Knots and LENR (Axil Axil)

The following post has been submitted by Axil Axil

Knot theory is old style science and goes back to Lord Kelvin.

[quote]Knots have been used for basic purposes such asrecording information, fastening and tying objects together, for thousands of years. The early, significant stimulus in knot theory would arrive later with Sir William Thomson (Lord Kelvin) and his theory of vortex atoms.

James Clerk Maxwell, a colleague and friend of Thomson’s and Tait’s, also developed a strong interest in knots. Maxwell studied Listing’s work on knots. He re-interpreted Gauss’ linking integral in terms of electromagnetic theory. In his formulation, the integral represented the work done by a charged particle moving along one component of the link under the influence of the magnetic field generated by an electric current along the other component. Maxwell also continued the study of smoke rings by considering three interacting rings.

When the luminiferous æther was not detected in the Michelson–Morley experiment, vortex theory became completely obsolete, and knot theory ceased to be of great scientific interest. Modern physics demonstrates that the discrete wavelengths depend on quantum energy levels.

But the æther has been now theorized to be a “Spin Net Liquid”

In condensed matter physics, a string-net is an extended object whose collective behavior has been proposed as a physical mechanism for topological order by Michael A. Levin and Xiao-Gang Wen. A particular string-net model may involve only closed loops; or networks of oriented, labeled strings obeying branching rules given by some gauge group; or still more general networks.

Their model purports to show the derivation of photons, electrons, and U(1) gauge charge, small (relative to the planck mass) but nonzero masses, and suggestions that the leptons, quarks, and gluons, can be modeled in the same way. In other words, string-net condensation provides an unification of photon and electron (or gauge bosons and fermions). It can be viewed as an origin of light and electron (or gauge interactions and Fermi statistics). However, their model does not account for the chiral coupling between the fermions and the SU(2)gauge bosons in the standard model.

[quote]The first hint that a new type of matter may exist came in 1982. “Twenty five years ago we thought we understood everything about phases and phase transitions of matter,” says Wen. “Then along came an experiment that opened up a whole new world.”

“The positions of electrons in a Fractional Quantum Hall (FQH) state appear random like in a liquid, but they dance around each other in a well organized manner and form a global dancing pattern.”

In the experiment, electrons moving in the interface between two semiconductors form a strange state, which allows a particle-like excitation (called a quasiparticle) that carries only 1/3 of electron charge. Such an excitation cannot be view as a motion of a single electron or any cluster with finite electrons. Thus this so-called fractional quantum Hall (FQH) state suggested that the quasiparticle excitation in a state can be very different from the underlying particle that form the state. The quasiparticle may even behave like a fraction of the underlying particle, even though the underlying particle can never break apart. It soon became clear that electrons under certain conditions can organize in a way such that a defect or a twist in the organization gives rise to a quasiparticle with fractional charge — an explanation that earned Laughlin, Horst Störmer and Daniel Tsui the Nobel prize (New Scientist, 31 January 1998, p 36).

A magnetic field got knotted up and formed a pair of toroids connected by a monopole field (quasiparticle) with fractional spin.

Lord Kelvin view of the atom as a knotted photon was not as science first thought.

Here is a theory of the electron as a knotted photon.
Is the electron a photon with toroidal topology?

Why should the quark be any different than the electron. The quark must also be a toroid made out of a knotted photon with fractional charge connected to its anti particle by a monopole field.

There seems to be a way to produce a monopole by twisting up photons to form a quasiparticle that can come into resonance with the quarks inside a nucleus using the same monopole based communications path the quarks effect each other with inside the nucleus.

What this monopole analog does is disrupt things inside the proton. It catalyzes proton decay.

[quote]Thus the monopole is the analog of a chemical catalyst. It is an agent provocateur. It wanders through matter stimulating proton decay and nuclear breakup without being changed itself. A single monopole can do this over and over again as rapidly as it can find its way into successive protons or nuclei. And with each such event, a quantity of energy is liberated which is far greater than that released in uranium fission. The implications of monopole catalysis are enormous. All matter, be it garbage or junk or gold ingots, becomes a source of unlimited energy. Given a suitable supply of monopoles the energy needs of the world are limited only by the supply of matter to be catalyzed into energy. If massive monopoles are ever found, they will be of incalculable worth for physical research and for energy production.

Beyond their utility as producers of energy, monopoles could probably be used directly in a spaceship engine. There have already been studies by Robert W. Forward and others showing that antimatter annihilating with matter in a magnetic “hemi-bottle”, an intense magnetic field pinched at one end and open at the other would serve as an extremely efficient spaceship drive. The problem is that the needed amount of antimatter fuel would require a truly staggering investment, because the antimatter would have to be manufactured by earth-based or orbiting “antiproton factories” of monumental size.

The same basic scheme, however, could be applied using monopole catalysis. The “fuel” would then be atoms of normal matter caused to explode because their protons and neutrons undergo catalyzed decay as a flux of monopoles is passed through them. The hemi-bottle magnetic nozzle then provides the dual function of guiding the charged nuclear fragments from the exploded nuclei out the exhaust port of the engine and at the same time collecting the monopoles at the pinch point for re-use in the next engine cycle.


