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

    Quote from sveinol

    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


    Thanks for your reply Sveinn. I was wondering if electron spin ordering and charge ordering effects were important in Rydberg matter formation or if the Rydberg matter state itself was affected in some way and if the external field could disrupt this process. If so then may be having the Rydberg matter form in a null field perhaps if the heater coil is counter wound or inside the center of some kind of quadropole may have some advantage. But if I understand right your answer the flux of Rydberg atoms is more important and the Rydberg matter would form regardless of the external magnetic field anyway. Is this correct?


    if electron charge and spin order is important in Rydberg matter this link might be interesting:


    http://www.spacedaily.com/repo…damental_Physics_999.html


    It is about charge and spin order States in certain crystals (not Rydberg matter) and indicates they found some common behaviour with the formation of charge and spin ordered States in correlated electrons that depended on pressure. I wonder if this could also be relevant to Rydberg matter formation?


    Once the Rydberg matter has formed does it have a certain life time or would it degenreate into free Hydrogen after a certain time or under certain thermal or pressure conditions?


    Could Rydberg Matter degenerate by external influence of a magnetic field? Or could an external magnetic field once the Rydberg matteris already formed be of benefit to UDD production or LENR?


    Does the Rydberg matter only form in certain temperature and pressure ranges?


    Could SSM depend on the time that the Rydberg matter or UDD is present or the Rydberg matter in in a particular coherent charge or spin order state?



    SO "The sources give a slowly decaying muon signal for several hours and days after being used for producing H(0)" The sources are the catalytic Fe2O3:K pellets that have received D2gas exposure that is not renewed. That is the slow decay.


    Greetings Sveinn, Sveinnn

    Thanks for your reply Sveinn. I was wondering if electron spin ordering and charge ordering effects were important in Rydberg matter formation or if the Rydberg matter state itself was affected in some way and if the external field could disrupt this process. If so then may be having the Rydberg matter form in a null field perhaps if the heater coil is counter wound or inside the center of some kind of quadropole may have some advantage. But if I understand right your answer the flux of Rydberg atoms is more important and the Rydberg matter would form regardless of the external magnetic field anyway. Is this correct?



    [SO] I expect only secondary effects of magnetic field, You can not from Rydberg matter first without forming a Rydberg atom, Hydrogen atom in 1s state is not going to link up into a Rydberg matter cluster.


    if electron charge and spin order is important in Rydberg matter this link might be interesting:


    http://www.spacedaily.com/repo…damental_Physics_999.html


    It is about charge and spin order States in certain crystals (not Rydberg matter) and indicates they found some common behaviour with the formation of charge and spin ordered States in correlated electrons that depended on pressure. I wonder if this could also be relevant to Rydberg matter formation?


    [SO] This paper is very nice paper about charge density waves and how they form as due interaction of the electrons or electron correlations, Rydberg matter is much more correlated and Ultra dense hydrogen can only exist due to this correlation that I suspect leeds to entanglement.


    Once the Rydberg matter has formed does it have a certain life time or would it degenreate into free Hydrogen after a certain time or under certain thermal or pressure conditions?


    [SO] If Rydberg matter is not disturbed in any way by foreign gas species it should live forever. Holmlid has suggested that Rydberg matter in space is just something that we call Dark matter the missing material mass in the Universe, not a bad idea.


    Could Rydberg Matter degenerate by external influence of a magnetic field? Or could an external magnetic field once the Rydberg matteris already formed be of benefit to UDD production or LENR?


    [SO] I don´t think so, formation I don´t see a mechanism other than surface is needed and Ni is magnetic, Pd has high magnetic susceptibility (magnetic fluctuations).


    Does the Rydberg matter only form in certain temperature and pressure ranges?


    [SO] Rydberg atom is a state were electron can be excited up 13.6 eV before it is a free electron. Converting that to temperature results in 13.6/0.025*300 ~ 5000K temperature.
    This simple argument indicates that 2000K is Ok for Rydberg matter.


    Could SSM depend on the time that the Rydberg matter or UDD is present or the Rydberg matter in in a particular coherent charge or spin order state?[/quote]


    [SO] SSM???


    Greetings


    Sveinn


    [SO] SSM???


