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.

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

Custom Search

Author Topic: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions  (Read 405921 times)

Offline mikewatson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #795 on: July 05, 2008, 04:06:46 PM »
Earl

here is the jpeg again. The file was too big. Nothing very exciting, only the lack of difference in pulse height with or without a magnetic field.

Mike

Offline mikewatson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #796 on: July 09, 2008, 04:47:33 PM »
I have not been able to repeat Naudin experiment using welding carbon  in contact with a 3mm rod of 3% thoriated tungsten. The voltage used in my test is 140 volts with a capacitance of 0.008 Farad. With or without a colinear magnetic field of either polarity the pulse area and height is closely the same. The current transformer load is unaltered from previous posts being 69 ohms.
Since I have great respect for Naudin's experiments, my failure to repeat his results suggests that the only other variable, namely the type and/or purity of carbon used is crucial. He used pure carbon.
When I get pure graphite rods I will repeat these experiments.

Mike

Offline Reiyuki

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 133
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #797 on: July 10, 2008, 07:08:41 PM »
I thought I'd share a variant I had in mind.  I have Tesla Coil parts laying around already, so this kind of experiment is more feasible for me.

The device acts as a low power Tesla Coil running from a Neon Sign Transformer.  Instead of a conventional Spark Gap, the graphite rods are used.
The output in the toroid is fed to a big stepdown transformer (10-1 or 100-1), in this case another Neon Sign Transformer.  That output is then fed back into the 120v windings of the Neon transformer.

(Not pictured is the B field power to the toroid.  I figured that was implied)


(http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/5892/tshvvsgld6.th.png)


It's a thought, let me know what you all think.  I kinda like it because you're already acting on high voltage with less likelyhood of burning electronics.  Anything that goes over 12kv can be spark-gapped to prevent burnout.

Offline mikewatson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #798 on: July 12, 2008, 12:36:16 PM »
Quote
It's a thought, let me know what you all think

Reiyuki,

I will return to the nuclear stuff shortly, but firstly a slight digression:-

Your suggestion might be give something useful. Here are a few suggestions.
My view is that that something might emerge using a real Tesla transformer rather than the RF transformers that a usually called by this name. To build this you have to increase the inter-winding capacitance, opposite to what you would normally expect. You will see why in the two Eric Dollard videos below.
Dollard demonstrates Tesla?s method of producing longitudinal magneto-electric waves rather than electromagnetic waves. It looks like Tesla waves only propagate in matter. Dollard demonstrates transmission some thousands of feet through the earth in one of these videos.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-721789270445596549&q=&hl=en

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6461713170757457294&q=&hl=en


The quality of the videos is poor. You can still buy the VHS originals from Borderland Science Research (?) but they are only marginally better.

J.L.Naudin did an analog simulation of a converse delay line mentioned in the videos with series capacitance and shunt resistance:

 http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/lmdtem.htm

Dr Stiffler?s (see thread on this site) longitudinal transmission appears to be the same as Tesla?s longitudinal transmission.
It seems that all tuned circuits have two natural modes the conventional one modeled as a delay line with series inductance and shunt capacitance and a second mode in which the circuit works with series capacity and shunt inductance. This last mode is usually considered parasitic. A piece of wire seems to favour this longitudinal mode, hence single wire transmission.

Back to the nuclear stuff.

In the early last century L.G.V Rota a little known engineer experimented with Tesla?s method of ground power transmission. Rota was very secretive during his life time, but he seemed to have found using buried metal electrodes that the Tesla electricity can cause spontaneous disintegration of various metals. Myself and a friend assembled a site (there is no selling on it) devoted to what we found about Rota?s work, based on the examination of his laboratory material. Rota died in 1952.
On the face of it longitudinal electricity can cause nuclear disruption.

http://www.wikirota.org/en/Main_Page

Mike

Offline duff

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 298
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #799 on: July 14, 2008, 09:35:09 PM »

Back to the nuclear stuff.

In the early last century L.G.V Rota a little known engineer experimented with Tesla?s method of ground power transmission. Rota was very secretive during his life time, but he seemed to have found using buried metal electrodes that the Tesla electricity can cause spontaneous disintegration of various metals. Myself and a friend assembled a site (there is no selling on it) devoted to what we found about Rota?s work, based on the examination of his laboratory material. Rota died in 1952.
On the face of it longitudinal electricity can cause nuclear disruption.

http://www.wikirota.org/en/Main_Page

Mike

Mike,

I've spent a couple of days going over your Rota site & patents. Very interesting info.

It would be interesting to hear what type of experiments you've done along these lines.

Perhaps you'd consider starting a Rota thread here...


-Duff

Offline Reiyuki

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 133
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #800 on: July 15, 2008, 09:10:19 AM »
Maybe I should have been more specific as to my intentions and reasoning for a tesla based VSG.

The main goal by using a high voltage (IE: Tesla) setup was to take advantage of the 'ring down' effect on an LC circuit.
All properly tuned tesla coils do this, and that high-frequency back-forth would give you an effect somewhat like:
Initial pulse, 250amp
negative wave, 230amp
2nd wave, 210amp
next wave, 170amp
next wave 100amp
etc etc

So, if the requirement for the capacitance would hypothetically be much lower, because that resonant ring would turn a single discharge into 3-20 AC pulses.


