Leif Holmlid: Ultra-Dense Deuterium Fusion

  • Relevant to the topic, I came across this on Russ George's Atom Ecology blog - written in November.


    'A few months ago along came a team of physicists from Iceland and Scandinavia who found that they could produce muons on demand. Without going into the devilish details they shone a laser beam onto some already condensed hydrogen making it condense even more and voila out came an abundance of muons. Their result are confounding plenty of those in science who are made intensely uncomfortable by the complexity of atom-ecology. In fact an abundance of those muons, at least to those who study muons, seem to be very crazy muons. Since these Nordic muons behaved in a crazy manner, could they be the Mischugenons that mystified Teller and I? That is a good question, just maybe it is so.'


    http://atom-ecology.russgeorge…oceed-in-a-straight-line/

  • Relevant to the topic, I came across this on Russ George's Atom Ecology blog - written in November.


    'A few months ago along came a team of physicists from Iceland and Scandinavia who found that they could produce muons on demand. Without going into the devilish details they shone a laser beam onto some already condensed hydrogen making it condense even more and voila out came an abundance of muons. Their result are confounding plenty of those in science who are made intensely uncomfortable by the complexity of atom-ecology. In fact an abundance of those muons, at least to those who study muons, seem to be very crazy muons. Since these Nordic muons behaved in a crazy manner, could they be the Mischugenons that mystified Teller and I? That is a good question, just maybe it is so.'


    http://atom-ecology.russgeorge…oceed-in-a-straight-line/


    Did you take note of this gem of wisdom, and apply it to your own experimental methods?


    Quote

    Once while running an experiment I happened upon a distinct highly reproducible radiation measurement. My Geiger Counter signaled the first hint of it and upon fiddling about with my “hey that’s strange” reaction to the enhance rate of Geiger clicks I managed to make the Geiger record vastly more counts, even saturating the detector. I did that by placing various different elementary foils between the source and the detector. Normally when one puts something in between a radiation source and a Geiger Counter the count rate inevitably goes down, not up. In my work a thin Silver foil sent the Geiger over the moon.


    A Geiger Counter does not see muons, but when the counter is covered with an appropreate metal, the nuclear reactions that muons produce generate gamma counts in the detector. Eros found this to be true when he covered his Geiger Counter with copper.


    If you ever produce a LENR reaction, will you remember to try out this method?

  • Good catch, and very interesting to see that other persons have successfully tried this "trick" with just a Geiger detector.


    Yes they have. The lead member of the Catalytic Carbon research group I work with has done this independently of Russ. Incidentally, I have a lot of copper foil in stock, if anybody would like to 'try this at home' email me via this forum and I'll post you a sample big enough to use as a screen.

  • A Geiger Counter does not see muons, but when the counter is covered with an appropreate metal, the nuclear reactions that muons produce generate gamma counts in the detector. Eros found this to be true when he covered his Geiger Counter with copper.


    If you ever produce a LENR reaction, will you remember to try out this method?


    According to the PNNL shielding bible the bigger problem of muon interaction with condensed matter is not gamma emmission, it's the "evaporating" neutrons!


    Thus before you put any muon shielding in place, take some hours (days) to study the material properties of the shielding. The gamma showers all strongly vary on shield type/thickness.

  • Muon detection may be a more sensitive probe of the existence of the LENR reaction than is the generation of anomalous heat. A weak though active LENR reaction may produce muons before the LENR reaction will produce anomalous heat. Therefore a sensitive muon detector could be used to provide accurate experimental feedback as the the trial and error based adjustments in the experiment increase the LENR reaction. Anomalous heat is a blunt and insensitive analog method of measuring reaction strength whereas electronic muon detection is far more sensitive to the energy production coming out of a weak LENR source.


    In short, use electrons based muon detection methods to get your LENR reaction to the sufficiently elevated level that is required to produce a detectable increase in anomalous heat.

  • Here is an idea for a drift tube method of detecting muons from your LENR experiment.


    Mount this plate array as pictured below in the video perpendicular to the sky where the muons produced by cosmic rays are formed. These cosmic ray formed muons will pass through the drift chamber without triggering a spark discharge since the path of those muons will be parallel to the plates.


    The muon from your experiment will be perpendicular to the plates and will produce a spark discharge. Alpha and beta particles will not pass through the first plate so only muons have enough penetrating power to produce a spark.