    Greetings


    Sveinn[/quote]


    Thanks Sveinn for your patience with my questions and for your interesting answers. Regarding SSM, I was curious if the duration of some stable state in this matter could explain in part the self sustain mode (SSM) seen in some LENR experiments where prolonged heating is observed after the heater power is switched off. But may be its not relevant in this context.


    It's getting really interesting seeing this develope especially the UDD and the detection of muons I wish you well with your continued research.
    Stephen

    Quote from sveinol

    ... Holmlid has suggested that Rydberg matter in space is just something that we call Dark matter …


    Randell Mills propose the Hydrino hypothesis and the Millsian software, a molecular modeling tool, able to compute orbisphere of electrons at 0.1% precision, including for very complex and big molecules like ADN.
    This could be usefull to help to study Rydberg matter and their stability ?
    Have you and idea if this software is really efficient ? Have you try it ?


    Randell Mills has a unconventional conception of the quantum effect.
    In another paper he said that the hydrino could explain Dark matter: the orbit of electrons being shrinked at 1/2 or 1/n size. And this could explain the radiation spectrum of the Dark matter zones.


    I also follow you in ResearchGate, but I am only a lover of science, no a researcher.

    Holmlid has suggested that Rydberg matter in space is just something that we call Dark matter


    This may be true. The Rydberg matter supports superconductivity(SC). This SC gives mass to photons in the way that the Higgs field gives mass to particles.

    Quote from axil

    Holmlid has suggested that Rydberg matter in space is just something that we call Dark matter


    This may be true. The Rydberg matter supports superconductivity(SC). This SC gives mass to photons in the way that the Higgs field gives mass to particles.



    Another option is, Rydberg matter is a "dark matter" due to the fact that it hardly absorbs any light, see Holmlid´s paper


    http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/2002MNRAS.333..360B

    Regarding the temperature in experiments, please take into consideration the energy levels of the valence electron in atoms.


    Keywords: Hydrogen spectral series
    n = ∞ (ionization) 0,0 eV
    n = 2 (the first excited state, Lyman series) -3,4 eV
    n = 1 (ground state) -13,6 eV


    When the electron of the neutral hydrogen atom is excited from n = 1 to n = 2, the excited electron of this Rydberg hydrogen atom is only 3,4 eV away from the ionization level.
    Higher excitation levels of the electron would be even more sensitive to ionization.
    According to the conversion formula hc = 1240 eV/nm, the 3,4 eV energy corresponds to 365 nm wavelength.
    Thermal radiation extends to a very wide wavelength range.


    Keywords: thermal blackbody radiation
    For example at 1000 °C a tiny part of thermal radiation photons already is at 3,4 eV energy level.


    Keywords: Rydberg formula for any hydrogen-like element
    It is easier to excite the valence electron of alkali atoms, e.g. lithium atom, that the electron of hydrogen.
    Only 5,39 eV is needed for lifting the valence electron of lithium from the ground state to the ionization level.


    Keywords: lithium energy levels
    The difference between the 2s, 2p and 3s energy levels in the valence electron of lithium is relatively small.
    That indicates that the formation of Rydberg lithium atoms by thermal energy is easier that the formation of hydrogen Rydberg atoms where the first step requires 10,2 eV.
    On the other hand, Rydberg lithium atoms may be vulnerable to ionization because the energy levels are closer to each other than in hydrogen atom.
    Nickel also has Rydberg levels.


    Some subjects that strain brains …
    Energy transfer from Rydberg alkali metal atoms to hydrogen atoms in hydrogen catalysts?
    Formation of Rydberg alkali atom – Rydberg hydrogen atom combinations?
    Excitation levels of valence electrons of neutral atoms on surfaces?
    Enthalpy of formation of Rydberg atom clusters -> deepness of the potential energy well -> sensitivity to ionization (decomposition) by thermal energy?

    FYI to sveinol



    It took scientists a full year to get the minds around this process, but Science has discovered how another part of the LENR mechanism functions: how the movement of electrons/photons inside of EMF based polariton soliton can produce a dark mode that is an effective EMF black hole. The absence of radiation is the result of the current being divided between two different components, a conventional electric dipole (this is the plasmon in the SPP) and a toroidal dipole (this is the polariton in an SPP) (associated with poloidal current configuration), which produce identical fields at a distance.



    If these two configurations are out of phase then the radiation will be cancelled out, even though the electromagnetic fields are non-zero in the area close to the currents.


