Single circuits generate nuclear reactions

[mikewatson]

To determine whether the kinks/humps on the discharge waveform across a thoriated tungsten/carbon arcing junction I observed are due to combustion of the carbon, I surrounded the thoriated tungsten/carbon arcing point with a shroud containing argon gas. There is no difference in the wavefrom with the argon gas or in air. The kink/ hump shows extra energy is dumped from the junction into the circuit, it is only present if an arc occurs. Carbon-Carbon arc also gives this kink.

Stefan Hartmann suggested on another thread that the apparent production of extra energy during arcing on the commutator of the Newman motor was due to burning of the carbon brushes. My result mentioned above calls that hypothesis into question. Also other devices such as the Brandt Switch (also called the Tesla switch, although nothing to do with Tesla) where two series connected accumulators are discharged through a load into two parallel connected accumulators. Brandt used mechanical switches and most likely arcing contacts were in operation there also.

It seem to me that low level exchange transmutations such as those described by C.L. Kervran are involved not involving beta particles. The implication is that low atomic weight  transmutations are fundamentally different from high energy transmutations familiar in nuclear physics.

See:-

http://www.rexresearch.com/kervran/kervran.htm

for an interesting review.
 
Mike

[mikewatson]

Although this thread has nearly died, I thought it might interest some to report on some of the history of this subject I have unearthed.
I found that the carbon arc nuclear reaction stems from the work of a Dr Ronald Richter. Richter worked for the Nazi's during WW2 on this subject and the US government had a file on him  in Operation Paperclip, the project after the war to find out about Nazi weapons and sciencific research. Richter was attempting to produce a nuclear reaction in a carbon arc using a mixture of hydrogen and lithium.After the war he went to Argentina and under the auspecies of President Peron continued his research on Huemul island. A report in 1952 on Richter's research was publised by Dr Jose Balsiero:

http://www.ib.edu.ar/informes-huemul/reports-huemul-principal.html

Richter's reasoning can be found in the above report, and the report was fairly negative. Richter claims he overcmes the problems mentioned in the report by using Larmor effect resonance. This crops up in the Tesla_2006 intoduction at the start of this thread.. coincidence?

It is a fact that Rutherford produced lithium fission releasing alpha particle having an energy of 8.76 Mev with only 150 Kv using protons while using deutrons he achieved fission starting at around 20- 40 KV
( Story of Atomic Energy, F. Soddy FRS, Nova Atlantis 1949 page97). If there were sufficient lithium fissions in the reactions in the carbon arc the temperature would rise very rapidly. Under proton bombardment lithium goes to an unstable Beryllium isotope that splits into two alpha particles carrying away 8.76 Mev each. Also some of the beryllium emits  17 Mev photon.

The fact that the original Richter work was in a Spanish speaking area and the unique claim about Larmor resonance makes me suspect that this research or an offshoot of it was behind the Tesla_2006 stuff which started this thread.

It would seem to me that carbon is too heavy, lithium being the best bet as used by Richter also odd number elements are best, such as lithium, Boron.

I would say these nuclear reactions are fairly hazardous but are well within the capabilities of people on these groups

On these grounds this has nothing to do with Prof. Vallee at all.

Mike

[Koen1]

Your assesment sounds logical, although I do not see a direct reason to conclude that
dr. Vallée was not working on the same thing.
I agree that it seems to make sense that similar arc-fusion research done in the
latter part of WW2 was taken to South America and continued, and that the
info we received from there may very well be an offshoot of this.
On the other hand, dr. Vallée's Protelf theory is not so terribly complicated
that a very bright German scientist could not have figured this out as well...
It may be that dr. Vallée was merely the first to publicly propose the theory
since the Germans had worked on it in secret during the war... Does that really
matter? The main thing is whether it is a viable process. The Germans also
developed jet engines during the war, yet they became famous as "jet engines"
through worldwide broadcasted American film footage while the public had to
dig deep to discover it was actually a German invention... Yet nobody cared
as long as they worked.

