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
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
Water in Space as an Analogy to Understand Hot and Cold Fusion (Mats Danielsson)
Hi all,
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