Lasted edited by Andrew Munsey, updated on June 14, 2016 at 8:59 pm.
All the Cold fusion theories are essays, since no theory till today has been successful to explain its occurrence.
From times to times a new essay appears as a promising theory, and many deposit their hope in it. In 2000 the Kenneth Shoulders’ theory was considered the best one by the majority of cold fusion researchers.
But the new promising theories go with the wind. Today is the time of Peter Hagelstein - a tenured MIT’s professor of electrical engineering - because many believe that his work is examplary and if verified experimentally, stands in line for a Nobel prize, as writes the journalist Bob Weber in his blog Strategy Kinetics http://www.strategykinetics.com/2006/02/cold_fusion.html#more
What did happen to Shoulders’ theory? Why did it fail to explain cold fusion?
The reason why it failed is the same why other theories have also failed, as any cold fusion theory will fail too. Among the proposed cold fusion theories, no one satisfies the fundamental requirement for accepting a proposed essay (see Don Borghi's experiment).
::Face to the situation, one could ask:
:::a) But why the cold fusion theorists do not develop a new theory satisfying the fundamental requirments that must be satisfied by a canditate theory in order to be successful?
:::b) Do cold fusion theorists not know what are the fundamental requirements?
Yes, the theorists know them. For example, they know that a cold fusion theory needs a neutron model formed by proton and electron. But a neutron model n=p+e cannot be proposed by keeping the foundations of Quantum Mechanics, because:
:1- A neutron formed by proton and electron violates the Fermi-Dirac statistics, because a particle formed by two fermions would have to be a boson with entire spin, but the experiments show that neutron’s spin is 1/2.
:2- A structure of the neutron n = p+e would have to have a mass mN < 938.811 MeV/c2, since there is a loss of mass. However, it is known by experiments that neutron’s mass is mN = 939.6MeV/c2.
:3- As the electron is within the structure of a neutron with structure n=p+e, then the neutron and the electron would have each one a magnetic moment with the same order of magnitude. But the experiments show that magnetic moment of the electron is by three orders of magnitude larger than that of the neutron. So, at first glance, it seems that the neutron could not be performed by the structure n= p+e.
:4- To keep an electron within a neutron requires a kind of force thousands of times stronger than the nuclear force.
There is no way to solve these problems by starting from the foundations of Quantum Mechanics. So, although the cold fusion theorists know the fundamental requirements, they don’t know how to get a theoretical solution that satisfies them. All they try to keep the foundations of QM.
The foundations of a theory capable to satisfy the fundamental requirements is proposed in Quantum Ring Theory1.
However Quantum Ring Theory is not a cold fusion theory. Actually QRT proposes foundations according to which an acceptable cold fusion theory must be developed. In short, QRT explains from what points of departure such a theory must be developed.
Beyond a solution that eliminates the theoreticals problems concerning the neutron’s model n=p+e, QRT also proposes a new nuclear model that presents some nuclear properties unknown by the nuclear theorists, as for instance the accordion-effect, which possibly has crucial participation in the cold fusion reactions.
Interestingly, QRT was not developed with the aim to explain cold fusion. The theory was developed because the current theories are unable to give answers for some fundamental theoretical problems, that nothing have with cold fusion. The author of QRT discovered his new nuclear model in 1993, and at that time he did not know that cold fusion exists. He heard about cold fusion at the first time in 1999.
The stronger theoretical argument used by a sceptical against cold fusion occurrence is exposed in Don Borghi's experiment, and it is regarding to the question of how a neutron can be formed by a proton and electron without violating the fundamental principles of Quantum Mechanics. The fundamental question of the sceptical is regarding to the anomalous mass of the neutron:
::The question then is, where will this additional mass come from?
And its consequence:
:: No one can escape the conservation of mass-energy
The electron moves through a helical trajectory.
There was an error working with the wiki: Code discovered this peculiar motion when he analysed the
There was an error working with the wiki: Code’s equation of the electron. It is known as
There was an error working with the wiki: Code.
Quantum Ring Theory proposes that there is a phenomenon, named "zoom-effect", due to electron's zitterbewegung.
::The zitterbewegung's zoom-effect can be the answer for the question:
::::where will this additional mass come from?
An idea of how the zitterbewegung works is given ahead
Let’s see what happens when a proton captures an electron and they form a neutron, as happens in the experiments made by Don Borghi2, Conte and Pieralice3, and Taleyarkhan4.
A free electron is moving with helical trajectory, with speed vv.
The electron’s speed within the neutron’s structure n=p+e one can get from the
There was an error working with the wiki: Code’s graphic on the
There was an error working with the wiki: Code, and in the paper Anomalous Mass of the Neutron (http://www.geocities.com/ciencia2mil/NEUTRONmodel.html) it is calculated that this speed is 92% of the light speed, after the instant when the electron is captured by the proton and starts go gyrate about it.
This relativistic velocity V=0,92c increases the electron’s mass.
