New Patent Filed by Leif Holmlid

Quote from can

Possibly also due to hydrogen spillover effects as the atoms dissociated at the active catalyst sites would migrate on the carbon layers formed. The possible positive role of suitable carbon layers (even deposited from hydrocarbons during reaction conditions, not just the catalyst support) has been highlighted in the catalyst literature too.

His early studies with thermionic emitters were of desorption of alkali atoms as clusters (Rydberg matter) from graphite and graphite-covered metal surfaces. No Rydberg clustering would occur from pure metals without a graphite layer. From the previously linked review:

Isn't the graphite doped with potassium at 7%?

Quote from Cydonia

can

you saw " graphite so carbon" i saw also another keyword in you file attached.

Work function and efficiency thermionic, told me more too

It seems that carbon appears just as a way to improve electron's product by lowering work function so easily product thermionic electrons.

it sticks again with my understanding ; first you make unstable H monoatomic then you fill it by adding 1 more electron with alkali species ( or active species...)

Unstable H+ become more stable H-, it's crazy as it sticks well with Chauvin's work and before Piantelli.

H- remains more stable, more longer than H+ but he will plan to find a new balance.

Then at this stage, not a lot of things will help it to become H0 sckrinked as IRs for example.

Display More

The work function is certainly one factor, but not the only one, otherwise simply having alkali vapors in the atmosphere would have easily produced alkali Rydberg matter clusters in his case. The alkali metal (typically Cesium in those experiments) had to diffuse through the graphite-covered material and desorb from it to produce Rydberg matter. A similar process is at play in the experiments employing iron oxide catalysts (with optionally hydrogen when he wanted to produce Rydberg matter hydrogen clusters and their ultra-dense form).

A group from Russia replicated some of Holmlid's early '90s results a few years ago, perhaps you might find this an interesting read. A quick overview of Holmlid's experiments is presented, then a report of the group's replication. The paper is available on ResearchGate:

https://www.researchgate.net/p…rmionic_energy_converters

Some excerpts (TIC = Thermionic Converter, CES = Condensed Excited States):

[...]

Quote from axil

Isn't the graphite doped with potassium at 7%?

What is doped with 7% weight potassium, as a whole, is the commercial iron/potassium oxide catalysts, in the experiments where they are used (not the thermionic emitter ones above). The concentration of alkali atoms (diffusing from the bulk when the catalyst is in an activated state) in the outer layers of the catalyst including the deposited graphite, will likely be higher.

The previously mentioned metastable phase KFeO₂ with which the outer layer of the active catalysts are supposed to be covered (without considering any additional deposited carbon/graphite layer on top of them) should be about 30.8% weight potassium: https://www.webqc.org/molecular-weight-of-KFeO2.html

In his latest blog post (actually in-topic) Russ George mentioned:

Quote from Russ George

Prof. Homlid has now expanded his work into technology development via a company based in Norway called Norrønt Fusion Energy. I had the pleasure of meeting with the director Sindre Zeiner-Gundersen of Norrønt a week or so ago where over a few beers we enjoyed some hours of talking shop.

This seems tangentially related with what Alan Smith mentioned in another thread on LENR-Forum:

Quote from Alan Smith

It is real enough. Norront have a fantastic team with superb equipment who have established beyond doubt that it is all real. And have verified it off-site too. What they have not reported on is heat- but they are seeing some direct electricity production at very low efficiencies of course- early days.

Quote from Alan Smith

This work has been exposed to some serious Muon spectroscopy studies at a certain high energy laboratory in the UK. And passed the test - that is one of the things I meant by verified off-site. Norront are without doubt doing great work.

I wonder if that helped with the peer review.

I don't understand where the 500 MeV energy comes from to create muons in Holmlid's experiments. As far as I know he has never discussed this discrepancy with other methods of generating them.

How are muons produced?

Muons are generated in the Earth’s upper atmosphere by cosmic rays (high energy protons) colliding with atomic nuclei of molecules in the air.

Muons can also be produced in a two-step process at large research facilities. High energy protons (>500 MeV) generated by a particle accelerator collide into a carbon or beryllium target. This high energy interaction between the incoming protons and the target protons or neutrons produces particles known as pions (π). Positive and negative pions are very unstable and almost immediately decay into positive and negative muons respectively as well as neutrinos. The muons are then selectively channelled into beamlines and transported to the spectrometer where the sample lies.

