The Exotic Vacuum Object (EVO) as the cause of the vacuum reaction.

    Quote from Dr Richard*

    At long last........independent verification of Leif Holmlid's results on Rydberg Matter and ultradense hydrogen!

    Leif Holmlid believed that he was producing mesons when he irradiated Ultra dense hydrogen (UDH)with a low powered laser or UV light. But Sveinn Ólafsson found that no mesons were reacted. Sveinn did not know what particles were coming out of the UDH when light hit the UDH. Sveinn was setting up a particle identification line to identify the particle. This is when Magicsound observed the particle in Sveinn Ólafsson's cloud chamber. That particle was an EVO.


    https://disq.us/url?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lenr-forum.com%2Fattachment%2F17202-vega-1-jpg%2F%3AP4lCOc9ia_tQcXzt-hCBThNPVMg&cuid=2168707


    The spiraling path seen in the photo is the result of the monopole nature of the EVO. The EVO can be either a monopole or a dipole since the EVO is comprised of either right or left handed electrons or both.

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.


    Learn some practical quantum mechanics using video gaming.

    Quote from PhysicsForDummies

    The theory spouted by Axil the most is string theory, which is only supported by it's "mathematical beauty", and is incapable of making any testable predictions. It is capable of generating all kinds of fantastic nonsense in the typical Axil genre.

    False vacuum decay - Wikipedia
    en.wikipedia.org


    Vacuum decay is widely accepted as part of the science involving the Higgs mechanism. That would include particle physics, string theory, condensed matter physics, quantum mechanics, black hole research, the standard model, and cosmology. It is included as a current experimental research subject at CERN.


    See

    Higgs vacuum decay and implications for the

    Standard Model

    Katie Marie Marshall


    The existence of the Higgs boson was first proposed in 1964 { an excitation of the Higgs field that provides a mechanism by which other particles are granted mass[1]. Some time after this proposal, the subject of vacuum decay began to attract interest in the 1970s, with work by Sidney Coleman and others investigating the "fate of the false vacuum" [2], [3]. When considering the fate of our universe, these two topics become inextricably linked. If the Higgs field is metastable, then a spontaneous phase transition may result in, as Coleman put it, "the ultimate ecological catastrophe". This dramatic claim refers to the phenomenon of vacuum decay { if a field occupies a local minimum energy state, then there exists a non-zero probability of a spontaneous transition to a lower energy state.

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    She does not tell you to forget math at all....

    The theory of General relativity was developed in 1907 as a concept. Albert Einstein came to a key realization: special relativity could not be applied to gravity or to an object undergoing acceleration.


    Finding the correct mathematical expression of these ideas took Einstein several more years. In 1912, Einstein’s friend, mathematician Marcel Grossman, introduced him to the tensor analysis of Bernhard Riemann, Tullio Levi-Civita, and Gregorio Ricci-Curbastro, which allowed him to express the laws of physics in the same way in different coordinate systems. Three more years of wrong turns and hard work followed, but in November 1915 the work was complete.


    The way Albert Einstein did it was first came the concept, then came the math.

    Quote from axil

    The EVO was first observed by Ken Shoulders as a dense cluster of electrons numbering at 10e23. Kiril B. Chukanov also identified it as a electron cluster. Chukanov has even patented it.

    I studied Chukanov's patent. It goes like this: 1) start with a near vaccum. 2) excite the small amount of gas to a plasma and keep it excited. 3) observe clustering of a plasma as Ken Shoulder observed and documented for an EVO. 3) slowly add more gas and keep it excited. 4) observe the cluster grows. 5) observe that for an unknown reason the quantum macro-object can become unstable and explode. 6) claim with more money to replace the destroyed equipment one will have an infinite source of energy.


    I know of a third party investigator. A guy that investigates these things for a living and is paid by the power companies to find anything. The power companies want to be free from fossil fuel as much as any business entity. In the many tests done with Chukanov the result was no net power production.


    What force holds the negatively charged EVO or quantum macro-object together? Personally, I prefer the ideal of Takaaki Matsumoto that it's a form of electrogravity. Electrogravity would be based on the electromagnetic coupling being 42 orders of magnitude stronger than universal gravity. Matsumoto suggests that the transition from the physic we know to this electrogravity is like fermenting soybeans. Nattoh is the Japanese term for this degenerate structure, and he applies it to a cluster of atoms. So, in that respect, he is thinking like Chukanov.


    So what happens. The electrons modify nuclear structure. Some kind of SAM thing. Matsumoto proposes itons. SAM proposes substitution of a "nuclear" electron and a proton for a neutron. Matsumoto avoids this substitution by proposing the nucleons in the nucleus remain indistinguishable. Per the standard model the only difference between a neutron and proton in the nucleus is isospin which assignment has no physical significance. The iton is physical and would then take the assignment of isospin to a physical basis. Itons or rather a net of itons holds a nucleus together. Itons are strings. The string is a physical connection in the order electron to neutrino to positron. Then these strings attract each other to form the net over the nucleus. Remember this is the fermented structure not the native structure.