    This also explains how SPPs are dark matter when generated by Rydberg hydrogen matter in space.



    A Spacer as referenced in the article is a SPP laser


    http://www.photonics.com/Article.aspx?AID=52028



    Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-08-t…nless-revolution.html#jCp
    The actual paper that this article is based on, is here:

    http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2…ms9069/pdf/ncomms9069.pdf


    This is very much in alignment with the EM model in BSM-SG (Basic Structures of Matter - Supergravitation Unified Theory). You can produce this donut type of EM pressure waves with a smith coil for example, they are like a photon type of energy configuration in the sense, that they have a boundary condition that encapsulates the energy and therefore causes it not the spread in a cubic sense, like a EM wave.


    As energy always must flow with the ε0 (nodes with energy - EQ nodes) and μ0 ( MQ nodes with lower energy ), here their boundary - those tori are only stable if those conditions are meat.
    This image looks very much like the type of wave coming from a smith coil, but the filling is of course of different configuration, only the boundary condition if of same type. But another possibility but requires very precise near field modulation could be some sort of energy low with a moving MQ boundary condition. The those contained nodes could even be under the critical Ecr level, meaning superconductive properties.



    If I would have a lab, I would definitely try to fire 4 smith coils in a very precise timing, angle into a center of a LENR core. If someone is interested I can give details :)

    @sveinol you have publish accurate mesurements on muons : https://www.researchgate.net/p…el_converter_arrangements


    Perhaps you already know about " The announcement is related to the fact that B mesons have an anomalous tendency to decay into tau leptons instead of into muons "
    From 3 experiments : " The combined significance of the results from BaBar, Belle and LHCb is 3.9 sigma. "
    see the Wire of India : http://thewire.in/2015/09/07/w…article-physicists-10162/
    and the e-catworld post : http://www.e-catworld.com/2015…nt-find-anomalous-effect/

    Is Sveinn Ólafsson still available for questions regarding this very interesting work? I appreciate he must be busy with the developments in his work.


    Following his very good and interesting presentation at SRI International:


    http://tempid.altervista.org/SRI.pdf


    And the interesting review of the presentation by Jones Beene who was able to attend and posted on the Vortex-L email archive:


    [email protected]/msg105372.html">https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg105372.html


    There has been a lot of discussion on various sites relating to the experiment and related phenomena in the various forums including this site LENR Forum, e-catworld and and other subsequent topic threads in the vortex-l email archive and probably others


    I think since we have now had time to think about and discuss the presentation, some questions have come up which maybe Svienn can clarify if he is available and able to.


    I was personally most intrigued by the production of mesons and would like to ask a questions related to this if possible:


    1. In the test under laser stimulation Kaons were observed.
    a) Were these also observed when spontaneous emission occurred?
    b) If not were less energetic mesons observed or other less energetic particles or phenomena.
    c) Were Kaons also observed under the artificial light stimulation?
    d) Were there any other particular differences between the stimulated and spontaneous emission characteristics


    2. The source of the mesons is identified as the Rydberg Matter in particular the Dueterium or Hydrogen. Is it strongly clear if the Mesons all come from the Rydberg Matter itself or does it comes from in part the catalyst or the target itself? I appreciate the different lifetime 52 ns for Hydrogen and 26 or 12 ns for Deuterium may indicate a strong fuel relationship.


    3. It is indicated that on laser stimulation the Mesons were generated in huge numbers in a burst, there has been some speculation about the mechanism based on this so it would be interesting to know if there is particular characteristics that would support one or other of them. Was there any indication about the distribution of their generation. was there for example:
    a) an initial low amount followed by a fast ramp up to maximum?
    b) an initial maximum amount with a slow decline?
    c) a single burst of Kaons with identical energy?


    4. Was there any indication of Pions being generated before the Kaons were observed?


    5. Have other materials of similar nuclear mass been used for the Catalyst and Target? And was any difference in behaviour observed? (Its speculative but I'm wondering if elements or isotopes similar to but different to the naturally active materials have an impact) If so:
    a) I understand Iron is used in the Catalyst has it been tried with purified isotopes such as purified Fe56 or Fe58 only?
    b) I understand Nicekl is used in the Target has it been tried with purified isotopes such as purified Ni58 or Ni62 only?
    c) Have either the target or Catalyst been tried with dopants of close but different elements such as Manganese or Cobalt or Copper or others?
    d) Does the Catalyst need to be an Oxide or does pure Iron work as well with different results?
    e) Does the Catalyst only work with the Potassium Present and do other contaminants such as Sulphur, Chlorine or Argon or others effect its performance.


