Let me backtrack… If we follow the credo that “experiment rules” and that Holmlid appears to be “making” muons, then the scenario which makes the most sense could be that SPP are indeed extending the life of cosmic muons, which then accumulate – giving the appearance that they are being made.
In effect, we do not need to “make” them so much as keep them from decaying. Is the glow stick all about …(drum roll)… zombie muons ? ---------------------------------------------- This is the reason that many physicists are skeptical of Holmlid. The problem is that plasmons have no real mass, yet can couple with a photon to create the quasiparticle we call the plasma polariton or SPP, which also has no rest mass. If SPP have enough energy, perhaps they can convert to muons, but that requires so much energy that it seems unlikely. By process of elimination, I am wondering if Holmlid’s version of dense hydrogen H(0), which I prefer to call DDL, is converted – despite its opposite charge. Is it time to muddy the water with degenerate matter? From: Axil Axil The Muon comes from the SPP. In the Holmlid paper, the muons increased when the lights in the lab were turned on. In order to minimize muon production, the Rydberg matter had to be covered to exclude light. "The sources give a slowly decaying muon signal for several hours and days after being used for producing H(0). They can be triggered to increase the muon production by laser irradiation inside the chambers or sometimes even by turning on the fluorescent lamps in the laboratory for a short time." Light is being converted to a form of energy that can produce muons. I say that that form of energy conversion is light to magnetic energy powerful enough to produce muons. In the Rossi reactor, the form of light is infrared. Deal with it.