I can't see it being done in low voltage without some sort of kilohenry inductor or something.

Offline UncleFester

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 90
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #801 on: July 17, 2008, 11:16:33 PM »
Sorry I've been gone for so long. I have a bunch of blown Mosfets and IGBT's to show for it though = ) No power out yet using low voltage. The high voltage version I was never able to try with an alignment field (other than magnets) though. The current transformer and Geiger both register even with just a simple capacitor discharge with no alignment field. Clearly these devices are being affected by the pulse itself (emi) and reading incorrectly. I believe this also happened with the JLN experiments.

This is all with no tungsten across the gap of course.

Offline mikewatson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #802 on: July 18, 2008, 08:15:09 PM »
I have attempted to repeat Naudin's VSG experiment again, this time with guarateed pure carbon and a 3% thoriated tungsten rod so far without success. I suspected at first that the toroid might be saturating preventing the reported increase in energy in the carbon from appearing, reducing the voltage to the capacitors still showed no sign of the VSG effect. The waveforms, with and without a magnetic field along the carbon, recorded on the Tek storage scope,  are identical not just similar.

The only difference is that I am using a total capacitance of 0.008 F, whilst Naudin's capacitors are somewhat bigger at 0.0094 F. I have also been using lower voltage around 60 volts in these tests, slightly higher than Naudin used in his earlier tests.

Another possibility is that my capacitors are switched by a large stud mounted thyristor which can take several thousand amps, these devices are relatively slow to switch on compared with a MOSFET, but nevertheless I would expect some output difference, with and without the magnetic field, even if less than in Naudin's case.

Regarding the beta radiation, I do not believe there is any. I covered my geiger counter tube and driver circuit in grounded aluminium kitchen foil to reduce EMI and tested it with the 1.2 Mev beta emission from potassium chloride (culinary salt substitute) and it detects beta even through the al foil, so it would surely detect the supposed more energetic radiation from carbon. Also I notice Naudin shows the geiger counter up against the toroid, I do not believe that beta would make it through 1 inch of transformer iron, even if present.

Mike

Offline Yucca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 884
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #803 on: July 19, 2008, 01:28:49 AM »
I have attempted to repeat Naudin's VSG experiment again, this time with guarateed pure carbon and a 3% thoriated tungsten rod so far without success. I suspected at first that the toroid might be saturating preventing the reported increase in energy in the carbon from appearing, reducing the voltage to the capacitors still showed no sign of the VSG effect. The waveforms, with and without a magnetic field along the carbon, recorded on the Tek storage scope,  are identical not just similar.

The only difference is that I am using a total capacitance of 0.008 F, whilst Naudin's capacitors are somewhat bigger at 0.0094 F. I have also been using lower voltage around 60 volts in these tests, slightly higher than Naudin used in his earlier tests.

Another possibility is that my capacitors are switched by a large stud mounted thyristor which can take several thousand amps, these devices are relatively slow to switch on compared with a MOSFET, but nevertheless I would expect some output difference, with and without the magnetic field, even if less than in Naudin's case.

Regarding the beta radiation, I do not believe there is any. I covered my geiger counter tube and driver circuit in grounded aluminium kitchen foil to reduce EMI and tested it with the 1.2 Mev beta emission from potassium chloride (culinary salt substitute) and it detects beta even through the al foil, so it would surely detect the supposed more energetic radiation from carbon. Also I notice Naudin shows the geiger counter up against the toroid, I do not believe that beta would make it through 1 inch of transformer iron, even if present.

Mike


Hi Mike,

I admire your tenacity, I wish the effect had manifested for you. Would it be worth your while eliminating the thyristor switch and making a spark gap that you can slowly close by hand to discharge the cap into the rod, it should give you a faster rise without having to purchase any extra parts?

Offline mikewatson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #804 on: July 19, 2008, 11:57:45 AM »
Yucca,
yes a spark gap could work, I am thinking of using a mouse trap with a couple of fat copper contacts possibly amalgamated on the surface with mercury, where the mouse's neck would go. Mechanical switches are electrically noisy, but mercury gets rid of that. Unlike expensive FETs this type of switch is cheap and is also very fast closing, in less than a nanosecond, and pretty well indestructable.

I still believe Naudin's results so somewhere I must have done something stupid.

Mike

Offline Yucca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 884
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #805 on: July 19, 2008, 03:28:05 PM »
Yucca,
yes a spark gap could work, I am thinking of using a mouse trap with a couple of fat copper contacts possibly amalgamated on the surface with mercury, where the mouse's neck would go. Mechanical switches are electrically noisy, but mercury gets rid of that. Unlike expensive FETs this type of switch is cheap and is also very fast closing, in less than a nanosecond, and pretty well indestructable.

I still believe Naudin's results so somewhere I must have done something stupid.

Mike

Best of luck with it Mike, your mousetrap & mercury idea sounds ingeneous and fun  :)

Fraser.

