Hello, I'm Steve C.

[StevenClark]

Hello, My name is Steve C and I'm interested in the essential truth of all sorts of things, particularly technical man made things, and I'm generally good at what I do.

I have been a fan of Paul Schatzkin, since observing his fine,(and brave) work tacklng the Thomas Townsend Brown shroud of disninformation. A side effect of my personal investigaton into Alt-Sci matters is that I get to evaluate the "Players" in this field for personal integrity, veracity, and "goodness of spirit".

I hope my small participation here and the tiny bit of new information I bring about the Strevens Bagnall Tranfusor, a related device I think, will be well received and useful to you.

I salute those of you who do ACTUAL WORK and build stuff. I was dead pleased to see someone using Dr Lohmann xray tubes elsewhere on this site, I have three to get rid of and I learned a bit of useful stuff about them.

40KV across the gap and adjust filament current to give 1ma of beam current IIRC...

Thansk for being here doing this stuff.

I feel that we can no longer leave it completely to the establishment to produce reliable science and technology for our use and education..

[JoeBallantyne]

Hi Steven -

So what is it that you do? You claim to be good at it, without specifying it whatsoever.

You are clearly pretty good at spewing word salad techno babble.

What are you good at that is actually useful for humankind?

Where on this beautiful earth do you live? What is your profession? What subject areas of interest to this community do you know about?

Why did you drop an unrelated post on a 15 year old thread, instead of starting your own new thread?

Be aware that we respect and appreciate folks who accurately report on real work that they are actively engaged in.

Joe.

[StevenClark]

O.K. A lot of questions there, much of it focussed on me, which isn't really the interesting thing.

I claim to do things well, because I've been told I do. To a fault sometimes.

I live a nice small life in Sunni England, where I essentially either loaf about idly usually with a cat, or I fix things for people. Even get paid for it sometimes. Being honest and transparent is my preferred mode of comminication, but being honest but obscure is a neccesity for the modern world so how much BIO do you really need?

I guess you need to know is that I'm technically competent, have owned my own soldering iron since about 1968, "invented" my own discrimininating metal detector when I was about 14, have been allowed to touch all sorts of things ranging from cash machines to aircraft, and I'm a safe pair of hands. And I don't bullshit or lie, but have been implicated in "miscommunication" due I've recently been told to being on some sort of spectrum, which accounts for some of my more meticulous and also my more clumsy moves.

I appreciate the sentiment expressed but I don't actually need "respect". I just felt a need as I leave his project to a very uncertain future (he is an elderly gentleman) to tell a group of somewhat like minded folks, "There's more to this than it would appear".

This week I believe that I solved a conundrum that has been puzzling me for many years, "why do people plant false information so earnestly on the internet?" My thinking (which is influenced quite strongly by M.Scott Peck's Book "People of the lie") is that they see the lie itself as a beutiful and enduring creation that they are either a part of or a creator of. If they can create a bunch of people that few spinning discs and a tesla coil can levitate they get some sort of sense of achievement, and the whole lying thing gets recursive and self feeding.

This isn't what's happening here. I'm pretty convinced I've seen an awesome thing, but I'll never KNOW until they finally get one of the tubes of converted material analysed in a more definitive way that the optical spectrometry we used.

Sorry if you don't like my written communication style. It did not get me job interviews either.
Maybe numbered questions and I give shorter answers would be best?

[JoeBallantyne]

Who is "they"? How long have "they" had these tubes of converted material sitting around without getting them analyzed?

If it is months or years, perhaps "they" don't actually want to get them analyzed at all, because then there would be a clear and simple explanation for your optical phenomenon. (tube of D2 gas turning murky green)

The names of the "they" would be much appreciated, as would be a clear exposition of exactly how to build the device, and what its supposed theory of operation.

A .pdf file with a detailed explanation could be easily attached to a post on this board.

Waiting for your detailed exposition with bated breath.

Joe.

[Richard Hull]

The "they" producing and testing ("it"),("the tube"), is very telling. I have lost interest already. All very vaporous. Not only no epitome of the process, but no stated result, goal, or output product. Lots of florid exposition in word salad form.

Richard Hull

[StevenClark]

It's hard not to reply to this sort of questioning without being a little bit snarky, but I'll try.

"They" are Chris Strevens, Luke Bagnall, and until recently myself, SteveClarke.

In real simple terms chris once made a device, which after a LOT of work and with some slight input from me over more than a decade, has been recently semi-duplicated, by luke in his little workshop under slightly better documented and instrumented conditions.

