No i believe rydberg state, R matter, dense and ultradense formation of both H and D is absolute correct. There are certainly commercial uses for it.
SindreZG
Verified User
- Member since Apr 4th 2014
- Last Activity:
Posts by SindreZG
-
-
No magic, just normal accellerator physics
-
The TOF results is a mix, microwaves, xrays, electrons and protons in the tof tubes.
-
its XRays and neutrons
Can we know what is your interpretation of the results you obtained? I know you replicated the effect but don’t agree with Holmlid’s interpretation, but I haven’t been able to know what is your alternative hypothesis to explain your results.
-
Bashing at other physicist doesnt make it more credible. Still results with uncalibrated detectors…
-
[…]
Im happy to share catalysts and assist a different research group if someone want to set up a fifth replication experiment to see if they can verify.
-
Yes i reproduced everything as far as i could with the funding i had, transportable battery operated pmts. SiPM detectors, calibrated xray detectrors, three different kind of neutron detectors. Large scale coincidence and anti coincidence Muon detectors. The detectors i used was a lot more advanced. Detection range 0-20 m from reactors under different operating conditions. as a physicist i will always be looking for answers- i saw the same radiation as Leif but i do not have the same conclusion. The Neutrons origin is most likely not from Fusion but from high energy Protons. Remember that just a slight misunderstanding of early results can lead to a cascade of later interpretations.
-
Pions and kaons can not be detected using simple detectors for a couple of 100 bucks with ns timing.
-
Attached is a database on muonix xrays, not just bremstralung and light: https://muxrays.jinr.ru
-
Display More
According to literature positive muons just lead to Bremsstrahlung and Cherenkov light. Can you tell us what X-rays you expect? So with Holmlid's guessified energy the expected penetration depth for u+ is 6..9 cm where the positron with up to 50MeV gets freed.
Are there medical papers about positiv "low energy muon" - u+ - damage? Cherenkov light could be enough for damage.
Negative muons are totally different as the coupling is much stronger and you get many X-rays.
I'm fully aware that many things Holmlid tells are just best guesses. But the energy of the fragments clearly has nuclear origin and the timing gives the correct answer for the Kaon, Pion, Muon chain - here is no doubt.
But it is a shame that nobody with more elaborate instruments tries to reproduce this key experiment. To make it clear: In my view this experiment will not promote any business as the radiation is far to dirty. So keeping any secretes would be childish except for the catalyst that could be used in CF.
Did your reproduction use the proper length (> 6 meters) to target /PMT?
-
My task was never to verify Fusion, just negative Muons. I can only verify and publish what i have detected and have solid data on. Pathway for Neutrons have several explanations. Fusion is the last of them.
-
Yes, i can verify, electron velocity, proton velocity, xrays and neutrons. No Muonic Xrays are detected from positive Muons using HpGe detectors with different materials.
Thanks for your interactions hereq SindreZG , can we know if you have an Hypothesis or even if you hazzard a guess of what is what Mr. Holmlid and you also have produced and detected?
-
Excellent, then we agree on harmfulness of radiation. Now rethink how Leifs setup works, thickness of reactors, distances and energy of particles. Electrons, protons, secondary radiation energies and how Leifs Detector actually should work and detect Muons. Im not saying there arent any Muons, but they havent been detected by using modern Muon detector technology by any means- and i have tried most of them. PMT with Al foil detector is probably the worst broadband ”detector” to actually verify anything or even to differentiate between any radiation.
It happened behind the doors of an US military national lab and certainly will not be published.
Muons only are a danger in the "last" moment of their existence (when slowed down & depolarized) . The interaction of kinetic muon's with organic material is very low its following the usual "Z" law.
Of course no radiation is harmless but the rule for muon's is simple: Don't (try to) stop them.
-
Absurd claim, negative muon can create fusion in Dt and positive Muons will create muonic xrays, energy based on target materials, thickness and positive muon energy. Muons can ionize molecules and and create dna mutations, this is well established facts. Never heard of any glow charge experiment used as a muon source, but share research on that if you have.
Muons are harmless for your body. Just avoid to place a piece of metal/copper in the flight path. Secondary radiation is the real danger. A friend has been exposed to a "deadly" particle flux in a glow discharge CF experiment at Los Alamos. But luckily the particle where identified as muons... So he still is healthy.
