Thought for Us
Thomas Hobbes on Cancer and the danger of nanoparticles:
“Hell is truth seen too late.”
Optimum NEMS/MEMS Electronics Circuit Design
By QM, the optimum NEMS/MEMS electronics circuit design in relation to hot spots and 1/f noise may be udnerstood by the size d of the circuit element in relation to the wavelength of EM confinement given by TIR. QM stands for quatnum mechanics, EM for electromagnetic, and TIR for total internal reflection. Taking the size d as the half wavelength of TIR confinement, the NEMS region is for d < 0.07 microns while MEMS is for d > 1 microns. In NEMS, there are no hot spots, but 1/f noise is created.; wheras, for MEMS, there is no 1/f noise, but hot spots may occcur. The optimum circuit design is the region between NEMS and MEMS where there are no hot spots and 1/f noise. See Paper and PressRelease
Nanobubbles by Quantum Mechanics
Nanobubbles are air-containing cavities in liquid water with surface molecules in a continual state of evaporation and condensation. Bubbles grow or shrink by diffusion according to whether the surrounding solution is over or under-saturated with air relative to the pressure. As the solubility of gas is proportional to the Laplace pressure that increases as the diameter decreases, there is increasing tendency for bubbles to reduce in size and dissolve in a few microseconds. However, nanobubbles are observed on submerged surfaces for days, defying the expectation of prompt dissolution.
Recently, the stability of nanobubbles is thought to come from the slow rate of dissolution of gas into the surrounding saturated liquid, i.e., the bubble gas cannot enter the surrounding liquid unless it can be transferred through the entire liquid. Depending on the thickness of the liquid layer, the diffusion can take many hours rather than fractions of a second. The dissolution is slowed down further by the fact that the edge of a nanobubble – where gas, liquid and solid meet – is typically ‘pinned’ in place and does not change over time.
However, the slow dissolution of gas into the liquid as the mechanism for nanobubble stability is not without controversy. Slow dissolution should show the bubbles ever so slightly shrinking over time, but this is not observed. Measurements of bubble height h over time for different liquid volume samples are recommended for confirmation. Regardless, it is unlikely if the liquid samples are all truly supersaturated, there should  not be any difference in the bubble dissolution.
The most likely reason for the stability of nanobubbles is the surface is continually being charged inducing an opposing force to the surface tension, thereby slowing their dissolution. It is clear that the presence of like charges at the interface will reduce the apparent surface tension, with charge repulsion acting in the opposite direction to the surface minimization due to surface tension. Simply put, surface tension tends to dissolve the bubble while surface charge tends to expand the bubble. Based on self-ionization of the water molecule, the bubble charge is thought to be negative hydroxyl ions while positive hydronium.dominate the bulk.
However,self-orgnaization occurs at a very unlikely probability. A far more fficent conversion to hyronium an dhydroxyl ions is required, In this regard, QM allows robust charging as air and water molecules continually evaporate and condense on the nanobubble surface. QM stands for quantum mechanics. On the bubble surface, the molecules have thermal kT energy, as they are a part of the liquid continuum. But once the molecules leave and enter the EM confinement of the bubble, QM precludes the molecules from having the heat capacity to conserve their kT energy by an increase in bubble gas temperature. EM stands for electromagnetic. Instead, conservation proceeds by QED creating photons at the TIR mode of the bubble surface. QED stands for quantum electrodynamics and TIR for total internal reflection. The Planck energy E of the QED radiation is significant, E > 60 eV compared to the 12.6 eV ionization potential of the water molecule. thereby providing the nanobubble with a continuous source of hydronium and hydtroxyl ions.
Cooling of Macrostructures by Nanoscale Coatings
Macrostructures cool by conduction, radiation, and convection. However, by simply applying a nanoscale coating to macrostructures, cooling is dramatically enhanced. However, classical physics that requires the same heat capacity of the atom for all coating thicknesses does not predict any enhancement for nanoscale coatings. Instead, the enhancement is explained by QM that by requiring the heat capacity of the atom in nanoscale coatings to vanish precludes the conservation of heat by the usual increase in temperature. QM stands for quantum mechanics. Instead, macrostructures cool as the heat into the coating under TIR is induced by QED to create non-thermal EM radiation thereby producing excitons (holon and electron pairs) that upon recombination enhance heat transfer by emitting the heat as EM radiation to the surroundings. TIR stands for total internal reflection, QED for quantum electrodynamics, and EM for electromagnetic. QED cooling applications are discussed for electronics and gas turbine blades. SeePaper and PressRelease
Cooling of Nanoelectronics by QED
Automobile engines cooled by radiators with circulating water are based on pool-boiling that began with the Industrial Revolution. Recently, researchers have claimed heat transfer based on pool-boiling experiments using water against porous 50 – 150 nm zinc oxide coatings may be made 10X more efficient than bare aluminum and copper surfaces. Indeed, nanostructured heat transfer surfaces are thought to supersede the traditional cooling fin. The increased area provided by the porosity of the nanoscale coating is given to explain pool-boiling heat transfer enhancement.
