In this edition of EGO OUT (Tuesday, April 11, 2017) Peter has referenced a wonderful and impactful idea in this article:

Proton-nuclei smashups yield clues about 'quark gluon plasma' Physicists probe exotic state of nuclear matter at Europe's LHC

https://www.sciencedaily.com/r…ly%3A+Top+Science+News%29

Science is studying the "chiral magnetic effect" (CME) in Quark-gluon plasma, or QGP. The magnetic fields that are generated in the QGP have a similar effect on quarks that LENR has on protons. The CME that appeared after the big bang in the QGP that existed back then was strong enough to keep energy from condensing into protons. Now-a-days, such vacuum altering magnetic fields are only seen in LENR. As stated by Jorn Kerst Boomsma in the summary of his thesis:

https://www.nikhef.nl/pub/serv…_pdf/thesis_J_Boomsma.pdf

Effects of instanton interactions on the phases of quark matter

IMHO, this thesis is a goldmine for LENR theory.

Quote

"Summary”

“There are strong indications that in heavy-ion collisions a new phase of matter is created, quark matter, which is a state of matter with deconfined quarks. Besides being created in heavy-ion collisions, it is also believed to have existed in early universe.

Today it might exist in the interior of very dense neutron stars. In this thesis we have studied how quark matter is influenced by instantons. These nonperturbative effects are closely related to the QCD vacuum angle θ. Because of the existence of instantons observables can become θ-dependent. In Nature θ appears to be very close zero, an additional argument for this was presented in Chapter 4 of this thesis. In heavy-ion collisions θ may effectively become nonzero, at least that conclusion is drawn from an effective low-energy theory of the strong interaction. When θ is different from 0 (mod π), the theory is not invariant under CP."

As additional background on this subject, the following article explains why CP violation is important to how the universe was created after the big bang:

http://cerncourier.com/cws/article/cern/28092

Rigel and Robert Bryant

Quote from Rigel

robert bryant

Thank you for the response. I commented in the other thread (meson based model) with an easter egg (for old Tommy C.)

A great video. I will look at your links, but I think I found the answer in the comments look for someone named David S. Please never take what I say as a conflict, I just did not understand as the graphic as it showed it... but I did not see the connection. I just have a tendency to follow up questions that I do not understand. We have such great minds here... Spending them on Rossi to me is like trying to fix burnt toast by scraping it off. Holmlid may have something, I am unaware if he has a video of what he thinks is going on. Mills quite honestly I have serious doubts of as he moves his target by financial quarter just like ITER or big science does. Anyway I enjoyed the video immensely.

The video covers the fusion-centric thinking that predominated LENR in the early 1990s. This thinking has be superseded by more recent experimental insights in the LENR process. The most prominent is the transmutation results that come from many LENR systems: i,e the Ni62 transmutation anf the Li7 to Li6 transformation. These reactions cannot be explained by fusion. Then there are the Mesons seen by Rossi and Holmlid. The only why that these mesons can form is from sub atomic particle decay. Fusion as a prime mover in LENR should be disregarded.

Quote from magicsound

I propose that we give the (possible) magnetic monopole particle a name: the Axilon.

Whether it is a virtual particle or a physical one isn't clear, but at least by naming it, we instantiate it in the thought universe.

Besides N_Axilons and S_Axilons, I suppose there could be a neutral version with internal flux but no external B-field, as well as

other short-lived variants like Grave and Silly Axilons.

April 1 is long past, and I make this proposal not as a joke, but rather in recognition of the thought and research Axil has given to the concept.

Display More

This material is very complicated, far more complicated than the coulomb barrier and its penetration thereof. So I will try to pull things together in a better way.

The Surface Plasmon Polariton(SPP) is the optical cavity that holds the soliton of photons as described in post 5 above. That soliton is a whispering gallery wave. That whispering gallery wave projects monopole magnetic field lines when it is exposed to the KERR effect that is produced by using a high voltage electrostatic potential whose description was added to the Rossi patent in update 2. Without the application of the KERR effect, the SPP is inoperative as the active agent in LENR.

