Is There Radioactive Stimulation of Radioactivity in Electrolysis Cells?
November 4, 1997 (with slight revisions received on Dec. 1, 1997).
[Received via email to INE, Nov. 19, 1997, slightly revised Nov. 21, 1997]
Preliminary Note: This is a preliminary note of general observations.
In order to raise funding and interest for researching this phenomena and to find collaborators, some striking observations are described. However, these are only preliminary results. More experimentation must be carried out to define the effect and be sure that there is no conventional explanation. This may be a very important phenomena for several reasons, and testing for this effect is encouraged. Testing would be easy to do by simply placing radioactive materials near operating devices and measuring any effect. Money for patenting and testing may be in order. I was granted the rights to two extensive patent disclosures regarding various aspects of this invention.
This note is meant to present a description of general observations of an effect that would be easy for people to test for themselves, and to present some explanatory ideas. Since the results were not consistent from the first week of observation to the second, perhaps a conclusion may be drawn. Since pinching the tube usually caused a significant surge of CPM as registered by Geiger counters in the second week and turning on the pump while the electricity was on usually or always caused the same in the first, perhaps it is the inflow of liquid that caused the effect. Also, the long term CPM increase that was measured in the first week of 40 or 50 CPM seems significant. No testing was done to determine the wavelength or type of any radiation output from the cell. Thought the effect was surprising and seemed to be usually repeatable, I am not sure what was causing it. But I could not think of any other reasons for the results except for the emission of radiation from the cell. The testing wasn't thorough, and so more testing should be done.
There was evidence that a radioactive object increased the radioactivity from a CETI thin-film coated microsphere electrolysis cell(1) as measured by three different Geiger counters. The object was a large piece of apparatus composed mainly of aluminum and steel that was used in other experiments that was irradiated at the experimental atomic reactor at the U of I so that the steel parts of it had turned into Cobalt 60. This piece of apparatus was about one and a half meters long and was measured by the Geiger counters to have a count per minute (CPM) rate of 40,000 at one end and 30,000 at the other and 10,000 or 5,000 along the middle. There was thin steel sheeting of a fume hood between the electrolysis apparatus and the piece, and the cell itself was about 1 and a half meters away from the end of the piece that equipment apparatus that measured 40,000 CPM. The cell was a fairly fresh one that had begun operation in the week that the effect was first observed, if I remember correctly.
During the day the effect was first observed and the radioactive piece of apparatus was near, there was a CPM rate averaging about 100 or 110 about 1/3 of a meter around the cell, but with the rod of the Geiger counter placed within about 4 or 5 centimeters of the casing of the cell, the CPM rate averaged about 150 as was measured several times. On the day the effect was first observed it was found that when the radioactive piece of apparatus was near the cell, there were surges of CPM increases within 10 seconds after turning on the current to the cell and the pump after having turned the current and the pump off for a few minutes which lasted up to twenty or thirty seconds or perhaps more. But during more extensive tests a week later, the results were more sporadic, perhaps because the cell had deteriorated or had been depleted. By the second week the cell may have been clogged by flakes of the bead coatings.
Though there were not many tests for the effect when the radioactive piece was not near the cell in the first week, in general it seems that if the radioactive piece was not in the room or on the other side of the room there was little or no increase of radioactivity measured. During the second week when tests were done when the radioactive piece was on the other side of the room, there was almost never any radioactivity that seemed like a significant increase over the base rate. To generalize the observations during the two weeks, I conjecture that it was the flushing the cell with fluid when the electricity was on and the radioactive piece was near that would generally cause significant surges of CPM increases within 15 seconds that might last more than 30 seconds.
Observations During the Day of the First Week
During the first day of testing it was found that while the radioactive piece was near turning off the electricity to the cell and turning off the pump for the fluid through the tubing and the cell for a few minutes, and then turning the electricity and pump back on at the same time usually or always caused a significant jump of CPM of up to double or triple the base rate after a few seconds and within ten seconds that lasted for at least a few seconds. And in several tests it was found that the most significant variable was the fluid flow.
In one test for example, it was found that after turning off both the electrical current and the pump for a few minutes and then turning on only the current to the cell, there was an insignificant surge of CPM of at most about 10 or 20 CPM, if any. But when the pump was then turned on about a minute later after letting the cell sit with only the current on, after about 5 or so seconds the CPM jumped from an average of about 125 to 280 or 300 CPM for about 8 seconds. One or two other tests confirmed this effect. This is evidence that the jump was not caused by turning on the current or the pump, since there would have been an immediate jump of CPM, but caused by the flush of new fluid into the casing. During the test that was described, while I was holding the Geiger counter, I also strongly felt some sort of energy from the cell. The energy was hard to explain, but it was as if a large electrical switch was turned on as the CPM jumped. It wasn't an electrical current though, but like a vibration. This radiation or energy may be dangerous.
