LENR in architecture

    Quote from AlainCo

    muons have not been observed except with Holmlid semi-hot fusion experiments, which are indirect interpretations.



    Holmlid asserts that muon will be found in all LENR reactions.


    Why is their such a reluctance to test for muon emissions in an active LENR reactor? Is it because you all don't want to know, what you don't want to know?


    A post from Jones Beene on vortex


    A post from Jones Beene on Vortex about the possible dangers of the SunCell


    The rule of thumb for light speed signal propagation is one foot per
    nanosecond. For the muon, a decay time on the average of 2.2
    microseconds implies that the field of muon decay is on the order of
    2,200 feet. muon decay can happen inside this 2,200 foot sphere or far
    outside it based on the vagaries of radioactive decay. The muon will
    not induce fusion until its energy is reduced enough to be captured by
    an atom. otherwise it will pass through less dense material without
    interaction.


    Because of entanglement, the fusion energy will be sent back to the
    source of the muon as a mechanism of the way LENR works so the fusion
    reaction will be hard to detect in the far field. In detail, no
    neutrons or gamma will be produced or detected.


    But as eros has found, if a heavy shield of lead and iron is placed in
    the flight path of the muon, the muon slows down and begins to react
    with atoms. Eros, a LENR experimenter with a functioning reactor began
    to detect nuclear reactions just outside the heavy lead and iron
    shield using a copper covered radiation counter. The dense matter is
    ionized enough to slow the muon flight quickly and produce rapid
    secondary nuclear reaction in the near field.


    One thing that Holmlid, ME356, Eros, and Defkalion all have detected
    is a high state of ionization as muons interact with matter and
    ionize it. There must be a truly huge flux of muons produced by LENR
    to disable electronic equipment at meters away from the LENR reaction.


    If LENR is heavily deployed in a high density urban housing situation,
    then a dense field of general muon interference will produce a
    impossible to shield zone of electronic and electrical failure.


    Ionization of tissue inside of the human body will also occur. How this
    ionization will affect the activity of nerves and the function of the brain
    is yet not known.

    While the issue here may not be totally off-topic, it is effectively so, because the topic here assumes developed LENR, as generally understood, which does not include muon generation.


    Quote from axil

    AlainCo wrote:


    Alain is quite correct. Notice: this is not a claim that muon radiation doesn't exist, only the fact of where the idea is coming from. And then Axil, an anonymous troll, proclaims this as truth. Again, that doesn't mean he's wrong, it means only, to me, that this is not evidence, and the claim is extraordinary, so ... more evidence would be needed; as matters stand, there are circumstantial arguments against the massive generation of muons.


    Quote

    Holmlid asserts that muon will be found in all LENR reactions.


    And he knows, how? Holmlid has not studied what are reported as LENR by others. So this is his speculation or hypothesis. Not fact, not yet. Axil does not wait for such measly details as experimental confirmation of his ideas, he simply makes them up and presents them as "amazing facts, what a genius!" And a few people fall for it, like Peter Gluck. He's been doing it for years.


    Quote

    Why is their such a reluctance to test for muon emissions in an active LENR reactor? Is it because you all don't want to know, what you don't want to know?


    Why is there such a reluctance to test for gremlins? After all, they could explain everything. Or could they? I will look at the muon hypothesis below. Essentially, there are already tests for muons, and they rule out large-scale muon generation in the FP Heat Effect, about which we know the most.


    Quote

    A post from Jones Beene on vortex.


    Beene has been discussing fringe science topics on vortex-l for a long time. I will look for his post and see how he handled critique, I have no prejudgment of that. Rather than cover the whole post, as Axil did, here is a link to it. (Axil usually leaves out details like that. Who needs source verification if he is affirming it?)


    [email protected]/msg108780.html">https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg108780.html Beene refers to slides, I'm skipping that, but you can find them in the mail as linked.


    Jones Beene Tue, 05 Apr 2016 07:31:32 -0700
    [...]

    Quote

    However, even today – the majority of observers in LENR seems to gloss over
    the main point – which is that although fusion can happen, the bulk of the
    energy release is in the form of muons (aka meson chain) and is generally
    lost to the reactor itself (since most of the energy ends up as neutrinos).
    Even so, there is net gain. The implication is that if properly engineered,
    the gain will be much higher.


    This is directly contradictory to the bulk of the evidence. In the FP Heat Effect, he preponderance of the evidence is that the energy of deuterium to helium conversion entirely appears as heat in the experiment, there is no major escape of energy as radiation or other reaction products; there is no other identified fuel and no other major ash, the strongest one, tritium, being about a million times down from helium. Other transmutations, where seen, are at similar levels to tritium or less.


