Display MoreDear Axil
This is good paper you are referring and can be compared to radio antenna theory scaled to nanoscale dimensions
Do you agree with this statement?
SPP is alternative energy source/storage of "incoherent" low energy photons or electromagnetic radiation in the 1-9eV range?
Greetings
Sveinn
See my reply above.
Display MoreHello Dr. Olafsson,
I think a classical analog that might be similar is a 1000 car freight train moving at
(say 10 km/h) up a hill. The lead car of the train will climb far higher than a single
car moving at the same velocity, since it borrows kinetic energy/momentum via
mechanical coupling.
Would not an electron (anti-electron or perhaps heavier charged particle) couple via
electric, or magnetic, field to the many other electrons with the same directional
momentum be able to climb a much higher potential wall than a single electron?
See, for example, Feynman Lectures, vol. 3, section 21-3, "Two kinds of momentum" --
[Excerpt] [[["But remember what happens electrically when I suddenly turn on a flux.
During the short time that the flux is rising, there’s an electric field generated whose line
integral is the rate of change of the flux with time: E=−dA/dt .
That electric field is enormous if the flux is changing rapidly, and it gives a force on the
particle. The force is the charge times the electric field, and so during the build up of
the flux the particle obtains a total impulse (that is, a change in mv) equal to −qA
In other words, if you suddenly turn on a vector potential at a charge, this charge
immediately picks up an mv -momentum equal to −qA
But there is something that isn’t changed immediately and that’s the difference between
mv and −qA . And so the sum p=mv+qA is something which is not changed when you make
a sudden change in the vector potential. This quantity p is what we have called the p
-momentum and is of importance in classical mechanics in the theory of dynamics, but it
also has a direct significance in quantum mechanics."]]]
http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/III_21.html
I believe that collisions between oppositely charged particles with approximately
equal opposite momenta in a strong magnetic field conforms to Feynman's description.
See also, Widom-Larsen's preprint: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0802.0466.pdf
where, I believe, they describe the same multi-particle coupling phenomenon
using the Darwin Lagrangian.
[SO] Yes SPP can accelerate particles somewhat but what for?
I understand the neutron arguments but there is no supporting experimental indications available?
Sorry for short answer
Sveinn
Analysis of both the fuel and the ash from the Hot Cat demo at Lugano shows composite sintered nickel micro particles that measure about 100 microns in size. These large particles act as an EMF antenna that gathers power (infrared) from an extended volume surrounding the large nickel particle of maybe 10 times that 100 micron volume in a large fraction of a cubic millimeter.
The Rydberg matter that is attracted to and rests on the surface of that large nickel particle in an aggregation concentrates that infrared power into a volume of 1 to 3 nanometers in diameter. Like hydraulic advantage, there is a power concentration factor in the billions. For example, 100 microns/1 nanometer = (100)(1000)^^3 = 10^^15 power amplification. The “Dark Mode” SPP is a black hole for coherent EMF. This soliton absorbs EMF with no limit until it explodes in a Bosenova. The soliton also absorbs nuclear energy from catalyzed muon based fusion originated gammBa photons from positive feedback effects. The SPPs with spin 2 all points toward the north pole of this black hole which acts as a monipole. This anapole magnetic field strengths that result are extreme. This EMF beam produces mesons from the vacuum through the Schwinger effect.
[SO] Dear Axil you are complicating things with using words such as monopoles and black holes the physics is much simpler. 
[SO] Dear Axil you are complicating things with using words such as monopoles and black holes the physics is much simpler.
Dear sveinol,
To justify my thinking, please see as follows:
For monopoles: Half-solitons in a polariton quantum fluid behave like magnetic monopoles
Note: There is a micro-graph in this research paper that shows an actual picture of the magnetic beam coming out of the SPP soliton.
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1204/1204.3564.pdf
For black holes: Prof. Daniele Faccio: "Black Holes, With A Twist" - Inaugural Lecture
The "Dark Mode" SPP soliton that produces the power involved in E-Cat LENR is really a rotating Black Hole for light. This is a real black hole including the Hawking radiation mechanism that radiates ½ of the vacuum energy extracted from virtual photons to the far field and absorbs the other ½ fraction of the vacuum energy to amplify and add to the energy contained in the soliton. Once light enters the soliton, it does not come out. The beam that projects out of the soliton is amplified by a process called Penrose Superradiance. These light based solitons have be generated using lasers. Waves of Hawking radiation have also been observed.
