PieEconomics - Cavitation Radiation Replication

12/31/2018 PieEconomics: Cavitation Radiation Replication?
More Create Blog Sign In
PieEconomics
A second look at mankind's biggest issues.
PieEconomics 1. Legal Tender based upon Bitcoin 2. Fate of Banks and Physical Currency
3. Government Restructuring 4. An Easy Net Worth Tax F.A.Q. Truthers and the Singularity
Cold Fusion, Comedy? Cavitation Transmutation: Take This Viral! Ed Pope's Forewarning
Cavitation Radiation Replication? PieEconomics Diet Hydrogen Drinking Water 5.0+
Cavitation Radiation Replication? Followers
Followers (5)
By: David Zweig
November 9, 2013 (Updates at end of article. Latest update 5/26/2014)

Follow
A man working in his garage used a drive motor from an old forced-air furnace and
a pump from an old washing machine to make a device similar to NanoSpire's Blog Archive
which is claimed to have produced cavitation fusion. When I asked him about
▼ 2011 (1)
▼
whether he obtained radiation readings he was very specific about the units of
▼ November (1)
▼
radioactivity (CPM) that were given off by the fusion as measured by his Geiger
Welcome to PieEconomics
counter. Here are the relevant parts of a thread that appeared in the comments
section of a Revolution-Green article:
David Zweig
Dog-One wrote: ...Creating the cavitation bubbles in the pump using lift elevation
and having control valves to force the bubbles to collapse inside the media chamber
filled with stainless steel pot scrubbers (many sharp edges) does work. What I'm
View my complete
not so confident about is the radiation emitted--it will trip my Inspector+ rad meter
profile
into alarm. Pretty sure I don't need my garage containing a miniature Fukushima.
Simon Derricutt wrote: ...Replication of the experiments needs a high-pressure

pump - shouldn't be that difficult. [Dog-One,] it sounds like you have tried
replication and also got a response on your Geiger counter. Any details you can
share? It would be good to know that someone who we can trust has seen this.
Dog-One wrote:
Since I have the floor for a moment, let me say this much: I probably should have
kept my big mouth shut. What I saw convinced me the LeClair Effect has merit. The
big fat BUT in my opinion is this is clearly a poor way to convert Matter to Energy.
And the form of energy you get isn't easily useable. Plus, you have the joy of waste
product. I'll bet James Griggs has no idea just how dangerous his Hydrosonic
Pumps actually are.
The apparatus I built has been taken down and I won't say where the residuals
where placed. It isn't all that complicated to build, but it does take a lot of tuning to
get it to work properly. And no, you don't need a high-pressure pump--you are after
vacuum, not pressure. I used a drive motor from an old forced-air furnace and a
pump from an old washing machine. The biggest pain in the ass is priming the
pump--you have to raise the water level above the pump to get it to start, then lower
the water/raise the pump until the vacuum causes cavitation bubbles to form.
Controlling the motor speed with a variac is a must. The breakpoint is extremely
sharp between pumping and loss of prime and it's right in that region you want to
operate. At that point you need to output those bubbles immediately into the media
chamber and apply enough resistance on the output side of the chamber to get the
http://pieeconomics.blogspot.com/p/cavitation-radiation.html 1/26
bubbles to spread out and collapse within the media. From there I just made a
spillway back to the pump bucket so you don't have a closed loop system.
Seriously, with a little patience, anyone can build this. I just don't recommend
anyone do it. But if you refuse to take my advice, first lower the pump enough to
avoid cavitation and monitor water temperature as a baseline. After an hour or so to
stabilize, very slowly raise the pump until you hear/sense cavitation. Now monitor
water temperature. As the water slowly heats up you'll likely have to tweak valves to
keep the bubbles centered in the media chamber. With my fixture, if I didn't stay
right on top of the controls I would lose prime and have to start all over.
What I didn't do is any analysis of power input/output. Seriously I wasn't looking

for COP numbers and I didn't integrate any instrumentation. I'm not looking for a
Doctorate Degree here. I was just looking to see if there was any evidence the
LeClair Effect was smoke-n-mirrors or for real. My summary: it or something
similar is real. But at the end of the day, what are you going to do with it? Nuke
your children? Your spouse? Your pets? Negative, I'd rather burn some wood in a
rocket stove.
PieEconomics wrote: Was your radiation meter on? Did it sound an alarm? What
reading did it give and what is the significance of that reading? If radiation was
detected this is Very Big News... According to LeClair, the radiation shielding issue
was easily solved [using a hot cell]... Once understood, people shouldn't be any
more afraid of properly shielded cavitation devices than they are of dental X-ray
machines.
Dog-One wrote:
My baseline in normal pumping mode was averaging 40 CPM. Alarm set for 100
CPM, After raising the pump and initiating cavitation, readings began to climb
linearly (best I could tell) with temperature, though I probably had a fair amount of
evaporative cooling going on. I lost prime at about 170 CPM after about two hours.
The bad news is these readings only dropped 20 CPM in the course of 30 minutes
and continued climbing once I re-primed the pump. So unlike your dental X-ray
example, you have waste water to deal with--there's no remediation for that.
Seriously guys, this is a bad idea to pursue. Does it work? I say yes. Should we
embrace it? I say no. Your taking some electrical energy to run a pump and pure
water and making heat and toxic water. Plus, everything that has come in contact
with that toxic water is now contaminated. It wouldn't really matter to me if the
COP was greater than 100, its risks outweigh its energy production capability.
That's about it in a nutshell. We need to be looking somewhere else for an energy
solution.
If Mark LeClair [president of NanoSpire] would like to do another presentation on

the Smart Scarecrow Show with a commercial grade unit, I'll happily watch and ask
questions. I still won't have one in my house. For me, put a fork in it, it's done.
What was it Einstein said, "Nuclear power is a hell of way to boil water." It is
however a great way to eradicate all of your enemies.
Well, this is important news, nevertheless. LeClair always maintained that his
device was for commercial purposes and not for installation in residences.
Simon Derricutt wrote:
...It would be good to know the energy of the radiation as well as the counts, but
looking at the cost of a gamma-ray spectrometer (around $7k) that's out of range of
our budgets. That sort of measurement would tell us exactly what reaction is
happening. We could thus tell as to whether the radiation from the product would
be a longer-term problem or not.
This problem of inducing radioactivity is one reason why I think that, if Stan
Meyers' water-powered car really did work, the energy from it would need to be
nuclear and so we'd get the same problem. It seems that any system where a
concentrated-enough energy density is created (such as electric arcs, cavitation,
high-powered lasers etc.) then we can affect the nucleus, even though (a long time
ago) I learnt that this was impossible. Experiments in free energy should therefore
always have a Geiger counter in use, and preferably a neutron counter too (again
the neutron counter is somewhat expensive). TANSTAAFL again - you don't get free
energy for nothing...
On the difficulty of getting the process to work the way you had it set up, it seems to
me that you could get a wider range available by putting vanes with a somewhat
aerofoil shape (but reversed) in the water flow. If as the water passed this curved
surface the radius of curvature was increasing along the direction of flow then at
one point the cavitation point would be reached. Variations in water flow would
simply move the cavitation point forwards or backwards. Using pure de-gassed
water would likely reduce the unwanted radioactive products, too. The point here is
that if the effect exists then we should see if it can be made safe to use rather than
just dismiss it as being too dangerous. Given what cavitation damage is seen on ship
propellers and other pumps that have not been well-designed, I'd suspect that such
induced radioactivity is in fact being produced in a lot of systems, but no-one has
measured it since it is not expected to be a problem.
Although you could be right that this can't be made safe to use, I think a bit more
exploration is needed before it's consigned to the trash bin.
Dog-One wrote:
The setup is quite tricky. The bubbles form on the low pressure side and once they
cross the impeller, they immediately begin to collapse since the low pressure is now
gone. So to get those bubbles to last long enough to have them collapse in the media
chamber, you have to make them big enough to survive the transition and have the
flow rate fast enough to get them there. What you are doing here is controlled low
temperature boiling using vacuum; it's not rocket science, but it's not trivial either.
I'm most certain there are far better ways to do this--using a pump is probably a
very poor method. A better way might be to use a piston that draws a vacuum and
then slams back down at some optimal frequency. There's a video out there
somewhere showing a very similar setup using around 14kHz oscillation. The
cylinder would then become your heat exchanger and you could completely isolate
the radioactive by-products from the environment. What might be inside the
cylinder other than water and the piston is some structure that promotes a very
even distribution of optimal size bubbles and the sharp edges that attract the re-
entrant jets.
I tend to agree there must be a better way to utilize the concept for energy
production. If one could convert this process directly into electrical output that
would be great. I'd even settle for enhanced Hydroxy production. Heat is a tough
one though. It's simply too difficult to get the energy to where you want it from
where you produce it.
Now granted this would be far safer than your typical GE Mark I nuclear reactor--
it's not likely it would ever melt down and poison the entire Pacific Ocean, but the
risk is still there you could completely contaminate your residence and harm your
family. What I feel is needed is for some great minds to come together and find a
more suitable liquid that when used, only generates heat without all the harmful by-
products. If someone can do that and build an apparatus that is reliable, I'm all
in. Then we just figure out a reasonably good way to transform this heat into
electricity or something else that is relatively easy to distribute.
So just to reassure you, I'm not totally against the concept. I think it needs a lot of
work in a controlled environment which rules-out garage builders like myself. Even
a proof of concept device is not a toy and I would highly discourage such a
replication unless you have a proper facility and are trained in handling nuclear
material. That said, the door is still wide open for other means of conversion from
Matter to Energy. I'm personally still not convinced there isn't a whole lot more
about magnetism and quantum engineering we can do safely. Even gravity lacks the
kind of thorough explanation I would require to say it's a dead end. No, the problem
isn't because we aren't thinking outside the box. The problem is we need a bigger
box.
Simon Derricutt wrote:
The piston idea looks good. The water in the cylinder would need to be de-gassed
and pure, and to have suspended in it small particles (nanoparticles?) of some solid
that would act as a nucleus for the cavitation bubbles. It would likely help if the
particles each had a hydrophobic spot at least, so it's possible that a very fine
emulsion of oil would do the job, though easily-available particles could be got
using artist's Titanium Dioxide white paint - take the stuff that remains is
suspension rather than the bits that settle out when you dilute the paint with a lot of
water. Lamp-black is another easily-available fine particle.The piston would need to
be fast moving and to produce a small vacuum space before slapping down to
produce a suddenly-increased pressure. Whereas the oil might get chemically
broken down, the TiO2 and C should be OK and last a while.
The main problem is that this produces low-grade heat (less than boiling-point, at
least) and uses high-grade electrical energy to drive it. Apart from the radiation
problem, making that heat into electricity again and thus being able to self-loop will
be difficult. With a big-enough COP and the radiation problem sorted, it might be
useful enough to be worth it, especially if you can run it on renewable energy
anyway.
As regards the liquid used, have you considered molten Lithium? Melts at around
200°C, so not too difficult to use, and could run up to maybe 400°C so would be
easier to run a steam-turbine or other heat-engine from it. Being very reactive, it
would need a bit of care in containment, but the reaction ought to produce just
Helium and not too much radiation. This may be a better way of doing the Lithium
reactor I've been thinking about than using piezos. [See comment, below,
suggesting molten fluoride salts as another alternative.]
PieEconomics wrote (responding to selected quotes):
“I tend to agree there must be a better way to utilize the concept for energy
production.”
LeClair agrees. He wrote: “I am sure... that the process can be controlled or