@All: I recently had an idea that might be an interesting concept, would like
to hear your input. Please bear with me if you want to hear this one, as it
has unfortunately turned into a long story which may at points be very vague.
Do state your questions if you wish me to carify.
It started out with an old idea of mine which was basically a form of magneto-
hydrodynamic generator using air as gaseous medium. (MHD-gen basically
uses highly ionised gas or plasma even, which is moved through a conduit,
and passes through a strong magnetic field which is perpendicular to the
flow. Two electrodes placed on the sides of the conduit so that a line can be drawn
between them that will be perpendicular to both the flow and the magnetic field.
As the flow continues, the Hall effect will induce a current between the two electrodes.)
Obviously, it requires a large amount of energy to turn the gaseous medium into
plasma, and it needs input to cause the plasma to flow along the conduit,
and the electrodes need to stand up to the high temperatures and energies of the
plasma stream, and if we're really using plasma and not just highly ionised gas,
we may even need a Tokamak-like containment "bottle".
Does not seem like a very efficient way to make electricity, I agree.
But I was playing with the idea of incorporating the Protelf process to get energy gain
in the system.
Then, of course, there was Tesla's old idea of an arc generator which was nothing more
than a sort of chimney with two strong magnets attached to the sides and a spark gap
at the bottom of the chimney. (Fyi: An arc would be fired over the spark gap, this would
create a large cloud of ionised air, this ionised air would be warmer than the unaffected
air and would rise to the top of the chimney, and as it passe dthrough the strong magnetic
field, the moving cloud of ions would be magnetically affected by the same Hall effect again,
and two elecrode plates fixed inside the cimney and perpendicular to both the flow of
rising air and the magnetic field would also absorb the high voltage contained in the ionised
air cloud. Another version drawn up by Tesla is almost exactly the same thing, but instead
of a spark gap that would use an amount of radioactive material to produce the ionisation effect.
It's all along the same lines, just slightly different ways of using the Hall effect to tap the ion flow.
Ok, thanks for bearing with me so far.
I had these ideas simmering in the back of my head for a while, but watching the Ironman movie
the other week seems to have jolted them again.
Obviously I did not see any breakthrough ideas in the movie, but explaining to a friend why the
"arc reactor" in the movie was not a reality did shake some things loose, it seems.
In the movie, two versions of such "reactor" are shown: a small version the size of a coke can,
and a large version the size of a bus, roughly. Now the small version remains obscure and
the parts of it shown in the movie don't make much sense, but the large version clearly looks like
a sort of glass Tokamak with way too few coils.
Well, this is sort of where the movie connection stops
It got me thinking: what if we replace the electrodes in a MHD-like setup with a direct inductive coupling?
Could it be done? Well, just using the exact same Hall effect coupling without direct electrode connections
does not seem very viable... But!...
... Imagine we have a circular flow of plasma or highly ionised air. Let's just assume we have a proper
containment chamber and conduit for the time being. So in a way, we simply have a circular current.
Let's also assume we have managed to induce this circular flow (/current) by energising a large coil
inside it. Idk, if it's easier to imagine, you can imagine a large toroidal glass containment chamber
in which the charged gases circle the central "donut hole", and the main coil inside this "hole".
Now imagine that, by some magical means X, the energy contained in the circular flow is increased.
I imagine the circular flow becoming somewhat "thicker", or possibly the formation of multiple such
circular flows, one above the other. Obviously, this would mean the entire circular flow increases in
energy content either way, and this increased circular energy flow should result in an increase in the
magnetic field strength.
Which we should be able to 'tap', just like we 'tap' the fluctuations (and alternations) of the magnetic
field in a transformer.
Ok, still following me here? Good.
Now here comes the kicker:
Imagine that magical means X is in fact a periodic Protelf arc discharge through the gaseous medium itself!
If dr. Vallée's tables are indeed correct (and I'm just referring to his output tables), this would mean that
certain gases like Oxygen and Nitrogen would yield significantly more output during this process than
any of the carbon rod experiments. The high energies listed in his tables should easily be able to
ionise significant amounts of gas, thereby adding quite a lot to the circular flow.
Besides that, the rotating medium contained inside a strong magnetic field and with sufficient room in the
reactor toroid could well provide sufficient space for any beta emissions to be both unharmful to anyone
outside the reactor as well as keeping the energy contained within the bulk of the gaseous medium
(so that it is not completely lost, still around inside the medium, just not directly contributing to output
at that moment).
So, brief review: we use a large containment chamber filled with say air, we put a flippin big coil in the
center of this toroidal chamber, we induce a circular charge flow inside the air-filled torus and use
the central coil(s) to do so, we fix the magnetic field configuration in such a way that we can periodically
cause Protelf/ArcReaction in the gas, this increases the energy flow inside the torus, we use the central
coil(s) to collect the additional energy by induction, and when the energy level has dropped down to
the basic level we repeat this Protelf/ArcReaction pulse. A continuous process, with periodic Protelf,
but without the need for direct connections between the medium and the circuitry.
No problems with the electrodes getting covered in carbon dust from the hV impact arcs, no problem
with the electrodes or any other dricetly connected circuitry overheating, no beta escaping the process,
none of that. A "brushless" Protelf reactor.

Okay, I see that what I intended as a lucid proposition has once again turned into a lot of text with
less structure than I had intended.  Oh well, that happens sometimes.
I hope however that it is still clear enough for those interested.
I would really appreciate getting some feedback on this.
What do you guys think of this idea? Feynman?

Laters!

[mikewatson]

Koen, I did not intend to suggest that Vallee knew nothing about Richter, I am sure he must have been aware of these other peoples efforts, I am just talking about the first post of this thread (Tesla_2006) possibly having its origins elsewhere than in Vallee's work.
Anyway, we do need something that works and the Naudin/Vallee experiement seemed a simple way except that after some 40 experiments I have been unable to repeat them. I have concluded that Naudin must have been in error, but I have been also unable to discover how he got the results he did. I am waiting with baited breath for somebody to repeat Naudin and show me the error of my ways. People's enthusiasm seems to died away at the first hurdle. Who said it was easy ? Bill Alek has built a replica of Naudin's experiment but he emailed me to say that he had blown up his Fets and when he got some more he would have another go.....

On your proposal it could possibly be a superior method of getting the energy out of a plasma provided we have a working energy source such as Richter's lithium -> helium +17.28 Mev and a torus might be the best way confining the reaction. Again here is the problem we need a simple reaction such as Vallee's if it can be shown to work. In your system why not use carbon dioxide or monoxide confined in the torus; the carbon could do its Vallee's carbon  -> boron -> carbon trick without a loss of gas?
Another simple method is to use the old Poulsen arc oscillator. Carbon arcs have negative resistance characteristic and 100 years ago Poulsen used this carbon arc negative resistance to inject energy into a tuned circuit for radio transmission. The series tuned circuit was connected across the carbon arc, and the arc was supplied with power from a DC source via RF chokes. The RF output was in the KW range.
Clearly if the if the arc was maintained by the Vallee process or similar you would not need an external DC supply. The frequency could be much lower than RF say a few hundred Hz.
But first we need this simple working nuclear reaction and so far Vallee's proposed reaction seems unproven.

Mike

       

[sparks]

    A plazma seems to be simply ions and electrons that are in different inertial frames but embeded in a common inertial frame giving rise to a magnetic sheath about the plazma matter.  This represents a macroatom with an infinite spectrum of atomic weights.  Be alot of fun figuring out names for all these elements.