Here is the comment originally sent to me by Triton Jäger on the video "VEGA - Further look at VEGA Valley SEM/EDS data" about the Japanese researcher developing higher oxidation states of Fe and assessing their properties.
"Hello Bob, well done again for your tremendous enthusiasm; thanks for that !! so, concerning your higher oxides of iron, you should definitely consult the work of the Japanese ISHIKAWA YASUO; this researcher manages to transmute, in large mass, many gases into hydrogen, using this type of super-oxygenated catalyst which is created spontaneously during the reaction: and this only by chemical means: he has filed a lot of patents, often in Japanese: here the patent links speaking more specifically of this super iron oxide and derivatives ; the first is in Japanese, the second a translation from Google Translate:"
"Partially reduced Fe2O3 or similar H2 splitting catalyst in/on standard nickel helps to create P+ in the lattice. Fe3+ Al3+ helps to capture electrons - see here:
Production of Hydrogen and Oxygen by Water Splitting Using Laser Induced Photo-Catalysis Over Fe2O3"
Wow, this article has grown very fast! I am still not finished watching the video and came here to comment about the Binding energy per nucleon chart that felt really familiar to me as I had seen it in the Cardone et al Mercury transmutation papers and talks, where he used it to make the point that their results pointed that the “Deformed Time Space” reactions could result in element synthesis completely outside the expected results going up or low in the chart, starting from Hg.
In particular in your video the mention of the BEN for Br being in an odd spot that would not ease the reaction for having it as product, called my attention, because by far, the element that Cardone et al found in higher concentration in the solids recovered from Mercury was Bromine (albeit they warn this could be an artifact of the separation and sampling process, as the solid was really hard to analyze from a quantitative point of view, being so heterogeneous in nature). I recall a while ago you made the Parkhomov’s table query for the elements on Cardone’s Mercury experiment (mainly Hg and Al plus the atmospheric gases) and Bromine was a possible product, so the end products will always depend on the starting ones and the duration of the experiment as products become reactants as time progresses.
You can see Y at the top of list and Br close to top.
These exchange reactions are the result of an Al / Hg amalgam being "trying to fit into a very small box" (which I have obviously clarified as either a sphere or a ring / flux loop). It yields mass defect energy changing the average per-nucleon binding energy of the products as I suggested in my Copenhagan lecture. I specifically said at the time that all energy gain according to my learning from Stoyan Sarg, comes from a reduction in the distortion of space time.
Forcing things in to the 'smallest box possible' is due to mechanisms that deform space time.
Hey Bob, I really enjoyed this video as always, thanks so much.
You mainly focused on the new decay path of alpha conjugate nuclea via alpha emitters in this video. In the past you focused more on the beta emitters K40 C14 as they would produce coherent beta emissions due to the monochromatic beta particle energy during inverse beta decay. It was speculated that this coherent beta emissions would feed the EVO's. Am I correct to understand that the alpha emitters that are generating these "dark hydrogen" particles are also to be considered food for the EVO's? If so is there any merit or benefit to combining beta emitters and alpha emitters in the bulk material? (I would need more chemical background before I would know what elements are safe to put in bulk, grain of the fuel but just for speculation) Could one go and put K40, C14 (beta emitters) and Sm/W (alpha emitters) and Fe(curie@770)/Ni(curie@354) (monopole accumulator) in a reactor.
I don't have any intention to build one currently, but if one did this (combining alpha and beta emitters) what do you speculate the best design of a reactor would be? If I understand correctly from your analysis of a potential new Parkhomov design you suggested in the past (I can't find the video only this older one where you reviewed his actual reactor design https://youtu.be/F0vRFy1OSYE?t=678). You want a metal that generates cold neutrinos in the middle which has a very high melting point. I think in the past you mentioned using Tungsten for this too. So are we still of the mind set a good design would be, Tungsten core, with a Tungsten heater wire wrapped around? Then around this heating wire we want some insulation I can't remember which insulation you recommended so if you have any recommendations be interested to know. Then around this insulation one wants to pack a powder material that consists of K40, C14 (beta emitters) and Sm/W (alpha emitters) and Fe(curie@770)/Ni(curie@354) (monopole accumulator). Then another small layer of insulation and perhaps another heater wire on the outside to be run at a lower temperature to try and keep the bulk of the powder at the same temperature.
