Cue Oliver M.: Lightning Makes Free Neutrons

Oh Dear. After blowing it off as not important for over 1/4 Century, non-Russian scientists have finally admitted that lightning can cause free neutrons (and all the hand waving explanations don’t explain how…)

This one can go in a lot of directions. The Electric Universe folks ought to have a field day with it (all sorts of things can start happening when you have free neutrons wandering around looking for a home). Will there be some kind of neutron conversion to ‘other stuff’? Maybe some into energy?

Then there is that niggling little question about the sun. If lighting on Earth can kick loose neutrons, what about the much stronger forces on the Sun? Might there not be a “Neutron Rain” on the Sun? Oh dear… What happens when your ‘gas ball’ has loads of magnetism and electric discharge and a constant shower of neutrons accumulating? (We have protons in the solar wind, so might they be the ‘left overs’ accelerated away by those magnetic fields, leaving behind a growing ocean of neutrons?)

Now, for my home lab, can I just set up a big Tesla Coil and get a nice free neutron source? Could I ‘drizzle’ them over depleted Uranium and get something more interesting? What happens when they hit a metal lattice loaded with protons? Might a strong electric discharge into a hydrogen / deuterium doped metal lattice knock loose a neutron or two, to drift into that metal and make a bit of fusion energy?

Oh dear, oh dear… I think I hear the sound of frozen paradigms thawing or even breaking…

http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2012/03/nuclear-lightening.ars

Lightning strikes produce free neutrons, and we’re not sure how
By Chris Lee

For the last 30 years there has been a very small controversy rumbling in the hallowed halls of physics. Way back in 1985, scientists from the then-USSR noted that whenever a thunder storm passed over their neutron detector, they observed an increased flux of neutrons. Unfortunately, they didn’t have much in the way of monitoring equipment to really nail down much beyond the initial observation.

Since then, scientists have put forward a couple of potential explanations for the observed flux. One was that the high fields generated during lightning strikes was modifying the trajectories of muons from cosmic ray showers. In short: these are cosmic rays, and this is not interesting. The second was that the gamma rays emitted during the lightning strike generated neutrons, a photonuclear event. But new measurements show that neither of these explanations can explain the data.

The (now) Russian scientists have designed an entirely new experiment that significantly improves their previous results. They installed three neutron detectors that were sensitive to low energy neutrons: one above ground, one partially shielded in a building, and a third underground with heavier shielding. Sitting next to the underground detector was a more traditional neutron detector that is sensitive to high energy neutrons. Finally, the electrical activity of incoming storms was monitored using a variety of instruments, allowing for better correlation between the neutron measurements and the electrical activity of any passing storms.
[…]
The new detectors also allowed the researchers to calculate the neutron flux from the storm activity. In the previous experiments, it had been assumed that each detection event corresponded to a single neutron. In a surprising turn up, the new data show that up to 5000 neutrons per cubic meter are produced every second by lightning strikes.

The article goes on to say it’s nothing very dramatic. I don’t think so. It may not have any practical impact right now, but it has some far reaching implications. You just have to get your mind out of the rain to see them…

Subscribe to feed

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in Science Bits and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

51 Responses to Cue Oliver M.: Lightning Makes Free Neutrons

  1. George says:

    “Could I ‘drizzle’ them over depleted Uranium and get something more interesting? ”

    Probably not else natural uranium would have become “something more interesting” by now. You need more than just the presence of neutrons. These are very low energy neutrons. They aren’t energetic enough to cause transmutation or fission. The higher energy Galactic neutrons are pretty scarce and there aren’t enough of those to do anything either.

  2. Ian W says:

    “up to 5000 neutrons per cubic meter are produced every second by lightning strikes”

    That is a fair number of neutrons. In Florida there can be evenings of continual lightning strikes – what happens to all those ‘free’ low energy neutrons? What effect do they have on existing atmospheric gases?

  3. Jason Calley says:

    I am so good at thinking up silly questions, I wonder why I never thought of this one before…

    If I have a bunch of cold neutrons — and I mean they are at room temperature or somewhat lower — what sort of density could I achieve? Could I fill up a tuperware container with a few grams worth? Why not? They don’t have those messy electrons in orbitals busy repelling each other. Wouldn’t a fluid of cold neutrons be appreciably more dense than hydrogen? Couldn’t I put some in a jelly jar? Could I fill up a squirt gun and shoot ’em in a stream? Why or why not?

