Re: [Vo]:The appearance of muons are explained by SPP theory.

[Axil Axil]

Muons have a very low cross section and do not interact with matter much at
all. That low reaction cross section is why muons are harmless to health,
However, in the Cat and Mouse configuration employed in the Rossi’s SSM
mode, something must be increasing that cross section by a huge amount.
That increase in the level of the probability of reaction must be due to a
quantum mechanical process. My guess the cause is coherence of the Cat. A
Bose condinsate might make the Cat look like an atom that is many
centimeters in size. The muon from the mouse can’t help but react with an
atom that is that big. The same must be true of neutrinos. Coherence and
entanglement might make particles that don’t usually interact with atoms
always interact with SuperAtoms in a Bose condensate cause by quantum
effects.

Just the muons and neutrinos that come to earth produced from cosmic rays
might trigger nuclear reactions in a Bose condensate.


Rydberg matter because of its coherence might be a great receiver for
subatomic particles that don;t usually react at all.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Here is another possibility involving the muon.
>
> Muon decay (Michel decay) consists of the almost immediate decay into an
> electron, an electron antineutrino, and a muon neutrino.
>
> This happens after only 2 microseconds, which is too short for chain
> reaction of muons* per se*, and therefore what we may looking at – for the
> active propagator of LENR in not the muon but instead … the muon neutrino.
>
> We know that the electron antineutrino doesn’t help much in this regard,
> since it is seen in beta decay and that kind of decay has been tried as
> an accelerant in LENR -- but the muon neutrino is not as well-known.
>
> This particle does not have the short lifetime of the muon, but in the past
> it was thought to be inert, like the other neutrino varieties. Perhaps
> this variety of neutrino is, in fact, not as inert as the others in some
> circumstances, due to some special property. The species was also once
> thought to be FTL but that claim was presumably retracted … but maybe not
> completely retracted.
>
> *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon_neutrino*
> 
>
> Anyway, the door is open for the possibility that upon the initial muon
> decay in certain materials, the muon neutrino can somehow interact (in
> what looks like a chain reaction) to create either another muon (which
> happens in lead) or in other circumstances will end up supplying the
> thermal gain which is seen.
>
> Stranger things have happened with neutrinos – which are still a great
> mystery to science.
>
> *From:* Axil Axil
>
> As a way to shield muon radiation, the LENR reactor could be buried
> underground in a silo with  the depth of the hole determined by the health
> effects produced by the expected muon flux… The flow of Muons from the
> "Mouse" into the "Cats" in Rossi's Self Sustain mode (SSM) configuration
> looks like an application of a muon chain reaction that you speculate
> about.
>
> Ø
> *http://www.i2u2.org/elab/cosmic/posters/display.jsp?name=poster.lead.cool.man.data*
> 
>
> Ø   The Effects of Lead Shielding on Muon Counts…. If you are near a
> LENR reactor, tt looks like lots of muons will get to and into the body. I
> wonder if muons are harmful?
>
> Aside from the possible (likely) harm from muons, the curious and
> disturbing thing about this paper is that the authors:
>
> 1)  expected to see a decreasing rate of muon counts as more lead
> above the detectors was added,
>
> 2)  They were extremely surprised to see that when going from 15cm to
> 20cm of lead, the count rate of muons actually increased
>
> 3)  This data point was extremely unexpected. They had expected that
> the rate of decrease of the muon count rates would have slowed, but the
> last thing expected was for the count rates to actually increase.
>
> That is a lot of lead, first of all. Even then, it never blocked all the
> muons. For the muon count to increase, with thicker lead, this means that
> some kind of chain reaction is happening above a thickness level, but muon
> keep progressing thought the metal.
>
> As an analogy – (of how LENR could benefit from this) consider the known
> parameters of fission … a chain reaction of neutrons is the driver of
> fission reactors, and thus the concept of a chain reaction of muons is
> intriguing. Can muons be harvested?
>
> As for using this information in a practical manner, the main problem is
> that tons of lead would be needed for even a small reactor - and in the
> end – the question is whether they can be converted into energy.
>
>

RE: [Vo]:The appearance of muons are explained by SPP theory.

[Jones Beene]

Here is another possibility involving the muon.

Muon decay (Michel decay) consists of the almost immediate decay into an 
electron, an electron antineutrino, and a muon neutrino. 

This happens after only 2 microseconds, which is too short for chain reaction 
of muons per se, and therefore what we may looking at – for the active 
propagator of LENR in not the muon but instead … the muon neutrino. 

We know that the electron antineutrino doesn’t help much in this regard, since 
it is seen in beta decay and that kind of decay has been tried as an accelerant 
in LENR -- but the muon neutrino is not as well-known. 

This particle does not have the short lifetime of the muon, but in the past it 
was thought to be inert, like the other neutrino varieties. Perhaps this 
variety of neutrino is, in fact, not as inert as the others in some 
circumstances, due to some special property. The species was also once thought 
to be FTL but that claim was presumably retracted … but maybe not completely 
retracted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon_neutrino

Anyway, the door is open for the possibility that upon the initial muon decay 
in certain materials, the muon neutrino can somehow interact (in what looks 
like a chain reaction) to create either another muon (which happens in lead) or 
in other circumstances will end up supplying the thermal gain which is seen.

Stranger things have happened with neutrinos – which are still a great mystery 
to science.

From: Axil Axil 

As a way to shield muon radiation, the LENR reactor could be buried underground 
in a silo with  the depth of the hole determined by the health effects produced 
by the expected muon flux… The flow of Muons from the "Mouse" into the "Cats" 
in Rossi's Self Sustain mode (SSM) configuration looks like an application of a 
muon chain reaction that you speculate about. 

