Posts by Drgenek

Quote from axil

This posit does not comport with the lack of low mass elements seen in transmutation of elements like iron derived from carbon. The additive process that built to iron is not seen in transmutation experimentation. Only iron is seen with no range of lighter building block type elements other than aluminum and silicon were seen in the transmutation product. The full range of intermediate transmutation produces were not seen as you have assumed to occur.

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

The oxyhydrogen plasma causes fusion of hydrogen to oxygen. The expected output of this plasma is an increase in nitrogen without the seed carbon rod present. Obviously, the experiment you reference was not set-up to measure this. But it is seen with mass balance and stoichiometry of aquafuel. Further, neither the stoichiometry of the aquafuel reaction or Santilli's intermediate fusion indicates any fusion of oxygen or hydrogen to carbon. Both analyses indicate hydrogen fusion proceeds stepwise to produce oxygen but the oxygen is consumed in further reactions. Most of the deuterium produced from hydrogen is also consumed in further reactions.

Neither the low mass elements nor the elements produced in the intermediate steps of the fusion process are normally seen in an oxyhydrogen fusion reaction (also called a Kidman reaction). These reactions are confined to the "EVO"s. However, the carbon rod interferes with the process by collecting intermediates to crystals. Crystals require seed. The output of crystallization depends on the crystallization process not on the cascade of reaction in the fusion process. The intermediates would be primarily Na, Mg and Al. If the electro-gravity is strong enough the Al fuses to Al to create Fe. Hence, no intermediate atomic weight elements.

I proposed most likely cascades of nuclear reactions are as seen below.

Quote from Wyttenbach

I can only propose that you once do the calculations and may be afterwards you will understand that gravity at the nuclear radius is a very weak force! Do not forget that the constant (G) is defined by Kg and you have to warp it down to a proton...

Yes. But G_e is 42 orders of magnitude greater than G. See prior post.

Quote from redirmogician

Could it be that in UDH a neutron-like reaction of a proton to an electron to another proton to form deuterium (and a neutrino) is taking place?

Almost! There are unit particles that are very small but they are not neutral particles, but each unit is a dipole. Of course, a dipole cannot be distinguished from a neutral particle except as the relative speed between particles increases or the distance between particles decreases. As a good guess this smallest particle will adhere to itself, can divide to positive and negative, and combinations of this unit particle leads to all other particles. Those combinations would then explain the families of standard model and the periodic table.

This small unit particle, an electron, a proton and energy combine to produce a neutron. The combination starts with the unit particle, an electron and energy forming a string. The energy in the combination is equal to n²(`13.6 eV) where n is an integer quantum number. These energy spectra are observed in hydrogen recombination and are called phat photons by Pharis Williams. If one puts n=240 into the phat equation above, one finds the energy is equal to the mass difference between a proton and a neutron. That is because the mass of a unit particle is insignificant in comparison to the mass of a neutron or proton.

As a string the unit particle can not separate from the electron regardless of the energy put into their combination. By swinging a unit particle at relativistic speeds about an electron a warp field is created. The electron is no longer an electron but rather a R-electron. R-electrons attract R-electrons due to the warp of time-space. A cluster of R-electrons would then be an EVO. Further, when a R-electron is combined with a proton, then the warp field extends to the hydrogen atom which causes the atom to become denser. Hence, a UDH in an n state of 240 resembles a neutron.

The gravitational field of an EVO can be modeled by doing a force balance on an R-electron at the escape horizon. At the escape horizon the R-electron neither falls into the EVO due to electro-gravity nor escapes due to Coulomb repulsion. Since, the EVO is composed only of R-electrons, since R-electrons have almost exactly the same mass and charge as electrons, one can use the force balance and solve for the electro-gravitational constant which is G_e = kq_e²/m_e². k is Coulomb's constant, q_e is the charge of an electron and m_e is the mass of an electron. Hence, electro-gravity is about 42 orders of magnitude stronger than Universal gravity.

The energy distribution of within an EVO is governed by electro-gravity and by phat states. Particles which escape an EVO must have at least the escape velocity or higher. Hence, one finds an amazing result from Ed Storms of a distribution of energy of particles from an LENR reaction. The peaks in the distribution are E = n² (.0457 MeV).

The input energy 794 V sets the size of the EVOs and hence the escape velocity but escape velocity is still dependent on the phat equation also. What is important is that energy distribution at the escape horizon reaches energies sufficiently high to cause nuclear reactions. So, these reactions are not low energy or cold nor do they overcome the coulomb barrier to fusion in some novel way.