  4. p.g.sharrow says:

    Hey! Jason, gathering a cup of “cold” neutrons would be tough, as it would weigh several tens of thousands tons and they “evaporate” into hydrogen in a few minuets at volume change of Atomic Radius, times 3.14 times, 10 to the 6th at the speed of light, Roughly, your cup would become the size of the earth at the speed of light! A rather large BANG. Might even ruin your day. 8-( pg

  5. E.M.Smith says:

    @Jason:

    That’s the kind of thing that’s got me wondering what happens to them…

    BTW, a common ‘pool type’ research reactor has a water blanket soaking them all up, but you can ‘pipe’ the neutron flux wherever you want. The “technique” is just to run a pipe through the water to where you want them. As the pipe is “empty” the neutrons are not absorbed…

    I have no idea what kind of faucet you put on the other end ;-)

    http://reactor.osu.edu/facilities/research-reactor

    The beam ports, two portholes that penetrate the north wall of the reactor pool, each have a 6-inch inner-diameter. Beam port #1, which is aligned perpendicularly with the core center, has a 7.8×1012 n/cm2/s maximum total flux and 4.5×1012 n/cm2/s maximum thermal flux. Beam port #2 approaches the core below center at an angle, and it has a 5.5×1012 n/cm2/s maximum total flux and 3.5×1012 n/cm2/s maximum thermal flux. A newly-built external neutron beam line facility is currently installed that uses beam port #2. See OSU’s Nuclear Analysis and Radiation site for more information.

    http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf61.html

    Like power reactors, research reactors are covered by IAEA safety inspections and safeguards, because of their potential for making nuclear weapons. India’s 1974 explosion was the result of plutonium production in a large, but internationally unsupervised, research reactor which closed at the end of 2010.

    So for some energies, provided one is patient enough, adding neutrons via a research reactor is a way to make ‘boom stuff’…

    Part of why I’m not keen on Iran saying it wants 20% enriched for it’s Research Reactor…

    A common design (67 units) is the pool type reactor, where the core is a cluster of fuel elements sitting in a large pool of water. Among the fuel elements are control rods and empty channels for experimental materials. Each element comprises several (e.g. 18) curved aluminium-clad fuel plates in a vertical box. The water both moderates and cools the reactor, and graphite or beryllium is generally used for the reflector, although other materials may also be used. Apertures to access the neutron beams are set in the wall of the pool. Tank type research reactors (32 units) are similar, except that cooling is more active.

    Just make a hole in the water and the neutrons dribble out ;-)

    Now with lightning knocking neutrons loose, I’m wondering just how “stuck together” the nucleus really is? I mean, they had to come from something, and you basically have N, C, O, and H (oh, and some traces of Argon, etc.) Most of those things are not very reactive to neutrons and have stable nuclear structures. So what the heck is ripping out a neutron?

    It just smells like something important happens that we don’t have clue about… Maybe high energy electrons smacking into H atoms on water vapor and turning a few protons into neutrons? And if THAT’s the case, could H ions in a metal lattice with a binding distance closer than the outer electrons get “smacked” enough to turn into a neutron and get drifted into the metal nucleus? Or could a synthetic lightning discharge through 100% water make even more neutrons? Could the ‘seed’ be identified such that all you need for a ‘pipe full of neutrons’ is a load of electricity?

    God I love a good mystery ;-)

    @P.G. Sharrow:

    Sounds like a decent rocket fuel then! Forget anti-matter drive, we can make a Neutron Drive starship! (Wonder if supercooled neutrons can be held stable in a vacuum bottle?…)

    IIRC too many neutrons in one place are a bit unstable and some of them start turning into protons and electrons. That “neutron repulsion” that Oliver talks about….

    Maybe he can ‘splain to us why we can’t have a bottle of neutrons and a Neutron Drive engine… ( or show how it can be done and we can all start a rocket company… The Electrical Neutron Drive Company ;-)

  6. Doug Jones says:

    Guys, do a little reading. Free neutrons have a half life of about 15 minutes, decaying into a proton, electron, and electron antineutrino. To do any useful transmutation you need many moles of neutrons, 6.022E23 each. A few thousand neutrons here and there are inconsequential.

