RNBE 2016 William Collis - a heretical theory involving unusual particles.

  • You give an electron radius of 193 fm, and the electron is said to be rotating at the speed of light (slide 7). In this sense you seem to be envisioning the electron as an extensive body of some kind, rather than a field with a probability density. Is it the outer radius of the electron field that rotates at the speed of light, or is this the speed of the rotation of the center? Is there some kind of shearing that arises from different areas rotating at different speeds? Or something else?


    Hi Eric, I was away for a while, I am now back.


    The description of the electron I give is not mine, comes from the Dirac equation reformulated through Geometric Algebra (totally equivalent) and reinterpreted in geometrical terms. You can have a look at the publications of David Hestenes like these ones:


    https://arxiv.org/abs/0802.2728


    geocalc.clas.asu.edu/pdf/SnarkPaper.pp.pdf


    Essentially the electron appears to be a point charge (or very pointy) which has an intrinsic rotation movement at the speed of light, which by the way should not make sense for charge sources. Anyway these properties of the electron emerged in many different papers by many authors. In the CF arena Holmlid leverages on the theory of Hirsch for the interpretation of his experimental results, and that theory uses an equivalent description of the electron with the same radius of 193[fm]. Some researchers propose a radius of 386[fm], the double, but the discussion is more or less limited to that. So the electron seems to have a size, and the reduced Compton length is not just a useful tool, it actually is the measure of a geometrical structure. The electron seems to carry a clock. When we see electrons travel at relativistic speeds, we also see the radius shrink exactly as SR prescribes. Sort of automatically.


    The probability density and all the rest remains as you know it from QM. No difference. For sure, the ZB geometrical interpretation naturally “suggests” the localization of the electron and Hidden Variables ... But that regards the INTERPRETATION of QM, and could be for another talk.


    The size of the electron is intermediate between the size of the nucleus and that of atoms. The size and properties of electron orbitals is determined by the ZB “essence” of the electron. The reason for the ZB rotation is unknown, but the electron has a structure, despite the so called Copenhagen interpretation prescribes not to consider it. Here the talk could be long and we would need to enter into Hidden Variables …


    You say that nuclei are attracted to one another through magnetic attraction, arising from the magnetism resulting from spinning of charges internal to the nucleons (slide 4). How are we to understand the approx. equal binding energy between two neutrons as between a neutron and a proton? (Because of Fermi statistics, two neutrons cannot form a triplet state and can only coexist in a singlet state, but the singlet state is unbound.)


    Here you are going straight into the core of the description of the nuclear force through the magnetic attraction. Very acute (seriously). Describing nucleons with one single rotating charge necessary ends with the contradiction you mentioned. But if you use three charges as the quarks’, you actually get that n-n is unbound, as als p-p. There can be binding only for p-n pairs. In other words the magnetic attraction mechanism (real or not as it may be) tells you that identical systems of rotating multiple charges can not have a positive binding energy. I am discussing these subjects in these months with Dallacasa and Cook.


    With the Hyd, the electron is doing a spirograph-like pattern around the much heavier proton (slide 12). What happens to the spherical harmonics needed by quantum mechanics, within which an electron is normally confined? You say that the binding energy of the Hyd is in the MeV (slide 14) and that beta decay of free neutrons has a small branch that yields Hyds (slide 14). The energy of a neutron beta decay is ~ 782 keV. Is the binding energy of Hyds variable? Or is the binding energy actually below but close to the order of MeV?


    Spirograph-like, that’s the English compact description I was looking for! Thank you Eric! Davidson suggested me the expression “racetrack” for the proton inside the electron ZB and you this. Sometimes a single word/expression is better than lengthy explanations.


    The electron is confined into orbitals, which have angular dependencies structured upon spherical harmonics, only when it is “trapped” inside an atom. The electron in the Hyd is not trapped inside an atom. The Hyd is a neutral nucleus, free to travel through structures of charged particles.


    About the binding energy: WELL SPOTTED! My latest understanding is that the binding energies of the Hyds are in the hundreds of [keV] range. So slide 14 is not up to date. I checked on my working version of the presentation and it had been updated, but the web version is still old. Thank you again. I will update soon.


