Atom-Ecology

  • The rotation of Earth?


    The 24 hour variation works against the idea that solar neutrinos are the active agent in variation in the radioactive decay constant. The mass of the earth should have no effect on neutrino flux. The agent that is producing this variation is attenuated by the mass of the earth. Solar flares have been shown to effect the radioactive decay constant greatly.


    There is some factor produced by both solar flares and the general solar reaction in general that are influencing the radioactive decay constant. I would venture to guess that this factor is magnetic in nature.


    To test this posit, place the LENR reactor in a magnetically shielded box and see if the effect related to a changing radioactive decay constant is eliminated or reduced.

  • To test this posit, place the LENR reactor in a magnetically shielded box and see if the effect related to a changing radioactive decay constant is eliminated or reduced.


    What shall I do with the large solenoid coils with their associated quite powerful intermittent DC magnetic field that provide the heating system? Inside or outside a box they create a field that (btw) totally overwhelms external fields. It's no good making up experiments unless you think them through.

  • What shall I do with the large solenoid coils with their associated quite powerful intermittent DC magnetic field that provide the heating system? Inside or outside a box they create a field that (btw) totally overwhelms external fields. It's no good making up experiments unless you think them through.

    And yet you still report a 24 hour variation in radiation intensity. What approach do you beleive will shed light on that issue? Or will you just let things lay as they currently are? Exploring such things might be beyond your ambitions.


    It could be that the solar magnetic influence is qualitatively different than the other magnetic sources that the reactor is exposed to.

  • The original Androcles is still running -70 days in- and still performing very well - gammas and heat. The next experiment is running, but it's reallytoo early to start discussing data.


    I believe that data from the new experiment has already been posted by Mr George on his blog http://atom-ecology.russgeorge…-ecology-and-cold-fusion/


    It seems to indicate that gamma counts from two different reactor oscillate in synchrony. Also, gamma-count oscillations occur not at 10 in the morning but at 8 at night. Is this correct? Do you still see gamma burrsting with 24 hour periodicity?

  • And yet you still report a 24 hour variation in radiation intensity.


    I do? As below.?


    We don't understand it either, though we have suspicions which are currently unvalidated. But it is spontaneous when it happens, which is hardly at all now, definitely not caused by anything we were doing to the system.


    There are synchronicities, but not tied to a clock hour as far as I can see.,

  • I do? As below.?



    There are synchronicities, but not tied to a clock hour as far as I can see.,


    Are you tracking the solar flare activity of the Sun vis-à-vis the synchronicities that appear in the emission cycles that you observe. Such synchronicities can be determined by accessing resent solar flare histories and matching those time frames up with your data,


    image006.jpg

  • Are you tracking the solar flare activity of the Sun vis-à-vis the synchronicities that appear in the emission cycles that you observe. Such synchronicities can be determined by accessing resent solar flare histories and matching those time frames up with your data,


    image006.jpg

    Is there a source/site where one can download such daily solar data for the past couple of months?

  • Alan: I think that our laboratory equipment is better including all kinds of Ludlums detectors.

    Yes, I am able to get some sort of transmutations as verified by third party labs, helium (mass spectrometer) and excess heat. But COP is just under 1,2. Usually only 1.04.

    But in no experiment there is radiation level above background. And I am getting positive results with both protium and deuterium. I would like to find out how to get gamma rays or any other radiation out of it.

  • Alan: I think that our laboratory equipment is better including all kinds of Ludlums detectors.

    Yes, I am able to get some sort of transmutations as verified by third party labs, helium (mass spectrometer) and excess heat. But COP is just under 1,2. Usually only 1.04.

    But in no experiment there is radiation level above background. And I am getting positive results with both protium and deuterium. I would like to find out how to get gamma rays or any other radiation out of it.


    Have you tried to place a cloud chamber near your experiment to check for the production of charged particles? A positive result would make you famous around here especially to me.


    For example. Piantelli detects 6.3 MeV protons coming from his activated nickel bar


    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSSAkzwGlitn1pDIjyEg50ZugCMsqOnelFAccfYf1nnGEeYuQu_MA

  • I would like to but I can't bring such things to the lab. But maybe I will find some compact version.
    I think that in my experiments there are many, many protons or deuterons ejected. But I can't measure it with any detector. Maybe their energy is very small or super high.

    Reason for this is that during the reaction all hydrogen literally is consumed. This mean that after few days there is a partial vacuum or rather a gas that can't react anymore.

    I mean not unlike loading in transition metals when after heating it is again released. In this case hydrogen is consumed or converted irreversible (again and again after injecting more) and after heating to a boiling point of the transition metal only negligible amount is recovered in comparison to what was consumed. NAH, it is not a leak. Remember it ends under atmospheric pressure always. Independent of how much was consumed. But it is nowhere as interesting as Gamma Rays.

    Why they are not present here?


    If I understand Russ, he is saying that Gamma radiation is directly corresponding with reaction rate. I think that this is not true in my case. But my experiments require higher temperatures, rather over 500 deg C.

