RevelationsIt will be ironic if the F-P effect is really muon catalyzed fusion—referred to as “cold fusion” by a guru of theoretical physics in 1956—turns out to be the effective mechanism for conversion of mass to thermal energy.
Jones, you seem to suggest that the muons carry the excess energy away from a fusion of 2 D or 2 H in the form of kinetic energy and at the same time conserve linear momentum. However, that is inconsistent with their characteristic of not being slowed downed (shielded) very well by ordinary matter and leaving that energy in the material near the fusion reaction. It’s one thing to catalyze a fusion reaction and another to leave the excess energy in the neighborhood of the fusion (as seems to happen in both the Pd–D system and the Li-H system and maybe the Ni-H system) with no energetic EM radiation emerging. Bob Cook From: Jones Beene Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2015 4:54 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [Vo]:Revelations In retrospect - it’s been one helluva month for surprising LENR revelations… and it could change the way the whole field is viewed (once the resistance subsides - assuming replication). This has nothing, ostensibly… or maybe a lot to do with the harvest-blood-super-moon eclipse tomorrow J At least there is a “prophecy” angle which seems to be upsetting to many closely held notions. Can we blame it on Obama? Anyway, first check out this story of Holmlid’s ultradense deuterium and muons – which we have talked about many times, in pieces, for several weeks and months: http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/09/near-term-commercial-fusion-power.html … and consider that the results, if true, could be much broader. To wit: 1) Muons, as the output of LENR, rather elegantly explain the lack of gammas and neutrons in many if not all past low energy experiments, and thus the muon finding could be applicable all the way back to P&F. 2) Muon detection is specialized. Muons can go through several feet of solid steel. Few in LENR before Holmlid considered it. http://cms.web.cern.ch/news/muon-detectors 3) P&F could have been inadvertently practicing a version of MCF (muon catalyzed fusion) but never realized it. 4) A source of light appears to be important to muon creation – suggesting that one of the reasons that cold fusion was difficult to do consistently could be related to varying illumination, which has never been a recognized parameter for cold fusion 5) “Cold Fusion” would be defined as an amplified version of MCF, the simple version of which was invented by Luis Alvarez in 1956. 6) Few in physics appreciate that muons can be manufactured so easily. This is almost as disturbing to the mainstream as cold fusion itself. 7) The NYT article is almost unassailable on this priority of first discovery of MCF by Alvarez. 8) The P&F version, using lithium electrolyte, would then form the same kind of ultra-dense deuterium on the cathode as does Holmlid. 9) The Letts/Cravens effect can be revisited as MCF 10) MCF can be expanded to incorporate the Lipinski finding of an unexpectedly low threshold energy for D fusion (easily supplied by the momentum of the muon). http://unifiedgravity.com/resources/Theory-Describing-All-Forces-and-Prediction-of-the-Baryon-Rest-Masses.pdf 11) So many muons seem to be forming, and their lifetime is so low, that when conservation of charge is considered – the muons could be transferring from another dimension - Dirac’s “sea”… as explicated by Hotson. Or else muons and anti-muons are both forming. 12) We should hope that the community of LENR researchers does not circle-the-wagons against Holmlid- at least giving him full benefit of the doubt until results show otherwise. Yet the full implications are disturbing to those who are fully invested in standard cold fusion approach of the past 25 years (somewhat ironic, isn’t it)
