The possible Role of Axions in LENR

  • The possible Role of Axions in LENR


    The axion is a hypothetical elementary particle postulated by the Peccei–Quinn theory in 1977 to resolve the strong CP problem in quantum chromodynamics (QCD). If axions exist and have low mass within a specific range, they are of interest as a possible component of cold dark matter.


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


    In particle physics, the Peccei–Quinn theory is a well-known proposal for the resolution of this strong CP problem. It was formulated by Roberto Peccei and Helen Quinn. The theory proposes that the QCD Lagrangian be extended with a CP-violating term known as the θ term. Because experiments have never measured a value for θ, its value must be small if it exists.


    The strong force is balanced on a knife’s edge where CP-violation does not occur. Only mesons show CP-violations in their decay. The particle that was invented to keep the strong force particles in balance is the axion. The strong force sits on a teeter totter that is held in balance by the axion as a dynamic process.


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


    The Maxwell equations have been modified to include the axion, so axions are an EMF kind of thing.
    Since Holmlid is seeing massive CP violations in the production of mesons, CP violation could be the cause of LENR.


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


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


    Axions convert back and forth between photons in the presence of a strong magnetic field. This is just what the doctor ordered for LENR: A method relating to EMF using strong magnetism to disrupt the balance of strong force particles that may result in the production of mesons.


    I am disregarding the grand unification theory of LENR to work on this axion connection because it has a strength range that does not depend on the power of the emf field to generate LENR activity.


    Here is some background that shows how strong magnetic field production is central to the detection of the axion particle though the magnetic conversion of axions to photons.


    http://www2.kek.jp/physics-sem…/20150127_semertzidis.pdf


    Axions and the Storage Ring Proton EDM experiments
    Yannis Semertzidis, CAPP/IBS and KAIST


  • No other group has looked for muons yet.


    The report from Piantelli that a 6.7 MeV proton was emitted from a nickel rod used as LENR fuel could actually have been a muon. The cloud chamber that Piantelli used in that detection would not have been able to detect the difference between that charged particle being a muon or a proton.

  • Something is causing the proton to decay


    Whatever is causing the proton to decay into strange matter is a new unknown process in physics. The cause is not part of current standard model theory. This makes LENR theory doubly hard. Not only do we need to explain the characteristics of LENR, but also LENR thinking gets involved in unknown physics that is itself ill defined and speculative and rooted in solving the hardest and still unexplained issues in physics.

  • To play the devil's advocate, I see two issues:


    1. The mass of a muon is about 1/9 that of a proton. Would not this imply that the energy of the particle was much lower than 6.7 MeV?
    2. Why would not Piantelli also see muon decay products, which sometimes include gamma emission?


    First, the energy of the particle is determined by the length of its path as it ionizes the atoms that its passes through. If all the muon energy was spent through ionization before it decayed, then the electron would have little or no kinetic energy remaining to produce another ion trail.


    Second, LENR seems to absorb gamma radiation even after the LENR reaction is over: absorption after death. This might be due to the continuing entanglement between the muon and the metalized hydride that produced it.


    John Fisher saw thousands of alpha particle tracks in CR39 detectors, But he never saw any gammas from those 2.1 MeV alpha particles impacting the CR39 detector plastic material. The metalized hydride quantum mechanically absorbed the gammas. Holmlid sees the same process in that billions of fusion events produce the neutral particle fragments that he sees but there are no gammas or neutrons produced. This remains the case even after the laser is off and loads of muons of still streaming out of the metalized hydrides.

  • Reference:


    Quote

    https://arxiv.org/pdf/1403.1290v1.pdf


    Resonant detection of axion mediated forces with Nuclear Magnetic Resonance


    Getting a feel for how axions are behaved.


    An axion can be exchanged between two spins


    Both the monopole-dipole and the dipole-dipole interaction produce coupling of axions


    An axion crucially is not screened by magnetic shielding.


    An axion can have a monopole magnetic coupling to nucleons.


    -------------------------------------------------


    The axion related conjecture that might cause nucleons to decay goes as follows:


    If a magnetic field of sufficient strength can enter the nucleus, then that magnetic field can convert axions that maintain the stability of the nucleons relative to CP violation, then the magnetic field can convert those axions to photons and produce nucleon decay and resulting strange matter based mesons.

