The vital question is about the rate vs. distance for the emergence of 
detectable muons. Surely there is a distribution bell curve regarding which we 
cold fusioneers are most interested in the nearest limb of that distribution. 
This then speaks to the reaction rate producing the meson beasties which 
presumably is directly related to the anomalous nuclear reaction rate, aka cold 
fusion as that’s been the moniker for good or for worse. For the capture of 
crazy meson/muons and resulting in detection it seems a combined 
intercepting/converting metal foil coupled to scintillation detector, aka GMT, 
works just fine provided the reaction rate is sufficient, aka > joules/sec …  
more is better remember we are out on a limb here. Any ideas about what might 
‘reflect’ a meson, perhaps beryllium as it is the best neutron reflector. Such 
reflectors might improve the containment and hence time the meson/muon beasties 
stay close enough for detection. 

 

Just for fun maybe it’s worth building a beryllium frustrum and thus have our 
di-lithium crystal warp drive. Computer draw me the wee specs for a transparent 
beryllium frustrum. Computer. Computer…. I dunna know what’s wrong with this 
computer it cannae do what I am asking it to do.

 

From: Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2017 2:55 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New paper from Holmlid.

 

I believe there are circular arguments going on here.  On the one hand you are 
saying that neutral mesons are decaying into muons (charged) far from the 
reactor.  But also there is the claim of fusion in his reactor, wherein many 
are supposing MCF.  He is also measuring charged particles in his reactor.  The 
decay "times" are statistical means and there will be some probability of a 
decay from t = zero to infinity.  That's why it is possible to see mesons -> 
muons in the reactor, more outside the reactor, and more further away from the 
reactor.

So, I am saying that there are meson decays going on all along the path from 
the reactor.  Muons should be easy to detect because they are charged and 
likely to interact with the scintillator crystal/liquid/plastic or by exciting 
photoelectron cascades in the GM tube. The fact that the corresponding muons 
are not detected in ordinary LENR with GM tubes and scintillators basically 
means that, in LENR, mesons are not produced.  They may not be produced in 
Holmlid's reaction ... but I have to finish reading the paper to understand the 
case he is claiming.

 

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 8:40 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net 
<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net> > wrote:

Bob Higgins wrote:

The descriptions in 5,8) below suggests that Holmlid's reaction produces a high 
muon flux that would escape the reactor.  A high muon flux would be very 
similar to a high beta flux.  First of all, it would seem that a flux of 
charged muons would be highly absorbed in the reactor walls. 


Bob - Yes, this has been the obvious criticism in the past, but it has been 
addressed. 

As I understand it, the muons which are detected do not exist until the meson, 
which is the progenitor particle, is many meters away. This makes the lack of 
containment of muons very simple to understand. 

At one time muons were thought to exist as neutral instead of charged (see the 
reference Bob Cook sent, from 1957) but in fact, the observers at that time, 
due to poor instrumentation - were seeing neutral mesons, not muons.

As an example, a neutral Kaon decays to two muons one negative and one 
positive. However, the lifetime of the Kaon which is much shorter than the muon 
but still about ~10^-8 seconds means that on average 99+% of the particles are 
tens to hundreds of meters away before they decay to muons. Thus the reactor is 
transparent to the progenitor particle.

This is why Holmlid places a muon detector some distance away and then 
calculates the decay time. Thus he claims an extraordinarily high flux of muons 
which assumes that the detector is mapping out a small space on a large sphere. 
However, they are not usable any more than neutrinos are usable, since they 
start out as a neutral meson.

 

Reply via email to