A simplified theory of LENR

  • A simplified theory of LENR


    A Grand Unified Theory (GUT) is a model in particle physics in which at high energy, forces of the Standard Model which define the electromagnetic, weak, and strong interactions, are merged into one single force. This unified interaction is characterized by one larger gauge symmetry and thus several force carriers, but one unified coupling constant. A common coupling constant means that each of these forces can affect the other. If Grand Unification is realized in nature, there is the possibility of a grand unification epoch in the early universe in which the fundamental forces are not yet distinct.


    There might well exist processes in condensed matter that can amplify and concentrate EMF to a high enough level to achieve a unified force coupling constant. In such a high energy state, the electromagnetic force would affect both the weak and the strong force. But as usual in quantum mechanics, the coupling constants of each separate force converge gradually, with the probability of inter-force interaction gradually increasing as the EMF power increases.


    One of the predictions of the Grand Unified Theory is the decay of the proton and the neutron. Most Grand Unified Theories predict that free protons will decay. They also predict that neutrons will decay by essentially the same process,


    To prove that the Grand Unified Theory was valid, a hunt for proton decay began in the 1980s. To complete and verified theory of the standard model of physics, much rests on the existence of proton decay, and yet to this very day, we’ve never seen a proton die. The reason may simply be that protons rarely decay, a hypothesis borne out by both experiment and theory. Experiments say the proton lifetime has to be greater than about 10^^34 years: That’s a 1 followed by 34 zeroes.


    The key phrase in that last sentence is “on average.” Because of quantum physics, the time any given proton decays is random, so a tiny fraction will decay long before that 10^^34-year lifetime. So, what you need to do is to get a whole bunch of protons together. Increasing the number of protons increases the chance that one of them will decay while you’re watching.


    The second essential step is to isolate the experiment from particles that could mimic proton decay, so any realistic proton decay experiment must be located deep underground to isolate it from random particle passers-by. That’s the strategy pursued by the currently operating Super-Kamiokande experiment in Japan, which consists of a huge tank with 50,000 tons of water in a mine. The upcoming Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment, to be located in a former gold mine in South Dakota, will consist of 40,000 tons of liquid argon.


    Because the two experiments are based on different types of atoms, they are sensitive to different ways protons might decay, which will reveal which GUT is correct … if any of the current models is right. Both Super-Kamiokande and DUNE are neutrino experiments first, but we're just as interested in the proton decay possibilities of these experiments as in the neutrino aspects.


    Proton Longevity Pushes New Bounds
    https://physics.aps.org/synops…0.1103/PhysRevD.90.072005


    One interesting paragraph in this article is revealing. “Other GUTs that incorporate supersymmetry (SUSY), a hypothetical model that assumes all particles have a partner with different spin, predict that the proton decays into a K meson and a neutrino with a lifetime of less than a few times 10^^34 years. The Super-Kamiokande collaboration has looked for signs of this decay in a 50,000-ton tank of water surrounded by detectors. If one of the many protons in the tank were to decay, the K-meson’s decay products (muons, π- mesons) would be detectable.”


    These particles are seen in Leif Holmlid’s experiments. Are proton and neutron decay occurring in vast numbers in Holmlid’s experiments? What could cause the decay rate of protons to hugely increase there?


    It might be the unified coupling constant. As the power and focus of the EMF increases, the various individual force cooping constants converge to the unified value. Then the probability of proton decay goes up in proportion. One of the perplexing characteristics of the LENR reaction is its wide range of apparent power from extremely week to very strong. A varying strength of the EMF field would supply that character to the LENR reaction.


    Another amplification seen in LENR is the speed at which nuclear decay happens. In a LENR reaction the decay rare can be so rapid that a radioactive isotope reaches stability almost instantaneously. In a weak LENR reaction, the isotope’s production of radiation is only affected slightly. This may be a result in the increase of the Weak Force cooping constant through EMF stimulation as it is amplified in varying amounts toward the Weak force unification value.


    Coming soon, the next step in our explanation of LENR is to understand what processes in condensed matter produce powerful and focused EMF strong enough to unify the common force coupling constant.


    After all, proton decay is a mainstay of the theories of how the universe works and follows from profound universally accepted concepts of how the cosmos fundamentally operates. If protons do decay, it’s so rare that human bodies would be unaffected, but not our understanding. The impact of that knowledge would be immense, and worth a tiny bit of instability. But that instability opens up access to the limitless power stored inside the atom through the discovery of the LENR reaction.

  • The decay or the proton of the neutron can produce a huge amount of energy, far more than fusion. The mass of the nucleon(proton and neutron) is 939 MeV. After decay, this energy is reformulated into sub atomic particles call mesons. These mesons decay in a chain until they get down to a stable particle call the electron. The electron is only .512 MeV so almost all of the nucleon's mass is converted to energy through sub-atomic particle decay.


    Meson decay is where all those electrons that the Rossi's Quark is producing come from. The last meson in the meson decay chain is the muon. The decay of the muon is where the electron comes from. In the picture, for the electron decay just change the charge sign on the muon.