    You mention that Hyds should be able to travel more freely in condensed matter than neutrons (slide 14). Note that as a hydrogen atom is drawn into a metal such as palladium, the electron is stripped off and becomes unbound, because of its large cross section for interacting with other electrons in the metal. What keeps the electron bound in the case of the Hyd as the Hyd travels through a material?


    Here i don’t know if I understand your question right. The electron in the Hyd is bound to the p/d/t through the magnetic attraction, which should be the nuclear force, and the binding energy is some hundreds of [keV], plus the Hyd is a neutral nucleus (it is not a particle). Chemistry is at energies far below and there is no chemical way to break the Hyd apart.
    Hyd should be quite difficult to detect because they are neutral and do not generate “spectacular” (energetic) emissions when they cause nuclear reactions.


    I haven’t done my homeworks reading what you suggested me. I will do it soon.

  • Andrea would the Hyd mimic in some way a Neutron as far as nuclear
    forces are concerned? I respect your ideas that those forces are EM in nature but have to understand it a bit deeper your theory. I suppose not otherwise I guess we would still see a neutron capture cross section dependence?
    or is it just the large cross section of the Hyd that ensures it's interaction with the nucleus?
    Could experiments be run with certain tracers to verify your ideas maybe such as Osmium for example?
    would it work also for Nickel as well as Palladium? .


    Well, Stephen, good luck with conventional physics! William suggest otherwise, he suggest the existence of an unknown neutral particle, which seems to have a lot in common with my Hyd.


    In the Hyd proton and electron do not interact weakly, each remains a separate entity, as nucleons in nuclei (I agree with the nuclear model of Norman D. Cook). I don't know if the cross sections for the Hyd are similar to those for neutrons, but there should be cross sections for the "capture" of a Hyd by a nucleus. Hyd have the electron "rotating" at the right frequency, so they should interact nuclarly (in my theory this means through the magnetic attraction mechanism) near to any nucleus.
    I don't know if the large size of the Hyd does give it special nuclear properties; I mentioned the large size of the Hyd when I was talking about the scattering of Hyds inside condensed matter.


    I always suggest to accelerate protons against ZrO2 or OsO and measure EUV. Os is very expensive and the tetraoxyde is troxic. The NAE orbital of Palladium is a bit deep (6th) and is well shielded by valence/metallic electrons, so it is not easy to use it. Probably the need for very high deuterium loading ratios is due to the need to take away from the Pd cores as many electrons as possible, not only the metallic ones. Ni is not a good NAE, but can be used to carry hydrogen at high density.

  • You give an electron radius of 193 fm, and the electron is said to be rotating at the speed of light (slide 7)


    Sorry for my medical absence! But electrons at light speed - even rotating - woke me up...


    But now I will feed You some paper stuff for a deeper reasoning.
    First an "old" paper about a generalization of energy-free transmutations.


    http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/FilippovDeffectsofa.pdf


    Then in the context of similar theories i stumbled over the hot topic "hallo nuclei".


    As a first post i give You a presentation which introduces the topic.


    http://local.ans.org/norcal/wp…he-Center-of-the-Atom.pdf


    A halo-nucleus is an atom which consists of a stable core and mostly has a pair of orbiting neutrons/protons etc..


    These halo nuclei look like possible intermediates for LENR reactions. More later, as I should not use my eyes, the doctor told ...

  • I don't follow your logic. Why cannot energetic arguments, explain stable products, or more accurately, as Collis shows, lack of detectable radiation?


    The path from a stable nuclear state/nucleon/set of nuclei to another eventually stable state/... with lower energy is almost always full of intermediate states which are not stable and emit "radiation". The roles defining the path/the steps between two stable states do not contemplate mechanisms for jumping the intermediate states based on the energy.
    When transmutations take place (A and/or Z change) the lowest energy differences are still "radiation" because they are in the MeV range. When neutron manage to "enter" nuclei they "always" generate excited new nuclei which need to emit gamma, as William Collis mentioned.

  • Hello Wyttenbach, it's interesting that Ba138 discussed above is neutron magic with 82 neutrons. But still goes to Sm150. It has 56 protons though so 6 more than proton magic 50. I guess int this case at least the nuclei are not Halo nuclei. But it's an interesting point to look at.


    I'm quite curious why a relatively stable neutron magic nucleus would absorb particles cotaining additional neutrons and form a less stable nucleus But perhaps the very stable nature of alpha particles enables this?