In a nutshell: The device takes a sealed specimen tube of what is warranted to be 99% pure deuterium gas at (IIRC) a pressure of 10-15 torr. As a part of teh process, two electrodes are attached to the outside of the glass at either end to allow the tube to be excited by electricity and radiate it's characteristic purple deuterium spectrum. After some time in the device, the gas is a little harder to strike and no longer glows purple, it glows green.

Now I don't want to violate the site rules, but might I ask for a little more "polite enquiry" and less snark?

You want a "Detailed exposition" then you go get it from the man who designed the thing himself, or the man who built the second one!
As for the various "ruined" tubes, at least one is under my own custody and control. They are nice enough guys, they let me keep a souvenir when I left...

They/We DEFINITELY DO want the tubes analysed!! Particularly ME, OH YES, and if you're looking for my hidden objective, that's it. I WANT TO KNOW.

I think I've answered the important things.

I said elsewhere that I'm not looking for respect, but equally I'm not looking for disrespect either. I've made it clear that I've left their project after more than a decade of working wth them, which does mean yes, I know a a far abit about it and COULD (but won;t unless you paid me serious money, AND they were O.K. with me doing it) write a detailed exposition, but it would not be the man who desigend it or the man who built his own version telling you, it'd be some guy (who's communication style you deride) who watched them do it, telling you... Certainly not worth paying the sort of money I'd want for writing it, when you can take a second look at what Chris has shared here and pick the bones out of it yourselves.

Personally I think Ive shot my bolt really informationally, I've told you what I've seen. The brighter ones have already figured out that it's impossible, there must be a "trick".

I will tell you in all honesty that I've spent some years now deciding whether to post here or not.

It is DEFINITELY your sort of thing, I'm not such a fool as I wish I was, and I'm sorry to say, I think they've managed to something preposterous, and I bought it to your attention, not to annoy any one, but just to say; "here's a thing, I'd advise you to look at and evaluate the thing itself and not the guys who made it".

I will DEFINITELY POST A Retraction and an apology here, and generally eat crow, if it transpires that I have missed any simple explanation for what I've seen.

[Dennis P Brown]

Hello and thanks for posting. I answered the question in another thread on what can cause colour changes in those tubes. In any case, if you discover it is something simple, no need for any apologies when one is just stating/reporting what was observed. Simply post the results and it explanation.

[Rich Feldman]

Welcome, Steve.
Does the apparatus still exist, so you could repeat the experiment today?
Internet shows it's easy to get deuterium discharge tubes with or without internal electrodes.
You could see if color change depends on having exposed metal inside the tube.

I stand with those who believe your color change is due to chemical behavior, and that nuclear transmutation is wishful thinking.

In neutron-producing fusors (as generally accepted here), the reaction products never amount to a billionth of the D2 mass.
Nuclear reactions are about a million times more energetic (per atom) than chemical ones.
Somebody in the other thread quoted Carl Willis: if there was enough fusion to change the gas composition, as indicated by glow color, you would have been fatally irradiated. I bet the glass tube would have melted long before that.

[StevenClark]

1. Yes, the apparatus does exist. The builder however, refused my request to "freeze" it's developement and "take stock" (fair enough, I suppose) and apparently it continues to "evolve".

2. Electrodes are on the outside.

Generally, I'm in agreement with the expressed attitude, that "this must be wishful thinking" or "it must be a chemical reaction" and in particular the "where are the neutrons?" question.

The bit I canot square away, is the gross colour change in a gas in a sealed glass tube. There's D in there, surrounded by glass. That's it.

I'll go and see if I can find Denis's explanation.

If and when I get an explanantion that makes sense, (and fits with the rest of science) for what I've seen I will be a LOT happier in myself that I did the right thing in quitting.

I do believe at such a time an apology would be appropriate for wasting all of your time on a red herring, and I'll be more accepting of "Snark".

I'll return to this when I have my answer, or notice further replies that need answering.

[Dennis P Brown]

Again, you are presenting information in good faith and asking questions. No apology is in order. Deuterium gas glow with two different colors by the way. A blue or a red. Never really did any reading on why.

[Richard Hull]

Most gases emit in many colors when ionized. The Hbeta line for deuterium in near ultraviolet (blue). However, to our eye, the Halpha is predominant. (Redish pink).

Tom Ligon and I used the ocean optics optical electronic spectrometer tuned to the Hbeta emission line to look at the doppler broadening to calculate the average energy of the ions in a fusor for Doc Bussard back in 1997.

Richard Hull