Strange Radiation from EVO Decomposition Catalyzing Powder and Plasma Based Systems.

  • An electric discharge in a gaseous environment produces a magnetic field that will make electrons move in cycloid or loop like motions. These looping electrons can then form filaments or coils that stretch out like the old fashioned slinky toy. However, under the right conditions -- such as if the self generated magnetic field is adequate or an external static or rotating magnetic field is applied -- the ends of the spring like filaments can join to form a torus. In this case, the electrons are circling on the surface of the toroid and the protons or positive ions are circulating on the interior like in a race track or accelerator. Kenneth R. Shoulders produced these objects utilizing multiple means, but especially discharges from the tips of sharpened cathodes (or wetted with mercury or tin so they would self regenerate). These vortexes are called EVOs or electron clusters. He learned how to create them, manipulate them, guide them, grow them, launch them, and destroy them at will.


    He observed many different track marks from the EVOs he produced. Many of these track marks are very similar or identical to those produced by the Strange Radiation that Alexander Parkhomov has recently reported. Just like with the strange radiation produced by Parkhomov's Ni-H system, plasma electrolysis devices, exploding wire/foil setups, and glow discharge devices, the EVOs produced by Kenneth Shoulders were reported to be capable of inducing transmutations among a wide variety of other effects. All of these systems have a few factors in common: some method of electrical discharge, some source of positive ions, and the presence of a magnetic field (self generated or externally supplied). Even when there is not an obvious source of an electrical discharge, if someone looks deeply they can see possible sources: triboelectric discharge, fracto-emission, and others.


    In powder based systems the production of atomic hydrogen seems to be very beneficial, if not a requirement, in producing excess heat and strange radiation. Simply put, exposing nickel powder to ordinary molecular hydrogen at anything less than ultra high temperatures (perhaps near the melting point of nickel where it becomes more permeable) doesn't allow for a sufficient quantity of hydrogen to be absorbed. Instead, one of many methods of accelerating the dissociation of molecular hydrogen into atomic hydrogen should be utilized. One way that seems to work adequately is the utilization of a spillover catalyst in the form of evenly distributed nano-particles or a film: palladium is a commonly used element for this purpose. However, to produce even higher levels of excess heat a spillover catalyst by itself may not be enough.


    A plasma produced by microwaves, radio frequencies, direct current, or some other means allows for molecular hydrogen (H2) to be dissociated into atomic hydrogen (H1) before it makes contact with the nickel. This accelerates hydrogen absorption significantly. Moreover, the atomic hydrogen in an excited plasma is likely to have more energy per atom than in an ordinary non-ionized high temperature gas as typically used in many LENR systems. But we can do more! Multiple groups have published papers, patent literature, and experimental data showing that if various quantities of certain elements are added to such a plasma, the energy of the protons increases. Without the addition of argon (which seems to work the best among the noble gases) or small amounts of lithium or strontium that can be vaporized (there are other elements which produce the same effect) the energy of the protons may remain at 5eV or typically slightly less. If these elements are added to the plasma, the energy of the atomic hydrogen atoms can surge up to at least 35eV with some parties claiming even higher energies. Logically, since even after contacting the surface of nickel atomic hydrogen must expend energy to penetrate the surface and move downward into the lattice, having a higher energy should allow for greater penetration. With cycles of hydrogen absorption and degassing, the quantities of hydrogen that can be absorbed and migrate through the lattice can reach very high loading levels. This results in defects and voids in the lattice that can contain highly pressurized hydrogen.


    The process of absorbing and releasing such quantities of hydrogen can induce charge separation in cracks and internal cavities. When this happens, electrical discharges can occur in the presence of absorbed atomic hydrogen. This is potentially one source of EVO production. Yet another could be the surface plasmon polaritons that are generated on the surface of the nickel when the electrons of the material are disturbed by charged particle impacts (protons or electrons). These waves amplify wherever there are surface features on the surface like nano-particles, pits, cracks, holes, or spires (Rossi's tubercles?). They can surge upwards or downwards in many cases, and I suggest that if they are stimulated powerfully enough (such by the impact of charged particles produced by the plasma) they could induce "sparking" deeper in the lattice in these micro-cavities. This would result in another source of EVO formation.


