR systems further masks the observations. A successful LENR device according to my hypothesis is one that can harbor an adequate density of coupled NAE available to be triggered. It should also exhibit the ability to recover the depleted fuel material quickly enough to produce an adequate amount of power. I also expect that the diffusion of heat(or phonons) from an active region will tend to limit the time that the coupling between NAE is effective. The probability of additional reactions as a function of temperature would strongly depend upon the thermal diffusion rate. This interaction would be complex, but hopefully can be engineered to meet system requirements. Obtaining metal particles of the ideal size would potentially be an excellent way to control the reaction. Enough NAE can be formed within these to enhance the positive feedback required to generate the heat. A further advantage of these rough spheres might be that they should exhibit sonic resonances of relatively high "Q". Both of these factors would contribute to the positive feedback gain which would translate into useful amounts of thermal power. A system of this nature would be expected to exhibit a threshold effect. Even though the local single NAE would increase in reaction rate as the temperature increases, the amount of power being generated would be extremely tiny until and unless positive feedback is exhibited. Only then would adequate heat be released to be useful and detected. The design goal is to achieve adequate NAE density within many active regions, develop a controlled method of coupling between these NAE, and to generate a structure that captures the heat or phonon energy for a long enough time to allow them to react. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Peter Gluck <[email protected]> Dear Friends, LENR NAEology is controversial science but a very necessary emergent technology. Therefore I have published the third paper in the NAE series: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/08/continuing-to-crack-crack-is-nae-theory.html My partner and opponent in this discussion is colleague Abd. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
