Hi all By the way the density of the incidents has to be distributed across a sphere that is approximately 144,000,000 π (pi) meters squared.
Then you have to plug in the distribution curve to get cubed meters for area. The numbers are very big Hence why I think the density will be very small. It is also why I think putting dense shielding round such a source may increase the reaction density in a smaller sphere making the effect more measurable but why I think putting shielding round such a source may be more dangerous than letting the such a source propagate out to a safe dispersal range. If LENR works in the way suggested it may be that rules about no lead tungsten within x meters might apply. Unless we go for Axil's 10ft dense walls option. Have to so the math. Kind Regards walker On 14 November 2016 at 12:49, Ian Walker <walker...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all > > With that size of sphere, 6000m radius, I am guessing, from experience the > density of interactions will be only a little above natural background. You > need to know the surface area of the sphere. Then the distribution curve > for the straight line from the source; then calculate peak and the nominal > width of the curve, probably a narrow bell curve. > > I did some work on ballistics, including terminal ballistics, looking at > shrapnel density and effective radius of devices, chance of a hit at a > certain range from the explosion. These reduce to a near statistically zero > probability on a logarithmic curve as you progress further from the point > source. You alter the force of the terminal explosive to produce shrapnel > that is still travelling at killing speed at a density of one hit per > person size. Having the shrapnel still moving at killing speed beyond this > range, is a waste of explosive charge and increase the risk of collateral > damage (killing those you had not intended) so you set the charge fit for > purpose. > > The effect we are looking at is similar. > > But the key thing is that the sphere will describe a circle round the > source, varying due to density of objects like walls in the path that is > centred on the source. This would be the experiment to do. > > As I said spread across such a large sphere the density will be very low. > > Slowing down the particles with dense shielding materials would decrease > the size of the sphere at that direction and increase the density of the > radiation at the calculable distance from the source. This would give proof > of the particle nature. > > Kind Regards walker > > On 14 November 2016 at 04:12, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> mischugnons... >> >> I might know what they are. They have made themselves visible in the >> research of Keith Fredericks that can be found here: >> >> http://restframe.com/ >> >> I have described the mischugnons as metalized hydrogen crystals and >> how they work, how they store GeV levels of power, how they manifest a >> monopole field, and how they catalyze the LENR reaction. Their >> description starts with Holmlid, shows how the metallic hydrogen's >> structure produces spin waves through hole superconductivity and >> whispering gallery wave, how they can store massive amounts of energy, >> and how that energy can be projected as monopole flux lines to >> catalyzed proton and neutron weak force decay to produce mesons as >> seen by Holmlid. >> >> Keith Fredericks calls the tachyons but they are just a monopole like >> quasiparticle that Holmlid and LENR reactors can created using a >> catalyst. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 7:13 PM, Russ George <russ.geo...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > In many many experiments over the years the mischugnons have made their >> > presence irrefutably known. It is a thrilling time just now in cold >> fusion >> > as there are many confirmations and affirmations of the choirs >> existence, >> > we’ve been hearing their voices for nearly 30 years and just now the >> > theatrical smoke is beginning to clear just enough that we can see the >> > outlines of the choir, it’s a big one. It’s not the single voices that >> make >> > the music of the choir so wonderful it is the combination of them all. >> > Perhaps it is a Gregorian harmony they are singing. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > From: Eric Walker [mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com] >> > Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2016 3:44 PM >> > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >> > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Holmlid, Mills & muons >> > >> > >> > >> > Ok. So you've survived the stinkers and the peanut gallery and the >> > charlatans, the high priests, the prelates and the faithful of >> physics. In >> > your own experiments you've seen muons or mischugenon. >> > >> > >> > >> > On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 5:32 PM, Russ George <russ.geo...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > What is interesting is that the real data has always shone most brightly >> > even when the signal was incredibly poorly understood. That’s the >> benefit of >> > longevity and dedication the real shining bits tend to agglomerate into >> an >> > understandable thing. Such is the case it seems with Holmlid’s ‘muons’, >> > there are too many coincidences coming together to ignore his >> contributions >> > to what is becoming a choir. >> > >> > >> > >> > What are those coincidences that lead one inevitably to the conclusion >> that >> > Holmlid is seeing muons, and that he's seeing the same thing you believe >> > you've been seeing? You speak with enough confidence to lead me to >> believe >> > that you've read his work, are quite familiar with it and are able to >> > support your position with concrete details. >> > >> > >> > >> > As for being the tutor or free simple sound-bite tour-guide sorry I have >> > neither the time nor inclination to help the reluctant. There is so >> much to >> > do and so little time to do it. As Thomas Edison so aptly put it long >> ago, >> > “The thing I lose patience with most is the clock, its hands move too >> fast.” >> > >> > >> > >> > Alas it's not for my edification that you should answer these questions. >> > It's for your own credibility! You've taken on the position that >> Holmlid is >> > seeing muons or mischugenon. You should now give support for that >> position. >> > >> > >> > >> > Eric >> > >> > >> >> >
