A Cracked Piece of Metal Healed Itself in an Experiment That Stunned Scientists. Implications to storms cracks

    Does this affect storms cracks


    A Cracked Piece of Metal Healed Itself in an Experiment That Stunned Scientists

    A Cracked Piece of Metal Healed Itself in an Experiment That Stunned Scientists
    File this under 'That's not supposed to happen!': Scientists observed a metal healing itself, something never seen before.
    www.sciencealert.com


    What we have confirmed is that metals have their own intrinsic, natural ability to heal themselves, at least in the case of fatigue damage at the nanoscale."


    These are exact conditions, and we don't know yet exactly how this is happening or how we can use it. However, if you think about the costs and effort required for repairing everything from bridges to engines to phones, there's no telling how much difference self-healing metals could make.


    And while the observation is unprecedented, it's not wholly unexpected. In 2013, Texas A&M University materials scientist Michael Demkowicz worked on a study predicting that this kind of nanocrack healing could happen, driven by the tiny crystalline grains inside metals essentially shifting their boundaries in response to stress.

    I have just posted how the polariton condensation theory (EVO) of LENR enables Ed Storms' LENR crack theory as follows:


    Post
    RE: The Exotic Vacuum Object (EVO) as the cause of the vacuum reaction.
    I would now like to explain how the polariton is formed and apply that understanding to explain the polariton LENR reaction causality can function in explaining Ed Storms crack theory of the NAE (nuclear active environments).

    The type of polariton most likely in the LENR reaction is a superposition (mix) of the electron and photon. This type of polariton is a strong matter light coupling. This coupling occurs when the quantum energy level of the electron and the photon are equal. In order for…
    axil


    This polariton based LENR process might be how the metal surface is being heated by a LENR reaction.


    The process that the researchers have used might produce polariton condensation inside the optical cavity produced by the initial electron beam stressing procedure. The creation of polaritons on a metal surface require that the surface of the metal be electrically insulated so that the optical cavity (crack) retains the electron/photon mix that must come to an energy equilibrium so that the polariton can form. A vacuum will provide that insolation. In LENR experiments. the insulation is usually provided by a hydrogen atmosphere.


    If this discovery is a LENR based one, it will discount that nuclear energy is involved in the production of heat. In the EVO theory of LENR, the heat is produced by an electron based heat generation process called breaking radiation (Bremsstrahlung) when the polariton condensate becomes unstable.


    Bremsstrahlung - Wikipedia
    en.wikipedia.org


    The initial polariton surface formation process

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/80/Propagating_surface_plasmon_polaritons.jpg/800px-Propagating_surface_plasmon_polaritons.jpg?20210224202359


    One thing to look out for is signs of the development of transmutation in and around the cracked area which would be sure to form if this crack healing process is LENR based.

    Quote from Alan Smith

    When all you have is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail. (As Maxwell never said)

    With the greatest of respect and admiration, this singular attitude also exactly motivates your nuclear based causation beliefs.



    I have conceded that fusion does occur in some situations involving lattice confinement fusion where the data shows exact gamma and neutron nuclear based indicators.


    This should lend pause to your attitude because there are other fusion claims that do not show such exact indicators. What makes the difference, what removes these indicators from the data? You cannot provide a reason. But the issue may be with your unshakable assumptions.

    Quote from axil

    the data shows exact gamma and neutron nuclear based indicators.


    Quote from axil

    This should lend pause to your attitude because there are other fusion claims that do not show such exact indicators. What makes the difference, what removes these indicators from the data?

    What makes these indicators so "exact"? Exact in what sense? They are no more exact than heat beyond the limits of chemistry with no chemical changes, and helium in the same ratio to the heat as D-D plasma fusion. Gamma rays and neutrons are easier to measure than helium, but they are no more definite. Or "exact" -- whatever that means.

    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.


    Data quoted by NASA: in the ICCF24 video:

    - neutron activation of materials.

    - created unstable radioactive isotopes

    - DT fusion indicators in CR39 triple tracts

    - DT fusion neutrons detected

    - DT fusion level neutron energy at 2.45 MeV

    - Higher neutron energy levels were detected by not characterized.

    - helium 3 detected

    - heat production


    The polariton modality will produce extreme EMF power concentrations when coherent bose condensation is not established.


    If you remember back in the early days of Rossi's reactor demos, there was reports of high levels of gamma production that lasted a second on a little more at startup and shutdown. This radiation was most likely produced by polariton generation that had not yet formed a global condensate. It is this condensate that changes the nature of the reaction from a nuclear energy process to a vacuum energy generation process as quoted in the theories of Dr Kim.on polariton condensation as follows:


    Yeong Kim

    Yeong Kim proposes that a nuclear Bose–Einstein condensation

    can suppress the Coulomb barrier and explain most LENR

    phenomena as a fusion process. The theory is based on the

    concept of nuclear Bose–Einstein condensate state for mobile

    deuterons trapped in a micro/nanoscale metal grain or particle,

    which acts as a confinement or trapping potential.41


    from

    A new look at low-energy nuclear reaction research

    Steven B. Krivit†*a and Jan Marwanb

    Received 28th July 2009, Accepted 26th August 2009

    First published as an Advance Article on the web 3rd September 2009

    DOI: 10.1039/b915458m


    https://disq.us/url?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnewenergytimes.com%2Fv2%2Flibrary%2F2009%2F2009Krivit-S-ANewLookAtLENR.pdf%3A6GZUFoTllzuGqdAo4P8ArAfnyxA&cuid=2168707


    Beyond and expanding on the theory of DR Yeong Kim: The key factor in the switch from nuclear power generation in the reaction is the development of superconductivity in the accumulating aggregation to Bose–Einstein condensation. This switch entails assess to power production based on the nature of the dressed electrons clusters under a state of superconductivity that produces an anti field to the Higgs field which controls the mass of quark particles that result in transmutation and feeds vacuum energy into these dressed electrons.


    This theory of vacuum energy access comes for the Sen conjecture which is a cornerstone of string theory that addresses the behavior of the antifield.


    See by a copy and paste into the command line

    https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Sen's+conjecture

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.