Rotating coupled mass in central orbits can only exist in stable quantized distances called energy surfaces. Using such a model and correctly deducing the density of matter in galaxies has been done by quite a few people. They all did show that we don't need dark matter and basic Newton laws work as expected. Unluckily the math of coupled rotating masses is a it more complicated than just writing some fancy - thrilling - papers about dark matter.
Yes, you right, the Dark Matter concept is nice for theoretical paper writing in our news media time.
But, it cannot be forever, already today after three decades the proponents of this idea are tired themself
to find any experimental evidences for Dark Matter existences.
I am not quite underestand the connection between rotating coupled mass and the constant velocity of outer stars in spiral galaxies.
Could you give a link to material about rotating coupled mass you are mentioning ?
From my point of view the explanation for the constant velocity is very simple - gravity has distance limit, when no
gravitational force is effecting these outer stars.
Of course, this rises another question about stars and galaxies formation. Modern physics claims that a star resulted from the gas condensation. The answer in h-space theory is different. Also the fact that spiral galaxies are increasing in size, i.e. galactic outskirts stars are flying away is fitting very good to the explanation in h-space theory. And, this is not the case for modern physics, it is very unclear why galaxies are increasing in size, see - https://www.forbes.com/sites/s…-scientists/#43681e505f95
Anyway, the h-space theory has much more than just a new view on the facts which were used to invent the Dark Matter concept.
Nice, if somebody would like to see a paradigm change in Physics I advise to read this site about h-space theory.
Just one example of a new view on a widely excepted interpretation about the distance unlimited action of gravitation.
There are the following facts:
1. Spiral galaxies are increasing in size, i.e. galactic outskirts stars are flying away.
2. Velocity of the galactic outskirts stars at the distance larger than some distance is constant.
3. Question - When velocity of physical body is constant ? Answer - when no force is applied to the body.
Conclusion from these facts is that gravitational force is not applied to the galactic outskirts stars. And,
this means that gravitation has distance limit. This is a conclusion from experimental (observational) data.
The h-space theory implies the existence of distance limit for gravitational interactions and it is independent from
the facts above, which become the experimental confirmation of the theory.
The key, a paradigm change in the h-space theory is originated from a new definition of physical Space.
What is the role of the plasma? Is it necessary for the generation of the excess heat or is it a byproduct of the heat?
At temperature 2000 °C, Li in gas phase (boiling point 1330 °C), Ni and Al are melted, so H is going in-out of Ni and H+ reacts with Li resulting in Li nuclei fission. If plasma is mix of Li+, H+ and electrons so plasma is source of heat. But, what is really the plasma in this case is open question.
One more question, based exclusively on my theoretical speculations. Why size is so small ? Besides the convenience to control, I see the dimension around 10 in order minus 4 - 5 meter is critical.
Is it really a wire?
All is an assumption.
As I have got from video (can be wrong), 0.6 mm is an active zone of fuel, so the tube itself can be a centimetre long, since you need connectors parts at both ends at least.
Just some conclusions from the demonstration:
1. The wire (the diameter less than 0.08 mm) made of NiAlLi – the fuel is placed in tube made of high temperature resistance material (temperature conductive).
2. The electric current flowing through the fuel is modulated and is the real activator of LENR – mainly the fission of Li. Thus, the fuel has electrical contact with control block modulating the input power.
3. LEN reaction is accompanying by generation of electric impulses able to pass to control block and they should be stopped to prevent the control box damage. These pulses generation is direct electricity generation from LENR and can be utilized.
If you do not believe, it is really not my problem.
I am sorry to say, but without providing the experimental data on neutrons flux, believing is not an argument for science and credibility.
Any claim needs evidence, without the data of neutron detection all your claims about this can not be taken seriously. Please, provide data of neutrons detection.
Quote from Shane D.: “Fantastic!
Now what about those "fuel wafers"? You know what I mean.”
My best guess is that the cat reactors are duplications of the fuel layers 8 times(steel/fuel) on either side of the heater layer. The fuel…
Actually, what I see on the figure is a cros-section of two tubes, not only a planar thing. The inner part of the inner tube has heater and the fuel is between inner tube and outer tube. It is possible that Rossi is still using the tubes, or he went from tube design to planar E-cat.
Quote from Valeriy Tarasov: “ backreaction.blogspot.de/p/talk-to-physicist.html
Modern type of academic scientist, a prominent physicist (participating in discussion of the Soul of Science - quantamagazine.org/20151216-ph…he-boundaries-of-science/)…
About the conference, for me it is interesting by the fact it was organized. It is indication of physics crisis. And, one more thing is that if physicists cannot explain something they simply use probability approach. Before, on this way quantum mechanics was born, now they would like to substitute the scientific method itself, and actually as in quantum mechanics, they are trowing away the principle of causality. No experiments to verify the theory - no causality - no science.