terminated before undesirable elements are produced. It also appears likely that the
zero point energy can be produced without triggering any nuclear reactions at all... I
know how to scale this up without the bother or expense of going massively parallel.
The laser powered version I expect to produce megawatts out of a desktop sized
unit. A pump produces thousands of cavitation bubbles per second, but they are
various sizes and not all are properly aligned or produce jets. The laser powered
system will be far more efficient... ”
“I lost prime at about 170 CPM after about two hours. The bad news is these
readings only dropped 20 CPM in the course of 30 minutes.”
This means that after 3-1/4 hours, the CPM is back down to normal background
levels of only 40 CPM. The increased radioactivity is short lived; once shut down,
any potential for environmental hazard soon ceases. This is good news, and is
consistent with what LeClair wrote to me: “The reactor produced both short and
long lived isotopes... The radiation hazmat team did find radioisotopes, but tried to
pass it off as ‘naturally occurring’. It is important to note that most of the samples
didn't not nucleosynthesize the heaviest elements and those that did only produced
barely detectable traces above uranium.”
“I just made a spillway back to the pump bucket so you don't have a closed loop
system.”
Doesn’t that describe a closed loop system, as far as the water is concerned?
Together with the fact that the radioactivity is short lived, a properly shielded
commercial grade unit would be considered a green technology, especially if the
energy could also be made to self-loop.
“I probably should have kept my big mouth shut… If Mark LeClair would like to do
another presentation on the Smart Scarecrow Show with a commercial grade unit,
I'll happily watch and ask questions.”
Mark LeClair's technology is mired in a shadowy world. Ed Pope, NanoSpire's

adivser, had worked in Naval Intelligence, and Sergio Lebid, LeClair's associate,
appears to have worked in top-secret operations for the government. LeClair wrote:
"...the cat is out of the bag and can't be stopped, even if they manage to stop us.
Even if it takes fifty years... The world's problems are political, not technological."
Reading this, one might think that every intelligence agency in the world would be
interested in gaining or controlling access to this technology.
Well, NanoSpire has been avoiding independent verification for so long, they
appeared to be just another free energy inventor that in reality didn't have the
goods but blamed government suppression for their delay. Now that your
replication lends credibility to LeClair's work, his statements about suppression
should not be dismissed out of hand, and you should quickly disclose everything
you know about this technology.
“The apparatus I built has been taken down and I won't say where the residuals
where placed.”
The media chamber along with the stainless steel pot scrubbers contained therein
should be tested for evidence of transmutation. Why not donate what is left of the
apparatus including all residuals to a university? Widely distribute on the internet
diagrams and detailed instructions, so that duplication in properly equipped labs is
foolproof. Then, the focus of attention will be on those labs.
If what you have disclosed on this thread is true, and other than due to normal
scientific skepticism I have no reason to think that it isn't, then this represents an
important milestone in science. If you hold anything back, ill-equipped hobbyists
may find the need to make the breakthrough for you.
[Sources for LeClair's quotes and other background information can be found in the
previous articles on this blog.]
--------
Update 11/11/13:
Here's a cavitation device invented by James Griggs, producing hot water/ steam.
While purportedly operating at over-unity, the inventor states that "in most all
water heating applications it is difficult to economically justify." I wonder if this
device was tested for radiation and transmutations.
FUELLESS HEATER NO FUEL NO GAS NO WOO…

WOO…
I found the video at Open-source-energy(dot)org which is an excellent site for

"studying efficient energy production." It was on this recent thread: LeClair Effect
Nuclear Reactions (True LENR). The original video was longer, and also included
this clip:
FUELLESS HEATER NO FUEL NO GAS NO WOO…

WOO…
The original video dates back to 2006, and Hydrodynamics is the company it
featured, which today markets the Shockwave Power Reactor (SPR):
Industrial SPR
Standard Package (customization available of metal, elastomers, etc.)

304 Stainless Steel SPR
Max temperature: 400°F
Max pressure: 300 psig
Max flow: 0.1 to 1,500 gpm
TEFC motor rated at 460 VAC, 1800 or 3600 RPM, 60 Hz
One AC-Drive
Piping connections with Viton elastomers
Double cartridge seal
Mounted on painted skid
Basic instrumentation and control panel
Training and operations manual
This commercial cavitation device utilizes a pitted spinning rotor producing

bubbles which then collapse within those pits, sending shock waves out into the
media which becomes heated to temperatures of up to 400 degrees F. Metal
surrounding the media does not sustain damage, since cavitation is confined within
the rotor pits (although presumably the rotor pits sustain cavitation damage over
time):
Pitted Spinning Rotor
Reactor
According to Doug Mancosky, Vice President of Research and Development at

Hydrodynamics, "the unit is capable of producing steam and hot water, however it
generally isn't the most economic option for commodity heating applications when
compared to conventional boiler technology." The device is mentioned as related to
alternative energy only in its capacity for processing alternative fuels such as
ethanol. The device also is used to process foods and beverages, so I would hope
there would be no radioactive residual -- in fact, there's no mention of radioactivity
at all:
http://hydrodynamics.com/marke...
Doug's quote, above, comes from the comment section of this SPR Cavitation video.
On 4/30/13 he was awarded this patent: US 8,430,968 B2 Method of extracting
starches and sugar from biological material using controlled cavitation.
The company has been selling products for some time. I e-mailed Doug today,
forwarding the accounts of cavitation radiation, and he responded as follows: "I've
seen the same articles. We see no evidence of nuclear style radiation."
Doug Mancosky (dmancosky@hydrodynamics.com)
Compare the Hydrodynamics statement that it sees “no evidence of nuclear style
radiation” with the statement from Quantum Fusion that “no less than seven
independent peer reviewed reports exist demonstrating neutron emissions from
collapsing cavitation bubbles.”
Quantum Fusion was the company profiled in the Revolution-Green article linked
above. According to the article: “There is a universal consensus among scientists
that the following criteria needs to be met in order to establish conventional
thermonuclear deuterium fusion unquestionably.” (See article for the five criteria
listed.) “We have conducted our own bubble fusion experiments... We have detected
neutron yield coincident with cavitation. We are working on an improved version of
this experiment that will satisfy the conditions 1-5.”
Will Quantum Fusion's New Device Need Shielding From Ratiation?
So, while Quantum Fusion has detected neutron radiation, they acknowledge their
proof isn't yet up to universal scientific standards. Here's what they say about the
new device they are working on: “We have designed and built a hydrodynamic
cavitation hardware... a modified centrifugal pump with perforated rotor and stator
and it acts as a hydrodynamic siren. We are working on refining the design so we
could achieve acoustic energy density on the order of 1 MW/m2 that is necessary to
achieve cavitation-induced fusion in this system. The machine is a work in progress
and can serve as a basis for a commercial CIF generator.”
Quantum Fusion's new device appears to have much in common with the
Hydrodynamics device. We'll see what Quantum Fusion has to say about this.
Update 11/12/13:
Here are quotes (in blue) from an e-mail response by Dr. Fomitchev-Zamilov of
Quantum Fusion:
"I do not believe NanoSpire's results as they are not presented in a scientific
manner. You simply cannot draw any conclusions from people hand-waiving and
not doing science properly, this only proliferates confusion."
Yes, this is normal scientific skepticism, which is part of the scientific method. Early
steps in the scientific method, however, can involve coming forward with unproven
observations and hypotheses and non-peer review testing, and these should also be
encouraged. I don't understand why the garage hobbyist who disclosed a few days
ago that his cavitation device emitted radiation, said “I probably should have kept
my big mouth shut." He is to be credited with giving away lots of details, but
considering that he has decided to totally abandon the project, why not make
complete information about it (including what's left of the device itself) fully
available? Properly equipped labs could more easily duplicate it and perhaps
further the lot of mankind. As far as creating unwanted publicity, there would be
none-- as NanoSpire found out, any unproven disclosure in this field is ignored by
the mainstream.
"Account of the state of our technology is correct."
Kudos to Quantum Fusion for proactively acknowledging that the work they have
underway is needed in order to meet unquestionably the scientific standards for
demonstrating thermonuclear deuterium fusion.
"I do not believe HydroDynamics claims in excess power - if it was the case they
should get a Nobel Prize for it as it would be a new (nuclear?) process as it is
unclear where the source of over-unity power would come from. I think this could
be possible in principle, but degree of scientific work necessary to establish proof is
significant."
Well, consider these passages from the Hydrodynamics' 2006 video clips, above:
"What's so extraordinary about such an ordinary looking machine is the claim that
it is more than 100% efficient. More energy has been measured coming out in the
form of heat or steam, than the electrical energy needed to turn the rotor. The term
for this is over-unity. Scientifically, this is supposed to be impossible, because it
overturns the fundamental law of the conservation of energy, that says you cannot
get something for nothing. And yet, external observers here claimed to have
measured up to 70% more energy out than in."
"Right after our initial installation [at the Albany, GA, firehouse] we measured the
output with Jim[Grigg]'s team, representatives from a local university, and one of
our local power companies, and we were all astounded by the output. Our
measurements indicated that the system was more than 100% efficient, which is
very hard to believe. The average engineer would say, baloney. But our measuring
devices were certified, and until someone comes along and tells us different, we will
say that it is more than 100% efficient."
Hydrodynamics' inventor, Jim Griggs, initially talked up the over-unity factor and
the fact that his device violates existing laws of physics. But now the company
avoids the claim of excess power. The company doesn't need to introduce any
distraction into the marketing of their cavitation heaters to the niche markets they
service. Their selling point is that cavitation allows substances to be heated evenly
from within, which is critical in processing certain products. Any over-unity that
exists adds no economic benefit.
Quantum Fusion also told me their system is different: "Our hardware is much
different from HydroDynamics, the devil is the details, as you know, and we spelled
it out in our hardware patent application."
Both systems begin by pumping in the liquid. According to the Revolution-Green