*   
http://www.i2u2.org/elab/cosmic/posters/display.jsp?name=poster.lead.cool.man.data
*   The Effects of Lead Shielding on Muon Counts…. If you are near a LENR 
reactor, tt looks like lots of muons will get to and into the body. I wonder if 
muons are harmful? 
Aside from the possible (likely) harm from muons, the curious and disturbing 
thing about this paper is that the authors:
1)  expected to see a decreasing rate of muon counts as more lead above the 
detectors was added, 
2)  They were extremely surprised to see that when going from 15cm to 20cm 
of lead, the count rate of muons actually increased 
3)  This data point was extremely unexpected. They had expected that the 
rate of decrease of the muon count rates would have slowed, but the last thing 
expected was for the count rates to actually increase.
That is a lot of lead, first of all. Even then, it never blocked all the muons. 
For the muon count to increase, with thicker lead, this means that some kind of 
chain reaction is happening above a thickness level, but muon keep progressing 
thought the metal.
As an analogy – (of how LENR could benefit from this) consider the known 
parameters of fission … a chain reaction of neutrons is the driver of fission 
reactors, and thus the concept of a chain reaction of muons is intriguing. Can 
muons be harvested?
As for using this information in a practical manner, the main problem is that 
tons of lead would be needed for even a small reactor - and in the end – the 
question is whether they can be converted into energy.

Re: [Vo]:The appearance of muons are explained by SPP theory.

[Axil Axil]

http://www.theguardian.com/science/life-and-physics/2011/may/14/1

Muons are harmless...thank goodness.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> As a wsy to shield muon radiation, the LENR reactor could be buried
> underground in a silo with  the depth of the hole determined by the health
> effects produced by the expected muon flux.
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> The flow of Muons from the "Mouse" into the "Cats" in Rossi's Self
>> Sustain mode (SSM) configuration looks like an application of a muon chain
>> reaction that you speculate about. We will need to watch Rossi to see what
>> type of health problems he develops from his time inside the shipping
>> container.
>>
>> Someone should tell Rossi about the possiblity of muons comming out of
>> his reactor then ask Rossi how he will deal with the muon flux coming out
>> of his reactor
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 11:54 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:
>>
>>> *From:* Axil Axil
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ø
>>> *http://www.i2u2.org/elab/cosmic/posters/display.jsp?name=poster.lead.cool.man.data*
>>> 
>>>
>>> Ø   The Effects of Lead Shielding on Muon Counts…. If you are near
>>> a LENR reactor, tt looks like lots of muons will get to and into the body.
>>> I wonder if muons are harmful?
>>>
>>> Aside from the possible (likely) harm from muons, the curious and
>>> disturbing thing about this paper is that the authors:
>>>
>>> 1)  expected to see a decreasing rate of muon counts as more lead
>>> above the detectors was added,
>>>
>>> 2)  They were extremely surprised to see that when going from 15cm
>>> to 20cm of lead, the count rate of muons actually increased
>>>
>>> 3)  This data point was extremely unexpected. They had expected
>>> that the rate of decrease of the muon count rates would have slowed, but
>>> the last thing expected was for the count rates to actually increase.
>>>
>>> That is a lot of lead, first of all. Even then, it never blocked all the
>>> muons. For the muon count to increase, with thicker lead, this means
>>> that some kind of chain reaction is happening above a thickness level,
>>> but muon keep progressing thought the metal.
>>>
>>> As an analogy – (of how LENR could benefit from this) consider the known
>>> parameters of fission … a chain reaction of neutrons is the driver of
>>> fission reactors, and thus the concept of a chain reaction of muons is
>>> intriguing. Can muons be harvested?
>>>
>>> As for using this information in a practical manner, the main problem
>>> is that tons of lead would be needed for even a small reactor - and in
>>> the end – the question is whether they can be converted into energy.
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:The appearance of muons are explained by SPP theory.

[Axil Axil]

As a wsy to shield muon radiation, the LENR reactor could be buried
underground in a silo with  the depth of the hole determined by the health
effects produced by the expected muon flux.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> The flow of Muons from the "Mouse" into the "Cats" in Rossi's Self Sustain
> mode (SSM) configuration looks like an application of a muon chain reaction
> that you speculate about. We will need to watch Rossi to see what type of
> health problems he develops from his time inside the shipping container.
>
> Someone should tell Rossi about the possiblity of muons comming out of his
> reactor then ask Rossi how he will deal with the muon flux coming out of
> his reactor
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 11:54 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:
>
>> *From:* Axil Axil
>>
>>
>>
>> Ø
>> *http://www.i2u2.org/elab/cosmic/posters/display.jsp?name=poster.lead.cool.man.data*
>> 
>>
>> Ø   The Effects of Lead Shielding on Muon Counts…. If you are near a
>> LENR reactor, tt looks like lots of muons will get to and into the body. I
>> wonder if muons are harmful?
>>
>> Aside from the possible (likely) harm from muons, the curious and
>> disturbing thing about this paper is that the authors:
>>
>> 1)  expected to see a decreasing rate of muon counts as more lead
>> above the detectors was added,
>>
>> 2)  They were extremely surprised to see that when going from 15cm
>> to 20cm of lead, the count rate of muons actually increased
>>
>> 3)  This data point was extremely unexpected. They had expected that
>> the rate of decrease of the muon count rates would have slowed, but the
>> last thing expected was for the count rates to actually increase.
>>
>> That is a lot of lead, first of all. Even then, it never blocked all the
>> muons. For the muon count to increase, with thicker lead, this means
>> that some kind of chain reaction is happening above a thickness level,
>> but muon keep progressing thought the metal.
>>
>> As an analogy – (of how LENR could benefit from this) consider the known
>> parameters of fission … a chain reaction of neutrons is the driver of
>> fission reactors, and thus the concept of a chain reaction of muons is
>> intriguing. Can muons be harvested?
>>
>> As for using this information in a practical manner, the main problem is
>> that tons of lead would be needed for even a small reactor - and in the
>> end – the question is whether they can be converted into energy.
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:The appearance of muons are explained by SPP theory.

