🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Bz90C5.7p1@world.std.com> mica@world.std.com (mitchell swartz) writes:
>    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? 

Wherefore art thou, neutrons and gammas?

It's not the logic that I purport, it's the logic that the skeptics
purport, and of course I'm not alone in claiming it, since I'm deliberately
parroting what other people say.

You suggest that a nuclear reaction, rather than producing one or two
gamma photons, might produce ten million infrared photons.  You're
right, I overlooked that possibility.  I guess that means my goose is
cooked and my scheme is forced.  Or at least that of the unruly gang of
skeptics, to which I may or may not belong.

The next time I meet someone in the Cold Fusion Skeptics Society, I'll
ask him whether or not there is an orthodoxy yet for whether, why, and
under what circumstances nuclear reactions produce infrared photons.
Also ultraviolet, microwave, and visible photons, as well as phonons,
polarons, magnetons, gravitons, and naked beauty (known as naked bottom
to the crudes in the US).

>    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.

Hilbert Space, Banach Space, Lobatchevsky Space, Minkowski Space, Phase
Space, Eilenberg-MacLane Space, no doubt the couplings occur through one
of these spaces.

>   [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.

The chromatic number of toroidal maps is indeed 7, assuming that
countries have no isolated pieces as Russia and the United States do.
I'm told that on a 17-holed torus it's 17.  Two guys with a computer
code claim that it's 4 for the sphere, but I personally think
that the argument has no hole when the surface does, and vice-versa.