article linked above, here are some of the ways the Quantum Fusion device differs:
(1) Whereas Hydrodynamics uses whatever liquid its client is processing, and the
bubbles form out of that liquid, Quantum Fusion uses a liquid that is optimized for
the cavitation process, and the bubbles, which are independently introduced into
the system, are a different substance from the liquid. (2) The cavitation bubbles are
comprised of deuterium gas. It is hypothesized that during each cavitation bubble
collapse, the deuterium therein fuses creating a mini-thermonuclear explosion. (3)
The bubbles are made to oscillate. Some competing cavitation systems induce
oscillation using sound, but Quantum Fusion achieves this utilizing a variable
pressure drive in its pump. (4) The shock waves from the bubble collapses are
focused so that they converge. This convergence of shock waves allows less pressure
to have to be created than would ordinarily be required when trying to achieve
temperatures that are conducive to creating thermonuclear explosions.
Clearly, Quantum Fusion adds many complexities to its system, whereas the
Hydrodynamics system is much simpler. This may account for not only its
measurable radioactivity, but also its potentially greater amount of over-unity,
which may someday allow it to self-loop.
Update 11/13/13:
I'm going to try to separate some of the issues:
(1) Can cavitation cause energy out to exceed energy in, otherwise known as over-
unity? It looks very likely, based on the use of independent observers and certified
measuring devices at the Hydrodynamics installation at the Albany, GA firehouse.
(2) Just because a process achieves over-unity using a particular energy source,
does that make it economically feasible to use that energy source? No. Using the
Hydrodynamics firehouse installation as an example, suppose $10 input of electric
energy powering an electric pump on a cavitation device outputs heat energy equal
to $12 of electric power. That is over-unity. But what if only $5 of natural gas
heating a boiler could be substituted as the input, with the heat output still having
the same worth as $12 of electric power? Clearly using natural gas would be
cheaper, notwithstanding that using an electric powered cavitation device achieves
over-unity.
(3) When a process can achieve over-unity, does that necessarily mean the system
can be made to self-loop, ie: to have the steam output power the input? Wouldn't
you just pay to get it started, and then after that the energy is free? No. Just because
a process has more energy output than input, does not mean that the overall system
can self-loop. There are numerous inefficiencies in converting the output, which is
one form of energy, to become the input, which is a different form of energy.
(4) Is over-unity a loose term? Yes. There is no such thing as getting more energy
out than in-- that is, if you include conversion of mass to energy (nuclear) and ZPE
(zero point energy) as an energy sources. We use the term over-unity when we
don't know where the excess energy output is coming from. A good place to look
would be to see if this excess energy is coming from some type of nuclear reaction,
which is distinguished from merely a chemical reaction or a physical change to
matter. While chemical reactions and physical changes are well understood and
easily identified, this is not the case with nuclear reactions, where there is much
more that we don't know and where we haven't even been able to figure out all of
the different types. For example, we are still only in the early stages of figuring out
LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reaction). As for ZPE, which some believe is energy
that originates in another dimension, our knowledge is at an embryonic stage.
(5) When it is hypothesized that the source of the excess energy is from some type
of nuclear reaction, this can be tested by checking for the presence of neutron
radiation. Quantum Fusion, as well as NanoSpire, claim excess energy from
traditional nuclear reactions (eg: hot fusion), and to support their hypothesis both
claim the presence of neutron radiation.
(6) A Geiger counter is used to test for the other four types of ionizing radiation:
alpha, beta, gamma, and x-ray. It does not test for neutron radiation. If the garage
hobbyist detected radiation from his cavitation device using a Geiger counter, how
does this help in determining whether a nuclear reaction took place? Well, release
of neutron radiation is accompanied by the release of other forms of ionizing
radiation (although the reverse is not usually the case). Recently, researchers
working on the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project were excited when they
detected gamma radiation. This may help further the hypothesis that the process
being tested which they term LENR is actually nuclear.
(7) How do we reconcile the various claims of radiation from cavitation? We already
discussed Quantum Fusion, which claims traditional nuclear reaction, and neutron
release as evidence thereof. Hydrodynamics and the garage hobbyist use much
simpler devices. Hydrodynamics sees no evidence of nuclear style radiation, but it
is unclear what if any type of radiation testing was done. What source other than
nuclear could account for their over-unity? The garage hobbyist used a Geiger
counter, but a more sophisticated device is needed in testing for neutron radiation
(at a qualified radiation lab). The real puzzler is NanoSpire, which uses a very
simple $250 setup and still manages to claim hot fusion and neutron release,
providing physical artifacts suggesting evidence thereof.
Update 11/17/13:
Nigel Dyer wrote on the Vortex Forum: "With LeClair I think you need to try and
separate out the hypothesies as to the mechanism from the observations of what
happened. Too often LeClair confuses the two." Unlike Dyer and other scientists on
the Vortex Forum, I am not a scientist, but using simple language, here is my
attempt to separate observation from speculation:
A change in pressure brought about by motion causes pockets of vapor (bubbles) to

materialize inside liquid. Alternately, bubbles are injected into the liquid (Quantum
Fusion's reactor).
As conditions change and the vapor begins to liquefy, there is abrupt compression
causing the bubbles to collapse. According to Moray King (see 11/18/13 update,
below), bubble collapse taps into a form of energy called Zero Point Energy (ZPE).
Bubbles collapse in one of two ways, either asymmetrically or symmetrically, and

