RE: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

[Stephen Cooke]

so including strange quarks, if so an explanation is needed as to 
how down quarks can change to strange quarks for example. 
2. Axil's SPP Analogue black hole Hadron evaporation. It will be amazing if it 
can work that way, i wonder if there is a particular absolute proof way to 
observe that , such as actually observing an form SPP and seeing Kaons come 
directly as a result of it? I suppose we will have to wait for new high tech 
equipment to see that.
But maybe there is another mechanism too. (Hopefully not involving any Gorillas 
;) )
It is interesting that this test it may give us a window on CP violation too

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 11:42:22 -0400
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT
From: janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

I don't understand how strange and antistrange quarks can come from protons. 
There would need to be a quark reformatting process involved that can turn 
matter into different matter and antimatter types instantly. It is easier to 
accept that light energy from the laser is turned into matter and antimatter, 
especially since the color of the light changes the nature of the matter 
produced. Said in another way, different light makes different matter.
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
wrote:
Could generation of +/- s quark pairs be the trigger for nucleon 
disintegration. Could each pair with an up quark to form kaons and force the 
disintegration of the nucleons from which the up quark comes? Each s quark has 
a rest mass of 100MeV. I'm not sure if there is a meson containing an s quark 
pair however. Unless it is in the form of K- long or K- short also about 497 
MeV that seem to contain a strange balanced mixture of + and - down and strange 
quarks. I'm not knowledgable enough of a nuclear physics to know if this is 
something to consider, but it seems intersting.
Sent from my iPhone
On 26 Oct 2015, at 08:03, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

K−, negatively charged (containing a strange quark and an up antiquark) has 
mass 493.667±0.013 MeV and mean lifetime (1.2384±0.0024)×10−8 s.K+ 
(antiparticle of above) positively charged (containing an up quark and a 
strange antiquark) must (by CPT invariance) have mass and lifetime equal to 
that of K−. 
The mass difference is 0.032±0.090 MeV, consistent with zero. The difference in 
lifetime is (0.11±0.09)×10−8 s. What's weird is that two different quarks types 
are produced out of nothing. You just don't find strange quarks in ordinary 
matter. 

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
in physical cosmology, baryogenesis is the generic term for the hypothetical 
physical processes that produced an asymmetry(imbalance) between baryons and 
antibaryons produced in the very early universe. The baryonic matter that 
remains today, following the baryonic-antibaryonic matter annihilation, makes 
up the universe.

LENR could be responsible for the past and ongoing production of matter in the 
universe in violation of CPT and that negative matter (antibaryons) is being 
sent back in time. 
We see excess electrons pop into existence in LENR reactions. Could LENR be the 
GOD reaction? In point of fact, Holmlid is producing electrons from nothing in 
his experiment. Don't get excited, we are just talking here.
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 12:53 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
CPT THEOREM
C(harge) -P(arity=reflection) -T(ime reversal) INVARIANCE is a property of any 
quantum field
theory in Flat space times which respects: (i) Locality, (ii) Unitarity and 
(iii) Lorentz Symmetry.

Holmlid is producing neutral K mesons. This particle demonstrates CP violation,
The discovery of CP violation in 1964 in the decays of neutral kaons resulted 
in the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1980 for its discoverers James Croninand Val 
Fitch.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP_violation

Who can say why LENR produces neutral K mesons? 










  

RE: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

[Stephen Cooke]

 all the nuclei 
at the same time.
If heavy nucleons are available in Holmlids experiment this could lead to a 
test of the idea by removing elements heavier than Nickel if we stopped seeing 
Kaons (and maybe only see pions onwards), it could demonstrate that maybe this 
process was in action.
HOWEVER:
*** If I understand correctly there are no sufficiently heavy elements 
available in Holmlids experiment for Kaons to form this way? If I remember 
right there are no elements heavier than Nickel listed? The catalyst I think 
only contains Potassium, Iron and Oxygen. Is the is correct? If so it implies 
another process must take place. ***
I think in the current consensus this leaves effectively two possibilities: 
1. Concurrent Nucleon disintegration or annihilation with the production of 
particles also including strange quarks, if so an explanation is needed as to 
how down quarks can change to strange quarks for example. 
2. Axil's SPP Analogue black hole Hadron evaporation. It will be amazing if it 
can work that way, i wonder if there is a particular absolute proof way to 
observe that , such as actually observing an form SPP and seeing Kaons come 
directly as a result of it? I suppose we will have to wait for new high tech 
equipment to see that.
But maybe there is another mechanism too. (Hopefully not involving any Gorillas 
;) )
It is interesting that this test it may give us a window on CP violation too

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 11:42:22 -0400
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT
From: janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

I don't understand how strange and antistrange quarks can come from protons. 
There would need to be a quark reformatting process involved that can turn 
matter into different matter and antimatter types instantly. It is easier to 
accept that light energy from the laser is turned into matter and antimatter, 
especially since the color of the light changes the nature of the matter 
produced. Said in another way, different light makes different matter.
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
wrote:
Could generation of +/- s quark pairs be the trigger for nucleon 
disintegration. Could each pair with an up quark to form kaons and force the 
disintegration of the nucleons from which the up quark comes? Each s quark has 
a rest mass of 100MeV. I'm not sure if there is a meson containing an s quark 
pair however. Unless it is in the form of K- long or K- short also about 497 
MeV that seem to contain a strange balanced mixture of + and - down and strange 
quarks. I'm not knowledgable enough of a nuclear physics to know if this is 
something to consider, but it seems intersting.
Sent from my iPhone
On 26 Oct 2015, at 08:03, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

K−, negatively charged (containing a strange quark and an up antiquark) has 
mass 493.667±0.013 MeV and mean lifetime (1.2384±0.0024)×10−8 s.K+ 
(antiparticle of above) positively charged (containing an up quark and a 
strange antiquark) must (by CPT invariance) have mass and lifetime equal to 
that of K−. 
The mass difference is 0.032±0.090 MeV, consistent with zero. The difference in 
lifetime is (0.11±0.09)×10−8 s. What's weird is that two different quarks types 
are produced out of nothing. You just don't find strange quarks in ordinary 
matter. 

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
in physical cosmology, baryogenesis is the generic term for the hypothetical 
physical processes that produced an asymmetry(imbalance) between baryons and 
antibaryons produced in the very early universe. The baryonic matter that 
remains today, following the baryonic-antibaryonic matter annihilation, makes 
up the universe.

LENR could be responsible for the past and ongoing production of matter in the 
universe in violation of CPT and that negative matter (antibaryons) is being 
sent back in time. 
We see excess electrons pop into existence in LENR reactions. Could LENR be the 
GOD reaction? In point of fact, Holmlid is producing electrons from nothing in 
his experiment. Don't get excited, we are just talking here.
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 12:53 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
CPT THEOREM
C(harge) -P(arity=reflection) -T(ime reversal) INVARIANCE is a property of any 
quantum field
theory in Flat space times which respects: (i) Locality, (ii) Unitarity and 
(iii) Lorentz Symmetry.

