quantum entanglement and cold nuclear fusion

Mr. Noblefuse, although I dont object against experimentation with tesla-coils, my thread was about whether standard quantum theory could describe situations where nuclei fuse though the process of de-coherence and re-coherence. Since your entry does not discuss any theoretical description of the dynamics of pinch discharge embedded in water or a derivation of the expected fusion rate based on what is know about magnetohydrodynamics or any link with quantum theory and the effect of de-coherence, I would kindly suggest that you start a separate thread on experimentation with pinch currents. Best regards, Jelle

Hello jelle boersma,

Jorrie is the guy you will need to talk to, while I can wrap my head around entanglement adding the cold fusion is beyond me. Unlike many here I think there is something to cold fusion after listening to a Nobel prize winner in physics who did some investigation into it. He said he was going to write a book about it but I have no idea what the book was to be called nor do I remember his name.

Brad

Jelle i only understand electrons going through a copper wire.

maar hier snap ik niks van

Neutrons have been generated by ultrasonic cavitation,however the purpose was to create a small, efficient source of neutrons for research and detection of hazardous materials.At this point in development,less energy comes out than goes in, but at least it has been proven that fusion can occur at low temperatures.Furthur refinement may result in an over-unity device.

I believe the bubbles were created by dissolving Uranium in a liquid solvent, and using ultrasonic waves to collapse the bubbles,creating fusion.

However,your entanglement theory may also hold promise.Never give up.

Maybe. You're way out of my league here, and probably everyone else's. I suggest you try a Physics forum.

Gentlemen, thanks for the feedback. Commenting on the general topic of 'cold-fusion'.. since 99.9% of the discussion has been focussed on fairly add-hoc experiments and in particular the details of calorimetry (since there appears to be no neutron or gamma flux in those experiments unlike in the case of hot D+D fusion for as yet unknown reasons). I am agnostic about whether cold-fusion has been experimentally produced or not, but without good theory to tell us what to expect I think that we are far away from producing anything which is very useful quickly even when some experiments hold up. Compare this to high-tc superconductivity which has existed for several decades, and which has received significant funding but has'nt resulted in any revolutionary applications, and which still doesnt seem to have a convincing theory to describe the effect quantitatively. To clarify the decoherence issue, the basic feature of de-cohered states is that they describe what at a classical level corresponds to having one state _or_ another state, but not both. Think of Schroedinger's throught experiment with a cat in a box which is either dead or alive depending on the decay of an unstable particle. The two states of the live and the dead cat clearly cannot coexist together in a classical way, but quantum theory describes them as de-cohered states which both exist with a non-zero amplitude while they dont interact. Now the foundations of quantum mechanics still seem to be controversial (eg, if one opens the box to observe the state of the cat, then quantum theory implies that there will be two decohered states of the observer which observe the two states of the cat respectively while not being aware of each other, unless one adds some other ad-hoc ingredient into the theory which states that the wave-function is reduced to a single state when observation takes place. Getting back to the fusion idea, the idea is to bring two nuclei close together by creating a state which describes the first _or_ the second nuclei at the same place, analogous to the two states of Schroedingers cat in the box, and then change the states which which the nuclei are entangled so that we move to a situation where the first nuclei _and_ the second nuclei are at the same place with some nonzero amplitude. I guess that anyone studying quantum-computing would have a sufficiently good grasp of quantum-entanglement to know whether my fusion idea is bogus or not.