Talk-Polywell.org

You guys are way over me on this, but can someone answer if this is possible or why not ?

The Tacoma Narrows bridge was designed to withstand at least a hundred year wind event, however is was brought down
by a mere 67 kph breeze due to destructive oscillation. In mechanical or optical systems, such as critical speed in rotary
machinery, optical resonant cavities (etalons) and lasers there are losses which limit the Q of the system to a defined maximum.

Is it possible that a metallic lattice in a particular configuration (or particle size) could act as a proton resonant cavity with the proton
absorbing thermal energy from the lattice wall (or electrostatic boundary) and increasing its thermal vibrational amplitude (not frequency)
until it occasionally breaks the barrier ?
If there is no way a vibrating proton can loose energy (not sure) before attaining enough energy to crack the column barrier this might
work occasionally.

In Piantelli and Rossi's experiments, heat is apparently needed to initiate the claimed effect, why?
In some of the sem images, scattered surface blisters in the um range are evident on the
samples (too lazy to find the ref) which does not seem to indicate a bulk effect.
Ok, here's the link

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lenr-canr.org%2Facrobat%2FCampariEGsurfaceana.pdf&rct=j&q=Surface%20Analysis%20of%20hydrogen%20loaded%20nickel%20alloys&ei=hRgpTqzYJcWEsgLqxuGaDg&usg=AFQjCNEkRUsxv2Sri7dPFp5GLKh50kJVsA&sig2=5Yon9eUwxAHgSnLIMUjAFw&cad=rja
Proton resonator?

> but can someone answer if this is possible or why not ?

It does not violate the energy conservation so it is not a perpetuum mobile. Matter is simply converted to energy and straightforward arithmetic with nuclear binding energy illustrates such possibility.

Does it actually work as it has been claimed?

Well, it is an open question and the spectrum of opinions offers no help to clarify this. Any information from Rossi is outside of strictly scientific domain and can not be treated as such since any his claim is self serving with no apparent reason to expect a scientific agenda behind therefore, there are plenty indirect information and considerations mostly from area of psychology. I personally am optimistic to guide my wave function to the realities I prefer to live in ;o)

Stefan

Possible, yes. Probable, no.
What I mean is that if such a behaviour existed we should have noticed it since quite a long time.
Cracking the coulomb barrier is not something that tends to pass unobserved in a lab.

Thanks guys.

Agreed however, high Q resonators are very finicky things. The higher the Q the higher the finicky. Take the first laser for example, without prior knowledge
of electron excitation levels and population inversion there is no way the lasing effect would have been stumbled upon by accident and I don't think it can happen in nature.
The necessary precision of the optics alone would have prevented this without a determined effort.

Maybe the heating effect has happened and gone unnoticed many times if the output was minimal and you are not specifically looking for it.
Besides, you know what happens to scientists who break columns.
Would you take 10 or 20mw excess heat in an experiment seriously?

Your example about discovery of the laser is fine but can hardly find application here.
We know that Rossi is supplying heat (i.e. random motion) and to think that random motion can actually get in a coherent state simply due to the presence of a "catalyst" is hard to believe, especially if you consider that around the world there are thousands of scientists that play with heath and cold every day looking for stuff like that.
This is why I stated that while it is possible I think that is not probable that such a phenomena went unnoticed till now.

Of course a real experiment could clear these issues, but this is something we already discussed ad nauseam.



Yes, provided that the input power was 1mw

For the one still interested in Rossi drama, I stated a couple of weeks ago that I was supposed to participate in a public conference about the e-Cat this Saturday.
Unfortunately I will have a medical check-up tomorrow, so I will not be there and I will not be able to report about the proceedings.

There is rumors that there might be a live broadcast on the net.
If I get a link I will post it here, even thought it will be all in Italian.

Here is one conjectured way that it might happen, there are a number of others. http://www.talk-polywell.org/bb/viewtop ... 4077#64077

_________________
Dan,
Do the numbers... correctly, "think Hydrogen".

There are polaritons where the photon required is IR, i.e., heat. Thus it may be that the process involves making some sort of surface plasmon polariton and having that polariton coax the proton in.

_________________
Dan,
Do the numbers... correctly, "think Hydrogen".

The probability is still in debate.
As sparky suggested with his TN bridge analogy, sometimes common physics is not seen until atypical events are created. In the E-Cat case, that atypical event MAY be the combination of nano-particles of enriched 62&64Ni with hydrogen vice deuterium. This is not something that folks do every day.

this may be oneof those... "D'oh" kinds of reactions.

_________________
Dan,
Do the numbers... correctly, "think Hydrogen".

Quite different experimental set up in respect to what we have in the e-Cat.
Than one can argue that the same result can be obtained by different setups, but I still find highly improbable that this is the case.

You know my point, I hope for it to be real because it will be a huge fun to see what it will bring in term of new physics and chemistry, but I really find hard to believe that someone found a gold pot on a road where thousand of people pass everyday.
October is near, we will see.

I suppose that for some, ignorance equals improbable but for me, ignorance is just that not knowing; and I don't know.

_________________
Dan,
Do the numbers... correctly, "think Hydrogen".

That's a clever word trick

> but I really find hard to believe that someone found a gold pot on
> a road where thousand of people pass everyday

Well, it has append many times, just for one such event we had thousands failures; so, skepticism is very well grounded even without any knowledge in physics and sadly such knowledge seems make no difference in opinions distribution.

Stefan