    Like many other LENR theories, Nattoh eliminates the miracles of cold fusion by having a multi-body reactant. So the fusion happens the energy is transferred to the itons? The net result looks like ball lightening that rolls along the surface of a copper plate cathode. It is pushed around by the evolving gas which gas results from the electrolysis of water above the cathode and between the cathode and anode. Cathode matter is delocalized or disintegrated and then re-localized or reintegrated as material in the ball lightening track. The matter is proposed to pass through a wormhole. The nuclear product is mostly carbon tubes or carbon films. Note there is no carbon is in the electrolysis system. Not the electrodes, not electrolyte solution.


    So Matsumoto wrote about electronuclear collapse. Electrogravity so strong that it causes an explosion like a supernova and produces "blackholes" wormholes and whiteholes. But there is much more. Matsumoto's greatest contribution was images from the radiation of LENR captured in film emulsions. The LENR not only is ball lightening, but it produces a wormhole, and it produces radiation. The radiation is explained as explosions (supernova?) and traces produced by Hawking radiation from blackholes.


    Here is an image an explosion (Hawking radiation). This is head on projection from an aligned blackhole. The white part of the image is the forbidden zone of the interference pattern. The blackparts are the radiation reaction with the film. The film interface is charged so it aligns the projection as either head on or sideways. A sideways image looks like a funnel. In this image the blackhole frees itself from the electric field before the blackhole has radiated away. The images where the blackhole causes a multiple exposure are multiple ring traces. It is like a stepwise movement of blackhole. In images where the blackhole is trapped for its entire lifetime, the head on image looks like a circular spot with a diffuse enclosure tiny dots.


    Quote from Drgenek

    5) observe that for an unknown reason the quantum macro-object can become unstable and explode.

    In the paper that coined the term “tachyon”, Gerald Feinberg studied Lorentz invariant quantum fields with imaginary mass. Any particle or field with an imaginary mass is a tachyon. Because the group velocity for such a field is superluminal, naively it appears that its excitations propagate faster than light. However, it was quickly understood that the superluminal group velocity does not correspond to the speed of propagation of any localized excitation (like a particle). Instead, the negative mass represents an instability to tachyon condensation, and all excitations of the field propagate subluminally and are consistent with causality. Despite having no faster-than-light propagation, such fields are referred to simply as “tachyons” in many sources. Imaginary mass is an important key to the reaction because it produces instability. If the condensate were stable, the tachyon would grow without limit and eventually destroy the universe.

    Quote from Drgenek

    I know of a third party investigator. A guy that investigates these things for a living and is paid by the power companies to find anything. The power companies want to be free from fossil fuel as much as any business entity. In the many tests done with Chukanov the result was no net power production.

    While active, the EVO does not produce any power.

    The EVO does not produce energy when it processes matter because it is in a state of superposition since it is coherent. This state of superposition is inherited from the superconductor based optical cavity in which the EVO has formed. This ability to destroy matter is an obstacle to reactor development because the EVO when active will eat the reactor as seen in the quote below...

    Quote from Drgenek

    6) claim with more money to replace the destroyed equipment one will have an infinite source of energy.


    Energy is only released when the EVO terminates otherwise, no energy is produced. Such quantum behavior makes reactor testing and research problematic and confusing. The reactor design must pulse the EVO creation/destruction cycle at high frequency to maximize energy production and minimize transmutation.


    Quote from Drgenek

    What force holds the negatively charged EVO or quantum macro-object together?

    The field of nanoplasmonics provides the answer. An optical cavity is a small voluum that confines one or more electrons and one or more photons together in a small place so that these particles can reach the same energy level. When this happens, the photons and the electrons will become entangled to form polaritons.


    Here is an article that contains a video that explains this process...


    What on earth is a polariton? - Mapping Ignorance
    When I first started writing about condensed matter science I found some difficulties with a few purely physical concepts, being myself a chemist by education.…
    mappingignorance.org



    The reaction is a result of a structure called the Exotic Vacuum Object (EVO) which can be produced in condensed matter systems as a offshoot of superconductivity called the Higgs mode which is currently being explored by science.

    Quote from Drgenek

    So what happens. The electrons modify nuclear structure. Some kind of SAM thing. Matsumoto proposes itons. SAM proposes substitution of a "nuclear" electron and a proton for a neutron. Matsumoto avoids this substitution by proposing the nucleons in the nucleus remain indistinguishable. Per the standard model the only difference between a neutron and proton in the nucleus is isospin which assignment has no physical significance. The iton is physical and would then take the assignment of isospin to a physical basis. Itons or rather a net of itons holds a nucleus together. Itons are strings. The string is a physical connection in the order electron to neutrino to positron. Then these strings attract each other to form the net over the nucleus. Remember this is the fermented structure not the native structure.


