Simon,
I think that was polywater. Which you do NOT get from a polywell!
The business about biological systems transmuting elements has been around since about Pasteur's time. An old co-worker of mine burned a little DARPA money fiddling with it some years back, so I got to see what he was talking about. While it would be really amazing if it turns out to be true, the examples cited in his background were damned near impossible to assay correctly.
Ah, here it is, lying on the floor behind me. US Army Mobility Equipment and Development Command, Report Number 2247, Dec 1977, Energy Development from Elemental Transmutations in Biological Systems, by S Goldfein. Why for them, idunno.
(Hey, and it is available on-line! http://www.rexresearch.com/goldfein/goldfein.htm)
There were three reactions cited by Sol, each of which were supposed to be reported or suspected in biological systems. Each involved adding one proton, H (1,1).
Na (11, 23) becomes Mg (12, 24)
K (19, 39) becomes Ca (20,40)
Mn (25, 55) becomes Fe (26, 56)
Mass loss in these ranges from .0078 to .0109 grams per mole. Times c^2 is not trifling.
He cited some very old reports of things like chickens continuing to produce eggs with a calcium-deficient diet. The K to Ca reports were more prevalant. He cited Vogel, Lauwes, Gilbert, Von Herzeele, Baranger, Kervran, and Komaki.
How credible? Well, this I gotta see, and I would be one picky sumbitch to convince. As Chris will no doubt point out, we're talking nuclear reactions in about the most delicate environment possible, living cells, for Pete's sake!. I have used the sodium reaction as a power source in SF, and while it ain't D-T, I would not personally want that kind of energy ripping loose in my cells even if it were only charged particle recoils. On the scale of a cell, that's like a red-hot cannonball.
But Sol was just crazy enough to write about it, and had a clever idea that ATP molecules look a lot like little-bitty cyclotrons. He actually worked out how a molecule could possibly do this.
Cold Fusion Proven True by U.S. Navy Researchers
Last edited by Tom Ligon on Tue Mar 23, 2010 2:04 am, edited 2 times in total.
I'm familiar wit the US work and its replication. I have been writing about it since 2008.Well the US researchers are highlighted by the title of this thread: Cold Fusion Proven True by U.S. Navy Researchers.
I see nothing similar re: the Russian work.
The US workers seem to favor heavy water. The Russians light water. I am unaware of any replication I would consider valid re: light water transmutation.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Your post peaked my interest in how certain biological systems can use radioactivity in their lifecycle.Tom Ligon wrote:Simon,
I think that was polywater. Which you do NOT get from a polywell!
The business about biological systems transmuting elements has been around since about Pasteur's time. An old co-worker of mine burned a little DARPA money fiddling with it some years back, so I got to see what he was talking about. While it would be really amazing if it turns out to be true, the examples cited in his background were damned near impossible to assay correctly.
Ah, here it is, lying on the floor behind me. US Army Mobility Equipment and Development Command, Report Number 2247, Dec 1977, Energy Development from Elemental Transmutations in Biological Systems, by S Goldfein. Why for them, idunno.
(Hey, and it is available on-line! http://www.rexresearch.com/goldfein/goldfein.htm)
There were three reactions cited by Sol, each of which were supposed to be reported or suspected in biological systems. Each involved adding one proton, H (1,1).
Na (11, 23) becomes Mg (12, 24)
K (19, 39) becomes Ca (20,40)
Mn (25, 55) becomes Fe (26, 56)
Mass loss in these ranges from .0078 to .0109 grams per mole. Times c^2 is not trifling.
He cited some very old reports of things like chickens continuing to produce eggs with a calcium-deficient diet. The K to Ca reports were more prevalant. He cited Vogel, Lauwes, Gilbert, Von Herzeele, Baranger, Kervran, and Komaki.
How credible? Well, this I gotta see, and I would be one picky sumbitch to convince. As Chris will no doubt point out, we're talking nuclear reactions in about the most delicate environment possible, living cells, for Pete's sake!. I have used the sodium reaction as a power source in SF, and while it ain't D-T, I would not personally want that kind of energy ripping loose in my cells even if it were only charged particle recoils. On the scale of a cell, that's like a red-hot cannonball.
But Sol was just crazy enough to write about it, and had a clever idea that ATP molecules look a lot like little-bitty cyclotrons. He actually worked out how a molecule could possibly do this.