However, the notion that porosity increases the heat transfer area in pool-boiling is one of classical physics that assumes temperature changes occur in the coating irrespective of its thickness. But QM and not classical physics is applicable to nanoscale coatings, porous zinc oxide or otherwise. QM stands for quantum mechanics. QM differs from classical physics by requiring the heat capacity of the atom to vanish in nanoscale coatings thereby precluding the conservation heat flow into the coating by an increase in temperature. Instead, conservation proceeds by the creation of QED induced non-thermal EM radiation. QED stands for quantum electrodynamics and EM for electromagnetic.
Enhancement of heat transfer over bare surfaces therefore occurs as QED induced radiation is emitted from the coating and absorbed in the water surroundings. Even water coolant, let alone pool-boiling are not required as the emission of QED radiation from zinc oxide coatings may be air cooled from the ambient surroundings, the latter notion of great interest in cooling electronics. Indeed, air cooling by coating conventional electronics circuit elements with nanoscale zinc oxide or other suitable materials is especially attractive and perhaps the only possible way to cool submicron circuit elements in nanoelectronics. The emission of QED radiation from nanoscale coatings is not new, having been mistaken in thin films as reductions in thermal conductivity that continue to this day, examples of which are presented from the literature. See Paper andPresentation
QED Cooling of Gas Turbine Blades
Recent advances in cooling electronics by applying nanoscale coatings to circuit elements suggest gas turbine blades may be similarly cooled. Unlike TBC that insulate the blade from high temperature, QED cools the blade by converting heat to non-thermal EM radiation that is dissipated to the surroundings. TBC stands for thermal barrier coatings, QED for quantum electrodynamics and EM for electromagnetic.
QED cooling finds basis in Planck's QM given in terms of temperature and TIR confinement by the Einstein-Hopf relation for the atom as a harmonic oscillator. QM stands for quantum mechanics and TIR for total internal reflection. Under the TIR confinement in nanoscale coatings, the heat capacity of the atom vanishes, and therefore the coating cannot conserve blade heat by the usual increase in temperature. Instead, conservation proceeds by the QED induced frequency up-conversion of blade heat to non-thermal EM radiation at the TIR confinement frequency of the TBC coating. The only TIR requirement is the RI of the TBC be greater than that of the blade material. RI stands for refractive index. TIR confinement is the natural consequence of the high surface to volume ratio of nanoscale TBC that concentrate the blade heat almost totally in the TBC surface. However, the TIR confinement is not permanent, sustaining itself only during the absorption of blade heat.
In this way, the blade is cooled as the TBC converts the blade heat into QED induced EM radiation that is emitted and absorbed in the surroundings. QED cooling is passive avoiding the complexity of fin and internal cooling while transferring the heat from the blades by the emission of EM radiation to the ambient surroundings. QED cooling by nanoscale coatings is not new, having been mistaken for some time in thin films as reductions in thermal conductivity, examples of which are presented from the literature. QED cooling of turbine blades by nanoscale TBCs is expected to be a hot topic at ASME Turbo 2014. See Paper
Redshift in Cosmic Dust
DUST 2014, the International Conference on Atmospheric Dust is directed to the world of the atmospheric particles. Beyond our atmosphere, cosmic dust comprising nanoparticles of primarily silicon permeate the vast reaches of the Universe. Like atmospheric dust obscurring observations of what we perceive on Earth, our optical observations of the Universe are distorted by cosmic dust.
In 1929, Edwin Hubble formulated the law that the velocity of a receding galaxy is proportional to its distance to the Earth. Hubble based his law on Doppler's effect whereby the wavelength of light from the galaxy is redshift if the galaxy is moving away from us. Thus, by measuring the redshift of known spectral lines, Hubble claimed to know the recession velocity of the galaxy relative to the Earth.
Based on the redshift of supernova light, astronomers now take Hubble's law as proof the Universe is not only expanding, but accelerating. If, however, the redshift has a non-Doppler origin, the Universe need not be expanding, let alone accelerating. Redshift without an expanding Universe is of utmost importance because many of the outstanding problems in cosmology would be simply resolved by Newtonian mechanics.
In this regard, redshift of galaxy light may occur upon absorption in submicron cosmic dust NPs by the mechanism of QED induced EM radiation. NP stands for nanoparticles, QED for quantum electrodynamics, and EM for electromagnetic. QED induced redshift may be understood by treating the absorbed photon as EM energy confined within the NP by TIR. TIR stands for total internal reflection. TIR confinement is a consequence of the submicron NPs having high surface to volume ratios, and therefore the absorption of the galaxy photon is therefore almost entirely confined to the NP surface corresponding its TIR mode. Since quantum mechanics precludes conservation of the absorbed galaxy photon by an increase in NP temperature, conservation proceeds by the QED induced creation of a redshift photon depending on the NP material and geometry.
The QED induced redshift is caused solely by the absorption of the galaxy photon in NPs and has nothing to do with an expanding Universe. Given that galaxy and supernova light is unequivocally absorbed by NPs on its way to the Earth, the Hubble redshift is highly likely not related to an expanding Universe. It therefore follows that an accelerating Universe expansion by dark energy based on Doppler shift is unphysical. Indeed, NPs hold in question the Hubble redshift as proof the Universe began in the Big Bang suggesting the notion once proposed by Einstein of a static Universe in dynamic equilibrium is a far more credible cosmology. Other consequences are:
Dark Matter not source of Gravitational Lensing,
Galaxy Rotation Problem resolved without Dark Matter, etc.