---------------
https://www.newscientist.com/a…-in-artificial-black-hole
Where does the vacuum energy come from in LENR.
Nano-particles slows down light and cause light(actually surface plasmon polaritons - SPP) to flow in a tight circle called a vortex. When this happens a black hole on a nano-scale is formed. This black hole of light sucks in virtual photons from the vacuum and adds that new born light to the light already spinning around inside the vortex..
Display MoreDear sveinol,
To justify my thinking, please see as follows:
For monopoles: Half-solitons in a polariton quantum fluid behave like magnetic monopoles
Note: There is a micro-graph in this research paper that shows an actual picture of the magnetic beam coming out of the SPP soliton.
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1204/1204.3564.pdf
For black holes: Prof. Daniele Faccio: "Black Holes, With A Twist" - Inaugural Lecture
The "Dark Mode" SPP soliton that produces the power involved in E-Cat LENR is really a rotating Black Hole for light. This is a real black hole including the Hawking radiation mechanism that radiates ½ of the vacuum energy extracted from virtual photons to the far field and absorbs the other ½ fraction of the vacuum energy to amplify and add to the energy contained in the soliton. Once light enters the soliton, it does not come out. The beam that projects out of the soliton is amplified by a process called Penrose Superradiance. These light based solitons have be generated using lasers. Waves of Hawking radiation have also been observed.
External Content www.youtube.comContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
---------------
https://www.newscientist.com/a…-in-artificial-black-hole
Where does the vacuum energy come from in LENR.
Nano-particles slows down light and cause light(actually surface plasmon polaritons - SPP) to flow in a tight circle called a vortex. When this happens a black hole on a nano-scale is formed. This black hole of light sucks in virtual photons from the vacuum and adds that new born light to the light already spinning around inside the vortex..
[SO] Thanks Axil for this information, I am not very well versed in these composite electron-photon quantum fluids and excitations. I think there is much more simpler mechanism hiding behind the curtains that fits Holmlid's observation much better. I am trying to write that up for a funding application and eventually a research paper. I like the "keep it simple" mantra. I am pondering now cryptically what is of more importance the Hydrogen system or the electron system of the nanoparticles.
Greetings
Sveinn
Regarding: "I think there is much more simpler mechanism hiding behind the curtains that fits Holmlid's observation much better."
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0912/0912.5414.pdf
Note the pictures of the rydberg matter in the figures at the end of this paper
Holmlid as reference this Winterberg paper as the theory that he believes is producing his experimental findings. He is right as far as that goes but the devil is in the details; and the details are very complex.
F. Winterberg, University of Nevada, Reno, has a reaction mechanism that I like a lot. It is based on a electron vortex and a Bose Einstein condensate(BEC) being imposed on the ultra dense hydrogen crystals of Rydberg matter. But unlike F. Winterberg thinking, I believe that the LASER pulse produces the BEC over the area that it irradiates.
The vortex is not an electron vortex, but an SPP vortex. If we want to understand LENR we must understand how nuclear reactions happen in and around a BEC.
This understanding will not be easy to arrive at. The true theory of LENR must explain many and varied unbelievable things which include the following: the thermalization of gamma radiation, the rapid to instantaneous stabilization of ALL radioactive isotopes, lack of neutron emissions, and the wide variation of seemingly random transmutation results which includes fusion of light elements into heavier elements and fission of heavy elements into lighter ones, remote reaction at a distance from the location of the LENR reaction, and instantaneous cluster fusion involving huge numbers of sub-reactions that occur instantly and collectively.
Now LENR must explain the spontaneous production of a wide range of subatomic particles that can only be produced in a particle accelerator in the 6 gigavolt range.
SPP theory provides an explanation to the production of mesons. This experimental discovery is new in LENR but SPP theory has predicted it.
