Ed Storms Pre-print on Cold Fusion, Materials and Gaps. Comments Please!

Agree with RB

Quote

Quote from RobertBryant The actual article is about NUCLEATION.. not nuclear transmutation
Axil salad is confused and confusing.

On the contrary, the article is about the discovery of False Vacuum Decay in a Bose Einstein Condensate and a domain wall that protects the False Vacuum Decay decay mechanism.

False Vacuum Decay is a process that changes the laws of nature actioned by the nature of the ambient vacuum..

In quantum field theory, false vacuum decay is now an experimentally verified event where a vacuum that is relatively stable decays into a alternative state. This happens through the creation of small bubbles. Nucleation is the mechanism that forms the domain wall that creates the EVO bubble. The formation of a domain wall proves that the EVO contains a vacuum state that differs from that of the ambient vacuum.

We now understand that these small bubbles are EVOs forms through the creation of a domain wall the keeps the EVO vacuum state from mixing with the ambient vacuum state.

The ambient false vacuum is a vacuum that is metastable, meaning it is relatively stable but not in the most stable state. A false vacuum can last for a very long time, but it could eventually decay into a more stable state.

.

The idea of false vacuum decay is that the true lowest energy is lower than what we think. A false vacuum is at a local minimum of the energy function, while a true vacuum is at a global minimum.

Learn about the false vacuum

False vacuum - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I have posted elsewhere the reasons why the EVO is a bubble of anti De-Sutter Spacetime.

The WIKI states as follows:

The present false vacuum state is called (de Sitter space), while tentative true vacuum is called, (Anti-de Sitter space).^[22][23]

Postulating the primacy and absoluteness of the movement of matter in our World leads to the conclusion that cold nuclear fusion is a method and form of movement of matter. Cold nuclear fusion always occurs during any movement of matter, and this can easily explain everything.

Then there is no need for the fantastic hypotheses of the Big Bang and the true and false vacuum.

Quote from Aleksandr Nikitin

Postulating the primacy and absoluteness of the movement of matter in our World leads to the conclusion that cold nuclear fusion is a method and form of movement of matter. Cold nuclear fusion always occurs during any movement of matter, and this can easily explain everything.

Then there is no need for the fantastic hypotheses of the Big Bang and the true and false vacuum.

As Paul Sutter explains, the universe was different early on as verified by the CERN collider. The forces that we now have were different early on, There is a loophole in nature where those early states of the universe can now be created inside the EVO.

The fantastic hypotheses that you fear is accepted by science and it underpins our understanding of nature.

The way the laws of physics works inside the EVO makes protons and neutrons impossible to exist. But the EVO is unstable and the EVO will terminate so that a plasma of quarks that had been produced inside the EVO will reform into new elements when the EVO is gone. This is what Aureon Energy has developed in their nuclear waste water remediation. stabilization product. Aureon does not mention fusion or fission. They say that do nuclear reorganization where heavy elements turn into light elements.

Quote from axil

A process that has just been experimentally verified to exist can cause transmutation

So I guess the experiment "verified" that sodium 23 transmuted to another isotope.

The experimental platform is composed of a bosonic gas of 23Na atoms, optically trapped and cooled below the condensation temperature. The gas is initially prepared in the internal state |F, mF ⟩ = |2, −2⟩ = |↑⟩, where F is the total angular momentum and mF its projection on the quantization axis. Microwave radiation with ampli- tude ΩR introduces coherent Rabi coupling between the |↑⟩ state and |1,−1⟩ = |↓⟩.Therelevantscatteringlengthsforsuchatwo-levelsystem are a↓↓ = 54.5a0, a↑↑ = 64.3a0 and a↓↑ = 64.3a0, and lead to the condition Δa = (a↑↑ + a↓↓)/2 − a↓↑ < 0, that is, to a system with a ferromagnetic ground state2Nothing to do with Ed Storms stuff BTW

Perhaps the moderators can deAxilate and otherwise prune this thread

New research sheds light on a phenomenon known as 'false vacuum decay'

An experiment conducted in Italy, with theory support from Newcastle University, has produced the first experimental evidence of vacuum decay.

phys.org

Quote from axil

A process (vacuum decay) that has just been experimentally verified to exist can cause transmutation (which has been shown to occur actioned by EVOs)

The EVO is a Exciton- Polariton Bose Einstein Condensate of a similar quantum mechanical modality as the condensate used in the referenced experiment. Research on these condensates are usually done using cold atomic atoms because producing polariton based condensates are hard to do and using these cold condensates make experimentally analyze easier.