See Paper andPress Release
QED - The Fourth Mode of Heat Transfer
Automobile engines have been water cooled by pool-boiling heat exchange since the Industrial Revolution. However, researchers have recently found pool-boiling heat transfer using porous 50 – 150 nm zinc oxide coatings are 4-10X more efficient than for bare aluminum and copper surfaces. Indeed, nanostructured heat transfer surfaces in pool-boiling may revolutionize cooling technology by making the traditional cooling fin obsolete. The mechanism of pool-boiling heat transfer enhancement is thought to be the increased area from the porous flower-like microstructure of zinc oxide.
However, to take advantage of the increased area, the temperature of the coating must increase with the heat of pool-boiling. But QM requires the heat capacity of the atom in nanoscale coatings under TIR confinement to vanish, and therefore the heat into the coating is not conserved by an increase in temperature. QM stands for quantum mechanics and TIR for total internal confinement. Instead, the heat as EM energy is conserved by the creation of QED induced non-thermal EM radiation inside the zinc oxide coating. QED stands for quantum electrodynamics and EM for electromagnetic. By QM, enhanced pool-boiling occurs as the heat into the coating under TIR confinement creates QED radiation that bypasses the inefficient heat transfer boiling process at the coating surface to be directly absorbed in the bulk coolant water.
Alternatively, QED cooling allows pool-boiling to be avoided altogether by transferring the heat to ambient air. In this regard, QED cooling in air by nanoscale coatings is of great interest as thermal management of conventional electronics using nanoscale coatings is far simpler to implement than cooling fins or pool-boiling. In nanoelectronics, QED cooling in air by nanoscale coatings of zinc oxide or the like may be the only way to manage the temperature of sub-micron circuit elements because of the limited space available. QED cooling of nanoscale coatings is not new, having been mistaken in thin films as reductions in thermal conductivity, examples of which are presented from the literature.
Extensions are made to diverse areas of physics and astronomy to show how man through QM and QED may better understand the world in which he lives. See Paper and Press Release
However, my IHTC paper on QED - The Fourth Mode of Heat Transfer was rejected because it was not consistent with prior work in near-field heat transfer that began with Professor Tien's erroneous analysis based on classical wave theory over 50 years ago. But near-field heat transfer in nanoscale gaps follows QM and not classical physics as the atoms in the gap surfaces do not have the heat capacity to change in temperature as required to satisfy the FDT. FDT stands for fluctuation dissipation theorem. Scientists effort using classical physics in nanoscale gaps is totally meaningless and may be likened to children playing in the sand. See the prior near-field scientists' work in the ReviewComment and Rejection/Response
Water flow through nanochannels of carbon nanotubes has been observed to be 2-5 orders of magnitude higher than predicted by the Hagen-Poiseuille theory of fluid mechanics that assumes the fluid does not slip at the channel wall. However, the general consensus is high flow is caused by fluid slip. But slip is questionable as the calculated slip-lengths for water in nanotubes exceeds the typical slip on non-wetting surfaces by 2 to 3 orders of magnitude. Hence, slip at the channel wall is an unlikely explanation for flow enhancement in nanochannels.
MD is commonly used to explain enhanced nanochannel flow. However, the MD simulations are not valid because QM precludes the atom from having the heat capacity to conserve viscous heating by an increase in temperature. QM stands for quantum mechanics. Instead, QED induces atoms in fluid molecules under the TIR confinement of the nanochannel to conserve viscous heat by the creation of EM radiation. QED stands for quantum electrodynamics, TIR for total internal reflection, and EM for electromagnetic. Standard MD computer programs require modification to simulate the QM effect in nanochannels.
In this regard, MD that is valid by QM is used to simulate a 2D model of 100 atoms in a BCC configuration of liquid argon under a constant shear stress as shown in the above figure..The L-J potential is chosen to have sigma = 3.45 A and epsilon = 120 k, k is Boltzmann´s constatn. The MD loading of a velocity gradient normal to the flow direction having velocity of 100 m/s over the MD box height of 32.6 A.
After 150000 iterations, the L-J viscosity converged to ~ 144 micro-Pa-s. Experimentally, the viscosity of liquid argon depends on temperature and varies vary from 54 to 175 micro-Pa-s. But closer agreement is not important as the issue is what happens in the MD solution as the attractve L-J potential vanishes. In this regarrd, the attractive L-J potential was reduced by a factor of 100 to 1.2 k. The MD solution was found to give the viscosity of 1 micro-Pa-s that relative to MD solution for an attractive L-J potentia of 120 k gave a viscosty reduction by a factor of 144.
Moreover, the MD solution for Coulomb repulsion was also performed and found to converge to a zero viscosity . Both MD solutions suggest a vanishing viscosity is inherent in nanochannels. See Paper andPress Release
The Interphase in Nanocomposites
Nanocomposites comprising NPs embedded in a polymer are observed to display significantly enhanced mechanical properties compared to the polymer alone without NPs. NP stands for nanoparticle. In the above figure, the EUV emission from the NP is shown (green) to cross-link the interphase adjacent the NP. Enhanced properties are attributed to the interphase comprising a thin < 100 nm polymeric region that forms adjacent the NPs. Since NPs are typically < 10 nm, the interphase controls the properties of nanocomposites.
