.
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
.
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
Causality violated by the atom model of Quantum Mechanics
Dear Joe
In my book “Os Dados que Deus Escondeu” (The Dice God Hid) published in 2003 in Brazil, in the Introduction it is explained why the atom model of Quantum Mechanics violates the causality.
Os Dados que Deus Escondeu
http://bodigaya.com.br/index.php/os-dados-que-deus-escondeu.html
Let me give a little idea why there is violation of the causality.
According to QM the atom emits photons when the electron changes its position from a level to another. The electron can, for instance, to go from n=1 to n=2, or from n=2 to n=4, or from n=1 to n=3, or from n=4 to n=1, etc.
But there is not, in QM, any cause responsible for some specific sequence. For instance, why sometimes does the electron go from n=1 to n=2, and sometimes it goes from n=1 to n=4? From the theory there is no way to find the physical cause for the reason why, from a starting point at the same initial level n=1, sometimes the electron goes to n=2, sometimes it goes to n=3, and sometimes it goes to n=4.
Bohr proposed the selection rules so that to describe that “statistical” behavior of the electron. However it is only a mathematical description. The cause of the sequence of the jumpings is not pointed out.
Suppose some atom A has the following sequence of six jumpings:
1) From n=1 to n=3
2) From n=3 to n=2
3) From n=2 to n=4
4) From n=4 to n=2
5) From n=2 to n=3
6) From n=3 to n=1
7) … and the sequence is ended, and it starts again, and it is repeated again, and again, and again…
What the cause of such a sequence is?
As Quantum Mechanics works via statistical laws, we dont have to expect any specific sequence when the electron moves from a level to another. According to the model of Quantum Mechanics, the sequence would have to be chaotic, and never repeated again. However, we know from experiments that, for the atom A considered above, the sequence is repeated indefinitely forever.
Suppose we take a die, and in the first of its side we write 1, in the second side we write 2, and so one, til to write 6 in the sixth side.
If we start to throw the die, it will give a chaotic sequence of extractions, for instance as follows: 5-3-5-2-1-4-3-6-6-4-2-1-5-4-3-6-2-6-4-5-…
There is not any repetition in the sequence. This is just the sequence which the model of the atom A, according to Quantum Mechanics, had to have.
Suppose that we want to build a die able to give the following sequence:
1) first extraction = 1
2) second extraction = 3
3) third extraction = 2
4) fourth extaction = 4
5) Fifth extraction = 2
6) sixth extraction = 3
7) seventh extraction = 1… , and so we realize that it is the sequence of emission of photons by the atom A.
Continuing to throw the die, it will repeat again the same sequence, and the sequence is never stopped.
How can we do it?
Well, we can to get it, for instance, by installing an apparatus within the die (with springs and an iron sphere moving within channels), so that it will follow the wished sequence.
QUESTION: What is the difference of such die and the atom model of Quantum Mechanics?
RESPONSE: The difference is because while the die has a physical device responsible for the extractions always in the same sequence , unlike the atom model of Quantum Mechanics has not any physical device capable to produce always the same sequence of photons emission observed in the experiments.
So, Quantum Mechanics is phantasmagoric. It works without physical causes.
.
Why the spin of the secondary fields Sn(p) of proton and Sn(e) of electron do not induce magnetic moments
Joe,
do you remember our discussion about the rotation of the secondary field Sn , here in the JoNP ?
Along the discussion I had explained that the spin of the field Sn does not induce magnetic moment.
Ahead is a stretch of the paper Aether Structure for unification between gravity and electromagnetism, submitted for publication in JoNP, showing the reason why the spin of the field Sn does not induce magnetic moment:
Page 8 of he paper ========================================
We see in the figure 4.2:
1- The red electriciton e(+) with orbit radius R= n2 has spin-down and is situated in a region of aether density proportinal to n=1.
2- The red electriciton e(+) with orbit radius R= 1 has spin-up and is situated in a region of aether density proportional to n2.
So, the magnetic moment due to the rotation of the field Sn(p) is null, because the two red electricitons in the Fig. 4.2 induce magnetic moments with the same value but with contrary signs.
Figure 4.2:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:STRUCTURE_OF_THE_FIELD_Sn%28p%29_of_the_proton.png
==============================================
.
The physical cause of the sequence of jumpings in the atom model of Quantum Ring Theory
As we realize from the Figure 4.2, the spin of the secondary field Sn does not induce magnetic moment because of the symmetry of the field.
Therefore, when the electron is moving within the electrosphere of a proton in a RADIAL direction (moving far away of the proton or, unlike, going to the proton’s direction), the spin Sn(e) of the electron has no magnetic moment. So, when the electron is going in the RADIAL direction, the only existing force of attraction proton-electron due to their electric charges is the Coulomb attraction.
But what does happens when the electron is moving in circular trajectory about the proton?
Well, in this case the symmetry of the field Sn(e) of the electron is broken, and then from the Fig. 4.2 we realize that a BIG MAGNETIC moment is induced by the spin of the field Sn(e).
