Ultra-dense hydrogen and Rydberg matter—a more informal general discussion thread

can

Thanks!

The publication of Measday is quite educating indeed.

A new publication by Svenn Olafsson and Leif Holmlid focussing on the annihilation process initiated by a weak laser pulse on ultra dense hydrogen:

Laser-induced annihilation: relativistic particles from ultra-dense hydrogen H(0).

ABSTRACT

Particle annihilation means that nuclear particles annihilate each other (for example nucleons like a neutron and an anti-neutron) and generate showers of mesons (mainly kaons and pions) at high energy. The kaons decay via pions and muons to electrons, positrons, neutrinos and photons. The energy which can be extracted from the very fast particles is of the order of 50% of the total energy of the nucleon masses involved or 500 MeV per mass unit. Several reports have been published recently on the meson showers ejected by pulsed-laser impact on ultra-dense hydrogen H(0). Since the particle velocities often are relativistic at >100 MeVu⁻¹ it is clear that a much more efficient nuclear process is responsible than in a normal hydrogen isotope fusion process (which can give only 3 and 15 MeV per mass unit out). The first experiment showing heat production above break-even in a laser-induced nuclear process in H(0) was published in AIP Avances as early as 2015. Here, we use a standard method for relativistic particle detection to show that the particles ejected by the laser pulse from D(0) are charged (thus not photons), and in fact positive, and that the signals decay with the characteristic decay times of kaons and pions with uncertainty < 1%. Using the measured kinetic energies of the mesons gives exact energy conservation. We conclude that annihilation of nucleons in H(0) is observed. This may have profound effects on future energy production, since the efficiency of the fuel in annihilation is roughly a factor of 100 higher than in a nuclear fusion process. Ordinary hydrogen (protium and deuterium) can be used as fuel instead of radioactive tritium. This means that energy is generated at low cost and with very little harmful radiation both for terrestrial and space applications (Acta Astronautica 2020).

Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/p…m_ultra-dense_hydrogen_H0 .

Quote from Rob Woudenberg

A new publication by Svenn Olafsson and Leif Holmlid focussing on the annihilation process initiated by a weak laser pulse on ultra dense hydrogen:

Nothing really new. Only as expected they see positive muons only. But the idea that two proton join and decay is pretty nonsensical as such reaction never have been seen in CERN. One must add 53 MeV to a proton to crack it. This is halve of it's excess energy what gives a resonance. But where from should this energy come from ?? Just to remind you each H*-H* pair misses 496eV!!

So their model has a big black hole as it is based on old wrong standard model ideas.

Wyttenbach
Undoubtedly there is some error margin in their model. The research is currently performed by only a few people that are not hardcore nuclear physicists.

Calibrating the outcome with your model is however valuable and should be discussed.

But calling an error of 496 eV related to 500 MeV per mass unit a huge black hole seems a bit overdone.

Quote from Rob Woudenberg

But calling an error of 496 eV related to 500 MeV per mass unit a huge black hole seems a bit overdone.

This is not an error. The cluster contains e.g. 17 H*. Then you add laser light with some low eV photons that certainly cannot dump 53 MeV into a proton orbit.

Standard model explanations simply are silly and if they go on with this nonsense model then it will kill the research.

Quote from Wyttenbach

This is not an error. The cluster contains e.g. 17 H*. Then you add laser light with some low eV photons that certainly cannot dump 53 MeV into a proton orbit.

Standard model explanations simply are silly and if they go on with this nonsense model then it will kill the research.

Are you doubting their measurement results?

What do you suggest is occurring otherwise looking at their TOF results?

You should remember it!! 8p --> 2 4-He + 56.7 MeV or 4D --> 2 4-He + 47.6 MeV. Both energies allow to crack a proton. With H you only get K+!
The fusion energy resonantly cracks the proton!

