Ponderations on Cavitation (Updated with impressive results from a paper of 2018)

    • Official Post
    Quote from Wyttenbach

    But here the difference is 3 grams even more unlikely...


    As said if amateurs do science I usually ignore the results. The mismatch is 1000% in other domains this simply is fraud.

    I have been looking at these results for a good while, also at the methods, even a video of the entire lenght of a run is available, and I frankly don't see any indication of fraud, and errors of measuring dissolved solutes are possible but not likely if you have the samples analyzed by a third party that is certified to do the analyses.


    These results, along with others including those of Urutskoev, are what has motivated me to propose a project and get financing to see if the results are reproducible with an analog system, and so far it has been possible to see an effect, which is absent in the control without cavitation.


    The exact mechanism will remain unexplained as long as we don’t increase research on this to see what variables influence the results.


    On the other hand, and specifically about Omasa's patent, I wonder, what woud be the logic behind attempting to patent a fraud?

    Quote from Curbina

    On the other hand, and specifically about Omasa's patent, I wonder, what woud be the logic behind attempting to patent a fraud?

    Non-specifically, some people use patent applications (and rarely, but occasionally, even get an approved patent) as support to their believability, and to increase their public visibility. The excuse that the patent office dislikes/bans ‘cold fusion’ type claims is useful for defending especially weak applications, although it can be true in addition to being an excuse.

    • Official Post

    Quite a waste of time if you ask me. In the case of Omasa, what I know is that he already had several patents for his device related to the production of his OHMASA gas, and they were about if not already lapsed, but he had noticed the effect many years ago and could not explain it nor think it was of much use until the Fukushima incident made him think of trying the reactor with tritium water.
    He is an engineer after all and as such he is far less concerned with the theory than with the potential applications to industry.

    Curbina

    In my various tests with electrolytic plasma cells and particularly concentrated electrolyte solutions I often found that the electrolyte gets aerosolized in larger amounts than expected and ends up getting deposited on surfaces in the same room even at considerable distances as a white dusty layer.


    It's possible that easily transported away microdroplets or alkali–water complexes can be formed under certain conditions. I think one has to be careful that the electrolyte is not leaving the cell in unusual ways.

    • Official Post
    Quote from can

    It's possible that easily transported away microdroplets or alkali–water complexes can be formed under certain conditions. I think one has to be careful that the electrolyte is not leaving the cell in unusual ways.

    That's quite correct - and I have noticed that in a cold lab you see wisps of 'wet steam' coming off the surface of an ultrasound tank even when the tank temperature is 20C or less. It is in the nature of energetic systems to find unexpected ways to shed that energy.

    Curbina

    I am not sure about other experiment types (e.g. ultrasonic cavitation), but in cathodic plasma electrolysis there is usually a strong concentration of positive ions (alkali) near the cathode, so if microdroplets are leaving the cell from this region (catholyte), electrolyte loss could be greater than what the loss of total solution volume would suggest.


    I think I recall reading in some of the Omasa patent applications that the vibrating vanes may be part of an electrolytic circuit, so similar loss mechanisms could be possible there as well. More in general, electrolyte concentration might not necessarily be homogeneous depending on operating conditions.


    This would mostly be an annoyance with 'regular' electrolytes, but with radioactive ones like Cesium-137, it would be more serious.

    • Official Post

    can , I appreciate the efforts to try to make me see sources of error I might have overlooked, but at some point I also realize you haven’t looked at this carefully at all, that’s a very basic thing and be sure I have done that discard process thoroughly, and that has only increased my curiosity about this, not the contrary.


    I agree that in electrolytic conditions there is a separation process due to charge and this is the basis of an effective desalination process, which I know well, but is very energy consuming so has not been very successful in commercial applications.


    But Omasa’s system, albeit he does use electrolysis for his OHMASA gas process, the “transmutation machine” as they call it, doesn’t use electrolysis at all. It’s purely mechanical stirring with his vibrating vane device, that creates cavitation by resonance. It’s not even ultrasound per se but it creates a high frequency resonance at around 20 to 26 KHz.