  • Its time to come back to US patent 7893414 B2 Feb. 22 2011 of Widom e.a. which was a first time (indirect) disclosure of secrete work done by US military labs. (Just remind that 90% of all nuclear physics work done in the US is top secrete!) This patent was a result of LENR research.


    End of year 2016 an "open" experiment reported at : https://arxiv.org/pdf/1610.08418v2.pdf


    did provide proof that BEC's can isolate external perturbations (radiation). BEC's are claimed to be one of the underlaying mechanisms of PD-D LENR, which was also the base for the above mentioned patent.


    The old Widom papers: Patent: https://www.google.com/patents/US20080296519


    https://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/0505026.pdf


    https://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/0509269v1.pdf

  • Quote


    This paper contains experimental results (which are unsurprising and I expect are correct) described with such a loss of context that nowhere does it say at what temperature they are obtained. However since they need a superfluid bath for this to work it will be very close to absolute zero.


    The argument against BECs being a mechanism for LENR - it is obviously attractive - is that we see claimed LENR phenomena more often at high temperatures, and never see LENR increasing as temperature decreases. Whatever new mechanisms might enable QM coherence (and it is a big ask, as those seeking higher temperature superconductivity have found) this is the opposite behaviour from that which would indicate a BEC mechanism.

  • This paper contains experimental results (which are unsurprising and I expect are correct) described with such a loss of context that nowhere does it say at what temperature they are obtained. However since they need a superfluid bath for this to work it will be very close to absolute zero.


    The argument against BECs being a mechanism for LENR - it is obviously attractive - is that we see claimed LENR phenomena more often at high temperatures, and never see LENR increasing as temperature decreases. Whatever new mechanisms might enable QM coherence (and it is a big ask, as those seeking higher temperature superconductivity have found) this is the opposite behaviour from that which would indicate a BEC mechanism.


    The comparison between a atomic BEC and a photonic BEC is an invalid one. The maximum temperature that a BEC be sustained at is proportional to the mass of the particle that is being condensed.


    The polariton is almost massless and can form a non-equilibrium condinsate at very high temperatures.


    See this as follows:


    http://iopscience.iop.org/arti…742-6596/633/1/012039/pdf


    Coherent quantum matter has intriguing properties such as BEC, a finite speed of sound and nonlinear excitations [1] like dark solitons [2]. Polaritons are quasiparticles consisting of excitons and cavity photons within semiconductor micro-cavities which obey Bose-Einstein statistics [3, 4] and thus the potential to condense into a single particle mode [5]. Excitons are coupled electron-hole pairs of oppositely charged spin-half particles in a semiconductor held together by an effective Coulomb force between them [4] as the energy to form a pair is lower than a free electron and a free hole. States of excitons interact with light fields [6] and can form polaritons in the so called strong coupling regime when confined to a micro-cavity [7]. These polaritons posses integer spin and for dilute systems condense and because polaritons are 10e9 times lighter than rubidium atoms [5], this condensation is observed in CdTe/CdMgTe micro-cavities [5, 3] and even at room temperatures in flexible polymer-filled micro-cavities [8]. This stands in contrast to atomic BEC observed below 200nK [9, 10, 11]. The Hamiltonian describing the interaction between the light modes and excitons is [4, 3]

  • Quote

    we see claimed LENR phenomena more often at high temperatures, and never see LENR increasing as temperature decreases.


    Polaritons are non-equilibrium process. Polaritons both gain energy through pumping and lose energy through dispersion.


    Consider the analogy of riding a bike. Riding a bicycle is a non-equilibrium process. The bike loses energy through friction, wind resistance, and uphill grades. The bicycle gains energy through pedaling and going down hill. If a rider does not peddle or go downhill, the bike will fall over.


    Using heat in polariton pumping is like pedaling a bike. Going downhill for a bike is like self sustain mode for LENR. In both the bicycle system and the polariton system, if the level of input pumping energy input is greater than the level of energy loss, then the polariton process as a system will be gainful.


    The polariton system requires at all times that energy is input into the system to remain alive.

  • Quote

    The argument against BECs being a mechanism for LENR - it is obviously attractive - is that we see claimed LENR phenomena more often at high temperatures, and never see LENR increasing as temperature decreases. Whatever new mechanisms might enable QM coherence (and it is a big ask, as those seeking higher temperature superconductivity have found) this is the opposite behaviour from that which would indicate a BEC mechanism.


