Pulsotron-2 new device working

[Javier Lopez]

Here are captures of some shots with the new device. In the reactor may be about 200 teslas and peak of 2.2 kiloteslas. I would need to build a new device in order to reach more than 5 kiloteslas.

[Doug Coulter]

Ok, I'll bite -- a little background on what this is, please? Sparks and loud noises can be fun indeed, but...what's it do other than that?

[Chris Bradley]

Doug,

See viewtopic.php?f=15&t=7171#p49043 et seq.

[Steven Sesselmann]

As always no details about the experiment....

For all I can see, this could be the closing ceremony at the Beijing Olympics.

Steven

[Frank Sanns]

A few questions:

1. What are the actual discharge times in your setup. Simulators are one thing but inductance of even the leads will lenghthen your discharge times and give much lower peak fields than you think.

2. What makes you think you will fully ionize your fuel charge?

3. How many of the predicted particles are you detecting during your pulses?


Frank Sanns

[Javier Lopez]

Yes, not only are fireworks, but also some data as can you see just down. But I am not happy with 20% error, so Iam pworking on decrease to Pulsotron-1B level

[Javier Lopez]

1. Discharge time vary a lot with the target: If I want high magnetics, it can be as low as 4 microseconds, but If I pretend high Lawson I can increase to more than 100 microseconds

2. I think fuel charge may be ionized by fermi level compression (I am reaching it), high temperature and UV

3. I am not triying fusion yet, because I have not safe installation to do that

Now I am working on new measurement probes in order to increase accuracy. The problem is that extreme low inductance makes very difficult to measure currents, because any thing have inductance, so I will include new phase measurement devices (I have to buy new and more accurate scope).

But before I have to solve the blue rays problem that I detected.

[Javier Lopez]

I have removed the table because 20% is too much error.
Now with my new scope I am impressed of peak current measured: 5.8 Megaamps. But some preliminary results said me to build new Pulsotron device with more voltage in order to quick store the energy before burst (I think Pulsotron-3 will cost about 6k€) as long as target breaks some time before expected.

[Carl Willis]

Javier,

I've had but a few questions all along for you, beginning with "Pulsotron-1" and still relevant now as you prepare to abandon "Pulsotron-2" and build yet another mystery device that dramatically blows stuff up.

1. Can you describe the "target" with enough detail to allow someone else to understand what it is and build it? In short: what are you doing?

2. You STILL are not doing fusion experiments because of some truly odd safety hangup! I STILL maintain that if you are going to get 10^20 neutrons or whatever you claim you will get from a pure fusion-fuel target, you would already be making easily-detectable nuclear byproducts from your device using plain everyday hydrogen and its small concentration of deuterium (hydrogen presumably comprises part of what you call your "hohlraum" or "target"). There continue to be safe and easy ways to verify the theoretical predictions relating to fusion that you have mentioned.

EDIT: I should add that your last post is rather odd in that it's the only instance of someone resurrecting an old thread to announce that they have deleted data. Huh??

-Carl

[Javier Lopez]

Here is the person in Spain thas is responsible to make the test in the right installation: Joaquin.sanchez@ciemat.es if you are very interested in this kind of testyou can apply to him (here in Spain hear first to anybody from outside than inside scientist)
Carl, I have 4 channels scope from a week ago, and I found a lot of things to solve before making the test. (Before new scope I only had a channel for voltage and another for current or other things)

What is interesting on having byproducts? do you know using hydrogen what happens on deuterium?

I deleted data because I have new data and lot more accuracy. Now I can measure plasma electric size! I use my ultralow impedance plasma sice probe and really work.

Now I know that the blue lines are a NEW KIND OF RADIATION, I name it "Segura ray". I detected that is not Serenkov because low speed of plasma ball and that is not an optics effect: it clearly can be seen how radiation follow plasma head and that is not optics effect when passing frmo low light to bright light as can be seen in crossing plasma balls. See photos:

[Carl Willis]

>Now I know that the blue lines are a NEW KIND OF RADIATION, I name it "Segura ray".

Um....a new kind of radiation?

I take it you are referring to the bluish lines in your photos that coincide with the ends of hot-particle tracks. I look at those and see camera artifacts, some kind of mundane lens flare effect.

You have a long way to go to make a scientific case that this is a new kind of radiation. I have a feeling you may have reached a dead-end among the skeptics on this forum.

Good luck with your projects.

