Experimental Instrument For Rydberg Matter Research (University of Iceland)

  • there is still the traditional Coulomb barrier that results from this Coulombic assumption to be tunnelled thru

    which presumptively is unlikely for two D(O) nuclei

    which is why he needs a negative Muon..?


    There are two possible fusion causes IMHO:

    1) A changing spinning state from s= 2 to s=1 initiated by a laser pulse. According to Holmlid's data this would cause H(0) nuclei to become close enough (0.56 pm) to fuse.

    2) Negative muons, initially generated from cause 1)


    Holmlid is carefully avoiding the word 'fusion' here. He probably needs more verifications to be a bit more determined.

    And, indeed, his analyses are based on conventional Quantum Physics.

    I would love to see him giving feedback on Wyttenbach papers. But I don't think that is going to happen soon.

  • Holmlid does make a distinction between what he calls ordinary fusion processes (e.g. D+D) and those which calls annihilation-like. Both can apparently occur spontaneously (on their own, without an deliberate energy input) at a low rate, but the hard-to-capture meson reactions seem to "dominate".


    https://iopscience.iop.org/art…02-4896/ab1276#psab1276s8


    Quote

    8. Nuclear processes in H(0)


    Nuclear processes exist in H(0), both in p(0) and D(0). These processes are not only fusion processes (of course only existing in D(0)), but other types of nuclear processes in fact dominate. Both laser-induced and spontaneous processes have been studied. These processes cannot be described as fusion reactions since they do not give the products expected from normal nuclear reactions. Instead, they much more resemble annihilation reactions from their product spectrum (Klempt et al 2005). They thus seem to belong to a novel type of nuclear reaction which may be directly coupled to the transformation of quarks inside the nuclei. Such experiments have not been performed by any other research group, and it is thus not possible to give any references to other studies. [...]


    Further below in the text he writes, in reference also to past experiments:


    Quote

    8.2. Heat generation

    Several different types of high-energy particles are generated by the laser-pulse interaction in H(0), as described above. Most of these particles are penetrating and do not stop close to the laser target. To test the possibility of local heat generation despite this, an experiment was designed with an enclosure (copper cylinder) around the laser target with H(0) (Holmlid 2015c). The temperature of the enclosure was measured during experiments with variable laser energy and gas pressure. Only D2 gas was used to optimize the heat generation by giving the possibility of D + D fusion. Thus, the results may be due to nuclear fusion and not only due to (at that time) unknown annihilation-like nuclear processes. Even under these conditions when most high-energy particles could not be contained in the enclosure, an excess heat was observed in the copper cylinder (Holmlid 2015c). The fact that high-energy particles left the enclosure was also described in this report. The results show clearly that excess heat can be generated by the laser impact on D(0), partly due to nuclear fusion, and that further energy generating processes giving even higher energy exist.


    The nuclear fusion processes in D(0) had been studied in another publication previous to the heat measurements. That study was done by TOF measurements using a PMT for sensitive particle measurements (Olofson and Holmlid 2014b). All particles involved in D + D fusion processes were detected but T which indeed was expected to react on forming 4He in the end. Of course, neutrons could not be detected by the PMT detector. Collisional processes of several emitted particles with the small D4(0) clusters were also detected. Thus, background information that fusion indeed took place under the conditions used for the heat measurements existed in Olofson and Holmlid (2014b) prior to the heat generation experiments in Holmlid (2015c).

  • Further below in the text he writes, in reference also to past experiments:


    To test the possibility of local heat generation despite this, an experiment was designed with an enclosure (copper cylinder) around the laser target with H(0)


    According to the SO(4) physics calculations almost all heat (fusion excess energy) is transported by the Kaon Pions otherwise the reaction would immediately stop.

  • Splitting a proton means you get 53MeV from fusion --> kaons and their full mass (in total about 990MeV) - 2-3 electrons/ positrons. It's the most energetic source of energy.


    Holmlid describes his proposed process steps as follows:



    Sorry for being a bit too curious but:

    Can you eleborate on your process steps a bit more?

    How do you generate the numbers you give here? (SO(4) simulator?)

  • Can you eleborate on your process steps a bit more?


    All particles finally decay to electrons or positrons and the kinetic energy gets attached to collisions or is converted into a gamma quantum. SM believe always energy disappear as neutrinos... Just an excuse for not being able to measure it. The cited Homlids equations are just guesswork.

