I’m describing a conductive fluid, with the ’fluid’ distinction being one of a true fluid, which is with ’free molecules’ as the main component. Not that of a fluid carrier with large chunks of material. That would not be a fluid.
If you want to know of a fluid that exhibits such mentioned behaviour, you can look at fluids that are off center in their pH, as that is one area where such happens. Battery acid, for one, or other similar fluids. Voltage differential enabling conductivity and whatnot. Ie, that one possible descriptor for neon gas is ’semiconductor’, or more correctly, ’diode’. but it may be possible to make a neon semiconductor, but is it worth the effort? How about mercury diodes? (mercury arc rectifiers)
There are no white papers as the sciences of such are well established. But only in gross terms, not in the specifics of what goes on at the electron orbital level. That component is not well established.
Some recent clues for the curious:
https://phys.org/news/2017-07-electron-orbitals-key-concept-high-temperature.html
(I've been taken to task and attacked, ridiculed, etc.. over the past few years for using the term 'electron orbital alignment', as being a key component of what is going on in the fluid, regarding it's behaviour. Now emergent science says such. Again. Not the first time. No, not by a long shot... the science emerges in a parallel path and merges into a defined set of parameters. But first comes the exploration and the sometimes sheer violence of the detractors.)
https://phys.org/news/2017-06-propagating-density-fluctuations-superconducting-copper.html
https://phys.org/news/2017-07-scientists-electrons-vibrating-atoms.html
It is as the normal case in the human world, where we can engineer solutions using components we poorly understand. Ie, that we still don’t understand and are still learning new things about even -cement/concrete.
https://phys.org/news/2017-07-ancient-concrete-romans.html
The people doing the engineering will probably get to the area of understanding the given intricacies long before the theoretical searching and scientific labeling/descriptors. Ie, that the science is ’real’ long before it is put into the scientific record and engineering record. To not make entry into the lexicon being the only reality... as that behaviour is the ’future killing’ sin of dogma.
The people doing the engineering and experimentation in this specific case/scenario -- it’s pretty well just me. And this is, sadly, a commercial endeavor. So I’m into the idea of hinting, but people have to do their own work. If I was into brutal and uncaring commercialism, I’d not even stray into the idea of any form of sharing or hints. The downside is, I’m many times taken to task by people who don’t really think this through, and/or don’t have the backdrop to look into it. the people who do understand, rarely, if ever, comment. They desire the hassle and stress less than I. Perhaps they are smarter than I in the sense of seeking the easier path.
As for measurement anomalies, those are commonplace in the analysis of the conductive fluid in use in these cables - as done in the main laboratories of a major technical component manufacturer, and a major telecom.
The behaviour of wire and insulation, under a given transient load, is well known. And that the ear responds almost solely to transients, is also well known. And many more details.
One puts it all on the same table... and sorts through it...
If you want to know of a fluid that exhibits such mentioned behaviour, you can look at fluids that are off center in their pH, as that is one area where such happens. Battery acid, for one, or other similar fluids. Voltage differential enabling conductivity and whatnot. Ie, that one possible descriptor for neon gas is ’semiconductor’, or more correctly, ’diode’. but it may be possible to make a neon semiconductor, but is it worth the effort? How about mercury diodes? (mercury arc rectifiers)
There are no white papers as the sciences of such are well established. But only in gross terms, not in the specifics of what goes on at the electron orbital level. That component is not well established.
Some recent clues for the curious:
https://phys.org/news/2017-07-electron-orbitals-key-concept-high-temperature.html
(I've been taken to task and attacked, ridiculed, etc.. over the past few years for using the term 'electron orbital alignment', as being a key component of what is going on in the fluid, regarding it's behaviour. Now emergent science says such. Again. Not the first time. No, not by a long shot... the science emerges in a parallel path and merges into a defined set of parameters. But first comes the exploration and the sometimes sheer violence of the detractors.)
https://phys.org/news/2017-06-propagating-density-fluctuations-superconducting-copper.html
https://phys.org/news/2017-07-scientists-electrons-vibrating-atoms.html
It is as the normal case in the human world, where we can engineer solutions using components we poorly understand. Ie, that we still don’t understand and are still learning new things about even -cement/concrete.
https://phys.org/news/2017-07-ancient-concrete-romans.html
The people doing the engineering will probably get to the area of understanding the given intricacies long before the theoretical searching and scientific labeling/descriptors. Ie, that the science is ’real’ long before it is put into the scientific record and engineering record. To not make entry into the lexicon being the only reality... as that behaviour is the ’future killing’ sin of dogma.
The people doing the engineering and experimentation in this specific case/scenario -- it’s pretty well just me. And this is, sadly, a commercial endeavor. So I’m into the idea of hinting, but people have to do their own work. If I was into brutal and uncaring commercialism, I’d not even stray into the idea of any form of sharing or hints. The downside is, I’m many times taken to task by people who don’t really think this through, and/or don’t have the backdrop to look into it. the people who do understand, rarely, if ever, comment. They desire the hassle and stress less than I. Perhaps they are smarter than I in the sense of seeking the easier path.
As for measurement anomalies, those are commonplace in the analysis of the conductive fluid in use in these cables - as done in the main laboratories of a major technical component manufacturer, and a major telecom.
The behaviour of wire and insulation, under a given transient load, is well known. And that the ear responds almost solely to transients, is also well known. And many more details.
One puts it all on the same table... and sorts through it...