THOR - Interim isotopic data for sample taken from the 24" Thunderstorm generator
And preliminary analysis
The interim data is back from the beam line and here are the comments from Vilnius.
Sample KU19-1
Carbon isotope ratio: δ13C = -25.23‰ in VPDB scale.
The units are permill (‰), not a percentage.
Nitrogen isotope ratio δ15N not measured,
because sample had too small amount of nitrogen for isotope analysis
Carbon percentage: C% = 14.83 % (carbon amount in the sample, in percent)
Nitrogen percentage: N% = 0.4% (nitrogen amount in the sample, in percent)
Equipment used: Elemental analyser Thermo Flash EA1112 connected to isotope ratio mass spectrometer Thermo Delta V Advantage.
Unfortunately we cannot measure you d34S now – I mean that usually we collecting at least 30-50 samples set from various customers during the period, then adjusting IRMS for Sulphur measurement and measure such set at once. But these months we only have one sample (yours), and to adjust IRMS and measure only one sample is not feasible economically.
Same situation with d18O. We collecting at least 30-50 batch of samples, adjusting IRMS and measuring at once. And to adjust IRMS and measure only one sample is not feasible economically.
If you could wait for 2-3 months, maybe we would collect more samples to start measurements.
Given that the Carbon and Nitrogen is 15.23% of the total mass of the sample, and we know from SEM/EDS testing that much of the rest of the sample gathered would have been Calcium Sulphate (CaSO₄) and Iron rich / Oxygen crenellated microspheres, there is going to be a good amount of Sulphur and Oxygen to analyse when it is economical for the facility to do so.
What does the δ13C = -25.23‰ in VPDB scale mean in percentage terms?
The carbon isotope ratio in the VPDB scale, δ13C=-25.23‰, indicates a specific ratio of the stable isotopes 13C to 12C. This value is a relative measure compared to the VPDB (Vienna Pee Dee Belemnite) standard, which has a defined ratio of 13C/12C. To convert the δ13C value to an absolute ratio of 13C/12C, we can use the following relationship:
Where:
Given that the VPDB standard has a 13C/12C ratio of approximately 0.0112372, we can rearrange the formula to solve for the sample's 13C/12C ratio:
Substituting the given δ13C value and the standard ratio:
So, the calculated value of the expression is approximately 0.010949. This would be the absolute ratio of for the sample when compared to the VPDB standard.
How much lower is the 13C content in the 24 inch Thunderstorm generator relative to that found in natural Carbon?
The normal amount of 13C in natural carbon is approximately 1.1%. To express the change in the 13C/12C ratio as a percentage change from this normal amount, we can use the following formula:
Using the previously calculated new ratio of 0.010949 for the sample and the normal ratio of 0.0111 (which is 1.1%), the percentage change is:
Calculating this gives us:
This means that the sample has a 13C content that is 1.36 % lower than the normal amount of 13C in natural carbon.
NOTE: The above was calculated with the assistance of ChatGPT.
What might this mean?
The beam line pride themselves in their accuracy, hence they will not attempt to produce data based on inadequate calibration or small sample sizes. This is why we cannot have a test done on the 15N/14N ratio, given the small content of the gas in the sample. It is also why we have to wait for the other tests, because calibration is so meticulous, in the case of 18O/16O analysis, they told us it takes a week of work to prepare and so they will only do that when they have more samples available.
Still, there are those that will say this is within the margin of error. That being said what if it is not?
We already know that the Thunderstorm generator is capable of producing the signatures of Ball Lightning (coherent matter travelling waves and iron-rich crenellated microspheres). We also know from John Hutchison, Ken Shoulders, Dr. Takaaki Matsumoto and others, that Ball Lighting can transmute elements.
Spin
I have categorically stated that I believe that spin nuclei are able to be captured more easily than non spin nuclei by the Fractal Toroidal Moment and its topological monopole, wherein reactions occur within the various phase singularities of the structure. The iron rich crenellated microsphere is an indicator that the right conditions have been produced.
Whilst 12C is non spin, 13C is:
Using the MFMP LENR fusion reaction calculator programmed by Philip Power based on data by Dr. Alexander Parkhomov, and the following query
E1 in ('H') and A2 =13 order by MeV descwe get:
This would reduce H from water, leaving excess O. It would increase the N output and deplete the carbon as apparently observed. Similarly, if 12C were to be caught up in the process inside a Ball Lightning, it may enter into an analogy of the CNO cycle, where 12C becomes 14N after the absorption (and decay) of two protons, leaving extra N and O from water and a removal of C and H from the fuel mixture. Where this happens inside the Ball Lightning, either inverse beta reactions of photon downsampling / shielding might prevent ordinarily expected radiation from being produced or, respectively, being observed.
Conclusion
Like the 14C data, this is an encouraging but not conclusive piece of data from isotopic analysis and points to some stepwise transmutation that could result in less carbon and more oxygen in the output of the device. It is unfortunate that we have to wait for the 18O/16O and 34S/32S data, but this is sometimes the reality of doing science, things take time.
Keep “Scratching at the Surface” Bob 😝 meticulous methodology is the only way to present controversial results to the physics community if it’s to change long establish conventional theory and be accepted without refute.
This is on the more general topic at hand. https://youtu.be/24TB1vPuzIU?si=HOKMToJqOkPFH2Ju Forgive my posting it here, but once again MFMP may be able to answer a question still evading answers: At around 8:30 mark sothic triangles appear as dendrites. How water grabs "impurities and surfaces to form ice at HIGHER TEMPRATURES" from that atomic base interaction with same is "not understood." Methinks Bob might see an answer in LENR.