We've already gone over the new Science paper on muonic hydrogen elsewhere,
but I saw a comment on E-Cat World that I thought was worth bringing up
here.  According to a summary of the Science article in Ars Technica [1],
the problem I alluded to in the title is that the charge radius of the
proton has been measured very accurately to be both 0.84fm and 0.88fm.
 This would not be a big deal if the accuracy of the measurements allowed
both of these values.  But the measurements are extremely accurate,
and incompatible, unless there is something unexplained going on.

The comment by Gerrit in E-Cat World elaborates [2]:

Have we discussed the recent finding of the shrunken proton yet ?

The proton in muonic hydrogen is 4% smaller that normal hydrogen. They
cannot explain it with current understanding, yet the new measurements are
very high accuracy.

http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/01/hydrogen-made-with-muons-reveals-proton-size-conundrum/

“The proton structure is important because an electron in an S [ground]
state has a nonzero probability to be inside the proton.”

Oh wait a minute, if the electron is inside the proton, doesn’t the whole
structure look like a neutron, ie it won’t see a coulomb barrier and can
fuse with another hydrogen at will ?

The next question that “established” science should target is measuring the
proton size of a hydrogen in a metal lattice.

I think it is inevitable that “established” science will eventually stumble
over the same phenomenon that has been shown to exists for over 23 years.

In a few years we’ll probably be hearing “Well, with the current
understanding of physics we can no longer claim that Fleischmann and Pons
were wrong”


So it seems that under certain conditions, physicists are measuring
something vaguely like Mills's fractional hydrogen -- it might be that it
is Mills's fractional hydrogen, or it might be something entirely
different.  Gerrit asks whether you could get screening, e.g., sufficient
to lead to the anomalous behavior in metal hydrides we've been following
here, from whatever it is that is going on.  The Ars Technica article ends
with this interesting comment: "The one option they [the research team]
seem to like is the existence of relatively light force carriers that
somehow remained undiscovered until now."  New force carriers is an
interesting thought.  Would that imply a heretofore unknown interaction?

Eric

[1]
http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/01/hydrogen-made-with-muons-reveals-proton-size-conundrum/
[2]
http://www.e-catworld.com/2013/01/robotics-and-lenr/comment-page-1/#comment-105365

Reply via email to