With the electron moving in circular trajectory about the proton, the electron is submitted to two forces:
a) the attraction proton-electron (Coulomb attraction and attraction due to the BIG magnetic moment of the field Sn(e) )
b) the centripetal force trying to expel the electron
If the electron had not being attracted by the BIG magnetic moment, quickly the centripetal force would win the dispute, and the electron would not be able to storage a big energy enough to allow the electron to do several sequence of consecutives jumpings about the proton.
Thanks to the contribution of the BIG magnetic attraction due to the spin of the field Sn(e), the electron stores a big kinetic energy of motion and of kinetic energy of its spin Sn(e). These two energy are liberated when the electron arrives to the many levels n=1, n=2, n=3, n=4, etc.
By losing energy after a sequence of consecutive jumpings, in the next big jumping the sequence will be different, because the condictions have changed, thanks to the waste of energy. And when the energy is totally wasted in the emission of photons after many big jumpings , the electron goes back to move about the proton again, so that to storage kinetic energy again, in order to do again a new sequence of several consecutive big jumpings.
The several different sequence of jumpings, as for instance from n=1 to n=4, n=2 to n=3, n=3 to n=1, etc., is consequence the physical mechanism explained here.
Of course there are many other details. For instance, the emission of photons is consequence (among other reasons) of the resonance between the pitch of the helical trajectory of the electron and the gradient ∆d of the aether density within the electrosphere of the atom (each atom has its specific ∆d ).
Joe,
looking at the incoherences of Quantum Mechanics (as for instance the violation of the causality principle), one must be astonished face to the fact that the physicists do not worry about them. In spite of so many incoherences point out that Quantum Mechanics cannot be the definitive description of the Nature, the physicists never show interest to discuss such questions and recognize that Quantum Mechanics is wrong, and why do not have interest to consider new theories with new principles missing in Quantum Mechanics.
I really don’t understand such a missing of interest in fundamental questions which prove that Quantum Mechanics was developed from wrong foundations.
Regards
Wlad
Lata:
We did not get, so far, the safety certification for any domestic application.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Giuliano Bettini:
The phrase “…vibrations in the QUAR …” was a smile, referred to the fact that we all work in that field…I was just comparing us to elementary particles!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
to “ask a precise question” of what you mean for quantum reactions, QUAR.
I scratched my head wondering what a question “without asking what happens inside the reactor” can be.
However on other occasions you wrote:
“In the quantum field theory, elementary particles are tiny vibrating waves in a particular field and interactions are between elementary particles in fields; forces carried in their interactions by means of bosons can be thought of as resulting from vibrations in fields.”
And regarding the Rossi effect and excess heat achieved in other systems, you spoke about:
“vibrations in the QUAR (or, if you prefer, LENR)field”.
So I would say: for “quantum reaction” you mean specifically
“reactions involving elementary particles and transmutations of them”?
Best regards,
Giuliano Bettini.
Hi Andrea,
Congratulations on getting the safety certificate. I think a home e-cat convection oven or e-cat powered microwave oven will be even more useful than home heater. In warmer climates, you don’t need a heater. But everybody needs to cook. Can we expect to see?
1. A home e-cat convection oven within one year.
2. A home e-cat microwave oven within two years.
Regards,
Lata
Energy emission by an electric charge accelerated following Maxweel’s law
Joe,
along the years I had already imagined several mechanisms, in order to explain why the electron does not emit energy when it travels the space between two levels in the atom.
Let me explain to you my last conclusion.
In order to simplify the explanation, we will consider the hydrogen atom.
1) A free electric charge with acceleration in the vaccuum
Consider an electron moving with constant speed V in the vacuum, and suppose that its helical trajectory has a radius R.
Suppose an electromagnetic force apply an acceleration on the electron.
The electron does not change its speed continously. Instead of, it speed grows by discrete quanta ∆V.
The elementary particles are constrained to move with helical trajectory subjected to the following law, proposed in Quantum Ring Theory:
=========================================================================
It is constant the flux the aether crossing within the helical trajectory
=========================================================================
This happens also with the photon, as shown in my book QRT. That’s why the photon reduces its speed from c in the vaccum to V in the translucent substances as water and glass.
Then let us analyse the acceleration of the electron in the vaccum.
The electromagnetic force applies an increase ∆V in the velocity V. In order to keep constant the flux of aether crossing its helical trajectory, its radius R has a reduction ∆R.
In the instant when occurs the reduction ∆R in the radius of the helical trajectory, there is emission of energy, according to Maxweel’s law.
The same happens when the electron is decelerated, but energy is emitted with the radius of the helical trajectory grows.
2) Electron moving between levels in the atom according to Quantum Mechanics
The space of the electrosphere of atoms according to QM is Euclidian, and therefore under the force of attraction with the proton, the electron is accelerated, and emit energy, as happens with the electron moving in the vacuum, as already explained.
3) Electron moving between levels in the electrosphere with aether
The gradient of growth in the density of the aether is not continous. Actually it grows with discrete quanta ∆d.