    There are many ways by which EVOs (described using many different terms) are theorized as inducing nuclear reactions and transmutations. I will not go into these theories in depth for the sake of brevity. However, it seems like the destruction of the electrically charged EVO may release strange radiation. The EVO might be the Active Agent that produces excess heat and transmutations in the lattice while the resulting strange radiation (perhaps sub-units of the EVO with different properties) is capable of traveling through many materials and inducing nuclear reactions, transmutations, and leaving track marks up to meters away. Utilizing an additional layer of LENR fuel around the innermost reactor might stop the strange radiation from being wasted. This is the "mouse" and "cat" configuration. By allowing the strange radiation to produce more nuclear reactions in the reactor instead of allowing it to escape the COP may be increased.


    So a recipe for plasma stimulated powder based LENR may not be too complicated. The keys would likely be to produce a plasma with anomalously hot protons that would maximize hydrogen absorption and surface plasmon polariton production to create the conditions for EVO production.


    In an almost pure plasma system like the Quark (which closely resembles that of Chernetski's plasma tube, the Correa's Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge Device, and a few others) the electrode surface may not need to be hydrogenated because EVO production in the lattice may not be a primary objective. Instead, as described in the literature of Black Light Power, if a percentage of argon or lithium (or what might be more challenging which would be strontinum) is mixed in the plasma, not only are hot hydrogen atoms produced but the plasma can be established at a very low voltage of 2 volts per centimeter or less. This could partially explain the very low voltage required by the Quark after primary ignition of the plasma. A further reduction of the voltage required may be achieved by utilizing optimized geometries of the electrodes. In the image located in the Gullstrom Rossi paper, the electrode looks hollow which could be an example of the use of a hollow cathode to produce an initial pseudo-spark discharge. Other geometries could also be used. Many optimal cathode geometries are reviewed in Kenneth Shoulder's book, "EV - A Tale of Discovery."


    Once a plasma is produced, it may be pulsed at a high frequency to achieve the striated or cycloid look described by Me356 and Chernetski as what allows for excess power production. If a very narrow central channel is used, the pulses may be focused even more intently amplifying the effect. For example, instead of Chernetski's design of having a channel the same or greater diameter as the plasma, the channel could be much smaller than the electrode diameter. Moreover, utilizing solenoid coils or permanent magnets (they may be backing the nickel electrodes in Rossi's system) could create a "magnetic mirror effect" or "magnetic trap" that would keep the spiralling EVOs and/or strange radiation concentrated in the middle of the channel. This would prevent the strange radiation from escaping and maximize the nuclear reactions taking place in the plasma. Hence, if a magnetic mirror effect is used, the need for an external "cat" wrapped around the discharge tube would be reduced because the strange radiation would not be wasted. A portion of the excess energy could be in the form of heat and another portion could be in the form of a powerful electro-motive force produced. Chernetski allegedly produced such a powerful electro-motive force that it burnt out a power station. Similar reverse spikes of power were reported by the Correa's.


    So the recipe for a nearly pure plasma based Quark system may not be too complicated.


    I feel that with existing information various wire/powder plasma assisted LENR systems along with Quark/Correa/Chernetski like systems could be successfully built. Sadly, as always, labor and money are the two most significant barriers.

  • I am eager for public and private discussion about the idea's I've expressed in the above post. Although I'm incapable of performing my own experiments for a number of reasons (no lab, no funding, no one locally interested in LENR that could assist me) I'm more than willing to share ideas (to be taken with a grain of salt or taken seriously) with anyone who wishes to discuss them. For the record, my hope is to see both types of LENR systems (powder and plasma) demonstrated on YouTube with full instructions for anyone who wishes to replicate. I'm totally 100% open source once a system has been proven to be both high powered (high COP or capable of self sustaining) and repeatable. I despise secrecy at this stage in the development of LENR.

