Posts by StephenC

Once LENR is understood and if it is found to be associated in some way to 4D EM models and experimental data. I imagine the next big thing on our radar will be what this implies for fundamental physics.

Experimentally evidence for particle physics comes down to energetic resonances after all.”

What underlies the particle families,QCD, resonance's and apparent constants in the SM. What does it tell us about what underlies other apparent Quantum behavior such as entanglement and duality. What does it tell us about relativity and space time. I’m pretty sure it will introduce a new window on theory along with data and constraints.

There are some interesting ideas already from concept level to more established theory touch on the topic.

For example there are magneto electrodynamic models of nucleon structure that quite well model nucleon resonances. Such as the Ceshire cat model.

http://www.physics.princeton.e…/EP/zahed_pr_142_1_86.pdf

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyrmion

there are also EM models of neutrinos although they are still not well understood.

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/ahep/2012/459526/

I’m curious where if all leads some of the nucleon theories already touch on some of the SO(4) concepts mentioned by Wyttenbach I think so it very curious to see where this is going.

I have a whole bundle of intuitive questions and maybe insights maybe red herrings... that I’m trying to answer for my own curiosity. Which I won’t confuse you all here with. But I suspect the answers will be found in these developments.

Rjzk thanks for this.

Bruce__H. Conspiracy is a double edged sword wielded by too many opposing grasping hands. I tend to stand well clear....

Umm don’t people tend to reply and respond to comments?

Rjzk. Interesting thread. I totally missed this before. Really glad to see it now.

Is this the first place Wyttenbach mentions 6D space? And it s quotient of two 3D spaces nature?

I’m curious about this concept and if and how it relates to his recent 4D and 6D descriptions

I wonder if there is a coupling between 2 3D spaces. Perhaps through spin? Or if each 3D dimension is split in two some common 4 th dimensional source. And what kinds of vector or scalar spaces it relates to. And how that explains time. Probably it’s deep in the maths but I wonder if there is a simple visualization?

(I like the idea of a coupling of two 3D spaces 3D seems quite fundamental consequence to me in spinning or rotating systems. Would the two 3D spaces need resonances to couple. And could it imply resonant coupling in the near field is required when they occur?)

Bruce__H yup I had similar thoughts about it. I’m not sure if the duration in Geosynchronous orbit. I’m more familiar with low earth orbit and Heliosynchonous polar orbits where the eclipse is a more significant fraction. Even with thermal inertia and longer integration times though I would expect a more intermittent behavior from eclipse in geosynchronous orbit.

As you say the apparent gradual maybe sinusoidal evolution does seem to point to a more directional aspect.

This feature must be very well known to the instrument specialists. I wonder how they explain it.

Bruce__H. In the case of GOES15 I wonder if there is a thermal effect when the satellite is in eclipse.

I like it.

Interesting paper thanks to Wyttenbach and Bocijn for sharing it.

Hi magicsound

(Sorry edited for the right Alan)

Actually much of my post I was meant for Johny Five. I was thinking pictures from one of his successful runs could be a good reference.

Alan what you’ve done with this live honest and thorough test is already amazing and already a lot of work. And I only have thanks for that.

But point taken.... It’s easy to sit on a back seat and make requests when someone is doing the hard work and that’s true for my request to Johny too.

It’s really great what you are doing. Really intriguing results too.

@JohnyFive

Yup I’m curious too.

On another point I wonder if next time you make a test run if you could do something that while not technical might help replicators with their tests. And help them check if they are on track or making early mistakes.

I can appreciate providing technical data can be difficult and also maybe brings things too much into focus or could be distracting to proper independent replication.

But something more empirical might help a lot.

I’m wondering if next time you run your test if you could take pictures of the contents of your beaker. Once every hour or so or if that’s too frequent once every few hours? And then maybe provide them in a time line.? This could be useful to “see” if the evolution of the materials. The electrodes and fluid are behaving in similar ways in the different replications to the tests you perform. If something is wrong early on in the test or weaker or stronger in its results it might also provide interesting empirical reference data. And good thing about pictures is they may show something we did not think to look for or measure in the data.

Alan Smith

Haha. I’m getting pretty dizzy! I hope that doesn’t mean I’m a bug

I have to say this 2m effect does remind me of some of the observations made by Holmlid regarding Kaon decay from UDH.

