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

Quote from Zephir_AWT

IMO cold fusion comes as a synergy of multiple effects, the collisions of long lines of atoms attenuated by lattice Mossbauer effect in particular. In this very moment multiple atoms will get closely packed and their orbitals will overlap, so that what we can get is the dense tube of electron plasma. The energy of fusion gets released in one direction in EM wave, but it gets absorbed fast by multiple atoms residing in the same crystalographic line or plane. Which is why it isn't released into an outside in form of ionizing radiation.

So that the above Matsumoto theory has some merit, if we consider scalar waves as a sort of gravitons. It's worth to note that X-ray beams, EVO's and magnetic pulses are merely byproduct of cold fusion reaction - this theory doesn't need it for cold fusion to run.

Our forum has a thread for theories. Any of these may be as good as yours. So, any of these theories would by your logic would be enough that yours or mine isn't needed. Yes, I used some of Matsumoto theory in my model. I also used Pharis Williams, R. Santilli, Richard Feynman, Ed Storms and many others whose works fits logically with my model. A model unlike a theory is falsifiable.

Your theory/model is dependent of a regular solid to create waves which create fusion. If cold fusion were only possible that way, then it could not be done in a liquid or gas. I have provided hard science that fusion happen in a liquid and a gas. The only true proof of nuclear reaction is a data derived reaction equation based on mass balance and stoichiometry, everything else is interpretation based on preconceived perceptions.

If one starts with hard science, it is much easier to do research in a useful direction. Thank-you for your interest.

I have presented hard evidence of nuclear fusion outside of the Lawson criteria. I have presented the basis for the mathematical analysis. There are no preconceived perceptions just a math problem. An electric arc in deuterium gas or in water produces nitrogen from the combination of many deuterium/hydrogen atoms to oxygen. In theory an intermediate Silcon-28 is produced which fissions to nitrogen-14. Since, the result of the analysis are so precise and predict so well the expected true values of the coefficients of a balance nuclear equation, there seems to be no reasonable argument against nuclear fusion outside the of Lawson criteria occurring in these two cases.

According to collision theory for reactions, multiple reactants combining as a catalyst is far more likely than simultaneous collisions of multiple reactants. The proposal is that the catalyst absorbs high energy particles and gammas from fusion, that the catalyst creates a distribution of particle energies which includes particles in MeV range. Hence, MeV range particles overcome the coulomb barrier which allows fusion. These miracle properties of the catalysis are possible if the catalyst possess an extreme gravitational field.

A model was then developed for a form of gravity between electrons which possess higher order interactions. Hence, electrons would convert to pseudo-electrons, then pseudo-electrons form a cluster due to an electron-gravity. An energy balance at the escape horizon of the cluster was used to define the gravitational constant for electron-gravity. Per the model an electron (pseudoelectron) at the escape horizon could have MeV energies if the cluster is large enough. Hence, the miracle properties of catalyst are possible based on electron-gravity.

I then used the images of T Matsumoto, proposed basis for those images, proposed basis for interpretation of images using electron-gravity, then showed that Matsumoto's blackholes are quantitative proof of electron-gravity. Otherwise, how would integer values of pseudoelectrons correlate to area of the image on film? Further the ring shape is predicted by the trajectory of massive particles escaping a source of gravity then reacting with the film. Since the radiation from Matsumoto blackholes appears to be massive, then I redeveloped a blackhole definition from the equation for the Schwartzchild radius. Universal gravity would be caused by dipole attraction between constituent particles more fundamental the those in the standard model. As the relative speed between particles increases these constituent dipoles are expressed. These dipoles cause a magnetic force at right angle to the relative velocity which acts to shear the constituent particles from the whole. (If the whole is a pseudoneutron). Hence, there is limit speed at which pseudoneutrons would be disintegrated to m_c, the universal constituent particle. A pseudoneutron cluster throws off an itonic net then becomes a Matsumoto blackhole. A celestial neutron star likely does the same when it goes supernova. So, Matsumoto blackholes and celestial blackholes are likely the same thing but get there with a different form of gravity. Blackhole are a source of dark energy. Dark energy would be m_c. It has exclusion because it is mass and therefore pressure as a function of concentration. The pressure of m_c could then account for the pressure that expands the universe, dark energy.

The presence of a pressure of universal constituents is testable as a radiation from cold fusion and as celestial radiation. I had intended to address this subject next but have decided instead to provide more analysis in support of pseudoelectrons and the quanta of their states.

In the pdf https://www.lenr-forum.com/att…cluster-with-gravity-pdf/ I developed a model as an explanation of the Kidman reaction. https://www.lenr-forum.com/att…-the-kidman-reaction-pdf/. The Kidman reaction was verified by mass balance and stoichiometry. https://www.lenr-forum.com/att…ed-equation-for-icfp-pdf/ and https://www.lenr-forum.com/att…reaction-to-aquafuel-pdf/ . I used the images of T Matsumoto, proposed basis for those images, proposed basis for the interpretation of images using electron gravity, and then showed that Matsumoto's blackholes are quantitative proof of electron gravity. https://www.lenr-forum.com/att…oto-s-diy-blackholes-pdf/ and https://www.lenr-forum.com/att…oto-s-diy-blackholes-pdf/ . The pdf below returns to the model and develops the connection between Pharis Williams' phat equation and electron gravity. This interpretation of phat equation provides another way to verify the model for nuclear fusion based on electron gravity.

Explaining Electron Gravity with the Phat Equation.pdf

Quote from THHuxleynew

Since you asked for comment.

You have lost me at this point. Special relativity says nothing about gravity. So I doubt I will be able to understand the rest.

THH

Well, you may be right. If you can't speculate a relationship between light and gravity from special relativity, then maybe you don't understand special relativity. But lucky for you, I broke that relationship down to basics in the post above. If you require everything that I present to have already passed years of so-called peer review, you are in no position to critic new analysis or new data. Aren't you even curious?

However, if you accept the scientific method, then you should be able to question basis of models and therefore the analysis to verify or falsify a model. Reality is messy, so a good model needs a well-documented basis.

Don't feel that you are obligated to be the only critic or even have interest in my model. This forum is just for discussion, so that the loose ends can be exposed. As you know only a mountain of evidence can meet the threshold of acceptance since the prejudice is so high against anything like my model. Anything you want to do one this subject is welcome.