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: 897181
  • *Total Topics: 15807
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 16
  • *Total: 19

Author Topic: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions  (Read 371726 times)

Offline broli

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2230
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #285 on: May 20, 2008, 12:57:34 PM »
where can i find a carbon rod say the size of a tooth pick,and one around the size of a pen/cil ?.

ironically you can take the graphite rod in a pencil  ;D

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline aleks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
    • DC Acoustic Waves Hypothesis
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #286 on: May 20, 2008, 01:02:11 PM »
where can i find a carbon rod say the size of a tooth pick
Dissect a pencil - medium hardness suggested. Wooden ones are easier to dissect than plastic ones.

Offline Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #287 on: May 20, 2008, 01:51:09 PM »
Ah f*** that last one, here is what we want:


Resonant Nuclear Battery May Aid In Mitigating The Greenhouse Effect
<-snip->

Dang Feynman how dare you beat me to dumping some beta collection info! ;) :D

but seriously, good f you to post that stuff.

Here's what I thought up last night:
a) "standard" beta battery in its most simple form can be made by coating a metal rod with beta emitter,
then inserting this rod into a hollow metal cylinder, and making sure the two are well isolated from eachother.
Beta radiation will be emitted from the central "electrode", causing it to lose electrons and thus gather positive charge,
and the outer casing will collect the beta particles and thus gather negative charge. A wire connection between the
two provides a current path.
b) slightly more complicated version uses a principle similar to that of photovoltaic cells: a "p" and "n" semiconductor
layer are used just like in "solar" cells, and the beta particles enter the "n" s.c. layer, knock loose some electrons,
those start to flow, and in the "p" layer that happens too (but with "holes"), resulting in electron flow between the two
layers.
Note: my older (1940s-50s) electrophysics books state that although b) is technically more efficient, not much efficiency
is lost when a) is used instead, and construction of that is much simpler. I could not find any such statements in more
modern books, so either it was true in the 50s but no longer is, or it still holds but is not found worthy to mention anymore.
In any case, it seems that although we may finally opt for the b) method for maximum efficiency, a) is a very workable
solution and should be usefull enough for our main goal: collection of the beta emitted charges.

Some pondering led me to c) we use the a) method but instead of using one metal cylinder we make it a layered cylinder,
of which the innermost layer of metal is a fairly light metal, the next layer a metal of a bit more mass and density, and perhaps
even a third layer of even greater density. The idea being that relatively low energy beta particles will "collide with" the lighter
metal and be "absorbed" by it very quickly, becoming available as conduction electrons in this lighter metal, but the beta particles
with higher energies will penetrate deeper into the material and "collide with" the more dense metal, getting "absorbed" there.
This could be usefull, but it may not be necessary at all, as some older texts suggest that a metal layer thicker than a film should
be able to "absorb" all beta.
One thing we may want to keep in mind is the secondary emission element: high energy beta particles passing through a medium,
even an isolator material, can and often do knock loose secondary electrons from this medium, and this can cause the medium
to charge up positively.
And I also came up with d) use of photomultiplier technique to turn high velocity particles (read: high energy beta radiation) into
a greater number of less speedy electrons. This is basically again a secondary emission phenomenon. Quick and dirty example:
a high velocity beta particle impacts photomultiplier electrode 1, knocks loose a secondary electron, and gets re- (de-?) flected
at an angle so it heads for electrode 2, as does the secondary electron. Now both the still quite high velocity particle hits electrode
2, knocking off another secondary electron, both again re-/de-flected off electrode 2 toward electrode 3, and the same happens
with that first secondary electron. Etcetera etcetera. One high energy particle leads to one h.e. and one average energy particle,
leads to two more, leads to four more, leads to etcetera. This way the energy contained in the velocity of one electron can be
turned into a greater number of electrons, and higher charge.
I am not entirely sure what the best embodiment of such a setup would be in respect to our VSG discharge chamber setup...
It may be possible that option c) already does this, as all the velocity of the colliding beta particles should end up as energy
in the metal, but there is a good chance this will be in the form of heat and not so much secondary electron charge... After all,
we should take any generated secondary electrons off the metal asap to avoid them recombning with the "holes" they left...
And this led me to final option e), which is to use c) with properly chosen metals so that the bimetallic junctions have a "p-n" bias
and act (a little) like a diode layer. Which is indeed a form of a), but using pure metals instead of expensive doped semiconductors.

