Julian Schwinger was a real man and scientist in the true sense of the term. Unlike Feynman, when Schwinger saw the truth of LENR, he embraced the possibility of LENR and wanted to understand what was going on. Unlike so many little men in science, a contemporary and collaborator of Feynman: Julian Schwinger did not cower in the face of recrimination. He removed himself from the type of science that Feynman embraced and thrived in. The history to come will make these facts and events all clear. The weight of time will stand against any flood of words that stand against the truth and the people who manufacture that deceptive verbal onslaught.
Can we talk about Holmlid?
-
-
Jed reports that a US Lab has confirmed LENR.
A couple of Cal-Tech astronomers may well have discovered, or at least solidly predicted, the existence of our solar systems' ninth planet--and it's not little.
WOW, it's fun to witness the shifting of old paradigms.
--penswrite
-
Myons, used fuel and fluorecresent lamps. Maybe I have seen(/feel) this. How myons affect biologically? Can they be reason of that strange electrical field for reported surrounding used dogbones etc?
Myons can be quite penetrative. How to shield effectively?
How to detect (with cheap/diy instruments) myons?
Inefficient/unfunctional RF shield broblem can explained if it is myon radiation..?If there is economical way to generate myons it can explain lot of cold fusion. Rydberg materia = H1.1 etc.
Ni + 2H1 + stimulation energy -> Ni + H1.1 +H1 --> Cu + P(6.7Mev) ----> P +Li7 ??? -
eros,
It depends on how penetrating these muons are. The muons produced from secondary cosmic rays are very penetrating (in the range of several GeV of energy) and pass through buildings and life without interacting with them. However the muons that are supposed to be produced by the Holmlid reaction (who together with Olafson he suspects that they are inherent in all LENR systems) should be much slower, in the several MeV range. These muons may slow down enough to interact with animate and inanimate matter surrounding the reactor potentially causing what is called "muon capture" where they initially replace a high orbital electron in an atom, forming what is known as muonic atom.
This summarizes simply the dynamics of muon capture:
Section 2.1 "Formation and evolution of muonic atoms"
http://www.ca.infn.it/~oldeman/mucapt/mukhopadhyay.pdfWith hydrogen and other light elements muons are more likely to decay than getting involved in nuclear capture.
With heavier elements nuclear capture is more probable and this often involves neutron emission.Muons decay with the emission of an electron and two neutrinos. I guess this can cause electrical disturbance of various kind.
-
Could the low orbiting negative particles that Randall Mills claims in Hydrino theory be due to the formation of muonic atoms were muons orbit close to the atom. My guess is that R. Mulls does not expect muons to be produced chemically and would confuse low orbiting muons with electrons.
-
So what muons do depends them kinetic energy? Range some Mev to Gev's they fly long distance. If fast enough, they decay on fly? When they slow down produce strange effects. In lighter elements some soft Xrays and beta emission when decay. In heavier Z(5?)11-> probably for neutron emission grow high. Heavy atoms may do fission.. Reactive lead shield uh..
Transmutations are explained with neutrons, neutrons are explained with myons, so muons explain distant transmutations too.Muons "cost" ~100Mev, if do 100 fusions then "cost" is same as coulomb barrier.. But how explain (lot of) muons?
How shield from muons? Magnetic fields? How much B and it thickness? Maybe thick steel and REmagnets? But how much thickness is enough?
-
So what muons do depends them kinetic energy? Range some Mev to Gev's they fly long distance. If fast enough, they decay on fly? When they slow down produce strange effects. In lighter elements some soft Xrays and beta emission when decay. In heavier Z(5?)11-> probably for neutron emission grow high. Heavy atoms may do fission.. Reactive lead shield uh..
Transmutations are explained with neutrons, neutrons are explained with myons, so muons explain distant transmutations too.Muons "cost" ~100Mev, if do 100 fusions then "cost" is same as coulomb barrier.. But how explain (lot of) muons?
How shield from muons? Magnetic fields? How much B and it thickness? Maybe thick steel and REmagnets? But how much thickness is enough?
Run your experiment remotely as ME356 does so you can put a lot of distance between you and the reaction.
-
Ug. It seems to happen to me once a day or so that I lose a response. Most site software will warn when one is about to abandon an edit. Any wild click can dump the edit window, and it's gone. The site also commonly logs me out when I'm away from the computer for a bit, losing any open edit windows. It logs me out and log-in is difficult. I pretty much have to actually log out and close those windows to recover. More sophisticated software automatically saves edits to a draft. It's waiting when I come back. Lenr-form has no provision for draft responses. Publish the response or it's toast.
I once frequently had this problem at this Forum, due in part to a tendency to longwinded writing (but maybe also cookie issues, as Alan suggests). As in that halcyon past, and perhaps again, I may tend to make such long posts, I make use of NotePad (a Firefox feature). In those days I forced myself to paste out the "composition in process" to NotePad or its equivalent. For me under Firefox and osx with "Noscript", this avoided the dreaded loss and allowed facile time-outs and research breaks of even a day or more. Those nascent compositions persisted nicely in the "dock" or on the desktop even under "sleep" and were painlessly continued and/or pasted back to the Forum for completion and posting.
-
Run your experiment remotely as ME356 does so you can put a lot of distance between you and the reactionIt is not usable solution for running reactors, atleast when power grow some usable level. Maybe usable in temporally experimet in rural areas.
Btw Me365 run some experiments remote, but not all. Hope it is not reason why he is silent.. -
Quote from Eric Walker
Perhaps — not completely sure. This paper is later than the ones I looked at. What I was referring to is alluded to in the abstract: "Laser-induced emission of neutral particles with time-of-flight energies of 1e30 MeV u 1 was previously reported in the same system." (In addition to neutral particles, I recall charged particles.) The apparatus in this paper looks similar, although I don't recall a photomultiplier tube being used in earlier cases. ...
