Non-equilibrium polariton condensates entangle properties of lasers, atomic Bose- Einstein condensates (BEC) and semiconductor physics. They provide a great variety of physical phenomena while maintaining a simple theoretical description. Among those phenomena are nonlinear excitations such as solitons or spontaneous spin bifurcations. In this paper I first present a short overview on the theoretical basis of polaritons. Then starting from a scenario of excitation generation in equilibrium BEC I turn to corresponding phenomenona in polariton condensates such as dark soliton formation (black EVO). Later the spin sensitive phenomena such as nonequilibrium bright solitons (Bright EVO)and half-bright solitons in semiconductor microcavities are discussed. Theoretically all the considered scenarios are described by partial differential equations (PDEs) and coupled systems thereof. The system of PDEs defines a so called condensate wave function, which completely describes the experimental relevant aspects of the physical system in a certain parameter regime where condensation occurs. The developed theories enable us particularly to make a variety of statements about excitations such as solitons (dipole) and half-solitons (monopole) in spinor systems forming within a non-equilibrium condensate (needs pumping). It turns out that by those means we can elucidate in particular the experimental implementation of a coherent superposition (this is what makes transmutation NOT produce energy) analog in a spin sensitive setting forming a macroscopic QUBIT within the semiconductor microcavity at temperatures in the Kelvin range.
Degenerate Vacua of the Universe and What Comes Beyond the Standard Model
https://www.groundai.com/project/degenerate-vacua-of-the-universe-and-what-comes-beyond-the-standard-model/2
how could we have missed these particles?
http://restframe.com/mm/posts/how-could-we-have-missed-these-particles.html
Valerian Yurov was recently published in European Physical Journal. The scientists have released their calculations, according to which the Universe may have quantum properties.
Artyom Yurov explained:
“To begin with, let’s remember what quantum physics is. Perhaps this is the most amazing phenomenon known to people. When scientists started studying atoms for the first time, they noticed that everything works “upside down” in the microcosm. For example, according to quantum theory, an electron may present in several places simultaneously.
Try to imagine your cat simultaneously lying on the sofa and eating from its bowl that is in the other corner of the room. The cat is not either here or there, but in both places simultaneously. But the cat is there only BEFORE you look at it. The moment you start staring at it, it changes the position to EITHER the bowl OR the sofa. You may ask, of course, that if the cat acts so weird only when not observed by us, so how do we know that it actually acts this way? The answer is simple: math! If we are to try and gather statistical information about us looking at the cat (needed to estimate the number of cases when the cat was on the sofa and when — near the bowl), we won’t have any information. This proves to be impossible if we consider the cat being EITHER near the bowl OR on the sofa. Well, it doesn’t work like that with cats, but works fine for electrons.
When we observe this particle, it really appears in one place and we can record that, but when we do not observe it, it must be in several places at once. For example, this is what they mean in chemistry classes when they talk about electron clouds. No wonder poor children never understand this. They just memorize … ”
Decoherence Effect
Yes, the cat is not some electron, but why? Cats consist of elementary particles, like electrons, protons, and neutrons. All the particles act the same when measured on the quantum level. So why a cat can’t be in two places simultaneously?
And the other question is: what is so magical about our ability to “observe”? Because when we don’t “observe,” the object is being “smeared” all over the universe, but the moment we look at it — it is gathered in one place! Well, physicists don’t say “gathered,” they say “wave function collapsed,” but those smart words actually mean “gathered” in one place as a result of observation! How are we able to do that?
“Firstly, the answer to these complex questions appeared at the end of the last century, when such a phenomenon as decoherence was discovered. It turns out that indeed, any object is located in several places at once, in very many places. It seems to be spread throughout the universe. But if the object comes into interaction with the environment, even collides with one atom of a photon, he immediately “collapses.” So there are no mystical abilities to cause quantum collapse by observation — this is due to interaction with the environment, and we are simply part of this environment.
Secondly, there is no absolute collapse as such. The collapse happens in the following way: if before interacting with the environment the object was “smeared” over two places, (we use “two places” to simplify, in reality it might be smeared over hundreds of thousands of places) but in fact, the object presents 99.9999% (and many, many nines after) of the time in one place, and a small remaining part of time in the second. And we observe it as being in one and only place! Everything happens in no time and the bigger an object is, the faster the “collapse.” We cannot realize it or somehow register, as such devices simply do not exist. And they cannot be created.”
Andrea Rossi
November 23, 2019 at 9:43 PM
Dear Readers of the JoNP:
We did it.
Obtained permanent self sustaining mode with production of strong excess of electricity, generating more excess of electricity than of heat.
It is a revolution.
We did not violate unity, we just discovered an energy that had not been exploited before.
I am very tired.
Independent parties tests will follow, eventually we will make a presentation.
I think we made something that will make a revolution.
My team colleagues are saying to me ” Andrea, stay calm, be humble”. They are right. Now I am tired, must reorganize the ideas. The work in these last 2 weeks has been very hard, but we did it. This morning, late, we got more electric energy that the electric energy necessary to make the Cat work. The increase is strong.
Too big to be true, but it is true.
If you are reading this message, means I am not dreaming: our Readers are independent parties that can convince me I am not sleeping and I am really writing this.
The merit is of my fantastic Team, without them this could not have been done.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
[3] Shahriar Badiei and Patrik U. Andersson and Leif Holmlid. High-energy Coulomb explosions in ultra-dense deuterium: Time-of- fight-mass spectrometry with variable energy and fight length. International Journal of Mass Spectrometry, 282(1 2):70 76, 2009.
