Ken Shoulders ; The Man Who Made Black Holes

  • " Under long pulse length conditions, the input resistor 28 must be chosen to prevent a sustained glow discharge within the glass tube."

    - I think it has been established (probably) that the Q-X runs at no long pulse.

  • Alan Smith

    I mean that if EVOs are objects forming at high electron density, glow discharge regime operation, even if pulsed, should not really be desirable. The effect would be better achieved with shorter pulses at a higher current. Therefore, a LENR device which would exploit this effect for energy production would in my opinion operate more on the right than the left side of the graph below. I could be wrong, of course:

    Electric glow discharge - The Plasma Universe theory ...

    Technically speaking, electric sparks should be brief arc discharges, although there is not a clear definition as far as I can read (examples: 1, 2). Curiously, lightning is defined as a (big) spark too. The last link from Wikpedia too mentions that sparks of long duration become electric arcs:


    [...] If the power supply continues to supply current, the spark will evolve into a continuous discharge called an electric arc.



    Hal Fox presented a brief to the point overview of his work with high-density charge clusters. Hal Fox is of the opinion this technology has great potential. I remember about 15 years ago when Hal Puthoff was working with Ken Shoulders in this same thing at Jupiter Technologies. This technology has been a long time coming and it is still not here. At the end of Hal Fox's discussion I asked, "Hal, Do you believe that Shoulder's electron clusters are superconductive?" Fox answered, "Yes they are superconductive and superfluid." I believe that this is a most important point. That's why I brought it up.

  • Eric Walker

    Infinite Energy Issue 61 was out in 2005:

    It's clear when looking at web search results that Kenneth Shoulders' work has been discussed for many years. What I actually meant was that from relatively recently he's been referenced a lot more (heavily so, even) compared to the past 6-7 years. I shouldn't be the one discussing possible cost-effective experiments that could be done to observe EVs.


    I came across that website many times when searching the web for more information about Shoulders' work. You quoted an interesting excerpt.

  • In his theory of LENR, Rossi sites quadrupole magnetism as the source of the LENR reaction. This conjecture is close to the truth but the details are not correct. Magnetic fields do catalyze the LENR reaction but it is monopole magnetism that does it. This conjecture is easily deminstrated by an experiment.…-isotope-decay-constancy/

    The anisotropic magnetic field from an Alcomax magnet is shown to change the nuclear decay constant by 2%. You can convince yourself that an anisotropic magnetic field can produce LENR effects by using a strong anisotropic rare earth magnet to change the nature of radioactive decay.

    A magnetic field produced by an electric current will have no effect no the radioactive decay constant.

    It is not the photons that produce the LENR reaction but the "virtual photons" that are the cause of LENR. The "virtual photons" are really the increase in the excitation of the vacuum produced by any number of EMF based causes.

    These various EMF causes all have a common theme, excitation of the vacuum that generates the increased probability of creation of various subatomic particles that interfere with the quantum chromodynamics (QCD) processes that keep matter from decaying.

  • [

    user='441']axil[/user] is there virtual quarks already? What color are they?

    decay of matter is an indirect reference to the reorganization of quarks in matter catalyzed by particles that come from amplified vacuum energy condensation.

    You have a point, If an electron/positron pair as fermions can condense from the vacuum, so can a quark pair(aka meson). Their color/flavor is based on the available vacuum energy that the quarks condense from.


    The vector meson ρ in the presence of external magnetic field has been investigated in the framework of the Nambu--Jona-Lasinio model, where mesons are constructed by infinite sum of quark-loop chains by using random phase approximation. The ρ meson polarization function is calculated to the leading order of 1/N c expansion. It is found that the constituent quark mass increases with magnetic field, the masses of the neutral vector meson ρ0 with spin component sz=0,±1 and the charged vector meson ρ± with sz=0 also increases with magnetic field. However, the mass square of the charged vector meson ρ+ (ρ−) with sz=+1 (sz=−1) decreases linearly with magnetic field and drops to zero at the critical magnetic field eBc≃0.2GeV2, which indicates the possible condensation of charged vector meson in the vacuum. This critical magnetic field is much lower than the value eBc=0.6GeV2 predicted by a point-like vector meson. We also show that if we use lowest Landau level approximation, the mass of the charged vector meson ρ± for sz=±1 cannot drop to zero at high magnetic fields.

    The vacuum in strong magnetic field

    Ingredients needed for possible superconductivity:

    A. Presence of electric charges?

    Yes, we have them: there are virtual particles

    which may potentially become “real” (= pop up from the vacuum)

    and make the vacuum (super)conducting.

    B. Reduction to 1+1 dimensions?

    Yes, we have this phenomenon: in a very strong magnetic field

    the dynamics of electrically charged particles (quarks, in our case)

    becomes effectively one-dimensional, because the particles tend

    to move along the magnetic field only.