And finally one wants to generate the system with sufficient insulation such that that the tungsten core / heater wire can be driven as hot as possible, and that the Fe/Ni stays just under it's curie temperature. Then just cycle it up and down past it's curie temperature.
Of course the hydrogen loading of the reactor needs to be done as you described in your earlier videos to minimize oxide buildups. If one uses only Fe and not Ni are there any special considerations for hydrogen loading?
Sorry to try and write it out with all the details, I just wanted to try and nail down a potential reactor design taking into consideration some of the things you mentioned in the past as well as the new stuff. If there is a better way or simpler way to build a reactor given what you know now just say.
The second video was the 800x COP Mizuno W + K2CO3 + H2O 'singularity'
It was not guess work, it was specifically due to my understanding that EVOs contained cold neutrino / Relic neutrino condensates, these should stimulate 40K decay and the resulting beta would energise the EVO. Then the binding energy of the EVO / Micro Ball Lightning so produced would cause cluster decay of the W. which would further yield energy.
I think Nickel is a very good core for the production of the 'Active Agents' - the Solitons of two magnetic types (as Solin calls them) which can cluster to form the Micro Ball Lightning. These then interact with the W in the Parkhomov 225 day reactor heater wire.
Years ago, I purchased some W powder for Mathieu Valat to put around an intended GlowStick replication - however, Mathieu never was able to run the test. The later test from Parkhomov gave me great satisfaction to see the concept realised (without AP mentioning its possibility). Since the 225 day reactor we have shown that not only is Ohmasa Gas producing micro ball lightning - coherent matter - this gas causes the fissioning of W.
I am saying that the protocol should be optimised to allow coherence... When I wrote this procedure back in late 2015 I was trying to combine the best learning from Piantelli, ourselves and Parkhomov and the literature in general.
This protocol is largely what was followed by parkhomov in his 225 day reactor - only he took the top temperature to 1700ºC.
I have shared in recent weeks that Shishkin noted how his cavitator would stop producing String Vortex Solitons (neutral Magneto Toro Electrical Radiation - Black EVOs) after a while. These things have been determined to be at least in part condensed cold neutrinos. To get it working again - he had to move it to a new location in his lab. I realised that this meant that the cohering forces and resulting structures had a long range event horizon that consumed and condensed all the relic neutrinos within that event horizon - after which no Strange Radiation was produced.
In the GS 5.2 protocol, the low temperature slow rises and holds and cycling is all about dissociation and adsorption. (at this stage, one must note that having separate H2 source would be far superior as the Li really does kill the ability of the PNK-02 Nickel powder to be effective somewhat). Once the the Nickel has adsorbed protons all over it - the idea is to punch through the curie point as fast as possible. It took a long time to realise why - we were never told even if Piantelli knew himself. having a single ferro magnetic element is good in that it has a very precise temperature.
This produces the basic EVO clusters, particularly from points and cracks where electron bunching can assist the electron bunching to coherence process.
Once the EVOs are formed, they will condense relic neutrinos in the vicinity - however, these will be used after a while, by taking the temp OVER 1000ºC the technologically synthesised Cold Neutrinos are synthesised and these can then additionally feed the process. With some K in play for production of high energy betas leading to ready supply of avalanche electrons and a little W (or another suitable Lanthanide like Samarium or Europium) for fission energy, you will be able to yield significant excess in my view. Gadolinium has a special place as it is both a ferro magnetic material and has thermal neutron absorption (Because SR acts a little like neutrons - and you can perhaps see why in the recent presentations). However, I decided to focus on Indium, as it is both a neutron absorber AND has a very high percentage of beta isotope. That is why I bought it for Alan Goldwater many years ago and why I took it to test with Ohmasa Gas.