Offline AbbaRue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #806 on: July 20, 2008, 09:03:34 AM »
Mouse Trap $1 at dollar store, ingenious!
To get a quick pulse place the contact point before the trap is fully closed,
so the contacts just touch momentarily.

Now with this idea there is even less of a reason why more people can't test this themselves.
I know mosfets can get expensive after a while if you keep frying them.
Once the rest of the circuit works then we can come up with the perfect mosfet setup.

Now you just need to worry about the cost of the capacitor bank, and toroid.
Both of which are very unlikely to get fried.


Offline AbbaRue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #807 on: July 20, 2008, 09:28:17 AM »
I can't stop thinking about "The Michael Meyer and Yves Mace Isotopic Generator"
and the similarities it has to this circuit.
It uses 3 coils mounted on an iron bar.
1. magnetizes the bar and could be replaced with a perm. magnet.
2. oscillates at the Resonance Larmor Frequency of 21 MHz AC. 
 (I don't know were they got that freq. from but is there one for carbon?)
3. Picks up the power produced.
This setup claims to extract power from radioactivity as well.

Maybe we don't need the capacitor bank, just the right freq. of oscillator.
Or maybe incorporate the oscillator and still use the cap. bank.
Perhaps an oscillator can replace the radiation from the Th.Tungsten rod.

You see how close the two concepts are to one another?
By the way this concept isn't totally off topic, it is the #2 concept mentioned on page one of this thread. 
For those who want more info on it, just go to page one, and read up on it.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2008, 09:52:09 AM by AbbaRue »

Offline mikewatson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #808 on: July 21, 2008, 12:05:19 PM »
If I remember correctly, the Larmor frequency only works for isotopes/elements that have an odd number of nucleons,  protons or neutrons. So common carbon 12 would not have a Larmor frequency but C13 would. C13 exists only at a concentration of about 1% in common carbon. I  looked it up recently and its Larmor frequency is in the region of 100 MHz.

I am afraid I am one of those people who does not give up easily on technical issues.
I want to find out why I cannot repeat Naudins VSG tests irrespective of whether it is due to the beta/Prolef effect or not. Suppose Naudin's claims for the cause of the current gain are in error, then what must be done to repeat the spurious effect of current gain, within the constraints of what he has published and demonstrated in his series of three tests?
For example one possible cause which might be suggested is that the first impulse through the tungsten/carbon junction improves the conductive path so the next pulse has a lower resistance with consequent higher current and the the presence of the imposed magnetic field has nothing to do with it. It would be easy to find out by reversing the sequence:- put the magnetic field on first and fire the impulse and then remove the magnetic field and fire the impulse, if the above were true the second impulse would always be bigger.
The problem is that my tests show the two impulses are always the same height and area with or without a magnetic field and whatever the sequence.

Mike

Offline AbbaRue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #809 on: July 22, 2008, 11:44:20 AM »
Naudin used a spark gap for his setup, spark gaps are interesting things.
Spark gaps are sources of negative resistance.
Also he used the Th.Tungsten, which is radioactive.
The original case happened in a nuclear reactor,
but this thread veered off the use of the gamma source.
Maybe someone purposely veered us off it so we wouldn't get a working unit.
Early in the game someone stated that we don't need the thorium to get output,
but no one has got any output since that statement was made.
Except for Uncle's run away.

The biggest question I have about Naudin's measurements is the radiation he was reading.
How did he conclude the radiation wasn't caused by Thorium residue from the spark gap.
The closeup shots clearly show that some of the tungsten rod was eroded away,
so there must be some thorium residue mixed in with the carbon residue.

Again, spark gaps are interesting things, it is the bases of the #3 system at the beginning of this thread.
I built an argon discharge tube 3 winters ago and I got 2.5 times the output then input from it, so I know they work.
It is also the source of excess energy from Naudin's cold fusion experiments.
A spark gap made of steam forms between the tungsten rod and the water.
It is also the bases of the bingo fuel system.
A spark gap made of steam forms between the carbon rods.
Then there's the presently active experiments on running an engine on water.
Again it's a spark gap, from the spark plug.
Then there are Tesla Coils, again spark gap.
One fellow used a magnet placed in at one end of a spark gap
and got much longer sparks then he should of for the voltage input he was using.
Plasma tubes, vacuum tubes, any time 2 metal electrodes are placed close together to get a spark,
or plasma, they have a spark gap.
Also consider that all spark gaps are capacitors that have been charged to there breakdown voltage. 
So capacitance has something to do with this excess energy.
Maybe this is the source of the Testatika Machine's excess energy as well.
The metal plates passing each other are varying capacitors.
Is this not what is happening in a spark gap as well.

Anyone keeping up with all the threads here, how many more examples can you come up with???

Over and over again I see a pattern forming in this forum, centered around spark gaps.
Maybe everyone here should start focusing on just experimenting with various spark gap setups.
Take measurements, and determine if this is the real source of over unity. 
I don't think there is any serious experimenter here that can't build some form of spark gap.

There must be an answer somewhere. 
There are to many reports of excess energy for there not to be something to it.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2008, 12:08:02 PM by AbbaRue »