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 Posts: 897323
  • *Total Topics: 15814
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 4
  • *Guests: 15
  • *Total: 19

Author Topic: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions  (Read 373402 times)

Offline eldarion

  • TPU-Elite
  • Sr. Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 326
    • My out-of-date overunity research page
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #750 on: June 23, 2008, 10:42:34 PM »
@UncleFester,

When I asked for a schematic in the last post, all I am interested in is a block diagram showing the connections between your neon inverter (a 2KVDC-generating black box as far as I'm concerned), your 0.68uF capacitor, the carbon rod and the switching device that discharges the capacitor into the rod.  Also helpful would be the connections to the collector toroid.

Thanks!

Eldarion

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #750 on: June 23, 2008, 10:42:34 PM »

Offline Grumpy

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 2247
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #751 on: June 24, 2008, 01:46:42 AM »
UncleFester is Tad?  No Shite? 

Hey, what ever happened with your Ed Gray replication?  In (I think) 2006 you were getting RE using carbon electrode spark gap in a copper tube as a collector. There is a PDF of your posts on the web somewhere.

@all

Is it possible the something else that mimics beta radiation is at work?

Offline Grumpy

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 2247
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #752 on: June 24, 2008, 01:49:20 AM »
PDF of Tad's replication of Ed Gray Conversion tube:

http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/MKay5.pdf

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #752 on: June 24, 2008, 01:49:20 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline eldarion

  • TPU-Elite
  • Sr. Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 326
    • My out-of-date overunity research page
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #753 on: June 24, 2008, 02:03:17 AM »
Is it possible the something else that mimics beta radiation is at work?

I say for sure!  As has been noted before, 6Kw of beta radiation would fry the hapless experimenter who stumbled across it... :o

Looks like our "beta" is actually an EMP affecting the meter...hmmm, where have I heard mention of an EMP and overunity before? :D

Eldarion

Offline Grumpy

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 2247
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #754 on: June 24, 2008, 02:15:47 AM »
Carbon rod slows "it" (the initial shock wave) down due to it's distributed resistance.

A normal resistor is like a sheet of paper - the arrow just goes right through it.  The carbon rod is like a bale of hay and the arrow stops.

(Hey, I have a horse - what sort of analogy would you expect?)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #754 on: June 24, 2008, 02:15:47 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline AbbaRue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #755 on: June 24, 2008, 07:25:41 AM »
I keep hearing about this beta radiation frying our skin off etc.
We need to keep in mind that this concept is only producing small amounts of boron12 in the midst of the carbon atoms.
Theoretically, much of the beta will be absorbed by the carbon rod, probably producing some sort of EMP.
To get the beta out of the rod we would have to design a different source of carbon that will allow that beta to escape.
Perhaps carbon mixed with air in some way to allow lots of open space between the carbon particles.
Maybe graphite powder is the way to go. Vibrate the graphite to get it full of air and then feed it into the unit to be pulsed.
Something like this may give you that high beta we are always reminded of.
But I think much of the beta is getting trapped in the carbon rod, so we don't see it.
3.1mm of glass can completely stop beta so probably the same amount of carbon will too.
The beta we are observing is only that which is produced on the surface of the rod.

This is my theory on the subject anyway, and it's based on simple logic.

I managed to find some coal on Sunday and I plan on cutting a rod from it.
Will see what kind of results I get.


Offline kewlhead

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #756 on: June 24, 2008, 07:36:31 AM »
@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


J = ?CE? = 1 watt/second

where J = joules, C = farads and E = voltage of the charge




Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #756 on: June 24, 2008, 07:36:31 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #757 on: June 24, 2008, 12:44:29 PM »
I keep hearing about this beta radiation frying our skin off etc.
We need to keep in mind that this concept is only producing small amounts of boron12 in the midst of the carbon atoms.
Theoretically, much of the beta will be absorbed by the carbon rod, probably producing some sort of EMP.
Yes, I agree, the fact that -according to the Protelf theory- beta emissions occur, does not necessarily mean we
will get freakishly strong radiation bursts outside of the rod material. Most of the 'reaction' should occur inside
the conductive rod, and most beta should immediately "bump into" surrounding atoms and become heat and/or
eddies and/or other EM inductive phenomena. Even if some of the beta gets out, it won't be much because we're
not using very high energy pulses anyway.
Besides, any form of electrical shielding will stop these rocketeer electrons, so a shield layer of glass, metal, plastic,
or even a combination of the two, should easily stop beta from reaching your skin.
If you're worried about your campfire starting a bushfire, you build a stone wall around it.
If you're worried about your beta frying your skin off, you build a shield around it.
Seems simple to me... ;)
Quote
To get the beta out of the rod we would have to design a different source of carbon that will allow that beta to escape.
Perhaps carbon mixed with air in some way to allow lots of open space between the carbon particles.
Maybe graphite powder is the way to go. Vibrate the graphite to get it full of air and then feed it into the unit to be pulsed.
Something like this may give you that high beta we are always reminded of.
Hey! Don't go revealing my "death ray" reaction chamber idea to the people now!
How are we ever going to take over the world if they know?! ;D (Muhahahaha?) ;) :D
Quote
But I think much of the beta is getting trapped in the carbon rod, so we don't see it.
3.1mm of glass can completely stop beta so probably the same amount of carbon will too.
The beta we are observing is only that which is produced on the surface of the rod.
Yes, mostly. Some of it may be the occasional near-surface beta emission with high enough
energy to actually penetrate the surface layers. But most of the beta generated inside the rod
will never show up as beta, it will just be moving electrons inside the conductor with a high
kinetic energy.
Still, all the fuss about beta... I never heard anyone complain back when we didn't have LCD and
TFT screens yet and everyone spent the entire day in front of a large beta cannon, seperated
from the very same horrible beta radiation by nothing more than a sheet of glass.
Do you suppose such a fuss would have developed around those as well if they had called
them "beta radiation cannons" instead of the much more friendly "cathode ray tubes"? ;)
Yes, you don't want high levels of beta radiation to hit your skin or any other tissue for more
than an instant. Just like you don't want high levels of any other form of radiation to hit
any particular tissue.
But that doesn't immediately make everything with beta in it a lethal radiation hazard.