    You're right, but the decay of condensed state manifest itself with production of neutrons at high temperatures, not with slowing of LENR (which also points to its actual role during cold fusion). I also think, that talking about low-temperature and low-energy density phenomena like the BEC in connection to high energy density process like the LENR is misleading (in similar way, like talking about Rydberg matter) and that the formation of entangled state between atom nuclei during cold fusion is the BYPROUCT of the actual mechanism, which originally merged the atom nuclei together. The twaddling about Rydberg matter and BEC doesn't explain, why such states were formed there in similar way, like the formation of Cooper pairs isn't the primary mechanism of superconductivity: you still have to explain, why these states of matter get formed just in superconductors and not within another materials. I.e. it's description of the (one aspect of) situation, rather than explanation of it.


    So that the situation is as follows: the atom nuclei must emerge along a single narrow line - which is the situation, which occurs most probably just in crystalline materials and the protons emerge in this line. After then the collisions of atom nuclei may result into attenuation of momentum with Mossbauer/Astroblaster effect and merge them occasionally together - so that they will form a homogeneous continuum. Just after then some boson condensation phenomena may occur, because the conditions for condensate were finally reached - but not before.


    If Axill wants to enforce the BEC mechanism, we should put the logical question: "which aspect of cold fusion the formation of BEC explains and it cannot be already explained by the above mechanism explaining its formation"? If none, isn't the whole BEC stuff redundant for explanation of cold fusion?

  • So that the situation is as follows: the atom nuclei must emerge along a single narrow line - which is the situation, which occurs most probably just in crystalline materials and the protons emerge in this line.


    @Zephir_AWT : The problem with this argumentation is the classical coulumb barrier. The main question is:


    How is the force generated, which bring two nuclei close enough together?


    For Mills like reaction there is one try shown in:


    https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0202049v1.pdf


    Regarding BEC's not applicable to LENR there is a simple refutation: The PD-D system (load 1:1) shows all form of RT super conduction an BEC -like EM suppression as claimed in the Widom patent and shown in the paper https://arxiv.org/pdf/1610.08418v2.pdf I linked yesterday.


    LENR does not need a BEC which is stable for more than a micro second. But the BEC is essential to distribute the reaction energy over a large area!


    But the missing link still is the energy to accelerate the nuclei!

  • Quote

    LENR does not need a BEC which is stable for more than a micro second. But the BEC is essential to distribute the reaction energy over a large area!

    Yes, you did understand the above point well. But the redistribution of energy is imaginable easily even without BEC formation, once we represent the cold fusion like the long line of colliding atom nuclei similar to Newton cradle. In the moment of mutual impact the line of atom nuclei behaves like the solid rod, which dissolves the energy of fusion and it redistributes it to a large number of atoms with longitudinal waves. As you can see, during impact this line of atoms essentially doesn't move and it behaves like single rigid body.



    Quote

    But the missing link still is the energy to accelerate the nuclei!

    Once you can explain the energy, which accelerated the poor hamster on the animation bellow, you also have a missing link in the above model. Again, this model is fully classical and it doesn't require any exotic forms of energy or matter (like the BEC) for its explanation. In general I'm avoiding the unexplained yet theories (like the quantum mechanics or entanglement) in attempts for explanation of existing phenomena.


  • As you can see, during impact this line of atoms essentially doesn't move and it behaves like single rigid body.


    @Zephir_AWT : This picture is to simple. 24MeV can not be distributed by a transversal wave without banging a huge hole... But with multiple layers of BEC (are naturally present in PD-D systems) the momentum is recursively folded into diverse planes.

  • If Axill wants to enforce the BEC mechanism, we should put the logical question: "which aspect of cold fusion the formation of BEC explains and it cannot be already explained by the above mechanism explaining its formation"? If none, isn't the whole BEC stuff redundant for explanation of cold fusion?


    The Surface Plasmon Polariton(SPP) is the key to LENR. The SPP forms a polariton condinsate through FANO interference which forces the waveforms of all the polaritons in the whispering gallery waveform to the same common energy level and shape. A common waveform for the polarion aggregation is thus formed as all the waveform fluctuations in the polaritons are suppressed. Being a BEC, all the SPPs will enter a state of coherence through EMF sharing in aggregation as a result of energy loss through dispersion.


    Random EMF pumping goes into the SPP and coherent EMF comes out as dispersion.


    There is a simple concept at play here. If we fill a glass with water and ice, given enough time, the water will reach a constant temperature. Entropy is always maximized at equilibrium. The same is true with EMF confined in a cavity.


