RE: [Vo]:Article: Dirt Cheap Muon Detector Puts Particle Physics Within DIY Reach
Speaking of muons, here is an off-the-wall observation about the cross-connection of LENR with “ultra-dense hydrogen”… via an internally borrowed lepton which happens to be of the correct mass-energy value. It avoids most of the problems of finding a nuclear nexus for the energy gain in LENR, but notably it is not Millsean, even though the gain comes from an electron orbital - as opposed to coming directly from the nucleus. Unlike the Mills version of step-wise Rydberg progression in ground state redundancy, this reaction would happen in one jump from a bare proton to a compact atom with a ground state which is near 200 × (−13.6 eV ) ≈ −2.72keV. This is based on mass energy of the muon being a factor of 200x the Bohr electron. Also, unlike Mills model, the energy gain happens NOT on the formation of the dense species, but on its decay. The leap-of-faith is that resonant k-shell electrons in metals like palladium can become a muon-equivalent species which is captured by a bare deuteron. On decay, it would be replaced in an Augur cascade, as in the Mossbauer effect. The “signature” wavelength of a photon emitted in a transition between the first excited state and the ground state would be ≈ 2.04 keV, the wavelength of which is ≈ 0.6 nm. This value is the key to falsifiability. The Mossbauer effect offers many similarities. If a photon and Augur cascade originating at 2 keV can be documented in LENR -- then it is almost a slam dunk that this hypothesis is at least partly accurate. Executive summary: UDH/UDD is identical to muonic hydrogen, but is a species which is not generated from muons per se. Instead the dense atom results from a proton or deuteron progressing into the electron shell of a host metal and resonantly appropriating a k-shell electron from the metal in which the hydrogen is dissolved (i.e palladium or nickel etc). In short, the muon is literally a nearly relativistic electron (200 x heavier) and if we take that description as being completely accurate as a plateau of stability, and also consider that many heavy elements like palladium have relativistic electrons near that value, and mash that up with the known mass-increase of electrons nearing lightspeed and mash all of it up with the known features of muonic-hydrogen, occurring naturally via muon capture, then what comes out of the blender is indeed a new understanding of “ultra-dense hydrogen” in which the relativistic electron from a heavy metal catalyst has assumed muon identity (as a value of mass-energy) without ever actually becoming a free muon. This is not a trivial semantic issue. Has Holmlid or anyone in the past proposed the exact and complete cross-identity of UDH with self-generated muonic hydrogen? If so, my apology for missing it.
RE: [Vo]:Article: Dirt Cheap Muon Detector Puts Particle Physics Within DIY Reach
Make that 10,000/m^2/sec according to Wiki… Correction – the standard muon flux 10,000/m^2 at sea level – so the flux is based on a square meter and the box looks to be far less area – so it could be perhaps 10-20% efficient. From: Jack Cole Ø Dirt Cheap Muon Detector Puts Particle Physics Within DIY Reach http://flip.it/0.QD-k This device is seeing one muon per second at sea level in Boston. The actual flux is about 150 per second, so the detector is less than 1% efficient. It would be most interesting for Hagelstein/Swartz to borrow one of them - so as to place a detector near an experiment which is known to produce excess heat. This begs to be done. And the normal muon flux makes the Holmlid claims of laser irradiation, which are apparently producing 100,000 times greater muon flux, all the more impressive – if true. Even if Holmlid’s detector is 100% efficient, the results are extremely impressive. This could explain why a LENR device, if muons are being produced, can have no apparent thermal gain at times … assuming muons are a type of energy release which happen irregularly, along with other kinds of energy release. The muons have a long life (relatively speaking) and would decay tens of meters away from the experiment, and be missed normally.
RE: [Vo]:Article: Dirt Cheap Muon Detector Puts Particle Physics Within DIY Reach
Correction – the standard muon flux 10,000/m^2 at sea level – so the flux is based on a square meter and the box looks to be far less area – so it could be perhaps 10-20% efficient. From: Jack Cole Ø Dirt Cheap Muon Detector Puts Particle Physics Within DIY Reach http://flip.it/0.QD-k This device is seeing one muon per second at sea level in Boston. The actual flux is about 150 per second, so the detector is less than 1% efficient. It would be most interesting for Hagelstein/Swartz to borrow one of them - so as to place a detector near an experiment which is known to produce excess heat. This begs to be done. And the normal muon flux makes the Holmlid claims of laser irradiation, which are apparently producing 100,000 times greater muon flux, all the more impressive – if true. Even if Holmlid’s detector is 100% efficient, the results are extremely impressive. This could explain why a LENR device, if muons are being produced, can have no apparent thermal gain at times … assuming muons are a type of energy release which happen irregularly, along with other kinds of energy release. The muons have a long life (relatively speaking) and would decay tens of meters away from the experiment, and be missed normally.
Re: [Vo]:Article: Dirt Cheap Muon Detector Puts Particle Physics Within DIY Reach
It is an interesting design using a solid state photomultiplier, but really it is a charged particle + gamma detector with no discrimination. It is listed as detecting cosmogenic muons because they are the most likely cosmic ray detection at the surface of the Earth. On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Jack Cole wrote: > Dirt Cheap Muon Detector Puts Particle Physics Within DIY Reach > > http://flip.it/0.QD-k >
RE: [Vo]:Article: Dirt Cheap Muon Detector Puts Particle Physics Within DIY Reach
From: Jack Cole * Dirt Cheap Muon Detector Puts Particle Physics Within DIY Reach http://flip.it/0.QD-k This device is seeing one muon per second at sea level in Boston. The actual flux is about 150 per second, so the detector is less than 1% efficient. It would be most interesting for Hagelstein/Swartz to borrow one of them - so as to place a detector near an experiment which is known to produce excess heat. This begs to be done. And the normal muon flux makes the Holmlid claims of laser irradiation, which are apparently producing 100,000 times greater muon flux, all the more impressive – if true. Even if Holmlid’s detector is 100% efficient, the results are extremely impressive. This could explain why a LENR device, if muons are being produced, can have no apparent thermal gain at times … assuming muons are a type of energy release which happen irregularly, along with other kinds of energy release. The muons have a long life (relatively speaking) and would decay tens of meters away from the experiment, and be missed normally.