Each atom has its particular quantum ∆d. The hydrogen has its quantum ∆d, the helium has its quantum ∆d, etc.
Now consider the aether involving the proton, but suppose that the proton is removed from there, in order that it remains only its electrosphere with that aether.
And consider that an electron with speed V, comming from the vacuum, enters within that electrosphere of the hydrogen atom (without the proton, since it was removed).
Well, when the electron enters in that electrosphere, it starts to face an aether with gradient ∆d.
When the electron touches the first ∆d, in order to keep constant the flux of aether within its helical trajectory, the speed of the electron has a decrease ∆V.
So, it happens as if the electron was submitted to a force Fa due to the aether applying a deceleration on the electron.
And pay attention that, in spite of the electron is decelerated, there is no emission of energy, because the electron keeps the radius R of its helical trajectory.
Therefore the electron continues moving with decelerated motion toward the direction where the proton was before removed.
Now let us put the proton again in his place into the electrosphere where the electron is moving with decelerated motion.
As the proton applies a force Fp on the electron, in this new situation the electron is submitted to two forces:
1- Fa due to the aether trying to decelerate it
2- The attraction force Fp of the proton trying to accelerate it
The force Fa of the aether on the electron depends on the gradient ∆d of the proton, and therefore Fa is equal to Fp, and as they are applied on contrary direction, then the electron is actually submitted to a null force, and the atom does not emit energy when the electron moves between to levels.
In the regions of the electrosphere far away of the proton, the density of the aether has a gradient ∆d very low, and therefore the electron is accelerated toward the proton emitting energy. But when the electron enters in the region where the gradient ∆d is high, the acceleration ceases, and the electron starts to move with constant speed.
Moving about the proton in the level n=1, the atom captures energy from the enviroment and the electron starts to gyrate faster about the proton, and it jumps when the centripetal force wins the dispute against the force of attraction trying to keep the electron in the level n=1.
regards
wlad
Dear Andrea,
I have another theory for LENR that may make some sense. It has been proposed that, the lowest allowed (by standard QM )electron orbit of Hydrogen, can be forced into a lower orbit by an external negative force(concentrated plasma electron cluster). This allows the new orbit to assume extra energy from the H nucleus because of its closer proximity and subsequently release the energy to provide over unity energy. However, the same effect can be accomplished using the negative fields of a H- ion imposed upon the electron cloud of the Nickel atom trapped in a crystal lattice, forcing the inner electrons closer to the Nickel nucleus and allowing them to assume energy from the interaction with the nuclear forces(strong or weak). When the amount of assumed energy exceeds a critical level, the electron emits the extra energy(returning to its original orbit) into the lattice in the form of photons that interact with the lattice to produce phonons. The nucleus balances this lost energy by rearranging their inner nucleons, producing some type of transmutation and emission of particles(Beta+-).
Joe wrote in August 14th, 2014 at 12:27 AM
Wladimir,
For an object to go from a state of zero velocity to nonzero velocity means that there is a change in velocity with time. This is the definition of acceleration. And acceleration is due to a nonzero resultant force acting on that object. Therefore, an electron going from one energy level (zero radial velocity) to another energy level (zero radial velocity) requires a positive and negative acceleration respectively. This requires a nonzero positive and negative resultant force acting on the electron respectively. In QRT, since a smooth gradient of aether is responsible for nullifying the smooth field of the electrostatic force of the nucleus (allowing only constant velocity between energy levels in the electrosphere), how is this smoothness destroyed at the various energy levels in order to allow nonzero resultant forces to occur there?
All the best,
Joe
================================================
Joe,
the description made by me in the post entitled Definitive breakdown of the Quantum Mechanics is actually a simplified explanation, because the mechaninisms within the electrosphere are actually more complex. For instance, there is the participation of the helical tajectory.
When the electron moves between two levels with constant speed, the resultant of forces on it is zero, and the electron moves thanks to its inertia (before to jump from n=1 to n=2, for instance, the electron stays in the orbit n=2 increasing its velocity, thanks to the absoprtion of photons by the atom).
The electron moving about the proton in circular motion would have to emit energy, from the classical physics. However, as shown in my book Quantum Ring Theory, because of the helical trajectory the electron does not emit energy, also bececause of the gradient of the aether.
When is moving far away of the proton, the pitch of the helix increases, because the density of the aether decreases.
With the electon coming from n=1, the photon is emitted in n=2 thanks to a resonance between the pitch of the helix and the distance proton-electron and also the velocity of the electron, and it occurs in the points with radius R= 2², R= 3² , 4² , etc. (the size of the pitch depends on the velocity).
When the velocity is slow, the resonance does no occur, and the electron passes by the level n=2 without emitting photon, and it emits the photon in the level n=3 or n=4.
Moving in circular orbit in the level n=1, there is a Coulomb attraction proton-electron, and there are two sort of energy to be accumulated: the kinetic energy due to its velocity, and the kinetic energy thanks to its spin (the spin is also quantized, and it produces a magnetic field increasing the force of attraction proton-electron).