From this post:

https://animpossibleinvention.…u-people-wouldnt-believe/

Fabiani remarks about the KERR effect as the E-Cat stimulus E-Cat reaction as follows:

Quote

“Over the years we realized that the reaction needs more stimuli than only heating. Everyone thinks that thermal stimulus is enough but that’s just the beginning. It’s not enough for maximum efficiency. It’s the base, the synthesis of the reaction. But the reaction has almost behaviors as of living matter, and it has responses as a function of the stimuli. They can be of many types other than thermal. And these are the ones that trigger, let’s call it the most fun part of it, allowing excellent gains in terms of response to the stimuli.”

Fabiani then talks about the SPP as a soliton of photons(ball lightning) and the KERR effect that activates that soliton as follows:

Quote

Talking about the validity of the E-Cat technology, Fabiani continues:

“With the failures, I found myself having to believe in it. Why? Because when something fails, you see the behavior of the object. The next time you adjust it, then you see that it behaves very differently. And then you realize that it is something unique. We have it all filmed, which still cannot be disclosed. We have photographs of creatures that emit pure light that have completely melted the reactor down, all in a very quiet way. You just turn off the stimuli system and the reaction is switched off. It’s impressive.

The creatures that emit pure light are the SPPs which is activated by a high voltage electrostatic field: the activating stimulus. In Rossi's patent, he defines this stimulus potential as being between 50 and 100 thousand volts.

Bob calls these SPPs the EVO defined by KEN Shoulders.

It may not look like it, but all the posts that I have authored are all connected and comprise a complete description of a theory of LENR that replaces the coulomb barrier penetration theory that Pons and Fleischmann invented back in the day. That fusion based theory was disruptive to understanding and acceptance of LENR as real. More than that, the LENR fusion theory also kept LENR from being reproduced in the Lab since the fusion theory of LENR was nonsense.

Nuclear theory—the theory of how protons and neutrons interact—explains how fusion works and generates many expectations about what we should observe when fusion actually happens. According to nuclear theory, deuterium atoms fuse and release energy in a two-step process:

1)The two deuterium atoms unite to form a single atom of helium-4 (helium with two protons and two neutrons).

2) This helium-4 atom has a lot of energy—so much energy that it is unstable.

The unstable atom quickly discharges some of this energy in one of three ways: releasing a neutron, proton, or gamma ray (a type of electromagnetic radiation) . In LENR experimentations, these fusion signs were not seen, so professional science discounted both LENR and LENR theory as pseudo-science.

If professional science were to accept LENR, another nuclear based reaction was responsible for LENR and the experimental results that were seen in LENR had to support that nuclear reaction.

It turns out that this nuclear reaction is the decay of the proton. The decay of the proton must have happened just after the Big Bang for the universe to exist, so why does it not happen today? Professional sciences are running some very expenses experiments to try to find out are the proton is decaying. LENR theory explains why the proton decayed after the big bang and why it is stable today but not when the proton is acted on in a in the very unusual conditions set up in a LENR experiment.

Quote from magicsound

Huh? 4He is 99.99+ % of all naturally occurring Helium and is quite stable. Perhaps there's a detail you omitted here.

Quote from magicsound

That is one way to look at it, but the "high-energy helium-4" is usually not shown in path 1. The more conventional notation has the neutron (2.45 MeV) ejected as part of the reaction, which is generally seen in hot plasma fusion but not in LENR.

I understand your thinking differs from the usual approach to the nuclear process(es) in LENR (cf. Storms). Can you explain why you think your path 1 above is the correct one? If it is in fact the dominant path, there would be lots of neutrons and thus secondary radiation (and dead experimenters).

According to the experimental results produced by Holmlid and now more recently by Rossi, mesons and pions are the byproducts of the LENR reaction. These byproducts come from the disintegration of sub atomic particles. Holmlid also has identified kaons which are composed of at least one strange quark. These Kaons and the strange matter that they contain can only come from the decay of the proton.

The exploding titanium foil experiments of Leonid Urutskoev show fission of uranium which can only have been produced by muons in the absence of detectable neutrons.