Back on this. I do not think it was. I seem to recall that the criticism was against the custom time-of-flight measurement setup, and I would agree that the method can be debated especially since it is not very easy to understand .
However the usage of a [scintillator-]photomultiplier as a supposed muon detector in other works seems quite straightforward. You would think that given the reported repeatability and slow decay characteristics of the signal in addition to evidence that it could be due to muons this would get more attention.
-
However the usage of a [scintillator-]photomultiplier as a supposed muon detector in other works seems quite straightforward. You would think that given the reported repeatability and slow decay characteristics of the signal in addition to evidence that it could be due to muons this would get more attention.
Have they distinguished a muon signal from one involving very energetic electrons? Have they verified that the thing causing the signal in the scintillator has a negative charge (e.g., by allowing it to deflect under a magnetic field)? Have they calibrated their custom setup using known standards or brought it to an accelerator facility that produces muons, I suppose, as a sanity check against their first-principles calculations? -
Have they distinguished a muon signal from one involving very energetic electrons? Have they verified that the thing causing the signal in the scintillator has a negative charge (e.g., by allowing it to deflect under a magnetic field)? Have they calibrated their custom setup using known standards or brought it to an accelerator facility that produces muons, I suppose, as a sanity check against their first-principles calculations?Muons have a mass of 105.7 MeV/c2, which is about 207 times that of the electron. Because it is heavy, it acts more like a neutron than an electron. This means that it is penetrating more than an electron. Puting a mass in the path of the unknown charge particle will stop electrons through ionization but muons will more likely pass through.
An accelerator facility cannot produce low energy muons. Accelerator made muons will penetrate mass to a great distance because they has high kinetic energy and time dilation from high speed.
A circular path in a magnetized cloud chamber will distinguish a muon from a proton. Knowing the strength of the magnetic field, it is possible to calculate the mass of the charge particle by using math to consider how large the radius of the circle generated in the ionization trail that the charge particle produces in the chamber.
-
Muons have a mass of 105.7 MeV/c2, which is about 207 times that of the electron. Because it is heavy, it acts more like a neutron than an electron. This means that it is penetrating more than an electron. Puting a mass in the path of the unknown charge particle will stop electrons through ionization but muons will more likely pass through.
I have read that muons are nearly indistinguishable from energetic electrons. -
I have read that muons are nearly indistinguishable from energetic electrons.Since low energy muons have never been produced in an accelerator, the kinetic energy of the negative charged particle overwhelms the mass of the charged particle in detection methods so an energetic muon and and energetic electron might look basically the same, because the mass difference is overwhelmed by the kinetic energy.
In a low energy muon, the mass difference between a muon and an electron is significant,
-
Quote
A circular path in a magnetized cloud chamber will distinguish a muon from a proton. Knowing the strength of the magnetic field, it is possible to calculate the mass of the charge particle by using math to consider how large the radius of the circle generated in the ionization trail that the charge particle produces in the chamber.
Axil you are not answering Eric's point.
rho = mv/(qB)
For gyroradius in magnetic field. Hence you can only determine m/q. Muon and 200X more energetic electron would be identical. Proton of course would curl the opposite way
-
Yes the custom TOF appartus is going to attract attention ( although it certainly demonstrates a more than ordinary skill in the art.. ) kinda a moot point though, since the whole experiment has to be replicated in another lab. I was under the impression that Dr. Olafsson has an independant experiment in Iceland.
Not that I've noticed. Olafsson has been supporting and co-authoring papers with Holmlid, but I've see no independent experimental work reported. If there is, someone please point to it. -
Axil you are not answering Eric's point.
rho = mv/(qB)
For gyroradius in magnetic field. Hence you can only determine m/q. Muon and 200X more energetic electron would be identical. Proton of course would curl the opposite way
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/t…302l/lectures/node73.html
See Larmor frequency...the Larmor frequency, does not depend on the velocity of the particle. It is possible to detect the charge mass ratio of the particle
It is clear, from Eq. (168), that the angular frequency of gyration of a charged particle in a known magnetic field can be used to determine its charge to mass ratio.
We see the effect of energy loss on the circular path from ionization scatterings, which also depends on the mass of the particle. We see on the right entering a high energy charged particle which decays in two short circular segment and ends an electron that spirals in the magnetic field as it loses energy from collisions mainly, since synchrotron radiation is very soft at the energies in the photo.
-
I was under the impression that Dr. Olafsson has an independant experiment in Iceland.
I do not consider Sveinn Olafsson to be independent of Holmlid. He has been a booster for Holmlid's work here and elsewhere. A replication would be interesting news. But I would worry that Olafsson will be too sympathetic to and too ready to adopt Holmlid's conclusions in interpreting whatever he observes. -
We see the effect of energy loss on the circular path from ionization scatterings, which also depends on the mass of the particle. We see on the right entering a high energy charged particle which decays in two short circular segment and ends an electron that spirals in the magnetic field as it loses energy from collisions mainly, since synchrotron radiation is very soft at the energies in the photo.
I do not doubt that muons can be distinguished from energetic electrons with sufficient checks. One thing I suppose might be apparent would be the decay at the end to an electron. The question here is whether Holmlid and Olafsson's custom-built apparatus, discussed above, is sufficient to distinguish between muons and electrons and whether they've done the necessary checks to rule out competing explanations. Even if the apparatus were in principle adequate (I doubt it is), I would not trust the two to be diligent enough to attempt to falsify their preferred explanation (muons). An independent expert in measuring charged particle radiation would be what is needed here.