    • Official Post
    Quote from Ahlfors

    "Combusting seawater"


    https://molecularimpactenergy.com/

    Thanks Ahlfors I am perfectly aware of this, but it has not much to do with the current thread topic, just with the general one, and even more with the thread about the “problem” with excess heat from cavitation.

    Curbina

    The electrolysis example was part of the broader idea where:


    Quote

    [...] electrolyte concentration might not necessarily be homogeneous depending on operating conditions


    Some related questions: what happens to dissolved salts when water evaporates? How are cavitation bubbles formed? Could the electrolyte end up concentrating close to the cavitation source?

    • Official Post
    Quote from can

    Curbina

    The electrolysis example was part of the broader idea where:



    A couple related questions: what happens to dissolved salts when water evaporates? How are cavitation bubbles formed?

    Salts concentrate in the remaining solution, cavitation bubbles are formed by abrupt phase change, both things would only drive the concentrations higher, And that’s why I find the loss of Cs more intriguing.


    An increase in the concentration by losing water vapor is expected, albeit to see the amount of increase of concentration seen by Omasa the loss of water would be insufficient by far, and it still wouldn’t explain a net gain of mass. Just to illustrate, In table 4 of Omasa’s patent application, the second element that starts with higher concentration in the original solution is Barium, but its concentration increases 2285 times (from 0,021 mg/L to 48 mg/L), even if 90% of the volume of the solution would have evaporated you could not explain the concentration increase, which would end being 0,21 mg/L.


    But a decrease of concentration as in the case of Cs, would require adding water, not losing it. Unless a gaseous compound or phase of Cs would be formed there’s no way to explain this conventionally in a satisfactory manner. Cesium vaporizes a 669 degrees so it simply being evaporated would require much more than simple evaporation of water. And again, this is why the loss of Cs is by far more interesting. But Omasa has done this with Magnesium and Copper also, Not only Cesium.

    Curbina

    To put it in a hopefully clearer form, I am proposing that:

    1. Local salt concentration could increase in a well-defined cavitating region during operating conditions (salt concentration becoming non-homogenous);
    2. Mist (i.e. wet vapor or microdroplets containing salts) originating from this higher salt concentration area (formed or promoted with cavitation. Also see Alan's Smith's comment above) could carry away significant amounts of salt from the solution;
    3. Water loss as dry vapor would be lower than that as mist or wet vapor (otherwise, salt concentration would end up increasing as you write).

    Does this sound plausible to you?

    • Official Post
    Quote from can

    Curbina

    To put it in a hopefully clearer form, I am proposing that:

    1. Local salt concentration could increase in a well-defined cavitating region during operating conditions (salt concentration becoming non-homogenous);
    2. Mist (i.e. wet vapor or microdroplets containing salts) originating from this higher salt concentration area (formed or promoted with cavitation. Also see Alan's Smith's comment above) could carry away significant amounts of salt from the solution;
    3. Water loss as dry vapor would be lower than that as mist or wet vapor (otherwise, salt concentration would end up increasing as you write).

    Does this sound plausible to you?

    I understand what you imply, but It’s a very convoluted mechanism, that might work with transducer kind of ultrasound, which creates micro droplets, and, if anything, would be not as amazing as transmutation, but still amazing. I would study this from a separation point of view, because it would be behaving in a selective way, increasing some concentrations and decreasing others even if the charge of the ions is the same.


    But the Omasa vibration mechanism is purely mechanic, and no microdroplets or mist is seen to be formed.

    • Official Post
    Quote from Wyttenbach

    What you not see is not what is there. There are always bubbles due to fast pressure changes. This is basic physics. No way around redoing the experiment.