Observations During the Second Week
These observations were followed a week later by methodical testing with a Geiger counter that was held by a clamp next to the cell and that was attached to an electronic counter that counted the counts that were registered. In various tests that were carried out then, the results were more sporadic. There was much less radiation if any from the cell, and less of a jump in CPM, if any, after turning on and turning off the pump. This may be because the conditions in the cell had deteriorated. The flow of fluid seemed to be much less then a week earlier, only a trickle, as if the cell was clogged, and the pump sounded differently, as if it was running dry. It seemed to me that there was a much greater fluid flow earlier. It was found later after opening the casing that the coatings of the beads were mostly gone, so I suspected that perhaps by the second week of operation, the coatings had flaked off and this may have impeded the flow of fluid. But the decrease or lack of surges of CPM in these latter tests when turning on or turning off the pump precludes the explanation that the previous surges were caused by simple electrical static of some type. In fact, it was found that simply repeatedly pinching the tube through which the fluid flowed in order to force the fluid into the casing would usually after a few seconds and within about 30 seconds caused a jump of CPM from about 100 to 200 or more. And surges seemed to last up to 20 or 30 seconds sometimes, at least. Pinching the tube may have flushed liquid into stale or dry areas in the casing.
However, when the radioactive piece of apparatus was set on the other side of the room about 8 meters away there was usually little or no significant surge effect from pinching the tubing and turning the equipment on and off. Then the base rate measured near the cell was much lower at about 40 or 70 CPM which was also background level rate so that measuring any base rate radiation above background was impossible. The background radiation seemed to vary a lot from day to day.
Description of General Effect
The general effect that was discerned during these tests was that there was higher CPM registered by Geiger counters when the radioactive piece was near, but not when it was out of the room or on the other side of it. There was a higher base rate during the first week, and significant surges of CPM increases were effected both weeks.
Hypotheses and Conjectures
This radioactive material was sitting near the fume hood during most or all the runs of the various electrolysis cells, so it may have influenced the operation of the cells and may have caused the production of elements if there were any. I only tried to check one or two other cells for radioactivity, and didn't find it. But I checked in a quick fashion because I wasn't expecting there to be any.
It seems that if a cell does become radioactive, it may do so only temporarily. The proper conditions may be lost over time.
This is not the first report of stimulation of these anomalous phenomena by radioactivity or electromagnetic radiation of various wavelengths. In particular, V. A. Filimonov(2) reported that a neutron source greatly increased the cold fusion phenomena.
Kapitsa(3) wrote that electromagnetic radiation could form globular volumes of plasma or ball lightning. Since then, researchers have experimentally produced ball lightning-like plasmoids using electromagnetic radiation. According to Kapitsa's calculations the wavelength would be equal to 3.65 times the diameter of the resulting plasmoid. I think atoms are plasmoids, and that plasmoids of various sizes produce the various cold fusion phenomena. In particular, gamma radiation may stimulate atomic reactions, modify atoms, or form atoms during various stresses such as electrolysis.
Energy and substance may be leaving various devices in at least three anomalous ways that people haven't taken into account. As plasmoids of various types and sizes, as electrical currents and surges(4), and as plasmoid wave phenomena that are a transverse wave that may affect materials very little, but which may convert to electrical current upon contacting conductors. Matsumoto may have found traces of plasmoid waves around an electrolysis cell(5).
I would like to thank G. Miley, Mike Williams for setting up the equipment, and the CETI company. The CETI company does not agree with these ideas or support the publishing of them.
References and Notes
1) For information about the equipment and the general experimental procedure for the various runs, see G. H. Miley et al., "Quantitative Observations of Transmutation Products Occurring in Thin-Film Coated Microspheres During Electrolysis," Proceedings of the ICCF-6, Hokkaido, Japan (Oct. 14-17, 1996).
2) V. A. Filimonov, "A New Cold Fusion Phenomenon," sci.physics.fusion newsgroup (article #16526, from email@example.com), January 21, 1995.
3) P. L. Kapitsa, "The Nature of Ball Lightning," in D. Ritchie, ed., Ball Lightning, Consultants Bureau, New York, 1961.
4)T. Matsumoto, "Discovery of a New Kind of Electrical Current," abstract submitted to the ICCF-6, Hokkaido, Japan (Oct. 14-17, 1996).
5)T. Matsumoto, "Interference Phenomena Observed During Cold Fusion," Fusion Technology, 21, 179 (March, 1992).
Edward Lewis's New Web Site About Plasmoid Marks on Electrolysis Cells
Edward Lewis's New Web Site About Plasmoid Marks on Electrolysis Cells with several new pictures, posted May 16, 1997.
"Additional Plasmoid Marks on Electrolysis Cells" a photographic article by Edward Lewis, May 16, 1997
"Photographs of Some Components of an Electrolysis Cell" a photographic article by Edward Lewis, March 1997
"Recent Experiments That Produced Fundamental Anomalies For Novel Hypotheses Concerning the Production of Elements, Superconductivity, and Anomalous Radiation" a paper by Edward Lewis, Oct. 1996
"The Periodic Production of Rationalized Phenomena and the Past Periodic Depressions" a paper by Edward Lewis, Oct. 1996
"Considerations about Plasmoid Phenomena and Superconductivity Phenomena," a paper by Edward Lewis, June 1996, June 1996, Revised. Oct. 1996.
"Gorgons, Tornadoes, and Plasmoid Phenomena," a paper by Edward Lewis, June 1996, June 1996, Revised. Oct. 1996.
"Tornadoes and Ball Lightning," a paper by Edward Lewis, June 1996, Revised. Oct. 1996.
"Concerning Production of Elements and Plasmoids," a paper by Edward Lewis, June 1996, Revised. Oct. 1996.
"Plasmoid Phenomena," a paper by Edward Lewis, June 1996
Return to the INE Main Page
Dec. 5, 1997.