In reply to Jones Beene's message of Mon, 26 Apr 2021 13:13:01 + (UTC):
Hi,
[snip]
>Yes, the argument could be made that muon catalyzed fission despite the name -
>is in fact, cleaner than fusion. So the bottom line is still the same: "does
>the Holmlid effect, and/or the Norront
Robin wrote:
> Assuming a radius of 10 fm for the nucleus of a Uranium atom, to which a
> negative muon would be attracted, and thus gain
kinetic energy, coming from "infinitely" far away, the muon would gain about 13
MeV of kinetic energy. That's more than
enough to fission even U238 (or
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sun, 25 Apr 2021 22:12:43 + (UTC):
Hi,
Assuming a radius of 10 fm for the nucleus of a Uranium atom, to which a
negative muon would be attracted, and thus gain
kinetic energy, coming from "infinitely" far away, the muon would gain about 13
MeV of
"Sticking" is a problem with muon catalyzed fusion, but with fission as far as
I know, this was not a major issue as there is a great excess of muons from a
GeV proton beam.
A lot of that work was done at Brookhaven 3-4 decades ago. I'm sure the details
are in old issues of Fusion Technology
Wasn't there a problem with "sticking"?
Each muon wasted to much of its short life hanging around after completing
each reaction?
Steve Jones was the expert on this. Wonder if he's still around lurking?
Best regards
Gary
On Sat, 24 Apr 2021, 13:18 Jones Beene, wrote:
> This is not a typo
This is not a typo - in fact muons can catalyze fission as well as fusion.
Holmlid devotees should take notice of this opportunity.
Decades ago, government Labs were looking at accelerator driven fission
using massive beam lines and un-enriched fuel, but this turned out to be
economically
6 matches
Mail list logo
