In reply to's message of Thu, 21 Jun 2018 23:28:53

Muons are leptons, and AFAIK there is no neutral variety. Did you mean neutral
pions? (Which BTW have a very short half-life).

>Neutral muons may act like neutrons and be absorbed to cause a reaction with 
>additional neutral muons and/or charged muons.
>A local source of charged muons, which are known to induce D fusion and maybe 
>H fusion to D.
>Bob Cook
>From: Jones Beene <>
>Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 12:19:18 PM
>Subject: RE: [Vo]:Zimmerman's piece could be scarier than we can imagine
>From: Axil Axil<>
>  *   I can not see how the Bose Condensation nature of ultra dense material 
> can support a chain reaction. The Condensate offloads its excess energy 
> through the production of muons not neutrons. Muons are not bad like 
> neutrons. Muons do not pump the Condensate, so there is no positive feedback 
> loop possible
>There are alternative scenarios for a feedback loop. One of the possibilities 
>does not involve uranium at all. Another would simply happen so rapidly that 
>most of the UDD is converted into helium before it can change state. Since 
>Holmlid does see some fusion, in addition to muons, it is likely that the 
>fusion part of the reaction could be optimized.
>If we accept that 105Pd is the active isotope of cold fusion - and that it is 
>converted into 107Ag in the main cold fusion reaction, which is one 
>interpretation of the recent Biberian finding (which triggered this posting to 
>begin with) then UDD is going to be gainful without being annihilated and 
>without the need of a laser.
>Also, imagine a large caliber bullet composed of fully loaded PdD. If a 
>spherical array of barrels is arranged around a depleted U core, what happens 
>when the core implodes? (given that we know that muons are preferentially 
>absorbed by U)
>Anyway, a hypothetical UDD explanation could combine Holmlid’s species with 
>P&F’s palladium lattice – so it would be a hybrid - and is open to criticism 
>on that account. The underlying fusion reaction should produce at least 14 
>MeV. If engineered properly there would be chain reaction of sorts (positive 
>feedback from pressure, for sure) which is dependent on the initial inventory 
>of UDD. The yield could be one fourth as much as uranium fission.
>Given how much the USA is hated in parts of the middle East, and how much 
>wealth there is - any of these nightmares becomes simply a matter of will and 
>can be countered by careful planning. We can only hope that our government is 
>taking the proper precautions. OTOH, a simple “dirty bomb” is devastating 
>enough and it can be argued that it will be the first thing which is tried.
>It does not help to hide one’s head in the sand and opine that we should not 
>even discuss the possibilities. The easiest way for enemies of the US to 
>succeed is for experts (or even those on the fringe) not to be vocal and  
>aware of what technology is available and how it can be used.
>If UDD is real, then it may not be presently taken into account by those who 
>should be looking at all the risks.

Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Reply via email to