Atom-Ecology

  • MRI effects deal with nuclear spin-flip... The energies are in the micro/milli eV region. They certainly have almost no influence on LENR...


    In LENR e.g. a quark wave may make a "spin"-flip what is about 15keV.. just to give a relation.

    Plainly speaking if you know, what produces the magnetism that actions the LENR reaction, where does that magnetism, comes from, and how does that magnetism enter the nucleus?

  • So Androcles is no more. Projects always have to have a name, so everyone is on the same page when discussing. So what do you want to call it Russ? Alan refers to Al>H as his Hydrogen System, which is a descriptive name. Whatever you guys decide is fine of course.

    Duh, how many times does one have to make specific mention of the descriptive name 'atom-ecology' to establish that is the name under which I pursue my work. This is appropos as it offers a very conventional term, 'ecology', for a very complex system wherein a vast number of different elements and isotopes, aka atoms, interact like they are part of Nature. Oh yeah they are part of Nature. Such complex systems in Nature are conventionally termed 'ecosystems.' These atom interactions occur quite naturally at all ambient temperatures found in Nature in a variety of physical states, aka solids, liquids, gases, plasmas, and magnetic miasmas. This means that the appropriate metaphore for studying such reactions is as a careful, patient, conservative 'naturalist' rather than a bombastic egocentric shirty follower of dogma. As Krishna Murti advised, 'one does not catch the unknown in a net of the known.' The most important first step is observation and that sometimes leads one to invent the new ideas, methods, and tools to facilitate better observation/understanding. I believe the 'atom-ecology' method is doing pretty well having invented and proven one new tool that allows us to catch and characterize here-to-fore uncatchable cosmic/solar rays. That same tool allows us to also produced and observe all manner of atom interactions many of which have enormous potential to deliver a useful energy harvest. So yes there has been and is a 'name' for this venue of study and that name is 'atom-ecology.' Oops I almost forgot, names are important ;)

  • If solar emissions are in some way correlated with heat or gamma emissions from LENR experiments, then it could happen that some experiments might only work at certain times of the day, year or even solar cycle.

    I think that is possible, but fuel refinement is the key to making all-weather cold fusion possible and practical.

  • Hello Jürg,


    Thank you for sharing your exciting discoveries. This is real scientific method : Experiments feeds the theories which give hints for experiment improvements. The glimpse for a a full LENR control system is now reachable. You and Russ and the team behind are the deep miners for a brave new world.


    You have explained very well your understanding with deuterium. The resonance of the neutron at about 78KeV is the key. The proton of the deuterium is sucking the small quanta of magnetic energy. Deuterium LENR seems to be subtle and gentle.


    For the protium (without any neutron) do you have already any hints of what we can see on a gamma spectrum?


    Arnaud


  • Comment from a skeptic.


    Beware apophenia and pareidolia!


    Both are natural, when dealing with unexplained experimental results and trying to understand them.


    Both, anyone who has done this a lot knows, tend to lead one in the wrong direction.


    So how do you tell when a complex line of rationalisations is on the right track and when not?


    It is impossible to be sure. Two helpful indicators:

    (1) don't believe anything (positive or negative) too strongly while things remain unexplained. Whatever you think you ruled out a long time ago may turn out to be the thing that did unexpectedly happen, and will alter your whole mindset.

    (2) if your current pet explanation gets more complex as you proceed to test it, it is likely a dead end, and certainly a bad way to understand what is going on.


    By these criteria the "lovely gammas" W hypothesis looks increasingly unlikely to me as its experimental effects get less definite and more complex. That negative factor (over-complex fit to experiment) is now large.


    As a skeptic, for various reasons, I did not much like it initially. Others could have had a much higher estimate of it at that time. Now, as the "lovely gamma" behaviour reveals itself as weirder and weirder, when fitted to the W hypothesis, the W hypothesis looks less likely than it did a few pages back; independent of initial estimates.


    In fact, weird "lovely gammas" make it more likely that this is some unexpected and not understood artifact (again this is independent of initial estimate of this probability, unless you have an aphysical certainty unswayed by additional evidence).


    What would help a LENR theory? Some simple, deterministic, controllable, and unexplainable (except by LENR) aspect of the "lovely gammas".


    I hope those doing the work find this.

