Single circuits generate nuclear reactions

[Creativity]

well,i could imagine an electron cannon to do the job even better.Such a cannon is sitting in TV to generate and accelerate electrons.Those electrons hit the fluorescent screen to knock off some photons.Nice thing is that in TV u have the whole setup(high voltage generator,acceleration coils,electron source,electron trajectory controll).Also noctovision devices have accelerator of electrons.

Next step could be to put the whole set up in vacuum so the particles colliden not with air gap.

@Earl

beta particles hit the atoms in structure of metal(coil windings ),ripping off the electrons.If u had already small current in coil,the potential difference(voltage) will accelerate  those free electrons causing more current in a coil.

[Koen1]

Yes, cathode ray tubes aka electron cannons do accellerate electrons... so what?
The problem we have is in the high speed beta particles.. We want to collect
them and their energy content, we don't want to make more or accellerate
them even more... We want to catch their energy.

Also, if there is only pulsed DC input and beta emission bursts, I don't really
see how AC could result in the collector coil...
Perhaps if there was AC input or if the magnetic field were alternated, then
it seems possible to get AC out as well... although I would expect a serious
DC bias on that if it occurs...
But hey, I haven't had my coffee yet so I may just be horribly off

[aleks]

Can anyone explain to a dumb EE how beta capture in a copper coil can cause AC output at the coil terminals?  I could see how this might happen if atoms or electrons are ringing after a shock from the environment, but I can not see AC output as a result of beta capture.

We should be getting beta "kicks" I think (fast rise time, a bit slower fall time). However, if pulses are discharged frequently, the beta kicks they produce may add up creating DC output with some pure AC component. If pulses are rare, this should create a train of beta kicks, not really usable for anything.

This device is genuinely a displacement current generator. That is, each beta electron hitting conductor will displace free electrons in this conductor and will create a current, in both directions relative to hit point (this is different to battery generation and should be treated differently - I believe betavoltaics make it possible to run non-closed serial circuits). That is why it is very important to divide a single collector winding into several decoupled segments so that no counter-action is taking place (otherwise there will be many interfering EM waves travelling inside the collector that do not produce usable energy, but only cause heating). So, having displacement current it is essential to treat ALL terminals of the collector as "+" (or "-"). If multi-layered winding is used it is by all means useful to have separate outputs from each layer.

Decoupling can be done with a suitable capacitor since capacitors as far as I understand stop displacement currents and only allow EM wave to propagate. So, each terminal of layer and segment of collector winding should come with its own capacitor. Since capacitors do not pass DC, it also means that pure AC output should be achieved by varying pulse frequency and rise time.

[tagor]

Consider the following:

1. SP3 Hybridized orbitals leave no circular/spherical shells of electrons shielding the nucleus.

2. Magnetic polarization, and electric fields in particular, do not directly align or re-localize the electrons already in hybrid molecular orbitals - we simply condense the probability distribution of the electron in said orbital, thus increasing the likelihood that it will "not" be in the vicinity of the nucleus when our incoming current arrives.

3. Incoming electrons do NOT follow straight-line paths. They ricochet between atoms and follow a random walking path, biased by the input voltage. If the electrons had a mean free path through the material, they would be traveling near the speed of light, and when they bounced into an obstacle (Another electron) we would get UV output at 500V, and X-rays at 1000-2000 Volts. We don't get this, so the mean free path must be very short and randomly oriented, since we only get thermal emissions from normal conductors (different quantum effects prevail with semiconductors like LED's).

4. Direction of magnetic field polarization only matters when looking at the electron spin compared to nuclear spin - as long as they're both interacting with the same field, and THEY are parallel, the reaction proceeds.

Vallee theory is virtually pigeon-holed with errors, assuming classical Bohr/Thompson electron behavior. This is fine for explaining the broad envelope in which we're operating, but Vallee never mentioned a Weak boson. A virtual particle is emitted, then this decays into a neutrino (tau, IIRC) and a beta particle. This is the emission we see. This is the "virtual particle" involved in the process, not a vacuum event.

The inconsistencies are between Vallee Synergetic Theory and modern physics, not between our explanation and the setup.

Much respect to Monseur Vallee`, but he had it at least a little wrong.

see also

http://franckvallee.free.fr/localhost/plain/overview/perspectives.html

Perspectives
STEM-Physics remains unachieved and many fields of research need development. There is an enumeration of the domains that must be elaborated and primarily in physics.

Ren?-Louis Vall?e, its author, is now 80+ years old ; he would therefore be happy to know his work pursued.

