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 401922 times)

Offline aether22

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1057
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #765 on: June 25, 2008, 08:53:19 AM »
This must be some low energy beta then, and it must only be produced near the center.

Problem is the skin effect likely means the current isn't.

6KW of beta radiation is a lot to shield with a little bit of carbon.

Let's just say that some wish to believe that it is an exotic OU nuclear reaction.
And others believe that there is a different reason for it's operation.

Personally when I saw JLN's experiment I could see it being designed that way based on aetheric principles I was aware of.

Offline Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #766 on: June 25, 2008, 12:34:41 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?"
:) hehe well that's the funny thing, theory says magnetism does not exert a 'pull'
on electrons along the magnetic field axis at all... At most, a perpendicular potential
difference should arise as in the Hall effect, but this 'drawing' of electrons from a magnets
poles should not happen according to just about every established theory.
That's also why it's so cool. ;)

Quote
I was thinking that the direction of the B field should match the direction electrons are pulled.
Well, according to  http://jlnlabs.online.fr/vsg/protelf.htm that is indeed what Vall?e said...
Quote
If that device could overcome the problem of overheating the Neo it should work.
Yes, one would think so. Although it is of course possible that the neo magnet heats up due
to internal electron interactions that also cause the spark to be longer...  In which case the
longer spark effect causes the magnet to heat up and cooling it might decrease the spark effect.
Quote
I was considering mixing silica gel with graphite and placing it in a paper tube.
To what effect, exactly? To allow for a better or extended path for the electrons to follow and
hopefully reduce heating effects? 
Quote
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?
Well generally I don't set out to produce specific resistance materials in my experiments,
I tend to work from my theory on the crystal unit and take it from there...
And I know I took readings of mixes with silica and graphite, but I've just dug through the
documentation I have here and I can't find the report on those tests... so unfortunately
I can't give you any clear info on what ratios I tried and what the resistance of those were
at the moment. I shall look around my workshop when I'm there again, perhaps I left the
info there. Or, if we're very unlucky, I may have thrown it out during a vigilant cleaning session...
After all, I do recall that most of the mixes I made with a certain minimum amount of graphite,
something like 70%+,  were good conductors with relatively low resistance, and that was
not what I was looking for at the time...

As to the silica gel, silica itself melts around the 1700 degrees Celcius and since silica gel
is basically silica synthesised from sodium silicate (which melts around 1000 degrees),
it should melt around that same temperature. (If impure it may contain traces of sodium silicate
and may melt at slightly lower temp)
That kind of temperature needs either a kiln for controlled melting, a melting crucible and furnace,
or for a rough and less controllable way putting it in a fire would probably reach such temperatures...
But since carbon combusts at 400 degrees Celcius and silica gel tends to retain water very well,
I would expect quite a bit of the carbon if not all of it to oxidise at temperatures 4 times that high...

May I suggest trying "waterglass" to make your carbon-based material?
"Waterglass" is a very watery solution of sodium silicate, and is sometimes used to make
conductive adhesive by simply adding some conductive powder to it (usually metals such
as silver or basically anything that doesn't chemically react with it like for example aluminium
does as soon as it comes into contact with the stuff) and mixing it up well untill you have
a paste. It can be applied and left to dry, or one can apply heat to it to have it dry faster.
If I'm not mistaken, heating it to 200 degrees for a brief period will almost instantly solidify it.
So I would suggest mixing a little 'waterglass' with carbon powder untill it is a nice paste,
then fill your tube with that, then either leave it to dry which can take a couple of days depending
on the temperature and humidity (dry and warm environment probably solidifies it within a day or two),
or put it in an oven on low heat for a while to speed up the solidification. :)
You'll have to do a few little experiments to determine the exact resistance of this mix, and
may need to add some other powder to increase or decrease that as you see fit. Oxide powders
are generally good for increasing resistance in that respect.
Hope that helps? :)

Oh, P.S., you may need to use something other than paper because waterglass tends to bind with
it quite well and it will be hard to remove the paper if it does. Perhaps covering the paper in a layer
of carbon/graphite powder may counter this? (One of the revolutionary uses of graphite powder back
in the day was its use as a coating for cannonball molds, as it kept the cannonballs from sticking to
the mold which they apparently did very often before the graphite came into use. History, always usefull. ;))
And another thing I have not tried yet with the 'waterglass' is using the blotch-type oven/kitchen paper...

