Holmlid is heaven compared to getting info from Rossi. On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 12:52 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:
> Axil, is it possible that you are jumping to wrong conclusions? When > observations do not seem to add up, it is time to prove that they are in > fact valid. I think we need at least a replication of these results before > we go way out on a limb trying to explain something that might not be > happening at all. > > It is fun to offer speculations but it is too easy to run off on a tangent > without the proper proof that the effect is real. Do you have total > confidence in what Holmlid is reporting? I remain skeptical. > > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Mon, Oct 26, 2015 11:03 am > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT > > The LENR reaction effect are long range with the detector being 3 meters > for the source of the reaction. > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> The reaction changes based on the color of the filter that is used on the >> laser. The time to change the filter is 60 seconds. This means that the >> Hydrogen rydberg matter is long gone on the second and third laser shot. >> >> When Cs137 is used as a probe. the reaction produces a spike in the beta >> decay as send in stabilization of radioactive isotopes seen in many other >> LENR experiments. >> >> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> The delay or 12, 26, and 52 ns means that the kaons appear before any >>> other particles are produced. >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Wait a minute – the end result of muon decay is an electron (or >>>> positron in the case of the antimuon). This is technically not “beta >>>> decay” at least not as taught by pedantics. Beta decay is defined as a >>>> type of radioactive decay in which a proton is transformed into a neutron, >>>> or vice versa, which doesn’t happen in muon decay. >>>> Anyway, muon decay produces three particles, which includes an electron >>>> or positron (same charge as the muon) and two neutrinos. The neutrinos >>>> essentially are lost to the reaction. Since Holmlid says copious muons >>>> are created from proton or neutron disintegration, which muons decay >>>> in microseconds, then copious positrons and electrons are formed … but >>>> not “from nothing”… the electrons come from muon decay. >>>> According to Bob Higgins, the positrons do no annihilate, but if you >>>> are looking for the source of electrons, it is from muon decay following >>>> nucleon disintegration. >>>> *From:* Eric Walker >>>> Axil Axil wrote: >>>> In point of fact, Holmlid is producing electrons from nothing in his >>>> experiment. Don't get excited, we are just talking here. >>>> If one applies straightforward logic, there are only three >>>> possibilities: >>>> · Baryogenesis and tachyons are creating the electrons. >>>> · Gorrillas are creating the electrons. >>>> · Beta decay is creating the electrons. >>>> Eric >>>> >>> >>> >> >