Holmlid is producing neutral K mesons. This particle demonstrates CP violation,
The discovery of CP violation in 1964 in the decays of neutral kaons resulted 
in the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1980 for its discoverers James Croninand Val 
Fitch.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP_violation

Who can say why LENR produces neutral K mesons? 










  


  

Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

[Stephen Cooke]

Not really, I'm more thinking about initially generating individual neutral 
mesons or +/- pairs from decay of highly excited nuclei, with no actual nucleon 
disintegration before some other kind of decay can occur, which might be almost 
as weird. 

What you are describing is a direct nucleon disintegration of a nucleon into 
mesons it is indeed hard to imagine a process how this can occur. Holmlid seems 
to be deciding something along those lines however, if I understand right. This 
is also problematic as he mentions that +/- Kaons are produced first that 
contain strange quarks these later decay to pions and so on. Strange quarks are 
heavier than up and down quarks so are unlikely to come from decay of those 
quarks, so we need to explain where the strange quarks come from. 

I do wonder if a long neutral Kaon which contains + and - strange and down 
quarks in an oscillating state could be generated from decay of sufficiently 
highly excited nuclei and that if these neutral Kaons containing strange quarks 
once produced can interact with nucleons sufficiently to lead to disruption of 
the a nucleon and generate the products seen in Holmlids experiment without a 
high energy impact. 

I also wonder if K0 interactions with nuclei have been observed in other 
devices including particle accelerators, these would be complicated by higher 
energy interactions however. I agree if they react to produce +/- Kaons and 
cause nucleon decay it would indeed be something amazing. But surely some kinds 
of experiments using K0 capture in nuclei have been performed at some point so 
if anything as strange as this occurs we should have evidence of it.

The alternatives are also hard to explain, however:

A random high energy perturbation outside nucleus some how generating the pions 

High energy impacts of light nuclei or mid weight nuclei might generate Mesons 
but then they would also likely generate neutrons, gammas and other fission 
products. 

Some amazing external force ripping apart the nucleons in deuterium into pions 
with out just over coming the inter nucleon binding energy and creating high 
energy protons and neutrons 

Tachyon disintegration, I'm still not fully up to speed on understanding the 
possibilities mentioned here about Tachyon disintegration, but Axil's insights 
have often been shown to potentially have an important part to play once we 
understand them, so maybe indeed that could be an alternative.

There is another possibility in that the data is misinterpreted and mesons are 
not present, but here I am assuming that is not the case.

> On 27 okt. 2015, at 22:41, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 6:28 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> "*** If I understand correctly there are no sufficiently heavy elements 
>> available in Holmlids experiment for Kaons to form this way? …"
>> 
>> This is not strictly correct. [ ... snip ... ]
>> Ni 62 and Fe 58 would both therefore be sufficient for containing a K0 Meson 
>> 496 MeV
>> Fe 56 on the other hand would just fall short.
> 
> Note that what you seem to be describing is squeezing the 3+ quarks in each ~ 
> of the 58 nucleons in a nickel nucleus into the quark and antiquark pair in 
> the kaon.  Has anything so fantastic been accomplished in a particle 
> accelerator?  (The number of quarks in a nucleon is complicated by the idea 
> of "sea quarks".)
> 
> Or, alternatively, your proposal appears to involve creating shrunken quarks 
> that no longer have the mass that was given over to the kaon.  (Something 
> some people here might be amenable to.)
> 
> Eric
> 

Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

[Stephen Cooke]

Yup with due respect to Holmlid who obviously has good well developed expertise 
in the field and years of experience and analysis behind him, we nevertheless 
cannot know for sure until other experts are brought in to witness and process 
the raw data and ideally the test is repeated independently. I'm fully with you 
there Eric. I hope we get that verification someday.

> On 28 okt. 2015, at 01:05, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> The alternatives are also hard to explain, however:
> 
> There is another alternative you didn't mention -- Holmlid has a fertile 
> imagination and is confused and needs to pull in someone who knows how to 
> measure charged particle radiation.
> 
> Eric
> 

Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

[Stephen Cooke]

Well if Kaons are present on the up side we always thought something strange 
was going on in this process.

Although energetically there is enough rest mass in Deuterium to produce a Kaon 
through some kind of low energy or collective trigger for the nucleons to 
trigger can it account for the formation of these quarks?

If it is not possible this way but on the other hand they are present it would 
indicate maybe that the right combination of quarks and anti quarks are 
produced to form all the mesons observed from high energy excitation in one 
place. 

This I think is consistent with your SPP analogue black hole Hadron evaporation 
idea? 

As an alternative approach to the analogue black hole idea, for a meson to form 
in a single bound place I suppose that meson combinations could be generated in 
a nucleus. If a nucleus somehow has enough extra energy to generate a quark 
neutral over all combination of mesons. I wonder if this also true if a nucleon 
or nucleon pair is destroyed in the process. As well as an energizing source 
(perhaps a laser, phonon resonance effect or magnetic stimulation from SPP), I 
suppose a nucleus of sufficient binding energy would be required. It seems 
Deuterium it self does not have any where near the binding energy to hold a 
pion let alone combinations of pions or kaons. So if a single nucleus is 
required to generate complete mesons this implies heavier nuclei are required 
at least of sufficient binding energy to hold a meson pair before being 
released from or quantum tunneling out of the nucleus. 

If we assume 8MeV binding energy per nucleon then perhaps we need a nucleus of 
atomic mass of 36 (heavier than Sulphur) to manifest +/- pion pairs for 
example.  For kaon pairs however, much heavier nuclei would be implicated. I'm 
not sure if these are present in the fuel but I suppose platinum would be heavy 
enough.

So perhaps as I think you have said in the past the UDD is providing a kind of 
magnetic resonance to other individual nuclei. If these are heavier nuclei 
perhaps they can be excited to a state where these meson pairs can be 
manifested.

If the accumulation of energy in the nucleus is slow perhaps the mesons would 
be ejected as soon as the are formed with minimal energy as soon they can 
tunnel out of the nucleus. I suppose - mesons would form pionic and kaonic 
atoms and maybe the + pion interact with a neutron to form a proton, otherwise 
they would decay following the chain mentioned by Holmlid. 

It might be still difficult to account for Kaons using the above approach if so 
we are left with:

Nucleon or nucleon pair disintegration,(perhaps in ultra dense material) then a 
trigger needs to be identified.

Nucleon annihilation followed by particle generation from the energy released.

Axils SSP black hole analogue and Hadron evaporation.

High energy nucleon impacts or fusion events. In which case we would expect 
more radiation if I understand correctly.