    C. Attractive interaction between the like-charged particles?

    Yes, we have it: the gluons provide attractive interaction between

    the quarks and antiquarks (qu=+2 e/3 and qd=+e/3)

  • As an in-topic note, I gave a quick look at all patents by Kenneth Shoulders on the subject of Charge Clusters / EVO. I noticed that the patent description is mostly always the same, with a section expanded with more details on some figures in one version. The wording is very slightly different in more recent patents in some areas. I haven't checked the claims in detail though.

    • 5,018,180 Energy conversion using high charge density, 1991
      • 42 claims, 97 figures
      • 31 sections
    • 5,054,046 Method of and apparatus for production and manipulation of high density charge, 1991
      • 151 claims, 61 figures
      • 25 sections (stops at "Conclusions", cut short)
    • 5,054,047 Circuits responsive to and controlling charged particles, 1991
      • 100 claims, 97 figures
      • Section 25 "Conclusions" (not numbered here) is expanded
    • 5,123,039 Energy conversion using high charge density, 1992
      • 25 claims, 97 figures
      • 31 sections
    • 5,148,461 Circuits responsive to and controlling charged particles, 1992
      • 66 claims, 85 figures
      • Section 25 "Conclusions" (not numbered here) is expanded
    • 5,153,901 Production and manipulation of charged particles, 1992
      • 36 claims, 61 figures
      • 25 sections (stops at "Conclusions", cut short)
  • Yes, it came from a heavily redacted commentary of his work made for the USAF. I think the role of that capacitor (and I have no idea who added that notation) is to actually inhibit arc discharges in the same way a capacitor is used to prevent arc-over on old style car ignition breakers.

  • On a slightly different note (but still related to the practical aspects of Shoulders' research), from the documents among others available in this page:

    It would seem that simply exposing a "witness material" to a stream of EVs just like those reported to be easily produced with negative electric sparks would cause transmutation in the material over time. The longer the exposure, the more the transmutation.

    This sounds way too simple, given that it would be possible to devise a simple EV generator like the one shown in Figures 1 and 2 in his patents (colored and annotated for clarity and personal reference below), which essentially is a better crafted version of the experiment I improvised (yep) a few days ago.

    Perhaps there is some critical detail I'm not getting?

  • It would seem that simply exposing a "witness material" to a stream ofEVs just like those reported to be easily produced with negative electricsparks would cause transmutation in the material over time. The longer theexposure, the more the transmutation.

    This sounds way toosimple, given that it would be possible to devise a simple EV generator like the oneshown in Figures 1 and 2 inhis patents (colored and annotated for clarity and personal reference below), which essentially is a better crafted version of the experiment I improvised (yep) a few days ago.

    Exactly what Shoulders always maintained.

  • I'm getting increasing suspicion that the EVO's stuff is intended to derail interest of cold fusion community from actual experiments which work. You already got into my focus due to remarks about astroturfing of Sifferkol and unusally high concentration of anti-lenr trolls here.

  • Alan Smith

    If it really just takes a device as simple as that, perhaps even just put up together with a simple spark coil driver circuit and operated in a standard atmosphere, that would be a very interesting experiment for people with easy access to elemental analysis. One could analyze the material at the beginning, then at regular intervals as exposure to these EVs progresses over time (I think Shoulders suggests this as well). The effect would also be localized to very specific small areas of the material, which would simplify contamination control/checking. Or one could also less expensively check for the emergence of other properties that the starting material is not supposed to have.

    But this is why I'm saying that it seems too easy and wondering if there's more than meets the eye for a successful transmutation experiment.


    If this works, it should be simple and inexpensive to find out, according to what Shoulders has written.

    What experiments that work are you suggesting instead?

  • The Lipinski/Me356/Rossi QuarkX indeed. What the EVO plasmoids actually have to do with these experiments? They even cannot be formed there.

    Faithfully replicating Lipinski's work isn't going to be simple and inexpensive, and what Rossi and me356 do is up to everybody's speculation - yours included unless you have inside information about them.

    If you're suggesting that I'm shilling for Ken Shoulders' work you couldn't be further away from reality. I haven't looked at all at it in the past year or so despite the heavy promotion from BG ("Homosymbion"), which probably had the opposite effect of getting me interested anyway. For me to start reading about it, it took Alan Smith creating this thread and McKubre exceptionally suggesting in the second comment here that it's worth looking into.

    I'm not interested much at this stage whether the explanation is physical, or whether EVs explain results from other researchers, or 9/11 or whatever. I've mostly only been looking for simple experiments that proponents could do to show that they are a real effect, sharing here in the process what I find (many of my posts are adapted from notes I write elsewhere for personal use).

    I suggest you perform the experiments you are so certain of and report the results in a dedicated thread in a manner that can be useful for others.