  • Hi Andrea, thanks I appreciate you looked a lot at conventional approaches in the past before arriving at your theories.


    I'm starting to understand more your Hyd concept and do find it interesting and derived from very good methodical thinking. I wondered in the past if spin and magnetic moments could play a role but your approach with looking a nuclear forces this way is interesting. I also like Norman Cooks approach to nucleus structure so it does have me thinking.



    i think that any good well thought through theory that has a potential unique signature that can be tested is worth looking at. I hope someone is able to take the time to perform the test. It could be very interesting.


    Would it be the case that any electron that has insufficient energy to form an electron shell would bind to the nucleus in this way? Or is the Hyd formed in a a different way.


    Could a kind of hyd form with 2 electrons?


    I.e. Would it be possible to have a Helium like Hyd
    With a alpha + 2 electron nucleus or a Hyd formed from an H- anion?


    Or Would this be inhibited by the spin interactions between the 2electrons? Or the inherent stability of the alpha nucleus.


    I'm curious if something like this could explain apparent steps of 2Z and 2n in the Ba to Sm evolution discussed above.


    Apologies if those questions are a bit naive and incorrect given a better understanding.

  • Hello Wyttenbach, it's interesting that Ba138 discussed above is neutron magic with 62 neutrons. But still goes to Sm150. It has 56 protons though so 6 more than proton magic 50. I guess int this case at least the nuclei are not Halo nuclei. But it's an interesting point to look at.


    I guess you mixed something. Samarium has 62 Protons. Barium138 has 138-56 neutrons.


    What is very interesting is the neutron cross-section of Ba138 has an extreme dense spectrum in the range of 104-105 eV.

  • A halo-nucleus is an atom which consists of a stable core and mostly has a pair of orbiting neutrons/protons etc..


    Yes, indeed. This is very different from the Hyd, which appears to involve a proton and an electron, whereas in a Halo nucleus my understanding is that you have a lighter subgrouping of nucleons that orbit around a stable core of nucleons. It's not obvious how halo nuclei are relevant to the discussion thus far.


    The paper by Filippov et al. is interesting. They seem to be describing a kind of electron-induced decay. (Probably long before I became aware of the possibility.)

  • Quote

    The reason for the ZB rotation is unknown, but the electron has a structure, despite the so called Copenhagen interpretation prescribes not to consider it. Here the talk could be long and we would need to enter into Hidden Variables …


    I have no attachment to the Copenhagen interpretation. And I love a heretical theory. But on what basis do you assert that the electron has structure? Shouldn’t that be something borne out by experiment?


    Quote

    Here you are going straight into the core of the description of the nuclear force through the magnetic attraction. Very acute (seriously). Describing nucleons with one single rotating charge necessary ends with the contradiction you mentioned. But if you use three charges as the quarks’, you actually get that n-n is unbound, as als p-p. There can be binding only for p-n pairs.


    Charge independence is not simply a theoretical supposition; it’s an experimental conclusion. It is a conclusion that comes from doing things like noting the isospin of various systems at different energy levels, and then looking at angular correlation in neutron-proton and proton-proton scattering. All else being equal, systems with the same isospin demonstrate the same behavior. This is a very different case from, e.g., string theory, where there’s very little experimental evidence that can be produced to sift between different possibilities. In this case there are lots of experiments to account for.


    An example is the deviation from Rutherford scattering, i.e., deviation from a pure Coulomb potential as neutrons and protons are scattered at moderate energies, which is also seen as protons and protons are scattered. Once one factors out the Coulomb repulsion that arises only between two protons, the scattering data look similar. Since the strong force is 1000 times stronger than the Coulomb force, there should be a clear signal.


    Quote

    In other words the magnetic attraction mechanism (real or not as it may be) tells you that identical systems of rotating multiple charges can not have a positive binding energy. I am discussing these subjects in these months with Dallacasa and Cook.


    See also ch. 4 of Krane, “Introduction to Nuclear Physics” (a textbook), as well much of Bethe and Morrison, “Elementary Nuclear Theory” (another textbook). It’s fine to take a position at variance with mainstream physics on the question of charge independence, I suppose, but be prepared to be asked to respond to some very difficult experimental questions that point in a different direction. Physicists will ignore you if you don't have good answers for those questions, so it's worth the time to really look into this.


