George Egely's Magic Wand

George Egely is speaking at the IWAHLM workshop in Assisi end of September. If (nearer the time) you guys can come up with some questions for him, I will try to ask them on video.

In this presentation at ICCF21, Egely almost has the reaction framework defined but he still reverts to the incoherent and counterproductive fusion meme. Is this retrenchment back to cold fusion done to mollify his audience in order to place them at ease? He says that he is referring to an alternative type of electric based reaction unlike the cold fusion reaction of the meme. He mentions the possibility that the top forgotten inventors in the past believed that this alternative reaction derived the overunity energy seen in most legacy systems from the vacuum. One such inventor was Tesla himself.

Then Egely brings up commonplace occurrence of excess electric power produced by the closing of a switch. Now how could that be produced by a fusion reaction? This switch closing paradigm is exactly what is powering the reaction in his own recent invention.

In his recent invention there is no occurrence of transmutation. So how can fusion be involved when no transmutation of elements is occuring? Only when the input power factor is increased does transmutation appear.

Dennis-Cravens describes the same observation at 2:40 into this podcast, that high input power distroys the reactor through the development of a destructive corrosion effect.

https://www.coldfusionnow.com/podcast/Ruby-Carat-Dennis-Cravens-Cold-Fusion-Now-015.mp3

The concept of resonance is advanced as a mechanism that underpins this alternate form of LENR. But this concept is not detailed and referenced in the context of standard science theory.

Egely should take some time to become familiar with the resonances that produce the polaritons which is the backbone structure in nano-optics and nanoplasmonics. This resonance mechanism has nothing to do with fusion. It is strictly a quantum mechanical process that appears in condensed matter systems which generates Bose condinsation of polaritons, the sole cause of the LENR effect.

Quote from CoherentMembrane

EVOs constantly spray out high energy electrons even when they are in a stable mode.

This is not how high energy electrons are produced by the termination of the EVO. The EVO starts out as a metastable aggregation of a limited number of electrons converted to polariton quasiparticles. Over time with EMF pumping, the EVO increases the number of polaritons in this aggregation that is the Bose condensate until the EVO achieves a state of instability. The condensate will explode quantum mechanically (aka bosenova) at some point and deconstruct into electrons and photons which form the polariton quasiparticle. This bosenova marks the end of the existence of the EVO.

I describe this process in this post. The pops that sound are produced by an AM radio tuned between stations. The AM radio is picking up the EMF produced by the explosion and broadcast by the high energy electrons exiting the Bosenova reaction as high speed.

Post

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

[…]

Good things happen when theory matches reality.

When the EVO eventually becomes unstable, it explodes in a Bosenova. Electrons will then reform from the polaritons that had aggregated to form the polariton Bose condinsate (EVO). If the electrons produced by the Bosenova are captured before they can interact with the plasma, then the kinetic energy released by the Bosenova remains contained in the electrical current formed when captured in the Bosenova.

Rossi is using Xenon to form light to…

axil

Jul 28th 2022

Oscilloscope Read out

Yellow trace is electricity in. Violet is heat converted to electricity out.

This project is catalytic fusion.

The condensed plasmoid tube is the catalyst activated by the transmutation of hydrogen.

The Process

The formation of condensed plasmoids as nearly stable particles. They catalyze the fusion of Deuterium (H4), Tritium (H3), Helium (H2) down to Hydrogen (H)

All these steps produce heat. This heat is turned to the evaporation of electrons on the surface of condensed plasmoids.

(there are many research papers on this)

This one is from Lutz Jaitner.

The surface of condensed plasmoids act just like the solar corona in miniature.

Lab results from Hungary show a 6KW consistent discharge from one cell. A generator can have multiple cells increasing the discharge proportionately.

View this Youtube video of the discharge

The plasmoids pump electrons to the batteries - car, boat, plane or house.

Reaction theory in full

https://condensed-plasmoids.com/condensed_plasmoids_lenr.pdf

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Self sustaining mode

This reactor is described to be self sustaining where the reaction charges the batteries that power the reaction. This is quite an accomplishment.

Some thoughts on the Egely 30KW reactor.

Self sustaining mode

This reactor is described to be self sustaining where the reaction charges the batteries that power the reaction. This is quite an accomplishment.

The condensed plasmoid theory is an excellent sale mechanism, but this theory does not explain other LENR systems which are not as energetic as the 30 KW system. Other LENR systems produce transmutation that exceed the atomic number of iron so such transmutation cannot be produced by fusion, they need a neutron reaction (R-process and S-process)

See Iron_peak

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_peak.

Rossi will get a heart attack when he becomes aware of the 30 KW reactor.

It is likely that the reaction tubes are filled with deuterium, and the purported fusion reaction is DD to 4He which is impossible.

If elements with atomic numbers higher than helium turns up in the plasma, then the fusion reaction theory is disproved because the fusion power needed to create carbon for example can only be found in stars and in LENR transmutation which is not fusion.

Quote from axil

...this theory does not explain other LENR systems which are not as energetic as the HYPOTHESISED 30 KW system...

FTFY

Note that the power output of Moray's "demonstration" machines was usually overestimated. People talked about him lighting arrays of 50w and 100w bulbs, and assumed that's what each bulb was actually burning.

However, witnesses mention that the bulbs were cold - and they thought the quality of light appeared different to that of normal incandescent bulbs, when lit by ordinary mains AC. This tends to indicate that the bulbs were acually being driven by RF - and were acting like improvised discharge globes. The machine power output was therefore unknown - but was likely to have been a fraction of the total bulb "rated" power.

