“LENR — From Experiment to Theory” (Paper by Jean-Francois Geneste, Airbus Group)

Jean-Francois Geneste has come up with a theory to replace general relativity(GR) or at least to upgrade it. This he calls dark gravity(DG). If seems like GR does not take into account negative energy or negative matter or handle time reversal properly.

Just like GR did not take into account black holes for some time after GR was put forward, Generate does not account for the possibility for EMF black holes and describes how they can form. However, he does mention black dwarf nuclei. There has been 40 years of thinking done by some very smart people involving black holes that could be utilized in understanding LENR; i am for taking advantage of that research. There is a principle in physics called parallelism where one system is so much like another that theory from one can be used in the other. There is more to understand here but at least Jean-Francois Geneste is on the right track.

I don't think that Jean-Francois Geneste understands the nature of the polariton and how that mix of light and electrons produce the huge concentrations of EMF that are needed to produce what he calls micro ball lightning. There has been a lot of work done in nano optics to show how energy flows in, out, and flows around inside these black objects. There is at least 20,000 papers that will apply. Nanoplasmonics explains how this black hole forms and what keeps them from collapsing. Nanoplasmonics also explains how radiation that is fed into these black holes is digested. This also leads to an understanding about how the positive feedback loop of nuclear energy contributes to the survival of the black hole.

<quote> I am afraid Geneste does make only little more sense than Axil at his best. But LENR-brainrot does that to people. Look at the Swedish nutty professors, for example. </quote>

I am going to try to get a thought out of you. Since you are right, why are you right? If you are going to passively aggressively insult someone, why don't you bring an individual thought to the discussion? I say this as since you are right you can say something to defend your argument. You certainly have coherent arguments. Please indulge me.

Rigel you're wasting time with this. A pathoskeptic is incapable of an individual thought. They are only capable of aggressive insults on constructive individual thought.
Thankfully there won"t be any attempt at a coherent argument that would waste space here. Low amu hydrogen fusion is real and has resulted in antiLENR-brainrot in some skeptics.

Quote from Mary Yugo

As for anti-LENR brainrot, it's a disease which could be easily cured by a few high power experiments done with a credible method by reliable people!

No George,

It would not help, as you and your likes have proven over and over again. You are not open to the possibility, and as in any experiment, there are always things that can be put into question hypothetically, and thus you will forever deny the existence of LENR, no matter what empirical evidence is put before you.

But please, humor us. What does qualify as "credible methods" and "reliable people"?

Yes George you are a devil,

Against my better judgement I'll make an attempt at coherency and waste space here.

amu= atomic mass units, (interesting question that reveals no knowledge of basic chemistry). Low amu relates to hydrogen fusion transmutation at the helium level. Simple and avoids the complex higher amu transmutations.
anti-LENR brainrot cure probably best done with electroshock therapy.

The traces come from neutral particles (no delta electrons) with a large magnetic moment (they curve). This particle is the Hydronion (Hyd):
http://lenr-calaon-explanation…ted_nuclear_reactions.pdf

The helical traces are a consequence of the precession of the emitted Hydronions. At 2[G] the ep (Hydronion made with protium) processes at 5.6 [MHz] (do you remember the measurements of Kidwell and friends?). So, with a helical pitch of 10 microns the Hyd would be flying around at 56 [m/s].

The Hydronions are emitted thanks to the phonons that cause magnetic waves (phonon-magnetic coupling if you prefer) which push the Hydronions around in the solid. Some end up ejected from the powder. Many are ejected at the explosion and are the cause of the transmutations. When the Hydronions are generated without an explosion (low phonon level) they undergo magnetic scattering in condensed matter (fortunately).

The Hyd are as large as the electron (huge in nuclear therms, 260 times the proton) and have the magnetic moment of the electron, which is again 960 times larger than the magnetic moment of the neutron.

