MIT suggests new physical model for condensed matter

Arxiv.org and Vortex-L ^ | Feb 8 2012 | David Ledin

[Kevmo]

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.4377.pdf

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg63015.html

The Cold Fusion Ping List

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/coldfusion/index?tab=articles

--------------------------------------------------------------

http://ecatnews.com/?p=1144

[Kevmo]

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.4377.pdf

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex- href=”mailto:l@eskimo.com”>l@eskimo.com/msg63015.html

The Cold Fusion Ping List

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/coldfusion/index?tab=articles

---

http://ecatnews.com/?p=1144

[mamelukesabre]

hahaha!

I thought the title read: “Mitt suggests new physical model for condensed matter”

[Track9]

Ping

[Mike Darancette]

I know about condensed matter.

[Kevmo]

abstract of the theory:


Including nuclear degrees of freedom in a lattice Hamiltonian

P L Hagelstein1, I U Chaudhary2

1 Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, MA 02139,USA
E-mail: plh@mit.edu
2 Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Engineering and
Technology, Lahore, Pakistan

E-mail: irfanc@mit.edu


Abstract.

Motivated by many observations of anomalies in condensed matter systems, we
consider a new fundamental Hamiltonian in which condensed matter and nuclear
systems are described initially on the same footing. Since it may be possible that
the lattice will respond to the mass change associated with a excited nuclear state, we
adopt a relativistic description throughout based on a many-particle Dirac formalism.
This approach has not been used in the past, perhaps due to the difficulty in separating
the center of mass and relative degrees of freedom of the nuclear system, or perhaps due
to an absence of applications for such a model. We recently found a way to separate
the center of mass and relative contributions to the Hamiltonian for the many-particle
Dirac model, which leads to somewhat different expressions for the kinematic mass,
Newton mass, and deBroglie mass of the many-particle Dirac composite. It is not clear
at this time whether such a difference is reflected in experiment. This separation allows
us to reduce the condensed matter and nuclear Hamiltonian into a more manageable
form. In the resulting model, there appears a new term in which nuclear transitions
are coupled to lattice vibrations.

[DonnerT]

Hmmmm,

Condensed matter, coherent light, oscillation, resonant frenquency, regenerative feedback.

Galt energy? :-)

[super7man]

Association Time:

Kevmo is to cold fusion as

Willie Greene is to ........

[garjog]

Could someone please translate this? It is a bunch of nonsense to me.

[Kevmo]

Basically the theoretical physicists are groping for ways to show that vibration energy couples to the metal matrix in Nickel or Palladium, causing the Lattice Assisted Nuclear Reactions and excess heat.

[Brad’s Gramma]

REAL friends PING their friends to threads!!!

:)

[MHGinTN]

It’s all about resonance, my boy, all about resonance. You want to be with it in the future, get resonance in the planar present using energy from the linear past.

[reed13]

bfl

[Milhous]

bttt

[Dogbert41]

Did somebody mention Mit?

[Moonman62]

I was ready to believe until I got to this part.

Put some protons in a micro-cavity and shake until coherent.

Rossi’s powder does this job. In the heavy water experiments, micro-cavities have done the same job in that system but not as intensely as it is done by the Rossi’s powder or Piantelli’s rough surface coating.

[Moonman62]

Basically the theoretical physicists are groping...

You may want to stop confusing people with your fancy scientific jargon.

[count-your-change]

Sure. The claim is being made that the nucleus of excited (unstable) atoms can transfer energy to the lattice (the regular frame work the metal) by the change of some of the atom's mass into energy that is coherent (same wave length, etc.) as vibrations in the lattice.
Since the wave length isn't the same for each excess energy is produced as heat as the atomic nucleus becomes more stable.
But moving to a more stable state should produce a gamma ray which is why gamma rays were sought as proof that actual nuclear reactions were taking place.

The problem has been showing the two systems, lattice and nucleus, together can produce more energy than either or both separately operating.

That's my rather broad understanding of what is being claimed. I welcome any corrections.

[eclecticEel]

Could someone please translate this? It is a bunch of nonsense to me.

Yeah, that's the point: it is nonsense.

[Johnny B.]

Rossi’s powder does this job.

It's probably a mistake to try to develop a theory based on the work of a con man.