  • Sidney Drell on the new results related to Sakharov's proton decay hypothesis


    Tue May 24, 2016 11:55 pm




    Andrei Sakharov's four page letter in the Soviet Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics in 1967 is one of the boldest and most famous physics papers of the century. Its aim was to explain why the matter in the universe is built of protons, neutrons, and electrons, while antiprotons, antineutrons, and positrons are so rare that we can observe antimatter only when it is produced in high-energy collisions, mainly in particle accelerators. This particle-antiparticle disparity is usually referred to as the "baryon asymmetry of the universe," protons and neutrons being the lightest of all baryons. Sakharov made the elegant assumption that originally the universe was neutral and had no baryon asymmetry. He then had the brilliant insight to realize that an asymmetry would build up following the big bang, via nonstationary processes during the expansion of the early universe, if his novel idea of proton instability were combined with the violation of particle-antiparticle symmetry (CP symmetry), which James Cronin, Val Fitch, and their collaborators had discovered experimentally in 1964 in decays of kaons. Many features of Sakharov's specific model of these processes became characteristic of grand unification models proposed in the 1970s, and the discovery of proton decay became, and remains today, the goal of several very-large-scale underground detectors.This summer it was discovered that the particle - antiparticle symmetry is also violated in the decay of a second family of particles known as the B-mesons. This most recent observation was reported by an international collaboration including more than 600 scientists and engineers from 73 institutions around the world, including Russia, working at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, operated by Stanford University on behalf of the U.S. Department of Energy. It Confirms this phenomenon for the first time definitely in this second family of particles known as the B mesons and adds strength to this approach of Sakharov to understanding the matter asymmetry in the universe. This result has been submitted to Physical Review Letters on July 5 for publication later this summer.


    ===========================


    There is a connection between nucleon decay and CP violation as defined by Sakharov's model.

  • As I have said many times before, the staff who worked DGT have confessed in conversation they never had anything by way of anomalous heat, radiation or fireworks. Not even a measly magnetic field. Sadly, as a basis for LENR theorising their claims are about as much use as a chocolate fireplace.

  • As I have said many times before, the staff who worked DGT have confessed in conversation they never had anything by way of anomalous heat, radiation or fireworks. Not even a measly magnetic field. Sadly, as a basis for LENR theorising their claims are about as much use as a chocolate fireplace.


    It is true that experimental confirmation is required in this and all other reports on LENR behavior. The strong RF production the ME356 claims suggest large magnetic field production but until a LENR capable system is produced in an open source context, magnetic measurement is not possible.


    The behavior of the DGT crew seems to contradict the usual patters of human nature of sane and clear thinking people. When DGT ran out of money, the DGT R&D crew stayed on as Alan Smith reports at the risk of their health and family life being motivated by a promise from management of good results and rewards to come. If the crew know they never had anything by way of anomalous heat, radiation or fireworks; not even a measly magnetic field, why would they keep at the R&D at the price of such physical, financial and emotional distress?


    This mode of behavior does not make sense to me: Alan please explain what happened to cause this peculiar and seemingly unbelievable state of affairs.

  • Axil, You have no clue of particle physics, so please calm down.


    You are right. Currently, particle physics is only done at a particle accelerator now, but with LENR, there is a possibility that particle physics can be done in other ways that have yet to be discovered. How to do particle detection in the workshop or basement is something new, Any ideas?

  • Using a CD as a particle detector might be done if the particle generates pits or holes in the aluminum coating of the CD. A computer program could be written to use a CD drive in a computer to read the pits and count them. Additional characterizations of the pits might be possible. There are freeware diagnostics programs available that might be modified to read the particle generated pits.


    Another possibility is just to use a microscope to count the pits and/or characterize them.
    ==============
    An example


    Free software
    http://www.digitalfaq.com/foru…ftware-media-quality.html


    check CD before particle detection run at reactor to insure a good CD


    next place CD near particle source for a given exposure time


    next check CD for surface flaws.


    Calibrate with a smoke alarm. Source of alpha particles


  • <a href="http://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.01196v2.pdf" class="externalURL" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">arxiv.org/pdf/1606.01196v2.pdf</a>
    The Desktop Muon Detector: A simple, physics-motivated machine- and electronics-shop project for university students


    Hmm, some information how to build plastic scintilator with photo diode.
    But:
    - no data what grade/type scintilation plastic should use (there are lot of diffrent types availabe)
    - photo diodes are unlinear in used wavelenghts (especially unknow scintilation material make them hard to implement for metering (suitable to sensor but accuracy), temp variation etc). Then typically are PMT tubes used if want some usable data.


    Ok, information is that there exist plastic scintilation material that is sensitive to muons. Lack off information is what type it is and what else it is sensitive and what wavelengths/amounts it send from muons and how it can discriminate muon from other radiation..