Let me call a spade a spade: Belief in the Big Bang is a scientific psychosis. The hypothesis of the Big Bang and the origin of our material World from one point in space-time and physical vacuum lulls the mind and does not help solve any of the pressing problems of modern physics, namely:

1) the problem of the fundamental incompatibility of quantum mechanics and general relativity;

2) the problem of gravitational interaction;

3) the problem of cold nuclear fusion

4) and others.

This scientific impasse can only be overcome through a philosophical and metaphysical path, namely by putting forward a new scientific paradigm that easily and simply solves these problems:

Quote from Aleksandr Nikitin

This scientific impasse can only be overcome through a philosophical and metaphysical path

I agree with your first conclusions but a plane built on metaphysics will behave like Putin....

The real problem is that the math used in physics is almost to complex for most that do physics. When I say to complex I clearly mean that (almost) all physicists have no clue of the relations between topology and the math they use in physics. A physicist that believes integrals up to infinity are physical simply is an idiot.

If you believe that the gravitation potential is a linear function only then you have no clue of real physics.

Just a simple example for beginner: If you bring, on paper, a mass to infinity you get a nice potential (1/r) formula unluckily you then have to wait for ever until in reality you can use this formula again! Why. The ugly mass flying to eternity will also attract the second mass and possibly the first one will slow down and not reach eternity that it anyway never will reach because there are to many masses in the universe.

So most simplistic formulas used in physics are factually nonsensical = not of universal use. Real physics is only defined locally.

The worst example of real physical bullshit is SRT also called special relativity, where people believe that a mass at rest can have a momentum. This really work for 0 dimensional systems! (finit closed circular orbits) where the mas on the circle has a momentum and relative to the radius it has none. But for a real mass as Einstein and other cheaters did claim this simply is fraud.

A kind of key point posseses some relevances ..

In the case of the current universe there is ome expecttions to onsider irs reality because after that the universe expanded apparently.

Maybe we should consider it as one of the 2 limits betwwen all the matter/energy is " playing".

At lower scale, suns possese the same frame with an internal limit as gravitation and the external one the thermonuclear reactions.

Always we can see the same rule, by which between these limits a lot of energy is "stored".

i expect a complementary things to get all these stored together , a little energy leak probably the light radiated finally.

Now to conclude the same rule shoud occur at nucleus side... But which are these limits in this case ?

To me the "central point" specificity anf the speed limit of light which act as a retaining wall.

Quote from Aleksandr Nikitin

Let me call a spade a spade: Belief in the Big Bang is a scientific psychosis. The hypothesis of the Big Bang and the origin of our material World from one point in space-time and physical vacuum lulls the mind and does not help solve any of the pressing problems of modern physics, namely:

1) the problem of the fundamental incompatibility of quantum mechanics and general relativity;

2) the problem of gravitational interaction;

3) the problem of cold nuclear fusion

4) and others.

This scientific impasse can only be overcome through a philosophical and metaphysical path, namely by putting forward a new scientific paradigm that easily and simply solves these problems:

Display More

Quote from axil

In quantum field theory, false vacuum decay is now an experimentally verified event where a vacuum that is relatively stable decays into a alternative state.

Reference for this experimental verified false vacuum decay? The one you gave before verified that an expected phenomena, analogous to false vacuum decay, can be experimentally observed.

That is not contentious - everyone expects such phenomena to exist - they come from the maths when you have a metastable quantum state.

Then there is false vacuum decay of the universe itself:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2109.04496.pdf

False vacuum decay in quantum mechanical first order phase transitions is a phenomenon with
wide implications in cosmology, and presents interesting theoretical challenges. In the standard
approach, it is assumed that false vacuum decay proceeds through the formation of bubbles that
nucleate at random positions in spacetime and subsequently expand. In this paper we investigate
the presence of correlations between bubble nucleation sites using a recently proposed semi-classical
stochastic description of vacuum decay. This procedure samples vacuum fluctuations, which are
then evolved using classical lattice simulations. We compute the two-point function for bubble
nucleation sites from an ensemble of simulations, demonstrating that nucleation sites cluster in
a way that is qualitatively similar to peaks in random Gaussian fields. We qualitatively assess
the phenomenological implications of bubble clustering in early Universe phase transitions, which
include features in the power spectrum of stochastic gravitational waves and an enhancement or
suppression of the probability of observing bubble collisions in the eternal inflation scenario.

