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

Quote from IobseRvable

...

..

.

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.

Quote from Director

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.

@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.

@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.

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.

A pulse generator and an automotive coil should produce abundant powerful sparks. I used to use a drill to spin an automobile distributor to run the magnetic pick-up to test aftermarket MSD units. The drill-spinning distributor and pick-coil (or points set) could be replaced with a (555-based?) pulse generator circuit with adjustable period without getting too complicated, while the automotive CD to coil part handles the coil load and final switching easily and robustly.

Paradigmnoia

The solenoid-based "Woodpecker" was interesting in that, at least from how it's been described, it appears to be a simple electromechanical device; basically 1800's technology. However I don't understand how it would work with a non-ferromagnetic core/striker like graphite or copper since, I guess, then the solenoid part wouldn't be able to pull it upward. I suspect some crucial detail might have been inadvertently left out or incorrectly reported.

Alan Smith

It does seem incredible but after all Ken Shoulders claimed that EVOs when produced (of which sparks would be the visible manifestation) would make visible marks on dielectric surfaces, which is what I think I observed last year on plastic surfaces and that small 10-12kV piezoelectric igniter (although I'm still not sure if they weren't just burn marks). I guess the incredible part is that these EVOs can jump to nearby dielectric surfaces and make similar marks there.

can

Something like this?

https://www.revolvy.com/page/Induction-coil

Paradigmnoia

I realize that an ordinary induction coil could be used for this, but the previously made description of the device made it sound like it was something different and it didn't help that the way I understood it was constructed seemed to work to some extent, in a couple tests. A diagram of an induction coil from your link:

From the video that has been just posted (I didn't realize there was actually an embedded video in the presentation) on ECW in a recent dedicated thread it looks like in the jar there are only a graphite rod and a graphite plate and so it does appear that they might be simply the terminals of a spark gap connected to the secondary winding of a induction coil like you're suggesting, with the difference that presumably Parkhomov made the induction coil by himself (since it runs at 100V, etc).

From the Parkhomov QA on ECW it looks like there might have been a solenoid actuating the graphite rod after all, just not visible in the video.

http://e-catworld.com/2018/10/…with-alexander-parkhomov/

I recently found it interesting that using gypsum foundry as a reactor casing in some areas to promote additional reactions when hematite particles reenter the race track act almost like a self sustaining reaction to keep the flow moving. At least til it eats the case away.

Quote from can

From the Parkhomov QA on ECW it looks like there might have been a solenoid actuating the graphite rod after all, just not visible in the video.

http://e-catworld.com/2018/10/…with-alexander-parkhomov/

The diagram you posted there looks plausible. The rate of "pecking" might be tricky to control.

Paradigmnoia

However, if the device runs on DC power (which is what I assumed) the power supply symbol is not the correct one as it's generally used for AC transformers (EDIT: I changed it to the standard symbol for DC input to avoid confusion). The rate of pecking does not appear to be critical from the information available, but until a complete description of wiring, circuit and rationale for the choices made is provided one cannot be 100% sure.

Below is attached a modified diagram of what I posted earlier in this thread, showing the complete process (that I imagined) and a DC power supply.

This is Parkhomov's summary of the principle of operation from the ECW blogpost:

Quote

Any experimenter can create a “woodpecker” device. You need a horizontal flat electrode immersed in water or another liquid, and a vertical electrode in the form of a thin rod. The vertical electrode is connected to an electromagnet, which is powered by a current, the circuit of which is closed through the electrodes. When the electrodes are connected, the electromagnet pulls up the vertical electrode, the circuit opens, after which the vertical electrode falls on the horizontal one. The chain closes again, the cycle repeats. In my devices, the voltage is up to 100V, the current is several A