Experiments are required to determine the properties of the interphase, but tensile tests of nanoscale specimens of the interphase are difficult to perform. Because of this, atomistic MD simulations are used to deerve interphase properties. However, the validity of the MD simulations is questionable as assumptions are usually unverifiable, e.g., the source of radicals in initiating cross-linking and the correctness of force-fields lack experimental support. Except for illustrating how the MD procedure would be performed if the assumptions of the interphase were indeed valid, the interphase remains uncharacterized.
In the alternative, the NPs in a polymer are proposed to emit EUV radiation that cross-links the polymer adjacent to the NP surface to form the interphase thereby enhancing the mechanical properties of nanocomposites. EUV stands for extreme ultraviolet.
The EUV radiation emitted from NPs is not new, having been known for some time as a major source of DNA damage that if not repaired may lead to cancer. Press Release
Briefly, the characterization procedure:
1. Prepare polymer tensile specimens, say < 1 mm diameter wires or 3 micron thick flat geometries. The polymer specimens are samples of the natural polymer which is not yet cross-linked.
2. For the nanocomposite application, determine the wavelength of the EUV emission expected from the NPs based on their diameter and refractive index.
3. Using the EUV source shown below, irradiate the tensile specimens. The EUV source used to irradiate the tensile specimens is based on QED induced radiation from a nanoscale coating of zinc oxide on the inside surface of a cylindrical tube. The tensile specimen having a circular cross-section is positioned axially in the tube. The tube is provided with end end-caps, but are not shown. Electrical current is induced in the coating by applying voltage in short pulses across the tube length. The electrical current produces Joule heat, but the temperature does not increase because of QM. Instead, QED conserves the Joule heat by creating EUV radiation that irradiates the the tensile specimen. The wavelength of the EUV radiation is given by L = 2 nd, where n is the coating refractive index and d the coating thickness. For zinc oxide having n = 1.5 and taking d = 10 nm, QED creates 30 nm EUV. Other EUV wavelengths require diffenent coating thicknesses, but this is not a problem as a set of cylindrical tubes for desired wavelengths can be provided. Compared to the cost if other EUV sources, the QED induced EUV source is insignificant.
See NAP2014 Presentation A MP3 audio recording of the presentation is available, but requires words on the PPT slide show to follow spoken words. Run both at the same time. Open the PPT slide show in one window and the audio in another. Let the audio run continuously, Sentence by sentence clicking allows the PPT slideshow to be adjusted to the audio.
4. Perform tensile tests of the EUV irradiated specimens. Determine the stress-strain curve of the natural and EUV irradiated polymer, i.e., Young's modulus and yield strength.
5. Use the EUV irradiated specimens in ANSYS or the like FEM simulations of the nano-composite to determine structural integrity. Or in MD simulations verify that force-fields do indeed give the experimental EUV irradiated stress-strain curve before applying to structural evaluations.
Nanobubbles in acid-base chemistry
In 1955, Eigen and de Maeyer initiated acid-base chemistry by assuming water molecules dissociate into H and OH ions through self-ionization. Recently, MD simulations have proposed self-ionization is the consequence of electric fields caused by random fluctuations that about once every 10 hours are strong enough to dissociate the water molecule by breaking an O-H bond producing a OH and hydronium H3O ion. In this way, self-ionization defines the concentration of H3O ions by the pH of water.
However, self-ionization is contrary to the Boltzmann distribution that gives the probability of dissociating the water molecule as the natural exponential e raised to the –(E/kT)power. Here, E is the dissociation energy and kT is the available thermal energy, where k is Boltzmann’s constant and T absolute temperature. Dissociation of the water molecule requires EM energy of at least 5 eV. Classically, kT = 0.0258 eV at ambient temperature giving e^–E/kT = 1^-84, a very small number that has been translated into a water molecule dissociating once every 10 hours.
Unfortunately, the thermal kT energy of the atom given by classical physics is only applicable to the low frequency anharmonic region of the QM harmonic oscillator, but not to the high frequency harmonic region of the O-H bond. QM stands for quantum mechanics. In fact, the Einstein-Hopf relation for the QM harmonic oscillator shows the kT energy of the atom vanishes at O-H bond frequencies, and therefore e^–E/kT = 0 meaning the water molecule does not dissociate once every 10 hours, but rather never dissociates. Similarly, the MD simulation that implicitly assumes kT > 0 is also invalid as kT vanishes. Regardless, self-ionization cannot occur, yet the water molecule is indeed dissociating as pH measurements are routinely measure H3O concentrations.
What is the mechanism by which water molecules are continually dissociating?
In this regard, nanobubble dissociation of water is proposed as the source of H3O ions that define the pH of water. Nanobubbles are nearly spherical < 100 nm air-containing cavities in liquid water. Generally, bubbles collapse by surface tension that increases as the diameter decreases, and therefore nanobubbles are thought to dissolve in a few microseconds. Contrarily, nanobubbles are known to remain stable for hours and even days, defying the expectation of prompt dissolution. Recently, the stability of nanobubbles is shown to depend on the charge repulsion of OH ions in the bubble that opposes surface tension, while the H ions form hydronium H3O ions in the bubble wall.
