Spin Waves and LENR (Axil Axil)

The Seventh Segment Signal

http://image.slidesharecdn.com…l-8-638.jpg?cb=1460722833

The x-ray radiation seen in the MFMP experiment called the "seventh segment signal" may have been caused by the initiation of "hole superconductivity" when the meissner effect expels electrons from the center of the superconducting material thereby producing x-rays through Bremsstrahlung.

Also when the Hole superconductor is quenched, the same kinetic energy release process produces electron collapse into the center of the dying superconductor also producing Bremsstrahlung.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1103.3912.pdf
Kinetic energy driven superconductivity, the origin of the Meissner effect, and the reductionist frontier

A person good at numbers can calculate how fast electrons are pushed out of the center of a material when it becomes superconducting. This can predict the x-rays generated by those electrons on their way out of the material to the surface of the material. The equations start at section 7.

The following post has been submitted by Axil Axil

It makes the whole post questionable by definition. So we can start right with first sentence:

There are at least three LENR systems now that have now reported strong RF radiation coming from the system.

I'd expect three links here.

Whom ever is downvoting this thread, I would like to say that you can write your own article with your own annotations at any time.
You may disagree with this article but it is educational and well written. So if you really want to make a point write a better article. To downvote someones hard work just makes you look petty. Just think about it and try to be a big boy and sort it out.

/tl dr; write a better article or ferme(z) la bouche

Zephir_AWT,
I think that you have theories and like to write. I have followed your comments on other websites. You are right that the article needs references. But it is otherwise well done. I would encourage you to write your own start with anything new with AWT. Or the experiments over 100 years old.

Quote from Rigel

Whom ever is downvoting this thread

Click on the red downvote numbers it shows who down-voted.

Thank you Jed.

Now that I see that info, I think I will revise my post. We all do not need to get along here. But need to respect each other. Disagreements run the gambit here and we are lucky our hosts allow such open and frank discussion. I have seen Zephir hounded on other websites by someone called Ira and felt it wrong. I will not shut up and let the same thing happen here. This type of hounding hurts the conversation much much more than Ty's nonsense.

The way to right a wrong is to do it better, not to denigrate. I am more than willing to learn about the michelson and morley aether experiment and its conclusions. It just needs to be presented, annotated - the same rules apply. I hope I am not offending you as I do not want that at all. What I want is to have people step up and provide more logic and science. This may sound impossible now but if you and Axil (and Hank) collaborated
and possibly combined writing styles we would have the new ideas we need to get the most out of our combined interest in LENR.

/* But it is otherwise well done. */

The problem is, it's nonsensical, the lack of sources cited is the least problem here.

"have now reported strong RF radiation coming from the system.." versus "..The x-ray radiation seen in the MFMP experiment.."

So, are we reading about RF radiation or X-ray radiation? Why the electrons should be "expelled from center of conductor", once it becomes superconducting (Axil Axil probably confused magnetic field with electrons here)? Bremsstrahlung doesn't result from "kinetic energy". And what the spin wave has to do with Bremsstrahlung?

/* Is superconductivity associated with a lowering or an increase of the kinetic energy of the charge carriers? Conventional BCS theory predicts that the kinetic energy of carriers increases in the transition from the normal to the superconducting state. However, substantial experimental evidence obtained in recent years indicates that in at least some superconductors the opposite occurs */

The kinetic energy of electrons doesn't change during superconducting transition - it would lead into 1st order transition (the latent heat would evolve/consume in similar way, like during melting of ice), not 2nd order one (only the heat capacity of superconductor actually changes). It's true that inside the superconductor the individual electrons move much faster, but their effective mass gets correspondingly lower, so no actual kinetic energy changes. If some latent heat get generated during it due to establishing of longer range EM fluctuations, then it remains quite marginal. Actually the effective mass of electrons within superconductor is calculated just under assumption, their kinetic energy remains the same, like inside the normal material.

It's important to understand, that the superconductive transition (despite its spectacularly singular manifestation with conductivity) isn't some abrupt effect: just during cooling the gradually growing superconductive areas (i.e. the pseudogap phase) within material finally merge and they will form a continuum - so that the current may pass through it. But this current can be only very subtle tightly above the critical temperature Tc and every weak magnetic field (including this one generated with current itself) will kill the newly formed superconductivity again. Therefore, if you want to load the superconductor with sufficient current, you should cool it deeply enough bellow its Tc.

[heat capacity during superconductive transition]

Quote from Zephir_AWT

/* But it is otherwise well done. */

The problem is, it's nonsensical, the lack of sources cited is the least problem here.

"have now reported strong RF radiation coming from the system.." versus "..The x-ray radiation seen in the MFMP experiment.."

So, are we reading about RF radiation or X-ray radiation? Why the electrons should be "expelled from center of conductor", once it becomes superconducting (Axil Axil probably confused magnetic field with electrons here)? Bremsstrahlung doesn't result from "kinetic energy". And what the spin wave has to do with Bremsstrahlung?

Display More

Hole Superconductivity is an alternative theory to Conventional BCS theory that seeks to explain "High Temperature" superconductivity.

See

http://sdphln.ucsd.edu/~jorge/hole.html

This theory covers superconductivity seen in high pressure physics.