Low-energy nuclear reactions and the leptonic monopole

Georges Lochak*, Leonid Urutskoev**

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

The oneway entangled transfer of energy from the proton to the SPP keeps the LENR reaction products from becoming excited and radioactive. The detection of muons as a reaction product of stored catalyst when stimulated by UV light points to the production of mesons by hadronization.

Any fusion products detected in these types of meson centric experiments are a result of muon catalyzed fusion. The evidence of transmutation products produced by fission without the detection of neutrons indicates muon production and resultant muon catalyzed fission.

http://xlab.me.berkeley.edu/pd…09_jstqe.2016.2545644.pdf

Unidirectional Perfect Absorber

The Whispering Gallery mode optical cavities of the Surface Plasmon Polariton (SPP) can form a perfect absorber of energy from the LENR based catalyzed nuclear reaction and share that energy between all the SPPs in the SPP aggregation. Energy is fed into the SPP network and it is shared equally among all the SPP members. Energy goes into the the SPP aggregate and it is stored there. Fano resonance converts all the stored optical energy to the same common frequency among the entire population of SPPs in the system.

https://www.quantamagazine.org…k-the-riemann-hypothesis/

Physicists Attack Math’s $1,000,000 Question

There is a connection between the riemann hypothesis and cold fusion. The expansion of quantum mechanics to include complex numbers and time/parity symmetry is a doorway into how energy is extracted form matter. What the 1/2 connection to the real number components of the solutions in this quantum mechanical solution set is a mystery that tantalizes the imagination.

Quote from Zephir_AWT

/* Some esoteric process is causing the proton to decay in LENR */

It doesn't and no experimental evidence for it exists. End of story, you may return to your homes, nothing to see is here.

No evidence...except as listed in post 31. In addition...

There are also laser irradiation of gold nanoparticles in a water solution where the fission of thorium and uranium were generated.

Initiation of nuclear reactions under laser irradiation of Au nanoparticles in

the presence of Thorium aqua-ions

A.V. Simakin and G.A. Shafeev

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0906/0906.4268.pdf

Initiation of nuclear reactions under laser irradiation of Au nanoparticles in the aqueous solution of Uranium salt

A.V. Simakin, G.A. Shafeev

Dec 01 2009 physics.gen-ph nucl-ex arXiv:0911.5495v1

On the Journal of Nuclear Physics today, Rossi stated: “This morning we are making an experiment, testing the device to allow the QuarkX to be able to work either with battery or with AC power source, like a computer.”

This announcement has sparked some interest, as many people over the years have expressed a hope that it might be possible to power a QuarkX with a battery, rather than having to have it dependent upon the grid for power. Battery powered E-Cats would provide a lot of flexibility and portability to the technology, and enable it to operate in places where a grid source of electricity was not available.

The activating stimulus as defined by update 2 of Rossi’s patent states that a high voltage (50,000 TO 100,000 VOLTS) electrostatic potential is required to activate the LENR reaction. The knowhow for the generation of this potential using a lithium battery is of interest.

The high voltage potential generated here is 60 kilovolts. This is right in the sweet spot for Rossi’s stimulus requirement.

From the theory paper, the voltage that passes through the QuarkX reactor speaks against a spark discharge. The current is what would be expected in glow discharge. The theory paper also speaks about the movement of electrons and ions moving to the positive and negative electrodes. This happens in glow discharge.

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

From what Rossi has described as the configuration of the “fuse” like: QuarkX reactor, the high voltage wires would be connected at each end of the “fuse”. The spark gap requirement would defined the length of the tube to be about a minimum of 2 centimeters for a 50 kv spark gap.

One consideration that I feel is important to understand is what PT symmetry violation means with respect to CP symmetry violation. We understand that we can produce PT symmetry breaking using optical mechanisms but can PT symmetry violation somehow generate CP violation which is required to produce the decay of the nucleon (protons and neutrons)?

