Axil Axil’s very exciting creative thinking about the LENR process and our discussions lately gave me this thought: We need a new analogy (model) to understand what we cannot experience. The standard model is not intuitive enough; it is much too static and based on complex concepts. We need something that anyone can take to heart intuitively.
I understand Axil Axil’s model (vision) as a stormy weather system and that analogy is much better than a static model but I have problem understanding that storm at a more detailed level.
I do not claim to have a better model, I just want to throw out this idea of a weather analogy at a smaller scale.
First, watch this video of how water behave in space where gravity forces are absent (close to zero):
Now, think of the behavior of a single proton as that bubble of water. What will happen when you smash high speed water drops into that bubble? It will be a splash. But soon the water will gather into different drops, smaller and larger, continue their trajectory paths – and in this scenario a hot fusion physicist has an instrument getting an eV value for the sum of mass and speed for each of the drops.
Gravity is absent (close to zero) at the scale this take place because the mass of the bubbles are so small.
Now, think of the behavior of a LENR reaction. We are not smashing but cooking instead. Cooking is adding energy, which in this case is vibrations like the guy in the video does to the bubble.
Depending on the frequencies and intensity (vibrations) given to the bubble the result will be different results, from nothing (it just goes back into its original form), to decay (many tiny bubbles leave at a higher speed), to transmutations (new larger bubbles form and leave with slow speed).
This analogy can be applied to more complex ‘particles’ as well. A cluster of subatomic particles as in a big uranium atom would also be a bubble-of-water-in-space but some force makes it decay, it loses tiny drops of water all the time. This bubble is probably swinging and swaging fiercely.
How to translate this analogy into quantum mechanics? Again this is just creative thinking, I have no mathematics or experiments to backup this idea with: The quantum – defined as “the minimum amount of energy required to form an electromagnetic field” – is in this model the tiniest water particle which is one molecule of water. Then, the quantum field must not have two, but three dimensions, and behaves as we see in the video.
Water molecules stick together because H and O have small opposite electrical charges. The force of this bond defines how ‘sticky’ the water is. The quanta would probably have (I guess) less stickiness than water molecules and therefore behave a little different. Playing the video at a slightly faster pace might get closer to truth.
This model is long from complete, even dumb and crazy, but water behavior has been studied before in history of science, see: http://einsteinsintuition.com/book-excerpts/chapter-2/2/
Mats G Danielsson aka Mats002