In nanobubbles, water molecules are continually evaporating from the bubble wall. In the bubble wall, the water molecules have thermal kT energy, as they are a part of the macroscopic liquid continuum. But in the EM confinement of the bubble, QM precludes all water molecules including H and OH ions from having the heat capacity to increase in temperature. Conservation of the thermal energy of the evaporated water molecules therefore cannot proceed by an increase in bubble temperature, and instead proceeds by the creation of QED induced non-thermal EM radiation. QED stands for quantum electrodynamics. For nanobubbles < 100 nm, the EM radiation induced by QED is in the UV at wavelengths< 250 nm.
With ubiquitous nanobubbles throughout the bulk producing UV radiation, acid-base chemistry differs that given by self-ionization. All water molecules that evaporate into the bubble are therefore dissociated by UV into H and OH ions. However, recombination produces an intermediate state of water that promptly ionizes in the bubble. The repetitive process in forming H3O ions from intermediate H2O molecules is illustrated in the above figure. In this plasma-like state, the nanobubbles constantly emit UV radiation that propagates throughout the bulk and upon absorption ionizes water molecules into H and OH ions. Unlike self-ionization which cannot occur, nanobubble dissociation of water is highly likely. In the bulk, the H and OH ions are not confined as in the bubble and recombination is therefore unlikely. The Hions having high fragment velocity separate from the relatively stationary OH ion to form H3O ions that having lifetime of ~1 ps allow pH measurements of the bulk to be made. See Press Release, Paper, and Presentation.
QED Induced Lithography
EUV lithography at light at 13.5 nm is planned in the next generation of computer chips. However, difficulty in producing the EUV light source is challenging Moore's law to the point of questioning whether the goal of advancing computer technology may not be possible. In retrospect, the difficulty in reaching this goal may be traced back to the requirement of classical physics that EUV light may only be created upon ionization of atoms in dense high temperature plasmas. Because of this requirement, LPP have evolved as the primary source of EUV light in 13.5 nm lithography. LPP stands for laser produced plasmas. The typical 13.5 nm lithography system is shown below
The LPP light sources uses high power CO2 lasers to heat solid and gas targets, the plasma of which produce the EUV light by atomic emission. LPP use solid targets of tin or lithium droplets and puffs of helium or xenon gases. The EUV light is collected and focused by a large diameter elliptical mirror that delivers the focused EUV light to the lithography system. As the EUV light projects onto the mask, it is reflected onto a series of mirrors, which reduce the size of the image prior to being focused onto a silicon wafer. The problem blocking Moores's law is LPP requires high temperature plasmas to create the EUV light. Furthermore, LPP systems are not only complex, but very expensive costing as much as $120 million. In this regard, QED lithography based on QM offers a simpler and inexpensive alternative. QED stands for quantum electrodynamics and QM for quantum mechanics. QED lithography follows the 13.5 nm lithography configuration shown above, except the expensive LPP Source comprising the CO2 laser and collector is replaced with the inexpensive Spherical EUV Source shown below.
The Spherical EUV Source comprises a low thermal expansion CerVit spherical glass lens provided on the front surface with a nanoscale coating having a higher refractive index, say zinc oxide. An insulated surface heater is provided on the back surface, the heat flowing through the lens thickness into the coating. However, QM precludes any increase in the coating temperature, and therefore QED converts the heat as EM energy into a steady source of EUV light. Lasers are not required. In the TIR mode of the coating, the EUV wavelength is 2nd, where n and d are the refractive index and thickness of the coating. The Planck energy E of the QED radiation is, E = hc /2nd, where h is Plancks constant and c is the velocity of light. For zinc oxide coatings having refractive index n ~ 2, the QED radiation for thicknesses d < 5 nm is in the EUV having wavelengths < 20 nm See Paper andPress Release
Litigation for Skin Cancer caused by Nanoparticles
In 2006, consumer lawsuits filed in Los Angeles Superior Court alleged manufacturers of sunscreens, including the popular Coppertone and Banana Boat brands, made false claims that exposed millions of innocent people to skin cancer. The suits were combined into a class action against Merck, on the grounds Coppertone lacked the labeling to warn consumers about the dangers of skin cancer from prolonged sun exposure. Prior attempts by the FDA to require sunscreen manufacturers to provide warning labels on their sunscreens were stayed by intense industry lobbying. Because of this, the class action sought to have Merck remove labels that Coppertone provided a “sunblock” and “all day protection” against harmful UVA and UVB rays known to cause skin cancer. Since medical damages for skin cancer were not alleged, the Merck class action suit only sought the removal of misleading labels on Coppertone that the FDA was unable to do because of the lobbyist.
In 2012, the Court ordered Merck to create a $10 million fund to cover monetary relief for millions of consumer claims, each claimant recovering at least the cost of Coppertone purchases. SeeSettlement The Court also ordered injunctive relief having Merck remove the terms "sunblock" and "all day protection" from Coppertone labeling. The Court ruling excluded monetary relief for skin cancer by consumers, but allowed medical damage lawsuits to be brought later in separate lawsuits based on the Merck precedent.
In this regard, sunscreen manufacturers commonly use ZnO – zinc oxide and other nanoparticles in their products of which there is extensive evidence of skin cancer. Indeed, "Friends of the Earth", a non-profit activist group, campaigns on the banner that sunscreens should be labelled to warn the consumer of the danger that nanoparticles in their products may cause skin cancer.
