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 405545 times)

Offline duff

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 298
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #615 on: May 25, 2008, 07:24:30 AM »
@Duff,
I hope I am not wasting your time,but if I understand correctly you had the current going in the same direction as the magnetic field. The magnetic field should be at a 90 degree angle to the current. Think of a cathode ray tube in a TV. The conductors should be perpendicular to the glass plates with the flame touching both conductors. But, like I said, I have not personally done this so I may be wrong about it working.

@xee

I'm not sure which magnetic field you are referring to.

In the initial experiment, the south pole of the magnet was facing magnetic north which produced an arc on the top side of the carbon/tungsten rod.

In the flame test I did not use magnets but the plates were oriented east/west, so the earths magnetic field was 90 degrees to the current, if current was flowing across the glass.

I did not perform the test as you have stated. If I understand you correctly, the magnets would be on the outside of the glass  with the copper plates perpendicular to the glass plates and touching the flame.

I posted the experiment because I thought it might be important related to beta capture. That theory seems have fallen by the way...

Perhaps your seeing something more here, if so, please explain.

-Duff

Offline tagor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1333
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #616 on: May 25, 2008, 07:26:58 AM »
I have experienced a second meltdown today. This leads me to believe that the first one wasn't an accident or connections error. However,  the reaction only takes place randomly and rarely. When it does, the results are devastating. The output heat and electricity are excessive. I am beginning to suspect we may not be able to control easily this reaction for continuous operation.

so the JL Naudin setup is not a continuous operation
it is one shot only !!
it is more easy to control all the parameters and reproduce the effet !!


If it is difficult to reproduce the effect ,
but you do not descrive very well your setup , how can we reproduce something !!!


with all the possibility of a big university in france , R L Vallee could not reproduce the d'Hoker setup !!
and you think to do it ?

you have to analyse all the parameters one by one
if you want to control something !!

Offline tagor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1333
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #617 on: May 25, 2008, 07:42:18 AM »
I have been doing some experiments based on R L Vallee's setup and actually started getting good results, ie positive results. The solution is actually quite simple, it's based on an EMP, that is Electromagnetic Pulse. .

if you speak of the JL Naudin VSG setup there is a radioactive element
if you speak of the d'Hoker setup there is no radioactive element

this is a big difference !!

you need to descrive very well your setup
If not , I can beat that you would never get results

see all the experiments on Franck Vallee's forum...

Offline AbbaRue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #618 on: May 25, 2008, 07:48:38 AM »
@Allcanadian:
I think you made two very good points for us all to keep in mind.
A quick pulse of energy, and a small rod of carbon.
I think the reason some have had poor results is because there carbon rods were to thick.
I think 6mm at the most in thickness, of coarse it needs to be thick enough so it won't just vaporize.
A AAA carbon rod "A"  Sounds like an all canadian choice Just the right thickness :)
 
I'm still waiting for the schematic for a variable pulse generator circuit,
 I want to try different pulse length to see if that makes a difference.

Offline xee

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #619 on: May 25, 2008, 08:22:37 AM »
@Duff,
Yes, the magnets would be on the outside of the glass with a North to South orientation between them and the conductors would be on the inside with the current 90 degrees to the North-South poles of the magnets. The Earth magnetic field would not be strong enough to bend the current. I do not think this has any application to this thread, I was just trying to help you in case you wanted to try this. The ion current through the flame is like the beam of electrons in a cathode ray tube in a TV and the electrons in the cathode ray tube can be moved by holding a strong magnet next to the tube so I would expect the ions in the flame to be moved also.

Offline sparks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #620 on: May 25, 2008, 09:40:46 AM »
All,


A third meltdown might spell the end of the road for me. I hope we can find a simple system control before it happens. In the meantime, think about this for a moment: what if the output energy comes mostly in the form heat as opposed to the high EM output that we are currently focusing on?

Thanks,

Miki.

   Great Question!

    Please note signature below.

Offline tishatang

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 296
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #621 on: May 25, 2008, 09:58:34 AM »
Miki

At first look, what we might think is a random event is not random after all.  Careful notes when the event occurred can lead us to discover the cause when we get new data.  The runaway might be caused by extra energy in the space vacuum triggering the event if it is on the borderline of occurring.  I am assuming the extra energy is coming from the space  vacuuum.

For example, where your lab is located relative to either the sun or the center of the Milky Way Galaxy.  One would think the energy available would be different in the earth's shadow than directly exposed to the sun or the center of the galaxy? 

Not the focus of this forum, but an example is here:

http://www.gizapyramid.com/Parr/Index2.html

Just a thought,
Tishatang

Offline sparks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #622 on: May 25, 2008, 02:01:31 PM »
  @Fenyman

   I think this is what happens if no carbon is used.  The magnetic monopole is so disruptive to human tissue people get broken real fast.  This is the basic design of the tesla howitzer.  But if we aim it at metal I am not sure what is going to happen.