Holmlid has also seen the instantaneous fusion of billions of atoms, This is also been seen in the production of the PURE Ni62 nickel ash particle in the Lugano fuel study. Here uncountable atoms of nickel entered a reaction where Li7 gave a either one, two, or three neutrons to all the countless nickel atoms that make up that 100 micron particle.
Like any individual LENR experiment, the full scope of the wonders of LENR cannot all be revealed at one time, but because Holmild is not seeing gamma radiation from billions of D D fusions, he is seeing a LENR reaction.
I understanded that you must start out simply for political and institutional reasons, but be sure that the true LENR theory is a great challenge.
The recent experiments by Holmlid indicate the production of a zoo of sub-atomic particles including muons associated with the LENR reaction. When muons decay, they produce electrons. Could the Hot cat be producing this unusual type of radiation? Is the name “M.meCurie” related to the discovery of radiation? Will the Hot cat produce so much muon radiation that it may be harmful to Rossi in that shipping container? Does Rossi know that his Hot cat is producing muons? Does Rossi use test equipment to test for muons? Will Rossi meet the same fate as “M.me Curie” under the possible extreme exposure to radiation? When breaking new ground in science danger to life and limb sometimes occurs.
All those muons coming from the "Mouse" might be driving the "Cat" into unexpectedly high SSM efficiency. Any reactor that can produce all those electrons, so many as to enable direct electrical production, that reactor must be producing huge amounts of muons. Rossi realty doesn't know what is happening inside the Hot cat...its new...and he is just an experimenter, but there is no free lunch in this world. For all those who care for Rossi's welfare. for safety sake, convince him to leave that shipping container.
If muons from the "Mouse" can catalyze SSM in the "Cat" it could also catalyze fusion reactions inside Rossi.
http://www.i2u2.org/elab/cosmi...
The Effects of Lead Shielding on Muon Counts…. If you are near a LENR reactor, tt looks like lots of muons will get to and into the body. I wonder if muons are harmful and at what level of flux?
Aside from the possible (likely) harm from muons, the curious and disturbing thing about this paper is that the authors:
1) expected to see a decreasing rate of muon counts as more lead above the detectors was added,
2) They were extremely surprised to see that when going from 15cm to 20cm of lead, the count rate of muons actually increased
3) This data point was extremely unexpected. They had expected that the rate of decrease of the muon count rates would have slowed, but the last thing expected was for the count rates to actually increase.
That is a lot of lead, first of all. Even then, it never blocked all the muons. For the muon count to increase, with thicker lead, this means that some kind of chain reaction is happening above a thickness level, but muon keep progressing thought the metal.
As an analogy – (of how LENR could benefit from this) consider the known parameters of fission … a chain reaction of neutrons is the driver of fission reactors, and thus the concept of a chain reaction of muons is intriguing. Can muons be harvested?
As for using this information in a practical manner, the main problem is that tons of lead would be needed for even a small reactor - and in the end – the question is whether they can be converted into energy.
The flow of Muons from the "Mouse" into the "Cats" in Rossi's Self Sustain mode (SSM) configuration looks like an application of a muon chain reaction that we are speculating about. We will need to watch Rossi to see what type of health problems he develops from his time inside the shipping container.
Muons have a very low interaction cross section with matter; muons do not interact with matter much at all at backgroud levels. That low reaction cross section is why muons are harmless to health at background levels, But the Hot cat might be producing a huge number of muons in SSM mode. However, in the Cat and Mouse configuration employed in the Rossi’s SSM mode, something must be increasing that cross section by a huge amount. That increase in the level of the probability of reaction must be due to a quantum mechanical process. My guess the cause is QM coherence of the Cat. A Bose condensate might make the Cat look like an atom that is many centimeters in size. The muon from the mouse can’t help but react with an atom that is that big. The same must be true of neutrinos. Coherence and entanglement might make particles that don’t usually interact with atoms always interact with Super Atoms in a Bose condensate cause by quantum effects.
Just the muons that come to earth from cosmic rays might trigger nuclear reactions in a Bose condensate. Rydberg matter because of its coherence might be a great receiver for subatomic particles that don’t usually interact with matter at all. What would happen if Rossi became QM coherent like one of his "Cats"?