    The FANO resonance mechanism is not temperature sensitive and the SPP will also form a BEC regardless of the temperature of the system.


    SPPs will form on the surface of transition metal nanoparticles. Ultra dense hydrogen (USD) is a secondary power amplification mechanism what supports SPP aggregate condinsation. Being an optimum crystal configuration for SPP amplification, the SPP on the surface of the UDH will form a BEC whose anapole magnetic component are all focused to the head of the UDH nanoparticle as witnessed by the superconductivity of the UDH.

  • Quote

    24MeV can not be distributed by a transversal wave without banging a huge hole... But with multiple layers of BEC (are naturally present in PD-D systems) the momentum is recursively folded into diverse planes

    The ionization energies are seven orders lower - you would need very large and compact stack of atoms (not just electrons) for to thermalize such an energy. In my theory of cold fusion the thermalization of reaction products is just reverse process of overcoming Coulomb barrier - these two two processes are tightly coupled each other. In similar way, like the 2D surface catalyst not only accelerates the speed of hydrogen burning, but it also greatly decreases its temperature. The cold fusion is therefore an extreme case of phase interface catalysis - a 1D catalysis.


    Quote

    The Surface Plasmon Polariton(SPP) is the key to LENR

    @Axill: I don't understand this reasoning, especially not its connection to glass of water: could you deduce some testable prediction from it? Your ability to chain poorly related concepts is exceptional. In particular, the surface energies of SPPs cannot be higher than the excitation energy of electrons, i.e. in range of few electronVolts - so you're by many orders off the nuclear energy range. The waves of very lightweight electrons, especially at the surface of metals would be subject of fun for every nuclear reaction.


    Quote

    SPPs will form on the surface of transition metal nanoparticles

    If we shake a sand inside box, a very high frequency of shaking will be needed for to achieve sparks. But if we would shake heavy pebbles, we can achieve sparks even under mild shaking. IMO the main reason why the cold fusion runs with metal plasma nanoparticles is, these particles are heavy and they collide mutually within plasma - not some SPPs.



    I know, that for SPPs similar energy attenuation mechanisms (analogy of Mossbauer lattice effects) can be applied, like for atom nuclei itself - but the available energy range for it is very low because of low mass and inertia of electrons. Analogously, the fact that for splitting of water with radiowaves the mechanism involving watter clusters can be applied in similar way, like for nuclear clusters during cold fusion doesn't imply, that the cold fusion runs with water clusters - got it? You're diligent collector of facts and I appreciate it - but your sense of physical reality is still pretty low.

  • Quote

    Zephir_AWT: I know, that for SPPs similar energy attenuation mechanisms (analogy of Mossbauer lattice effects) can be applied, like for atom nuclei itself - but the available energy range for it is very low because of low mass and inertia of electrons.


    The question that you are asking is where does all that power come from. The power comes from the boson nature of the polariton. Polaritons can accumulate in any number and condense because they are bosons. The power that they accumulate is a function of "pumping" and the Q factor of the surface in which they inhabited because of the Meissner effect. Superconductive nanowire as provided by Holmlid's ultra dense hydrogen clusters form a almost perfect reflector that guarantees miniscule power loss while the pumping feeds more light based EMF into the SPP.


    When the nuclear power based positive feedback loop becomes established, then the power of the SPP on the surface of the ultra dense hydrogen crystal becomes almost unlimited. The "Dark Mode" SPP stores energy into the giga EV range in a superconductive format as shown by experiment.

  • Quote

    I don't understand this reasoning, especially not its connection to glass of water: could you deduce some testable prediction from it?


    The SPP is bosonic light. Whenever this waveform is confined inside a cavity, it will condense into a single waveform through the action of self interference(fano resonance). This is how a BEC of polaritons come into being. Polaritons, because it is in their nature to form in a cavity will also form a BEC.

  • Quote

    http://physics.aps.org/articles/v9/154


    Matter-Light Condensates Reach Thermal Equilibrium



    In the Ultra dense hydrogen surface where Surface Plasmon Polaritons form, the two surfaces that support Bragg reflection to a almost perfect extent is the spin wave layer that the superconductive nature of the UDH generates and the ions that cannot absorb light because they do not have any electron orbitals in which light can give up its energy.


    Light photons pass through the ions and hit the SPPs on the surface of the UDH spin wave where the photons are absorbed than integrated into the polariton waveform on the surface of the UDH forming inside the SPP. The SPP act as a near perfect "dark mode' absorber of photon energy that builds literally without limit, until that energy leaks away through Hadronization into mesons.


