Jones Beene wrote: > > Fred, there are many unexplored possibilities assuming the > existence of a useful level of electronium (*e) in nature. But let > me digress a bit with an excursion into the twilight zone of > quantum mechanics. Snip the foamy Dirac Sea. As usual even when someone agrees with you, you disagree ,Jones. :-) > > From that stage, all we need to do to demonstrate, and to > effectively prove the existence of a useful level of electronium > (*e) is to show evidence from real and unrelated experiments that > the Ps- (negative ion) is *longer-lived* then the Ps itself. > Prolific Low Energy Deuteron Stripping (LEDS) a few eV instead of 2.2 MeV was witnessed in the early "Columbus II" gas pinch experiments at Los Alamos and the Twisted Torus "Stellerator, Tokamaks, CTR etc. The mass 2 to 3 electron mass (*e-) Triad in the deuteron instead of a regular electron could explain this. > > I believe that there is indeed evidence for this claim in the > current literature, some of which you have mentioned in past > postings. > Good. > > This transitory version of the particle would be relevant even IF > a very long lived version of electronium (*e) is also a part of > nature. > Like the neutron it might have a more stable state when bound in a deuteron between the two (three quark triads) the Protons. > > Having established the existence of a useful natural level of > electronium (*e) with a lifetime long enough to catalyze either > stripping or low energy fusion - then we seem to be a giant step > ahead of having to work down from only a raw presumption that (*e) > also exists in a permanent long lived state. I believe that it > does, but that it is such a low percentage of the normal electron > population, that it will hard to prove working form the top down > Fine. Set up a LEDS experiment and see how the stripped neutrons decay (time and energy). Wild-Eyed Theories (WETs) don't mean squat if you can't come up with a supportive experiment. Whenever one gets a "warm feeling" about a (WET) it might be a bladder control problem, or worse. > > IOW even if there is some stable (*e) undetected - we can work > around the lack of proof and show that it must be there in a > transitory state. > Isn't the CF & PNL, ORNL's (undisclosed publicly) neutron Sonofusion Bubble experiments sufficient supporting evidence to justify the LEDS/Neutron Lifetime-Decay experiments?
Fred > > Jones > > From: Frederick Sparber > To: vortex-l > Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 1:12 AM > Subject: Re: Electroniumized Deuterons & Low Energy Deuteron > Stripping > > The P-e-P ----> D reaction is well known, but, if instead a > heavier electronium (*e-) > participates: > > P-(*e-)-P ----> (*D) > > Stripping: (*D) -----> P + (*n) > > Then: (*n) ----> (*e-) + P > > What happens to the D - D Fusion reactions when they change to D - > (*D) > or (*D) - (*D)? > > Fred
