🚀 go-pugleaf

   In sci.physics.fusion; 4536; [Subject: Re: quantity and quality at your
 location];  13 Dec 1992, greg@dent.uchicago.edu (Greg Kuperberg) states:


=   "Well if a nuclear reaction produces a few watts of heat in aggregate,
=  it stands to reason that it should produce a few watts of radiation
=  also.  In fact, assuming that only one charged nucleus is formed in a
=  given indivisible fusion reaction, conservation of energy, momentum,
=  and charge mandate some radiation. I think the skeptics would say
=  that a quantity of radiation to match the observed heat would warrant
=  writing a will, or at least visiting the doctor, given that so many
=  cold fusion researchers avoid the planning planning planning that you
=  and I have both recommended. 

    Greg, if "it stands to reason", what exactly is the reason? Why?


    Your suggestion would seem to not include the "observed heat" as a
 "quantity of radiation".   Rather than considering that the "heat"
 actually observed may, itself, consist of infrared radiation, and phonon
 radiation (of more than one type), the logic that you purport (and are not
 alone in claiming) decrees to limit how nature must work.  In your forced
 scheme the existence of phonon and infrared radiation requires the
 presence of neutrons (etc., and whatever).  Why? 

    The only such similar couplings of which I am aware of are those
 through Hilbert Space wherein the polarization(s) that a material does
 undergo when wrought with an applied electric (or magnetic field in the
 equivalent) are linked to the conduction(s) which that material also
 undergoes.  The polarization(s) is linked through Hilbert Space to the
 conduction because as the material physically reorganizes (eg. as it
 polarizes with atomic separation, dipole rotation, ion drift, etc. etc.)
 in the applied electric field, the physical movements of those
 reorganization(s) are precisely those which cause the conduction.

    Where is a similar argument, or reason, for the linking of phonons and
 infrared radiation to neutron production?
                                 
   
   [Given your topology background, one more question.  I assume the field
 has advanced considerably since I was painting donuts almost four decades
 ago to find the chromatic number (7, I think) required to paint a
 maximally-colored-yet-distinct map on its outer toroidal surface.
   Was that not 3 more needed colors than flat-landers could conceive of
 being required?
   Perhaps the skeptics are merely 2 dimensional in their thinking?]