    We are doing an analogue of Lu et al, using directly a sonotrode with 500 watts and 20 KHz nominal frequency. We are doing a simple check: KCl solution made with pro analisi reactives and distilled water.

    We check starting concentration of K and Ca. 5 minutes ultrasound stirring, great care in not loosing any solution volume. Result: Concentration of K and Ca move in opposite ways. Will keep doing

    this, always compared with non cavitated controls.


    We will also do Omasa analogue experiments.

    10/31/2019 Cherepanov A.I. about cavitation (hydro-wave) technology and the mechanism of HTY based on ether -

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.


    And after - November 6, 2019, I wrote my article - read from page 33 -

    In the wake of N.V. Samsonenko at a seminar at RUDN University on October 31, 2019 ..., 11/6/2019 russ. - https://drive.google.com/file/…38RBCMMl/view?usp=sharing


    In the wake of N.V. Samsonenko at a seminar at RUDN University on October 31, 2019 ..., 11/6/2019 russ. -

    https://cloud.mail.ru/public/4tsu/25DN1iuaE

    • Official Post
    Quote from Wyttenbach

    I hope you use an air tight case! 40-K is only there for 0.012% (isotope rate!) at best. Everything else would indicate compound reactions.

    Did you do any blind test with just with water?

    We don’t know the isotopic ratio of our particular KCl, we just know we started without detectable Ca and we end with some after 5 minutes. By blind test you mean sonicating distilled water? If so we haven’t, yet. Our blind is stirring the solution with an equivalent amount of energy input with non cavitation system (the classic magnetic stirrer).

    But about sonicating distilled water, literature has reported new elements in distilled water after 30 minutes of sonication. Omasa has also done it but takes several hours to see new elements with his system (25 hours I recall).


    We intend to do such a test at some point but our sonotrode is good for 5 minute continuous runs only, so we have to allow pauses to emulate the 30 minutes of Cardone et al.

    Взаимодействие с другими людьми

    Quote from Ull25

    Напоминает угольную лампу Теслы, работы Генри Морея и многих других людей после. Несколько месяцев назад я провел эксперимент с никелевым НПС, водородом и искрой 30 000 В, он дал несколько интересных источников света, которые нельзя было объяснить ничем, что я знаю. Кажется, много способов добраться до поверхностных плазмонов. Я выделю время, чтобы провести больше экспериментов с высоким напряжением.


    Чем больше я размышляю над этим, тем больше думаю, что синтез скрывается у всех на виду, и в этом нет ничего особенного. Если вы читали работы Эгели, вы знаете о том, как солнечная корона вызывает слияние с пылью. Это должно быть довольно легко сделать здесь, на Земле. Я действительно думаю, что нам не хватает чего-то очевидного.

    Взаимодействие с другими людьми

    Quote from Curbina

    Almost by sheer chance I found this another very old paper of transmutation of lead to mercury in a certain type of lamp with an electric sparking effect. The researcher struggled to make sure they were not fooling themselves and ended not sure of anything.

    The author of this article concluded - "At the moment I am, therefore, inclined to conclude that the mercury found in our earlier sparking experiments came, certainly partly and perhaps entirely, from the carbon disulphide."


    Synthesis of lead from mercury -


    Quote from Curbina

    We don’t know the isotopic ratio of our particular KCl, we just know we started without detectable Ca and we end with some after 5 minutes. By blind test you mean sonicating distilled water? If so we haven’t, yet. Our blind is stirring the solution with an equivalent amount of energy input with non cavitation system (the classic magnetic stirrer).

    But about sonicating distilled water, literature has reported new elements in distilled water after 30 minutes of sonication. Omasa has also done it but takes several hours to see new elements with his system (25 hours I recall).


    We intend to do such a test at some point but our sonotrode is good for 5 minute continuous runs only, so we have to allow pauses to emulate the 30 minutes of Cardone et al.

    Probably you thought about this already, but have you repeated the Ca increase in different types of container (metal, glass, plastic, wood)?

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.