  • One reason that you will never see neutrons in LENR is because the neutron never leaves the nucleus on its own. What comes out of the nucleus are negative sub-atomic particles. Being confined by the Coulomb barrier, the positive sub-atomic particles stay inside the nucleus and disrupt the it.

  • The question of possibility of proton decay, or in other words: can baryon number be violated, is a crucial one.
    Such violation is required for example to create more matter than anti-matter while Big Bang/baryogenesis, or to convert mater into mass-less radiation in hypothetical Hawking radiation.
    As proton decay is extremely unlikely (or even impossible) in room temperature, it would need really extreme temperatures - much higher than for hot fusion(!), beside Big Bang, the required conditions might be fulfilled in the center of a neutron star - before it reaches infinite density required to form the horizon, leading to huge energies released as gamma-ray bursts, preventing collaps into a black hole
    http://www.scienceforums.net/t…ay-allow-for-black-holes/


    These are muuuuuuch more extreme conditions than we want for an explanation of LENR.


    ps. A star which seems to require proton decay to explain enormous luminosity - while having a few solar masses, it is 10 million times brighter, mostly in X-rays. Wikipedia article says: "shining about 100 times brighter than theory suggests something of its mass should be able to."
    http://www.nasa.gov/press/2014…ockingly-bright-dead-star
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M82_X-2

  • Whatever explanation is found for LENR a fundamental requirement is that no penetrating radiation should be predicted (in most situations). It is not clear to me how conjectured proton decay meets this requirement. In fact the vast majority of theories and models fail at this hurdle.

    • Official Post

    This comment on proton decay -or rather transformation - comes from a previously unpublished note from Professor Sergio Focardi. Translated from Italian of course -fairly badly by me, but the meaning is -I hope- clear.


    .....N = P + e^- + av,where e ^-is a negative electron and av is an antineutrino; radiation persists for a few minutes in the system, then they annihilate into thermal energy, no radioactivity. To determine the transformation of (elements), transforming the Proton, with emission of energy corresponding to the loss of matter is the particle that Enrico Fermi called W, which was later identified by Carlo Rubbia, work that earned him the Nobel Prize. On this system the W particle is triggered by the excitement of hydrogen atoms..... The energy provided is sufficient, taking into account that the interaction of the W particle, an intermediate boson which respects the Bose-Einstein statistics, for weak nuclear interactions....

  • One reason that you will never see neutrons in LENR is because the neutron never leaves the nucleus on its own. What comes out of the nucleus are negative sub-atomic particles. Being confined by the Coulomb barrier, the positive sub-atomic particles stay inside the nucleus and disrupt the it.


    Hard to reconcile this with positron emissions seen in a substantial number of radioactive decays, from CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics 76th Ed.:
    8B, 9C, 10C, 28P, 29P, 30P, 11C, 12N, 13N, 23O, 14O, 15O, 17F, 18F, 17Ne, 18Ne, 19Ne, 19N, 20N, 21N, 22N, 20Mg, 21Mg, 22Mg, 23Mg, 22Al, 23Al, 24Al, 25Al, 26Al, 24Si, 25Si, 26Si, 27Si, 27S, 28S, 29S, 30S, 31S, and so on for at least 150 other examples of isotopic beta plus decay not ending in internal transition or external capture.

  • This comment on proton decay -or rather transformation - comes from a previously unpublished note from Professor Sergio Focardi. Translated from Italian of course -fairly badly by me, but the meaning is -I hope- clear.


    .....N = P + e^- + av,where e ^-is a negative electron and av is an antineutrino; radiation persists for a few minutes in the system, then they annihilate into thermal energy, no radioactivity. To determine the transformation of (elements), transforming the Proton, with emission of energy corresponding to the loss of matter is the particle that Enrico Fermi called W, which was later identified by Carlo Rubbia, work that earned him the Nobel Prize. On this system the W particle is triggered by the excitement of hydrogen atoms..... The energy provided is sufficient, taking into account that the interaction of the W particle, an intermediate boson which respects the Bose-Einstein statistics, for weak nuclear interactions....


    Hello Alan, do you have a link to the original paper from Prof Focardi?

  • Hard to reconcile this with positron emissions seen in a substantial number of radioactive decays, from CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics 76th Ed.:
    8B, 9C, 10C, 28P, 29P, 30P, 11C, 12N, 13N, 23O, 14O, 15O, 17F, 18F, 17Ne, 18Ne, 19Ne, 19N, 20N, 21N, 22N, 20Mg, 21Mg, 22Mg, 23Mg, 22Al, 23Al, 24Al, 25Al, 26Al, 24Si, 25Si, 26Si, 27Si, 27S, 28S, 29S, 30S, 31S, and so on for at least 150 other examples of isotopic beta plus decay not ending in internal transition or external capture.


    These are not LENR activated reactions.

  • These are muuuuuuch more extreme conditions than we want for an explanation of LENR.