Now you may have noticed this is all based on fairly standard beta emitter elements. And of course, if an atom emits an electron
as beta radiation, the atom is left a bit more positive and the positive charge of the atom plus the negative charge of the (collected)
beta particle will allow electron flow and if enough of these flow we have current.
This raises a question with respect to the VSG.
If we are in fact triggering momentary beta emissions, we are in a way artifically creating a beta emitter. To do so, we pump a charge
through the material, in this case carbon. The carbon then briefly becomes a powerfull beta emitter, and we can collect the beta particles.
Question: when the carbon emits the beta particles, does it gain positive charge similar to a "normal" beta emitter?
If it does, we may be able to use the carbon rod as a positive pole very briefly, right after the beta emission spike... and in that case
we could at least during part of the cycle use the charge difference just as we would in the "simple" beta battery concept. (in contrast
to using "p" and "n" collector layers and the charge difference between them to get output)
If it doesn't, then we may need to opt for a "p"-"n" setup (or simpler bimetal junction version), and we may also need to incorporate a
ground connection (for source/sink use).

Since I myself prefer to stick along the lines of the VSG, I am not terribly enthousiastic about placing magnets perpendicular
to the direction of current through the carbon rod... I would prefer to keep the magnetic field coaxial with the electric, so I
personally prefer the version where the magnets are placed at the ends of the tube.

At present I envision a setup very similar to what Stefan drew: the carbon rod is placed in a metal cylinder (multilayered
for relative p-n flow) and strong magnets placed at the ends of the cylinder so the field runs coaxial with the rod.
Metal must be a good conductor, magnets may be permanent or electro. Connect the metal cylinder to a capacitor
via a diode, connect the other capacitor plate to a ground, and connect a transformer between the two plates.
Now every hV pulse fed through the carbon rod should result in a burst of beta, which should charge the capacitor
and power the trafo. Of course similar thing will happen if AC is used, for AC can be viewed as pulses alternating flow direction.
Possible improvements: use many diodes and many capacitors, spread the diode connections evenly over the metal cylinder
to allow charges generated by beta absorption to be taken off the metal cylinder as fast as possible, keeping the accumulation
of electrons in the metal to a minimum, and minimising the need for these electrons to flow all the way through the metal
toward the one single diode connection, during which they encounter many other electrons and this could very well cause
unnecessary temperature increase and energy loss. So we minimise this by hooking up many diodes spread out over the
metal surface. We connect them all to capacitors, and we connect these in such a way that we can use them as a capacitor
bank. We power the trafo from this cap. bank.
If we find that the carbon rod undergoes a positive charge phase after the beta burst, we may want to use that and we could
connect the positive plates of our capacitors to it briefly. If we find that it does not occur or is impossible to use effectively,
we can use the ground for that plate connection.
Oh, and yes, this idea is based on beta collection only, it is possible that charge multiplication can be achieved by properly
utilising secondary emissions, but that is more complicated and this should already give a nice output. We can always improve
on it later.

I hope that story is a bit clear, as I have the same problem as Feynman in that I sometimes post stuff that I think is
clear but on later review it turns out to have been terribly vague to everybody but me. ;)

Regards!
Koen

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #287 on: May 20, 2008, 01:51:09 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Creativity

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 266
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #288 on: May 20, 2008, 01:51:44 PM »
there are 'automatic' pencils.U just buy the graphite for it,starting from 0.5 mm in diameter,different hardness possible.Just go to the shop with paper/drawing warez.