[Axil Axil]

The flow of Muons from the "Mouse" into the "Cats" in Rossi's Self Sustain
mode (SSM) configuration looks like an application of a muon chain reaction
that you speculate about. We will need to watch Rossi to see what type of
health problems he develops from his time inside the shipping container.

Someone should tell Rossi about the possiblity of muons comming out of his
reactor then ask Rossi how he will deal with the muon flux coming out of
his reactor

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 11:54 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> *From:* Axil Axil
>
>
>
> Ø
> *http://www.i2u2.org/elab/cosmic/posters/display.jsp?name=poster.lead.cool.man.data*
> 
>
> Ø   The Effects of Lead Shielding on Muon Counts…. If you are near a
> LENR reactor, tt looks like lots of muons will get to and into the body. I
> wonder if muons are harmful?
>
> Aside from the possible (likely) harm from muons, the curious and
> disturbing thing about this paper is that the authors:
>
> 1)  expected to see a decreasing rate of muon counts as more lead
> above the detectors was added,
>
> 2)  They were extremely surprised to see that when going from 15cm to
> 20cm of lead, the count rate of muons actually increased
>
> 3)  This data point was extremely unexpected. They had expected that
> the rate of decrease of the muon count rates would have slowed, but the
> last thing expected was for the count rates to actually increase.
>
> That is a lot of lead, first of all. Even then, it never blocked all the
> muons. For the muon count to increase, with thicker lead, this means that
> some kind of chain reaction is happening above a thickness level, but
> muon keep progressing thought the metal.
>
> As an analogy – (of how LENR could benefit from this) consider the known
> parameters of fission … a chain reaction of neutrons is the driver of
> fission reactors, and thus the concept of a chain reaction of muons is
> intriguing. Can muons be harvested?
>
> As for using this information in a practical manner, the main problem is
> that tons of lead would be needed for even a small reactor - and in the
> end – the question is whether they can be converted into energy.
>

RE: [Vo]:The appearance of muons are explained by SPP theory.

[Jones Beene]

From: Axil Axil
 
*   
http://www.i2u2.org/elab/cosmic/posters/display.jsp?name=poster.lead.cool.man.data

*   The Effects of Lead Shielding on Muon Counts…. If you are near a LENR 
reactor, tt looks like lots of muons will get to and into the body. I wonder if 
muons are harmful? 

Aside from the possible (likely) harm from muons, the curious and disturbing 
thing about this paper is that the authors:

1)  expected to see a decreasing rate of muon counts as more lead above the 
detectors was added, 
2)  They were extremely surprised to see that when going from 15cm to 20cm 
of lead, the count rate of muons actually increased 
3)  This data point was extremely unexpected. They had expected that the 
rate of decrease of the muon count rates would have slowed, but the last thing 
expected was for the count rates to actually increase.

That is a lot of lead, first of all. Even then, it never blocked all the muons. 
For the muon count to increase, with thicker lead, this means that some kind of 
chain reaction is happening above a thickness level, but muon keep progressing 
thought the metal.

As an analogy – (of how LENR could benefit from this) consider the known 
parameters of fission … a chain reaction of neutrons is the driver of fission 
reactors, and thus the concept of a chain reaction of muons is intriguing. Can 
muons be harvested?

As for using this information in a practical manner, the main problem is that 
tons of lead would be needed for even a small reactor - and in the end – the 
question is whether they can be converted into energy.

Re: [Vo]:The appearance of muons are explained by SPP theory.

[Axil Axil]

http://www.i2u2.org/elab/cosmic/posters/display.jsp?name=poster.lead.cool.man.data

The Effects of Lead Shielding on Muon Counts

If you are near a LENR reactor, tt looks like lots of muons will get to and
into the body. I wonder if muons are harmful?


On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> The problem with Holmlid’s work is that he uses an extremely small amount
> of reactant – trillions of times less than in a Rossi reactor. This tiny
> scale makes it very difficult to extrapolate what he is doing to a larger
> size.
>
>
>
> Holmlid’s work looks like a miniature NOVA/NIF hot fusion device
> (Livermore Lab) more than it resembles LENR.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nova_%28laser%29
>
> …since the input and output are hot, and only the target is cold (which is
> the same general situation at LLNL).
>
>
>
> I have no problem with calling Holmlid’s work LENR if - when it is
> scaled-up, the radiation level does not also scale-up to the toxic level –
> which it arguably would with massively more 13 MeV “particles” – whatever
> they are.
>
>
>
> The one and only defining characteristic for LENR - should be this: gain
> above chemical levels, with acceptably low ionizing radiation. No one cares
> about the power input being a laser, or a SPP chip, nor whether the reactor
> is glowing, so long as it is safe.
>
>
>
> *From:* Axil Axil
>
>
>
> I will reread Leif Holmlid muon paper again with your comments in mind to
> see if there is any observations that shed light on your posits.
>
>
>
> Jones Beene wrote:
>
> Axil,
>
> I may have missed it, but how do you account for the short lifetime of the
> muon and why is that signature not showing up?
>
> The muon is unstable with a lifetime of 2.2 microseconds (2.197×10^−6 sec)
> and since they have a mass much larger than an electron, but decay to an
> electron and neutrino, the decay is energetic. If lots of them were being
> produced, then there should be a primary and secondary radiation signature
> – bremsstrahlung - from the thermalization of decay electrons. This
> signature is known, and if seen would validate your hypothesis.
>
> *From:* Axil Axil
>
> Posts combined revised and extended as follows:
>
> The appearance of muons in the LENR reaction are explained by SPP theory.
>
> Regarding:
> http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/rsi/86/8/10.1063/1.4928109
>
> Muon detection studied by pulse-height energy analysis: Novel converter
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:The appearance of muons are explained by SPP theory.

