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: 897178
  • *Total Topics: 15807
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 24
  • *Total: 26

Author Topic: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions  (Read 371710 times)

Offline aleks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
    • DC Acoustic Waves Hypothesis
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #450 on: May 22, 2008, 11:51:56 AM »
this morning , in PARIS, there was an alerte (just like in the last second war)

for a moment I think some one in france was playing with this device ...

but it seems there is no reason for this alerte !!
These alert devices are checked once per year I think, just for the case...

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #451 on: May 22, 2008, 01:51:45 PM »
Wonder what monocrystalline pharmaceutical grade Lithium Carbide would do?
Ooh Lithium, I like it already :D
To be honest, at first I thought it was important to have the atoms in gaseous state in order
to perform the Protelf reaction, so I had made some rought concept designs of a Lithium
based version, basically heating Lithium in an evacuated glass tube untill it vapourises,
then switch on the B-field and blast a few hundred volts through the vapour.
But as experiments have been performed it seems that at least for carbon it is not
necessary to have a gaseous state, so perhaps Lithium doesn't need one either...
In which case solid Lithium or a conductive compound of Lithium, like the Lithium Carbide
you suggested, should be usable as well. That makes the entire design a lot simpler:
now we only have to replace the carbon rod with a rod of Lithium carbide or some other
Lithium compound, and we should still get even more output. :) But perhaps the rod
needs to be a pure material?

With the recent discovery that there is definately OU but not in all cases beta, and the
suggestion that it could be a special magnetic oscillatory phenomenon, it is interesting
to see if Vall?e's suggested materials still perform in a similar way...
After all, even if there is no measurable beta radiation, it is still the carbon rod in a B field
with a voltage jolt that makes the magic happen, just like Vall?e's suggested setup predicts,
there's just no measurable beta...  So it is plausible that the other materials he suggested
for even greater energy output will still produce more energy, with or withour beta.
In my opinion this is a great setup whether it emits beta or not, because it is already OU
even if the beta is lost. With beta the output could be a lot more, but without it it's already
a self-powering energy producing setup. Or at least, with R's setup it is. ;)
Still, may be worth looking into some tests with Lithium instead of a Carbon rod...?

I am getting a little confused though... some are getting beta, some not, some are getting
clear OU, some not...

@AbbaRue: I was thinking about those liquid hV diodes you made a while ago...
Could we perhaps make an altered version for use with this setup?
I was thinking along the lines of using the carbon rod inside an aluminium tube,
then sealing the entire tube watertight and immersing it in a bath of the sodium-based
solution you used in your diodes, and basically using the aluminium tube as
one electrode and some second material as the other...
The main idea is to use it as a n-p diode-like element, but at the same time the
aluminium tube should be getting hot from heat conduction from the carbon,
and this heat should be exchanged with the solution. Obviously the entire setup of
aluminium tube+solution+container/electrode should get hot, but we can always
apply cooling to this container/electrode, and we could perhaps even use
a thermocouple to get even more usefull energy out.
It was just a wild idea and it may not be very effective, but thought I'd throw it up
anyway. ;)

These alert devices are checked once per year I think, just for the case...
Yeah it's probably a regular test. We get them every 1st of the month.
It's either that, or the nuclear plant next to Paris went halo and they quickly
killed the automatic alarm. ;) ;D Nah, prolly not.

Dang!  Now that's gonna be a party!   I propose we hold the conference in Berlin.  (Stefan, can I sleep on your couch?)
Hey now that's not a bad idea! :D
If we coordinate we can combine it with the citywide rave party in Berlin in summer, if you're into that.
And it would be a good opportunity to practise our German. :)
I say let's do it. And let's print T-shirts to commemmorate the happening. ;)

Quote
As for the theoretical bets, since all the obvious ones are taken, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say its, "Current-induced beta emission in magnetically-biased bulk graphite arising from cooper-pair-bisoliton recombination at graphene nanocrystal boundaries" -- (or something like that....)
Hahah lol Well it sounds darn good, I'll give you that. :) Especially the extremely convincing "or something like that". ;) :D

Offline sparks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #452 on: May 22, 2008, 02:14:39 PM »
  I don't know if the below tempic differential intelligence of the space-time continuom circuit below is enough to get beta out of a piece of aluminum foil attached to the electron mass storage unit called earth.  I would use a couple of incandescents between ground and a piece of aluminum foil as you try to find out though.  And use caution in manipulation of the foil so you don't short out the spark gap into your body.  :o :o :o :o danger. 

@Fenyman

   I guess in keeping with the spirit of things here you could replace the aluminum foil with a slab of carbon.