    This is the experimental frontline. Needs a lot of better experiments & measurements.

  • Needs a lot of better experiments & measurements.

    To convince the opposition both in Scandinavia and elsewhere

    Sindre is being very methodical in replicating and extending Holmlid's research

    Leif Holmlid states

    "

    This total energy output is based on numerous experiments which measure the number of muons formed; however, the uncertainty in
    this number is relatively large due to the complex mixture of mesons and leptons forme
    d by the present generator"


    so definitely he would do more experiments to reduce this uncertainty... if he could ...but I think that expts won't be enough

    .. expts never have been enough .. at least since Copenhagen ..

    post-Bohr nuclear physics has been very political..in Scandinavia and elsewhere

    Can you eleborate on your process steps a bit more?

    I think you will find 53 Mevs in the attached ITERwytt..;)

    but remember this is not THE path but A possible path..


    once you produce Kaons.. these unstable entities represent mostly energy.. since they degrade to

    pions muons and thence to photons ... electrons.. ? by journeys that are so far unquantified.


    and which is only part of further research...

    the 3 million $ so far is a mere drop in the bucket..

  • Speaking of papers, here's a freshly published one with Sindre Zeiner-Gundersen as a co-author:




    Future interstellar rockets may use laser-induced annihilation reactions for relativistic drive

    Leif Holmlid, Sindre Zeiner-Gundersen

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2020.05.034


    Quote

    Abstract: Interstellar probes and future interstellar travel will require relativistic rockets. The problem is that such a rocket drive requires that the rocket exhaust velocity from the fuel also is relativistic, since otherwise the rocket thrust is much too small: the total mass of the fuel will be so large that relativistic speeds cannot be reached in a reasonable time and the total mass of the rocket will be extremely large. Until now, no technology was known that would be able to give rocket exhaust at relativistic speed and a high enough momentum for relativistic travel. Here, a useful method for relativistic interstellar propulsion is described for the first time. This method gives exhaust at relativistic speeds and is a factor of at least one hundred better than normal fusion due to its increased energy output from the annihilation-like meson formation processes. It uses ordinary hydrogen as fuel so a return travel is possible after refuelling almost anywhere in space. The central nuclear processes have been studied in around 20 publications, which is considered to be sufficient evidence for the general properties. The nuclear processes give relativistic particles (kaons, pions and muons) by laser-induced annihilation-like processes in ultra-dense hydrogen H(0). The kinetic energy of the mesons is 1300 times larger than the energy of the laser pulse. This method is superior to the laser-sail method by several orders of magnitude and is suitable for large spaceships.

  • Future interstellar rockets may use laser-induced annihilation reactions for relativistic drive

    Leif Holmlid, Sindre Zeiner-Gundersen

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2020.05.034

    Interestingly an answer to my previous question "Why bother fusion while the energy of mesons created is 15 to 30 times that of D+D fusion after firing a laser pulse at UDD?":


    "The energy released by the annihilation is 100 times larger than by fusion."

    (that is, if their assumptions and models are correct of course;)

  • By the way, I'm wondering if this paper in preparation (Ref. 30) will give a final answer on the catalysts.


    Quote

    L. Holmlid, A. Kotarba and P. Stelmachowski, “Function of the Solid Catalyst Used for Production of Ultra-dense Hydrogen H(0)”. (in preparation).


    From this latest manuscript is still seems that the preferred catalysts are the usual ones.


    Quote

    The catalysts needed for producing the ultra-dense hydrogen H(0) from hydrogen gas are made of base metals like iron and chromium [28,29] in oxidized form with alkali metal (for example potassium) as promoter [30]. These materials should be available in most star systems on asteroids and small planets with solid surfaces with a close example of Mars (the red iron oxide planet), if the catalyst becomes contaminated, or deactivated [31] for other reasons, and has to be replaced.


