Relation between short-range forces and the concept of neutrality

.
by
Jacques Chauveheid
.
Read the whole article
Download the ZIP file
.
.
Introduction:
.
A. Preliminary remarks
If quantum mechanics can provide quantitative expressions of forces in conformity  with the work of Erhenfest and the principle of correspondence, recognized quantitative expressions for nuclear and weak forces do not currently exist. In addition, the four basic forces do not depend on temperature, since measured in vacuum between particles.
In one of his books, Abraham Pais recalled a comment by Rutherford during the 1914-1919 period: “the Coulomb forces dominate if v (speed of alpha particles) is sufficiently small”, evidencing by these words the velocity-dependence of the strong-nuclear force. However, since Rutherford did not apparently refer to temperature, optimal conditions for nuclear fusion do not necessarily arise in disordered configurations characterized by extremely high temperatures, such as those encountered in stars like the sun. Even compared with galaxy formation, hot fusion in many stars seems the slowest and most inefficient physical phenomenon in the universe, because the sun’s ten billion year lifetime has an order of magnitude similar to the age of the universe, this circumstance having been highly beneficial for the life on earth.
Although not based on equations, Rutherford’s conclusion constitutes the essence of the “cold” approach to nuclear fusion and reactions starting from moderate energy levels, instead of extreme temperatures hardly controlling with precision the physical parameters ruling nuclear phenomena. In this view, a better theoretical understanding of these parameters will help nuclear technologies.
.

B. Theoretical antecedents
Eddington mentioned the concept of asymmetric affine connection in 1921 and pointed out applications in microphysics, but he did not pursue this idea [5]. In 1922, Elie Cartan introduced geometric torsion, as the antisymmetric part of an asymmetric affine connection. In May 1929, Cartan wrote a letter to Einstein in which he recommended the use of the differential formalism he developed, but Einstein did not follow Cartan’s advice.
Between 1944 and 1950, J. Mariani published four papers dealing with astrophysical magnetism and introduced an “ansatz” structurally similar to that used in the present theory. The German word “ansatz”, used by Ernst Schmutzer (correspondence), refers to a supposed relationship between fields of distinct origin, for example geometric contrasting with physical. Einstein also used an ansatz when he identified gravitation with the 4-space metric, but he did not put it in the form of an equation, presumably because being trivial.
The organization of the paper is the following: Section II details the Lagrangian formulation and the calculus of variations. Section III is about field equations and quantitative expressions of forces. Section IV introduces the short-range force between charged particles, first referred to as strong-nuclear between nucleons. Section V is on Yukawa and complexity. Section VI details the short-range forces in both systems electron-proton and electron-neutron, evidencing a weak nuclear mechanism in LENR technologies.

When not stated otherwise, mathematical conventions are those of reference.
.
Read the whole article
Download the ZIP file
.

712 comments to Relation between short-range forces and the concept of neutrality

  • Andrea Rossi

    Ralf:
    For whom it may interest: I wake up at 6, run 1 hour ( or bike, or tennis, or swim, I consider mandatory 1 hour exercise per day), two hours per day are dedicated to study Physics, mandatory, either related to the E-Cat or independent from it, or at least not directly related. Twelve hours are dedicated to the work on the E-Cats and Hot Cats, which depends on the specific situation, can be experiments in the laboratory, control of the manufacturing to study better systems, invention every day of new things to make it better together with the great Team with which I share the job in IH. This can happen in the factory of IH or of the Customer of IH or in other locations of IH: inventions, I can’t help to stay without them. Measurements analysis are a daily duty too. Obviously meetings are part of the job, to maintain a clear vision of the precise duties of every component of the Team, that vibrate upon a dynamic field. The remaining hours are dedicated to my personal life, usually, but many times these plans have to change: it happened that I had to stay 36 hours straight on a plant in critical operation to control it, without sleeping, eating, just drinking water. Luckily God gave me strong excess of stamina and I use it, if necessary, to the limit. In September I am afraid this situation will be frequent, but with the help of my great team we can do it. Failure is not an option.
    Hobby: I adore to read books of Physics, I need to learn. Recreation: Play Tennis with my woman ( much stronger than me). I also like to play drums ( Jazz), but I have no more the time to exercise, so I am losing the skill: years ago I was very good, now I stink.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    WaltC:
    Yes, this is a good idea, even if not practicable until we have a domestic certification.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    I have a great Team that makes it possible.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Ralf

