Does a reaction producing muons vs. not producing muons have IP and patent implications for the various inventors?
On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > > 1. Sverre Haslund > April 5, 2016 at 3:01 AM > <http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892&cpage=86#comment-1168663> > > Dear Andrea > > Can you confirm if the Rossi effect produce muons ? > > Warm regards, > Sverre Haslund > 2. Translate > > Andrea Rossi > April 5, 2016 at 7:16 AM > <http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892&cpage=86#comment-1168783> > > Sverre Haslund: > I can confirm that the so called Rossi effect does NOT produce muons. > Warm Regards, > A.R. > > > On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Speaking of capturing a form of energy which is normally widely dispersed… >> >> An obvious question from those awaiting word on the year-long results from >> Rossi is this: could there be a cross-connection between the ecat and the >> Holmlid/Ólafsson findings of large muonic output? >> >> There could be. Rossi is not aware of the muon possibility, but he >> reportedly uses similar reactants – nickel, potassium and hydrogen with >> thermal triggering, whereas Holmlid uses iron, potassium and hydrogen with >> laser triggering. >> >> But the big advantage to having the large structure of Rossi with tons of >> metal inside of it and numerous separated reactors - is that more of the >> ellusive muons will be captured locally in the metal and in adjoining >> reactors - instead of dispersing away. Steel is actually a good way to >> capture muons. Any single reactor will lose most of its muons, but can >> capture a few from each of the other reactors in the array. In fact if the >> COP is low, it is possible that most of the gain derives mostly from this >> shared effect for muon capture. >> ____________________________________________ >> From: Robert Dorr >> >> Nicely done presentation. Well worth giving a look. >> >> >> These are the same slides used by Ólafsson at the colloquium back in >> October >> at SRI, reported here: >> >> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg105372.html >> >> Here is the easy link to the slides >> https://goo.gl/Zlenbp >> >> However, even today – the majority of observers in LENR seems to gloss >> over >> the main point – which is that although fusion can happen, the bulk of the >> energy release is in the form of muons (aka meson chain) and is generally >> lost to the reactor itself (since most of the energy ends up as >> neutrinos). >> Even so, there is net gain. The implication is that if properly >> engineered, >> the gain will be much higher. >> >> In short, “something is accidentally created,” which causes seemingly >> impossible nuclear reactions (nucleon disintegration) and that something >> is >> UDH or UDD – ultra dense hydrogen. George Miley used to call it IRH or >> inverted Rydberg hydrogen. Now it is simply call UDH or DDL (deep Dirac >> level). >> >> Ultra-dense hydrogen can be the source of all or part of Cold fusion LENR >> related phenomena. Laser induced fusion in UDH is the most effective way >> to >> see the results since it produces muons as the longest-lived species. This >> is also known as the “meson chain reaction” and the lifetime is several >> microseconds, so that most of the energy will be deposited as neutrinos >> many >> meters away from the reactor – up to hundreds of meters. >> >> >> >
