The sheet always delivers around 5x background with Ag foil.
Background = radiation! Try to identify it! Modern digital cameras can also be used as cheap low energy X-ray detectors. Just search the internet to get more info. Otherwise use old analog film.
Hi Alan,
Your replication was very well done , your having paid much attention to detail.
Your results may be significant but I await an LiOD run using a fresh Ti cathode.
An LiOD run using the old hydrogen filled cathode would also be interesting.
Put the old cathode in a hydrogen atmosphere to stop it outgassing.
Your pancake detector is unconventionally wired.
Convention would have pancake body, box, and coax screen bonded with coax
inner going to GM inner electrode.
Your electronics driver/amplifyer polarity probably dictated this unconventional
setup. Can you post a schematic of the electronics ? Pete.
I already identified that the cell is not producing any Gammas as far as I can measure. Background from NaI is still more or less constant.
I already found that these are not high energetic photons with energy > 20keV.
Pancake detector is much more sensitive for low energetic particles than NaI. Especially it can pick up Beta radiation.
And my Alpha detector is picking up according datasheet just Alphas while completely rejecting Beta, Gamma.
Very soft X-rays with energy under 15keV can't be discounted completely yet.
magicsound I think that the best would be to measure the paper similarly as I am doing (in close contact) to achieve good results first. Then you can try to exclude any possible errors. This would be easier way I think than adding obstacles before achieving a proper results. So you might get first clear readings and then you can identify nature of it.
I expect some raised eyebrows!
Please explain your meaning.
Please explain your meaning.
I was motivated to perform a control test of the paper by Kirk's comments on paper chemistry. This test seems to have not produced detectable radiation, using the same measurement process as the the "live"test.
My expectation was that some reviewers would take this as supporting the evidence for enhanced radiation from the "JohnyFive" replication. There's still plenty of room for skepticism, but one well-founded objection, that the paper itself might be active, seems to have been discounted.
magicsound You can still use the cell for few more weeks. It should work well until there is enough water.
Cell with D2O can yield very likely better interesting results but demineralized H2O is working pretty good for me.
Side note - From my experiments I've found that just current near or less than 1mA is enough in order to generate required particles.
This is extremely interesting as you could power it from basically any available source if regulated. For example potatoes or lemons..
Regulated lemons - now there's a thought.
Yes, you can regulate lemons just by changing them for a new
Your pancake detector is unconventionally wired.
Convention would have pancake body, box, and coax screen bonded with coax
inner going to GM inner electrode.
Your electronics driver/amplifyer polarity probably dictated this unconventional
setup. Can you post a schematic of the electronics ?
Yes, you are correct. The electronics package is a GQ GMC-320+, a relatively inexpensive unit I selected initially for its USB interface. It's not open-source so the schematic isn't made available. When I adapted it for the LND7317 tube, I found if it was connected conventionally per your comment, it would not work correctly, with very high noise seen at the output of the detector circuit. It took a while to reverse-engineer the circuit, but I finally saw that the front end FET was connected at the low (cathode) side of the tube, with the anode connected directly to the HV supply through a 3 meg ohm resistor. Here's a simplified schematic of my system:
The cathode was more sensitive to EMF if connected conventionally through the coax shield to the front end amplifier. That is why the coax is wired with the shield on the anode (HV) and the core on the cathode.
magicsound Are you doing more tests? You can perform repeatable measurements after each activation while one day between measurements is fine.
@JohnyFive
Yup I’m curious too.
On another point I wonder if next time you make a test run if you could do something that while not technical might help replicators with their tests. And help them check if they are on track or making early mistakes.
I can appreciate providing technical data can be difficult and also maybe brings things too much into focus or could be distracting to proper independent replication.
But something more empirical might help a lot.
I’m wondering if next time you run your test if you could take pictures of the contents of your beaker. Once every hour or so or if that’s too frequent once every few hours? And then maybe provide them in a time line.? This could be useful to “see” if the evolution of the materials. The electrodes and fluid are behaving in similar ways in the different replications to the tests you perform. If something is wrong early on in the test or weaker or stronger in its results it might also provide interesting empirical reference data. And good thing about pictures is they may show something we did not think to look for or measure in the data.
Yup I’m curious too.
I’m wondering if next time you run your test if you could take pictures of the contents of your beaker. Once every hour or so or if that’s too frequent once every few hours? And then maybe provide them in a time line.? This could be useful to “see” if the evolution of the materials.
I'll be doing more tests for sure. But this is a slow experiment (especially in the preparation phase), so you won't get instant entertainment-on-demand.
Regarding your request for pictures, the appearance hasn't changed since the photo I posted of the white deposits on the cell wall. No color change and only very slight further drop in electrolyte level.
Current status (pun fully intended): the cell is still powered, drawing around 6mA, or 21 mW at 3.5 volts. I've turned off the data collection and streaming for now, and will leave it running over the weekend. On Monday, I'll do another set of radiation tests and share the results here. Unless something really unusual is seen, I'll then start preparing for the next test run using LiOD electrolyte, and get that going about a week from now.
AlanG
Thanks Alan, I look forward to your LiOH Monday data and LiOD data.
Hi magicsound
(Sorry edited for the right Alan)
Actually much of my post I was meant for Johny Five. I was thinking pictures from one of his successful runs could be a good reference.
Alan what you’ve done with this live honest and thorough test is already amazing and already a lot of work. And I only have thanks for that.
But point taken.... It’s easy to sit on a back seat and make requests when someone is doing the hard work and that’s true for my request to Johny too.
It’s really great what you are doing. Really intriguing results too.
Current status (pun fully intended): the cell is still powered, drawing around 6mA, or 21 watts at 3.5 volts.
Would that be 21 mW?
Would that be 21 mW?
Yes, thanks for catching my goof - fixed now.
The cell resistance has continued its gradual increase. It's now at nearly 2 k ohms, measuring 1.8 mA @ 3.5 volts for ~6.6 mW power.
Electrolyte appearance and level have not changed since my last report.
AlanG
You can increase voltage to reach 50 - 100mW power.
Did you make another radiation measurements?
You can increase voltage to reach 50 - 100mW power.
Did you make another radiation measurements?
OK. 4.2 mA @ 11.8 V 50 mW
Radiation test tomorrow 15 Oct 18:00 UTC