  • http://egely.hu/wp-content/upl…yPseudoParticlesPart1.pdf


    http://egely.hu/wp-content/upl…yPseudoParticlesPart2.pdf


    http://egely.hu/wp-content/upl…seudo-Particles-Part3.pdf


    The above are three good documents that will help you learn more. The Chernetski device in particular is not too different than the Quark. It's simply lacking many optimizations.


    If you realize the significance of the above you will realize how it means we are basically close to building something BETTER than the warp core of the Starship Enterprise.

  • The following paper may explain a LOT about what's really taking place.

    Electron Structure, Ultra-dense Hydrogen and Low Energy Nuclear
    Reactions




    http://vixra.org/pdf/1809.0575v1.pdf




    Here is my interpretation:


    Electrical discharges in hydrogen environments with the presence of a magnetic field induce electrons to form loops. These loops can come together at the end to form toruses that are Exotic Vacuum Objects. Electrons travel on the surface of these EVOs in a state that may be superconducting. They are electrically charged and may induce LENR reactions via various mechanisms. During the formation of an EVO the protons in the interior are compressed into ultra dense hydrogen. When an EVO is destabilized, the ultra dense hydrogen sprays out at high energy. This is what's called Strange Radiation. These particles appear to be magnetic monopoles. They can travel through many materials, follow magnetic field lines, and induce LENR reactions. So we have two LENR catalysts: electrically charged EVOs that induce LENR via one set of mechanisms and magnetic monopoles that induce LENR via other mechanisms.


    The result is perhaps a near total explanation of LENR.

  • The above are three good documents that will help you learn more. The Chernetski device in particular is not too different than the Quark. It's simply lacking many optimizations.


    It appears this is in the first document.

    http://egely.hu/wp-content/upl…yPseudoParticlesPart1.pdf




    As for the highlighted section, that's something I also noticed, albeit in slightly different, comparatively much more rudimentary tests. After applying arc discharges repeatedly along the surface of the electrode(s) for a while, the discharges would progressively become easier to initiate / more intense.

  • Director,


    Someone at Sochi gave a presentation in Russian, on the history of SR sightings in LENR. I forgot where it was, but if you find it, and can get someone to interpret, I think it would be very interesting. More importantly, it may help you, and others, start putting the pieces together.

  • Hello Shane,


    Interpretation is a big problem since most of the presentations were in Russian. I watched most of the ones Bob Greenyer posted and used the closed captioning auto translation function on YouTube. But the translations were awful. I will try to look for and find that presentation.


    I'm putting some of the pieces together day by day. I believe I've put together a couple today. In all seriousness -- and I do not say this frivolously -- I think that there's enough information out there right now to produce amazing LENR systems with a relatively modest amount of money, time, and labor. There's a LOT more we need to learn about Strange Radiation and EVOs, but the pieces of the puzzle that have came together so far open several doors. For example, I'm NOT a firm believer in the hydrino. But I don't think it can be denied that they are inducing some sort of interesting effect when they mix their "catalysts" into a hydrogen plasma and observe "hot hydrogen" species that reach 35eV or higher (they report even higher energies but I'm not totally convinced of them because third parties only report up to 40eV or so). These catalysts such as argon are the same ones that dramatically improve x-ray production and spheromak formation in various hot fusion experiments reported by Bostic. Moreover, Shoulder's reported that some of these same additives dramatically improved EVO production. I really think the problem that stops the LENR community from moving forward is that different parties are stuck on THEIR pet theories instead of observing what's directly observable from experiments conducted by people who had DIFFERENT theories.


    For the last several nights I've been researching these issues non-stop. My biggest problem right now is having virtually NO ONE to talk to who has done similar research. Bob Greenyer is pretty much unavailable most of the time and most of the other individuals I talk to are very busy with other projects.


  • That is a somewhat common occurrence. What happens is that over time, as the article describes, sharp points can start to be formed. Depending on the material, this can be tiny razor like edges or even microscopic spires.