Conversely, sunscreen manufacturers argue the nanoparticles reduce the danger of skin cancer because on the skin surface they absorb solar radiation and therefore UVA and UVB rays known to cause skin cancer do not reach the epidermal layer and enter the blood stream. In fact, experiments show human macrophage cells do indeed remove ZnO nanoparticles from skin surface, but DNA damage in the epidermal layer was not reported.
Unfortunately, DNA damage is of utmost importance, which if not repaired by the immune system, leads to skin cancer. In fact, nanoparticles in body fluids are known to cause DNA damage. Nevertheless, the question in skin cancer remains:
How can nanoparticles on the skin surface not in contact with the DNA in the epidermal layer damage the DNA in the epidermal layer?
To answer this question, experiments comprising cobalt Co-chromium Cr nanoparticles placed on one side of a cellular barrier were found to damage the DNA of human fibroblasts on the other side, even though the nanoparticles never crossed the barrier, a finding that suggests DNA damage also occurred even though the ZnO nanoparticles in the aforementioned tests never reached the epidermal layer. The researchers proposed the mechanism for DNA damage at a distance as a cascade of biological signals in the intervening cells.
In an alternative to DNA damage by signaling, the toxicity of nanoparticles is more likely caused by the emission of QED induced EM radiation at UV and higher frequencies . QED stands for quantum electrodynamics and EM for electromagnetic. QED radiation is based on the QM argument that under TIR confinement the atoms in nanoparticles lack the heat capacity to conserve thermal energy from body fluids by an increase in temperature. QM stands for quantum mechanics and TIR for total internal reflection. Since nanoparticles cannot conserve thermal energy by an increase in temperature, steady EM radiation in the UV and above is emitted that readily penetrates intervening cells thereby damaging the DNA at a distance.
Although nanoparticles in sunscreens do absorb harmful UVA and UVB rays from the sun as claimed, QED converts the absorbed EM energy to far more damaging UVC radiation. More importantly, QED also converts harmless visible solar rays absorbed by nanoparticles to damaging UVC radiation. Therefore nanoparticles in sunscreens make the DNA damage worse than if they were not used at all. But solar radiation is not required to damage DNA as thermal energy at body temperature absorbed by nanoparticles is converted by QED to damaging UVC radiation, i.e., all cancers are likely initiated by nanoparticles.
A class action lawsuit following the Merck precedent is presented that requires manufacturers that include nanoparticles in sunscreens to add labeling such as “contains nanoparticles known to damage DNA that may lead to skin cancer” thereby allowing the consumer to decide on whether or not to purchase the sunscreen. See Press Release
At Nanosafe 2014, the liability of sunscreen manufacturers for damages of Cancer caused by nanoparticles was not well received. Attendees cared less about the skin cancers they are creating using nanoparticles than the benefits of having a tanned appearance. Nanosafe is obviously controlled by sunscreem manufacturers. See Paper presented at the Nanosafe poster session including a relevant quote by Thomas Hobbes.
The fallacy of 100% efficiency in Solar Cells
Solar energy conversion based on a TPV cell converts heat to electricity by photons. TPV stands for thermophotovoltaic. Traditionally, solar cells are based on classical physics that assumes photons with sufficient Planck energy create excitons ( electron and hole pairs ) in a semiconductor thereby allowing the generation of electricity. Solar cell efficiency ls governed by the Shockley-Queisser limit is about 33.7 % because of the inability of the cell to respond to all wavelengths of sunlight. But the efficiency is low as the frequency of the TPV cell can never be matched to all frequencies in the entire solar spectrum. What this means is solar cells based on exciton theory can never achieve electrical conversion efficiencies of 100 %
The fallacy of achieving 100% conversion efficiency may be easily understood. For solar photons with Planck energy E less than the bandgap Eg of the TPV cell, E < Eg, electron-hole pairs are not created. Hence the solar energy is dissipated as heat with the electrical conversion efficiency = 0 %. Conversely, solar photons having energy E above the bandgap Eg, E > Eg, are absorbed and create electron-hole pairs. But the excess energy, E - Eg is lost to heat dissipation making the conversion efficiency << 50%. Only in the extremely unlikely event the E = Eg is the conversion efficiency 100 %.
Recently, a new world record of 44.7 % was claimed for the conversion of sunlight into electricity using a new TPV solar cell structure with four solar sub-cells. Indeed, Professor Yablonovitch presented solar cell efficiency enhancement by regenerative TPV at HKUST. Only time will tell if 100 % TPV cell solar efficiency is consistent with this approach. Although < 100% efficient, the world record is significant, but still indicates that only 44.7% of the solar spectrum's energy, from UV through to the IR is converted into electrical energy. See the NREL timeline of solar cell development leading up to the 44.7 % efficiency.
In the alternative, QM differs from classical physics by requiring the heat capacity of the atom to vanish in thin films, the consequence of which is expected to make a significant difference in achieving 100% TPV cell efficiency. QM stands for quantum mechanics. What this means is BB radiation supplied to a thin film does not increase the temperature of the film, but rather is induced by QED to create EM radiation that charges the film or is lost to the surroundings. QED stands for quantum electrodynamics, and EM for electromagnetic. See Press Release.