One of our members, CoherentMembrane is very knowledgable about the work of Henry Moray. He might care to comment on this.

Quote from Alan Smith

George Egely is speaking at the IWAHLM workshop in Assisi end of September. If (nearer the time) you guys can come up with some questions for him, I will try to ask them on video.

One question to ask Egely: is it in the product plan to permit the 30kw unit to provide a variable amount of power based on demand?

Power production regulation must be in the product plan because a car battery will need to be charged at a variable rate based on the battery's charge level.

How is power production regulation performed?

Will power production regulation work for a home installation? with batteries? without batteries?connected to the grid?

What is the cost neighborhood of the 30KW unit?

The core must be replaced every year: how much does the replacement core cost?

Can Egely provide a demo video of the 30KW unit operating over the long term and at both high and low power production?

What voltage choices will be provided?

Will the demo, if held, show radiation testing that does not indicated increased radiation production from the test unit when in operation?

Can the unit drive an inductive load like a motor and/or a resistive load like lighting or both simultaneously?

Can overload protection be demoed?

Can short circuit protection be demoed?

Can self sustain mode be demoed?

Can heat production of the unit be shown while the unit is in operation?

Has the unit been tested for safety by an accredited internationally known and respected testing service?

Quote from axil

Power production regulation must be in the product plan because a car battery will need to be charged at a variable rate based on the battery's charge level.

Bad example. The battery charger itself does that, even when plugged into the power grid.

But thank you for your interest.

Quote from Alan Smith

Bad example. The battery charger itself does that, even when plugged into the power grid.

But thank you for your interest.

If the auto is traveling, is your assumption that the auto is continuously connected to a battery charger? Does the product plan include battery charging continuously while the auto is in motion? If not, why is the 30kw unit pictured installed inside the auto as a inherent component of the auto?

The 30KW unit pictured in an auto in this image

http://www.gaiaenergynz.com/ws/media-library/5131cf8e4d96438c9f6155812ca9c071/car-with-device-3.webp

Quote from axil

Rossi will get a heart attack when he becomes aware of the 30 KW reactor.

We can dream...

Returning, specifically, to George’s “magic wand”; notice that the T5/4w Osram fluorescent tube is only connected by a single wire.

I happen to have a small portable battery powered lamp with a similar T5 tube here. It’s about 25 years old, and I just keep it for emergency use in case of power cuts. It contains four AA batteries – which might have only been changed two or three times since I bought the thing.

According to Osram the tube only needs 29v, at a relatively low frequency (eg. 50 Hz), across both electrodes to work. It probably needs a bit more to start, but that isn’t specified (see below):

https://www.tradesparky.com/ecommerce/downloadasset?productAssetId=29825

I measured mine, and the tube is currently seeing 48v on start-up (but it does have fairly new batteries).

Since the “magic wand” tube is only connected via a single electrode, it must be being driven by a fairly high frequency voltage in order to give off any light. (Maybe tens of kHz?)

So, just like the Moray devices, the rating of the lamp cannot be used as a gauge for output power.

(Edit: n.b. Of course the lamp is just there for visual appeal. The true output is measured via the heat from a resistor - just like the "desktop" version.)

(Edit 2: Of more concern is the way the "input power" is supposedly being measured. The input calorimeter may be measuring the current in that particular resistor, but that isn't a true reflection of the AC power passing to the "spark gap" stage.)

Frogfall,

I know the measurements must be performed carefully to avoid errors, but measuring the lumen output is a way of determining the COP of the device. I have heard of multiple parties that measured the light output from similar systems and found a net gain of energy.

Quote from PhysicsForDummies

We can dream...

That is not very nice. No one should wish suffering on another human.

I do think that while different Rossi and Egely's devices are working on similar principles.

Quote from CoherentMembrane

I know the measurements must be performed carefully to avoid errors, but measuring the lumen output is a way of determining the COP of the device. I have heard of multiple parties that measured the light output from similar systems and found a net gain of energy.

Thanks CoherentMembrane - it's good if they can get reliable results comparing bulbs/tubes driven at different frequencies and waveforms.

Quote from Alan Smith

One of our members, CoherentMembrane is very knowledgable about the work of Henry Moray. He might care to comment on this.

I studied his work some time ago. The connections to the EVO phenomenon make his work very interesting. Although I do not trust the exact figures, I do believe many of his systems produced a net gain of energy.

Quote from Frogfall

Thanks CoherentMembrane - it's good if they can get reliable results comparing bulbs/tubes driven at different frequencies and waveforms.

The problem is that virtually everyone who starts building and testing gets money hungry, goes secretive, and don't share their results openly. It is beyond frustrating. I've heard of amazing results from teams that folded and now the data is lost forever.

A system like Egely's needs to be optimized to the max and then tested in a way that is convincing. For example, being powered by a straight DC supply that is constantly measured and the output doing mechanical work. This would be very convincing, but the losses involved may be greater than the energy produced.

Quote from CoherentMembrane

Although I do not trust the exact figures, I do believe many of his systems produced a net gain of energy.

I'm not trying to accuse Moray of fraud - he was definitely onto something, and his machines (such as we can know about them) are very intriguing.

I'm sure he struggled to understand the results he was getting - and so his progress was necessarily slow, as he had to rely on trial and error.

I assume you have read the 1981 report, written by Rodney Sego after his attempt to find details of hardware that remained after Moray's death. For anyone who is interested, there is a copy at the link below (29.6 MB scan):

http://www.radioionics.com/pdf/The%20Moray%20Energy%20Device%20-%20It%27s%20Workings.pdf

George Egely experements and

presentation about 10 years ago.