sam12 Member
  • Male
  • 70
  • from Quill Lake SK Canada
  • Member since Jan 26th 2016
  • Last Activity:

Posts by sam12

    om inception, the MFMP had 3 aims,

    1. Show to the world there is a new practical primary energy source we call the New Fire
    2. Once shown, help develop peoples understanding of what the New Fire is
    3. Help promote the development and uptake of the New Fire in all its various guises

    A non-exhaustive subset of the work we have done towards meeting these three goals is summarised below.


    Towards aim 1

    Dec 14th 2012, replicated Francesco Celani with 12.5% excess.

    Oct. 2013, saw "Gamma", later I determined to be emission of quanta of neutral EVOs, supported by 1995 observations of Matsumoto and 2010s observations of Shishkin et. al.).

    Jan 2015 - *GlowStick* 5.2 saw "Signal", later determined to be explosive de-packing of large EVO, producing macro effects in NaI (Tl) scintillator and PSU.

    Mid 2017, First observation of "Strange Radiation" / Exotic Vacuum Object (EVO) tracks from ECCO Fuel.

    September 2017 - clearest ever EVO track in copper oxides of LION crust - Jan/Feb 2018, 'Pseudo-Monopole' EVO structures on inside of LION quartz, flux-loops between monopole structures found on x-rays and then, in predicted form on crust of copper oxides in addition to the LION “paw Prints” lead to the basic 'O' structure (that has two forms Ns and Sn) which is equivalent to the ‘Birdies’ found by many Russian researchers including Bogdanovich et. al., Shishkin et. al.

    First connection with Matsumoto data in Oct 2018 following Sochi, Russia, Parkhomov Reaction tables.

    2019 Hutchison, Ohmasa data showing BL effects such as transmutation of oxygen into sulphur and fission of W and In - more flux loops, development of ULTR experiment.

    2020, Publishing of hypothesised fractal 'O' structure based on observation of quantised structures found on Hutchison sample (feb 17th). First replications of ULTR experiments.

    2020-2022, wide replication of ULTR experiments, showing mode of action and potential element synthesis and coherent matter interaction phenomena. VEGA experiments, showing the formation of coherent matter phenomenon, observation of all Strange Radiation phenomena as previously recorded on witness materials, but now caught on video as coherent matter travelling waves, including the nature of their extreme interactions and their birth place in de-stabilisation of coherent matter (ball lightning). Imaging of collapsed coherent matter travelling waves in both ULTR and VEGA experiments.

    2019 - 2022 Observation of the crenelated Fe+O hollow microspheres in ULTR and VEGA that exactly match the form of those observed in Hessdalen produced from natural long-lived-plasmoids (Ball Lightning) in Norway. Similar to those produced in our NOVA reactor from 2017.

    April 22nd 2022, observation of physical manifestation of fractal toroidal structures as predicted in Feb 2020, on the surface of the VEGA Valley. Sharing this with the Russian Cold Nuclear Transmutation and Ball Lightning community, lead to the revelation of discussions (1995) and mathematical proof (1993) of fractal toroidal EM structures researched during classified soviet era energetics research program which showed how non-physical matter based objects (EVOs) could be produced technologically. These structures could capture zero-point / vacuum fluctuation energy. Contemporary (1994) US DOE funded work regarding Hessdalen BL and later US DOE funded work, (2009), concluded that EM currents initiated by fractal toroidal EM structures, not dependent on physical matter, could over a certain threshold, lead to baryon decay.

    Towards aim 2

    Transmutation and Baryon decay observed by Hutchison/Shoulders (1979+), Matsumoto (1990+), Solin (1992), Adamenko et. al. 2000+, MFMP 2017+ (signature disappearing matter inside samples and/or SR tracks) explains all observations in the whole Cold Nuclear Transmutation and Ball Lightning field. It is, as clearly stated by Shoulders/Solin - a clustered soliton driven, more specifically a coherent matter based phenomenon as detailed by Solin and it is clear that defence contractors are aware of this to a degree.

    In a video by Boyd Bushman, he discusses at the same time, the Neutrino-verse, Hutchison, Anti-Gravity and an energy source well beyond Fusion that Lockheed Martin was researching. Only baryon decay is well beyond fusion - it yields over 166x more energy than DD fusion to 4He.

