For LENR to occur, the electrons need to force the nuclei closer together. This requires a new kind of electron interaction. This realization is one of the important consequences resulting from this discovery.
Seems however that it's not sufficiently clear that "a new kind of electron interaction" requires necessarily a new realistic electron model.
I think I already mentioned this, but this "new kind of electron interaction" is most likely what the late Kenneth Shoulders termed "EV" and also the late Takaaki Matsumoto acknowledged to be what he was observing and that he likened to the ball lightning phenomena and called Micro Ball Lightning, and proposed the term electro nuclear collapse to explain the observed phenomena.
I know this is highly controversial, but there is evidence that this interaction can happen without the need for a gap in a metal lattice, as an equivalent phenomena has been observed in hydrodynamic systems (ultrasound or mechanical driven cavitation systems in aqueous systems) and also in magnetohydrodynamic systems where self organizing plasmas can be formed. The gaps in metal are probably a favorable condition to form this electro estructure capable of rearranging matter to produce heat, as the phenomena outside metals tends to be much more prone to transmutation than heat.
I agree, the EV and ball lightning both involve an electron assembly process similar to that required for cold fusion. I note this in my paper. The process might also aid the operation of chemical catalysts and certain chemical reactions.
However, the assembly of enough electrons needed to cause a nuclear process would be an extreme example of this mechanism. Therefore, fusion would need a very special environment in which to occur. I believe nanogaps are required because these would encourage a high concentration of electrons to form. These gaps can be formed by many different processes including cavitation.
Also, transmutation has such a high Coulomb barrier that its occurrence is considered impossible without the added energy supplied by a local fusion event. So, I suggest people stop thinking of transmutation as a separate process. Instead, This event makes sense only as a secondary process as the result of a fusion reaction. The Iwamura work is consistent with this conclusion.
Seems however that it's not sufficiently clear that "a new kind of electron interaction" requires necessarily a new realistic electron model.
If not then the present model must be applied in a different way because this behavior has not been predicted or explained by the present model. That is why the EVO claim has been rejected by conventional scientists.
Nanogaps imply no more than 15 eV maximum...
I agree, the EV and ball lightning both involve an electron assembly process similar to that required for cold fusion. I note this in my paper. The process might also aid the operation of chemical catalysts and certain chemical reactions.
However, the assembly of enough electrons needed to cause a nuclear process would be an extreme example of this mechanism. Therefore, fusion would need a very special environment in which to occur. I believe nanogaps are required because these would encourage a high concentration of electrons to form. These gaps can be formed by many different processes including cavitation.
Also, transmutation has such a high Coulomb barrier that its occurrence is considered impossible without the added energy supplied by a local fusion event. So, I suggest people stop thinking of transmutation as a separate process. Instead, This event makes sense only as a secondary process as the result of a fusion reaction. The Iwamura work is consistent with this conclusion.
Nanogaps imply no more than 15 eV maximum...
The energy is not the issue. The question is whether enough electrons can assemble into a stable structure that can cause the nuclei to get close enough to interact. This is a new kind of electron assembly. You need to stop thinking in ordinary ways.
"This is a new kind of electron assembly."
Ordinary way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_field_equations
See also papers from Jean Pierre Vigier ( or Graneau at your side), i can't share here because pdf can't be uploaded here because harddisks fully filled by the kazak B....probably..
The energy is not the issue. The question is whether enough electrons can assemble into a stable structure that can cause the nuclei to get close enough to interact. This is a new kind of electron assembly. You need to stop thinking in ordinary ways.
Every model is wrong. Some are useful.
We are still waiting for your Kw....
Every model is wrong. Some are useful.
Also, transmutation has such a high Coulomb barrier that its occurrence is considered impossible without the added energy supplied by a local fusion event. So, I suggest people stop thinking of transmutation as a separate process. Instead, This event makes sense only as a secondary process as the result of a fusion reaction. The Iwamura work is consistent with this conclusion.
About electrons and electron clusters, you have pretty sensible arguments presented. Your only misconception is that you believed Maxwell's theory and believed in his barrier, which today is called the Coulomb barrier, and Charles Coulomb himself has nothing to do with this nonsense. Maxwell was wrong. The Coulomb barrier, which follows from Maxwell's formula, does not exist in nature. My explanation of this fact in this material is Answer Cherepanov A.I. physicist Frederick David Tombe January 21, 2023 - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/QUjd/fsJKtB66n
Answer Cherepanov A.I. physicist Frederick David Tombe January 21, 2023 - https://docs.google.com/file/d…E5Q6I_ji/edit?usp=sharing
Answer Cherepanov A.I. physicist Frederick David Tombe January 21, 2023 -
Also, transmutation has such a high Coulomb barrier that its occurrence is considered impossible without the added energy supplied by a local fusion event.
Ed, you should start to forget teh old physics garbage of Coulomb barrier. In neutral mass there is no barrier at all! Charge is only formed if you separate e - p. A bound electron behaves as EM flux and is a part of the total mass structure.
