New Paper from Quantum Gravity Research.

  • axil thanks. Of course everybody can Google it but I want axil to think about that one more time. Maybe he will see something different in that this time.

    I don;t understand what you want me to see. Please explain in more detail.

  • axil I was hoping that you would say something like - nah, half of it is BS but you seem to sand up for every concept out there embracing physics across the board with all the quirks.

    I see LENR as a divining rod that will winnow the wheat from the chaff as these various speculative theories of science are put to the ultimate test.

  • axil let's throw any theory we have at it then till something sticks.

    I share the idea that lenr and emdrive will make scientists to do some soul searching.

    I have a scenario : a theory in mind for LENR; It involves the magnetically induced decay of hadrons AND NOT NUCLEAR FUSION. I look kindly on any existing scientific thinking that support that theme. Specifically thinking involving anisotropic magnetic field line generation, optical cavities, conversion of light into magnetism, state changes in quantum mechanics, nanoparticles, polaritons, ultra dense hydrogen, analog black holes, hawking radiation, superconductivity, grand unification of fundamental of forces, and much more...these fields are all connected by the aforementioned theme. LENR is highly complicated, multidisciplinary and interconnected.

  • The only reason, why mainstream physics considers LENR at least theoretically is, it admits the release of energy during merging of lightweight elements into a heavier ones. We are utilizing the residual excessive energy after explosions of supernovae so to say. Whereas the LENR by particle decay lacks even this last connection with physical reality: not only we wouldn't know about its possible mechanism, we even wouldn't know about possible source of energy, as the electrons and protons are the most stable particles in the Universe. You cannot get some energy by their decay even theoretically. The decay of protons and neutrons within neutron stars proceeds on the account of the gravitational energy of large pile of mass: the occasional radiation formed there is the product of gravity force, not internal tension of particles.

  • The current theory of transmutation energy is solely based on fusion/fission energy theory. At the end it just depends on energy content of resulting isotopes as calculated from binding energy curve.

    If binding energy curve is fake rather subtly incomplete (for lenr understanding) every actual Lenr theories ARE fake.

    In all cases, if the independant particle model ( as suggested both by Cook and Rossi) is the good way to explain deformed nucleus structure, this curve will have to be modified.............

  • The binding energy curve is based solely on experimental values, not a theory. Many less stable isotopes are missing on this curve - what you can see is just an envelope formed by these most common/stable ones...


    Yes, to could explain some transmutations without any XH, we should find ashes with more weight than expected normally in this chart.

    As hybride atom, for example potassium ash associated with binding energy ( and weight !) of calcium.

  • Many experiments with electrolysis of potassium carbonate were connected with elevated levels of calcium, the same applies to rubidium and cesium

    Potassium transmutation then calcium ash or Sodium + Carbon then something like silicon as ash..

    Are you sure that these ashes were really what you found ?

    According to Einstein, mass of each elements should be the sum of protons/neutrons added to the famous binding energy.

    Therefore it couln't be exactly true for Lenr behavior ?

    you should change the way you measure these ashes to be sure of your results.

    A simple way to check your results.. weigh your ashes, if you find an abnormal increase in density, you will know ..( if you compare with "normal" density of each element)

  • Thank you for your responses. This little experiment (more of a 'lab frolic' really) is nor nearly well enough characterised to be the topic of extensive discussion. I used an ash test method, though weighing was not carried out. What I was interested in was a small solid residue still present after calcining the sample at 1050C (as hot as I could get it) for 2 hours, because there should have been zero residues. I friend (an analytical chemist) was equally intrigued and performed a simple test using hydroflouric acid to dissolve the ash completely. The subsequently precipitated crystals were (he tells me) characteristic of Silicon Flouride. But we both went through all the inputs to the experiment including the water and all the mixing vessels and techniques without finding a clearly natural origin.

  • It seems to me that spin is important in LENR because spin somehow correlates with mass. The key to the LENR reaction is the production of additional mass of the quarks that comprise hadrons. This change in quark mass is induced by unbalanced magnetic field lines. This type of anisometric field lines produces an increase in the spin rate of the quark which will add energy to the quark. Balanced magnetic field lines do not increase the spin of the quark. When the quantum of additional spin energy is reached, the quark will convert that spin energy into additional mass. When mass is added to a quark, the flavor of the quark changes and the quark will jump to the next higher flavor. For protons and neutrons in an anisotropic magnetic field, the up or down quark will transform into a strange quark, the flavor that is the next up in energy/mass size. This change in quark flavor will convert a proton into a kaon.

    Actually, things get more complicated. The lambda is a baryon which is made up of three quarks: an up, a down and a strange quark. Based on the amount of magnetic energy that is pumped into the proton or the neutron, however, a variety of different Lamba particles can be produced. The third converted quark might be strange, charm, beauty, bottom, or top. This Lambda particle will decay in short order to produce a zoo of different decay particle types including the kaon.

    And then thing get even more complicated when subatomic molecules form.…c-molecule-say-physicists

  • Alan Smith wrote" i suspect is Sodium (ex Sodium Carbonate) to Silicon."

    Na-> Si?

    My speculation if deuterium/neutrons are present

    1.Na-23 plus neutron --> Na-24

    2. Na-24 plus 2 deuterium --> Al-28

    3. Al-28 --> Si-28 plus beta..i.e. Beta decay

    There are many isotopes which decay to Si-28 (Magic Number notion)

    Srinavasan got Xs heat with Na2CO3 , but no tritium in 1992…asan-TritiumNiHSystem.pdf

  • To quickly summarize Lenr, we should tell we found often tranmutations not clearly correlated with XH.

    If, as i suggest XH could be "hidden"inside a "new nucleus structure" where for each element, number of nucleons remain the same but binding energy is stronger.

    I ask experts in measurement here to know how to check correctly this ?

    Normally each elements are identified by mass "measurement devices" but if the mass is wrong ( because heaviest binding energy), how we should do that correctly ?