    In simple terms, a condensed matter system can create a bubble of false vacuum at a higher vacuum potential than the Higgs field that acts as (is) another universe where the laws of nature are those that existed in the first microseconds after the big bang when the electroweak force was still in place. This microbubble of modified primordial spacetime can stabilize radioactive isotopes via the unified electroweak force. Based on the new laws in place in this micro bubble universe, the EVO can produce transmutation of elements by rearranging the matter it encounters at a quark level.

    Quote from Drgenek

    So Matsumoto wrote about electronuclear collapse. Electrogravity so strong that it causes an explosion like a supernova and produces "blackholes" wormholes and whiteholes. But there is much more. Matsumoto's greatest contribution was images from the radiation of LENR captured in film emulsions. The LENR not only is ball lightening, but it produces a wormhole, and it produces radiation. The radiation is explained as explosions (supernova?) and traces produced by Hawking radiation from blackholes.

    According to Ed Witten's description of a bubble of nothing (EVO) there exists a naked singularity at the center of the EVO. I beleive that this singularity is the place where the crenulated hollow iron and carbon ball is formed that is present in all LENR reactions producing transmutation.


    https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F35fdf076-2720-4ce3-b215-71535f1b8c1b_1200x512.png


    The explosion seen when an EVO explodes is called a Bosenova. It is under study by science and this research can be found in about 20 references in the preprint server.


    Here is the WIKI of Bosenova

    Bosenova - Wikipedia


    A bosenova or bose supernova is a very small, supernova-like explosion, which can be induced in a Bose–Einstein condensate by changing the external magnetic field, so that the "self-scattering" ...


    In an EVO, a bosenova is caused by instability in the imaginary mass tachyon condensate formed in the optical cavity in a superconductor.

    Quote from Drgenek

    Here is an image an explosion (Hawking radiation). This is head on projection from an aligned blackhole. The white part of the image is the forbidden zone of the interference pattern. The blackparts are the radiation reaction with the film. The film interface is charged so it aligns the projection as either head on or sideways. A sideways image looks like a funnel. In this image the blackhole frees itself from the electric field before the blackhole has radiated away. The images where the blackhole causes a multiple exposure are multiple ring traces. It is like a stepwise movement of blackhole. In images where the blackhole is trapped for its entire lifetime, the head on image looks like a circular spot with a diffuse enclosure tiny dots.

    The flowing picture is an EVO which has formed a supersolid lattice of polaritons in the shape of hexagons


    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f319759a8c6cd7f20278c45cbeaaacc22c927e7f24e4d1c89ddfedc9458a3436.gif

    The trouble with Electron Microscopes is that you can find all kinds of things in the most mundane specimens, some of them very mysterious in shape or origin. . The trick is being able to tell the difference between real phenomena and artifactual ones.

    Quote from Alan Smith

    The trouble with Electron Microscopes is that you can find all kinds of things in the most mundane specimens, some of them very mysterious in shape or origin. . The trick is being able to tell the difference between real phenomena and artifactual ones.

    Observations are the conduit through which the ‘tribunal of experience’ delivers its verdicts on scientific hypotheses and theories. Observations are applied to a model of the system under test. The methods of observation must be judged as real phenomena and artifactual ones based on the compatibility of such methods of investigation in arguing for the credibility of the final empirical results and their appropriate interpretation and use.


    The observations in exploring the theory and model that LENR is a nuclear process of fusion is not appropriate for the use of and electron microscope whose results are therefore artefactual to exploring the theory and the model that describes such a system. But an electron microscope is appropriate in the exploration of a model and a theory of a microbubble based cause of transmutation and dissolution of matter on the micro level.


    More generally, expectations and assumptions engendered by the model and the theory define the appropriateness of the methods employed in the observations of that theory and model. If the assumptions associated with the model and theory are invalid, then the observations of that theory and model will produce artifactual results This misapplied method of observation and its generation of counterfactual results has been true as applied to the theory of cold fusion that has been pursued for over 30 years. This invalid model has led to a dead end in the progress of the development of the cold fusion model as applied to third party observations in science and rejection of the theory by science in general.

    “

    The advocates of the empiricist consensus assumed either the H-D account of justification, or possibly the Popperian view of falsification. Both of these accounts of why we are justified in believing general statements ("laws" or "theories") hold that each proposed general hypothesis has to meet the "test" of observational evidence, or in other words what we "test" by the scientific method are hypotheses one by one. The philosophical thesis known as "holism" presents a serious challenge to this apparently innocent assumption.

