Woodpecker, proof of concept

  • Bruce__H

    00:55 UTC, I just removed the paper-covered Al foil. Let's see what happens.


    * * *


    EDIT #1: it took a while, but eventually it started decaying at a rate similar to that of the shorter previous instances using a steel anode tip. This is clearer when looking at longer term data.


  • It does seem similar to muon type signatures In Holmlids experiments.


    I wouldn’t want to touch too much a working device before it’s well characterized. Still lots to do there I guess.


    But I do wonder if distance increases or decreases the signal or if it shows 1/r^2 decay.


    I wonder if Replacing the foil in paper with some unused writable cd discs would show something akin to what Bob is searching for.


    Also curious if just copper, zinc or Nickel shows similar sustaining behavior or if it requires the mixture. I suppose that’s something for later.


    It’s been fascinating seeing the progress of this test here

  • It does seem similar to muon type signatures In Holmlids experiments.


    I wouldn’t want to touch too much a working device before it’s well characterized. Still lots to do there I guess.


    But I do wonder if distance increases or decreases the signal or if it shows 1/r^2 decay.


    A problem is that the data and electrical connections of the Geiger counter I have are relatively flimsy, and it currently has no enclosure, so I cannot move it around too much without risking downtimes due to them breaking off or touching the leads of the GM tube and causing a false signal. I cannot really easily take it and verify at various distances.


    Leif Holmlid (and also Sindre Zeiner-Gundersen, Sveinn Olafsson) uses a photomultiplier-scintillator detector where the scintillator has been replaced by Al foils. With this type of detector, also given the relatively short half life of the unstable Al isotopes one can more easily check if the muon signal decreases/increases with distance. With a Geiger counter it's more complicated and probably just moving it around is going to show a standard 1/r^2 decay from whatever material was activated by neutrons/muons near the source. An idea could be perhaps enclosing a sensitive Geiger detector in an Al or Cu (possibly) box/tube, but it might not react as quickly as a photomultiplier tube coupled with a fast oscilloscope or multi-channel analyzer.


    Holmlid has indicated in the past that copper might also work well for detecting muon emission this way.



    Figure from https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.4928109



    Other persons, e.g. Russ George, have suggested silver foils/sheets.


    I wonder if Replacing the foil in paper with some unused writable cd discs would show something akin to what Bob is searching for.


    So far I've kept a DVD-R besides the Geiger counter, but I have not observed any tracks similar to those reported by Zhigalov et al, only dust accumulation. At the moment I'm testing without the DVD in place and I'm having some difficulties however obtaining a strong signal, so I'm starting to wonder if it could also have an enhancing effect. Will try checking out later more in detail.


    The last vertical dashed line is where earlier I started a new test. Initially the signal appeared to decrease, but then it recovered. It feels almost as if what I'm doing has very little effect. Keep in mind that the background Geiger CPM was previously 70-75 CPM.



    Also curious if just copper, zinc or Nickel shows similar sustaining behavior or if it requires the mixture. I suppose that’s something for later.


    Alloys that work well towards dissociating molecular hydrogen should be better. Francesco Celani for instance, at least for his gaseous experiments, found from the published literature that Constantan (CuNi alloy) works better towards this goal than Cu or Ni on their own.


    https://www.researchgate.net/p…_and_air-flow_calorimetry



    I recall reading Simon Brink suggesting that metals combinations that form good alloys could be good LENR materials, but I don't have a reference for this.

  • Google-translation of Fabrice's report (linked above) for convenience...


    Nuclear physics experiments are not restricted to the most advanced research centers. Several teams of high school students have ventured into this area of science successfully. We told you about the team from the high school of Montigny-le-Bretonneux who had made a fog chamber to study the spontaneous fission of Americium. They had recovered this fissile element in the smoke detectors of their high school. We will report soon on their experimental protocol.

    This month, we will describe the physics experiment carried out by Marissa Champagne and Morgane Habety, two students from the New Iberia High School in Louisiana. The Americans do not have the equivalent of our preparatory classes and our grandes écoles, and the quality of the institutions is very unequal. In return, students' creativity is valued in science education, particularly through Science Projects and Science Fairs. These are research projects on various themes that span the entire duration of the school year. The choice of subject is free and optional and it is often real research whose ingenuity and quality sometimes surprises professionals. The reflexes of researchers and the way of thinking adopted by young creative minds will be reinvested later in the professional career of these former students. This probably explains the US leadership in the field of science and technology.


