Posts by Rob Woudenberg

Quote from redirmogician

What happens when the resulting meson collide with other nucleons, do the muons transfer momentum to other nucleons, or do they fuse into other particles. I was wondering if there is any way to harvest energy by charged particles instead of heat.

Negative muons could replace electrons when colliding.
This is what happens with muon catalyzed D-D fusion.

Simplified explanation by this youtube video.

Harvesting highly energetic charged particle energy can be done by guiding them through the centre of toroidal coils.

I recommend you to read Leif Holmlid's papers, in particular his publications after 2014.

A 52 minutes interview with Frank Gordon by Steven Krivit (New Energy Times) has been published on YouTube.

Quote from redirmogician

is there some way to convert the mass of a meson into usable energy before it decays into a neutrino

It's the kinetic energy you have in mind I guess.
The most logical one would be to convert it to heat by a material that would absorb the mesons.

I haven't seen any material to convert this to useable heat without being too bulky.

Quote from Curbina

I think that is kind of obvious as Holmlid has proposed it as an idea to develop thinking on space propulsion more than anything else.

For space it could be applied almost instantly.

But for energy production here on earth it needs further research since up till now there is no real known method to produce annihilation energy on a sufficiently large scale. Breaking down UDH or UDD into sub particles that decay would offer this option. That would require the acceptance of existence of UDH and it's method to produce it.

I think redirmogician refers to the annihilation option to obtain energy from UHD.
Harvesting annihilation energy (mass into, mainly kinetic, energy) with current technology is extremely hard to do. This needs further research as Holmlid announced in the past.

Another option would be to use the muon catalyzed deuterium fusion path, in this case using UDD.

Quote from Ahlfors

...

Good finding Ahlfors, I missed your earlier post on this.

Holmlid's work is now being further developed by a new Swedish startup company Lazerah.

Let's keep an eye on this.

Quote from Alan Smith

You are quite right about the YAG laser producing the effect speedily, but I believe that once established even the flourescent lights in the lab will trigger muon emissions.

I am not discussing muon emission here however.

There are three types of energy potentially being generated when it comes to UDH:

- Condensation energy (de-excitation of the electron to extreme low energy 'orbit').

- Muon catalysed fusion. Destruction of UDH into subparticles, e.g. negative muons which in turn cause hydrogen to fuse.

- Annihilation energy where mass of sub particles is converted to (kinetic) energy.

The light emission caused by condensation is what currently is being discussed.

It might in turn also trigger UDH into the other mentioned energy types, but in principle UDH is a very stable state of Hydrogen according to Holmlid.

Personally I think that what Sveinn presented here may be related to the process of forming UDH as suggested by Holmlid and Sindre, described by can in post #250.

Here the presence of Potassium Rydberg Matter is catalyzing the formation of Hydrogen Rydberg Matter by transferring its energy. Adding an external laser pulse may speed up this process by transferring additional energy to the available Hydrogen Rydberg Matter. As I suggested, the condensation of Hydrogen Rydberg Matter to UDH very likely releases the observed intense light. Note, I do not mean the light emitted when Hydrogen Rydberg Matter de-excites to ordinary Hydrogen, generating IR photons, see also post #94 of this thread, but in particular those Hydrogen Rydberg Matter clusters that further de-excite to UDH.

Quote from j9381

Sveinn Olafsson process (potassium, iron oxide surface + hydrogen and a laser, correct?)

Researchers, like Sveinn, that investigate Ultra Dense Hydrogen, do not apply tin.

Quote

Brilliant Light Power's (molten tin and electrical discharges

BLP does not apply lasers

The EUV light source ASML applies is an intriguing technology, but is not related to UDD/UDH.

This EUV light source has an efficiency of only 5 % max according the cited article.

I think you suggest that hitting a metal surface with a laser pulse may create additional light emitting (dusty) plasma.

The phenomenon mentioned by Sveinn during the presentation produces clearly much more visible light than the source laser is generating (efficiency >> 100 % ). Besides, in his setup the laser does not hit the hardware target but is aimed just below its surface (as shown at time slot 8:32 in the presentation video).

milton

Thanks for that find. I must have seen it before but couldn't remember it.

It certainly could be a confirmation of my thoughts.

can
I am not sure you still follow LF on a regular basis, but I have a thought on UDH/UDD that I would like your opinion on.

Some LENR scientists observe bright light when operating their setups. Examples: BLP, Rossi.

In general light is generated when excited electrons 'fall back' to a lower energy level.

That made me wonder whether release of EM radiation ever has been reported in the case of atoms having Rydberg state that return to 'normal' state. In addition, EM radiation will also be released when normal Hydrogen condenses to UDH. Question is whether that would fit into the visible light frequency range though.

Quote from Alan Smith

Be careful about that - surface adsorption is exothermic except in Au and Ag, Subsurface adsoprption is generally endothermic, except in Pt.

