that energy is freed by keV (<50keV if I remember well) quanta
That may be the case for photons. If you're going with Hagelstein, as Ed Storms and some others do (and which I very much do not), the limit would be 10-20 keV for any particles with mass.
Your assumption is that the low energy fusion dispatches all the surplus energy with the help of one stream of quanta. Unfortunately, we don’t know. The fusion process is inside the palladium lattice and we cannot exclude that a part of the fusion radiation is adsorbed by the electron shells of the adjacent palladium atoms and released again. The electron configuration of palladium is 2, 8, 18, 18 and every sub-shell consist of only 2 electrons. So there is quite a lot of different electromagnetic frequencies that can be radiated by a single palladium atom (inclusive infra red radiation by the fusion stimulated vibrations of the palladium atoms inside the lattice).
The longer the wavelength, the more chance that adjacent palladium atoms adsorb radiation. So when the fusion is equal to hot fusion radiation, the palladium lattice is more transparent and measurements had detected all that hot fusion radiation (and there was a lot of nuclear fission too).
So we cannot simply deduce the real fusion volume but it is logical that the fusion process must happen within a much larger volume than hot fusion. Moreover, without a larger fusion volume there cannot be cold fusion because of the Coulomb force. There is no known mechanism that can explain the required hot fusion energy. So the conclusion must be: the Coulomb force is decreased.
Quotethe low energy fusion dispatches all the surplus energy with the help of one stream of quanta. Unfortunately, we don’t know.
How the absorption coefficient of neutrons and gamma ray will differ, if they would be emanated EXACTLY along line of atom nuclei within crystal lattice? How it would differ, if these atom nuclei will get entangled at least partially?
In “free space” there is no high concentration of quanta so there isn’t a Coulomb force too. When you want to create the Coulomb force, you have to create a particle, like the proton. In other words: changing the properties of a proton is changing the Coulomb force (and other characteristics).
Nuclear fusion is the spatial addition of 2 nuclei and the result is not equal to 2 x the mass of 1 nucleus. The boundary of the new nucleus holds less mass (quanta) so the surplus is radiated to the environment. However, the speed of light is a constant so it is not the new nucleus that radiates this stream of quanta, it are the properties of space itself who do the job (quantum fields). Single quanta can only move with the speed of light and when the mechanism/force that forms the new boundary put quanta one by one aside, you have an electromagnetic wave. (Of course this is a popular description of a model but it isn’t too bad for getting an impression. And it is the answer to your last post. )
The cracks in the palladium lattice are the result of the adsorption of too much hydrogen atoms. The thermal vibrations of the palladium are too few/low to hold all these hydrogen atoms without damages to the lattice. Increasing the temperature of the lattice, is increasing the vibrations of the palladium atoms (mutual distances become larger) so the inside pressure on the palladium atoms by the hydrogen atoms is decreased.
When experimentalists say that the cause of cold fusion is linked to the existence of nano cracks, you can draw the conclusion that the narrow enclosure of the hydrogen atoms is essential to force cold fusion (with the help of electromagnetic stimulation).
And that’s it! There are no other particles involved or phenomena like vibrational excitations. Because there are “millions” of nearly the same circumstances/configurations and why there are no more observations of cold fusion?
All those hypothetical phenomena are suggested because the researchers don’t know how cold fusion is created. When I put a cube of 99,96% nickel on the dinner table none of those researchers will suggest that all these hypothetical phenomena are also present in the nickel cube. So they simply try to force a clarification with every known phenomena they can “remember”.
So everything can be compressed within one question: “How can electromagnetic stimulation “force” locked hydrogen atoms to increase their boundary so the Coulomb force will decrease.”
Quote
“How can electromagnetic stimulation “force” locked hydrogen atoms to increase their boundary so the Coulomb force will decrease.”
This question leads into particular interpretations of cold fusion, for example the Frank Znidarsiac theory, in which the electron orbitals around atoms behave like the elastic droplets resonating under mutually interfering longitudinal and transverse waves (1, 2,
3,...).
His predictions of resonance frequency are in good agreement with 80 GHz observed at ENEA lab. Once the electron orbitals get entangled, then the frequency goes down because multiple orbitals undulate like the single body. Under this situation multiple electrons get arranged along single line, so that they represent an effective shielding of Coulomb force for protons embedded.
