LENR Simplified: Pencils, Windmills and Super Mario

The following post was submitted by ECW reader Lilylover

Often technical posts like the one about ‘Discrete Breathers’ may not generate a lot of interest. Sometimes they are important, sometimes they are trifling. So, today, I thought maybe I’ll interest some of the E-Catters into desiring to read a technical/dry post by providing a simplified version. This might also help you decide chaff from wheat; and make you more hopeful about LENR scenario. Bear with the randomness and length; I think in the end you’ll be glad you did.
•••
1

Imagine a box as large as a refrigerator with hundreds of small holes barely large enough to let a pencil through. You have inserted thousands of pencils to fill up the box. Now, imagine that you toppled the box. Do you expect all the pencils to fall out of box? None? Some? If you shuffle it a bit more, what then? Imagine if these holes were on all six sides of the box — even in this scenario, only after a lot of vigorous shaking, some pencils will fall out. But if the holes were only on one surface, fewer pencils will fall out after similar random shaking. Now, for the same amount of shaking if you wanted to get the maximum number of pencils out from that one particular surface you’ll modify your shaking techniques so as to try to align the pencils perpendicular to the surface. This strategy will yield more pencils as opposed to vigorous random shaking.

2
Once upon a time there was a windmill atop a hill in a fairly windy area. An albatross and a hummingbird decided to fly through the rotors. There were spectators betting on who would come out on the other side alive. How would you bet? Why? They both flew through it and made it through alive. Then, they said, let’s do this until only one of us is alive. Who do you think would stay alive? The albatross said, “Wait a minute. Surely my luck will run out faster. I see what you are doing. Let’s be fair.” Then the albatross asked for a 5-minutes-time-out to come up with a fair plan. Meanwhile, a poor crow watching this from afar saw an opportunity. He told the betters that he wanted to participate. They okayed. The desparate crow hoped that if went normally, surely the albatross will be dead and he could split the prize with the hummingbird. Not knowing about the crow, the albatross came up with a plan — a smaller windmill for hummingbird in the same proportion as to the big windmill was to the albatross. The hummingbird said that was fair since it would be equally dangerous game for both of us. The crow said, “I’m in. Me too!” The crow wanted to use the albatross’ windmill. The hummingbird and the albatross told him that’s not fair – we are taking more risk, you’d be taking less.

How about using hummingbird’s windmill? The crow complained — “you’d be taking less risk, I’d be taking more. That’s not fair.”

Then, they said, “Well, then, let’s have another windmill that’s right for your size.” “That seems fair,” said the crow. But now with equal risk for the same reward, the crow cowered. He said, “I’m out.” … and away he flew.

They flew through their windmills. Both made it through alive. But the hummingbird realized that if they continued like this, he’d be tired sooner. So, he said, “how about  we create a series of seven windmills 10 feet apart and then fly through those?”

Albatross: I’m big, I cannot maneuver within 10 feet to be ready for the next windmill. I’ll surely lose. Let’s keep them 200 meters apart.
Humming bird: I’m small, I’ll get tired by the time I reach third windmill. Surely, I’ll lose. Let’s keep them at 5 body-lengths apart.
Albatross: I do good in the straight line, surely, 5 body-lengths is not good for me.
Hummingbird: BTW, for the same wind speed, my windmill rotates faster. So we have to wait for the wind that causes the same rpm.
Albatross: That’s beyond my control. How about, you get a little bit bigger windmill to compensate for the higher rpm by the same wind speed?
Hummingbird: How about you get a smaller windmill, instead? It’ll be equally risky.
Albatross: True, but more risky, nonetheless. Are trying to kill me sooner? Instead of getting us both killed, let’s both use oversized mills and keep playing the game longer and safer.
•••
All but Rossi: Let’s make them smaller, faster and riskier.
Rossi: Let’s make them bigger and safer. That’s rational.

3
This will be a part of my “Things I learned from Super Mario” series:

In Super Mario, there comes a stage when bars go up and bars go down. If you time it correctly, you can simply fast walk across as if gaps or bars matter not. Or, like an expert, with adoptive timing, you can jumpy-jumpy-jumpy-cross much faster. Or, you can take your time and handle the up-bars; maximize the points; rest a bit; then handle the down-bars at your comfort. Calm, confident but slow. When the bars go faster and faster things get complex. You have to develop certain pattern of timing and jumping to cross it all. Then, you meet fire on the bars, animals and mushrooms, coins and stars; then the falling bricks with dragon-fire and cannons. Cross all that and you find your key! Then it’s all worth it. Practice a few times and you know how to win the game.
•••
Enhanced Probability Nuclear Reaction – Some Concepts
•••
1. Coulomb Barrier

When you think about Coulomb barrier, do not think in terms of a rubber film or metal film barrier being pierced by plastic pellet or silver bullet. Think of it as a probabilistic barrier like our hummingbird and albatross trying to pass through a ‘proper spatio-temporal’ window. Force is useful but brutal force is redundant  – the secret of alchemy without cyclotrons.

