RE: The erroneous thinking of Cold Fusion

Harvey Norris ( (no email) )
Wed, 31 Mar 1999 02:07:11 PST

On Tue, 30 Mar 1999 10:29:56 -0600, Euejin Jeong wrote:

> Hi All;
>
> Let there be no mistake. Cold fusion is a physical phenomenon. There must

> be a long way for the engineering perfection. But it's already worth with

> what it is right now. Suppose you spent billions of dollars to perfect the

> engineering model for the cold fusion, you may have already succeeded in
> building a cold fusion power plant who knows? There is no known way of
> elemental transmutation by Electro-chemical means. And the cold fusion
> experiment has reported that they have succeeded in observing those
effect.
> I don't understand why this doesn't surprise everybody in the physics
> community and jump into it with tons of money waiting for the support. The

> physics community has lost the innocence long time ago. And some of you
are
> contributing to that effect.
>
> EJJ
>
>> Kind of reminds one of the time the allies secretly recorded the great
German physicist Heisenberg after the defeat of Germany ( when he was in
England) to gauge his reaction to the actual detonation of an atomic bomb
on Japan. (Speculation on German Atomic Bomb work in
WWII- History Channel) He at first refused to believe this was possible, yet
his own colleages did believe and in fact were those responsible for making
it possible. Of course Heisenberg had a real moral dilema on his conscience
and perhaps this intruded upon his common sense to a much greater degree
than his allied counterparts whether such a thing were possible.
It is sort of hard not to agree with Jerry D's assesment of cold
fusions potential which seems to be less practical than a year and a half
ago when great hopes seemed to be on the horizon. However as long as
analomies exist,hope still exists, and lots of researchers wont so easily
give up.
For example high voltage capacitive discharges in water produce such an
explosive force as to punch holes through aluminum coverings of the water
container. Others have mentioned the fact that the initial expenditure of
energy seemed insufficient to produce this effect.
Personally I believe that every possible approach to new forms of
electrolysis should be pursued in this search. Now matter how impractical it
sounds there may be something there that someone has missed.
Electric current itself might be explained as a gyroscopic
precession in some circumstances. We know that an electric field will cause
electrons to bouce from atom to atom in conductive materials establishing a
drift velocity of electrons that we macroscopically observe as current. If
the electric field is applied to dielectrics it streches the molecule and in
the small instant of time where this occurs a net charge movement or
"displacement current" exists. To maximize this displacement current/vs time
effect one only needs to allow the electric field to rapidly change
polarity. Now we are told this may allow the dielectric molecules to
spin,and in physics of two dimensions we find that when spin occurs usually
part of the energy that would have enabled straight line or translational
movement to occur gets transferred into rotational inertia or angular
momentum.
But we live in a 3 dimensional world so when we ask how these dipoles could
spin in an electric field we must say the spin occurs with360 degrees of
rotational freedom with respect to that of the electric field. Now if
another variable is brought into the picture, such as a magnetic field at
right angles to the electric, our laws predict that the magnetic field will
also exert a force in direct proportion to the volume of displacement
current. How will this force act? It acts at right angles to the electric
field; and it also acts at right angles to the magnetic. This is an exact
analogy to the actions of gyroscopic precession; when a right angle force is
applied to a rotation it causes a third right angle force to act.
Essentially these 360 degrees of rotational freedom are then reduced to one
correct way to spin; the magnetic field will exert a force on all the
incorrect spins to make them spin all one way and we might say the magnetic
field acts to cohere all the spins in 2 dimensions,eliminating the 360
degrees of rotational freedom.
What I have described is an adaptation of the Lorentz force law to
displacement currents.Thus if this effect is proven the currents caused by
the Lorentz force in this example are nothing more than the effect of
gyroscopic
precession.But the problem becomes the fact that simple spin will not cause
a current since we are dealing with a dielectric material to begin with.
However what MIGHT occur is a special case where the dielectric might act in
a diodic fashion to allow current conduction only at this dimensional
direction.
So many other factors are present that this is only a crude analogy to
get one to think about further possible modifications.In the first place the
molecules are not just sitting there experiencing gyroscopic spin
modifications, but are actually undergoing translational movement through
space resulting in random molecular bombardments. However if part of this
linear momentum in converted into rotational momentum as is done in simple
2-d physics demonstrations of rolling cylinders; then the amount of random
collisions per unit time will be reduced because of the reduced amount of
translational movement that consequently occurs per unit time. So what is
the greatest problem of electrolysis? It is EXACTLY these random collisions
that express themselves as unwanted heat that perhaps the cold fusion
scientists are actually hoping to find:when maybe they should be
concentrating on ways to secure the exact opposite effect, to prevent this
heat from occurring in the first place.
Sorry for beating an old horse here as I may have mentioned these ideas
before on the list, but the circumstance leads to promoting them again. The
second gedanken is the fact that the lorentz reactions will always oscillate
when the the electric and magnetic fields are obtained from a single phase
of resonance. In order to obtain the electric field for the cheapest energy
cost it would have to be secured from resonance. The detractors of this idea
will state: How can one possibly secure a diodic electrolysis reaction with
a Lorentz reaction when that reaction is itself in oscillation? Well the
answer seems simple but the means to attain it is not because every
generator ever built to my knowlege has an odd number of phases and not an
even no. because it was considered redundant. This redundancy was never
completely considered in further ramifications in my opinion,and so it didnt
even have to be swept under the rug because of its apparent idiocy. Health
Research used to make a quote:
It is the fool who doesnt know something cant be done that goes ahead and
does it anyway, or something along those lines. If the electric field
changes or alternates exactly in concert with the magnetic, then the lorentz
reaction will not; it will pulse in one direction. If one plans to use
resonance to get these fields it cannot be done with Edisons 3 phase; a 4
phase that has 2 redundant opposite mirror image phases must be used. Like
teslas predicament my entire building for working on this project has been
destroyed and now I must rebuild first at another location before this idea
can be placed into reality for all to see.
Sincere in the work; Harvey D. Norris

_______________________________________________________
Get your free, private email at http://mail.excite.com/