Quote from Andrea Calaon

The traces come from neutral particles (no delta electrons) with a large magnetic moment (they curve). This particle is the Hydronion (Hyd):

Did you see this presentation?

http://www.ecoinventions.ca/ic…s-possibility-of-tachyon/

This shows that the mystery particle is a tachyon. The SPP is a black hole based tachyon. These things as very heavy and powerful and mostly entangled. Think about it.

What your theory can not explain is the production of muons. You need an energy level of 140 MeV to do that. And Lief Holmlid tells us that muons show up for days after excitation of the catalyst using fluorescent room light. Therefore, there must be a huge energy storage mechanism involved in this particle.

Hello Andrea,

I like your theory. But I'm not a theorist and can not judge it in deep.

Nevertheless, there is a point I noticed which is unclear. It is about the Ionisation energies of the ECO (Electron Orbital Core). In the table page 22 of your slide presentation, the ionization state is unclear. The ionization energy is the energy needed or released to move from one state to the next one (+1 or -1). For example, Mg has an ionization energy of 80.17 eV if ionized from Mg +2 to Mg +3. It is a transition.

For the H, to receive 80.17 eV of energy, the Mg must go from +3 state to +2 state. How can you have Mg +3 in a NAE? Which electron is given to the nucleus to lower its ionization state?

The more I write, and the more you theory is becoming foggy. For an e- to move out of the nucleus you need energy, you don't receive energy! So imagine that the coupling exists, the H move close to the nucleus at the right speed (see energy), the e- of the transition ionisation energy is captured. But where comes the energy of the ionization? Asap a second electron will come to fill the gap made by the capture. That releases energy in form of Xray.

So your theory should say that a p/d/t with a sufficient energy comes close the target nucleus. It gives to the nucleus the energy of ionization and take out the gained electron with him. The nucleus will not give the energy, it is the p/d/t.

Do you understand my point?
Arnaud

Dear axil,
thank you for the link to the presentation. I will watch to it as soon as possible (I think I did but some time ago an only in bits).
You say

Quote

This shows that the mystery particle is a tachyon.

A tachyon would only violate CAUSALITY, and this is not ... a detail. My opinion is that the whole of Physics would not be possible without causality, even in a block-universe.
The last time I remember tachyons surfaced was about the speed of neutrinos. And it ended in experimental error.
I will have to investigate the production of muons. My ignorant guess is that Hydronions could have caused signals that can be erroneously mistaken for muons. In fact Hydronions would emerge from a material that has been active for days, like Urutskoev showed.
What would produce muons for days? Where does that huge and extremely concentrated energy come from? The future? If this is the conclusion let me be impolite: LUDICROUS.
The traces in the experiments of Leonid Urutskoev (reproduced in France) are NOT muons.
I will come back to you after studying a bit more.
Regards
Andrea

A "simple" way to verify your theory, is to beam protons with the right energy to a target made of the right ionized state ... just need the right ionized state. Then we should see the Hydronion forming. How to detect them?

Dear Arnaud,
I see you've read through my presentation. I hope I haven't wasted too much of your time.

About your first post:
The E in ECO should stand for External.
I use the ionization energies as an indication of the energies that the most external orbital has, when the atom is neutral, simply or multiply ionized. The energy required to extract one electron should be the energy possessed by the most external orbital in a given ionized state.
In other words I assume that if a certain photon frequency can free an electron from an orbital, being the process a resonance process, that frequency should in a way or another be an orbital motion frequency (in QM terms it has no strict sense …).
In the case of Zr, once the atom has lost 4 electrons in an ionic bond, it remains with its fifth orbital “naked”. The External orbital of the Zr core in the oxide has an energy near to the fifth ionization energy of an isolated Zr(IV) ion because the electron orbitals in ionic bonds overlap only minimally with the core orbitals. For non ionic bond this would not hold true.
The electron that is sucked in (extracted form the atom) towards the crossing hydrogen nucleus is the electron in the external core orbital (ECO). Following this there will be some soft gammas and a few Auger electrons due to the rearranging orbitals. Without nuclides like B10 these gammas should be responsible for the very low gamma emissions just above background.

