sonoluminescence: sonofusion explained
in [Physics]
|
Prev: The Negative Correlation Between Global Temperature Rise andCO2 Concentrations
Next: HIDDEN JSH PAPER DISCOVED FINALLY REVEALED HERE for your review and critical coments and/or prase
From: Angelo Campanella on 29 Sep 2009 13:45 "Szczepan" <sz.bialek(a)wp.pl> wrote in message news:h9s2pu$5kv$1(a)node1.news.atman.pl... > "Angelo Campanella" <a.campanella(a)att.net> wrote >> The speculation a few years ago was that there is a possibility that >> this sort of bubble collapse that brought the two sides (more or less) of >> the bubble together with such a force, that even the atomic nuclei can be >> thrust together with sufficient energy that "nuclear fusion" could be >> triggered. When that speculation got out "onto the street", more >> scientists and technicians tried it in their lab... One such adventurer >> thought he saw a positive energy increase, and the rest is history. No >> one could repeat his experiment, so the matter has been dropped. > > The "positive energy" is also the result of the voltage changes at > formation/collapsing. No. I mean that it was alledged that the test substance warmed up, or perhaps that some alpha, or beta, or gamma ray emission was triggered by the cavitation. When the ftest material warms up more than is expected by the energy required to make cavitation wouls warrant, it would be said that extra energy was oserved. As I said no one has been able to repeat the results. Perhaps I do not understand waht you mean by "voltage changes". Voltage looses its original meaning (a potential difference between two objects) in a plasma. It's hard to define the two objects when in a plasma induced by external conditions. The atoms are definitely ionized at the moment of bubble complete collapse. That collapse impact results in electrons being thrust out of their normal orbital positions about the atom's nucleus. At that instant the atom is ionized with a plus charge. Light emission as we know it does NOT occur when the orbital electrons are thrust out of their orbits. Light is emitted at a specifc frequency (waevlength) ONLY later when a free-straying electron falls back into an unoccupied orbit. Thereby in that action, a photon is created and relased. After that, the atom is "whole" again, and the released photon is traveling way off in space somewhere. FYI, cavitation damage occurs while the atom is ionized but has not yet reetrieved a stray electron. This ionized atom is free to engage in acid-like etching of the metal object that had just created the cavitation (e.g. the leading edge back-side of a fast-turning ship's propeller). The atom in question could be a water hydrogen atom, thus becoming a true acid for that moment. The most observed result of ship propeller cavitation is that the metal is eaten away, leaving pits and some metal oxides. The pit deepens with time and exposure. In suc erosion, the light emitted has little to do with the corrosion... light is just an incidental by product. Angelo Campanella
From: Szczepan Bialek on 29 Sep 2009 14:21 "dlzc" <dlzc1(a)cox.net> wrotenews:3baf5f19-a8a1-4bef-a281-5a34c21db7c4(a)y10g2000prg.googlegroups.com... Dear Szczepan: On Sep 29, 12:38 am, "Szczepan" <sz.bia...(a)wp.pl> wrote: > "dlzc" <dl...(a)cox.net> > wrotenews:8dafd271-c3ec-41e4-aa3d-cfdada285d02(a)a21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com... > On Sep 28, 11:00 am, "Szczepan" <sz.bia...(a)wp.pl> wrote: > > "N:dlzcD:aol T:com (dlzc)" <dl...(a)cox.net> > > wrotenews:zs2wm.445251$Ta5.340035(a)newsfe15.iad... > > > "Szczepan" <sz.bia...(a)wp.pl> wrote in message > > >news:h9phpg$nto$1(a)node1.news.atman.pl... > > >> "N:dlzcD:aol T:com (dlzc)" <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote > > >>news:3NOvm.1401$S_4.201(a)newsfe23.iad... > > >>> Dear Szczepan: > > > >>> "Szczepan" <sz.bia...(a)wp.pl> wrote in message > > >>>news:h9ntg5$ftr$1(a)node1.news.atman.pl... .... >> > >>>> Bubble formation/collapse are at cavitation. >> > >>>> There are also small sparks. Do you know >> > >>>> why? > >> > >>> Do you have a citation? They emit light, because, >> > >>> among other things, the gas laws apply. As the >> > >>> pressure increases, so does the temperature, >> > >>> until a plasma forms. (And it is more complex >> > >>> than this.) > >> > >> Thinks are rather a little different and simple. >> > >> In old explanations the cavitation damages were >> > >> caused by collapsing. Now we know that the >> > >> damages are caused by electrochemical corossion. > >> > > Again, do you have a citation? Rather than >> > > answer a claim, you