Hi Sveinn:
Would it be possible to get a pre-print/link to Reference 35 of your co-authored paper with Leif, entitled "Muon detection studied by pulse-height energy analysis: Novel converter arrangements", published in Review of Scientific Instruments, which is:
L. Holmlid, "Decay of charged nuclear particles at 13 and 26 ns formed by laser-induced processes in ultra-dense hydrogen," Ann. Phys. (submitted). ?
Do you know how long it will be until it is online as an "Articles in Press"?
Thank you so much.
There is a recent article by Leif Holmid about laser induced fusion in ultra-dense deuterium, that Pr Svein Olafson have cited recently.
http://scitation.aip.org/conte…dva/5/8/10.1063/1.4928572
Quote
Previous results from laser-induced processes in ultra-dense deuterium D(0) give conclusive evidence for ejection of neutral massive particles with energy >10 MeV u−1. Such particles can only be formed from nuclear processes like nuclear fusion at the low laser intensity used. Heat generation is of interest for future fusion energy applications and has now been measured by a small copper (Cu) cylinder surrounding the laser target. The temperature rise of the Cu cylinder is measured with an NTC resistor during around 5000 laser shots per measured point. No heating in the apparatus or the gas feed is normally used. The fusion process is suboptimal relative to previously published studies by a factor of around 10. The small neutral particles H N(0) of ultra-dense hydrogen (size of a few pm) escape with a substantial fraction of the energy. Heat loss to the D2 gas (at <1 mbar pressure) is measured and compensated for under various conditions. Heat release of a few W is observed, at up to 50% higher energy than the total laser input thus a gain of 1.5. This is uniquely high for the use of deuterium as fusion fuel. With a slightly different setup, a thermal gain of 2 is reached, thus clearly above break-even for all neutronicity values possible. Also including the large kinetic energy which is directly measured for MeV particles leaving through a small opening gives a gain of 2.3. Taking into account the lower efficiency now due to the suboptimal fusion process, previous studies indicate a gain of at least 20 during long periods.
This looks like hot fusion, but the higher efficiency may show it is also LENR...
I let experts comment.
my personal question is whether this is an intermediate "regime" between plasma physics and material science? 
Display MoreRegarding: "I think there is much more simpler mechanism hiding behind the curtains that fits Holmlid's observation much better."
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0912/0912.5414.pdf
Note the pictures of the rydberg matter in the figures at the end of this paper
Holmlid as reference this Winterberg paper as the theory that he believes is producing his experimental findings. He is right as far as that goes but the devil is in the details; and the details are very complex.
F. Winterberg, University of Nevada, Reno, has a reaction mechanism that I like a lot. It is based on a electron vortex and a Bose Einstein condensate(BEC) being imposed on the ultra dense hydrogen crystals of Rydberg matter. But unlike F. Winterberg thinking, I believe that the LASER pulse produces the BEC over the area that it irradiates.
The vortex is not an electron vortex, but an SPP vortex. If we want to understand LENR we must understand how nuclear reactions happen in and around a BEC.
This understanding will not be easy to arrive at. The true theory of LENR must explain many and varied unbelievable things which include the following: the thermalization of gamma radiation, the rapid to instantaneous stabilization of ALL radioactive isotopes, lack of neutron emissions, and the wide variation of seemingly random transmutation results which includes fusion of light elements into heavier elements and fission of heavy elements into lighter ones, remote reaction at a distance from the location of the LENR reaction, and instantaneous cluster fusion involving huge numbers of sub-reactions that occur instantly and collectively.
Now LENR must explain the spontaneous production of a wide range of subatomic particles that can only be produced in a particle accelerator in the 6 gigavolt range.
SPP theory provides an explanation to the production of mesons. This experimental discovery is new in LENR but SPP theory has predicted it.
Holmlid has also seen the instantaneous fusion of billions of atoms, This is also been seen in the production of the PURE Ni62 nickel ash particle in the Lugano fuel study. Here uncountable atoms of nickel entered a reaction where Li7 gave a either one, two, or three neutrons to all the countless nickel atoms that make up that 100 micron particle.