When doing "LENR" by electrolysis with metal hydrides, lattice imperfections create resonance cavities which collect the specific wavelengths that the phat equation predicts will cause "LENR" by creating R-electrons/UDH. Clusters of UDHs have been measured by Miley et al. These cluster act the same way the hydrogen infested EVO of Ed Storms do. However, clusters in metals cause more fusion of metal in the lattice to itself than hydrogen to hydrogen fusion. When metals (Ni or Pd) fuse they produce elements that will fission. The majority of the transmutation results from fission.

The major disadvantage of fusion due to electro-gravity is that the energy from the fusion and/or fission is captured by the extreme gravity of the cluster of an R-electron produced planetoid. For example, a very precise and accurate mass balance and stoichiometry of intermediate fusion data from Santilli reveals that mass loss due to transmutation should have produced in two minutes, in magnitude, about 96 million BTU but only produced about 3000 BTU.

The mystery of the missing energy leads us to Matsumoto. When an electro-gravity cluster is capturing the energy from the nuclear reactions, it is converting energy to mass as phat energy bound in warp field(s). Matsumoto found that cold fusion produced a unique form of radiation which produced images rather that tracks on photographic film.

To produce an image the radiation, needs to be a light source that is captured by the interface of the film. The light source then radiates to develop grain by grain an image. By analyzing these images, Matsumoto decides that the radiation is neutron stars created by electronuclear gravity that collapse into blackholes which electro-gravity blackholes are a source of radiation. The radiation is something like Hawking radiation.

One can verify if electro-gravity blackholes are produced from R-electron based neutrons because these "pseudo" neutrons would exist in countable numbers. Further, electro-gravity blackholes would radiate out of existence and produce an image which would be sized as integer values of a number of "pseudo" neutrons from which they were composed. You can look up the images, measure them and produce the graph yourself. Here is what I got.

Rs is a calculated Schwarzschild radius for the electro-gravity blackhole which is based on some assumptions and use of the electro-gravitational constant in place of the universal gravitational constant. It would seem that Matsumoto is justified in claiming photographs of blackholes.

It follows that electro-gravity-based fusion/fission produces as it primary output a radiation that is consistent with radiation from blackholes as its major product.

Further one can use the Schwarzschild equation with a focus on an "in everything particle" to predict that these "in everything" particles are radiation from electro-gravity blackholes. This means that the "strange" radiation from "LENR" would have mass and can convert to energy to develop grain by grain an image.

The conversion of mass to energy is a form of electrochemistry, so the LEC is likely a result of this electrochemistry.

I realize this post is rather long, but I though most you might like a model that ties the various threads in this forum together. I tried to keep it short and focused. I could provide links to other threads to provide more details.

Hora, Miley, et al in ICCF-7 have a paper " Nuclear Shell Magic Numbers Agree with measured Transmutation by Low-Energy Reactions. See page 147 in this link.

ENECOtheseventh.pdf (lenr-canr.org)

The nuclear reactions initiated at seemingly at low energy (most fusion) happen and are followed by fission. The fission output is proposed to be due to whatever quantum structure governs stable nuclei.

The paper by Nagel relates the peaks to nuclear attraction wells of specific size based on atomic number but Hora et al relate the wells to Z or proton numbers. They propose the quantum relationship between sizes of wells as R(n) = 3ⁿ. see page 150.

Some nucleons have a positive bias (protons) while other have dipoles (neutrons). All nucleons exchange components so any bias of charge does not reside on any nucleon long enough to affect experiments designed to scatter off charges within the nucleus. Hence, the difference between neutrons and protons so short lived that nuclear structure is nearly undetectable. The nucleus can be modeled as liquid. Nevertheless, net field effects are observed such as spin and electron structure mirroring off an abstract nuclear structure.

This dynamic nuclear fluid causes higher rates of decay of elements as a function of A and Z numbers relative to the five peaks (the stable combinations of mobile charge with nucleons).

As far as mechanism, this data tells us that fusions to heavy elements occur in "LENR" and likely occurs far more often than hydrogen to hydrogen fusion. The mechanism of this type of nuclear reaction is like that of a star closer in mass to a black hole than to the mass of our sun.

The easiest way to model these reactions is with a gravitational constant which is orders of magnitude stronger than universal gravity.

You state, "The method of creating ball lightning, described by the authors in an article in the journal Physical Review Letters, turned out to be surprisingly simple."

Could you provide a link to the reference?

I did the energy balance on Aquafuel using data in Santilli report. Based on the chemical composition from NASA the expectation is 13.24 kj/gm. However, the torque/horsepower yield was 90% compared to gasoline. Gasoline is 44.54 kj/gm, so Aquafuel is 40.09kj per gm. Therefore 40.09/13.24 is 3.02 times what is expected based on chemical composition.