  7. omanuel says:

    Thank you, thank you, for bringing this to my attention and for staying on top of “rumbling in the hallowed halls of physics.

    http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2012/03/nuclear-lightening.ars

    Those hallowed halls will come a-tumbling down, like “the walls of Jericho”. Both were fabricated out of Fear of Reality, God, “What Is”

    1. The hallowed halls of modern physics were rebuilt at the end of World War II. For details, see the blog I am building as sixty-six years (66 yrs) of pseudo-physics collapses:

    http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about/
    Fear and the instinct of survival
    persuaded world leaders to hide the
    energy that vaporized Hiroshima
    in 1945: They thus became rulers
    rather than servants of the public.
    The 2009 result: Climategate !

    2. Modern physics erred in ignoring the power of electricity and magnetism since the end of World War II. Evidence of current-induced nucleosynthesis on the solar surface was finally reported in 2006 [J. Fusion Energy 25, 141-144 (20 Oct 2006)]:

    Click to access 0512633.pdf

    That report was viewed favorably by Electric Universe folks. However, I still questioned electricity’s net influence on solar luminosity for two reasons:

    i.) Electricity is only important for the expanded (atomic) form of matter.

    The visible universe consists of two forms (compacted or nuclear and expanded or atomic) of one fundamental particle:

    The Neutron and The Hydrogen atom (p+ and e-)
    The Compacted and The Expanded Forms of Matter

    Charge separation occurs when a neutron decays. Electricity plays an important role in the expanded (atomic) form of matter.

    ii.) Neutron repulsion energizes neutrons at the centers of
    _a.) Heavy nuclei (A> ~150 amu) like uranium,
    _b.) Fluid planets – like Jupiter,
    _c.) Ordinary Sun-like stars,
    _d.) Galaxies like ours.

    Forces of attraction and repulsion between nucleons were deciphered in 2000, reported in [J. Fusion Energy 19, 93-98 (2001)] and shown on the cover of the 1999 ACS Symposium Proceedings organized by Nobel Laureate Glenn T. Seaborg:

    Click to access jfeinterbetnuc.pdf

    http://www.amazon.com/Origin-Elements-Solar-System-Implications/dp/0306465620

    Structure and reactivity of nuclei reflect these forces of attraction and repulsion:

    _a.) Very light atoms (A < 4 amu) are fusile (fusible) because of high surface/volume ratios and unsaturated, attractive N-P forces at their surfaces

    _b.) Heavier atoms (A = 4-150 amu) have high nuclear stability and cores consisting of approximately equal numbers of neutrons and protons (Like He-4).

    _c.) Yet heavier atoms (A > 150 amu) become increasingly unstable, have neutron-rich cores and always spontaneously decay for A > 209 amu.

    _d.) Centers of ordinary stars and galaxies exhibit the behavior expected in the core of very, very heavy atoms.

    Similarity between the structure of atoms and stars were reported by Niels Bohr in 1913

    Click to access Bohr_1913.pdf

    We later arrived at a similar conclusion [J. Fusion Energy 25, 107-114 (2006)]

    Click to access 0511051v1.pdf

  8. E.M.Smith says:

    @Doug Jones:

    Oh dear, Avogadro’s Number rears it’s head ;-)

    For all the connections I did make, somehow I didn’t make the one to chemistry and Avogadro’s Number… As, IIRC, that would be about 1 gram, a kg of neutrons would be E26 or so…

    Well, clearly it’s going to take a big leap forward in efficiency to use electricity to make enough to be interesting… OTOH, if you get thousands of fusion events per second that could still be an interesting quantity of energy, so the ‘connection’ to the potential mechanism for H infused metals in LENR still has some potential in it.

  9. Wayne Job says:

    Not to put to finer a point on all this, lightening is a huge surge of electrons, electrons per sec are the smallest little energy packet that is stable and self sustaining. They are the building blocks of every thing, some what like a miniature lego set. Contrary to popular belief these little buggers actually like one another and couple up as quarks, these quarks are a bit quirky and tend to also have an affinity and do a couplet dance to attract a mate, some what like a peacock, the goal is a positron, also in the lightening stream and thus they mate and a neutron is born.

    Neutrons are also hunter gatherers and they go looking for more electrons, these scientists should also look for light elements. Hydrogen and helium are thus born.

