Cavitation Radiation Replication?

By: David Zweig

November 9, 2013 (Updates at end of article. Latest update 5/26/2014)

A man working in his garage used a drive motor from an old forced-air furnace and a pump from an old washing machine to make a device similar to NanoSpire's which is claimed to have produced cavitation fusion. When I asked him about whether he obtained radiation readings he was very specific about the units of radioactivity (CPM) that were given off by the fusion as measured by his Geiger counter. Here are the relevant parts of a thread that appeared in the comments section of a Revolution-Green article:

Dog-One wrote: ...Creating the cavitation bubbles in the pump using lift elevation and having control valves to force the bubbles to collapse inside the media chamber filled with stainless steel pot scrubbers (many sharp edges) does work. What I'm not so confident about is the radiation emitted--it will trip my Inspector+ rad meter into alarm. Pretty sure I don't need my garage containing a miniature Fukushima.

Simon Derricutt wrote: ...Replication of the experiments needs a high-pressure pump - shouldn't be that difficult. [Dog-One,] it sounds like you have tried replication and also got a response on your Geiger counter. Any details you can share? It would be good to know that someone who we can trust has seen this.

Dog-One wrote:

Since I have the floor for a moment, let me say this much: I probably should have kept my big mouth shut. What I saw convinced me the LeClair Effect has merit. The big fat BUT in my opinion is this is clearly a poor way to convert Matter to Energy. And the form of energy you get isn't easily useable. Plus, you have the joy of waste product. I'll bet James Griggs has no idea just how dangerous his Hydrosonic Pumps actually are.

The apparatus I built has been taken down and I won't say where the residuals where placed. It isn't all that complicated to build, but it does take a lot of tuning to get it to work properly. And no, you don't need a high-pressure pump--you are after vacuum, not pressure. I used a drive motor from an old forced-air furnace and a pump from an old washing machine. The biggest pain in the ass is priming the pump--you have to raise the water level above the pump to get it to start, then lower the water/raise the pump until the vacuum causes cavitation bubbles to form. Controlling the motor speed with a variac is a must. The breakpoint is extremely sharp between pumping and loss of prime and it's right in that region you want to operate. At that point you need to output those bubbles immediately into the media chamber and apply enough resistance on the output side of the chamber to get the bubbles to spread out and collapse within the media. From there I just made a spillway back to the pump bucket so you don't have a closed loop system.

Seriously, with a little patience, anyone can build this. I just don't recommend anyone do it. But if you refuse to take my advice, first lower the pump enough to avoid cavitation and monitor water temperature as a baseline. After an hour or so to stabilize, very slowly raise the pump until you hear/sense cavitation. Now monitor water temperature. As the water slowly heats up you'll likely have to tweak valves to keep the bubbles centered in the media chamber. With my fixture, if I didn't stay right on top of the controls I would lose prime and have to start all over.

What I didn't do is any analysis of power input/output. Seriously I wasn't looking for COP numbers and I didn't integrate any instrumentation. I'm not looking for a Doctorate Degree here. I was just looking to see if there was any evidence the LeClair Effect was smoke-n-mirrors or for real. My summary: it or something similar is real. But at the end of the day, what are you going to do with it? Nuke your children? Your spouse? Your pets? Negative, I'd rather burn some wood in a rocket stove.

PieEconomics wrote: Was your radiation meter on? Did it sound an alarm? What reading did it give and what is the significance of that reading? If radiation was detected this is Very Big News... According to LeClair, the radiation shielding issue was easily solved [using a hot cell]... Once understood, people shouldn't be any more afraid of properly shielded cavitation devices than they are of dental X-ray machines.

Dog-One wrote:

My baseline in normal pumping mode was averaging 40 CPM. Alarm set for 100 CPM, After raising the pump and initiating cavitation, readings began to climb linearly (best I could tell) with temperature, though I probably had a fair amount of evaporative cooling going on. I lost prime at about 170 CPM after about two hours. The bad news is these readings only dropped 20 CPM in the course of 30 minutes and continued climbing once I re-primed the pump. So unlike your dental X-ray example, you have waste water to deal with--there's no remediation for that.

Seriously guys, this is a bad idea to pursue. Does it work? I say yes. Should we embrace it? I say no. Your taking some electrical energy to run a pump and pure water and making heat and toxic water. Plus, everything that has come in contact with that toxic water is now contaminated. It wouldn't really matter to me if the COP was greater than 100, its risks outweigh its energy production capability. That's about it in a nutshell. We need to be looking somewhere else for an energy solution.

If Mark LeClair [president of NanoSpire] would like to do another presentation on the Smart Scarecrow Show with a commercial grade unit, I'll happily watch and ask questions. I still won't have one in my house. For me, put a fork in it, it's done.

What was it Einstein said, "Nuclear power is a hell of way to boil water." It is however a great way to eradicate all of your enemies.

Well, this is important news, nevertheless. LeClair always maintained that his device was for commercial purposes and not for installation in residences.

Simon Derricutt wrote:

...It would be good to know the energy of the radiation as well as the counts, but looking at the cost of a gamma-ray spectrometer (around $7k) that's out of range of our budgets. That sort of measurement would tell us exactly what reaction is happening. We could thus tell as to whether the radiation from the product would be a longer-term problem or not.

This problem of inducing radioactivity is one reason why I think that, if Stan Meyers' water-powered car really did work, the energy from it would need to be nuclear and so we'd get the same problem. It seems that any system where a concentrated-enough energy density is created (such as electric arcs, cavitation, high-powered lasers etc.) then we can affect the nucleus, even though (a long time ago) I learnt that this was impossible. Experiments in free energy should therefore always have a Geiger counter in use, and preferably a neutron counter too (again the neutron counter is somewhat expensive). TANSTAAFL again - you don't get free energy for nothing...

On the difficulty of getting the process to work the way you had it set up, it seems to me that you could get a wider range available by putting vanes with a somewhat aerofoil shape (but reversed) in the water flow. If as the water passed this curved surface the radius of curvature was increasing along the direction of flow then at one point the cavitation point would be reached. Variations in water flow would simply move the cavitation point forwards or backwards. Using pure de-gassed water would likely reduce the unwanted radioactive products, too. The point here is that if the effect exists then we should see if it can be made safe to use rather than just dismiss it as being too dangerous. Given what cavitation damage is seen on ship propellers and other pumps that have not been well-designed, I'd suspect that such induced radioactivity is in fact being produced in a lot of systems, but no-one has measured it since it is not expected to be a problem.

Although you could be right that this can't be made safe to use, I think a bit more exploration is needed before it's consigned to the trash bin.

Dog-One wrote: 

The setup is quite tricky. The bubbles form on the low pressure side and once they cross the impeller, they immediately begin to collapse since the low pressure is now gone. So to get those bubbles to last long enough to have them collapse in the media chamber, you have to make them big enough to survive the transition and have the flow rate fast enough to get them there. What you are doing here is controlled low temperature boiling using vacuum; it's not rocket science, but it's not trivial either. I'm most certain there are far better ways to do this--using a pump is probably a very poor method. A better way might be to use a piston that draws a vacuum and then slams back down at some optimal frequency. There's a video out there somewhere showing a very similar setup using around 14kHz oscillation. The cylinder would then become your heat exchanger and you could completely isolate the radioactive by-products from the environment. What might be inside the cylinder other than water and the piston is some structure that promotes a very even distribution of optimal size bubbles and the sharp edges that attract the re-entrant jets.

I tend to agree there must be a better way to utilize the concept for energy production. If one could convert this process directly into electrical output that would be great. I'd even settle for enhanced Hydroxy production. Heat is a tough one though. It's simply too difficult to get the energy to where you want it from where you produce it.

Now granted this would be far safer than your typical GE Mark I nuclear reactor--it's not likely it would ever melt down and poison the entire Pacific Ocean, but the risk is still there you could completely contaminate your residence and harm your family. What I feel is needed is for some great minds to come together and find a more suitable liquid that when used, only generates heat without all the harmful by-products. If someone can do that and build an apparatus that is reliable, I'm all in. Then we just figure out a reasonably good way to transform this heat into electricity or something else that is relatively easy to distribute.

So just to reassure you, I'm not totally against the concept. I think it needs a lot of work in a controlled environment which rules-out garage builders like myself. Even a proof of concept device is not a toy and I would highly discourage such a replication unless you have a proper facility and are trained in handling nuclear material. That said, the door is still wide open for other means of conversion from Matter to Energy. I'm personally still not convinced there isn't a whole lot more about magnetism and quantum engineering we can do safely. Even gravity lacks the kind of thorough explanation I would require to say it's a dead end. No, the problem isn't because we aren't thinking outside the box. The problem is we need a bigger box.

Simon Derricutt wrote:

The piston idea looks good. The water in the cylinder would need to be de-gassed and pure, and to have suspended in it small particles (nanoparticles?) of some solid that would act as a nucleus for the cavitation bubbles. It would likely help if the particles each had a hydrophobic spot at least, so it's possible that a very fine emulsion of oil would do the job, though easily-available particles could be got using artist's Titanium Dioxide white paint - take the stuff that remains is suspension rather than the bits that settle out when you dilute the paint with a lot of water. Lamp-black is another easily-available fine particle.The piston would need to be fast moving and to produce a small vacuum space before slapping down to produce a suddenly-increased pressure. Whereas the oil might get chemically broken down, the TiO2 and C should be OK and last a while.