    Dear Andrea,
    could you tell us something about an average working day?
    At what time you start work, end work?
    What do you do the most time?
    Meetings? Study results? Making drawings? Visiting the labs/fab? Travelling to other IH sites?
    Lunch time? After works? Hobby/Recreation? Do you still do your running sport?
    Maybe you can give us little look inside your daily business as a R&D Chief in Operation :-)
    Thanks
    __
    Ralf

  • WaltC

    Dear Andrea,
    I like the “all of the above” list that you have in mind for upcoming work. It’s good to have lots of irons in the fire– it keeps everyone energized.

    – Is the following item (that’s been discussed here before) also on your “radar screen”?:

    A portable E-cat based room heater that plugs into a normal power outlet, provides a high COP, and can heat a single room with a thermal output of, say, 0.5KW-1.5KW.

    I realize you’re not currently certified to sell such a device to the residential market, but once you had certification, if you had something like that “on the shelf” and ready to go, it would be a quick sell into many homes around the world since it has the benefit of ultra high efficiency and “no installation required!”. We could pick it up at the portable heater section of any store and plug it in immediately.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear AR,

    You must have discovered cloning and made many copies of yourself to do so much, so continually, and so well… (LOL)

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels.
    f
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    As the independent report draws near and your 1MW industrial unit is eventually released to your customer, what will you be working on? Is it

    a. A higher sustained eCat temperatures?
    b. Multi-MegaWatt thermal output eCat?
    c. Smaller eCat output?
    d. Non-electrically driven eCat (e.g., natural gas)?
    e. Electricity production?
    f. All of the above (plus some more)?

    What do you plan to be working on in 2015?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    There are not free meals ( First Principle of Thermodynamics).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Angel Blume:
    Thank you,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    I would say that we are working to have also at higher temperatures the same reliability.
    Yes, the production of high temperature and low temperature plants will have separated lines.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi,

    Have E-Cat systems that could be used in the lower temperature range of 200-400 degrees Celsius more developed and “robust” than Higher Temperature systems to be used in a temperature range of 600-800+ degrees Celsius? By more robust, I mean more reliable, more efficient, having greater operation time before recharging etc. Lower temperature systems would probably be less expensive as well.

    If so, are there any plans on dividing the product line into lower and higher temperature systems? (Not Industrial vs Domestic systems, but Industrial High Temp and Industrial Medium Temp systems.)

    Best regards,

    Joseph Fine

  • Angel Blume

    Dear Mr. Rossi

    I thank you for your response. It makes sense for me and reveals the “-cat” expression. Keep secrecy of catalyst. Good luck.

  • Daniel De Caluwé

    Dear dr. Rossi,

    The point I try to make is this:

    Because of human influence in present climate change, and because of the fact that the present nuclear energy technology is not good enough (safety and environmental issues), and in the case the results of the tests (mentioned below) would be ‘negative’, and imagine (hypothetical) to the level that IH would decide to stop funding your work, it’s my opinion that you or someone else should go on with your work, even if that would mean with public money, and this just for the reason that the world needs your technology (or the further development of it in case of ‘negative’ results). And confronted with the environmental problems of present solutions (fossil fuels and present nuclear technology), and the limitations of others (wind and solar), and the fact that the world population rises quickly (at the moment 7 billion people, and in 2040 or 2050 maybe 10 billion people on this planet, who will ask for the same living standard as we have now), we maybe need a kind of Manhatten Project (for the further development of Cold Fusion, LENR and/or QUAR), and why not, financed by the UN? (The public worldwide interest is or could be bigger than the private interests, working via the free market, but that’s just my opinion 😉

    Kind Regards,

  • Koen Vandewalle

    Andrea,

    Even in the case that the report of TIP2 is negative, then does the Rossi-Effect bring new scientific insights that industry can rely on to create substantial solutions to the problems of the world of today ?
    I mean very specific towards energy and environmental problems.