Thanks for adding that nuance.

Since the experiments Sheehan described applied two different metals there will be a difference in the amount of adsorption thermic effect. This will in any case cause a temperature difference and that is exactly what I wanted to point out.

Sheehan is already for decades inspired by differences in hydrogen recombination ability of materials but he created a tunnel vision on that effect, cutting out other effects.

Quote from Alan Smith

Now at the SSE YouTube Channel: Advanced Energy Concepts Challenging the Second Law of Thermodynamics

I just finished viewing Daniel Sheehan's presentation.

The conclusion of the epicatalysis experiment he describes around time 22:44 onwars leaves out an important thermal effect caused by absorption of hydrogen into metals. Sheehan only concentrates on the differences between metals regarding the differences of recombination capabilities of hydrogen atoms between two different metals. But it's not only that effect that matters.

Two different metals have different hydrogen absorption capacities. Absorption of hydrogen into metal lattices is an exothermical effect. Therefore the heat caused by absorption in two different metals is different, causing a temperature difference during the absorption phase in the experiment as described by Sheehan. His conclusions are only valid if temperature measurements are performed after hydrogen absorption has reached the saturation stage. It's not clear whether that has been the case.

Akito Takahashi, Osaka University, posted an update at ResearchGate regarding the MHE (Metal Hydrogen Energy) research performed in Japan.

This update shows focus on Nickel / Hydrogen (consistent with the focus of Clean Planet), optimism about their theory matching their practical results and entering next stage of research and development aiming for industrial applications.

This update includes two JCCF22 presentations worth reading:

(PDF) New MHE Experiments by D-System (researchgate.net)

(PDF) Characteristics of Excess Power Generation in MHE Experiments by D-System (researchgate.net)

Quote from Wyttenbach

The US military did repeat P&F 1989. They measured muons from glow discharge the next year.

I would be interested in the publications of this.

Do you, or anyone else, have a reference?

Graph from one of Clean Planet's presentations gives a bit more clarity on this.

I posted it earlier in this thread:

Here they show the theoretical value (small red dot to the upper right of the graph, indicated by 理論憊) and the energy density of QHE.
The QHE density is represented by the bigger red ellipse in the center of this graph. As mentioned earlier QHE density here represented is derived from practical experiments (hence the wide range). The centers of both circles differ a factor of 1000 roughly.

QHE is obtained by metal stacks through which hydrogen is forced.
The only public information of what causes QHE can be derived from Iwamura's publications where e.g. transmutations are reported. They still report that they do not exactly know the details of the physics.

To add some of my own thoughts: I do not exclude that excess heat is also produced by the formation of ultra dense hydrogen (condensation energy of Rydberg Hydrogen matter and maybe even transmutations caused by subatomic particles produced by decomposition of ultra dense hydrogen). It's probably a mix of effects at a controlled slow rate, mainly controlled by heater temperature.

Quote from Daniel_G

They claim that 1g of Hydrogen can produce 1,000,000kJ of energy or 10,000x that of natural gas. If this was true, a 10kW(heat) reactor would use 1g of hydrogen in about 28hours. They are off by 100,000%.

Based on the assumption of converting all Hydrogen mass to energy and/or Helium?

This is not what is claimed.

More details of their numbers can be found in this publication.

Quote

Concluding Remarks

New type of excess heat experiments using a nano-sized metal multilayer composite and hydrogen gas have been performed based on the permeation-induced transmutation experiments with multilayer thin film and excess heat experiments with nano-particles. Anomalous Excess energy generation using nano-sized multilayer Cu/Ni metal composite and Cu/Ni metal with third material (CaO, Y2O3) composite were observed. Maximum released excess energy reached 1.1 MJ and average released energy per absorbed total hydrogen was 16 keV/H or 1.5 GJ/H-mol. It cannot be explained by any known chemical process and suggests that the observed heat generation must be of nuclear origin. Many analysis methods have been applied to identify what kind of reactions occur by the interaction of the nano-sized multilayer metal composite with hydrogen gas.

The papers of Iwamura indicate transmutations, so this is probably the source of excess heat.

The current figures seem based on these practical results from their research setup, so, the rate of transmutations that occur.

I would love to see proof of others achieving similar or better results, not only words.

Quote from Gregory Byron Goble

This opinion (no proof) is open for debate here on this thread.

Is it? You stated it as a fact. Then, when asked for proof, you didn't provide any.

What's next? The earth is flat?

This thread is not about NASA.

There is no proof provided USPTO accepts LENR related patent applications.

Some may pass due to clever wording, but the majority gets rejected when LENR effects are claimed.

Quote from Gregory Byron Goble

LENR IS now considered part of known science by the US patent office.

Please provide a link where this is stated by USPTO.