The main problem is that this produces low-grade heat (less than boiling-point, at least) and uses high-grade electrical energy to drive it. Apart from the radiation problem, making that heat into electricity again and thus being able to self-loop will be difficult. With a big-enough COP and the radiation problem sorted, it might be useful enough to be worth it, especially if you can run it on renewable energy anyway.

As regards the liquid used, have you considered molten Lithium? Melts at around 200°C, so not too difficult to use, and could run up to maybe 400°C so would be easier to run a steam-turbine or other heat-engine from it. Being very reactive, it would need a bit of care in containment, but the reaction ought to produce just Helium and not too much radiation. This may be a better way of doing the Lithium reactor I've been thinking about than using piezos. [See comment, below, suggesting molten fluoride salts as another alternative.]

PieEconomics wrote (responding to selected quotes):

“I tend to agree there must be a better way to utilize the concept for energy production.”

LeClair agrees. He wrote: “I am sure... that the process can be controlled or terminated before undesirable elements are produced. It also appears likely that the zero point energy can be produced without triggering any nuclear reactions at all... I know how to scale this up without the bother or expense of going massively parallel. The laser powered version I expect to produce megawatts out of a desktop sized unit. A pump produces thousands of cavitation bubbles per second, but they are various sizes and not all are properly aligned or produce jets. The laser powered system will be far more efficient... ”

“I lost prime at about 170 CPM after about two hours. The bad news is these readings only dropped 20 CPM in the course of 30 minutes.”

This means that after 3-1/4 hours, the CPM is back down to normal background levels of only 40 CPM. The increased radioactivity is short lived; once shut down, any potential for environmental hazard soon ceases. This is good news, and is consistent with what LeClair wrote to me: “The reactor produced both short and long lived isotopes... The radiation hazmat team did find radioisotopes, but tried to pass it off as ‘naturally occurring’. It is important to note that most of the samples didn't not nucleosynthesize the heaviest elements and those that did only produced barely detectable traces above uranium.”

“I just made a spillway back to the pump bucket so you don't have a closed loop system.”

Doesn’t that describe a closed loop system, as far as the water is concerned? Together with the fact that the radioactivity is short lived, a properly shielded commercial grade unit would be considered a green technology, especially if the energy could also be made to self-loop.

“I probably should have kept my big mouth shut… If Mark LeClair would like to do another presentation on the Smart Scarecrow Show with a commercial grade unit, I'll happily watch and ask questions.”

Mark LeClair's technology is mired in a shadowy world. Ed Pope, NanoSpire's adivser, had worked in Naval Intelligence, and Sergio Lebid, LeClair's associate, appears to have worked in top-secret operations for the government. LeClair wrote: "...the cat is out of the bag and can't be stopped, even if they manage to stop us. Even if it takes fifty years... The world's problems are political, not technological." Reading this, one might think that every intelligence agency in the world would be interested in gaining or controlling access to this technology.

Well, NanoSpire has been avoiding independent verification for so long, they appeared to be just another free energy inventor that in reality didn't have the goods but blamed government suppression for their delay. Now that your replication lends credibility to LeClair's work, his statements about suppression should not be dismissed out of hand, and you should quickly disclose everything you know about this technology.

“The apparatus I built has been taken down and I won't say where the residuals where placed.”

The media chamber along with the stainless steel pot scrubbers contained therein should be tested for evidence of transmutation. Why not donate what is left of the apparatus including all residuals to a university? Widely distribute on the internet diagrams and detailed instructions, so that duplication in properly equipped labs is foolproof. Then, the focus of attention will be on those labs.

If what you have disclosed on this thread is true, and other than due to normal scientific skepticism I have no reason to think that it isn't, then this represents an important milestone in science. If you hold anything back, ill-equipped hobbyists may find the need to make the breakthrough for you.

[Sources for LeClair's quotes and other background information can be found in the previous articles on this blog.]

--------

Update 11/11/13:

Here's a cavitation device invented by James Griggs, producing hot water/ steam. While purportedly operating at over-unity, the inventor states that "in most all water heating applications it is difficult to economically justify." I wonder if this device was tested for radiation and transmutations.




I found the video at Open-source-energy(dot)org which is an excellent site for "studying efficient energy production." It was on this recent thread: LeClair Effect Nuclear Reactions (True LENR). The original video was longer, and also included this clip:


The original video dates back to 2006, and Hydrodynamics is the company it featured, which today markets the Shockwave Power Reactor (SPR):


Industrial SPR

Standard Package (customization available of metal, elastomers, etc.)
  • 304 Stainless Steel SPR
    • Max temperature: 400°F
    • Max pressure: 300 psig
    • Max flow: 0.1 to 1,500 gpm
  • TEFC motor rated at 460 VAC, 1800 or 3600 RPM, 60 Hz
  • One AC-Drive
  • Piping connections with Viton elastomers
  • Double cartridge seal
  • Mounted on painted skid
  • Basic instrumentation and control panel
  • Training and operations manual

This commercial cavitation device utilizes a pitted spinning rotor producing bubbles which then collapse within those pits, sending shock waves out into the media which becomes heated to temperatures of up to 400 degrees F. Metal surrounding the media does not sustain damage, since cavitation is confined within the rotor pits (although presumably the rotor pits sustain cavitation damage over time):

Pitted Spinning Rotor

Reactor


According to Doug Mancosky, Vice President of Research and Development at Hydrodynamics, "the unit is capable of producing steam and hot water, however it generally isn't the most economic option for commodity heating applications when compared to conventional boiler technology." The device is mentioned as related to alternative energy only in its capacity for processing alternative fuels such as ethanol. The device also is used to process foods and beverages, so I would hope there would be no radioactive residual -- in fact, there's no mention of radioactivity at all:
http://hydrodynamics.com/marke...

Doug's quote, above, comes from the comment section of this SPR Cavitation video. On 4/30/13 he was awarded this patent: US 8,430,968 B2 Method of extracting starches and sugar from biological material using controlled cavitation.

The company has been selling products for some time. I e-mailed Doug today, forwarding the accounts of cavitation radiation, and he responded as follows: "I've seen the same articles. We see no evidence of nuclear style radiation." Doug Mancosky (dmancosky@hydrodynamics.com)

Compare the Hydrodynamics statement that it sees “no evidence of nuclear style radiation” with the statement from Quantum Fusion that “no less than seven independent peer reviewed reports exist demonstrating neutron emissions from collapsing cavitation bubbles.”

Quantum Fusion was the company profiled in the Revolution-Green article linked above. According to the article: “There is a universal consensus among scientists that the following criteria needs to be met in order to establish conventional thermonuclear deuterium fusion unquestionably.” (See article for the five criteria listed.) “We have conducted our own bubble fusion experiments... We have detected neutron yield coincident with cavitation. We are working on an improved version of this experiment that will satisfy the conditions 1-5.”
Will Quantum Fusion's New Device Need  Shielding From Ratiation?
So, while Quantum Fusion has detected neutron radiation, they acknowledge their proof isn't yet up to universal scientific standards. Here's what they say about the new device they are working on: “We have designed and built a hydrodynamic cavitation hardware... a modified centrifugal pump with perforated rotor and stator and it acts as a hydrodynamic siren. We are working on refining the design so we could achieve acoustic energy density on the order of 1 MW/m2 that is necessary to achieve cavitation-induced fusion in this system. The machine is a work in progress and can serve as a basis for a commercial CIF generator.”

Quantum Fusion's new device appears to have much in common with the Hydrodynamics device. We'll see what Quantum Fusion has to say about this.

Update 11/12/13:

Here are quotes (in blue) from an e-mail response by Dr. Fomitchev-Zamilov of Quantum Fusion:

"I do not believe NanoSpire's results as they are not presented in a scientific manner. You simply cannot draw any conclusions from people hand-waiving and not doing science properly, this only proliferates confusion."

Yes, this is normal scientific skepticism, which is part of the scientific method. Early steps in the scientific method, however, can involve coming forward with unproven observations and hypotheses and non-peer review testing, and these should also be encouraged. I don't understand why the garage hobbyist who disclosed a few days ago that his cavitation device emitted radiation, said “I probably should have kept my big mouth shut." He is to be credited with giving away lots of details, but considering that he has decided to totally abandon the project, why not make complete information about it (including what's left of the device itself) fully available? Properly equipped labs could more easily duplicate it and perhaps further the lot of mankind. As far as creating unwanted publicity, there would be none-- as NanoSpire found out, any unproven disclosure in this field is ignored by the mainstream.

"Account of the state of our technology is correct."

Kudos to Quantum Fusion for proactively acknowledging that the work they have underway is needed in order to meet unquestionably the scientific standards for demonstrating thermonuclear deuterium fusion.

"I do not believe HydroDynamics claims in excess power - if it was the case they should get a Nobel Prize for it as it would be a new (nuclear?) process as it is unclear where the source of over-unity power would come from. I think this could be possible in principle, but degree of scientific work necessary to establish proof is significant."