  10. Ralph B says:

    The reason lead, steel, etc aren’t good neutron shields is that they just bounce like pool balls off of a bowling ball (not truly correct but easy enough to visualize) water is a good shield due to the hydrogen…a collision transfers energy from the neutron to the hydrogen as they are of similar mass. Moderated, (slow, low energy) neutrons are what U235 uses to fission.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_neutron#Thermal_neutrons

    Putting a pipe (I think the correct term is channel, but pipe is pretty much what it is) allows the buggers to beam out. Try drinking from that garden hose…

  11. Jason Calley says:

    @ Doug Jones “Free neutrons have a half life of about 15 minutes, decaying into a proton, electron, and electron antineutrino. ”

    Ouch! That short?! That does make it a bit of an engineering problem. :) I notice that you make a point of saying “free neutrons.” How free is free? Apparently neutron stars do not have neutrons with a half life of 15 minutes — otherwise astronomers would not talk about pulsars, etc. If I did, in fact, have a jelly jar full of neutrons, (and per p.g.sharrow, it would have to be a VERY strong jelly jar), would they be free? How closely packed (or how strongly compressed) do neutrons have to be before they are no longer “free”? Alternatively, if you have a lump of neutrons, how thick is the layer of “free” neutrons near the surface? If the free layer is very thin, does that drop the decay rate down to something usable?

    On the other hand, there have, for decades, been sporadic reports of half lives being changed by various researchers. http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/25446 Of course, at this point we veer into speculation…but it would be nice to have that neutron rocket engine!

  12. Pascvaks says:

    “A cry in the darkness..” or “A fool crying in the wilderness..” or…
    Lightning strikes and neutrons – light elements seem to get by OK(?) – Maybe the little uptick in neutrons is the result of pollutants? Complex/heavy particles in the wrong place at the wrong time? The more ‘crap’ in the air during a thunderstorm the more ‘neutrons’ are likely to be seen? Remember, this did all start in Russia, we’re not talking about spick-n-span (sarc) N.America or paranoid, save-the-planet Europe here.

    A nice lightning bolt (or several) should also break molecules apart, and leave a number of questionable atoms that you wouldn’t ‘expect’ floating around in the mix. Right?

    Ozone is nice at great altitude. Perhaps lightning is also responsible for naturally adding a very, very light mix of other helpful (or not) ‘pollutants’ to the high atmosphere that we haven’t bothered to pay much attention to? We have been rather hung up on carbon lately haven’t we?

    Not sure I have this straight, the more lightning the warmer the climate or the colder? I think it does something to the ‘system’, doesn’t it?

  13. adolfogiurfa says:

    The purpose of naming particles with different names it is just an artifact made by us humans in order to describe reality. That is, too, the “Babel tower confusion of tongues”. “Neutrons” are not absolutely neutral bodies, as nothing absolutely neutral could exist. The transformation of one particle into another it is not other than a change in frequency and wavelength. In the known phenomenon of photocell it is not that from one side enter photons and the photocell produces electrons, no, it is the same as when you connect to the mains a transformer which changes voltage, say, from 220 to 110. In the process there is an energy loss, of course, transformed in other wavelengths, as infrared for example (“heat”), etc.
    Energy-“mass” it is a continuum, it is our mind which chop it in pieces of different names.
    See:
    http://es.scribd.com/doc/76744326/Unified-Field

  14. adolfogiurfa says:

    @E.M.: Your good sense of smell is proverbial: It just smells like something important happens that we don’t have clue about…
    You, indeed, have the clue.

  15. tckev says:

    Next stupid question –

    If a descent thunder storm happens over a nuclear power station do they see the effects of all these free neutrons?

  16. TomH says:

    Take a look at slide 18/40 about neutron detection in exploding wire experiments in this link:
    http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?resId=1&materialId=slides&confId=177379
    then also glance at slides from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries at the recent CERN LERN colloquium on transmutation of elements in LENR (they use the term “Low Energy Nuclear Transmutation” or LENT) http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?resId=5&materialId=slides&confId=177379

    Not very scientific, but I go “hmmmmmm”.

