Meyer-Mace Isotopic NMR Generator

[jan.kolar]

I have read czech patent 284333. I dont understand french but from the first view i think its identical with french patent 2680613. Author of french and czech patent is the same - Michel Meyer only co-authors are different.
In the description its written that device is ecological and safe. No mention about radioactivity level (weird). Projected output power 50kW, iron rod lifetime 2400hours, time needed for start-up 15 min (after this time device is automatically disconnected from grid and uses part of its output power to feed itself).
Regarding radiocative materials i heard that the longer half-life means greater danger. Then half-life of 54Fe (3.1x10^22 years) should be very bad. But maybe this is not true because 3.1x10^22 is extremely large half-time (larger than cosmos age). If you read wikipedia article you find the note that 54Fe is stable (i.e. radioactive decay is very very slow maybe can be neglected, who knows).

[gyulasun]

Hi Jan,

The process involved may not be a radioactive one because a normal iron atom is supposed to be excited by the 21MHz energy (from an electric oscillator) and also a static magnetic field of about 0.5 Tesla is present, this is what happens I think.
Here are some more theory, see pages 18 and 19 in the pdf file
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter3.pdf  Two neutrons are issued during the process when Fe56 changes to Fe54 and if this is what happens then neutrons are not radioactive particles, are they?

Naudin also mentions this process here: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mmcgen.htm

Unfortunately, there is no any test results available from any other experimenters. Maybe the Chech patent partners could be asked on some details...

rgds,  Gyula

[onthecuttingedge2005]

I have read czech patent 284333. I dont understand french but from the first view i think its identical with french patent 2680613. Author of french and czech patent is the same - Michel Meyer only co-authors are different.
In the description its written that device is ecological and safe. No mention about radioactivity level (weird). Projected output power 50kW, iron rod lifetime 2400hours, time needed for start-up 15 min (after this time device is automatically disconnected from grid and uses part of its output power to feed itself).
Regarding radiocative materials i heard that the longer half-life means greater danger. Then half-life of 54Fe (3.1x10^22 years) should be very bad. But maybe this is not true because 3.1x10^22 is extremely large half-time (larger than cosmos age). If you read wikipedia article you find the note that 54Fe is stable (i.e. radioactive decay is very very slow maybe can be neglected, who knows).

Hi Jan.

you have it backwards, the shorter half life means that the isotope decays faster and with more energy.

imagine 1lb of an isotope that has a half life of 1 second, this would be totally lethal if unprotected, some isotopes with 1 second half life are considered SF or Spontaneous fission and that is lethal itself, longer half lives are more stable.

Gamma ray and or Neutron emitters are lethal especially whether they are short lived or not but still follow this rule.. Alpha or Beta are a bit safer but respect is still in order.

about 54Fe:

26-Fe-54

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Atomic Mass: 53.9396148 ± 0.0000014 amu
Excess Mass: -56248.410 ± 1.328 keV
Binding Energy: 471758.653 ± 1.330 keV
Beta Decay Energy: B- -8243.079 ± 0.221 keV

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Atomic Percent Abundance: 5.845% 35
Spin: 0+
Stable Isotope

Possible parent nuclides:
Beta from Mn-54
Electron capture from Co-54

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Cross Section

at 0.0253 eV = 2.649 b
Maxwell avg. at 0.0253 eV = 2.404 b
at 14 MeV = 2.498 b
Fission spectrum avg. = 3.658 b
g-factor = 1.0243
Elastic Scattering Cross Section

at 0.0253 eV = 492.9 mb
Maxwell avg. at 0.0253 eV = 492.9 mb
at 14 MeV = 1.080 b
Fission spectrum avg. = 3.235 b
g-factor = 1.1284
Total Inelastic Cross Section

at 14 MeV = 481.5 mb
Fission spectrum avg. = 335.9 mb
(n,2n) Cross Section

at 14 MeV = 1.203 mb
Fission spectrum avg. = 1.032 micro barn
(n,na) Cross Section

at 14 MeV = 120.8 micro barn
Fission spectrum avg. = 0.1892 micro barn
(n,np) Cross Section

at 14 MeV = 490.6 mb
Fission spectrum avg. = 138.0 micro barn
Radiative Capture Cross Section

at 0.0253 eV = 2.156 b
Maxwell avg. at 0.0253 eV = 1.911 b
Resonance integral = 1.323 b
at 14 MeV = 136.1 micro barn
Fission spectrum avg. = 6.069 mb
g-factor = 1.0003
(n,p) Cross Section

at 14 MeV = 361.0 mb
Fission spectrum avg. = 80.71 mb
(n,alpha) Cross Section

at 0.0253 eV = 1.237800e-19 b
Maxwell avg. at 0.0253 eV = 2.476090e-19 b
Resonance integral = 68.03 mb
at 14 MeV = 83.17 mb
Fission spectrum avg. = 864.7 micro barn
g-factor = 2.2572

Jerry

[exnihiloest]

Good thread Tak!

So this device documented on Naudins site uses the same effect (NMR) as the device in the french article?:


The french device mentions resonance at about 173kHz that sounds more like mechanical resonance than NMR or could it be a subharmonic?

I can do 173kHz now with my homebuilt sig-gen once I get the output FETs installed but I can't do 21MHz as in the three coil device until I do more work on my sig-gen.

According to the article "Science et Vie" nr.700  March 1976 (in french)
http://www.rexresearch.com/meyernmr/meyer.htm ,
the frequency must be very precise: 172,753.867 hz.
The oscillator must maintain this frequency with the stability of the nine digits. It seems it is a key point. Even a quartz oscillator would not be enough. Such an oscillator should be derived from an atomic clock (maybe one transmitted by radio, we can get several such signals in Europe in the VLF band).

I must add that I am very skeptic and suspect measurement errors. Ordinary amp- and voltmeters are easily distorted by HF signals, and here HF currents from the coils can pass to the copper by capacitive effects.
 

[jan.kolar]

Hi Jan.

you have it backwards, the shorter half life means that the isotope decays faster and with more energy.

imagine 1lb of an isotope that has a half life of 1 second, this would be totally lethal if unprotected, some isotopes with 1 second half life are considered SF or Spontaneous fission and that is lethal itself, longer half lives are more stable.

Gamma ray and or Neutron emitters are lethal especially whether they are short lived or not but still follow this rule.. Alpha or Beta are a bit safer but respect is still in order.

Maybe energy is greater but only for short time-span i think energy is following exponencial curve-decay. Take for example uranium 235 that is used in nuclear power plants. I dont know details of radioactive decay-chain but if half-time of uranium or its byproducts would be short (for example few seconds or less) then radioactive waste would not be problem. But i point out that i am not expert on nuclear physics.