   I am not sure when the described experiment is done if the bulbs will light if carbon is used.  I would think that the carbon resistance is going to cause the carbon block to heat up though.  Possibly glow red if the carbon block is a point.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #452 on: May 22, 2008, 02:14:39 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Yucca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 884
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #453 on: May 22, 2008, 03:16:44 PM »
It would be fairly easy to retrofit existing nuclear reactors to use this tech, hell they've already got the carbon rods in, also you could cut out the heat exchanger and just run the primary coolant straight to the turbine as the water would not get contaminated. Maybe they've already done this but just don't mention it so they can still keep the cost/kwh up. But then again where would they get their precious bomb ingredients from if they did away with the heavy stuff.

Offline DrStiffler

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 610
    • Stiffler Scientific
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #454 on: May 22, 2008, 03:26:56 PM »
@All

A couple of things please that will help clear my clouded mind a bit (I hope).

1) Who 'now' has OU, OU that they can take a person to the device and show it working, sustained? or intermittent and for what length of time?

2) Is there watching or does someone know a state of the art Industrial Electrician that will comment on the pictures of what is presented as the 60kW Juan device?

I will need to clean up some business after getting back and then get back here and see if I can supply any aid, meager as it may be.

That picture has bothered me, I have seen it before and I want to say a motor control unit or a stage light dimmer, a fellow on the plane with me said the end plated on the coils were Plastic (the grey plates) and they are pressed by 'formed' end plates.

Please don't get me wrong I am not negative or saying anything against this work, but maybe we need to find if the start is real before to much resource is used?

Thanks and back in a couple of hours.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #454 on: May 22, 2008, 03:26:56 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Feynman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 620
    • Feynman's Lab
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #455 on: May 22, 2008, 04:13:44 PM »
1)

'UncleFester' appears to have twice run a circuit sustained to runaway, once run with no battery, self-climbing from 500V - 1500V over 30 seconds until reaction was deliberately quenched.  Also he has multiple non closed loop trials with COP=2 to COP=5. And of course there are apparently generators in South America which have been produced that use this effect.   

2) I can send it to groundloop (EE) and ask what he thinks. 

3) Someone commented it could have been a motor controller, so perhaps it is.  That 60kW photo was not in the document, so maybe it started circulating later. One person pointed out the windings are too small to be 6kW per toroid, but that may depend on what current it is running it at.  If it is real it is probably three-phase AC (see the four GE CL04 three phase motor controllers), so that may also mean higher voltage / lower current.    Or maybe its just a motor controller unit thats been passed off as a generator somewhere along the way. 

Agreed, some skepticism is healthy. I don't know if the picture is real either.  But the wierd thing is it appears that the formulas for circuit capacitance work, B-field bias curve shapes match Naudin's etc.  And there now seem to be full schematics showing how output is coupled (which look mostly okay to me), and we also have third-party description of how to use a diode to dump amps back into the primary , etc.  So I think the principle works and can be replicated, even if that 60kW picture might be fake. 

But we will see I suppose! 
 

Offline Dr J. Bean

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #456 on: May 22, 2008, 04:30:20 PM »
You would think that carbon arc lamps
and carbon arc welders or cutters would have
already shown this effect. A large static charge
say on an arc lamp housing.
Has this been shown to be the case?
And where are the working devices schematics?

Jellybean





1)

'UncleFester' appears to have twice run a circuit sustained to runaway, once run with no battery, self-climbing from 500V - 1500V over 30 seconds until reaction was deliberately quenched.  Also he has multiple non closed loop trials with COP=2 to COP=5. And of course there are apparently generators in South America which have been produced that use this effect.   

2) I can send it to groundloop (EE) and ask what he thinks. 

3) Someone commented it could have been a motor controller, so perhaps it is.  That 60kW photo was not in the document, so maybe it started circulating later. One person pointed out the windings are too small to be 6kW per toroid, but that may depend on what current it is running it at.  If it is real it is probably three-phase AC (see the four GE CL04 three phase motor controllers), so that may also mean higher voltage / lower current.    Or maybe its just a motor controller unit thats been passed off as a generator somewhere along the way. 

Agreed, some skepticism is healthy. I don't know if the picture is real either.  But the wierd thing is it appears that the formulas for circuit capacitance work, B-field bias curve shapes match Naudin's etc.  And there now seem to be full schematics showing how output is coupled (which look mostly okay to me), and we also have third-party description of how to use a diode to dump amps back into the primary , etc.  So I think the principle works and can be replicated, even if that 60kW picture might be fake. 

But we will see I suppose! 
 


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #456 on: May 22, 2008, 04:30:20 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Inventor81

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #457 on: May 22, 2008, 04:36:37 PM »
There is no question that UncleFester got results.

