The Fundamental Question about LENR- and a tentative sketch of answer.
Despite what Abd and other supporters of classic LENR as-it-is say, I deeply love LENR and want to see it transformed in LENR+, prosperous, popular realm of science- in fast and harmonious development toward understanding and applications. I know that this can be attained only by hard work including the metamorphosis of the barely definable LENR in the productive LENR+
Love for LENR can be expressed and manifested the best and most convincingly helping it to get the answers to its essential questions and to solve the most painful problems. for me, the question considered as start-point by many:
"Does LENR exist? "
has a positive answer, based on what i know- not a question more. However, for: "What exactly, is LENR?"
I am, as everybody else, still undecided.
However in order to understand LENR and to master it, I think we have to answer an even more fundamental and important question:
"WHY does LENR exists?" That is, why has Nature created it?
I will try to give you, at least a sketch of an answer today and i duly hope this will be discussed seriously and improved greatly with your active help. Can we allow us to ignore the root questions?
Method and inspiring ideas
I will combine disparate data and try to build multiple creative bisociations
Brian Josephson spoke about life-likeness of CF,
Chris Tinsley has stated: "Cold Fusion is for Hot Fusion, what Biochemistry is for
Daniel Rocha has observed that Cold Fusion/LENR is similar- mainly as complexity
to photosynthesis but unfortunately has not developed this idea in his theoretical work;
knows that nanoplasmonics is of paramount importance for HENI (his name for what we still call LENR) and this is about light-matter interaction.
In his ICCF-17 presentation Yiannis shows many examples of LENR taking place in the Nature.
Vladimir Vysotskii is the leader of biological LENR with amazing results;
I told long ago that catalysis is a form of synergy,and LENR is a form of catalysis.
Please note for this discussion my following Septoes http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2012/06/100-septoes.html:
Life is hungry matter and edible too (after Valeriu Butulescu, aphorism writer)
The Universe is obsessed to be interesting.
The world is simultaneously chaotic and ordered.
Evolution is the inherent perfectibility of Nature.
I have developed my philosophy, starting with the idea of ever increasing
interestingness of Nature in this essay: http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2015
(read this please now)
I came upon this Theory of Life of this bright young physicist called Jeremy England and I also noted this: A New Physics Theory of Life http://www.
Nature, as Technology, see: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2011/08/technology-mon-amour.html
is based on universal, unbelievably rich phenomena of:
TRANSPORT, TRANSFER and TRANSFORMATION of
MATTER, ENERGY and INFORMATION;
the range is much broader than in our technologies but it exist the general trend to increase effectiveness, efficiency and the interstingness. It seems the Universe is at maximum interestingness when there are small islands of order in a sea of chaos.
Two contrary trends are eternally confronted as oruzd and Ahriman in the Zoroastric
religion: one is decay, the hypergeneralized Second Law of Thermodynamics and the other is new and new forms of organized matter in ever superior forms
And Nature works the best by synergies- cooperation between different forms of matter, energy and information- Life and Mind are generated by this beneficial
Therefore at least three mega-questions:
Why does catalysis exist?
Why does life exist? and
Why does LENR exist?
have one and the same answer, because they are based on synergies that are possible in Nature and lead to the increase of its interestingness.
What is remarkable is the role of light both in photosynthesis and nanoplasmonics.
To be discussed and improved.
Please think about the 6 Pillars of LENR+: Otherness, Complexity, Diversity, Metamorphosis, Creativity and Dynamicity in the great natural world.
Peter I am surprised at you not being certain what LENR is. That word is all about seeking uncertainty. Certainly COLD FUSION is all about the unequivocal observation of nuclides growing by the fusion with other nuclides or pieces thereof.ReplyDelete
LENR is such a confusing misnomer suited mainly for bureaucrats. It's a moniker that guarantees never enough certainty.
COLD FUSION is simple and direct and definitively shown countless times. It clarifies and focuses one on realities in hand.
LENR obfuscates, obscures, and obliterates experimental results in overwhelming inordinate theories endlessly argued by pontificating armchair gadflies, wannabes, trolls, and flim flam promoters.
I disagree. Cold fusion is a little too presumptive to something we don't yet even understand. It also has some historical baggage that clouds and biases our expectations of the root cause and effect.Delete
It's a cool name though.
By the way should muon catalyzed fusion be called mu mason fusion, and wasn't that the original cold fusion?
OK, please tell what certainties regarding Cold Fusion' topology, nature and mechanism you have and also please say if these refer to both PdD and NiH. if you think both exist. Thanks.Delete
Sure. I think the energy density is nuclear in nature and I think there is good evidence of transmutations but I don't think there is good indication of how the transmutation occurs, wether it's beta decay, some kind of fusion fission chain, neutron nucleosynthesis, etc. I think at this point it's reasonable to conclude there is a good chance we are dealing with multi body physics, and quantum effects of some yet understood nature.Delete
I do think it exists for both PdD and NiH but I think right now the evidence suggests the reaction is stronger with Ni.