Single circuits generate nuclear reactions

[Walter Hofmann]

Hi BEP,
I drill graphite rods all the time I use my lathe and masonry concrete drill bits they work excellent. I make graphite cylinder for my experimentel cells in sizes of 1/4 inch all the way up to 1 1/2 inch.
without a lathe is very complicated when not even impossible to hold the center.
greetings
walt

@Inventor81

Your 'B' is the only way I do it. I typically use solid copper for the loop so it can be formed into a rectangle. The reason is I continue to believe these devices either use or should use the rotational attributes of a homopolar device (along with the mag field, of course).
The root of this belief was a simple experiment with a small plastic cup setting on top of a coin shaped magnet. Put a saltwater solution in the cup and sprinkle a little pepper for visuals. Insert + and - wires. One in the center and one at the edge of the water. The water rotates.

I know you would already know this but I added detail for others.

The point is: the current flow needed to be between the center and the radial edge within the mag field to obtain rotation. I'm quite sure there are a lot of things going on. One of which may be rotation.

@All

This is probably the best thread to ask.... When cutting or drilling graphite, is there common tooling? If so what is it? I need to drill an axial center hole in a small graphite rod. Carbide bits chunk the material. Diamond Dremmel bits dull too quickly.

Thanks,

John

[UncleFester]

This site also uses Carbon Rods & Radioactive Tungsten Rods, and he has both photos & Schematics.  I am wondering if we can use anything here to help us out?


http://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/SparkGapExp/SparkGapExp.htm
.

Not really. I was over there this weekend and it's just a spark gap setup with Th loaded rods. We don't need spark gaps, nor do we want them. Only missing thing is the different types of carbon. There might be less pure types that work better.

[UncleFester]

All,

I have experienced a second meltdown today. This leads me to believe that the first one wasn't an accident or connections error. However,  the reaction only takes place randomly and rarely. When it does, the results are devastating. The output heat and electricity are excessive. I am beginning to suspect we may not be able to control easily this reaction for continuous operation.

To the experimenters, if your system doesn't output enough heat and electricity to melt 16 to 18 gage wire, you haven't seen the reaction yet. Keep working at it. In the meantime, don't leave that thing unattended for even one second. It may energize out of control in no time. I am also beginning to suspect that might be the reason JLN didn't follow through with this research. Sustain operation requires extreme control that may not be disposal to the home experimenter.

A third meltdown might spell the end of the road for me. I hope we can find a simple system control before it happens. In the meantime, think about this for a moment: what if the output energy comes mostly in the form heat as opposed to the high EM output that we are currently focusing on?

Thanks,

Miki.

Did you follow the energy formula for input capacity? I am running 6awg wire and don't seem to have a problem with anything except the rod itself heating. All I do is turn the duty cycle down and it's no longer an issue. What load is on the collector? My setup slowly ramps up and seems fairly stable so far. I wonder about your setup anbd how we might cure this issue. There has to be a way for your setup to run stable.

[Inventor81]

Has anyone confirmed that the beta detectors are giving false readings? A good test would be to wave a strong magnet back and forth near the beta detector and see if it gives any beta counts (it shouldn't).

The basic idea is that at the flux levels required to recoup your input energy, you would kill yourself within 30 minutes.

You WOULD experience physiological effects after a few tens of seconds - and even after a second or two, you would have sunburn-like injuries to the skin exposed to the device.

Thus, it is not the beta which is providing the "overunity".

Also, you cannot move a magnet fast enough to create the kind of voltage spikes encountered when the device "ran away". The device could be set up with a copper slug in place of the carbon rod, and run at full tilt with the meter nearby. Thus, the device would be operating as normal, with the only change being the carbon/copper swap. Thus, electrically, it would be virtually identical to the original circuit. I have a feeling that it's merely an EMP device, since it fried several computer components nearby.

[xee]

@Inventor81,
Thanks for the reply. Does that mean you think the meters are not even any good for detecting low levels of beta rays when they are used in changing strong magnetic fields? It seems that you think there never were any beta rays at all, just false readings due to magnetic fields. Is that a correct reading of what you are saying?