When the electron is coming back after the first big jumping, for instance jumping between n=4 to n=2, the kinetic energy of its spin is changed to the form of kinetic energy of motion 0,5m.V² when it passes by the level n=2. As the spin lost a portion of its energy, the rotation of the spin decreases, and so decreases the additional magnetic moment due to the spin, in order that now the electron will do a second big jumping, however with a lower level of energy than it did in the first jumping.
As the magnetic attraction proton-electron decreased, the centripetal force wins the dispute, and the electron makes its second jump from n=2 to n=3.
The additional magnetic field due to the spin changes drastically the state of the aether in the electrosphere, in order that each big jumping occurs in a particular condiction of the aether.
When moving in circular orbit about the proton in n=1, the electron accumulates energy for many consecutive jumps. When the capacity of the electron to acummulate energy is satured, the centripetal force wins the dispute, and the electron jumps, doing several consecutive jumpings (emitting photons in going and coming.
There are many other details, as for instance concerning the forces on the electron, because as the Sn(e)-spin of an electron into the atom produces an additional magnetic field, when the field Sn((e) suffers variation in its angular speed, the variation of magnetic intensity has influence on the frequency of photon emission.
regards
wlad
Hank Mills:
1- the data of the safety certification are restricted to the Customers
2- depends on specific situations
3- sooner or later we will be able to. Depends on the IP issues and situation
4- what is discussed in our team, when it becomes an issue to be published, is published, in due time
5- difficult to say
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dima Redko:
The safety certifications we obtained are strictly referred to industrial plants, for the reasons I many times explained. Our plants can work only if operated by professionally prepared employees that have to be certified by us.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea!
You mention that your modules of E-cats and Hot-cats have been certified, that’s great news! Does it mean that Home ECAT-units are certified too, since they are basicaly single E-cats, or Home ECats require different certification? If so, when might we hope to expect this happen?
Wladimir,
For an object to go from a state of zero velocity to nonzero velocity means that there is a change in velocity with time. This is the definition of acceleration. And acceleration is due to a nonzero resultant force acting on that object. Therefore, an electron going from one energy level (zero radial velocity) to another energy level (zero radial velocity) requires a positive and negative acceleration respectively. This requires a nonzero positive and negative resultant force acting on the electron respectively. In QRT, since a smooth gradient of aether is responsible for nullifying the smooth field of the electrostatic force of the nucleus (allowing only constant velocity between energy levels in the electrosphere), how is this smoothness destroyed at the various energy levels in order to allow nonzero resultant forces to occur there?
All the best,
Joe
How God wrote eCat in a mysterious way
Ahead is a discussion between Andrea Rossi, Wlad, Mr. Joe, Mr. JR, and Mr. Curiosone, in the Rossi’s blog Journal of Nuclear Physics.
http://zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3566&mode=&order=0&thold=0
.
Dear Andrea,
Congratulations on the safety certification of the hot cat reactors. That is an important accomplishment. Of course from everything we know about how they work, there was no doubt as to their safety.
1 – Regardless as to the actual temperatures hot cats are capable of reaching, what is the temperature range they are certified, safety wise, to function within? This is simply the numbers on the certificate, of course, and has nothing to do with what the upcoming third party report may disclose, positive or negative.
2 – Are there any other types of certification required or legal hoops to go through before low or high temp E-Cats can be used in an industrial setting?
3 – When the third independent party report is released, do you plan to present your understanding of the theory of how the E-Cat operates, separately of any theory that may be in the report?
4 – Have you been communicating with members of the team preparing the report to formulate a joint theory on the E-Cat?
5 – To me, it is pretty obvious the upcoming report will show massive anomalous heat production (although as you say the report could be negative). In addition to excess heat and high COP, what else are you hoping to see in the report?
Thank you.
Steven N. Karels:
I cannot give this kind of information, either in positive or in negative.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
We obtained a Safety certification. Is necessary for the development of industrial plants made by Hot Cats.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Eernie1:
Thank you.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
The most important item that can come from your work is not the new devices you produce. Although they are important, humanity can survive without them since it is obvious now that there is enough available energy sources on earth from various sources to sustain our needs for as long as the sun shines.
What is more important is the knowledge that stems from your work. This can open the door to a large number of new devices that can benefit man in the future. As the saying goes “You can give a man a fish and he will not be hungry for a day. But show a man how to fish and he will never be hungry”.
I think that if your device is shown to work, you will be better known for discovering the Rossi effect than for developing the E-cat.
Dear Andrea,
It would seem that to have both E-Cats and Hot Cats certified is significant news.
From Industrial Heat’s perspective, what does this certification now make possible for you?
Many thanks,
Frank Acland
DEFINITIVE BREAKDOWN OF THE QUANTUM MECHANICS
The new experiment published by the journal Nature in the end of 2014 represents the definitive breakdown of Quantum Mechanics, as explained ahead.