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

  • The ionization energies are seven orders lower - you would need very large and compact stack of atoms (not just electrons) for to thermalize such an energy. In my theory of cold fusion the thermalization of reaction products is just reverse process of overcoming Coulomb barrier - these two two processes are tightly coupled each other. In similar way, like the 2D surface catalyst not only accelerates the speed of hydrogen burning, but it also greatly decreases its temperature. The cold fusion is therefore an extreme case of phase interface catalysis - a 1D catalysis.



    @Zephir_AWT : You forget two things: The coulomb barrier of hydrogen is about 511keV and we (LENR) only need a fraction to overcome it (roughly 1000keV). The resulting He nucleus releases at least one photon with 10MeV. Thats 10000 times more energy than needed to overcome the coulomb barrier. Thus any explanation with reverse coulomb is unsound. Or you accept, that a gamma quantum can get thermalised as others desparately suggested...

  • Quote

    Zephir_AWT wrote:The ionization energies are seven orders lower - you would need very large and compact stack of atoms (not just electrons) for to thermalize such an energy.


    Remember that SPPs and zero spin atoms are bosons. SPPs are all bosons and will form a superatom because they are coherent. LENR does not like fermions because fermions cannot produce a condinsate. Bosonic atoms can produce a condinsate and that is why lithium 7 is a critical catalyst in the Ni/H reaction whereas lithium 6 is a poison to the reaction.

  • Remember that SPPs and zero spin atoms are bosons. SPPs are all bosons and will form a superatom because they are coherent. LENR does not like fermions because fermions cannot produce a condinsate. Bosonic atoms can produce a condinsate and that is why lithium 7 is a critical catalyst in the Ni/H reaction whereas lithium 6 is a poison to the reaction.


    axil : What about H2 or deep H(0)2, H(-1)2 arent they bosonic?

  • Published (Jan 12, 2017) on PLOS.org --

    "Mesons from Laser-Induced Processes in Ultra-Dense Hydrogen H(0)" - Leif Holmlid

    http://journals.plos.org/ploso…1371/journal.pone.0169895


    Does anyone knows whether this is related to the approach to anti-matter catalyzed fusion? discussed at ---

    "Positron Dynamics Vision of Antimatter Catalyzed Fusion"

    http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2…vision-of-antimatter.html


    Also interesting (at least to me) is whether the dramatically increase pair production (electron-positron) reported in the preprint --- "Modulation effect in multiphoton pair production"

    https://arxiv.org/abs/1701.03586

    --- due to EM-field modulation, is relevant.

  • Quote

    The time variation of the collector signals was initially assumed to be due to time-of-flight of the ejected particles from the target to the collectors. Even the relatively low particle velocity of 10–20 MeV u-1 found with this assumption [2123] is not explainable as originating in ordinary nuclear fusion. The highest energy particles from normal D+D fusion are neutrons with 14.1 MeV and protons with 14.7 MeV [57]. The high-energy protons are only formed by the D + 3He reaction step, which is relatively unlikely and for example not observed in our laser-induced D+D fusion study in D(0) [14]. Any high-energy neutrons would not be observed in the present experiments. Thus, ordinary fusion D+D cannot give the observed particle velocities. Further, similar particle velocities are obtained also from the laser-induced processes in p(0) as seen in Figs 4, 6 and 7 etc, where no ordinary fusion process can take place. Thus, it is apparent that the particle energy observed is derived from other nuclear processes than ordinary fusion.

    Sorry my good fellows; forget fusion. Like any good scientist, Holmlid has gotten over his preconception of fusion as the energy source for these sub atomic particles. In other words, LENR has nothing to do with fusion or neutrons. Kaon production points to a amplified weak force decay process working to decay protons and neutrons providing a initial energy potential of a giga electron volts per reaction as all the mass of these nucleons are converted to mesons. There is a huge amount of energy consumed in meson production, and a trifling amount to heat.


    The take away...if you want to detect the LENR reaction, learn how to detect muons!!!

  • Some see Holmlid as bringing a theory and experimental key to LENR. Hopes are huge.

    As I understand his experiment it is quite new, and without replication I'm quite uncertain...


    Is there a program/project to replicate his findings in one of the big LENR team who regularly replicate other's work (SKINR, ENEA, NRL, SRI...) ?