Single circuits generate nuclear reactions

[hydrocontrol]

It's interesting to hear alike thoughts. Even though I've never dealt with JLN personally, I had some "what the heck" feeling when studying JLN's works. Whether he never achieved OU or he is afraid of assasination. Anyway, there is little hope JLN's website can be used as a 'source' for FE information - much of it outdated and does not lead anywhere it seems (lack of measurements and other details). He started working on propeller flyers - such a pity for FE researcher (but maybe he wasn't one).

The last time I checked, being a FE researcher does not pay the bills.   In fact it tends to generate a lot more bills.    I doubt that I am the first one to notice that JLN's propeller flyers are 'popping' up in military supply companies. I suspect that he had to go this route to pay for his 'research'. Looking at all the research that he was doing previously it was a tremendous amount compared to what most of us can do 'in our spare time'. That has to cost $$$ or he had to have 'outside' support. If that 'outside' support was military then that would explain why certain avenues never got explored or 'finished'..  I do consider JLN's work worthwhile even if it is somewhat old. Good for a reference and a direction. The 'run your mower on water' was very useful and is being exploited. I doubt that without his work that this would have taken off as much as it did.

Back on subject. I just noticed that in Dr. Stiffler thread that his dead 'neon' had pitted electrodes much like the tungsten electrodes JLN showed. The temperature of the neon bulb never got high enough to the Stainless steel temperature of the neon electrodes to cause melting or pitting so something else must be at work here. Anyone else here notice that. I wonder if Dr Stiffler has a geiger counter.

[AbbaRue]

A question to throw around.
How could we use permanent magnets on the rod instead of an electromagnet?
I think it would have to be strontium magnets because neodymium magnets can't take much heat.

Maybe if I understood the concept better of how the electromagnet helps.
Could the rod be placed in the toroidal facing the core like the one in "Thane Heins Perepiteia"  forum? 

Or could we place magnets on each side of the carbon rod facing the rod?

Another big puzzle for me is how do I test the output of this device?
I don't have a digital oscilloscope to freeze the wave form with.
I just have an ordinary oscilloscope and the output pulse could last for only milliseconds.

I was thinking maybe connecting the output to a capacitor and then measure the voltage across it.
Has anyone come up with a solution to this?

[Koen1]

So here are the major experiments I thought of to figure out what's going on with this whole process.


Suggested Experiments:

1)  Replicate Naudin's B-field Experiment
Independent Variable: B-field strength or lack thereof.
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows Naudin's effect can be replicated, and it is nuclear in nature.


2) Determine effect of Thoriated Tungsten
Independent Variable: Presence of Thoriated Tungsten electrode
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  validates or contradicts gamma-ray requirement of Synergetic theory.


3) Determine effect of Input Voltage  (constant charge = 10 uF)
Independent Variable: Voltage of Input Discharge (0 - 30kV)
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows whether we are experiencing linear on nonlinear energy scaling.  nonlinear scaling would suggest nuclear fusion.


4) Determine effect of Discharge Energy (constant voltage = 35V)
Independent Variable: Energy of Input Discharge  (variable capacitor size with constant voltage)
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows whether we are experiencing linear on nonlinear discharge scaling.  expected results unknown.


5) Determine effect of Toroid Windings
Independent Variable: # of windings on collector toroid
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows how output energy curve relates to toroid construction.

6) Determine effect of Toroid Material
Independent Variable: Toroid Material
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows how output energy curve relates to toroid construction.


7) Determine effect of Toroid Dimensions
Independent Variable: Toroid Dimensions
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve

*implications:  shows how output energy curve relates to toroid construction.

Perhaps also

Determine importance of Spark Gap
Independent Variable: Spark Gap Dimensions (0 - n mm between Tungsten and Carbon rod)
Dependent Variable: Output Energy Curve


just an idea...

