Return to the INE Main Page

Simple Macroscopic Alchemy Demonstration
Silver Increased by a Factor of 164 Times!

By Robert Bass, Ph.D.

From: NEN, Vol. 5, No. 9, Jan. 1998, pp. 7-9.
New Energy News (NEN) copyright 1998 by Fusion Information Center, Inc.
COPYING NOT ALLOWED without written permission.


Simple Macroscopic Alchemy Demonstration
Silver Increased by a Factor of 164 Times!
by Robert W. Bass, Ph.D.

This demonstration of elemental Low Energy Nuclear Transmutation (LENT) was performed by Stan Gleeson of the Cincinnati Group (CG) on October 21, 1997. There are 11 items of required Materials & Equipment, and 13 steps in the Protocol of the process.

Eleven Items of Required Materials & Equipment

1. One piece of Aluminum [Al] 9 inches ["] square & 1" thick, used as a Heat Sink to prevent excessive boil-off during electrolysis.

2. Two Zirconium [Zr] Electrodes, each 10" long by 1" wide by 0.093" thick. The Zr stock used should be of highest purity available. According to a catalog, the major impurities are Hafnium and Titanium [Ti]; the Titanium is present at 3000 parts per billion [ppb] or 3 parts per million [ppm]. The fact that before-&-after processed solutions showed Ti present at only 0.001 ppm & 0.002 ppm, respectively, is taken to be hard evidence that during processing only a negligible amount of impurities leached from the electrodes. Moreover, the catalog-specified purity of the Zr stock was independently verified by a nationally recognized commercial quantitative-analysis service provider (Data Chem, Inc.) to have been perfectly correct. The surface of the electrodes will be covered initially with pickling. The electrodes must be prepared to have scarred, pickling-free surfaces 1" down from the top and 3" up from bottom, by grinding on both sides with a hardened steel rasp (file), and subsequent rinsing in pure water.

3. One (at least) 520-Watt [W] Alternating Current [AC] Power Supply capable of Voltage Regulation and able to supply (at least) up to 1.3 Amperes [A] at 400 Volts [V].

4. At least 700 milliliters [ml] of pure (distilled) Water, plus sufficient additional pure water to rinse thoroughly all beakers, parts, and tools, to minimize contamination [assumed done].

5. One 600 ml glass Beaker, 4.5" tall and of 3.5" diameter.

6. Attachable Conducting Leads from the Power Supply to each Electrode.

7. One gram of pure (reagant grade) Sodium Metasilicate [SMS], namely Na2SiO3.

8. One-half gram of pure (reagant grade) Tungsten [W] Tri-Oxide, namely WO3.

9. Standard Stirring & Siphoning tools & extra beakers for preparing & mixing.

10. Means for external Heating of 400 ml solution to 75 degrees Centigrade.

11. One piece of clean polycarbonate Separator 5" long by 1" wide by 1/2" thick.

Thirteen-step Protocol

1. Prepare a Mother Solution as follows:
1.1 Begin with 400 ml of pure Water.
1.2 Add SMS to Water, stir until dissolved.
1.3 Add Tungsten Tri-Oxide and heat solution to 75 degrees C while stirring.
1.4 Let solution settle for one hour.

2. Draw off 10 ml of Mother Solution from the top of the settled solution, and pour into the 600 ml Beaker half-filled with 300 ml of pure Water, making a 310 ml volume in the Beaker.

3. Insert Electrodes into solution and stir gently.

4. Lay polycarbonate Separator diametrically across mouth of beaker.

5. Place Electrodes on edge, facing each other & spaced apart 1" by Separator, such that in a side-view projection only one electrode's silhouette can be seen, measuring 10" long by 1" wide, with bottom end near bottom right-hand corner of Beaker's profile, and with top end's edge resting on upper left-hand corner of beaker's profile, and with horizontal overhang of the top part of the Electrode 1.5" beyond the beaker's lip. The purpose of the projection of the Electrodes beyond the Beaker's lip is to ensure that no contamination falls into the Beaker during the attachment of the Conducting Leads from the Power Supply to the Electrodes. With electrodes in place the solution will rise to about the 350 ml level of the Beaker. The wetted side-view projection of the part of an electrode immersed in the solution would consist of a horizontal line intersected by two parallel lines 1" apart, the upper being of length 2.25" and the lower being of 2.75" length.

6. Attach Conducting Leads from the Power Supply to the Electrodes.

7. Place Beaker upon Heat Sink.

8. Measuring time in minutes, adjust AC current Voltage, measured in V, while observing current flow, measured in milliAmperes [mA], according to the following schedule, during which the mixture will begin to boil, and the amount of liquid lost as steam is noted as Loss in ml:


Time     Voltage     Current     Loss [ml]
[min]    [V]         [mA]

 0       400          980
 1       403         1200
 2       402         1280
 5       402         1300        [Boiling]
10       406          700
15       407          605
20       407          575         50
25       407          560        100
30       405          530        125

9. Turn off power and disconnect Electrodes.

10. Keeping bottom ends of Electrodes below the surface, scrape each Electrode's end clean by scraping against each other. All four 1"-wide faces must be scraped.