    Yes, neutrinos would escape without notice (which is effectively contradicted below), but there would be substantial missing energy. If there was neutrino production in every reaction, that energy would be very, very noticeable as missing. There is apparently no missing energy, but at this point, the best measurement of the heat/helium ratio has an estimated accuracy of +/- 10%. If there were neutrino production, though, the remaining ash would be different, I'd expect. The reaction is probably not 4D -> Be-8 -> 2He-4, but that would be clean, the only problem being that, as stated, if nothing else happens, there would be some very hot alphas particles, and there are not, the Hagelstein limit is 20 KeV for charged particle radiation in these experiments.


    Quote

    In short, “something is accidentally created,” which causes seemingly
    impossible nuclear reactions (nucleon disintegration) and that something is
    UDH or UDD – ultra dense hydrogen. George Miley used to call it IRH or
    inverted Rydberg hydrogen. Now it is simply call UDH or DDL (deep Dirac
    level).


    The actual theoreticians working on this are cautious and don't state speculations as fact, they merely look for possibilities and express them. There is a basic problem with all the theories that create fusion through density or shielding (as with DDL electrons). They would be expected to produce hot fusion products, the same as muon-catalyzed fusion. (Which is not related to the idea here, which is about muon production, not catalysis from muons already existing -- generally supplied from high-energy accelerators and then captured by hydrogen isotopes at very low temperatures.)


    However, ultra dense hydrogen might allow other forms of reaction catalysis, which is why it is on the table as a possibility.


    Quote

    Ultra-dense hydrogen can be the source of all or part of Cold fusion LENR
    related phenomena. Laser induced fusion in UDH is the most effective way to
    see the results since it produces muons as the longest-lived species. This
    is also known as the “meson chain reaction” and the lifetime is several
    microseconds, so that most of the energy will be deposited as neutrinos many
    meters away from the reactor – up to hundreds of meters.


    And this is what Alain called "semi-hot fusion." Now, those mesons. A bit about mesons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meson


    All known mesons are unstable and spontaneously decay, and the longest-lived meson, the long life kaon, has a lifetime of about 5 x 10^-8 second. that's about 50 nanoseconds. At light speed, then, half of all such muons could travel about 1.6 meters before decaying. Of course, light speed is impossibly fast, but as the velocity approaches light speed -- from very high energy -- relativistic time dilation allows unstable particles to travel much further.


    Muons were called "mu mesons" but are apparently not classified as mesons any more, and they live longer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon half-life is 2.6 microseconds. Muons are highly penetrating. so if there were significant high energy muon generation, the energy would escape the experiment.


    Beene's comment "energy deposited as neutrinos". If hundreds of meters away, and for a muon, it would produce an electron and two neutrinos. The two neutrinos would completely escape, leaving only an ordinary beta particle, i.e., an energetic electron. This would be the only major dangerous particle, because it could be generated within the body. Even energetic electrons outside the body will do little damage. What would the energy be? I found no ready sources. There is this consideration:


    The electron mass is 0.511 MeV, the muon mass is 105 MeV


    Muons would carry off a boatload of energy per reaction, mostly as the mass of the muon. It would be missing from the cell, the opposite of what appears to be the case.


    There was no particular followup to the Beene email, other than one writer claiming that Beene was wrong about DDL electrons.


    Nobody is looking for muons because there is no reason to expect them, and the high involvement of muons would be expected to generate some effects that would not be observed. However, anyone could arrange to search for muons from an operating LENR cell. The use of radiation detectors using various methods of detecting radiation is common. There appears to be no substantial radiation hazard, it is difficult to detect anything and experiments detecting radiation generally use detectors very close to the source so that quite small levels of radiation can be detected.


    The idea here that dangerous levels of muon radiation would be present is, then, far-fetched. However, when operating LENR experiments become more common, if muons are involved, this will be discovered. What we know is enough to not be worried about high levels.

    Quote from Alan Smith

    Hi Axil. (and co) Just remember (please) that this thread is about the architectural impact of low-cost energy, in particular LENR. If you wish to have a prolonged discussion about Muons, find a more suitable thread to do so.


    I was accused of being an attack dog because I offered an unpopular opinion about the use of unregulated LENR. The reasons behind my subsequent posts are rooted in a desire to explain that these opinions are not restricted to only me, but are shared by others. So it might be considered a school of thought. The propositions of the applicability of LENR to use in high density living conditions require that a background for understanding be laid down. The person who started the thread needs to know that the thoughts expressed are not the ravings of an unhinged attack dog, but follow a generally recognize line of logical thinking.


    Logical thinking might be discouraged by moderation or certain illogical and emotionally impaired members of this forum and run counter to a preferred agenda that is commonly held by most forum members. That agenda being unregulated deployment of LENR. My only interest is the pursuit of truth and the public good as I see it.

    Quote from Alan Smith

    That is QUITE enough about Muons. Lets have some more about Architecture.