Quote
This is my theory on the subject anyway, and it's based on simple logic.
Yes, I agree. Or at least, it seems to make much sense to me. :)

Offline k4zep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 650
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #758 on: June 24, 2008, 01:45:51 PM »
Good Morning All,

All of the above just boils down to...............Build the damn thing. We all must experiment till we find a rod that works..If no one can find a rod that works after exaustive messing around, then we will have to say "possible good theory, maybe bad theory, can't make it work at our level of expertiese"!   ..Remember how many experiments Thomas Edison did before he found the perfect carbon filament for a light bulb!!!!!

Right off the bat, I have found that when I put only 1.3 J of energy into a 1/8" X  2" 4 ohm rod, that sucker gets hot!
Man you put 110J into a 1/4" rod and it is going to glow!  Assuming we find a rod that works, it looks like cooling will be the next order of work.  Hollow rod with circulating coolant?

All the intellectualizing, bla bla bla is not where the rubber meets the road but I do like the theory that the output might look like an EMP pulse riding on top of the driving pulse.  IF it works, something has to be carrying energy to the toroid coil.

Waiting for the US Mail to bring me a different rod and a large "cap".

Hang in there Uncle Fester I did enjoy your video and developed a better understanding of the device from it.  This results oriented R&D can drive you up the wall because lots of time it is 2 steps forward, smoke, 3 steps backwards...........


Ben

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #758 on: June 24, 2008, 01:45:51 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline leo48

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 254
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #759 on: June 24, 2008, 05:34:34 PM »
Hello to all
this is my first result
(http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/6845/picture140lm4.jpg)
leo48

Offline AbbaRue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #760 on: June 24, 2008, 07:55:03 PM »
@Koen1
Your link to the Neo Magnet experiment on the website was quite interesting,
it answered one of my questions "What direction does magnetism draw electrons?"
I was thinking that the direction of the B field should match the direction electrons are pulled.
If that device could overcome the problem of overheating the Neo it should work.
I was considering mixing silica gel with graphite and placing it in a paper tube.
From your crystal cell experiments do you have an idea what ratio of gel to graphite
I would need, to get about 2 ohms per inch at say 4mm width.
Does heating silica gel cause it to melt?

Based on this formula: J = ?CE? = 1 watt/second
108 J would work out to 108 watts. Now math isn't my strong point.
108W / 37V = 3 A     37V / 3A = 12.3 ohms.
So anything less then 12 ohms zapped by 37 volts should give me the 108 J needed?
Did I miss something? Or does that zap have to last a full second to get the 108 J?
If so then we have to multiply that by the pulse width.

« Last Edit: June 24, 2008, 08:18:42 PM by AbbaRue »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #760 on: June 24, 2008, 07:55:03 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline xee

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #761 on: June 25, 2008, 12:13:14 AM »
@ AbbaRue,
For equation J = ?CE? = 1 watt/second, the voltage is the change in open circuit voltage of the capacitor (before discharge minus after discharge) as measured with high impedance voltmeter. Equation is meaningless when the capacitor is connected to a low resistance load or a voltage source while measuring the voltage. When correctly measured, time is not relevant, only the change in voltage.

Actually the way the equation is written is confusing. ?CE? = change in Coulombs of charge in the capacitor of C farads. Amps are number of Coulombs flowing in wire per second. Watts = amps squared times load resistance in ohms. So I think the equation J = ?CE? = 1 watt/second is only true for C=1F, E=1V, and load resistance = 1 ohm. No, it even isn't true then. Bad equation.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2008, 01:17:55 AM by xee »

Offline AbbaRue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #762 on: June 25, 2008, 06:51:40 AM »
@Xee
Looks like you are well versed in electronic theory.
If I discharge a 0.16 F cap. at 37V across a resistor for 200 microseconds.
What resistance do I need to get 108J.

Offline eldarion

  • TPU-Elite
  • Sr. Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 326
    • My out-of-date overunity research page
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #763 on: June 25, 2008, 07:17:07 AM »
@Xee
Looks like you are well versed in electronic theory.
If I discharge a 0.16 F cap. at 37V across a resistor for 200 microseconds.
What resistance do I need to get 108J.

A capacitor discharges in 5 time constants.  1 time constant = R * C, or rearranged (tau / C) = R, where tau is 40us.  This gives R=0.00025 ohms.

I still haven't heard any rebuttal of my 6Kw problem mentioned above...

Eldarion

Offline AbbaRue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #764 on: June 25, 2008, 07:49:16 AM »
@eldarion
I think the answer has been given.
Most of the beta is absorbed by the carbon and transformed into another form of energy.
Some will be EMP, some as heat.
Only a small portion of the beta from near the surface of the rod escapes the rod.
In fact the EMP produced from the beta colliding with the carbon atoms is probably what we want to harness.
This is the purpose of the B field, to align the EMP inside the rod.
Without the B field the EMP would move in random directions and be lost as heat.
The term Colliding used above may not be the right term, it's only used to illustrate the point.
How the beta is transformed into EMP is unknown.

So no rebuttal is required.


 

OneLink