Hi all, I have done experimentation and research in this area for over 7 years. Many null results but some very promising results using a pulsed laser and monitoring ablation changes when the proposed dense hydrogen (deuterium) forms. I am an entrepreneur and machine builder, not a trained scientist but I have worked alongside several high-level PhD experimentalists in quality labs. I bring this point up to the handful of researchers in the area from time to time... While we certainly need to consider the theory of what could be happening as we move forward, the first step must be to definitively prove that a unique formation of hydrogen occurs (let's call it Hydrogen-X as a placeholder) HX. Shouldn't this be the principal goal, that the current research community in this field should prove that HX exists? The TOF results as well as ablation time increase, etc. shows that it can be made repeatedly but often there is no baseline to compare to. THEN, the field can move to the next step. I have personally visited over 20 University physics departments during the last 7 years, I can usually get the chair of the department to briefly read an abstract or two but they quickly dismiss it. "Why haven't we heard of this? It sounds sketchy" is the common response. "Well" I say, "you're reading about it now, take a deeper look". But all the data is confusing and extremely specialized. If HX is forming on the surface as RM or UDD on a metal this should be straightforward science to prove or disprove. Then the complex particle analysis can start taking place next.

What are your thoughts about the best way to prove that HX exists? We need the simple detector which is easier said than done. My 2 cents.. Mike

Quote from Terniac

What are your thoughts about the best way to prove that HX exists?

Just read Mills test report for H*-H* produced in the SUN-CELL. Analytical_Presentation_030119p42_44.pdf

H*-H* is the base product that also can occur in clusters of 7H* 19H* etc. according Holmlid.

Quote from Terniac

, the first step must be to definitively prove that a unique formation of hydrogen occurs (let's call it Hydrogen-X as a placeholder) HX. Shouldn't this be the principal goal, that the current research community in this field should prove that HX exists? The TOF results as well as ablation time increase, etc. shows that it can be made repeatedly but often there is no baseline to compare to. THEN, the field can move to the next step. I have personally visited over 20 University physics departments during the last 7 years, I can usually get the chair of the department to briefly read an abstract or two but they quickly dismiss it. "Why haven't we heard of this? It sounds sketchy" is the common response. "Well" I say, "you're reading about it now, take a deeper look". But all the data is confusing and extremely specialized. If HX is forming on the surface as RM or UDD on a metal this should be straightforward science to prove or disprove. Then the complex particle analysis can start taking place next.

What are your thoughts about the best way to prove that HX exists? We need the simple detector which is easier said than done. My 2 cents.. Mike

Deuterium, oxygen and nitrogen exist in a new form, a super-magnetic atoms. Supermagnetic atoms bond magnet to magnet which produce a variety of "magnecules", atoms bonded magnetically. Unfortunately, these magnecules are more like clusters than molecules and hence very little energy causes them to become structurally changed. Hence, these supermagnetic atoms show up as unknown masses in mass-spectroscopy. To prove the existence of supermagnetic atoms, I assumed their existence, used their expected properties to provide identity to unknowns in the mass spectrum analysis and then completed the mass balance between before reaction and after reaction. The mass balance then indicated the some atoms disappear in the amounts and ratios required for a balanced reaction equation for nuclear transformation. Hence, based on measurement cold fusion happens but surprisingly energy production does not. For complete details see US020180322974A120181108 (storage.googleapis.com)

Great input. A laser, while there is a learning curve, my system was quite simple with one focusing lens, an optical flange window and I had a single axis manipulator so I could move the target laterally so as to be able to have a dozen or so fresh places on the target available without opening the chamber. My University student assistant, who was quite good with all things electronic was very helpful and we did have a charge detector but a 100 megahertz scope I don't believe is quite quick enough. We had an 18 volt negative bias and proper 50 ohm terminations and cabling.

Bottom line I think is, on a bare and fresh target (usually 316 SS x 1mm thick, in my case) there will be a particular signature from the plasma plume. LH says plume particles accelerate from keV range to MeV when RM (not sure) but for sure when UDD forms. This is what we were looking for but we didn't have the expertise to really dial in on it. What we learned was that the ablation of the stainless steel would slow down by 200% to 400% which is remarkable considering it's an invisible layer of hydrogen. Ablation only is not very sophisticated but shows something is happening but with better instrumentation, wouldn't the comparison of the bare target signal (keV) to the one that had the HX (MeV) conclusively show that some kind of new substance was on the metal? It can't be orange marmalade nothing else has been introduced to the system, it must be made of Hydrogen. A new state or phase of hydrogen is a huge deal as we all know. It would sure be nice to get a few more labs to write good papers on the formation of an HX. Mike

