[NewCandle] foil roll experiments

[Keith Nagel]

Good job getting rid of the D20, clearly we haven't
got the apparatus down to an "essential" experiment.

Here's another suggestion. Get some powdered aluminum
and sprinkle a goodly amount into the active solution.
Start slow at first to check reaction rate. This
will produce a much more active displacement reaction
and eliminate most of the geometrical complexity
of the foil rolls. The smaller the aluminum particle,
the more active the resulting displacement. Stirring
also helps if things are slow.

K.



-----Original Message-----
From: newcandle-bounces at ipdiscover.com
[mailto:newcandle-bounces at ipdiscover.com]On Behalf Of Nick Reiter
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 9:04 AM
To: New energy for the new world.
Subject: [NewCandle] foil roll experiments


Hello all,

Been off for the long holiday weekend and managed to sneak off to the
basement laborium to try some tests with foil rolls and the uranyl acetate.

First of all, I did want to mention that I tried Horace's suggested test, of
putting some new foil rolls into the presumably partially reacted or spent
solution from the original Pixie 23 bucket.

Upon initial insertion, I again looked carefully for the rise in count rate,
along the lines of what I saw before.  And indeed, while less in magnitude
(an increase of maybe 1.5x instead of 2x+) the effect reproduced.  I
immediately pulled a roll back out to see if it had gotten that "hot" in a
short time by itself, and oddly, no - very little count rate noted, barely
above ambient (30 to 50 cpm)

That was about a week ago.  Over the next few days after that, I pulled the
same roll periodically, and have seen it become slowly more radioactive, up
to about 2500cpm from the "roll end" and about 1000 cpm from the side.

Overall suggesting that the mechanics were reproducing, albeit with less
intensity, presumably because the bucket solution was already partially
reacted and "spent".

Now yesterday, I set up a more controlled separate experiment in a Nalgene
500ml graduated cylinder.

I attached the counter tube firmly to the side of the cylinder, looking
"in", and took first a background count with 250ml of distilled water
inside.  Typical 30 to 50 cpm.  I poured out the water, and poured in 250 ml
of ~.1M uranyl acetate (fresh) in H2O.  Solution-only reading was between 80
and 100cpm.  This was poured out, and a single 75ft foil roll was slipped
into the graduated cylinder.  The uranyl acetate solution was then oured
back in, down through the center hole and allowed to rise up and wick up
through the foil.

Within about 3 or 4 minutes, as the solution was wetting into the roll (as
adjudjed by the changing top level of the liquid just above the foil, the
cpm on the counter tube climbed up to dance between 150 and 200cpm.

It looks like a legitimate effect, but what mechanism would produce it, I
don't kow.  In a modestly controlled geometry, there appears to be an
enhancement of emission rate from weak uranyl acetate as it permeates
between aluminum foil roll turns.  Again, I ponder - is this a Casimir force
related effect?  Or some coherency of emission from geometry of reflection?
Or hey, anyone up for ORANUR?

N







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