this determines how the zero point energy dissipates.
Asymmetrical bubble collapse ocurs when the bubble collapses unevenly. The
weakest spot on the surface of the bubble begins to depress into the bubble. Water
rushes in to drill all the way through the bubble and out the other side, causing the
now shrinking remaining vapor to take on a torus (donut) shape. This rush of water
is called a reentrant jet.
The patent page on NanoSpire's website shows two instances where a bubble
collapse is forced to occur asymmetrically, causing a reentrant jet to form and exit
the other side of the bubble: (1) When the bubble is located near a wall or other
solid surface, the reentrant jet hits the wall at a 90 degree angle. (2) When the
bubble is located near a smaller collapsing bubble, both reentrant jets face each
other, with the larger reentrant jet passing through the smaller reentrant jet and on
through what remains of the smaller bubble.
Symmetrical bubble collapse occurs when the bubble collapses evenly. Occurring
when a bubble is out in the open, away from surfaces or other collapsing bubbles,
the pressure on the bubble is even so no reentrant jet forms. The bubble expands
and then shrinks, but before it disappears it gives off a bright flash of ultra-violet/
deep blue light called sonoluminescence, as well as releasing heat energy. If all of
the energy released from cavitation was in the form of heat, instead of some being
in the form of light, temperatures would reach above 10,000 degrees K.
It is the asymmetrical bubble collapse that are more interesting of the two, since
these don't waste most of their energy in the form of unusable visible light energy as
symmetrical bubble collapse does. Asymmetrical bubble collapse gives off
electromagnetic energy (EMF) as well as heat and kinetic energy, which causes
damage to nearby physical surfaces. Let's focus on the EMF energy given off in
asymmetrical collapses, since it is this form of energy that may cause the other
forms to arise, and may be indicative of nuclear activity. But there are different
theories as to from where the EMF originates. Is the EMF given off by the
remaining bubble torus, or does the EMF emanate from what occurs at the tip of
the reentrant jet, after it leaves the other side of the bubble?
Reentrant Jet Theory of Cavitation Fusion
Mark LeClair along with Moray King believe that the reentrant jet continues
accelerating after exiting the other side of the bubble. They believe the reentrant jet
becomes a new type of water crystal which shoots out approaching relativistic
speeds, catching up with and then colliding through the force field (called a bow
shock) that travels just in front of the nose of such crystal, causing ball lightning
and supernova style hot fusion and transmutations, as well as causing nearby solid
materials to incur cavitation damage.
Vortex Theory of Cavitation Fusion
Under this theory, the reentrant jet turns what remains of the now shrinking
surrounding bubble (torus) into a vortex, which is a tornado-shaped whirlwind.
While acknowledging the role of the reentrant jet in asymmetrical bubble collapse,
as well as in transforming the remaining bubble into an EMF-emitting vortex,
scientists advocating this theory believe the significance of the reentrant jet ends
there. While the speed of the reentrant jet can be as much as Mach 4 as it leaves the
bubble on its way toward the matter or other bubble that caused it to form, these
scientists do not believe the reentrant jet accelerates after leaving the bubble, or
that water contained in the jet turns into crystals that go on to cause hot fusion,
transmutations, or cavitation erosion damage. Instead, these scientists believe the
significant energy from asymmetrical bubble collapse is in the EMF given off by the
remaining bubble vortex. Here is what a scientist, who goes by the name Axil, has to
say regarding the nature of these vortexes:
(1) While visible light emanates from symmetrical bubble collapse, light energy is
also involved in the formation of EMF vortexes in asymmetrical bubble collapse.
Axil wrote: "The LeClair... vortexes are stable for a very long time; like ball
lightning. A Polaritron vortex lasts only 20 to 30 picoseconds due to coulomb
repulsion. So these long lived EMF vortexes must be without charge to be stable for
so long: so they must be photon based vortexes. How photon based vortexes can
form from nanoplasmonic processes is not clear to me." Note that the source of this
energy is also not clear to Moray King, who terms the source Zero Point Energy.
(2) EMF from the vortexes causes cavitation damage to nearby solid material. Axil
wrote: "The huge magnetic field produced by light in the polariton plasmid vortex
stays together long enough to affect the atoms on the surface of the solid material
being eroded."
(3) Nuclear events brought about by this EMF are more akin to LENR (Low Energy
Nuclear Reaction) than to hot fusion. Axil wrote: "The *Key* to LENR is optical
vortexes (AKA solitons). Nanoplasmonics mechanisms load light into nano-sized
optical resonators in unlimited amounts. These solitons produce hugely powerful
tightly focused atomic scale magnetic beams. The power of these beams may get up
to 10 to the 16th power tesla." Regarding LeClair's theory, Axil said: "His belief in
hypersonic water crystal collision is not correct... LeClair’s experimental
descriptions mostly rings true with my understanding of LENR in cavatation...
LeClair may have erroneously connected the water crystal that he sees with the
action of... magnetic vortex solitons."
Nigel Dyer "spent something like four hours with Mark", and viewed firsthand some
of the artifacts which showed damage from the vortex waves. He wrote:
"When I had a look at the tracks that were present on the samples that Mark
showed us, I was left with the clear impression that what was going on was not
simply ballistic. It did not look as if the cavitation bubble shot out a lump of
something that gouged its way along the surface of the metal, the tracks were too
even across the length. It was almost as if the cavitation bubble initiated some kind
of LENR event that continued as the vortex (or whatever) passed along the surface,
giving it a continuing and consistent source of energy. The vortex theory may
possibly support this. [Dyer clarified by email: "It is not the same as my hypothesis,
but at this stage I feel we could do with as many (testable) hypothesizes as possible.]
It seemed unlikely that it was a highly columnated source of energetic
particles/radiation from the bubble because many of the tracks are not straight,
which also suggests that it was not a simple ballistic event..." [Dyer clarified by
email: "In Mark Leclair's case, when I looked at the lines that are scored by the
continuing re-entrant jets as they score along the surface... if anything it suggests
that something with a very specific shape went along the surface without twisting,
which is where I guess Marc got the inspiration for his hexagonal crystal. Indeed,
there is almost too good a match between the two which is one of my continuing
nagging doubts about his results."]
Dyer also said that he knows "someone else who appears in part to have managed to
repeat the results." When we talk about LeClair's results we need to distinguish
between the two types of damage that were observed: (1) Cavitation damage to solid
surfaces inside the reactor, and (2) Radiation damage outside of the reactor, to the
room and items therein and to trees outside the building. I believe Dyer is referring
to confirmation of the cavitation damage to solid materials inside LeClair's reactor,
as well as referring to at least some of the radioactive damage that occurred outside
the reactor. I do not think he is referring to confirmation of the wide-array of
transmuted materials found inside the reactor or other evidence of hot fusion.
So, both Axil and Dyer believe LeClair's reaction to be LENR based, and not hot
fusion. If this is the case, why does LeClair's reaction give off such large amounts of
radiation, while traditional forms of LENR (eg: Rossi and Defkalion) do not? Axil
provides two theories: (1) "In the Ni/H reactor [traditional LENR], these solitons
are entangled and form a Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC). Therefore no gamma
radiation is emitted from the BEC because of EMF superatom frequency leveling.
However, in the LeClair system it is too cold for a BEC to form so gamma radiation
will not be converted to heat." (2) "In cavitation, the solitons can grow especially
strong because vortex structures like to combine together. Many solitons can
combine into one huge monster. In the Ni/H reactor [traditional LENR],
consolidation of solitons may not occur which makes for a weaker Ni/H reaction."
This leaves wide open the question of how the transmutations into so many
elements (some gram-sized and some still in LeClair's possession) came about.
These scientists don't see the conditions being present that would be needed for hot
fusion to take place. If NanoSpire's system is some type of LENR (Low Energy
Nuclear Reaction), the amount of transmutation would be limited. For example,
with traditional LENR it has been reported that nickel transmuted into copper.
Regarding cavitation LENR, Axil quoted from an article finding "clear evidence of
transmutation during cavitation damage in rubber." From the article: "Many times,
at the bottom of the well-developed cavities were found metallic and other types of
particles (Figure 10b) such as ZnO2, silica and CaCO3, which are composed of
carbon black and sometimes sticking of them by creating bigger inclusion." If
LeClair's system is LENR one would not see hydrogen, atomic number one,
transmuted supernova style into 78 elements ranging from lithium up through the
periodic table to californium and 108 isotopes ranging from 7Li to 249Cf, as
claimed by Leclair.
Dr. Fred Zeopfl (see 1/8/2014 update, below) disagrees with the article Axil quoted
describing transmutation occurring during cavitation damage in rubber: "Zinc
oxide, silica, calcium carbonate and carbon black are common additives (fillers,
extenders and diluents) that improve the physical properties of rubber and many
plastics. If you want to get into the details, here is an industry reference (The
Handbook of Fillers, Extenders and Diluents, 2nd Ed.):
www.amazon.com/Handbook-Fillers-Extenders-Diluents-
Edition/dp/1890595969. It is just absurd to assume that water cavitation produced
these materials from rubber when they were deliberately added to the rubber in the
first place!"
Update 11/18/13:
Moray B. King, mentioned above, is a scientist who has been lecturing since the
1970's about a commonly overlooked source of energy. In a lecture at the recent
Breakthrough Energy Movement Conference, Moray gave a background to Zero
Point Energy and explained how it relates to LeClair's reaction. Listen to the
presentation here together with viewing the slides here. (The slides may take a few
minutes to download.) The lecture's program guide provided this intro:
"Water electrolyzers can emit a secondary gas (besides hydrogen), comprised of

energetic water clusters. When subjected to an abrupt high voltage discharge they
convert to torus shaped plasmoids that cohere the ZPE. Inside an internal
combustion engine, the plasmoids exhibit a surprising excessive force that drives
the piston.
"The presentation connects the discoveries of Ken Shoulders and Mark LeClair.
Shoulders measured excess energy phenomena of microscopic ball lightning, called
exotic vacuum objects (EVO). LeClair discovered that collapsing cavitation bubbles
launch reentrant jet water crystals whose plasma bow shock front behaves like
Shoulders’ EVO. The water crystals often stabilize into micron size rings that form
the seed of the charged water cluster.
"For hobbyists the water cluster gas is easy to make: Simply combine cavitation
with high voltage spikes at low current. The gas can run a generator. Widespread
replication of self-running gen-sets would achieve a breakthrough energy
discovery."
So, now we see LeClair's water crystals appearing in another cavitaton setting. But
there are some differences between the crystals in water cluster gas (more
commonly known as Brown's gas) and those produced in LeClair's reactor:
LeClair's reactor: The crystals form as reentrant water jets rush out of collapsed
asymmetrical bubbles. The crystals are charged with zero point energy, as a result
of cavitation alone. The crystal accelerates towards its bow shock. The zero point
energy manifests when the crystal collides through its bow shock. The energy
manifests creating conditions enabling supernova style hot fusion.
Brown's gas: The crystals form after high voltage low current electrical spikes are
applied to cavitating water bubbles. The crystals are charged with zero point energy,
as a result of the combination of cavitation and electrical energy. The crystals
emerge as a fog-like gas, forming groups of rings. When the gas is lit, the ring
formations dissipate as each crystal shoots out independently. As with LeClair's
reactor, the crystal accelerates towards its bow shock. The zero point energy
manifests when the crystal collides through its bow shock. The energy manifests as
a "cool" 266 degrees F flame that vaporizes tungsten (which is surprising since
tungsten has a boiling point of 6,192 degrees F and a vaporization point of 10,031
degrees F).
More reflective of mainstream thinking is this section of a Wikipedia article on

