Please look at this document from L.I. URUTSKOEV who coined the term "Strange Radiation"
http://disq.us/url?url=http%3A%2F%2Faflb.ensmp.fr%2FAFLB-297%2Faflb297m330.pdf%3A3YRq8EiVHq9VyTnY_19ahXnNf5A&cuid=2168707 page 1160 part 4 "Rather surprising is the mere fact of recording radiation at the distance of 1 to 2 m from the setup. Indeed, the radiation had to emerge from the setup, pass through the air and penetrate two layers of black paper wrapped around the detectors. It is clear that a charged particle would not travel this distance. The other remarkable fact is that the particle energy estimated from the blackening area under the assumption of Coulomb interaction equals E ~700 MeV. However, in this case, δ-electrons, or a “hairy leg,” as nuclear physicists would say, should be observed. However, it can be seen from the Figures that the “leg” is “shaven”, that is, no δ-electrons are involved." 700MeV AFTER it has come out of device, travelled 1-2m in air and penetrated 2 layers of black paper! Strange radiation has been shown to carry energy beyond 1 million GeV. without demonstrating any electrical charge. Such a energy storage mechanism must be formed from a cluster of atoms rather than just sub atomic particles such as neutrons. On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 2:35 PM Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > > Arguably the LENR theorists with the most impressive credentials > (notwithstanding having unappreciated concepts) are Widom/Larsen and Peter > Hagelstein. Both espouse controversial theories involving a new type or > characteristic of neutron - for explaining excess heat. Because fission > neutrons are so well known, it is difficult for these theorists to convince > even a few of the thousands of nuclear engineers and physicists out there - > that there could be more to the picture than fission or fusion neutrons. > > Hagelstein envisions neutrons which can move away from a host nucleus > (hop) as if unbound; and W/L hypothesize an ultra low momentum species. In > either case the neutron is relatively nonreactive and does not "activate" > adjacent materials, as would be expected of normal thermal neutrons. This > leaves open the possibility that there are indeed two varieties or > categories of a broader species which includes the well-known neutron of > high energy physics. > > Allowing the excess heat of LENR to be explained by a new type of > "neutron" decay has advantages which are absent from other theories like > actual fusion. The energy level is intermediate - not too high and not too > low and few gammas are expected - since most of the gain is carried away by > fast electrons. Moreover, looking to the future, it could be intuitive to > cherry pick the best features from both W/L and Hagelstein and others, in > search of a better understanding. > > The notion of a second type of neutron is bolstered by what is known as > the "neutron lifetime puzzle". While the free neutron lifetime has been > studied for decades, there is a total and complete lack of agreement on an > exact value, and to a rather large discrepancy at that. Firstly, there are > different results from two two basic experimental methods ("bottle" versus > "beam"). Then there is a different result from more tightly confined and > colder neutrons. Over the years, increasing refinement in technique should > have resolved this issue of free neutron half-life, but has not. The > difference in lifetime values is at least 9 seconds which is massively out > of place for a standard particle of matter where nanoseconds are a long > time. > > This strongly suggests that there is more than one variety. Consider this. > Most of the matter in the Universe is composed of hydrogen, which provides > the justification for describing a second type or category of neutron. It > is arguable that the single proton will preferentially bind with one kind > of neutron and the second type of neutron is preferentially bound to > heavier species of matter. The preference could be strong (which explains > the lack of expectede activation). > > Stranger things have happened, with the emphasis on "strange." > > ... to be continued... > > > > > >
