Posts by Promethian

fabrice DAVID I'm wondering what do you think, Sir?

I've been pondering for a great while about the wavefunction in QM as to whether it evolves or collapses.

My main interest as of late has been stochastically determined quantum mechanics by entropy and temperature gradients for atomic elements reacting as per how an ideal understanding of quantum chemistry might entail. I don't believe that wavefunction collapses do often occur; but, suppose that they are true for localized events with very low entropic states.

My main "theory" I've been pondering about as of late is related to very specific nuances in the said temperature gradients or ambient temperature events related to stochastic evolution of the wavefunction. This type of theory is characterized by a quantum dynamic scenario or state of affairs where the stochastic event is related intrinsically with the temperature and entropic state of the system under observation or operating in this state space.

My understanding is limited to the notion that events are a lot less uncertain due to the temperature of the localized system with a low entropic state due to nuclear forces interacting with elements in the system. I've researched the notion that many particles interact in a 'resonance' fashion with other particles making up atomic elements. These elements on the Mendeleyev table are constantly subject to these low entropic states or temperature gradients where they realize something I consider as a resonant state with one another at unspecified temperature gradients. This sort of theorizing of mine gives rise to the suspicion that these QM 'events' simply evolve the wavefunction instead of collapses or 'events' occurring for (not entirely particles); but, elements and compounds in nature.

The only instance where I have surmised that wavefunction collapses occur in highly massive events where entropy is extremely high is closer to colliding black holes or neutron stars.

What do you think about all this?

Quote from Paradigmnoia

Super Kamiokande

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-Kamiokande

Thanks.

The two W bosons are verified mediators of neutrino absorption and emission. During these processes, the W^± boson charge induces electron or positron emission or absorption, thus causing nuclear transmutation.

Someone on Wiki added this for the W-boson entry, wonder what that means?

Quote from Promethian

When a neutrino interacts with matter, charged particles are produced. These emit light known as Cherenkov radiation when they travel through a transparent medium (such as ice or water) at a speed greater than the speed of light in that medium.

I suspect this phenomenon is stronger with antineutrinos in nuclear reactors rather than neutrinos, since its fission with production of W-bosons.

Antineutrinos that interact with matter through the Glashow resonance are expected to produce characteristic events in which the resulting W⁻ boson decays into a cascade of secondary particles, including particles called hadrons. Roughly 5% of the neutrino energy in these events is expected to be taken up by secondary particles that are neutral or don’t have enough energy to produce Cherenkov radiation⁵, limiting the amount of energy that can be observed to about 6.0 PeV. Moreover, low-energy muons are expected to be produced in the cascade, and to outrun the wavefront of the Cherenkov radiation at a high enough rate to trigger early pulses of light that would be detected by the DOMs.

Ok found something interesting:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glashow_resonance

In 1959, the theoretical physicist Sheldon Glashow used the standard model of particle physics to predict¹ that negatively charged W bosons (W⁻ bosons) can be formed in the collisions between an electron and an electron antineutrino (the antimatter version of an electron neutrino). This process is now called the Glashow resonance, and occurs for electron antineutrinos that have energies of about 6.3 petaelectronvolts (1 PeV is 10¹⁵ eV).

[...]

When a neutrino interacts with matter, charged particles are produced. These emit light known as Cherenkov radiation when they travel through a transparent medium (such as ice or water) at a speed greater than the speed of light in that medium.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00486-1

Quote from Paradigmnoia

However, an antineutrino collision with an electron would/could cause Cherenkov radiation.

Can you expand on this or provide an article?

Quote from Paradigmnoia

(Which is how to find neutrinos anyways.)

Based on the above? How so?

Quote from Paradigmnoia

I think that there needs to be a charged light speed particle to make Cherenkov radiation, so neutrinos of any kind are out.

See:

https://neutrinos.fnal.gov/wp-…ecay-leptonnumber-web.jpg

I'm not entirely sure how Cherenkov radiation arises, and have some questions.

I looked on the antineutrino map here and due to it considered whether Cherenkov radiation arises from antineutrinos?

What are your thoughts?

Based on my understanding of Unified Gravities device some 4-5 years ago, they were colliding lithium with protons and hydrogen to elicit fusion. I suppose this is different than calculating the ideal values for nuclear resonance for deuterium and lithium-7 as I mentioned above and then inducing decoherence or sustaining a plasma for fusion. Although, they were getting a COP of 3700, but only a power output of 15 kW from their device.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Check the Lipinski work. Mechanism is my now very old "about LENR" paper...

I just checked out the old patent, and don't think its related to what I am professing. Open to new thoughts. I had one of their newer patents from Unified Gravity before they went to the government.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Check the Lipinski work. Mechanism is my now very old "about LENR" paper...

Sorry, don't have it. Are you referencing the Unified Gravity Corp. that he had?

What do you mean by "about LENR paper"?

Possibly, better explained via Brillouin's device with lattice effects, but instead utilizing lithium-7 and deuterium or tritium with resonance frequencies, and then quickly causing a voltage spike or diffraction spike to elicit an electron discharge from the resonance state.

Quote from Alan Smith

As you know Lithium and Hydrogen Isotopes will react chemically to form metal hydrides. I have a hunch that where that happens further 'under the counter' sharing is unlikely.

Well, yes. Typically in aq solutions this happens.

I've become more interested in fusion from tritium and lithium-7 under resonance effects occurring between the two isotopes.

As mentioned solar panels can mitigate this issue with membranes simply polarizing and then depolarizing with an electric voltage applied periodically whist the lithium-7 absorbs electrons from the silicon underneath. (Possible production of tritium likely)

***What is most interesting is utilizing for fusion power these electron sharing activities between the above mentioned isotopes at much lower temperatures to elicit fusion.****

I believe electrolysis is another avenue for this resonance phenomenon also.

Thanks.

Oh, and nickel and deuterium LENR effects must surely occur at certain resonances as per the Q-Pulse mechanism of Brillouin, yes?

Wyttenbach , to be so bold, may I ask for your opinion?

Quote from Alan Smith

Back to the point -I'm not familiar with the term 'sharking'. Can you calrify?

I'm sorry, that was a typo. I meant, "sharing". I believe that lithium can share electrons with deuterium uniquely or for tritium to produce highly efficient solar panels or electrolysis devices or even small scale LENR devices for production of electric power through a quick resonance effect through sharing electron orbitals with above mentioned compounds and then a quick dissonance or reverse polarity induced electrically.

I hope to see very efficient deuterium oxide devices with lithium-7 for solar panels or potentially electrolysis devices.

Otherwise, it's standard understanding that lithium-7 reacts positively with uranic elements whilst undergoing these resonance effects.

Thank you for posting.

Quote from Alan Smith

Of course. If I can help I will.

What are your thoughts about nuclear resonance between lithium-6/7 with substrates like deuterium or tritium for small power devices described above?

Potentially, lithium-7 can preserve the longevity of thorium/uranium/plutonium fuel significantly through sharing the S,P,D,F orbitals for above mentioned elements. Yes?

Alan Smith , may I ask for your opinion or advice on this issue?

Forgot to mention that some very efficient LED lamps with lithium-6 and deuterium would be possible.