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 377522 times)

Offline Yucca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 884
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #255 on: May 19, 2008, 11:21:04 PM »
I haven't got big caps yet, so cant test yet.

Would this config stand a good chance of working, the black block in the middle is a ceramic magnet for mock up purposes, I will of course use carbon.

I intend to charge big cap up to 300V (slowly using puny voltage multipler circuit) then discharge through the carbon.

Offline Feynman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 620
    • Feynman's Lab
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #256 on: May 19, 2008, 11:26:42 PM »
Quote
I am not sure how to discriminate, since we cannot label our electrons and check their passports when they're coming out of the rod to see where they've been.
-Dr. R

rofl


@Yucca

looks good my friend. 

Offline Inventor81

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #257 on: May 19, 2008, 11:26:49 PM »
use a carbon composition/carbon film resistor as your carbon rod.

Already has electrical contacts, and it can be soldered to a breadboard inside a small toroid.

This is my evening's experimental setup. IF, and that is a big IF, everything works properly, then I should be able to take a photo with my phone, of my phone, powered by the setup, with the handy dandy Li-Ion battery lying disparaged on the workbench.

If not, then we're wrong and full of BS, and this is some other electromagnetic effect unrelated to beta capture.

Seeing as how we've got 300 amps worth of beta particles flowing through a CC of air at 1 foot from the device.... I tend to think this is about as real as it gets.


Offline aleks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
    • DC Acoustic Waves Hypothesis
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #258 on: May 19, 2008, 11:28:15 PM »
Maybe to build a good "rod" for this would be to use
an aluminium tube,
At first you should be sure that beta particles hitting aluminium will create displacement voltage in it. Otherwise there is no sense in using aluminium for capture. Industry-grade betavoltaics use diodes which leads me to think that aluminium is not such a great thing for betavoltaics. I personally think that a multi-turn toroidal transformer would be a better thing; or rather an electromagnet: there is no need for voltage transformation: you just need a lot of copper wire turns around beta particle emission. I'm also pretty sure that beta particles are emitted perpendicular to carbon rod axis. So, each beta particle hitting copper wire will create a displacement current in it. What may be also necessary is a bit of decoupling: probably segmented windings over toroid should work much better since beta particles are emitted 360 degrees around carbon rod in average. This will create counteracting displacements if a single winding is used, so this will lower achieved COP and produce heat. Probably having 8 or 16 multi-layered windings around single toroid could be beneficial for the case of displacement currents. You may then combine these windings to likening: more voltage or more current (of course decoupling between windings will be necessary or otherwise it will be roughly the same thing as a single winding).
« Last Edit: May 19, 2008, 11:54:15 PM by aleks »

Offline UncleFester

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 90
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #259 on: May 19, 2008, 11:28:50 PM »
Understood. Then it's a plain discharge since whatever input frequency is, the capacitor - after reaching required charge threshold - will discharge in a unit pulse (example would be charging a capacitor from AC grid power outlet and then using it as a stun-gun). So, genuinely your "carbon rod input" is pulse discharge - not an AC. It would be AC only if you removed a high-energy capacitor.


EXACTLY. And if I had another spark gap I could allow the power supply to disconnect during discharge which should increase current levels. Remember I am putting very tiny amounts of power in, even with the capacitor discharging it is only .055uF! Total input into the neon power supply was 6.04 VDC @ .430Amperes (half an amp roughly), and yet the output was 508VAC @ 64mA. This is not enough current to even light a small 120VAC bulb and that is what I was aiming for. So current levels need to increase on the input side. I believe this will allow much higher currents on the output.

Offline DrStiffler

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 610
    • Stiffler Scientific
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #260 on: May 19, 2008, 11:34:47 PM »
@All
Well I will not respond to my own thread while on vacation, but I see something here and just can not keep enjoying the surf and all.

*Runaway is not possible unless the reaction was self sustaining once started. A simple in line fuse and a Zener diode should be the cheapest way to prevent such things.

Regardless, the worst that can happen is you burn up a few parts before it all shuts down. If you try feeding the output back to a power supply and say you use a  chip regulator, it will self destruct.My guess would be a couple of hi power zeners that are a few volts apart and a fuse inline. This will shut it all down.