    Quote

    The electron is confined into orbitals, which have angular dependencies structured upon spherical harmonics, only when it is “trapped” inside an atom. The electron in the Hyd is not trapped inside an atom. The Hyd is a neutral nucleus, free to travel through structures of charged particles.


    How do you differentiate between an electron trapped in the Coulomb potential of a positively charged proton (i.e., an atom) and an electron-proton system that forms a neutral (and very large) composite particle (a nucleon)? Is the neutron also composed of an electron and a proton in this scheme, with the electron orbiting within a much smaller radius? If not, why not?


    Is the binding energy of the Hyd a smoothly varying function, or is it quantized into energy levels? Or is it constant?


    If the force that binds the electron to the proton in the Hyd is magnetism, does the Hyd have a large magnetic moment?

  • Interestingly looking at the isotopes table chart in the following link:


    https://www-nds.iaea.org/relnsd/vcharthtml/VChartHTML.html


    (they also have a good App)


    Ba138 (and Ba137) are relatively very rich in neutrons and therefore thirsty for protons.


    they are very stable however due to the magic number of neutrons (1less in the case of Ba137)


    This stability prevents the neutrons beta decaying to a proton.


    if they subsequently absorb positive particles such as deuteron or alpha they will remain neutron rich up to Sm150 (and Sm149)


    If we look at Sm150 and Sm149 we see that they are stable but have plenty of of protons.


    if subsequent positive particles were absorbed they would decay by positron emmision, electron capture or alpha emission.


    if deutrons or alpha particles are absorbed by some method the nuclei imbetween Ba and Sm tend to be stable or decay via beta decay with long half lives.


    note if Alphas are being absorbed perhaps we would expect Sm150 to go to Gd154 which is also stable so maybe this is a clue that deuteron or deuteron type Hyds are being absorbed. And the 2z steps perhaps are due to how easy the relative nuclei can absorb deuterons. For example nuclei with odd protons would perhaps more easily absorb the positive particles.

  • Yes, indeed. This is very different from the Hyd, which appears to involve a proton and an electron, whereas in a Halo nucleus my understanding is that you have a lighter subgrouping of nucleons that orbit around a stable core of nucleons. It's not obvious how halo nuclei are relevant to the discussion thus far.



    @EW: Is it only a coincidence that "reasonably stable" halo nuclei are only predicted for light (A <20) isotopes? There were experiments with 6He which are in line with other measurements for charge exchange.
    It looks like there exist (like in chemistry) charge orbits for smaller isotopes, which could explain the intermediate states for the LENR transmutation effects.
    In larger nuclei the coulomb pressure (of the shell electrons) is to large for stable nuclear charge orbits.



    One more theoretical paper: http://www.euroschoolonexoticb…s/nlp/LNP700_contrib1.pdf

  • https://www.sciencedaily.com/r…/2016/08/160822152626.htm


    For more detail see as follows:


    https://arxiv.org/pdf/1604.08297v1.pdf


    Quote

    Abstract


    Nonperturbative coupling of light with condensed matter in an optical cavity is expected to reveal a host of coherent many-body phenomena and states [1–7]. In addition, strong coherent light-matter interaction in a solid-state environment is of great interest to emerging quantum-based technologies [8, 9]. However, creating a system that combines a long electronic coherence time, a large dipole moment, and a high cavity quality (Q) factor has been a challenging goal [10–13]. Here, we report collective ultrastrong light-matter coupling in an ultrahigh-mobility two-dimensional electron gas in a high-Q terahertz photonic-crystal cavity in a quantizing magnetic field, demonstrating a cooperativity of ∼360. The splitting of cyclotron resonance (CR) into the lower and upper polariton branches exhibited a √ ne-dependence on the electron density (ne), a hallmark of collective vacuum Rabi splitting. Furthermore, a small but definite blue shift was observed for the polariton frequencies due to the normally negligible A 2 term in the light-matter interaction Hamiltonian. Finally, the high-Q cavity suppressed the superradiant decay of coherent CR, which resulted in an unprecedentedly narrow intrinsic CR linewidth of 5.6 GHz at 2 K. These results open up a variety of new possibilities to combine the traditional disciplines of many-body condensed matter physics and cavity-based quantum optics.


