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.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 84248
  • *Latest: khniki

  • *Total Posts: 898013
  • *Total Topics: 15837
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 13
  • *Total: 16

Author Topic: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions  (Read 375232 times)

Offline UncleFester

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 90
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #735 on: June 22, 2008, 01:36:38 AM »
Hi Uncle Fester,

Understand the numbers above but slightly confused as to some values.  If  2000VDC @ .68uf will excite a rod, (I have everything to duplicate this level right now except for carbon)  why have we been so hung up on the high value 108J per pulse except for high power output. 


This level of energy will not see a effect. It's only very small amounts of current and only half the input voltage. Output sine wave is still whatever the input is. In my case it was 35Khz from the neon driver HV circuit. The current was just enough to self run and go into a runaway mode, but not enough to light a bulb or do anything useful. Thus the required 108-110 joules is the requirement to see the full effect where you have 2/3 the input voltage and many times the current needed to self run. I believe if you talked to JLN and Valee they would say the 110 joules was found from experimentation from Valee and probably where Naudin got his info to run his experiments, hence the reason he used that amount of energy as input.

We may find later on as with many other schemes: I.E. Meyer, Bedini, Gray, Johnson, Newman that high voltage in very short pulses increases the effect many times over. Using a triggered spark gap or some other form running in the 2KV to 25KV range. Although if larger amounts of current are present at those voltages it will be much more difficult to make the power usable I.E. possibly a pole transformer or something similar would be required to drop the voltage levels down to 480-120VAC. Obviously a few amps at 2KV would be highly lethal, let alone 25KV @ 5 ampere! Windings on the toroid would of course also be special wound with HV magnet wire.

A physicist worked on the following equations. According to him there should also be Gamma rays through this process.......

The way I evaluated the dose rate of Boron beta decay is as follows:
First, 1 joule is equal to 6.24 * 10^12 MeV, and the decay energies of both Boron 12 & 13 round off to 13.4 MeV.

And since the natural aboundance of Carbon 12 is ~99% and Carbon 13 is ~1% I divided the 6.24 * 10^12 MeV of total decay energy for 1 joule into 6.18 * 10^12 MeV for Boron 12 decay and 6.24 * 10^10 MeV for Boron 13 decay.

As per the usual convention I omitted decay modes that comprise less than 1% of the total energy release.

Percent & amount ofenergy   Betas      Gammas         Count each Particle


[ Boron 12 -- Total energy 6.18 * 10^12 MeV ]


92.2%   6.01 * 10^12 MeV   13.4 MeV            4.48 * 10^11

1.50%   9.27 * 10^10 MeV   5.71 MeV   3.21 MeV & 4.43 MeV   6.92 * 10^9

1.23%   7.60 * 10^10 MeV   8.93 MeV   4.43 MeV      5.67 * 10^9


[ Boron 13 -- Total energy 6.24 * 10^10 MeV ]


91.2%   5.75 * 10^10 MeV   13.4 MeV            4.29 * 10^9

7.60%   4.74 * 10^9  MeV   9.75 MeV   3.68 MeV      3.54 * 10^8


Derived Gamma Averages:

Gamma      Total Count   Total Energy

4.43 MeV   1.26 * 10^10   5.58 * 10^10 MeV

3.21 MeV   6.92 * 10^9   2.22 * 10^10 MeV

3.68 MeV   3.54 * 10^8   1.30 * 10^9  MeV

--------   ------------   ----------------

3.99(Avg) MeV   1.99 * 10^10   7.93 * 10^10

From this I derived the dose rate using the unshielded dose rate equation number two in the "Shielding for Gamma Radation.pdf".

kSEUen/P

-------

4 Pi r^2

I used:

k = 1.60 * 10^(-10)   Value for grays per second

S = 1.99 * 10^10    Gammas per second

E = 3.99 MeV

Uen/P = 2.045 * 10^(-2) Soft tissue & 4 MeV

r = 100cm

1.60*10^(-10) * 1.99*10^10 * 3.99 * 2.045*10^(-2)
------------------------------------------------- = 2.07*10^(-6) grays per joule
      4*Pi*100^2