  17. adolfogiurfa says:

    @TomH: That presentation is very interesting. Fortunately some countries interested in blowing up neutrons everywhere are using “antique” technology. However I would change Fermi´s dictum: “Give me enough neutrons and I shall give you the entire periodic table” for “Give me enough electrons and I shall give you…”, because we are surrounded by “neutrons”. I like the Hydrine way of adding hydrogen (a big neutron) per metallic atom and obtaining the next element of the table.
    @Vukcevic: “…neutrons, which are subatomic particles without electrical charge”. Come on! “without electric charge” not even a phantom!, even phantoms have a few decent milligauss
    :-)
    The question would be: Why such an almost perfect neutrality would ever cease to exist?…perhaps an immortal being should not eat, because if it does even a single photon it blows off!
    In this universe nothing and no one is free from radiations..so “dust we are and to the dust we shall return”…unless we manage to start a negentropic process in order to become energetic phantoms. :-)

  18. omanuel says:

    @TomH 28 March 2012 at 8:17 pm

    CERN Colloquium on Low Energy Nuclear Transmutations, March 22, 2012
    and Fleischer and Pons reported “Cold Fusion” aka “LENT” in 1989

    Slides from two of the talks presented at the CERN Colloquoum illustrate the sad state of nuclear science after sixty-six years (66 yrs) of manipulation by frightened world leaders.

    1. The following quotes from the third slide (#3) in the overview of “Low Energy Nuclear Transmutations” by Professor Yogendra Srivastava at the 20120322 CERN Colloquium

    http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?resId=1&materialId=slides&confId=177379

    Should be inscribed on the walls of every office in the US Department of Energy, the US Congress, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the US Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, and Co-Chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), the US National Academy of Sciences, and the US Department of Defense – especially DARPA

    Hence, the renewed clarion call for hot fusion -supposedly
    occurring in the core of the stars, for T around 17 Million K

    • I say supposedly: for the lack of success achieved so far

    -after 60 years and over 200 billion dollars-
    might make you wonder that perhaps a realization of hot
    fusion on Earth is even more ephemeral than the one at
    300 degrees.

    • While strident criticism of low temperature fusion is legion
    among most physicists, the silence generated by the same
    physicists regarding hot fusion is positively deafening.

    • Europe is spending over a billion Euros on hot fusion this year

    • An optimistic estimate for production of usable energy via
    hot fusion is the year 2025.

    • In the US, the prognosis is for the year 2050.

    2. Slides from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries presented at the same 20120322 CERN Colloquium on the nuclear transformations confirmed by chemical analysis:

    http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?resId=5&materialId=slides&confId=177379

    by Y. Iwamura, M Sakano, T Itoh et al on deuterium-permeated palladium (Pd)

    a.) Sr into Mo (element #38 into element #42)
    b.) Cs into Pr (element #55 into element #59)
    c.) Ba into Sm (element #56 into element #62)
    d.) W into Os (element #74 into element #76)
    e.) W into Pt (element #74 into element #78)

    The above chemical analysis remind me of the types of analysis that Dr. Kazuo Kuroda probably performed on nuclear ashes of Hiroshima when he was sent there to determine the nature of the weapon used on 6 Aug 1945.

    That is one reason for my interest in figuring out what Kuroda found in Hiroshima ashes in Aug 1945 and why leaders of the US NAS tried to block publication of his reports on self-sustaining nuclear fission at the 1956 AGU meeting in Washington, DC

    See: http://www.springerlink.com/content/n556224311414604/

    Those nuclear transformations should be posted in the offices and studied by the US DOE Secretary of Energy (Stephen Chu), US EPA Administrator (Lisa Jackson), Director of the US White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (John Holdren), President of the US NAS (Ralph Cicerone), and US DARPA director (Regina Dugan), . . . even if she escapes to Google and leaves us in darkness.

    http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9225527/DARPA_director_goes_to_Google_but_probes_continue

    See information posted on http://www.omatumr.com/ http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about
    and http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=164758567

  19. gallopingcamel says:

    Chiefio,

    Never get your knickers in a twist over neutrons being created by interactions involving energetic electrons. If you find neutrons scary (they can be if you happen to be on the beam line of the Spallation Neutron Source at Oak Ridge National Laboratory), just remember that the neutron is not stable.

    A free neutron has a half life of under 15 minutes so lacking any other solution you could wait them out. In the real world we use materials containing hydrogen to slow them down (thermalize them) so that they will be easily absorbed by almost any atomic nucleus.

    My favorite neutron shielding consists of tanks of water (water contains plenty of hydrogen) and polyethylene because it is available in sheet form with some excellent mechanical properties. Great for doors!

    Where the neutron flux is particularly intense I recommend concrete. In some situations I used ten feet of concrete to take care of the neutrons plus four feet of lead to tame the gamma rays. Even so the radiation monitors would go beserk from time to time when we did something stupid.

