Posts by can

It's not simple to shield the antenna given my crude setup. I tried moving it in real-time to check out the source.

I get a clearer signal if I put the antenna tip close to the plasma. For this I used a 12 cm whip antenna with a loading coil.

I tried to also put it close to the DC boost converter and I get a 75 kHz signal (the working frequency as stated by the manufacturer. See here). Once the reaction is going I only get random noise, however. Also, I think this only decreases under heavy load down to the audible range.

AlainCo

Currently I'm looking more at series of peaks spaced by frequencies in the order of kHz on relatively narrow ranges rather than doing measurements spanning very wide ranges. Violante et al. performed measurements up to 83 GHz in a way that makes looking at the small details difficult.

In any case, I tried using sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO₃) as the electrolyte and I obtained about the same results, with peaks having spacing again of about 127.5 kHz. I'm not sure if this is theoretically expected from Holmlid, since his results were with potassium. But again, in completely different experiments.

NaHCO₃ gave a strongly yellow light when the reaction was steady, by the way.

Most of the signal appears when electrolysis at medium voltage is performed (and the DC boost converter is already under load), but as voltage is increased (possibly giving slight plasma formation or micro-discharge) or a plasma reaction occurs, then the 127.5 kHz peaks appear as well. It does not seem to be related with the switching frequency of the boost converter as it remains fixed regardless of all the different audible noises the converter's circuitry makes under varying loads and voltage.

EDIT: for what it's worth, I tried checking one of the "bumps" (of those spaced by roughly 50 MHz) at about 1296 MHz and one around 327 MHz, but I couldn't find the same small feature there.

I also tried using a very sharp pencil (graphite+clays containing Si, Al, Fe) as the cathode, which made the plasma reaction easier to produce, but it did not bring any significant change other that it seemed more energetic.

It could be something as mundane as the PWM switching frequency of some electronic component under load, but neither the 12V power supply I'm using (150 kHz), which is anyway far from being at high load in these tests, nor the DC boost converter (75 kHZ) should be directly causing it. Also, the signal is strongly decreased if I further immerse the electrodes, causing the plasma reaction to stop, and it looks as if the smaller features rise and decay slower than the larger-scale noise.

Yesterday I made a couple animations from the data retrieved from the RF receiver. Every 'snapshot' covers a span of a few seconds of time. I'll try doing more tests later, but I'm not confident that overall this not yet another RF artifact of some sort. The sharp persistent peaks in the second one, for instance, are due to an external signal.

EDIT: so far it does not seem to be dependent on antenna length, DC boost converter voltage setting.

Try without the "Dr" :

http://world.std.com/~mica/nanorrefs.html

Wyttenbach

Check PM. Most studies by Holmlid on that regard have been with Rydberg matter of potassium, though.

EDIT: just for fun, I tried aligning my data (different run) with the previously posted figure. At this stage it could still be due to anything else.

candide89

In the last few comments I am referring about a signal repeating every 127.0–127.5 kilohertz, found inside a signal repeating every 49–50 megahertz.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Wasn't 50Mhz use for garage door openers ??

It's a very broad and intense peak that only arises when the plasma electrolysis reaction occurs, over the entire frequency spectrum measured. It's one of those visible here:

Using a different program I took a zoomed view of the descending portion of the first one visible at about 50 MHz. See below.

Left: no plasma; right: plasma. Vertical scale in dBm.

The repeating 50 MHz signal could be an artifact of some sort due to the cables/antenna setup, but this one with 127 kHz spacing perhaps is something else.

Shane D.

I've read about this 127.5 kHz signal before in apparently unrelated research. If this is indeed the same signal it means that a very easily accessible alternative experiment for reproducing the same results has been found.

Source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemphys.2008.12.019

Earlier, inside one of the "bumps" at about 50 Mhz from the plasma electrolysis tests I found a roughly 127 kHz repeating signal using a different analysis tool which creates a "waterfall graph" out of RF data from the receiver I have been using. This graph type shows frequency on the X axis, time on the Y axis and encodes signal power (Z axis) with color.