Well, consider these passages from the Hydrodynamics' 2006 video clips, above:

"What's so extraordinary about such an ordinary looking machine is the claim that it is more than 100% efficient. More energy has been measured coming out in the form of heat or steam, than the electrical energy needed to turn the rotor. The term for this is over-unity. Scientifically, this is supposed to be impossible, because it overturns the fundamental law of the conservation of energy, that says you cannot get something for nothing. And yet, external observers here claimed to have measured up to 70% more energy out than in."

"Right after our initial installation [at the Albany, GA, firehouse] we measured the output with Jim[Grigg]'s team, representatives from a local university, and one of our local power companies, and we were all astounded by the output. Our measurements indicated that the system was more than 100% efficient, which is very hard to believe. The average engineer would say, baloney. But our measuring devices were certified, and until someone comes along and tells us different, we will say that it is more than 100% efficient."

Hydrodynamics' inventor, Jim Griggs, initially talked up the over-unity factor and the fact that his device violates existing laws of physics. But now the company avoids the claim of excess power. The company doesn't need to introduce any distraction into the marketing of their cavitation heaters to the niche markets they service. Their selling point is that cavitation allows substances to be heated evenly from within, which is critical in processing certain products. Any over-unity that exists adds no economic benefit.

Quantum Fusion also told me their system is different: "Our hardware is much different from HydroDynamics, the devil is the details, as you know, and we spelled it out in our hardware patent application."


Both systems begin by pumping in the liquid. According to the Revolution-Green article linked above, here are some of the ways the Quantum Fusion device differs: (1) Whereas Hydrodynamics uses whatever liquid its client is processing, and the bubbles form out of that liquid, Quantum Fusion uses a liquid that is optimized for the cavitation process, and the bubbles, which are independently introduced into the system, are a different substance from the liquid. (2) The cavitation bubbles are comprised of deuterium gas. It is hypothesized that during each cavitation bubble collapse, the deuterium therein fuses creating a mini-thermonuclear explosion. (3) The bubbles are made to oscillate. Some competing cavitation systems induce oscillation using sound, but Quantum Fusion achieves this utilizing a variable pressure drive in its pump. (4) The shock waves from the bubble collapses are focused so that they converge. This convergence of shock waves allows less pressure to have to be created than would ordinarily be required when trying to achieve temperatures that are conducive to creating thermonuclear explosions.

Clearly, Quantum Fusion adds many complexities to its system, whereas the Hydrodynamics system is much simpler. This may account for not only its measurable radioactivity, but also its potentially greater amount of over-unity, which may someday allow it to self-loop.

Update 11/13/13:

I'm going to try to separate some of the issues:

(1) Can cavitation cause energy out to exceed energy in, otherwise known as over-unity? It looks very likely, based on the use of independent observers and certified measuring devices at the Hydrodynamics installation at the Albany, GA firehouse.

(2) Just because a process achieves over-unity using a particular energy source, does that make it economically feasible to use that energy source? No. Using the Hydrodynamics firehouse installation as an example, suppose $10 input of electric energy powering an electric pump on a cavitation device outputs heat energy equal to $12 of electric power. That is over-unity. But what if only $5 of natural gas heating a boiler could be substituted as the input, with the heat output still having the same worth as $12 of electric power? Clearly using natural gas would be cheaper, notwithstanding that using an electric powered cavitation device achieves over-unity.

(3) When a process can achieve over-unity, does that necessarily mean the system can be made to self-loop, ie: to have the steam output power the input? Wouldn't you just pay to get it started, and then after that the energy is free? No. Just because a process has more energy output than input, does not mean that the overall system can self-loop. There are numerous inefficiencies in converting the output, which is one form of energy, to become the input, which is a different form of energy.

(4) Is over-unity a loose term? Yes. There is no such thing as getting more energy out than in-- that is, if you include conversion of mass to energy (nuclear) and ZPE (zero point energy) as an energy sources. We use the term over-unity when we don't know where the excess energy output is coming from. A good place to look would be to see if this excess energy is coming from some type of nuclear reaction, which is distinguished from merely a chemical reaction or a physical change to matter. While chemical reactions and physical changes are well understood and easily identified, this is not the case with nuclear reactions, where there is much more that we don't know and where we haven't even been able to figure out all of the different types. For example, we are still only in the early stages of figuring out LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reaction). As for ZPE, which some believe is energy that originates in another dimension, our knowledge is at an embryonic stage.

(5) When it is hypothesized that the source of the excess energy is from some type of nuclear reaction, this can be tested by checking for the presence of neutron radiation. Quantum Fusion, as well as NanoSpire, claim excess energy from traditional nuclear reactions (eg: hot fusion), and to support their hypothesis both claim the presence of neutron radiation.

(6) A Geiger counter is used to test for the other four types of ionizing radiation: alpha, beta, gamma, and x-ray. It does not test for neutron radiation. If the garage hobbyist detected radiation from his cavitation device using a Geiger counter, how does this help in determining whether a nuclear reaction took place? Well, release of neutron radiation is accompanied by the release of other forms of ionizing radiation (although the reverse is not usually the case). Recently, researchers working on the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project were excited when they detected gamma radiation. This may help further the hypothesis that the process being tested which they term LENR  is actually nuclear.

(7) How do we reconcile the various claims of radiation from cavitation? We already discussed Quantum Fusion, which claims traditional nuclear reaction, and neutron release as evidence thereof. Hydrodynamics and the garage hobbyist use much simpler devices. Hydrodynamics sees no evidence of nuclear style radiation, but it is unclear what if any type of radiation testing was done. What source other than nuclear could account for their over-unity? The garage hobbyist used a Geiger counter, but a more sophisticated device is needed in testing for neutron radiation (at a qualified radiation lab). The real puzzler is NanoSpire, which uses a very simple $250 setup and still manages to claim hot fusion and neutron release, providing physical artifacts suggesting evidence thereof.

Update 11/17/13:

Nigel Dyer wrote on the Vortex Forum: "With LeClair I think you need to try and separate out the hypothesies as to the mechanism from the observations of what happened. Too often LeClair confuses the two." Unlike Dyer and other scientists on the Vortex Forum, I am not a scientist, but using simple language, here is my attempt to separate observation from speculation:

A change in pressure brought about by motion causes pockets of vapor (bubbles) to materialize inside liquid. Alternately, bubbles are injected into the liquid (Quantum Fusion's reactor).

As conditions change and the vapor begins to liquefy, there is abrupt compression causing the bubbles to collapse. According to Moray King (see 11/18/13 update, below), bubble collapse taps into a form of energy called Zero Point Energy (ZPE).

Bubbles collapse in one of two ways, either asymmetrically or symmetrically, and this determines how the zero point energy dissipates.

Asymmetrical bubble collapse ocurs when the bubble collapses unevenly. The weakest spot on the surface of the bubble begins to depress into the bubble. Water rushes in to drill all the way through the bubble and out the other side, causing the now shrinking remaining vapor to take on a torus (donut) shape. This rush of water is called a reentrant jet.

The patent page on NanoSpire's website shows two instances where a bubble collapse is forced to occur asymmetrically, causing a reentrant jet to form and exit the other side of the bubble: (1) When the bubble is located near a wall or other solid surface, the reentrant jet hits the wall at a 90 degree angle. (2) When the bubble is located near a smaller collapsing bubble, both reentrant jets face each other, with the larger reentrant jet passing through the smaller reentrant jet and on through what remains of the smaller bubble.

Symmetrical bubble collapse occurs when the bubble collapses evenly. Occurring when a bubble is out in the open, away from surfaces or other collapsing bubbles, the pressure on the bubble is even so no reentrant jet forms. The bubble expands and then shrinks, but before it disappears it gives off a bright flash of ultra-violet/ deep blue light called sonoluminescence, as well as releasing heat energy. If all of the energy released from cavitation was in the form of heat, instead of some being in the form of light, temperatures would reach above 10,000 degrees K.

It is the asymmetrical bubble collapse that are more interesting of the two, since these don't waste most of their energy in the form of unusable visible light energy as symmetrical bubble collapse does. Asymmetrical bubble collapse gives off electromagnetic energy (EMF) as well as heat and kinetic energy, which causes damage to nearby physical surfaces. Let's focus on the EMF energy given off in asymmetrical collapses, since it is this form of energy that may cause the other forms to arise, and may be indicative of nuclear activity. But there are different theories as to from where the EMF originates. Is the EMF given off by the remaining bubble torus, or does the EMF emanate from what occurs at the tip of the reentrant jet, after it leaves the other side of the bubble?

Reentrant Jet Theory of Cavitation Fusion

Mark LeClair along with Moray King believe that the reentrant jet continues accelerating after exiting the other side of the bubble. They believe the reentrant jet becomes a new type of water crystal which shoots out approaching relativistic speeds, catching up with and then colliding through the force field (called a bow shock) that travels just in front of the nose of such crystal, causing ball lightning and supernova style hot fusion and transmutations, as well as causing nearby solid materials to incur cavitation damage.