1) How photons are emitted by atoms according to Quantum Mechanics
According to the Quantum Mechanics, into the electrosphere of the atoms the electrons do not travel the space between two levels n and n+1. According to the theory, the electron disappears in the level n, and it appears instantaneously in the level n+1, without traveling along the space which separate the two levels.
The reason why the electron does not travel the space between the two levels in the atom is easy to be understood, and it is consequence of the assumptions adopted in the development of the Quantum Mechanics, as seeing ahead :
a) The space within the electrosphere of atoms is considered Euclidian
b) There is Coulomb attraction between the proton and the electron
c) Therefore, if the space between two levels had been travelled by the electron, it would have to be accelerated, because it is submitted to the force of attraction
d) By having acceleration, the electron would have to emit energy when moving in that space between the levels, according to the Maxwell’s law (continuous emission).
e) However, the experiments show that the atom does not emit energy continuously, but actually it emits discrete packages of energy (photons) only when the electron arrives to the points of emission in the levels n=1, 2, 3.. , etc.
f) Therefore, according to Quantum Mechanics, the electron cannot travel along the space between the levels, and that’s why according to the theory the electron disappears in one level, and it appears instantaneously in another level.
.
2) How photons are emitted by atoms according to Quantum Ring Theory
Unlike happens in Quantum Mechanics, according to the model of atom proposed in Quantum Ring Theory the electron travels the space between the levels within the electrosphere. In order to simplify the explanation, we will explain what happens in the hydrogen atom. The mechanism of the phenomenon according to QRT is the following:
a) The space within the electrosphere of atoms is non-Euclidian (there is a gradient of density which grows toward the direction of the proton).
b) The electron moves with helical trajectory in the electrosphere of the atom
c) The electron moves with CONSTANT speed between two energy levels, and this is the reason why it does not irradiate energy when it moves along the space between two levels
d) Because the space is non-Euclidian, when the electron is moving toward the direction of the proton, there is a growth in the inertia of the electron (it is a growth in the resistance of the electron against its acceleration toward the proton, because while the force of attraction grows inversely proportional to the decrease of the distance proton-electron, at the same time grows its resistance opposing the growth of the attraction force). The same happens when the electron is moving leaving away the proton.
e) Such constant speed of the electron in the electrosphere of the atoms can occur only in the atom model of Quantum Ring Theory, because the electrosphere is filled with aether (the reason why the space is non-Euclidian).
.
3) The Hans Dehmelt experiment
In 1989 Hans Dehmelt published a paper describing a new technology, which detected the trajectory of the electrons within the electrosphere of the atoms. His experiment proved to be wrong the assumption adopted in Quantum Mechanics, because he detected that the electron travels the space between two levels of energy in the atom.
Obviously that discovery had represented in 1989 the definitive breakdown of the Quantum Mechanics, because as the electrons travel the space between levels in the atom (as detected in the Dehmelt experiments), then according to Quantum Mechanics the atoms have be emitting energy continuously, and therefore the theory is denied by the experiments made concerning the atom emission.
In order to save Quantum Mechanics face to the definitive breakdown, the community of physicists adopted the strategy of claiming that in the Dehmelt experiment the atom is “dressed”. So, according that new ad hoc hypothesis, the electron actually does not travel the space between levels, however due to the new technology used by Dehmelt the measurements show an “apparent” trajectory of the electron, because thanks to that new technology the atom becomes “dressed”.
So, by this way the community of physicist succeeded to avoid the definitive collapse of the Quantum Mechanics along 25 years.
.
4) The experiment published by Nature in 2014
But finally now, in the end of July 2014, the journal Nature published a paper proving that Quantum Mechanics is indeed wrong, because the hypothesis of “dressed atom” is actually a bunch of baloney.
The experiment published by the journal Nature detected trajectories in a way different of that predicted in Quantum Mechanics:
Mapping the optimal route between two quantum states
http://arxiv.org/abs/1403.4992
The experiment shows that the Interpretation of Copenhagen was wrong, as predicted in the book Quantum Ring Theory.
Irfan Siddiqi, UC Berkeley associate professor of physics, says about the wrong entanglement of states considered in Quantum Mechanics:
“To Bohr and others, the process was instantaneous – when you opened the box, the entangled system collapsed into a definite, classical state. This postulate stirred debate in quantum mechanics, But real-time tracking of a quantum system shows that it’s a continuous process, and that we can constantly extract information from the system as it goes from quantum to classical. This level of detail was never considered accessible by the original founders of quantum theory.”
http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2014/07/30/watching-schrodingers-cat-die/
.
5) The experiment made by Aephraim Steinberg
The experiment published now in 2014 by Nature was performed thanks to a new technology, already used by Aephraim Steinberg, who published in 2012 a paper proving that Bohr’s Principle of Complementarity is also a bunch of baloney.
The meaning of Steinberg experiment is explained in the ZPEnergy:
http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3295&mode=&order=0&thold=0
Steinberg, from the Toronto University-Canada, made the double-slit experiment with photons, and the results show that Quantum Mechanics is wrong, while Quantum Ring Theory is correct, because:
1- According to Quantum Mechanics, a quantum particle can behave either as a particle or as a wave, but it cannot behave as wave and as a particle at the same time.