Imagine yourself to be almighty javelin thrower. You throw it as fast as the bullet from your gun. Still, the bullet has more probability to pass through the windmill. Right?

2. Structured distortion

Random latency is not useful for high frequency traders’ profits. Structured distortion is where the gain lies.
(BTW, in the absence of the transaction charges, addition of 4X average consumer-grade-hardware-latency to the transaction-registration-time will solve the high frequency theft. No money needed!)

What if with your almighty javelin capability, if I distort the blades of windmill creating a larger gap, will it be easier for you to wait for the right gap and then throw? Yes, as long as you are perfectly capable to time it correctly. Right? So, with proper technique and structured distortion, probability of crossing the barrier is enhanced. Now, ignore the javelin and only use the bullets from gun – probability increased a lot more! What if the windmill goes stationary? Even better? (Opportunity for rotational magnetic fields to be employed for relatively stationary windmill effect.)

Gas loading of metals -> structured distortion. Introduction of charged ions in polarized solution -> structured distortion.

Rossi’s crafted catalyst -> predetermined, desired, controlled, structured distortion with high degree of predictability.

Think of exploding certain bars or pushing around certain bars to make way for Mario -> structured distortion.

Structured distortion or correctly crafted material or say, engineered lattice structure of certain material provides with easy access to or enhances the probability of nuclear reaction. This is one of the reasons Rossi says no existing laws are broken.

3. Excitation energy

All the material that we observe has come to settle into present stable state. Now, imagine a rolling boulder on a steep hill with a pothole. This boulder settles into a pothole. It has become stable for all practical purposes regardless of the position of the pothole on the hill – very close to the top or bottom or inbetween. There could be multiple potholes along the slope. The location of potholes is a point of huge contention. The order of magnitude varies from our atoms being almost empty to Neutron stars being so dense. The variability in the restive states is huge. For now, ignore that. If you roll the boulder a little bit out of the pothole, it starts rolling again, giving away it’s energy. Rolling up out of the pothole is a non-zero effort that is needed to get the ball rolling. Think of this as excitation energy. Also think of a group that comes together to solve a problem. With silence, nothing gets done. As is. Status quo. With haphazard heated arguments some points get across but result may not necessarily be achieved. Wtih a non/semi-structured thoughtful debate, ideas are exchanged and solution is achieved faster.

(In case of debates, too much structure is like straight-jacketing the ideas => ineffective. Don’t stretch the analogy.)
If someone pushes you around mildly, you recover the balance withing one step; pushes forcefully, may be you need 3-4 steps to regain balance. Similarly, to get into another stable state, from the present restive state, an excitation force that disturbs present equilibrium is necessary. Also, this transient state of regaining balance is less inertial and more conducive to start running or continuing a reaction. Hot/energetic/vibrant water is more reactive than cold. Temperature or certain metal lattices act as catalysts for different reactions. If something catalyzes a reaction, that thing is also likely to catalyze another similar reaction.
Think of excitation energy as an act of pressing the button to begin moving the Mario. Or think of excitation phenomenon as the ability of Mario to move while the button is being pressed. Doesn’t always work – say, when Mario is pressed against wall.

4. Waveform

Only the correct lock-and-key mechanisms will fight toxins or cause toxicity in the biological sense of immune system; others will be ineffective. Think of baffling the wind with controlled baffles to control windmill’s speed. As our atomic clocks improve in accuracy, our instrumentation becomes more and more synchronized, our ability to fire precisely at the moment we want improves.

Say we’ve distorted the blades and created a wider gap, now we fire our 10 bullets exactly when we are sure. Then we wait, then we fire the next ten. This is better than continuously firing and losing some on the blades; or, firing only one bullet with each rotation at the center of the gap and waiting for next round — sort of a semi-automatic approach. This pattern in which we fire the bullets, is analogous to our desired waveform.

Or, the way we play the Mario to cross successfully, is our Mario-waveform to the key to success.

Right now we have fast moving bars and animals on the way with cannon-n-fire scattered around and few master players who’ve got the moves! That’s LENR today.

The structured catalyst will remove some animals and remove some cannon-n-fire and slow down the bars. More experimentation will give more moves/waveforms to achieve the same result.