  • In the third paper from Egely, he identifies the science that underlies the LENR reaction: polaritons, magnons, analog magnetic monopoles, vortex motion, quasi particles( see the epilogue). The EVO is based on nanoplasmonics and therefore so is the LENR reaction.

  • Axil,


    For starters, there is too much terminology in play. Secondly, an EVO isn't what you describe as a surface plasmon polariton. SPP may help create and launch a group of electrons so they can cluster into an EVO, but an SPP is NOT an EVO. According to your thinking spheromaks don't exist and that an EVO isn't composed of electrons. However, we know they ARE! The whole process is documented by Mesyats who called them electron bunches and Bostic who called them filaments and a list of other scientists.

  • That is a somewhat common occurrence. What happens is that over time, as the article describes, sharp points can start to be formed. Depending on the material, this can be tiny razor like edges or even microscopic spires.


    For what it's worth (they're not exactly the most rigorous and controlled experiments in the world), I observed this with impure graphite (i.e. soft pencil cores) and steel electrodes. The photo below shows a sample steel electrode with a partially modified surface from the arc discharges. The roughened area (bottom portion) eventually acquired a sort of grainy, almost prismatic finish.


    This is after washing with clean water to remove carbonate deposits from an electrolyte solution that was also used in the process, so I might have possibly lost most of the spikes or points formed.



  • Axil,


    For starters, there is too much terminology in play. Secondly, an EVO isn't what you describe as a surface plasmon polariton. SPP may help create and launch a group of electrons so they can cluster into an EVO, but an SPP is NOT an EVO. According to your thinking spheromaks don't exist and that an EVO isn't composed of electrons. However, we know they ARE! The whole process is documented by Mesyats who called them electron bunches and Bostic who called them filaments and a list of other scientists.

    “clustering of electronic charge” is not possible because fermions repel each other. This electron repletion is due to the Pauli Exclusion Principal. But electrons can be turned into bosons when they are entangled with photons. This hydrid particle is called a polariton. Trillions of polaritons can cluster together into a BOSE condensate. Electrons alone cannot form condensates. Only bosons can form condensates.


    Why is heat or light stimulation needed in LENR? Because electrons must join together with photons to become LENR active. polaritons make charge/spin separation easy. You can condense electrons in a capacitor till the cows come home and you won't get LENR. A spark produces heat and light, that is where LENR comes from.


    Here is one for you. An EVO can stay together for days or even months. Do you think that a pile of electrons will do that?

  • Director

    You have probably read more than I have about the subject so maybe you can clarify.


    One thing that isn't clear to me is whether an electromagnetic pulse (which can be "listened" to easily with an AM radio, although FM will work too to a lesser extent, at least with mine) is always associated with the production of an EVO, or if it only can.


    The excerpt below (among others) appears to suggest that it's the former, but if that's the case, then one could simply aim to produce the maximum possible electromagnetic noise in an hydrogen environment, and on this regard arc discharge systems would far be superior to most other experiments, I would guess.


    http://www.padrak.com/ine/FB97_1.html


    Quote

    SIMPLE TEST FOR CHARGE CLUSTERS


    If you are working with devices in which charge clusters are expected to be produced, the following procedure is suggested. Place a small transistor radio near the suspected cluster target. Tune to an AM (amplitude modulated) part of the radio band where there are no AM stations on the air. Turn up the volume and listen for "cracks" of static. When a charge cluster strikes it will emits sufficient electromagnetic energy to hear on such a radio. Remember that FM (frequency modulation) clips these bursts of EM radiation and that static discharges will not be heard on FM stations.


    If you question whether these clusters can do damage to metal surfaces, just disconnect the capacitor that is wired across the breaker points of a distributor in a gasoline-fueled internal combustion engine. You will soon find that you will need to replace the distributor breaker points. The capacitor is sufficient to prevent the formation of charge clusters.


    If it was this easy I think I would have obtained plenty of strange radiation tracks on nearby witness materials, but so far I haven't had such luck unfortunately.