I found these examples:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 192814.htm
Bacteria Use Radioactive Uranium To Convert Water Molecules To Useable Energy
ScienceDaily (Oct. 19, 2006) — Researchers from Indiana University Bloomington and eight collaborating institutions report in this week's Science a self-sustaining community of bacteria that live in rocks 2.8 kilometers below Earth's surface. Think that's weird? The bacteria rely on radioactive uranium to convert water molecules to useable energy.
Also, Deinococcus radioduranslives lives in nuclear waste. It is capable of withstanding an instantaneous dose of up to 5,000 Gy of ionizing radiation with no loss of viability, and an instantaneous dose of up to 15,000 Gy with 37% viability. A dose of 5,000 Gy is estimated to introduce several hundred complete breaks into the organism's DNA. For comparison, a chest X-ray or Apollo mission involves about 1 milligray, 10 Gy can kill a human, 60 Gy will kill E. coli, and over 4000 will kill the radiation-resistant tardigrade.
Several bacteria of comparable radioresistance are now known, including some species of the genus Chroococcidiopsis (phylum cyanobacteria) and some species of Rubrobacter (phylum actinobacteria); among the archaea, the species Thermococcus gammatolerans shows comparable radioresistance. Deinocuccus radiodurans also has a unique ability to repair damaged DNA. It isolates the damaged segments in a controlled area and repairs it. This bacteria can also repair many small fragments from and entire chromosome.
The Widom-Larson theory is the most plausible theory right now to explain "cold fusion".
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/WL/WLTheory.shtml
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/WL/WLTheory.shtml
I certainly did not mean that. If I gave that impression, I did not communicate correctly. So I can prefect my communication skills in the future, what did I write that gave you that impression?MSimon wrote:Axil,
Radiation breaking apart water molecules is not transmutation.
Last edited by Axil on Tue Mar 23, 2010 8:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
It would still be better than chemical energy.DeltaV wrote:Widom-Larsen's theory is that the weak nuclear force is at play in "cold fusion" effects, not the strong nuclear force, as in thermonuclear fusion. This sets a definite limit on the amount of energy that could be released. Still a usable amount for certain applications.
Agreed. More energy than chemical. Less than strong nuclear. Could be just right for ground transport, remote power gen, etc.kurt9 wrote:It would still be better than chemical energy.DeltaV wrote:Widom-Larsen's theory is that the weak nuclear force is at play in "cold fusion" effects, not the strong nuclear force, as in thermonuclear fusion. This sets a definite limit on the amount of energy that could be released. Still a usable amount for certain applications.
Let me give you some of my background thinking on this to explain myself.MSimon wrote:Axil said:
Given the lack of evidence for that I suspected you may have gone off on an even wilder tangent. Evidently that is not the case.I am interested in transmutation of elements through cavatation.
I currently believe that the LENR is a quantum mechanical phenomenon. This wave–particle duality of energy and matter at the atomic scale provides a unified view of the behavior of nuclear and subatomic particles such as photons, neutrons, and electrons.
The mathematical formulation of quantum mechanics is abstract and its implications are often non-intuitive. The centerpiece of this mathematical system is the wavefunction. The wavefunction is a mathematical function of time and space that can provide information about the position and momentum of a particle, but only as probabilities, as dictated by the constraints imposed by the uncertainty principle.
One interesting quantum mechanical phenomenon, the Bose Einstein condensates are systems of many like particles comprised of many weakly interacting bosons confined in an external potential that tend to behave in unison as the energy common to their assemblage is decreased.
Under such lowering energy conditions, a large fraction of the bosons begin to occupy the lowest quantum state of the external potential, at which point quantum effects become apparent on a macroscopic scale.
When many atoms are confined in a structure of a crystal a Bose Einstein condensates begins to form. As energy is removed from this collection of atoms, they act more and more in unison as a single particle from a quantum mechanical point of view. In the case of deuterium, such Bose Einstein collections of deuterium form inside the various and random voids within crystal structure of palladium. As more energy is removed from these collections, the probabilities of nuclear events (cross section) increase within this collection.
These deuterium atoms are waves as well as particles. Under increasing pressures and ever lowering common energies the wave functions of the various atoms overlap and the probabilities of their nuclear recombination increases.