By this way, within the neutron, the electron’s mass increases from its repose mass 0,511MeV to 1,291MeV (calculated in the paper).
The mass of proton is 939,3MeV.
Therefore n=p+e has a mass: 938,3+1,291 = 939,6 (which is the mass of neutron obtained from experiments).
The spin 1/2 of the electron is a result of the combination of its intrinsic spin with its zitterbewegung.
Schroedinger was the first to consider such hypothesis:
:Zitterbewegung (English: "jitter") is a theoretical helical or circular motion of elementary particles, in particular electrons, which is responsible for producing their spin and magnetic moment. The existence of such motion was first proposed by Erwin Schrödinger in 1930 as a result of his analysis of the wave packet solutions of the Dirac equation for relativistic electrons in free space
Then, when the electron is captured by the proton, it loses its zitterbewegung, and so it loses its spin 1/2. Within the neutron the electron becomes a boson, and so the neutron is formed by a fermion (proton) and a boson (the electron that lost the spin).
But before to understand cold fusion, we neeed to have a complete understanding of the nuclear phenomena. However we dont have it. Indeed, in the Introduction of the book Quantum Ring Theory it is written in the page 4:
::Perhaps one would like to say that the foundations for cold fusion are the same of that proposed in Quantum Mechanics. Indeed, in Jan-2004 the cold fusion researcher Dr. Dimitriy Afonichev sent me an e-mail where he said the following:
:::"I think that occurrence of cold fusion can be explained on the basis of the existing theories".
::Truthfully his words transmit not merely a personal opinion, because actually several theorists those try to explain the cold fusion occurrence share his viewpoint. However such opinion is very intriguing, since the own academic community is agreeing that the existing theories in the branch of Nuclear Physics are unable to explain even the ordinary nuclear properties, as confessed by Eisberg and Resnick in their book Quantum Physics5, where they say in the first page of the Chapter 15:
:::"Though we dispose nowadays of a sufficient complete assembly of information about the nuclear forces, we realize that they are too much complexes, not having been possible up to now to use this acknowledge for building an extensive theory of the nuclei. In other words, we cannot explain the whole properties of nuclei in function of the properties of the nuclear forces that actuate on their protons and neutrons".
::So, as the existing theories are unable to explain the nuclear properties responsible for the hot fusion occurrence (which occurs according to the principles of Quantum Mechanics), it's hard to believe that such existing theories could explain nuclear properties that would be responsible for the occurrence of some so much complex as it is the cold fusion (which occurs by infringing the principles of QM).
As Quantum Mechanics is unable to explain even ordinary nuclear phenomena, as confessed by Eisberg and Resnick, then there is a big chance that QM is unable to explain cold fusion too.
In order to understand easily that something is missing in the foundations of QM, take for instance the interaction between two neutrons. Two neutrons have no repulsion. But in a short distance, they are attracted by the strong force. So, after interacting within a nucleus, two neutrons would have to form the 0n2, and nothing would separate them again. But 0n2 does not exist in nature. Heisenberg tried to explain it with the introduciton of the concept of Isospin. Unfortunatelly the isospin is an abstract mathematical concept. Two neutrons tied strongly by the strong force cannot be separated by an abstract concept, because an abstract concept cannot produce a FORCE capable to win the force of attraction by the strong force. Only a FORCE of repulsion can win the force of attraction.
The author of QRT proposed a new nuclear model in order to give answers for fundamental questions not answered by the current Nuclear Physics, as for instance why a particle formed by two neutrons does not exist in Nature, since the concept of isospin does not solve the problem, it only describes mathematically that 0n2 does not exist, but does not show the physical cause “why? it does not exist.
In 2002 the Infinite Energy magazine has published the paper What is Missing in Les Case’s Catalytc Fusion6, in which it is proposed some improvements to be addopted, in order to avoid the missing of replicability in cold fusion experiments.
In 2003 in the ICCF-10 the researchers Lets and Cravens exhibited their experiment, in which they have adopted the suggestions in the paper published in 2002 by IE.
In the book QRT it is proposed an explanation for Lets-Cravens experiment, showed in the paper entitled “Lets-Cravens Experiment and the Accordion-Effect?
The Accordion-Effect is a nuclear property unknown by nuclear theorists, and it is responsible for the resonance that takes place between a nucleus (for instance Pd) and the oscillation of deuterons due to zero-point energy.
In 2004, after reading some of the papers (published later in 2006 in the book Quantum Ring Theory), the late Dr.
There was an error working with the wiki: Code said: "interesting and intriguing ideas".
That's why he suggested to put the papers on a book form, and to publish it.
Interestingly, Schrödinger’s hypothesis of helical trajectory is not compatible with the foundations of Quantum Mechanics. That’s why there is an alternative hypothesis, proposed by Krekora et al. (Phys. Rev. Lett., v. 93, 043004-1, 2004) to explain the zitterbewegung that appears in the Dirac’s equation.