  • Yes. I tried this with pure copper and silver foils. But nothing changed. So Cu and Ag has no response.

    I think that this would work for Russ as he was explicitly talking about Silver foil.

    And this worked probably for Rossi too as he made his first reactors from copper.

  • I am convinced that Russ is observing Muon catalyzed fusion or some kind of this. This would explain probably everything.

    We need to know from where he is getting muons.

    I think that Nitrogen is involved somehow hence need for Air to be present.

  • Thanks Alan! This mean that during reaction air can circulate from inside to outside and vice versa, right?


    Not exactly correct. The fuel is placed into an alumina tube with one end closed . like this. The ends are sealed, generally by inserting a closely fitting bolt dipped in high-temperature cement. The total fuel volume may be anything up to 2ml, and the free space inside around 2ml also - depending on the experiment. Some may have much less fuel in them. But the key fact for you is that all the filling and sealing operations are carried out at normal atmospheric pressure, in air.


  • Thank you, any detail is greatly appreciated.

    This thing is very important for a future replicators since it mean that key is not really in how gas inside reactor is pure to make it work (no need for vacuum pump). Basically what Rossi is doing for years. The key is seemingly in the fuel preparation as reaction is happening inside the lattice. On the other hand I have to admit that in my experiment air is doing pretty bad things. So probably your reaction is happening on a different level.


    In one early Rossi reactor we can see clearly Nitrogen bottle. Nitrogen is of course major part of the air. I would be very interested in what Nitrogen is actually doing there. Strangely there are people that think it is LENR killer. I guess that not.

  • Indeed, in case of Rossi I wouldn't be surprised to see anything like this.


    Anyhow I would like to try to replicate the phenomenon that Russ is observing.

    From revealed information we know the following:

    • Fuel is electrolytically loaded with Deuterium for days. As you can see from photos provided on Russ blog the fuel grain look like it was attached around a wire - very likely for electrylysis.
    • It is mix of a few powders or sponge.
    • Reactor is running under atmospheric pressure, Air.
    • Temperature during reaction is between 200 - 300C.
    • There are very likely Copper/Silver foils near the reactor to convert unknown radiation (Muons?) to Gamma Rays.
    • It is heated by a coil.


    My assumptions:

    • It is just interesting for me how the fuel is holding together. If it is not a sponge, then it is powder that was probably filled in a thin tube with wire for electrolysis inside.
    • After loading extracted so it look like a rice.
    • It could be coated with a thin layer of unknown element that can prevent deuterium to escape. This could develop tremendous pressure at the surface once heated. If the fuel is mainly Palladium, then coating is required.
    • LiOD could be used for electrolysis.
    • Palladium is used. (Russ described in his blog that only a certain Palladium powder was working for him). Probably some very fine.



    Something for thinking about Rossi's first experiments. He himself revealed he was working with reactors made of copper and lead shielding. This mean he was expecting radiation even that he explained the first success (strange thing) happened with this particular reactor. And why he used copper since working with stainless steel is easier and cheaper? Maybe just luck or he knew something.

    It would be nice to correct me if I am wrong in anything.

  • As you can see Leif Holmlid is doing LENR research and found out that ultra dense deuterium can be great Muon source.

    So first we need to generate free muons and then to engage a kind of muon catalyzed fusion. Question is how these two things can be done.

    First task is to have UDD.

  • Bruce__H: There is no reason to believe the results are not true. There are at least few scientists that found out the same or similar behavior and provided good documentation. Yes, usually it is barely measurable but it is natural to progress in what you are doing for long time.

    Of course it would be awesome to know all the details but nobody can't stop you from doing own experiments.


    All in all, Russ or Alan were not claiming anything. They are just acquiring data.

  • I had a look at this blog post, and I was surprised to read that "many scientists" are suggesting the explanation for Huygens synchronicity "will be found in the strange entanglement of matter. Einstein’s spooky action at a distance".
    I would be curious to hear who these scientists are, as this sounds like a rather extraordinary claim.


    https://phys.org/news/2017-05-…ntanglement-isolated.html


    https://www.nist.gov/news-even…glement-mechanical-system


    https://www.nature.com/news/20…3/full/news.2009.540.html


    https://journals.aps.org/prl/a…103/PhysRevLett.98.030405


    Always do a little of your own research to avoid embarrassment..

  • Alan Smith Thanks... Got me to thinking/studying. Action at a Distance. Sort of imponderable... along the thoughts of Einstein.


    Researchers prove Huygens was right about pendulum synchronization

    https://phys.org › Physics › General Physics

    Mar 29, 2016 - A drawing by Christiaan Huygens of his experiment in 1665. In 1665 Christiaan Huygens discovered that two pendulum clocks, hung from the same wooden structure, will always oscillate in synchronicity. Today, some 350 years on, Eindhoven and Mexican researchers present the most ...

    https://phys.org/news/2016-03-…ulum-synchronization.html


    Finally Huygens is proven correct, NO?