2- Unlike, as Quantum Ring Theory considers that the wave-particle duality is consequence of the helical trajectory, then the particle can have interference with its own helical trajectory when it crosses a slit.
So, according to QRT, the quantum particle can behave as a wave and as a particle as the same time.
In the Steinberg experiment, a photon crossed a unique slit, and it had inferference with itself (a wave feature), while from Quantum Mechanics we would have to expect a particle feature only, since the photon crossed only one slit.
.
CONCLUSIONS
1- This new technology is proving definitively that Quantum Mechanics was developed from wrong foundations, and it must be replaced by a new theory with new fundamental principles missing in Quantum Mechanics.
2- A new model of atom capable to explain how the electron can travel the space between levels in the atom must be developed from the new principles considered in the atom model proposed in Quantum Ring Theory.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Have you considered using nickel-plated carbon nanotubes. They are commercially available at about $1,600 per 100 grams. Specs follow:
60% Ni/38% MWNT (95+%, OD 8-15 nm)
$180/5g
$630/25g
$1,575/100g
Nickel-coated multi-walled carbon nanotubes
Nickel content: ~ 60 wt%
Carbon nanotube content: ~ 38 wt%
Specification of carbon nanotubes:
Outside diameter: 8-15 nm
Inside diameter: 3-5 nm
Length: 10-50 um
SSA: ~ 230 m2/g
My thoughts are that hydrogen molecules might more easily disassociate to form atomic hydrogen within the nanotubes and be directly exposed to the nickel with application of heat.
Steven N Karels:
For power demand above 1 MW so far we think to combine 1 MW plants.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Thank you for addressing some of the previous questions. Is there a technical reason to stay at the 1 MW thermal output for your delivered units? Can a 10 MW or 100MW or 1000MW single unit be scaled up using 1 – 10kW units? Or would you prefer to stay at a 1MW package and scale up by paralleling 10, 100 or 1000 1MW units for the combined thermal output? I would assume maintenance access at some point becomes an issue?
Steven N Karels:
The size issue so far has been resolved choosing the solution of adopting the modular assembling of 1- 10 kW units.
The reason of this choice is that we have consolidated experience on small modules and that if one or several modules break up we can preserve most of the power in operation.
Besides, to menage many cats is easier then to menage several tigers.
Last, but not least: our modules of E-cats and Hot-cats have been certified.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
You previously posted thoughts of a mini-reactor (around 1 kW thermal output) and a larger reactor (around 25 kW thermal output) and a much larger reactor (around 100 kW thermal output).
a. Can you discuss the practical or theoretical limitations of the reactor sizing? Control, heat dissipation?
b. Given your current research activities, what do you see as the smallest and largest eCat reactor sizings?
c. Taking all this into account, what is the largest size of a number of combined reactors into a single unit in terms of thermal output?
d. And what drives this limit?
Please answer what you can, consistent with your needs for protecting intellectual property.
Giuliano Bettini:
As you know, I do not answer to question regarding what happens inside the reactor, so far, Beyond what I already have written on this subject.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
thanks, it seems to me that, in your answer, you implicitly agree that the “Rossi effect” obeys the rules of Quantum Mechanics, such as all the chemical and/or nuclear reactions do.
In this sense, the name “quantum reactions” attributed to the Rossi effect does not define anything specific.
And that’s OK.
However, I wonder if the Rossi effect has in itself something specific, which differentiates it from all the other possible reactions.
I try:
1 is it a nuclear reaction, ie, involves the nucleus?
2. involves, in particular, in this case, the Nickel nucleus?
3 during the reaction, isotopes of Nickel are forming?
4. during the reaction, the above-mentioned isotopes of Nickel are subject to a decay with the emission of soft-Gamma radiations?
5, is instead a reaction that involves the formation of isotopes of Hydrogen?
6. during the reaction, the above-mentioned isotopes of hydrogen are subject to a decay with the emission of soft-Gamma radiations?
7. are, instead, (the Rossi effect reactions) reactions that are affecting the electrons in the interior shells?
8. in every way, can you confirm that in the reaction the soft-Gamma-radiation (or hard-X) have the order of magnitude of 100 keV?
9. are these the responsible for the heat produced?
I would not have been boring, it is only an attempt “to put a precise question.”
Thanks again,
Giuliano Bettini.
Giuliano Bettini:
can you put a precise question? Under a generic point of view you already answered to yourself inside the same question.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Frank Acland:
All these works are “vibrations in the QUAR (or, if you prefer, LENR) field”…
Warm Regards
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
I supposed to know something about physics, but apparently I did not know a damn thing!
All the chemical and/or nuclear phenomena obey quantum mechanics, or something like that (for what I know). So I presume you use the term “quantum reactions” in some specific way, but what’s this specific way?
Best regards, good work,
Giuliano Bettini.
Dear Andrea,
You said that the sole systems that the scientists funded by Industrial Heat have replicated obtaining interesting results are the publications of Ikegami- Petterson and Ahern, while all the other systems replicated gave zero results.