  20. Hugo M says:

    I’d think TomH pushed the most relevant link here when he mentioned the neutrons produced by exploding wire experiments. As I understand the 1972 publication of Stepahakis et al, the term “wire” is a bit misleading. In fact these were polyethylene and polypropylen threads evaporated along a very short, high tension and high current discharge of 10^12 Watts, with the evaporated PE or PE providing a plasma target interacting with the electrons. Due to the short duration of 10^-8 s the required energy was still quite low — only 10^4 Joule. In fact these conditions appear to be comparable to those found in lightning discharge channels. If only O. Manuel could give his horses a rest and speak up to the point! Neutron generation does not take that much. There are, for example, matchbox-sized neutron generators using turmalin and similar crystals as mean to provide an acceleration voltage.

  21. omanuel says:

    I agree, Hugo.

    The same information is expressed more clearly where I can edit it:

    http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about/#comment-20

    I would appreciate help in trying to tie together the mysteries that plagued us, as society slid into its present demise. I will not live in fear, because I am certain the forces that control us are far more benevolent than the world leaders who sought to control us out of fear of the “nuclear fire” that consumed Hiroshima on 6 Aug 1945.

  22. vukcevic says:

    adolfogiurfa says:
    @Vukcevic: “…neutrons, which are subatomic particles without electrical charge”. Come on! “without electric charge” not even a phantom!
    Hi Adolfo
    When I edited that Wikipedia page sentence was:
    “…..neutrons are subatomic particles which are neutered of electrical charge …
    but William Connolly re-edited it.
    I emailed back ‘balls’.

  23. p.g.sharrow says:

    @Oliver M; I am glad to see you addressing science instead of old politics.
    @ Vuk; I agree, the neutron represents a “Neutered” condition. The electron shell charge ” negative, is sequestered next to the deep no charge,”positive” proton to yield a +/- “neutral” condition but it still has surface charge or it would not cozy up next to the proton.

    Connolly is a prime example of someone that has been educated way beyond his intelligence and refuses to learn something he was not taught in collage. pg

  24. adolfogiurfa says:

    @Vukcevic: Relatively “congealed” mass, or worse “reconnected”, almost neutral is terribly unipolar, like piling up magnets being attracted on one pole, like a bunch of government employees packed together as to make the less work possible. :-)

  25. omanuel says:

    @p.g.sharrow

    Thanks. Unfortunately government science and politics have been intertwined, at least since Henry Kissinger’s secret visit to China in 1971:

    Click to access Climategate_Roots.pdf

    The survival instinct compelled world leaders to end the arms race, the space race, and Unite Nations against Global Climate Change or face the possibility of death in a world-wide “nuclear fire.”

    I do not object to globalization, nor the corruption of almost every field of science since 1971 – astronomy, astrophysics, cosmology, climatology,nuclear, particle, planetary and solar physics – nearly so much as I object to the establishment of a tyrannical government and citizens loss of the “Bill of Rights” – the first ten (10) amendments to the Constitution.

    http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/BillOfRights.html

  26. TomH says:

    O/T somewhat to lightning-produced neutrons in the original post, but LENT (as Mitsubishi prefers to call LENR) produces net energy.

    MHI makes passing reference (slide 2) on potential applications: “Portable Nuclear Energy Source”. Most of the attention on LENR is as an energy source…Mitsubishi is showing in their presentation how the commercial value may lie elsewhere: low energy neutron capture in LENR could produce rare earth elements (interesting, but probably economic only as a byproduct of producing commercially useable excess energy), and for transmuting nuclear waste, which is a very critical issue to Japan’s economy if they ever hope to return to nuclear energy for electric generation.

  27. Hugo M says:

    Oliver,

    I can’t spot any difference between your post here and the link you provided to your own site. Plus I’m quite certain that our host is absolutely fair to everybody commenting here. Hence there is no need to control or edit anything after the fact. As an aside, regarding your hypothesis that the ugly stance of the powers that be could be explained out of fear: I’m quite inconvinced. That wasn’t the reason from the very beginning (The japanese government had offered their capitulation on honourable terms quite some time before) and it is obviously also not the reason for the horrible wars of our times. But please, this is again far off-topic. Regarding the physics of our athmosphere and especially lightning discharges, there is so much which is not understood until today, starting with the fact that the the difference of potentials are known to be much too low to trigger a spontaneous discharge.