There seems to be a common misconception that if you overcome the Coulomb barrier then radiationless fusion results. Unfortunately physics predicts hot fusion products in such circumstances. This is experimentally verified with muon catalysed fusion experiments. We should conclude that overcoming the Coulomb barrier alone does not solve the problem.
Sorry that I continue without answering (evenso Zephir_AWT) but otherwise everything becomes a bit confusing.
We need an answer to our question about “electromagnetic stimulation that forces locked hydrogen atoms to increase their boundary so the Coulomb force will decrease”.
I personally prefer an elucidation with the help of quantum field theory but because most people like the phenomenological way of thinking I take the latter.
Suppose I take a dinner plate and I put solitary atoms on it. Now I take a microscope and a laser. I focus on one of the solitary atoms and adjust my laser in such a way that the “beam” is small enough to hit only 1 atom. I push the button of the laser and the laser beam hits the atom. The result is the “firing” of the atom like a bullet out of a gun.
So when we supply an electromagnetic wave to a single atom, the result is described by Newton mechanics.
F = m a [F = force; m = mass; a = acceleration]
In other words: hydrogen atoms locked inside a palladium lattice must behave themselves very strange when we apply an electromagnetic wave to the hydrogen atoms. They have to rocket away but they cannot.
The palladium atoms around differ from the hydrogen atoms because of their mass and the electrostatic attraction (metallic bonding). The result of a metallic bonding is like adding mass. When we want to accelerate 1 palladium atom, the electrostatic force is like a glue so all the other palladium atoms will accelerate too. Of course this is impossible.
So when we want to accelerate 1 palladium atom Newtons formula is:
F = (106 mh + me) a
(mh = mass hydrogen atom; me = energy electrostatic force expressed in mass).
The mass of a palladium atom is 106 x the mass of a hydrogen atom and every palladium atom has adjacent palladium atoms (lattice configuration).
Conclusion: electromagnetic stimulation will alter the velocity of a hydrogen atom much more than the velocity of a palladium atom (maybe the typical relation is 120 : 1).
In palladium based fusion there is electromagnetic stimulation with the help of free electrons (electromagnetic wave packets). So there is not a hit of 1 solitary atom, a bunch of atoms are involved (palladium and hydrogen atoms).
A. For the palladium atom the equation is: F = mp a
B. For the hydrogen atom it is: F = mh a
The force F (electromagnetic wave packet) is equal in both equations and mp = 120 x mh
The hydrogen atoms cannot accelerate in a free way because they are “mechanically” bound to the palladium atoms. However, the mathematically relations between Force, mass and acceleration in Newtons equation cannot be changed.
When I substitute the acceleration of a solitary hydrogen atom with the acceleration of the paladium atoms, I have to write:
F = mh (a : 120)
Unfortunately, this is wrong because I have to decrease the force F too. But it cannot because the force is equal for the involved hydrogen atoms and the involved palladium atoms. So the only property that has to change is the mass of the hydrogen atom.
F = (mh : 120) ap [Ap = acceleration palladium atoms]
Conclusion: the mass of the hydrogen atom has to decrease to met the acceleration of the palladium atoms.
Decreasing the mass of a nucleus is ruled by E = m c2 , so the energy of the nucleus drops down. However, c2 is a constant that represents surface area. That’s why we have to conclude that the boundary of the nucleus is expanded because the mass is partly vanished.
In other words: the Coulomb force of the hydrogen is temporarily vanished and the hydrogen atom can fuse with an adjacent hydrogen atom.
So cold fusion is a very simple mechanism.
LENR has nothing to do with fusion and the coulomb barrier.
Zephir_AWT, (your post #24)
I don’t know much about the absorption coefficient of neutrons and gamma rays but I think that I understand entanglement.
The most characteristic property of spacetime (or quantum fields) is the absence of anti-spacetime (or anti quantum fields). So there is no existence of anti-energy (anti-quanta).
So there is symmetry in the universe and we can describe it as flat spacetime or flat quantum fields. It means that the energy distribution in every point of the universe is the same and it gives raise to the main law in physics: the conservation of energy.