Did you ever look at the Gold (AU) spectrum? It does not exists as the (most) electrons are included in the mass structure.
If I model some Nickel Isotopes then we see that the core contains extra electron masses what explains why external resonant stimulation like done by Brillouin works.
If I model some Nickel Isotopes then we see that the core
What about Pd structures?
Pd105 might have some nuclear levels around 25 Kev..(and lower)
which corresponds to the theoretical K shell level for Pd..
But perhaps my nonexpert interpretation of the data is wrong
https://www.jkps.or.kr/journal…?doi=10.3938/jkps.59.1773..
Ed, you should start to forget teh old physics garbage of Coulomb barrier. In neutral mass there is no barrier at all! Charge is only formed if you separate e - p. A bound electron behaves as EM flux and is a part of the total mass structure.
Did you ever look at the Gold (AU) spectrum? It does not exists as the (most) electrons are included in the mass structure.
If I model some Nickel Isotopes then we see that the core contains extra electron masses what explains why external resonant stimulation like done by Brillouin works.
In other words, all of the present understanding of nuclear structure is wrong. All of the present understanding of the electron structure on which chemistry is based is wrong. All of the measurements of the Coulomb barrier are wrong. According to your understanding, nature is organized in entirely different ways. Frankly, I'm not willing to reject the basic understanding that has resulted from over two centuries of effort.
In other words, all of the present understanding of nuclear structure is wrong
Yes this is 1000% true. The standard model is outraging garbage and has been experimentally refuted by dozens of experiments. The latest total fail has been linked here 4 days ago.
All of the present understanding of the electron structure on which chemistry is based is wrong.
This is 100% wrong.
Chemistry happens among excited electron levels not (always) directly related to the nucleus.
The coulomb barrier always is/was measured by kinetic experiments. Cold fusion has no kinetics. This is key for understanding the energy transfer of CF. In kinetic experiments excess energy is added to decay particle momenta. This does not work if you have a symmetric excitation in the form of D*-D* due to the most basic lay in physics = momentum conservation. 4-He also has no gamma spectrum, that would allow an asymmetric transfer mode. So the only active mode is fine structure radiation like Schwarz did measure.
Display MoreYes this is 1000% true. The standard model is outraging garbage and has been experimentally refuted by dozens of experiments. The latest total fail has been linked here 4 days ago.
This is 100% wrong.
Chemistry happens among excited electron levels not (always) directly related to the nucleus.
The coulomb barrier always is/was measured by kinetic experiments. Cold fusion has no kinetics. This is key for understanding the energy transfer of CF. In kinetic experiments excess energy is added to decay particle momenta. This does not work if you have a symmetric excitation in the form of D*-D* due to the most basic lay in physics = momentum conservation. 4-He also has no gamma spectrum, that would allow an asymmetric transfer mode. So the only active mode is fine structure radiation like Schwarz did measure.
Every day that liquid H2 or D2 does not fuse demonstrates that a barrier exists. Even D in Pd does not fuse most of the time. This also demonstrates the existence of a barrier. I suggest you read my paper and comment on my description rather than simply speculating based on your imagination.
I agree, the standard model is incomplete but what is missing is the question.
Every day that liquid H2 or D2 does not fuse demonstrates that a barrier exists. Even D in Pd does not fuse most of the time. This also demonstrates the existence of a barrier. I suggest you read my paper and comment on my description rather than simply speculating based on your imagination.
I agree, the standard model is incomplete but what is missing is the question.
I could never put words in the mouth of Wyttenbach but for what I have read in the last 4 years or so what I think he means is that by using the currently agreed upon models we have reached the extent of our capacity to control matter, and to go beyond that we need new models. His model apparently allows the understanding of new forms in which matter interacts and what appears as a barrier in the previous model is not really a barrier but a property of matter that can be managed with a new understanding that allows to see what really this property is and how it can be managed. I am not an advocate of his model, which is mind bending and requires a lot more abstraction capacity than one can exert without certain previous training, but the unification of all forces as components of the EM force is certainly a tatantlizing proposition from the SO4 Physics that Wyttenbach proposes.
I think Wyttenbach has to work a lot more in his interpersonal communication skills as he often comes as arrogant and dismissive of anyone else's opinion, but that doesn't mean his model is not an interesting proposition that I think has already bear experimental fruits.
Well, common people like follow reassuring polite guys, who speak well, scammers, mythomaniacs are also like that...
On the other hand, disruptive people often have a shitty character.. even the great Einstein had a lot of worries in this way...
Jurg is right when he says:
The Coulomb barrier is/has always been measured by kinetic experiments. Cold fusion has no kinetics. This is essential for understanding CF energy transfer.
I myself do not believe in the particle accelerators science at all.
It is the work of Czerski who lowers the shooting power then found a Lenr rate far too high.
Every day that liquid H2 or D2 does not fuse demonstrates that a barrier exists
Charles never put his name on this barrier,,,
perhaps there is only a barrier as to understanding why D2 doesn;t fuse under normal conditions,,
of course there is the unexplained 2006 finding by a tripartite of Mizuno, Takahashi and Celani
Perhaps they opened a small magnetic gate?