Plotting more conventionally one single line from the above data gave this:

Tools used:

• http://kmkeen.com/rtl-power/
  • For producing csv data from the receiver
• https://github.com/keenerd/rtl…master/heatmap/heatmap.py
  • For producing the waterfall graph
• Python/pandas/matplotlib
  • For the more conventional 2D plot above

Whether this is a real signal (from actual reactions occurring in the plasma) or not, I'm not sure yet.

I tried taking the RF spectrum of a mini Mizuno-type plasma electrolysis made using steel electrodes, 300V, thin cathode and KOH electrolyte (more details on the device used and general setup in this other thread). I also used a whip antenna extended to 16 cm. Since it takes a while to perform a full frequency sweep (or in other words, RF power is not retrieved at all frequencies at the same time) and the reaction is not continuous, I usually set the spectrum analyzing program to display the maximum values. The data is background-subtracted, although it's difficult to obtain a good background over the entire range (24-1800 MHz).

The actual maximum values recorded are shown with the gray line. Interestingly during the plasma reaction there was a roughly 50 MHZ broad repeating signal, visible especially on the upper end. This seemed more or less independent of the antenna length, so it could be a true "signal within a signal". On the other hand, the overall general shape of the gray curve is more dependent on the antenna setup.

EDIT: here is a detail of the upper region at a higher gain setting.

EDIT2: it's possible that this feature has to do with signal reflection in the cable.

My point is that the observed noise in plasma discharge experiments is in itself a signal, only often incorrectly captured by the antennas used due to technical limitations (limited bandwidth), which may give peaks and valleys—within the same RF power spectra—that are not actually real.

A more speculative consideration is that very powerful and brief discharges, given the characteristics of "square" or "sawtooth" waves, could potentially spill into the ionizing radiation range with slightly more than negligible power.

My thinking is that a very short and sharp discharge event, ideally with zero rise time and zero fall time, repeated at high frequency would be akin to a square wave, and so it would have an infinite number of odd harmonics of amplitude decreasing as 1/n harmonic, and therefore that this would be the spectrum generated with a large number of discharge events.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Audio/geowv.html

Many randomly spaced brief events would create a continuous spectrum, but as mentioned earlier, the antenna used would respond best at its resonant frequency and its harmonics, which would create a series of more or less broad peaks in the recorded power spectrum. I tried plotting an example of this (log10 of a mathematical square wave spectrum manually fitted to the recorded RF spectrum):

It is likely that this has already been discussed in detail elsewhere, but so far I haven't been able to find much.

After a few cm worth of graphite electrodes and many tests, reproducing the same conditions as earlier, when I thought I observed the ferromagnetic graphite effect, I have to conclude that what I saw was due to iron contamination of the worn electrode that was initially used. So, in the end the results are still "inconclusive" on my part as per thread title (i.e. if iron was indeed synthesized, it wasn't in macroscopic amounts that could be easily tested with a magnet).

On the other hand, a few other interesting observations could be made:

• The graphite electrodes that I used apparently need a period of "priming" in order to work properly and heat up. It could be that the initial surface layer, which looked smooth, had a too low resistance, or that some compound preventing them from heating up was adsorbed in the surface layers (they don't smell anymore as they did when new).
• The RF noise emitted by these experiments appears to be similar to that of Mizuno-plasma electrolysis setups. The peaks observed apparently depend on the antenna resonant gain characteristics. I made a thread about this for further discussions (and request for more information) here: RF noise in plasma discharge experiments

I took a couple screenshots showing the "flaming" anode from a video I uploaded here. From various sources, graphite burns above 700–800 °C, but I think I saw it suddenly start "igniting" above this level. The effect would be show up by a typical "flame sound".