Of course this is not what we see around, but we can imagine this hypothetical situation. The total amount of energy in every point of flat spacetime (quantum fields) is unknown but we know that energy (quanta) from around can move to a local area (volume). This alteration creates local differences and our observable universe is the result.
Besides spacetime (quantum fields) there is no other volume in the universe. So the properties of spacetime (quantum fields) are everywhere to be found within the volume of our universe. The consequence is the mutual influence of all the imaginary points in the universe. Changing the position of 1 (imaginary) point is altering all the other points in the universe.
Now let’s imagine that every point has symmetry. So when I disrupt the symmetry in one point somewhere else the opposite must occur. Otherwise there is no conservation of energy.
But what about a local disruption of the symmetry (A) and at the same time the opposite (B)? When I alter the properties of A, the conservation of energy alters “automatically” the properties of B in an opposite way. That’s entanglement.
Quote
I don’t know much about the absorption coefficient of neutrons and gamma rays but I think that I understand entanglement
If yes, how the entanglement arises?
QuoteThe most characteristic property of spacetime (or quantum fields) is the absence of anti-spacetime (or anti quantum fields). So there is no existence of anti-energy (anti-quanta). So there is symmetry in the universe and we can describe it as flat spacetime or flat quantum fields.
I don't think you understand the entanglement, because of violation of simple logic in the above sentence: the absence of antienergy implies symmetry? In dense aether model the entanglement is manifestation of negative energy instead. While the positive energy is mediated with transverse waves of vacuum, the omnipresent ZPE and quantum noise indicates, the vacuum is filled with longitudinal waves too. The shielding of these waves at distance results into well known gravity field and curved space-time around massive bodies: because the longitudinal waves are missing around massive bodies, the excess of transverse waves manifest itself as a positive energy field, it slows down light and it dilates time there.
But at the proximity the shielding is reversed, because the transverse waves propagate in much lower speed through vacuum than these longitudinal ones. It results into well known Casimir field. The shielding of virtual photons leads into relative excess of scalar waves and negative energy field there. In manifest itself with contraction of time and with increasing of light speed there (Scharnhorst effect). This is what the symmetry of Universe means in dense aether model and the resulting Casimir force is the macroscopic case of entanglement.
But the things will get even more interesting once we decrease number of dimensions, for example at the case of collinear massive bodies. In this case the Casimir field will get pronouncedly elongated character of dark matter filaments and the intensity of the shielding and force increases significantly. The problem is, the massive bodies are nearly hollow object composed of pinpoint particles, so it's difficult to achieve exactly collinear arrangement. But at the scale of atom nuclei it's already not so great problem and the shielding force is called Yukawa force there (instead of Casimir force, but its principle is similar).
For example the observation of so-called Hungarian boson is the example of such attenuated entanglement. It still applies to pair of particles, but one of them (boron-8 nuclei) is on the verge of its decay. It's composed of two alpha particles held together at distance with meson mediated forces so it has rod-like shape like the dumbbell. Along axis of this dumbbell the shielding Yukawa force gets enhanced both toward strength, both distance and it manifest itself with increasing tendency to symmetric decays.
The entanglement attenuated with collinear arrangement of atom nuclei plays an important role during cold fusion, which I believe runs via low-dimensional collisions. It glues and helds atom nuclei together after their impact in the state of the boson condensate like the colossal Casimir force. But it has many other effects: being a concentrated pilot wave it serves as a waveguide for resulting particles and gamma rays and keeps them along connection line of atoms, where they can be absorbed and thermalized most effectively. And it also decreases Coulomb barrier and it dissolves the resulting energy of fusion into a larger volume, so that the energy dissipation doesn't run from single pin-point place - but from rod-like volume area of crystal lattice of much larger effective surface.
QuoteWhen I alter the properties of A, the conservation of energy alters “automatically” the properties of B in an opposite way. That’s entanglement.
OK, but WHY the properties get balanced between pair of entangled particles A and B - and not between A and C or B and C, providing that the C is the third particle, just not entangled with these previous ones A and B? At the quantum scale the entanglement is not automatic state, which establishes between all pairs of particles automatically. Instead if it, it's quite fragile state and it has tendency to spontaneous breakup, which is called the decoherence. What happens during establishing of entanglement and during decoherence? What the collapse of wave function means and how it applies to this scenario?
