I believe there are circular arguments going on here. On the one hand you are saying that neutral mesons are decaying into muons (charged) far from the reactor. But also there is the claim of fusion in his reactor, wherein many are supposing MCF. He is also measuring charged particles in his reactor. The decay "times" are statistical means and there will be some probability of a decay from t = zero to infinity. That's why it is possible to see mesons -> muons in the reactor, more outside the reactor, and more further away from the reactor.
So, I am saying that there are meson decays going on all along the path from the reactor. Muons should be easy to detect because they are charged and likely to interact with the scintillator crystal/liquid/plastic or by exciting photoelectron cascades in the GM tube. The fact that the corresponding muons are not detected in ordinary LENR with GM tubes and scintillators basically means that, in LENR, mesons are not produced. They may not be produced in Holmlid's reaction ... but I have to finish reading the paper to understand the case he is claiming. On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 8:40 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > Bob Higgins wrote: > > The descriptions in 5,8) below suggests that Holmlid's reaction produces a > high muon flux that would escape the reactor. A high muon flux would be > very similar to a high beta flux. First of all, it would seem that a flux > of charged muons would be highly absorbed in the reactor walls. > > > Bob - Yes, this has been the obvious criticism in the past, but it has > been addressed. > > As I understand it, the muons which are detected* do not exist* until the > meson, which is the progenitor particle, is many meters away. This makes > the lack of containment of muons very simple to understand. > > At one time muons were thought to exist as neutral instead of charged (see > the reference Bob Cook sent, from 1957) but in fact, the observers at that > time, due to poor instrumentation - were seeing neutral mesons, not muons. > > As an example, a neutral Kaon decays to two muons one negative and one > positive. However, the lifetime of the Kaon which is much shorter than the > muon but still about ~10^-8 seconds means that on average 99+% of the > particles are tens to hundreds of meters away before they decay to muons. > Thus the reactor is transparent to the progenitor particle. > > This is why Holmlid places a muon detector some distance away and then > calculates the decay time. Thus he claims an extraordinarily high flux of > muons which assumes that the detector is mapping out a small space on a > large sphere. However, they are not usable any more than neutrinos are > usable, since they start out as a neutral meson. > >
