This is a micrograph of an EVO that has impressed an impression comprised of transmuted material on an aluminum surface. The shape is produced by a polariton petal condensate comprised of a core (white), that is surrounded by the petals (see image technical description below) which are generated by a polariton interlaced circulation of interweaving left and right handed polaritons, which is then surrounded by a hexagonal magnetic zone (size: 523 microns) that is best seen (only seen) in polarized light.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1401988111

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Petal-shaped-polariton-condensates-A-D-Spatial-images-and-spectra-horizontal-cut_fig1_262817238/download

The petal is an interference pattern typical of photon based confinement.

Quote from Alan Smith

axil I think that images of surface effects caused by laser excitation of surfaces at cryogenic temperatures has got very little to do with EVO strikes.

This particular EVO was produced by Egely's custom built microwave reactor and found on the aluminum surface of that reactor, and the EVO shows transmutation of aluminum to carbon ( the white area is diamond).

What we can learn from this data: This EVO was produced by the LENR reaction and does not show any signs of fusion based nuclear effects. LENR based transmutation is an extremely tender and structurally precise process down to the nanometer. It is a process that reforms matter instantaneously without any signs of energy production. Producing energy from the EVO (aka LENR) requires an in-depth understanding of the EVO's life cycle where the energy can be harvested at the end of that cycle when the EVO becomes unstable immediately after its termination. Transmutation does not produce any energy.

Quote from Alan Smith

Then why put in links to other papers and not mention Egely's work? There is a suggestion BTW from the analysis technician that carbon present in this set up because the electrodes were cleaned with Isopropanol before use. I doubt you knew that. As for diamonds, who said that? Also no microwaves, DC You should be more careful about what you post, this is not kiddies corner..

I should have included the video from which the data is derived as follows:

This data comes from a picture of crenulated ball of transmuted matter produced by the SAFIRE reactor that is attributed to the AURON energy company (as shown on the copywrite mark on the far left of the micrograph). The image on the right is from VEGA3 which is a SAFIRE replication experiment.

These balls are seen in many LENR transmutation instances such as LION, in cavitation as previewed by magicsound lab, SAFIRE, and SAFIRE replication experiments - the VEGA experiments).

What we can learn from this data: In other SEM images from other experiments, some of these type crenelated balls were viewed under SEM as broken apart and appear to be hollow where a thin shell of mostly iron in those experiments surround a empty void. As seen in the micrograph once again, this LENR based transmutation is an extremely tender and structurally precise process down to the nanometer

Here again we view a highly detailed stature of mixed transmuted material that shows no sign of nuclear energy based turbulent formation. In the case of this SAFIRE transmuted ball, the transmuted material is rare earths. In SAFIRE, these balls were found on the iron anode that had begun to melt down. Such detail in the formation of the ball requires extreme speed and a non turbulent sub micron based consolidation process which involve a mix of various transmuted material.

Speculation as to the method of Ball formation: There might be a singularity at the center of the EVO around which transmuted material accumulates. The singularity would produce a void and its event horizon would be the zone in which the transmuted material would accumulate.

Quote from Alan Smith

Which is also nothing to do withe George Egely.

To the best of my understanding, the reactor which MFMP inspected for transmutation was of Egely's design and he supervised its construction and operation.

I ran across a micrograph of an EVO that was produced by a LENR fuel source that shows the supersolid hexagon based lattice structure that a large assembly of polaritons assume inside an EVO. There is a direct connection between the EVO, supersolid, and polariton condensation that might well serve as proof of the polariton based origin of the EVO.

https://www.lenr-forum.com/image-proxy/?key=28f699ba45886a9e98dd2e0069d52a9857a5ea810eb5376e0aa21e47c9c22952-aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmRpc3F1c2Nkbi5jb20vaW1hZ2VzL2YzMTk3NTlhOGM2Y2Q3ZjIwMjc4YzQ1Y2JlYWFhY2MyMmM5MjdlN2YyNGU0ZDFjODlkZGZlZGM5NDU4YTM0MzYuZ2lm

Quote from axil

John Huizenga wrote a scathing book denouncing cold fusion research in 1993. He mocked cold fusion by alluding to its unexplained characteristics as "miracles." Huizenga's three miracles were:

Miracle #1: the mystery of how the Coulomb barrier is penetrated

Miracle #2: the lack of strong neutron emissions

Miracle #3: the lack of strong emission of gamma or x-rays

Y'all still can't explain the 3 miracles of cold fusion. Where are the predicted fusion generated gammas and the neutrons? You talk of fusion and fission but the nuclear indicators are nowhere to be found.

