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

  • Referring to the interview with Sveinn Ólaffson, I am wondering why he mentioned that when muon are stopped X-rays and/or gamma radiation should be detected (in the video at around 20:00 minutes).

    Muons normally decay after approximately 2.2 us into electrons, muon-neutrinos and elektron-neutrino.

    When I look at wiki there is no mentioning of X-rays or gamma radiation, so these effects should then occur when stopping muons before they decay. But what does stop mean in such case? I would expect they replace electrons of atoms that form the mass that stop muons, which in turn could create transmutations. Is it the transmutations that cause these X-rays and gamma radiations? This also the reason why I asked Holmlid whether he detected any transmutations in his setup.


    If I understand correctly Holmlid applied a scintillator to stop muons. Why did he not detect and report X-rays and gamma radiation? Maybe I missed this.

    Atomic muon capture knocks out electrons as the muon descends towards lower orbitals. This causes the emission of characteristic X-rays (up to several MeV) which depend on the element.


    Excerpt from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0370-1573(01)00012-6




    Initially Holmlid reported a beta-like signal which was thought to be due to nuclear capture reactions, but then he proposed a different mechanism here: https://www.researchgate.net/p…by_lepton_pair-production


    I don't recall X-rays from atomic capture being mentioned in the process.

  • 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 .

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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?

  • This excerpt from the recently published paper linked earlier should be of interest. The annihilation mechanism is different than what is suggested above:


    Quote

    [...]

    3. Annihilation reaction in H(0)

    Further studies of the nuclear processes in this system have measured the energies for all mesons formed [22]. The important steps for forming the antineutrons and antiprotons pass a quasineutron state, that is a (p+ + e) entity able to form a neutron. This is a known process called β capture. The particle formed is proposed to oscillate to form either a neutron or an antineutron. This antineutron is the antiparticle which gives the annihilation reaction. More details are given in reference [33].


    I think the oscillation quoted should be the one described here: Neutral particle oscillation - Wikipedia

  • 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

  • Terniac.


    Well, what an interesting post. I can think of a couple of things.


    First suggestion, make HX inside a low-mass quad spectometer and plot the mass changes from H to HX. If there aren't too many volatiles involved it could be a good demo. This assumes that HX has a gas-phase of course.


    The second suggestion is more dependent on it retaining it's configuration. Make it react with something or hydride something. Chlorine comes to mind. The iHCl (for example) could be dissolved in water and studied using absorption spectrometry with standard HCl as a control.

  • Terniac , thanks for joining the conversation!


    You pose a very important question, one which we have been trying to answer here for a while.

    Holmlid and company have been looking at what is produced by hitting the target where the HX is supposed to be formed with the laser and watching what flies off. Holmlid says it’s muons. Svein Ólaffson himself is not so sure, as you can see him talking about in the interview that LENR-forum posted here:


    External Content m.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.


    Early pioneer of “cold fusion” Takaaki Matsumoto theorized that clusters of “condensed” or “frozen”hydrogen were formed in a copper target in his electric sparks on K2CO3 electrolyte experiments. He published pictures of what he thought were these clusters, which he called “itonic hydrogen”. He also detected many kinds of particle emissions in his experiments by means of nuclear emulsions.


    Perhaps direct observation of this elusive HX is precluded not by it being elusive, but because of our theoretical biases makes us look for something while it in reality is present in a different way.


    Some others that have their own approach to the HX and hace their own names for it, as Mills, claim they have been able to measure it by different spectroscopic methods. Another one that is rarely mentioned is Santilli, who also claimed to have developed a different IR spectroscopic method to quantify his flavor of HX (albeit Santilli makes the case for it being mixed with other stuff normally, but he produced his HX in gas form, and claimed it weights multiples of the weight of H).


    Just to close my post, you can see that the main hindrance is that many have come to the idea of a condensed or clustered hydrogen independently, and each one developed his own theoretical approach to it, and not two of them agree in much of anything about it.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • , 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