So there is the advantage of cycling if you can prevent the EVO generator from being sintered, this will be easier with Cobalt in the core as its Curie point is at 1,121 °C, over the temperature required to synthesised cold neutrinos and melting point 1,495 °C. Given the above it is probably easier to just get Samarium Cobalt magnets and smash them up and heat cycle them just as that researcher showed at ICCF-4 in Hawaii with D2.
The advantage with having a heater wire that is a solenoid of W in H2 atmosphere, it can actually be far hotter. So the W can receive the EVOs and feed them by way of Cold Neutrino synthesis and cluster decay energy - they are also carrying electrons!
I will synthesise all this at some point. It was very rough dump of some things I wanted to get into the public record.
Thanks so much I think I understand the relation between the key points in process better now.
1) The role of beta and alpha emitters in conjunction with each other.
2) Synthesis of cold neutrinos vs just using those in the local area.
3) Avoiding sintering the ferromagnetic material which would reduce the emission of EVO's due to less surface area and less sharp geometries and ability to adsorb hydrogen due to less surface area.
4) The role of neutron/di-neutron absorbers that trigger further beta decay to further feed EVO's.
I think the biggest barrier to entry to these systems currently is the ability to generate and load hydrogen gas into the material which will generate the initial EVO's. I guess that's why so often people use LiH as it lower the barrier to entry. But I can see the downfall now with sintering. It would be nice if there was some alternate way to get the hydrogen/protons into the system without needing to load the gas manually as it would lower the barrier to entry (not sure if that's a good thing, but I'de hope it might be).
The particles, or wavelets, are much more tightly bound than those in solids even though the number density is virtually the same, being in the range of Avogadros number. This high binding energy is demonstrably large when the ensemble is either suddenly disrupted or the group is caused to bore through ordinary solid matter (4). Where [4 ] Charge Clusters In Action I found a readable copy here http://freel.tech/charge-clusters/publications/shoulders/2%20-%20Charge%20Clusters%20In%20Action%20(Ken%20Shoulders).pdf but I don't see a reference to an actual quantity except for Avagadro’s number. I did check some of the patents and EV a Tale of Discovery.
But I'm not seeing it, if someone else could lend their eyes to confirm or show me where I missed it. That would be great.
Sorry - a bit off topic - but I believe Gordon was mentioning a Viktor Schauberger documentary in the chat for this stream. He said it had been posted in recent comments on Remoteview.icu - I can't seem to find it. Does anybody know the link/documentary he was referring to? Thanks!
It is interesting to note that the dark hydrogen theory fully explains all the results from Santilli about the synthesis of neutron from protons (hydrogen) and electrons by means of electric disharges. In the most recent implementation of its "neutron generator", he accelerate hydrogen through an discharge in order to obtain a directional flow of "neutrons" (clearly the directional flux is obtained in a ballistic way, and this imply that the generated particles are way bigger than real neutrons). The dark hydrogen also eleganlty explains the results from Borghi and Sternglass. If this is true, we know that dark hydrogen is able to transmute matter just like ordinary neutrons (all these researcher also used the activation method to measure the "neutron" flux).
Here is the comment originally sent to me by Triton Jäger on the video "VEGA - Further look at VEGA Valley SEM/EDS data" about the Japanese researcher developing higher oxidation states of Fe and assessing their properties.