    I derive that from an earlier answer of yours that you plan to work even more in that case of a negative outcome.

    It remains a very strange situation that a technology that could avoid some kind of world armageddon, remains private property. There exist examples of inventions with military and/or intelligence properties that become military secrets or of national interest, and therefore can not be exploited by private persons or companies.

    I know this is a very stupid question because most of the problems we have now are often man-made and they could be solved if all humans were able to think and work together with sophisticated systems of motivation and redistribution.

    We’re mostly looking for an easy way out, that does not demand to change our habits a lot. Do you, in general, believe there is an easy way out ?

    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  • Andrea Rossi

    Carlo Marcena:
    Please read my answer to Daniel De Caluwé one hour ago.
    Warmest Regards,
    A.R.

  • Carlo Marcena

    Dear Andrea, dear All,

    I want to underline and support Hank Mills last contribution to this blog, and in particular his statement “The simple truth is that the E-Cat works. Regardless as to the upcoming report, there can be no reasonable doubt of this”.
    At this point in time, the only doubts may be about COP value, dependability, availability, etc.: all of them being fundamental issues to be identified, measured, resolved, improved …, still – for sure – in need of important R&D work. But all of them notwithstanding, another quote from Hank last message, “the E-Cat technology has already proven to be real”.
    Warm regards,
    CM

  • Andrea Rossi

    Daniel De Caluwé:
    I did not say that. The results could be positive or negative and the implications in both cases will be relevant. In what measure I am not able to say, will depend on the results.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Angel Blume:
    1- yes
    2- confidential
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Angel Blume

    Dear Mr. Rossi

    I wonder if you could answer following questions.

    1.-Is the so called Rossi effect explainable through the Standard Model?
    2.-Having Ni60 the maximal binding energy, are you working with any other Ni stable isotope?

  • Daniel De Caluwé

    Dear dr. Rossi,

    As I also know for a very long time that you have something very valuable (based on all previous tests and all information we got so far), I agree completely with the last message of Hank Mills, so, if the results of the Third Party Test (nr. 2) and the results of the 1MW plant (tested at the site of a customer) would turn out to be ‘negative’, we on this forum all know that in that case, it could only be because of commercial reasons, but not because your technology doesn’t work or isn’t valuable for the world. And because of the human influence in the present climate change, and the fact that the present nuclear technology is not good enough (because of safety and environmental issues) the world needs your technology very badly! So, even if the results would be ‘negative’, we on this forum know that this could only be for commercial reasons, and that you already have a product that – in that case- is almost ready for the market, so you and/or other researchers have to go on with your R&D work than!

  • Andrea Rossi

    Tom Conover:
    Thank you!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    Our funding will come from the Customers, if the plants will operate profitably.
    Thank you for your kind words.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    I understand that for certain reasons you must appear impartial about the potential results – positive or negative – of the recent testing. However, in my own personal opinion, the E-Cat technology has already proven to be real. Even if the test results turned out to be negative, the E-Cat technology has already been proven to work:

    1 – In dozens of previous tests, many of which were conducted or monitored by third parties.

    2 – In many different form factors ranging from the size if a D Cell battery to a two liter soda bottle.

    3 – Using many different types of caloremetry including tests heating water, heating air, messuring IR radiation being emitted, etc.

    4 – In constant powered mode, intermittent powered mode, and self sustained mode in which the output continued for many hours with no input.

    5 – In tests conducted at different locations.

    The simple truth is that the E-Cat works. Regardless as to the upcoming report, there can be no reasonable doubt of this. There is a tiny chance of course that the reactors you sent for the recent testing may have not produced any excess power due to fuel contamination. But even if they didn’t, the tech as a whole would still work.

