Posted on 06/18/2021 8:44:39 AM PDT by Kevmo
https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg117156.html
Re: [Vo]:Mizuno - and possibly his most overlooked paper Jones Beene Mon, 11 Mar 2019 13:53:05 -0700
Here is a suggestion for Norront Fusion (Holmlid licensee) ... Their website indicates they have three Holmlid-effect muon generators operating at the moment. Suggestion: Hybrid Holmlid/Mizuno device for generating neutrons. Place a magnetized Mizuno device in the output path of a Holmlid muon generator. Typically every muon catalyzes ahundred or so D+D fusions. A small muon output is thereby multiplied.
That is such a major improvement that physicists would be impressed to the extent that massive financial support would be shifted from ITER and other wasteful programs towards a fusion device with an actual commercial future. There is no possible good outcome for ITER in the next 30 years, whereas a Holmlid/Mizuno type device could be ready in 30 days. (if you already have the small muon generator). Jones
------- One interesting possibility arises from the experiment due to the factthat there is no fusion without a relatively strong magnetic field nor without very cold (but not liquid) deuterium gas in that strong field.
Both conditions are required.
That intersection of two critical restrictions implies that a "temporary BEC" may exist under conditions where a full BEC is not seen. TheBEC assembles a dense target for muon interaction, on occasion.
IOW there is recurrent boson condensation but on a transient basis. Only in the condensed state will fusion occur. And only a small population of deuterons is every in that transient BEC state.
This was never considered, and no group pursued the finding further- probably because only a few muons from cosmic rays are available; and at the time there was no cheap and low energy way to produce muons. That may have changed ---------------------------------------
The knock on cold fusion over the years has been lack of neutrons. Yet that "lack" is not accurate.
As it turns out, 15 years ago Mizuno and others performed a defining experiment. Problem is... almost nobody quotes it today, or even knows about it. "Neutron emission from D2 gas in magnetic fields under low temperature" is the paper from 2004. Mizuno, Akimoto, Takahashi and Francesco Celani
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTneutronemi.pdf
Summary
"We observed neutron emissions from pure deuterium gas after it was cooled in liquid nitrogen and placed in a magnetic field. Neutron emissions were observed in ten out of ten test cases. Neutron burst ... were 1000 times higher than the background counts....We observed a clear neutron energy peak at 2.5MeV." (indicates d-d nuclear fusion)
Comment: why is this study not given the credit it deserves? The authors are top notch. The results are astounding. The experiment was partially replicated by Ahern at MIT.
The neutron bursts align with cosmic ray bursts (which create muons which then catalyze fusion).
The solenoid magnetic field of .8 T is large, but could be obtained using permanent magnets. This experiment begs to be replicated today using permanent magnets and a tiny muon source using laser irradiation.
---------------------------------------------
Re: [Vo]:Mizuno - and possibly his most overlooked paper Brian Ahern Tue, 12 Mar 2019 05:25:24 -0700
I think Jones is on the correct path. You need greater than 0.8 Tesla to get the effect.
________________________________ From: mix...@bigpond.com Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 11:01 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mizuno - and possibly his most overlooked paper
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Mon, 11 Mar 2019 20:52:43 +0000 (UTC): Hi Jones,
*** Here is a suggestion for Norront Fusion (Holmlid licensee) ...
Re: [Vo]:Muons: 'Strong' evidence found for a new force of nature
Jones Beene Thu, 08 Apr 2021 18:11:49 -0700
It is possible that whatever it is Cambridge may have found relative to muons also relates to surprisingly efficient muon production in the Holmlid/Norront reactor... apparently there is a mystery particle which affects muons in a previously unknown way ?
BTW from their site, Norront have 3 muon reactors working in Norway and one in Sweden.
Things are getting interesting...
This whole UDD *leads to* muon thing may be near, or even gone past the proverbial "tipping point"... when we look back on it in a couple of years.
Jones
H LV wrote:
PBS Space Time
Why the Muon g-2 Results Are So Exciting!
https://youtu.be/O4Ko7NW2yQo
Harry
Muons: 'Strong' evidence found for a new force of nature
https://www.bbc.com/news/56643677
quotes:
.... There is currently a one in a 40,000 chance that the result could be a statistical fluke - equating to a statistical level of confidence described as 4.1 sigma.
A level of 5 sigma, or a one in 3.5 million chance of the observation being a coincidence, is needed to claim a discovery. ....
Prof Ben Allanach, from Cambridge University, who was not involved with the latest effort, said: "My Spidey sense is tingling and telling me that this is going to be real. ....
The Muon g-2 experiment involves sending the particles around a 14-metre ring and then applying a magnetic field. Under the current laws of physics, encoded in the Standard Model, this should make the muons wobble at a certain rate.
Instead, the scientists found that muons wobbled at a faster rate than expected. This might be caused by a force of nature that's completely new to science.....Harry
That was written to back your comments up.
I know it was.
I try hard to discourage the seagulls but there is no support from the moderators, even though JimRob posted the rules and they heavily enforce that set of rules on Qanon threads.
As long as that situation exists, we’ll likely have gangtrolls inhabiting these threads, trying to pollute them.
Yeah, I see the disruption. I don’t care for it either.
No problem.
I like asking folks nicely.
We’ll see how it goes.
Think of me when you see more of it.
I like asking nicely as well. Seagulls have been disrupting these threads for more than a decade.
That’s asking one side for far, far too much patience.
I don’t disagree, but I’ll try to help if you’ll let me know.
Because I do not understand the science well, I have to ask: Is the usage of the word "every" above a typo or a particular meaning I am unaware of?
only a small population of deuterons is every in that transient BEC state.-—> only a small population of deuterons is ever in that transient BEC state.
That’s what I thought, but each science specialty seems to redefine some otherwise common words to mean specialized things.
Thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.