EDIT: here are a couple photos of the electrodes. The cathode looks moist. This should be expected because the positively charged alkali will migrate to the negatively charged cathode, then quickly form oxides which rapidly react with moisture in the atmosphere, after the electrode has been dried by the heat of the discharge reaction. I find more surprising that the anode appears visually completely dry.

From recent tests with an intermittent carbon arc I observed with a cheap software-based RF spectrum analyzer somewhat familiar spectra (30–1750 MHz):

The first especially reminded me of the one shown by Renzo Mondaini in his Mizuno-style plasma electrolysis setup as described in this other thread (0–2000 MHz):

Upon investigation it appears that similar plasma discharge systems show likewise a similar RF spectrum. For example, the one shown in this old paper by Iorio–Cirillo also looks familiar and more similar to the second I posted above (0–1000 MHz):

I'm not quite sure but I suspect that the above graphs show broadband RF noise with decay characteristics typical of high-frequency rate spark gaps/transmitters (as used in early radio). I couldn't find many examples but see for example the blue area in this graph from: https://www.nutsvolts.com/maga…ng_something_from_nothing

Then, the peaks and valleys observed in the actual experiments, as well as the noise floor, would mainly depend on the resonant characteristics of the antenna and receiver used. In the first two graphs I posted, the first was made with a ~60 cm long whip antenna, and the second with the same extended to 26 cm. It turns out (not unexpectedly, in retrospect) that difference in the location of the peaks is proportional to ratio of the antenna lengths. In other words the peaks are a function of antenna geometry rather than the actual reactions occurring in the spark gap/discharge, although this might not necessarily always be the case for all experiments.

Is there a specific name or concise mathematical relationship for the type of RF noise observed in these experiments or spark gaps in general? Are there other related examples from the LENR field?

I get similar results with the whip antenna extended to 26 cm and the 27 cm antenna mast advertised as being for the UHF range (I used a slightly narrower frequency range with the latest test so the graph was scaled).

So I guess this similarity to the spectrum shown by Mondaini in a somewhat different experiment type could be an artifact of some sort for this antenna type (and it could be he used one similar to mine). However I do not know enough about antenna theory to tell more about what could be going on.

The antennas are made like this. The mast is replaceable:

Source: https://www.nooelec.com/store/nesdr-smart.html

Quote from Wyttenbach

327/1420 are the nuclear resonance peeks of Deuterium/Hydrogen also known as fine structre signal...

I meant that in Mondaini's case it appeared to peak at a higher frequency than 327 MHz, but Alan Smith pointed out that the peak is supposed to be narrow, not wide as seen there.

Following more testing and curiosity, I Just tried taking another spectrum in the 30–1750 MHz range (the wider the range, the longer it takes to perform a full frequency sweep. Furthermore the signal response with this antenna might be poor at high frequency) at a slightly elevated antenna gain setting. It appears that I'm getting a low and broad peak just above 1400 MHz. See the gray line:

Whether this is just a coincidence/artifact, I can't say.

EDIT: I tried with the other 27cm antenna (in a more favorable, elevated position) and although some of the broad peaks roughly match, others seem to be missing. So it's still possible that this could be mostly the effect of different RF response to broadband noise of different antennas.

EDIT2: on the other hand I think I am seeing that more of the graphite clusters seem very weakly attracted to the magnet, so perhaps this RF monitoring could be a way for optimizing the reaction (if it actually exists). To be confirmed, though.

Alan Smith

I do not have knowledge/experience with how narrow those signals would be, although I'm aware that molecular signals can be sharp.

I'm not sure if what is being measured in my case is a series of equally-spaced broad signals. If the first broad peak can be assumed to be the combination of two different things (from the double-peak character it could be the case), then it might be. I'm not an expert in molecular spectroscopy however. It's likely that this could be possibly due to the setup arrangement.