  • Duh, how many times does one have to make specific mention of the descriptive name 'atom-ecology' to establish that is the name under which I pursue my work. This is appropos as it offers a very conventional term, 'ecology', for a very complex system wherein a vast number of different elements and isotopes, aka atoms, interact like they are part of Nature. Oh yeah they are part of Nature. Such complex systems in Nature are conventionally termed 'ecosystems.' These atom interactions occur quite naturally at all ambient temperatures found in Nature in a variety of physical states, aka solids, liquids, gases, plasmas, and magnetic miasmas. This means that the appropriate metaphore for studying such reactions is as a careful, patient, conservative 'naturalist' rather than a bombastic egocentric shirty follower of dogma. As Krishna Murti advised, 'one does not catch the unknown in a net of the known.' The most important first step is observation and that sometimes leads one to invent the new ideas, methods, and tools to facilitate better observation/understanding. I believe the 'atom-ecology' method is doing pretty well having invented and proven one new tool that allows us to catch and characterize here-to-fore uncatchable cosmic/solar rays. That same tool allows us to also produced and observe all manner of atom interactions many of which have enormous potential to deliver a useful energy harvest. So yes there has been and is a 'name' for this venue of study and that name is 'atom-ecology.' Oops I almost forgot, names are important ;)


    Russ,


    Yes, you have explained that before. Got you, appreciate it, and thanks for the "duh" BTW. What I was thinking was a specific name for this phase of your research. You assigned the name Androcles for the Lion experiments, so I thought you would distinguish this from it, and those before Essex, with a new name. After all, each of the new reactors has a designated name (Dewey etc.), so by extension I thought it made sense to... oh never mind. Guess we will just call whatever you do *AE* as you suggest. Fine by me.


    Just a side note: the one good thing Rossi did was to clearly differentiate each new reactor in development from the others, by assigning each a new name; i.e. Ecat LT, HotCat, 6 cylinder, QX, and now SK, Makes for an easier discussion, and eliminates confusion. On that note, Swartz had his Nanor, and Phasor. Brillouin their Hot Tube, and LT. Mills has his MHD, and Thermal Sun Cells.

  • By these criteria the "lovely gammas" W hypothesis looks increasingly unlikely to me as its experimental effects get less definite and more complex. That negative factor (over-complex fit to experiment) is now large.


    As a skeptic, for various reasons, I did not much like it initially. Others could have had a much higher estimate of it at that time. Now, as the "lovely gamma" behaviour reveals itself as weirder and weirder, when fitted to the W hypothesis, the W hypothesis looks less likely than it did a few pages back; independent of initial estimates.


    I very well understand that "lovely gammas" are not a physical description and I would never use such a term in a paper. Thus it is rational that simple bloggers with no theoretical background get confused by wild terms...


    The history of the "lovely gammas" is very simple: A well running experiment with a varying high COP turned mad during the diurnal phase and emitted about 100 times background gammas.


    The suspect particle causing the effect is most likely a relativistic positronium. The dual flux nature of this particle makes it ideal for a 4D symmetric stimulation/coupling to an existing strong LENR field.


    Our daily business, independent of external radiation, is LENR with excess heat in the range of 1-2 watts from 1g of fuel. This amount is quite handsome and easy to measure in a well insulated system. The gammas are always present and we also had one fuel that started gamma emission without any heating!


    If the new model is right then the delta E of a "deep magnetic state" and normal deuterium ground state is close to nothing. The only problem is to bring the electron down into a 4D magnetic orbit what needs a little bit more than just super-wave stimulation. Some call the acting agent catalyst as there is a kind potential barrier. But as Holmlid said: Turning on the lab light was sometimes enough.


    The nice thing about this fact is that LENR is everywhere and it's the normal way nature works. This is the worst what could happen to standard fantasy physics and ITER.

  • that LENR is everywhere and it's the normal way nature works.

    Thanks Juerg for the info that there is a small activation energy.

    When writing on the fly the truth is simplified.

    'Everywhere' probably you mean 'in many places'?