11. Remove Electrodes.

12. Note liquid's level at 175 ml, i.e. total loss of 135 ml of Water to Steam.

13. Add 135 ml of pure Water to bring fluid volume back to original 310 ml.

Results of Quantitative Analysis

The before-processed Mother Solution and the after-processed solution were analyzed by Robert Liversage of DataChem using a freshly-calibrated ICP.

The symbol U will denote the unprocessed solution, and the symbol P will denote the processed solution. The increase in measured quantity of Tungsten [W] is because more of the W got dissolved as a result of the heat generated during the electrolysis. The quantitative analysis of U and P will be recorded in ppm, and the increase-or-decrease difference D = 100. ([P/U] - 1) will be in percentage [%]. Table 1 is complete, and Table 2 is a condensed summary. (Elements whose D was less than 1,000% in magnitude have been omitted from Table 2 for clarity.)


Element     P [ppm]     U [ppm]     D [%]

Ag          0.0001      0.0164      16,300%
Al          0.009       0.016           78%
B           0.005       0.035          666%
Ba          0.007       0.250        3,471%
Ca          0.188       0.299           59%
Cr          0.001       0.025        2,400%
Cu          0.002       0.010          400%
Fe          0.017       0.827        4,765%
K           0.020       0.101          405%
Mg          0.057       0.088           54%
Mn          0.001       0.011        1,000%
Ni          0.0005      0.0156       3,020%
Pb          0.005       0.003          -67%
Pt          0.007       0.003         -133%
S           0.078       0.135           73%
Si          3.19        3.11            -3%
Sn          0.0007      0.020        2,757%
Ti          0.001       0.002          100%
V           0.0011      0.0001      -1,000%
W           1.27        3.04           139%
Zn          0.008       0.018          125%
Zr          0.014       02.08       14,757%


Element     P [ppm]     U [ppm]     D [%]

Ag          0.0001      0.0164      16,300%
Ba          0.007       0.250        3,471%
Cr          0.001       0.025        2,400%
Fe          0.017       0.827        4,765%
Mn          0.001       0.011        1,000%
Ni          0.0005      0.0156       3,020%
Sn          0.0007      0.020        2,757%
V           0.0011      0.0001      -1,000%
Zr          0.014       02.08       14,757%


Those who do not believe in the possibility of LENT will have to claim that somehow the processed solution got contaminated. But if so, where did the contamination come from? Both the catalog specification of the Zr electrodes and the CG's independent verification of this specification by an independently performed quantitative Mass Spectroscopy analysis show that there is not enough of the elements which were dramatically increased in quantity to account for any putative "contamination" by leaching.

As a variation on the preceding experiment, instead of use of a Heat Sink, the beaker was placed inside of a coolant apparatus containing a bath of ethylene glycol and dry ice, and maintained at near 0 degrees C. Before that, twice as much of the Mother Solution [namely 20 ml] had been used in Step 2, and the resultant solution had been microwave-heated to dissolve more of the Tungsten; this worked, in that the new before-&-after processed W measurements were 13.3 ppm and 22.8 ppm, respectively, showing that 10.5 times more W had been dissolved successfully in this experiment than in the prior one. (The remainder was dispersed throughout the solution in the form of a colloidal gel, which further dissolved during the electrolysis, thereby accounting for the increase in measured W from 13.3 to 22.8 ppm.) Consequently, if contamination were the cause of the measured appearance of Ag, etc. then there should have been up to 10 times more alleged "contamination" appearing, but (as explained below) this did not happen!

Furthermore, in this second case, much more total energy was put into the electrolysis, in that the Voltage went up to 456 V and the Current never went below 0.9 A and after 2 minutes was at 1.4 A, and after 30 minutes was at 1.1 A. However, the increases in elements formerly not present were far less dramatic. In this "cooled" case, the Zr impurity increased only by 3,840% and the only differences D over 450% in magnitude were a decrease in Zinc [Zn] by -1,264% and increases in Aluminum [Al] by 1,229% and in Silver [Ag] by 8,100%. However, there is not enough Silver in the Zr electrodes to account for such a vast increase in Silver. Accordingly, both experiments can be viewed as Transmutation of Tungsten into "Silver, etc." with the non-cooled experiment providing twice as much transmutation [namely 164 times versus 81 times as much Silver as originally present] as did the cooled experiment, which is consistent with the fact that in the cooled experiment all transmutations were radically diminished.

The cooled experiment not only serves as a control on possible contamination, but actually provides new, additional evidence to rule out any level of contamination sufficient to explain the dramatic appearance of Silver not originally present (because, for example, in the cooled experiment the level of Ti contamination in the before and after processed solution remained absolutely the same [D = 0%], while the Silver increased by a factor of 81). If the Silver were contamination from the Electrodes, then why did not the vastly predominant contaminant Ti increase by any quantitatively measurable amount?

The only remaining logical possibility is that Low Energy Nuclear Transmutations (LENT) have indeed taken place.

Return to the INE Main Page
Jan. 26, 1998.