Electrogravity (electron-gravity) as a cause of nuclear reactions.

Quote from Wyttenbach

What ever word you add to gravity its just nonsense! Fusion is a complex process that involves different layers of action as the nuclear structure is formed in steps. The classic idea of a nuclear force was refuted (falsified) quite a long time ago. If two Deuterium touch at rest nothing will happen. If they touch spin aligned then D*-D* may come into live where in the case of D*-D* this can be several steps to more stronger electro weak D***-D*** bonds. Where the exact starting point of the D-D meta stable state occurs is an other discussion.

So as Göthe ones said in Faust: If you don't understand it invent a new word...

Electronuclear gravity is Matsumoto's term, not mine. For him nuclei can ferment. When that happens a cloud of positrons and electrons would surround something. Next fermented thing goes supernova. It sheds a net like structure and what is left produces a number of particles that exceed 3 quarks per nucleon by at least 100-fold. He called the thing after the supernova a black hole. The net structure and the production of an enormous number of particles was recorded on film. The theory seems really wild. But it is too soon to discuss this as the evidence will follow in a later pdf.

Quote from Drgenek

The object of this thread is to discuss cold fusion data and analysis of that data particularly as the experiments relate to ball lightening, charge clusters and gravitational effects. A further object is to suggest that an explanation which summarizes these observations could be called electrogravity. However, perhaps a better term would be electron-gravity. I intend to show that unique states of electrons cause a form of gravity which gravity creates an energy distribution which energy distribution catalyzes nuclear reactions.

The involvement of gravity in cold fusion is like seeing a purple cow. It is a hard thing to see as real. So, there will be many pieces to fit together until what is logical from the start becomes real.

There is a link for a pdf of a powerpoint with notes in post #1. A second link to continue the presentation is in post #14.

A data derived balanced nuclear equation provides a high degree of certainty that the nuclear reaction occurs.

It matters to some. If one believes in some LENR theory, then whatever the one writes their believers believe. If one is a hard skeptic, one believes nothing and would not dignify what one rejects out right by examining it. But for those who just want good science, there is a price to pay. One must put in the effort to understand.

The presentation in this post provides the logic and analysis to show a data derived balanced nuclear reaction equation, the Kidman Reaction. I challenge you to check it out in your own spreadsheet. Ask about it. Is it significant?

A Data Derived Balanced Equation for ICFP.pdf

If no nuclear reaction occurs in Santilli's ICFP, then it should not be possible to use the data from his patent application to derive a balanced nuclear reaction equation. There is no conspiracy in this analysis. The data was produced and certified by an independent lab. I was not involved in Santilli's experiment. Santilli was not involved in my analysis. I have listed the logic step by step so that anyone with sufficient skill and a spreadsheet should be able to replicate the analysis. Here is the slide for the stoichiometry.

The derived equation shows an accuracy of 4 decimal places. The expected accuracy of gas spectroscopy is 3 ppmv. Therefore, the accuracy is to the limit of measurement. Since the stoichiometry is not fake, one concludes the reactions happen.

What does the equation tell us? 7 deuterium atoms combine with one oxygen atom and in that process produce two hydrogen atoms and two nitrogen atoms. A sequence of elementary nuclear reactions has been identified which could combine to explain the overall reaction equation.

This sequence is only slightly different than the alpha cycle proposed for the reaction sequence in heavy stars. The containment found in heavy stars allows fusion of hydrogen to oxygen. Hence a catalyst which functions as a heavy star would explain the derived equation. The catalyst provides a distribution of energy which includes the energy necessary to overcome the coulomb barrier. Particles accelerated by extreme gravity could obtain that energy. The high kinetic energy could be contained by gravity. I believe that such a catalysis is a good model.

One way to test the equation is to apply it to account for gas composition produced by an electric arc in water. Here is a pdf that does that Application of the Kidman Reaction to AquaFuel.pdf

I hope you are all ready for the next presentation in this series. In prior presentations one established the connection between the before and after reaction samples by mass balance and stoichiometry. Hence, an analytical relationship of cause to effect was established. It was suggested that a catalyst causes nuclear reactions by being an accelerator of particles and by it being an absorber of energy and thereby it redistributes energy allowing for nuclear fusion.

If anyone has an uncertainty about whether or not fusion happens in the case of ICFP or AquaFuel now would be the time to raise your questions.

The next question is how does it happen? In order to answer that question, one need a model that could predict what might be observed and measured. This next presentation is designed to do that via model development.

Fusion and Fission on a Cluster with Gravity.pdf

Quote from Drgenek

I intend to show that unique states of electrons cause a form of gravity which gravity creates an energy distribution which energy distribution catalyzes nuclear reactions.

The involvement of gravity in cold fusion is like seeing a purple cow. It is a hard thing to see as real. So, there will be many pieces to fit together until what is logical from the start becomes real.

The prior installment in this series provided a model for testing. A unique state of an electron was defined as a pseudoelectron. Then a model was derived for a form of gravity and an energy distribution which would include energies sufficient to catalyze fusion on a cluster of pseudoelectrons. In the attached pdf the implications of pseudoelectrons are extended and comparisons to work of Matsumoto are made.

Matsumoto’s DIY Blackholes .pdf

This is all a necessary basis before I can present analysis for verification or falsification of the model. It takes time for me to get these presentations in good order, I promise more analysis in the next installment.

Those of you who suffered through more theory in order to have a basis to interpret the images of Matsumoto will now be rewarded. With a basis in hand one can set expectations and then test them. Up to now, it was necessary to just listen to a fantastic story. The explanation of electron gravity provides an interpretation for Matsumoto's images, there is model but what can it do? One can extend the model of pseudeoelectrons to explain DIY blackholes but?????? You all have a right to be skeptical. But the dogma of skeptics isn't science. If you have questions, please ask for clarification.

In this installment in this series on electron-gravity one provides analysis to support predictions from the model. The challenge for you is: can you provide a better model to interpret Matsumoto's images and support it with math? If you follow the logic and math, you will find an expectation for the energy/mass output of electron-gravity catalyzed fusion.

Quantum of Matsumoto’s Blackholes .pdf

Thank-you for reading.