# Electron-assisted fusion

• closed trajectories and electron's clock (de Broglie's, zitterbewegung) performing integer number of ticks during a single closed orbit, like in quantization for Couder's droplets:

@Jarek : That is what R.Mills assumes and describes as phase locked in photons. But the non-radiation condition states that at each "point" (during one phase the integral over the corresponding/ convoluted spherical harmonics should vanish) of the orbit the photon current an the electron current should be (in average) orthogonal.

Just assuming that this also could be the case with highly eccentric orbits, is wish level assumptions. Mills mathematically shows that it works fine under central-fore conditions with certain well defined ratios of a/b axes of ellipsoid trajectories.

I suggest you deliver a proof (mathematical) for these more general assumptions - which would be great!

• Wyttenbach, we already had this discussion - an ultimate argument against spherical or circular trajectories is for example the electron capture ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_capture ) : that nucleus can capture electron from orbital, what needs it getting to ~10^-15m distance ... in contrast in Bohr it is 10^-10m - there is no chance for electron capture.
You need nearly zero angular momentum trajectories for electron capture ("free-falling"), there are also dozens of other arguments and papers showing agreement of such free-fall atomic model with many experiments, like various scattering scenarios, calculating diamagnetic coefficient, Stark effect ... see these peer-reviewed papers:

• Wyttenbach, we already had this discussion - an ultimate argument against spherical or circular trajectories is for example the electron capture ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_capture ) : that nucleus can capture electron from orbital, what needs it getting to ~10^-15m distance ... in contrast in Bohr it is 10^-10m - there is no chance for electron capture.

@Jarek : You missed the question: Why should your orbits not radiate? We have no mathematical prove for that.

Regarding e-capture, as you said: The electron needs about 782keV excess energy to be successful for most nuclei! But that's not LENR thus not of (our) core interest!

• Is there a mathematical proof that electron shouldn't radiate in quantum description of atom?
We rather have experimental proofs that electron is extremely tiny (<10^-21m in Penning trap) - it cannot be objectively smeared into 10^-10m of quantum cloud ... so there is a hidden dynamics there and so acceleration ...
We just don't understand photons, their production, including synchrotron radiation.

Regarding e-capture, I didn't meant by proton, but by nuclei having abundant protons, which are reducing energy by capturing electron - see the Wikipedia article with examples:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_capture
Or internal conversion also requiring electron getting to ~10^-15m distance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_conversion

update: physicsforums discussion
https://www.physicsforums.com/…-orbit-corrections.899922

The post was edited 2 times, last by Jarek ().

• I have recently found 2001 Eugene Oks paper with a few dozens of references claiming that there is a real problem with standard quantum description of the simplest: ground state Hydrogen atom:

http://iopscience.iop.org/arti…8/0953-4075/34/11/315/pdf

So the question is high-energy tail in momentum distribution (HTMD): standard quantum derivation leads to 1/p^6 tail.

The paper claims that experiments rather suggest 1/p^4 type of tail:

"The point we are trying to make is that the above fundamental dispute still remains unresolved: the experiments seem to favour a HTMD of ∼1/p^k , where k is at least 1.5 times smaller than in the quantum HTMD"

I have tried to discuss this fundamental issue in physicsforums, but there is no reply:

https://www.physicsforums.com/…istribution-1-p-6.919070/

ps. gentle introduction to Maximal Entropy Random Walk - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximal_Entropy_Random_Walk

showing why standard diffusion models are only approximation (of the Jaynes maximum uncertainty principle required by statistical physics models), and that doing diffusion right there is no longer disagreement with thermodynamical predictions of QM (Anderson localization).

The post was edited 1 time, last by Jarek ().

• So the question is high-energy tail in momentum distribution (HTMD): standard quantum derivation leads to 1/p^6 tail.

The paper claims that experiments rather suggest 1/p^4 type of tail:

Jarek : This sounds interesting, as the Dirac equation neglects the internal magnetic energy that depends on 1/r^3....

• Wyttenbach , the shape of this high energy tail seems crucial especially for scattering experiments ... but maybe also for probability of fusion.

Oks points the start of this dispute about tail's shape to 1960s Gryzinski's papers - showing disagreement of quantum considerations especially for plasma and scattering scenarios, repaired by him using classical approximation with radial ("free-fall") trajectories of electron.

In 2001 paper Oks was able to repair the quantum considerations by considering wavefunction singular in the center - with electron affecting the nucleus, what again seems essential for probability of fusion.

The post was edited 2 times, last by Jarek ().

• This is known since ages... Simple accelerator physics...

# “Data!data!data!, I can't make bricks without clay.”

The post was edited 1 time, last by axil ().