    In the 2009 US DOE funded SLAC associated Fryberger paper, it is stated that the superconducting, superfluid condensate in Ball Lightning is able to decay baryons and then convert that matter to light and leptons with 90% efficiency with a proportion escaping confinement being neutrinos.

    Shishkin concludes that String Vortex Solitons (SVS) could possibly be clusters of neutrinos because of how they decay beta isotopes, but they could also be pure EVOs - EM phantoms that interact with beta isotopes and decay them or even decay ordinary matter. Black EVOs / SVS can carry and shield the charge of ions.

    EVOs are initiated by electrons and short duration disruptive events, can self-cluster or be encouraged to, when energised or coherently built beyond a certain point, they can do all the observed phenomena. This is hinted at in the awarded Lockheed Martin "Systems and Methods for Generating Coherent MatterWave Beams", that, without credit, initiates the cluster sub-units in the way described by Ken Shoulders, aggregates them in the way of Bostick, without credit, with the addition of coupled 10um resonant cavities. The diagram of the structure of the coherent matter, detailed in Figure 3. is functionally equivalent to that which would produce the track shown in 1993 by Matsumoto, Caught as a partial track on a masked webcam in 2017 from ECCO fuel, replicated by us in 2019 on Ohmasa vibrator plate and recorded as the inside of a hollow synthesised carbon sphere on our "exploded VEGA Valley" in the gaps between crystal grains.


    With our work on 1 & 2, we have shown, though it may not be obvious to all, that one can synthesise matter from vacuum energy, photons, sound and relic neutrinos etc., transmute matter from element to element and return matter to vibration, EM waves and leptons both charged (like electrons) and uncharged (like relic neutrinos). This is "The 'god's' Toolbox" as I have called it since 2018 (little g deliberate).

    Taking matter and converting it into light and leptons is, as noted above, about over 166 times more energetic a prime energy source than DD fusion. According to David Fryberger, working for DOE, it is around 1GeV per nucleon with 90% recoverable directly as photons or electrons and based on the coherent matter of Ball Lightning.

    It matches the claims of J.Roth working for the US military and published in 1995 in Fusion Technology and the claims of Boyd Bushmann for Lockheed Martin’s energy research which he implied was connected to John Hutchison's work - the work that was investigated by Ken Shoulders for 33 years in light of also Bosticks government funded fusion research that and gave rise to EVOs which Ken Shoulders says is the same thing as Natural Ball Lightning - which is also what Matsumoto said it was and what John Hutchison spent time reproducing as Tesla was able to do.


    In recent months, we have shown an exploded Ball Lightning Fe+O crenelated sphere with associated bulk Si and Ca fragments from the overall collapse of the coherent matter structure - all of the elements observed in the first Ball Lighting spectra observed and published in a peer review Journal.


    We have also replicated the observations of Solin (1992) and Matsumoto (1996) whereby elements, in particular Carbon, Silicon etc., are synthesised inside hollow balls (and tubes) in VEGA Valley. Specifically, we have shown ejection of these synthesised elements from the inside of a Fe+O crenelated hollow Iron sphere, that is the same as that observed from a Ball Lightning impact in Hessdalen. Norway.


    It is Coherent Matter, and paraphrasing - "binding energy is beyond that of ordinary matter leading to novel nuclear reactions" (Ken Shoulders) or the "dyality angle of the EM structure is beyond a threshold value that causes baryons to lose their reference to the local Dirac Sea leading them to fall apart" (David Fryberger) or "the magnetic solitons aggregate to such a level that there is unification of the forces leading to baryon decay" (Solin) or "the itonic mesh leads to the electro-nuclear collapse of matter" (Matsumoto).


    Regardless, it is unequivocally, in my mind, the same as Ball Lightning, it is the technological equivalent of a natural Phenomenon. J. Roth said in his 1995 Fusion Technology paper, that a 10mm BL could produce all the energy for a house. We have produced a 15mm one in the "Exploded VEGA Valley" and in the presentation above, I will discuss another potential explanation for how the skin of this hollow coherent matter structure is formed that goes some way to explaining the extraordinary destruction pattern that we have shown on the event horizon.

    Bob Greenyer Live.

    Bob thinks ICCF 24 sets a high bar

    for future ICCF.


    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.

    Some entertainment.


    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.

    ED gets excited about the Carolina Reaper every day.


    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.

    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.

    The amazing Chip Story.