You say:
“For an e- to move out of the nucleus you need energy, you don't receive energy! So imagine that the coupling exists, the H move close to the nucleus at the right speed (see energy), the e- of the transition ionisation energy is captured. But where comes the energy of the ionization? Asap a second electron will come to fill the gap made by the capture. That releases energy in form of Xray.”

I understood that I should improve the explanation of the NAE.
H moves near to the External Core Orbital, not near to the nucleus. The hydrogen nuclei canNOT approach the nucleus.
The energy for the necessary ionization comes from the huge binding energy of the Hyd, so energetically there in no problem at all.
The emissions you mention are correct. I should add them more clearly in the presentation.

About you last post:

YES Arnaud! It should be not too difficult to check my theory.
I suggested Iwamura to bombard ZrO2 with protons or deuterons changing the energy in the range of a few [eV].
Actually what Swartz has done is already not bad for ZrO2. Possibly a multi layer would increase the NAE density. But the limit is in the fact that the NAE is only a few oxide layer thick.

Detection:

• As Urutskoev did with ArX (emulsions); possibly combined with strong magnetic fields,
• By stimulating the active material with radio frequencies while scanning (like in CW-NMR). At some frequencies there should be the "response" of the trapped Hyd. Which is the strange RF radiation measured by ENEA, Kidwell, …
• Surrounding the sample with B10 and looking for gamma at 1.445 and 1.745 [keV].

The last method is for me the least sure, in the sense that I am not 100% sure B10 is responsible for those energies.
For sure there are even better methods that expert physicists could easily suggest.

Best regards, and thanks again for your attention.

Andrea

Hello Andrea,

Thank you for the answer. There is still an unanswered question. Where the energy comes from to ionize a nucleus to expulse the naked electron?

Arnaud

Quote from Andrea Calaon

Dear axil,
thank you for the link to the presentation. I will watch to it as soon as possible (I think I did but some time ago an only in bits).
You say

A tachyon would only violate CAUSALITY, and this is not ... a detail. My opinion is that the whole of Physics would not be possible without causality, even in a block-universe.

Regards
Andrea

This reference contains the tachyon theory. I believe that these ideas in string theory are where the true path to understanding LENR lies.

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/c…getdoc/slac-pub-11616.pdf

The Inside Story:
Quasilocal Tachyons and Black Holes

I have been reading an article by a string theorist about the connection between black holes and tachyons. It seems that tachyons are a major prediction of string theory and the connection between black holes and tachyons are tight. This connection in the science business is called dualism. I was surprised and pleased that the many experimentally observed behaviors of SPPs were predicted by theoretically predicted tachyon behavior including the production of quark based subatomic particles as a dualistic production that mimic hawking's radiation. It seem that tachyons don't evaporate like black holes do. They reach a equilibrium condition until they receive more input energy whereupon they produce more quark based subatomic particles.

The author said:

"Most work on black holes in string theory, including the present work, focus on theoretical objects which are probably not realistic."

I say that this guy does not yet know his theory reflects real things and that LENR will soon become a desktop based experimental tool to verify multi-dimensional D-Brane theory.

The author also says:

"In the confined theory, the gauge-invariant composite glueballs arise at an energy and size scale commensurate with 18 the strong coupling scale of the field theory. In our time dependent transition, the excitations in the tachyon phase correspond to field theoretic modes at an energy scale below the mass gap. From the dual field theory point of view we expect forces from flux tubes to dynamically force them to shrink toward the size scale of the glueballs in the confining theory. The forces we analyzed in this section, which act to force excitations into the bulk gravitational solution dual to the confining geometry, may provide a gravity-side manifestation of this phenomenon. This effect is similar in some ways to the description of black hole evaporation via hadronization in [18]. "

Reference 18 shows this. This is what Holmlid sees.