    Marissa and Morgane have decided to replicate the experience of Japanese physicist Mizuno, one of the pioneers of research on "fusion". cold. When an electrolysis is carried out between two asymmetrical electrodes, one of these electrodes having a very limited surface, the formation of a bright electric arc around this electrode is observed. A stable plasma is formed under the liquid (here a solution of bicarbonate in water drawn from a bayou) and the current passes preferentially in this zone, since the arcs have a negative resistance. Observed by the physicist Wehnelt at the At the end of the 19th century, the inventor of the "electron gun" of television monitors and oscilloscopes, this effect served as a basis for the production of an electrolytic switch for Rumhkorf coils. The coils of Rumhkorf, dear to Jules Vernes were the first efficient high-voltage generators and we owe them many discoveries of physics. During an electrolysis according to Wehnelt, we not only get a luminous phenomenon, but also the current is modulated: a periodic pulse current of complex shape is obtained. Commander Ferrié, one of the pioneers of the TSF, had noticed that a dissymmetric electrolysis cell could straighten high-frequency currents like a modern diode. This observation led to the "electrolytic detector" which was soon dethroned by the galena detectors, then by the lamps, then by the transistors.

    Professor Mizuno noticed that the energy released in such a device exceeded the energy introduced in electrical form. He hypothesized that the excess energy came from the fusion of the hydrogen nuclei according to the reaction: p + p to d + beta + + neutrino. This proposal is not unimaginable since we have just seen that the arc in liquid medium has the characteristics of a diode. In the junction zone, the voltage is concentrated on a very small thickness and the electric field reaches extraordinary values. DIGITAL APPLICATION A voltage of 200 volts applied to a junction area of 100 micrometers thick gives a field of two megavolts per meter. We can imagine that this field can accelerate and merge the nuclei, especially if impulse overvoltages cross the circuit. High voltage, self-modulated current and parasitic cross-effects: Marissa and Morgane did not choose the ease! Power measurements using the wattmeter are particularly difficult to perform on such a circuit. The high school girls solved the problem by using three wattmeters inserted in the circuit. Two wattmeters of two different brands on the AC power circuit, and a pair of voltmeter / ammeter forming a third power meter on the DC circuit. Important improvement: a radio frequency filter prevents oscillations and pulses generated by the arc from going back up to the measuring devices.

  • fabrice DAVID


    Google-translation of Fabrice's report (linked above) for convenience...


    ... In the junction zone, the voltage is concentrated on a very small thickness and the electric field reaches extraordinary values. DIGITAL APPLICATION A voltage of 200 volts applied to a junction area of 100 micrometers thick gives a field of two megavolts per meter. We can imagine that this field can accelerate and merge the nuclei, especially if impulse overvoltages cross the circuit. ....


    Something seems off with the reasoning here. I don't view a field of two megavolts per metre as extraordinary and I am surprised that it is thought that this would be large enough to drive nuclei together. To gain perspective here, think about the electrically active neurons in the brain. Neurons work by creating a charge separation across their external cell membranes which is on the order of 100 millivolts. The membrane itself is on the order of 10 nanometres, so the field across the membrane is 1E-1V / 1E-8m = 1E+7V/m or 10 volts per metre which is 5 times larger than the field mentioned in the passage here. So why isn't this membrane field generating nuclear transmutations?

  • Today I did some more testing. The idea was trying to check out if there is an enhancement by running the cell while the signal is elevated. My prediction also was that with a

    paper-covered Al foil in place just behind the Geiger tube, counts would increase faster than without.



    In the first graph the vertical dashed lines denote, in order from left to right:

    • When I started the tests
    • When I added back the DVD-R next to the Geiger counter
    • When I did another brief test after a period of inactivity

    The second graph shows the overall situation since I started testing the CuNiZn anode tip, while the third graph the runs since I started obtaining strong Geiger count rate bumps upon testing (this roughly coincided with running longer runs after I installed the cooling fans, and possibly starting to leave the anode cooling outside the cell after each run).



    A couple videos (unlisted in my channel as they're essentially more of the same):



    Highlights

    • Using the paper-covered Al foil from the get-go did not appear to bring the expected results.
    • In today's testing session I have had more of a water overheating problem rather than a coil's. A few days ago I had the opposite problem.
    • I found that if I keep a screwdriver (or more in general a ferromagnetic part) just above the anode while it's operating it might get magnetically attracted and bounce up-down harder and in a noisier manner. However this needs to be set up just right to be profitably used.
    • When the water is close to reaching boiling temperature, the sparks emit a smoother, lower tone. When the water is cold they sound sharper.
    • It appears that attempting a run while Geiger counts are in the process of increasing makes the progression stop or slow down temporarily. It continues increasing after a period.
      • This could be further highlighting the importance of "off-times"
      • It's also possible that the active test temporarily disrupts the source of the rise of Geiger counts

    Preparations

    • Put paper-covered Al foil behind Geiger counter
    • Removed DVD-R
      • It was accumulating dust anyway
    • Refilled distilled water level in the jar

    Log

  • In a previous thread, I mentioned the potential problem of electrostatic fields attracting charged radon byproducts and increasing GM counts. See:

    MacGyver (aka JohnyFive) LENR experiment


    Is it possible that this experiment builds up a static charge on the anode and wires, and that attracts enough radon byproducts to increase the counts? Maybe you could try the balloon test described here to see if it produces the same profile of count increases.


