Atom-Ecology

  • The basic idea here is to think about the transfer of information. Entanglement allows one particle to instantaneously influence another but not in a way that allows classical information to travel faster than light. This resolved the paradox with special relativity but left much of the mystery intact.


    Unluckily we today know that the transportation of information at speed >c is possible, because there are different - non destructive - pathways to retrieve the "bit" information out of an entangled quantum system.


    Why did nobody draw the conclusion that general relativity is wrong based on the proven spooky action on distance?


    Mills gave the prove some 20 years ago and all the old - ART proving - calculations still work fine, sometimes even better! The 4D model confirms Mills findings with a clear relation to magnetic flux flow at light speed.


    Physics is not pure mathematics sometimes mathematicians have to accepts the true nature behind physics. But lets wait until the mind-fixed generations dies out...

  • I think that Nitrogen is involved somehow hence need for Air to be present.


    What sort of experiments are you conducting exactly?


    In those where elemental alkali metals are involved (i.e. Lithium in relatively large amounts), non-metal impurities like nitrogen (in particular, in the case of Lithium) can affect significantly their capability of dissolving the elements they come in contact with.




    Source: https://ntrl.ntis.gov/NTRL/das…tleDetail/UCRL50647.xhtml


  • There is no spooky action at a distance. In quantum entangled systems there are aether particles transmitted at hyperluminal speeds. Sadly, the mainstream scientific community refuses to wrap their minds around the larger picture. Of course the builders of the anomalous vehicles flying in our skies probably have most of this stuff worked out already.


  • But these are all linear phenomena, and an autonomously bursting system doesn't sound at all linear to me. It puzzles me that the red

    trace in the following figure from Russ George's latest blog entry seems to be such a pure superposition of 2 sines with slightly different frequencies. Why should heat generation from coupled nonlinear oscillators appear as a superposition of sines? That is not usually how coupled nonlinear oscillators work. It is how coupled linear oscillators work but that is from the textbooks, I wouldn't expect it in reality ... not from autononously bursting systems




  • Electron properties

    Electrons have three fundamental properties: charge, mass, and spin. By definition, the electric charge on an electron is −1. The mass of an electron has been measured and found to be 9.109389 × 10 −31 kilograms. Electrons also spin on their axes in much the same way that planets do. Spinning electrons, like any other moving electric charge, create a magnetic field around themselves. That magnetic field affects the way electrons arrange themselves in atoms and how they react with each other. The field is also responsible for the magnetic properties of materials.


    Read more: http://www.scienceclarified.co…ectron.html#ixzz5LM0K5rOj


    These electron properties can be removed from each other in terms of position. The spins of many electrons can be concentrated in a location that are far away from the locations of their electron component properties: orbit and charge. These electron spins can also be entangled with the spins of photons. These entangled spins form a condensate that can move in an independent fashion that is decoupled from the other properties of both the constituent electrons and photons.


    See


    https://amolf.nl/wp-content/up…oday_ExcitonPolariton.pdf


    The new era of polariton condensates

    David W. Snoke, and Jonathan Keeling


    One important characteristic of the polariton condensate that the LENR experimenter should be aware of is its transition point.


    There is a point in the input power that is input into the polariton aggregation that will cause the polariton condensate to form. This threshold is when gamma radiation is converted into heat by the polariton condensate. In the condensate, the energy content of the gamma is distributed equally among all the members of the condensate's aggregation and is thus thermalized.


    .


    Quote

    FIGURE 3. THE BOSE–EINSTEIN CONDENSATION OF POLARITONS carries clear, experimentally observable hallmarks. (a) As polariton density increases (left to right) above the condensation threshold, the polaritons’ in-plane momenta, evidenced by the angular distribution of their light emission, peaks sharply at zero (top), and their energies and momenta converge on the minimum of the dispersion curve (bottom).


    That curve shifts slightly upward due to interaction effects as the polariton density increases. Here, regions of parameter space colored red correspond to those that produced the highest density of photon counts. (Adapted from ref. 5.) (b) In experiments that achieve full equilibrium, the evolution of the observed energy distribution (dots), plotted as a function of wave number k∥, is well described by the Bose–Einstein distribution (curves). Here, polariton density increases as curves change from purple to orange, with the orange curve corresponding to a system on the verge of condensation. The inset shows the sharp decrease in the spectral width of the polariton emission line as pump power crosses the threshold for condensation, indicated by the dashed line. (Adapted from ref. 7.)

  • When it comes to entanglement I'm a bit dissapointed, all experiments I know of is based on an initial interaction where it is possible that the states can have

    been setted at the interaction, not at the measurements. What is known by the experiments is that in order for this to be true the underlying laws are nonlocal.

    QM is nonlocal. Mills models are nonlocal in nature because you don't see the transition, only the boundary condition where things have been settled. And if you don't believe

    in nonlocal theories. You can say that there is a local theory behind the scenes but the time frames of the interaction is so large so that nonlocal rules

    approximate the systems well enough for the experiment and all interesting measurable quantities.

  • When it comes to entanglement I'm a bit dissapointed, all experiments I know of is based on an initial interaction where it is possible that the states can have

    been setted at the interaction, not at the measurements. What is known by the experiments is that in order for this to be true the underlying laws are nonlocal.

