Does LENR produce plasmoids + harmful radiations?

    Quote from Curbina

    How do you suggest it got into a nuclear emulsion? It’s not the same that a hard surface and the process ensures it doesn’t get scratched.

    These scratches are easily made on photographs. Simply sliding photos, one on another, is sufficient.


    This material was fairly soft, so a thick imprint was made of the physical particle that made it.
    If it was actually inside the emulsion that would be from something different.


    Normally atomic-type particles expose the emulsion to make a track. That doesn’t look exposed to me.

    • Official Post
    Quote from Paradigmnoia

    These scratches are easily made on photographs. Simply sliding photos, one on another, is sufficient.


    This material was fairly soft, so a thick imprint was made of the physical particle that made it.
    If it was actually inside the emulsion that would be from something different.


    Normally atomic-type particles expose the emulsion to make a track. That doesn’t look exposed to me.

    Your own statements about how these are easy to form in a hard surface (to which I totally agree) is self contradictory with your position about the track left in the nuclear emulsion.


    A soft surface (as the nuclear emulsion which is a gel surface) wouldn’t oppose enough force in the context of a three body interaction to leave such a mark, It would be single scoop mark with the the depth of the particle that left the mark. The emulsion does not provide enough resistance to cause the rotation of points that the three body interaction requires.


    Now, how about this one recorded in an x ray plate?



    • Official Post

    Now, getting back to the paper that was recently published about the effect of the “strange radiation”

    In biological systems, I think the paper proves beyond doubt that some kind of penetrating radiation is emitted during the events that are said to cause it.


    Bob Greenyer has highlighted to me the following points that I feel is important to share here:


    (quoting a message from Bob Greenyer to me):


    This aspect was made public after 9 years of research by Shishkin and the team at Dubna at Sochi in Oct. 2018, I translated the presentation and published it Feb 2019.


    https://youtu.be/gcF-KSLIAWs?t=1175


    This is unsurprising as the EVOs (SVS - Black EVOs) will pick up ions from material they pass through.


    In addition the Shishkin team showed that the damage in pits corresponded to the ions being transported


    What this paper adds is the evidence of the relationship to these aspects and genetic damage.



    Bob


    Bob also sent me the following image:


    A quick data visualization by Felix Scholkmann:


    Quote from Curbina

    Your own statements about how these are easy to form in a hard surface (to which I totally agree) is self contradictory with your position about the track left in the nuclear emulsion.


    A soft surface (as the nuclear emulsion which is a gel surface) wouldn’t oppose enough force in the context of a three body interaction to leave such a mark, It would be single scoop mark with the the depth of the particle that left the mark. The emulsion does not provide enough resistance to cause the rotation of points that the three body interaction requires.


    Now, how about this one recorded in an x ray plate?


    This one is cool because there are two paired distinct faces being repeated by the rolling particle.

    “Little bird looking down” then “little bird looking up”. Over and over

    The track width - 10um - clearly points to a macroscopic "particle" and not a "real" particle. The track is a kind of hopping trace you also can see when you slide stones on a calm water surface.


    For me there is still one open question if, in dense mass, we must treat charge differently in case it has concave or convex shape. +/- classic positron/electron exterior charge is convex not necessarily inside dense matter where we could have ++ +- -- -+ or even more complex combinations as ---++ etc. We know that gravitation is an EM force mediated by the electron internal charge. This charge is not visible. We see only the mass part.

    So we only can say: An important part of physics is not yet fully understood.

    • Official Post
    Quote from Wyttenbach

    The track width - 10um - clearly points to a macroscopic "particle" and not a "real" particle. The track is a kind of hopping trace you also can see when you slide stones on a calm water surface.


    For me there is still one open question if, in dense mass, we must treat charge differently in case it has concave or convex shape. +/- classic positron/electron exterior charge is convex not necessarily inside dense matter where we could have ++ +- -- -+ or even more complex combinations as ---++ etc. We know that gravitation is an EM force mediated by the electron internal charge. This charge is not visible. We see only the mass part.

    So we only can say: An important part of physics is not yet fully understood.

    Wyttenbach , thanks for your input. The track is of course “microscopic” albeit one has to remember that what is seen is the result of an interaction and not the particle itself. The “stars” left by known particles in nuclear emulsions are also much bigger than the particle that leaves the trace.

    It is speculated by Es Lewis that a plasmoid or “micro ball lightning” is what leaves these traces, in such case it would be the cluster of electrons scooping matter in their way.


    Your last sentence is probably what we must have very clear at all times: we have much yet to understand.