[Jones Beene]

The problem with Holmlid’s work is that he uses an extremely small amount of 
reactant – trillions of times less than in a Rossi reactor. This tiny scale 
makes it very difficult to extrapolate what he is doing to a larger size.

 

Holmlid’s work looks like a miniature NOVA/NIF hot fusion device (Livermore 
Lab) more than it resembles LENR.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nova_%28laser%29

…since the input and output are hot, and only the target is cold (which is the 
same general situation at LLNL).

 

I have no problem with calling Holmlid’s work LENR if - when it is scaled-up, 
the radiation level does not also scale-up to the toxic level – which it 
arguably would with massively more 13 MeV “particles” – whatever they are.

 

The one and only defining characteristic for LENR - should be this: gain above 
chemical levels, with acceptably low ionizing radiation. No one cares about the 
power input being a laser, or a SPP chip, nor whether the reactor is glowing, 
so long as it is safe.

 

From: Axil Axil 

 

I will reread Leif Holmlid muon paper again with your comments in mind to see 
if there is any observations that shed light on your posits. 

 

Jones Beene wrote:

Axil,

I may have missed it, but how do you account for the short lifetime of the muon 
and why is that signature not showing up? 

The muon is unstable with a lifetime of 2.2 microseconds (2.197×10^−6 sec) and 
since they have a mass much larger than an electron, but decay to an electron 
and neutrino, the decay is energetic. If lots of them were being produced, then 
there should be a primary and secondary radiation signature – bremsstrahlung - 
from the thermalization of decay electrons. This signature is known, and if 
seen would validate your hypothesis.

From: Axil Axil 

Posts combined revised and extended as follows:

The appearance of muons in the LENR reaction are explained by SPP theory.

Regarding: 
http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/rsi/86/8/10.1063/1.4928109

Muon detection studied by pulse-height energy analysis: Novel converter 

 

Re: [Vo]:The appearance of muons are explained by SPP theory.

[Axil Axil]

I will reread Leif Holmlid muon paper again with your comments in mind to
see if there is any observations that shed light on your posits.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Axil,
>
>
>
> I may have missed it, but how do you account for the short lifetime of the
> muon and why is that signature not showing up?
>
>
>
> The muon is unstable with a lifetime of 2.2 microseconds (2.197×10^−6 sec)
> and since they have a mass much larger than an electron, but decay to an
> electron and neutrino, the decay is energetic. If lots of them were being
> produced, then there should be a primary and secondary radiation signature
> – bremsstrahlung - from the thermalization of decay electrons. This
> signature is known, and if seen would validate your hypothesis.
>
>
>
> *From:* Axil Axil
>
>
>
> Posts combined revised and extended as follows:
>
>
>
> The appearance of muons in the LENR reaction are explained by SPP theory.
>
>
>
>
>
> Regarding:
> http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/rsi/86/8/10.1063/1.4928109
>
>
>
> Muon detection studied by pulse-height energy analysis: Novel converter
> arrangements
>
>
>
> The detection of muons produced by Rydberg hydrogen matter supports the
> Surface Plasmon Polariton (SPP) theory of LENR. This theory specifically
> described how muons are produced and how these muons result in the
> production of fusion among the full range of atomic elements. This theory
> has been recorded in posts written by AxilAxil in the Vortex L, EGO OUT
> blog, and the E-cat World blog over many months.
>
>
>
> With the detection of muons in fusion processes related to Rydberg matter
> reported by Leif Holmlid, I wonder if the tracks reported in the cloud
> chamber experiments of Dr. Piantelli were actually tracks produced by muons
> of the appropriate 6 MeV enemy levels rather than tracks produced by
> protons?
>
>
>
> With the detection of muons in fusion processes related to Rydberg matter
> reported by Leif Holmlid, I wonder if the tracks reported in the cloud
> chamber experiments of Dr. Piantelli were actually tracks produced by muons
> of the appropriate enemy levels rather than tracks produced by protons?
>
>
>
> Leif Holmlid states that the production of Muons in the nuclear reactions
> catalyzed by the fundamental cause of LENR are not caused by the fusion of
> deuterium. The fundamental LENR cause resides inside the Rydberg matter as
> explained in the SPP theory.
>
>
>
> "In this discussion, it is excluded that the muons are formed from the
> fusion energy, but it is clear that they are formed from nuclear and decay
> processes starting in the D(0). "
>
>
>
> As explained here before on this site, nuclear energy from fusion is
> carried to the SPP soliton via worm holes via teleportation and
>  transformed into increased photonic energy and associated increases in an
> anapole magnetic field that produces muons through the  Schwinger effect.
>
>
>
> http://www.phys.uconn.edu/~dunne/dunne_schwinger.html
>
>
>
> The positive feedback loop between fusion reactions and production of
> magnetic fields and entanglement results is a transfer of that energy
> derived from fusion into the production of mesons, muons, pions and other
> subatomic particles. One result of this conversion of fusion based nuclear
> energy is the production of electrons from the decay of muons. We have
> suspected this electron production mechanism as informed from comments
> Rossi has made about his observation of electrical power production from
> the E-Cat.
>
>
>
> The Cat/Mouse interface may be using muons produced by the "Mouse" to
> activate the LENR reactions in the Cats when the Cats surround the Mouse to
> capture most of the Muon flux.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:48 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
> As explained here before on this site, nuclear energy from fusion is
> carried to the SPP soliton via worm holes via teleportation and
>  transformed into increased photonic energy and associated increases in an
> anapole magnetic field that produces muons through the  Schwinger effect.
>
>
>
> http://www.phys.uconn.edu/~dunne/dunne_schwinger.html
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:32 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>
>
> *Leif Holmlid states that the production of Muons in the nuclear reactions
> catalyzed by the fundamental cause of LENR are not caused by the fusion of
> deuterium. The fundamental LENR cause resides inside the Rydberg matter as
> explained in the SPP theory."In this discussion, it is excluded that the
> muons are formed from the fusion energy, but it is clear that they are
> formed from nuclear and decay processes starting in the D(0). "*
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 7:54 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
> With the detection of muons in fusion processes related to Rydberg matter
> reported by Leif Holmlid, I wonder if the tracks reported in the cloud
> chamber experiments of Dr. Piantelli were actually tracks produced by muons
> of the appropriate enemy levels rather than tracks produ

