Atom-Ecology

    This is a new thread meant to foster sharing of data and ideas on actual physical experiments being performed. Speculation whether they be of models or mysticism ought to find a home on one of the other threads.


    For example to climb the learning curve using a 'looking for heat' tube furnace conducted on the lab bench provided to me by Alan Smith I have run a number of experiments with both heavy hydrogen and ordinary hydrogen. The raw Geiger radiation data Alan has posted earlier is interesting in that it is clear I can trigger the radiation emissions that the Geiger faithfully, though generically, logs. Here is the very RAW geiger data one can see some excursions well above the long duration 'background' counts. Given the relative insensitivity of Geigers to gamma (or x-ray) photons the Androcles deuterated fuel mixture is doing something quite extraordinary as there is only a fraction of a gram of fuel mix, about the volume of 5-10 grains of rice. https://www.lenr-forum.com/attachment/5106-andro-may7-pdf/

    RussGeorge wrote:

    Alan has posted earlier is interesting in that it is clear I can trigger the radiation emissions that the Geiger faithfully, though generically, logs. Here is the very RAW geiger data one can see some excursions well above the long duration 'background' counts. https://www.lenr-forum.com/attachment/5106-andro-may7-pdf/


    It seems that you triggered the emissions at the same time once a day. How did you do it?

    As mentioned this is very RAW data and much work needs to be done on repeating it with further experiments, Androcles 3-10 are brewing and soon to be tested. Once more experiments are showing the same result, if they do, it will be time to reveal more on the protocol that triggers the emissions. Speaking too soon or too boldly leads one down the rabbit hole and I am entirely too near to Lewis Carroll's old haunts to dare falling in, at least not until it becomes clear whether to take the red pill or the blue pill.


    I have told Rossi in the past that regardless of his keeping his cards close to his chest, an Italian tide will lift all boats ;) With a little more caulking of the seams this old boat will be ready for sea and it will be all hands on deck. The world desperately needs clean abundant energy and the greatest danger to that reality not becoming a fact soon enough to save the world is waiting for someone else to deliver it.

    Interesting graph.


    Thank you for sharing and thank you for your efforts.


    Can you confirm that the timing of these events coincide with a known protocol event. Is it an immediate result or is there a delay that is also repetitive?


    Example: Protocol calls for applying "X" frequency and then always 5 minutes later the spike is seen. Or is it frequency is applied and immediately the spike is seen.


    (the above frequency statement is meant only as an example, not to imply what is being conducted)


    It would be of interest if the result is consistently seen after a consistent delay or window from the triggering event and what that delay was.


    My understanding is that the general opinion is that LENR does not give off ionizing radiation. While this is certainly opinion, as LENR is not well understood, do you think what you are seeing is indicative of "classical LENR", some variation of LENR or something else entirely?


    Again thank you and Godspeed!

    1. known and Immediate

    2. The testing protocol imposes a period of rest as in I sleep every night :)

    3. General opinions on LENR are rampant, informed opinions are rare. The only real opinion that matters is letting the data speak for itself.


    Too much to do and too little time to do it. A modest team effort could multiply the progress to be made and time to make it dramatically.

    The classic move of placing shielding between the reactor and the Geiger counter would be appropriate now. If you can show that the increase in counts is missing when the shielding is in place but returns after the shielding is taken away then that eliminates the possibility of some sort of the signal originating somewhere in your measuring equipment.

    Did you obtain this?


    http://atom-ecology.russgeorge…oceed-in-a-straight-line/

    Quote

    Once while running an experiment I happened upon a distinct highly reproducible radiation measurement. My Geiger Counter signaled the first hint of it and upon fiddling about with my “hey that’s strange” reaction to the enhance rate of Geiger clicks I managed to make the Geiger record vastly more counts, even saturating the detector. I did that by placing various different elementary foils between the source and the detector. Normally when one puts something in between a radiation source and a Geiger Counter the count rate inevitably goes down, not up. In my work a thin Silver foil sent the Geiger over the moon.


    RussGeorge wrote:

    What you think anyone would fail to do that simple test....

    No doubt you thought of it, but it never hurts to mention something like this.


    I have occasionally seen scientists neglect to do what I considered obvious steps. McKubre and others described how professionals made large mistakes such as confusing the anode and the cathode. See p. 11:


    http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJlessonsfro.pdf

    RussGeorge

    Quote

    I have told Rossi in the past that regardless of his keeping his cards close to his chest, an Italian tide will lift all boats ;) With a little more caulking of the seams this old boat will be ready for sea and it will be all hands on deck. The world desperately needs clean abundant energy and the greatest danger to that reality not becoming a fact soon enough to save the world is waiting for someone else to deliver it.


    Is the above cryptic statement intended to mean that you still think Rossi has demonstrated LENR? If so, why on Earth would you think it, given all the evidence to the contrary over the past 7+ years?

    We has been through all this many times before


    Leif Holmlid: Ultra-Dense Deuterium Fusion


    Muon ionization has caused many experimenters in the past to complain about EMF interference.


    ME356 said that he could not use electronic equipment withing 3 meters of his experiment.


    EROS has complained about unshieldable RF that caused him many problems.


    Defkalion said that they had major unshieldable EMF interference problems in their testing and even took their phone system down.


    The EMF interference is coming from a charged particle that will be detected by a cloud chamber. Just setup a cloud chamber near the experiment to see the particles that are coming off the experiment. You will find muons.

    axil wrote:

    Defkalion said that they had major unshieldable EMF interference problems in their testing and even took their phone system down.

    Let me again remind readers here that Defkalion was not a reliable source of information. See:


    http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GamberaleLfinaltechn.pdf


    I think it is a little irresponsible for Axil to quote Defkalion without also mentioning that they have . . . credibility problems. It hurts Axil's credibility. But we have been through all this many times before.


    To put it a little more strongly, given this report from Gamberale, anyone who would believe Defkalion lacks critical judgement, and cannot be trusted. He may be honest himself, but he is too gullible to see when others are fooling him.

    I'm not terribly impressed by these results. I'm intrigued, but then all results in LENR are intriguing ... the fake ones, the real ones, the mistaken ones, the deluded ones ... they are all intriguing.


    Alan Smith says that Russ George is a careful experimenter. That would convert intriguing results into interesting ones. I don't see much evidence of that so far though.