Full article is at

Now we know that quantum knots are real. Holmlid has found that Rydberg hydrogen matter is superconductive and also demonstrates the meissner effect. From nanoplasmonics, we also know that surface plasmon polaritons(SPP) will always formed on the surface of a long nano-string type nanoparticle and might well produce this superconductive nature to the rydberg matter via Bose Condensation. Knotted vortex circulation of photons in SPPs that are trapped in a photonic locked vortex circulation in a topological plasmoid could produce an effective analog monopole capable of destabilizing subatomic particles as seen in Holmlid experiments.

The energy storage mechanism that absorbs energy from either a the LENR reaction’s based positive feedback loop or stimulation that comes from heat, laser or arc discharge might entail the addition of additional photonic quantum knots to form in a plasmoid circulation. Like in any coil, we can always add more wire windings to a coil adding more magnetic power. So to with quantum knots, there is always room for more.

Axil Axil

  • Axil Axil

    Doesn’t this all fit in with what Holmlid is doing: producing subatomic particles(k-mesons) and billions of neutral atomic fragments moving outward at a substantial fraction of the speed of light. That sounds like an monopole powered LENR space engine to me.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Mesons can also be produced by high energy collisions (e.g. of electrons and protons). That would, however, require hundreds of MeV. Is there any information about the energies that were reached in Holmlid’s experiments?

      • Axil Axil

        He is using a pulsed(10 nanoseconds) green laser light in a power range between 33 and 200 millijoules.

        A green laser pointer can produce a continuous green light beam of 175 millijoules.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          I have no idea how one could derive the energy of particles from these figures. But if very high energies were locally possible, the collision model might be able provide an explanation for the observed results.

          • Axil Axil

            At a conference that explained Holmlid’s work that was recently held on the west coast, a Holmlid replicator complained to Holmlid that he was not able to replicate Holmlid’s results. Holmlid asked how long the replicator was at it preparing his fuel. The replicator told Holmlid one day. Holmlid then told the replicator that it takes a couple of weeks to energize the fuel. That is the replicator needed to radiate the fuel for a few weeks before the Rydberg matter became active. The Rydberg matter stores up a great deal of energy and needs only a slightest jolt to become excited. It is like an explosive that needs a spark to activate.

            Piantelli tells us that LENR requires a shock to begin. In an extreme case, Holmlid says that the florescent light from his lab is enough for his active fuel to produce muons.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Storage could certainly play a role, but most important seems to be that the incoming energy is concentrated in a very small volume – like sunlight in a burning glass. This might be the ‘trick’ that gets LENR working. One millijoule sounds very little, but it equals 6.24 petaelectronvolts…

          • oaklandthinktank

            hehehe – i was so nervous, there. awkwardly, the SRI talk was on my birthday! whew… i’m glad these things are simple.

            ((majority capital concentrates toward the tapering of the quality curve. cheap pots and pans, decent quality/dollar = everyone and their mother has a stove and sink. expensive wafer fab, where quality/dollar tapers when $B spent = only a few do. diy future depends upon 2cent solution being the shoulders of the “S” of quality-curve. thank gosh lenr can happen with a laser pointer!))

  • Jonnyb

    It’s all very interesting, love the Electron being a Photon in a Toroidal Orbit.

  • Axil Axil

    The string net liquid theory of the æther looks at the vacuum as a sea of virtual particles that come in and out of existents fleetingly. Light is a excitation or setting of the state of spin of at least one of those virtual particles. That particle sets the spin of the next particle that comes into existence. This means that the first excited particle entangles the next particle in the string. This transfer of spin from one virtual particle to the next is how the beam of EMF moves through the æther.

    Matter is formed as a closed loop of spin transfers from one virtual particle to the next until the particle decays at random. Virtual particles come into existence at random and there is always a chance that a string of spin entanglements can be disrupted when a virtual particle does not show up
    to continue the closed loop of spins.

    • Jonnyb

      Yeh but wonder what media the Virtual Particles come from and go to? Can’t be from nothing or can it? Personally think that nothing is an impossibility.

      • Axil Axil

        Reality is information. Virtual particles come from the uncertainty principle. Where does the uncertainty principle come from? Recently physics postulates that space-time is a 2 dimensional holographic projection of information at the edge of the universe into the 3 dimensions inside the volume of the universe. Anytime you project a hologram to a higher dimension, there is a fuzziness generated through a loss of holographic definition. This fussiness is where the uncertainty in reality comes from.

        • Jonnyb

          Yes thanks I read this one a few years ago, hmmm. I personally think the answer will be far simpler, but possibly very strange. Although a multi dimensional world seems implausible, but not impossible. The more I consider something existing and interacting simultaneously in different planes only showing itself if/when it interacts with something in that plane as a possibility. Thanks for your insight.

  • Gerard McEk

    So seen in this (photon/electron) light, how does entanglement work?

