.
by
by
Jacques Chauveheid
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
.
Rafal Krych:
We are working…
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
This is why humanity needs home e-Cats so badly: How a solar storm two years ago nearly caused a catastrophe on Earth.
Best wishes and keep up with good work with ending the “Fossil Fuels Age”!
Rafal
Dear Andrea,
This is why humanity needs home e-Cats so badly: .
Best wishes and keep up with good work with ending the “Fossil Fuels Age”!
Rafal
Curiosone:
The answer is yes. It is the foundamental of LENR.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Curiosone:
I have ordered to myself to study and update myself on Physics at least 2 hours per day, rain or shine.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Do you continue to study physics, or now you just make your experiments and manufacturing?
W.G.
Dr Rossi:
Are you still convinced that the “lattice” theory of Norman Cook is right?
Thank you for your answer,
W.G.
Italo R.:
Yes, you are absolutely right. The People of the E-Cat are extremely important . It maintains us constantly under a positive pressure. I am very disappointed not to be able to give information about the TIP-R2, of which I know nothing, and also for the 1 MW plant, about which we will give information only after a period of consolidation of the operation. That’s why now we talk of the rumors of Harley Davidsons. By the way, I read that many fans of this motorcycles are angry about the electric Harley, since its characteristic noise is an iconic heritage of these ouvres d’art. Anyway, it will not take long before we will have to talk about specific things.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
“… we, the Team….”
and that reminds me “We, The People of E-Cat” 🙂
Kind Regards,
Italo R.
Paul:
…and this give further evidence that no paint is indispensable.
I really hope, and I am sure that, the Team of Industrial Heat has in me a good, but not indispensable, player. Their organization will overcome my subjective shortcomings.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
p.s.: 1 a.m. of Thursday July 24th, and we are working: we, the Team.
Andrea,
In regards to: “Nobody is indispensable.”
If you change the paint, you change the painting.
Paul
Frank Acland:
Nobody is indispensable.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
So do you feel that if you were to step away from your work now (I do not expect this), that the team at IH would be able to continue along developing E-Cat technology very well without you?
Many thanks,
Frank Acland
Frank Acland:
My team will be able to make better than me for sure.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Steven N Karels:
No more brumm brumm?
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Harley Davidson is now testing a prototype electric powered motorcycle. Perhaps, in the future, an eCat powered motorcycle? So many possible eCat applications and so little time to think of them all.
Dear Andrea,
Regarding the first public 1 MW plant. As you have designed, built and tested it, do you now see ways it can be improved? Can the masterpiece be surpassed by an even better masterpiece?
Many thanks,
Frank Acland
Curiosone:
I am hearing the rumor of a Harley Davidson making “brumm, brumm” out of the window of my laboratory. That’s some rumor!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Curiosone:
The work of the Third Independent Party does not depend on me, as I wrote repeatedly. I must ask that the discussions about the report are put on hold until it will be published. I do not know, and cannot know when it will be ready and cannot provide any better information. I understand your feeling, I am very anxious too, but we must be patient.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
DTravchenko:
Yes.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
DTravchenko:
We find the work of our competitors to be anyway respectable and noteworthy.
LENR as a field is rapidly pursuing cleaner and more affordable sources of energy. Making the world a better place through cleaner and more affordable energy is why we are working so hard with our R&D testing.
This is a good thing and would be of great benefit to Society.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Andrea Rossi:
What do you think in general, not in particular, of all the people working in the LENR ?
Warm Regards,
D.T.
Dr Andrea Rossi:
In your team is also a nuclear physicist?
Warm Regards,
D.T.
Andrea:
I imagine you are talking with the TIP now and again: how is the sensation, good or bad?
W.G.
I am hearing a rumor that the report of the TIP will be published in September…
W.G.
This article was published in 1999,today it is of storical interest.
http://www.radiocittadelcapo.it/wp-content/uploads/2-CHIMICA-E…MISTERI1.doc
Regads G G
Curwin,
If eCat can use 3He AND it is economical to mine it on the moon, it would be less costly to use it rather than transporting hydrogen from the Earth. Probably hydrogen will be transported to the moon but for water unless vast quantities can be found during mining.
Steven N Karels:
Even with the *astronomical cost of space launches, there seems to be enough energy in a kilo of H/D/Ni (or whatever) to perhaps make 3He a moot question?
Steven N. Karels:
Thank you, anyway interesting as an idea. Obviously I cannot give information, in positive, or in negative, regarding the materials I use or do not use in the reactor, even if projected in the future.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Helium-3 is readily available on the Moon’s regolith. It is also commercially available, albeit rather expensive. If you could obtain a sufficient quantity, you could test it. If it proves successful, you could then patent the process. That might serve you well but, of course, patents are limited in time and we do not know when a lunar colony will be viable. Use of lunar 3He would be much more economical than transporting hydrogen to the moon.
There was conjecture that 3He might be the fusion fuel in the near future, be mined on the moon and transported to the Earth. If eCat is successful with nickel and ordinary hydrogen, there will be no need for lunar mining for Earth’s fuel needs.
