Now the Safire reactor walkthrough video is available on Youtube also:
Saw this one months ago on Ben's vimeo. Pretty cool though. They have the gases blurred out but they are visible in older videos lol. They did an excellent job getting it commissioned in 2 weeks and working first try. Smart dudes.
Here’s the confounding factor: the printed lab results state values in ug/L with two significant decimal points. One can see that the desk image 2 has the values for the control sample. If this is correct, the table comparing the control to the processed water is also in ug/L but with three significant decimal points. So, it would imply that the Thorium level in the control is just 44 ug/L and this is very low (44 mg/cubic meter). This requires clarification, because I can hardly believe that a produced fracking water would have so low levels of sodium, which is usually in
the tens to hundreds of mg/L.
Also the desk images do not show Thorium but do show Thallium at 0.600 ug/L which is insignificant. This maybe where the confusion is...?
Here’s the confounding factor: the printed lab results state values in ug/L with two significant decimal points. One can see that the desk image 2 has the values for the control sample. If this is correct, the table comparing the control to the processed water is also in ug/L but with three significant decimal points. So, it would imply that the Thorium level in the control is just 44 ug/L and this is very low (44 mg/cubic meter). This requires clarification, because I can hardly believe that a produced fracking water would have so low levels of sodium, which is usually in
the tens to hundreds of mg/L.
The table is not a decimal point it's a comma so it's 44000 ug/L before and 6600 ug/L after. This is confirmed in the Before and After chart where it states Thorium/100 making it 440*100 and 66*100 units (ug/L).
it would be great if you could ask for clarification of the units employed.
You are correct Curbina, I updated my posts to ugs. Ooooops... Yeah so we are talking 44mg/L and it probably only holds 0.5L so it is a very small amount. Probably similar to the concentration in produced water I would guess.
Yep those table numbers reflect the chart which I didn't realize. Thanks.
Are you sure about this figure? Did you also dissolve the electrode ?
Pretty sure. The above Before and After chart shows about 45000 units (propbably ugs) before and 7500 units after the experiment which is about 16.67% left.
The problem among many CF analysis was the fact that people always did look at the sample they treated and not at the containment/equipment. Had Fleischmann done a MS sample of his electrode - as Biberian did later - then no discussion would have broken out. The electrode did store large amounts of excess Sliver isotopes.
It looks like the deposits on the electrode are insignificant and only detectable at microscopic levels. They probably rinsed the electrode and container with water before analysing the solution.
What Saffire shows is just the last step in the chain and here the question is: How much energy is needed/can be regained from such a process.
SAFIRE will be the first step and afterwards the elements will be filtered once the radiation has been eliminated.
From my understanding the Thorium or Radium and other elements (Sodium/Barium etc) are the main source of the energy once the plasma is struck but yet there will be a required external source and they are not looking to generate or recover energy only to neutralize radiation to clean produced water for this device. I doubt it will be a large energy draw as they are only operating at around 1 Amp for this small test. I'm more worried about how long the electrode will last but I guess they are confident it's worth doing so maybe months if not longer.
And last: Why testing Thorium? Thorium is no problem at all as it can be easily filtered out. For storing the waste all the 232Th decay chain products need to be remediated.
Radium is the most abundant and radioactive element in the produced water and Thorium decays to Radium so finding no Radium after the experiment may indicate that the process will work to clean produced water.
They didnt show any decay chain products so maybe smaller elements than the Thorium are fully decayed or maybe they are not an issue as they have short half-lives.
The decay rate using ultrasound is only increased by 104 which equates to 1.67hrs from 1.9yrs for Th 228 in the first paper's abstract. SAFIRE is reducing Th 232 (a longer billion year half-life) to only a few minutes. Have to compare sample sizes and energy used and cost of components like piezo speakers, signal generator vs anode materials, power supply, gases and vacuum or pressurization required but still looks like SAFIRE is much better at neutralizing radiation for speed.
And notice the SAFIRE Th sample was reduced to 17% (from about 45000 to 7500 units) which is much lower than the 50% half-life (about 3 half-lives or 40 billion years worth of decay).
And the 63 Ni is only reduced 13% in 200s leaving 87% left so to get the sample size down to 17% left it would take 41mins. It's not apples to apples comparing it to 232 Th but it is a lot longer using ultrasound it would seem.
Probably the closest ones are those published by Cardone et al of accelerated decay of Thorium by means of ultrasound treatment.
The decay rate using ultrasound is only increased by 104 which equates to 1.67hrs from 1.9yrs for Th 228 in the first paper's abstract. SAFIRE is reducing Th 232 (a longer billion year half-life) to only a few minutes. Have to compare sample sizes and energy used and cost of components like piezo speakers, signal generator vs anode materials, power supply, gases and vacuum or pressurization required but still looks like SAFIRE is much better at neutralizing radiation for speed.
The brick wall replies more intelligently.
Yup, it knows how to be silent. 
I should have used a more descriptive term such as spacetime, my bad. There are different types of spacetimes.
It's like banging your head against a brick wall...
"An approximation to such vacuum is a region with a gaseous pressure much less than atmospheric pressure."
SAFIRE III is aqueous and gaseous mix produced by electrolysis operating at around 340psi which is way above atomospheric pressure, so no SAFIRE III is not operating within your vacuum definition.
When thorium-232 is irradiated in a nuclear reactor, it produces protactinium-233.
Lucky SAFIRE isn't using irradiation.
SAFIRE II operated in a vacuum (mTorr). SAFIRE III is operating around 340psi. Maybe you're vacuum and mine are a little different.
But a 232Th reactor cannot run on its alone first you must convert it to 233U. Finally you produce the same mess as any other reactor:
SAFIRE is not a fission reactor like the Oakridge reactor relying on fission to produce neutrons to transmute Th232 to U233. Aureon team are only showing the natural decay chain which doesn't include U233 and they don't mention any U233 or resulting decay elements in the samples. Looks like it is a different process to the fission/neutron reactor chain. Maybe Th232 can run on it's own with a little zap in the right environment. 
I posit that this process is vacuum decay.
Just add electricity. =)
Happy Christmas
Safire hasn't really tried to explain whats going on with esoteric convoluted language, they just say we dont know but here are the results and we're learning how to control it.
Display MoreAction at a distance should allow a gas based SAFIRE reactor to process radioactive waste by placing the SACIRE III reactor inside a container of waste and letting that waste be exposed to the electroweak gage particles that the reactor is emitting though its transparent gas enclosure.
This method was experimentally deminstated in this work
Low-energy nuclear reactions and the leptonic monopole
Georges Lochak*, Leonid Urutskoev**
This experiment used a Plexiglas partition to separate the plasma produced by an exploding foil from a solution of uranium salt. U238 was seen to decay fractionally to lead.
I explained the theory behind this experiment recently to support a discussion I had with A Smith. Look that discussion up if there is any interest.
I've never heard any of the SAFIRE team use any terms that you do. Let me know when you have a working experiment.
However one thing is the reactor and other is how you run it.
Make it out of the optimum materials, maybe treat the waste water with extra gases or fluids, pressurize or depressurize, apply energy (DC at a certain frequency or variable if conditions are variable to keep the plasma in quiescent state) and Bob's your uncle LOL. Who knows the flow conditions and plasma interactions within... Surely it looks like another patent will be necessary as it looks nothing like the old anode ball in a chamber design.
I have heard about it being used in water but not sure on how it is done and if SAFIRE can get into a quisscent state but they wouldn't be considereing it if they didnt think it was feasible I guess.
I really should proof read my posts. =(