The nuclear reactions produce something that has potential energy or fuel value. The fuel was not detected by chemical composition. I have been trying for years to figure out what that non-chemical fuel is.

This a mass balance based on the two nuclear reactions: the fusion of hydrogen to produce oxygen and fusion of oxygen with hydrogen to produce nitrogen. The assay data is the NASA data in the article by Santilli which by comparison matches the data in first column. The next two columns account for the hydrogen and oxygen produced from hydrolysis. Under the row missing hydrogen, one sees that some of the hydrogen from hydrolysis is missing. Missing hydrogen to oxygen is the hydrogen that fuses to produce oxygen: that oxygen is in the column oxygen from hydrogen. The hydrogen that fuses to oxygen to produce nitrogen is the column labeled Kidman reaction. Some of this oxygen come from atmospheric gas which is in the column oxygen from atmosphere. The column total oxygen for Kidman reaction is to account for all the oxygen, this number is approximately the same as the number for the oxygen consumed for the Kidman reaction in the column labeled Kidman reaction. There are two sources of nitrogen in Aquafuel: the nitrogen produced by nuclear reaction in the column Kidman reaction and nitrogen from atmosphere in the column by that name.

Richardson is right in that it's not just electrolysis.

The Kidman reaction is an irrefutable reference experiment for a new type of fusion reaction.

ARPA-E LENR funded projects news and updates - Page 17 - Players - LENR Forum (lenr-forum.com)

Quote from GRMattson

But if you do the mass defect equation for deuteron-deuteron fusion to He4 you get:

2.01356 + 2.01346 - 4.00261 = .02451

Which means the reaction is endothermic, as it is. You can't have it both ways. Straighten it out.

.Google dueteron-deuteron fusion to find out what conventional wisdom says happens on the sun to produce He3. The reaction doesn't stop at He4. And if the He4 needs to grab some extra energy to set free the neutron how does it then produce a high energy neutron? That reaction can produce tritium or He3, but very few photons, which fact is significant. One overlooked fact of Papp's engine is that it produced very little heat. That is consistent with the reaction of He4 to He3. Just because the reaction doesn't occur spontaneously doesn't mean you can't excite to happen if it is exothermic.

Display More

Check your math. The mass defect is on the He4 side of the balance of products and reactants, so the reaction would be exothermic.

You might consider making neutrons like per this patent.

US20040017874A1 - Modulated quantum neutron fusion - Google Patents

Quote from fractious

An essay from a researcher affiliated with an MIT team that was awarded some of the ARPA funding. Gives his view of CF history. In his opinion, excess heat is not the most compelling evidence for CF. Instead, he says focus on observations that indicate nuclear reactions and pins his hopes on an "irrefutable reference experiment".

https://thebreakthrough.org/is…/fusion-runs-hot-and-cold

There has already been an irrefutable reference experiment. It just isn't well known.

The accepted accuracy for this measurement is 2 ppm by volume. So, what is really the problem?

Is it that the explanation doesn't fit the economic motives of the scientific community. Is that is can't be real if not blessed by peer publication review? Give me a valid reason that would be acceptable to a true scientist. We only find what we are willing to seek.

Quote from Wyttenbach

You missed a basic physics class -0.1.. means exotermic....= produces energy...

Do the balance. He4 is lighter than the sum of He3 and a neutron. Mass = energy, so if He4 were to lose a neutron to create He3 then the mass defect requires the addition of the energy equal to 0.1 mass units.

energy changes in nuclear reactions - Google Search

I don't suppose you will admit to an error? It is not my intent to embarrass you. I wish luck with your theories. If I must be your strawman, please get the math right. I know I make errors, but this is not one of them.

Quote from GRMattson

@Dgenek

The reaction of He4 to He3 occurs on the sun which is a part of nature, so I consider it to be occuring naturally.

.

The reaction on the sun is called a proton- proton chain reaction. The final step to produce He4 is fusion of two He3. Stellar nucleosynthesis - Wikipedia

Can you provide a link to He4 to He3 occurring naturally? It would violate thermodynamics. (reactants - products ) = ( 4.00260 - ( 1.08665 +3.01603)) = -0.10008 mass units. Hence, the reaction must absorb mass or energy rather than produce it. I liked it better when you proposed Radon fission that is exothermic.

Quote from Gennadiy Tarassenko

. Can you explain this situation to me in such a simple way.

Sorry. I don't know how. Where you able to open the video?