Do you think the excess heat achieved in these systems is produced by a different phenomenon than the ‘Rossi Effect’?
Many thanks,
Frank Acland
New experiment published in Nature confirms Helical Trajectory of elementary particles predicted in Quantum Ring Theory
Look at the shape of the million trajectories measured in the experiments:
http://www.eurekalert.org/multimedia/pub/77169.php?from=273859
The release:
http://phys.org/news/2014-07-optimal-route-quantum-states.html
And the paper published by Nature:
Mapping the optimal route between two quantum states
http://arxiv.org/abs/1403.4992
The experiment shows that the Interpretation of Copenhagen was wrong, as predicted in the book Quantum Ring Theory.
Dr. Irfan Siddiqi, UC Berkeley associate professor of physics, says about the wrong entanglement of states considered in Quantum Mechanics:
“To Bohr and others, the process was instantaneous – when you opened the box, the entangled system collapsed into a definite, classical state. This postulate stirred debate in quantum mechanics, But real-time tracking of a quantum system shows that it’s a continuous process, and that we can constantly extract information from the system as it goes from quantum to classical. This level of detail was never considered accessible by the original founders of quantum theory.”
http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2014/07/30/watching-schrodingers-cat-die/
So,
one more experiment is showing that are wrong some fundamental principles of Quantum Mechanics, as predicted in the book Quantum Ring Theory.
Regards
Wlad
Andrea,
Taking Dr.Fine’idea in consideration, perhaps QUAR (aka Rossi effect) is a nucleonic interaction and reaction class in general.
Mark:
Very difficult question I sympathize with.
To answer correctly we must first of all make a distinction between the so called Rossi effect and other phenomenons. I am talking exclusively of the Rossi effect.
None of the definitions you proposed are proper and to rephrase them could be misleading.
The more I think to it, the more I like QUAR, quantum reactions. There is nothing new, I use what I learnt from the study of books used in the Universities.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Dr Joseph Fine:
LENR is a perused acronym that would be anyway considered the old way, but your idea is fine.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Andrea Rossi,
Mark inspired me to ask/suggest if a new name for LENR might be LENR?!
😀
That is, Low Energy Nucleon Reactions (instead of Nuclear Reactions).
Since a Nucleon is a component of a nucleus (such as the Neutron and Proton) there could be interactions of Nucleons which do not involve the fusion or fission of nuclei.
The case of Hydrogen would be an exception, since the nucleon of 1H1 is also the nucleus.
Hi Andrea,
Could you correct one of my a,b, c, d by deleting or adding some words to make it more correctly describing the Rossi effect?
Eernie1:
I know the feeling.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
In my extensive reading of the Physical literature(of which there is not much conclusive about the Graviton) I must conclude that the Graviton is treated like a mysterious particle. Almost no experimental evidence is available and the mathematical treatment of the subject requires a great deal of assumption. Various explanations and scenarios are abundant and vary widely. In other words my guess and yours are as good as presented by anyone else. What I stated as my view of the Graviton is based on my idea that it acts much like the gluon. It holds masses together by attraction as the gluon holds the nucleons together by creating an artificial attraction between the quarks. Since the gluon decays rapidly when detached from the nucleons, my guess is that the Graviton also decays when detached from the masses that created it, possibly into dark energy or matter and that is the reason it has not been physically observed. Its manifestation is in the reported accelerated expansion of the Universe.
The bottom line of my efforts to explain gravity is the enjoyment and satisfaction I get in exercising my imagination. I hope you also feel this satisfaction in your efforts.
Andrea Rossi wrote in August 12th, 2014 at 6:40 AM
Wladimir Guglinski:
… but I want to confirm that I strongly adhere to the quantum fields theory.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
======================================
COMMENT
Therefore:
a) As from the principles of Quantum Field Theory the results of the Don Borghi experiment are impossible to occur…
b) … it implies that you reject the Don Borghi experiment…
c) … as are doing the most Physicists who betray the Scientific Method, trying to save the Quantum Field Theory
Curiously,
the synthesis of neutrons from protons and electrons at low energy (impossible to occur from the principles of Quantum Field Theory) is probably one among the mechanisms involved in cold fusion occurrence.
And therefore,
by rejecting the results of Don Borghi experiment is impossible to explain cold fusion.
And also curiously, the frequency used by Don Borghi in his experiment is in the same order of the frequence used by you in your eCat.
So,
I confess that I am no able to understand the mysterious way on how God writes in order to give insight for scientists to advance the Physics.
The way used by God is more mysterious than the way on how the own cold fusion occurs.
I suppose one day in the future we will understand how cold fusion occurs.
