Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions  (Read 395211 times)

sulake

  • Guest
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #120 on: May 12, 2008, 03:02:46 PM »
  The principle of the VSG

About the function of the VSG, why does it have to be Positive -> Carbon -> Th/Tungsten -> Negative ??

Where does the actual transmutation occur, in the small spark on the joint of the tungsten and carbon?
Or does the B particles depart from the tungsten and turn into electons inside the carbon? If so, then the rods are not the best shape for the "reactor" at all?
Maby the Tungsten rod should be completely inside the carbon, but not electrically connected, except at the other end?

(http://www.hotlinkfiles.com/files/1312894_pjsuv/reactor1.jpg)

Offline Feynman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 620
    • Feynman's Lab
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #121 on: May 13, 2008, 03:26:35 AM »
@sulake
Good idea  ... According to the Synergetic theory, the presence of the gamma ray is only a catalyst.   We can think of it as the energy necessary to knock an electron out of an orbital and into the nucleus, where the electron capture and proton-electron fusion supposedly occurs.  Now we have not done experiments (with/without the thoriated tungsten) so we can't really say what real-world effect it has. There is definitely a nuclear effect going on though, and that was proven by Naudin's experiments (showing the profound effect of the B-field on system energy). Assuming the Synergetic theory is 100% correct, then yes, the existing setup is very inefficient.  It would be better to surround the carbon with the Thoriated Tungsten. Again, we've got alot of experiments to do to understand this, collect data, how we may get extra energy, etc.

@Earl
You could hypothetically generate AC directly with proper switching. 

Offline sparks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #122 on: May 13, 2008, 03:34:18 AM »
   This is another example of rf acting as a catalyst in the conversion of mass to energy. Problem here is that there will be no restoration of the mass by the Earth energy field.  It's a oneway fuckedup mess just like neuclear fission in a power plant. 

Offline Feynman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 620
    • Feynman's Lab
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #123 on: May 13, 2008, 03:57:43 AM »
So here are the major experiments I thought of to figure out what's going on with this whole process.


Suggested Experiments:

1)  Replicate Naudin's B-field Experiment
Independent Variable: B-field strength or lack thereof.
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows Naudin's effect can be replicated, and it is nuclear in nature.


2) Determine effect of Thoriated Tungsten
Independent Variable: Presence of Thoriated Tungsten electrode
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  validates or contradicts gamma-ray requirement of Synergetic theory.


3) Determine effect of Input Voltage  (constant charge = 10 uF)
Independent Variable: Voltage of Input Discharge (0 - 30kV)
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows whether we are experiencing linear on nonlinear energy scaling.  nonlinear scaling would suggest nuclear fusion.


4) Determine effect of Discharge Energy (constant voltage = 35V)
Independent Variable: Energy of Input Discharge  (variable capacitor size with constant voltage)
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows whether we are experiencing linear on nonlinear discharge scaling.  expected results unknown.


5) Determine effect of Toroid Windings
Independent Variable: # of windings on collector toroid
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows how output energy curve relates to toroid construction.

6) Determine effect of Toroid Material
Independent Variable: Toroid Material
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows how output energy curve relates to toroid construction.


7) Determine effect of Toroid Dimensions
Independent Variable: Toroid Dimensions
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows how output energy curve relates to toroid construction.



8) Determine importance of Spark Gap
Independent Variable: Spark Gap Dimensions (0 - n mm between Tungsten and Carbon rod)
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  confirms or contradicts 'gas phase' aspect of Synergetic theory.  (unless high voltage inherently vaporizes some carbon atoms to a gas).
« Last Edit: May 13, 2008, 02:25:17 PM by Feynman »

Offline AbbaRue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #124 on: May 13, 2008, 07:54:49 AM »
I bought 10 Th-Tungsten rods  today, 1/8 inch thick. Very expensive.
Also bought 1/4 inch carbon welding rods 12 inches long with the copper coating on them.
Very cheap. 50 of them cost $26.  I HAD to buy a whole box of them at the welding supply store.