There is equally no question in my 197 IQ, insanely skeptical, hopeful but practical, mind that the reaction does occur in nature, can be stimulated in nature by various processes, and is very much a semiconductor like process.

There is no reason why this would not work on industrial diamond.

I have my reservations about it working with solid noncrystalline graphite.

however, UF got results.

The only question is was it a fluke, did his O scope fry and ring like a bell, then self-repair so that it works just fine now?

Also, why would, during subsequent tests with detected beta, a half inch thick aluminum plate gather 500V worth of electric charge? Static. Not a 500V-ish sine wave or anything induced by EMI. 500V DC. (virtually zero amperes).

I am also beginning to think that a toroid is required for the operation - it definitely would alter the magnetic field alignment. It's entirely possible that this is a diamagnetic interaction... think about the toroidal field interfering with the solenoid field around the carbon.

Funky oscillating field pattern.


SWIRLY field.


Not sure if that makes a difference or not... but it would seem to. If the field oscillates, then there is rapid magnetic switching going on.

Even rotation of the field.

I can see it, but can't quite meaningfully diagram it in lightwave/3DS max. Way too many lines, and it got way too confusing.

I can totally see this as the magnetic field imparting momentum to the charge carriers in a semiconductor system.

Think a microscale hall effect.

Keep in mind that I'm still trying to reconcile what the theory I worked up said vs. what is happening.

There should be a barrier to the reaction of about 500-1000eV (EUV/X-Ray energies)

Gamma is way too hot to trigger it.

The classical view of the atom will not work in describing all these processes as they actually happen, only provide a more rudimentary "get your hands on it" view.

Have to head out to work now, but feel free to call - you have a PM.

R3CUR5!V3


Offline Inventor81

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #458 on: May 22, 2008, 04:39:45 PM »
Ah, yes, the "box".

I think it's a crossover network.

Either that or an array of isolation transformers.

Not sure how I can see six toroids like that transferring 60KW without melting.

Also I can't see where any connection is made to the carbon rod in the middle, nor a biasing magnetic field.

No contact, so no credibility - however Juan's numbers seem to jive with the theory I cobbled together.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #458 on: May 22, 2008, 04:39:45 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Feynman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 620
    • Feynman's Lab
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #459 on: May 22, 2008, 04:40:02 PM »
@jellybean
Quote
A large static charge
say on an arc lamp housing.
Has this been shown to be the case?
You got me. So far it seems like much of the 'beta' (if that's indeed what's going on) is confined to the rod itself and simply magnifies an existing EMF pulse, although UF did notice some charge collecting on surfaces. Perhaps you should try the carbon-arc experiment?

Quote
And where are the working devices schematics?
I think you may be better served by a picture than schematics, but maybe tonight we will get some pics... I will tell you my understanding.   Dead 12V battery with 6V measured on terminals running into small inverter at ~35khz, then into neon sign transformer, then into HV capacitor in series then discharged into the magnetically biased carbon rod.  Output flux is collected on toroidal transformer with the two output windings connected in parallel. This is then full-wave rectified, and hooked back up to the inverter.  Battery charges.  Battery is disconnected. Circuit keeps running , voltage climbs.  Geiger counter screeches, though this may be from the neon EMI rather than beta. Correct me if i left something out UncleFester.

Offline waterfireho

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #460 on: May 22, 2008, 05:00:06 PM »

3) Someone commented it could have been a motor controller, so perhaps it is.  That 60kW photo was not in the document, so maybe it started circulating later. One person pointed out the windings are too small to be 6kW per toroid, but that may depend on what current it is running it at.  If it is real it is probably three-phase AC (see the four GE CL04 three phase motor controllers), so that may also mean higher voltage / lower current.    Or maybe its just a motor controller unit thats been passed off as a generator somewhere along the way. 



From what I got from Juan...
Each carbon / torrid is capable of 8kw, then you take 2kw to re charge cap bank and that leaves the 6kw as usable power. Then the torrids are connected in Parallel to get the 60kw out of it.

The motor controllers are just Contactors (big Relays), that are probably what switches the cap bank in and out for Charge / Discharge cycles.

The small circuit boards at the bottom are probably the pwm controllers and dc Biasing circuit.

Now, one thing also I wasn't able to get from him before I lost contact was, whether or not you needed TWO cap banks and /or torrid/carbon circuits to self run. IE: Charge opposite cap bank with each firing or if it was collected on the BEMF cycle.

Dave

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #460 on: May 22, 2008, 05:00:06 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Yucca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 884
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #461 on: May 22, 2008, 05:04:11 PM »
Ah, yes, the "box".