  • The production of an EVO is NOT associated with an EMF. An EMF is only produced if a sufficiently large enough EVO accelerated into a target explodes. You have to realize that Kenneth Shoulders was able to guide EVOs down guide lines on dielectric sheets toward anodes. There are also issues with the electrical properties of your target. For example, smashing an EVO into a thick target will produce gamma rays while smashing an EVO into something thin will produce an EMF.

  • The production of an EVO is NOT associated with an EMF. An EMF is only produced if a sufficiently large enough EVO accelerated into a target explodes. You have to realize that Kenneth Shoulders was able to guide EVOs down guide lines on dielectric sheets toward anodes.


    For an EVO to explode it has to be created first. To be clearer, I was wondering is if electromagnetic pulses are always caused by EVO, or rephrased differently if behind EMPs there's always the destruction of an (or more) EVO.


    There are also issues with the electrical properties of your target. For example, smashing an EVO into a thick target will produce gamma rays while smashing an EVO into something thin will produce an EMF.


    How is thin/thick defined here, more precisely?

  • It's all in Shoulders papers and his book.


    Producing EVOs according to one point of view is very easy. KS claims that almost any electrical spark will produce one or more EVs. However, you must understand them to know how to guide them, direct them, and control how they interact with matter.

  • ...

    ..

    .

    Since when and where is the source of this statement ?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauli_exclusion_principle


    Quote

    Particles with an integer spin, or bosons, are not subject to the Pauli exclusion principle: any number of identical bosons can occupy the same quantum state, as with, for instance, photons produced by a laser and Bose–Einstein condensate.


    A more rigorous statement is that with respect to exchange of two identical particles the total wave function is antisymmetric for fermions, and symmetric for bosons. This means that if the space and spin co-ordinates of two identical particles are interchanged, then the wave function changes its sign for fermions and does not change for bosons.


  • It's all in Shoulders papers and his book.


    Producing EVOs according to one point of view is very easy. KS claims that almost any electrical spark will produce one or more EVs. However, you must understand them to know how to guide them, direct them, and control how they interact with matter.

    There is another way to produce EVOs. Load deuterium into diamond, palladium, nickel, iron oxide, or maybe titainum, and EVOs will eventually form along with ultra dense matter(UDM) within the crystal imperfections of these lattices.


    EVOs and UDM go together like a horse and a rider.

  • Director

    What I'm saying is basically that if the electromagnetic noise (pulses) measured gives a direct indication on the size and amount of EVO produced (and destroyed), then electrolysis or gaseous H loading of metals seem a rather tortuous way to achieve the same results.


    With pretty much any spark gap it doesn't take a lot of effort to produce electromagnetic noise large enough to be heard on a nearby AM transistor radio (also FM with a bit more effort). On the other hand this seems rather difficult to achieve with electrolysis or gas-loaded systems, if one is to rely on piezo-/pyro-/tribo- emission or similar effects from the loaded lattice.

  • Hello Can,


    I've read that if a spark plug fires without a resistor that it can create powerful EMPs. Someone once told me that a very long time ago if someone was driving by their business with a vehicle that wasn't using resistors with their spark plugs, they could hear the popping on their radio even when tuned to a specific station. However, those impulses are much more powerful than the typical ones that Shoulders utilized. Ordinarily, to prevent extremely powerful EMPs, x-rays, or gamma rays, he used a resistor to limit the current to only what was required to produce the EVO size and acceleration he desired.

  • Director

    By abruptly dumping enough enough into an unshielded spark gap, it becomes a spark-gap transmitter, which nowadays are illegal due to the broadband radio disruption they cause. Resistors in modern spark plugs act as a current limiting device, limiting the energy of the discharge.


    http://www.ngk-sparkplugs.jp/e…echinfo/qa/q08/index.html


    Ordinary spark plugs when fired up in the air aren't very loud (nor that dangerous). More powerful arc discharges for example from short circuits can be on the other hand quite loud. I prevously wrote "effort" but a better word would be "commitment" since you have to understand the possible risks. Parkhomov's strange radiation-producing "Woodpecker" device looks like it might be that dangerous, IMHO.