    I fully agree with this view, albeit we cannot exclude that the proton reaction might (rarely) happen too. The occurring LENR transmutations are certainly not in line with frequent proton decays. Super clean Pd-DD fusion with an excess of He3 could prove the contrary.


    From a theoretical viewpoint I would focus on the work about "the basic structure of space/'ether' " as e.g. Krasnoholovet does. Susi is dead since a long time, as also the standard model is dead, at least from a viewpoint that it can explain everything.


    I just remind you, that also Einstein worked a live long on the idea, how he could add the property of space to his equations...So, it must be a tremendous task.

  • Transmutation of elements have be seen in raw electrical discharge experiments such as those from "Proton 21" and also those conducted by Ken Shoulders. Also, Ken shoulders has patented a process using electric discharge to stabilize atomic energy waste produces using electrical discharge.

  • It is from private correspondence. Focardi was certainly a great original thinker, and one of the real pioneers of Ni/H LENR, along of course with Piantelli. But since Piantelli outlives him still, Focardi is somewhat overlooke


    Alan, where did you get this private correspondence in Italian from? I agree that "Focardi was certainly a great original thinker, and one of the real pioneers of Ni/H LENR", nevertheless according to Piantelli he NEVER succeeded in his own lkab of observing excess heat. It is my understanding that ALL Rossi's IP is actually based on secrets discovered by Piantelli and passed on by Focardi. If anyone thinks that Rossi has ever discovered something novel I would like to know what it is?


    The so called Rossi technology is simply a scale-up of what Piantelli discovered more than 20 years ago. I expect to be contradicted here, but I do not expect any evidence to supporet such a claim.

  • Alan, where did you get this private correspondence in Italian from? I agree that "Focardi was certainly a great original thinker, and one of the real pioneers of Ni/H LENR", nevertheless according to Piantelli he NEVER succeeded in his own lkab of observing excess heat. It is my understanding that ALL Rossi's IP is actually based on secrets discovered by Piantelli and passed on by Focardi. If anyone thinks that Rossi has ever discovered something novel I would like to know what it is?


    The so called Rossi technology is simply a scale-up of what Piantelli discovered more than 20 years ago. I expect to be contradicted here, but I do not expect any evidence to supporet such a claim.


    I have been begging MFMP to setup a cloud chamber to check for muons in their experiments. The H- theory of piantelli seems to have the favor of MFMP so a cloud chamber has little experimental value for them. The same request when out to me356.


    Rossi has to explain where all those electrons, a product of muon decay, he is seeing as electrostatic accumulations. Rossi extracts those electrons which comprise a large proportion of his total COP.


    Rossi also able to maximize electrical production at the expense of light and heat production. Now how can that happen?

  • There are all sorts of nuclear processes going on in LENR making for a very chaotic situation. One of them may well be muon catalyzed fusion where muons interact with hydrogen.


    Another is the disintegration of the nucleus due to positive meson confinement in the nucleus because of the coulomb barrier. These positive meson infected nuclei break down and expel one or more alpha particles that carry away the decay energy of these decaying mesons. CR39 detection has shown that large numbers of alpha particles are produced by the LENR reaction. These alpha particles latter became helium when they combine with the electrons produced by negative muon decay.

  • My problem with explaining LENR is to keep it simple and get to and explain the key concepts. LENR is very complicated. There are a large number of enabling concepts that serve to amplify the production of EMF power density, but these issues only confuse things and most people get lost in the weeds. Sorry to have confused you all with trivia.


    A criticism of this concept is that it would take a huge concentration of EMF power to effect the coupling constant of the fundamental forces. How this amplification takes place is very involved covering many fields of science.

  • I have been begging MFMP to setup a cloud chamber to check for muons in their experiments


    Given than Piantelli's Cloud Chamber results are incompatible with muon fusion, why would you encourage MFMP to contradict this? Where do these muons come from? Why don't they kill the lab tecnicians with lethal radiation???

  • Given than Piantelli's Cloud Chamber results are incompatible with muon fusion, why would you encourage MFMP to contradict this? Where do these muons come from? Why don't they kill the lab tecnicians with lethal radiation???


    Piantelli had to disassemble his reactor to extract the nickel bar that he then inserted into the cloud chamber. The nickel bar had to cool off to be inserted inside the chamber. Only some residual activation of the nickel would have been seen. There was no active LENR reaction going on inside or on the surface of the nickel bar.


    Muons are very penetrating because they are so heavy. Many muons that are being produced by cosmic rays right now and are going through you right as you read this and you are ok. But the airborne floating nuclear active environment particles that John Fisser detected in his CR39 experiments are dangerous because they produce 10s of thousands of alpha particles, far more dangerous the radon. That is why LENR experiments should be confined for safety sake.

  • He Axil: Did You measure it ?? What was the voltage/ wattage..?


    On his blog, Rossi says that this power is 50 or 60 cycles. This reflects the output of his collection circuits. I beleive he said he could provide DC also if required. The power is 20 watts out of a total 100 watts total COP.

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.