    What I want to see happen is the world wake up to the fact that the ideal power source for the next several hundred years has arrived. There is a lot of engineering and R and D that must be done. But when a fraction of the funding that goes into wind or solar power starts going into the E-Cat, all of these issues will be resolved.

  • Tom Conover

    Dear Andrea,

    I hear you saying “The data related to the 1 MW plant ” (that is now) ” in the factory of the Customer of Industrial Heat …” to Eernie1 and I just have to smile at the progress you continue to make!!

    Godspeed, my friend.

    Tom Conover

  • Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    The data related to the 1 MW plant in the factory of the Customer of Industrial Heat will be published in due time. Until then we will be under NDA.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe,
    one last remark:

    Look the difference between the acceleration and deceleration in the 3 cases:

    1) Free electron being accelerated (or decelerated) in Euclidian space:
    The electron is submtted to an electromagnetic force aplied on the same direction (or in contrary direction) of the motion

    2) Electron in the atom model of Quantum Mechanics:
    The electron is submitted to the electromagnetic force due to the proton in the same direction (or contrary direction) of the motion when the electron moves in the radial direction.

    3) Electron in the atom model of Quantum Ring Theory:
    Moving in circular trajectory in the levels n=1, n=2, n=3, etc., the electron is NOT submitted to any electromagnetic force in the same direction (or contrary direction) of the motion.
    Therefore, when the energy of the photon absorbed (or emitted) by the atom is transferred to the electron, there is NOT any force applied on the electron toward the direction (or contrary the direction) of its motion.
    In the case of emission of photon, it is not the electromagnetic field of the proton which emits the photon when the electron decelerates because of the emission of the photon (unlike, in the case of free electron decelerating in the Euclidian space, the emission of photon is due to the electromagnetic field applied on the electron).

    regards
    wlad

  • eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    At this time I presume you and your team have been operating the factory unit for a lengthy time(more than a month). Have you run into unexpected bugs(problems)? If so, have they been eliminated? In my experience with many startups,there have been problems(mostly minor) with all of them. Expect them and you will not be disappointed.
    Bona Fortuna!!!

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in August 17th, 2014 at 2:24 AM

    Wladimir,

    Let me re-phrase my last question:

    In QRT, since either a positive or a negative change in radius R of the helical trajectory of an electron results in energy (in the form of photons) being emitted only, what happens to radius R when energy (from a photon or anything else) is absorbed by the electron?
    ============================================

    COMMENT

    Joe,
    considering an Euclidian space (not into the atom), we have the following for the change in the radius R of the helical trajectory:

    a) When there is shrinkage in the radius R (acceleration of the electron), the electromagnetic field is in front of the motion, applying a force in the direction of the motion. The photons are created by the energy of the electromagnetic field.

    b)In the case of the growth of the radius R (deceleration of the electron) there is an electromagnetic field at the back of the electron’s motion, applying a force against the force. The photons also are created by the energy of the electromagnetic field.

    The energy from which the photons are emitted is not of the electron

    Considering into the atom, we have:

    In the case of a photons emitted or absorbed by an atom, as I said the energy will be extracted or supplied only for electrons moving in a circular orbit about the proton (levels n=1, n=2, n=3, etc.).

    The gradient of aether density exists only in RADIAL direction within the electrosphere.
    Moving in CIRCULAR orbit, there is not gradiente density of the aether. The electron’s motion occurs as if it had been moving in an Euclidian space.

    a) When the electron moving in circular orbit the atom absorbs a photon, the energy of the photon is absorbed by the electron, it has acceleration, and the radius R has a shrinkage

    b) When the electron moving in circular orbit and the atom emits a photon, the electron loses that energy of the photon, it has deceleration, and the radius R has a growth.

    .

    But pay attention that the situation within the atom is different than for a free electron being accelerated by an electromagnetic field, because:

    1) Into the atom the energy of the photon (absorbed or emitted by the atom) changes the kinetic energy of the electron

    2) For a free electron, the change of the kinetic energy of the electron is due to the electromagnetic field applied, which changes the electron velocity and at the same time emits photons.