The problem with an arc is not that a nuclear reaction does not occur but that it generates electro-gravity black holes. See comment here.

Deuterium fusion in Glow Discharge - Replication Attempts - LENR Forum (lenr-forum.com)

Then when one does the calculation based on the amount of transmutation, E=mc² should yield 63 million BTU. Compare that with the in the slide in the link above.

The electro-gravity black holes absorb the 63 million BTU and in theory emit approximately 10³¹ particles from the above reaction. Each particle has a mass of about 0.109 eV. Mass emission not energy production.

Since Free energy = heat + delta T (entropy), with a blackhole involved, the reaction yields mostly entropy instead of heat. However, if one generates the electro-gravity energy field by rotation of a dielectric in a magnetic field, then the radius of the energy field is large, so it does not develop a blackhole until it condenses to a much smaller radius or perhaps not at all. At large radius between attracted particles, the energy of gravity remains as potential energy rather than kinetic energy. As the radius between attracted particles drops the energy converts to kinetic energy, so the dielectric would get hot from the inside towards the outside.

The mostly likely nuclear reaction in mineral hydrate will be the reaction in the slide above. The reaction doesn't need deuterium, it works with the hydrogen in water also.

Perhaps an experiment I conducted with an electric arc rather than glow discharge would interest you. For this experiment I used three different ratios of deuterium to hydrogen. In each case the hydrogen isotopes had less than 1.3% oxygen present. The oxygen concentration was monitored by an oxygen probe. When the arc is applied the rate at which the oxygen disappears was measured.

I found that the rate which oxygen disappears is proportional to the deuterium. The more deuterium the faster oxygen disappears.

Of course, chemically deuterium should react slower than hydrogen because of isotope effects on bond energies. However, I was interested in the relative rate of the arc induced fusion of hydrogen or deuterium to oxygen. I originally discover this reaction by analysis of the patent application of R Santilli.

A moving magnetic field will induce charge separation within a dielectric such as a rock. That charge will move as much as it can to create capacitance to preserve the electric field energy that the moving magnet created. I don't think a pyramid structure about the space or material to be activated is necessary but a spherical structure for dielectric could be.

Hence, you should be able to just set magnets in relative motion like a stator about your rock acting as a rotor. Make the rotor from a relatively non-conductive mineral. It should be very helpful if the mineral has hydrated water.

Expect a material to form that is affect by electro-gravity; mostly from electrons and hydrogen. The magnets put the electro-gravity affected mass into motion within the rotor. These masses are attracted by electro-gravity but repelled by their net negative charge. The result should be torus of electro-gravity affected material moving within the rotor much like described in the video.

If the rotor material is hot enough, and the energy transferred from the mechanical motion great enough, then the electro-gravity should condense to form core which should be hotter than outer edges of the rock acting as a rotor. Hence, you should be able to test your theory.

I hope that helps.

Quote from GRMattson

When you write nano stars do you mean micro black holes? I got slapped down over that once. Seems the event horizon reaches the Planck limit long before the mass as the size decreases. Be careful.

The basic premise of this thread is that the fission of He4 to He3 occurs naturally, and it may be possible to do so artificially with a low input of energy, that being indicated by the history surrounding Papp's Noble Gas Engine. It's really a call to action (research). Let's find out if it's possible. I would suggest therefore you start a separate thread about electro gravity.

You mention the use of a Lazer and H2O to generate neutrons. That being somewhat confusing. A similar experiment could be done with He4 with less confusion. Another possibility would the use of a capacitor bank, as it would be easy to keep track of the energy usage. Detecting the neutrons could be more of a problem.

The problem with the event horizon, Planck limit and mass applies to universal gravity but not to electro-gravity because the coupling of electro-gravity is so much stronger. At nano-star doesn't have to be a blackhole.

You may enjoy Moray Kings view on Plapps engine

One Million Cavitating Water Electrolyzers | Moray B King #Zero-Point Energy #Tesla #Quantum Physics - YouTube Look at 34:17 starting with slide titled "Energetic clusters can form in inert gases"

I don't think fission of He4 to He3 occurs naturally because that reaction is highly endothermic. In contrast hydrogen could be converted to He3. See my patent application titled "Compositions and nuclear methods for Helium-3 and other isotope production."

A careful read of my post about lasers and D2O or H2O give my reasons for not believing neutrons are generated in any significant number.

Per you request I will only discuss electro-gravity in this post as needed to reply to any questions directed to me. Respectfully.