I have an associate in this field and he is still unclear on configuration (as am I). When this can be cleared up I will commit three Ph.D's and myself to replication, I am planned to return to Texas Thursday and the lab can get ramped up for my return.

Love the concept and hope that (U * t) is being properly applied here.

So far great work and looks like someone will be collecting a few prizes.

Offline Feynman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 620
    • Feynman's Lab
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #261 on: May 19, 2008, 11:52:15 PM »
Hey Doc

We agree with your analysis.   Runaway is unlikely, could can only occur in direct connected feedback because semiconductor would burn out first.   But if someone uses un-fused direct feedback, we think runaway may be a real and potential hazardous effect. 

We think 'runaway' depends on thermal conductivity and mass of the carbon rod. There is potential for Z-pinch effect within the rod causing exponential increase in current density during the runaway.   This depends on resonant freq of circuit as a whole, but once it occurs reaction can become self sustaining and thermally decompose carbon rod (ala firecracker). This would shut down reaction but would fracture the rod but release and as-yet uncalculated amount of thermal energy (rather like a carbon arc lamp), but with much much higher current densities.  The Z-pinch doesn't increase absolute current, but resulting magnetic field restricts current to much smaller cross sectional area, which could result in extremely fast increase in the rate of reaction in the affected cross-section.

Due to small mass of the rods, physical damage should be rather minimal.  That is, low total energy but higher power. So very fast and powerful but not necessarily high energy.  But this could mean fragments of carbon rod, which may pose a hazard in the unlikely event someone manages to achieve Z-pinch effect combined with this Synergetic/NMR proton-electron phenomenon within the carbon orbitals.

We think this can be prevented by using PWM, or as you mention, always using some sort of fusing when operating in self-powering modes.  We also consider the 'runaway' hazard to be minimal when the circuit is configured properly (aka 'fused').  We look forward to your return and contributions to this research.

-Dr  R and Feynman

Offline DrSimon

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #262 on: May 20, 2008, 12:07:56 AM »
Hey Doc

We agree with your analysis.   Runaway is unlikely, could can only occur in direct connected feedback because semiconductor would burn out first.   But if someone uses un-fused direct feedback, we think runaway may be a real and potential hazardous effect. 

We think 'runaway' depends on thermal conductivity and mass of the carbon rod. There is potential for Z-pinch effect within the rod causing exponential increase in current density during the runaway.   This depends on resonant freq of circuit as a whole, but once it occurs reaction can become self sustaining and thermally decompose carbon rod (ala firecracker). This would shut down reaction but would fracture the rod but release and as-yet uncalculated amount of thermal energy (rather like a carbon arc lamp), but with much much higher current densities.  The Z-pinch doesn't increase absolute current, but resulting magnetic field restricts current to much smaller cross sectional area, which could result in extremely fast runaway in the carbon rod.

Due to small mass of the rods, physical damage should be rather minimal.  That is, low total energy but higher power. So very fast and powerful but not necessarily high energy.  But this could mean fragments of carbon rod, which may pose a hazard in the unlikely event someone manages to achieve Z-pinch effect combined with this Synergetic/NMR proton-electron phenomenon within the carbon orbitals.

We think this can be prevented by using PWM, or as you mention, always using some sort of fusing when operating in self-powering modes.  We also consider the 'runaway' hazard to be minimal when the circuit is configured properly (aka 'fused').  We look forward to your return and contributions to this research.

-Dr  R and Feynman
*Dr  R and Feynman
Gentleman we have a SEC15-30W ready for testing. The 30W is capable of up to 600V output, yet what would be nice if possible is to specify the pulse in Joule/Sec? The specified 300V and 300amps seems to require a small clarification? Is it possible to state the Joule/Sec required.

We are ready with Beta counters in place, should be an interesting test.

Offline ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7510
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #263 on: May 20, 2008, 12:10:52 AM »
Dr Stiffler  you might as well come home  you'll have more fun in the lab  this is beyond exciting   Chet

Offline DrStiffler

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 610
    • Stiffler Scientific
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #264 on: May 20, 2008, 12:21:18 AM »
Dr Stiffler  you might as well come home  you'll have more fun in the lab  this is beyond exciting   Chet
@ramset
Maybe, guess my legs have been cut so short that I have a hard time getting to into anything any more.