I was thinking the same thing about the setup. I see no need to fry the tungsten rods against the carbon rods.
I was thinking of placing the tungsten rod beside the carbon rod to get the gamma into a larger area of the carbon.
Maybe try placing 3 tungsten rods around the carbon rod. 

I placed my radiation detector near the tungsten rods,
and I get about 90 micro-rems/hr. through the plastic box
and 220 micro-rems/hr. placed right against the rods.

Also thought of using 2 carbon rods placed end to end to set up an arc.
Have one rod inside the electro-magnet, and the other surrounded by the tungsten rods.

I used the following circuit simulator to test 160,000 uF on different resistances:
http://www.falstad.com/circuit/
I found that 30V across 0.1 ohms gives you a 300 A pulse.


Once I figure out how to connect the rods to the output I can start experimenting.
Needs a very good contact that can handle the high current.
I am using 12 AWG wire to connect the 10 caps in parallel.

Offline hydrocontrol

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 281
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #125 on: May 13, 2008, 10:09:52 AM »
It's interesting to hear alike thoughts. Even though I've never dealt with JLN personally, I had some "what the heck" feeling when studying JLN's works. Whether he never achieved OU or he is afraid of assasination. Anyway, there is little hope JLN's website can be used as a 'source' for FE information - much of it outdated and does not lead anywhere it seems (lack of measurements and other details). He started working on propeller flyers - such a pity for FE researcher (but maybe he wasn't one).
The last time I checked, being a FE researcher does not pay the bills. ::)  In fact it tends to generate a lot more bills.  ;D  I doubt that I am the first one to notice that JLN's propeller flyers are 'popping' up in military supply companies. I suspect that he had to go this route to pay for his 'research'. Looking at all the research that he was doing previously it was a tremendous amount compared to what most of us can do 'in our spare time'. That has to cost $$$ or he had to have 'outside' support. If that 'outside' support was military then that would explain why certain avenues never got explored or 'finished'..  I do consider JLN's work worthwhile even if it is somewhat old. Good for a reference and a direction. The 'run your mower on water' was very useful and is being exploited. I doubt that without his work that this would have taken off as much as it did.

Back on subject. I just noticed that in Dr. Stiffler thread that his dead 'neon' had pitted electrodes much like the tungsten electrodes JLN showed. The temperature of the neon bulb never got high enough to the Stainless steel temperature of the neon electrodes to cause melting or pitting so something else must be at work here. Anyone else here notice that. I wonder if Dr Stiffler has a geiger counter.

Offline AbbaRue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #126 on: May 13, 2008, 11:08:31 AM »
A question to throw around.
How could we use permanent magnets on the rod instead of an electromagnet?
I think it would have to be strontium magnets because neodymium magnets can't take much heat.

Maybe if I understood the concept better of how the electromagnet helps.
Could the rod be placed in the toroidal facing the core like the one in "Thane Heins Perepiteia"  forum? 

Or could we place magnets on each side of the carbon rod facing the rod?

Another big puzzle for me is how do I test the output of this device?
I don't have a digital oscilloscope to freeze the wave form with.
I just have an ordinary oscilloscope and the output pulse could last for only milliseconds.

I was thinking maybe connecting the output to a capacitor and then measure the voltage across it.
Has anyone come up with a solution to this?
« Last Edit: May 13, 2008, 11:28:33 AM by AbbaRue »

Offline Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #127 on: May 13, 2008, 11:30:48 AM »
So here are the major experiments I thought of to figure out what's going on with this whole process.


Suggested Experiments:

1)  Replicate Naudin's B-field Experiment
Independent Variable: B-field strength or lack thereof.
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows Naudin's effect can be replicated, and it is nuclear in nature.


2) Determine effect of Thoriated Tungsten
Independent Variable: Presence of Thoriated Tungsten electrode
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  validates or contradicts gamma-ray requirement of Synergetic theory.


3) Determine effect of Input Voltage  (constant charge = 10 uF)
Independent Variable: Voltage of Input Discharge (0 - 30kV)
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows whether we are experiencing linear on nonlinear energy scaling.  nonlinear scaling would suggest nuclear fusion.


