The Exotic Vacuum Object (EVO) as the cause of the vacuum reaction.

    Quote from Paradigmnoia

    Propane-oxygen....

    You can cut pretty much anything with enough heat a spare oxygen. See 'thermic lance for something really scary. at it's simplest just a piece of iron pipe with oxygen running through it.


    External Content youtu.be
    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.

    There are alternatives. One has been explained in detail in this thread. If you want alternatives, you need to get to some thread that Axil hasn't attempted to control it content by all his posts. An EVO is a macro quantum object, but the quantum relationship is not as indicated by Axil. To explain with math why an EVO slowly disintegrates rather than explodes see the link below.

    EVO Theory - a new paper from Graham Hubler. - General LENR Talks - LENR Forum (lenr-forum.com)

    Quote from Alan Smith

    You can cut pretty much anything with enough heat a spare oxygen. See 'thermic lance for something really scary. at it's simplest just a piece of iron pipe with oxygen running through it.

    All you good fellows purport to be objective scientists driven only by observation and evidence; what a joke. But when you clearly see the reading of no less than three optical thermometers on the video showing a temperature of the combusting Ohmasa gas at a maximum temperature of no more than 150C, you all without exception reject this eye witness evidence without pause or comment. I have also provided third party experimental data showing confirming results. Truly, this rejection of facts that confound and contradict objective reality and expose your deeply ingrained prejudices as more like religious faith than objective science.

    Quote from Alan Smith

    axil. I haven't rejected anything. and please remember your manners.

    Your post on the the negligible effects of liquid lead on the hand seemed to imply that the multiple temperature measurements of Ohmasa gas combustion at extreme low temperatures are not to be considered true.


    Sometimes the weakness in human nature is hard the deal with. Just like when Omasa accused Bob Greenyer of fraud when Bob told Omasa that the gas that he had invented only produced a temperature no warmer that bath water, and even after three separate temperature readings showed the truth of Bob's claims did Bob lose his cool.


    Paradigmnoia accused me of not respecting reality when in fact it was he who rejects facts, the facts that those optical thermometers showed. This juxtaposition was hard to take. I hope that you can excuse my ill manors but understand how such a extremely frustrating situation can naturally occur.

    Quote from axil

    But you were presented in the videos, temperature readings of the ohmasa gas combustion of no more than 150C. That is reality that you reject.

    And I did it to a several flames at home, all with wrong results compared to thermometers, thermocouples, and known melting points of things that don’t vaporize first. You reject the science of infrared thermometry due to personal bias and lack of physical experience.

    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.


    One of the most difficult propositions of the Vacuum reaction conjecture is that the EVO is coherent. General perception mandates that coherence cannot exist at any temperature beyond the boiling point of nitrogen. But the EVO is coherent and can exist in a hot plasma. But it is beyond dispute that the EVO can exist at least at room temperature.


    Since we were recently discussing Ohmasa gas and its properties, this MFMP video first shows the impression that cavitation has made on a new cavitation plate removed from a Omasa device that produces Ohmasa gas. The same figure of eight structures were seen in the ULTR experiment where the hollow iron crenelated sphere of transmuted material is produced when aluminum foil is dematerialized in a cavitation cleaner. The two circulations that produce the figure of eight pattern seen in cavitation is caused by the left and right handed electrons that make up the EVO polariton circulation. The right handed electron generates the south magnetic pole and the left handed electron forms the north magnetic pole.



    Helicity

    Let's consider a spinning body in movement and project the spinning on the direction of

    movement (we only care about the spinning in the direction of movement). Helicity is the

    projection of the spin along the direction of movement: it is right-handed if it is parallel to the

    movement; left-handed otherwise. The figure illustrates the concept of helicity.


    The EVO is not a plasmoid since the EVO is coherent. A plasmoid is comprised of electrons confined within a magnetic field. Since the EVO is a polariton condensate, it is comprised of bosons that are mostly photons that have been dressed with many of the quantum properties of the electron.


    The next post will move on to a more in-depth look at the coherent ball lightning nature of the EVO as seen in the VEGA experiment.

    Quote from axil

    All you good fellows purport to be objective scientists driven only by observation and evidence; what a joke. But when you clearly see the reading of no less than three optical thermometers on the video showing a temperature of the combusting Ohmasa gas at a maximum temperature of no more than 150C, you all without exception reject this eye witness evidence without pause or comment. I have also provided third party experimental data showing confirming results. Truly, this rejection of facts that confound and contradict objective reality and expose your deeply ingrained prejudices as more like religious faith than objective science.