RE: [Vo]:The appearance of muons are explained by SPP theory.

[Jones Beene]

Axil,

 

I may have missed it, but how do you account for the short lifetime of the muon 
and why is that signature not showing up? 

 

The muon is unstable with a lifetime of 2.2 microseconds (2.197×10^−6 sec) and 
since they have a mass much larger than an electron, but decay to an electron 
and neutrino, the decay is energetic. If lots of them were being produced, then 
there should be a primary and secondary radiation signature – bremsstrahlung - 
from the thermalization of decay electrons. This signature is known, and if 
seen would validate your hypothesis.

 

From: Axil Axil 

 

Posts combined revised and extended as follows:

 

The appearance of muons in the LENR reaction are explained by SPP theory.

 

 

Regarding: 
http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/rsi/86/8/10.1063/1.4928109

 

Muon detection studied by pulse-height energy analysis: Novel converter 
arrangements

 

The detection of muons produced by Rydberg hydrogen matter supports the Surface 
Plasmon Polariton (SPP) theory of LENR. This theory specifically described how 
muons are produced and how these muons result in the production of fusion among 
the full range of atomic elements. This theory has been recorded in posts 
written by AxilAxil in the Vortex L, EGO OUT blog, and the E-cat World blog 
over many months.

 

With the detection of muons in fusion processes related to Rydberg matter 
reported by Leif Holmlid, I wonder if the tracks reported in the cloud chamber 
experiments of Dr. Piantelli were actually tracks produced by muons of the 
appropriate 6 MeV enemy levels rather than tracks produced by protons?

 

With the detection of muons in fusion processes related to Rydberg matter 
reported by Leif Holmlid, I wonder if the tracks reported in the cloud chamber 
experiments of Dr. Piantelli were actually tracks produced by muons of the 
appropriate enemy levels rather than tracks produced by protons?

 

Leif Holmlid states that the production of Muons in the nuclear reactions 
catalyzed by the fundamental cause of LENR are not caused by the fusion of 
deuterium. The fundamental LENR cause resides inside the Rydberg matter as 
explained in the SPP theory.

 

"In this discussion, it is excluded that the muons are formed from the fusion 
energy, but it is clear that they are formed from nuclear and decay processes 
starting in the D(0). "

 

As explained here before on this site, nuclear energy from fusion is carried to 
the SPP soliton via worm holes via teleportation and  transformed into 
increased photonic energy and associated increases in an anapole magnetic field 
that produces muons through the  Schwinger effect.

 

http://www.phys.uconn.edu/~dunne/dunne_schwinger.html

 

The positive feedback loop between fusion reactions and production of magnetic 
fields and entanglement results is a transfer of that energy derived from 
fusion into the production of mesons, muons, pions and other subatomic 
particles. One result of this conversion of fusion based nuclear energy is the 
production of electrons from the decay of muons. We have suspected this 
electron production mechanism as informed from comments Rossi has made about 
his observation of electrical power production from the E-Cat.

 

The Cat/Mouse interface may be using muons produced by the "Mouse" to activate 
the LENR reactions in the Cats when the Cats surround the Mouse to capture most 
of the Muon flux.

 

 

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:48 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

As explained here before on this site, nuclear energy from fusion is carried to 
the SPP soliton via worm holes via teleportation and  transformed into 
increased photonic energy and associated increases in an anapole magnetic field 
that produces muons through the  Schwinger effect.

 

http://www.phys.uconn.edu/~dunne/dunne_schwinger.html

 

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:32 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

Leif Holmlid states that the production of Muons in the nuclear reactions 
catalyzed by the fundamental cause of LENR are not caused by the fusion of 
deuterium. The fundamental LENR cause resides inside the Rydberg matter as 
explained in the SPP theory.

"In this discussion, it is excluded that the muons are formed from the fusion 
energy, but it is clear that they are formed from nuclear and decay processes 
starting in the D(0). "

 

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 7:54 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

With the detection of muons in fusion processes related to Rydberg matter 
reported by Leif Holmlid, I wonder if the tracks reported in the cloud chamber 
experiments of Dr. Piantelli were actually tracks produced by muons of the 
appropriate enemy levels rather than tracks produced by protons?

 

 

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

Regarding:  
http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/rsi/86/8/10.1063/1.4928109

 

Muon detection studied by pulse-height energy analysis: Novel converter 
arrangements

 

The detection of muons produced by Rydberg hydrogen matter supports the Surface 
Plasmo

Re: [Vo]:The appearance of muons are explained by SPP theory.

[Axil Axil]

Posts combined revised and extended as follows:

The appearance of muons in the LENR reaction are explained by SPP theory.