We can form surface muon beams from pions decaying at the surface of the target. That beam is made of positive muons only, as the negative muons are captured. We can also form high momentum beams of positive and negative muons, where the pion decays in flight.

Dr Richard

There are a couple proposed hypotheses in section 8.7 in the latest general review (open access paper) but I don't think the final word on the exact processes involved or as for why they occur is out yet. As a side note, in what he calls "spin state s=1" the hydrogen pairs in the ultra-dense state are supposed to be located at a distance of about 0.56 pm from each other.

Ultradense hydrogen and hydrino concepts have many things in common. For example, ultradense hydrogen is stabilized by Rydberg orbitals, which are spherical and thus nonradiative in similar way, like alleged subquantum levels of hydrinos. According to Holmlid superdense hydrogen is forming superconductive filaments - well, hydrino is supposed to form magnetic filaments too. Filaments could also stabilize subquantum energy levels by Cassimir vacuum effect along long chains of metal atoms, between of which hydrogen atoms would be embedded like beads on rosary. Now Holmlid is pushing dense hydrogen into dark matter theory - in similar way, like Randell Mills already did many times.

The problem with both dense hydrogen both hydrino concepts is, they're all "single-man shows" and they were never transformed into more tangible stuff, than some lines in spectra. For example some compound, which someone could buy and study independently. Regarding their dark matter theory, this is apparent BS, as the observed behavior and distribution of dark matter cannot be explained by dense hydrogen or by hydrinos.

Quote

H(0) is the lowest energy form of hydrogen and H(0) is thus expected to exist everywhere where hydrogen exists in the Universe.

Which just doesn't exist. Such a hydrogen should be present at the Earth after them, it should form component of water, geological rock humidity etc. In addition, from where Holmlid thinks, that H(0) is the lowest energy form of hydrogen? Rydberg matter is pretty highly excited - and thus energy rich - form of matter instead. The understanding of trivial physical consequences is what both Holmlid, both Mills claims are sadly lacking.

Regarding dense hydrogen based Fusion company, I'm skeptical about this startup too. It's based on observation of Leif Holmlid, that short laser pulses generate quite a lot of muons, which are believed to catalyze hot fusion. But there is no reason for involvement of dense hydrogen in production of muons - laser pulses are known to produce many antiparticles, the annihilation of which would also produce muons. The energy for H(0) formation is quite low (in range of dozens of electronvolts) - so it's improbable that it participates on muon (105.66 MeV) formation. Even if we admit, that muons are generated without involvement of dense hydrogen there are many technical difficulties, like alpha-sticking problem. You'll need quite intensive source of muons - yet the energetic yield would be quite low.

That's the question-does the 250 mJ laser supply enough energy to induce a proposed electron spin-flip or neutron quasi - particle formation? There seems to be an unresolved mystery here - and why do we end up with mesons from proton decay rather than fusion of the two protons if tunneling probability has been increased? Whilst we can accept his work from a phenomenological point of view, theoretical physics is needed to work out the underlying mechanisms - maybe he's working on it for his next paper, hopefully?

Dr Richard

Not sure if it will be covered by the next paper, but a more complete theory (description) might be in preparation according to https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aadda1 (paywalled, published last year):

Quote from Curbina

I think the question is moot once you detect the particles being emitted. These experimental observations are verifiable and have been verified independently. Now the theory has to catch up with the experiments and not the other way around.

Agreed, but the question is which bits of the theory. The observations are interpreted a certain way by Holmlid and the others who follow him in his group. I've not seen any such interpretation from outside Holmlid's group, so whether those experiments actually produce mesons, and if so (more arguably) whether said mesons come a state of hydrogen no-one other than Holmlid and followers thinks exists is another matter.

Normally these things get solved in a scientific debate, but thus far Holmlid has been pretty well ignored by conventional science, and embraced uncritically by LENR science. Neither approach helps.

Norront Fusion is a logical extension of simply having found an economical way of producing muons - good luck to them if this approach ever works. Meanwhile it seems sensible to apply the same theoretical perspective ie the possible role of muons generated at low energies to other LENR applications like Mizuno's R20 reactor.