    I suppose differences chemically similar or different materials or dopants would also be interesting.


    f) Does the experiment work with Targets that are not in the Group 10 transition Metals
    g) Are there other chemically efficient catalysts


    6. In terms of energetics do you see a slow increase of energy generating the effect or a sudden burst of energy being required?


    7. In usual high energy Nuclear Physics experiments such as DAPhiNE Kaons are produced (either directly or indirectly from Phi Mesons I'm not sure about the exact process) with high energy electron or proton beams interacting with a Nucleon in and Nucleus to cause Nucleon resonance which then allows Mesons and if the energy is high enough for Kaons to be produced. Photogeneration of Kaons using high energy Gamma can also have a similar effect. Very High energies are required for the processes, however, of the order of 1 GeV.
    a) Do you see a similar high energy photo generation or particle impact process going on in your experiment?
    b) Do you suggest that collective behaviour and entanglement is enabling excitement of a nucleon to sufficient energy to spawn the Mesons?


    If so could this also generate the large quantities of Kaons seen above?


    c) If not it would suggest the possibility of some other process is generating the Mesons in large quantities perhaps directly from the SPP of sufficient accumulated energy as has been mentioned by Axil.
    d) Do you have some other mechanism in mind and would you be able to share the idea?


    8. I understand that the preparation of the catalyst and fuel took a long time.
    a) was this due to the preparation of the Catalyst to form suitable surfaces and structures to stimulate Rydberg Matter formation?
    b) was this due to the time for H or D absorption?
    c) was this due to the time for Rydberg Matter Formation?
    d) was this due to the production of SPP on the UDD? (Or does this only appear later if so how long does it take for a suitable SPP to form with out stimulation)


    Sveinn I apologise for the huge number of questions especially if some of them are in fact irrelevant, feel free to ignore the ones which are and if the others cannot be answered thats also OK. I wish you and Leif Holmlid continued success with these fascinating experiments.

    I can try to answer these questions some there is no possibility to answer since I am in Iceland and Leif did these measurements.


    1. In the test under laser stimulation Kaons were observed.
    a) Were these also observed when spontaneous emission occurred?

    Possibly yes, but hard to perform such measurements due to weak signal


    b) If not were less energetic mesons observed or other less energetic particles or phenomena.
    c) Were Kaons also observed under the artificial light stimulation?
    Same answer
    d) Were there any other particular differences between the stimulated and spontaneous emission characteristics
    Intensity of signal.


    2. The source of the mesons is identified as the Rydberg Matter in particular the Dueterium or Hydrogen. Is it strongly clear if the Mesons all come from the Rydberg Matter itself or does it comes from in part the catalyst or the target itself? I appreciate the different lifetime 52 ns for Hydrogen and 26 or 12 ns for Deuterium may indicate a strong fuel relationship.


    Rydberg matter d(1), p(1) is not doing this, it is the transformed form of it who is doing this the d(0), p(0) state.
    Lifetime of Hydrogen ??? you mean lifetime of generated particle?


    3. It is indicated that on laser stimulation the Mesons were generated in huge numbers in a burst, there has been some speculation about the mechanism based on this so it would be interesting to know if there is particular characteristics that would support one or other of them. Was there any indication about the distribution of their generation. was there for example:


    a) an initial low amount followed by a fast ramp up to maximum?
    b) an initial maximum amount with a slow decline?
    c) a single burst of Kaons with identical energy?


    Please note that I am not co-author of the Kaon results, but production rate of p(0) or D(0) is controlled by many simple factors, T target, laser intensity and time since gas application. One laser shot gives current of particles not individual particles.

    4. Was there any indication of Pions being generated before the Kaons were observed?


    Impossible to tell you need sophisticate detector ( CERN? ) to be able to resolve such questions, Here total particle charged current is being measured which has its limitations.

    More answers later S.Ó.

    @sveinol


    It is great privilege to talk directly to a research scientist that is doing cutting edge research beyond what is now the forefront of science.

    String theory predicts many of the strange results that you are seeing, but these string theorists believe that the applications of these theories are cosmological and not experimentally accessible here on earth.