4) Determine effect of Discharge Energy (constant voltage = 35V)
Independent Variable: Energy of Input Discharge  (variable capacitor size with constant voltage)
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows whether we are experiencing linear on nonlinear discharge scaling.  expected results unknown.


5) Determine effect of Toroid Windings
Independent Variable: # of windings on collector toroid
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows how output energy curve relates to toroid construction.

6) Determine effect of Toroid Material
Independent Variable: Toroid Material
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows how output energy curve relates to toroid construction.


7) Determine effect of Toroid Dimensions
Independent Variable: Toroid Dimensions
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows how output energy curve relates to toroid construction.

Perhaps also

8) Determine importance of Spark Gap
Independent Variable: Spark Gap Dimensions (0 - n mm between Tungsten and Carbon rod)
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

???
just an idea... ;)

I'm still more interested in possible other materials than carbon...
after all, according to Vall?e, the "kickback" from Boron back to Carbon
yields 2.988 Gigawatts per gram of "transmuted" material,
while that of Nitrogen => Oxygen yields 5.88 Gigawatts /g,
that of         Carbon => Nitrogen yields 19 Gigawatts /g,
and that of   Helium(6/2) => Lithium(6/3) yields 47.6 Gigawatts /g.
In other words, use of a Oxygen=>Nitrogen=>Oxygen reaction
can already give almost double the output of the Carbon=>Boron=>Carbon,
use of Nitrogen=>Carbon=>Nitrogen already increases this to
over 6 times the output of the C=>B=>C,
and the Lithium=>Helium=>Lithium gives a whopping 15.8 times greater yield.

Obviously, getting out 3 times what you put in using carbon is already
a great breakthrough.
But just imagine what a huge advance we could make if we manage to get the
lithium version to work :D ;D

Offline Feynman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 620
    • Feynman's Lab
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #128 on: May 13, 2008, 02:22:11 PM »
@Koen

Good call, I completely forgot about that!  I will edit and add it to the list.   Thanks!

You are right about the other materials, they may prove to release more energy supposing Synergetic theory continues to be confirmed by experiments.   Based on this theory though, regular air should contain all the necessary elements!!!   Nitrogen and Oxygen!   But in seriousness, can anyone design a good gas experiment?   I suppose we should probably use pure gas rather than mixtures.     And as for lithium, that will probably only work with the pure element, and lithium is unstable in elemental form (it rapidly forms complexes such as LiOH and Li3N).  So for higher energy materials predicted by Synergetics, then nitrogen is next best (to lithium).   That might be an added bonus since Nitrogen is inert.

@Abba

You know, I have the exact same problem.  I would like to measure the discharge curve in its entirety, so its possible to calculate energy AUC in Joules.  I was thinking of grabbing the scope Naudin was using, but I am not sure how much this costs.   If I cannot afford it, I was also thinking of running the discharge through a -30db or -40db attenuator , and then into my Tektronix analog scope using "single-shot" mode.   I have never tried "single-shot" mode yet, so I guess I will have to learn how to use it!

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/57/RF_attenuator_20db_coaxdyna.jpg/800px-RF_attenuator_20db_coaxdyna.jpg)
100 watt -20db attenuator

So those are my ideas.  I would like to get the curve.   Barring the curve, I guess the next best solution is to charge up another capacitor.  This could be risky though because the input voltage: output voltage  scaling is unknown.     That is, if you run a 2kV discharge into the carbon, how many effective kV do you collect in the toroid?  I don't know!   Haha so yeah we are going to need some clever ways of measuring, since not everyone has Naudin's funding.  ;) ;)