    In principle, I understand your indignation ... But ... But at the same time I want to note the following - and you and your opponents argue in the paradigm of that - "old physics" that incorrectly represents the nature of things to you - because of this misfortune you have so many all sorts of inconsistencies... I argue and use the paradigm of "physical chemistry of the microworld of Kanarev FM", in which the temperature is characterized by photons and in this paradigm, photons have mass. For this reason, it is clear to me today that most physicists misunderstand the essence of the indications of the instruments they use ... The big trouble is that the so-called "electricity" and "electric current" that you use everywhere, you also misinterpret. .. Thus, you, relatively speaking, are sitting in this trap and today you have no way to escape from it... What to do? You should relearn... And this is very, very difficult - I know from my own experience... It is very difficult to "jump" from the knowledge that you have been invested in MEPhI... I switched to new knowledge for 3 years... I broke my ideas about the nature of things... It was a shock... And it was not easy!

    Quote from axil

    A plasmoid is comprised of electrons confined within a magnetic field.

    In this phrase "A plasmoid is comprised of electrons confined within a magnetic field." there is just a wrong understanding of the nature of things... It is the clusters of free electrons that form the magnetic lines of force... Thus, they are clusters of free electrons. and there is that very mysterious magnetic field ... These electrons pump mass through themselves and this is the very power characteristic of the magnetic field - the greater the mass, the greater the POWER of the magnetic field. This process involves the magnetic systems of molecules that make up the substance of the Earth and near-Earth space. The same "factory magnets" that use either nickel or samarium have a parallel-directed magnetic structure and therefore have the ability to pump the mass through their structure in a strictly directed manner, thus exerting a "magnetic force effect."



    Quote from Cherepanov2020

    These electrons pump mass through themselves and this is the very power characteristic of the magnetic field - the greater the mass, the greater the POWER of the magnetic field.

    Mass is generated in fermions through interaction with the Higgs field. This interaction is foundational in modern science.


    See

    How the Higgs field gives particle mass explained
    An explanation of how the Higgs field gives particles mass.
    www.britannica.com

    Quote from axil

    Mass is generated in fermions through interaction with the Higgs field. This interaction is foundational in modern science.


    See

    https://www.britannica.com/vid…ield-Higgs-particles-mass


    Leave these fairy tales for little girls and boys... There is nothing like this in nature... The Higgs field is the fantasies of sick people who are ready to deceive everyone for profit. I don't believe in fairy tales... These storytellers lied to the whole world that two detectors at CERN observed a new particle with a mass of about 125-126 GeV/c² with a statistical significance level of 5 sigma. None of this happened ... Ivanov Mikhail Yakovlevich reported to us about this at a seminar at RUDN University on April 26, 2018 - 2 hours 7 minutes 35 seconds -

    20180426 Full seminar at RUDN -

    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.


    “I want to say that the theory by which the Higgs boson is obtained is based on the Lagrange formalism. She is not faithful! There is no Higgs boson! And, unfortunately, CERN was deceived! Having built 126 GeV in the peak there ... When I was last at CERN, I was skiing with them, they, the CERN specialists, gave graphs that do not have this very peak!"

    Quote from axil

    Mass is generated in fermions through interaction with the Higgs field. This interaction is foundational in modern science.

    Here you wrote - "This interaction is fundamental in modern science." There are many different people on this site... I don't know the level of training of each of you... And I don't want to offend you - anyone who communicates with me and reads my comments... You are all smart people.. I think so, since You are interested in this site ... But nevertheless, most of you are misguided people ... And stubborn people ... More than a year has passed since I posted my topic - "Charles Coulomb and his theory. Why did Maxwell distort the teachings of Charles Coulomb?"


    Think about it... I have the impression that I communicate with deaf people... You don't hear me... And I shout to you - "There is no "positive charge" on the proton" - Maxwell was fatally mistaken... There is no "electric field" in nature "- Maxwell was fatally mistaken!" The question is how protons were accelerated and accelerated at CERN if there are no "positive charges" on them and the machine itself at CERN did not create an electric field inside itself, i.e. this machine is not an "accelerator" of either protons or electrons. This is understandable...? So where do these fairy tales about GeV or TeV come from? This is only on paper... In reality, such energies were not there and are not there... All these thousands of experimenters are fatally mistaken people and none other than Sir Maxwell gave rise to their delusion. But they do not understand this, because they did not read my revealing articles.


