My response to Robert Murray-Smith
and the tone of his "Hutchison Effect replication" video
Here is the video. Below is my comment on it and challenge to debate him on the subject.
His name is Hutchison, as you write in the description, not Hutchinson - I used to make the same mistake sometimes. Anyhow, I have met him and the first thing I asked was about the comically fake videos - he did not bat an eyelid, he just straight away [said], "sometimes a TV crew wanted to see something and pressed to come over in a few days, I said it would take weeks to get things working, but they wanted to come over in days, so, I put on a show"
That being said, I have had some samples from him analysed and in damaged areas, there are non-natural isotopes. I have respected you Robert for many years, but I don't want you to be on the wrong side of history on this.
I derived a fractal toroidal structure, in part, from studying his samples, that explained the x-rays of "plasmoid" strike marks in Bostick and Nardi's 1980 paper (they had been researching for the US DOE since 1948 for ways to make fusion). When I showed my findings to a group of senior Russian researchers on 31 April 2022, one, without comment, pointed me to a 1995 paper by Zhvirblis in "Chemistry of Life" referring to classified Soviet era energetics research - what they were researching was an exact technological equivalent in the form of a coil of coil of coil of coil - of the structure I had derived, from Hutchison sample. Then, I saw that the Zhvirblis paper referred to a 1993 paper in the Russian peer reviewed journal "Electricity" by Nevessky a senior physicist and mathematician at the Russian Academy of Science, he was tasked by Zhvirblis to see what, if anything, making a coil of the type he saw in 1988, would mean.
Turns out it would mean, from generalised Maxwell equations, that the Poynting vector would be closed in a loop - this would explain the observance in 1980s of an electromagnetic phantom that would persist for up to two days - something that has been seen since by Urutskoyev in 57Fe in early 2000s exploding Ti foil experiments and in the peer reviewed 2019 paper by Bogdanovich et. al. This also explained observations in other systems we had evaluated or in the field of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science.
On the 10th May 2022, a person following my investigations, sent me a paper from 2009 by a SLAC researcher called David Fryberger, in this 2009 paper, funded by the US DOE, he built on his previous DOE funded explanation of ball lightning from 1994, by realising that there must be possible, from generalised Maxwell equations, the ability to create "vacuum currents in the dirac sea" that are NOT dependant on ordinary matter. This supports the earlier work of the Soviet Energetics program, Zhvirblis/Nevessky and indeed, his papers explain many of the anomalous properties that Kenneth Radford Shoulders ascribed to, what he ultimately called, "Exotic Vacuum Objects" - which Ken said Ball Lightning are. Ken, who is the father of micro-electronics and inventor of the Quadrupole Mass Spectrometer, spent 33 years investigating Hutchison Effect.
In the 2009 paper, Fryberger states that the if the right level of clustering, energy and frequency is achieved in the clusters that are functionally equivalent to Ball Lightning, then the dyality angle of them is such that it disrupts ordinary matter nucleons reference with the local dirac sea, leading to the decay of nucleons. This is Coherent Matter Reactions.
We have imaged the toroids of toroids. We have produced in a range of systems the crenelated Fe + O microspheres also found in natural Ball Lightning impact. We have also videoed the process of Ball Lightning reaching coherence and consuming W, Ti, Ni and Cu. It does the consumption on the inner boundary layer and we have shared 8k SEM images of the interaction cut zone between Ball Lightning and a copper pipe, a 10 yen coin, a Steel Hutchison sample from 1986 and another steel Hutchison sample from 2007. They all show a regular 'scalloping' in the affected area and material disappearance.
Moreover, on our Ball Lightning cut Cu pipe, we see an orthogonal circular mesh of disrupted material in this fresh cut. It appears as if a mesh of toroidal structures have made the material disappear, this is consistent with John Hutchison, Ken Shoulders, Dr. Takaaki Matsumoto, David Hudson, Tadahiko Mizuno, Stanislav Adamenko, SAFIRE project and our own research. Fryberger offers one explanation, the Dyality process decays matter into light and leptons. We have observed both light and lepton emission in our research, strong light at below the blackbody temperature required to generate it and it is clear that John observed light emission from things that were not hot also.
I would like to offer a public zoom debate with you on John Hutchison's work and the immense international, multi-decade research that was, in part, spawned from it now that we are getting to a good understanding, both from a physical experimental and mathematical/electro-dynamic and physics principles point of view, how he made the samples we physically have possession of.