Speculations on LENR theory, coherence, stimulated emission, and fusion

http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LochakGlowenergyn.pdf

Low-energy nuclear reactions and the leptonic monopole

Georges Lochak, Leonid Urutskoev

When Leonid Urutskoev, a top nuclear scientist in Russia was asked to analyze the Chernobyl reactor disaster, he came to the conclusion that the official reason put forth for its cause was wrong. He suspected that the disaster was produced by a number of electrical explosions in a nearby generator.

To prove his theory, he came up with a new type of experiment using electrically exploding arcs in titanium foil. He found that the residue from the pure titanium foil explosion contained new elements, elements produced by transmutation. But he also found that dissolved uranium salts in the water that surrounded the titanium foil explosion channel was found to fission because of the detection of the fission element byproducts produced by the explosion.

This implied that the explosion of the titanium foil had an effect at two separate locations, first, inside the titanium foil itself and second outside of the explosion channel at a considerable distance from the explosion.

Urutskoev asked around the Russian nuclear community and found that other than neutrons, the only thing that could produce fission in uranium was muons. But U235 did not fission as expected, U238 fissioned as the even isotope reaction rule in LENR dictate.

The LENR reaction sent out something that produced the reaction at a distance from the primary zone of causation (Nuclear active environment - NAE) that caused even isotopes of uranium to fission.

Next, Urutskoev placed the titanium ash on a photographic emulsion (film) and spotted charged particles coming out of that ash that behaved like magnetic monopoles.

What this all means is that the LENR reaction is a complex multi-faceted reaction consisting of many stages and causations.

In detail, the NAE produces nuclear reactions but it also produces particles that can exist independently once created and can produce nuclear reaction remote n space and time from the NAE.

From the reference above:

Quote

Here are some conclusions based on the presented experimental dat

1. The particle which left the trace in the nuclear emulsion is charged, as nuclear
emulsions are insensitive to neutrons.

2. The particle cannot have electric charge, as otherwise it could not be able to
pass through two meters of atmospheric air and two layers of black paper.

3. The particle does not have high energy, as no delta-electrons are observed.

4. The mechanism of the interaction between the particle and the photosensitive
layer is not clear. Assuming the Coulomb mechanism, the absorbed energy estimated using the darkening area equals around 1 GeV.

5. The radiation is of nuclear origin; it interacts with magnetic fields.
This calls for a discussion of Lochak’s magnetic monopole. Lochak created his theory 20 years before our experiments [9 – 12], that is, before those results for understanding and explaining of which we are now attempting to use it. It should be emphasized that this is a good omen for a theory. It is always suspicious when the theories are created specially to explain an experimental observation. They are like the circles drawn on a target after a shoot has been made.

Display More

To add some knowledge that we has aquired from other research:

The Surface Plasmon Polariton produces a monopole magnetic field. The SPP is naturally found on the surface of metal including metallic nanoparticles. The SPP a boson is coherent and will readily form Bose condensates.

The Ultra dense hydrogen nanoparticle is coherent and formed under high pressure conditions or via catalysts.

The UDH as a superconductor will allow SPP formation on its surface spin wave.

Once created, the UDH can persist indefinitely on its own and travel in swarms of coherent particles that will share in the nuclear energy(fusion and fission) that the swarm will generate via entangled muon generated outreach.

A UDH swarm

http://restframe.com/mm/images/actual_setup.jpg

tracks from Fig. 1 are correlated as a group but cannot all be overlaid on top of each other. These tracks appear to be correlated, yet twisted or acted upon by some central force. The tracks were digitized in a vector graphics editor and shown in Fig. 2.

http://restframe.com/mm/images/vector_swarm_d.jpg

Measurements taken at successive common points of corresponding tracks indicate a swarm of identical particles each going through coordinated abrupt transitions at each vertex or kink. The field influence on corresponding track segments are geometric centers.

http://restframe.com/mm/images/15.jpg

Axil or anyone, Is there a minimum size and weight or density threshold for LENR to occur? You have addressed many things over the years I may have missed it. Has anyone mentioned how large or small the samples have to be?

Quote from Rigel

Axil or anyone, Is there a minimum size and weight or density threshold for LENR to occur? You have addressed many things over the years I may have missed it. Has anyone mentioned how large or small the samples have to be?

I estimate that the minimum size is a sphere with a circumference of 10 nanometers, which is the wavelength of the light that is released when a polariton decays.