    Quote
    "Holism," is the view that what is in fact "tested" by observational evidence (if anything is) are not individual laws or theories, but rather large constellations of belief which include not only the one "theory" that is allegedly undergoing empirical "testing" but also a whole array of "auxiliary hypotheses" which are more or less tacitly taken for granted.

    This point was first made by the non-consensus French philosopher/historian of science, Pierre Duhem. Later the American pragmatist Willard van Orman Quine made effectively the same point, but extended the set of "auxiliary hypotheses" to include not only those statements which the positivists had considered "synthetic" but also even those once regarded as "analytic," i.e. true by definition. Quine's point was that faced with "recalcitrant evidence" (observations which do not square with our expectations), there is always the option of altering meanings, or even logical laws, to save a cherished hypothesis from potential refutation. Thus in famous phrases Quine argues that our whole system of scientific claims, our "web of belief," faces the "tribunal of experience" only as a "collective body" not as individual hypotheses.


    Quote
    Thus the "Quine-Duhem thesis" has come to be the name for the (presumably true) view that what is actually required for a test is not merely one hypothesis, but the conjunction of that hypothesis with a wide variety of often tacit auxiliaryhypotheses

    The occurrence of an observation which refutes a prediction derived from the conjunction of the theory under test with all the necessary auxiliaries only shows that at least some one member of that conjunction is false, not that the false assumption is necessarily the theory under test. Whether the false prediction resulted from the falsity of the tested hypothesis or the falsity of some other one or more of the auxiliary assumptions is not known. Thus, according to the Quine-Duhem thesis, by suitable modification or buttressing of the proper auxiliary hypotheses, any theory can always be "saved" from potential refutation. Furthermore, it is often claimed that historical research shows that scientists do frequently do precisely this. Hence it would seem that, contra Popper, theories cannot be definitively refuted any more than they can be confirmed. “



    Holism

    Quote from axil

    Observations are the conduit through which the ‘tribunal of experience’ delivers its verdicts on scientific hypotheses and theories. Observations are applied to a model of the system under test. The methods of observation must be judged as real phenomena and artifactual ones based on the compatibility of such methods of investigation in arguing for the credibility of the final empirical results and their appropriate interpretation and use.

    Matsumoto premise is that the SEM image looks like numerous images in found in film emulsions. The emulsion images are proposed as a result of Hawking radiation from the dissolution of mass by extreme gravity. (blackholes, wormholes and whiteholes) These extreme gravitational objects (EGO) are not the ball lightening that electric arc produces (EVO) but are ejected from the EVOs. The EGO radiate to create the images in the emulsion and can create similar images in metal.


    As the EGO radiates it magnifies the source. The net image which I found from Matsumoto and which you miss identified and and which you failed to properly attribute to Matsumoto, has an OC description. Matsumoto identifies as itonic net around a cluster of nucleons. That cluster of nucleons is disintegrating under what Matsumoto call electronuclear collapse. I calculate about a billion-fold magnification by the electronuclear collapse as compared to the scale on the SEM image.

    Quote from Drgenek

    The white part of the image is the forbidden zone of the interference pattern. The blackparts are the radiation reaction with the film. The film interface is charged so it aligns the projection as either head on or sideways. A sideways image looks like a funnel. In this image the blackhole frees itself from the electric field before the blackhole has radiated away. The images where the blackhole causes a multiple exposure are multiple ring traces. It is like a stepwise movement of blackhole. In images where the blackhole is trapped for its entire lifetime, the head on image looks like a circular spot with a diffuse enclosure tiny dots.

    Let me illustrate. Here is sideway image. It is cone. The cone has a point. Given the reaction of the film with Hawking radiation then the point of cone is the location of the extreme gravitational object (EGO).




    The smaller the blackhole, the faster the Hawking radiation causes its mass to disintegrate, and the faster it disappears. As one sees from the cone images, Hawking radiation escapes gravity perpendicular to force of gravity and tangent an escape orbit. This projection creates a dark ring in the head on projection. The ring projection is illustrated in the next image. The image shows a multi-exposure or the ring image of the EGO and apparent movement of EGO which creates the projected image in the head on orientation.





    Note that the moving ring image is composed of tiny black dots. One supposes that each dot is due to a reaction of film emulsion with a particle of Hawking radiation.


    The next image is labeled blackhole. Since the Hawking radiation creates a ring image, then the multi-exposure that filled in circle implies that the EGO remains stuck by the electric field of the film interface for the entire lifetime of the EGO and remain immobilized in the head on orientation.




    It is very reasonable to develop the math to describe what going in in terms of electronuclear gravity. I have done just that elsewhere in this forum based on EVOs and Ed Storms Amazing Results.

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.