Vortex Theory of Cavitation Fusion

Under this theory, the reentrant jet turns what remains of the now shrinking surrounding bubble (torus) into a vortex, which is a tornado-shaped whirlwind. While acknowledging the role of the reentrant jet in asymmetrical bubble collapse, as well as in transforming the remaining bubble into an EMF-emitting vortex, scientists advocating this theory believe the significance of the reentrant jet ends there. While the speed of the reentrant jet can be as much as Mach 4 as it leaves the bubble on its way toward the matter or other bubble that caused it to form, these scientists do not believe the reentrant jet accelerates after leaving the bubble, or that water contained in the jet turns into crystals that go on to cause hot fusion, transmutations, or cavitation erosion damage. Instead, these scientists believe the significant energy from asymmetrical bubble collapse is in the EMF given off by the remaining bubble vortex. Here is what a scientist, who goes by the name Axil, has to say regarding the nature of these vortexes:

(1) While visible light emanates from symmetrical bubble collapse, light energy is also involved in the formation of EMF vortexes in asymmetrical bubble collapse. Axil wrote: "The LeClair... vortexes are stable for a very long time; like ball lightning. A Polaritron vortex lasts only 20 to 30 picoseconds due to coulomb repulsion. So these long lived EMF vortexes must be without charge to be stable for so long: so they must be photon based vortexes. How photon based vortexes can form from nanoplasmonic processes is not clear to me." Note that the source of this energy is also not clear to Moray King, who terms the source Zero Point Energy.

(2) EMF from the vortexes causes cavitation damage to nearby solid material. Axil wrote: "The huge magnetic field produced by light in the polariton plasmid vortex stays together long enough to affect the atoms on the surface of the solid material being eroded."

(3) Nuclear events brought about by this EMF are more akin to LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reaction) than to hot fusion. Axil wrote: "The *Key* to LENR is optical vortexes (AKA solitons). Nanoplasmonics mechanisms load light into nano-sized optical resonators in unlimited amounts. These solitons produce hugely powerful tightly focused atomic scale magnetic beams. The power of these beams may get up to 10 to the 16th power tesla." Regarding LeClair's theory, Axil said: "His belief in hypersonic water crystal collision is not correct... LeClair’s experimental descriptions mostly rings true with my understanding of LENR in cavatation... LeClair may have erroneously connected the water crystal that he sees with the action of... magnetic vortex solitons."

Nigel Dyer "spent something like four hours with Mark", and viewed firsthand some of the artifacts which showed damage from the vortex waves. He wrote:

"When I had a look at the tracks that were present on the samples that Mark showed us, I was left with the clear impression that what was going on was not simply ballistic. It did not look as if the cavitation bubble shot out a lump of something that gouged its way along the surface of the metal, the tracks were too even across the length. It was almost as if the cavitation bubble initiated some kind of LENR event that continued as the vortex (or whatever) passed along the surface, giving it a continuing and consistent source of energy. The vortex theory may possibly support this. [Dyer clarified by email: "It is not the same as my hypothesis, but at this stage I feel we could do with as many (testable) hypothesizes as possible.] It seemed unlikely that it was a highly columnated source of energetic particles/radiation from the bubble because many of the tracks are not straight, which also suggests that it was not a simple ballistic event..." [Dyer clarified by email: "In Mark Leclair's case, when I looked at the lines that are scored by the continuing re-entrant jets as they score along the surface... if anything it suggests that something with a very specific shape went along the surface without twisting, which is where I guess Marc got the inspiration for his hexagonal crystal. Indeed, there is almost too good a match between the two which is one of my continuing nagging doubts about his results."]

Dyer also said that he knows "someone else who appears in part to have managed to repeat the results." When we talk about LeClair's results we need to distinguish between the two types of damage that were observed: (1) Cavitation damage to solid surfaces inside the reactor, and (2) Radiation damage outside of the reactor, to the room and items therein and to trees outside the building. I believe Dyer is referring to confirmation of the cavitation damage to solid materials inside LeClair's reactor, as well as referring to at least some of the radioactive damage that occurred outside the reactor. I do not think he is referring to confirmation of the wide-array of transmuted materials found inside the reactor or other evidence of hot fusion.

So, both Axil and Dyer believe LeClair's reaction to be LENR based, and not hot fusion. If this is the case, why does LeClair's reaction give off such large amounts of radiation, while traditional forms of LENR (eg: Rossi and Defkalion) do not? Axil provides two theories: (1) "In the Ni/H reactor [traditional LENR], these solitons are entangled and form a Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC). Therefore no gamma radiation is emitted from the BEC because of EMF superatom frequency leveling. However, in the LeClair system it is too cold for a BEC to form so gamma radiation will not be converted to heat." (2) "In cavitation, the solitons can grow especially strong because vortex structures like to combine together. Many solitons can combine into one huge monster. In the Ni/H reactor [traditional LENR], consolidation of solitons may not occur which makes for a weaker Ni/H reaction."

This leaves wide open the question of how the transmutations into so many elements (some gram-sized and some still in LeClair's possession) came about. These scientists don't see the conditions being present that would be needed for hot fusion to take place. If NanoSpire's system is some type of LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reaction), the amount of transmutation would be limited. For example, with traditional LENR it has been reported that nickel transmuted into copper. Regarding cavitation LENR, Axil quoted from an article finding "clear evidence of transmutation during cavitation damage in rubber." From the article: "Many times, at the bottom of the well-developed cavities were found metallic and other types of  particles (Figure 10b) such as ZnO2, silica and CaCO3, which are composed of carbon black and sometimes sticking of them by creating bigger inclusion." If LeClair's system is LENR one would not see hydrogen, atomic number one, transmuted supernova style into 78 elements ranging from lithium up through the periodic table to californium and 108 isotopes ranging from 7Li to 249Cf, as claimed by Leclair.

Dr. Fred Zeopfl (see 1/8/2014 update, below) disagrees with the article Axil quoted describing transmutation occurring during cavitation damage in rubber: "Zinc oxide, silica, calcium carbonate and carbon black are common additives (fillers, extenders and diluents) that improve the physical properties of rubber and many plastics. If you want to get into the details, here is an industry reference (The Handbook of Fillers, Extenders and Diluents, 2nd Ed.): www.amazon.com/Handbook-Fillers-Extenders-Diluents-Edition/dp/1890595969. It is just absurd to assume that water cavitation produced these materials from rubber when they were deliberately added to the rubber in the first place!"

Update 11/18/13:

Moray B. King, mentioned above, is a scientist who has been lecturing since the 1970's about a commonly overlooked source of energy. In a lecture at the recent Breakthrough Energy Movement Conference, Moray gave a background to Zero Point Energy and explained how it relates to LeClair's reaction. Listen to the presentation here together with viewing the slides here. (The slides may take a few minutes to download.) The lecture's program guide provided this intro:

"Water electrolyzers can emit a secondary gas (besides hydrogen), comprised of energetic water clusters. When subjected to an abrupt high voltage discharge they convert to torus shaped plasmoids that cohere the ZPE. Inside an internal combustion engine, the plasmoids exhibit a surprising excessive force that drives the piston.

"The presentation connects the discoveries of Ken Shoulders and Mark LeClair. Shoulders measured excess energy phenomena of microscopic ball lightning, called exotic vacuum objects (EVO). LeClair discovered that collapsing cavitation bubbles launch reentrant jet water crystals whose plasma bow shock front behaves like Shoulders’ EVO. The water crystals often stabilize into micron size rings that form the seed of the charged water cluster.


"For hobbyists the water cluster gas is easy to make: Simply combine cavitation with high voltage spikes at low current. The gas can run a generator. Widespread replication of self-running gen-sets would achieve a breakthrough energy discovery."

So, now we see LeClair's water crystals appearing in another cavitaton setting. But there are some differences between the crystals in water cluster gas (more commonly known as Brown's gas) and those produced in LeClair's reactor: 

LeClair's reactor: The crystals form as reentrant water jets rush out of collapsed asymmetrical bubbles. The crystals are charged with zero point energy, as a result of cavitation alone. The crystal accelerates towards its bow shock. The zero point energy manifests when the crystal collides through its bow shock. The energy manifests creating conditions enabling supernova style hot fusion.

Brown's gas: The crystals form after high voltage low current electrical spikes are applied to cavitating water bubbles. The crystals are charged with zero point energy, as a result of the combination of cavitation and electrical energy. The crystals emerge as a fog-like gas, forming groups of rings. When the gas is lit, the ring formations dissipate as each crystal shoots out independently. As with LeClair's reactor, the crystal accelerates towards its bow shock. The zero point energy manifests when the crystal collides through its bow shock. The energy manifests as a "cool" 266 degrees F flame that vaporizes tungsten (which is surprising since tungsten has a boiling point of 6,192 degrees F and a vaporization point of 10,031 degrees F).

