emerging quasiparticles to solve cold fusion

[AntonioLao]

The following link is a list of all known quasiparticles. However, the billion dollar question is which ones can solve cold fusion?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_quasiparticles

[Lloyd Gillespie]

The question is Antonio__How many of em actually really do exist...???

[SteveA]

The following link is a list of all known quasiparticles. However, the billion dollar question is which ones can solve cold fusion?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_quasiparticles

That's quite an interesting rewrite of things ... a bit more of a form I'd enjoy working with as well. Thanks much for the ideas.

Regarding cold fusion, consider this - there's already a lot of energy around, what are we really looking for? A bit more intelligent and efficient control?

Now consider this - if you simply increased a photon rate, but the rate of time perceived per photon detection remained 1 to 1, then the information per event would remain the same (technically a rate of time might be increased relative to some more fundamental reference, but that's just an abstract view).

The information content per photon detection should be a function of the distribution of possible unique sources that could have detected it and so the equivalent energy per photon can be a subjective measure (for example, in Relativity we have red shifted and blue shifted spectra depending upon an observers motion - faster motion could arise from an accumulation of more elemental motions and thus provide a greater context by which to observe a photon).

With regard to these "quasiparticles" a good question then would be over how many unique combinations of these can we derive per photon detection? The more precisely, or larger the contextual array of orthogonal properties that can be detected (such as not simply aggregate quantity over time, but serial orderings of detections - which can give factorial increases in the detection space), the greater the information context and equivalent efficiency available.

For example, if you wanted to have the state of a photon determine 1 of 3 states for something else, then a manner to detect 1 of 3 possible manners in which to detect that photon. If you wanted a single photon to simultaneously determine a pair of these states, then you'd need 3*3=9 possible detectable states, then the information conveyed per photon becomes double what it previously appeared to possess.

Instead of splitting an atom ... splitting something even finer - the photon (Of course that might take some large molecular structures and/or more precise manners of localizing influences to work efficiently and provide that expanded context, though having a better apriori model of these could help and getting those on a scale that can be worked with, such as quasiparticles could help as well. It would seem that influences of quanta should exist on scales we can observe directly, even if it requires a bit of close attention, otherwise we shouldn't even know of their existence).

So it could be we don't need cold fusion specifically, but finer control over available energy (for example, a non-linear thermal pump would be quite a useful invention - for example, could we construct a small enough mechanism to ratchet heat energy on molecular scales? That could save a bit on heating and cooling bills ).

Of course a lot of the ideas you've been working on would apply to that as well. If we had a way to model "natural chaos" on small scales and efficiently enough to be responsive in "real time" in order to allow controllable non-linear interactions, that could be something rather revolutionary.

[AntonioLao]

My question: is the universe the largest quasiparticle of them all? It is the only quasiparticle that works with cold fusion.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

My question: is the universe the largest quasiparticle of them all? It is the only quasiparticle that works with cold fusion.

A slight correction__Yes, the Universe is an infinite infinitesimal series of quasiparticles__all the way to eternity, if I'm allowed a wee bit o' conjecture...

[AntonioLao]

Then what is a particle? Does a particle exist by its definition or by its experimental fact or by both definition and fact?

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Both, by the absolute mechanics necessity of the Universe__at the quasi-volumes level of field-particles__From Planck to whole...

Truth must be derived from 'Absolute Necessity', to be truly quantifiable, as axioms are all conjectures__otherwise...

Even the 'I-Self' illusion of oneness, is a continuum field of quasi-autonomous volumes of Vr feelings, logics and intellect__with triadic character fields of 'zero, negative and positive' states of field actions...

The 'zero field' is the rest state of emotions in the internal continuum...

All external quasi-autonomous volumes, correspond to all internal quasi-autonomous volumes, of continuum fields and waves, with the same triadic charges...

[AntonioLao]

Lloyd, are you implying that ABSOLUTE CONSCIOUSNESS symbolizes a true particle?

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Lloyd, are you implying that ABSOLUTE CONSCIOUSNESS symbolizes a true particle?

Not consiousness Antonio, as I do not accept consciousness as a valid concept... I'm simply talking about the pure mechanics of thought, as not a true particle, but a quasi-particle-wave__as I see no particle as a discrete entity__particles to me, are always composites of waves and substance... Imo, no thought could exist unless passed as a quasi-particle-wave of very hyper-fine density, as it is carrying information, and we know information is transfered from the external world to film, by photons__so I see no difference in mind/brain mechanics, as it's absolutely required to be a real mechanical process transferring the information, within the brain, just as much as outside the brain. It's just the bio-quantum-mechanics splits the quasi-particle-waves into finer hyper-fine structures science can't yet measure, due to the noise of the greater sized external fields, waves, substances, whatever...

It just dawned on me after posting elsewhere about the classification of emotions, and Emmy Noether's field ideas of zero and positive fields, plus a few other's ideas, such as Herbart's mathematics and logic of mental fields, back in the late `18th century__that these ideas when put together, all jived to create the possibility of truly using a mathematics/algebra to represent our feelings as fields of quasi-autonomous volumes of or by way of these other field maths... If we see as empirical philosophy has always interpreted the picture__emotions just sit until disturbed by outside forces, or other people's actions we react to, that this can be represented by a zero field of rest state, whereas when action is taken by any individual, it's either a positive or negative action__so that's definitely a triadic state non-action/action potential. Then when I looked at Plutchick's chart of emotions at http://www.toequest.com/forum/logic-reasoning/4690-east-meets-west-logic-328.html#post125276 , I realized each state of our complex emotions could be represented as quasi-autonomous volumes of random action/motion feelings(real particle-waves), within the internal continuum of all field actions of the mind__much the same as Tim and I have been theorizing over at his thread, about absolute fundamental motions, yet the Universal Necessities of uniform laws of physics applies that thinking thought, to this thinking...

It's really about a fundamental extension of the axiology maths that already exist in Herbart's, Lossky's, Hartman's, Lefebvre's and others' works, for the last 100 years, yet my relating it through more sound physics' math approaches, and the relational algebras first introduced by the Peirce's, here in America__and all those who've continued that mathematical and logic school of thought ever since__Mainly Russia and Finland, but now spreading rapidly around the world, by way of the web...

I think it shows great promise, in possibly being a way to enter logical, moral, esthetic and ethical values into the cold scientific domain__through a new sound and fully grounded methodological use of logic, empiricism and math__supporting our better nature's thinking toward improving global informations' processing, and academic teaching systems...

Of course, all this is new thinking, and would have to be worked out thoroughly...

Absolute thought is a true hyper-fine structured particle-wave__but many of em, as it's a multi-reiterating/re-copying system__bit by bit into it__the feelings' percepts and the intellect's concepts...

[AntonioLao]

the pure mechanics of thought

I still think this only exist in your absolute consciousness. As much as I wanted to, I can't find it in mine.