The result gives actually gives the dose rate per joule of raw emitted decay energy.  Multipy this figure by the watts output by the Boron to get grays per second.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #735 on: June 22, 2008, 01:36:38 AM »

Offline k4zep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 650
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #736 on: June 22, 2008, 05:07:49 AM »
This level of energy will not see a effect. It's only very small amounts of current and only half the input voltage. Output sine wave is still whatever the input is. In my case it was 35Khz from the neon driver HV circuit. The current was just enough to self run and go into a runaway mode, but not enough to light a bulb or do anything useful. Thus the required 108-110 joules is the requirement to see the full effect where you have 2/3 the input voltage and many times the current needed to self run. I believe if you talked to JLN and Valee they would say the 110 joules was found from experimentation from Valee and probably where Naudin got his info to run his experiments, hence the reason he used that amount of energy as input.

We may find later on as with many other schemes: I.E. Meyer, Bedini, Gray, Johnson, Newman that high voltage in very short pulses increases the effect many times over. Using a triggered spark gap or some other form running in the 2KV to 25KV range. Although if larger amounts of current are present at those voltages it will be much more difficult to make the power usable I.E. possibly a pole transformer or something similar would be required to drop the voltage levels down to 480-120VAC. Obviously a few amps at 2KV would be highly lethal, let alone 25KV @ 5 ampere! Windings on the toroid would of course also be special wound with HV magnet wire.

A physicist worked on the following equations. According to him there should also be Gamma rays through this process.......

The way I evaluated the dose rate of Boron beta decay is as follows:
First, 1 joule is equal to 6.24 * 10^12 MeV, and the decay energies of both Boron 12 & 13 round off to 13.4 MeV.

And since the natural aboundance of Carbon 12 is ~99% and Carbon 13 is ~1% I divided the 6.24 * 10^12 MeV of total decay energy for 1 joule into 6.18 * 10^12 MeV for Boron 12 decay and 6.24 * 10^10 MeV for Boron 13 decay.

As per the usual convention I omitted decay modes that comprise less than 1% of the total energy release.

Percent & amount ofenergy   Betas      Gammas         Count each Particle


[ Boron 12 -- Total energy 6.18 * 10^12 MeV ]


92.2%   6.01 * 10^12 MeV   13.4 MeV            4.48 * 10^11

1.50%   9.27 * 10^10 MeV   5.71 MeV   3.21 MeV & 4.43 MeV   6.92 * 10^9

1.23%   7.60 * 10^10 MeV   8.93 MeV   4.43 MeV      5.67 * 10^9


[ Boron 13 -- Total energy 6.24 * 10^10 MeV ]


91.2%   5.75 * 10^10 MeV   13.4 MeV            4.29 * 10^9

7.60%   4.74 * 10^9  MeV   9.75 MeV   3.68 MeV      3.54 * 10^8


Derived Gamma Averages:

Gamma      Total Count   Total Energy

4.43 MeV   1.26 * 10^10   5.58 * 10^10 MeV

3.21 MeV   6.92 * 10^9   2.22 * 10^10 MeV

3.68 MeV   3.54 * 10^8   1.30 * 10^9  MeV

--------   ------------   ----------------

3.99(Avg) MeV   1.99 * 10^10   7.93 * 10^10

From this I derived the dose rate using the unshielded dose rate equation number two in the "Shielding for Gamma Radiation.pdf".

kSEUen/P

-------

4 Pi r^2

I used:

k = 1.60 * 10^(-10)   Value for grays per second

S = 1.99 * 10^10    Gammas per second

E = 3.99 MeV

Uen/P = 2.045 * 10^(-2) Soft tissue & 4 MeV

r = 100cm

1.60*10^(-10) * 1.99*10^10 * 3.99 * 2.045*10^(-2)
------------------------------------------------- = 2.07*10^(-6) grays per joule
      4*Pi*100^2

The result gives actually gives the dose rate per joule of raw emitted decay energy.  Multipy this figure by the watts output by the Boron to get grays per second.