Steven N. Karels:
Honestly, I am not able to answer. Being an experimentalist, I will answer you when I will go to the moon, try it with a series of tests and I will satellite you the results, positive or negative as they might be.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Looking to the future – do you think eCat technology could be employed on the Earth’s moon, but using 3He instead of 1H? Please let me know if the result could be positive or negative (LOL)
Steven N. Karels:
Thank you for your futuristic insight,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
AlainCo:
He,he,he…did the old expert of Los Alamos you heard of look like Peter Sellers? ( experimental observations reserve surprises).
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Just a funny question (the rest is either positive or negative).
Do you plan to build a tea kettle ? (even if it boils 10 tons of lyophilized tea)
It seems that from old expert of Los Alamos I heard of, only a tea kettle can make them change their position.
Scientific papers seems to have no value for most scientists. (experimental observation).
Dear Andrea Rossi,
The analysis I presented was regarding what would happen if the world population increased to 10 billion AND the per capita energy consumption of everyone reached the current USA level. Other than solar or hydro, energy production uses the energy stored within the fuel (nuclear, coal, natural gas or eCat). Since eCat emits no greenhouse gases nor dangerous residuals as in nuclear power generation, eCat could replace most other fuel-based systems without adversely affecting the Earth.
Georgehants:
He,he,he…I prefer coffee, but after playing tennis tea is better. Obviously this is jamesbondy language to talk about the catalyzers of the E-Cat (!) dodging the NDA.
Warm Regards,
A.
Dear Mr. Rossi, as there is very little info coming, could you confirm that you prefer British tea to American coffee.
I hope that is not covered by a NDA.
Ha.
Best wishes
Steven N. Karels:
The heat produced from the E-Cats is in substitution, not in addition, to the average.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 20, 2014, at 8:49 PM, “Steven Karels” wrote:
Too Much Heat?
If the world switched to eCat technology for all of its energy needs, would the planet become too warm?
Assumptions:
1. ECat technology used to generate electricity for all forms of energy produced (heating, cars, electrical).
2. World population of 10 billion (10,000,000,000) people
3. All people consume at the USA per capita level.
4. Effective conversion efficiency is 30% (Carnot of 45% plus COP of 6)
5. If the total man-made energy release is less than 1% of the solar insolation, then no excessive heating should be observed
Given:
1. The total solar energy absorbed by Earth’s atmosphere, oceans and land masses is approximately 3,850,000 exajoules (EJ) per year or 3.85 * 10^^24 Joules
2. USA per capita energy consumption per year = 300 GJ or 3 * 10^^11 J per year per person (USA)
Computation:
1.0 * 10^^10 people * 3 * 10^^9 J/(year – person) = 3 * 10^^19 J per year
Accounting for a 30% efficiency means the amount of heat released per year is 1.0 * 10^^20 J
Therefore, since the amount of energy released, (with everyone on the planet consuming as much energy as the average American), the net increase is less than 1% of 1% of the solar insolation and excess heating should not be a problem. This, without the release of greenhouse gases.
Silvio Caggia:
Yes, you are correct.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Lata:
I am sorry for your feeling, but I am not playing with candies. For what concerns the Third Independent Party report, there is nothing I can do but waiting the publication, which does not depend on me and I cannot have more information. Regarding the 1 MW plant, we cannot give any specific information before we are allowed to publish the data of its operations. We cannot risk to give data that eventually could become substantially different. Imagine you have candies you do not know what are they made with and you have to say to your children “I cannot give you these candies until I am not sure they are positive for you”.
Thank you for your kind attention,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hi Andrea,
As a mother of two little kids, I must reprimand you for constantly saying results will be positive or negative. It is like showing a kid a candy wrapper. When the kid gets interested, you say candy may or may not be in there. I believe you must be a grandfather. It is not very grandfatherly for you to be teasing your followers 🙂
Regards and Good Luck,
Lata
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Reading between lines, it seems to me that the 1MW plant 001 is an evolution from the bologna container, while the TIP report is about the hot-cat cylinder module.
This could explain why the positive or negative results of the last has no direct relation with the results of the first…
My idea is that the goal of the last is to study the “rossi effect” by itself, while the object of the first is the industrial application of the effect…
To make an automotive metafora: can we say hot-cat is like a “formula 1” car while 1MW plant is like a “rally” car?
Steven N. Karels:
Of course. As I said, photos and data will be published when the visits will be allowed.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Photos are nice, but I would rather see test data – output versus input.
Giuliano Bettini:
We will publish the photos of the new 1MW plant .
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Georgehants:
There are no clues, just very sophisticated measurements of which we are waiting the results.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea,
georgehants says: “Come on, keep the galley happy, give us a small clue.”
I propose, just a Selfie with the new 1 MW plant.
All celebrities make a Selfie now. =D
Thanks
Giuliano Bettini
Angel Blume:
We will publish, from now on, only results of plants in operation. The Third Independent Report will be the last report published regarding an experiment on the current E-Cat or Hot Cat, , at least until we will not introduce significant modifications. We cannot give any further information about our plants until the opening of visits to our industrial plant in operation. About the TIP Report: it is not “so long delayed”, it is running through the normal reviewing period of any important scientific publication. There is no doubt that the results will be important, positive or negative as they might be.
Warm Regards,
A.R.