So what's new about this? Hasn't it all been patented before?
Large-scale hand-warmer tech works a treat!
Bussard would have had a successful polywell fusion reactor if the funding hadn't been pulled - but that's what they all say, just a bit more cash.........
So has the rest mass of the photon been measured, if it can be stopped? As in
In 2001, Ron Walsworth, Mikhail Lukin and colleagues at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics formed slow moving polaritons in a vapor of rubidium atoms, in much the same way that Hau slowed light in a BEC. By turning down the lasers that made the vapor transparent, the researchers gradually reduced the portion of the polaritons that were made of photons and increased the portion made of atoms, and the light was effectively stopped and stored in the vapor. By turning the lasers back up, the researchers converted the polaritons back into photons, which then resumed their speed-of-light travel. At about the same time that this work was being done, Hau’s group stopped light in a BEC.
Among other things, stopping light might provide a way to store data in future optical computers, or lead to new ways to manipulate light.
There are similarities to Holmlid's recent work if ultra dense hydrogen has properties of a Bose-Einstein Condensate (BEC). Maybe the stopped photon behaves like a W- or Z- boson? Still looking for a mechanism for spontaneous & laser driven meson release from UDH.
Or is it all a strategy to disseminate misinformation to foreign powers since hacking attacks into government patent or commercial databases could never be totally prevented? ie give the hackers a load of codswallop whilst protecting the real advances elsewhere, probably hidden in plain sight? Chinese tech advances in anti-gravity propulsion? I'm sure John le Carre could write a good spy thriller based on this!
I agree with Wyttenbach that both Mills & Holmlid's work are essentially forms of LENR even if neither of them acknowledge it.
Use strategies to increase UDH/hydrino formation in a Mizuno-type reactor then, or couple it to the muon-generator?
There might be a way around the alpha particle sticking problem too ...
Contribution of Muon Catalyzed Fusion to Fusion Energy Development
K. Nagamine 1, 2), T. Matsuzaki 1), K. Ishida 1), S. N. Nakamura 1, 3), N. Kawamura 1),
Y. Matsuda 1)
1) Muon Science Laboratory, RIKEN, Wako, Saitama, Japan
2) Meson Science Laboratory, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK),
Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
3) Department of Physics, Graduate School of Science, Tohoku University, Sendai, Miyagi,
e-mail contact of main author: [email protected]
Abstract. Recent experimental studies on muon catalyzed fusion (µCF) process of D-T mixture have uncovered
anomalously large muon (µ–) regeneration from the (µα) + stuck atom formed after nuclear fusion in dtµmolecule. The result has opened a new direction towards a realization of the break-even. In addition, highintensity hadron accelerator projects for neutron source etc. will realize kW µCF reactor once advanced muon
generator be installed. Considering these new trends, we may be able to develop the fusion energy related R&D
program based upon the µCF process such as materials irradiation facility, tritium breeding, fundamental plasma
They don't seem to acknowledge it but Holmlid has a way of producing -muons at much lower energy than 5000 MeV - same thing may be occurring with hydrino-based systems.
The nuclear fusion reaction can be catalyzed in a suitable fusion fuel by muons (heavy electrons), which can temporarily form very tightly bound mu-molecules. Muons can be produced by the decay of negative pions, which, in turn, have been produced by an accelerated beam of light ions impinging on a target. Muon-catalyzed fusion is appropriately called “cold fusion” because the nuclear fusion also occurs at room temperature. For practical fusion energy generation, it appears to be necessary to have a fuel mixture of deuterium and tritium at about liquid density and at a temperature of the order of 1000 K. The current status of muon-catalyzed fusion is limited to demonstrations of scientific breakeven by showing that it is possible to sustain an energy balance between muon production (input) and catalyzed fusion (output). Conceptually, a muon-catalyzed fusion reactor is seen to be an energy amplifier that increases by fusion reactions the energy invested in nuclear pion-muon beams. The physical quantity that determines this balance is Xμ, the number of fusion reactions each muon can catalyze before it is lost. Showing the feasibility of useful power production is equivalent to showing that Xμ can exceed a sufficiently large number, which is estimated to be ∼104 if standard technology is used or ∼103 if more advanced physics and technology can be developed. Since a muon can be produced with current technology for an expenditure of ∼5000 MeV and 17.6 MeV is produced per fusion event, it follows that Xμ ≈ 250 would be a significant demonstration of scientific breakeven. Current experiments have measured Xμ 150. Therefore, the energy cost of producing muons must be reduced substantially before muon-catalyzed fusion reactors could seriously be considered. The physics of muon-catalyzed fusion is summarized and discussed. Muon catalysis is surveyed for the following systems: proton-deuteron, deuteron-deuteron, deuteron-triton, and non-hydrogen elements. The idea of muon catalysis in a plasma medium is also presented. The formation of mu-atoms and mu-molecules and their disintegration in a condensed plasma are calculated. It seems that in a homogeneous plasma, there are no values of temperature and density appropriate for achieving the desired Xμ ≈ 1000. New ideas that might lead to the goal of 1000 fusions per muon by the use of laser beams or selective electromagnetic radiation are suggested.