But if the Schrödinger hypothesis is really the solution for the fundamental question of the neutron formed by proton+electron, then we realize that the foundations of Quantum Mechanics are indeed unable to solve the theoretical problems concerning cold fusion occurrence, because the electron’s helical trajectory is inadmissible in Quantum Mechanics. And so we realize how far away are the colf fusion theorists in their attempt of looking for a successful theory, since they do not consider just the hypothesis (the zitterbewegung) able to bring a solution for the question.
Another paper concerning the neutron new model n=p+e , entitled New Model of Neutron , is available in the Internet too.
It’s of interest to give some enlightenment on this paper', as follows:
:::1) When we analyze the mass of pions according to the current Standard Model, we arrive to contradictory conclusions about the mass M(d) of the quark down and the mass M(u) of the quark up.
:::::In the paper New Model of Neutron it is shown that we arrive to the following two contradictory conclusions:
:::::::CONCLUSION 1: M(d) > M(u)
:::::::CONCLUSION 2: M(u) > M(d)
:::: So, from the Standard Model of current Particle Physics we reach to undesirable and unsatisfactory results.
:::2) Look at the chemical reaction Na+Cl->NaCl
:::::QUESTION: what is the matematical formalism underlying such a chemical reaction?
:::::ANSWER: No one. The chemical reactions have not been established through the mathematical formalism.
The chemical reactions have been established based on the LOGIC, and such a procedure was viable because the chemists had the help of a property of the chemical reactions: the mass of the reagent elements does not change after the reactions. For instance, the mass of Na is the same in the two sides of the equation Na+Cl->NaCl.
In the case of the high energy nuclear reactions the discovery of the equations became very complicated, for two reasons:
:1) Either particles can desintegrate by discharging energy, or particles can be created, by the transformation of energy to matter.
:2) In the model adopted by the theorists, the addition of spins is applied to all the reactons.
However in the beta decay the addtion of spins cannot be applied (but there is conservation of the total angular momentun, because in the reactions there is creation of neutrinos and antineutrinos).
Such anomaly in the addition of spins in the beta decay made the situation to be very bad, and the theorists could not apply the LOGIC for the discovering of the mechanic of high energy reactions, as the chemists made in the Chemistry.
That’s why the theorists tried to solve the problems by the mathematical formalism, through the Lie symetries as SU(2), SU(3), etc.
But the result was unsatisfactory, as one can understand easily. There are particles that does not fit to the theory, and that’s why Murray Gell-Mann felt the need of proposing ad hoc bandages, like the Strangeness.
As the theorists did not discover the true cause of the beta decay anomaly, they impute to other cause the occurrency of that anomaly: they state that the parity is not kept in the beta decay.
By addopting the “spin-fusion? hypothesis caused by the zoom-effect of the zitterbegung, as proposed in QRT, it is explained the anomaly of the beta decay, and from such a way the high energy reactions can be explained through the LOGIC, in the same way as occurred in Chemistry for the establishment of the chemical reactions.
::The paper New Model of Neutron is available in the link http://www.geocities.com/ciencia2mil/NewMODELneutron.html
According to Edmund Storms, “for a model to be useful, it must tell me what elements I should mix, of what concentrations, and in what physical environment to make the process occur in a predicted way?.
He is right. However, earlier to tell what elements have to be mix, of what concentrations, and in what physical environment, such a model must satisfy the fundamental requirements. If a model does not satify them, obviously it will never tell us what elments we have to mix, etc.
Probably the new nuclear model proposed in QRT will be used in a cold fusion theory in the future. Many parameters have to be found empirically in order to find the characteristic constants of each nucleus, and such procedure will require many physicists working together, as happened when several physicists and engineers developed the bomb in Los Alamos.
1- W. Guglinski, Quantum Ring Theory-Foundations for Cold Fusion, Bäuu Press, 2006
2- C. Borghi, C. Giori, A.A. Dall’Ollio, Experimental Evidence of Emission of Neutrons from Cold Hydrogen Plasma, American Institute of Physics (Phys. At. Nucl.), vol 56, no 7, 1993.
3- E. Conte, M. Pieralice, An Experiment Indicates the Nuclear Fusion of the Proton and Electron into a Neutron, Infinite Energy, vol 4, no 23-1999, p 67.
4- R.P. Taleyarkhan, C.D. West, J.S. Cho, R.T. Lahey, Jr., R.I. Nigmatulin, and R.C. Block, Evidence for Nuclear Emissions During Acoustic Cavitation, Science, vol 295, pp 1868-1873 (March 8, 2002) (in Research Articles).
5- R. Eisberg, R. Resnick, ‘’Quantum Physics of Atoms, Molecules, Solids, Nuclei and Particles’’, John Wiley & Sons, 1974
6- W. Guglinski, What is Missing in Les Case's Catalytic Fusion, Infinite Energy Vol. 8 , No. 46 , 2002
LENR NEWS, BLOGS, MAGAZINES:
LEADING LENR COMPANIES:
There was an error working with the wiki: Code
There was an error working with the wiki: Code
There was an error working with the wiki: Code