• The most important counterargument against considering dynamics of electrons, which assistance seems crucial for fusion, is the Bell theorem.

I have recently rewritten my paper about connection between QM and MERW ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximal_Entropy_Random_Walk ) - that repairing diffusion to be in agreement with the (Jaynes) entropy maximization principle, also repairs disagreements between predictions of stochastic models and QM, like the stationary probability distribution being exactly as in the quantum ground state.

Completely rewritten fresh version: https://arxiv.org/pdf/0910.2724v2.pdf

MERW turns out also having the Born rule: amplitudes describe probability distribution toward both past and future half-spacetime, to randomly get some value we need to "draw it" from both time directions, hence probability is (normalized) square of amplitude.

In this fresh paper I have yesterday added simple derivation of Bell inequalities and their violation for Born rule (also in MERW) - this picture contains a complete proof of Bell's theorem:

Top: assuming some probability distribution among 8 possibilities, we always get the above inequality.

Bottom: example of its violation using just quantum Born rule: probability is normalized square of amplitude.

• Jarek : In homogenous 4D the ratio 6:10= 0.6 is a magic figure representing the number of rotations needed to reach the "opposite" position. Or more clearly: Our view of symmetry does no longer exist in 4D, as different (in length) paths lead to the same position.

• A recent preprint on lowering of fusion barrier via electric screening in stellar environments and possibly in labs -

Nuclear clustering and the electron screening puzzle

https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.03388

- and a number of related items possibly of interest ---

The electron screening puzzle and nuclear clustering
http://www.sciencedirect.com/s…0370269316001155-main.pdf

Strong screening by lattice confinement and resultant fusion reaction rates in fcc metals
http://www.sciencedirect.com/s…cle/pii/S0168583X17306286

Differential and total cross sections and astrophysical image-factors for 2H(d,n)3He and 2H(d,p)3H reactions in a wide energy range
http://www.sciencedirect.com/s…cle/pii/S0092640X17300311

Quantum controlled fusion
http://www.sciencedirect.com/s…cle/pii/S0009261417301641

Observation of electron emission in the nuclear reaction between protons and deuterons

http://www.sciencedirect.com/s…cle/pii/S0370269317307025

Experimental verification of hypothesis of dd reaction enhancement by channeling of deuterons in titanium deuteride at ultralow energies

http://www.sciencedirect.com/s…cle/pii/S0168900214008651

Study of the d(p, γ)3He reaction at ultralow energies using a zirconium deuteride target
http://www.sciencedirect.com/s…cle/pii/S0168900213016343

Some abstracts and presentations on LENR and aneutronic fusion from

"Channeling 2016: 7th Int'l Conf. on Charged & Neutral Particles Channeling Phenomena"

https://agenda.infn.it/confSpe…er=%5Ball%5D&confId=10663

Cold Nuclear Fusion Development
https://agenda.infn.it/contrib…sessionId=21&confId=10663

Flux peaking of 7–12 keV deuterons at channeling in TiD2 crystal and enhancement of neutrons yield in d(d,n)3He reaction
https://agenda.infn.it/contrib…sessionId=10&confId=10663

http://www.sciencedirect.com/s…cle/pii/S0168583X17303294

Orientation effect in d(d,n)3He reaction initiated by 20 keV deuterons at channeling in textured CVD-Diamond target

https://agenda.infn.it/contrib…sessionId=10&confId=10663

http://www.sciencedirect.com/s…cle/pii/S0168583X17301799

First experimental evidence of D(p,γ)3He reaction in deuteride titanium in ultralow collision energy region
https://agenda.infn.it/contrib…&sessionId=5&confId=10663
http://www.sciencedirect.com/s…cle/pii/S0168900214003696

- Slides

https://agenda.infn.it/getFile…ialId=slides&confId=10663

Laser-Plasma Energetic Particle Production for Aneutronic Nuclear Fusion Experiments

https://agenda.infn.it/contrib…sessionId=26&confId=10663

http://www.sciencedirect.com/s…cle/pii/S0168583X17303257

• The slides are out of date because they fail to mention Rossi's resounding failure to convince Darden and IH that he has a real product or even a real technology. The megawatt test touted in the slides as ongoing is now ongone. And it failed miserably. There needs to be an update or the misinformation that Rossi actually has a technology will continue to mislead people.

• The slides are out of date because they fail to mention...etc etc.

All of them? Most of these have nothing to do with Ni-H.

• If the author can't be bothered to stay up to date with what is probably the biggest scam ever in the LENR field, why bother reading the rest?

• Why read when you can criticise without making any effort whatsoever? Reading isn't difficult Mary, one word at a time. You get there in the end.

• New post on Vessela Nikolova blog (Italian only, for now):