Whoooooow Nellie,

Now you have went over my experimenters head...I never went beyond basic Calculus and it kicked my ass, I guess that's why I'm not a mathematician.  .....I'll have to take your word for it......Puttering around still, As I just don't understand the math involved, I can not visualize what is going on there.  I have seen that the output pulse is approximately the same as the input pulse so I guess the effect rides on that waveform if and when it can integrate itself on top of the induced pulse via the 1 turn to X number of turns in the Toroid.  With just a 50/1 turn ratio, I am seeing a very high pulse voltage and current out of a toroid with my simple circuit but the duty cycle is 1% or less so output is zilch really. It becomes obvious quickly that we have to have at least a 50% duty cycle and maybe more to make a sine wave output or we have to store the pulses via a bridge into a large cap and use downstream.  So much work to get viable information!!!!!
THIS IS NOT SIMPLE! 

Ben

Ben

Offline UncleFester

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 90
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #737 on: June 22, 2008, 07:03:17 AM »
Looks like you are not seeing much of an effect. Decay takes place over 20mS timespan and falls off sharply. Sharp rise and fall as the reaction takes place and sharp fall off as it ends. This forms a sine wave which should take place over about 12 to 15mS time period. Collapse of the field follows and the toroids field should collapse and form the negative side of the sine wave.

The previous post basically say's you should also be getting Gamma rays from the process, which to me was not good news since it would be much harder to deal with Gamma rather than alpha or beta rays.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #737 on: June 22, 2008, 07:03:17 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline AbbaRue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #738 on: June 22, 2008, 07:39:46 AM »
Keep in mind that the Th in the tungsten rod that Naudin used is a Gamma source.
Welders work with this all day long without any serious effects.
So the small amount of gamma this gives off shouldn't be a problem.

Offline k4zep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 650
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #739 on: June 22, 2008, 09:31:04 AM »
Looks like you are not seeing much of an effect. Decay takes place over 20mS timespan and falls off sharply. Sharp rise and fall as the reaction takes place and sharp fall off as it ends. This forms a sine wave which should take place over about 12 to 15mS time period. Collapse of the field follows and the toroids field should collapse and form the negative side of the sine wave.

The previous post basically say's you should also be getting Gamma rays from the process, which to me was not good news since it would be much harder to deal with Gamma rather than alpha or beta rays.

3:00 a.m.  Have done a lot of experimenting tonight, have much to digest.............have a lot of thinking and things to recheck before I come to any conclusions with any certainty.  Have seen a lot I can not explain, have a much better understanding of workings, basically when small cap used, very short pulse in and out, would have to be a high frequency device.  This causes all sorts of new electronic design problems. I wonder what the freq. of  the 6 watt unit was?   have seen ideas and statements I have to digest, I have to recheck this integration into the toroid and reaction that causes full sine wave production effect from 1/2 wave burst effect.......Arrrrgggggghhhhhhhhhh Charley Brown.

Ben

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #739 on: June 22, 2008, 09:31:04 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline k4zep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 650
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #740 on: June 22, 2008, 04:22:03 PM »
3:00 a.m.  Have done a lot of experimenting tonight, have much to digest.............have a lot of thinking and things to recheck before I come to any conclusions with any certainty.  Have seen a lot I can not explain, have a much better understanding of workings, basically when small cap used, very short pulse in and out, would have to be a high frequency device.  This causes all sorts of new electronic design problems. I wonder what the freq. of  the 6 watt unit was?   have seen ideas and statements I have to digest, I have to recheck this integration into the toroid and reaction that causes full sine wave production effect from 1/2 wave burst effect.......Arrrrgggggghhhhhhhhhh Charley Brown.