    I should not be restricted in my freedom of expression by the tread busting filibustering tactics of LOMAX whose avalanche of illogical word salad has killed more threads that you can shake a stick at.


    It is fair and proper to counter the use of LENR in architecture by listing the arguments against it.


    Enough! Alan

    Quote from Alan Smith

    That is QUITE enough about Muons. Lets have some more about Architecture.


    Great. Provide something. A danger that could affect architectural considerations was raised. If it is necessary to shield reactors against massive muon generation, this would have substantial architectural impact. I am claiming that this is not necessary and an undue complication at this time. Basically, LENR power is likely to be like a local gasoline-powered generator, except without noise or toxic gas emissions, and probably much cheaper. It is likely that there will be no radiation risk, but, of course, before LENR generators would be able to enter home usage, this would all be thoroughly tested.


    Quote from axil

    (quoting Jones Beene) The muon is an unstable fermion with a lifetime of 2.2 microseconds, which is an eternity compared to most beta decays. Ignoring time dilation, this would mean that muons, travelling at light speed, would be dispersing and decaying in an imaginary sphere about 600 meters from the reactor. Thus, the effect of radioactive decay could be significant at unexpected distance– and Mills may never had imagined that this is a problem. Fortunately, humans are exposed to a constant flux of muons due to cosmic rays, and the flux is well-tolerated.


    First of all, one cannot ignore time dilation at light speed. The effect of time dilation will vary with the energy of the muons. The speculative idea doesn't get so far as to consider the muon or meson energies; however, what is also completely ignored by Beene is the inverse square law of radiation intensity, the intensity of radiation will vary inversely with the square of the distance from the source. (this assumes total penetration. The actual decline, due to absorption from random interactions in matter, will be greater.) So the intensity of radiation 600 meters away would compare with the radiation a meter away as 1/3600. Relativistic time-dilated muons would travel further, thus the intensity would be lower, it could be much lower.


    Muons are charged particle radiation and will lose energy as they move through matter. When their energy is very high, the rate of energy loss per meter is relatively low. As an example, high-energy charged particle radiation will pass through a CR-39 solid state nuclear track detector, leaving no track, and the tracks only appear when the charged particle slows. (Basically, charged particles disrupt chemical structures, like SSNTDs or the human body cell DNA, where we are most sensitive), by wiggling them with charge, sometimes breaking bonds. If the particle is travelling very fast, the wiggle is very small, the energy deposited is a product of the charge and the time in proximity. While the force might be high, it is a constant force for a given distance of approach, and the time over which it acts is shorter.)


    Fast neutrons are highly penetrating and are only slowed by nuclear interactions. (They bounce off of nuclei.) Slow neutrons are absorbed, causing transmuations. However, neutron radiation is not safer when one is closer, the opposite. I expect something like that from muons. Muons can be detected at great distance, and penetrate deep into the earth, if they have high enough energy. Nuclear reactors produce very substantial muon radiation, but it is not a major factor in the radiation exposure of workers there. The distance given is the muon decay distance, but muon decay does not create more dangerous particles, rather, less dangerous. The neutrinos are almost entirely so penetrating that they are very difficult to detect, and we are already subject to very high neutrino flux from the sun. That leaves the electron, and electron radiation is very much not penetrating. The only danger would be from energetic electron radiation generated inside the body, like from swallowing a beta emitter. At distance, the levels of this would be very, very low.

    • Official Post

    We are doing futurology, trying to find probable and possible future and their consequences.


    I agree we should consider blackswan possibilities, but we should label them as improbable.
    Claiming that a minority claim is cartain is not what should be done to do futurology.


    Axil have the bad habits to claim thins ARE like he THINK they are, instead of PROPOSING they are like he think.
    I dont CLAIM LENR is not radioactive, I REPORT that there is strong EVIDENCE there is not much radiation or radioactive products as outcome.


    the evidences, and the pain LENR scientists have to convince the nuclear physicist, shows that there is no highly noticeable radiations of any kind that organic and artificial devices can detect.


    The risk of a dangerous LENR is highly improbable from available data, and if doing futurology we should take it as main hypothesis.
    In case LENR is dangerous, alternate scenarios can be considered too.

    Quote from AlainCo


    I dont CLAIM LENR is not radioactive, I REPORT that there is strong EVIDENCE there is not much radiation or radioactive products as outcome.


    It is possible that the nature of the radiation is DIFFERENT from what might be expected from a nuclear reaction based LENR. What experimenter has taken the effort to look at other radiation mechanisms such as high levels of ionization of matter from a LENR reaction? Five experimenters have reported the results of charged particle ionization separately and without correlation in their experiments.