See

arxiv.org/pdf/1103.3912.pdf
Kinetic energy driven superconductivity, the origin of the Meissner effect, and the reductionist frontier

A person good at numbers can calculate how fast electrons are pushed out of the center of a material when it becomes superconducting. This can predict the x-rays generated by those electrons on their way out of the material to the surface of the material. The equations start at section 7.

http://sdphln.ucsd.edu/~jorge/abstracts/chargeexp.html

Quote

Charge expulsion and electric field in superconductorscond-mat/0308604 (Los Alamos) , Phys.Rev.B 68, 184502 (2003).The theory of hole superconductivity predicts that when a metal goes superconducting negative charge is expelled from its interior towards the surface. As a consequence the superconductor in its ground state is predicted to have a nonhomogeneous charge distribution and an outward pointing electric field in its interior. Here we propose equations to describe the behavior of the charge density and electric field in superconductors, and solve them for a spherical geometry. The magnitude of the predicted interior electric field depends on superconducting parameters such as the condensation energy and the London penetration depth and is found to be of order 10e6 V/cm. A physical interpretation of the result is given. It is predicted that for small superconducting bodies (compared to the penetration depth) an electric field outside the superconductor should result from this physics. This may explain a recent experimental observation in Nb metal clusters.
Return

I get your point Zephir, did you get mine? I have a bad habit of reading references. It is a bad habit because of web rabbit holes (reference urls). These damn rabbit holes lead to 'thar b dragons' (note where I have been lost on Spinwaves). And dragons be more difficult than rascally wabbits.

What I have seen Axil has written on SSP's solitons, spin, Superconducting and then brought many ideas to the table(forum). It is easy to pick apart something, but it is out there. I will read references when given (except Springer/paywall etc ).
Your points I did read and accept. Let's keep advancing the dialogue with new ideas.

/* Let's keep advancing the dialogue with new ideas. */

This is just the mindset, which delays the acceptation of many bright ideas and findings (including the cold fusion) for many decades. The physicists actually don't want to get final solutions - they just want to research them and twaddle, twaddle ad nauseum. This is job keeping attitude, not the solution oriented attitude. We don't need to deal with new ideas and findings - we need to deal with these relevant ones finally. And the Axill ideas are distracting if not downright wrong - despite they deal with concepts, which are new for many people here and as such interesting by itself. You shouldn't confuse the learning in discussion with making progress in discussion.

/* The theory of hole superconductivity predicts that when a metal goes superconducting negative charge is expelled from its interior towards the surface */

Why just the ideally conductive material should exhibit inhomogeneous distribution of potential? The charge distribution inside the superconductor would lead into very high current inside the superconductor and magnetic field - or not? The holes are really important for HT superconductivity, but these are different holes and they act in solely different way. The electrons become superconducting, when they're squeezed together - but we have no proper vessels or pipes for it, because the electrons are tiny and they would leak through atoms in their walls. Instead of it we must lure the electrons to holes in similar way, like the hungry hens to the feeder. The difference with the hole superconductivity is, these holes are unmovable by itself, because they do represent the positively charged atoms within atom lattice, not the more sparse places of electron density.

The reason, why most of HT superconductors are formed with cuprates is just the fact, the copper atoms can be charged into high oxidation state Cu3+. Such an atoms become strongly attractive for conductive electrons and these electrons will concentrate around them. At the moment, when these holes form continuous lines (hole stripes) and the electrons form a linear crowds of condensed electrons around them, then the superconductivity is established.

Only two people at the world really understand the HT superconductivity in this moment: me and this guy. If you understand the above paragraphs, you may be third one. The main reason, why J.F.Prins remains ignored and you probably never heard of him is just the fact, every physicist active in the field of superconductivity just wants to pursue and discuss "new ideas" - not these actually working ones.

Okay Zephir. I am not sure why you embed the image but I think it's on Murray Gell-Manns work related to the Nobel Prize. Is it from a Ted talk? I do not know, honest question. I try to find the references. So not sure of the point.

I don't want to be part of anything here but learning new ideas. And just maybe a working LENR device.

/* I don't want to be part of anything here but learning new ideas. And just maybe a working LENR device. */

Your attitude is based on belief, that the correct solution wasn't bespoken yet. Even the extremely inquisitive people may become worst ignorants easily in this way - just because they get superficial. When many people who just want to hear new ideas will met together, then these good (but undeniably older) ones will get ignored and forgotten with no mercy. With such an attitude you may wait for working LENR device another twelve years without problem. Not accidentally just the teachers of physics are the most conservative guys, despite they're collecting tirelessly new ideas all the time. And Axil Axill is the master in generation of new but superficial - and distractive - ideas, so he may actually delay the progress, willingly or not.

/* but I think it's on Murray Gell-Manns work related to the Nobel Prize */

It's famous memorandum of Robert Wilson, the head of American Society of Physicists. It's just an official memorandum of the scientific ignorance of people, who decided to delay the progress in the name of longer research of it.

Zephir I think I am supposed to respond to the" ignorants" but yes I did not know the famous quote. I think that bespoken word theory is what you are getting at. I will assume my ignorance is based on AWT?

Not to be challenged by ignoramuses or something. In a nutshell is the bespoken word AWT?

/* I will assume my ignorance is based on AWT */

AWT often deals with emergent and time-reversed phenomena, which results from cumulation of many dual effects. In our country we are saying that "road to the hell is pawed with good intentions", which can be also applied to the people who are collecting new facts and information way too eagerly.