Single circuits generate nuclear reactions

[waterfireho]

I will get back as soon as I can function and supply details, but I feel the other Dr's did the experiment as they found here and I have not followed that close, but do know they are both capable in the EE area as well as their own.

Leaving in an hour so got to go.

Good Luck All..............

Dr Stiffler ..

Shoot me an Email when you get back and I will relay some Info I have from Juan on this that might help you .

Dave

[Feynman]

@Dave

Thanks for posting those formula, they are coming in very useful as it becomes more clear there is actually something to Juan's device.  Also, what are your thoughts the carbon rod type and purity?


@DrStiffler, all

I think UncleFester's self-running original experiment is using spec grade carbon rods. They are listed below.  Perhaps this has something to do with beta production.



The carbon rods are offered in either spectroscopically pure of technical grades for standard electron microscopy evaporation requirements using carbon coaters. Due to the purification process used all carbon rods we supply have a graphite structure. The purification process removes impurities at a high temperature and causes the carbon to crystallize. The graphite structure has no adverse effects on the carbon coating or the carbon coating process. The user might perceive an additional advantage: the carbon rods( graphite rods) are less brittle than the carbon rods and are easier to handle and easier to shape.


"Spec-Pure" (spectroscopically pure) grade is available for carbon rods with impurities equal or less than 2ppm (single element 1 ppm or less). Typically the impurity level is more likely 1ppm or less. This grade should be used for TEM, WDS, EBSD, Microprobe and more critical SEM/EDS applications.


Grade 1 Spec-Pure Carbon Rods

Spectroscopically pure graphite structure carbon rods with an impurity level of 2ppm or less with 1ppm as maximum level for each element. The rods are all 12" long with three nominal diameters (1/8", 3/16" and 1/4") to comply with the carbon source used in different carbon evaporators. Use for TEM, WDS, EBSD, Microprobe and more critical SEM/EDS applications."

[waterfireho]

 Hi Feynman

Glad the info helps  hopefully we can get this thing working right.

Juan was using the carbons from lamps, I asked him about the carbon arc welding rods and he said they should be fine, I will try to find his email on it but I think he mentioned something about being too pure but I can't say for sure until I find it.

Something else that may not be realized is the Receiving windings need to be Magnetically biased too, so they can PULL IN the Beta particles. That is another reason for the 12v dc bias, it sets up a Dipole in the carbon AND sets up the Torrid to receive the energy.

Also was told NOT to use a Spark Gap as it cuts down the duration of energy transfer from the cap bank to Carbon.

Dave

[Inventor81]

Wonder what monocrystalline pharmaceutical grade Lithium Carbide would do?

Sounds like a semiconductor/quantum semiconductor effect.

Any dopant could significantly alter the response of the media.

I also doubt that anyone would go to the effort of getting spectroscopy grade carbon rods.

Gouging rods... don't seem to work?

Copper contaminant?

Who knows?

Perhaps if we bake "normal" carbon rods at high temp to drive off impurities?

If I were a blacksmith, I'd do the same thing for about half an hour on a piece of 1/4 inch round steel to even out the carbon distribution. Take it up to near forge welding temps (2700 Farenheit, white hot) and hold it for a good ten or fifteen minutes, then let her come back down over the course of an hour or so to a dull red, pull it out of the fire, then let it cool next to the forge.

Of course, my forge burns charcoal... so it would also burn your carbon rod - so no, I won't heat treat your carbon rods for you!

[AbbaRue]

One important point that needs to be made.
A quote from Naudin's tests:

"During these VSG tests the radiations counter has shown a net increase of the radiations level when the colinear B-Field is used. It is interesting to notice that the measured radiations remain at least 10 seconds after that the short current pulse has been sent. This increase of the radiation level when the conditions are gathered shows that a nuclear reaction seems to occured."

If this isn't a Beta source then how could the energy remain for at least 10 seconds. 
I know of no other energy source that would keep a radiation detector reading for 10 seconds.
Also the radiation was only measured when the B-field was used,
if this isn't Beta then why is the B-field needed to produce it.

One last point:
This whole concept is based on a freak accident that happened at a nuclear power plant.
5 volts at 300,000 amps damaged the inside of a reactor,
and through detailed investigation it was found that beta radiation had done the damage. 
How could they have been so far out in there findings.
I would think that a nuclear power plant would have top notch test equipment on hand.
  http://pesn.com/2005/04/07/6900079_PROTELF_Proton-Electron_Fusion/ 

As far as carbon source is concerned, didn't the original unit in the 1970's us coal for the electrode?

A priceless study would be, to have an isotope that puts out a strong beta field and compare the measurements
with what we are getting from these units.  Also would be a good way to determine the best way to capture the energy.

I think we need to keep experimenting, the hard facts of what is happening will put an end to doubts.