  28. adolfogiurfa says:

    @TomH: In many cases transmutation gives off by products of rare earth elements. This explains the association of some rare elements in gold deposits. Andrea Rossi´s E-Cat uses the reaction between Ni nano powder and Hydrogen to jump from atomic number 28 to 29….BTW the excess heat from some “laptop” computers comes from hydride formation (hydrine).

  29. R. de Haan says:

    Cold/Hot fusion, her is something available right now although in Germany mass hysteria breaks out if you only mention the word nuclear
    http://www.gen4energy.com/

  30. R. de Haan says:

    adolfogiurfa says:
    29 March 2012 at 5:39 pm
    “BTW the excess heat from some “laptop” computers comes from hydride formation (hydrine)”.

    My laptop, a Macbook Pro, even runs hot without the battery.
    Especially when I run video’s, animation or heavy applications.

    Must be bad cooling of the processor.

  31. adolfogiurfa says:

    R,de Haan: Exothermic reactions such as the reaction between NaOH (sodium hydroxide) and water (H2O) should be revisited having in mind intermediate reactions.

  32. R. de Haan says:

    adolfogiurfa says:
    29 March 2012 at 9:10 pm
    “R,de Haan: Exothermic reactions such as the reaction between NaOH (sodium hydroxide) and water (H2O) should be revisited having in mind intermediate reactions.”

    I think a lot of research is done already as half the world is looking for the holy grail of the super battery but maybe digging through past research with a modern views could be an interesting
    way to go.

    A friend of mine working for Philips took up the task to simply dig through the patent files of a single laboratory and what he found resulted in almost thirty new startup within the first three months. There is a lot of hidden knowledge and potential applications waiting to be re-discovered.

  33. adolfogiurfa says:

    @R.de Haan: It is a matter of putting aside “Pride and Prejudice”, which is harder if you are nicely educated as a gay and cool individual.

  34. R. de Haan says:

    dolfogiurfa says:
    29 March 2012 at 11:20 pm
    “t is a matter of putting aside “Pride and Prejudice”, which is harder if you are nicely educated as a gay and cool individual.”

    I don’t think I follow you on this Adolfo

  35. p.g.sharrow says:

    @R. de Haan; I think Gay and Cool individual has a different meaning to Latin speakers then the rest of us. ;-) pg

  36. Larry Geiger says:

    Speaking of Germany,what happened to those guys in Italy making electricity out of…??? Did someone ever figure out what was going on?

    (Ok, can random associate too…)

  37. adolfogiurfa says:

    @ R.de Haan: What I meant was, perhaps in old english, “gay”, not as one of a singular sex orientation but of refined quality as being above “those nasty commoners”:
    The term was originally used to refer to feelings of being “carefree”, “happy”, or “bright and showy”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay
    “cool” as the most modern definition:Something regarded as cool is an admired aesthetic of attitude, behavior, comportment, appearance and style, influenced by and a product of the Zeitgeist.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cool_(aesthetic)
    Summarizing: Those whose self conceit and ego is so big as not to accept anything but what is socially accepted by his/her peers. (obviously we old goats, we don´t belong to such a selected class of people): They are the “alphas” and we the “gammas” of their ideal “Brave New World”…..(order?)

  38. adolfogiurfa says:

    May I add the following?. As far as I know, a lot of them like to live in Kaliphornya.

  39. adolfogiurfa says:

    @Larry Geiger: Visit http://pgtruspace.wordpress.com/ and read about Andrea Rossi´s E-Cat.

  40. p.g.sharrow says:

    Modern science has known that a neutron on its own under standard conditions has a half life of only a few minuets but within a Iron nucleus lasts for billions of years. They only allow for the destruction of neutrons under our conditions. When free neutrons are liberated they are kicked out of the atomic structure under high energy conditions and have a short half life, nano seconds in an atomic blast to a few minuets in spontaneous low energy fission. These are all hot neutrons due to their high energy levels and short half life.
    The detected cool neutrons would carry low energy and have an extended half life and could not result from fission of the heaver atmospheric gases. This leaves the creation of new neutrons from hydrogen or free proton ions during the lightning events. We know that powerful EMF fields can “freeze” the internal actions of atomic structures. The very powerful magnetic fields of lightning could be “freezing” the electron shell to the proton surface and creating swarms of cool neutrons. pg

  41. R. de Haan says:

    adolfogiurfa says:
    30 March 2012 at 1:52 am

    Thanks for the explanation but I was referring to your remark about setting aside “Pride and Prejudice”. I always thought that the scientific method” and it’s strait forward application in any research still was an universal standard for all true scientists.