I think it's a crossover network.

Either that or an array of isolation transformers.

Not sure how I can see six toroids like that transferring 60KW without melting.

Also I can't see where any connection is made to the carbon rod in the middle, nor a biasing magnetic field.

No contact, so no credibility - however Juan's numbers seem to jive with the theory I cobbled together.

I also cannot see the connections to the carbon rods within the toroids but the connections could be behind the PCBs mounted on the toroids and could be enameled copper wire so that they are not too visible as they would just run next to the collector windings.

As for the biasing magnetic field, Juan states it is supplied by DC bias on the collector toroid, he doesn't use permanent mags.

The four GECL04 relays are rated at 16kw each so can handle 64kw at 380V:
http://www.eauctiondepot.net/EbayPics3/2008_0519_221810.JPG

If I saw this out of context I would say (as PaulDude has already said) that it's a motor starter, the inductors are matched to the motor and are able to store energy that the CL04s can dump into the motor.

The only thing that really upsets me about the picture is that I can't see any high power FETs/Heatsinks for fleshing out the alleged PWM boards with real power for the carbon reaction.

So I can't say that it isn't a carbon reactor, but I can't say it is either???

Offline aleks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
    • DC Acoustic Waves Hypothesis
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #462 on: May 22, 2008, 05:36:56 PM »
You would think that carbon arc lamps
and carbon arc welders or cutters would have
already shown this effect. A large static charge
say on an arc lamp housing.
How much "large" this static charge can be? Such things are usually ignored or attributed to other things. You know, if you do not persuade this OU effect you are likely not even think it's there. Some static, some beta... Who cares? Field effects are usually hard to catch until they accelerate something really bad. So, if you do a "clever" device you'll get OU energy. Not to note that constant arcing is hardly usable. Pulsed arcing should be used.

The truth is, discharges in thin wires are proven to generate OU heat (measured with calorimeter vs consumed capacitor energy). Another interesting fact is that water vaporization explosion by means of pulse electric field produces 7 times more energy than invested - this is also a confirmed fact to my knowledge (an experiment where a glass cup filled with water jumps about 1 meter high).

Offline Dr J. Bean

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #463 on: May 22, 2008, 05:44:26 PM »
I suppose that in an arc lamp there is
no external magnet, but the current though the
rod would I assume create a magnetic field.
Copper cladding might absorb something?
Graphene is interesting, a black hole in a pencil.
Though i wonder if it retains its properties
if ?flakes? in bulk.


 Jellybean

PhD: Jellybeanology
Bs: pseudology

@jellybeanYou got me. So far it seems like much of the 'beta' (if that's indeed what's going on) is confined to the rod itself and simply magnifies an existing EMF pulse, although UF did notice some charge collecting on surfaces. Perhaps you should try the carbon-arc experiment?
I think you may be better served by a picture than schematics, but maybe tonight we will get some pics... I will tell you my understanding.   Dead 12V battery with 6V measured on terminals running into small inverter at ~35khz, then into neon sign transformer, then into HV capacitor in series then discharged into the magnetically biased carbon rod.  Output flux is collected on toroidal transformer with the two output windings connected in parallel. This is then full-wave rectified, and hooked back up to the inverter.  Battery charges.  Battery is disconnected. Circuit keeps running , voltage climbs.  Geiger counter screeches, though this may be from the neon EMI rather than beta. Correct me if i left something out UncleFester.


Offline Feynman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 620
    • Feynman's Lab
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #464 on: May 22, 2008, 05:49:35 PM »
I'm pretty sure most all the stuff we got from Juan is real at this point. Juan claimed Carbon resistance was 1.8ohm for 6mm diameter rod, UF has *exactly* 1.8ohm in rod.  Naudin used a different carbon rod.  Additionally you can see the two rows of toroids are obviously connected in parallel (vertically). Furthermore 60kW matches nicely with parallel capacity of four GE CL04s Also I think the connections to the carbon Rod probably come off PCB or are snaking in, which explains the fit, and those Al end caps are to keep the 'beta' or EMI from leaking out. The controller boards at the bottom right basically match the schematics. The only question really is where are the caps, but Dave posted some email where Juan explained that too.  Juan also noted some arcane details about how the power supply circuit has to disconnect while firing etc. So I think that 60kW thing is real.   

This also explains why Juan's calculations have been exactly right so far, so much so they can be used to make accurate predictions about how these systems behave. I'm still curious as to the Beta/EMI question, but I guess that's an academic one compared to "can we get another self-powering replication?"

(http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/4830/econuclear60kwig9.jpg)

 

OneLink