    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.


    Charging a Smart Phone.

    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.

    Yes I do.

    But my last posting I asked A.R. to

    reply to points from DR Mike ECW

    Comment.He did not but Stephen and

    Steve did.


    Avatar

    Dr. Mike2 days ago

    Frank,

    I don't think you are delusional, but I do believe you are ignoring the data that is available from the demo and the Levi reports:

    1. Rossi claims he converts light to electricity, yet in the SKled device, he clearly demonstrated that he is unable to generate high intensity light at low power. How is Rossi able to generate low power, high intensity light for the SKlep device when he could not generate low power, high intensity light for the SKled device?

    2. Rossi claims that he can generate electricity from light at >95% efficiency (and we know from the light escaping from the SKlep device in the demo that the light is not monochromatic). If Rossi had such a device, the device would replace all existing solar panels, trading 10-20% efficient devices with 95% efficient devices.

    3. Levi was testing both the prototype 'A' device, known to be a light source with a CPV array, in the same time period as he was testing the SKlep device shown in the demo. It is illogical that the SKlep device was not a relatively minor modification of prototype 'A'.

    4.Rossi claimed that the residual voltage with the SKlep device disconnected (~0.18V for prototype 'A' and ~0.12V for the demo SKlep device) was due to residual energy stored in condensers (capacitors). This statement is false as demonstrated by a) a capacitor would be discharged within a fraction of a second if the one ohm load was really connected across the output of the device, and b) this disconnected output voltage would not be sensitive to ambient light as stated by Levi and shown in the demo when Rossi's movements caused this residual voltage to first drop to ~0.09V, then return to ~0.12V.

    5. The 0.18V residual voltage on prototype 'A' when it was disconnected indicates that the 1 ohm load resistor was not really connected across the output of this device. The CPV array would have had to generate 18mA of effectively a short circuit current (a 1 ohm load) from just a small amount of ambient light leaking into the reflective pyramid directing the light toward the CPV array. The expected short circuit current from a small amount of stray light would be microamps at most, yielding an output voltage across the 1 ohm load resistor of microvolts. Levi's data shows the one ohm load was not connected in the measurements for prototype 'A'. An open circuit voltage was measured for prototype 'A', meaning this device was producing zero output power.

    6. Rossi statement (and Levi's) that the output current could not be directly measured due to the effect of the ammeter's resistance on the output is a false statement. If a series ammeter was inserted, its effect could be measured by measuring the voltage across the ammeter. A clamp-on ammeter would have no effect at all.

    7. Your friend indicated that the lid to the box containing the oil bath was not warm. The oil bath with heat sinks was basically contained in a closed plastic box. All heat flowing out of the essentially closed system (with a claimed 100W internal heat source) would have had to flow out of the plastic enclosure. Not only was the load resistor designed to not require an oil bath to maintain a stable resistance, the only logical reason for enclosing the oil bath in a plastic box is to obscure the fact that the load resistor was producing no heat. Can you explain how the lid to oil bath enclosure was not "warm to the touch"?

    8. The poor marketing of the SKlep device, including failure to provide application notes on how the SKlep devices might be connected to produce higher output powers, seems to indicate Rossi has no intent of selling the SKlep device. Do you believe anyone would order 1000's of devices with the limited available data?

    One might logically conclude that after Rossi found that the prototype 'A' (with a CPV array for the output) was unable to produce appreciable output power, but could output an appreciable open circuit output voltage, he found that he needed only about 5 series connected CPV cells (not a larger array) to generate an even larger open circuit voltage. If you or anyone else has an explanation of the non-zero output voltage, which is sensitive to ambient light, with the SKlep device disconnected, other than an open-circuit voltage of series-connected photovoltaic devices, I would appreciate you providing the alternative explanation. Also, how do you propose Rossi can generate low power, high intensity light for the SKlep device when he failed to do so in the SKled device? 14
    Reply

    • Avatar Stephen  Dr. Mike8 hours ago edited

      In principle it should be easily possible to verify or not some of these points and arguments you make with a dummy test on ground with a lamp, PV cells and a resistor.

      Then there would be a clear benchmark for comparison rather than just considered ideas.

      I tried a crude thermal test with a Perspex box and small heater and didn’t detect noticeable heat. I was somewhat surprised by that but more scientific check could easily be done. So that point is open for me.