QED Theory - A new approach to the design of solar cells
The QED induced TPV cell resting on a hot 1200 C surface of a combustion process is illustrated in the above figure. The hot surface emits BB photons in the near IR shown in red that are absorbed in the TPV cell which is, say a single ultrathin 50 nm aluminum film. Unlike solar cells based on electron-hole theory which may be a few microns thick, QED theory requires the thin films to be < 100 nm thick. Aluminum is chosen because like most metals has a high quantum yield of electrons/QED photon while having high IR absorption of BB photons. However, BB photons absorbed in the aluminum film do not increase its temperature. Instead, QED creates EM radiation that charges the film. But the quantum yield of electrons / QED photon is 0.01 to 0.1< 1 so not all QED photons create electrons, and therefore some QED radiation shown in green is lost to the housing. The lost QED radiation may be minimized by providing multi-layers of aluminum films, but for clarity only a single aluminum film is shown.
In summary, the TPV cell comprises an ultrathin aluminum film interposed between the hot source and the housing, The RI of the aluminum film need only be greater than that of the surroundings. RI stands for refractive index. Under these conditions, any BB radiation absorbed by the film is placed under TIR confinement, the importance of which is the QED radiation created is sufficiently high to ionize the film. For Planck's constant h and the velocity of light c, the QED wavelength w = 2nd, where n and d are the RI and thickness of the film. The Planck energy E of the QED radiation is beyond the UV, E = hc/w > 5 eV.
What this means is using QED theory the conversion efficiency of solar cells may indeed approach 100%. In contrast, using the traditional exciton theory, it is unlikely 100% efficiently can ever be achieved. The reason is simple - it is far easier to have solar photons dissipate their Planck energy by non-radiative heat than to create electron-hole pairs. But QM converts the non-radiative heat to QED radiation that charges the film to produce electricity. Because of this, QED trumps exciton theory making possible 100% conversion efficiencies that otherwise is not possible in solar cells.
Cosmology by Cosmic Dust
Since Hubble, cosmology based on Doppler’s redshift considers the Universe as finite beginning and expanding since the Big Bang. If, however, Hubble’s redshift is shown to have a non-Doppler origin, the Universe need not be expanding. Redshift without an expanding Universe is of utmost importance as the outstanding problems in cosmology would be resolved.
In this regard, redshift of galaxy light is shown to occur upon absorption in submicron cosmic dust NPs by the mechanism of QED induced radiation. NP stands for nanoparticle and QED stands for quantum electrodynamics. QED induced redshift treats the absorbed galaxy photon as EM energy confined by the cosmic dust NP under TIR confinement. EM stands for electromagnetic and TIR for total reflection. QED redshift is a consequence of QM that precludes the NP atoms under TIR to increase in temperature upon absorbing the galaxy photon. QM stands for quantum mechanics. Instead, the photon is redshift depending on the properties of the NP.
The Galaxy photon having wavelengthλ is induced by QED to create a redshift photon of wavelength λ = 2 nD, where D and n are the diameter and refractive index of the cosmic dust particle. The redshift Z = ( λo - λ ) / λ. For he Lyman photon and silicate cosmic dust, the QED induced redshift Z and the recession velocity of the Galaxy to the speed of light V/c by Doppler’s effect as shown in the figure below. See Paper and Presentation See Paper in Publications of the Koreans Astonomical Society, September Issue, Volume 30, 2015.
The QED redshift is caused solely by the absorption of the Galaxy photon in cosmic dust and has nothing to do with an expanding Universe by the Doppler effect.. Given that Galaxy light is unequivocally absorbed by cosmic dust, the high galaxy velocities inferred by the Doppler effect are therefore meaningless as the Galaxy need not be receding at all, but ratherstationary. But QED induced redshift has further significance in that the following outstanding problems in cosmology may be resolved by Newtonian mechanics.
Dark Energy not needed to explain a Universe that is not expanding
Mass of Black-holes by cosmic dust
Sunyaev- Zel'dovich effect independent of redshift
Galaxy Rotation Problem resolved without Dark Matter
No need for MOND to explain Galaxy Rotation Problem
Light Curve dilation explainedin Supernovae Explosions
To obtain correct estimates of Hubble redshift, the QED induced Z redshift must be removed from the Z measurement. To do this, the Z for the Ly-α and H-α lines must always be measured separately for every Z measurement. The corrected Z is then:
Other lines may also be included. In effect, each and every Z-measurement must include data that justifies the assumption that Z is independent of wavelength.
Quantum Mechanics and Nanotechnology
Classical physics applied to nanotechnology invariably produces non-physical results. Because of this, the notion of QED Radiations was founded. QED stands for quantum electrodynamics. QED radiation is based on the QM requirement that heat capacity of the atom vanishes at the nanoscale. By this theory, conservation of absorbed EM energy cannot proceed by the usual increase in temperature, and instead the EM energy absorbed by a nanostructure under TIR is converted by QED to EM radiation that produces charge from creation of excitons (holon and electron pairs), or upon recombination of holes and electrons is emitted as EM radiation to the surroundings. QM stands for quantum mechanics, EM for electromagnetic,and TIR for total internal reflection. QED induced radiation not only offers a rational explanation for the nanoscale inaccessible by classical physics, but is applicable to the absorption of all forms of EM energy by nanostructures, say as in the absorption of Joule heat in nanoelectronics. QED radiation is fundamental physics applicable to diverse areas of nanotechnology including nanofluids, cancer, cosmology, and lithography, the latter of interest in preserving Moore's law at 13.5 nm.