When such fusion events occur, the energy that results from such fusion events are shared among all the members of the deuterium assemblage.
The probability that a gamma ray emission is produced is decreased because many atoms share in this nuclear excitation energy. When radiated, this energy produces low grade radiation such as heat instead of high level gamma or X-ray EMF.
Bose Einstein condensate activity is increase by magnetic and electric fields as well as increased pressure. This is seen in LENR phenomena.
I believe that Bose Einstein condensates form inside cavitation bubbles. The immense pressures that accompany cavatation bubble collapse increases the probabilities of nuclear reactions of various elements just as the voids within the crystal structure of palladium does for deuterium.
-
MirariNefas
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 3:57 am
I've heard of this. That stuff's been pretty discredited, hasn't it? The chickens were scavenging their own bones for the calcium, or something like that.Tom Ligon wrote: He cited some very old reports of things like chickens continuing to produce eggs with a calcium-deficient diet. The K to Ca reports were more prevalant. He cited Vogel, Lauwes, Gilbert, Von Herzeele, Baranger, Kervran, and Komaki.
MirariNefas,
That would be my guess, that complex organisms, even eggs, would be damnably hard to properly assay for any change.
I don't know that these observations are so much dis-credited as were never credited in the first place. This is one area where extreme diligence would be needed for proof. And I mean extreme.
The one system cited with some potential for proper assay was the sprouting of watercress seeds. However, all he could say was there was "variation" in the ash, and the studies were primitive.
If it were my job to do this (and it would take some heavy persuasion to make me take this on), I would use the simplest system I could get away with. Bacterial colonies would be my first choice (although they don't have mitochondria, but mitochondria are symbiont bacteria so some bacteria would probably have the same ability). You could completely control the growth media. Modern instruments could detect minute changes, and more to the point look for shifts in isotope abundance. Presumably the transmutations should leave a very specific fingerprint.
The polywater effect must be remembered -- water in fine capillaries in that investigation evidently picked up silicates and behaved like a gel. What false positives might you get? Concentration of trace elements in cells is a talent of life ... if anything is present they will scrounge it. Misidentification of elements ... how good are you at distinguishing between an atom of calcium and an moleular fragment of potassium plus a hydrogen, or some entirely different atom plus -OH or -CH2? I've done enough mass spec work to see the traps.
This would take the talents of a really meticulous microbiologist plus a very good instrumental chemist, with clean facilities and an administrative environment that did not throw them out on their arses for even bringing it up.
This link gives a bit more detail on the 1960's studies on seeds, which may be higher quality. I'm still not buying it, but I'm interested. If nothing else, this is fodder for science fiction. http://www.levity.com/alchemy/nelson2_8.html
That would be my guess, that complex organisms, even eggs, would be damnably hard to properly assay for any change.
I don't know that these observations are so much dis-credited as were never credited in the first place. This is one area where extreme diligence would be needed for proof. And I mean extreme.
The one system cited with some potential for proper assay was the sprouting of watercress seeds. However, all he could say was there was "variation" in the ash, and the studies were primitive.
If it were my job to do this (and it would take some heavy persuasion to make me take this on), I would use the simplest system I could get away with. Bacterial colonies would be my first choice (although they don't have mitochondria, but mitochondria are symbiont bacteria so some bacteria would probably have the same ability). You could completely control the growth media. Modern instruments could detect minute changes, and more to the point look for shifts in isotope abundance. Presumably the transmutations should leave a very specific fingerprint.
The polywater effect must be remembered -- water in fine capillaries in that investigation evidently picked up silicates and behaved like a gel. What false positives might you get? Concentration of trace elements in cells is a talent of life ... if anything is present they will scrounge it. Misidentification of elements ... how good are you at distinguishing between an atom of calcium and an moleular fragment of potassium plus a hydrogen, or some entirely different atom plus -OH or -CH2? I've done enough mass spec work to see the traps.
This would take the talents of a really meticulous microbiologist plus a very good instrumental chemist, with clean facilities and an administrative environment that did not throw them out on their arses for even bringing it up.
This link gives a bit more detail on the 1960's studies on seeds, which may be higher quality. I'm still not buying it, but I'm interested. If nothing else, this is fodder for science fiction. http://www.levity.com/alchemy/nelson2_8.html