Offline FatBird

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1179
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #623 on: May 25, 2008, 04:47:25 PM »
@ Miki Said:

I have experienced a second meltdown today. This leads me to believe that the first one wasn't an accident or connections error. However,  the reaction only takes place randomly and rarely. When it does, the results are devastating. The output heat and electricity are excessive. I am beginning to suspect we may not be able to control easily this reaction for continuous operation.

==================================================================

There are SO MANY VARIABLES.  Please post a Drawing of your Circuit that did your meltdown, Source Battery Voltage, Pulse Frequency, Graphite Rod Diameter & Length, Toroid Collector number of Turns, etc.

Thank you very much.


.

Offline allcanadian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1317
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #624 on: May 25, 2008, 07:18:39 PM »
More experiments this morning and things are making much more sense, I reduced the carbon rod to a pellet measuring 2mm x 2mm held between two 2% thorium tungsten rods. I treated the pellet by applying enough current to make the pellet very very hot (smoking hot) hence the need for the tungsten rods. I believe the energy level needed is quite high, in physics it is said that matter will absorb energy to a certain level at which point this matter will radiate energy in excess of which it cannot absorb --- but physics gives no indication as to the time frame in which this happens. If we consider the fundamentals of physics, position, motion and acceleration what may be most relevant would be the extent of the change (acceleration) in a given time frame--- exponential accelerating forces having no constant acceleration. If the time frame from the capacitive discharge is infinately small and the energy level is very high I believe the carbon pellet is forced to "radiate" this applied energy as a field energy versus heat and this may be what I am seeing. The key word here is "radiate" ie.. energy acting outward from the source, I think this energy can take almost any form depending on the time frame and energy level.

@poynt99
I am measuring output with a 20w lightbulb and my oscilloscope is connected across the lightbulb. At this point I am using "relative" measurement, that is comparing the capacitive discharge through  standard induction versus a capacitive discharge through the device. There is a lot of room for error but at this point I am more concerned with the proper proportions and energy levels than output, that is getting the damn thing working properly.

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #625 on: May 25, 2008, 07:32:19 PM »
@allcanadian,

by "standard induction" do you mean you're discharging the cap through a primary on the same toroid coil and still taking the output off the sec.?

and by comparison, you're discharging the cap through the carbon pellet/tungsten rod combo and noting voltage/current and relative bulb intensity?

you should register some output at your bulb regardless of which way you discharge the cap, and as well with a piece of copper wire in place of the carbon/tungsten. all 3 methods should produce some reading.

so how will you know if the device is "working properly" I wonder if no input vs. output power comparisons are done?

sorry for the not so bright question...sometimes it takes me a while to catch on

Offline FatBird

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1179
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #626 on: May 25, 2008, 10:33:22 PM »
This site also uses Carbon Rods & Radioactive Tungsten Rods, and he has both photos & Schematics.  I am wondering if we can use anything here to help us out?


http://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/SparkGapExp/SparkGapExp.htm



.

Offline Inventor81

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #627 on: May 26, 2008, 12:32:28 AM »
Anyone tried putting a loop through the toroid as opposed to around the toroid?

i.e. the drawing below:

A is the current setup with the current looping around the toroid core

B is the new proposed setup with the current looping in and out of the lumen of the toroid.

Offline xee

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #628 on: May 26, 2008, 02:41:07 AM »
Has anyone confirmed that the beta detectors are giving false readings? A good test would be to wave a strong magnet back and forth near the beta detector and see if it gives any beta counts (it shouldn't).

Offline BEP

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1289
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #629 on: May 26, 2008, 04:06:48 AM »
Anyone tried putting a loop through the toroid as opposed to around the toroid?

i.e. the drawing below:

A is the current setup with the current looping around the toroid core

B is the new proposed setup with the current looping in and out of the lumen of the toroid.

@Inventor81

Your 'B' is the only way I do it. I typically use solid copper for the loop so it can be formed into a rectangle. The reason is I continue to believe these devices either use or should use the rotational attributes of a homopolar device (along with the mag field, of course).
The root of this belief was a simple experiment with a small plastic cup setting on top of a coin shaped magnet. Put a saltwater solution in the cup and sprinkle a little pepper for visuals. Insert + and - wires. One in the center and one at the edge of the water. The water rotates.

I know you would already know this but I added detail for others.

The point is: the current flow needed to be between the center and the radial edge within the mag field to obtain rotation. I'm quite sure there are a lot of things going on. One of which may be rotation.

@All

This is probably the best thread to ask.... When cutting or drilling graphite, is there common tooling? If so what is it? I need to drill an axial center hole in a small graphite rod. Carbide bits chunk the material. Diamond Dremmel bits dull too quickly.

Thanks,

John