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic…-NCWWxOMFJsqLSNwrl-hv3qQE

Dear Arnaud,
what gets ionized is the atom/ion, not the nucleus. The nucleus is positively charged anyway.
I had answered to you last question in my previous post: the energy necessary for the ionization comes from the binding energy of the Hydronions. In other words the attraction that the electron feels towards the hydrogen nucleus is way larger than any electrostatic attraction and prevails over the forces that keep the electron in the orbital. The energy released by the binding between the electron and the hydrogen nucleus is in the [MeV] range, while the ionization energy is around 85 [eV], so there is an enormous potential well the ionization energy comes from.
The binding energy is released in the Extreme Ultraviolet, so in quanta that are near to the ionization energy.
The energy that binds electron and hydrogen nucleus inside the Hyd comes actually from the same mechanism that binds nuclei together, so the Hyd could be seen as a new neutral nucleus.

Quote from acalaon

Dear Arnaud,
what gets ionized is the atom/ion, not the nucleus. The nucleus is positively charged anyway.
I had answered to you last question in my previous post: the energy necessary for the ionization comes from the binding energy of the Hydronions. In other words the attraction that the electron feels towards the hydrogen nucleus is way larger than any electrostatic attraction and prevails over the forces that keep the electron in the orbital.

The theory does not explain the cluster fusion seen in the Lugano test.

I have done this explanation. Here it is:

There is a natural assumption all of us will make assuming that the buildup of lithium and nickel isotopic change in the ash happened at a relatively constant rate over a long period of time. But what may have happened is a one time explosive reaction where lithium and nickel interacted in a singular and monolithic event involving trillions of atoms. Such an event was seen in Holmlid's experiment where trillions of fusion reactions produced huge numbers of neutral particle reaction products.

Just by chance, the analysts of the isotopic change in the Lugano ash content picked up this one in a million 100 micron nickel particle as the object of their examination.

This one particle was so unusual that it is near impossible for it to be fabricated by someone who wanted to salt the ash sample.

The salter would have had to remove the 100 micron fuel particle and
replace it with the Ni62 and Li6 coated ash particle. The fuel was divided into parts where some was reserved for latter isotopic analysis and another part was loaded into the reactor.. The devil is in the details when the method of scam is considered.

We must try to understand how a massive burst LENR reaction involving trillions of atoms can occur in a single event. And how a single isotope can result from many different precursors that fed into this singular reaction.
===========

The complete conversion of a proportionally large micro sized nickel particle with a 100 micron diameter might provide convincing supporting evidence that protons find their way into the center of these massive nickel particles by quantum teleportation. This quantum mechanical based movement is supported by the entanglement of protons in the hydrogen gas that surrounds the outside the nickel particle and the atoms of nickel inside the particle. Yes, Teleportation...like in star trek. A proton located in the hydrogen gas envelope does not need to find its way through large amounts of nickel by bumping and grinding their way through all that nickel. These protons just appear like magic inside the micro particle.

This conclusion might seem ridiculous on it face but this conclusion is fully supported by the experimental evidence from Lagano.

If the protons or in fact any subatomic particle did physically penetrate the nickel particle, we would expect that the outer layers of the particle would experience more nuclear reactions than the center of the particle. This penetration type of reaction would produce a layered ash profile. The outmost surface of the particle should have some copper and/or zinc content, and the inside should still have some untouched lower Z isotopes of nickel...like Ni58.

But NO, the particle is pure Ni62, completely homogeneous Ni62, utterly pure Ni62. It must be that the protons that make up the gas envelope see no material resistance to the penetration of the nickel. The entangled protons mated with each nickel atom move through the nickel particle via the 5th dimension in which entanglement works directly through the nickel bulk to its entangled nickel mate into the center of the micro particle or to its dedicate nanowire edge with equal probability. This looks like proton teleportation to me.

And even more perplexing, the delicate nickel nanowire surface covering of the microparticle is pure NI62. This delicate surface nano sized feature has suffered no subatomic particle impact damage what so ever. This ash looks the same as the fuel...physically unchanged but isotopically different.

