Ask questions to Dr. Sveinn Ólafsson, Science Institute - University of Iceland

Hi Ecco, I hope Svein see your post and answer. I wonder if this is what happens how is it giving out the extra energy? My understanding is that after the condensation from H(1) to H(-1) it will go back to it's ground state while emitting Gamma/X-Ray/UV? And if so what is the energy out compared to energy put in needed for the pressure?

Hi Ecco

This compression idea of Holmlid is valid from this picture but as soon as you think of temperature then you have hard time thinking that H(1) Rydberg matter (before converting to H(0)) will survive the temperature in ICF and even less in stars.

Greetings

Sveinn

@Ecco,

As a logical thinker, if you continue to proceed down this heretical line of thinking, you will be eventually forced to disregard many of the assumptions that underlie astrophysics. You might be ready for the great leap forward. But it is best that sveinol stay away from this subject since he makes his living in academic science.

I posted on this subject here The Liquid Sun

I have referenced this associated article on this site:

Quote

Liquid Metallic Hydrogen: A Building Block for the Liquid Sun

http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2011/PP-26-07.PDF

Here is the associated video:

Regardless of what sveinol thinks, in his experiments with cavitation, Mark LeClair comes close to understanding how metalized hydrides keep their structures intact with temperatures and pressures seen in supernovae.

Here is an experiment that shows how the LENR reaction utilizing water crystals can operate at temperatures of 5000K.

http://newinflow.ru/pdf/Klimov_Poster.pdf

@sveinol
Thanks for answering!

My understanding from the diagram and the associated text was that given enough density and temperature (and speed?) the transition from regular hydrogen to H(0) could be possible, without an intermediate step to H(1). Here's a very relevant excerpt (it even mentions that the condensation to H(0) itself can give off large amounts of energy, which might in part answer the question of @Mats002

I'm aware that conditions during ignition in ICF might not be exactly the same as in stars, but as there already are theories embracing the possibility of stars not primarily composed of plasma (such as the one @axil linked) and since prof. Holmlid has already tried to link Rydberg Matter in all its forms with observed and unobserved phenomena in space (e.g. dark matter), I wonder if it's really too much of a stretch to think that it could be also involved with stellar nucleosynthesis.

I haven't seen recent theoretical papers from Holmlid dealing with H(0) in the Universe in detail, perhaps he has some in preparation?

For Holmlid to consider the logical consequences of metallic hydrogen as the active agent in stellar nucleosynthesis is too much of a stretch for Holmlid to think about. Science is not ready for that level of paradigm shift. I would not want Holmlid to walk down such a dangerous road.

@axil: in inertial confinement fusion both the temperature and density of stellar cores is exceeded - even if only briefly - so I don't think it takes a huge leap to relate those assertions to stellar nucleosynthesis, whether the liquid/metallic hydrogen sun hypothesis is accepted or not.

Putting this aside, there might be implications for past results in nuclear fusion weaponry too, which work with principles similar to ICF (i.e. the compression stage).

Quote from Ecco

@axil: in inertial confinement fusion both the temperature and density of stellar cores is exceeded - even if only briefly - so I don't think it takes a huge leap to relate those assertions to stellar nucleosynthesis, whether the liquid/metallic hydrogen sun hypothesis is accepted or not.

Putting this aside, there might be implications for past results in nuclear fusion weaponry too, which work with principles similar to ICF (i.e. the compression stage).

As Dr. Pierre-Marie Robitaille states, the Sun can be a liquid or it can be plasma, but it cannot be both a liquid and plasma at the same time. There is no theory of hot fusion that I know about that supports Holmlid’s idea about highly compressed liquefied gases producing fusion.

Consider the Lawson criterion. It is an important general measure of a system that defines the conditions needed for a fusion reactor to reach ignition, that is, that the heating of the plasma by the products of the fusion reactions is sufficient to maintain the temperature of the plasma against all losses without external power input. As originally formulated the Lawson criterion gives a minimum required value for the product of the plasma (electron) density ne and the "energy confinement time."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawson_criterion

Later analysis suggested that a more useful figure of merit is the "triple product" of density, confinement time, and plasma temperature T. The triple product also has a minimum required value, and the name "Lawson criterion" often refers to this inequality. There is no possible combination of density, confinement time, and plasma temperature that would allow the Holmlid idea associated with metalized ultra-dense hydrogen to produce hot fusion.

@axil: even before this, that nuclear reactions can be easily achieved at low energy in the laboratory simply by using hydrogen and a catalyst heated in a partial vacuum means there's something wrong or incomplete in the current scientific understanding of how nature works and will have to be dealt with sooner or later. It is not conceivable that these processes are not already spontaneously and pervasively occurring in the universe.

This does not only apply to Holmlid's ultra-dense hydrogen, but all other LENR claims and results as well.

axil: Check out this device:

http://www.amptek.com/pdf/coolx.pdf

Is it LENR that makes it go?