    That said I now got your point as you refer to the political activists, AKA Fraudsters, cloaked as scientists screwing up science in total neglect of the scientific method.
    WUWT today has put up yet another example of such works.
    It contains some hubris about models and some totally BS fancy talk about declining ice sheets and cloud cover.

    Depending on the paper it’s printed on it could be used to wipe your AH.
    But only if the ink used is water resistant.

  42. omanuel says:

    @Hugo M (29 March 2012 at 5:27 pm)

    I can understand why you are not convinced by work in progress on a 66-year old mystery:

    The project seems headed toward an ancient view of Reality: “The force that sustains life is the force that creates and destroys its very atoms.”

    World leaders saw the destructive side of Reality in the “nuclear fire” that consumed Hiroshima on 6 August 1945.

    Kuroda may have seen the creative side of Reality in the ashes of Hiroshima.

    http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about/#comment-21

    Sanity is acceptance of Reality, whether realized by experimentation, observation or meditation. The Reality revealed by observation on 6 August 1945 may be the Reality that was revealed much earlier by meditation, and the Reality found in nuclear rest mass data in 2000.

    “Lord Shiva represents the aspect of the Supreme Being (Brahman of the Upanishads) that continuously dissolves to recreate in the cyclic process of creation, preservation, dissolution and recreation of the universe. http://www.koausa.org/Gods/God9.html

    “In the Shaiva tradition of Hinduism, Shiva is seen as the Supreme God and has five important works: creator, preserver, destroyer, concealer, and revealer (to bless).”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiva

    Patience and assistance deciphering this mystery would be deeply appreciated.

  43. adolfogiurfa says:

    @omanuel: Just take it easy!, cool it down!, let nature do its work. An indian Swami said to Paul Brunton, (who as a young journalist was eager to change the world, back in the beginning of the 20th century, and fix everything, from poverty to wars): “Don´t worry about changing the world, if YOU change there will be one person less to be changed in this world”

  44. adolfogiurfa says:

    ….and read what P.G.Sharrow wrote above about neutrons (your passion). He has a point…

  45. adolfogiurfa says:

    @omanuel: There are two ways for energy: either by increasing frequency (Eros, life) or by decreasing frequency (Thanatos, death). We should be very careful to choose the right way.

  46. omanuel says:

    @adolfogiurfa (30 March 2012, 2:30-2:38 pm)

    Thank you for the excellent quote, “Don´t worry about changing the world, if YOU change there will be one person less to be changed in this world.”

    The battle of life is the battle against SELF: You are defeated if you think you have won!

    But we will all escape the ego cage and win, . . . at death!

    I had completed the 2nd grade and was eight years old when this mystery began on 6 Aug 1945. The laws of Nature predict that I will escape the ego cage soon. I do not want to leave behind a society that is still suffering because world leaders would not accept Reality: “The force that sustains life is also the force that creates and destroys its very atoms.”

    That is the purpose of this project: http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about/

  47. p.g.sharrow says:

    “God grant me the strength to change that which can be changed, the patients to accept that which can not be changed. And the wisdom to know one from the other.” pg

  48. omanuel says:

    @p.g.sharrow (30 March 2012, 7:56 pm)

    Thanks for the comment. The “Serenity Prayer” is the path to sanity:

    “God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change . . . Accept Reality
    The courage to change the things I can . . . Change my attitude toward Reality
    And the wisdom to know the difference . . . My attitude cannot changed Reality!

    Sanity is being in contact with Reality.
    Insanity is being out of contact with Reality.
    Today’s society has lost contact Reality.

  49. gallopingcamel says:

    p.g.sharrow,
    All that high voltage stuff makes me nervous. Take good care of yourself!

  50. p.g.sharrow says:

    That high voltage is of some concern. Inductance / capacitance circuits osculating at peaking currents of hundreds of amps IS scarey. A lot of thought goes into each part as well as a lot of time in fabrication. At present I am creating the “shell capacitor”. Only 0.035mfd, but it is the outer termination of the “great coil” and is 12 feet in circumference. The last major part to be created before I can assemble things for testing. God has protected me for 65 years, I hope he has not become bored. ;-) pg

Comments are closed.