Quote from GRMattson

So, how do you explain the spontaneous fission of say a thorium atom? Does a Mev gamma ray or high energy particle just happen to hit it at right time and place? Or has nature set up a sensitivity to low energy effects that cause the atom to kick out an alpha particle? If there is a possibility of an isotope of an element becoming another isotope of that element by emitting a neutron I am not aware of any physics principle that says that would necessarily require a high input of energy.

I'm just wondering, are you like Axil on a ego trip by throwing extraneous stuff into a thread to mess it up or do you just hate new ideas that you didn't think of.

First, let me apologize, I didn't mean to mess up your thread, give you the impression that I hate any ideas, that I am trying to create general confusion for my own entertainment or that my ego won't allow a diverse discussion of ideas.

I don't know what causes the natural rate of radioactive decay. I don't reject the idea of Parkhomov that some relic neutrino could cause it, but I don't accept the idea as 100% probability true. The photo decay of deuterium to emit a neutron and leave a hydrogen requires about 2.3 Mev gamma ray. The physics principle that necessitates that energy is thermodynamic energy balance. The article above by Simakin et al is decay of thorium at above and below a natural rate caused by laser interaction with gold nanoparticles. Their interpretation is "According to observed nuclear transformations, exposure in D₂O results in generation of thermal neutrons, while laser exposure in H₂O provides more energetic neutrons capable of fission of Th nuclei." In H₂O the rate of thorium decay is above normal and in D₂O the rate of thorium decay is below normal.

I think they are saying that thermal neutrons are produced near gold nanoparticles in D₂O and that the thermal neutrons subtract energy from thorium so that thorium decays more slowly. While fission capable neutrons are produced near gold nanoparticles in H₂O so that thorium decays faster. But it does not make sense to me that neutrons are produced from H₂O. Would a hydrogen be converted to a neutron, or a neutron expelled from oxygen? Further, there are neutron cross-sections, so if neutrons increase or decrease radioactive decay where do they all go?

Collision with a nanostar isn't more or less elastic than collision with any molecule (if the colliding molecule isn't attracted by electro-gravity). Collison between molecules can transfer energy or part of the molecule. The same interactions are expected for a nanostar. A nanostar can transfer a large amount of energy, or a neutron at its escape horizon but it can also absorb energy from nuclear reaction or from an atom when that atom collides with the stars escape horizon. My opinion is that the increase and decrease in natural decay rate of thorium in Simakin's experiment is due to nanostars not neutrons.

Hey, if you don't want me explaining how electro-gravity fits in this thread, tell me. I will respect you wishes and not contribute more to this thread.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

Dark Energy is the source of magic in the universe. Beware that most of the energy of the universe is magic, just waiting to be released without regard for the laws of physics in the restoftheverse.

If we were talking to someone from distance future, we likely would perceive their version of physics as magic. And if their physics makes common use of dark energy who of us would be in awe of that.

A better example of over unity in electrically induced explosions is as follows. Proc. 27th IECEC, Vol. 4, 4,335 (1992) by engineering professor Gary Johnson. This quote is from Moray King's book "Water the key to new energy." "Johnson's experiments confirm that both excessive force and energy (exceeding what was stored on the capacitor) was consistently exhibited from abrupt electric discharges in water"

Unfortunately, the typical efficiency to produce electric energy from mechanical energy disallows a cyclic over unity process.

However, what is brilliant light power doing? Basically, converting water into electricity by a variation of the above process.

Quote from GRMattson

Try focusing on the purpose of this thread, which is about the possibility of inducing fission by creating low energy effects. You fell into the trap of coming up with a wild convoluted process for a problem that doesn't exist.

There are no low energy effects. Reaction whether chemical or nuclear occur because the distribution of energies of reactants includes energies sufficient for activation. The activation energies for nuclear reaction are in the MeV range. That distribution is possible because of electro-gravity. This is not a guess. These energies have been measured as is seen here.

Ed Storms Amazing results data fitting - Physics - LENR Forum (lenr-forum.com)

Both fusion and fusion occur because the compositions of matter which due to electro-gravity cause a distribution of energy which enable nuclear reactions. The application of a laser to nanoparticle in the following article illustrates the point. Simakin et al speculate water provides the neutron source for fission.

[0906.4268] Initiation of nuclear reactions under laser irradiation of Au nanoparticles in the presence of Thorium aqua-ions (arxiv.org)

Electro-gravity is neither wild nor convoluted. It is an unfortunate result of the combination of quantum mechanics and relativity. We can't create truth we just discover it.

Why do find the production of nano-size stars so offensive? Why not reason it through and accept it as the simple solution that it is? Why are you looking for something more complicated? The data fits the model what more do we need?