From the various descriptions of symmetry in this article:

https://www.europhysicsnews.or…2016/02/epn2016472p17.pdf

Space time (PT) Symmetry is only valid in an open system where energy and/or matter can be gained or lost. In a closed system, PT symmetry does not exist since a closed system can neither gain nor lose energy and/or matter. Because LENR requires CP symmetry breaking and CP symmetry breaking requires PT symmetry breaking, LENR can only occur in an open system.

Open vs. Closed Systems

Systems can be either open or closed. A closed system is one where a quantity or series of quantities cannot enter or leave the system. For example, a system might be closed to energy, meaning energy might not be able to enter or leave the system. A vacuum thermos flask does a really good job of stopping energy from leaving the system to keep your drink warm. So it might make sense to treat it as a closed system - but no system in the real world is ever perfectly closed, so it will only be an approximation.

The opposite of a closed system is an open system. An open system is one where a quantity or series of quantities can enter or leave the system to a significant degree. If you pour your hot drink into a mug instead of a vacuum thermos flask, the heat will escape relatively quickly into its surroundings. So a mug is most certainly an open system! Open systems are a lot more complicated to understand than closed systems, and so scientists prefer to work with closed systems when possible. Science usually stays away from open systems because closed systems makes things much simpler to explain and can be a good starting point before trying to explain open systems, too. Quantum mechanics only deals with closed systems.

Traveling backward in time.

If you make a movie of yourself throwing a ball, and thread the film backwards, it'll look the same as you catching a ball. So if you want to think of the falling object as being the same as the rising one going backwards in time, the physics will support that statement, but it doesn't sound all that cool. It is, however, the same thing as antimatter being viewed as going backwards in time.

At the most basic level, the laws of physics are symmetrical: reverse time and they will follow the same route in reverse. Reverse the charge, and things will be attracted where they would have repulsed, and vice versa. Flip them both, and you've flipped it twice, so it's just like you started.

Since a positron is exactly like an electron, only with the opposite charge, then if you (a) replace an electron with a positron, and (b) reverse time, it behaves exactly like an electron. The physicists call this Charge/Parity (CP) symmetry, where "parity" is actually more like looking at things in a mirror rather than flipping time, but it's the same idea.

Flipping time is another way of looking at flipping left and right: a left-moving object going forwards in time is just like a right-moving object moving backwards.

An electron like a ball sitting in the same spot is a closed system. It cannot change into a positron because it is not moving. The motionless ball is a closed system which cannot experience CP symmetry breaking. A moving ball is an open system where its motion can be deemed to have CP symmetry.

So in an open system that has experienced PT symmetry breaking, LENR occurs because the nucleon undergoes CP symmetry breaking since in this case PT = CP.

In optics, there are special conditions involving optical cavities that can experience PT symmetry breaking. These cavities can reach out magnetically and become entangled with nucleons via their magnetic projections. This phenomenon is known as the chiral magnetic effect (1) — “chiral” means “distinguishing left from right, When PT symmetry is broken in these entangled open systems of optical cavities and nucleons decay via CP symmetry breaking. The energy of the nucleon decay flows one way into the optical cavity.

It seems to me that it is central to the understanding of LENR to appreciate the mechanisms of symmetry breaking with regards to nucleons.

These optical cavities can form is many ways in various types of LENR systems.

Leif Holmlid has applied fast high electric field and sees meson signal. Leif does not need to apply the very high voltage electrostatic field that Rossi is using as a stimulator. Leif has mentioned in one of his experimental write-ups that even the room lighting in the lab could produce muons.

It is my guess that the Bose Einstein condensate nature of the ultra-dense hydrogen (UDH) amplifies the effect of the light that the UDH absorbs. Many UDH particles can form a Bose condensate which further gathers and amplifies the effects of light. This conjecture is supported by Keith Fredericks’ observation. He has seen these entangled UDH based particles in LENR ash.

See

http://restframe.com/mm/posts/tm/

All the magic is happening in the spin wave the forms the shell of the UDH including superconductivity. UDH is the optimum LENR platform, but other LENR mechanisms can be produced in optical cavities generated on rough metal surfaces and in between nano and micro particles.

1 - http://www.preposterousunivers…arks-and-gluons/#comments