Ben

Morning all,

4 hours sleep, 2 more hours thinking.  Verified last night that what we basically have is a RC time constant discharge circuit.  This produces a pulse and a waveform across the toroid as a simple transformer with a high current low voltage pulse in the primary (carbon 1 turn) and the resultant Higher voltage lower current in the secondary (multi turn).  Up to this point, it is just a normal toroid transformer with a very low resistance/impedance on the primary.  If you remove the carbon and use a simple wire through the toroid, that is what you get and the basic time constant is there. 

According to trial and error data, it requires a basic pulse with at least 110J of energy to kick start a particular carbon rod into the reactive process and then this output adds to the pure RC time constant waveform that we then see as added output. I suspect that 110J is for a particular size rod and not a written in stone quantity.  The 6 watt self runner would indicate that this is a reasonable deduction. 

If you want a sine wave, you have to take the the inductance in the secondary, the RC time constant and the burst time constant into consideration. If you just want to look at the burst, then the resistance and cap. value can vary and the transformer ratio is just for voltage amplification as long as you have enough energy density in the rod to initiate the reaction.

 As Uncle Fester has noted, there is a rapid rise in energy and then a rapid drop in energy during this time constant/discharge period, probably a snapping action as the reaction is initiated and then as the current density falls below the theoretical trigger level the rapid recombining of elements happens and this resets the status quo.  If this pulsing is done on a 50% duty cycle and at the correct power levels, the natural integration of the pulses in the inductive output coil of the toroid and core interaction results in a sort of sine wave output. 


At this point, things become very complex, as Uncle Fester says, the theory is very simple, doing it is a SOB especially until you find the right rod!!!!!........................to be continued...........Got to eat some breakfast and drink some coffee.

Ben

Offline tishatang

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 296
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #741 on: June 22, 2008, 05:10:56 PM »
@UncleFester and All

Do you suppose that this process transmutes carbon into iron?  Go here and see:

http://amasci.com/freenrg/carbiron.html

In those experiments, they used relative low volts and high amps.  Here we are using High voltage bursts.  Maybe transmutation is causing runaway or other abnormalities?

Tishatanag

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #741 on: June 22, 2008, 05:10:56 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline AbbaRue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #742 on: June 22, 2008, 07:08:52 PM »
@k4zep
How did you capture a picture of the wave form, it looks like your using a regular scope?
If you were using a digital camera set on video, what resolution did you have it set at?

I'm hoping to find some coal down at the beach today, will cut it into rods.
Coal should have a higher resistance.
The welding rods are only 0.2 ohms per foot, and the toroid is only 1 inch wide.
Lots of waisted output using that.
I also tried cutting a graphite rod 6mm dia. 70cm long but the resistance was to low to measure.
The pencil lead sounds pretty good, how does it hold out, does it fry right away?

Offline k4zep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 650
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #743 on: June 22, 2008, 07:38:15 PM »
Hi AR,

Used a small Sony Cyber Shot camera on low light settings.  Kept taking pictures till I got lucky. 

Will try and post a video much later today or tomorrow.  Wife wants me to go out shopping with her and I guess I need a break too.

Have changed over to a 4 uf good to 4000VDC.  I can say the pencil lead @ 2", 4ohms holds up well with a 1KV voltage pulse.
Thats about 2 J/ pulse.  Looking to pick up more lead pencil lead today when I go out too.

I agree the basic setup with a narrow toroid and a long carbon rod physically doesn't look to take advantage of maximum induction effects there!  I hope all the folk trying this keeps at it....IF I find a readily available rod that works even at low levels, will let all know.
I am also considering a bifilar wound toroid coil.  One for the bias and one for power pickup.  Then too, any one know if a simple bifilar wound coil right on the carbon again one for bias and one for power would work or not?

As a final thought could not a third winding, low impedance say 4-10 turn #8-10 wire in series with the cap and reactor, with polarity additive would it not add positive feedback to the loop and increase the output?  Again, I don't know how much actual OU this device can be yet.