> On 26 Oct 2015, at 08:03, Axil Axil  wrote:
> 
> K−, negatively charged (containing a strange quark and an up antiquark) has 
> mass 493.667±0.013 MeV and mean lifetime (1.2384±0.0024)×10−8 s.
> K+ (antiparticle of above) positively charged (containing an up quark and a 
> strange antiquark) must (by CPT invariance) have mass and lifetime equal to 
> that of K−. 
> 
> The mass difference is 0.032±0.090 MeV, consistent with zero. The difference 
> in lifetime is (0.11±0.09)×10−8 s. What's weird is that two different quarks 
> types are produced out of nothing. You just don't find strange quarks in 
> ordinary matter. 
> 
> 
>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>> in physical cosmology, baryogenesis is the generic term for the hypothetical 
>> physical processes that produced an asymmetry(imbalance) between baryons and 
>> antibaryons produced in the very early universe. The baryonic matter that 
>> remains today, following the baryonic-antibaryonic matter annihilation, 
>> makes up the universe.
>> 
>> LENR could be responsible for the past and ongoing production of matter in 
>> the universe in violation of CPT and that negative matter (antibaryons) is 
>> being sent back in time. 
>> 
>> We see excess electrons pop into existence in LENR reactions. Could LENR be 
>> the GOD reaction? In point of fact, Holmlid is producing electrons from 
>> nothing in his experiment. Don't get excited, we are just talking here.
>> 
>>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 12:53 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>> CPT THEOREM C(harge) -P(arity=reflection) -T(ime reversal) INVARIANCE is a 
>>> property of any quantum field theory in Flat space times which respects: 
>>> (i) Locality, (ii) Unitarity and (iii) Lorentz Symmetry.
>>> 
>>> Holmlid is producing neutral K mesons. This particle demonstrates CP 
>>> violation,
>>> 
>>> The discovery of CP violation in 1964 in the decays of neutral kaons 
>>> resulted in the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1980 for its 

Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

[Stephen Cooke]

Yup I was also wondering about the different quarks in the Kaons. Was the 
signature in their data clear? Or was there some other reason they inferred 
Kaons as well as Pions?

Sent from my iPhone

> On 26 Oct 2015, at 08:03, Axil Axil  wrote:
> 
> K−, negatively charged (containing a strange quark and an up antiquark) has 
> mass 493.667±0.013 MeV and mean lifetime (1.2384±0.0024)×10−8 s.
> K+ (antiparticle of above) positively charged (containing an up quark and a 
> strange antiquark) must (by CPT invariance) have mass and lifetime equal to 
> that of K−. 
> 
> The mass difference is 0.032±0.090 MeV, consistent with zero. The difference 
> in lifetime is (0.11±0.09)×10−8 s. What's weird is that two different quarks 
> types are produced out of nothing. You just don't find strange quarks in 
> ordinary matter. 
> 
> 
>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>> in physical cosmology, baryogenesis is the generic term for the hypothetical 
>> physical processes that produced an asymmetry(imbalance) between baryons and 
>> antibaryons produced in the very early universe. The baryonic matter that 
>> remains today, following the baryonic-antibaryonic matter annihilation, 
>> makes up the universe.
>> 
>> LENR could be responsible for the past and ongoing production of matter in 
>> the universe in violation of CPT and that negative matter (antibaryons) is 
>> being sent back in time. 
>> 
>> We see excess electrons pop into existence in LENR reactions. Could LENR be 
>> the GOD reaction? In point of fact, Holmlid is producing electrons from 
>> nothing in his experiment. Don't get excited, we are just talking here.
>> 
>>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 12:53 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>> CPT THEOREM C(harge) -P(arity=reflection) -T(ime reversal) INVARIANCE is a 
>>> property of any quantum field theory in Flat space times which respects: 
>>> (i) Locality, (ii) Unitarity and (iii) Lorentz Symmetry.
>>> 
>>> Holmlid is producing neutral K mesons. This particle demonstrates CP 
>>> violation,
>>> 
>>> The discovery of CP violation in 1964 in the decays of neutral kaons 
>>> resulted in the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1980 for its discoverers James 
>>> Croninand Val Fitch.
>>> 
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP_violation
>>> 
>>> Who can say why LENR produces neutral K mesons? 
> 

Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

[Stephen Cooke]

Good point about the delays, is there a good explanation for the different 
delays for the two sources 52ns for protium and 26 ns deuterium? Interesting 
that protium takes exactly twice as long and is half the mass. I appreciate the 
+/- kaon half life is about 12ns. 


> On 26 Oct 2015, at 15:13, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Holmlid says that the the reaction is delayed by 26ns for deuterium and 52 ns 
> for protium. This means that the reaction is produced by a decay product of 
> the K mesons. The 10 billion kaons are produced simultaneously. Positrons are 
> seen but no gamma. This is important. This means that the mechanism that 
> suppresses of thermalizes the gamma radiation exists AFTER the hydrogen 
> Rydberg matter is blasted apart. The Rydberg matter is not causative. 
> 
> This also means that more electrons are seen then positions like what 
> happened in the big bang in respect to CPT violation. Positrons were seen a 
> long distance away from the site of the reactions. This means that the gamma 
> thermalization extends outward meters from the site of the reaction.
> 
> How long does it take to reenergize this process? How long do we need to wait 
> before another laser shot produces similar results. Both Mills and Papp were 
> able to repeat their reaction is milliseconds. Can Holmlid do the same? Does 
> this reaction still need hydrogen Rydberg matter to exist after the first 
> laser shot? Holmlid said that it takes weeks to build up the Rydberg matter. 
> But both Mills and Papp got repeatable results in milliseconds. Does this 
> mean that the case of the reaction persists to thermalize radiation and 
> stabilize radioactive isotopes long after the Rydberg matter is gone?
> 
> We are at a stage in LENR where Niels Bohr was doing his exploration of the 
> structure of the atom. Holmlid needs to modify his experimental processes to 
> get as much info out of his experiment as he can.
> 
> 
> 
>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 7:15 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> Well if Kaons are present on the up side we always thought something strange 
>> was going on in this process.
>> 
>> Although energetically there is enough rest mass in Deuterium to produce a 
>> Kaon through some kind of low energy or collective trigger for the nucleons 
>> to trigger can it account for the formation of these quarks?
>> 
>> If it is not possible this way but on the other hand they are present it 
>> would indicate maybe that the right combination of quarks and anti quarks 
>> are produced to form all the mesons observed from high energy excitation in 
>> one place. 
>> 
>> This I think is consistent with your SPP analogue black hole Hadron 
>> evaporation idea? 
>> 
>> As an alternative approach to the analogue black hole idea, for a meson to 
>> form in a single bound place I suppose that meson combinations could be 
>> generated in a nucleus. If a nucleus somehow has enough extra energy to 
>> generate a quark neutral over all combination of mesons. I wonder if this 
>> also true if a nucleon or nucleon pair is destroyed in the process. As well 
>> as an energizing source (perhaps a laser, phonon resonance effect or 
>> magnetic stimulation from SPP), I suppose a nucleus of sufficient binding 
>> energy would be required. It seems Deuterium it self does not have any where 
>> near the binding energy to hold a pion let alone combinations of pions or 
>> kaons. So if a single nucleus is required to generate complete mesons this 
>> implies heavier nuclei are required at least of sufficient binding energy to 
>> hold a meson pair before being released from or quantum tunneling out of the 
>> nucleus. 
>> 
>> If we assume 8MeV binding energy per nucleon then perhaps we need a nucleus 
>> of atomic mass of 36 (heavier than Sulphur) to manifest +/- pion pairs for 
>> example.  For kaon pairs however, much heavier nuclei would be implicated. 
>> I'm not sure if these are present in the fuel but I suppose platinum would 
>> be heavy enough.
>> 
>> So perhaps as I think you have said in the past the UDD is providing a kind 
>> of magnetic resonance to other individual nuclei. If these are heavier 
>> nuclei perhaps they can be excited to a state where these meson pairs can be 
>> manifested.
>> 
>> If the accumulation of energy in the nucleus is slow perhaps the mesons 
>> would be ejected as soon as the are formed with minimal energy as soon they 
>> can tunnel out of the nucleus. I suppose - mesons would form pionic and 
>> kaonic atoms and maybe the + pion interact with a neutron to form a proton, 
>&

Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

[Stephen Cooke]

Could generation of +/- s quark pairs be the trigger for nucleon 
disintegration. Could each pair with an up quark to form kaons and force the 
disintegration of the nucleons from which the up quark comes? Each s quark has 
a rest mass of 100MeV. I'm not sure if there is a meson containing an s quark 
pair however. Unless it is in the form of K- long or K- short also about 497 
MeV that seem to contain a strange balanced mixture of + and - down and strange 
quarks. I'm not knowledgable enough of a nuclear physics to know if this is 
something to consider, but it seems intersting.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 26 Oct 2015, at 08:03, Axil Axil  wrote:
> 
> K−, negatively charged (containing a strange quark and an up antiquark) has 
> mass 493.667±0.013 MeV and mean lifetime (1.2384±0.0024)×10−8 s.
> K+ (antiparticle of above) positively charged (containing an up quark and a 
> strange antiquark) must (by CPT invariance) have mass and lifetime equal to 
> that of K−. 
> 
> The mass difference is 0.032±0.090 MeV, consistent with zero. The difference 
> in lifetime is (0.11±0.09)×10−8 s. What's weird is that two different quarks 
> types are produced out of nothing. You just don't find strange quarks in 
> ordinary matter. 
> 
> 
>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>> in physical cosmology, baryogenesis is the generic term for the hypothetical 
>> physical processes that produced an asymmetry(imbalance) between baryons and 
>> antibaryons produced in the very early universe. The baryonic matter that 
>> remains today, following the baryonic-antibaryonic matter annihilation, 
>> makes up the universe.
>> 
>> LENR could be responsible for the past and ongoing production of matter in 
>> the universe in violation of CPT and that negative matter (antibaryons) is 
>> being sent back in time. 
>> 
>> We see excess electrons pop into existence in LENR reactions. Could LENR be 
>> the GOD reaction? In point of fact, Holmlid is producing electrons from 
>> nothing in his experiment. Don't get excited, we are just talking here.
>> 
>>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 12:53 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>> CPT THEOREM C(harge) -P(arity=reflection) -T(ime reversal) INVARIANCE is a 
>>> property of any quantum field theory in Flat space times which respects: 
>>> (i) Locality, (ii) Unitarity and (iii) Lorentz Symmetry.
>>> 
>>> Holmlid is producing neutral K mesons. This particle demonstrates CP 
>>> violation,
>>> 
>>> The discovery of CP violation in 1964 in the decays of neutral kaons 
>>> resulted in the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1980 for its discoverers James 
>>> Croninand Val Fitch.
>>> 
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP_violation
>>> 
>>> Who can say why LENR produces neutral K mesons? 
> 

RE: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

[Stephen Cooke]

Yup I agree with you Axil although I am no expert on these matters I also don't 
know of anyway they could be generated from the protons. I will be interested 
if someone has an explanation for that. 
Just to expand on the strange quark pair generation idea: 

This is why I was wondering that if sufficient energy is applied if a strange 
anti strange quark pair can be manifested. If so quarks do not exist in 
isolation so they would normally need to be contained in a meson. Unlike Pion 0 
which contain + and  - up quarks or + and - down quarks I do not see such a 
meson for just + and - Strange quarks. (Does any one know if one exists)?
There are a few other Mesons however might be applicable. These are the eta 
meson, the eta prime meson, the short K 0 and the long K 0. All these Mesons 
are neutral and are their own anti particle. All these Mesons contain strange 
mixed up combination of + and - pairs of quarks the eta contain Up, Down and 
Strange quarks, the short and long K0 contain Down and Strange quarks. I'm not 
exactly what they mean in physical terms. The eta and eta prime Mesons are 
heavier than the Kaons and have very short half lives. The short kaon also has 
a short half life. The long Kaon however has a longer half life of 51 ns.
(The strange combinations of quarks in eta and K0 mesons can be found in the 
Meson list in this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mesons)
Since K0 short and Long are their own anti particle I wonder if they can be 
generated individually at lower energy than required for + - Meson pairs i.e 
497 MeV for K0 long rather than 996 MeV for +/- Kaon pairs. 
I should say that if this process is to work either it would need to be 
contained with in the nuclei. For particles the mass of Kaons this implies 
quite heavy Nuclei otherwise the energy would exceed the nucleus binding 
energy, for +/- K pairs it would imply nuclei heavier than Antimony are 
required (perhaps Pt if available would full fill this) for a single K 0 to 
form this would imply a nucleus of heavier than Nickel. I suppose one could 
imagine a resonant or entangled process where the energy was raised and 
distributed across several nuclei, thereby liberating Kaons from all the nuclei 
at the same time.
If heavy nucleons are available in Holmlids experiment this could lead to a 
test of the idea by removing elements heavier than Nickel if we stopped seeing 
Kaons (and maybe only see pions onwards), it could demonstrate that maybe this 
process was in action.
HOWEVER:
*** If I understand correctly there are no sufficiently heavy elements 
available in Holmlids experiment for Kaons to form this way? If I remember 
right there are no elements heavier than Nickel listed? The catalyst I think 
only contains Potassium, Iron and Oxygen. Is the is correct? If so it implies 
another process must take place. ***
I think in the current consensus this leaves effectively two possibilities: 
1. Concurrent Nucleon disintegration or annihilation with the production of 
particles also including strange quarks, if so an explanation is needed as to 
how down quarks can change to strange quarks for example. 
2. Axil's SPP Analogue black hole Hadron evaporation. It will be amazing if it 
can work that way, i wonder if there is a particular absolute proof way to 
observe that , such as actually observing an form SPP and seeing Kaons come 
directly as a result of it? I suppose we will have to wait for new high tech 
equipment to see that.
But maybe there is another mechanism too. (Hopefully not involving any Gorillas 
;) )
It is interesting that this test it may give us a window on CP violation too

