[NewCandle] influence of aluminum geometry on Geiger counter rates

[Keith Nagel]

Hey Nick,

Thanks for following up on this.

Your test results are very intriguing. It's unfortunate you could
not get any displacement from your Al powder.
Besides, perhaps the U is being incorporated into the Al oxide layer.

Can you try testing both reduction and oxidation? You could set up an
electrolysis cell with aluminum rods as anode and cathode.
Trying a wide range of voltage, do you notice a change in
count at either one of the rods? I seem to remember we did
a lot of this stuff a few years ago, when we were experimenting
with anode glow. Just not doped with U.

K.


-----Original Message-----
From: newcandle-bounces at ipdiscover.com
[mailto:newcandle-bounces at ipdiscover.com]On Behalf Of Nick Reiter
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 1:52 PM
To: New energy for the new world.
Subject: [NewCandle] influence of aluminum geometry on Geiger counter
rates


Hi all,

Been a while since I had been able to finish off some "effect-screening"
tests I wanted to do, one of which was suggested by Keith a few weeks ago.
All of course in regards to the phenomenon of the jump in Geiger counter
readings when a solution of uranyl acetate in water wicks into the
inter-turn spaces of an aluminum foil roll...

There essentially were four tests I made to check the influence of geometry
on the effect.

In the first, I replicated the observation made on two occasions previously,
with the foil roll, added to a column of .1M uranyl acetate in H2O.  The set
up was simple, Geiger counter head strapped to a plastic 500ml graduated
cylinder.  Baseline readings were made with water, then with uranyl acetate
solution.  Then we poured the solution back out, inserted a 75 foot roll of
Al foil, and poured 250ml of solution back in, enough to cover the roll top.
(no D2O added)

The jump upward in count rate was noticed within 3 to 5 minutes.  This was
reported here about 3 weeks ago.

I then tried three other geometries of Al introduced into the column of
250ml of solution.

1.  A 1.25" x 8" round solid bar of aluminum, inserted into the liquid.  A
slight drop in counter reading (about 40%) was noted immediately, and did
not change until the bar was removed.  We might be safe to presume that this
drop in count was due to thinning of the annular volume of emitting
solution, and shielding by the solid Al mass.

2.  Next, a duplicate of the original foil roll was modified by sealing the
inside seam and the outside seam with plastic tape, and sealing both ends of
the roll with silicone rubber.  Thus we produce an aluminum foil cylinder,
with all internal turns and voids, however it is sealed against any
immediate ingress of solution into the turns.  When this piece was inserted,
a slight drop in count rate - similar to test 1 - was observed immediately.

3.  Finally, a test suggested by Keith.  About 50ml of 3 to 5 micron
diameter spherical Al powder was added to the uranyl acetate column while
the Geiger counter was operating.  The powder made a grey dispersion, though
no immediate hydrolysis reaction or bubbling was noted.  I periodically
swirled the dispersion a bit and kept it afloat for 5 minutes.  From a
starting count rate of 250cpm average, there was no discernible change.

Thus these three geometric tests to me seem to support the general idea that
the act of infiltration of the uranyl acetate solution into foil roll
inter-turn cavities is related to a rise in count rate noted by a Geiger
Mueller counter nearby.

Of course, one then asks "why".

Maybe some kindly seasonal avatar will gimme that epiphany for Christmas!

Best regards and seasonal cheer to all.

nr





_______________________________________________
NewCandle mailing list
NewCandle at ipdiscover.com
http://ipdiscover.com/mailman/listinfo/newcandle_ipdiscover.com