MFMP project ULTR: Is it possible to induce transmutation using an off-the-shelf affordable ultrasonic cleaner? Two years later the answer is a resounding Yes!

The MFMP has engaged in a very interesting and already producer of surprising results experimental project that, as we have already been made aware by magicsound, has found potential evidence of transmutation induced on a sheet of thin indium foil, that happened during the cleaning of the foil in a commercial brand very economic ultrasound cleaner bath.

You can follow the online document here:

http://www.quantumheat.org/ind…onic-driven-transmutation

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rvVhRGGLSuIEpdXmj6jAbf0whitX1iFLiCpU2Wbpi64/edit

Could this be the experiment that finally proves LENR happens and that anyone can perform?

Stay tuned...

Quote from Nigel Appleton

With respect to the cited paper

"The astonishing 63Ni radioactivity reduction in radioactive wastes
by means of ultrasounds application"
Alberto Rosada1
· Fabio Cardone2,3 · Pasquale Avino4

Having done a lot of ultrasonication, I would like to see the before/after sonication elemental analysis of sample of various corrosivities NOT containing radionuclides. In my experience sonotrode erosion is common (nay, inevitable), and would possibly account for a good deal of the observed increases in the concentrations of many elements in sonicated material vs unsonicated.

This is out of interest, not to decry interesting results found in other cavitation experiments

Display More

Well, they know exactly the elemental components that are in the sonotrode and every part in contact with the solutions and usually discard those from the results. At least they reported that methodology in the “nuclear metamorphosis of mercury” paper, and in this Ni63 paper they did exactly the same, they provide a detailed elemental composition of the sonotrode. The paper is open access so you can download it without problem from the link posted (open in a new tab for better visualization).

Nigel Appleton , you do sonication for cleansing or for reaction enhancement? If you read the papers you will probably find similarities or dissimilarities with what you do. There is one paper from Lu et al that I did not link because the site seems to be down, and it found transmutation from K to Ca in the presence of hydrides. They used ultrasound for stirring, and my hypothesis is that the transmutation has everything to do with the ultrasound stirring and nothing to do with the hydrides.

Now I added the link to a pdf print of the html version of Lu et al paper to the live document on the MFMP ULTR project page.

I think the ULTR project as far as it is going in its first controlled replication round is quickly showing strong evidence of transmutation in the thin indium foil. The consistent production of damaged areas in the foil and the presence of many elements that are not indium in those damaged areas is undeniable. I know is early to claim “Eureka!” because ruling out contamination ain’t that easy, but we are approaching quickly the stage when one can begin to think “if it walks like a duck...”

Nigel Appleton, regarding your questions, I think the Ni63 reduction paper has enough information to answer your questions in a straight forward manner:

The paper states the following regarding the sonotrode composition:

The Ergal sonotrode is made of Al/Zn/Mg/

Cu alloy with the following composition: Al 87.3–90%, Zn

5.1–6.1%, Mg 2.1–2.9%, Cu 1.2–2%, other elements are Fe,

Mn, Si, Cr, Ti, Zr, 1.6–1.7%;

Regarding the difference of % difference between non sonicated and sonicates samples, the results reported are these:

Discard all components from the sonotrode, and you still have significant increases in other elements after sonication, most notably Na, V, Ga, La and Ce. Anyway, the dicrease in Ni63 is per se important, along with the increase in Ni62 (which is not a component of the sonotrode).

Quote from Wyttenbach

This table makes no sense: Can you edit it and give mass number , % before % after ?? and relative change. Of course the total should be again 100%...

Well, the table is as published in the paper, so I can´t really edit it, what I can do is go to Mr. Rosada's Researchgate page and see if he can share the original data to prepare the table as you request. Let me get back to you once and if Mr. Rosada agrees to share his spreadsheet. I have been in touch with Dr. Cardone (co author) so they probably will agree.

Quote from RobertBryant

Nickel 63 is absent in native nickel..

Is the elemental data done by SEM EDX or other?

Perhaps Curbina you could check with Rosada on the inferences used.

Ni 63 in this case (because of being radiactive) was added to the working sample, and a 14% of its initial content was lost in the before/after treatment comparison.

This paper is about the capacity of half life reduction enabled by Ultrasonic treatment. Bear in mind that this group has been working in this issue for well over a decade and they have gained a lot of experimental know how regarding shape, frequencies, angle of exposure (the reactions ara anisotropic so the relative positions of the sonotrode and liquid to be treated is important) and they have not disclosed all of the aspects die to patents pending.

Well, the group of Cardone et al spent a good part of their initial research finding a way to produce a sonotrode less prone to failure. In fact their patent applications that have morphed since the first was filed is mostly about the sonotrode itself and less about what wonders can it be used to causing transmutation and radiation reduction.