I don't think Mills' strategy of using low V makes much difference to hydrino formation since this is catalysed by HOH/Ag/AgO - which is effectively acting like a dehydrogenation Rydberg Matter catalyst similar to Holmlid's KFeO2 or other metallic oxides, I think most of us are now agreed that the hydrino is equivalent to ultra dense hydrogen - an essential first step to form dense hydrogen clusters which reduce inter proton distances to close to 2 pm - some level of hydrino/UDH formation must be occurring in the SAFIRE reactor anyway to account for their LENR / transmutation data. Strategies to boost UDH/hydrino formation by using appropriate catalysts should convert the SAFIRE reactor plasma into a fusion reaction system to generate controllable excess heat and a higher density of transmutations as seen at the anode. Or even more simply, use Norront Fusions new patented -muon generator to pump these fusion catalytic particles into a H/D SAFIRE plasma mix - should work a treat: the rate of fusion reactions could be controlled by varying the -muon influx.
He can always redefine the hydrino in the light of new research/evidence - a dense form of H, maybe so dense (140 Kg/cm>3) it won't even allow neutrinos or antineutrinos safe passage?
Thunderbolts (birds) are Go! Beats me why R.Mills just doesn't build a SAFIRE - type reactor to form his hydrino-based plasmas - a nice stable system to study!
I don't see how such an explosive fusion reaction system could be controlled - isn't this the principle of how the H-bomb works, a thermonuclear blast or no fusion reaction at all?
- US20190027260A1.pdf(1.24 MB, downloaded 5 times, last: 10 minutes ago)
They say it makes kW of energy in a small setup. So we can string together some buckets and air and solve ALL ENERGY NEEDS ON THE PLANET... and that a century of engineers missed out on this?
Oh come on this is an obvious con - especially when you see the mugshot of Rossi on one of the websites it linksto - E-Cat Deuschland or whatever.
I wouldn't feel too sorry for the 'poor guy' - Woodford has made his millions already at the expense of his 'poor investors'.
We'd all like Mills' work to be true, especially if LENR's are occurring downstream from hydrino (or dense H) formation. Trouble is, given the time that's already elapsed between making the initial promise of revolutionizing energy production to the status quo now, what are the odds of any of this work being successful? (and throwing vast sums of money at the problem has simply not worked so far - which is why I was suggesting helping the guy out by putting our brains together here, kicking the ideas around, and seeing if we could at least theoretically come up with something which worked).
Here's another (International Skeptic's) view of Mills' work;
Mill's theory does 2 things:
1) Steal the results of QM, and just 'declare' that the electron is a shell at the expectation radius, instead of a wave.
2) Ignore all other QM experiments that would invalidate Mills' idea of the electron.
Sometimes replacement of a quantum system with a classical analog can give you close results, if you limit yourself to a particular type of property. I don't find this is strange at all. One can imagine electrons as a spinning torus to get a property of spin, etc. However, one always finds that the classical approximation is self-contradictory when looking at another property of the system.
That's an interesting question - how about a free neutron traveling through outer space having been released from a fusion reaction in a supernova at just below light speed c . This neutron travels from the supernova to our solar system and has a lifetime of 10 min before beta decaying to a stable proton, an electron and an electron antineutrino. If the antineutrino is released at close to the speed of light, what is the speed of the antineutrino relative to Earth?
-and Holmlid estimated the density of ultra dense deuterium to be 140 Kg/cm3 (compared to the density of lead Pb of only 11 g/cm3) Whereas other forms of dense H:
The density of metallic hydrogen can be estimated roughly by taking the distance between protons to be of the order of the Bohr radius a0 = ħ2/me2 = 0.529×10−8 cm (52.9 pm). Hence we have ϱ ∼ Maa0−3 ∼ 10 g cm−3 (here M is the proton mass (= 1.67×10−24 g)). (interestingly close to the density of lead Pb) A lower density value is given by quantitative, though unreliable, analysis: for instance, according to the calculations(15), molecular hydrogen is in thermodynamic equilibrium with metallic hydrogen at a pressure p = 2.60 Mbar when the density of metallic hydrogen is 1.15 g cm−3 (in this case the density of molecular hydrogen is 0,76 g cm−3)
The distance between protons is less than 2 pm in UDH so interactions with neutrinos would have a 100 - 14. 10>3 fold higher probability than with lead or the dense metallic hydrogen state. Interaction with other background radiations (neutrons, protons or muons) would have much higher probabilities.