Dark matter’s shadowy effect on Earth: possible link of dark matter, LENR and global warming?

    Quote from Alan Smith

    I'm not a believer in the Dark Matter fudge factor, and more importantly neither is our associate Dr. Mike McCullough. See his paper here : - http://www.m-hikari.com/astp/a…20/p/gineASTP1-4-2020.pdf. Mike also has a very readable blog at :- http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.com/


    I see little reason at the moment however to doubt the ubiquity of UDH/UDD throughout the universe, in space and in some form within solid matter. It seems entirely possible that this condensed material, was perhaps created at the instant of the big bang or is maybe formed within and ejected from dying stars. After all, almost everything else in the universe has been made by stars. It does have a possible role in cold fusion, and - here's an outrageous hypothesis for you- perhaps in the form of 'natural cold fusion' it made all the heaviest elements. To assume that cold fusion/LENR only happens when scientists do it to is ridiculous - a natural phenomenon will occur naturally, whenever and wherever the local environment allows it to.


    To make things clearer, in the way I described, this condensed form of hydrogen would (at least in some state) essentially be akin to the luminiferous aether proposed at the end of the 19th century and for which evidence was not found at the time. This could possibly mean rolling back physics at least 100 years, invalidating much of quantum mechanics, of what is known about electromagnetism, the vacuum and so on. So it would not be simply a fudge factor, but a fundamental model change of how most known physical phenomena operate.


    Of course this is only a pie-in-the-sky idea, or if you wish, shower thought. One cannot simply reject most of 20th century physics, although some have tried to.

    Quote

    I'm not a believer in the Dark Matter fudge factor, and more importantly neither is our associate Dr. Mike McCullogh


    Dr. McCullogh is very enthusiastic about development and pushing his theory, which he still renames (MiHsC, QI..) - but I perceive him as rather problematic. A quick search in literature reveals, he just plagiarizes Dr. Milgroom formula a=H*c, which he proposed for explanation rotational curves of galaxies in 1983 already. Milgrom also recognized the role of Unruh radiation, Hubble radius and Rindler horizon in explanation of this formula, but he himself (correctly) abandoned it, because Unruh radiation is luminal and it cannot by applied for phenomena at cosmologic distance.


    McCullogh also systematically denies, that Milgrom's formula has an explanation in Milgrom's MOND theory, which is not indeed correct, and many independent derivations of this formulas already exist (1, 2, 3,...). If we consider that Universe expands, we must realize that this expansion will slow-down gravity spreading and it will act like weak deceleration, which is of the same order like Milgrom's acceleration, so that it can be derived even from commonly accepted L-CDM model. Milgrom also correctly recognized, that this deceleration is local and it has origin in vacuum fluctuations (see for example Mordehai Milgrom The Modified Dynamics as a Vacuum Effect ).


    What McCulloch is currently working on is sorta epicycle model of dark matter based on inversed perspective, which still gives correct numbers in certain range, but it has unphysical explanation. In dense aether model the dark matter isn't effect of matter at the center of dark matter - but massive objects which surround this center. From this reason, both Milgrom's both McCulloch's theories fail for explanations of dark matter distributions, which violate spherical symmetry (dark matter filaments, Bullet cluster), or galaxies with anomalously high (Arps quasars) or anomalously low density of dark matter, because in their theories dark matter distribution is always well defined function of central matter distribution. These theories thus work best in explanation of rotational curves of galaxies where gravity is involved and in these cases they work well (the predictions of Milgrom and McCulloch's theories differ only by small factor).


    But anyway, it doesn't matter which dark matter theory one believes, if we admit that it can have influence for speed of nuclear reactions and generation of geothermal heat. And for understanding of this influence one should understand nature of dark better than with regression formulas of its distribution.

    The link of global warming to LENR is as old, as LENR research actually. Dr. J. Marvin Herndon proposed similar theory in 1992 already. He was indeed ridiculed and ignored with mainstream science for it. Note that the cold fusion research has started with Dr. Steven's Jones observations of hellium-3 content around volcanoes and hydrothermal vents. Then there is tritium leaking from underground where excess of heat is also generated - see for example Helium-3 Leaking from Earth in Southern California - and these observations coincide with recent trend of global warming. In this connection Dr. Palmer suggested that rock, lava, or crystals in the Earth might help to catalyze the fusion reaction. Later research indicated, that both neutrinos, both high frequency electric magnetic fields could catalyze the low energy nuclear reactions by itself. See for example What Keeps the Earth Cooking? Radioactive decay is key ingredient behind Earth's heat and links herein - and you'll see the geothermal theory of global warming from quite different perspective. Just the potassium generates as much heat during its decay as the incoming energy from Sun and there is lotta potassium in soil and marine water and just the slight increase of the speed of its radioactive decay (which is quite slow) would affect the thermal balance of Earth crust significantly. For example climate change of catastrophic 2012 movie has been initiated by "bewildered" neutrinos, which "melted" the Earth crust. Not quite accidentally its plot has been labeled as the most "unscientific movie ever" both by MIT both NASA, the agenda of which is based on anthropogenic global warming.