More reflective of mainstream thinking is this section of a Wikipedia article on Oxyhydrogen:

"Fringe Science and Fraud

"'Brown's Gas' is oxyhydrogen with a 2:1 molar ratio of H2 and O2 gases, the same proportion as in water. It is named after Yull Brown, who claimed that it could be used as a fuel for the internal combustion engine.[4][14] It's also called "HHO gas" after the claims of fringe physicist[15] Ruggero Santilli, who claims that his HHO gas, produced by a special apparatus, is "a new form of water", with new properties, based on his fringe theory of 'magnecules'.[14]

"Many other pseudoscientific claims have been made about Brown's Gas's pretended ability to neutralize radioactive waste, weld metals, help plants to germinate, etc.[14]

"Oxyhydrogen is also often mentioned in conjunction with vehicles that claim to use water as a fuel. The most common and decisive counter-argument against producing this gas on board to use as a fuel or fuel additive is that more energy is needed to split water molecules than is recouped by burning the resulting gas.[4][16] Additionally, the number of liters per minute of gas that can be produced for on-demand consumption through electrolysis is very small in comparison to the liters per minute consumed by an internal combustion engine.[17]

"An article in Popular Mechanics reports that Brown's Gas cannot even increase the miles per gallon (MPG) of your vehicle, and that the only real savings come from tampering with your engine, which may confuse the anti-smog controls.[18]

"'Water-fueled' cars should not be confused with hydrogen-fueled cars where the hydrogen is produced elsewhere and used as fuel or where it is used as fuel enhancement."

 
Update 11/27/13:

Here are excerpts from email responses I recently received from scientists:

Moray King:

(1) Regarding what causes cavitation erosion to adjacent solid material: I think tip of reentrant jet has phenomena like [Ken] Shoulders' EVO, which exhibits a ZPE coherence.

(2) Regarding acceleration of the reentrant jet: LeClair proposed the reentrant jet water crystal self accelerates. Shoulders' claims to have observed his EVO did likewise.

(3) Regarding why the reentrant jet turns into water crystals: Reentrant jet forms water crystal due to extreme pressure.

(4) Distinguishing symmetrical and asymmetrical bubble collapse: Not all bubbles form reentrant jets. Some stay spherically symmetrical.

(5) Regarding where the Zero Point Energy ultimately manifests: I think the bow shock is where ZPE coherence is occurring (it's like Shoulders' EVO); it is like nanometer ball lighting.

(6) Whether it is accepted science that reentrant jets accelerate after leaving the other side of the bubble: Self acceleration is new phenomena. ZPE coherence producing a "space warp" drive like phenomena. It is beyond the accepted paradigm.

(7) Regarding the formation of Brown's Gas: Low current, high voltage spikes of electricity are applied to cavitating water bubbles, and the reentrant jets leaving asymmetrical bubbles turn into water crystals, stabilizing into micron-sized rings. That is what I am proposing for the secondary gas. Typical Brown's gas also has hydrogen and oxygen.

(8) Can liquids other than water can be used for creating Brown's Gas? Officially Brown's gas is a mixture hydrogen, oxygen, water and water cluster gas.

(9) A bubble bursts quickly, so is the event, including ring crystal stabilization or supernova style fusion over almost instantly after the cavitation light flashes, or does ball lightning linger? Sonoluminescence is from symmetrical collapse of cavitation bubble. Here there is no reentrant jet and no ball lightning.

(10) Is the radiation outside the reactor (in the room and outside the building): a) the same powerful EMF of the vortexes (toruses) in the reactor, but now radiating out through the reactor walls, or b) radiation from supernova style nuclear fusion? Tripping a Geiger counter can be caused by EM pulsing. It important to make other types of measurements as well to prove nuclear reactions are occurring.

(11) If cavitation is a LENR event, the excess energy comes from the transmutation of matter from one element to an adjacent element, and this is a completely separate nuclear event from the supernova style transmutations that LeClair believes occurs later when the nose of a crystal plows past its shock bow. I think transmutation is caused by coherent ZPE interaction from the bow shock. Here there must be many reentrant jets. Cavitation produces both types of bubbles (spherical and torus).

(12) Does excess energy in cavitation come from: a) conversion of matter (nuclear), b) from ZPE, or c) from both? I think mostly from ZPE. But some nuclear reactions are exothermic.

(13) Is ZPE tapped: a) by the torus formed after the reentrant jet passes through the bubble, b) by the torus rings that the crystals later form which when electricity is applied becomes Brown's Gas, or c) by both processes? Both. When Brown's gas becomes a plasma torch, the torus rings become EVO plasmoids.

(14) Does ZPE give off ionic radiation, and if so, why and what types? Coherent ZPE would manifest excess energy in the interacting plasmoids. Plasmoids can radiate EM field energy.

Moray's additional comments:

"Unfortunately the science has not evolved to where we know the details. In fact most in academia would deny the existence of macroscopic ZPE interactions.

"The advantage of LeClair's transmutation discovery is that it is a relatively simple experiment that produces a result that is beyond the accepted paradigm. It forces consideration of ZPE ideas or at least new ideas that could affect the atomic nucleus. It offers a "nuclear ash" in the form of unusual isotopes. The end result of nucleo-synthesis is similar to what Adamenko discovered at the Proton-21 laboratory using plasmoid strikes at pure single element targets.

"I think before we go too far on speculating about the exact details of plasma vortex rings (plasmoids), self-acceleration (ZPE propulsion), and the existence of like phenomena in Brown's gas, we need experimental replication to confirm that there indeed is a new phenomena discovered, and it is worthy of widespread investigation.

"That being said, I can speculate on some answers to your questions. But remember they are just my opinion. We simply don't know the details yet."


Emails (in blue) from Axil:

(1) Regarding how the reentrant jet while still within the bubble creates the vortex EMF: "I also believe that the reentrant jet is what causes erosion of adjacent solids. It is energy emanation from the shrinking electromagnetic vortex of the collapsing cavitation bubble. The reentrant jet is a projection of anapole magnetic that originates at the center point of the EMF vortex."

(2) Here is how I interpret Axil's explanations about resonators within the EMF vortexes: Resonance within a bubble occurs twice, and in two different forms. First, there is sound resonance, caused by either pulsating the pump or by externally introducing sound. This causes the bubble to expand and then abruptly collapse. It contracts to about one micrometer (micron) in diameter (one-millionth of a meter) when light is produced, resonating within the bubble, and then escaping as the bubble finishes collapsing either in the form of visible blue/ purple light (symmetrical collapse) or in the form of "dirty" EMF (asymmetrical collapse). Math equations govern the action of resonators within spherical shapes:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/AminiFthestudyof.pdf

"Most of the information on LENR can be found on the Internet. It’s just a matter of putting it together… and most importantly… making the information and its connections understandable... Look at:

http://www.atlasobscura.com/places/whispering-gallery-at-st-paul-s-cathedral

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whispering-gallery_wave

"The stuff in the bubble vortex must be EMF to enable the evanescent wave at the surface of the bubble. EMF means light, electrons and holes. It is amazing that water vapor can be transformed into UF light, but when a sonoluminescence bubble bursts, it produces a blue light:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e62_1354862274

(3) "Cavitation damage of rubber and plastic is revealing:

"Clearly, the projection of large magnetic fields from the center of the collapsing cavitation bubble will have produced a huge hydrostatic pressure pulse of water as the water is carried forward by the emerging magnetic field.  But if the damage mechanism in cavitation was solely due to a pressure pulse of the reentrant jet, rubber would be resistant to such a damage mechanism. The high pressure water pulse should bounce off the rubber surface.

"EMF induced chemical reformulation of the rubber is also going on.

"Also, if the attractive mechanism that directs the reentrant jet toward the rubber surface were electrostatic, rubber should also resist that mechanism.

(4) "The attraction of the reentrant jet to a [solid] surface might well be a quantum mechanical mechanism... I am sorry to complicate your reality, but a recent experiment in quantum physics seems to support TSVF.

"In this experiment, by placing a double-slit experiment along one path of a larger double-slit experiment, the researchers have shown that photons traverse a section of the apparatus that they neither enter nor exit.

"Light can get inside a dark place without any windows to enter or exit.

"Applying this newly discovered reality to LENR, the emergent jet produced by a cavatation bubble may be drawn to the material to be damaged by its power. This may be why an emergent jet forms to emanate from a cavitation bubble when near a metal surface, but the bubble collapses symmetrically in a sonoluminescent blue flash when no material boundary surface is close by.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-state_vector_formalism

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2013/nov/26/physicists-ask-photons-where-have-you-been#"

Update - 1/8/2014:

Excerpts (in blue) from emails recently received from Dr. Fred Zoepfl, reprinted here with permission:

Dr. Zoepfl's background: "I have a Ph.D. in nuclear and chemical engineering and over 35 years of experience in commercial and Naval nuclear power. I worked on ADM Rickover's staff at Naval Reactors in the radiation protection branch from 1975 to 1980. I have taken over 50 courses in chemical and nuclear engineering, radiation protection, materials science, fluid mechanics, and chemistry/physics."

Regarding the science of NanoSpire's claims: "It is simply physically impossible to cause thermonuclear fusion and element transmutation under the conditions LeClair describes. There is simply not enough energy available in high-pressure water or in a cavitation bubble to overcome the nuclear Coulomb barrier. it is physically impossible to make transuranics like californium (Z = 98) and fermium (Z = 100) from water and an aluminum plate."