EDIT: I took a few others in the 30–1000 MHz range

Due to the way this works, it's not simple to get good spectra. What I noticed:

• It works best when the electrodes are struck in the atmosphere above the water level. If the electrodes are immersed, the signal is low.
• It works well when the electrodes are wet, but not very well (almost not at all) when they are dry.
• It does not work at all if the arc is continuous. It must be intermittent, which can be achieved by sliding or other strategies. When this happens the electrodes vibrate and emit a high-pitched noise.
• It's easier if the solution contains KOH and it seems easier if the concentration is higher. It was first made with distilled water.
• However, when I tried adding tap water to the electrolyte solution (thinking that it would not make much sense to use more distilled water since conductivity was already high), it suddenly became much more difficult to obtain a good spectrum. It's possible that this might have been a temporary fluke.
• I tried also a thin 27 cm antenna with a 2.5cm coil, but I didn't seem to get good results. The 60-cm extensible whip antenna appeared to work better.

However, even so I do not get ferromagnetic particle production, at least not in large amounts. I guess some could be found by searching them carefully. Whether this has any relevance to the typical carbon arc experiments remains to be seen. It could have some relevance to the Mizuno/Mondaini plasma electrolysis experiments.

If you recall Renzo Mondaini's experiments: Fusione fredda Renzo Mondaini—trascrizione

He shows a RF spectrum of the supped reaction in his videos:

I tried overlapping this spectrum on the one I got earlier. It's not a perfect match but there are similarities. His one was taken in the ?–2000 MHz range; mine in the 30–850 MHz range:

It could still be he used a similar antenna setup with a similar RF response, however.

EDIT: here there was more discussion on Mondaini's measurements:

Fusione fredda Renzo Mondaini—trascrizione (post 125839)

Mondaini claimed that there was a peak at 327 MHz corresponding to Deuterium, but from the graph it seemed at a somewhat higher frequency than that.

Just out of curiosity I tried using a cheap software-based RF spectrum analyzer at gain +0 dB with a fully extended 60 cm whip antenna in close proximity of the arcing electrodes and I get, relatively to the background-subtracted signal (yellow), peaks (gray) in the regions as seen in the graph below in the 30-850 MHz range. These are only the maximum peaks over a few minutes or testing and they do not necessarily appear in the same place at the same time. It takes about 15 seconds to perform a full sweep over the selected frequency range.

I used the following program: https://github.com/pavels/spektrum

With this USB RF receiver: https://www.nooelec.com/store/…vers/nesdr-smart-sdr.html

EDIT This is after a few more minutes of testing after adding some KOH flakes (liberal amount), again only showing the maximum values. The difference could be coincidental and depend more on the position of the electrodes relatively to the antenna.

Some graphite particles or clusters of graphite particles seem attracted to the same magnet, but the effect is not large. The attraction to the bulk of the floating particles seems significantly stronger.

Quote from Curbina

Singh states using 30 to 35 V with 15 to 18 A. Sundaresan worked at 10V with 20 to 25 A initially and later lowered to 15A.

Albeit Santilli has not done a specific replication, he has reported changes in the carbon rods, but he works with a 24KWh welder.

As the intensity of the magnetic field of the plasma is allegedly what drives the process, perhaps using higher amperages is a requirement.

I haven't read much about Santilli but he sometimes writes that the discharge has to exceed threshold values.

https://www.researchgate.net/p…roids_from_a_Hydrogen_Gas

These thresholds seem a difficult requirement to fulfill in the relatively low power experiments performed and described (also in the references) in this thread, but perhaps at least 3 kW of power as suggested in the excerpt could be reached transiently if the graphite electrodes intermittently arc like they appear to do in water (due to quenching) and by sliding or weak contact.

It's kind of an obvious observation but from the voltage/current data reported by the other groups which reproduced the Ohsawa experiment it is apparent that they used electrodes with different geometries than what I used. Below I also added data from what I tested (I did not measure voltage in real-time but I have often seen it decreased to about 11V at high load). EDIT: I just tested again and it seems that in my case peak current is about 42.5A and that supply voltage is stable at 11.67V. I think voltage starts decreasing significantly when largely exceeding about 45A (I recall seeing 70+A peak in other testing several months ago).