Probably it is worth taking careful precautions close to a he cell until it is better understood. I appreciate that the radiation level is low though.

I wonder if it would be possible to determine if the effect is due to a “gas” decaying at a distance. Or particles.

I suppose you could get this from a TOF measurement.

Maybe a crude way to do this could be to Move the paper or device some where new more than 2m way and then see how long it takes to get counts at 2m.

A. If it is almos instantaneous particles could be implied.

B. If it is taking some seconds the may be a “gas” like substance that later decays is implicated

From the TOF and/or distance one may be able to estimate the half life of what ever effect is going on I guess.

Although I’m intrigued by the possibility of a Li p process some how occurring in the paper.

I agree that it would likely require something pretty exotic to bring it there and stabilize it and enable later reactions.

I think the resulting alpha energies a few MeV are similar magnitude with those of AM-241 though.

But I should say that Da Phys mentioned to me on Ecat world that we should expect some alpha on the surface from UDD as well as the volatile compounds he mentioned. I’m not sure if UDH would be associated with alpha as well.

I think this is an important point. Is your test with alpha detection with Deuterium sourced materials or Hydrogen? If Deuterium could you check for alpha also with Hydrogen?

Regarding your measurements of radiation at 2m.

This could be interesting. Are you seeing a 1/r^2 drop of at 2m compared to 1m?

A. 1/r^2 might imply something that is radiating but not interacting much with air. Maybe muons? (Although half life would need to be considered) or something more stable such as beta?

B. More attenuation than this might indicate something interacting with the air such as alpha or protons? Of something that decays such as muons of mesons. Maybe we could distinguish which from the attenuation rate?

C. Less attenuation than 1/r^2 would be the most interesting. This might imply neutral particles decaying after a certain TOF in to charged particles. This could be pretty consistent with Holmlid work with neutral Kaons and Pions Being generated from UDH.

If you are seeing alpha as well as radiation from the pancake following a rule other than B above I really wouldn’t know What to make if that. If C it would imply something decaying to alpha at distances from the paper. That would be strange indeed.

Very good test and thanks for checking this.

I was curious about the Li +p approach would give something too. It would have bee be at least close to a normally accepted solution but it never really explained heavier element transmutations.

If you can prove UDH with this simple experiment it will be really amazing

Da Phys in Ecat forum suggested using the detector the other side of the foil. And also the other side of several sheets of foil.

Apparently with penetrating emissions associated with neutral Kaons from UDH decay this could lead to an increased count at the detector.

Da Phys appears to me to know about UDH much better than most. He is definitely deep in to understanding it at a proper and respectful scientific level. That should speak to some here. I wonder if it would be worth you contacting him directly for ideas about how to verify the presence of UDH or its meson products.

He also Mentioned that some volatile compounds can be produced from UDD but not UDH. I’m not sure what compounds they are but I suppose they might explain the smell you had when using Deuterium?

I guess charged meson or muon tracks in a cloud chamber might be possible if the can be destinguished from beta or protons. Perhaps if branching due to decays were seen it would be conclusive proof.

Longview.

Hehe good I will tell my wife that next time.... you know 😀

Yup I think if we see only lithium

and hydrogen fusion it’s one thing. understandable in normal terms if hard to explain in energy terms. Even if we would still need to explain how it is sustained after stimulation.

But heavier elements than beryllium would be pretty hard to explain away. Even with proton fusion. If we are in the realms of lithium fusing with carbon or two carbon atoms fusing then we really have no choice but to look at exotic mechanisms.

I know I’m stating the obvious here but it would be really cool if we saw proof.

Oh my goodness is it actually oxygen that’s fusing in my guts? Not just methane after all

Good questions.

Also if high energy MeV Alphas can yield Bremsstrahlung from interacting electrons or ions?

Good it’s not methane... some might get suspicious

If you find heavier elements like fluorine or Nickel for example in the paper I guess it’s time to call Bob.

Thanks for those replies @JohnyFive.

I’m also curious about the possibility of Beryllium.

I wonder if you could describe the smell a bit.

I understand from some reports that beryllium has a sweet taste. But is toxic so shouldn’t be tried! Good idea to wear a gas mask.

But compounds of Beryllium could be indicative of some interesting processes. And some of these can generate odours.

beryllium Carbide I think slowly reacts with water to produce beryllium oxide and methane for example... if you are smelling methane this could have all kinds of implications. Methane on Mars for example.