Offline Earl

  • TPU-Elite
  • Sr. Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 435
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #289 on: May 20, 2008, 02:27:59 PM »
All,

I just took a wooden pencil and pulled off the eraser.  With a HB rating and a length of 180mm, the measured resistance is 19 Ohms.  Diameter is maybe 2mm.

An automatic pencil lead with a length of 60mm has a resistance of about 2 Ohms.
Diameter is maybe 0.5 mm.

I interpret to mean that automatic pencil lead has much less clay mixed into the graphite powder than the much larger diameter wooden pencil lead.

One thing should be absolutely clear.  If you want to shock the graphite and create such a large voltage gradient that electrons are ripped off atoms and accelerated with high velocity as they smash into other atoms, then the correct way, and only way, is to hit the end of the carbon rod with a HV pulse of 300 to 2kV with an obligatory rise time of no slower than 10ns, preferably even say 300ps rise time from a HV avalanche generator.  The graphite/carbon filament or rod would make a perfect load for an avalanche pulse generator.  Avalanche pulse generators are so simple, that even hobbyists can build them.

Can anyone explain to a dumb EE how beta capture in a copper coil can cause AC output at the coil terminals?  I could see how this might happen if atoms or electrons are ringing after a shock from the environment, but I can not see AC output as a result of beta capture.

Earl

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #289 on: May 20, 2008, 02:27:59 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Creativity

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 266
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #290 on: May 20, 2008, 03:06:07 PM »
well,i could imagine an electron cannon to do the job even better.Such a cannon is sitting in TV to generate and accelerate electrons.Those electrons hit the fluorescent screen to knock off some photons.Nice thing is that in TV u have the whole setup(high voltage generator,acceleration coils,electron source,electron trajectory controll).Also noctovision devices have accelerator of electrons.

Next step could be to put the whole set up in vacuum so the particles colliden not with air gap.

@Earl

beta particles hit the atoms in structure of metal(coil windings ),ripping off the electrons.If u had already small current in coil,the potential difference(voltage) will accelerate  those free electrons causing more current in a coil.

Offline Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #291 on: May 20, 2008, 03:26:35 PM »
Yes, cathode ray tubes aka electron cannons do accellerate electrons... so what?
The problem we have is in the high speed beta particles.. We want to collect
them and their energy content, we don't want to make more or accellerate
them even more... We want to catch their energy.

Also, if there is only pulsed DC input and beta emission bursts, I don't really
see how AC could result in the collector coil...
Perhaps if there was AC input or if the magnetic field were alternated, then
it seems possible to get AC out as well... although I would expect a serious
DC bias on that if it occurs...
But hey, I haven't had my coffee yet so I may just be horribly off ;)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #291 on: May 20, 2008, 03:26:35 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline aleks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
    • DC Acoustic Waves Hypothesis
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #292 on: May 20, 2008, 04:21:51 PM »
Can anyone explain to a dumb EE how beta capture in a copper coil can cause AC output at the coil terminals?  I could see how this might happen if atoms or electrons are ringing after a shock from the environment, but I can not see AC output as a result of beta capture.
We should be getting beta "kicks" I think (fast rise time, a bit slower fall time). However, if pulses are discharged frequently, the beta kicks they produce may add up creating DC output with some pure AC component. If pulses are rare, this should create a train of beta kicks, not really usable for anything.

This device is genuinely a displacement current generator. That is, each beta electron hitting conductor will displace free electrons in this conductor and will create a current, in both directions relative to hit point (this is different to battery generation and should be treated differently - I believe betavoltaics make it possible to run non-closed serial circuits). That is why it is very important to divide a single collector winding into several decoupled segments so that no counter-action is taking place (otherwise there will be many interfering EM waves travelling inside the collector that do not produce usable energy, but only cause heating). So, having displacement current it is essential to treat ALL terminals of the collector as "+" (or "-"). If multi-layered winding is used it is by all means useful to have separate outputs from each layer.