5. Future: Field Effects
The next step naturally, is – motion-freeze, not unlike Matrix – Morpheus walking with Neo as the World around is frozen. Rotational magnetic field – like sitting on a huge blade mounted on the same axis of the windmill rotating at the same speed, centered over the gap – zero rotational difference -> easy shot. Or, in case of our Mario – bars, animals and cannon fires totally frozen, or moving very very slowly, and Mario has all the time to plan and dodge and cross.

•••
Now, the ‘Discrete Breather’ theory:
A name is a name; not an explantion. A name of a phenomenon is not an explanation of the phenomenon, once removed. The typical mistake of a student of theoretical physics. Invoking new names for phenomena and calling them explanation / mechanisms is not correct. Good for them if they can get their PhD through such ‘names of mechanisms’ passed off as ‘mechanisms’.

“A new mechanism of LENR in solids is proposed, in which DBs play the role of a catalyzer via” >> Fluff

“Extreme dynamic closing of adjacent H/D atoms” >> The spreading of the windmill blades. How? More energy – heat/electricity/… .
Equivalent of saying, catalyzed chemical reactions, are faster than non-catalyzed chemical reactions.Or, comical equivalent of “Tiller light is the only light beer, that is also a Tiller. That’s how light beers are made.”

“Required for the tunneling through the Coulomb barrier.” >> Truthful fluff.

“DBs have been shown to arise either via thermal activation at elevated temperatures or via knocking atoms out of equilibrium positions under non-equilibrium gas loading conditions, employed under radiolysis or plasma deposition methods.” >> The effects of distortions (Enhanced Probability of Nuclear Reaction because of Enhanced probability of passing through Coulomb barrier), begin to appear when distortion of any kind, abc, fgh, or, xyz is introduced.

“The present mechanism explains all the salient LENR requirements:” >> Without violating any rules of physics, I have formulated a circular hypothesis, that will yield me my PhD because:

“(i, ii) long initiation time and high loading of D within the Pd lattice as preconditioning needed to prepare small PdD crystals, in which DBs can be excited,” >> Long initiation is not a salient requirement. It’s present day limitation. Once we refine or techniques to craft desired lattice structure for catalysts, use proper and minimal excitation energy, and find out proper waveform, the “long initiation” will go out the window. High loading of D on Pd was the only way old-timers could introduce irregualariy-of-field-based-catalysis. Gas loading proposed herein for distorting field characteristics vs Rossi’s gas loading in the spirit of firing bullets into the windmill are of different nature.

“and (iii, iv) the triggering by D flux or electric current,” >> The effects of field distortions are increased when there is more distortion. “D flux”. If you have more money, you’ll be able to buy more things. Pretty much self evident.
Electricity- if you use more excitation energy, the rate of reaction will increase.
Also, let’s mix and match and say – if you use bullet vs javelin, you can fire more bullets past the windmill.

“which facilitates the DB creation by the” >> Fluff.

“input energy transformed into the lattice vibrations – ‘large amplitude anharmonic lattice vibrations’.” >> Instead of saying input energy used to forcefully propel the bullet past the windmill a little faster (D-D collisions breaking Coulomb barrier); he says the vigorous shaking of the above refrigerator-sized box has let out more pencils. The more you shake, the more pencils come out, with a caveat of ‘only if the conditions are right’. From that refrigerator box, it’s easier to draw out pencils when the box is medium full as opposed to completely full or almost empty.

Vladimir Dubinko is pretty much saying the entire screen of Mario is being shaken by virtue of which we can slide and drop and toss Mario in the right place to get desired outcome. Dr. Rossi’s approach of using less energy to play Mario is a lot more elegant than this Scientific-worker’s approach of using more energy to vibrate the platform.

The biggest pitfall? The assumption that “salient requirements/conditions” for LENR – exist, are specific, and, well known.  And need to be explained without violating existing laws. Instead of specific outcome from a generic theory, the attempts are made to formulate a theory that is based on one of the possible outcomes of the theory as a prerequisite for the validity of the theory.

Instead of “Discrete Breathers”, it might as well be “Gap Management”, “Mind the gap” or “Dart in the Windmill” theory, sorry, mechanism.
He has used correct equations in irrelevant/plausible context. Neither his professor, nor Rossi, probably read through it fully. Maybe Rossi did, but wants others to stay temporarily misguided or feels bad about yesterday’s “Schnapps-talks”.

I took this opportunity to simplify some concepts. I’m tired now, If this gets published, and if you have any doubts, I’ll try to clarify.

•••
Random notes:  How to discredit myself? Include Inka and UFO in my writing! Based on Inka and Atlantis stories, they left after alchemy was discovered.

So, LENR transmutation was more difficult than high speed travel. If we put enough research into gravitational waves, flying saucers will be achievable. We just need to need it badly.