[5] Leif Holmlid and Sveinn Olafsson. Spontaneous Ejection of High-energy Particles from Ultra-dense Deuterium D(0). International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 40(33):10559 10567, 2015.
[13] i Tommaso, A.O. and Vassallo, G. Electron Structure, Ultra-dense Hydrogen and Low Energy Nuclear Reactions. to appear in Journal of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, (accepted) 2019.
[16] S. Zeiner-Gundersen and S. Olafsson. Hydrogen reactor for Rydberg Matter and Ultra Dense Hydrogen, a replication of Leif Holmlid. International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, ICCF-21, Fort Collins, USA, 2018.
Superconducting hydrides under pressure
Chris J. Pickard, Ion Errea, Mikhail I. Eremets
(Submitted on 1 Oct 2019)
The measurement of superconductivity at above 200K in compressed samples of hydrogen sulfide and lanthanum hydride at 250K is reinvigorating the search for conventional high temperature superconductors. At the same time it exposes a fascinating interplay between theory, computation and experiment. Conventional superconductivity is well understood, and theoretical tools are available for accurate predictions of the superconducting critical temperature. These predictions depend on knowing the microscopic structure of the material under consideration, and can now be provided through computational first principles structure predictions. The experiments at the megabar pressures required are extremely challenging, but for some groups at least, permit the experimental exploration of materials space. We discuss the prospects for the search for new superconductors, ideally at lower pressures.
Starting from 2017, a definitive proof for the existence of this state was provided by several experiments using atomic Bose-Einstein condensates.[2] The general conditions required for supersolidity to emerge in a certain substance are a topic of ongoing research.
As per JOHN A. GOWAN
Single elementary particles created today must be the same in every respect as those created eons ago during the "Big Bang". The conservation requirement of elementary particle invariance constrains the mechanism of weak force single particle creation and transformation. Weak force transformations recreate primordial "symmetric energy states" of the "Big Bang" force-unification eras (in the case of the "W" IVB (Intermediate Vector Boson), the electroweak force unification era) to accomplish the invariant creation and transformation of single elementary particles. Massive IVBs are employed not only because they can be quantized to exactly recreate the energy-density of the required symmetric-energy state, but because massive particles are unaffected by the entropic expansion of spacetime, however great.
The W+, W-, and W (neutral) (or Z neutral) are the "Intermediate Vector Bosons" (IVBs - "field vectors" or force-carriers) of the weak force. The weak force IVBs are unusual in that they are very massive bosons, whereas all other field vectors are massless. The mass of the IVBs is why they are called "intermediate" vector bosons. The great mass of the IVBs is used to recreate the primordial conditions of the "Big Bang" in which the reactions they now mediate first took place. Such extreme measures are necessary because single elementary particles created today must be the same in all respects as those created eons ago in the "Big Bang". Only the weak force is capable of creating single elementary particles rather than particle-antiparticle pairs derived from electromagnetic energy.
Apparently, a physical matter leak occurs between our Universe and another still unexplored one. All that
has to be done to show this effect is to generate an EVO and let it subside to its natural black state limit,
whereupon it disappears from our cognition. This produces a highly unexpected but actual disappearance of
matter that is accomplished on an everyday basis. The frequency of this event occurs at an astoundingly
high rate and the precursors can be seen in natural lightning events like that shown by the author in the
essay, EVO Life Cycle.
The general principle of superposition of quantum mechanics applies to the states[that are theoretically possible without mutual interference or contradiction] ... of any one dynamical system. It requires us to assume that between these states there exist peculiar relationships such that whenever the system is definitely in one state we can consider it as being partly in each of two or more other states. The original state must be regarded as the result of a kind of superposition of the two or more new states, in a way that cannot be conceived on classical ideas. Any state may be considered as the result of a superposition of two or more other states, and indeed in an infinite number of ways. Conversely, any two or more states may be superposed to give a new state...
In physics, fractionalization is the phenomenon whereby the quasiparticles of a system cannot be constructed as combinations of its elementary constituents. One of the earliest and most prominent examples is the fractional quantum Hall effect, where the constituent particles are electrons but the quasiparticles carry fractions of the electron charge.[1][2] Fractionalization can be understood as deconfinement of quasiparticles that together are viewed as comprising the elementary constituents. In the case of spin–charge separation, for example, the electron can be viewed as a bound state of a 'spinon' and a 'chargon', which under certain conditions can become free to move separately.
Spin–charge separation is one of the most unusual manifestations of the concept of quasiparticles. This property is counterintuitive, because neither the spinon, with zero charge and spin half, nor the chargon, with charge minus one and zero spin, can be constructed as combinations of the electrons, holes, phonons and photons that are the constituents of the system. It is an example of fractionalization, the phenomenon in which the quantum numbers of the quasiparticles are not multiples of those of the elementary particles, but fractions.
Building on physicist F. Duncan M. Haldane's 1981 theory, experts from the Universities of Cambridge and Birmingham proved experimentally in 2009 that a mass of electrons artificially confined in a small space together will split into spinons and holons due to the intensity of their mutual repulsion (from having the same charge).[5][6] A team of researchers working at the Advanced Light Source (ALS) of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory observed the peak spectral structures of spin–charge separation three years prior.