    .

    Note also that, when the electron moves in RADIAL direction in the electrosphere of an atom, there is not emission of photons.

    Probably the energy of a photon absorbed does not change directly the kinetic energy of motion of the electron. The mechanism can be the following:
    1) The energy of the photon accelerates the velocity of the spin of the electron (increases its kinetic energy of spin).
    2) The kinetic energy of spin is transfered to kinetic energy of motion, and the electron restaures the original speed of its spin

    In the case of a photon emitted by the atom, and the electron moving with speed V, we have:
    1) Firstly there is a decrease in the velocity of the electron’s spin
    2) In sequence the electron absorbs energy from is kinetic energy of motion, decreasing the speed V, and restaures the speed of the spin.

    Joe,
    note the difference between the two models of hydrogen atoms:

    a) In the case of Quantum Mechanics, as the space is Euclidian into the atom, there is the force of the electromagnetic field of the proton actuating on the electron (like happens in the case of a free electron moving along an Euclidian space, and accelerated by an electromagnetic field)..
    That’s why the electron needs to emit energy if it moves between two levels, in radial direction.

    b) In the case of Quantum Ring Theory, as the space is non-Euclidian into the atom, the force of the electromagnetic field of the proton is canceled by the gradient of the aether.
    Therefore, the emission and absorption of the energy of photons by the electrons happens in a different way of that considered in Quantum Mechanics, where the electron is under the influence of the electromagnetic force due to the field of the proton.

    regards
    wlad

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Yes, we have doubtless reached good results in past, but not enough.
    You are right: let’s wait patiently. It will not be for ever…
    Warmest Regards,
    A.R.

  • Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi:

    I discussed this with other people on Facebook, and I conclude you may have meant…. ” it is ‘too’ soon to make claims of results that have not yet been achieved.” Please keep working and achieve these results, preferably positive.

    Why not claim the results that have already been achieved?

    Patient regards,

    Joseph Fine

  • Joe

    Wladimir,

    Let me re-phrase my last question:

    In QRT, since either a positive or a negative change in radius R of the helical trajectory of an electron results in energy (in the form of photons) being emitted only, what happens to radius R when energy (from a photon or anything else) is absorbed by the electron?

    All the best,
    Joe

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Thank you for your correction.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Joseph Fine

    Andrea,

    In your reply to Hank Mills, you suggest there may soon be “claims of results that have not yet been achieved”. With the greatest respect, I think this means there may soon be “claims of results that have not been achieved before”, rather than claims of results that no one has achieved.

    I apologize for being picky. But this is only a matter of words, not Physics.

    Grammatical regards,

    Joseph

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in August 16th, 2014 at 4:37 PM

    Wladimir,

    In QRT, since only emission of a photon occurs with either a positive or a negative change in the radius R of the helical trajectory of the electron, what happens to this radius R when a photon is absorbed instead of emitted? Logically, should not R remain unaffected? If so, then what is the mechanism for electrons absorbing photons in QRT?

    All the best,
    Joe
    =========================================

    Joe,
    electrons do not absorb photons.

    Photons are absorbed by atoms.
    It’s a process of resonance, involving the proton (considering hydrogen atom), the aether of the electrosphere, and the helical trajectory of the electron.
    Probably the electromagnetic energy of the photon is captured by the aether, and trasnformed in kinetic energy of the electron.

    The electron does not capture the electromagnetic energy of the photon when the electron is moving in radial direction within the electrosphere. The electron is not able to do it.

    The electron captures the energy of the photons only when the electron is moving about the proton, in the fundamental status n=1, or in circular trajectory at other levels n=2, n=3, etc.