I have reached to one of the co authors of the Ni⁶³ radiation reduction paper (Dr. Cardone). He suggested me to contact the corresponding author for the data, albeit he sees no need for that as the Table 1 seems pretty straight forward on his opinion. (I will reach to the corresponding author ASAP).

For understanding the experimental work this group has been doing for more than 17 years its important to have in mind that this work has been performed under the guidance and from the perspective of their proposed Extended Einstein theory of Deformed Space Time (DST).

Dr. Cardone shared with me, a while ago, a paper from Gianni Albertini that, in their opinion, contains the simplest core mathematical and physical principles of their DST theory, and he suggested me to point researchers interested in the Ni⁶³ results to this paper as a way to better understand their work, and the importance of controlling the ultrasound energy input in terms of causing an effective DST nuclear reaction, as they call them.

I attached the paper in this post, the title is "Two questions about a non-flat nuclear space-time" authored by Gianni Albertini, Domenico Bassani and Fabio Cardone (Eur. Phys. J. Plus (2018) 133: 39).

Abstract:

The quest for the explanation of new or at least anomalous nuclear reactions put some authors in front of the clue, the “ansatz”, that the nuclear space-time should be no longer flat but endowed with curvature. Other authors made assumptions implying the breakdown of local Lorentz invariance at the nuclear scale. We report some suggestions aiming to check the validity of these assumptions. Given that this breakdown occurs, curvature is a case among the more general deformations of the space-time that are predicted in the deformed space-time theory.

Now, as far as I have been able to gather (from all the experiental and theoretical work done by the group of Cardone, the previus Russian cavitation works, the papers of Stringham and the patent of Ohmasa), one can be reasonably sure that in the presence of cavitation and ultrasound shocks, nuclear phenomena can be produced. What Cardone et al claim is that this can be controlled to a great extent to make it more effective, (and indeed they show results that happen with "optimized" ultrasound exposures that are very short in duration).

What I see from the results of MFMPs project ULTR so far, is that, if one weights the claims of ability to control the reactions of Cardone's group, the MFMP hit "the sweetspot" rather luckily. One of the aspects that influence the capability of observing these nuclear reactions according to the DST theory, is that there is an optimal size for the cavitation bubble that is in the region of 10 to 20 nanometers.

I think the ultrasonic bath being used in the project ULTR happens to create a good portion of the cavitation bubbles in that region, and that would explain the undeniable evidence of mechanical damage with potential transmutations observed in the Indium foil, happening in a very short time (3 minutes as reported in the serendipitous finding that led to starting the project).

I know that there is a long way yet to be able to say that project ULTR is providing solid proof that we are seeing transmutation. What one can see so far is, IMHO, encouraging, and I can't wait to see the controls and repetitions.

This also goes a long way how a seemingly simple experiment that can be performed quicky, can generate a ton of work for analyzing the results with SEM and EDAX, so my hat is off to the MFMP team that is doing this with minimal resources.

I just found an older blog article (from 2015) of someone that must have had access to Ohmasa's lab and that shows earlier transmutation experiments of Ohmasa that talks about an "undisclosed catalyst" that I can only conclude is the tritium water that later is disclosed in the patent application.

This blog entry also has a video of over an hour of duration of a Cesium Chloride vibration experiment (10 g/l), which I think is interesting because it shows how the solution changes in "cloudiness", increasing notoriously after 30 minutes of treatment, but I also see an apparent change in viscosity (an increase on viscosity) associated with the onset of the cloudiness.

One can always argue that the most possible source of the additional elements said to appear in the solution after treatment is contamination from the environment and equipmet directly in contact with the solution. Looking at the result tables shown in the Patent and in this early blog article, however, something that stands out, and kind of negates the possibility of this contamination being the main cause of the appearance of initially absent elements (and of course leaving aside the eternal accusation of intentional fraud), is that the results show a very different magnitude of elemental increase between experiments with different "catalysts". If it were really contaminantion from the equipment, it should be of the same magnitude for each different run with a different "catalyst" employed. Other thing that one can say looking at even older reports (as for example the results reported by Ruby Carat in 2013 here https://coldfusionnow.org/lent…rials-by-super-vibration/) is that the transmutation effect is always observed, even if the treatment is only the vibration of water.

http://amateur-lenr.blogspot.c…asas-new-nuclear.html?m=1 (Japanese LENR blog with results reported in 2015 and the video of the Cesium Chloride experiment).

Quote from BruceInKonstanz

Sorry, the thread is "Summary: Who is actually doing a replication attempt?"

Thanks BruceInKonstanz I was just reading that post. Very Interesting!!! I was trying to figure the potential sources for the sulphate if its not present in the water or in the potassium carbonate. Really interesting!!!