Like any individual LENR experiment, the full scope of the wonders of LENR cannot all be revealed at one time, but because Holmild is not seeing gamma radiation from billions of D D fusions, he is seeing a LENR reaction.
I understanded that you must start out simply for political and institutional reasons, but be sure that the true LENR theory is a great challenge.
[SO] I fully agree with you LENR is complex but the complexity is not in the nanoscale grain structure or where surface plasmon polaritons can live the complexity is in the ultra-dense Hydrogen phase. The transformed Rydberg matter phase.
Greetings
Sveinn
Display MoreHi Sveinn:
Would it be possible to get a pre-print/link to Reference 35 of your co-authored paper with Leif, entitled "Muon detection studied by pulse-height energy analysis: Novel converter arrangements", published in Review of Scientific Instruments, which is:
L. Holmlid, "Decay of charged nuclear particles at 13 and 26 ns formed by laser-induced processes in ultra-dense hydrogen," Ann. Phys. (submitted). ?
Do you know how long it will be until it is online as an "Articles in Press"?
Thank you so much.
[SO] I think it will be soon I am not co-author of that work.
Display MoreThere is a recent article by Leif Holmid about laser induced fusion in ultra-dense deuterium, that Pr Svein Olafson have cited recently.
http://scitation.aip.org/conte…dva/5/8/10.1063/1.4928572
This looks like hot fusion, but the higher efficiency may show it is also LENR...
I let experts comment.
my personal question is whether this is an intermediate "regime" between plasma physics and material science?
[SO] I would say this lives inside a multi region comprising Surface physics, Catalytic chemistry, Nuclear physics, Particle physics, Atom physics and Quantum physics.
In the end this is most simply stated as a breeding between nuclear physics and chemistry.
Greetings
Sveinn
Hi Sveinn,
I enjoy very much reading your posts and thanks a lot for sharing your knowledge and experience with us.
Do you know if Rydberg matter forms better in an external magnetic field either static or dynamic or in a Null Magnetic field i.e. shielded from or removing the effect of the earths magnetic field fro example? I'm wondering if the magnetic field somehow helps the formation or if it instead interferes with coherent correlated spin and charge order states forming and if this plays a part in Rydberg Matter formation?
Display MoreDr Sveinn Ólafsson,
According to the paper Search for Superconductivity in Ultra-dense Deuterium D(−1) at Room Temperature: Depletion of D(−1) at Field Strength >0.05 T by Andersson, Holmlid and Fuelling, a magnetic field above 0.03-0.07 T can prevent D(0) and D(1) from forming. However, since higher excitation levels (D(2), D(3), ...) are observed with it, does this mean that the overall effect of external magnetic fields is beneficial for Rydberg matter formation?
I think here the time of flight signal from D(-1) (now D(0)) disappears when B is applied. This can mean two things, D(0) returns back to Rydberg matter or it desorbs from the surface were the laser is probing. Rydberg matter is not destroyed or not desorbed in the experiment.
Some researchers in the LENR field have claimed that magnetic B-fields could have a role in excess heat production.
Could be, but still not well researched with good experiment.
Hi Sveinn,
I enjoy very much reading your posts and thanks a lot for sharing your knowledge and experience with us.
Do you know if Rydberg matter forms better in an external magnetic field either static or dynamic or in a Null Magnetic field i.e. shielded from or removing the effect of the earths magnetic field fro example? I'm wondering if the magnetic field somehow helps the formation or if it instead interferes with coherent correlated spin and charge order states forming and if this plays a part in Rydberg Matter formation?
The effect of applied external magnetic field is relative low compared to a say magnetic film were the field can become locally quite strong.
The orbit of Rydberg electrons create small magnetic field but most common effect of magnetic field is that electron energy levels split.
Formation of Rydberg matter is mostly affected by the intensity of incoming flux of Rydberg atoms and that should not be affected by magnetic field.
Sveinn
Why do muons take so long to decay when produced by Rydberg matter?