Summary: Hopeful Future

Various combinations of designer-catalysts (structured distortions), various methods of excitation and perpetuation, and various methods of waveforms are yet to be discovered and will be discovered.  All of them are essential components as of now. Think about star-densities. Think about know yet to be discovered.

Lilylover

  • bachcole

    Yeah, even if it is true, what does that have to do with LENR?

  • Maxfield Q Norse

    I do not understand, is Musk going to destroy the earth when he leaves?
    Perhaps he can take you with him.

  • jousterusa

    You were right – this stuff gets boring quick! But the writer’s grammatical errors are so many that my editor’s mind keeps pausing at them, rewriting them mentally before before I continue. By the sixth iteration, I was so bored and tired I had to stop – and agree with you! :)

  • Iggy Dalrymple

    300,000 tickets (without seat assignment) sold for Super bowl at stadium with 80,000 seats. Catalyst = free beer.

    • Maxfield Q Norse

      I would have gone with a fleet week analogy.

  • kdk

    Thanks for the great explanation.

  • clovis ray

    I like your analogy, i would only add that the balls in the box is the ones i always thought were causing all the heat, and by heating the box before you start you get exrta balls in ,and then when the temp is changed again they are trapped in a place meant only for 1 ball, friction will then occur. with large surfice area, or many boxes, the temp goes up. hows that.

  • hempenearth

    In relation to being on the right track and MH370, it seems they were searching for electronic footprints they had created themselves. Pooh Bear and Piglet followed their own footprints in circles searching for a Woozle.
    Great analogies Lily

    • psi

      I thought it was a heffalump…..: )

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Lilylover, thanks for this both illustrative and amusing text. To take up your picture with the javelin: If you could stop the rotation of the mill completely or if you were able throw the javelin in a synchronized helical trajectory, you would have no problems to come through. In any other case, you would need a minimum speed to pass the window between two successive blades. A higher speed would increase the probability, both for the javelin and for the pencils in the box. From this point of view, I would think that Dubinko’s proposal makes indeed some sense, except if you were able to reach perfect synchronization.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      You could also imagine that the rotor blades of the windmill become somewhat narrower if the speed of the javelin is increased. The holes in the box would become correspondingly wider.

  • bachcole

    Sorry, I’m completely lost.

  • Bernie777

    “(BTW, in the absence of the transaction charges, addition of 4X average consumer-grade-hardware-latency to the transaction-registration-time will solve the high frequency theft. No money needed!)” Oh no, that regulation would be anti capitalistic (:

    • LilyLover

      I know, you are being funny. Thanks.
      To clarify my typo – I meant random latency.
      Say, you place an order with 300ms latency, then GS/HFTraders place order at 10ms. If the the transaction is always registered at “T(order)+T(rLat)”, we defeat the HFT malpractice. T(rLat) varies randomly between 0 to 1200 ms or 0 to 1.2 seconds. This addition of randomness defeats the fastness of transaction.
      It’s opposite of regulation; it’s addition of deregulation, useful chaos!
      Anti regulation society should welcome it!

  • bitplayer

    I like the way Lilylover’s text illustrates how things that are “impossible” at large scales can be possible at smaller scales.

    A key question is “What is the smallest scale of space, time, matter and energy that can affect human well-being?”

    The history of science shows that it keeps getting smaller. Paraphrasing Feynman, there’s a lot of room at the bottom…for things to happen in unexpected ways.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Admittedly, I do not know “Super Mario” (please forgive me for that). Anyway, this is a nice text to stir my thoughts a little bit. What will be the right moment to reply? When the thoughts are still circulating or when they have settled, possibly in a new configuration?

    • ecatworld

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enP5URleQpQ This gives the general idea, Andreas.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        Ok, I guess that refers to probabilities in deterministic systems (computer programs are deterministic)?

        • AB

          I think the general message is that under the right conditions, success is assured every time (implying that Rossi has managed to reliably create the right conditions in his materials).

          • Maxfield Q Norse

            For success to be reliable to a particular standard, you must control the influencing variables, This is sometimes addressed with a statistical approach called six sigma. If you have six sigma control, Six sigma represents the highest statistical level of control and is % 99.999997 accurate. This would be when you have properly identified each variable and controlled for it. In a general sense more uncontrolled variables means less accuracy; some variables will have more influence than others.

        • clovis ray

          I call it, the rossi effect, lol and i would call lily lover, version, Discrete, breathers,structured Distorsion, and i will add it to all the rest of the guesses,
          lol,sorry,and i also would add that this theory would be as close as any,and was explained so well even i could understand, thanks.