Production of Ultra-dense Hydrogen H(0): A Novel Nuclear Fuel" https://www.sciencedirect.com/…cle/pii/S0360319921008144

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy

Volume 46, Issue 35, 20 May 2021, Pages 18466-18480

Review Article

Authors

LeifHolmlid

Andrzej Kotarbab

Pawel Stelmachowskib

Abstract

Condensation of hydrogen Rydberg atoms (highly electronically excited) into the lowest energy state of condensed hydrogen i.e. the ultra-dense hydrogen phase, H(0), has gained increased attention not only from the fundamental aspects but also from the applied point of view. The physical properties of ultra-dense hydrogen H(0) were recently reviewed (Physica Scripta 2019 https://doi.org/10.1088/1402-4896/ab1276), summarizing the results reported in 50 publications during the last ten years. The main application of H(0) so far is as the fuel and working medium in nuclear particle generators and nuclear fusion reactors which are under commercial development. The first fusion process showing sustained operation above break-even was published in 2015 (AIP Advances) and used ultra-dense deuterium D(0) as fuel. The first generator giving a high-intensity muon flux intended for muon-catalyzed fusion reactors was patented in 2017, using H(0) as the working medium. Here, we first focus on the different nuclear processes using hydrogen isotopes for energy generation, and then on the detailed processes of formation of H(0). The production of H(0) employs heterogeneous catalysts which are active in hydrogen transfer reactions. Iron oxide-based, alkali promoted catalysts function well, but also platinum group metals and carbon surfaces are active in this process. The clusters of highly excited Rydberg hydrogen atoms H(l) are formed upon interaction with alkali Rydberg matter. The final conversion step from ordinary hydrogen Rydberg matter H(l) to H(0) is spontaneous and does not require a solid surface. It is concluded that the exact choice of catalyst is not very

important. It is also concluded that the crucial feature of the catalyst is to provide excited alkali atoms at a sufficiently high surface density and in this way enabling formation and desorption of H(0) clusters. Finally, the relation to industrial catalytic processes which use H(0) formation catalysts is described and some important consequences like the muon and neutron radiation from H(0) are discussed.

Quote from Rob Woudenberg

Curbina
Although not formally confirmed, lawyers of BLP can not simply stop a researcher from doing research that has overlap with BLP's activities based on legal reasons. If true, they might have offered him an amount of money or stake in BLP to cease his research and publications. We probably never will know.

Yes, I have received a cease and decist notice from BLP.

BLP is never (in my opinion) going to offer $ to anyone for this sort of thing (to stop research).

What they are/were doing (perhaps???) is positioning themselves legally so that that if a commercial technology was developed by someone else, they can claim that it utilises BLP IP and would likely attempt to negotiate significant payment for use of this IP. As a listed company, this is maximising value for shareholders...

The actual extent of BLP IP coverage is very hard to define, noting that they attempt to cover 137 different forms of dense hydrogen and just about all elements as potential catalysts in their patents, in a wide variety of electrochemical configurations!!!

For many of us who are really just trying to assist with developing a viable safe pathway to a clean energy future, receiving one of these legal letters is highly demoralising and has unfortunately ended the research efforts of many which is a real shame.

The reality is that the BLP theory is not fully correct, but they do have some early publication and patent coverage on dense hydrogen. Technologies are very possible beyond the BLP ideas, but considerable care is needed in presenting ideas to avoid risks of BLP attempting claims should a technology become ready for commercialisation.

Not easy to navigate unless you know in advance what is going on...

SB.

Quote from Cydonia

Methods of production[edit]

The only truly stable state of a hydrogen-like atom is the ground state with n = 1.

Not entirely true.

Dense hydrogen is stable when trapped inside chemical structures such as fullerenes, e.g. C-60. Geological deposits are known and are currently being extracted.

Oh, and about 80% of the mass the Universe is hydrogen with n greater than 1, i.e. H(n=29) otherwise known as dark matter. Refer to papers on the subtleatomics.com website.