Offline AbbaRue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #767 on: June 25, 2008, 07:29:41 PM »
@Koen1 Thanks for the reply.
I ground up a carbon gouging rod on 80 grit sandpaper.
Mixed it with silica gel 1 part silica to 3 parts carbon powder.
A tube 4mm wide 50mm long gave me about 50 ohms.
To high but makes a good high wattage resistor. :)
I now think that straight carbon powder will give me the right resistance.
Will try that next.

Offline xee

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #768 on: June 25, 2008, 10:11:13 PM »
@ AbbaRue ,
The explanation I gave you yesterday was not very good. I didn't have time to check then, but I did do some checking today. The equation was correct except for the 1 in from of watt/sec. It should have been Joules = 1/2 (C E^2) = watt/sec. The following web pages give a good explation and example calculation:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/electric/capeng2.html
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/316/lectures/node52.html

In your case you should ignore the watt/sec and just use Joules. The time it takes to discharge does not change the number of Joules removed from the capacitor, this is only a function of the change in voltage on the capacitor. So a capacitor charged to a given voltage will contain a certain amount of energy in Joules and that energy will be transferred to the load by the time the voltage on the capacitor is zero. The time it takes to do this is determined by the load resistance as was pointed out by Eldarion.

Offline k4zep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 650
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #769 on: June 26, 2008, 12:23:11 AM »
@ AbbaRue ,
The explanation I gave you yesterday was not very good. I didn't have time to check then, but I did do some checking today. The equation was correct except for the 1 in from of watt/sec. It should have been Joules = 1/2 (C E^2) = watt/sec. The following web pages give a good explation and example calculation:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/electric/capeng2.html
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/316/lectures/node52.html

In your case you should ignore the watt/sec and just use Joules. The time it takes to discharge does not change the number of Joules removed from the capacitor, this is only a function of the change in voltage on the capacitor. So a capacitor charged to a given voltage will contain a certain amount of energy in Joules and that energy will be transferred to the load by the time the voltage on the capacitor is zero. The time it takes to do this is determined by the load resistance as was pointed out by Eldarion.


Hi All,

Not to get nitpicking here but nobody seems to mention the internal resistance of the cap. at these very low load resistances!

Ben

Offline Reiyuki

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 133
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #770 on: June 26, 2008, 01:13:30 AM »
Just spent the whole day reading over the thread, and I am impressed.  I plan to scrounge an experiment together ASAP.

Here's an idea, haven't seen it mentioned yet.
It was noted several times that a high B-field was necessary for the system to work.

Wouldn't it be possible to wind some thick-gauge wire around the carbon rod and use a capacitor discharge to provide the magnetic kick?  Not sure how much power you need to equal out the gauss rating of a neo magnet.   Just a thought.

Still pondering, what if you could skip the Neo's altogether, in favor of just having it completely LC-driven.  You could feasibly run the system as resonant AC.


Thoughts/comments?   (Loved the thread, figured I'd contribute what I could)

Offline miki02131

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #771 on: June 26, 2008, 01:13:53 AM »
@ AbbaRue ,
The explanation I gave you yesterday was not very good. I didn't have time to check then, but I did do some checking today. The equation was correct except for the 1 in from of watt/sec. It should have been Joules = 1/2 (C E^2) = watt/sec.

Unfortunately, you have still mistaken the energy Unit. Think of energy in terms of watt-hour, watt-sec, kilowatt-hour, kilowatt-sec for example as opposed to watt/sec.

Thanks,

Miki.

Offline lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1372
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #772 on: June 26, 2008, 04:00:01 AM »
Under a strong "B Field" the carbon atoms align perpendicular to the impending electron flow. This allows spaces in the carbon for extra electrons to accumulate. As the current increases, the carbon produces a field perpendicular to the carbon rod and the "B Field". When the field in the carbon overtakes the "B Field" the carbon atoms again change direction closing the holes and forcing the accumulated electrons out in the opposite direction of the current flow. This causes the current to go even higher and forces out even more electrons causing the current to go higher continue to flush all the previously trapped electrons in an avalanche. The toroid simply captures the magnetic surge as a large field pulse like a simple single wind on the coil.