Oxyhydrogen:
"Fringe Science and Fraud
"'Brown's Gas' is oxyhydrogen with a 2:1 molar ratio of H2 and O2 gases, the same
proportion as in water. It is named after Yull Brown, who claimed that it could be
used as a fuel for the internal combustion engine.[4][14] It's also called "HHO gas"
after the claims of fringe physicist[15] Ruggero Santilli, who claims that his HHO
gas, produced by a special apparatus, is "a new form of water", with new properties,
based on his fringe theory of 'magnecules'.[14]
"Many other pseudoscientific claims have been made about Brown's Gas's
pretended ability to neutralize radioactive waste, weld metals, help plants to
germinate, etc.[14]
"Oxyhydrogen is also often mentioned in conjunction with vehicles that claim to use
water as a fuel. The most common and decisive counter-argument against
producing this gas on board to use as a fuel or fuel additive is that more energy is
needed to split water molecules than is recouped by burning the resulting gas.[4]
[16] Additionally, the number of liters per minute of gas that can be produced for
on-demand consumption through electrolysis is very small in comparison to the
liters per minute consumed by an internal combustion engine.[17]
"An article in Popular Mechanics reports that Brown's Gas cannot even increase the
miles per gallon (MPG) of your vehicle, and that the only real savings come from
tampering with your engine, which may confuse the anti-smog controls.[18]
"'Water-fueled' cars should not be confused with hydrogen-fueled cars where the
hydrogen is produced elsewhere and used as fuel or where it is used as fuel
enhancement."
Update 11/27/13:
Here are excerpts from email responses I recently received from scientists:
Moray King:
(1) Regarding what causes cavitation erosion to adjacent solid material: I think tip
of reentrant jet has phenomena like [Ken] Shoulders' EVO, which exhibits a ZPE
coherence.
(2) Regarding acceleration of the reentrant jet: LeClair proposed the reentrant jet
water crystal self accelerates. Shoulders' claims to have observed his EVO did
likewise.
(3) Regarding why the reentrant jet turns into water crystals: Reentrant jet forms
water crystal due to extreme pressure.
(4) Distinguishing symmetrical and asymmetrical bubble collapse: Not all bubbles
form reentrant jets. Some stay spherically symmetrical.
(5) Regarding where the Zero Point Energy ultimately manifests: I think the bow
shock is where ZPE coherence is occurring (it's like Shoulders' EVO); it is like
nanometer ball lighting.
(6) Whether it is accepted science that reentrant jets accelerate after leaving the
other side of the bubble: Self acceleration is new phenomena. ZPE coherence
producing a "space warp" drive like phenomena. It is beyond the accepted
paradigm.
(7) Regarding the formation of Brown's Gas: Low current, high voltage spikes of
electricity are applied to cavitating water bubbles, and the reentrant jets leaving
asymmetrical bubbles turn into water crystals, stabilizing into micron-sized rings.
That is what I am proposing for the secondary gas. Typical Brown's gas also has
hydrogen and oxygen.
(8) Can liquids other than water can be used for creating Brown's Gas? Officially
Brown's gas is a mixture hydrogen, oxygen, water and water cluster gas.
(9) A bubble bursts quickly, so is the event, including ring crystal stabilization or
supernova style fusion over almost instantly after the cavitation light flashes, or
does ball lightning linger? Sonoluminescence is from symmetrical collapse of
cavitation bubble. Here there is no reentrant jet and no ball lightning.
(10) Is the radiation outside the reactor (in the room and outside the building): a)
the same powerful EMF of the vortexes (toruses) in the reactor, but now radiating
out through the reactor walls, or b) radiation from supernova style nuclear
fusion? Tripping a Geiger counter can be caused by EM pulsing. It important to
make other types of measurements as well to prove nuclear reactions are occurring.
(11) If cavitation is a LENR event, the excess energy comes from the transmutation
of matter from one element to an adjacent element, and this is a completely
separate nuclear event from the supernova style transmutations that LeClair
believes occurs later when the nose of a crystal plows past its shock bow. I think
transmutation is caused by coherent ZPE interaction from the bow shock. Here
there must be many reentrant jets. Cavitation produces both types of bubbles
(spherical and torus).
(12) Does excess energy in cavitation come from: a) conversion of matter (nuclear),
b) from ZPE, or c) from both? I think mostly from ZPE. But some nuclear reactions
are exothermic.
(13) Is ZPE tapped: a) by the torus formed after the reentrant jet passes through the
bubble, b) by the torus rings that the crystals later form which when electricity is
applied becomes Brown's Gas, or c) by both processes? Both. When Brown's gas
becomes a plasma torch, the torus rings become EVO plasmoids.
(14) Does ZPE give off ionic radiation, and if so, why and what types? Coherent ZPE
would manifest excess energy in the interacting plasmoids. Plasmoids can radiate
EM field energy.
Moray's additional comments:
"Unfortunately the science has not evolved to where we know the details. In fact
most in academia would deny the existence of macroscopic ZPE interactions.
"The advantage of LeClair's transmutation discovery is that it is a relatively simple

experiment that produces a result that is beyond the accepted paradigm. It forces
consideration of ZPE ideas or at least new ideas that could affect the atomic
nucleus. It offers a "nuclear ash" in the form of unusual isotopes. The end result of
nucleo-synthesis is similar to what Adamenko discovered at the Proton-21
laboratory using plasmoid strikes at pure single element targets.
"I think before we go too far on speculating about the exact details of plasma vortex
rings (plasmoids), self-acceleration (ZPE propulsion), and the existence of like
phenomena in Brown's gas, we need experimental replication to confirm that there
indeed is a new phenomena discovered, and it is worthy of widespread
investigation.
"That being said, I can speculate on some answers to your questions. But remember
they are just my opinion. We simply don't know the details yet."
Emails (in blue) from Axil:
(1) Regarding how the reentrant jet while still within the bubble creates the vortex
EMF: "I also believe that the reentrant jet is what causes erosion of adjacent solids.
It is energy emanation from the shrinking electromagnetic vortex of the collapsing
cavitation bubble. The reentrant jet is a projection of anapole magnetic that
originates at the center point of the EMF vortex."
(2) Here is how I interpret Axil's explanations about resonators within the EMF
vortexes: Resonance within a bubble occurs twice, and in two different forms. First,
there is sound resonance, caused by either pulsating the pump or by externally
introducing sound. This causes the bubble to expand and then abruptly collapse. It
contracts to about one micrometer (micron) in diameter (one-millionth of a meter)
when light is produced, resonating within the bubble, and then escaping as the
bubble finishes collapsing either in the form of visible blue/ purple light
(symmetrical collapse) or in the form of "dirty" EMF (asymmetrical collapse). Math
equations govern the action of resonators within spherical shapes:
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/AminiFthestudyof.pdf
"Most of the information on LENR can be found on the Internet. It’s just a matter of
putting it together… and most importantly… making the information and its
connections understandable... Look at:
http://www.atlasobscura.com/places/whispering-gallery-at-st-paul-s-cathedral
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whispering-gallery_wave
"The stuff in the bubble vortex must be EMF to enable the evanescent wave at the
surface of the bubble. EMF means light, electrons and holes. It is amazing that
water vapor can be transformed into UF light, but when a sonoluminescence bubble
bursts, it produces a blue light:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e62_1354862274
(3) "Cavitation damage of rubber and plastic is revealing:
"Clearly, the projection of large magnetic fields from the center of the collapsing
cavitation bubble will have produced a huge hydrostatic pressure pulse of water as
the water is carried forward by the emerging magnetic field. But if the damage
mechanism in cavitation was solely due to a pressure pulse of the reentrant jet,
rubber would be resistant to such a damage mechanism. The high pressure water
pulse should bounce off the rubber surface.
"EMF induced chemical reformulation of the rubber is also going on.
"Also, if the attractive mechanism that directs the reentrant jet toward the rubber
surface were electrostatic, rubber should also resist that mechanism.
http://www.gruppofrattura.it/ocs/index.php/esis/ECF16/paper/viewFile/7323/38
02
(4) "The attraction of the reentrant jet to a [solid] surface might well be a quantum
mechanical mechanism... I am sorry to complicate your reality, but a recent
experiment in quantum physics seems to support TSVF.
"In this experiment, by placing a double-slit experiment along one path of a larger
double-slit experiment, the researchers have shown that photons traverse a section
of the apparatus that they neither enter nor exit.
"Light can get inside a dark place without any windows to enter or exit.
"Applying this newly discovered reality to LENR, the emergent jet produced by a
cavatation bubble may be drawn to the material to be damaged by its power. This
may be why an emergent jet forms to emanate from a cavitation bubble when near a
metal surface, but the bubble collapses symmetrically in a sonoluminescent blue
flash when no material boundary surface is close by.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-state_vector_formalism
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2013/nov/26/physicists-ask-photons-
where-have-you-been#"
Update - 1/8/2014:
Excerpts (in blue) from emails recently received from Dr. Fred Zoepfl, reprinted
here with permission:
Dr. Zoepfl's background: "I have a Ph.D. in nuclear and chemical engineering and
over 35 years of experience in commercial and Naval nuclear power. I worked on
ADM Rickover's staff at Naval Reactors in the radiation protection branch from
1975 to 1980. I have taken over 50 courses in chemical and nuclear engineering,
radiation protection, materials science, fluid mechanics, and chemistry/physics."
Regarding the science of NanoSpire's claims: "It is simply physically impossible to
cause thermonuclear fusion and element transmutation under the conditions
LeClair describes. There is simply not enough energy available in high-pressure
water or in a cavitation bubble to overcome the nuclear Coulomb barrier. it is
physically impossible to make transuranics like californium (Z = 98) and fermium
(Z = 100) from water and an aluminum plate."
Dr. Zoepfl asked four other Ph.D.s who are full professors to review the Nanospire
presentation: (1) the Chairman of the Physics Department at the University of
Maine, (2) a professor of materials science at Penn State, (3) a professor of nuclear
engineering at the University of Missouri (affiliated with the Sidney Kimmel
Institute for Nuclear Renaissance), and (4) the Chairman of the Astronomy and
Astrophysics Department at the University of California.
Regarding this peer review: "They all found Mr. LeClair's ideas to be both ridiculous
and hilarious. There is no ionizing radiation or radioactivity associated with Mr.
LeClair's nonexistent 'LeClair Effect.' He is basically using a 0.5-hp pump to direct
plain water at an aluminum plate. If you are familiar with bass fishing tournaments,
you may know that bass boats use 250-hp motors (500 times more powerful than
Mr. LeClair's pump). Each motor is equipped with a 'cavitation plate.' So you can
imagine that, if Mr. LeClair were correct, the entire lake would explode when over
100 bass boats take off at full power during a tournament, and of course all the
participants would die of radiation exposure.
"I have reviewed Mr. LeClair's 'results' and his products are small fragments of
commonly available materials like brass and carbon steel. These are probably
detritus from the internals of his system that were produced by cavitation erosion, a
well-understood process. Even assuming that 'elements' formed from plain water, it
would truly be a miracle for them to spontaneously organize themselves into
commercially available alloys, don't you think? Also, if these elements were recently
formed by thermonuclear fusion, they would be highly radioactive and would have
isotopic distributions (e.g., C14 to C12 ratio, K40 to K39 ratio, etc.) that would be
significantly different from present-day materials."
Regarding Quantum Fusion: "[They claim] that they can produce "hot fusion" (not
LENR/CANR/LANR/cold fusion) in a heavy water bubble. The two most feasible
'conventional' fusion technologies (inertial and magnetic confinement; NIF and
ITER, respectively) heat D-T to over 100 million degrees K. Here is the reason:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fusion_rxnrate.svg. The x-axis on this plot is
BILLIONS of degrees Kelvin. D-D fusion is basically impossible below 10 million
degrees K. What Quantum Fusion is asking you to believe is that a tiny bubble in
heavy water can achieve these kinds of temperatures, which is simply ludicrous.
"Talk with Prof. Seth Putterman at UCLA. Putterman is the queen of

