----- Original Message -----
From: "Hoyt A. Stearns jr."
You might be interested in this article:
http://www.rsystem.org/rs/cwkvk/muon.htm
Well it is certainly interesting that he can work out the lifetime
for the muon using this theory. That is impressive.
Of course, he does have the luxury of knowing in advance what the
correct value is - but his math does not appear to be a kludge.
I wonder if Larson is fully tuned into a possible *major*
implication of this? i.e. the association of reciprocal-argon with
the muon ... as certainly - if it is true, then the quantum
uncertainty which is inherent in a moderately hot plasma of argon
and deuterium - would seem to imply that there would be increased
probability of actual fusion (still at a low rate) - if enough of
what he is calling "inversion" time intersects with a substantial
population of accelerated deuterons and argon = then a substantial
rate of muon catalyzed fusion is poised to occur (thousands of
times more than normal QM probability based on no-argon but is it
enough to be useful?)
Come to think of it ... there is one place in nature where this
could this be showing up regularly - the auroa borealis ! Here you
have solar deuterons captured by earth's magnetic field which
holds the solar wind at bay, up north near the poles where there
will be some argon at that elevation. The same solar wind and
magnetic field are said to "produce" the Aurora Borealis, by
conventional rationalization, but instead they may just set the
stage for muon catalyzed fusion when argon temporaily "flips" or
when cosmic rays make regular muons ....
...Hans Alfven thought this could happen.... but what did he know
;-)
Jones
I can tell you this - if I had a "joe cell" that was showing some
promise but maybe not enough - I would start sparging it with a
little argon to see if things improved...
... did I hear someone say Papp motor ?