No neutrons were detected so the active subatomic particle supporting the Ni58 to Ni62 transmutation must be protons from the gas outside the particle. These protons change themselves into neutron after they enter the Ni58 nucleus.

Yes, this is impossible to believe, If it weren't for logic and the results of Lagano experiment, what other answer could there be?

Norman D. Cook abd Andrea Rossi are inventing theory that has no experimental foundation from Lagano data. How can you admire such a misrepresentation of reality?
============
Regarding the announcement of the replication attempts made by Igor Stepanov et al: “After three trials with fast destruction of the cell due to uncontrollable overheating, at June 19, 2015 it was succeed to obtain constant function of the cell with excess heat observed.”

One of the major issues that face the replicators of the Lugano experiment deals with destruction of the reactor as a result of a massive production of power at the onset of the LENR reaction that has been called a “blowout”. The question arises as follows: What produces these blowouts and how can they be avoided?

The Quantum mechanical theory of LENR (QMLT) provides guidance as to the cause and solution to this issue. To start off, it has been observed in the analysis of the fuel from the Lugano report that large aggregations of nickel particles form as a consequence of electrostatic attraction between 5 micron nickel particles. A nickel particle aggregation of up to 100 microns in size is formed in the fuel sometimes before the LENR reaction fires off.

The QMLT explains that this large super nickel particle aggregation forms of Bose Einstein Condensate of SPPs that are coherent and entangled with the atoms of hydrogen that surround the Nickel particle aggregation (NPA). The NPA acts as a single system as if it were a superatom that was 100 microns in size.

When the LENR reaction begins, the entire NPA acts in unison and a global Fusion reaction happens to all the nickel atoms throughout the NPA. The same fusion reaction happens to each and every nickel atom in the same way and at the same time. The NPA produces a combined instantaneous power spike from each and every nickel atom no matter if the atom was Ni58 or N60 an so on. All the nickel atoms instantaneously become Ni62 in a single global unitary nuclear reaction. This single reaction is why only Ni62 is seen in the ash of the NPA. This is called super radiance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superradiance

The energy production from all the millions of nickel atoms happen at the same time and produce an enormous amount of heat. This destroys the NPA and the reactor structure near it.

The solution to possibly avoiding this fusion explosion is to reduce the size of the NPA to a 5 micron size and spread the zone of the lenr reaction over a large volume. That is, to insure that the nickel particles are distributed over and throughout a very large volume. The goal is to avoid global entanglement at startup and postpone it untile the reaction has matured. This might be done by placing the nickel particles inside a metal foam mesh to keep them from moving together under the influence of electrostatic attraction. The nickel foam mesh will dissipate the static charge that usually aggregates free moving particles,
==========
In the Lugano test, the 100 micro nickel particle swapped either 1, 2, 3 or 4 neutrons from lithium 7 to get to pure Ni62 from Ni58, Ni60 and Ni61 and this swap happened to all billion atoms of the that particle in one shot. This is what this latest theory cannot explain. This is called cluster transformation.
==========
This is called super-absorption. The energy release would be spread equally throughout a BEC of a billion coherent solitons each getting a few hundred thousand electron volts. These solitons store energy. Their energy holding capacity is 1,000,000 GeV or more each but most hold far less. Then there is the energy that produce subatomic particles such as muon and mesons. These particles need a lot of energy devoted to their creation. The release of energy is buffered by these subatomic particles because they have a relatively long lifetime. Muons decay over a very long time and release their energy content very slowly.
============
The energy from muon decay leaves electrons and the remainder of this energy is reabsorbed back into the SPP soliton. All the while more muons are generated in a continuing cycle from the SPPs. The Solitons are also slowly decaying through the emission of hawking radiation in the infrared range, This is part of the thermalization of high energy radiation. Also, these SPPs explode in a bosenova when they reach energy storage capacity, they then release XUV and soft x-rays which will also thermalize.