    The key to LENR is strong coupling between the hydrogen atom and light. When the cavity that holds the hydrogen is the optimum size, vacuum energy provides most of the energy to delocalized electrons from protons to form metalized hydrogen. The optimum cavity size does the same job as extreme pressure to form metalized hydrogen.


    If hydrogen is packed into a Nano cavity of the ideal size a strong coupling state might be achieved between the protons in the hydrogen and the light. In this way a state of superconductive coherence of protons might be formed: a proton condinsate.

    This state of superconductivity has been detected by Holmlid and Miley in iron oxide. The high temperature proton BEC might produce a super-dense state of hydrogen as measured by Holmlid where the electrons and protons are delocalized from each other, this state of charge delocalization has been seen in water inclusions inside a crystal.


    http://physics.aps.org/articles/v9/43
    Water Molecule Spreads Out When Caged



    What actually compresses the protons into a condinsate is vacuum energy because the cavity squeezes the light/matter condensate greatly.

    As described in the referenced article by looking for a hydrogen BEC in cavities, a LENR researcher could find the ideal dimensions of the Nano cavity that produces the condensed hydrogen and engineer a material that produces this ultra-dense hydrogen crystal in abundance.


    Currently in LENR reactors, pure chance produces metalized hydrogen in a highly porous metal that feature a wide range of cavity sizes which include the optimum cavity size that is made widely available by random chance.

    What really compresses hydrogen to the LENR active ultra-dense metalized state is not high pressure, but the ideal combination of cavity shape/size, light frequency, and EMF environment and vacuum energy.

  • The key to LENR is strong coupling between the hydrogen atom an light. When the cavity that holds the hydrogen is the optimum size, vacuum energy provides most of the energy to delocalized electrons from protons to form metalized hydrogen. The optimum cavity size does the same job as extreme pressure to form metalized hydrogen.



    Once more Axil this paper is about a low T (2-4K up to 80K) effect, which we cannot expect in high T LENR.


    But if you look at the sono-fusion bubble colapse, then we see a kind of low T effect too, because of "hyper adiabatic" cooling of the bubble. In metallic H/D states proton tunneling has been reported, what introduces a huge "space" for coupling effects (may be through halo orbits).

  • Once more Axil this paper is about a low T (2-4K up to 80K) effect, which we cannot expect in high T LENR.


    But if you look at the sono-fusion bubble colapse, then we see a kind of low T effect too, because of "hyper adiabatic" cooling of the bubble. In metallic H/D states proton tunneling has been reported, what introduces a huge "space" for coupling effects (may be through halo orbits).


    Measurements in these types of experiments require low temperatures to keep interference from heat to a minimum, however high temperature superconductivity is a issue in LENR. Polaritons will alway produce superconductivity if they can form, coherence is their natural state. So the issue is how hot can it get before polaritons will not form. Holmlid has detected superconductivity at room temperature so it can be deduced that polaritons can exist at room temperature.


    But can polaritons exist at any temperature. Because polaritons are formed when light and electrons are entangled, this behavior does not inherently limit entanglement at any temperature. The requirement for entanglement is that the electron and the photon must come together for a sufficiently long time and both be at the same energy level.


    With regards to cavitation, LeClair provides evidence that nuclear reactions are produced by metalized water at pressures 10,000 times greater than exist in the core of the Sun. When a hydride becomes metalized it may well be protected from extreme temperatures and pressures because of the magnetic fields that develops on the outside ot the metallized hydride crystal as a result of delocalized electrons. A positive feedback loop effect might provide the strength that magnetic field might need to shield the metalized hydride crystal from any temperature and/or pressure.

  • excitation with energy Xrays (931ev)


    This energy level (931eV) is quite in line with the optimal resonance X-ray energy (between 600-700eV) for the lithium disk fusion experiment.


    It seems now more and more likely that hard evidence ("discrete" energy barriers) occurs for new/unknown coupling mechanism of matter.


    The detection was only possible with the world best infrastrucure, able to deliver exactly calibrated, narrow bandwidh radiation! (Hope to see more!)

  • Eric Walker asked if there is any evidence for electron structure.


    These 2012 reports interpret expt with the idea the electron can be split into spinon and orbiton and charge bits
    using resonant excitation with energy Xrays (931ev) on Sr2CuO3 lattice


    This is evidence that electrons can participate in quasiparticles, not that they have internal structure. Do polaritons give evidence that photons have internal structure?