Ben




Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #743 on: June 22, 2008, 07:38:15 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline eldarion

  • TPU-Elite
  • Sr. Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 326
    • My out-of-date overunity research page
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #744 on: June 22, 2008, 08:30:52 PM »
@UncleFester, k4zep,

I finally got around to testing my setup here.  I get the attached waveform on a tiny toroidal coil with maybe 20 turns placed around the carbon rod.  This looks like a small part of the reaction starting, correct?  The rod makes a very loud clicking sound on every discharge...

I know my power levels are way too small right now, and the toroidal transformer is the wrong type (correctly sized transformer is in the mail), but here are the details of my setup anyway:
240uF @ 160V photoflash capacitor bank
Fired at 40Hz with an 800A 1200V IGBT with custom driver setup
Input power 13.8V @ 2.75A into a 120V inverter; rectified to charge capacitor bank

Next step is to increase the voltage, probably with some sort of voltage multiplier circuit on the AC output of the inverter.

Any thoughts? ;D

Eldarion

Offline k4zep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 650
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #745 on: June 22, 2008, 09:03:29 PM »
@UncleFester, k4zep,

I finally got around to testing my setup here.  I get the attached waveform on a tiny toroidal coil with maybe 20 turns placed around the carbon rod.  This looks like a small part of the reaction starting, correct?  The rod makes a very loud clicking sound on every discharge...

I know my power levels are way too small right now, and the toroidal transformer is the wrong type (correctly sized transformer is in the mail), but here are the details of my setup anyway:
240uF @ 160V photoflash capacitor bank
Fired at 40Hz with an 800A 1200V IGBT with custom driver setup
Input power 13.8V @ 2.75A into a 120V inverter; rectified to charge capacitor bank

Next step is to increase the voltage, probably with some sort of voltage multiplier circuit on the AC output of the inverter.

Any thoughts? ;D

Eldarion

Hi Eldarion,

Wow, nice scope shot.  It is VERY similar to the shot on my old analog scope a few post ago.  I didn't show the High positive peak that I triggered on but the negative (which I assume is the burst) is right on.  Very good work!!!!!  Looks like we are on the same page!  That clicking sound might be arcing in your rod connections as I hear that under those conditions. Now what to do to increase that burst!

Would give my right whatever for an integrating scope that would show the total energy in each peak........

Ben

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #745 on: June 22, 2008, 09:03:29 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Edge

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #746 on: June 22, 2008, 10:38:35 PM »
You can calculate the DC resistance of a graphite rod using R=rho*(L/A).  You need the resistivity (rho), the length (L), and the cross sectional area (A).  The published values for the resistivity of graphite is between 300-1600 uohms*inch.  For a 0.250" dia x 2.500" length rod, A=0.0491 sq inch.  Using 1600 uohms*inch, the resistance is 1600E-6*(2.5/0.0491) = 0.082 ohms.

The AC resistance can be calculated using the skin effect.  But for a pulse or RC decay it is not a single value of resistance.  These waveforms have a spectrum of frequencies.  Here are several values for the above rod at a single frequency:

DC = 0.082 ohms
60Hz  = 0.76 ohms
1KHz = 3.03 ohms

The resistivity values are from:

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2004/AfricaBelgrave.shtml
Poco Graphite
GraphiteStore.com

Offline aether22

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1055
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #747 on: June 23, 2008, 07:50:22 AM »
I know many pages have already gone and i have only read a few of them, but let's see what we have here.

We have a device that is designed based on a theory of a nuclear reaction that is somehow OU (despite the fact that it's ends products are the same as it's starting products, this would seem very unlikely and not generally how OU happens).

We have tests by JLN and a few others that seem to indicate that it is creating a power output but correct me of I am wrong no one has claimed truly more out than in or a closed loop operation besides the person who started this thread but he has acted in an untrustworthy way. (this is my impression from reading not enough of this thread so if this is clearly wrong I apologize)

The Valle's theory has produced both Naudin's plans with a Thorium Carbon spark gap, and another set of plans that do not have any spark gap or Thorium.   At this point I am not aware of any test of the non-spark gap version.

So other than maybe testing the non spark gap version I can see a few points that should be tested.