The muon decays when a W- appears from the vacuum. This appearance is timed by the probability of the decay of the muon. But if the vacuum is energized so that it has an excess of positive vacuum energy. then the W- will not appear on time, the muon will be delayed as it usually does. Excess vacuum energy slows down time. A excess of positive vacuum energy appears if a corresponding zone of negative vacuum energy is present.
The delayed decay time of muons allows the to catalyze far more fusion events because they are are around for so long.
That zone of negative vacuum energy exists inside the SPP. Negative vacuum energy speeds up time a lot. This acceleration of time is why radioactive isotopes produced by fusion in LENR decay almost instantaneously. That is because the ash from a fusion event is entangled with the inside of the SPP in which all the energy of the fusion event is delivered through teleportation.
See this reference about vacuum energy
[quote='axil','http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/1853-Ask-questions-to-Dr-Sveinn-Ólafsson-Science-Institute-University-of-Iceland/?postID=6779#post6779']Why do muons take so long to decay when produced by Rydberg matter?
Small correction here:
Nothing indicates in Holmlid's experiments that the muons are behaving differently than normal muons.
Greetings
Sveinn
Thanks for answering. I've thought of this: many LENR experiments include a heating coil / solenoid around a core composed of more or less densely packed ferromagnetic powder or a solid metallic bar. For all intents and purposes this is not unlike an electromagnet, and the magnetic field on the core can be relatively strong (typically 0.75-1 T) below its Curie temperature, provided enough coil turns and current applied. It might be thus quite interesting knowing how exactly Rydberg matter interacts and evolves with it.
Perhaps a simple test for garage experimenters could be trying to see if there is a discontinuity in long term pressure decrease (primarily due to Rydberg matter formation, assuming no pressure leak or diffusion of hydrogen through external surfaces) by first keeping temperature below the Curie temperature of said magnetic core, then raising it not significantly above it.
I see your point now, and you have suggested a possible experiment, Can you do it ?
Note that local field can be higher than the average, large magnetic field can also be fluctuating on nanoscale in a wide frequency range with total B=0
is that helping the formation more than a stable magnetic field?
Greetings
Sveinn
Recently, I was watching an easy to understand lecture on YouTube titled "ER = EPR", or "What's Behind the Horizons of Black Holes?" given by Prof. Leonard Susskind, director of the Stanford Institute for Theoretical Physics. He was explaining how he resolves the AMPS paradox about the limitation a entanglement to explain manipulation of energy inside a black hole through wormholes.
His explanation related to Black Holes explains perfectly how energy from a fusion event is sent into a SPP(an EMF Black Hole) as a consequence of entanglement. Susskind said that it would take science 100 years to recognized that his theory was true or not because there was no way to experimentally test it.
He also explained how a black hole sends out entangling photons from black hole evaporation. This wormhole base energy transfer mechanism must also happen with SPPs. All this EMF from SPP evaporation must create an totally entangled environment inside a LENR reactor. This might explain why Rydberg matter is superconducting.
I thought to myself that this energy transfer happens as a fundamental mechanism in LENR that can be experimentally verified. Susskind can resolve the structure of space time and connect quantum mechanics to general relativity and prove it experimentally using a LENR reactor. If only one of the LENR experimentalists would let down their proprietary dress and work with black hole science. Just imagine how far our understanding of the universe will move forward when science and LENR are reconciled.
Display More[quote='axil','http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/1853-Ask-questions-to-Dr-Sveinn-Ólafsson-Science-Institute-University-of-Iceland/?postID=6779#post6779']Why do muons take so long to decay when produced by Rydberg matter?
Small correction here:
Nothing indicates in Holmlid's experiments that the muons are behaving differently than normal muons.
Greetings
Sveinn
From the Holmlid paper as follows:
"The sources give a slowly decaying muon signal for several hours and days after being used for producing H(0). They can be triggered to increase the muon production by laser irradiation inside the chambers or sometimes even by turning on the fluorescent lamps in the laboratory for a short time."
What can delay the appearance of muons for days after they are initially produced? I assume that muon detection will stop after some time after excitation. For these delayed muons, where does the energy for their production come from after days of zero excitation. This behavior does not follow the behavior of muons that are produced by a particle accelerator.
Slow decay sounds like a delayed reaction to me.