"Hello Bob, well done again for your tremendous enthusiasm; thanks for that !! so, concerning your higher oxides of iron, you should definitely consult the work of the Japanese ISHIKAWA YASUO; this researcher manages to transmute, in large mass, many gases into hydrogen, using this type of super-oxygenated catalyst which is created spontaneously during the reaction: and this only by chemical means: he has filed a lot of patents, often in Japanese: here the patent links speaking more specifically of this super iron oxide and derivatives ; the first is in Japanese, the second a translation from Google Translate:"
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Rjl-Pyo7ZQBrUZS6As3hc0zYxak_b-pZ/view?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/document/d/11Ip_1f_1bUhrHAAm2c4yjEuLFZDR1jgQ/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=102978756288560332775&rtpof=true&sd=true
On 13 December 2014 I suggested here:
https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject/photos/a.587293604634676/883520658345301
"Partially reduced Fe2O3 or similar H2 splitting catalyst in/on standard nickel helps to create P+ in the lattice. Fe3+ Al3+ helps to capture electrons - see here:
Production of Hydrogen and Oxygen by Water Splitting Using Laser Induced Photo-Catalysis Over Fe2O3"
http://bit.ly/1yNwUY2
Wow, this article has grown very fast! I am still not finished watching the video and came here to comment about the Binding energy per nucleon chart that felt really familiar to me as I had seen it in the Cardone et al Mercury transmutation papers and talks, where he used it to make the point that their results pointed that the “Deformed Time Space” reactions could result in element synthesis completely outside the expected results going up or low in the chart, starting from Hg.
In particular in your video the mention of the BEN for Br being in an odd spot that would not ease the reaction for having it as product, called my attention, because by far, the element that Cardone et al found in higher concentration in the solids recovered from Mercury was Bromine (albeit they warn this could be an artifact of the separation and sampling process, as the solid was really hard to analyze from a quantitative point of view, being so heterogeneous in nature). I recall a while ago you made the Parkhomov’s table query for the elements on Cardone’s Mercury experiment (mainly Hg and Al plus the atmospheric gases) and Bromine was a possible product, so the end products will always depend on the starting ones and the duration of the experiment as products become reactants as time progresses.
Not only Br - but Y was found in many samples. Here are the exchange reactions without Cold Neutrinos
https://www.nanosoft.co.nz/results/select_*_from_TwoToTwoAll_where_neutrinoeqnoneandlbE1inlbAlrbandE2inlbHgrbrbByMeVDescLimit1000.html
You can see Y at the top of list and Br close to top.
These exchange reactions are the result of an Al / Hg amalgam being "trying to fit into a very small box" (which I have obviously clarified as either a sphere or a ring / flux loop). It yields mass defect energy changing the average per-nucleon binding energy of the products as I suggested in my Copenhagan lecture. I specifically said at the time that all energy gain according to my learning from Stoyan Sarg, comes from a reduction in the distortion of space time.
Forcing things in to the 'smallest box possible' is due to mechanisms that deform space time.
Hey Bob, I really enjoyed this video as always, thanks so much.
You mainly focused on the new decay path of alpha conjugate nuclea via alpha emitters in this video. In the past you focused more on the beta emitters K40 C14 as they would produce coherent beta emissions due to the monochromatic beta particle energy during inverse beta decay. It was speculated that this coherent beta emissions would feed the EVO's. Am I correct to understand that the alpha emitters that are generating these "dark hydrogen" particles are also to be considered food for the EVO's? If so is there any merit or benefit to combining beta emitters and alpha emitters in the bulk material? (I would need more chemical background before I would know what elements are safe to put in bulk, grain of the fuel but just for speculation) Could one go and put K40, C14 (beta emitters) and Sm/W (alpha emitters) and Fe(curie@770)/Ni(curie@354) (monopole accumulator) in a reactor.
I don't have any intention to build one currently, but if one did this (combining alpha and beta emitters) what do you speculate the best design of a reactor would be? If I understand correctly from your analysis of a potential new Parkhomov design you suggested in the past (I can't find the video only this older one where you reviewed his actual reactor design https://youtu.be/F0vRFy1OSYE?t=678). You want a metal that generates cold neutrinos in the middle which has a very high melting point. I think in the past you mentioned using Tungsten for this too. So are we still of the mind set a good design would be, Tungsten core, with a Tungsten heater wire wrapped around? Then around this heating wire we want some insulation I can't remember which insulation you recommended so if you have any recommendations be interested to know. Then around this insulation one wants to pack a powder material that consists of K40, C14 (beta emitters) and Sm/W (alpha emitters) and Fe(curie@770)/Ni(curie@354) (monopole accumulator). Then another small layer of insulation and perhaps another heater wire on the outside to be run at a lower temperature to try and keep the bulk of the powder at the same temperature.