Don't accept to be misled by the dogmatism of relativity. Thus official physicists:
still refuse to reconsider the flawed relativity and the emptiness of vacuum

have obtained quite fewer results in 50 years than they could have had with the Synergetics point of view

haven't yet resolve the waves particles dualism

try to escape their dead end with ever more complicated math

and lost any ability to provide a consistent and physically understandable model

As a consequence of this blindness, governments' budgets for fundamental physics will still continue to dramatically decrease. There is no gain to follow them!

As a logical extension of Quantum Mechanics, STEM-Physics promises tremendous new excitements for a renewed physics
A mathematical tool must be developed in order to correctly model the non-linear wave medium

Large parts of physics remain unexplored by STEM-physics, it's time to start new researches as well experimentally than theoretically

Other domains of science are also involved

Join our team, become a pioneer!
Mathematics
Explanation and expected tools...

View list

Physics
The remaining questions and the unexplored domains of physics...

View list

Science and Philosophy
Synergetics implies other great questions and discoveries...

View list

this words comes  from F Vallee ( RL Vallee's son )

[Feynman]

Hey all

@Koen

Thank you very much for that detailed analysis.  I was actually reading those very patents last night!  That earliest one I found that I think we were both looking at was ridiculously simple.  It's just a surrounding sphere of metal which collects a negative charge from the beta particles. I almost burst out laughing when I was reading the patent, like "is this it??" .   The only 'problem' there would be we might get a high internal impedence, but that may not be an issue or not.  R and I both think we are going to get particles with a handful of specific quantum energies rather than a whole rainbow of them, but I am unsure what this means for the impedence.

As R posted , because of electron mean free path, the orientation of the magnets is not so important.  This has been experimentally confirmed.  It works both ways.  Originally I was going to try using the magnets axially, but then I realized you cant use superglue (cyanoacrylate) to bond carbon to neodynium.  So instead I made the carbon rod sandwich.  Both setups (axial and sandwich) should work okay.

On smaller 'VSG' setups using the 'sandwich' neo method, the main difference will be the path of the beta electrons.  In my setup I posted, I believe the vast majority of the beta will be curving out of the carbon rod, (that is, not smacking into the neos), which may or may not make it easier to collect.  We will see! 



These devices are obviously way overunity so I plan on making several different setups, using different sizes, orientations, and collector methods.

As I've said before yes, they are OU, and yes we can self-run, but we seem to be hitting an upper limit of 50-250mA on output current regardless of the input (so far).  COP is generally between 2 and 5.  I think there are a few ways to solve this (capture more beta);   one is the LC resonant tank circuit in the patent I posted, and which zerotensor eloquently commented upon.  The other , more simple method may be that we just need to bias the collector coils with a nice strong current (1A+) so we get 'flux cutting' (also mentioned in the patent), such that the beta electrons amplify the current rather than the voltage.  The current in the biased collector will also create a magnetic flux (much weaker than the neos), but still strong enough to perhaps deflect more of the beta into the windings and amplifying the current.

To those who are wondering why we get AC out, I have no idea. That is the word on the street. Perhaps this is incorrect and I misunderstood, but I'm pretty sure that's the case.  I can't explain why, and it doesn't make sense to me either (I would expect to see DC with hash). The only thing I can think of is that the collector in the present operational setup is a current transformer.   I will post the scope traces of my own setup once I get it working and you can decide for yourself what the heck is going on.  Also, perhaps we get DC (w/ hash) out if we bias the collector coils with a nice current before generating the beta?   I think we will know the effect of 'collector current bias' by this evening. Cross your fingers.

Again, we are OU with what is perceived to be an extremely low efficiency of beta collection. But we are not high enough OU to run appliances. Yes we could self-run and maybe have enough left over for 5-10 LEDs.  But we don't want to run LEDs, we want to run jackhammers.  I think we are losing 99+% of the beta. If we can figure out how to turn more of this into usable current (via biasing the collector, resonant LC tank, Koen's NP junction, whatever will work etc), I think we will have a serious self-running generator on our hands.

@b0rg
for small carbon rods:  take apart an AA, C, or D 'heavy duty' battery.  it must be 'heavy duty', not 'alkaline'.  use gloves and safety goggles. peel back the top of the case using pliars, going around the perimeter of the top of the battery, bending the rim back all the way around.  Once you get it loose, pop the (+) top using a screwdriver and pliars.  Careful not to break the carbon rod inside , it's brittle.   Then dig the carbon rod out; it will be surrounded by black mush (potassium permanganate) and chunks of cardboard. Excavate the mush around the rod until you can pull it out of the case.  Once manage you pull out the rod, it will still have have chunks of mush on it.  Just scrape the mush off using a screwdriver, and now you've got a nice pure carbon rod (no clay).  That's where I got the carbon rod in the picture I posted (it came from a D battery, then I cut the rod in half).



D battery carbon rod is 26mm in length and 8mm diameter.