The reason it works is because the carbon under the "B Field" can easily be saturated with electrons, then when the field changes direction the carbon works like a battery forcing the stored electrons against the in rushing current. This is typical of all diamagnetic material but shows more in carbon because it is one of the stronger diamagnetic materials.


Offline xee

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #773 on: June 26, 2008, 06:19:42 AM »
@ miki02131,
Yep. You are correct. One Joule = one watt-sec not watt/sec. Maybe I will get it correct eventually. Thanks for the correction.

Offline twosox

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #774 on: June 26, 2008, 02:41:20 PM »
testing my circuit now, but getting nothing from the fet. is the attached circuit correct?
got a nice square wave going into the bd137 which is switching but the irf3205 is doing
nothing.

thanks guys.

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #775 on: June 26, 2008, 02:58:03 PM »
yes, you are dropping most of your gate drive voltage across the 10 Ohm resistor because of the 1 Ohm resistor shunt. remove the 1 Ohm and it should work.

Offline twosox

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #776 on: June 26, 2008, 03:18:02 PM »
excellent, thanks poynt99. i'll try that tonight, any problems i'll let you know.

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #777 on: June 27, 2008, 02:13:26 AM »
you still might need a path to ground on the emitter though, so driving a fet with one transistor is not the best. maybe a 100Ohm to ground.

you might want to check into fet drivers ;)

Offline mikewatson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #778 on: June 27, 2008, 12:20:58 PM »
I have not seen any sign of beta radiation from a carbon rod subjected to a  high energy capacitor discharge with or without a magnetic field in either direction along the axis of the rod.

The rod used is a 7 mm welding carbon. The distance between the electrodes on the carbon rod was initially 230 mm and then a second set of tests were done with 60mm between the electrodes.
A thin window Geiger counter tube was used and checked to see if it could detect 1.3 Mev beta radiation from the K40 trace in potassium chloride, which it did.

The capacitors which provided the impulse were 8 parallel connected 1000 microfarad 400 volt capacitors switched through a large thyristor. The pulse energy was varied from 40 joules up to the maximum 640 joules with the applied voltage starting at 100 volts for the first impulses  and finishing with 400 volt for the final impulses. Several impulses were tried through the carbon at each voltage setting without a trace of beta emission.
Magnets placed with the field in either direction along the rod had no effect.
The impulses from the Geiger counter were viewed on a storage scope so the average count was clearly visible.

Mike


Offline k4zep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 650
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #779 on: June 27, 2008, 02:17:09 PM »
I have not seen any sign of beta radiation from a carbon rod subjected to a  high energy capacitor discharge with or without a magnetic field in either direction along the axis of the rod.

The rod used is a 7 mm welding carbon. The distance between the electrodes on the carbon rod was initially 230 mm and then a second set of tests were done with 60mm between the electrodes.
A thin window Geiger counter tube was used and checked to see if it could detect 1.3 Mev beta radiation from the K40 trace in potassium chloride, which it did.

The capacitors which provided the impulse were 8 parallel connected 1000 microfarad 400 volt capacitors switched through a large thyristor. The pulse energy was varied from 40 joules up to the maximum 640 joules with the applied voltage starting at 100 volts for the first impulses  and finishing with 400 volt for the final impulses. Several impulses were tried through the carbon at each voltage setting without a trace of beta emission.
Magnets placed with the field in either direction along the rod had no effect.
The impulses from the Geiger counter were viewed on a storage scope so the average count was clearly visible.

Mike



Same problem I found.  I have been laying low till I get in a "Pure" rod.  My large low ESR Cap. arrived yesterday.  It is a honker.  4200uf, 500VDC rating.  Will make up a simple circuit of several high power IGBT's and a series bus system to switch this Cap.  No Hurry here, it seems we all are missing something so time will tell.