    Nevertheless, the machine is at CERN, you can turn it on and SOMETHING inside is happening ... Yes! I confirm - there is SOMETHING really going on! Only what happens there is not what the researchers who work there think. They do not understand real physics and the real physical processes that take place there. This is an absolute shock for them! This is the ruin of their career! This destroys them as the smartest specialists in this field! Alas, it is so! But this is not my fault. Blame Maxwell, whom they trusted ... Or rather, the followers of Maxwell are to blame, who did not check Maxwell and began to teach Maxwell's theory to others, and they, in turn, taught their students ... And so this chain of learning has come down to our days - delusions and Maxwell's mistakes were passed down from generation to generation of new physicists... This misconception would have continued further if it had not occurred to me to double-check all this after I found articles over and over again in the press in which researchers lamented the absence of " Coulomb barrier "... And I found the culprit of these problems in physics - it turned out to be Maxwell.


    So you blindly repeat the mistakes of others and write - "This interaction is foundational in modern science." If I had read this 6 years ago, I would not have objected and even agreed with you - you are right ... you are right ...


    And today the situation is different and I tell you - you are wrong. There is no reaction in nature that you called "fundamental".

    Tungsten rod cut with small propane and compressed oxygen cans and a cheap hardware store brazing kit. You too can accomplish this wonder, without the use of specially electrolysized flavours of hydrogen and oxygen (if you are safe with fire).

    This is the same as the sharp point demonstrated by Brown several times.

    .

    NB: that tip is so sharp and hard you could probably sign your name on a sheet of glass with it.

    .

    Quote from Drgenek

    There are alternatives. One has been explained in detail in this thread. If you want alternatives, you need to get to some thread that Axil hasn't attempted to control it content by all his posts. An EVO is a macro quantum object, but the quantum relationship is not as indicated by Axil. To explain with math why an EVO slowly disintegrates rather than explodes see the link below.

    EVO Theory - a new paper from Graham Hubler. - General LENR Talks - LENR Forum (lenr-forum.com)

    Actually I thought we could hear the real alternative, 4D-explanation, because the critiques has been strongest from that side. The existence in the form of a cluster of negative charges has been questionized. It would be interesting to hear what is it all about according to the 4D-theory if that kind of thinking is not valid.

    Quote from Rjzk

    Actually I thought we could hear the real alternative, 4D-explanation, because the critiques has been strongest from that side.

    The problem here is that the standard method in physics is experiment --> model --> better experiment --> better model... In between the key process is understanding what happens. If people see "light" from a current then its electrons. Every child "knows" this but physics is not children territory...

    Spark erosion is a concrete working method that uses "EVO's"... as some people here would say as they come from electric current.


    Much more interesting are EM mass clusters that form out in large range fusion events. These certainly emit bright light and have nothing to do with "electrons from current".


    So the thread here first misses a strict definition about what (which physical process) people really talk.

    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.


    All those here might encode your alternative rules of nature into a simulation of reality to see is your laws are consistent with the current clockwork of our universe. When a new discovery of science is made, it is verified against all the currently accepted laws of nature that make up our universe. Then a simulation is performed to see if the new rules describe our universe. So far, the laws of nature that we currently beleive to be true are the only set of laws that work for our universe.


    So consistency to what is possible is the keystone for including new findings into the collection of laws that work for our universe. In order for LENR to be considered part of the description of our universe, it must demonstrate consistency with all the laws that have been laid down over the centuries. If not consistent, LENR will be rejected as nonsense.


    It is the responsibility of those who aspire to claim new knowledge to show that their contribution is valid and consistent with what has gone before. This is the function of peer review, experts who are familiar with the subject will check for consistency with current knowledge. Inconsistency will be rejected.


    LENR does many unbelievable things and it will be difficult to explain how those behaviors are produced. All you here seem to be supremely self-assured, so give facing peer review a try and see what comes out.

    Quote from axil

    It is the responsibility of those who aspire to claim new knowledge to show that their contribution is valid and consistent with what has gone before.

    Unluckily this has never been shown for any of the standard models used in physics for modelling mass and particles. So nothing of what you are referencing is valid today. If you don't have the basic math/physics education to understand why e.g. the Driac equation simply is crap (= not basic physics) or why classic gradient fields are nonsense close to any particle, then I can't help you.


    What CERN does as in a so called verification is just repeating the old experiment using the same fake Lagrangian with some 1000 fudge constants they claim in agreement with a fake model. So reproducing crap is what you call consistency...

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.