Beryllium Carbide is normally produced at high temperatures. But there is carbon in the paper. So perhaps some more reactive beryllium like pregenorator would be implicated. Or something else that catalysis it’s formation.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beryllium_carbide

Beryllium oxide (BeO) [ whilst not quite an odor ] is soluble in water so that might indicate something about why it is removed when wet.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beryllium_oxide

This kind of chemical effects could be true of a Beryllium like pregenorator (some kind of exotic compound LiH) or true Be. Obviously the simplest logical assumption using true Be is the best solution. but If Be appears but then diminish over time especially in line with the long 20 minutes half life then perhaps it could indicate something more exotic. Normal Be8 or stimulated Be9* half-life should be much shorter. And Be9 in ground state is stable. (This long half-life to me could imply a pregenorator making Be).

Beryllium Hydoxide incidentally is only slightly soluble but hydrated on heating to produce soluble BeO and H2O.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beryllium_hydroxide

I wonder if the BeO would precipitate out in an acid?

If something exotic is implicated (I admit it’s a big if) . If an exotic LiH compound entity simulating a Be is implicated maybe certain Be compounds such as Be2C or BeOH stabilize the exotic component from a chemical point of view where as others such as BeO do not. So the compound the compound HLi nucleus remains (until it interacts at nucleus level) but in the other less stable ones the compound lithium and hydrogen separate into their individual entities or more classical ionic bound LiH.

A crazy thought I admit... but I wonder if certain chemical compounds could stabilize an pregenorator entity so it’s nucleus interaction is in hibited too. If so it could form an interesting method of storage.

Hi @JohnyFive .

Whilst you are waiting for the new detector.

I had a very interesting exchange on e-Cat world with someone there called Da Phys. He is someone who’s comments and understanding I respect a lot and he has very good insight about UDH. He is of the view the effect you are seening is due to UDH and gave some very good arguments to me to explain. Especially with respect to the foil.

Perhaps more importantly is his observation if correct could imply neutral penetrating radiation that may be needs consideration.

May I ask some questions about the test with the foil?

1. I understand in one test with LOD with silver foil the test was a negative due to moisture in the paper. But in a later test with LOH it with foil when the paper remained dry you saw a doubling of the count. Is that correct?

2. In the case with the count doubling was the detector on the other side of the foil with respect to the paper? Or between it? Or under the paper?

3. If it was on the other side of the foil. When the foil was removed did the count drop again with just the paper.

4. if the foil was replaced did it increase again?

5. When the foil was removed from the paper was there any counts just from the foil. And if so how did it compare to the counts with the paper?

6. If you were not able to make these checks before could you make them whilst you are waiting for the alpha sensor?

I think they could be a good indicator of the validity of the UDH approach.

Edit:

From you posts above I think I fact the paper was on top of the detector and the foil was on top of the paper the in the other side . So it does look like the agent is reflected or contained by th foil. But I would still like to confirm that with you before getting back to Da Phys on it.

It could still be interesting to see if the steps above testing the foil and paper separately after exposure and removing and replacing the foil indicate something.

Also If that was set up could you also check with the foil. Between the paper and sensor.... if There are mesons from UDH that might indicate something.

I’m really impressed how versatile this simple test is for potential checking theoretical approaches.

@JohnyFive every thing your doing already is great. If we get replications there will be plenty of chances to experiment.

Regarding the dental film. If the pancake sensor also detects X-rays it might help to use the film to help identify if the radiation is due to X-Rays or due to particles.

It might also help to see if the radiation is localized in hot spots or distributed uniformly over a surface.

But I must admit I have no idea how to get hold of dental film either. Would ordinary film in a optically dark envelope be sufficient? I wonder?

I wonder if a UV sensor would show up anything?

Maybe someone can help? Im sure it can be checked later sometime anyway.

I hope this does not sound like not too crazy a suggestion.

Is there a way to look for UV or X-Rays coming from the paper?

Both before the paper is removed when the test is active and after when it is removed?

I’m wondering if some particular signatures of atomic interaction level effects that I’m thinking about are present.

Would it be possible to use dentil film or something equivalent on top of the paper? First during the test . Then in the time after?

It’s curious it works with Hydrogen and Deuterium in the same way.

I wonder about the role of the Lithium.

Did you run the test with another Hydroxide? Maybe NaOH or KOH?