sonoluminescence and even obtained a U.S. patent for sonofusion in 1997...
Putterman quit puttering around with nuclear sonofusion after he figured out that
it was physically impossible. In fact, he became one of sonofusion's greatest skeptics
and he disproved the sonofusion claims made by Taleyarkhan."
Regarding what happens in cavitation bubbles: "Just conventional physics:

http://etd.library.vanderbilt.edu/available/etd-06172013-
143310/unrestricted/Ramsey_Dissertation_Final_2013.pdf"
Regarding Ed Pope and David Nagel: "My good friend Ed Pope is the person who
sent me LeClair's original 'fusion results' (his SEM/EDAX data on brass and carbon
steel metal fragments) and the Nanospire presentation... Ed Pope even asked me to
research the rare earths market for him so that [he and LeClair could sell] newly
formed rare earths produced by the 'LeClair Effect'. He was the one who actually
arranged the 'test' of Nanospire's technology at NRL. I spoke with Dave Nagel...
about this test, and he told me that they could not detect any kind of ionizing
radiation whatsoever during the test, and that they used 'some very sophisticated'
radiation detection equipment..."
Regarding the garage hobbyist's radiation readings: "An increase in a Geiger

counter reading from 40 to 170 CPM is not a confirmation... It could be from
normal fluctuations in natural background radiation levels. In any case, Geiger
counters don't detect neutrons..."
Dr. Zoepfl may have a point that the radiation readings reported are not necessarily
indicative of nuclear fusion. With the ongoing Fukushima situation there's lots of
information out there to put things into perspective.
Nuke Professional gives these interpretations of various Geiger counter CPM (clicks
per minute) radiation readings:
12 - This is low. It doesn't get much lower.

25 - Pretty normal.
50 - Happens once in a while with no real reason. Just keep an eye on it.
100 - Alert. No need to panic, but try to figure out what is going on, stay out of the
rain, avoid unnecessary trips.
150 - Real risk of cancer if exposed for a year.
500 - Real risk of cancer if exposed for 90 days.
On any given day elevated radiation reading which are similar or higher than those
achieved by the garage hobbyist can be found to have been measured. Here are
some reported by the Nuclear Emergency Tracking Center on January 8, 2014 at
11:30 AM EST (CPM of Gamma in energy range 600-800keV):
Eureka, CA, US CPM: current 210 Low 139 High 240 Avg. 169, Dev. 20.1.
Olympia, WA, US CPM: current 143 Low 83 High 178 Avg. 110, Dev. 16.6
Carlsbad, NM, US CPM: current 231 Low 124 High 312 Avg. 177, Dev. 30.7
Milwaukee, WI, US CPM: current 170 Low 84 High 225 Avg. 123, Dev. 23.7
Bangor, ME, US CPM: current 175 Low 138 High 329 Avg. 188, Dev. 25
Bismarck, ND, US CPM: current 188 Low 139 High 404 Avg. 212, Dev. 42.7
Fresno, CA, US CPM: current 371 Low 244 High 992 Avg. 384, Dev. 95.7
Shreveport, LA, US CPM: current 211 Low 188 High 386 Avg. 222, Dev. 26.6
Dr. Zoepfl describes some cutting-edge technology: "If you would like me to send
you some info on things that actually work and that could use some start-up
funding, I would be happy to do that as well. Here are some ideas I've been working
on:
1. a visible light responsive (VLR) durable photocatalyst coating that is transparent,
self-cleaning and purifies the air by removing common air pollutants;
2. functionalized nanodiamonds that can be added to lubricants to improve engine
performance by 10% to 30%;
3. a phytomining technology that can remove metals like nickel, cobalt, zinc and
cadmium from soils (with USDA/ARS);
4. non-toxic insect/rodent repellents that could be spray-applied to wood,
agricultural products, etc. (with Dow Corning);
5. transparent solar heat reflective (SHR) coatings that could be spray-applied to
common construction materials (kind of like a "liquid window film");
6. a transparent coating that would prevent "roof algae" and purify the air (a typical
2000 sq.ft. roof would clean the air as much as 20 trees); and
7. A diamond coating technology that can be applied at room temperature and that
could be functionalized to make superhydrophobic/superhydrophilic/oleophobic
surfaces that are nearly as hard as natural diamond. [When I later pointed out
LeClair's claimed postage stamp sized diamond transmutation, Dr. Zoepfl's
response was that: 'Diamond formation is an extremely well understood process, as
you can imagine. There is no diamond whatsoever produced by LeClair's process.']
"Please let me know if you would have any interest in these technologies. They are
all real.
"Fred Zoepfl, Ph.D.,

Vice President, Technical Programs
Systems Technology, Inc. (STI)
14925 Bogle Drive
Chantilly, VA 20151 USA
Phone/Fax: +1-703-729-8669
E-mail: fzoepfl@yahoo.com"
--------------
An Austrian also has a report of radiation from cavitation:
Excerpts from LeClair's email to Sterling Allan dated 12/29/2013 (Austrian

inventor's sub-quotes are in blue):
"The group in Austria have been interacting with me to make sure they get the
protocol right. On July 23 this year, they reported the following, running a facsimile
of the experiments we did with a rolled up aluminum plate with a drilled hole grid,
exposed to cavitation from a pump. They saw radiation levels that were well above
background during the experiments and similar to our results of 250 cpm (10X
above background of 25 cpm) during our most intense experiment:
'it started of with 50 cpms fluctuated and hovered between this value and
background level, suddenly rose to 100, 150, 200 (briefly even 250) before falling
back to 50 and eventually fading out to background .... as said, this entire event took
maybe 10 to 15 secs, enough to take a picture, afterwards we had difficulties to
repeat that, although we regularly tracked the 50-100 cpm mark (still well above
background).'
"They reported the following results to me from another experiment on August

