13 Comments
author

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

Expand full comment
Oct 12, 2021Liked by Bob Greenyer

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.

Expand full comment
Oct 11, 2021Liked by Bob Greenyer

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.

Expand full comment
Oct 11, 2021Liked by Bob Greenyer

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 Avogadro’s 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.

Expand full comment
Oct 11, 2021Liked by Bob Greenyer

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!

Expand full comment

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).

Expand full comment