    Under the right conditions( eg right composition,right heat,right magnetism,right orientation LENR(AE) can occur..in nature

    just as LIFE occurs in nature under the right conditions


    I can see the potential for LENR(AE) where D2 and H2 are in high concentrations in the presence of Li, Ni, Fe.. other metals

    This will probably mean anoxic conditions because of course the D2,H2 become water otherwise

    -the sun chromosphere- the Earth mantle-

    LIFE that we are ......is not anoxic..so mostly LENR(AE) and our LIFE don't cohabit


    Of course... given the 'low activation'energy it may be possible for some anaerobic bacteria to have enzymatic systems

    that carry out LENR(AE)..


    The skeptic in me will say "if Its everywhere then why I can't see it anywhere? "Skeptics are everywhere that our LIFE is.

  • Thanks Juerg for the info that there is a small activation energy.


    The delta is small! But there is a structural barrier E-pot --> E rot (not quite a simple potential well) .


    This is also the reason why you will (almost) never see LENR by just banging a nucleus with a particle. The electron must go to a lower potential and simultaneously 4D magnetic energy must be added in a symmetric fashion. This energy will compensate for the flux loss given by the proton magnetic mass formula.


    In Lipinskis case banging with protons works because the induced sheer wave coupling is symmetric.


    Very strong fields could be a more clever method to induce/support the symmetric coupling.

  • there is a structural barrier E-pot --> E rot (not quite a simple potential well) .


    Perhaps Vysotskiis bacteria know that already.. but then there are billions of them


    And the bacteria may know more than Vysotskii


    "

    These states can be automatically formed in many places of the biological system - during
    DNA replication, on the surface of membranes, at cell division, in mitochondria, etc.
    The amplitude of these fluctuations can exceed the average (thermal) energy by many
    orders of magnitude and reach tens and hundreds of kev, which is sufficient for effective
    nuclear fusion. It is very important that in such processes, radioactive isotopes can never
    be forme
    d" Vysotskii-2018

    https://coldfusionnow.org/wp-c…_Vysottski_transcript.pdf

  • Can you keep you presumptive hubris in check THHnewtral?


    That negative factor (over-complex fit to experiment) is may be now large.

    But I wouldn't have a clue without a statistical analysis of the thousands of data


    Bocjin: I think you've misunderstood my point, which is basically an application of Occam's Razor to hypotheses.


    Of course it is really difficult to quantify how large - you'd need a complete math description of the hypotheses space to do that, but it is large. I don't know if you've spent much of your life looking at weird unexplained results and trying to fit them to possible reasons? If you had you could abstract from that experience to make this point. Again and again the real solution ends up being something quite simple - at least compared with the guesses when it is not understood.

  • So Okham's Razor is an axiom of physics ??? or philosophy?


    In statistical analyses numerical p-values confidence intervals are used to shave with


    Okham's Razor is not sharp enough for experimental science... but it's waffly enough forinternet pontification


    It is an approximation of what you get from Bayesian inference. In realistic cases quantifying BI is impossible, but you can still usefully use it in the same way as OR is usefully used, to say that one thing is << another.


    https://bayes.wustl.edu/etj/prob/book.pdf

  • It is an approximation of what you get from Bayesian inference.


    Bayesian..Yes ,,but NO 'Ockham Razor approximation' in LHC Stats 101. ..


    https://indico.cern.ch/event/3…337/CERN_ATL_Prosper3.pdf


    Your conclusion.....about Wyttenbach et al's gamma emission data


    "That negative factor (over-complex fit to experiment) is now large"



    is not Bayesian ,or Occamian or even Huxleyian....afaik.

    because it is based on less than 1 % of the data.


    Please read over what you write on the fly...



  • Similar great progress is being made simultaneoulsy on the other side of the lab bench on the 'Hydrogen Mine' front that converts aluminium scrap to hydrogen.


    Russ,


    Thank you for mentioning the Hydrogen Mine. I have not paid enough attention to it as I should have. For those uninformed, I can tell you, it has attracted much attention also. I just have to slap my head for missing all the signals. Some of those visitors to the dairy farm, are there to see it alone, and not the Atom Ecology. Funding is coming, and investors are knocking at the door.


    I do not know what it is about dairy farms in the English countryside, but apparently they are good for innovation.