    QM is nonlocal. Mills models are nonlocal in nature because you don't see the transition, only the boundary condition where things have been settled. And if you don't believe

    in nonlocal theories. You can say that there is a local theory behind the scenes but the time frames of the interaction is so large so that nonlocal rules

    approximate the systems well enough for the experiment and all interesting measurable quantities.


    This all depends on the version of QM that you are dealing with.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Broglie%E2%80%93Bohm_theory


    Quote

    The Copenhagen interpretation states that the particles are not localised in space until they are detected, so that, if there is no detector on the slits, there is no information about which slit the particle has passed through. If one slit has a detector on it, then the wavefunction collapses due to that detection.


    In de Broglie–Bohm theory, the wavefunction is defined at both slits, but each particle has a well-defined trajectory that passes through exactly one of the slits. The final position of the particle on the detector screen and the slit through which the particle passes is determined by the initial position of the particle. Such initial position is not knowable or controllable by the experimenter, so there is an appearance of randomness in the pattern of detection. In Bohm's 1952 papers he used the wavefunction to construct a quantum potential that, when included in Newton's equations, gave the trajectories of the particles streaming through the two slits. In effect the wavefunction interferes with itself and guides the particles by the quantum potential in such a way that the particles avoid the regions in which the interference is destructive and are attracted to the regions in which the interference is constructive, resulting in the interference pattern on the detector screen.



    pilot wave theory is both determinate and local.

  • But then the state is not determined at the initial interaction which is needed as well from my claim of a down to earth explanation

    very non hokus pokus non faster then light explanation of these "entanglement" experiment. Really no need for anything mysterious.

  • I just read Russ's blog "Huygens Synchronicity Observed In Atom-Ecology And Cold Fusion"


    http://atom-ecology.russgeorge…-ecology-and-cold-fusion/


    This two reactor experiment is astonishing.


    This may be an example of the "mouse and cat" method employed by Rossi. This method is how one powered "mouse" reactor powers through entanglement "N" numbers of fueled but unpowered "cat" reactors.


    My explanation of this seeming transfer of power between reactors is through quantum entanglement of polaritons. As I have explained previously, the density of polaritons is the parameter that defines the condition when a Bose condensate of polaritons will form. This condensate is what converts gamma radiation into heat. The two reactors are most likely sitting on the threshold of the polariton condensation point. These two systems can transfer energy between them that polariton generation is sensitive to. One reactor passes energy to the other whereupon that reactor passes the polariton condensation point and heat is then produced from gammas.


    This heat producing rector then passes energy back to the gamma producing reactor which then moves its energy pumping level beyond the polariton condensation point. The oscillation in entangled energy transfer sets up a periodic transfer of polariton energy between reactors to drive heat production back and forth from the gamma stage to the heat stage.


    This quantum energy transfer between reactors is similar to what happens in in the transfer of mechanical energy in Newton's cradle.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_cradle


    Newtons_cradle_animation_book_2.gif


  • As far as I could tell, none of those links are claiming that Huygens synchronisation is caused by entanglement. The first one just uses Huygens clocks as an illustration for how quantum entanglement works, saying that "quantum systems synchronize in just the same way". The next two talks about entangled ions. Exciting as that may be, it's quite a big step to go from a pair of entangled ions to whole clock pendulums...

  • As far as I could tell, none of those links are claiming that Huygens synchronisation is caused by entanglement.


    Very good. But it just goes to show that if this topic interests you you have much more to learn, as I do. And if it doesn't then you don't have to read them.

  • Like hedgehogs lining up for dinner, 4 upgraded reactors undergoing calibration. On the wall above is the Lab Jack wifi data-logger (another upgrade) and 5 Geigers, (4 test, one lab background) though the pancake Geiger heads are not yet in place.



  • Bruce is almost right. The only difference is that we have better calibration, better power and temperature measurement, better calorimetry, better data-logging, better instrumentation and controls for everything. Apart from that, identical.

  • Bruce is almost right. The only difference is that we have better calibration, better power and temperature measurement, better calorimetry, better data-logging, better instrumentation and controls for everything. Apart from that, identical.

    And don't forget we have shared more meaningful real data than Rossi, tested and refuted more than a 'lion's' share of other incomprehensible hyperbole, and have been doing so in just a few short months of work. But who's counting.

  • I am looking forward for a results.


    I started preparation steps of the fuel in 99,9% D2O and LiOD.

    I will be experimenting with Nickel, Titanium and Palladium. All of them are well known for LENR activity.

    Loading should take 2 weeks.


    Then it will be heated to 200°C while measuring gamma, beta and neutrons while being covered by Ag/Cu foils.

  • [And it is difficult to judge how meaningful, or real, your data are.]


    It is real, as am I.

    It is difficult for me to judge because you have not yet been independently verified or replicated. I am sure it is real in the sense that the instruments are producing these numbers. But I have seen countless claims come and go that were based on real numbers, real instrument data, but were mistakes nonetheless. The fact that the gamma rays you report seem to be peaking at certain hours should give one pause.


    Others have not seen gamma rays from cold fusion. Not many, anyway. So on the face of it, it seems unlikely you are seeing them. Another possibility is that they are real but not caused by cold fusion. Ed Storms thinks that neutrons in cold fusion are caused by fracto-fusion and other conventional causes. Perhaps the gammas you are seeing have a similar conventional cause.