I'm still more interested in possible other materials than carbon...
after all, according to Vall?e, the "kickback" from Boron back to Carbon
yields 2.988 Gigawatts per gram of "transmuted" material,
while that of Nitrogen => Oxygen yields 5.88 Gigawatts /g,
that of         Carbon => Nitrogen yields 19 Gigawatts /g,
and that of   Helium(6/2) => Lithium(6/3) yields 47.6 Gigawatts /g.
In other words, use of a Oxygen=>Nitrogen=>Oxygen reaction
can already give almost double the output of the Carbon=>Boron=>Carbon,
use of Nitrogen=>Carbon=>Nitrogen already increases this to
over 6 times the output of the C=>B=>C,
and the Lithium=>Helium=>Lithium gives a whopping 15.8 times greater yield.

Obviously, getting out 3 times what you put in using carbon is already
a great breakthrough.
But just imagine what a huge advance we could make if we manage to get the
lithium version to work

[Feynman]

@Koen

Good call, I completely forgot about that!  I will edit and add it to the list.   Thanks!

You are right about the other materials, they may prove to release more energy supposing Synergetic theory continues to be confirmed by experiments.   Based on this theory though, regular air should contain all the necessary elements!!!   Nitrogen and Oxygen!   But in seriousness, can anyone design a good gas experiment?   I suppose we should probably use pure gas rather than mixtures.     And as for lithium, that will probably only work with the pure element, and lithium is unstable in elemental form (it rapidly forms complexes such as LiOH and Li3N).  So for higher energy materials predicted by Synergetics, then nitrogen is next best (to lithium).   That might be an added bonus since Nitrogen is inert.

@Abba

You know, I have the exact same problem.  I would like to measure the discharge curve in its entirety, so its possible to calculate energy AUC in Joules.  I was thinking of grabbing the scope Naudin was using, but I am not sure how much this costs.   If I cannot afford it, I was also thinking of running the discharge through a -30db or -40db attenuator , and then into my Tektronix analog scope using "single-shot" mode.   I have never tried "single-shot" mode yet, so I guess I will have to learn how to use it!


100 watt -20db attenuator

So those are my ideas.  I would like to get the curve.   Barring the curve, I guess the next best solution is to charge up another capacitor.  This could be risky though because the input voltage: output voltage  scaling is unknown.     That is, if you run a 2kV discharge into the carbon, how many effective kV do you collect in the toroid?  I don't know!   Haha so yeah we are going to need some clever ways of measuring, since not everyone has Naudin's funding. 

[Koen1]

But in seriousness, can anyone design a good gas experiment?   I suppose we should probably use pure gas rather than mixtures. 

Well I've been thinking of using a 'simple' discharge tube, much like an arc lamp... But I haven't worked anything out yet.

And as for lithium, that will probably only work with the pure element, and lithium is unstable in elemental form (it rapidly forms complexes such as LiOH and Li3N). 

Indeed. I realised this too. Too bad, it would be too cool to be able to present a "lithium electrofusion reactor" and make all the Trekkies wet their
pants over a working "dilithium fusion core" However, perhaps it is possible to use Li in vacuum or even in a low pressure He-filled tube...
I'm thinking something like a thoriated tungsten cathode coated with Lithium, and a 'normal' tungsten anode... But again, not worked out yet.

So for higher energy materials predicted by Synergetics, then nitrogen is next best (to lithium).   That might be an added bonus since Nitrogen is inert.

Yes, that would probably add some safety in comparison to oxygen or hydrogen. And it's easy to obtain as well.
Hmm... Interesting idea... So an arc-lamp filled with nitrogen might already be usefull for experiments, or a special evacuated tube with lithium coated elecrodes...
What about the old electron tube ("valve") technology of stimulated emission?
I'm thinking: vacuum tube with the normal cathode and anode of suitable material (as we're talking high V I guess tungsten), and a third electrode filament coated
with Li and heated by current through it. In 'normal' vacuum tubes the heated filament would emit electrons which would then be pulled to the anode due to
the electric field. In  this version the heated filament would emit energetic Lithium ions, which are then free for interaction. The B-field coil can easily be wrapped
around such a tube, and the high voltage can still be put through the cathode-anode couple. In theory.