Why do muons react more easily with relativistic electrons in the 6s shell of 
Pb than with less energetic ones?   Is it because of the greater loss of energy 
associated with the lower differential masses, and/or some resonance in the 
energy field coupling between a muon and a heavy  (relativistic) electron?   
Neutral muons should not be affected the same way IMHO.

I wonder what electro chemists have to say about the Swedish/Finish article?

Are there other elements that conduct electricity well that have heavy 
electrons like Pb?  Is it only s shell electrons that become/are sufficiently 
heavy to cause the higher voltage during an oxidation/reduction?   Thorium 
comes to mind as likely having heavy s shell electrons.

Bob  Cook

From: JonesBeene<>
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 12:43 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:The ultrafast 6s orbital of certain heavy metals

From: Nigel Dyer<>


I have reproduced a version of Vysotskii's undamped thermal waves results which 
he detects using a peizo-electric detector with a high frequency range (which I 
could only get from the states).  The results suggest that whatever is being 
detected is travelling far faster than the velocity of sound.  The detectors 
are made of PZT = lead zirconate titanate.  Could this unusual property of lead 
be a clue to what is going on with the Vysotskii measurements?


Yes that is a distinct possibility. I would imagine that the relativistic 
electrons can transfer quanta of spin energy - following which their velocity 
is replenished by the zero point field.

The spin would initially interact with thermal waves in the THZ or IR range in 
the process of downshifting.

JonesBeene wrote:

Despite its 150 year-old history, the lead-acid battery is not as 
well-understood as one might suspect.  On paper it should hardly work at all.  
Tin – a similar metal to lead will not work when substituted.

More recently, in experiments in 2011 it was demonstrated that most of the 
power of the lead-acid batter: 80%+  – or roughly 10 V out of the 13 V of the 
electrical potential- comes from relativistic electron effects (as opposed to 
redox chemistry) ! This is due to the unusually fast 6s orbital of lead and a 
few other heavy metals. The relativistic electrons (they are paired) could 
relate to why lead shielding (or normal radioactivity) could actually increase 
the signal from muon interaction, rather than shielding against it.

Possibly - the relativistic electron effect has relevance to LENR in the form 
of trace elements found in electrodes by chance-  and there are a few candidate 
elements which have the 6S electron. But palladium or nickel do not.

Yet from the earliest days of P&F, some electrodes worked better than others of 
the same nominal composition. In their hero effort in France only 2 of 7 Pd 
electrodes worked. In commercial metallurgy – anything less than 1% 
contamination is seldom reported since it is either not deemed to be critical 
or the alloy assay techniques are not accurate for low percentages.

In fact, “Coolessence” the Colorado Lab now defunct, did some interesting work 
with lead and palladium. No one took notice.

The element mercury is another candidate dopant which has the relativistic 6s 
electrons. There are at least 4 metals of interest.

Mercury is found in palladium ore 
(temagamite<>) and could inadvertently 
be present as a trace element in Pd electrodes as a fractional percent but 
never mentioned. The reason Hg is a liquid relates to the relativistic orbital 
which is also found in the element bismuth. It is possible that traces of 
mercury, lead or bismuth could be  the “mystery element” – the hidden  reactant 
in certain palladium electrodes which work better than pure metal. BTW - Silver 
does not have the relativistic electrons but gold does.

The “inert pair effect” of lead, mercury, gold and bismuth refers to the 
tendency in these heavy metals for their 6s electrons in the valence cloud to 
resist oxidation - and the effect could possibly be put to planned use by 
doping with higher levels. In fact, although not well known, hydrogen can react 
with lead to form a gas called Plumbane, PbH4, but this is not well 
characterized or studied, since it is unstable. Lead is a Mills catalyst and so 
it is reasonable that densification activity with hydrogen would lead to a more 
stable form of the molecule along with excess energy. The chemical instability 
could be a plus in terms of asymmetry.

It would be interesting to see if plumbane, which is a gas at ambient 
temperature (surprisingly) could be reacted or densified in such a way that one 
or more of the four protons drop to the 54.4 eV redundancy state. This would be 
a fabulous rocket fuel, even with the high density of led, no?

The further possibilities of having chemical access to relativistic electrons 
and/or as a method to densify hydrogen or turn a heavy element into a gas  are 
mind boggling. The name ‘Led Zeppelin’ comes to mind.

Reply via email to