Single circuits generate nuclear reactions

[UncleFester]

Minimum of two times output versus input. That also takes into account time period (current), voltage and total capacitor input VS time. I'm sure there are others working on it quietly, it's too damn good to pass up if used with a HV pulse motor I.E. Gray. The amazing fact is that the reaction becomes a compounding equation based on how much voltage potential is used in the test. Anything above 100 volts or so and you end up with Kiloamperes and at least three times output versus input. Can you imagine what a Gray circuit would do under the same circumstances? You are looking at 10uF charged to 3KV and you might have problems containing that much beta radiation, and the output I can guarantee would be in the 100's of kilowatts output for single digit kilowatt input.

Remember that Gray's system (which I've also built) was NOT this high of an energy gain. The engine would run the equivalent of 500 miles before the batteries needed to be recharged (granted it was only 4-60AH batteries), so it was NOT overunity. The big difference here is that Gray was seeing the same effect as the VSG, but only tenths of a percent of the energy gain because he was not using the B-field on his carbon rod, and thus with this massive energy gain of the VSG we should have a 100HP high voltage pulse motor that recycles charge just like Gray's system BUT with a massive lower voltage pulse in the hundreds of amperes back the batteries as a side effect. In this case you can clearly see you have have a car that should a minimum have a range of 1000's of miles possible 5000 or more miles before the small bank needed to be recharged.

Furthermore the power supply for this system is simplified to only require a IGBT, or other high current device to discharge the capacitor bank, but at much lower voltages. I have 1200V @ 200 Ampere IGBT's here just for that purpose. The only problem I can see so far is that the carbon and or tungsten rods would need to be resurfaced so that the glazing that happens does not eventually ruin the conduction across them. You would also need to switch banks back and forth just like the Gray system in order to avoid problems with the sensitive switching devices and it would need a decent amount of shielding for the beta radiation (gamma and alpha is not a problem in this design). And yes, the whole system could run on capacitors but they would need to be huge and made for high current pulse applications. Not sure if a bank of super caps could be wired in series and handle the abuse this system would dish out or not.

Food for thought,

Tad

[aleks]

One simple thought - unfortunately due to radiation this device may easily be marked 'outlaw' by various social powers if it does produce overunity. I think the device which can make a final breakthough should be fairly simple in both construction and operation, should be scalable and should be clean in most known ways. Otherwise various objections may be raised by a horde of social competitors.

[Koen1]

@UncleFester: Naudins experiments show that the version he tested
went slightly unstable when the tungsten electrode got covered in
carbon dust from the hV spark discharges... He then needed to remove
the electrode and clean it, and then it worked nice and smooth again.
Naudin also mentions that free "gaseous" carbon atoms must be available
for the Protelf process to work efficiently.
What are your experiences with carbon dust coating the cathode and hindering
spark discharges?
And did you use the spark gap method shown by Naudin, or did you use some
other method? I ask because I wonder if it also works if we do away with the
spark gap and pump a hV pulse directly throught the carbon rod.

Thanks

[Feynman]

@Koen
You need the spark gap to get the carbon into a gaseous phase.  It is a precondition for the reaction. One solution may be to place the rods parallel so that the spark gap is spread on a larger area on the carbon surface.

@UncleFester
Thanks!

@all
So are we going to build a self-powering circuit or what!

[UncleFester]

@Koen

Yes, this is a problem with this particular reaction between these particular elements, but look at the other elements that are hundreds of times more powerful than this reaction, in fact the reaction between carbon is the LOWEST energy potential of all the reactions at only 8KW/g. For instance lithium with an energy potential of 1,910,000 GW/g is insanely huge and should not suffer the same issues as the carbon. Also Nitrogen, Helium and Oxygen are listed as high energy potential as well. If this could be figured out in terms of the B-field alignment of these gases then it is solved and not just solved, but at hundreds of times the energy gain of the original carbon reaction!

Yes, the carbon rod being constantly vaporized is a problem. Simple mechanical automated means could be used to quickly clean the spark gap materials but a gas or liquid might be easier to deal with in the long run. I only ran a dozen one-shot runs like JLN did, so I only saw a minimal amount of reduction during those runs, but pulsing a thousand times per second or more would require some sort of cleaning system for carbon.

@Feynman

Also, I did not mention that it is not only possible, but plausible to use the same energy discharge across many (maybe 5 or more) reactors. This utilizes the original charge and yet the gains are multiplied many times for the same input. Not only is this situation overunity, but hundred if not thousands of times overunity considering that we only lose a percentage of the original charge per spark gap firing! Furthermore, we could also run the output from one reaction to the gap of another unit to create a multiplication of energy. In this case we would no longer worry about energy loss in the components but rather how to keep the system from becoming a runaway reaction....

@Aleks

True indeed there would be the authorities that would be informed of such a system by competing technologies and most likely create problems, but considering we are not dealing with Gamma or Alpha radiation (far more harmful and much more difficult to shield, and longer lasting decay) then it would be easy to deal with technologically to quell the nay-sayer's and panic monkeys.