Display More

Dude, my involvement in LENR started with a (modified) replication attempt of Parkhomov's high-temperature reactor. After some trials, we measured strong bursts of elevated Geiger counter reading. If that's not a nuclear indication, I don't know what the indication would be.

There are many well-documented experiments, which measured neutron emission peaks, peaks in the gamma ray spectrum, appearance of new elements, etc. Your time could be better spent by reading those experimental reports, than Huizenga's "nothing to see here" book.

If there is a contradiction between what LENR experimenters observe, and what hot fusioneers observe in D-D fusion, then it is logical to consider that we might be looking at some other reaction than plain D-D fusion. That possibility did not occur to Huizenga, because he used his tax-payer funded position only for destructive purposes, was not interested scientific progress.

BTW: are you Axil teaming up with someone else, or he just randomly happens to quote you when he slanders LENR theory works?

The three miracles are:

1) Krivit is mostly right

2) Someone else is mostly right

3) Axil thinks he is helping LENR/CF

Quote from Andras

Dude, my involvement in LENR started with a (modified) replication attempt of Parkhomov's high-temperature reactor. After some trials, we measured strong bursts of elevated Geiger counter reading. If that's not a nuclear indication, I don't know what the indication would be.

Gamma radiation was seen in early Rossi demos at startup and shutdown of his early reactor. The reaction is complicated and nuclear energy indications will sometimes be seen. But as Dr. Kim stated in his Bose Einstein condensate based theory, when coherence develops in the reaction, energy production stops. A coherent reaction means that the vagaries of quantum mechanics are confusing what the reaction is doing. In your Parkhomov replication experiment, those gamma readings were no doubt fleeting.

Celani reports gamma radiation emitted from Rossi's reactor as follows:

[Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Jed Rothwell Wed, 16 Feb 2011 11:49:18 -0800

Here is a revised version of the message I sent the other day.

Villa reported no gamma emissions or other radiation significantly above
background from the Rossi device. Celani, however, said that he did detect
something. Here are the details he related to me at ICCF16, from my notes,
with corrections and additions by Celani.

Celani attended the demonstration on Jan. 14. The device did not work at
first. He and others were waiting impatiently in a room next to the room
with the device. He estimates that he was around 6 m from the device. He had
two battery-powered detectors:

1. A sodium iodide gamma detector (NaI), set for 1 s acquisition time.

2. A Geiger counter (model GEM Radalert II, Perspective Scientific), which
was set to 10 s acquisition time.

Both were turned on as he waited. The sodium iodide detector was in count
mode rather than spectrum mode; that is, it just tells the number of counts
per second.

Both showed what Celani considers normal background for Italy at that
elevation.

As he was waiting, suddenly, during a 1-second interval both detectors were
saturated. That is to say, they both registered counts off the scale. The
following seconds the NaI detector returned to nomal. The Geiger counter had
to be switched off to "delete overrange," which was >7.5 microsievert/hour,
and later switched on again.

About 1 to 2 minutes after this event, Rossi emerged from the other room and
said the machine just turned on and the demonstration was underway.

Celani commented that the only conventional source of gamma rays far from a
nuclear reactor would be a rare event: a cosmic ray impact on the atmosphere
producing proton storm shower of particles. He and I agreed it is extremely
unlikely this happened coincidentally the same moment the reactor started .
. . Although, come to think of it, perhaps the causality is reversed, and
the cosmic ray triggered the Rossi device.