    From my previous post:


    There is a series of papers on classroom experiments that use this technique to gather radionuclides. See this link:


    https://www.cns-snc.ca/media/u…rs/2C_nuclear_balloon.pdf


    After rubbing the balloon, in just 20 minutes it collected enough to make the GM counter read 1000x background (40 -> 4000 cpm).

  • Is it possible that this experiment builds up a static charge on the anode and wires, and that attracts enough radon byproducts to increase the counts? Maybe you could try the balloon test described here to see if it produces the same profile of count increases.


    It is good to do this sanity check.


    But with a bit of logical reasoning we see that it is unlikely radon. Why should ALU collect radon?

  • Robert Horst

    I previously tried putting an Al foil barrier the between anode and the Geiger counter, and counts didn't decrease:

    I could try putting it very close to the GM tube. Do you think it would increase counts significantly according to the same hypothesis? In how much time do you estimate that to happen and to what extent?



    EDIT: I could also try tuning off the power supply completely so that the fans will be off and the anode at ground potential, and see in 3-4 hours if anything changes. Actually I might be doing this right now.

  • Bruce wrote : Something seems off with the reasoning here. I don't view a field of two megavolts per metre as extraordinary and I am surprised that it is thought that this would be large enough to drive nuclei together. To gain perspective here, think about the electrically active neurons in the brain. Neurons work by creating a charge separation across their external cell membranes which is on the order of 100 millivolts. The membrane itself is on the order of 10 nanometres, so the field across the membrane is 1E-1V / 1E-8m = 1E+7V/m or 10 volts per metre which is 5 times larger than the field mentioned in the passage here. So why isn't this membrane field generating nuclear transmutations?

    Longview, fabrice DAVID and Wyttenbach like this.



    Our friend Jean-Luc Biberian could answer this question better than me.

  • Thanks to Alan for his translation. I posted this old paper only for the copper engraving of the Whenelt Interrupter. When I was at High School, I had built a mercury interruptor under alcohol very similar to the "woodpecker" (to drive a Rhumkorff coil) I have still the blueprint somewhere, I will search for it.

  • How intense does an electric field need to be to plausibly trigger nuclear phenomena? The work that Fabrice David mentions achieves fields of 2 MV/m but I have pointed out that fields considerably larger than this are completely typical property of the membranes of neurons with no known nuclear effects. Based on this, my guess is that fields required for LENR must be many orders of magnitude greater than the 1 MV/m range suggested.


    - Is there a line of physical reasoning that might produce a minimal field strength needed for triggering LENR phenomena?

    - Is there a way to estimate the field strengths achieved in can's woodpecker setup?

  • How intense does an electric field need to be to plausibly trigger nuclear phenomena? The work that Fabrice David mentions achieves fields of 2 MV/m but I have pointed out that fields considerably larger than this are completely typical property of the membranes of neurons with no known nuclear effects. Based on this, my guess is that fields required for LENR must be many orders of magnitude greater than the 1 MV/m range suggested.


    It would seem reasonable to believe that LENR depends on particular environmental conditions as does nerve conduction. The presence of electrical currents in both environments does not demand the production of identical behaviours.

  • It would seem reasonable to believe that LENR depends on particular environmental conditions as does nerve conduction. The presence of electrical currents in both environments does not demand the production of identical behaviours.


    I'm afraid I don't understand your point. Could you restate?

  • Based on this, my guess is that fields required for LENR must be many orders of magnitude greater than the 1 MV/m range suggested.


    Bruce's logic


    Nerve conduction .


    Electric Field = 10 Mv/m no LENR

    Junction zone =2Mv/ therefore no LENR



    Question for Bruce


    Are there anythings apart from electric field that are necessary for nerve conduction?


    eg. lipid bilayer... voltage gated ion channels and controllers..


    Do you think there might be a possiblity of low voltage paths in LENR?

    Perhaps this is what Alan means by environmental

    or are you going with the impassable Coulomb barrier hypothesis,


  • Yes! Exactly! I think this is a good starting point. But I then therefore ask the question .... "Is there a line of physical reasoning that might produce a minimal field strength needed for triggering LENR phenomena?"


    I think this is a good question to ask at this point. Don't you? I do.

  • - Is there a line of physical reasoning that might produce a minimal field strength needed for triggering LENR phenomena?


    The field at the proton de Broglie radius is about 1.1MeV over about 52pm. The above mentioned field is just peanuts for a nucleus...You must always relate it to the proton radius then it is obvious that it is to small.