-Carl

[Mike Beauford]

Ok Javier,

Call me an un-believer, but thinking that you discovered a new form of radiation is highly unlikely, given the power levels you are playing with. I know you're really into what your doing, but I got to be honest with you. Your basically making sparks that are hooked up to an oscilloscope and some data collection gear at this point. Sometimes I make sparks too! Also, I'm guessing you need to study some more physics and analyze your setup, before you start making claims like that.

Just my honest opinion!

Mike Beauford

[Chris Bradley]

Javier Lopez wrote:
> Now I know that the blue lines are a NEW KIND OF RADIATION, I name it "Segura ray". I detected that is not Serenkov because low speed of plasma ball and that is not an optics effect: it clearly can be seen how radiation follow plasma head and that is not optics effect when passing frmo low light to bright light as can be seen in crossing plasma balls.
Sorry, Javier, but you're in your own world on this one.

Look at the images again - IF there were some blue beams shooting out of these 'plasma balls', then why is the plasma ball a line (showing the exposure time) yet the blue beam isn't a sheet? Surely, if it was an exposure in which the plasma ball was flying whilst it was emitting this blue light, then you'd also see the blue light blurred as an area on the photograph, not as a single line emitted just from the end-point of the imaged track.

If you are going to suggest that these beams are coming at the end of these plasma ball's short life, this would appear false because it is self-evident that your camera isn't going to catch that monetary instant of the emission of this light in every case, for all photographs. It should also be obvious that these 'beams' wouldn't all be directed in front of the oscilloscope. Surely some would end up directed away and behind it?

It is, by any initial assessment, something that shuould be regarded as an optical effect of the camera, unless there is some fantastical explanation available of such an extraordinary interpretation that it is 'new radiation'. Regrettably, one has to read into your experiments the same basic standard of science, viz. founded on elementary miscomprehensions. I would suggest this is representative of the likely level of scientific rigour you've now given us to anticipate for the rest of the experimentation and your interpretation of results.

[Wilfried Heil]

These blue lines are not physically there where you see them.

It is an artefact produced during image readout by the "rolling shutter" CMOS sensor in your camera, which is blinded by the spark. As you can see, the lines always move from upper left to lower right and their inclination is proportional to the speed of the spark from left to right. That is, faster sparks give a more slanted line as they move farther to the right during the readout of the image. A steady light would create a vertical line.

Besides the fireworks, is there anything that you want to communicate here about what you are trying to do?

[myID]

Hi-

this is great- I guess blue ray radiation can have the opposite effect on cells: it will not destroy them but heal them!
If you get enough of this radiation you will never age!
Perhaps the blue ray particles are also cause gravity?

NICE!
Greets

[Frank Sanns]

I belive it is the CCD sensor that "smears" in bright lights and the CMOS sensor. Both can exhibit the rolling shutter shutter effect.

The effect can be seen here: http://www.dvxuser.com/jason/CMOS-CCD/

Frank Sanns

[Javier Lopez]

> Look at the images again - IF there were some blue beams shooting out of these 'plasma balls', then why is the plasma ball a line (showing the exposure time) yet the blue beam isn't a sheet?

It can be an answer, I thought that plasma ball takes form of a line because when you throw something firing, it is larger because air resistance and ligth incandescent gases goes to the aft (CCD takes images lines after lines not in the same way than analog cameras that takes pixel by pixel). If it is an optics effect because long exposure time , it would be seen as a sheet:
Also you can see in teh image where two fire balls are crossing that both blue rays are not parallel in spite that both balls are in the sime position with respect the camera (you can not see the video, but moving fw and back frame by frame it can be seen that blue ray direccion is clearly attached to fire ball direction (it vary the direction with ball direction not with the direction with respect the camera)

Perhaps I was too happy and perhaps I said that it was confirmed too soon (perhaps I see it clear but it must be confimed and repeated by thirty party) BUT IT TOTALLY UNFAIR to drop out my work because you do not agree with blue ray things. I have been working hard from January taking full full full and full free time of hard working, dozens simulations, building metal parts, mechanical design, buying lots of parts everywhere to obtain results with my funds, instruments and without any help in order to hear then this kind of irrespective response from a speaker sitting comfortably at home with his computer.


It is important to state that the blue ray is only a CURIOSITY AND A SIDE EFFECT that does not matter to the end goal that is to try ignition (when I think I can do it) the only effect can be in some kind of lost of energy. If it could make to waste time I will forget the blue ray forever.

[Javier Lopez]

If you get enough of this radiation you will never age!
Perhaps the blue ray particles are also cause gravity?