    Any photon absorbed in a level (for instance n=2 ) must have the same wavelength of the photon emitted in that level ( n=2 in our example here).
    Photons of other wavelength are not absorbed in that level n=2. This explain the spectrum of absorption, discovered by William Hyde Wollaston in 1802 and rediscovered by Fraunhofer in 1814:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraunhofer_lines

    regards
    wlad

  • Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    Please remind that the report of the Third Independent Party is still under discussion as well as the analysis of the data; also the industrial plant needs a long period of validation; as a consequence of these considerations, we must be well aware of the fact that the results could be positive or negative. Substantial R&D is also on course. We are working at the maximum level allowed by our force, but it is soon to make claims of results that have not yet been achieved.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    In addition to the E-Cat not requiring sunlight or wind it has another huge benefit: compactness and/or power denisity. A significant portion of the cost of a solar installation is the mounting. Solar and wind generators need large areas of space. Proponents of solar power forget that there is no way for a car (even with every inch covered with hypothetical, 100% efficency solar panels) to run continuously using solar. A Tesla Roadster, for example, would have to tow a trailer with hundreds of panels to continually drive a normal speeds.

    The E-Cat, however, can produce huge amounts of power from a compact space. An E-Cat generator could fit under the hood of a car, in a closet, or in a shed. Producing 10kw, or more, from something the size of a two liter soda bottle is amazing. Even adding volume for a generator to convert heat to electricity, the power density is still large.

    So in addition to 24/7 operation, the compactness is also a benefit.

  • Joe

    Wladimir,

    In QRT, since only emission of a photon occurs with either a positive or a negative change in the radius R of the helical trajectory of the electron, what happens to this radius R when a photon is absorbed instead of emitted? Logically, should not R remain unaffected? If so, then what is the mechanism for electrons absorbing photons in QRT?

    All the best,
    Joe

  • Andrea Rossi

    BroKeeper:
    1- We will be able to give these data when we will produce electric energy.
    2- If the renewable energy sources you are referring to are the ones without emissions like windmills or solar, the competition will be exclusively based upon economic considerations, taking in account the independence of the E-Cat from metheorological conditions ( wind force, “sunnity” , etc.). We will be able to make a comparative analysis when we will have an actual plant making electric energy.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Bob:
    Impossible to videotape.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Bob

    Dear Andrea Rossi

    Have you ever made videorecordings inside an e-cat chamber while the e-cat is in operation?

    If yes, can a video clearly show the so-called Rossi effect as it occurs.

    Thanks

    Bob

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in August 15th, 2014 at 10:02 PM

    Wladimir,

    On August 15th, 2014 at 3:45 PM, you ask the following:

    “Why the spin of the secondary fields Sn(p) of proton and Sn(e) of electron do not induce magnetic moments?”

    Since the electron and the proton do exhibit magnetic dipole moments, what is their cause then – the primary fields Sp(e) and Sp(p)?

    All the best,
    Joe
    ===========================================================

    COMMNENT

    Joe
    the radius of the fields Sn(e) and Sn(p) have the magnitude of the Bohr radius, R=10^-11 m.

    It’s a very large radius.

    If the spin of Sn(e) had magnetic moment, it would be in the order of magnitude several times larger than the electron’s magnetic moment measured in the experiments.

    The neutron is formed by proton+electron

    But the magnetic moment of the electron is 1000 times stronger than that of the neutron, and one could expect that the magnetic moment of the neutron would have to be 1000tims stronger that that measered in the experiments, by considering a model n=p+3.

    However, when the electron is captured by the proton, and they form the neutron, the electron loses its helical trajectory, and it loses its spin 1/2 (that’s why the neutron has spin 1/2)>
    So, we conclude that the electron’s magnetic moment is due to its helical trajectory.

    The hypothesis that electron’s magnetic moment and its spin is consequence of its helical trajectory was origanlly supposed by Schroedinger:

    ==============================================
    1. INTRODUCTION
    The idea that the electron spin and magnetic moment are generated by a localized circulatory motion of the electron has been proposed independently by many physicists.
    Schroedinger’s zitterbewegung (zbw) model for such motion is especially noteworthy, because it is grounded in an analysis of solutions to the Dirac equation.