    Взаимодействие с другими людьми

    For me, the physics of "incomprehensible" or "strange" radiation is not a secret ... I talked with Shishkin on this topic ... But the minus for him is that he does not have the education of a "nuclear physicist", and most importantly he not familiar with the physics of the microworld (like many thousands of physicists), and therefore he is not able to correctly interpret his experiments and the photographs obtained ... My articles on this topic -

    We analyze Nikitin's report Three sources and three components of the foundations of the CMM theory, January 8, 2018 (1) .doc - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/88sM/BNnxNXo4P

    On the dangers of working on LENR.doc installations - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/FUra/3EV6jCnRi

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    The track width - 10um - clearly points to a macroscopic "particle" and not a "real" particle. The track is a kind of hopping trace you also can see when you slide stones on a calm water surface.


    For me there is still one open question if, in dense mass, we must treat charge differently in case it has concave or convex shape. +/- classic positron/electron exterior charge is convex not necessarily inside dense matter where we could have ++ +- -- -+ or even more complex combinations as ---++ etc. We know that gravitation is an EM force mediated by the electron internal charge. This charge is not visible. We see only the mass part.

    So we only can say: An important part of physics is not yet fully understood.

    There is nothing that you wrote about this physical phenomenon ... The only thing I agree with is the participation of electron clusters in these processes ... There is evaporation of matter in combination with the pressure of photons ... Therefore, various bizarre tracks are observed ... Any lightning in the sky is the same track and it is also bizarre ... You should not be surprised that the tracks can be curves and straight or parallel and circular - this is how the magnetic field in matter and the photons that interact with matter manifest themselves so bizarrely. .. There is always a multifactorial nature of the processes ... Bound electrons are responsible for the state of aggregation of matter ... If you observe a hole, then evaporation occurred, if an influx, then evaporation and deposition at the same time ... ROLE OF PHOTONS and ROLE of bound ELECTRONS - determine these processes. .. Any plasmoid is free electrons, which, in conjunction with the magnetons of molecules, form clusters - magnetic formations that can take bizarre shapes due to but the internal magnetic system and that system, which is formed by photons interacting with electrons, their magnetic field and spin ...

    Quote from Cherepanov2020

    There is nothing that you wrote about this physical phenomenon ... The only thing I agree with is the participation of electron clusters in these processes ... There is evaporation of matter in combination with the pressure of photons ... Therefore, various bizarre tracks are observed ... Any lightning in the sky is the same track and it is also bizarre ... You should not be surprised that the tracks can be curves and straight or parallel and circular - this is how the magnetic field in matter and the photons that interact with matter manifest themselves so bizarrely. .. There is always a multifactorial nature of the processes ... Bound electrons are responsible for the state of aggregation of matter ... If you observe a hole, then evaporation occurred, if an influx, then evaporation and deposition at the same time ... ROLE OF PHOTONS and ROLE of bound ELECTRONS - determine these processes. .. Any plasmoid is free electrons, which, in conjunction with the magnetons of molecules, form clusters - magnetic formations that can take bizarre shapes due to but the internal magnetic system and that system, which is formed by photons interacting with electrons, their magnetic field and spin ...

    Curious Cherepanov Have you built a theoretical reactor body to this ?

    Взаимодействие с другими людьми

    Quote from LeBob

    Hard UV and soft X rays that can be blocked by a metal foil or light ceramic container are considered ionizing radiation?

    Yes it is. It takes energy to remove an electron from a molecule ... THIS reasoning is not inherently a "physical" term - it is a purely mathematical term ... This is an "energy" approach in physics - read "mathematical" - and this is a kind of theoretical virus ... And how was it to be presented? And we must talk about POWER! It is the FORCE required to remove the electron, which rotates on the axis of rotation of the proton, with which it interacts linearly. So where does the power come from? And the force is generated in a photon by its 6 magnetic fields ... A photon is an ultraviolet photon and an X-ray photon has a mass - that is why it is able to "press" on an electron and carry out "ionization". See the table of photons - there is a mass and its corresponding mass energy ... Below is a screenshot from Wikipedia of the Russian and English isotope of gallium. In Russian energy is represented in "eV" ... And in English for some reason this is not ...





    A photon with energies of 6 eV can remove the first electron in gallium.


    Let's calculate the mass of this photon -


    mf = E / C ^ 2 = 6 eV • 1.602 • 10 ^ -19 / (3 • 10 ^ 8 m / s) ^ 2 = 1.068 • 10 ^ -35 kg


    This photon is 4 orders of magnitude lighter than an electron ... but has a huge momentum, and hence a FORCE, which "knocks" the electron out of its cell.


    Let's calculate the wavelength of a given photon - it is equal to its radius -


    λf = rf = k0 / mf = 2.21 • 10^-42 kg • m / 1.068 • 10^-35 kg = 2.069 • 10^-7 m is an ultraviolet photon and this is the beginning of the ultraviolet range


    Why did I give you these calculations? And in order for you to get rid of the concept of “hard ultraviolet photon” from your head ... An ordinary ultraviolet photon ionizes on the first electron of gallium ... But ... But already the next electron of gallium, the second electron, will require a large energy ~ 24 eV.