    So Holmlid's KFeO2 UDH catalyst probably resides within the Earth's core? - makes sense if a Fe-K alloy is formed there:


    Kanani Lee, who recently earned her Ph.D. from UC Berkeley, and UC Berkeley professor of earth and planetary science Raymond Jeanloz have discovered a possible answer. They've shown that at the high pressures and temperatures in the Earth's interior, potassium can form an alloy with iron never before observed. During the planet's formation, this potassium-iron alloy could have sunk to the core, depleting potassium in the overlying mantle and crust and providing a radioactive potassium heat source in addition to that supplied by uranium and thorium in the core.


    So if UDH is catalysed from H released from hydrides, maybe the missing 50 % heat unaccounted for by fission is due to fusion reactions (possibly stimulated by neutrinos/antineutrinos)?:)

    Furthermore:


    The paper was published in March 1986, and on March 12, 1986 many of the concepts in the paper were described by Dr. Jones at a Colloquium of the BYU Physics Department. BYU Physics Professor Paul Palmer was present and associated these ideas with geological data on heat and helium-3 which are correlated in volcanoes and other thermal regions of the earth. Both heat and helium-3 are released in fusion reactions (proton-deuteron and deuteron-deuteron reactions). Dr. Palmer suggested that rock, lava, or crystals in the earth might help to catalyze the fusion reaction. This creative leap is recorded in Dr. Palmer's logbook, dated March 13, 1986 in some detail (copies available on request to BYU Physics Department).


    Rock, lava or crystals containing KFeO2 maybe?

    Quote from Dr Richard

    Furthermore:


    The paper was published in March 1986, and on March 12, 1986 many of the concepts in the paper were described by Dr. Jones at a Colloquium of the BYU Physics Department. BYU Physics Professor Paul Palmer was present and associated these ideas with geological data on heat and helium-3 which are correlated in volcanoes and other thermal regions of the earth. Both heat and helium-3 are released in fusion reactions (proton-deuteron and deuteron-deuteron reactions). Dr. Palmer suggested that rock, lava, or crystals in the earth might help to catalyze the fusion reaction. This creative leap is recorded in Dr. Palmer's logbook, dated March 13, 1986 in some detail (copies available on request to BYU Physics Department).


    Rock, lava or crystals containing KFeO2 maybe?


    In WO 2018/204533 which is PCT US2018/030723 the the cold fusion mechanism which yields nitrogen from deuterium also likely produces tritium. That is the catalyst causes photodisintegration of deuterium with obligate coupling of the neutron to absorption to another deuterium. Since this is chemistry not plasma physics, the reactants are deuterium molecules. A leaving group is involved, so the proton produced obligately couples to one of the deuteriums in the other molecule to produce H-D. The tritium that is produced is not detected because of accelerated radioactive decay caused by w-waves. So the expected product is Helium-3.


    We all know that for a red giant the fusion cascade stop at Helium-3. But in magma (which co-incidentally has temperature like that of the surface of the sun), the rock also presents oxygen. I remind you that the equivalent of hydrogen to hydrogen fusion occurs readily in electric arc in water, so as with that case, the presence of a hydrogen containing reactant and oxygen with hot magma is expected to lead to chain of reactions which yield Nitrogen and Helium-3 with traces of Tritium. But the reaction does stop there because unlike in a red giant, the oxygen reactant greatly boost the w-wave density in the catalyst which then can lead to shielding sufficient for the fusion sequence to proceed beyond the red giant stage. So one can expect production of helium 4 and nitrogen. I haven't been able to get funds to prove this supposition. But, I offer the following from Wikipedia article "Helium production in the United States", "The Four Corners area of the southwest US has a number of gas fields containing 5 to 10 percent helium and large percentages of nitrogen, with little or no hydrocarbons. The fields are associated with igneous intrusions." My supposition then is that an igneous intrusion into a natural gas field can by "cold" fusion produces gas deposit like the Helium rich deposits in the southwest US.


    Doesn't that make more sense that current theory that helium deposits results from alpha decay or radioactive isotopes?

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.