Offline Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #129 on: May 13, 2008, 03:05:19 PM »
But in seriousness, can anyone design a good gas experiment?   I suppose we should probably use pure gas rather than mixtures. 
Well I've been thinking of using a 'simple' discharge tube, much like an arc lamp... But I haven't worked anything out yet.
Quote
 And as for lithium, that will probably only work with the pure element, and lithium is unstable in elemental form (it rapidly forms complexes such as LiOH and Li3N). 
Indeed. I realised this too. Too bad, it would be too cool to be able to present a "lithium electrofusion reactor" and make all the Trekkies wet their
pants over a working "dilithium fusion core" ;D However, perhaps it is possible to use Li in vacuum or even in a low pressure He-filled tube...
I'm thinking something like a thoriated tungsten cathode coated with Lithium, and a 'normal' tungsten anode... But again, not worked out yet.
Quote
So for higher energy materials predicted by Synergetics, then nitrogen is next best (to lithium).   That might be an added bonus since Nitrogen is inert.
Yes, that would probably add some safety in comparison to oxygen or hydrogen. And it's easy to obtain as well.
Hmm... Interesting idea... So an arc-lamp filled with nitrogen might already be usefull for experiments, or a special evacuated tube with lithium coated elecrodes...
What about the old electron tube ("valve") technology of stimulated emission?
I'm thinking: vacuum tube with the normal cathode and anode of suitable material (as we're talking high V I guess tungsten), and a third electrode filament coated
with Li and heated by current through it. In 'normal' vacuum tubes the heated filament would emit electrons which would then be pulled to the anode due to
the electric field. In  this version the heated filament would emit energetic Lithium ions, which are then free for interaction. The B-field coil can easily be wrapped
around such a tube, and the high voltage can still be put through the cathode-anode couple. In theory. ;)

sulake

  • Guest
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #130 on: May 13, 2008, 06:00:04 PM »
...I was thinking maybe connecting the output to a capacitor and then measure the voltage across it.
Has anyone come up with a solution to this?

Some measurements can be recorded with soundcard. This would show you forexample the difference between no-Bfield and with-Bfield pulse. You can not see any units (volts) but you can see exactly what is the difference between two setups (total power difference).
Normal soundcards have sample ratio of 44100Hz(22.67?s). You can use any small ferrite coil as a current transformer, like in the picture.
Put a resistor across the ferrite coil that you dont break your soundcard line-in with a HV pulse.
A good SounCard Scope with "single trigger" is found here http://zeitnitz.de/Christian/Scope/Scope_en.html
(http://www.hotlinkfiles.com/files/1316670_od0iw/ferritecoil.jpg)

Offline Feynman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 620
    • Feynman's Lab
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #131 on: May 13, 2008, 07:35:27 PM »
CANCEL YOUR THORIATED TUNGSTEN ORDERS BOYS -- WE DONT NEED NO GAMMA

DEATZILS COMIN SOON

(http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/atomic/imgato/carbonlev.gif)

Offline Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #132 on: May 13, 2008, 08:03:23 PM »
* starts clicking like crazy to cancel order * ;)
:D

Offline sparks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #133 on: May 13, 2008, 08:45:55 PM »
CANCEL YOUR THORIATED TUNGSTEN ORDERS BOYS -- WE DONT NEED NO GAMMA

DEATZILS COMIN SOON

(http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/atomic/imgato/carbonlev.gif)

  No GAMMA just beta.  Magnetic disresonance of the 8th electron in conductor atomic fields by means of electron dipole shifting in response to an em wave will get you plenty of photons.  Earth's energy/mass will reset the 8th electron to it's proper energy orbital.
  Beta ray is just the electron hop from one energy shell to the other.  Carbon forms an elemental sharing of 4 electrons so therefore it takes alot more rf to elicit a mass to energy conversion.  Whereas conductors have a 7 proton configuration which involves a loose coupling of an eigth electron to fill the outer energy shell or go noble, or reach resonance.  Neuclear disresonance due to the nature of neutrons isn't a healthy thing to do.  We got enough neucleus crackers and spent fuel rods laying around emitting neutrinos to last us at least 20or 30 thousand years.  This shit needs to see a little rf to hasten the process of radio active decay. 
« Last Edit: May 13, 2008, 09:56:23 PM by sparks »

Offline miki02131

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #134 on: May 13, 2008, 10:33:57 PM »
Guys,

I am definitely interested in this topic. Matter-to-energy conversion is real and proven science. I have been researching it on several fronts. I am here to contribute and replicate.

In the meantime, be careful with the topic starter. He is actually located in Spain. He has robbed BAP of a few hundred dollars on a promise to build one of these devices that he never provided.

Thanks,

Miki.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2008, 11:09:32 PM by miki02131 »