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 11:42:22 -0400
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT
From: janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

I don't understand how strange and antistrange quarks can come from protons. 
There would need to be a quark reformatting process involved that can turn 
matter into different matter and antimatter types instantly. It is easier to 
accept that light energy from the laser is turned into matter and antimatter, 
especially since the color of the light changes the nature of the matter 
produced. Said in another way, different light makes different matter.
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
wrote:
Could generation of +/- s quark pairs be the trigger for nucleon 
disintegration. Could each pair with an up quark to form kaons and force the 
disintegration of the nucleons from which the up quark comes? Each s quark has 
a rest mass of 100MeV. I'm not sure if there is a meson containing an s quark 
pair however. Unless it is in the form of K- long or K- short also about 497 
MeV that seem to contain a strange balanced mixture of + and - down and strange 
quarks. I'm not knowledgable enough of a nuclear physics to know if this is 
something to consider, but it seems intersting.
Sent from my iPhone
On 26 Oct 2015, at 08:03, Axil Axil <janap...@

Re: [Vo]:Colloquium at SRI

[Stephen Cooke]

Yup it's certainly astonishing if true. 

If a Nucleon is disintegrating this way, I wonder how it still can meet 
conservation rules. In order to form pions it implies quark anti quark pairs 
with combinations of up and down quarks are formed from a nucleon. In effect 
the equivalent quarks for a anti nucleon need to be produced. If they interact 
with another nucleon I suppose they may change transfer energy to that nucleon 
and change the nucleon type and conserve spin etc somehow to maintain 
conservation states otherwise I suppose the conservation might be taken up by 
the kind of produced lepton and neutrinos produced. I'm curious how it can work 
I suppose we will need to wait to see the of their theory.

Sent from my iPad

> On 23 okt. 2015, at 16:54, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> 
> From: Stephen Cooke
> 
> Ø   That nucleons may actually disintegrate is nothing short of 
> astonishing! Is this what they are actually saying? Did they really observe 
> such huge amounts of energy?
> 
> 
> Yes precisely. This is why it will be more controversial than cold fusion 
> until replicated. Many observers were left in a state of amazement, but … all 
> of this was in the prior papers. We talked about it here earlier.
> 
> Sometimes you just have to hear it directly from a credible person instead of 
> seeing it in a paper. Ólafsson is a tall, handsome Nordic fellow - not as 
> charismatic as McKubre, but some of that comes with age. He is very 
> believable.
> 
> Ø  
> 
> Ø   900 MeV is close to the rest mass of a neutron (939 MeV) and proton 
> (938 MeV), Half the mass of the Deutron Nucleus!
> 
> 
> Yes – it is the entire mass of a nucleon which is being converted into 
> energy. I should not have rounded this off. Much of that energy will be lost 
> to neutrinos but there will be gammas.
> 
> Ø  
> 
> Ø   When they 900 MeV is released I see 3 possible meanings for this:
> 
> 
> 1)  Did they imply total disintegration of one of the nucleons to Pions 
> to Muons to electrons and neutrinos and gamma?
> 
> 
> Yes. They see mesons first, then pions, then muons and finally electrons. 
> They have a detector. I think the skepticism from other Physicists will focus 
> on the detector. Ideally other detectors should be used as well. I hope the 
> slides will be published soon as this would require a lone time to try to 
> explain, otherwise.
> 
> 
> 2)  If so could it be the just the Neutron or Proton or either one that 
> can disintegrate?
> 
> 
> Either one or both together.
> 
> Ø  
> 
> Ø   Which ever the case its astonishing amount of energy to release in 
> one reaction almost up there with matter antimatter annihilation. 
> 
> 
> If they can confirm this finding using a neutrino detector – that would go a 
> long way. I walked away from this with the feeling that a new door is opening 
> in the world of alternative energy. They may not have it completely right, 
> but this could represent the final hurdle in the process started in 1989 (or 
> earlier).
> 
> It is too bad for mainstream physics that most of them have they missed the 
> boat on this. If Holmlid is accurate, it makes the billions spent on the LHC 
> and the Higgs closer to self-promoting fraud than to the efficient 
> advancement of science. Unlike the situation in 1989, it will be much harder 
> to erect obstacles.
> 
> Let us hope that this is not a Pandora’s box which is opening.
> 
> 
>  

RE: [Vo]:Colloquium at SRI

[Stephen Cooke]

Thank a lot Jones Beene for this great and interesting report.
If Holmlid process was some how creating dense material that enhanced the 
Stella type proton proton chain reaction, from deuteron proton reactions 
onwards that would already be amazing. That nucleons may actually disintegrate 
is nothing short of astonishing! Is this what they are actually saying? Did 
they really observe such huge amounts of energy?
900 MeV is close to the rest mass of a neutron (939 MeV) and proton (938 MeV), 
Half the mass of the Deutron Nucleus!
When they 900 MeV is released I see 3 possible meanings for this:
1) Did they imply total disintegration of one of the nucleons to Pions to Muons 
to electrons and neutrinos and gamma? If so could it be the just the Neutron or 
Proton or either one that can disintegrate?
2) Did they imply this came the disintegration of both nucleons to Pions i.e 
(939 MeV + 938 MeV) - (6 * 139 MeV). If so even more energy would be released 
as the pions decay to muons and eventually Electron/Proton and neutrinos or 
gamma? 
3) Did they imply something else.
Which ever the case its astonishing amount of energy to release in one reaction 
almost up there with matter antimatter annihilation. 

From: jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 17:16:42 -0700
Subject: [Vo]:Colloquium at SRI






Colloquium at SRI




Very interesting presentation this morning. Ólafsson was both low key and 
optimistic that Holmlid is onto something important. Alan Goldwater also 
presented his open source work on the basic glow reactor of Rossi/Parkhomov. At 
first glance, there would appear to be no connection between the two … but read 
on.

Holmlid is clearly the lead individual on the dense hydrogen phenomenon and 
Ólafsson is interpreting his work going back to 2008 and before. However, most 
of the proof is by process of elimination. This will be even more controversial 
than cold fusion until proven. Again, what was demonstrated is NOT cold fusion 
and not really hot fusion either. Copious amounts of radiation would expected 
in such a laser driven reaction when it gets up to the kilowatt level of 
thermal gain. Now it is subwatt. 

However, in different circumstances (electrolysis) the same reactant (which is 
dense deuterium clusters) could explain P cold fusion, and explain the lack 
of radiation in circumstances where a laser does not disintegrate the reactant. 
IOW, there can be a range of circumstances– all involving dense deuterium bound 
at a few picometers separation - where other outcomes are expected: other than 
disintegration to mesons -> pions -> muons etc. With the laser as the input 
power, when a deuteron disintegrates in a laser pulse, over 900 MeV or ~ 40 
times MORE energy is released than in fusion !