    In my opinion, what is producing the Kaons that you are seeing is something called tachyon condensation.


    Reference to string theory


    http://slac.stanford.edu/cgi-wrap/getdoc/slac-pub-11616.pdf


    http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0507219v3.pdf


    A major tenant of string theory is the tachyon. There has been photographic evidence of this sort of particle track observed in LENR experimentation for many years. Recently, the chief scientist at AIRBUS released a paper on this subject and this area of research is big in Russia.


    https://drive.google.com/file/…bGM5ZDFIWXpRLUViMmZB/view


    It is possible to estimate the energy content of these monopole tachyons together with their kenetic energy content using photographic emulsions by placing the ash from the recent LENR experiment on the photographic emulsion and wait for a 24 hour exposure.

    I believe what you are seeing are tachyons. Here is a site that documents the LENR research in this area and I hope that your research includes a search for exotic particle tracks on photographic emulsions.


    For exotic particle approach to LENR theory, see for theory and experimental results as follows:


    http://restframe.com/rf/home.html

    Hi Sveinn, thank you for making yourself available for questions. I have two:

    • What steps have you taken to validate to your own satisfaction that Leif Holmlid's measurements are not misinterpreted, and to what extent are you simply taking what he has reported at face value?
    • Holmlid has reported a charged particle current. He appears to be using a spectrometer of his own making. Do you have any details about how he is able to calibrate it? Typically spectrometers are calibrated using standard sources of radioactivity, e.g., alpha emitters of known decay energy. I do not see how his setup can be calibrated using such a procedure, but perhaps I have missed an important detail.

    Continuing where I left from,,,


    5. Have other materials of similar nuclear mass been used for the Catalyst and Target? And was any difference in behaviour observed? (Its speculative but I'm wondering if elements or isotopes similar to but different to the naturally active materials have an impact) If so:
    a) I understand Iron is used in the Catalyst has it been tried with purified isotopes such as purified Fe56 or Fe58 only?
    b) I understand Nicekl is used in the Target has it been tried with purified isotopes such as purified Ni58 or Ni62 only?
    c) Have either the target or Catalyst been tried with dopants of close but different elements such as Manganese or Cobalt or Copper or others?
    d) Does the Catalyst need to be an Oxide or does pure Iron work as well with different results?
    e) Does the Catalyst only work with the Potassium Present and do other contaminants such as Sulphur, Chlorine or Argon or others effect its performance.


    I suppose differences chemically similar or different materials or dopants would also be interesting.


    f) Does the experiment work with Targets that are not in the Group 10 transition Metals
    g) Are there other chemically efficient catalysts


    I guess you didn't understand the catalytic section of my talk it is no fancy stuff


    surface + 2D electron gas (electrons from Alkali metals) and Hydrogen arriving is needed to form Rydberg atom that can condense into Rydberg matter of Hydrogen, Thats it !


    the surface can be metal and insulator since catalytic activity depends on combination of favourable surface processes that can come from both type of surfaces. Some alloys can not be doped by alkali metals to form 2D electron states on the surface.


    This is standard surface physics or surface chemistry depending on who is practicing this. No fancy dark stuff needed so far:-)

    6. In terms of energetics do you see a slow increase of energy generating the effect or a sudden burst of energy being required?


    The feeble laser 10ns, 100mw pulse is the sole initiator of this if he is hitting different amount of p(o) or d(0) the correlated amount of particle current is generated.


    7. In usual high energy Nuclear Physics experiments such as DAPhiNE Kaons are produced (either directly or indirectly from Phi Mesons I'm not sure about the exact process) with high energy electron or proton beams interacting with a Nucleon in and Nucleus to cause Nucleon resonance which then allows Mesons and if the energy is high enough for Kaons to be produced. Photogeneration of Kaons using high energy Gamma can also have a similar effect. Very High energies are required for the processes, however, of the order of 1 GeV.
    a) Do you see a similar high energy photo generation or particle impact process going on in your experiment?
    b) Do you suggest that collective behaviour and entanglement is enabling excitement of a nucleon to sufficient energy to spawn the Mesons?


    The laser is so feeble it can not excite anything on the scale of meson, so the energy to create a meson has to come from the fusion energy or from the proton/neutron in p(0) or d(0)
    Is fancy dark stuff needed here? I don´t know lets wait for further confirmation since unstable-able proton is something that is not of current consensus in the particle physics world.