"We observed neutron emissions from pure deuterium gas after it was cooled in liquid nitrogen and placed in a magnetic field. Neutron emissions were observed in ten out of ten test cases. Neutron burst of 5.5counts/s were 1000 times higher than the background counts. These bursts occurred one or two times within a 300 s interval. The total neutron emission can be estimated from the counting efficiency, and it was 104-105 counts/s. The reaction appears to be highly reproducible, reliably generating high neutron emissions. We conclude that the models proposed heretofore based upon d-d reactions are inadequate to explain the present results, which must involve magnetic field nuclear reactions.
Display MoreCharles never put his name on this barrier,,,
perhaps there is only a barrier as to understanding why D2 doesn;t fuse under normal conditions,,
of course there is the unexplained 2006 finding by a tripartite of Mizuno, Takahashi and Celani
Perhaps they opened a small magnetic gate?
"We observed neutron emissions from pure deuterium gas after it was cooled in liquid nitrogen and placed in a magnetic field. Neutron emissions were observed in ten out of ten test cases. Neutron burst of 5.5counts/s were 1000 times higher than the background counts. These bursts occurred one or two times within a 300 s interval. The total neutron emission can be estimated from the counting efficiency, and it was 104-105 counts/s. The reaction appears to be highly reproducible, reliably generating high neutron emissions. We conclude that the models proposed heretofore based upon d-d reactions are inadequate to explain the present results, which must involve magnetic field nuclear reactions.
That's some really Cold Fusion! -196°C and clear neutron bursts!!! Thanks for sharing, this! I had no idea of the existence of this research! I found the whole paper at ResearchGate.
Well, common people like follow reassuring polite guys, who speak well, scammers, mythomaniacs are also like that...
Once you understand that the field of particle physics fusion and related theorists is a gang of crooks that just is interested in getting as much money as possible from the world wide tax payers you can no longer be polite. CERN/ITER are gigantic pyramid systems, worse than what Berny Madow did.
The problem is that after repeating >10 years mathematical sermons you believe that math = physics and you are no longer able to see the garbage in your hands/minds etc..
Even bigger is the problem that today most people believe science is what Fox News BBC, NYT, etc.. tells you, as we could see during a pandemic, that has been declared for a totally harmless illness for healthy people age < 75.
So we have so called "real scientists" that talk educated bullshit and the fake rest that just wants your money.
The basics of physics is damn old boring (rotator - ) mechanics that 1:1 works to explain the nucleus. Main problem. The US army has stolen all advanced manuscripts during their science raid 1945 in Germany and locked them away from the public. Reason: It was about rocket science. So who could learn it? Learn from Sommerfeld?
We also have to live with the US military free mason cheater gang, that "has stolen" the Lithium bomb from Germany and renamed it to Hydrogen bomb, what helped to found the fusion myth and later ITER. There never was great science in the USA just resources and power. Today still most brilliant native US people choose a career as layer or MBA just for the money hunt.
Who made the real advances in semi conductor design? Certainly not the USA a country where native brilliant scientists are very rare...
So we, the few idealists, have to use our little money to enable the worlds future. So clear your mind. Do no longer pay for any disinformation channel. We can make better use of the money. If you still can, start to understand the basics of physics one has forgotten to teach you.
We observed neutron emissions from pure deuterium gas after it was cooled in liquid nitrogen and placed in a magnetic field.
This is the reality! If D2 is at rest and the field aligns the spin's D*-D* will form out and later - halve live 18 hours - it fuses to 4-He. neutrons are produced in the rare case when larger D*-H* clusters are formed. Its much easier to do the Holmlid way.
In other words, all of the present understanding of nuclear structure is wrong.
Please allow me to offer a Structured Atom Model that you may not have considered yet. this was developed in the last decade or so, precisely due to disappointment in the current models ability to give us some proper understanding of the nucleus, which is largely ignored!
Here is a link to the website, https://structuredatom.org/atomizer/atom-viewer
We have a book about it with all the details and more. There are also video linked to Youtube with further visualizations and an "atom viewer" that allows anyone to see these structures of all the elements and the most occurring isotopes, all to be found on this website.
We hope to present some relevant findings at the next ICCF conference in Poland.
At a 3 body system we first are confronted with a choice, are the three bodies lined up or put in a triangular shape?! This options of different organization is important and right now ignored by all. How can you deal with these complex issues, including attempts to calculate the binding energy, or why or how a neutron is absorbed by the nucleus? What happens during a transmutation step? In the case of 3 bodies it is quite clear that the two possible constructs (linear or triangle) actually represent the two occurring isotopes with that number, namely He3 (triangular)and H3 (linear).
nb. The late Norman Cook has shown in his work that the nucleus cannot ! be a randomly, chaotic moving system, there simply is no room for that!
Sodium 23 (Colors are not representing something 'real', they are used in the model to show repeating substructures, all spheres are protons as there are no neutrons)
