The resent work by Holmlid show that muons are produced by rydberg matter. I now believe that rydberg matter was a product of the Papp engine plasma process.
Notice that both Holmlid and Papp produce no heat and very high speed neutral particles from explosive rydberg matter fragments. The Papp engine produced excess electrons as a decay product of muon production as seen by Holmlid. Papp used alpha decay from radium to extract these excess electrons to power an super capacitor based alternating duel cylinder system. Without this radioactive charge capturing system, the Papp engine does not work. No radium means no electron capture. The arc discharge from the "bucket" electrodes that held the radium greatly increased the positive charge produced by alpha decay of the radium as a LENR based reaction. This extremely high positive charge on the electrodes is what attracted the excess electrons from the plasma and produced the back current that drove the piston firing cycle. On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, OTEC is a good metaphor – but without disagreeing with Jed’s > assessment, the operative detail left out is that empty “space” is a > rguably the virtual heat sink which would express temperatures near > absolute zero (on paper). The idea is that ambient heat transfers to a > virtual heat sink, which is very cold. > > Of course, the normal way to do this is via a refrigerant, but > refrigeration takes work. Mark mentions propane – a refrigerant (it is > not burned). For Papp, xenon and other noble gases do the same. Can one > cool via a refrigerant using the same work which is later harvested? > Mainstream science of course says … (shouts)… NO WAY. > > Anyone who witnesses a bona fide the Papp replication attempt (not the > “popper” LOL) … often comments that the engine runs cold. Why? It is part > of the M.O. > > I suspect, but do not know – that Rauen’s engine will run cold (assuming > it is working). I hope to be among the first to witness this. > > *From:* Jed Rothwell > > Jones Beene <*[email protected]* <[email protected]>> wrote: > > Like the Papp engine, there will be strong disagreement over the > thermodynamic issues involved . . . > > That is putting it mildly! I think most people would say it is a > flat-violation of the laws of thermodynamics. You cannot run anything on > "atmospheric heat" because the atmospheric temperature is uniform, except > on a giant scale that I do not think any human technology can achieve at > present. I guess you could tap atmospheric heat if the heat sink is outside > the atmosphere, like a gargantuan OTEC generator in air instead of water. > > > > As for Papp, there is an overload of worthless anecdote still floating > around the net, but no independent evidence to suggest that a functional > prototype was ever built. It is all “stand” (with lots of arm waving) and > no “deliver”. > > Ha, ha! Well said. > > One thing for sure, Papp and Rossi seem to have been cast from the same > mold – part inventor, part showman, and 100% controversial. > > Yup. > >