Dr. Zoepfl asked four other Ph.D.s who are full professors to review the Nanospire presentation: (1) the Chairman of the Physics Department at the University of Maine, (2) a professor of materials science at Penn State, (3) a professor of nuclear engineering at the University of Missouri (affiliated with the Sidney Kimmel Institute for Nuclear Renaissance), and (4) the Chairman of the Astronomy and Astrophysics Department at the University of California.

Regarding this peer review: "They all found Mr. LeClair's ideas to be both ridiculous and hilarious. There is no ionizing radiation or radioactivity associated with Mr. LeClair's nonexistent 'LeClair Effect.' He is basically using a 0.5-hp pump to direct plain water at an aluminum plate. If you are familiar with bass fishing tournaments, you may know that bass boats use 250-hp motors (500 times more powerful than Mr. LeClair's pump). Each motor is equipped with a 'cavitation plate.' So you can imagine that, if Mr. LeClair were correct, the entire lake would explode when over 100 bass boats take off at full power during a tournament, and of course all the participants would die of radiation exposure.

"I have reviewed Mr. LeClair's 'results' and his products are small fragments of commonly available materials like brass and carbon steel. These are probably detritus from the internals of his system that were produced by cavitation erosion, a well-understood process. Even assuming that 'elements' formed from plain water, it would truly be a miracle for them to spontaneously organize themselves into commercially available alloys, don't you think? Also, if these elements were recently formed by thermonuclear fusion, they would be highly radioactive and would have isotopic distributions (e.g., C14 to C12 ratio, K40 to K39 ratio, etc.) that would be significantly different from present-day materials."


Regarding Quantum Fusion: "[They claim] that they can produce "hot fusion" (not LENR/CANR/LANR/cold fusion) in a heavy water bubble. The two most feasible 'conventional' fusion technologies (inertial and magnetic confinement; NIF and ITER, respectively) heat D-T to over 100 million degrees K. Here is the reason: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fusion_rxnrate.svg. The x-axis on this plot is BILLIONS of degrees Kelvin. D-D fusion is basically impossible below 10 million degrees K. What Quantum Fusion is asking you to believe is that a tiny bubble in heavy water can achieve these kinds of temperatures, which is simply ludicrous.

"Talk with Prof. Seth Putterman at UCLA. Putterman is the queen of sonoluminescence and even obtained a U.S. patent for sonofusion in 1997... Putterman quit puttering around with nuclear sonofusion after he figured out that it was physically impossible. In fact, he became one of sonofusion's greatest skeptics and he disproved the sonofusion claims made by Taleyarkhan."


Regarding what happens in cavitation bubbles: "Just conventional physics: http://etd.library.vanderbilt.edu/available/etd-06172013-143310/unrestricted/Ramsey_Dissertation_Final_2013.pdf"

Regarding Ed Pope and David Nagel: "My good friend Ed Pope is the person who sent me LeClair's original 'fusion results' (his SEM/EDAX data on brass and carbon steel metal fragments) and the Nanospire presentation... Ed Pope even asked me to research the rare earths market for him so that [he and LeClair could sell] newly formed rare earths produced by the 'LeClair Effect'. He was the one who actually arranged the 'test' of Nanospire's technology at NRL. I spoke with Dave Nagel... about this test, and he told me that they could not detect any kind of ionizing radiation whatsoever during the test, and that they used 'some very sophisticated' radiation detection equipment..."

Regarding the garage hobbyist's radiation readings: "An increase in a Geiger counter reading from 40 to 170 CPM is not a confirmation... It could be from normal fluctuations in natural background radiation levels. In any case, Geiger counters don't detect neutrons..."

Dr. Zoepfl may have a point that the radiation readings reported are not necessarily indicative of nuclear fusion. With the ongoing Fukushima situation there's lots of information out there to put things into perspective.

Nuke Professional gives these interpretations of various Geiger counter CPM (clicks per minute) radiation readings:

12 - This is low. It doesn't get much lower.
25 - Pretty normal.
50 - Happens once in a while with no real reason. Just keep an eye on it.
100 - Alert. No need to panic, but try to figure out what is going on, stay out of the rain, avoid unnecessary trips.
150 - Real risk of cancer if exposed for a year.
500 - Real risk of cancer if exposed for 90 days.

On any given day elevated radiation reading which are similar or higher than those achieved by the garage hobbyist can be found to have been measured. Here are some reported by the Nuclear Emergency Tracking Center on January 8, 2014 at 11:30 AM EST (CPM of Gamma in energy range 600-800keV):

Eureka, CA, US CPM: current 210 Low 139 High 240 Avg. 169, Dev. 20.1.
Olympia, WA, US CPM: current 143 Low 83 High 178 Avg. 110, Dev. 16.6
Carlsbad, NM, US CPM: current 231 Low 124 High 312 Avg. 177, Dev. 30.7
Milwaukee, WI, US CPM: current 170 Low 84 High 225 Avg. 123, Dev. 23.7
Bangor, ME, US CPM: current 175 Low 138 High 329 Avg. 188, Dev. 25
Bismarck, ND, US CPM: current 188 Low 139 High 404 Avg. 212, Dev. 42.7
Fresno, CA, US CPM: current 371 Low 244 High 992 Avg. 384, Dev. 95.7
Shreveport, LA, US CPM: current 211 Low 188 High 386 Avg. 222, Dev. 26.6

Dr. Zoepfl describes some cutting-edge technology: "If you would like me to send you some info on things that actually work and that could use some start-up funding, I would be happy to do that as well. Here are some ideas I've been working on:
1. a visible light responsive (VLR) durable photocatalyst coating that is transparent, self-cleaning and purifies the air by removing common air pollutants;
2. functionalized nanodiamonds that can be added to lubricants to improve engine performance by 10% to 30%;
3. a phytomining technology that can remove metals like nickel, cobalt, zinc and cadmium from soils (with USDA/ARS);
4. non-toxic insect/rodent repellents that could be spray-applied to wood, agricultural products, etc. (with Dow Corning);
5. transparent solar heat reflective (SHR) coatings that could be spray-applied to common construction materials (kind of like a "liquid window film");
6. a transparent coating that would prevent "roof algae" and purify the air (a typical 2000 sq.ft. roof would clean the air as much as 20 trees); and
7. A diamond coating technology that can be applied at room temperature and that could be functionalized to make superhydrophobic/superhydrophilic/oleophobic surfaces that are nearly as hard as natural diamond.
[When I later pointed out LeClair's claimed postage stamp sized diamond transmutation, Dr. Zoepfl's response was that: 'Diamond formation is an extremely well understood process, as you can imagine. There is no diamond whatsoever produced by LeClair's process.']

"Please let me know if you would have any interest in these technologies. They are all real.

"Fred Zoepfl, Ph.D.,
Vice President, Technical Programs
Systems Technology, Inc. (STI)
14925 Bogle Drive
Chantilly, VA 20151 USA
Phone/Fax: +1-703-729-8669
E-mail: fzoepfl@yahoo.com"


--------------

An Austrian also has a report of radiation from cavitation:

Excerpts from LeClair's email to Sterling Allan dated 12/29/2013 (Austrian inventor's sub-quotes are in blue):

"The group in Austria have been interacting with me to make sure they get the protocol right. On July 23 this year, they reported the following, running a facsimile of the experiments we did with a rolled up aluminum plate with a drilled hole grid, exposed to cavitation from a pump. They saw radiation levels that were well above background during the experiments and similar to our results of 250 cpm (10X above background of 25 cpm) during our most intense experiment:

'it started of with 50 cpms fluctuated and hovered between this value and background level, suddenly rose to 100, 150, 200 (briefly even 250) before falling back to 50 and eventually fading out to background .... as said, this entire event took maybe 10 to 15 secs, enough to take a picture, afterwards we had difficulties to repeat that, although we regularly tracked the 50-100 cpm mark (still well above background).'

"They reported the following results to me from another experiment on August 28th:

'as you can see we moved the item into our bunker, but still have not yet installed the remotely adjustable valves .... we are working on that as well. the result with this prototype was decent but quit fluctuating (radiation bursts lasted a round 5 secs) as it kept drifting like a hysteresis loop between lower and upper values - but nothing that spectacular, just slightly better than what we obtained with prototype-I. we also found out that the pump we are using is made of a kind of carbonate-synthetic with a huge gap between the housing and the rotating cylinder; probably the reason why cavitation event occur in irregular manner and as such are quite scarce. So we opt now for prototype-III, where we will use a tune-able pump that allows us to control its revolution from 0 to 130%. In addition, we will have a pumping unit that is made of metal rather than plastics. I'll keep you posted on that.'"

Here is a comment LeClair made to the 2012 PESN NanoSpire article, with more information regarding his radiation readings:

"The radiation shielding required is typical for any nuclear reactor. However, in the bulk of the experiments including those in Buxton and at NRL, the gamma and beta components were very small, typically 50-60 CPM, with a 40 CPM background, only a 25-50% increase above background but very consistent. The neutron flux, which Geiger counters have very low sensitivity to, must have been very large, as a later experiment unexpectedly demonstrated where we saw higly activated 56 minute half-life 39CL in the PVC core enclosure. The enclosure for that experiment was 225 CPM, more than five times the background two and a half hours after the experiment was over! Because of the typically low Geiger counter readings, the Geiger counter wasn't on for that experiment. I luckly captured the rest of the five hour decay curve to background with a data logger Geiger counter. The decay curve extroplated backwards (green trace on graph) indicates that the radiation was approximately 1100 CPM during the experiment."

