Hi Robin, Yes, muon catalyzed fusion would elegantly solve many tough problems for LENR ... IF there were a ready source of muons, of course, which there is not. Or is there? ... maybe, but this would require that your "fast electron" morph into the "composite fermion" (Anyon). To be explained.
But first, and speaking of the absence of muons, when they would solve so many thorny problems to have them on hand - it occurs that we may be overlooking something else: specifically a long-lived "muon substitute" which could be the equivalent mass of a muon or even more. This is less speculative than the skeptics who are shaking their heads now may imagine, in that the species is actually nearly "proved," at least to the extent that it was part of a Nobel Prize some years back, or rather part of the aftermath of that breakthrough. In planning for the next in a series of postings on Casimir heating (a non-conservative Casimir-like force which may be a preliminary step on LENR) there is one detail that I have been intending to mention - but was dreading another long posting - so thankfully, I find that the gist of it appears on the Wiki site for the fractional quantum Hall effect - FQHE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fqhe Basically it is the concept of "composite fermions". This also goes along with a version of the Shoulder's EVO. It is probably a subset of the EVO phenomenon. Basically a muon is extremely short-lived, but instead of muon catalyzed fusion, we can perhaps find the next best thing in LENR by way of "composite fermion catalyzed fusion" CFCF. Actually it is a far better thing. Part of the underlying theory for this was proposed by Jain and further extended by Halperin, Lee and Read. "The fractional states of electrons are understood as the integer QHE of composite fermions.... This makes electrons at a filling factor 1/3, for example, behave in the same way as at filling factor 1. A remarkable result is that the filling factor 1/2 corresponds to zero magnetic field for composite fermions, resulting in their Fermi sea. Experiments support composite fermion theory." Etc etc it is complicated but it has an instant attraction for this expanded usage. The most important detail may be this: Fractionally charged quasi-particles, which make up our composite fermions - are neither bosons nor fermions - but they exhibit anyonic statistics ! In our "space" of three dimensions, particles are restricted to being fermions or bosons, according to their statistical behavior. However anionic statics are NOT in 3-space but exist in 2-space - which goes along with some of the other theories of Casimir cavity confinement ... i.e. implicating the apparent loss of a dimension, whether it be space or time. Jones -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] In reply to Frank's message of Mon, 31 May >on Sun, 30 May 2010 11:03:27 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax said >isn't this the problem of cold fusion itself? Generally, the problem reduces >to finding a mechanism which allows the weak force to take over by screening >the strong force or bringing nuclei within range that tunneling, for >example, can take place. But simple screening, isolated from collective >effects, clearly isn't the solution, because that would probably not change >the branching ratio; muon-catalyzed fusion doesn't, if I'm correct. Electrons are 207 times lighter than muons, so there may be a much larger chance that they will absorb the reaction energy (IC) than there is for muons, thus allowing the reaction to He4 to take place, which is much more stable than the "low" energy reactions to either He3 or T. IOW He4 would "like" to form but usually cannot because of conservation of momentum considerations. Production of a fast electron however would make it possible. (As would production of 2 alphas under Takahashi's scheme). Note that emission of a gamma also allows momentum to be conserved, however the gamma emission is so such slower than simple fission that the fission of the excited nucleus to either T or He3 usually takes place long before gamma emission has a chance. The implication here is that if electron emission is the actual mechanism, then it must be close enough to the nucleus to vastly increase the odds of it being the predominant energy carrier. That in turn implies that it is either in a very small Mills orbital, or actually in the nucleus when the reaction happens. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