  • Holmlid proposes the usage of a photomultiplier with a "converter" material (usually a thin layer of a material like aluminum) in front of it. This means, like a normal scintillator-photomultiplier detector, but without the scintillator. The reason for this is that the muons emitted by the reaction are slow enough to be involved in muon capture in a thin material. The process can cause the creation of unstable atoms that emit electrons by beta decay. The beta decay electrons are detected directly by the photomultiplier. It seems that this method increases the detection rate of the muon emitted by the reaction by a factor of 100 or so compared to a standard scintillator-photomultiplier detector.


    So if I want to keep it KISS I can wrap alumium foil on insulated beta sensitive GM tube?? (If Al muon generated betas are hard enough?)


    Alumium captured muons, about half will kick neutron and other half decay/kick beta.(?)


    One question is how discriminate (holmlid etc) that particle actually is muon and not hard beta (betas have seen many times)..
    Hard beta will pass through thin alumium easilly and hit PMT primary phosphor and generate lot of e- to detect..?

  • OK, alumium foil and GB tube dosn't work because it need energy spectrum to discriminate collected betas low energy, created inside thick Fe walled box.


    Holmlid radiation broblem looks similiar as I have. Holmlid experiments are small, my 10x or more bigger. It go through everything I have tested and show nothing to GM etc.


  • If you get a (much) larger signal by adding a layer of metal to the
    front window of the detector (a photomultiplier in the case of Holmlid)
    then definitely it is not due to ordinary electrons.


    Do you have photos to make this clearer?


    You maybe right, I read paper, they claims that black cloth vs. 3mm Al give ~4x more, 3mm Al + unknown steel (maybe 2mm if same as plastic case) give ~25x more counts. They claims also 2mm Pb with 3mm Al give 4x more low energy (150kev) counts. If ordinary betas then counts should drop with shielding.
    There is maybe posible to do functional detector with GM tube surrounded 3mm Al (or 2mm Cu) tube. Tube cuts <1Mev betas and convert some muons to betas that have ~2/3 energy level that beta sensitive GM tube can detect. There is maybe posibility to use 2mm Pb shield to reduce x-rays, but then muon betas may lost 1/2 instead 1/3 due GB tube energy level limit. It may give signal that Al shielded GM tube give more counts as unshielded if muons are present.


    Photos from invisible, hard to detect or posible nonexistent radiation? Or my setup? It is not direct replication because contains some portion my own inspiration. I don't share photos/data yet, it is too dangerous if someone try replicate it with some fuels (lot of some strange radiation). (and there is more higher COP claims from others). Some time ago I found that if old religious literature is atleast some parts right it give hints that what I have done is maybe part of lost atlantis thecnology and super old. However atlantis is typically claimed old dream only and there is (I don't know) no evidences it even existed.
    Anyway running "talisman above others" is not good idea for runner brains and if it is really it, not good for universe. I was (minor) God alike some time without enough knownledge. Extreme difficult to keep universe stabile. Then my power levels dropped and when down level where universe/physics stop bending then I take hospital and lot of pills. But still bended some doctors, many patients etc.
    We are here matrix/sandbox inside known physics limits which are set for us to make things save enough to live. Going outside limits is dangerous. Simulation is controlled inside simulation. There inside is root keys but they are not for all. Cycle is to grow knownledge enough for end of cycle to generate new cycle. This cycle will last, humans are not ready yet.
    I'll seek heat/electricity/maybe material transmutation tool. Then it give to me hey be God. And if it was real then I'am sure I don't want ~100% other people to be God a like. Or what you like if pick random jack from street and he be God for all?
    Got the broblem? Strange radiation to head. I'll want to know what it was, how to shield, make save enough energy source etc.


    And when I had some "power" I directed my head one caduceus coil connected to scope at best resolution. And I think it show signal variations when I think something.. Brain sensors are typically cold SC coils. There may be something. And mind controll may be old tech and maybe we are born with magnetite crystalls in head our collective sandbox..

  • Ok fast test, same model GM tubes (sbm-22) 2pcs. 1.st near reactor ~5-6cm distance, only 0.5mm Cu plate (cooling jacket) is between reactor.
    2nd tube, about 30cm from reactor, 0,5mm Cu, 2~4mm Pb, ~60mm Fe, (+some air+insulation) and GM tube is put inside ~1.2mm walled Cu tube.
    2nd tube gives 2-3x more counts as. 1st. (and counts are 5-10x more than bg should be). (reactor is shutdown and loaded with "unreactive" fuel)
    There is ofcourse posibility for errors, but if suppose no errors is there other explanations than muons?


    Week ago shutdown core give unpleasant amounts of counts to Cu modified GM tube (and it have also "unreactive" fuel inside)..


    Muons are quite hard to shield:
    https://www.researchgate.net/p…ity_in_the_CMS_Steel_Yoke