Decoupling can be done with a suitable capacitor since capacitors as far as I understand stop displacement currents and only allow EM wave to propagate. So, each terminal of layer and segment of collector winding should come with its own capacitor. Since capacitors do not pass DC, it also means that pure AC output should be achieved by varying pulse frequency and rise time.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2008, 05:05:38 PM by aleks »

Offline tagor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1333
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #293 on: May 20, 2008, 04:45:23 PM »
Consider the following:

1. SP3 Hybridized orbitals leave no circular/spherical shells of electrons shielding the nucleus.

2. Magnetic polarization, and electric fields in particular, do not directly align or re-localize the electrons already in hybrid molecular orbitals - we simply condense the probability distribution of the electron in said orbital, thus increasing the likelihood that it will "not" be in the vicinity of the nucleus when our incoming current arrives.

3. Incoming electrons do NOT follow straight-line paths. They ricochet between atoms and follow a random walking path, biased by the input voltage. If the electrons had a mean free path through the material, they would be traveling near the speed of light, and when they bounced into an obstacle (Another electron) we would get UV output at 500V, and X-rays at 1000-2000 Volts. We don't get this, so the mean free path must be very short and randomly oriented, since we only get thermal emissions from normal conductors (different quantum effects prevail with semiconductors like LED's).

4. Direction of magnetic field polarization only matters when looking at the electron spin compared to nuclear spin - as long as they're both interacting with the same field, and THEY are parallel, the reaction proceeds.

Vallee theory is virtually pigeon-holed with errors, assuming classical Bohr/Thompson electron behavior. This is fine for explaining the broad envelope in which we're operating, but Vallee never mentioned a Weak boson. A virtual particle is emitted, then this decays into a neutrino (tau, IIRC) and a beta particle. This is the emission we see. This is the "virtual particle" involved in the process, not a vacuum event.

The inconsistencies are between Vallee Synergetic Theory and modern physics, not between our explanation and the setup.

Much respect to Monseur Vallee`, but he had it at least a little wrong.


see also

http://franckvallee.free.fr/localhost/plain/overview/perspectives.html

Quote
Perspectives
STEM-Physics remains unachieved and many fields of research need development. There is an enumeration of the domains that must be elaborated and primarily in physics.

Ren?-Louis Vall?e, its author, is now 80+ years old ; he would therefore be happy to know his work pursued.

Don't accept to be misled by the dogmatism of relativity. Thus official physicists:
still refuse to reconsider the flawed relativity and the emptiness of vacuum

have obtained quite fewer results in 50 years than they could have had with the Synergetics point of view

haven't yet resolve the waves particles dualism

try to escape their dead end with ever more complicated math

and lost any ability to provide a consistent and physically understandable model

As a consequence of this blindness, governments' budgets for fundamental physics will still continue to dramatically decrease. There is no gain to follow them!

As a logical extension of Quantum Mechanics, STEM-Physics promises tremendous new excitements for a renewed physics
A mathematical tool must be developed in order to correctly model the non-linear wave medium

Large parts of physics remain unexplored by STEM-physics, it's time to start new researches as well experimentally than theoretically

Other domains of science are also involved

Join our team, become a pioneer!
Mathematics
Explanation and expected tools...

View list

Physics
The remaining questions and the unexplored domains of physics...

View list

Science and Philosophy
Synergetics implies other great questions and discoveries...

View list



this words comes  from F Vallee ( RL Vallee's son )


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #293 on: May 20, 2008, 04:45:23 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Feynman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 620
    • Feynman's Lab
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #294 on: May 20, 2008, 05:01:03 PM »
Hey all

@Koen

Thank you very much for that detailed analysis.  I was actually reading those very patents last night!  That earliest one I found that I think we were both looking at was ridiculously simple.  It's just a surrounding sphere of metal which collects a negative charge from the beta particles. I almost burst out laughing when I was reading the patent, like "is this it??" .   The only 'problem' there would be we might get a high internal impedence, but that may not be an issue or not.  R and I both think we are going to get particles with a handful of specific quantum energies rather than a whole rainbow of them, but I am unsure what this means for the impedence.