Regarding:
http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/rsi/86/8/10.1063/1.4928109

Muon detection studied by pulse-height energy analysis: Novel converter
arrangements

The detection of muons produced by Rydberg hydrogen matter supports the
Surface Plasmon Polariton (SPP) theory of LENR. This theory specifically
described how muons are produced and how these muons result in the
production of fusion among the full range of atomic elements. This theory
has been recorded in posts written by AxilAxil in the Vortex L, EGO OUT
blog, and the E-cat World blog over many months.

With the detection of muons in fusion processes related to Rydberg matter
reported by Leif Holmlid, I wonder if the tracks reported in the cloud
chamber experiments of Dr. Piantelli were actually tracks produced by muons
of the appropriate 6 MeV enemy levels rather than tracks produced by
protons?

With the detection of muons in fusion processes related to Rydberg matter
reported by Leif Holmlid, I wonder if the tracks reported in the cloud
chamber experiments of Dr. Piantelli were actually tracks produced by muons
of the appropriate enemy levels rather than tracks produced by protons?

Leif Holmlid states that the production of Muons in the nuclear reactions
catalyzed by the fundamental cause of LENR are not caused by the fusion of
deuterium. The fundamental LENR cause resides inside the Rydberg matter as
explained in the SPP theory.

"In this discussion, it is excluded that the muons are formed from the
fusion energy, but it is clear that they are formed from nuclear and decay
processes starting in the D(0). "

As explained here before on this site, nuclear energy from fusion is
carried to the SPP soliton via worm holes via teleportation and
 transformed into increased photonic energy and associated increases in an
anapole magnetic field that produces muons through the  Schwinger effect.

http://www.phys.uconn.edu/~dunne/dunne_schwinger.html

The positive feedback loop between fusion reactions and production of
magnetic fields and entanglement results is a transfer of that energy
derived from fusion into the production of mesons, muons, pions and other
subatomic particles. One result of this conversion of fusion based nuclear
energy is the production of electrons from the decay of muons. We have
suspected this electron production mechanism as informed from comments
Rossi has made about his observation of electrical power production from
the E-Cat.

The Cat/Mouse interface may be using muons produced by the "Mouse" to
activate the LENR reactions in the Cats when the Cats surround the Mouse to
capture most of the Muon flux.


On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:48 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> As explained here before on this site, nuclear energy from fusion is
> carried to the SPP soliton via worm holes via teleportation and
>  transformed into increased photonic energy and associated increases in an
> anapole magnetic field that produces muons through the  Schwinger effect.
>
> http://www.phys.uconn.edu/~dunne/dunne_schwinger.html
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:32 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> Leif Holmlid states that the production of Muons in the nuclear reactions
>> catalyzed by the fundamental cause of LENR are not caused by the fusion of
>> deuterium. The fundamental LENR cause resides inside the Rydberg matter as
>> explained in the SPP theory.
>>
>> "In this discussion, it is excluded that the muons are formed from the
>> fusion energy, but it is clear that they are formed from nuclear and decay
>> processes starting in the D(0). "
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 7:54 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> With the detection of muons in fusion processes related to Rydberg
>>> matter reported by Leif Holmlid, I wonder if the tracks reported in the
>>> cloud chamber experiments of Dr. Piantelli were actually tracks produced by
>>> muons of the appropriate enemy levels rather than tracks produced by
>>> protons?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>>
 Regarding:
 http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/rsi/86/8/10.1063/1.4928109

 Muon detection studied by pulse-height energy analysis: Novel converter
 arrangements

 The detection of muons produced by Rydberg hydrogen matter supports the
 Surface Plasmon Polariton (SPP) theory of LENR. This theory specifically
 described how muons are produced and how these muons result in the
 production of fusion among the full range of atomic elements. This theory
 has been recorded in posts written by AxilAxil in the Vortex L, EGO OUT
 blog, and the EcatWorld blog over many months.

 The SPP behavior that has not yet been recognized by plasmonic science
 is the ability of SPPs to produce a positive feedback loop that compensates
 for the energy losses due to diffusion through  the offsetting gains
 produced

Re: [Vo]:The appearance of muons are explained by SPP theory.

[Axil Axil]

As explained here before on this site, nuclear energy from fusion is
carried to the SPP soliton via worm holes via teleportation and
 transformed into increased photonic energy and associated increases in an
anapole magnetic field that produces muons through the  Schwinger effect.