  • Hello Can,


    I won't say there is zero risk when it comes to the woodpecker or other SR devices. However, I think back to Nikola Tesla's life and all the spark gaps and high voltage systems he worked with and realize he lived a very long life. Since he was obviously producing SR in many of his experiments (such as exploding wires for example) I doubt this type of radiation in less than optimized systems is extremely dangerous. My guess is that if someone is going to build a woodpecker they should find a way to remote activate it and at least stay in the other room until the run is finished. I personally think the chance of vision loss from the bright light is probably greater than the chance of getting cancer, for example.


    So what are your plans for additional experiments? If I had a space to do experiments, which I don't, I'd LOVE to get a piezoelectric igniter for a gas grill, take it apart, remove any resistors that might be in the circuit, and try to produce track marks on targets. Then I'd try to see if I could get an EVO to run along a groove in a dielectric. However, I think controlling these EVOs precisely takes a decent amount of effort. In Kenneth Shoulder's book he describes how air pressure is one variable that will determine how high an EVO runs above a dielectric or if it will simply run along the surface -- making contact -- and damaging it. There are so many ways to proceed with EVO/SR experiments it's mind boggling.

  • Director

    I was referring to the known and immediate electrical hazards of these experiments rather than the possibility of strange radiation.


    I already tried breaking apart a small grill piezoelectric igniter last year but I couldn't make much out of the results. Inside there was a piece similar to this one:





    Igniters like these emit quite feeble sparks and they are rather fragile and difficult to use for purposes different than their intended one. I thought at some point of purchasing an automotive coil but didn't feel like spending money on one when other people already have the equipment to perform the same experiments.


    At the moment I'm sort of thinking of replicating a "Woodpecker". The basic concept tested with a coiled wire (17 turns), the usual over-abused ATX PSU @ 5V and a weakly ferromagnetic steel screwdriver does work (barely) in the air as the diagram below shows, in that after striking the base plate the pin does get pulled upward (by inverting polarity of the terminals it gets pushed towards it). To work better it would either need many more turns on the solenoid to move the pin with more force (and a better constructed setup), or a pin with a significantly higher magnetic permeability, or a much higher current (and better/oversized PSU), or all of the previous improvements. A big inductor somewhere in the circuit should also help.



       

  • If you want a safe and cheap spark generator then I suggest that you go hunt for the solenoid water-fill valve off a junked washing machine. These normally work on 12V DC.

    Inside is a nice copper coil. replace the sliding steel piston inside the coil with a nice snug-fitting steel nut and bolt. This will be the new core. Charge the coil briefly with a 9V battery or a 12V psu if you have one and the coil will generate a strong magnetic field in the nut and bolt. When you disconnect you should see an instant, brief but good spark as the magnetic field collapses generating a low-current high-voltage back EMF in the coil windings. 2 such coils in series will raise the voltage even more- though you will need a 24V psu to get best results.

  • Alan Smith

    With a few dozen meters of thick gauge wire wound around a somewhat ferromagnetic dumbbell (likely hollow) I've already made a coil capable of producing relatively loud and bright sparks at 5V input (and probably about 8A input but I cannot check at the moment) when the terminals are disconnected. I haven't been able to produce any strange radiation marks so far on nearby DVD-R, also when used as a protection screen against particles and light (the DVD-R was inside a paper case) within 10 cm distance. Either my methodology is wrong somewhere (possibly), or as it's been suggested around, perhaps it needs to run continuously for a period of time.


    So I was checking out how feasible an automated Woodpecker-like device would be at zero cost with what I already have around.

  • can


    Maybe time will help. Remember that magnetic field strength - and thus the power of your spark is a function of ampere-turns, so if you have lower amps, more turns really helps.

    It is my opinion that (despite the number of claims) that strange radiation marks visible with the naked eye on unetched plastic are just a bit too incredible to be correct. We all have to have something to be sceptical about!