QED radiations gives short workshops on QM in nanotechnology. At Isfahan University of Technology pictured above QED radiations on October 8-9, QED Radiations gave the Presentation. A MP3 audio recording of the presentation is available, but requires words on the PPT slide show to follow spoken words. Run both at the same time. Open the PPT slide show in one window and the audio in another. Let the audio run continuously, Sentence by sentence clicking allows the PPT slideshow to be adjusted to the audio.
QED induced EUV Light Source
EUV lithography at light at 13.5 nm is planned in the next generation of computer chips. However, difficulty in producing the EUV source is challenging Moore's law to the point of questioning whether the goal of advancing computer technology may not be possible anymore. In retrospect, the difficulty in reaching this goal may be traced back to the requirement of classical physics that EUV light may only be created upon ionization of atoms in dense high temperature plasmas. Because of this requirement, LPP have evolved as the primary source of EUV light in 13.5 nm lithography. LPP stands for laser produced plasmas.
In the alternative, QM allows the EUV to be induced by QED in nanoscale films. See "QED induced Lithography" above on this page and the Abstract for the Dublin Conference on EUV sources.
My abstract on advancing Moore's law for fabricating the new generation of computer chips using a QED induced EUV light source was blocked from being mailed to the Dublin conference. All the files in my Yola inbox and sent items were immediately deleted upon my sending the abstract. This requires continual surveillance. I am a US citizen living in Hong Kong, and it is highly likely the US, Chinese, or Hong Kong governments ( or all ) hacked my abstract. But why? Perhaps, the abstract speaks for itself by QED lithography offering a very simple technical and economic solution to the production of EUV light in 13.5 nm lithography. In contrast, LPP lithography although heavily funded by the US and Chinese governments has been a total failure. Que bono arguments suggest the US and Chinese governments will do whatever it takes to save face to their taxpayers for funding failure.
Lifetime of Excited States under Jet Expansion
The extended lifetime of excited states of gas molecules observed  during jet expansion is proposed to be the consequence of the QM heat capacity of the atom. QM stands for quantum mechanics. QM given by the Einstein-Hopf relation for the atom as a harmonic oscillator shows the heat capacity of a molecule may be described by the temperature and EM confinement of its constituent atoms. EM stands for electromagnetic. The EM confinement depends on the external constraints placed on the atom, the constraints expressed in terms of the harmonic and anharmonic wavelength regions of the oscillator. At ambient temperature, the harmonic region of the oscillator has short oscillator wavelengths < 1 micron; whereas, the anharmonic region is characterized by long wavelengths > 30 microns. Generally, atoms in macroscopic structures have heat capacity, but in nanoscopic structures the heat capacity of the atom vanishes.
Contrary to [1, 2], molecules in jet expansions do not always increase in temperature upon laser irradiation as can be deduced by treating the molecule as a nanoscopic structure that by QM does not have the heat capacity to conserve the absorption of laser energy by an increase in temperature. Instead, the molecule conserves the laser energy by the creation of QED induced EM radiation that charges the atoms in the molecule, and if not is emitted only to be absorbed by other molecules in the surroundings. QED stands for quantum electrodynamics. In a large number of molecules, each molecule continually emits and absorbs QED radiation, but again, QM precludes any increase in temperature of the molecules. Only upon absorption of QED radiation by a macroscopic structure having heat capacity does the temperature increase. Traditionally, the increase in temperature of a gas comprising a large number of molecules has been assumed to occur based on each molecule having heat capacity, but by QM the temperature actually increases by the absorption of QED radiation from the molecules by the macroscopic walls of the container.
SM differs from QM. SM stands for statistical mechanics. By SM, the heat capacity of an atom in a molecule never vanishes. SM implicitly assumes the EM confinement of the atom is always in the anharmonic region of the QM oscillator, i.e., SM has no size effect as in QM. Unlike QM, SM treats gas molecules in a container as having an average heat capacity which is valid only in the anharmonic region under periodic boundary conditions.
The heat capacity of the atom is of importance in explaining the extended lifetime of excited states of molecules observed during laser excitation in jet expansion. In the figure, the heat capacity of gas molecules in jet expansion is depicted to decrease while the QED radiation increases with increasing spacing between molecules. The heat capacity of the atom is related to the lifetime of an excited molecule as it defines how much of the laser energy is lost by non-radiative increases in temperature. In the QM interpretation, the heat capacity of the atom at large spacings vanishes, and therefore the EM energy from the laser is conserved solely by QED emission without non-radiative loss usually associated with the molecule having a narrow absorption peak. In contrast, molecules having heat capacity allow the atoms to dissipate the laser energy by non-radiative losses usually thought caused by the molecule a broad absorption peak. Because of the uncertainty principle, long-lifetime-excited states of molecules in jet expansion are an anomaly of QM where the constituent atom have vanishing heat capacity while short-lifetime-excited-states do not. See Press Release
 M. Taherkhani. Development of a novel, long-lifetime supersonic jet source for laser spectroscopy of biological molecules, University of Manchester, PhD. Thesis, 2010
 J. F. Ready, Effects of High-Power Laser Radiation, New York: Academic, 1971