http://www.phys.uconn.edu/~dunne/dunne_schwinger.html

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:32 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Leif Holmlid states that the production of Muons in the nuclear reactions
> catalyzed by the fundamental cause of LENR are not caused by the fusion of
> deuterium. The fundamental LENR cause resides inside the Rydberg matter as
> explained in the SPP theory.
>
> "In this discussion, it is excluded that the muons are formed from the
> fusion energy, but it is clear that they are formed from nuclear and decay
> processes starting in the D(0). "
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 7:54 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> With the detection of muons in fusion processes related to Rydberg matter
>> reported by Leif Holmlid, I wonder if the tracks reported in the cloud
>> chamber experiments of Dr. Piantelli were actually tracks produced by muons
>> of the appropriate enemy levels rather than tracks produced by protons?
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> Regarding:
>>> http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/rsi/86/8/10.1063/1.4928109
>>>
>>> Muon detection studied by pulse-height energy analysis: Novel converter
>>> arrangements
>>>
>>> The detection of muons produced by Rydberg hydrogen matter supports the
>>> Surface Plasmon Polariton (SPP) theory of LENR. This theory specifically
>>> described how muons are produced and how these muons result in the
>>> production of fusion among the full range of atomic elements. This theory
>>> has been recorded in posts written by AxilAxil in the Vortex L, EGO OUT
>>> blog, and the EcatWorld blog over many months.
>>>
>>> The SPP behavior that has not yet been recognized by plasmonic science
>>> is the ability of SPPs to produce a positive feedback loop that compensates
>>> for the energy losses due to diffusion through  the offsetting gains
>>> produced by non linear energy production. This ability to amplify the
>>> chemistry based catalytic activity of SPPs is not yet in the province of
>>> plasmonic research.  When nano-particles setup the SPP to amplify their
>>> power and force SPP wave forms to loop onto themselves in a vortex, it
>>> produces a short lived “Dark Mode” configuration that acts just like a
>>> celestial black hole that draws energy into itself from its surroundings.
>>> This ability to attract, concentrate and store new energy involves at least
>>> two distinct although related mechanisms.
>>>
>>> First, SPPs  concentrate and reorient the spin of photons then project
>>> the magnetic single pole beam so formed from one of the poles of the
>>> vortex. This beam both destabilizes and then transports energy from the
>>> affected matter back along the path of the beam through the action of
>>> quantum teleportation. This anapole magnetic beam mechanism can act at a
>>> considerable distance away from the vortex. The magnetic beam is energetic
>>> enough to produce mesons from condensation from the vacuum which the decays
>>> into muons which act to produce muon canalize fusion.
>>>
>>> Next, the SPP soliton can share, transfer and accumulate  energy through
>>> quantum mechanical entanglement with clusters of matter of arbitrary size.
>>> This instantaneous gleaning of energy from many distinct sources occurs
>>> within a spherical zone around the vortex.This duality of causation in
>>> the results observed in the LENR reaction leads to understandable
>>> confusion. But this multiplicity in the results as produced by the
>>> fundamental cause of LENR are unified by a commonality of characteristics
>>> linked to a common origin of the effect..
>>>
>>> These common and universal conditions include the thermalization of
>>> gamma radiation, the rapid to instantaneous stabilization of radioactive
>>> isotopes, lack of neutron emissions, and the wide variation of seemingly
>>> random transmutation results which includes fusion of light elements into
>>> heavier elements and fission of heavy elements into lighter ones, remote
>>> reaction at a distance from the location of the LENR reaction, and
>>> instantaneous cluster fusion involving huge numbers of sub-reactions that
>>> occur instantly and collectively.
>>>
>>> Even though the LENR reaction oftentimes occurs concurrent with the
>>> presence of hydrogen isotopes, hydrogen in not required as a fundamental
>>> cause of the reaction as shown in the experiments done at Proton 21 where a
>>> ball of copper is blasted with a high powered arc discharge, and the carbon
>>> dust experiments performed using microwaves conducted by George Egely, the
>>> new editor of infinite magazine. In the Proton 21 experiments in
>>> nano-particles involved are copper based and in the Egely case the
>>> nano-particles are 

Re: [Vo]:The appearance of muons are explained by SPP theory.

[Axil Axil]

Leif Holmlid states that the production of Muons in the nuclear reactions
catalyzed by the fundamental cause of LENR are not caused by the fusion of
deuterium. The fundamental LENR cause resides inside the Rydberg matter as
explained in the SPP theory.

"In this discussion, it is excluded that the muons are formed from the
fusion energy, but it is clear that they are formed from nuclear and decay
processes starting in the D(0). "

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 7:54 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> With the detection of muons in fusion processes related to Rydberg matter
> reported by Leif Holmlid, I wonder if the tracks reported in the cloud
> chamber experiments of Dr. Piantelli were actually tracks produced by muons
> of the appropriate enemy levels rather than tracks produced by protons?
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> Regarding:
>> http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/rsi/86/8/10.1063/1.4928109
>>
>> Muon detection studied by pulse-height energy analysis: Novel converter
>> arrangements
>>
>> The detection of muons produced by Rydberg hydrogen matter supports the
>> Surface Plasmon Polariton (SPP) theory of LENR. This theory specifically
>> described how muons are produced and how these muons result in the
>> production of fusion among the full range of atomic elements. This theory
>> has been recorded in posts written by AxilAxil in the Vortex L, EGO OUT
>> blog, and the EcatWorld blog over many months.
>>
>> The SPP behavior that has not yet been recognized by plasmonic science is
>> the ability of SPPs to produce a positive feedback loop that compensates
>> for the energy losses due to diffusion through  the offsetting gains
>> produced by non linear energy production. This ability to amplify the
>> chemistry based catalytic activity of SPPs is not yet in the province of
>> plasmonic research.  When nano-particles setup the SPP to amplify their
>> power and force SPP wave forms to loop onto themselves in a vortex, it
>> produces a short lived “Dark Mode” configuration that acts just like a
>> celestial black hole that draws energy into itself from its surroundings.
>> This ability to attract, concentrate and store new energy involves at least
>> two distinct although related mechanisms.
>>
>> First, SPPs  concentrate and reorient the spin of photons then project
>> the magnetic single pole beam so formed from one of the poles of the
>> vortex. This beam both destabilizes and then transports energy from the
>> affected matter back along the path of the beam through the action of
>> quantum teleportation. This anapole magnetic beam mechanism can act at a
>> considerable distance away from the vortex. The magnetic beam is energetic
>> enough to produce mesons from condensation from the vacuum which the decays
>> into muons which act to produce muon canalize fusion.
>>
>> Next, the SPP soliton can share, transfer and accumulate  energy through
>> quantum mechanical entanglement with clusters of matter of arbitrary size.
>> This instantaneous gleaning of energy from many distinct sources occurs
>> within a spherical zone around the vortex.This duality of causation in
>> the results observed in the LENR reaction leads to understandable
>> confusion. But this multiplicity in the results as produced by the
>> fundamental cause of LENR are unified by a commonality of characteristics
>> linked to a common origin of the effect..
>>
>> These common and universal conditions include the thermalization of gamma
>> radiation, the rapid to instantaneous stabilization of radioactive
>> isotopes, lack of neutron emissions, and the wide variation of seemingly
>> random transmutation results which includes fusion of light elements into
>> heavier elements and fission of heavy elements into lighter ones, remote
>> reaction at a distance from the location of the LENR reaction, and
>> instantaneous cluster fusion involving huge numbers of sub-reactions that
>> occur instantly and collectively.
>>
>> Even though the LENR reaction oftentimes occurs concurrent with the
>> presence of hydrogen isotopes, hydrogen in not required as a fundamental
>> cause of the reaction as shown in the experiments done at Proton 21 where a
>> ball of copper is blasted with a high powered arc discharge, and the carbon
>> dust experiments performed using microwaves conducted by George Egely, the
>> new editor of infinite magazine. In the Proton 21 experiments in
>> nano-particles involved are copper based and in the Egely case the
>> nano-particles are based on carbon. In the Papp reaction. The nano
>> particles are based on chlorine and noble gases.
>>
>> LENR has made itself known in our world ever since the days of young
>> Tesla when electricity has be made powerful enough to generate nano
>> particles from matter. Since we have brought Egely’s name up, Egely has
>> written a wonderful series of articles explaining how SPPs have produced
>> LENR for over a century in many diverse and now long forgotten systems
>> goi