There were about 35 people in attendance including  a few heavy hitters who 
prefer not to be identified. The venue is a stone’s throw from Sand Hill Road. 
A video crew filmed the whole thing. Holmlid apparently wants to call the 
phenomenon “Cold Spallation” but I think that is a bad choice, since it does 
not look like nuclear spallation as we know it. And there is nothing cold about 
the output. BTW – Ólafsson said that calling the Rydberg matter “inverted” (in 
the paper with Miley) was not accurate.

The only thing needed now is replication. 

A professor whose name I did not catch (San Jose State ?) has been trying to 
replicate LH but has not been successful. Holmlid recently told him that the 
dense hydrogen takes several weeks to accumulate, and has an extended shelf 
life thereafter. That seems to me to be the main takeaway lesson  ** weeks to 
accumulate **. 

As I recall, a few years back, there was a message where Rossi mentioned that 
his supplier in Italy required months to make a batch of active reactant. Could 
it be that Rossi has been inadvertently getting dense hydrogen all along?



The presentation of Alan Goldwater was very impressive. I am confident that if 
and when Alan announces thermal gain in a Rossi style reactor – we can believe 
it. That has not happened yet but he is very methodical and dedicated. Like 
many others including myself, he accepts Bob Higgins downgraded assessment of 
the Lugano report (slight gain – perhaps COP~1.2 see Bob’s white paper).

I encouraged Alan – in light of Olafsson’s presentation - to consider a 2-stage 
or compound system where he would manufacture the dense deuterium separately 
from the reactor where it is to be converted to heat. At first he seemed 
dubious that two steps would be required – in order to merge Holmlid’s results 
with Rossi. But this strategy would allow a very low powered continuous laser 
to accumulate the dense material over time. The ideal situation, if one wishes 
to avoid radiation toxicitym seems to be: do NOT to use a fast pulse intense 
laser to convert dense deuterium into heat (this assumes there does exist the 
radiation-free route to convert it to heat).

IMO - It will be 

RE: [Vo]:MMDD .... Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration

[Stephen Cooke]

You might be right Axil, These days I certainly tend to think there is some 
kind of collective disruptive or resonant behaviour that is exciting the nuclei 
or causing them to act this way. I acknowledge your good arguments and evidence 
for the formation of SPP's in these devices. It also seems some kind of trigger 
for collective behaviour is required. 
I think its interesting to look at the possibilities of low energy virtual 
resonant meson exchange rather than nucleon exchange. If it can occur.
I'm certainly no expert on this but I suppose if the resonance increases slowly 
(but still fast in atomic scales) the first real single particles to be 
generated would be pions? unless particle pairs involving electrons, positrons, 
muons and associated neutrinos are be generated before. Is this correct 
thinking?
pion0 has slightly less mass than pion+ or pion- and has much shorter half life 
so it is curious if we do not see gamma from pion0 decay. Could it be that the 
longer half life of virtual Pion+ and Pion- means in theory are more likely to 
tunnel? Or electrons, muons and pion0 are suppressed somehow so that pion+ and 
pion- are the first to be generated.
I suppose generating a real meson would have higher energy consequences, but 
this could lead to the observed muons. 
I'm imagining if the energy is a "slowly" building resonant effect maybe as 
soon as a pion is manifested if it is a pion- perhaps its wave function 
occupies the S orbital to form Pionium until it interacts with the nucleus or 
decays via muon decay. If it is a pion+ perhaps it is ejected with sufficient 
energy to interact with another Deuterium nucleus to form a diproton that 
decays to 2 high energy protons, or it decays to a muon of characteristic 
energy that is later detected.
I suppose a real nuclear physicist will correct me on a lot of my assumptions.
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 04:16:37 -0400
Subject: Re: [Vo]:MMDD  Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration
From: janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

I believe that what you imagine is what is happening in one of the many cases 
involving SPP extreme magnetic projections and entanglement,

Re: [Vo]:MMDD .... Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration

[Stephen Cooke]

In case it is interesting I have found a couple of interesting papers on pionic 
deuterium.

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/econf/C070910/PDF/290.pdf

http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Joao_Veloso2/publication/226690552_Pionic_Deuterium/links/0fcfd509900d147bc600.pdf?inViewer=true=true=true=publication_detail


The papers are quite technical and apparently Pionic Deuterium has been studied 
quite extensively. There are some interesting points about pion production and 
absorption with nuclei and nucleon pairs, ground state s orbital interaction 
with the nucleus, x-Ray production and experimental set up. The second paper is 
much more detailed.

It seems to me if we see effects in the experiments described in these papers, 
if pions are indeed generated then we might even be more likely to see 
something in ultra dense material.

I wonder what kinds of energies would be yielded in these kind of reactions. If 
any was produced we would need to balance this against those the energy 
required for pion production. But perhaps the excess energy for pion production 
comes from muon catalysed fusion and / or external forces and resonance effects.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 19 Oct 2015, at 22:18, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I guess there is a chance that they saw X-ray spectra from Pionic Deuterium 
> as well as inferring from muons of specific energy. It will be interesting to 
> see what he says on Thursday, I hope someone can ask these kind of questions. 
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
>> On 19 okt. 2015, at 18:18, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>> 
>> The lifetime of pions is a factor of 100 times shorter than the muon, which 
>> is itself short.
>>  
>> How pions can be detected at all, with so short a lifetime is a question 
>> worth asking.
>>  
>> There is a good possibility that they are inferred – from finding muons, 
>> which can be detected. Hopefully, Ólafsson will address this issue of 
>> detection on Thursday.
>>  
>>  
>> From: Stephen Cooke
>>  
>> … Is It possible that the nuclei are sufficiently close that those pions or 
>> virtual ones get generated in association with one nucleus and absorbed by 
>> another either directly or by tunneling at lower energy?
>> 
>>  

RE: [Vo]:MMDD .... Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration

[Stephen Cooke]

One negative point to this idea I suppose is that if a pion is absorbed by a 
nucleon pair in a nucleus the whole mass energy in the pion will be released so 
if even a stationary pion was absorbed the final 2 nucleons in the pair will be 
ejected with kinetic energy about 63 MeV each. I suppose it is difficult to see 
how these nucleons would not generate gamma or neutrons on interaction with 
other nuclei.
Also on the negative side: If a pion is implicated and needs to be generated 
within a nucleus, i suppose if this is not from a high energy collision it 
would need to be created in a nucleus with higher total binding energy than the 
pion mass energy. This would be a medium weight nucleus so if we assume 8 MeV 
binding energy per nucleon it would probably require a nucleus heavier than 
Oxygen at least. 