    • giovanniontheweb

      matter/antimatter pair belong to the same topology and time event and despite they run away from each other they are in fact one single object they are not less entangled than two quarks

    • Axil Axil

      This is a very interesting question. I will speculate here. The electrons physically stay in the lattice as a dipole, but the photons aggregate in the SPP soliton as an exotic neutral particle(ENP). That is, the electrons and photons are connects quantum mechanically but are separated physically.

      There is evidence that the SPP can leave the reactor and float away in the air and these SPPs can produce nuclear reactions outside of the reactor. But the energy from these LENR reactions are sent back to the electrons in the lattice inside the reactor by quantum teleportation.

      Just because two particles are entangled, they do not need to be physically connected. QM experimentation has shown that two particles can be separated by as much as 100 kilometers and still be entangled.

      • Gerard McEk

        Frightening…. so if I am hit by a SPP and that causes some nuclear reaction, this energy may be teleported to a totally different place and indifferent of any time frame. If the SPP happens to be huge and I am fully ‘nuclear reacted’ I might re-appear elsewhere in time (past, present future) and space, so completely teleported, if you are able to control this.
        I wonder how much of Rossi has been teleported;)

  • Dave Lawton

    Were I use to work Sir Mike Berry wrote a couple of papers on Knots. Mike`s papers may interest some of you.

  • Zephir

    I can just repeat my previous comment here, no need to copy&paste it here

    • Axil Axil

      How Physics Lost Its Fizz
      Physics, which decades ago seemed capable of answering the deepest mysteries of existence, is now just recycling once-exciting ideas

      By John Horgan on January 18, 2016

      To recapture its fizz, physics desperately needs not new ideas but new facts. Discoveries, not inventions. Ideally, physicists will stumble on something so startling that they abandon their pursuit of multiverses, strings and other fantasies and return to reality.

      In the late 1990s, astronomers studying supernovas deduced to their astonishment that the expansion of the universe is speeding up. But this discovery, the most exciting since I became a science writer, has not forced radical revisions of the big-bang paradigm.

      Similarly, the Higgs boson, detected a few years ago by the Large Hadron Collider, merely confirmed the standard model of particle physics. Ho hum.

      Things have gotten so bad that physicists are openly fretting about the future of their field. In a recent TED Talk, “Have we reached the end of physics?”, Harry Cliff states that “for the first time in the history of science, we could be facing questions that we cannot answer, not because we don’t have the brains or technology, but because the laws of physics themselves forbid it.”

      I still keep an eye on physics, but I doubt it will ever thrill me as it once did. My go-to source for fizzy ideas now is research into the brain and mind. Science’s wildest frontier is inside our heads.

  • Axil Axil

    The strong force for could be based on monopole magnetism. Monopole magnetism does not follow the inverse square law of spherical propagation.

    This is consistent with the way the strong force does not weaken as the distance between the quarks are increased as they are pulled apart.

    Another similarity between non perturbative quantum chromodynamics and monopole magnetism is that both are described by non associative mechanics where the wave function cannot be applied since the forces involved are linear.

    • reader22b

      Interesting. In the physorg article you linked to they say monopoles may not exist but they are figuring out a way to test for them. I’m sure it’s different than what you are talking about but in this article they say weyl fermions act as monopoles: .

      My direct question to you is: would a ‘weyltronic’ motor/device never need to be recharged because it doesn’t lose energy as heat? ie the weyl fermions just keep going round and round. ie no more need for an e-cat x.. 🙂

      • Axil Axil

        It might someday be possible to build superconducting computer circuits the use the weyl fermions. Another possible application is a laser.

        I don’t think that these particles can produce energy. I’m not sure though.

        I must confess, I’m not sure if the monopole I describe here is a monopole or a tachyon. It could be either one.

        See Keith Fredericks work at

        • reader22b

          “I don’t think that these particles can produce energy. I’m not sure though.”

          They carry a charge, like electrons do, but without waste heat.

        • reader22b

          Still waiting for my comment to appear..

          My point was that weyl fermions are energy carriers, like electrons, and perhaps you don’t need to keep producing them because their energy is not lost. ie it changes everything. ‘weyltricity’.

  • Mats002
  • oaklandthinktank

    so, holmlid’s eddies move along the lattice surface… what about a rigid tube of specific circumference and equatorial resonance? support vortices which encompass, like a ring around the maypole, not a circle drawn on its’ surface… i hear carbon forms stiff tubes, and you can tune growth of forests which would make great cold cathodes… ( harvest the heavy metals when the light burns out! that osmium dioxide is a refractory foundation for high temp ‘starches’, ‘lipids’, ‘microtubules’…

    • Axil Axil
      • oaklandthinktank

        seems to me, if you have a nanotube forest grounded to a conductive substrate, infill between strands with insulator, and you pump ionized H- through, while vibratto of transverse mag coils ripple conduction band along the forest of filaments, some kind of precessing schauberger piccolo kundalini envelopes sloshing clumps of H? Li would probably help. i apologize for spitballing naked hypotheses, with only Rajmanujan at the bedside of my speculations. : ,

        also, axil – thank you for all the thoughts better said. our hypotheses can travel to alternate realities, and back, without causing a teacup to rattle. i’m always excited to read your posts – you weave us perseus’ thread, down to the fundamental conceptions. thanks!