28th:
'as you can see we moved the item into our bunker, but still have not yet installed
the remotely adjustable valves .... we are working on that as well. the result with this
prototype was decent but quit fluctuating (radiation bursts lasted a round 5 secs) as
it kept drifting like a hysteresis loop between lower and upper values - but nothing
that spectacular, just slightly better than what we obtained with prototype-I. we
also found out that the pump we are using is made of a kind of carbonate-synthetic
with a huge gap between the housing and the rotating cylinder; probably the reason
why cavitation event occur in irregular manner and as such are quite scarce. So we
opt now for prototype-III, where we will use a tune-able pump that allows us to
control its revolution from 0 to 130%. In addition, we will have a pumping unit that
is made of metal rather than plastics. I'll keep you posted on that.'"
Here is a comment LeClair made to the 2012 PESN NanoSpire article, with more
information regarding his radiation readings:
"The radiation shielding required is typical for any nuclear reactor. However, in the
bulk of the experiments including those in Buxton and at NRL, the gamma and beta
components were very small, typically 50-60 CPM, with a 40 CPM background,
only a 25-50% increase above background but very consistent. The neutron flux,
which Geiger counters have very low sensitivity to, must have been very large, as a
later experiment unexpectedly demonstrated where we saw higly activated 56
minute half-life 39CL in the PVC core enclosure. The enclosure for that experiment
was 225 CPM, more than five times the background two and a half hours after the
experiment was over! Because of the typically low Geiger counter readings, the
Geiger counter wasn't on for that experiment. I luckly captured the rest of the five
hour decay curve to background with a data logger Geiger counter. The decay curve
extroplated backwards (green trace on graph) indicates that the radiation was
approximately 1100 CPM during the experiment."
We see that the CPM for LeClair's experiment rose to between 100 and 200, and up
to a recorded 250 (briefly?) during what he termed his "most intense experiment."
Looking at the CPM interpretation chart above, are LeClair's and Lebid's radiation
sickness symptoms as described in my Cavitation Transmutation article typical for
these CPM readings? It might be worthwhile to review the State of Maine's
HAZMAT report, and any report that followed up on the radiation sickness claims.
Perhaps the answer is that the symptoms were a result of neutron radiation emitted
at the same time, which would not have been measurable in Geiger counter CPMs
which measure gamma radiation.
Dr. Zoepfl commented by email: "All of LeClair's [statements] about "chlorine-39"
and "transmutation" are imaginary. The two stable isotopes of chlorine are Cl-35
(76%) and Cl-37 (24%). Polyvinylchloride (PVC) looks like (CH2-CHCl)n, where n
ranges from 600 to 3000 (n is called the "degree of polymerization"). The idea that
any process other than a large nuclear reactor could produce the radioactive isotope
Cl-39 from PVC is just absurd. I don't know why LeClair came up with this, but it is
sheer unadulterated nonsense. Cl-37 would have to absorb not one but two
neutrons to form Cl-39. The intermediate radioisotope Cl-38 would also be present
at the same time in far larger quantities than Cl-39, so his "decay curves" are also
physically impossible. Transmutation involves a change in the number of protons in
an atomic nucleus. This takes a great deal of energy to accomplish for stable
isotopes. If it were easy, it would happen all the time."
Further Validation Delays
Continuing with LeClair's email to Sterling Allan dated 12/29/2013:
"I'll also send you an e-mail concerning our attempting to perform a replication
experiment at Penn State in 2012 and how that ended up. Some have unjustly
accused NanoSpire of avoiding doing replication experiments. Aside from the
invited experiment we did at NRL and attempted to do with McMaster University,
we approached Penn State to do replication as well. We had a verbal commitment in
May, 2012 from Brenden Heidrich, a Research Associate of the Penn State
Radiation Science and Engineering Center, to rent NanoSpire a well-equiped hot
cell for a replication experiment of the cavitation based LeClair Effect. We were told
that the facilities were available on several dates, I selected June 6, 2012 and they
sent the Master Service Agreement contract to me to sign. Then they reneged on the
agreement without explanation at the last minute."
See my previous article for Ed Pope's views regarding the NanoSpire experiment at
Penn State that actually did take place. It should not be very difficult to avoid the
pitfalls that occurred there.
As for a suitable and convenient lab, the UMass Lowell Radiation Laboratory is less
than a two hour drive from NanoSpire. Quoting UMass: "Although the main focus
of the laboratory is to support the research and education missions of the
university, use of its facilities by those outside the university is fully welcomed."
http://www.uml.edu/centers/rad... I spoke to the lab several months ago, and was
told that use of the lab can be rented out by the half day. Basically, if you come up
with the money, and have a coherent plan, you don't need any special academic
approval. In addition, when I described NanoSpire's device, the lady I spoke with
was very encouraging about renting out the facility for that type of testing.
Someone qualified like Fred Zoepfl could help with independent validation.
Update: 1/12/2014
Light + Nanoparticles can produce LENR including Transmutation
...According to Axil's latest email, it's not just light from cavitation, but light from
laser can also work:
"In my opinion, like all manifestations of LENR, this reaction is based on

nanoplasmonic energy amplification and concentration.
"I consider that Nanoplasmonics is the quintessential expression of the

electrochemists art, a science conceived and brought into being by progenitor and
paterfamilias of LENR, Martin Fleischmann himself back in 1974.
"A series of experiments that I am particualy fond of and not related to the E-Cat
shows how light under the mediation of nanoparticles (provides topological order of
the spin net liquid) can produce a nuclear reaction. Laser light alone does not
produce the nuclear effect. I believe that LeClair is producing water based
nanoparticles that catalyze the LENR reaction as I have explained to you in past
communications.
"It is clearly shown [in this article] that neutrons are not required to initiate fission
and the transmutation that fission can produce: Initiation of nuclear reactions
under laser irradiation of Au nanoparticles in the aqueous solution of Uranium salt.
"Abstract: Laser exposure of suspension of either gold or palladium nanoparticles in

aqueous solutions of UO2Cl2 of natural isotope abundance was experimentally
studied. Picosecond Nd:YAG lasers at peak power of 1011 -1013 W/cm2 at the
wavelength of 1.06 – 0.355 mm were used as well as a visible-range Cu vapor laser
at peak power of 1010 W/cm2. The composition of colloidal solutions before and
after laser exposure was analyzed using atomic absorption and gamma
spectroscopy in 0.06 – 1 MeV range of photon energy. A real-time gamma-
spectroscopy was used to characterize the kinetics of nuclear reactions during laser
exposure. It was found that laser exposure initiated nuclear reactions involving
both 238U and 235U nuclei via different channels in H2O and D2O. The influence
of saturation of both the liquid and nanoparticles by gaseous H2 and D2 on the
kinetics of nuclear transformations was found. Possible mechanisms of observed
processes are discussed.
"Here is another paper explaining how the nanoplasmonic mechanism can change
the half-life of U232 from 69 years to 6 microseconds. It also causes thorium to
fission.
"I have been looking for a theory that supports the Nanoplasmonic underpinnings
of LENR. Composite fermions look good so far. For one thing, LENR is rooted in
topology. These experiments are conclusive for me. These Nanoplasmonic
experiments with uranium can be done inexpensively, why are they not replicated?
"Critics of LENR are hard put to explain these series of experiments and why
transmutation and fission are not demonstrated by them."
Update: 3/28/2014:
Discussion between Fred Zoepfl and Simon Derricutt:

http://revolution-green.com/free-energy-radio-smart-scarecrow/ (see comment
section)
PieEconomics wrote: "This video shows a Geiger Counter detecting X-Rays given off
by the unpeeling of Scotch tape: http://youtu.be/BizTHR1ni_Q?t=4m10s. The
action of unpeeling tape may be causing the excitation of electrons, creating the
radiation. Normally, excitation of electrons causes only a lesser form of radiation,
called non-ionizing radiation. But X-Ray radiation (like gamma radiation) is
ionizing radiation, a more powerful form of radiation that has the power to remove
electrons from atoms (turning the atoms into ions). LeClair's and Dog-One's
cavitation implosions are similar to this video's demonstration of tape unpeeling, in
that they all produce ionizing radiation. Is it reasonable to think that this ionizing
radiation is caused by excitation of electrons, even though radiation caused by the
excitation of electrons is generally of the lesser, non-ionizing form? If so, neither
LENR nor hot fusion might be involved at all."
Simon Derricutt responded: "... in Dog-One's case... he saw radiation after he'd
switched it off... As such, I'd expect Dog-One to have produced a nuclear reaction.
For LeClair, it's difficult to be certain about much but he does claim to have
transmutation products. If those claims are true then again it would be nuclear.
Ionising radiation on it's own can be electron stimulation as postulated in the video
you've attached, but if that radiation shows a half-life after switching off or
alternatively if nuclear changes can be proved by isotopic analysis or other ways,
then a nuclear reaction it is."
Update 3/29/2014
Some promising developments (discussion yesterday continued today)...
PieEconomics wrote: "'...then a nuclear reaction it is.'