make another one... > >> > It is not easy to find very old things. But the one is: > http://www.springerlink.com/content/304g1j5n51145200/ > >> > "The proposed method of protecting impellers and >> > turbine linings against cavitation, which involves >> > painting them with a zinc paint and applying >> > cathodic protection from an outside direct-current >> > source," > >> > "a zinc paint and applying cathodic protection >> > from an outside direct-current source," is against >> > electrchemical corrosion. > >> Which means that the plasma oxidizes exposed >> metals, and the zinc (and potential) is applied to >> retain / reattach the base metal. This same >> thing is done in water / sewer lines, fence posts, >> and so on. Neither plasma nor electrical current >> here. >No response to this... Was below: "> Electrical sparks are inside the bubbles at colapsing in result of condensation. The voltage difference does the job." The damages are in area where the bubbles appear. Not in collapsing area. >> > But is a publication made by people from Japan. >> > They measured the voltages and the intensity >> > of light. May be that I find it. > >> > SEE at this: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cavitation.jpg > >> > It is tipical electrochemical erosion. >> > If you have possibility or opportunity to observe >> > such demages you will see that they are in >> > zone where the formation of bubbles take place. > > > Which does not support your claim of electrical spark. > >> Electrical sparks are inside the bubbles at > colapsing in result of condensation. > The voltage difference does the job. >Which angel gave you this insight? Because we have measured the temperature, and what is there is a very hot plasma. Like the surface of the Sun. And the corrosion prevention methods you pointed to (above) are to prevent oxidation and oxidative damage, not "sparks". Inside bubles the sparks jump. SO what is there is a very hot plasma. .... >> > > How about leaving the name alone, since it is >> > > common ground for the rest of humanity, and >> > > your choices convey no more meaning? > >> > Of course. Many phenomenon have names from >> > places where they were discovered. In nature it >> > take place in clouds. > > > No, it does not. It requires a fluid - gas interface, > > and high intensity sound. > >> In clouds the small inter cloud lightning appear at > condensation. >Which does not address either your perverse need to change the name, or sonoluminescence. Angelo wrote: "Sea water luminescence is quite common. It is easily observed any night at sea by staring at the wake off the fantail" Also cloud luminescence is quite common. It is easily observed insome night by staring up" Name may be different but the mechanism is the same. In collapsing bubbles is the same like in clouds. .... >> > >>>> Each small spark is like light. > >> > >>> Each light is not a spark. > >> > >> But here the electrons jump. > >> > > If there is light, electrons jump. Say something >> > > meaningful. > >> > There no sophisticated phenomenon. Only the >> > small electric sparks. Do you know why the >> > voltages are different? > > What sparks? As to voltages, this corresponds > > to the average distance between "free" electrons. > >> When the two charged drops join together the > voltage rise (the distance between "free" electrons > on the surface of drop). If the voltage is high > eneogh the sparks jump. >The entire fluid is conductive, and at the same potential. Adding a current flow in addition does not change the process. Compressing the bubble does *not* produce the same effect that coalescence of water drops do. In bubbles is vapour. It is like small cloud. Big clouds big lightnings, small clouds small lightning. > > Think "piezoelectricity". > > "Piezoelectricity is the ability of some materials > (notably crystals and certain ceramics, including > bone) to generate an electric potential[1] in > response to applied mechanical stress" > >> There the stress is not necessary. The electrets > are such artificial crystals. >The stress in this case is removing electrons from neutral atoms, forming a plasma. But there is no necessary potential difference, no macroscopic arc of electrons jumping, and I have wasted too much time arguing with the "fence post" you seem intent on being. In the electrets is enough to change the distance between the metal plate and the electret. No touch no stress. You prefer the Wiki explanations. I have come across that Japanese publication and now I have no doubt that Wiki is wrong. I am a litlle familiar with the ECM (electrochemical machining) and I know what such damages are like. S* David A. Smith