Thank you, I am addressing the issue of reactors that can only test one sample at a time. In reference to 10 nanometers. Are you saying that you could possibly create 30 BB' size spheres and test in bulk? Do you know of reactors that can test 5 or more samples (I am thinking of maybe 30 samples BTW). Do you think that if you used a tube design you could pot say 5 mixtures in a tube? Then cluster the tubes like a boiler does? At some size you are going to get cross contamination. I just like to think how to improve things. I really like MFMP but worry they will get disheartened in a few years when they can only test one mixture at a time against a control. Even though they have come a long way.

Quote

Axil or anyone, Is there a minimum size and weight or density threshold for LENR to occur?

There are discussions about catalysis of radioactive decay with neutrinos (which I consider rather scalar wave effect) and in this case the energy density is unmeasurable.

Axil, you are always kind to my questions. I am posting 2 links. Be-forsale-on-ebay It is selling 99% Be from broken x-ray windows. The second link Oxyacetylene-reaches-5000f is just what heat a torch could produce no need to look at the second link, as it is just for reference, But the torch would easily melt Be at roughly 2300f. The first ebay link shows a hand full of bb size balls. Do you see why it would be unfeasible to create different bb size samples and pot them in the melted Be? The samples would be transparent to X-rays and pretty much all EM. Then lasers or an electron gun could be used to create plasma for both temp and coherence. Once potted the samples would be ready for the reactor. Please provide any critique. Thanks as always.

/shame I unloaded that pottery furnace last summer.

AlainCo,

Your starting point is correct: the most significant property of low energy nuclear fusion is the absence of hot fusion radiation. No theoretical physicist had done it better.

However, it has no sense to go any further when you don’t understand the origin of this “low energy” radiation. So forget all the other sentences you wrote and try to understand the consequences of this novel phenomenon.

First, the origin of electromagnetic radiation is always the release of energy from a local source and every alteration has a volume. So when we want to understand the relation between frequency and different local sources, we only have to imagine a composed molecule of different types of atoms. For example HCl (hydrogen chloride).

The molecule is like a dumb-belt and it can rotate along its centre of mass. To get rotation of both atoms we must apply 0,0026 eV. However, both atoms can also vibrate mutually, an alteration that occurs within an evident smaller volume than the rotation of the whole molecule. Now we have to apply 0,358 eV. And when we want to alter an electron in the outer shell of one of the atoms we have to supply far more energy. So the general rule of thumb is: the smaller the volume of the local source of the alteration, the higher the frequency of the released energy. So we cannot force a proton to release energy with the frequency of 0,0026 eV or 0,358 eV. The proton is far to small to radiate the size of half the wavelength of the 0,0026 eV electromagnetic wave (E = f h [f = frequency; h = Planck’s constant]). By the way, this is no new physics, students had to understand this at the end of the first half of the last century (1935 - 1950).

In other words: the volume of the cold fusion process by the nuclei of the hydrogen/deuterium atoms must be much larger than the volume of the same nuclei by the hot fusion process.

That isn’t awkward, because the size of a simple nucleus (proton) isn’t always the same. In general it depends a lot on the energy of the collisions physicists use to measure the dimensions. On the other hand: hot fusion is only possible when the involved nuclei have a very high velocity to overcome the Coulomb force. So the volume of the interaction (fusion) between the 2 nucleus is really small.

Now you understand this “phenomenon” about the unusually fusion radiation, do you think you have to make changes to the rest of your post?

@Alan, this is very helpful. My plan was to possibly load the bb's into a tube and fire gas/heat/EM and see what radiation came out. If any this is just to narrow down the mix. But I see it would be null based on calibration as you have said. Back to the drawing board. How long does it take to calibrate the LFH reactor? Is there a readme?

//I am quite aware of the dangers of handling beryllium. It is going to be an issue.

Quote from Rigel

Axil, you are always kind to my questions. I am posting 2 links. Be-forsale-on-ebay It is selling 99% Be from broken x-ray windows. The second link Oxyacetylene-reaches-5000f is just what heat a torch could produce no need to look at the second link, as it is just for reference, But the torch would easily melt Be at roughly 2300f. The first ebay link shows a hand full of bb size balls. Do you see why it would be unfeasible to create different bb size samples and pot them in the melted Be? The samples would be transparent to X-rays and pretty much all EM. Then lasers or an electron gun could be used to create plasma for both temp and coherence. Once potted the samples would be ready for the reactor. Please provide any critique. Thanks as always.

/shame I unloaded that pottery furnace last summer.