First I would note that possibly excess energy is seen in another spark gap and transformer experiment, this one does not use carbon though, it is "Electricity Amplification by Neo Magnet" and personally I am not sure that there is any important difference between the results Naudin got and those seen by Luc.
So to test this it might be an idea to swap the carbon for various other electrodes.
I am pretty sure the Thorium rod is magnetizable right? If you add a coil around it you have an electromagnet instead of Luc's Neo magnet.

One thing I would suggest trying would be replacing the carbon with a different diamagnetic material, such as Bismuth or Silver.

Another thought would be to replace the Thorium loaded welding rod with a non Thorium welding rod or with a piece of mild steel, the effect may be reduced but is it still gone?

The idea is that beta radiation from the spark gap (which may be caused by things other that a carbon-boron nuclear transition) is somehow helping induce energy in the transformer, if that is so can you move the transformer along so it is not by the spark gap/carbon rod but so the carbon circuit is still through it's center, does this cause a significant loss in induced energy? (there should still be a single turn transformer effect naturally)

Finally I can't see ANY reason that this experiment requires having the carbon circuit inductively coupled to the transformer (at least based on the theory of operation) so run a rest where the spark gap/carbon rod is through the center of the transformer but does a hair pin turn and exits the transformer the way it entered, so it has no net magnetic inductive effect on the transformer.

These experiments might go a way to verifying that it really is working the way theory it was based on predicted, however they may show that the effect is in fact mostly or entirely based on something else entirely.

This will gave a solid base to work from and none of these experiments seem very hard to try if you have the setup already. (in fact I have most everything needed to do all the testing but as you may have guessed I doubt this device works the way it is advertised to and I am busy with other experiments, in fact pretty much the only thing I am missing is the welding rods, I even have a Geiger counter, big caps, toroid transformer, scope, function gen, carbon rods, wire etc...)




Offline Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #748 on: June 23, 2008, 03:28:50 PM »
True to the earlier experiments with a simple B-field and a carbon rod,
Luc here has experimented with a spark gap and a strong B-field from a neodymium magnet,
and he's able to pull sparks that should only measure 1/16th of an inch
out to something like 1/4th of an inch...
By simply using a neo magnet south pole as anode or a neo magnet north pole as cathode..! :D

Now I seem to recall from Vall?e's papers that Oxygen and Nitrogen were also on the list of
possible Protelf materials.... and air just happens to be 20% of the former and 78% of the latter...

so is Luc perhaps performing open-air Protelf ???
Or perhaps he is Protelf-ing the conductive neodymium??

I'm just making suggestions here, I haven't actually studied the similarities deeply enough to
say anything solid about this.
But it may be interesting to check out Luc's thread on the subject: http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4124.msg105036.html#msg105036

In any case he has a strong B-field from a neodymium magnet, has the neo connected to the anode, taps the cathode
wire to the neo to generate pulses, then feeds that through a transformer (or a car ignition coil) to up the voltage and get
sparks. The sparks he gets on the secondary can be significantly longer than the feed voltage should allow for,
and only when the neo is added to the pulser circuit.
:D

Offline eldarion

  • TPU-Elite
  • Sr. Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 326
    • My out-of-date overunity research page
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #749 on: June 23, 2008, 04:35:58 PM »
@aether22,

UncleFester (Tad) here either had or had a 6 watt self-running device (with no spark gap in it, if I recall correctly.)  He is building a newer device now and has opted not to release the schematics of the earlier self running device.

@all,

I would also like to point out that UncleFester's energy calculations are incorrect. (no offense).  Everyone here should read up on the watt and its formal definition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt) so as to avoid similar mistakes in the future.

If his self runner was using 6W of power, and fully discharging the 0.68uF capacitor that was fully charged to 2Kv, his firing frequency would have been around 3 to 4Hz.

@UncleFester, it would help if you released your old schematic.  We could see what you were doing and help understand why it worked (you were definitely NOT dumping 109 joules in each pulse, so why was there OU?)

Thanks!

Eldarion

 

OneLink