I propose the barrier fall slowly, like a chinese torture...
Think of nucleons as extremely strong neodymium magnets that both repel one another at large distances and attract one another at very close distances. Protons and deuterons repel one another in the manner of magnets with the same pole facing one another, but once you press a deuteron close enough to a nucleus (e.g., another deuteron), the two will snap together with a loud "snap"! Even if you could arrange sufficient screening to somehow bring the deuteron very close to the nucleus, they will still snap together at the end. The potential curve is not a linear one. It increases dramatically and then all of a sudden drops off (going from right to left):
One implication of Ed Storms's gradual fusion suggestion, and yours as well, in borrowing his, is that somehow this potential curve can be ironed out so that there are no sharp drop-offs that would cause the two nuclei to snap together at the end and thereby release a large quantum of energy as a result. I'm highly skeptical that any amount of screening will accomplish this, in just the right amounts needed at each step of the approach. This is partly because the tunneling is a quantum phenomenon: at point A in time, you have a separate deuteron and nucleus approaching one another; and then at point B, they are a single composite daughter nucleus left in an excited state, with an apparently discontinuous transition between the two states of the world, before and after.
This video gives a sense of the force acting on the magnets right at the end; it is an analogous but much stronger nuclear force which must somehow, implausibly, be held back to prevent the deuteron from tunneling into the nucleus as they approach one another.
Since we are, to a large extent speculating, I have been pondering a different view of what might be happening inside a nucleus which is part of (or influenced by) one of Ed Storms NAE's. Rather than a tightly bound group of particles making up each proton the various quarks and gluons actually start to 'move around' so that instead of being a single (if quantum) object the particles behave more like a flock of starlings, swirling around before returning to the roost. Under such conditions there would be no billiard ball collisions, but the momentary merging of two flocks which then re-organises into a new paired configuration. 'When marshmallows collide, there is no bang, but only sweetness'.
It seems like there would be nothing preventing subatomic particles from being formed in the process here.
What would happen if the 'flock' was to be violently disrupted?
I tried to be polite so I answered your post (#24). Hoping that you should understand that the proposed idea is too complicated.
However, the first lines of your post (#35) showed me that you want to start a discussion that will take too long and is also off-topic (in my opinion). I don’t say that I don’t want to read your posts. I will read them one of these days, but not now.
Look, I am a bit like Peter Gluck. It is my opinion that LENR is really important for everyone on this planet and I hope it is possible to describe the LENR mechanism in the right way and create consensus about it. The next step is to build an easy and cheap LENR reactor with the help of the theoretical model.
I don’t mind who describes the LENR mechanism so it would be nice when someone else had done this before. Unfortunately nobody have done it. So I am not interested in all kinds of discussions about hypothesises that have no empiric evidence in relation to LENR. Sorry.
Try to imagine the example I wrote (post #31) about the laser beam that hit the solitary atom.
The atom rocketed away so there was a force and there was impulse. However, the beam of the laser is a dense stream of quanta. It shows that reality in physics has many faces.
Introducing the strong force has consequences because nearly all the data about the relations between forces and particles are obtained with the help of particle accelerators. They smash particles together and the data are related to hot fusion (that’s why most of the physicists don’t believed that cold fusion is true).
At the beginning of particle physics there were no high energy accelerators. In that time the diameter of the proton had another value (larger). So the physical circumstances are responsible for the outcome and not the opposite. You cannot translate hot fusion to cold fusion, both are different processes.
Maybe you have visited the site of Peter Gluck from time to time and read his discussion with Ed Storms about the strange absence of the possibility to increase the heat production (palladium based fusion). Manipulating the current don’t change the amount of radiated heat.
Now look to my post #31 once again. The decrease of the Coulomb force is caused by the electromagnetic wave packet but the origin is the difference between the mass of the hydrogen atom and the mass of the palladium atom. We cannot change this relation. So when we change the electric flow rate or the voltage, the heat production will be the same. Just like Ed Storms experiments have showed.
I know it is a bit strange that such a simple mechanism is responsible for the phenomenon “cold fusion”. However, it is time to design and test a simple and cheap LENR reactor that is successful.