From: Szczepan Bia�ek on 30 Sep 2009 04:26 "Angelo Campanella" <a.campanella(a)att.net> wrote news:h9th3h$1l1d$1(a)adenine.netfront.net... > > "Szczepan" <sz.bialek(a)wp.pl> wrote in message > news:h9s2pu$5kv$1(a)node1.news.atman.pl... >> "Angelo Campanella" <a.campanella(a)att.net> wrote >>> The speculation a few years ago was that there is a possibility that >>> this sort of bubble collapse that brought the two sides (more or less) >>> of the bubble together with such a force, that even the atomic nuclei >>> can be thrust together with sufficient energy that "nuclear fusion" >>> could be triggered. When that speculation got out "onto the street", >>> more scientists and technicians tried it in their lab... One such >>> adventurer thought he saw a positive energy increase, and the rest is >>> history. No one could repeat his experiment, so the matter has been >>> dropped. >> >> The "positive energy" is also the result of the voltage changes at >> formation/collapsing. > > No. I mean that it was alledged that the test substance warmed up, or > perhaps that some alpha, or beta, or gamma ray emission was triggered by > the cavitation. When the ftest material warms up more than is expected by > the energy required to make cavitation wouls warrant, it would be said > that extra energy was oserved. As I said no one has been able to repeat > the results. I thought about the Dr Grenau experiments. > > Perhaps I do not understand waht you mean by "voltage changes". Voltage > looses its original meaning (a potential difference between two objects) > in a plasma. It's hard to define the two objects when in a plasma induced > by external conditions. David wrote: "As to voltages, this corresponds to the average distance between "free" electrons". We know that V = Q/C. It means that at evaporating the voltage drops. At condensation grow up. That was measured by Japanese. So electrochemical damages must take place in the area where the bubbles appear. Not where they collapses. > > The atoms are definitely ionized at the moment of bubble complete > collapse. That collapse impact results in electrons being thrust out of > their normal orbital positions about the atom's nucleus. At that instant > the atom is ionized with a plus charge. Light emission as we know it does > NOT occur when the orbital electrons are thrust out of their orbits. Light > is emitted at a specifc frequency (waevlength) ONLY later when a > free-straying electron falls back into an unoccupied orbit. Thereby in > that action, a photon is created and relased. After that, the atom is > "whole" again, and the released photon is traveling way off in space > somewhere. > > FYI, cavitation damage occurs while the atom is ionized but has not yet > reetrieved a stray electron. This ionized atom is free to engage in > acid-like etching of the metal object that had just created the cavitation > (e.g. the leading edge back-side of a fast-turning ship's propeller). Now you have opportunity to understand me. "the leading edge back-side" is in the zone where the bubbles appear. No collapsing there. "acid-like etching of the metal" is true but not perfect. The damages are exactly like the electrochemical erosion. I am a little familiar on electrochemical machining. >The atom in question could be a water hydrogen atom, thus becoming a true >acid for that moment. False way. > The most observed result of ship propeller cavitation is that the metal is > eaten away, leaving pits and some metal oxides. The pit deepens with time > and exposure. Excellent observation. >In such erosion, the light emitted has little > to do with the corrosion... light is just an incidental by product. Excellent conclusion. The light may be an indicator of intensity. The process is easy to describe. In the formation zone electrons are pick from the metal, next flow with the water an come back to metal in the collapsing zone. The damages are in the formation zone (electrochemical machining). It is easy to repeat the Japanese measurements. S*
From: Szczepan Bia�ek on 30 Sep 2009 14:45
"Szczepan Bia�ek" <sz.bialek(a)wp.pl> wrote news:h9upcv$hl9$1(a)node1.news.atman.pl... > > > The process is easy to describe. In the formation zone electrons are > picked from the metal, next they flow with the water an come back to metal > in the collapsing zone. The damages are in the formation zone > (electrochemical machining). > It is easy to repeat the Japanese measurements. Here are a simmilar measurements: http://th-www.if.uj.edu.pl/acta/vol37/pdf/v37p2919.pdf S* |