And finally one wants to generate the system with sufficient insulation such that that the tungsten core / heater wire can be driven as hot as possible, and that the Fe/Ni stays just under it's curie temperature. Then just cycle it up and down past it's curie temperature.
Of course the hydrogen loading of the reactor needs to be done as you described in your earlier videos to minimize oxide buildups. If one uses only Fe and not Ni are there any special considerations for hydrogen loading?
Sorry to try and write it out with all the details, I just wanted to try and nail down a potential reactor design taking into consideration some of the things you mentioned in the past as well as the new stuff. If there is a better way or simpler way to build a reactor given what you know now just say.
Thanks again for a great video.
When Henk reached out to me when he was trying to do something like SAFIRE, he asked what should I do.
I said take W and add KOH to it. This produced immediate results and this was the first VEGA video I published.
https://remoteview.substack.com/p/vega
Now you know a fair chunk of my justification for suggesting this to Henk.
The two blogs prior, were Transmuting Tungsten 1
https://remoteview.substack.com/p/transmuting-tungsten-01
and Transmuting Tungsten 2
https://remoteview.substack.com/p/transmuting-tungsten-02
The second video was the 800x COP Mizuno W + K2CO3 + H2O 'singularity'
It was not guess work, it was specifically due to my understanding that EVOs contained cold neutrino / Relic neutrino condensates, these should stimulate 40K decay and the resulting beta would energise the EVO. Then the binding energy of the EVO / Micro Ball Lightning so produced would cause cluster decay of the W. which would further yield energy.
I think Nickel is a very good core for the production of the 'Active Agents' - the Solitons of two magnetic types (as Solin calls them) which can cluster to form the Micro Ball Lightning. These then interact with the W in the Parkhomov 225 day reactor heater wire.
I explained it in this video
https://remoteview.substack.com/p/how-could-parkhomovs-225-day-reactor
Years ago, I purchased some W powder for Mathieu Valat to put around an intended GlowStick replication - however, Mathieu never was able to run the test. The later test from Parkhomov gave me great satisfaction to see the concept realised (without AP mentioning its possibility). Since the 225 day reactor we have shown that not only is Ohmasa Gas producing micro ball lightning - coherent matter - this gas causes the fissioning of W.
https://remoteview.substack.com/p/assisi-2021-lenr-in-a-can
I am saying that the protocol should be optimised to allow coherence... When I wrote this procedure back in late 2015 I was trying to combine the best learning from Piantelli, ourselves and Parkhomov and the literature in general.
http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/519-the-cookbook-is-in-the-signal
This protocol is largely what was followed by parkhomov in his 225 day reactor - only he took the top temperature to 1700ºC.
I have shared in recent weeks that Shishkin noted how his cavitator would stop producing String Vortex Solitons (neutral Magneto Toro Electrical Radiation - Black EVOs) after a while. These things have been determined to be at least in part condensed cold neutrinos. To get it working again - he had to move it to a new location in his lab. I realised that this meant that the cohering forces and resulting structures had a long range event horizon that consumed and condensed all the relic neutrinos within that event horizon - after which no Strange Radiation was produced.
In the GS 5.2 protocol, the low temperature slow rises and holds and cycling is all about dissociation and adsorption. (at this stage, one must note that having separate H2 source would be far superior as the Li really does kill the ability of the PNK-02 Nickel powder to be effective somewhat). Once the the Nickel has adsorbed protons all over it - the idea is to punch through the curie point as fast as possible. It took a long time to realise why - we were never told even if Piantelli knew himself. having a single ferro magnetic element is good in that it has a very precise temperature.
This produces the basic EVO clusters, particularly from points and cracks where electron bunching can assist the electron bunching to coherence process.