The other point is space angle and 1/r. 1000 muon's/s can lead to 50'000 secondary radiation events/s where the usual background is around 150..300.
I once asked Leif about polarization/ isotropy of the radiation beam. I assume that the particle flow is highly space inhomogen something also Lipinsky's did not believe and later failed. So Leif's answer was not conclusive. It should be easy to look for muons outside the vacuum tube. Just use 1..2cm copper blade and a PMT behind it and walk around if the count is reasonable... Such missing details are crucial for final credibility.
-
Of course xrays and muons create different reactions in materials-but for leifs detector the spectrum would look similar. No, i was not given beam time slot. You need to apply for beam time and specify energy, detectors and materials to be placed. Aluminium is not a scintillator of any kind. A standard calibrated Muon detector with scintillator should have been used.
I did the 1:1 experiment and showed the same results as Leif, same ”muon” spectrum, same TOF, neutrons, xray, coil signal,H/Dt etc etc.
If Leif did produce Muons in the lab at the University most student and himself would have had serious health problems from all the radiation.
Display MoreNot in your London visit?
Xray and muons cause totally different reactions. Holmlid in some experiments did mount ALU foils upfront the PMT. This is well known leading to an increase of signal count of the whole spectrum including high energy gammas from muon capture.
A muon in the PMT causes multiple Xray's on its down spinning path. On the other side a 1mm ALU foil blocks almost all X rays (< 10keV) from the outside. The standard muon test is a thick copper foil/sheat but may be then you should be out of the lab if the production peeks is > 1000/s ...
Of course we all would like to see a 1:1 reproduction including the catalyst. But such an experiment with an at least 7 Meter long vacuum tube will be quit costly. It is 100% clear that Holmlids impact on new physics is already at least 100x greater than what CERN did. The aneutronic production of 4-He alone should give him a nobel.
-
im not saying we arent creating elusive particles. Im just stating that the detector Leif was using is sensitive to xray. Xray and muons would probably react the same in his detector. It has never been calibrated up to a known muon source.
Just had now time to take a closer look, I guess Dr. Holmlid won't be happy that his replicators say the muon hypothesis is not valid, but his loss is our gain as now they provide interesting proof that Rydberg matter alone with or without laser stimulation can emit X ray radiation, where have we seen this before?
-
wyttenback, please explain CF energy transfer?
No basic fusion is aneutronic. The neutron is not a key building block of matter - one of the big mistakes in the standard model. E.g. 4-He contains no neutrons. We often see an Xray spectrum from H*/D*-clusters. Mostly due to recombination induced by CF energy transfer.
-
This is experimental data logged over 5 years with dkfferent setups and using different detectors. how can you state this is impossible?
Display More?The text may need modification..or is the contradiction for effect.
"
This highest bremsstrahlung of 50 keV corresponds to channel 800, whereas the shoulder
at channel 200 corresponds to 21 keV X-Rays. We can conclude from figure 10 that the PMT detector set
up with aluminum foil acts as a simplified primitive low energy resolution X-Ray detector. The most likely
cause of the spontaneous radiation from the active chamber is therefore X-Rays.
"However, this conclusion is in fact impossible since the active chamber has no ongoing excitation with
laser or high voltage. Hydrogen has only entered a particular catalyst, and X-Ray emission from such a
chemical process is generally regarded as an impossibility.
Next we have to add the pulse shape observations. The radiation emitted from the active chamber can
come in bursts of multiple events within an event, as shown in figure 12. One raw pulse can contain up to
6-9 individual faster peaks indicating that the emitted radiation also is a combination or succession of pulse
trains, packets, or clusters. We do not see random smaller amplitude pulses between the main pulse clusters.
From this, we can only conclude that the we are most likely observing X-Rays bunches coming as random
events from the chamber."
The interesting result is that deuterium (vizaviz hydrogen) increases the radiation intensity and level
up to around 50 keV
-
Thank you Alan! I will provide link to the preprint of two articles as soon as the journals has given green light.
-
If someone can reach Rends, kindly ask him to remove the copy of my article as i am about to publish a updated article. I cannot publish as long as he is sharing content...