From: stephen_coo...@hotmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:MMDD  Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 16:16:09 +0200




'The amount of energy needed to create a free pion is large; the rest mass for 
a pion is ~ 135 MeV'
Very true this is also true for the muon which has a rest mass for a pion is ~ 
106 MeV. 
I'm not sure if muons can be generated without pions? muon pair production 
would require even more energy. 
The energy is also quite high compared to the binding energy of light Nuclei.
If I am right I think the laser produces much less thermal energy too.
It is difficult to imagine how either muons (or pions) can form with out some 
kind of collective resonance effect or an additional high MeV energy source 
such as sufficient energy from a high energy fusion event or more even 
strangely a nucleon decay to mesons.
It will be interesting what Holmlids observations and explanations say, I'm 
quite curious as you say he could well have another explanation.

From: eric.wal...@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 08:47:08 -0500
Subject: Re: [Vo]:MMDD  Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 2:21 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
wrote:
If any was produced we would need to balance this against those the energy 
required for pion production.
The amount of energy needed to create a free pion is large; the rest mass for a 
pion is ~ 135 MeV.  Consider that the largest amount of energy typically 
discussed in the context of cold fusion up to now has been ~ 24 MeV.  Holmlid's 
observations are likely to go back to something other than the generation of 
pions.
Eric

  

RE: [Vo]:MMDD .... Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration

[Stephen Cooke]

'The amount of energy needed to create a free pion is large; the rest mass for 
a pion is ~ 135 MeV'
Very true this is also true for the muon which has a rest mass for a pion is ~ 
106 MeV. 
I'm not sure if muons can be generated without pions? muon pair production 
would require even more energy. 
The energy is also quite high compared to the binding energy of light Nuclei.
If I am right I think the laser produces much less thermal energy too.
It is difficult to imagine how either muons (or pions) can form with out some 
kind of collective resonance effect or an additional high MeV energy source 
such as sufficient energy from a high energy fusion event or more even 
strangely a nucleon decay to mesons.
It will be interesting what Holmlids observations and explanations say, I'm 
quite curious as you say he could well have another explanation.

From: eric.wal...@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 08:47:08 -0500
Subject: Re: [Vo]:MMDD  Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 2:21 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
wrote:
If any was produced we would need to balance this against those the energy 
required for pion production.
The amount of energy needed to create a free pion is large; the rest mass for a 
pion is ~ 135 MeV.  Consider that the largest amount of energy typically 
discussed in the context of cold fusion up to now has been ~ 24 MeV.  Holmlid's 
observations are likely to go back to something other than the generation of 
pions.
Eric
  

Re: [Vo]:MMDD .... Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration

[Stephen Cooke]

This is definitely a crazy train of thought on my part but it's got me 
wondering: Bearing in mind Holmlids detection of muons and possibility they 
come from decay of positive or negative pions along with the fact that they are 
generated in ultra dense  deuterium. Is It possible that the nuclei are 
sufficiently close that those pions or virtual ones get generated in 
association with one nucleus and absorbed by another either directly or by 
tunneling at lower energy? If this occurs would this then change neutrons to 
protons and visa versa in the different nuclei? Could energy be exchanged 
between nuclei with transfer of neutral pions. I appreciate this would be very 
strange if this could occur. So I suppose the very short half life and extent 
of the pion wave function is not sufficient even in ultra dense material to 
allow this before the pion converts to a muon? 


> On 12 Oct 2015, at 17:25, Jones Beene  wrote:
> 
> MMPD  Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration
> 
> 
> The work of Leif Holmlid and others has opened up the possibility of 
> understanding what appears to be a new kind of nuclear reaction – a limited 
> type of chain reaction which is not fusion nor fission. The result of this 
> reaction is the complete disintegration of deuteron into quarks -- and then 
> into muons. The continuing reaction is propagated and catalyzed by muons 
> before they decay. Most of the net energy of the reaction is lost in the form 
> of neutrinos, but the fraction which is thermalized is still significant.
> 
> This nuclear reaction is dependent on the prior formation of a population of 
> “ultra-dense deuterium” which is an isomer of hydrogen which forms as a 2D 
> (two dimensional) layer on selected surfaces. The densification process has 
> been recognized for many years and rigorously described in the important 
> paper from 2009 of Nabil Lawandy entitled “Interactions of Charged Particles 
> on Surfaces.”
> 
> www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LawandyNMinteractio.pdf
> 
> 
> Individual deuterons are bosons which can occupy the same quantum state, so 
> long as their electrons are delocalized. This delocalization of electrons is 
> the key feature of ultra-dense deuterium, which becomes a condensate at 
> elevated temperature, thus allowing this novel reaction.
> 
> Upon application of a laser pulse which irradiates the condensate, a few 
> muons will be emitted which then proceed as a limited chain-reaction to 
> catalyze further reactions. In this reaction of relatively cold deuterons, 
> gamma emission cannot proceed, and fusion to deuterium is suppressed in favor 
> of complete disintegration of protons and neutrons into quarks.
> 
> The excess energy which would normally be expressed as very energetic gammas 
> is internalized to dislocate quarks from the bound state. Almost immediately, 
> quarks decay into muons – which have a greatly increased lifetime (but still 
> short) and muons are capable of catalyzing and  propagating the further 
> continuity of the reaction in a way reminiscent of nuclear fission of uranium 
> (in which neutrons are the mediator). Most of the net energy of this reaction 
> is lost to neutrino formation - but thermal gain is still possible.
> 
> More details to follow…
> 
> Jones

Re: [Vo]:MMDD .... Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration

[Stephen Cooke]

I guess there is a chance that they saw X-ray spectra from Pionic Deuterium as 
well as inferring from muons of specific energy. It will be interesting to see 
what he says on Thursday, I hope someone can ask these kind of questions. 

Sent from my iPad

> On 19 okt. 2015, at 18:18, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> 
> The lifetime of pions is a factor of 100 times shorter than the muon, which 
> is itself short.
>  
> How pions can be detected at all, with so short a lifetime is a question 
> worth asking.
>  
> There is a good possibility that they are inferred – from finding muons, 
> which can be detected. Hopefully, Ólafsson will address this issue of 
> detection on Thursday.
>  
>  
> From: Stephen Cooke
>  
> … Is It possible that the nuclei are sufficiently close that those pions or 
> virtual ones get generated in association with one nucleus and absorbed by 
> another either directly or by tunneling at lower energy?
> 
>  

Re: [Vo]:Publishing the Lundin/Lidgren paper

[Stephen Cooke]

I'm glad it was published.

I think it is unlikely that a theorist is going to find the complete theory in 
one simple step. In the same way it is unlikely that the first simple 
experiment will create just the right complete conditions for perfect LENR. But 
each one of these theories and experiments provide new ideas and data points 
that may well contribute to the final understanding of the phenomena.