As R posted , because of electron mean free path, the orientation of the magnets is not so important.  This has been experimentally confirmed.  It works both ways.  Originally I was going to try using the magnets axially, but then I realized you cant use superglue (cyanoacrylate) to bond carbon to neodynium.  So instead I made the carbon rod sandwich.  Both setups (axial and sandwich) should work okay.

On smaller 'VSG' setups using the 'sandwich' neo method, the main difference will be the path of the beta electrons.  In my setup I posted, I believe the vast majority of the beta will be curving out of the carbon rod, (that is, not smacking into the neos), which may or may not make it easier to collect.  We will see! 

(http://www.lbl.gov/abc/graphics/magnet.gif)

These devices are obviously way overunity so I plan on making several different setups, using different sizes, orientations, and collector methods.

As I've said before yes, they are OU, and yes we can self-run, but we seem to be hitting an upper limit of 50-250mA on output current regardless of the input (so far).  COP is generally between 2 and 5.  I think there are a few ways to solve this (capture more beta);   one is the LC resonant tank circuit in the patent I posted, and which zerotensor eloquently commented upon.  The other , more simple method may be that we just need to bias the collector coils with a nice strong current (1A+) so we get 'flux cutting' (also mentioned in the patent), such that the beta electrons amplify the current rather than the voltage.  The current in the biased collector will also create a magnetic flux (much weaker than the neos), but still strong enough to perhaps deflect more of the beta into the windings and amplifying the current.

To those who are wondering why we get AC out, I have no idea. That is the word on the street. Perhaps this is incorrect and I misunderstood, but I'm pretty sure that's the case.  I can't explain why, and it doesn't make sense to me either (I would expect to see DC with hash). The only thing I can think of is that the collector in the present operational setup is a current transformer.   I will post the scope traces of my own setup once I get it working and you can decide for yourself what the heck is going on.  Also, perhaps we get DC (w/ hash) out if we bias the collector coils with a nice current before generating the beta?   I think we will know the effect of 'collector current bias' by this evening. Cross your fingers. ;)

Again, we are OU with what is perceived to be an extremely low efficiency of beta collection. But we are not high enough OU to run appliances. Yes we could self-run and maybe have enough left over for 5-10 LEDs.  But we don't want to run LEDs, we want to run jackhammers.  I think we are losing 99+% of the beta. If we can figure out how to turn more of this into usable current (via biasing the collector, resonant LC tank, Koen's NP junction, whatever will work etc), I think we will have a serious self-running generator on our hands.

@b0rg
for small carbon rods:  take apart an AA, C, or D 'heavy duty' battery.  it must be 'heavy duty', not 'alkaline'.  use gloves and safety goggles. peel back the top of the case using pliars, going around the perimeter of the top of the battery, bending the rim back all the way around.  Once you get it loose, pop the (+) top using a screwdriver and pliars.  Careful not to break the carbon rod inside , it's brittle.   Then dig the carbon rod out; it will be surrounded by black mush (potassium permanganate) and chunks of cardboard. Excavate the mush around the rod until you can pull it out of the case.  Once manage you pull out the rod, it will still have have chunks of mush on it.  Just scrape the mush off using a screwdriver, and now you've got a nice pure carbon rod (no clay).  That's where I got the carbon rod in the picture I posted (it came from a D battery, then I cut the rod in half).

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/af/Zincbattery.png)

D battery carbon rod is 26mm in length and 8mm diameter.





« Last Edit: May 20, 2008, 06:14:19 PM by Feynman »

Offline tagor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1333
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #295 on: May 20, 2008, 05:01:16 PM »
see also

Quote

SWOT analysis of STEM-physics
As for any new initiative, it is wise to analyse the many aspects that the processes of promoting, advocating, experiencing and developing this new theory can involve.