In the light of the Chernobyl reactor disaster, and the insights that we can glean from it, the best LENR reactor design, IMHO, is a LENR molten salt LENR fission reactor.

In professional nuclear engineering, it is well understood that fission produces 100 times more energy per reaction mare or less than fusion, but fission produces relatively few neutrons to keep the reaction going. On the other hand, fusion is weak at producing energy but generates neutrons by the boatload.

If an abundant source of muons is available, the lack of neutron production that drives the fission reaction is not a concern anymore. A single muon will produce 200 MeV per muon fission reaction vs. 3 MeV for fusion.

So a muon fission reactor is very rich and efficient in energy production and a muon fusion reactor is energy poor. So a muon fission reactor is the way to go because it is about 100 times more energetic than of fusion reactor at producing energy per muon.

For example, if the QuarkX produces as many muons as I think that it does, It will require only a few QaurkX reactors inside the core of a molten fluoride salt based thorium reactor to produce a ton of high quality heat energy.

Rossi said that 20 watts of electric power is produced by his old 100 watt QUARK reactors

Assuming a low voltage of 1 volt, 20 watts means 20 coulombs of electrons are produced a second. If one muon decays to one electron not counting muon escape from the QuarkX, then (20) (6.25 x 10^18 electrons) or about 10^20 of muons per second is produced by 100 watts of QuarkX power production. This assumes that most of the atoms in the molten salt blanket are thorium atoms.

That much neutron flux would support a 100 megawatt nuclear reactor on a single reaction per muon basis. But Muons might generate 150 fission and/or fusion reactions per muon. Just a few QuarkX reactors can push out a lot of power and also confine muons inside the reactor thereby utilizing muon production at high efficiency.

Axil, I am interested in testing multiple samples. I am just concerned how to make a modular reactor that could easily swap samples without break down. As Alan mentioned it is the calibration that is the issue. I want to break it down (of course I could be off base completely) and see which sample can be stimulated and by what method. I do not think I can handle it safely since my thoughts are in a different direction than what has been done in the past. The input power is not a concern at this point. I plan on using plasma to drive it. I am aware that you do not think it is fusion any longer. After all I read your references. This is not designed to produce power, just test samples to narrow down what lattice will produce either radiation or heat. My thoughts are any samples that show either one will then be examined and retested, and tested. Then the candidates will go in a more rigorous reactor with better calorimetry. The smaller the sphere the more samples can be tested in a drop down (gravity) reactor. So it is clear it is a plasma reactor. Do you see issues?

Quote from Rigel

Axil, I am interested in testing multiple samples. I am just concerned how to make a modular reactor that could easily swap samples without break down. As Alan mentioned it is the calibration that is the issue. I want to break it down (of course I could be off base completely) and see which sample can be stimulated and by what method. I do not think I can handle it safely since my thoughts are in a different direction than what has been done in the past. The input power is not a concern at this point. I plan on using plasma to drive it. I am aware that you do not think it is fusion any longer. After all I read your references. This is not designed to produce power, just test samples to narrow down what lattice will produce either radiation or heat. My thoughts are any samples that show either one will then be examined and retested, and tested. Then the candidates will go in a more rigorous reactor with better calorimetry. The smaller the sphere the more samples can be tested in a drop down (gravity) reactor. So it is clear it is a plasma reactor. Do you see issues?

I don't think that multiple simultaneous fuel tests will be valid. The muon radiation from the samples that work well will influence the other samples. This is how I think that the Cat/Mouse setup works for Rossi.

Alan, I will not be making the spheres maybe outsource to an aircraft fab plant, I am not even sure that Be is required but it is transparent to x-rays and can withstand heat. Do you have a feeling for what size a sample would be required to test. Oh and as always thanks for putting up with me.

AlainCo,

You can find all the evidence at Wikipedia (electromagnetic wavelengths in relation to the volumes of electron shells, etc.). That’s why I gave the example of the HCl molecule. However, every electrical engineer knows the relation between wavelength and the dimension of the antennae.

The radiation of the low energy fusion starts when the quanta of both nuclei are forced together. So the actual distance between both nuclei at the beginning is not involved into the wavelength of the radiation. Both fusible boundaries must be together (adjacent) before the rearranging of all the involved quanta starts.

That’s why the wavelength of low energy fusion not only indicates the origin of the volume of the fusion process, it also shows that the Coulomb force is surmounted (decreased).

First the boundary expands, second the Coulomb force decreases, third the fusion process starts, fourth the fusion radiates quanta, fifth the new boundary of the fused nuclei is formed.