    But if you think of it, free proton is stable, that is known with arbitrary precision


    The research questions: Can you entangled 2 protons? Are they then stable? has never been addressed theoretically or experimentally by the nuclear physics community

    If so could this also generate the large quantities of Kaons seen above?


    c) If not it would suggest the possibility of some other process is generating the Mesons in large quantities perhaps directly from the SPP of sufficient accumulated energy as has been mentioned by Axil.
    d) Do you have some other mechanism in mind and would you be able to share the idea?


    SPP ? Is as good guess as anyone at this stage since further experimental confirmation and data is completely lacking,


    I can give this cryptic Rossi style answer to what mechanism we are browsing it is not "dark" it is "weak" :)


    8. I understand that the preparation of the catalyst and fuel took a long time.
    a) was this due to the preparation of the Catalyst to form suitable surfaces and structures to stimulate Rydberg Matter formation?
    b) was this due to the time for H or D absorption?
    c) was this due to the time for Rydberg Matter Formation?
    d) was this due to the production of SPP on the UDD? (Or does this only appear later if so how long does it take for a suitable SPP to form with out stimulation)


    Once again


    open the can of the container fetch the Fe2O3:K pellet and you have a Rydberg matter generator for p(1) and d(1) ,that´s it!


    getting p(0), d(0) from p(1) and d(1) is done by the laser initially.


    Graphite can also do this according to older papers of Leif.


    Greetings


    Sveinn

    Hi Sveinn, thank you for making yourself available for questions. I have two:


    1. What steps have you taken to validate to your own satisfaction that Leif Holmlid's measurements are not misinterpreted, and to what extent are you simply taking what he has reported at face value?


    You can always misinterpret experimental results since you overlooked an alternative explanation, it depends on the mind of the researcher how open he is too new things i.e Psychology. So obviously I am more of the open minded scientist but currently I have no reason to doubt Leif in his primary assessment that there is ultra dense hydrogen found in his experiments. What it is we are just barely beginning to uncover.

    2. Holmlid has reported a charged particle current. He appears to be using a spectrometer of his own making. Do you have any details about how he is able to calibrate it? Typically spectrometers are calibrated using standard sources of radioactivity, e.g., alpha emitters of known decay energy. I do not see how his setup can be calibrated using such a procedure, but perhaps I have missed an important detail.


    This is not so fancy, digital oscilloscope saving current traces is all is needed, no spectrometer except if you can call lifetime measurement a spectrometer. Digital oscilloscope has very nice time accuracy.

    Hi Sveinn, Thanks very much for taking time to answer my questions so quickly. I very much appreciate it. It really does look like an amazing phenomena you are seeing especially the apparently simple way h(0) and d(0) seems to be generated in your experiment and that such relatively week and relatively simple stimuli can generate such amazing results.


    Regarding your question "Lifetime of Hydrogen ??? you mean lifetime of generated particle?", Yup I wasn't very clear in my question but indeed I was considering the Long Kaon 0, and +/- Kaon half life and the apparent delays in generation that were mentioned in the presentation.


    Regarding the catalyst and target questions I think your presentation and papers are clear enough, I guess I went off on a bit of a tangent there. I had a bit of a wild idea that in addition to the material generating the Rydberg matter that maybe a secondary effect could be the initial Kaons could be generated somehow from nucleons resonance in the Catalyst or or Target rather than the UDD, following some external disturbance stimulation generated by the SPP for example. I had wondered if the collective binding energy in a nucleus was sufficient enough maybe it could contain a resonant process in the nucleons sufficient to generate a Kaon. Also if Nuclei with slightly too low binding energy could affect the process. But on reflection it was a bit of a crazy idea to link Nucleus binding energy to nucleon resonance energy in this way with out a clear link or mechanism and its clear I think from the signature you describe that the Kaons are coming directly from the h(0) and d(0). Thanks for your patience with that question. Its fascinating enough that this catalyst readily generates Rydberg matter from the surface as you describe.


    Probably it is mentioned somewhere already but I wonder is it known either theoretically or experimentally what size the h(0) and d(0) particles would be and how many nuclei they would typically contain? would they be quite large say 10's or 100's micro meters in size or would they be much smaller still may be nano meters in size? Do we know how many of these particles would be typically produced in one event?

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.