Both linier and angular momentum are conserved through the emission of neutrinos as the meson decays to a negative muon. It is this muon that catalyzes fusion of hydrogen.
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Keep in mind that Rossi claims low energy radiation that could be from > positron-electron decay. > Remember both photons carry a spin quanta also with spin transfer. > Both linear and angular momentum is conserved with a transfer > of “rest” mass into EM fields of the photons. The transfer of energy > between magnetic and electric fields at right angles to each other may vary > well represent a spin and its associated angular momentum for each > photon. And of course the photons each also carry linear momentum. > > Regarding one of Dave’s questions yesterday regarding spin interactions, > it has been my thought that orbital spin momentum can be changed into > intrinsic spin angular momentum without any violation of spin > conservation. The extensive existence of this orbital momentum associated > with a metal lattice and intense magnetic fields may allow such coupling. > The change in spin quantum numbers associated with orbital momentum may > vary well establish vibrations in the lattice and hence linear momentum > with its classical heat or temperature of the lattice. > > Bob > Sent from Windows Mail > > *From:* Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Saturday, August 9, 2014 7:35 PM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > > Muon catalyzed fusion could be the enabler of Proton Proton fusion (PP). > > The double protons seen in the Piantelli experiments might be due to the > first steps in the PP fusion chain. PP will exist until there is a positron > emission to form deuterium. > > The PP could then be fused with nickel to form copper via muon fusion. > > > On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 11:13 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Muon catalyzed fusion might come about when a magnetic field creates a >> muon during proton interaction with a magnetic field from meson production >> via meson decay. >> >> To create this effect, a stream of negative muons, most often created by >> decaying pions <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pion>, is sent to a crystal >> of hydrogen. The muon may bump the electron from one of the hydrogen >> isotopes. The muon, 207 times more massive than the electron, effectively >> shields and reduces the electromagnetic repulsion between two nuclei and >> draws them much closer into a covalent bond than an electron can. Because >> the nuclei are so close, the strong nuclear force is able to kick in and >> bind both nuclei together. >> >> They fuse, release the catalytic muon (most of the time), and part of the >> original mass of both nuclei is released as energetic particles, as with >> any other type of nuclear fusion. The release of the catalytic muon is >> critical to continue the reactions. The majority of the muons continue to >> bond with other hydrogen isotopes and continue fusing nuclei together. >> >> However, not all of the muons are recycled: some bond with other debris >> emitted following the fusion of the nuclei (such as alpha particles and >> helions <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helion_%28chemistry%29>), removing >> the muons from the catalytic process. This gradually chokes off the >> reactions, as there are fewer and fewer muons with which the nuclei may >> bond. The number of reactions achieved in the lab can be as high as 150 >> fusions per muon (average). >> >> Muons will continue to be produced through energy injection into the >> protons and neutrons of the atoms within the influence of the magnetic beam. >> >> This magnetic based reaction is more probable than the magnetic formation >> of a quark/gluon plasma since it only requires 100 MeV of energy to produce >> the muon. >> >> Linier and angular momentum is conserved via neutrino production during >> the decay of the pion to keep all spins zero. >> >> >> On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 6:00 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> >> wrote: >> >>> OK, so that leaves just about nothing to extract. It would certainly >>> not be adequate to explain LENR levels of energy we are expecting. So, why >>> do we hear members of the vortex speaking of variation in the mass of the >>> proton as being important? >>> >>> I have to ask about the measurement technique and how it is possible to >>> determine the mass to that level of precision. I have never witnessed the >>> determination of proton mass and plead ignorance to the processes that are >>> used. Can anyone actually make a physical measurement that is to the >>> accuracy suggested? Anyone can calculate the number to as many decimal >>> figures as they desire by using a computer model but the results might not >>> reflect the real world values. >>> >>> Does anyone have first hand experience in making this determination and >>> what is the real standard deviation of the energy content of a lone >>> proton? If the numbers are as precise as you are suggesting then why not >>> put to rest the thought of being able to somehow extract this source of >>> energy? Jones, I think you might have some input that would be helpful. >>> >>> Dave >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> >>> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> >>> Sent: Sat, Aug 9, 2014 4:45 pm >>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:A good analogy for nanomagnetism >>> >>> I wrote: >>> >>> If this value is accurate, at that precision I believe we have +/- 1 >>>> 0.21 eV to use for free energy speculation. >>>> >>> >>> Sorry -- +/- 0.21 eV. (I need a personal editor.) >>> >>> Eric >>> >>> >> >
