No more Testatika research at Methernitha

[f_dyne]

I found some data on isotopes.

From here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon-29
"Silicon (Si) has numerous known isotopes, with mass numbers ranging from 22 to
44. 28Si (the most abundant isotope, at 92.23%), 29Si (4.67%), and 30Si (3.1%)
are stable; 32Si is a radioactive isotope produced by argon decay. Its half-life
has been determined to be approximately 170 years (0.21 MeV), and it decays by
beta emission to 32P (which has a 14.28 day half-life [1]) and then to 32S. "

then I made some calculations:

32-Si mass=(31,97414808 * proton mass) (Kg)
32-S mass=(31,97207100 * proton mass) (Kg)

Energy release per atom: (32-Si mass - 32-S mass) x C^2
Atoms per cubic meter, full SiO2 quartz crystal: (calculus) = 2,48e28
Energy per cubic meter: 7,74e15 Joule/m3

that is, 7,74e6 Joule/mm3.

This means that if Baumann found 32.Si isotope quartz crystals, he found some
real beta decay nuclear value.

F_dyne
http://xoomer.virgilio.it/fischerconsulting/edgeresearch.htm

[FastRuner]

Hello.

All Testatika-video in this page:
http://www.matri-x.ru/video.shtml

Best regards, FastRuner.

[NerzhDishual]

Hi OU guys,

How the Paul Baumans's Testatika device might work....

If my memory serves me correctly, I read, some years ago, and somewhere on the internet that Paul Baumann built (designed?) his first Testatika machine while serving a time in jail (in the workshop of the prison).

Now: I guess  that ( in that case) my memory is right. I could not had imagined such thing.
The question remains: is this information accurate?

If yes, this  first  Testatika should had only used conventional  materials and should had been built  with  usual tools that  would had been available in a prison workshop. No crystals or other radioactive stuffs that seem not ordinary available in a jail. )... But, who knows???...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               Now, what about  capacitors?
                              I mean: parallel plates capacitors.

It is a well known fact that if you separate the two plates (by increasing the gap for example) of  a previously charged capacitor you proportionally increase the energy stored in the said capacitor.

Example:
Area of the plates: 1 m2
Air gap between the plates : 8.84 mm
Condenser capacity : 10-3 microFarad (1 nano)

Let the voltage between the plates be : Uinit = 3000 Volts.
The initial energy (IE) stored in the condenser is:  4.5 miliJoules

If we, by any mean,  increase the gap between the plate by 10.
New condenser capacity 10-4 microfarad (100 pico).
The new capacity is divided by 10 and the new voltage (Uend)  become : 30 000 Volts
Q = C*V  ---->  V= Q/C  (Q is conserved).
The new energy  (NE) is : 45 miliJoules.

The energy has been multiplied by 10. What a miracle!
Not at all!  Say (official) Science because you had to use some energy (NE-IE) to separate the condenser plates  Actually, these plates are stuck by electrostatic forces. Indeed,  I was able to do some simple maths considering the most obvious case (perpendicular pull (see further)). I figured out that  (official) Science was right (once again ).... So, no miracle. No 'free lunch'. No 'OU'.  Move on. Nothing to see...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      But.... But...

When two (strong) magnets are stuck together, or one single magnet is stuck to the fridge, which kind of 'pull' do you (or any child!)  use to separate them? The perpendicular pull or the 'shearing/tangential' one? (see picture). Sorry for my English. Hope this is not too 'gobbledygooky'!

IMHO, the only question is: is the 'shearing/tangential' way more efficient that the perpendicular
one?  Jean Louis Naudin seems to have some hints about this question: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/2magpup.htm

Now, I guess that some Tensor calculus could be of any help. Sorry guys, as Vector calculus is already over my few neurons, do not rely on me about this kinda strange calculations. (

Anyway, had this be proved  (tangential is more efficient than perpendicular) that 'OU' could be possible (once again!) Actually what stands for magnets stands also for condenser plates...

Do you see what I mean???
The trick is to  lower the capacity (C) of the condensers and  consequently, while the charge is
conserved, to increase the voltage and then the energy.  Q = C*V  ---->  V= Q/C  (Q is conserved)
E = 1/2 C * V * V

In that case,  the lowering of the capacity  is not achieved by  gap increasing  but by face-to-face  plates areas diminishing using the shearing/tangential pull.

Yes, you still  need some energy to lower this capacity .
But  what if this energy were less that the gained energy doing  it?

Now, perhaps, I'm kidding myself

Very Best




                                                                               ..