That was strange my phone sent that before I finished writing. If Holmlid's results are not a measurement error then I'm not sure if cosmic mouns could explain the quantity mesons generated together.
I'm not really fixed on any particular ideas I like reading all of them, and have plenty more to learn. I still have not really understood R Mills Hydrinos for example. I suspect and think evidence is pointing to a particular blend of chemical, material, condensed matter, nano particle effects, phonon resonance, entanglement, SPP, EM, nucleus and even sub nucleon effects. Possibly even more. An unusual blend of even simple effects seems more likely to me than one complex idea. If it took a common blend of conditions and processes we would see it more commonly around us. Could it be there are several layers to LENR, and once the first one is fulfilled more complex or energetic versions become possible. Once we have sufficient loading of Hydrogen and the Ultra dense material produced, and once a sufficient and appropriate resonance is set up for example. Perhaps your idea of energy from the vacuum is an initial process that already produces noticeable effects from relatively low energy. Could the energy generated in such a system feed Axil type SPP on the surface of the UDD which at some level produce more energetic LENR effects that themselves feed back in to the process that eventually have sufficient energy to produce very energetic effects such as Phi Meson Production leading to Kaons through nucleon interactions or Hadronisation effects and cause nuclear disintegration reported by Holmlid. Which liberates enough energy to sustain the reaction in some cases. Leading to the very high temperature burn out events that have been reported. Perhaps there are other and better combinations of increasing energy effects each lower energy effect opening the door to the next more energetic one. > On 30 Oct 2015, at 14:26, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > I did mention cosmic muons but I also be remember reading that they have been > mentioned elsewhere in the past i > Sent from my iPhone > >> On 29 Oct 2015, at 21:25, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: >> >> From: Stephen Cooke >> >> Ø It's a nice process you are describing, but I'm curious how it can >> generate the mesons reported by Holmlid? Is there some mechanism based on >> this idea where mesons are produced or can they only generated by very high >> energy interactions with nucleons and require much higher energies than you >> are describing here? >> >> I am somewhat in Eric’s camp on the mesons, kaons and so on, which could be >> misidentified and/or have other explanations. The important detail in >> Holmlid’s work seems to be the clusters of dense hydrogen, and how to make >> them… That and the elegance of finding a way to make clusters of hydrogen on >> an inexpensive catalyst, with very high chemical binding energy. >> >> The mesons etc. which are claimed to be present could be related to cosmic >> rays – and/or to a hidden feature of dense hydrogen, such as having a large >> capture cross-section for muons, neutrinos or other exotica. Didn’t you >> mention that ? Plus – the sharpness of the laser pulse can cause the >> occasional nuclear reaction in normal deuterium, even if there was no dense >> RM. Certainly the dense clusters would seem to make an ideal target for ICF >> fusion. I am quite happy to leave all of that to the National Labs, in favor >> of focusing on the low end. That would mean gamma free. >> >> All of the high energy results, if accurate, are icing on the cake. The >> “cake” in this metaphor, would be … finally … a valid explanation for the >> “real LENR,” with emphasis on “low energy.” If the thermal gain can be >> understood as chemical, with no gamma and little transmutation – then that >> is the huge benefit of Holmlid’s work. >> >> >>