    This requires a photon with a mass of 4.272 • 10^-35 kg, its radius and wavelength will be -


    λf = rf = 5.173 • 10^-8 m is a harder ultraviolet photon ...


    If it is required to remove the third electron, then the photon energy will be ~ 54 eV


    This requires a photon with a mass of 9.612 • 10^-35 kg, its radius and wavelength will be -


    λf = rf = 2.299 • 10^-8 m is an even harder ultraviolet photon ...

    Quote from Alan Smith

    I was always taught that photons have momentum, but zero mass. Which sounds like a contradiction.

    I was taught the same way! But in 2017, I came to the conclusion that this is false knowledge ... In fact, a photon has a mass !!! If you realize this, then physics will become simpler and clearer for you ... And most importantly, you will realize that there is no quantum physics in nature!


    Continuing the previous post, I draw your attention to the fact that neither gallium nor other atoms have "NO ORBITALS"! The electrons do not rotate around the nucleus of the gallium atom - they rotate on the axes of rotation of "their protons". Schematically electrons are represented as "blue ovals", protons - "red ovals" - this emphasizes the fact that both electrons and protons rotate. A neutron is presented as a "green circle" - a neutron in a stable nucleus does not have the ability to rotate ... The same situation is in radioactive isotopes - where a neutron has two or more bonds, a neutron has no opportunity for decay, and only that neutron decays - their maybe 1 or 2, which has only one connection with the nucleus or with the neutron of the nucleus - I call such a neutron "unstable" and it is correct to call such an isotope "unstable" ... Why so? And because the name "radioactive" implies the "magic activity" of the isotope, but it is NOT in nature! The activity is shown not by the isotope, but by the incident photon, which is engaged in the spinning of the "unstable neutron" ... There may be several such photons ... What is the conclusion? If you create conditions such that the access of photons to an unstable neutron in an unstable isotope will be terminated, then there will be no decay !!! For this reason, radiocarbon analysis gives an error in determining the age of the material, since the decay of carbon-14 depends on solar activity, which is irregular and can vary greatly from year to year ... Nobody knows what activity of the Sun was 500 years ago or 5000 years ago ...

    Below I present to you a table from Wikipedia -


    I present to you my models of what is presented in the table -






    Pay attention - in the zinc nucleus there are no protons on the axis of the nucleus! It is this circumstance that allows zinc to protect the metals that are coated with zinc from oxidation ... Why is this so? And because oxidation is a magnetic process - iron oxidizes very well precisely because oxygen has both the right and the left of the proton and iron also has the left and the right of the proton - they are attracted to each other and form what we call an oxide.





    I continue




    Once again I want to draw your attention to the fact that a proton is a small proton, it holds an electron at a distance that exceeds its own size by a million times ... If it were possible to draw the above drawings to scale, then it would be necessary to lengthen the "radial axis "on which a neutron, a proton and an electron sit, and the electron had to be drawn a kilometer from the proton, and the size of the electron would have been 1 meter ... This is how the secondary magnetic field pushes the electron away - and both the proton and the electron have it ...

    I understand that generally, was more pointing out when people hear ionizing radiation they think it is a bad thing. In reality, wavelength and shielding material make this relative. With hard UV, beta decay electrons and soft X rays all of the ionizing radiation can be absorbed and utilized inside a portable device. I would intuit roughly volume/mass and energetic output comparable to a range of ICEs, home furnace/kilns and fancy wood stoves. I believe nano and microscale structures in light element reactive substrates could contain "strange radiation" and channel output. You can end up with something manageable for human life if it's in an airtight sealed closed loop. Might want to wear a blacksmith/welding visor to look at it 😎.


    True, I am concerned with the ionization energy of s-orbitals at the centre of transition metals as the enthalpy of pico hydride formation. Also with the enthalpy of formation of the dihydrino also known as the dense hydride H2*(1/4), the only mono element pico-hydride. Both of which are subnuclear and superchemical in scale, 0.5 keV and up. Thanks for your diagrams and perspectives, in many ways we are on a similar page though I lack your kind of experience which I hope to gain.


    Ionization and free electrons are important to the flow of energy from these processes. The source of entropy is the formation of the hydride nuclear compound atoms and isotope stabilization. Once bound in substrates and polymers they should be of high value and utility. Clusters of this compound matter with its atom-sized magnetic dipoles and potential magnetic effects could also be energised by accelerated beta decay electrons. At the end of the day this seems primarily electromagnetic/weak and a whole atom scale phenomena.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.