    Unsolicited observations of identical experimental consequences lends credence to the prediction of a common causative reaction. For Example, Defkalion saw no commercial or competitive advantage in reporting a major problem that they suffered in the testing and demonstration of their system that later turned up in other systems. ME356 explained why his testing instruments and sensors were malfunctioning 3 meters away from his reaction. This is very similar to what Defkalion had reported. Now Holmlid tells why such observations are a result of muon production. This is one of the reasons that I beleive that Defkalion has a valid LENR reaction going on. Now, the picture becomes a little clearer, a common thread can be drawn to the point that if ionization production is not observed in a LENR experimental situation, then the power production of the reaction and even its existence is rightly questioned.


    As related to Architecture, the question to consider is the calculation of the levels of background radiation produced by unimaginably huge amounts of LENR radiation generated in high density unshielded widespread deployment.

    THE METAL-LEAF ELECTROSCOPE


    I built an Electroscope in fourth grade. Its easy to build and use.
    This device can detect muon ionization in the same way that it can
    detect beta radiation.




    Electrostatics at Home


    https://mysite.du.edu/~jcalvert/phys/elechome.htm


    My electroscope used two gold leaf strips that separated when a charge
    was applied to the electrode.


    Movement of the strips will show a change in the ionization level
    around the reactor. Aren't you experimenters ashamed of such a
    horrendous lack of attention to such an important aspect of LENR when
    its detection is so easy and cheap?


    I bet that a person good at numbers could tell what the muon flux
    is from the speed of deflection change in the metal leafs.

    • Official Post
    Quote from Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

    Great. Provide something. A danger that could affect architectural considerations was raised. If it is necessary to shield reactors against massive muon generation, this would have substantial architectural impact. I am claiming that this is not necessary and an undue complication at this time. Basically, LENR power is likely to be like a local gasoline-powered generator, except without noise or toxic gas emissions, and probably much cheaper. It is likely that there will be no radiation risk, but, of course, before LENR generators would be able to enter home usage, this would all be thoroughly tested.


    I am providing something very concrete in fact, a face-to-face meeting with the original enquirer after information in a building of great architectural significance. What about you>


    I have no objection to comments about the dangers of muon radiation at all, but when the thread becomes entirely about Axil's muon obsession then it has veered entirely off topic, And since you are one of the chief complainants about 'off topic' I should think you would support some restriction instead of deliberately attempting to encourage muonic meandering (mostly I suspect, just to annoy). If not, hard luck.

    Regarding: "Axil's muon obsession"


    I am fighting hard about the false expectation, a long standing delusion, that LENR can be deployed in the home or any other place where humans congregate. Such deep rooted delusion is so far impossible to counter. Experimenters do not even think that the situation is serious. LENR radiation might be bearable close to the single low powered reactor. The danger is additive. As the number of LENR reactors grow, so does the dangers that they engender increase. But when many gigawatts of LENR power production is concentrated in a confined urban environment, the consequences of LENR radiation become untenable. It is better to uncover this potential danger now, than after our cities around the world are crammed with LENR reactors of every sort.


    From the very beginning, it is paramount that the social consciousness of the clandestine off net unshielded LENR reactor user understand that his use of LENR power endangers his neighbors. The education and formation of his caring social conscience is of utmost importance.


    ENOUGH FIGHTING! We don't actually (and may never) possess any such muon producing domestic reactor, clandestine or not. Your objection is both noted and overdone. Alan.

    Quote from axil

    ENOUGH FIGHTING! We don't actually (and may never) possess any such muon producing domestic reactor, clandestine or not. Your objection is both noted and overdone. Alan.


    How do you know? Beside Holmlid, no one has ever tested for muon production that we know of. Muons are not something that hit you on the head. If we don't look, how do we know?

    Quote from axil

    From the very beginning, it is paramount that the social consciousness of the clandestine off net unshielded LENR reactor user understand that his use of LENR power endangers his neighbors.


    It would endanger the researcher even more than his neighbors. I know many people who have spent weeks next to active cold fusion reactors. In fact, I probably know just about everyone who has done that. None of them suffered ill heath because of it, so up to around 100 W the reactors do not produce a dangerous flux of muons or any other particle. I presume 100 W would be enough power to cause some danger, if you are right.


    Some researchers have been harmed, but only by conventional problems such as nanoparticle nickel poisoning.


    In other words, you thesis fails because of the "dead graduate student problem" as it was called by skeptics in the early days of cold fusion. The problem being there are no dead grad students, so there is no neutron flux, so it cannot be fusion.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    In other words, you thesis fails because of the "dead graduate student problem" as it was called by skeptics in the early days of cold fusion. The problem being there are no dead grad students, so there is no neutron flux, so it cannot be fusion.


    The effect of intense muon induced ionization of the body may also be unexpected. Ionization of the brain could lead to psychotic problems, weird behavior, paranoia, anti social behavior...you have often remarked that Rossi is crazy, unpredictable, wacky, bizarre, idiosyncratic, moody...could his unusual and unhinged condition have been produced by chronic exposure to ionization of the brain?

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.