And I hope we will also understand how God writes the mysterious way so that to allow the advancement of science.
regards
wlad
Wladimir Guglinski:
As always, we publish your theory and consequent considerations of yours, as we will continue to do, but I want to confirm that I strongly adhere to the quantum fields theory. It is not true that the snakes came from the academic world, the snakes came from well individuated sources. I owe to the Academic environment all I learnt about Physics and is at the base of my research.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Curiosone wrote in August 10th, 2014 at 2:35 AM
Andrea Rossi:
Thank you for your answers: your “analogies” are big help to understand the worls of elementary particles for us laymen. I also have to thank Wladimir Guglinski, but I am not able to understand what he says, I have not enough education.
W.G.
======================================================================
Dear Mr. Curiosone
dont worry about your poor education in Physics.
Because sometimes learning what is taught in univerisites is harmful to the development of science.
According to the foundations of Quantum Mechanics (foundations from which Quantum Field Theory was developed), cold fusion is impossible.
In 1998 during a lecture in Portland State University, the Nobel Laureate Murray Gell Mann said:
“It’s a bunch of baloney. Cold fusion is theoretically impossible, and there are no experimental findings that indicate it exists.”
http://www.angelfire.com/on/GEAR2000/kaplan2.html
That’s why, along more than 20 years, the academic physicists rejected cold fusion, by using all kind of subterfuges, as pointing out errors in the calorimeters, and by claiming that theoretically cold fusion is impossible to occur.
The reason for the cold fusion refusal was always the same: if cold fusion exists, then the foundations of Quantum Mechanics are wrong. And physicists like Gell Mann, who received their Nobel Prize thanks to their contribution for the development of Quantum Mechanics, could no admit their theories being threatened by cold fusion.
So, along more than 20 years, experiments like of the pioneers Fleischmann and Pons (and many others) have been rejected by the academic physicists.
When Andrea Rossi started his research, he did not have at that time a deep knowledge on the foundations Quantum Field Theory, and so he did not know that cold fusion is theoretically impossible.
That’s why Andrea Rossi continued firmly believing that he would succeed to get a technology able to extract energy from cold fusion.
And as happened to other cold fusion researchers, the work of Andrea Rossi also was under the attack of academic snakes, who tried to discredit his research along the years, claiming that his results are a fraud.
It is interesting to note that, if Andrea Rossi had studied Physics in the universities, he would never discover his eCat, because by getting an academic background he would believe in the untouchable dogma that cold fusion is theoretically impossible, and therefore he would not start a research in cold fusion, since he would be convinced that theoretically cold fusion is impossible.
But now Andrea Rossi started to study Quantum Field Theory, at least two hours per day. And now finally he fully believes that the QFT is the best available model.
Happily, Andrea Rossi discovered it now, because if he had discovered it 20 years ago, today we would not have his eCat producing energy from cold fusion.
And now, as Andrea Rossi knows that Quantum Field Theory is the best available theory, he adopts the same speach of the academic snakes who attacked his work along 20 years, claiming that his research is a pseudoscientific work impossible of being successful, because it is impossible according to the principles of Quantum Field Theory.
Finally, dear Mr. Curiosone,
it is curious to see how God writes in mysterious ways.
regards
wlad
BroKeeper:
Thank you for this suggestion.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Mark:
None of them.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Hi Andrea,
Which of these is more correctly describing the Rossi effect
a, a new form of powerful chemical reaction.
b, a new form of benign nuclear fusion
reaction.
C, a new form of benign nuclear fission reaction.
D, a new form of benign nuclear annihilation of sub atomic particles reaction.
Dear Andrea,
Here QUAR and many other clever interesting scientific acronyms posted in the E-Cat World blog that you may want to review represents well the Rossi Effect; but I was wondering how well the common consumer would relate to scientific expressions? Perhaps a more whimsical the scientific acronym the more memorable it could be as a household name. Having a little fun shuffling the LENR buzz words another energy storing critter in constant motion came to mind:
Safe QUantum Exothermic Rossi Effect Lattice – Catalytic Assisted Generated Energy or ‘SQUEREL CAGE’. Wish you much fun in your work.
Dear Mr. Curisione,
as Andrea Rossi did not answer my questions, I can suppose that we may complete his sentence which he said to you, as follows:
About Wladimir Guglinski: take in account that he is bearer of a theory that is not coherent with the Quantum Field Theory, because he thinks that it is wrong. This is not the opinion of most of the Physicists… because they do not follow the Scientific Criterium, since they reject some experiments which prove Quantum Field Theory be wrong. Therefore you find incoherence between what he writes and what you find in what I write, because the most of the Physicists betray the Scientific Method when Quantum Field Theory is disproved by some experiments.
regards
wlad
Eernie1:
The graviton is defined a stable elementary particle in all the Physics books adopted in the Universities. About the indirect evidence of them I already answered as well as about the search of direct evidence.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
If I can impose upon you during this time of waiting for the TPR2, would you cite a source that defines the Graviton as a stable particle. As I understand, the case has not been made for its stability except as a theoretical outcome of string theory and which is contested by scientists who would like a proof using standard QM. The thought is that unlike the photon(wave packet) which is easily detected and is found abundantly in space when detached from its association with masses(free) because of its stability, the graviton defies all attempts to detect any free particles. If stable there should be huge amounts in space and detectable.