I just have found this by occasion and could not stay neutral :).
Link - http://backreaction.blogspot.de/p/talk-to-physicist.html
Modern type of academic scientist, a prominent physicist (participating in discussion of the Soul of Science - https://www.quantamagazine.org…he-boundaries-of-science/) and blogger suggests – talk to me 20 minutes about physics and it will cost you 50$ . Good business! Other guys are more accurate and selling their stories from textbooks in the form of books.
This is a nice example of the modern academic scientist – just business :). And, you are talking about new discoveries in LENR with such academic people, and trying to convince them to change their theories? It will kill their business.
Nice, the first real LENR alternative to E-cat - the other way of fission of stable light isotopes like lithium. Instead of the induction of fission by proton in E-cat - the induction by alpha particles from radioactive element. It looks more safe than another way of induction of lithium fission by neutron radioactive source (what actually happens in thermonuclear explosion).
IMHO. At different steps of development of anything new, the different things are useful.
For generation of new idea scepticism is poison, killing the new thing. Imagination and open mind is only the source of the new idea.
For the next step, to proof a new idea and to polish this idea constructive scepticism is useful.
LENR research is at the stage of transition from new newborn to starting to walk level. F&P initiated LENR, Rossi is already making babysitting .
If somebody considers that LENR is not real, why they are here at this forum at all ? IMHO this forum for people who accepted reality of LENR and would like to understand LENR in all details and to develop LENR technology. All sceptics about reality of LENR should find a new place for their conspiracy fraud insights.
1. All posts are welcome till they present the different ways of discussion of scientific, technology problems of LENR and around it.
2. A sceptical user is always good, and actually it is very useful, but pathosceptical behavior is bad for discussion, it destroys the discussion.
3. User ban should exist if there are deliberate, repetitive and empty (in sense of discussion and information, containing a statement like “this is crackpot”) posts from this user. A simplified example - if you say one, two, three times - it is a fraud, you are skeptical. But if you are saying this in every posts, that is pathology or organized defamation.
In the Thomson's paper from 1913, on Fig. 2 we see the parabola defined for O+ ions.
The charge-to-mass ratio of O+ ion from textbooks is 1/1836*16 = 1/29376
From h-space theory, the charge-to-mass ratio of the CO2+ is approximately 1/26950.
And, what is most likely from calculations according to h-space theory that is identification of NO2+ as O+, because:
1. NO2+ should be produced in result of the discharge in air, in the Thomson device.
2. in h-space theory the charge-to-mass ratio of the NO2+is approximately 1/29463, very close to the 1/29376 .
Main purpose of the lithium in the reactor is to make it breathe as I have described few months ago.
You can create sudden pressure changes in the reactor (of few bars) up and down just by faster temperature transitions.
This is used for nickel lattice…
IMHO The main purpose of the lithium in fuel is actually that lithium is a fuel - 7Li + H -> alpha particles
Nickel foam could do that !
What is the size of the pores in this foam ? From my point of view (based on the h-space theory) the diameter of these pores should be in the range of micrometer or less.
And, second question. How to fill the pores of foam with lithium ?
I have looked at the specification:
Material: Nickel Foam, Purity> 99.99%
Sold in roll only
Thickness: 1.6 mm
Net weight: 104g
Surface Density: 346g/m^2
Porosity: ≥95% (80-110 Pores per Inch)
Extensibility: Lengthwise≥5%; Widthwise≥12%
Tensile Strength：Lengthwise≥1.25N/mm^2; Widthwise≥1.00N/mm^2
From number of pores per Inch, in better case the diameter of pore is roughly 0.1 millimeter. If this foam can be filled with nanoparticles of LiAlH, and then squeezed, maybe it will be a right way.
Because of the short duration of all tests mentioned in the paper, except of the Lugano test, no significant changes in isotopes ratio of Li and Ni were detected (by ICP-MS method in case of Parhomov second test (АП2)) . Some strange things happened with other elements at the end of the Parhomov's test (АП2): increase of K, Cr, Si, Na, Mg, Ca, Ti, V and decrease of Al, Ni, Cl, Mn, Cu,Zn, but these changes are not reliable since this done by ICP-AES - i.e. on the surface of fuel.
Can we say undoubtly that nickel is melted in functioning E-cat, or it is only an idea? As I remember Rossi was saying that melting of E-cat fuel will stop the reaction. Did I miss something ?