Muons, SPP, DDL & RPFMuon decay rate is not a constant but is influenced by various parameters. Spin and angular momentum vectors respectively, associated with the muon and electron or positron resulting from the decay, respectively, are coupled in the decay process. In this regard a magnetic field in so far as it effects the polarization of the muon and the angular momentum vector of the electron may increase or decrease the probability of the decay rate.
If the muon decay is modified by a magnetic field, then the mass loss of the muon may be given up to orbital spin energy of the local SPP or the local lattice electrons without the production of neutrinos needed to conserve linear momentum in a decay process unassisted or made possible in a coherent coupled QM system. The muon decay is described in some complexity in the link that follows: http://pdg.lbl.gov/2011/reviews/rpp2011-rev-muon-decay-params.pdf In summary IMHO the details of the decay mechanism are not very understandable based on the cited paper. Bob Cook From: Jones Beene Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 7:05 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Muons, SPP, DDL & RPF Its acronym time again. LENR is nothing if not full of acronyms. All of this set of letters seems to work together. Here is a website from Steve Byrnes – and it is quite well done. Even if you disagree with the conclusions (and by now, most of us have our own opinions on the details) it is well-researched, but a little dated - including the piece on muons: http://sjbyrnes.com/cf/?p=744 If the Holmlid disclosure about finding muons (heavy electrons) in the context of ultra-dense hydrogen (also known as DDL or deep Dirac level) and especially when irradiated by laser is correct, then there is a good possibility that this will lead to an improved understanding of one mechanism for LENR gain using plasmons to make heavy electrons (there are other mechanisms besides SPP). If Byrnes had realized that there could be a connection between an incandescent glow-reactor and SPP, and subsequently - between SPP and DDL and muons, his conclusion might look more cutting edge. But he has the brilliant insight to suggest a new possibility for muon-catalyzed fusion of deuterium, starting with a “spectator muon” which is renewed or replaced sequentially by the reaction itself, to wit: D+D + muon → helium-4 + muon (instead of gamma) … where the fist muon can be a cosmic muon which can catalyze a reaction and then be rejuvenated, renewed or replaced by the same fusion reaction that it catalyzes. The muon is a “heavy electron” with a short life, but now we can surmise that it can have its lifetime greatly extended as part of the catalysis. The probability for this to occur is larger than zero, but how large? … “Maybe it’s pretty high” says Byrnes. Can it explain the lack of gamma, as well? Probably. But now, as we are learning – this rebirth effect will be more robust with SPP and fractional hydrogen. There is one further detail which can be added in the glowing ferment: the enhanced diproton reaction, which is being labeled as RPF or “reversible proton fusion.” This avenue can explain most actual SPP results better than one-way fusion. This pathway works cleanly with the muon catalyst, more so than does Storm’s hydrotron, for instance. Surface plasmons typically do not occur or participate in electrolytic fusion (such as the P&F reaction) unless a laser is added (Letts/Cravens effect). SPP production requires semi-coherent photons which are typically IR or visible in wavelength, and which a laser can supply. A magnetic field helps. There is little doubt that the Letts/Cravens effect is a simple implementation of SPP. However, deuteron fusion using SPP would produce gammas UNLESS the replacement muon carries away the gamma energy – which is the real beauty of having the muon modality in the first place. It explains the lack of gammas elegantly at the same time it explains an extended lifetime for the heavy electron. The better scenario for finding a good fit in muon catalysis, assuming that we can combine Holmlid’s and Byrnes insight - happens with protons instead of deuterons. This is the reversible diproton reaction, such as occurs on the sun with astounding frequency. There is little transmutation in the end, but instead we have a plethora of catalyzed inelastic collisions which do not proceed to permanent fusion – only soft x-rays. Consequently the reaction is called “reversible” (due to Pauli). P+P + muon → Helium-2 → P+P + muon + excess energy Helium-2 (diproton) has a shorter half-life than the muon. The excess energy which is seen in RPF would appear as soft x-rays or UV and happen in nanoseconds. The energy derives either from QCD and Helium-2 mass as it decays - or from muon mass-energy when that species finally decays, having being renewed several times. Since the muon “lives” for a few microseconds, it can catalyzes only few reversible fusion reactions, but if the reaction itself effectively adds extra microseconds to the muon life (or alternatively) emits a new muon and we have positive feedback and continuity of the reaction. It appears to be a chain reaction. When muons are renewed via QCD in the RPF reaction, some level of incidental transmutation should be seen - which is consistent with Piantelli’s reported slight amount of transmutation. But in the end, with RPF there are few gamma rays (far from commensurate with heat), little transmutation (incidental levels only), but lots of UV, soft x-rays and most importantly, muon continuity … Many pieces of the puzzle could fall together – to the extent that the SPP, Muon, DDL & RPF interconnection is viable. Is it? Did I miss an acronym? Jones