Once the EVOs are formed, they will condense relic neutrinos in the vicinity - however, these will be used after a while, by taking the temp OVER 1000ºC the technologically synthesised Cold Neutrinos are synthesised and these can then additionally feed the process. With some K in play for production of high energy betas leading to ready supply of avalanche electrons and a little W (or another suitable Lanthanide like Samarium or Europium) for fission energy, you will be able to yield significant excess in my view. Gadolinium has a special place as it is both a ferro magnetic material and has thermal neutron absorption (Because SR acts a little like neutrons - and you can perhaps see why in the recent presentations). However, I decided to focus on Indium, as it is both a neutron absorber AND has a very high percentage of beta isotope. That is why I bought it for Alan Goldwater many years ago and why I took it to test with Ohmasa Gas.
So there is the advantage of cycling if you can prevent the EVO generator from being sintered, this will be easier with Cobalt in the core as its Curie point is at 1,121 °C, over the temperature required to synthesised cold neutrinos and melting point 1,495 °C. Given the above it is probably easier to just get Samarium Cobalt magnets and smash them up and heat cycle them just as that researcher showed at ICCF-4 in Hawaii with D2.
The advantage with having a heater wire that is a solenoid of W in H2 atmosphere, it can actually be far hotter. So the W can receive the EVOs and feed them by way of Cold Neutrino synthesis and cluster decay energy - they are also carrying electrons!
I will synthesise all this at some point. It was very rough dump of some things I wanted to get into the public record.
Hey Bob,
Thanks so much I think I understand the relation between the key points in process better now.
1) The role of beta and alpha emitters in conjunction with each other.
2) Synthesis of cold neutrinos vs just using those in the local area.
3) Avoiding sintering the ferromagnetic material which would reduce the emission of EVO's due to less surface area and less sharp geometries and ability to adsorb hydrogen due to less surface area.
4) The role of neutron/di-neutron absorbers that trigger further beta decay to further feed EVO's.
I think the biggest barrier to entry to these systems currently is the ability to generate and load hydrogen gas into the material which will generate the initial EVO's. I guess that's why so often people use LiH as it lower the barrier to entry. But I can see the downfall now with sintering. It would be nice if there was some alternate way to get the hydrogen/protons into the system without needing to load the gas manually as it would lower the barrier to entry (not sure if that's a good thing, but I'de hope it might be).
The quote from Rexresearch appears here https://tesla3.com/ken-shoulders/ with ref (4)
The particles, or wavelets, are much more tightly bound than those in solids even though the number density is virtually the same, being in the range of Avogadros number. This high binding energy is demonstrably large when the ensemble is either suddenly disrupted or the group is caused to bore through ordinary solid matter (4). Where [4 ] Charge Clusters In Action I found a readable copy here http://freel.tech/charge-clusters/publications/shoulders/2%20-%20Charge%20Clusters%20In%20Action%20(Ken%20Shoulders).pdf but I don't see a reference to an actual quantity except for Avagadro’s number. I did check some of the patents and EV a Tale of Discovery.
But I'm not seeing it, if someone else could lend their eyes to confirm or show me where I missed it. That would be great.
Jacob, this is very helpful. I will include this work in an update recording based on the comments I added earlier today.
I think 'Wavelets' is a more accurate description for coherent matter waves rather than particles.
I'm glad to help
Sorry - a bit off topic - but I believe Gordon was mentioning a Viktor Schauberger documentary in the chat for this stream. He said it had been posted in recent comments on Remoteview.icu - I can't seem to find it. Does anybody know the link/documentary he was referring to? Thanks!
Viktor Schauberger - Comprehend and Copy Nature (Documentary of 2008)
https://youtu.be/yXPrLGUGZsw
Much appreciated.
It is interesting to note that the dark hydrogen theory fully explains all the results from Santilli about the synthesis of neutron from protons (hydrogen) and electrons by means of electric disharges. In the most recent implementation of its "neutron generator", he accelerate hydrogen through an discharge in order to obtain a directional flow of "neutrons" (clearly the directional flux is obtained in a ballistic way, and this imply that the generated particles are way bigger than real neutrons). The dark hydrogen also eleganlty explains the results from Borghi and Sternglass. If this is true, we know that dark hydrogen is able to transmute matter just like ordinary neutrons (all these researcher also used the activation method to measure the "neutron" flux).