  • Duh, how many times does one have to make specific mention of the descriptive name 'atom-ecology' to establish that is the name under which I pursue my work. This is appropos as it offers a very conventional term, 'ecology', for a very complex system wherein a vast number of different elements and isotopes, aka atoms, interact like they are part of Nature. Oh yeah they are part of Nature. Such complex systems in Nature are conventionally termed 'ecosystems.' These atom interactions occur quite naturally at all ambient temperatures found in Nature in a variety of physical states, aka solids, liquids, gases, plasmas, and magnetic miasmas. This means that the appropriate metaphore for studying such reactions is as a careful, patient, conservative 'naturalist' rather than a bombastic egocentric shirty follower of dogma. As Krishna Murti advised, 'one does not catch the unknown in a net of the known.' The most important first step is observation and that sometimes leads one to invent the new ideas, methods, and tools to facilitate better observation/understanding. I believe the 'atom-ecology' method is doing pretty well having invented and proven one new tool that allows us to catch and characterize here-to-fore uncatchable cosmic/solar rays. That same tool allows us to also produced and observe all manner of atom interactions many of which have enormous potential to deliver a useful energy harvest. So yes there has been and is a 'name' for this venue of study and that name is 'atom-ecology.' Oops I almost forgot, names are important ;)



    I have come to understand that the particle physicists have missed the boat when it comes to their methods of discovering new particles. New particles will come from 'atom-ecology' where a variety of physical states will combine and express an independent existence in a self organized compilation of matter and energy capable of an independent existence and with weird and unexpected properties.


    These new ideas will answer the riddles that are now confounding professional science such as dark energy and matter, and Russ may have already discovered this new particle type since it seems to be sensitive to here-to-fore uncatchable cosmic/solar rays.

  • I have come to understand that the particle physicists have missed the boat when it comes to their methods of discovering new particles. New particles will come from 'atom-ecology' where a variety of physical states will combine and express an independent existence in a self organized compilation of matter and energy capable of an independent existence and with weird and unexpected properties.


    These new ideas will answer the riddles that are now confounding professional science such as dark energy and matter, and Russ may have already discovered this new particle type since it seems to be sensitive to here-to-fore uncatchable cosmic/solar rays.

    Indeed traditional physics is a reductionista sort of mentality, it is dedicated to the ever more precise measure of things that are known, a fine job for technicians that are dutifully issued the fancy stickers their daddies buy them every year from kindergarten to post-graduate school. Real science and discovery comes from work on the frontiers of the vast wilderness where one must guess wrong many times for every correct guess/observation. The very nature of nature is that it is complexity upon complexity so imagining nature will conform to pre-ordained ideas is sheer folly. Perhaps after another millenia or two of observations we humans might begin to have some semblence of what the atom-ecology really looks and behaves like. In the meantime there are plenty of good recipes to be tried and tested, of which some are already proving to be particularily delightful.

  • I like the Atom Ecology route.


    For those having trouble with it I think here is a simple an example.


    Think of an instrument with 1 string. It resonates only at a certain fundemental with certain harmonics. Reductionist thinking tries to break down science like this by choosing a set of strings that resonate closely to their observations. These models are useful can enable a degree of engineering based on known principles but in the end they are just models.


    Nature is a more complex music than these models alone and exploiting it requires a different approach altogether. By taking a harp with hundreds of thousands of strings at least some strings will vibrate at fundementals and harmonics with a resonance. And many of those different strings will resonate together.


    I see Russ approach as a bit like this. Once known it may then be possible to select and modify the strings in the “harp” to optimize it resonance.


    Looking from out side This concept to me also seems to apply in someway to the Norman Cook Rossi paper which was looking at nucleon resonanceces in atomic Nuclei where he was considering a kind of inverted Mossbauer effect resonating different but similar band gaps for different nuclei.


    I think Russ is thinking in a much broader way than just resonances. And is perhaps looking at and for all kinds stimulation in an ecosystem even unknown or unexpected ones.


    But I think that this concept shows how it can reveal something as an ecology of states rather than a reduced set.


    I think it’s a good approach and a perfect pairing with Alan Smith experience to comb trough what it shows up.

  • I see Russ approach as a bit like this. Once known it may then be possible to select and modify the strings in the “harp” to optimize it resonance.


    In LENR energy is stored - transported by magnetic gamma states. Crucial things are the nature of the different states like short/long living/"inverting field". This is not just based on the theory it is also what we measure!

    The key will be to find a set of elements that optimally matches to all conditions above (and some more...).