      I do think the Voc argument is something that should be addressed though. I sense many like me who want this to work worrry about that one.

    • 1
    • Reply
      • Avatar Dr. Mike  Stephen3 hours ago

        The dummy test would not require a lamp. The experiment required to demonstrate that the 1 ohm resistor was not really connected to the output of prototype 'A' would be to measure the output of a photovoltaic array about the size described in Levi's report under the low light conditions of the prototype 'A' experiment (just a little ambient light leaking into the

        array). A measurement of the output voltage with and without the resistor connected across the PV array output would show that open-circuit voltages were being measured in Levi's measurements on prototype 'A'. This dummy test would show that the result of the prototype 'A' was zero output power because the load resistor was disconnected. A reasonable person would conclude that Rossi was also really using a small array of PV cells in the SKlep device with the load resistor disconnected for the measurements.

        My guess is that most engineers and scientists who have not worked with CPV cells would not realize that small arrays of these cells only output microamp (or less) short-circuit currents under very low light conditions, but would produce non-zero open-circuit voltages even at very low light levels.

      • Reply
        • Avatar Stephen  Dr. Mikean hour ago edited

          I agree in principle but a more accurate test to compare with the presentation would be to use a PV that could fit in or under prototype B with a small gap for 0.5 cm ? For the ambient light.

          But the concept I was trying to outline is to imitate the full profile if what he reported with normal apparatus. That should easy to do given your comments.

          I guess from your handle and comments you are an expert scientist who has worked with testing PV or at least have used them extensively in your work. Have you done a test similar to this?

          Anyway the open circuit Voltage question is a valid one that has been raised here by many before and to put minds to rest I hope it addressed.

          I keep going by thinking of the potential science that may be behind it in the same way I do with other approaches there are limit ways to see energy management that obeys symmetry and thermodynamic laws. Thinking about these developments fee and others is a tool to explore those ideas.

          But I think for others the uncertainty getting hard to bare. I fully understand that.

          Bu I think blocking or attempting to block something that may give more clarity is not helpful either.

        • Reply
        • Avatar Steve Albers  Dr. Mikea day ago

          He seems to be willing to field a lot of questions on JONP, so we might ask some of these.

        • 1
        • Reply
          • Avatar Dr. Mike  Steve Albers16 hours ago

            A good idea, but if you review the questions and answers on JONP, you will find that good questions receive cryptic or meaningless replies (like an answer to just go back and review the demo video). Do you have any observations on my key points, which I might not be considering

    Talk about throwing someone under

    the Bus.


    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.

    MFMP and Leveraging the Power of EVOs.

    A Recap of Video starts just past one hour 13 minutes.


    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.

    University of Bologna.

    Founded by Students for the Students.


    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.


    Laura Bassi


    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.

    2022-04-02 10:35 eernie1 

    Dear Andrea,

    Are you and Dr. Levi still friends and do you still communicate?

    Friendly regards.

    2022-04-02 15:54 Andrea Rossi 

    eernie1:

    Actually we have not been in contact after the tests of the UNIBO report, but I always considered and continue to consider him an intelletually honest individual. He is a Professor of Physics of one of the most important universities of the world. Everybody has understood that he has been forced to sign the “erratum” and I can understand why he signed it: he has two daughters and one son, all aged between 12 and 18 years…

    He would never write that pout-purri of stupidities, written from somebody that has a very poor education in the matter, let alone sign them in a normal situation. He can’t talk, but we can understand all the same.

    Warm Regards,

    A.R.

    Oh really, magician? That's amazing...

    A Third Party at same level of the Levi's tests hoax.

    I like Levi.

    Somebody that went as far to

    put his job on the line.

    At least that is the way I look at 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.

    Rossi sock puppets can be precisely identified by a handful of certain characteristics. Heinz Sause is a genuine user.

    There are many misconseptions about the CE mark or "CE certification". You have to declare that your product complies with EU regulations, that's basically it. Tests, examinations etc. are not compulsory and completely up to the manufacturer or the importer. In most cases the "CE certification" is a self written piece of paper.

    I just asked A.R. If SKLep is Self

    Certified or Third Party Certified.


    What are the pros and cons of self-certification? - Certification Experts
    Thinking about CE marking self-certification? Here’s what you should know. Before you can sell your product within the European Union, it must obtain the CE…
    certification-experts.com