The SWOT analysis, which consists in formalizing any Strength, Weakness, Opportunity and Threaten, brings a complete sight over Synergetics' ideas.
It is thus a good way for introducing STEM-physics.


SWOT analysis of STEM-physics
Strengths
STEM-physics provides an interpretation to the main results of physics in which the incoherent space-time distortions are clearly discarded.

STEM-physics reconciles the quantum-wave dualism.

STEM-physics extends the quantum theory by explaining the deep nature of space, energy and matter.

STEM-physics demonstrates how space embeds a great amount of energy.

STEM-physics explains cold fusion and how to obtain a positive energy balance from neutrinos involved in K capture.

STEM-physics could certainly stem new discoveries in physics.

STEM-physics opens tremendous new perspectives in many other sciences.

Weaknesses
STEM-physics directly refutes the so-called proven theory of relativity, which is dogmatically adopted by official physics.

STEM-physics has long been the only work of its lonely author with poor communication means.

STEM-physics still needs an easy-to-realize experiment in order to evidence positive energy balance.

A mathematical model of STEM-physics is still not enough developed.

Opportunities
STEM-physics isn't a guru's theory. It needs team involvement to be developed.

STEM-physics' model certainly explains not everything and the team is strongly recruiting in order to pursue developments.

STEM-physics can be developed as an extent of quantum theory, a sort of general theory of fields that would have been get rid of relativity.

STEM-physics can help to develop emerging industries in order to serve the poorest peoples: water supply, small autonomous electrical generators, low-cost heaters and coolers...

Threatens
Any monopole of energy, held by governments and industry, has no lean to promote STEM-physics which explains how space energy could be harnessed.

The acceptance of STEM-physics implies some officials to face their errors; they will consequently fight against the new idea.

STEM-physics has great chance to be rapidly ranked as a crank theory in order to avoid that it disturbs official stances.



this words comes  from F Vallee ( RL Vallee's son )


http://franckvallee.free.fr/localhost/plain/overview/introduction/faq.html



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #295 on: May 20, 2008, 05:01:16 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline aleks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
    • DC Acoustic Waves Hypothesis
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #296 on: May 20, 2008, 05:10:40 PM »
It's just a surrounding sphere of metal which collects a negative charge from the beta particles. I almost burst out laughing when I was reading the patent, like "is this it??" .
Well, sphere or cylinder collect charge, they become positively charged. In the end this generates electrostatic energy which is saturatable: a given piece of metal won't charge more than some fundamental space charge laws allow it to charge. Hence, it is inefficient. I think we should strive to use EM energies and displacement currents that are produced by beta electrons. In this case spheres and cylinders are unusable.

Offline Feynman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 620
    • Feynman's Lab
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #297 on: May 20, 2008, 05:17:07 PM »
I could have sworn the patent said the sphere collects a negative charge (as it gets hit with beta rays), because they show it has an optional ground connection on the collector sphere. 

Yes you are right, they do mention saturation after which beta rays are deflected from the surrounding collector (and an upper limit on absorbable charge).  So this is not an optimum setup, but it is notable because it was the earliest patent I could find on betavoltaics.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2008, 05:44:49 PM by Feynman »

Offline aleks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
    • DC Acoustic Waves Hypothesis
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #298 on: May 20, 2008, 05:20:09 PM »
I could have sworn the patent said the sphere collects a negative charge (as it gets hit with beta rays)
Yep, could be. If number of electrons rises, it's a negative charge rising. But in reality + can always be changed to -, so I'm mixing these things from time to time.

Offline tagor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1333
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #299 on: May 20, 2008, 05:30:14 PM »
this is from Eric d'Hoker ( belgium)




but , since 30 years  nobody could reproduce this !!
but you can do it

 

OneLink