    References 28-31:

    • Muhler M, Schlögl R, Ertl G. The nature of the iron oxide-based catalyst for dehydrogenation of ethylbenzene to styrene 2. Surface chemistry of the active phase. Journal of Catalysis. 1992 Dec 1;138(2):413-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9517(92)90295-S
    • Kotarba A, Barański A, Hodorowicz S, Sokołowski J, Szytuła A, Holmlid L. Stability and excitation of potassium promoter in iron catalysts–the role of KFeO 2 and KAlO 2 phases. Catalysis letters. 2000 Jul 1;67(2-4):129-34. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019013504729 (also on Researchgate)
    • L. Holmlid, A. Kotarba and P. Stelmachowski, “Function of the Solid Catalyst Used for Production of Ultra-dense Hydrogen H(0)”. (in preparation).
    • Meima GR, Menon PG. Catalyst deactivation phenomena in styrene production. Applied Catalysis A: General. 2001 Apr 30;212(1-2):239-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-860X(00)00849-8


    Also related:


    Quote

    The most suitable future storage medium will probably be an assembly of thin metallic or graphitic films. H(0) can be stored most easily at temperatures of a few hundred K, and at pressures from zero to a few bars. Since H(0) is easily produced from hydrogen gas in contact with a suitable catalyst [29,30], it will best be produced in the laser drives in the rockets when needed. Large-scale storage as H(0) is not recommended since the spontaneous nuclear reactions taking place in H(0) [32] could give uncontrolled energy and radiation release.

  • This made me think why they composed this paper.


    Norront is still strugling with getting the proper amount of investements, although energy providers like Vattenval are probably very aware of what their technology potential is. There might be too much other forces that may cause solid resistance to invest in their technology. So they probably seek additional investment parties in different areas, e.g. healthcare industry (neutron and muon related treatments), and by this paper now also space technology. Makes a lot of sense.

  • Funding difficulties might have many reasons, but one could be that it does not look complicated enough, given that on the surface it employs relatively affordable lasers and industrial catalysts, and that experiments are reportedly already ongoing in various laboratories. Possible investors might wonder why despite this there are no applications or even just demonstration units yet (i.e. "too good to be true"), while others might decide that they don't need to fund other companies and try instead to look on the subject on their own.


    From section 4 in any case it sounds as if a possibly difficult to solve issue, more than producing it, is collecting enough ultra-dense hydrogen in a single place, which according to Holmlid's latest patent application makes releasing energy from it easier/more efficient. However, excessive accumulation "could give uncontrolled energy and radiation release". I found this interesting.

  • Funding requests


    - HELANS High Efficiency Laser Assisted Neutron Source

    - Verification test of a potential Muon Source by third party

    Sindre via Norront has put in 2 funding

    requests to Viken for 350,000 SEK each? is that 35,000 USD?



    There are 21 other requests.. but none to do with nuclear physics..

    e,g."Sustainable pottery concept for flowers and herbs, from seeds to window sills"


    Was I wrong.. maybe there is not much opposition to new nuclear..in Norway


    Maybe I need to get some Norwegian friends to access this money...


    Project: Radiationless, collisionless fusion heat production from dense hydrogen...without laser. or gallium.

  • Not only interesting, but also worrisome. This could draw interest of (nuclear) defense industry.

    It's probably related to the potential avalanche effects I pointed out earlier.


    The same property could also mean that it will be difficult to put together—on Earth at least—the material in large enough amounts to have dangerous or very large-scale uses, although there's no limit to human imagination and various parameters and conditions could influence this like they do for the critical mass of fissionable materials.


    Regardless of this, many entities would certainly be interested in attempt producing what essentially is antimatter:


    Quote

    [...] This annihilation-like method is well studied in the laboratory and gives initially fast kaons and pions from protons or deuterons by annihilation-like processes. We use the phrase annihilation-like since the practical evidence and use is more important for its characterization than the claim inherent in the strict nomenclature without the -like. The necessary antimatter used is concluded to be formed by oscillations of the quasi-neutrons [4,5] initially formed in the ultra-dense hydrogen by laser-induced processes from spin state s = 2 to s = 1 [4].


    (from section 1 in the paper, which also explains why they call the processes annihilation-like)

  • Possible investors might wonder why despite this there are no applications or even just demonstration units yet (i.e. "too good to be true"), while others might decide that they don't need to fund other companies and try instead to look on the subject on their own.


    Lack of a demonstration unit that generates energy with a convincing COP is probably an important reason.

    Their recent new setups show an infrastructure for fundamental research rather than (pre)development of products.


    If I look to the business model of Norront Fusion Energy they indicate a license program on their IP rather than developing (end)products.