    The Zitterbewegung Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics
    http://geocalc.clas.asu.edu/pdf-preAdobe8/ZBW_I_QM.pdf

    ===============================================

    regards
    wlad

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in August 15th, 2014 at 7:34 PM

    Wladimir,

    In QRT, why is there only EMISSION of energy when an electron undergoes either acceleration or deceleration in a vacuum? Should not one of these two conditions necessitate an ABSORPTION of energy instead? The following is your quote from August 14th, 2014 at 7:16 PM:

    “In the instant when occurs the reduction ∆R in the radius of the helical trajectory, there is emission of energy, according to Maxwell’s law.

    “The same happens when the electron is decelerated, but energy is emitted with the radius of the helical trajectory grows.”

    All the best,
    Joe
    ======================================================

    Why/how does an electron emit a photon when decelerating?
    http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/29877/why-how-does-an-electron-emit-a-photon-when-decelerating

  • BroKeeper

    Dear Andrea,

    With the advent of new Wind Farms like that pointed out by Robert Curto and Solar Farms built in the West could you and IH provide?:

    1. An Estimated ‘Levelized’ Cost of Electricity (LCOE) for HT E-CAT plants vs. the “Levelized Cost and Levelized Avoided Cost of New Generation Resources in the Annual Energy Outlook 2014” listed by National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) projections for 2019 (if not exact then a questimate)?
    http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/electricity_generation.cfm

    2. The Pros and Cons, other than cost, the HT E-Cat would have next to other low cost energy sources, specifically the renewable sources with the understanding we need all of them.

    With much respect, BK

  • Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    Changements in quantic status of elementary particles. Quanta are discrete and undivisible quantities of energy: you cannot divide energy infinitely, because at a certain point you arrive to an amount of energy that cannot be further divided: this is a “quantum” ( discovered by Planck) and gives name to the “Quantum Mechanics” as well as to the “Quantum Field Theory”. Imagine to see a car going away from you in the night: you will see the red lights get dimmer while it goes away and away…should you have an unlimited view, at a certain point you could see that arrived at a certain amount of light you could have no more the possibility to see it get dimmer, because all at a time you could see no light at all; it should be possible to see the same amount of light just making the car get closer a distance as small as you want: like when you use a switch to turn on a lamp, you have that amount of light, or you have no light, there are no possibilities to get a fraction of it: that’s a quantum ( a photon). Changements in quantic status determine energy transmission.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    p.s. “Quantum Regards” you granted me is a very small amount of regard, I would say: it’s is the mimimum possible regard you can reserve! ( he,he,he…)

  • Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    Thanks for the info,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Giuliano Bettini

    Dear Andrea,
    because I was unable to formulate a question, I try with a more direct question:
    what the heck do you mean by “quantum reactions”?
    Quantum Rergards,
    Giuliano Bettini.

  • Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, they plan to build a 3,000 MW Wind Farm for 6 billion
    dollars.
    Plus they have to build a 725 mile power line, for 3 billion dollars, to get the power to where it is needed.
    You can Google:
    LARGEST WIND FARM APPROVED IN WYOMING
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
    USA

  • Joe

    Wladimir,

    On August 15th, 2014 at 3:45 PM, you ask the following:

    “Why the spin of the secondary fields Sn(p) of proton and Sn(e) of electron do not induce magnetic moments?”

    Since the electron and the proton do exhibit magnetic dipole moments, what is their cause then – the primary fields Sp(e) and Sp(p)?

    All the best,
    Joe

  • Daniel De Caluwé

    Dear Readers,

    Although dr. Rossi can explain the Rossi Effect with present quantum fields theory, and although he doesn’t need a revolution in science, on this forum and with the E-cat of dr. Rossi, we’re not only witnessing a big revolution in energy technology, but with the messages of dr. Guglinsky also a revolution in science, and I would suggest: mark these pages in your favourites: 😉

    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=853&cpage=9#comment-987216

    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=853&cpage=9#comment-987498

    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=853&cpage=9#comment-987537

    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=853&cpage=9#comment-987815

    So, thank you very much to both!

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>