I was fascinated by the use of Alfvén waves as an analogy to explain 
Ponderomotive forces at atomic level in solids. I'm also curious about the 
neutron spalation issues etc discussed here. I'm sure they are well aware if 
those issues so I hope they can expand on that and explain here someday. It 
seems they have in mind that the neutrons are coupled with the lower mass 
Nickel somehow perhaps in a collective way as they say the lower energy Ni 58 
are filled first. I'm curious if they can explain more about that

It might be in the end there is a simple and unusual but it seems more likely 
to me the over all solution is likely it is complex in the system and made up 
of particular combinations of processes in specific conditions. As Ed Storms 
and many others have said this would explain why we do not se it under normal 
circumstances but only in very specific conditions and places. It seems likely 
to me that at theory level too it will take a special combination of current 
ideas and concepts.

I hope that the exceptional knowledge providers, theorist and experimenters 
alike who present here and elsewhere are always are able to raise there ideas 
for discussion without fear of being wrong or incomplete and also to be open to 
both the critical and supporting discussions that result as that way we are 
more likely to find the right combination that explains LENR. And more than 
likely there are bits of truth in every idea.

With out hearing these ideas and discussing them a critical piece might be 
missed. Ponderomotive forces could be one of those.


> On 17 okt. 2015, at 15:39, Mats Lewan  wrote:
> 
> Several weaknesses in the paper presented by Lundin and Lidgren have been 
> discussed here, as it should be.
> When I gave attention to the paper on my blog I expected such weaknesses to 
> be discovered and exposed. However, my reason for giving publicity to the 
> paper were three:
> 
> - the authors’ claim that they had made a successful, albeit non documented, 
> experiment, indicating that they might have found some kind of useful method. 
> I had hoped that they would have made their planned real experiment before 
> presenting the paper.
> - the fairy novel introduction of the little-known phenomenon of 
> ponderomotive forces in the LENR field.
> - the fact that their paper wouldn’t even be considered for traditional 
> peer-review, which is sad since only increased exchange of ideas in this 
> field, where so many cross competences apparently are needed, will lead to 
> progress.
> 
> Also compare with Edward de Bono’s concept of Lateral Thinking (which I refer 
> to in the last chapter of my book) where one method of dealing with the 
> brains tendency to pick pieces of information, one at a time (and therefore 
> miss hidden paths if the pieces are presented in the ‘wrong’ order) is to 
> consider also apparently ‘impossible’ paths that normally would be discarded, 
> since they might lead to a possible and real goal, even though they pass 
> through forbidden areas. One way of doing this is trying to see valuable 
> pieces of a new proposition, even though the the theory as a whole might not 
> be valid.
> 
> As someone pointed out, such an attitude might also encourage the authors to 
> take part in the discussion here.
> 
> Mats
> www.animpossibleinvention.com
> 
> 
> 

RE: [Vo]:MMDD .... Muon Mediated Deuteron Disintegration

[Stephen Cooke]

I really enjoy browsing this site, the discussions are amazing. 
I recently on LENR Forum had some similar thoughts but since I am more an 
enthusiast than and far from a serious physicist so they are pretty speculative 
and I appreciate from the discussions here that there are also all sorts of 
nucleus and nucleon state energy and conservation issues to be taken into 
account. I wonder if they are relevant though so i thought to copy it here:
I recently read an article on Space Daily about atoms during a 
supernova:spacedaily.com/reports/How_do_…ernova_explosion_999.htmlIt talks 
about X-ray interactions in Supernova producing an exotic plasma state where 
the inner electrons are ejected from atoms. A supernova is obviously a 
different environment than that discussed in Leif Holmlid experiment and the 
article does not talk at all about either cold or hot fusion but I wonder if 
the high temperatures and energies produced by the lasers might be creating a 
similar environment on a local scale that has a similar atomic effect that LENR 
can then maybe take advantage of.I could not help wondering if this could play 
a part in Rydberg matter formation. Also if the inner vacancies from the 
ejected photons could capture a muon before the outer electrons rearrange and 
fill these positions.Note according to the article high energy X-rays are 
produced as a consequence of this effect which i understand are not seen in 
LENR experiments. I wonder if the XUV light seen in sonoluminescence 
experiments and by Mills is at similar frequencies?Could there be 
characteristic photon emission from transitions in muon shell levels similar to 
those from electrons and at what frequencies these occur. Could these be 
observed experimentally?If characteristic radiation can be seen from muon 
energy level transitions then it could be interesting to see if radiation of 
these frequencies occur astronomically, either in supernovae or other energetic 
shocks and boundaries such as associated with different parts of solar flares. 
Given the muon half life if the radiation occurs well way from known sources 
such as high in the solar corona rather than just close to the photosphere then 
it may tell us something about how and where they are formed.I like Axils ideas 
about the SPP directly producing the radiation but on a slightly different tack 
I wonder if in the absence of lasers could the SPP mentioned by Axil generate 
similar disruptions to the inner electrons either directly or magnetically or 
through the radiation generated by the SPP solitons?If muons are seen do we 
know if they are positive or negative or do we see both, I suppose in order to 
form muonic atoms and allow muon catalysed fusion they would need to be 
negative? I suppose even if muons could be generated from some process perhaps 
involving decay, interaction or resonance of virtual pions in the nucleus quite 
a lot of energy would be needed? Would the high temperatures of 50 to 500 MK be 
sufficient for this? Am I right in saying this is equivalent thermally to about 
4.3 to 43 keV? This seems quite low to generate pions or muons. Or is the 
specific laser frequency also important?Once produced in a nucleus would 
negative muons wave function naturally move into the available orbital due to 
overlap with the nucleus or would conservation of momentum require them to be 
ejected?If negative muons are produced from a negative pion in the nucleus I 
suppose conservation rules would require a Neutron to change to a Proton. If 
these come from the deuterium this implies it forms He2 + which I suppose would 
immediately decay to 2 Protons or by beta + decay back to deuterium. Do we see 
a change in protium/deuterium ratio consistent with this?Looking further I read 
that beta decay rates are sometimes modified in highly ionised atoms and 
sometimes bound beta decay where an emitted election is transferred to a bound 
state can occur. phy.pku.edu.cn/~jcpei/meeting/201408/litvinov.pdfI wonder if 
this could also occur for muons generated from pion decay in the nucleus, 
particularly as the orbitals for muons have greater overlap with the nucleus 
when compared to electron orbitals. Could it be that atoms in Rydberg state or 
with ionised lower orbitals are more likely to generate muons or capture 
negative muons from a nucleus? I suppose this would have been previously 
observed if this is the case, however. I'm not sure how conservation of 
momentum is respected in bound beta decay however maybe the momentum not 
included in the neutrino is taken up by the atom. I suppose any positive muons 
produced would be ejected and form muonium. Still it is difficult to account 
for the energy required if they do come from the nucleus. Edit: I wonder if to 
some extent all nucleons exist in a cloud of one or more virtual mesons 
according to the quark composition of the nucleon and how their wave functions 
would behave and interact. I wonder if a highly charged