We see that the CPM for LeClair's experiment rose to between 100 and  200, and up to a recorded 250 (briefly?) during what he termed his "most intense experiment." Looking at the CPM interpretation chart above, are LeClair's and Lebid's radiation sickness symptoms as described in my Cavitation Transmutation article typical for these CPM readings? It might be worthwhile to review the State of Maine's HAZMAT report, and any report that followed up on the radiation sickness claims. Perhaps the answer is that the symptoms were a result of neutron radiation emitted at the same time, which would not have been measurable in Geiger counter CPMs which measure gamma radiation.

Dr. Zoepfl commented by email: "All of LeClair's [statements] about "chlorine-39" and "transmutation" are imaginary. The two stable isotopes of chlorine are Cl-35 (76%) and Cl-37 (24%).  Polyvinylchloride (PVC) looks like (CH2-CHCl)n, where n ranges from 600 to 3000 (n is called the "degree of polymerization"). The idea that any process other than a large nuclear reactor could produce the radioactive isotope Cl-39 from PVC is just absurd. I don't know why LeClair came up with this, but it is sheer unadulterated nonsense. Cl-37 would have to absorb not one but two neutrons to form Cl-39. The intermediate radioisotope Cl-38 would also be present at the same time in far larger quantities than Cl-39, so his "decay curves" are also physically impossible. Transmutation involves a change in the number of protons in an atomic nucleus. This takes a great deal of energy to accomplish for stable isotopes. If it were easy, it would happen all the time."

Further Validation Delays

Continuing with LeClair's email to Sterling Allan dated 12/29/2013:

"I'll also send you an e-mail concerning our attempting to perform a replication experiment at Penn State in 2012 and how that ended up. Some have unjustly accused NanoSpire of avoiding doing replication experiments. Aside from the invited experiment we did at NRL and attempted to do with McMaster University, we approached Penn State to do replication as well. We had a verbal commitment in May, 2012 from Brenden Heidrich, a Research Associate of the Penn State Radiation Science and Engineering Center, to rent NanoSpire a well-equiped hot cell for a replication experiment of the cavitation based LeClair Effect. We were told that the facilities were available on several dates, I selected June 6, 2012 and they sent the Master Service Agreement contract to me to sign. Then they reneged on the agreement without explanation at the last minute."

See my previous article for Ed Pope's views regarding the NanoSpire experiment at Penn State that actually did take place. It should not be very difficult to avoid the pitfalls that occurred there.

As for a suitable and convenient lab, the UMass Lowell Radiation Laboratory is less than a two hour drive from NanoSpire. Quoting UMass: "Although the main focus of the laboratory is to support the research and education missions of the university, use of its facilities by those outside the university is fully welcomed." http://www.uml.edu/centers/rad... I spoke to the lab several months ago, and was told that use of the lab can be rented out by the half day. Basically, if you come up with the money, and have a coherent plan, you don't need any special academic approval. In addition, when I described NanoSpire's device, the lady I spoke with was very encouraging about renting out the facility for that type of testing.

Someone qualified like Fred Zoepfl could help with independent validation.

Update: 1/12/2014

Light + Nanoparticles can produce LENR including Transmutation

...According to Axil's latest email, it's not just light from cavitation, but light from laser can also work:

"In my opinion, like all manifestations of LENR, this reaction is based on nanoplasmonic energy amplification and concentration.

"I consider that Nanoplasmonics is the quintessential expression of the electrochemists art, a science conceived and brought into being by progenitor and paterfamilias of LENR, Martin Fleischmann himself back in 1974.

"A series of experiments that I am particualy fond of and not related to the E-Cat shows how light under the mediation of nanoparticles (provides topological order of the spin net liquid) can produce a nuclear reaction. Laser light alone does not produce the nuclear effect. I believe that LeClair is producing water based nanoparticles that catalyze the LENR reaction as I have explained to you in past communications.

"It is clearly shown [in this article] that neutrons are not required to initiate fission and the transmutation that fission can produceInitiation of nuclear reactions under laser irradiation of Au nanoparticles in the aqueous solution of Uranium salt.

"Abstract: Laser exposure of suspension of either gold or palladium nanoparticles in aqueous solutions of UO2Cl2 of natural isotope abundance was experimentally studied. Picosecond Nd:YAG lasers at peak power of 1011 -1013 W/cm2 at the wavelength of 1.06 – 0.355 mm were used as well as a visible-range Cu vapor laser at peak power of 1010 W/cm2. The composition of colloidal solutions before and after laser exposure was analyzed using atomic absorption and gamma spectroscopy in 0.06 – 1 MeV range of photon energy. A real-time gamma-spectroscopy was used to characterize the kinetics of nuclear reactions during laser exposure. It was found that laser exposure initiated nuclear reactions involving both 238U and 235U nuclei via different channels in H2O and D2O. The influence of saturation of both the liquid and nanoparticles by gaseous H2 and D2 on the kinetics of nuclear transformations was found. Possible mechanisms of observed processes are discussed.

"Here is another paper explaining how the nanoplasmonic mechanism can change the half-life of U232 from 69 years to 6 microseconds. It also causes thorium to fission.

"I have been looking for a theory that supports the Nanoplasmonic underpinnings of LENR. Composite fermions look good so far. For one thing, LENR is rooted in topology. These experiments are conclusive for me. These Nanoplasmonic experiments with uranium can be done inexpensively, why are they not replicated?

"Critics of LENR are hard put to explain these series of experiments and why transmutation and fission are not demonstrated by them."


Update: 3/28/2014:

Discussion between Fred Zoepfl and Simon Derricutt: 
http://revolution-green.com/free-energy-radio-smart-scarecrow/ (see comment section)

PieEconomics wrote: "This video shows a Geiger Counter detecting X-Rays given off by the unpeeling of Scotch tape: http://youtu.be/BizTHR1ni_Q?t=4m10sThe action of unpeeling tape may be causing the excitation of electrons, creating the radiation. Normally, excitation of electrons causes only a lesser form of radiation, called non-ionizing radiation. But X-Ray radiation (like gamma radiation) is ionizing radiation, a more powerful form of radiation that has the power to remove electrons from atoms (turning the atoms into ions). LeClair's and Dog-One's cavitation implosions are similar to this video's demonstration of tape unpeeling, in that they all produce ionizing radiation. Is it reasonable to think that this ionizing radiation is caused by excitation of electrons, even though radiation caused by the excitation of electrons is generally of the lesser, non-ionizing form? If so, neither LENR nor hot fusion might be involved at all."

Simon Derricutt responded: "... in Dog-One's case... he saw radiation after he'd switched it off... As such, I'd expect Dog-One to have produced a nuclear reaction. For LeClair, it's difficult to be certain about much but he does claim to have transmutation products. If those claims are true then again it would be nuclear. Ionising radiation on it's own can be electron stimulation as postulated in the video you've attached, but if that radiation shows a half-life after switching off or alternatively if nuclear changes can be proved by isotopic analysis or other ways, then a nuclear reaction it is."

Update 3/29/2014

Some promising developments (discussion yesterday continued today)...

PieEconomics wrote: "'...then a nuclear reaction it is.'
(1) Is it almost 100 percent certain that if radiation continues after cavitation ceases, that it is emanating from a nuclear reaction in the atoms that comprise the residuals? Gamma radiation is released incidental to a nuclear reaction, and this can be measured by a Geiger Counter (neutron radiation detection would be 100% indicative, but a Geiger Counter does not measure neutron radiation).
(2) Is it almost 100 percent certain that a nuclear reaction in the residuals will cause the temperature of the surrounding water to rise? ...and that since this is nuclear there should be over-unity?
(3) We know that over-unity in itself is not enough, due to inefficiencies. How large of a COP do we need to see for this to be world-changing?
(4) Why does everyone RUN AWAY from this simple, inexpensive project? Safety as an issue is easily dealt with. On my first inquiry to a radiation lab where I described the experiment, they said it's just a routine project that they are eager to rent out the facility for.
(5) ...I agree that we can take Dog-One at his word. I am not a scientist, and we need more scientists to get involved. If the scientists and engineers on this forum speak out, it would be easy to raise the money (<$10,000) at a site like GoFundMe."

Simon Derricutt responded: "...I don't know of any non-nuclear reaction that will emit ionising radiation powerful enough to be counted by a Geiger counter after the power to the reaction mechanism is turned off. Maybe someone else knows of one. In Dog-One's experiment, he did not have any EMI that could affect the electronics and give erroneous counts.
2 - The radiation will be absorbed in the water, so there will be a temperature rise. Could be difficult to differentiate between that and the Joule heating unless it's a large effect.
3 - If the effect really exists, then it will likely be improved through further experiment. The COP at the moment needs only to be measurable - better than the error bars. Even getting the gamma spectra will be enough to demonstrate that it's real.
4 - Friends of mine are checking out something on these lines, and I will also be checking things fairly soon. The main thing about this is being able to be certain of the measurements, and to get a plot of the gamma energies so that we can better work out what is actually happening. This will not be open-source. As to why reputable scientists don't get more involved, they would then be disreputable scientists... We first need to prove beyond any (un)reasonable doubt that it works.
5 - There's a whole lot of cavitation experiments but they mainly look for excess heat. It's worth knowing what goes in, what changes and what comes out. This comes back to point 2 - the COP may be irrelevant in some situations if you can transmute elements."