Re: [Vo]:The appearance of muons are explained by SPP theory.

[Axil Axil]

With the detection of muons in fusion processes related to Rydberg matter
reported by Leif Holmlid, I wonder if the tracks reported in the cloud
chamber experiments of Dr. Piantelli were actually tracks produced by muons
of the appropriate enemy levels rather than tracks produced by protons?


On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Regarding:
> http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/rsi/86/8/10.1063/1.4928109
>
> Muon detection studied by pulse-height energy analysis: Novel converter
> arrangements
>
> The detection of muons produced by Rydberg hydrogen matter supports the
> Surface Plasmon Polariton (SPP) theory of LENR. This theory specifically
> described how muons are produced and how these muons result in the
> production of fusion among the full range of atomic elements. This theory
> has been recorded in posts written by AxilAxil in the Vortex L, EGO OUT
> blog, and the EcatWorld blog over many months.
>
> The SPP behavior that has not yet been recognized by plasmonic science is
> the ability of SPPs to produce a positive feedback loop that compensates
> for the energy losses due to diffusion through  the offsetting gains
> produced by non linear energy production. This ability to amplify the
> chemistry based catalytic activity of SPPs is not yet in the province of
> plasmonic research.  When nano-particles setup the SPP to amplify their
> power and force SPP wave forms to loop onto themselves in a vortex, it
> produces a short lived “Dark Mode” configuration that acts just like a
> celestial black hole that draws energy into itself from its surroundings.
> This ability to attract, concentrate and store new energy involves at least
> two distinct although related mechanisms.
>
> First, SPPs  concentrate and reorient the spin of photons then project the
> magnetic single pole beam so formed from one of the poles of the vortex.
> This beam both destabilizes and then transports energy from the affected
> matter back along the path of the beam through the action of quantum
> teleportation. This anapole magnetic beam mechanism can act at a
> considerable distance away from the vortex. The magnetic beam is energetic
> enough to produce mesons from condensation from the vacuum which the decays
> into muons which act to produce muon canalize fusion.
>
> Next, the SPP soliton can share, transfer and accumulate  energy through
> quantum mechanical entanglement with clusters of matter of arbitrary size.
> This instantaneous gleaning of energy from many distinct sources occurs
> within a spherical zone around the vortex.This duality of causation in
> the results observed in the LENR reaction leads to understandable
> confusion. But this multiplicity in the results as produced by the
> fundamental cause of LENR are unified by a commonality of characteristics
> linked to a common origin of the effect..
>
> These common and universal conditions include the thermalization of gamma
> radiation, the rapid to instantaneous stabilization of radioactive
> isotopes, lack of neutron emissions, and the wide variation of seemingly
> random transmutation results which includes fusion of light elements into
> heavier elements and fission of heavy elements into lighter ones, remote
> reaction at a distance from the location of the LENR reaction, and
> instantaneous cluster fusion involving huge numbers of sub-reactions that
> occur instantly and collectively.
>
> Even though the LENR reaction oftentimes occurs concurrent with the
> presence of hydrogen isotopes, hydrogen in not required as a fundamental
> cause of the reaction as shown in the experiments done at Proton 21 where a
> ball of copper is blasted with a high powered arc discharge, and the carbon
> dust experiments performed using microwaves conducted by George Egely, the
> new editor of infinite magazine. In the Proton 21 experiments in
> nano-particles involved are copper based and in the Egely case the
> nano-particles are based on carbon. In the Papp reaction. The nano
> particles are based on chlorine and noble gases.
>
> LENR has made itself known in our world ever since the days of young Tesla
> when electricity has be made powerful enough to generate nano particles
> from matter. Since we have brought Egely’s name up, Egely has written a
> wonderful series of articles explaining how SPPs have produced LENR for
> over a century in many diverse and now long forgotten systems going back to
> the times and work by Tesla. They are well worth a read and as follows:
>
> http://www.egely.hu/letoltes/Fusion-by-Pseudo-Particles-Part1.pdf
> http://www.egely.hu/letoltes/Fusion-by-Pseudo-Particles-Part2.pdf
> http://www.egely.hu/letoltes/Fusion-by-Pseudo-Particles-Part3.pdf
>
>