Another scientist said perhaps both detectors malfunctioned because of an
electromagnetic source in the building or some other prosaic source. Celani
considers this unrealistic because he also had in operation battery-operated
radio frequency detectors: an ELF (Extremely Low Frequency) and RF (COM
environmental microwave monitor), both made by Perspective Scientific. No
radio frequency anomalies were detected. I remarked that it is also
unrealistic because the two gamma detectors are battery powered and they
work on different principles. The scientist pointed to neutron detectors in
an early cold fusion experiment that malfunctioned at a certain time of day
every day because some equipment in the laboratory building was turned on
every day. That sort of thing can happen with neutron detectors, which are
finicky, but this Geiger counter is used for safety monitoring. Such devices
have to be rugged and reliable or they will not keep you safe, so I doubt it
is easy to fool one of them.

Celani expresses some reservations about the reality of the Rossi device.
Given his detector results I think it would be more appropriate for him to
question the safety of it.

When Celani went in to see the experiment in action, he brought out the
sodium iodide detector and prepared to change it to spectrum mode, which
would give him more information about the ongoing reaction. Rossi objected
vociferously, saying the spectrum would give Celani (or anyone else who see
it), all they need to know to replicate the machine and steal Ross's
intellectual property.

Celani later groused that there is no point to inviting scientists to a demo
if you have no intentions of letter them use their own instruments. (Note,
however, that Levi et al. did use their own instruments.)


Jacques Dufour also attended the demonstration. He does not speak much
Italian, so he could not follow the discussion. He made some observations,
including one that I consider important, namely that the outlet pipe was far
too hot to touch. That means the temperature of it was over 70°C. That, in
turn, proves there was considerable excess heat. McKubre and others have
said the outlet temperature sensor was too close to the body of the device.
Others have questioned whether the steam was really dry or not. If the
question is whether the machine really produced heat or not, these factors
can be ignored. All you need to know is the temperature of the tap water
going in (15°C), the flow rate and the power input (400 W). At that power
level the outlet pipe would be ~30°C. Celani points out that the input power
was quite unstable, fluctuating between 400 and 800 W, but it was still not
large enough to explain the excess heat.

Celani did not see the steam emerge from the end of the pipe, but he
reported the whistling sound of steam passing through the pipe. (Dufour did
not notice that but he says he is hard of hearing, especially high frequency
sounds.) I think there is no question the water boiled, and much of it was
vaporized, so there was massive excess heat. Celani complained that
phase-change calorimetry is too complicated, but I think he exaggerates the
difficulty. I agree that the actual calorimetric method could be improved,
especially with a 5-minute test of steam sparged into a container of cold
water.

- Jed

Agree no strong force is involved in cold fusion only the weak one. This P&F original mistake could have saved us from all this counter publicity.

Quote from Andras

Dude, my involvement in LENR started with a (modified) replication attempt of Parkhomov's high-temperature reactor. After some trials, we measured strong bursts of elevated Geiger counter reading. If that's not a nuclear indication, I don't know what the indication would be.

There are many well-documented experiments, which measured neutron emission peaks, peaks in the gamma ray spectrum, appearance of new elements, etc. Your time could be better spent by reading those experimental reports, than Huizenga's "nothing to see here" book.

If there is a contradiction between what LENR experimenters observe, and what hot fusioneers observe in D-D fusion, then it is logical to consider that we might be looking at some other reaction than plain D-D fusion. That possibility did not occur to Huizenga, because he used his tax-payer funded position only for destructive purposes, was not interested scientific progress.

BTW: are you Axil teaming up with someone else, or he just randomly happens to quote you when he slanders LENR theory works?

Quote from Cydonia

Agree no strong force is involved in cold fusion only the weak one. This P&F original mistake could have saved us from all this counter publicity.

Electroweak interaction - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It might be that the EVO is a spacetime object (a vacuum object) where the electroweak force is operative in the EVO's effective field as had occurred in the early universe before the Higgs field came into exitance. This means that all the electoweak particles (W+, W-, Z and the photon) are massless because they have not undergone spontaneous symmetry breaking as a result of exposure to the Higgs field. The Higgs field may not exist within the EVO and therefore only weak force interactions are possible. This could be the cause of instantaneous stabilization of unstable isotopes and other transmutation based processes.

Is this what you meant by your statement?