Update 5/26/14:

Mark LeClair's new interviews:

Part 1, May 9, 2014:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/newearthnation/2014/05/09/cavitation--the-missing-link-to-cold-fusionand-more This quote starts at 137:20 -

"I went to Penn State to use their reactor facility, one of the best in the country, their hot cell, it wasn't that expensive to rent, maybe a couple thousand dollars for a day's use of the cell would have been more than enough. They denied me access to it even though it is supposed to be available to the public. They violated my civil rights and prevented me from going forward with this experiment... I kept posing the question both to the person running the reactor facility, his boss, then I also sent a letter to the trustees of Penn State. None of them ever responded... They advertise themselves being available to the public... it almost smacks of discrimination. The problem was that Penn State is closely allied with the Naval Research Lab, and I'm sure that they got wind of the fact that the Naval Research Lab put the kibosh on it.... McMaster University... was going to do a full replication of the experiment... and that never went forward even though they were gun-ho there, so I mean I gain traction in terms of getting these really prestigious groups to act, and then as soon as the powers that be get wind of it they immediately stop on it. So I am doing all the right things in trying to prove it in a good solid scientific manner for the rest of the world but they are preventing that from happening. So what is the answer? I don't even get phone calls or emails. I get no feedback from the public, by the the way, so whoever is out there trying to contact me, I am not ignoring you. I am being suppressed. I am not seeing communications that are relevant. It is pretty depressing, actually. I can get the word out but I can't get much feedback coming back. I think that these talk shows are the only way I can hear anything back that's real and not coming from some troll."

Again, I ask if Mark has tried to use the nearby radiation lab at U. Mass, Lowell?

Part 2, May 26, 2014: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0-tfH2x6DQ

New Page: http://aetherforce.com/the-alchemy-of-cold-fusion-revealed/

5 comments:

  1. I believe that molten fluoride salts can replace water in the LeClair reaction. During the development of the molten salt reactor, it was found that the erosion rate on the impellers of the molten salt pumps during cavitation were ten times the erosion rate using water.

    The temperature of the molten fluoride salts are in the 500C to 700C range, high enough to provide good thermodynamic efficiency in power generation.

    These types of molten salts are ionic liquid and dielectric. It will support cavitation just great.

    The molten salts will vaporize in the low pressure phase of the cavitation bubble formation process. The fluorides in the salts will support the formation of many transition metal fluoride compounds except nickel which is impervious to fluoride corrosion.

    A number of secret sauce candidate elements: lithium and potassium can be used in the molten salt eutectic.

    Nickel micro and Nano powders might increase the LENR reaction rates and associated heat production.

    The big advantage of the higher operating temperatures over the curie temperatures of nickel enabled by the molten salts is the possible elimination of radiation production that cold water temperatures might cause in water cavitation.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Please help me understand this. You're saying that the Gribb's type machine that produces cavitation causes radiation, and that you agree with the self-admitted garage tinker, "Red-One" that it's very dangerous to people.

    Yet, Hydro Dynamics, Inc has been building these same massive cavitation machines for over 24 years, sold them to over 500 companies in countries all over the world. I've checked their website out and they are a real company doing real work.

    To my understanding, these same cavitation machines have been used in hospitals, food manufacturing and food consumption - for 24 years. Where's the glowing bellies? The radioactive bile movements? Where's the environmentalist outcries? Where's the mouth ulcers? Where's the FDA knocking on doors? This is mind-boggling that you persist in your beliefs that type of cavitation is gives off radiation of health concern!

    I will personally telephone Hydro Dynamics this week and ask them directly. I will also reference your website(s) and Red-One as well.

    Why am I so animate about this? Who am I? I'm just a man who is fed-up with all this amateur bad-science. It hurts real science and it's hurts investors and inventors like me who depend on FACTS, not conjecture and harmful accusations.

    You guys agree that you are not scientists nor do you have on-spec testing equipment, nor are you formally trained in the use, methods and scientific operations of such equipment.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Addendum to my last post: I wish to add two points.

    (1) I am in 100% support of amateur science, but please understand what "science" is. Good amateurs follow a well defined scientific method. Also understand I am fed-up with "amateur bad-science"; when some unknown person comes along and reports that they've built a test machine and ran tests from it, then they tossed it all away in a hidden location. After much time has passed they go on a blog site and claim this and say that. Madness.

    Real science is the opposite, it encourages replication and follows scientific method on recording and using proper equipment. If these items/methods are not employed by the amateur, then fine, but do not publish (to the public), your non-verified outcomes. Don't be like a cackling hen and claim this, that and the other without ability of replication - it is ludicris. It also damages the entire subject matter.

    (2.) I would ask any quality amateur scientist (or better, a real scientist) to post their procedures and findings here or else where on this matter before it is kiddnapped by a bunch of loons. When these loons take the reins, real science drops any and all interest in it, and then it just withers and dies over time. Finally it turns into a bigfoot/UFO/Atlantis circus. This is what "amateur bad-science" does to the advancement of the human race; it stalls it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. 1 of 2

    I have made some progress in LENR theory as follows:

    Science grows through explaining exceptions. For example, Newtonian physics explains most of the universe, but there are a few exceptions that it cannot explain: the orbit of Mercury and the bending of light through the influence of high mass is another. To explain these exceptions, the general theory of relativity is required. Einstein was judged to be a kook until Max Planck took him under his wing and sponsored his ideas. Not until then did general relativity gain any traction in the science world.

    LENR is another example of the exception to the rule. Quantum mechanics works well for most things but there are a few things that it cannot handle. For example, what goes on inside the proton and neutron is not subject to the rules of quantum mechanics, so a new force was invented called the color force that handles this exception. The color force is the source of the strong interaction, or that the strong interaction is like a residual color force which extends beyond the proton or neutron to bind them together in a nucleus. The other exception that goes along with the color force is the fractional charge that quarks have. There are also the strange cases that come up involving the fractional quantum hall effect where magnetism produces balls of fractional charge that really surprised physics.

    The color force is carried by gluons which makes it different from magnetism. But the quarks inside the protons are thought to be monopoles and they cannot be separated. But why is a quark different than a monopole which can be separated. This confinement is caused by superconductivity inside the proton or the neutron.

    If we could produce a monopole that was inside a superconductor, then we would have something special. We would have quarks. This is the exception that quantum mechanics cannot handle. The color force, quarks, and superconducting monopoles are covered by non-associative quantum mechanics.

    It just so happens that nano particles can produce a superconducting monopole. This is accomplished in Rydberg matter which has been proven by Holmlid to be superconducting and subject to the meissner effect. The Surface Plasmon Polaritons(SPP) are analog monipoles that form on the surface of Rydberg matter.

    ReplyDelete
  5. 2 of 2

    The Rydberg matter that is produced in the LENR reaction is a carrier of the color force that keeps quark contained. This conjecture is proven true in the experiments of LeClair. The water particle is a water based Rydberg matter formed under the tremendous pressure and temperatures produced in the collapsing cavitation bubble. When this nanoparticle begins to eat through material no matter how hard, the particle is protected by destruction from nuclear level forces equal to that of a supernova by the quark based superconductive strengthen color force at the tip of the water crystal. The monopole shield is impenetrable and can withstand a supernova based explosion. When LeClair puts this extra force into the cavitation erosion equations, the equation becomes valid after a hundred years of failure.

    LeClair states:
    NanoSpire Cavitation Erosion Model Prediction of Fusion Thermodynamics

    Mark LeClair of NanoSpire has solved the one hundred year old problem of accurately predicting cavitation erosion for all materials, as a function of cavitation and material properties. Researchers including Lord Kelvin, Lord Rayleigh and many scientists since their day have been unable to solve this seemingly intractable problem. Previous attempts at deriving an accurate general equation have been off by a factor of up to 300X compared to data.


    Mark has derived a general equation for cavitation erosion that is a 98% R^2 curve fit for ASTM-G32 cavitation erosion data for 22 different materials. The equation takes van der Waals repulsion into account during high speed impact of cavitation reentrant jets. The equation predicts that a thin layer exists at the point of cavitation reentrant jet impact with a substrate where van der Waals repulsion dominates. The pressure in this thin zone is in the range of a few hundred up to just over a thousand gigapascals depending on the strength of the material.

    In cold fusion, we are dealing with a special exception to standard reality involving the color force, gluon force carriers, quark confinement, non-associative quantum mechanics produced by a special shape (topology) of a special nano/micro particle.
    See for the theory as follows:

    Vortices in Non-Abelian Gauge Field Theory

    http://www.tims.ntu.edu.tw/download/talk/20110113_1507.pdf

    ReplyDelete