http://mclarage.blogspot.com/2…ject-update-apr-2017.html

In this description of the SAFIRE project, a description of the double layer is provided. This structure is very much like the structure of metallic hydrogen where there is a charge separation between the positive core and the electron envelope. The very high pressure cavitation process produces a metallic water structure that demonstrates the same charge separation mechanism.

the description of the double layer can inspire an understanding of how metallic hydride materials behave.

The double layer concept is explained after figure 5.

Quote from Longview

While sympathetic to LENR as a possible phenomenon that appears to have gained some evidence of operability here on Earth..... I can assert with considerable confidence that LENR is not a "force" whether it is natural or not. I doubt LENR is responsible for any limit to hydrogen's very substantial compressibility (only exceeded by helium). Blathering about LENR without respect for falsifiability or much concern for formulating hypotheses that even have a remote chance of being any more testable than say psychoanalysis or Marxism (two of Popper's favorites)-- will only harm LENR theory and research in the longer term.

And by the way, the deviation from ideality which allows "ultradense hydrogen" appears is very much a surface-associated phenomenon-- perhaps this is the commonality you wish to identify as "LENR". It is instead most likely a result of restraint of motion not necessarily invoking all new physics. So perhaps you, Axil, meant to write something akin to "surface associated ordering [may] contribute to hydrogen's evident high compressibility in LENR contexts...."

Holmlid states above as seen in his experiments as follows:

Coulomb explosions in H(0) in spin state s = 1 generate protons with kinetic energies larger than the retaining gravitational energy at the photosphere of the Sun. The required proton kinetic energy above 2 keV has been directly observed in published experiments.

2KeV translates into a temperature of 20,000,000C.

Eugene Wigner and Hillard Bell Huntington predicted that under an immense pressure of around 25 GPa (250,000 atm; 3,600,000 psi) hydrogen would display metallic properties:

If it takes that much pressure to form metallic hydrogen, it should require at least that much pressure to destroy it.

When Silvera and Dias managed to turn hydrogen metallic, it was at a pressure of 495 GPa, well beyond the 360 GPa of Earth's core.

That is 4,950,000 atm of pressure at least to destroy it.

But when metallic hydrogen forms, then you need to deal with degeneracy pressure.

View this video to understand degeneracy pressure.

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

Quote

Electron degeneracy pressure will halt the gravitational collapse of a star if its mass is below the Chandrasekhar limit (1.39 solar masses^[5]). This is the pressure that prevents a white dwarf star from collapsing. A star exceeding this limit and without significant thermally generated pressure will continue to collapse to form either a neutron star or black hole, because the degeneracy pressure provided by the electrons is weaker than the inward pull of gravity.

This video is informative also.

Where to Find Some Metallic Hydrogen - Ask a Spaceman!

Longview wrote

" Our planet surely has some phase interfaces (crust to mantle and mantle to outer core etc.) , whether these are LENR active would be a question for theory and research"

There is a relatively new theory about aneutronic fusion at the centre of the earth..in iron deuteride lattices...just a few major assumptions.. interesting though

Possible generation of heat from nuclear fusion in Earth’s inner core by Mikio Fukuhara

http://www.nature.com/articles/srep37740

Quote from Longview

Hans Bethe's Nobel prize for recognizing this proton-proton mechanism and quantifying its applicability to our Sun ranks, IMHO, second only to his timely and outspoken recognition of the fallibility of the 1980s US "Star Wars" project.

Longview :

Bethes model makes two absurd assumptions:

1. A di-proton is generated
2. Good spends some energy and lets one of the protons decay...

Protons can never decay and the probability to kinetically build a di-proton is exactly “0”. Even worse if you have two high momentum particles symmetric H-H → D fusion can be 10000% excluded because of momentum conservation. But this is exactly what Bethe claims...

Nevertheless the Sun does H-H fusion and the result is live on earth. Luckily for Bethe the energy calculation will always be the “same”, independent of any fantastic theory.

For the sake of argument, let's set aside the transition from pp to pn (deuterium) via the weak force and replace it with something else. How do we then understand the accumulation of heavier elements (e.g., helium, nickel, etc.) in stars? Presumably there is fusion occurring at some point?

Quote from Eric Walker

For the sake of argument, let's set aside the transition from pp to pn (deuterium) via the weak force and replace it with something else. How do we then understand the accumulation of heavier elements (e.g., helium, nickel, etc.) in stars? Presumably there is fusion occurring at some point?

LENR is know to produce every element that exists. This can be done using magnetic catalyzation via quark fusion and not nuclear fusion.

Quote from Longview

So far it is barely accepted to produce ANY element that exists, and that would only be in our community of believers. Where, by the way, I am currently a 'warm' agnostic, accepting F&P type electrolytics, Mitchell Swartz fusors, both barring conclusive disproofs).

More likely "magnetic capitalization" via Bitcoin, other cryptocurrencies and "pump and dump" schemes to fleece the "bigger fool" as in tulip mania. Quarks are already quite fused at LENR temperatures.

"magnetic capitalization" should read "magnetic catalyzation"

Longview, as you indicate, helium is light. In a supernova, there are r-process, rp-process and p-process nucleosynthesis, none of which (to my knowledge) produce nickel; nonetheless I assume some nickel is also produced in supernovae. But what we must account for is the generation and gradual accumulation of elements such as helium and nickel in stars over time before a supernova event has occurred. Or we must assert that there is no such generation and accumulation during the normal burning of a star.

If we allow that helium gradually accumulates in light stars, and we claim that the pp chain is in error and the sun's energy comes from another process, we must account for the helium accumulation.

Quote from Longview

Eric, I don't see overwhelming need to accept that the pp process is in error. Do you know of any good evidence for that?

I also have no reason to question the existence and operation of the p-p chain. Wyttenbach stated that the Bethe model was based on absurd assumptions, and I wanted to explore the ramifications to see where they would lead.

Quote from Longview

If the "decay" is to a neutron, then there is increased mass, so that is not a "decay" in any case, but requires work / energy and likely other considerations.

How do you know that there aren't catalytic and physical processes that allow such transformations?

Longview :

The (Bethe) model speaks of positron emission, what needs energy. But so far there were never ever any nuclear levels above 0 eV detected for Deuterium. From known facts Bethes model is nonsense.

The LENR mechanism with a two time rotating B field along an E-field allows to build strings of matter, which will produce any elements. The output only depends on the amount of matter and the strength of the B-field. The ideal place seems to be the corona of the sun. On earth, a reactor of the Mills type.

Quote

So is Swartz one the many that will take his LENR secrets to the grave, as so many others before him?

From the distended scurrilous rumour-mill, Planet-lomax.net:

"You mention the Nanor and a possible price of $30,000. If that is a fair price, this thing is far, far too expensive for something reported to generate a few milliwatts. Few would buy it, if any, but IH might — and, in fact, I would not be surprised to find out that they have already arranged independent testing. They are working with Hagelstein and the connection between Hagelstein and Swartz is close enough that Hagelstein would not talk with me, because Swartz. He did not explain, but it was obvious."

One should not forget that heavy elements (really any element that doesn't get pushed away by the solar wind) are drawn into stars on a regular basis by gravity. Dust, comets, asteroids, even planets and companion stars can be pulled in to a star, thus contributing large amounts of non- nuclear-derived elements.