I think you are confusing false vacuum decay as words for a mathematical phenomena that can occur in many QM systems that have metastable states (experimentally confirmed by your reference) with an observation of the universe false vacuum decay (for real). This does not yet exist. It is entirely possible that it did happen - many models predict it - but we know if it happens - that the energy scale for it to happen are extraordinary in the current universe. We will get more info about the very early universe from gravitational wave observations which are getting better and better. Even so observations of false vacuum decay would be indirect: and based on a whole load of other hypotheses about evolution of the early universe at very high energy levels.

Belief in the Big Bang is a scientific psychosis. The hypothesis of the Big Bang and the origin of our material World from one point in space-time and physical vacuum lulls the mind and does not help solve any of the pressing problems of modern physics, namely:

1) the problem of the fundamental incompatibility of quantum mechanics and general relativity;

there is a lot of evidence out there which cannot easily be explained without a big bang. You might almots say by now that disbelief in big bang theory was a psychosis. Not saying you can't construct alternate theories - but they are pretty contrived.

The compatibility of QM and GR is very strongly hinted by holographic principles shown in string theory. It does not yet work properly - and in fact one reason for hoping for some non-big-bang early universe theory is that would remove the current theoretical problem to using string theory.

But blaming experimental evidence because it is not convenient for theory is a mugs game. Why not instead work on a better theory?

Quote from THHuxleynew

there is a lot of evidence out there which cannot easily be explained without a big bang.

You may be think that limited minds just need simple models to claim a fit with what they claim to see.

Unluckily we have a new telescope that backdates the big bang by 2x, we also have black holes from the original big bang time stamp and worst, the universe shows no center for a big bang what is obvious once you know that gravity plays absolute no role for the matter distribution and the only solution spaces for matter like flux are higher dimensional torii.

So in reality there is no evidence for a big bang except for folks that read the bible/Tora.

If the Big Bang is true then.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Belief in the Big Bang is a scientific psychosis. The hypothesis of the Big Bang and the origin of our material World from one point in space-time and physical vacuum lulls the mind and does not help solve any of the pressing problems of modern physics, namely:

1) the problem of the fundamental incompatibility of quantum mechanics and general relativity;

there is a lot of evidence out there which cannot easily be explained without a big bang. You might almots say by now that disbelief in big bang theory was a psychosis. Not saying you can't construct alternate theories - but they are pretty contrived.

The compatibility of QM and GR is very strongly hinted by holographic principles shown in string theory. It does not yet work properly - and in fact one reason for hoping for some non-big-bang early universe theory is that would remove the current theoretical problem to using string theory.

But blaming experimental evidence because it is not convenient for theory is a mugs game. Why not instead work on a better theory?

Display More

Sabine might put this discussion into perspective. Now that we have insight into the EVO, we can research what when on at the moment of the Big Bang as Sabine mentions. The universe may have begun through vacuum decay as per this video.

Quote from axil

The universe may have begun through vacuum decay

Via transmutation from sodium-23??

Quote from RobertBryant

Via transmutation from sodium-23??

The universe always exists. Universes arise and disintegrate only in our heads as a result of the collapse and transformation of consciousness!!!

Quote from Alan Smith

That is a statement of faith, and not a scientific principle since the statement cannot be proven false.

Also this thread has now become very 'off topic/ Please refer to the thread title before posting to make sure that you are 'on topic'.

Dear Alan Smith! You're right.

But in the course of scientific research, I came to the firm conclusion that within the framework of the scientific principles of the Big Bang, the Standard Model of quantum theory and the General Theory of Relativity, the problem of cold nuclear fusion cannot be solved.

I propose a new scientific principle, the truth or falsity of which does not require falsifiability, namely: the principle of the primacy and absoluteness of the movement of our World (the power of which is an absolute invariant). Using this principle, the problem of cold nuclear fusion and others can be easily and simply solved.