Well, if it is not an optics effect, I think it is a low power radiation because most of the energy is released in an empty cavity where some day I will be able to place the Deuterium. The only damage that can provoke pulsotron is to burn my hand during soldering, cut my hand when cutting hard thinghs, receive an electric shock or receive some target flying part, I think I am the first scientist (amateur) in the world to receive a plasma ball at the face. So in the Pulsotron-2 I used a lot of parts and time in secure charge/discharge units and also designed the sistem to leave me free from flying parts!

[Javier Lopez]

> I belive it is the CCD sensor that "smears" in bright lights and the CMOS sensor. Both can exhibit the rolling shutter shutter effect.

I know the problem (two years ago I designed a video CCD board for GAIA satellite), I think you refer that when grabbing a pixel with too much light, it affect to all pixels over it and down to it. This happen because there is too light that pixel passes part of it to the entire column. This effect happens when using my old digital camera and also to my new one but in different ways: when there is too much light spot, in my old camera it can be seen a vertical white line but in my new one it appears black, but EVER this line is vertical and of course is impossible see in a photo this kind of effect with different angles.

[Dustinit]

You may be able to prove / disprove whether its an optics / shutter artifact by rotating the camera to portrait and see if the blue lines then become horizontal. This will change the relative direction of motion of the shutter and ccd scan relative to the sparks. Also it may be worth taking photos of a sparkler or welder to see if they have the same effect. Its an interesting aberation I have not seen before but I don't think it is any new kind of blue ray... but I kinda hope you prove us all wrong.
Dustin.

[Chris Bradley]

Javier Lopez wrote:
> IT TOTALLY UNFAIR to drop out my work because you do not agree with blue ray things. I have been working hard from January taking full full full and full free time of hard working, dozens simulations, building metal parts, mechanical design, buying lots of parts everywhere to obtain results with my funds, instruments and without any help in order to hear then this kind of irrespective response from a speaker sitting comfortably at home with his computer.

I very much understand your frustration at doing much work without any support at all. You do not need to convince me of that. But I will remain of the opinion that this is the level of our expectations now, because it is far more important to address the questions that have been coming, rather than focussing on trivia like this 'blue ray' distraction. Take time to explain your reaction target, as Carl has asked, and how you have measured the actual magnetic fields and come up with your fusion reaction calculations, and your work will take on an entirely different quality. Your work will become 'merit-worthy' only once fully explained but it is currently coming across as vague and without sound descriptions. Plenty of people have spent their whole lives trying to turn base metals into gold (even Issac Newton did so in his elder years) but would have 'wasted' their time [many did] had they not doucmented their work so others can learn from it (even if it is not what to do). Documentation and dissemination is key here and you need to 'sit yourself comfortably behind a computer' for a while and prepare some documents to explain your work, if you want it to be understood.

The science is in the explaining and dissemination, as well as the 'doing' of experiments.

[Javier Lopez]

Thanks Dustin. It can be the solution.

In response to Chris Bradley I will obtain data and photos of the measurement devices. I would like also to write a pdf and hang it in a public link.

[Javier Lopez]

Hello again

I would like have code for publicizing about my device at Arxiv in order to make them free open to everyone as long as Arxiv wants to know that I work in science related.
Do anybody can give me one?, It can be physics or optics, because some of them are optics sensors.
It can be useful for others projects, so I would insert the link here

[Richard Hull]

Not to be cruel but it sounds a bit like a polywater target to me.

The fusion by products that Carl mentioned are easily detected post blast materials activated during the 10e20 neutron blast you expect. No need for anything more complex than a simple GM counter used in the minute after a shot reading materials placed near it for this pupose, like silver or indium. Any kind of real data like this to report?

No activation, no neutrons, no fusion. It sort of follows the rules of physics associated with high temperature fusion.

Richard Hull

[Carl Willis]

This discussion is more than four years old and is about a project that is even older. It appears that the discussion ended when Javier was asked to engage with more details and data. The only thing new right now is that he wants endorsements so he can put papers on Arxiv.

I don't know that anyone here is an active Arxiv participant. If not, the issue is moot. If so, use your judgement so as not to lose endorsement status. Arxiv's policy on endorsements (http://arxiv.org/help/endorsement) is as follows, bolding is mine:

You should know the person that you endorse or you should see the paper that the person intends to submit. We don't expect you to read the paper in detail, or verify that the work is correct, but you should check that the paper is appropriate for the subject area. You should not endorse the author if the author is unfamiliar with the basic facts of the field, or if the work is entirely disconnected with current work in the area.

Obviously it would be best if Javier would put the data he wants to publish on this forum. He's been asked about that many times.

-Carl