It sound like you have seen something of interest? Can you tell us what voltage across what capacity and rep rate is so exciting? I do not want to go through the bottom up as we already have HV generators that can be run PWM with ease, but what is being required in watt/sec? I fully understand this will depend on rod size etc., but a good place to start? The lab can manufacture the drivers in 10 days for mass distribution if this indeed is what it looks like.

Offline Feynman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 620
    • Feynman's Lab
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #265 on: May 20, 2008, 12:30:55 AM »
@Dr. Stiffler and friends

Well, we have what appears to be COP>1 .

We don't have the energy curves yet , so there's basically zero data on the optimum input function to maximize beta emission, but we'll post 'em when we get 'em.   If you guys got geiger counters, by all means, see if you can replicate the effect and try to find the global maxima. We all could use the voltage (x) vs. beta emission (y) graph, that would be a great place to start.  Another good graph would be frequency (hz) vs beta (y).  Or current (x) vs beta (y).  We'd also like to verify we are not getting spurious emissions in other radiation bands (ie thermal neutrons).

If you want to copy the existing setup you want ~300V 35khz AC going into a cap discharging into 5"long 1/2" diameter carbon rod biased with N50 neos. The magnets are absolutely crucial according to the experiments.

The pulse has no specific requirement other than it probably needs to be above about 100V or so and ideally would be above 300A, so that'd be around a 30kW pulse.  But it can be any arbitrary pulse width.  So the pulses can be very short.  Remember half life of Boron-12 is 20ms and it decays throwing off beta electron and antineutrino.   Once the reaction starts it appears that it can self-sustain (assuming fused PWM feedback).  This is mechanism is assuming you are collecting the massive emissions of beta electrons and feeding this to the input.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2008, 02:00:31 AM by Feynman »

Offline UncleFester

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 90
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #266 on: May 20, 2008, 01:27:39 AM »
I just ran 37VDC @ 59Hz into 1000uF and got 50VAC on the toroidal windings so low voltage works as well, but I still don't seen much current. Carbon rod gets very hot. I measured 146F from ambient of 82F within 2 minutes. This test was using the original duplication components of the JLN experiment except much lower capacitance of course. High voltages I used earlier kept the carbon rod cool and did not generate any perceptible heat.

This now appears to me as though higher voltages allow much higher overall wattage on output, but low voltages do work. I have not been able to do large pulse discharges yet of 100 or more amperes but I will test that and report as well. I am lacking large high voltage caps, but it seems as though a Marx bank with decent capacitance would perform very well and not need any semiconductor controls. Considering the power supply is isolated during discharge using this device it should be a good, safe test.

This just can not be true. At least I hope it is not. It would dramatically decrease the application possibilities. All electrical systems and components must be scalable. What are factors that must be changed when scaling down or up the VSG?
I think that one key factor could be the current density in the rod and in the spark gap. In the papers it vas mentioned that the Tokamak reactor vas destroyed with only 5V and 300A. So this must be scalable. And my capacitors can not store the 386J energy that J Naudins VSG4.1 has, that means that the current density in the Th/W rod is 13 J/mm2. I will have to hassle with smaller rod diameters and smaller power. You can also think this with A/mm2 if you like. J/mm2 is not very practical  :D

(http://www.hotlinkfiles.com/files/1340917_mcosy/factors.jpg)

Offline miki02131

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #267 on: May 20, 2008, 02:49:00 AM »
Guys,

Trying to get power out of these devices will more than likely turn out to be fruitless. Thus real-time usage or work may not be such a good idea. The way around is to store the potential in a battery or capacitor. Then use the charged battery or capacitor to do real work thereafter.

Thus the process should be: Potential -> Storage -> Work. The output look has to be kept open.

I am currently scratching my head seeing how a bad battery that use to take days to charge is now accepting a charge over 13V in just a few hours when place in parallel with the spark gap. I still need to observe more before I jump to early conclusions. But this thing is leaving without hair day by day.

Thanks,

Miki.

Offline Feynman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 620
    • Feynman's Lab
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #268 on: May 20, 2008, 02:56:36 AM »
Quote
Trying to get power out of these devices will more than likely turn out to be fruitless.

Giving up so soon? ;)     These things are no doubt ou. We just need to scale up the output current.

Offline zerotensor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #269 on: May 20, 2008, 03:19:26 AM »
Here is a picture I cooked-up just now.