(1) Is it almost 100 percent certain that if radiation continues after cavitation
ceases, that it is emanating from a nuclear reaction in the atoms that comprise the
residuals? Gamma radiation is released incidental to a nuclear reaction, and this
can be measured by a Geiger Counter (neutron radiation detection would be 100%
indicative, but a Geiger Counter does not measure neutron radiation).
(2) Is it almost 100 percent certain that a nuclear reaction in the residuals will cause
the temperature of the surrounding water to rise? ...and that since this is nuclear
there should be over-unity?
(3) We know that over-unity in itself is not enough, due to inefficiencies. How large
of a COP do we need to see for this to be world-changing?
(4) Why does everyone RUN AWAY from this simple, inexpensive project? Safety as
an issue is easily dealt with. On my first inquiry to a radiation lab where I described
the experiment, they said it's just a routine project that they are eager to rent out
the facility for.
(5) ...I agree that we can take Dog-One at his word. I am not a scientist, and we need
more scientists to get involved. If the scientists and engineers on this forum speak
out, it would be easy to raise the money (<$10,000) at a site like GoFundMe."
Simon Derricutt responded: "...I don't know of any non-nuclear reaction that will
emit ionising radiation powerful enough to be counted by a Geiger counter after the
power to the reaction mechanism is turned off. Maybe someone else knows of one.
In Dog-One's experiment, he did not have any EMI that could affect the electronics
and give erroneous counts.
2 - The radiation will be absorbed in the water, so there will be a temperature rise.
Could be difficult to differentiate between that and the Joule heating unless it's a
large effect.
3 - If the effect really exists, then it will likely be improved through further
experiment. The COP at the moment needs only to be measurable - better than the
error bars. Even getting the gamma spectra will be enough to demonstrate that it's
real.
4 - Friends of mine are checking out something on these lines, and I will also be
checking things fairly soon. The main thing about this is being able to be certain of
the measurements, and to get a plot of the gamma energies so that we can better
work out what is actually happening. This will not be open-source. As to why
reputable scientists don't get more involved, they would then be disreputable
scientists... We first need to prove beyond any (un)reasonable doubt that it works.
5 - There's a whole lot of cavitation experiments but they mainly look for excess
heat. It's worth knowing what goes in, what changes and what comes out. This
comes back to point 2 - the COP may be irrelevant in some situations if you can
transmute elements."
Update 5/26/14:
Mark LeClair's new interviews:
Part 1, May 9, 2014:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/newearthnation/2014/05/09/cavitation--the-
missing-link-to-cold-fusionand-more This quote starts at 137:20 -
"I went to Penn State to use their reactor facility, one of the best in the country,
their hot cell, it wasn't that expensive to rent, maybe a couple thousand dollars for a
day's use of the cell would have been more than enough. They denied me access to it
even though it is supposed to be available to the public. They violated my civil rights
and prevented me from going forward with this experiment... I kept posing the
question both to the person running the reactor facility, his boss, then I also sent a
letter to the trustees of Penn State. None of them ever responded... They advertise
themselves being available to the public... it almost smacks of discrimination. The
problem was that Penn State is closely allied with the Naval Research Lab, and I'm
sure that they got wind of the fact that the Naval Research Lab put the kibosh on
it.... McMaster University... was going to do a full replication of the experiment...
and that never went forward even though they were gun-ho there, so I mean I gain
traction in terms of getting these really prestigious groups to act, and then as soon
as the powers that be get wind of it they immediately stop on it. So I am doing all
the right things in trying to prove it in a good solid scientific manner for the rest of
the world but they are preventing that from happening. So what is the answer? I
don't even get phone calls or emails. I get no feedback from the public, by the the
way, so whoever is out there trying to contact me, I am not ignoring you. I am being
suppressed. I am not seeing communications that are relevant. It is pretty
depressing, actually. I can get the word out but I can't get much feedback coming
back. I think that these talk shows are the only way I can hear anything back that's
real and not coming from some troll."
Again, I ask if Mark has tried to use the nearby radiation lab at U. Mass, Lowell?
Part 2, May 26, 2014: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0-tfH2x6DQ
New Page: http://aetherforce.com/the-alchemy-of-cold-fusion-revealed/
5 comments:
Axil November 12, 2013 at 12:59 AM

I believe that molten fluoride salts can replace water in the LeClair reaction. During
the development of the molten salt reactor, it was found that the erosion rate on the
impellers of the molten salt pumps during cavitation were ten times the erosion rate
using water.
The temperature of the molten fluoride salts are in the 500C to 700C range, high
enough to provide good thermodynamic efficiency in power generation.
These types of molten salts are ionic liquid and dielectric. It will support cavitation
just great.
The molten salts will vaporize in the low pressure phase of the cavitation bubble
formation process. The fluorides in the salts will support the formation of many
transition metal fluoride compounds except nickel which is impervious to fluoride
corrosion.
A number of secret sauce candidate elements: lithium and potassium can be used in
the molten salt eutectic.
Nickel micro and Nano powders might increase the LENR reaction rates and
associated heat production.
The big advantage of the higher operating temperatures over the curie temperatures
of nickel enabled by the molten salts is the possible elimination of radiation
production that cold water temperatures might cause in water cavitation.
Reply
Ken Edwards August 24, 2015 at 3:14 AM

Please help me understand this. You're saying that the Gribb's type machine that
produces cavitation causes radiation, and that you agree with the self-admitted
garage tinker, "Red-One" that it's very dangerous to people.
Yet, Hydro Dynamics, Inc has been building these same massive cavitation
machines for over 24 years, sold them to over 500 companies in countries all over
the world. I've checked their website out and they are a real company doing real
work.
To my understanding, these same cavitation machines have been used in hospitals,

food manufacturing and food consumption - for 24 years. Where's the glowing
bellies? The radioactive bile movements? Where's the environmentalist outcries?
Where's the mouth ulcers? Where's the FDA knocking on doors? This is mind-
boggling that you persist in your beliefs that type of cavitation is gives off radiation
of health concern!
I will personally telephone Hydro Dynamics this week and ask them directly. I will
also reference your website(s) and Red-One as well.
Why am I so animate about this? Who am I? I'm just a man who is fed-up with all
this amateur bad-science. It hurts real science and it's hurts investors and inventors
like me who depend on FACTS, not conjecture and harmful accusations.
You guys agree that you are not scientists nor do you have on-spec testing
equipment, nor are you formally trained in the use, methods and scientific
operations of such equipment.
Reply
Ken Edwards August 24, 2015 at 5:12 PM

Addendum to my last post: I wish to add two points.
(1) I am in 100% support of amateur science, but please understand what "science"
is. Good amateurs follow a well defined scientific method. Also understand I am fed-
up with "amateur bad-science"; when some unknown person comes along and
reports that they've built a test machine and ran tests from it, then they tossed it all
away in a hidden location. After much time has passed they go on a blog site and
claim this and say that. Madness.
Real science is the opposite, it encourages replication and follows scientific method
on recording and using proper equipment. If these items/methods are not employed
by the amateur, then fine, but do not publish (to the public), your non-verified
outcomes. Don't be like a cackling hen and claim this, that and the other without
ability of replication - it is ludicris. It also damages the entire subject matter.
(2.) I would ask any quality amateur scientist (or better, a real scientist) to post their
procedures and findings here or else where on this matter before it is kiddnapped by
a bunch of loons. When these loons take the reins, real science drops any and all
interest in it, and then it just withers and dies over time. Finally it turns into a
bigfoot/UFO/Atlantis circus. This is what "amateur bad-science" does to the
advancement of the human race; it stalls it.
Reply
Axil December 31, 2015 at 3:44 PM

1 of 2
I have made some progress in LENR theory as follows:
Science grows through explaining exceptions. For example, Newtonian physics

explains most of the universe, but there are a few exceptions that it cannot explain:
the orbit of Mercury and the bending of light through the influence of high mass is
another. To explain these exceptions, the general theory of relativity is required.
Einstein was judged to be a kook until Max Planck took him under his wing and
sponsored his ideas. Not until then did general relativity gain any traction in the
science world.
LENR is another example of the exception to the rule. Quantum mechanics works
well for most things but there are a few things that it cannot handle. For example,
what goes on inside the proton and neutron is not subject to the rules of quantum
mechanics, so a new force was invented called the color force that handles this
exception. The color force is the source of the strong interaction, or that the strong
interaction is like a residual color force which extends beyond the proton or neutron
to bind them together in a nucleus. The other exception that goes along with the
color force is the fractional charge that quarks have. There are also the strange cases
that come up involving the fractional quantum hall effect where magnetism
produces balls of fractional charge that really surprised physics.
The color force is carried by gluons which makes it different from magnetism. But
the quarks inside the protons are thought to be monopoles and they cannot be
separated. But why is a quark different than a monopole which can be separated.
This confinement is caused by superconductivity inside the proton or the neutron.
If we could produce a monopole that was inside a superconductor, then we would

have something special. We would have quarks. This is the exception that quantum
mechanics cannot handle. The color force, quarks, and superconducting monopoles
are covered by non-associative quantum mechanics.
It just so happens that nano particles can produce a superconducting monopole.

This is accomplished in Rydberg matter which has been proven by Holmlid to be
superconducting and subject to the meissner effect. The Surface Plasmon
Polaritons(SPP) are analog monipoles that form on the surface of Rydberg matter.
Reply
Axil December 31, 2015 at 3:45 PM

2 of 2
The Rydberg matter that is produced in the LENR reaction is a carrier of the color
force that keeps quark contained. This conjecture is proven true in the experiments
of LeClair. The water particle is a water based Rydberg matter formed under the
tremendous pressure and temperatures produced in the collapsing cavitation
bubble. When this nanoparticle begins to eat through material no matter how hard,
the particle is protected by destruction from nuclear level forces equal to that of a
supernova by the quark based superconductive strengthen color force at the tip of
the water crystal. The monopole shield is impenetrable and can withstand a
supernova based explosion. When LeClair puts this extra force into the cavitation
erosion equations, the equation becomes valid after a hundred years of failure.
LeClair states:
NanoSpire Cavitation Erosion Model Prediction of Fusion Thermodynamics
Mark LeClair of NanoSpire has solved the one hundred year old problem of
accurately predicting cavitation erosion for all materials, as a function of cavitation
and material properties. Researchers including Lord Kelvin, Lord Rayleigh and
many scientists since their day have been unable to solve this seemingly intractable
problem. Previous attempts at deriving an accurate general equation have been off
by a factor of up to 300X compared to data.
Mark has derived a general equation for cavitation erosion that is a 98% R^2 curve
fit for ASTM-G32 cavitation erosion data for 22 different materials. The equation
takes van der Waals repulsion into account during high speed impact of cavitation
reentrant jets. The equation predicts that a thin layer exists at the point of cavitation
reentrant jet impact with a substrate where van der Waals repulsion dominates. The
pressure in this thin zone is in the range of a few hundred up to just over a thousand
gigapascals depending on the strength of the material.
In cold fusion, we are dealing with a special exception to standard reality involving
the color force, gluon force carriers, quark confinement, non-associative quantum
mechanics produced by a special shape (topology) of a special nano/micro particle.
See for the theory as follows:
Vortices in Non-Abelian Gauge Field Theory
http://www.tims.ntu.edu.tw/download/talk/20110113_1507.pdf
Reply
Enter your comment...
Comment as: Google Accoun
Publish Preview
Home
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
Total Pageviews
45,476
Simple theme. Theme images by luoman. Powered by Blogger.

PieEconomics - Cavitation Radiation Replication

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

PieEconomics - Cavitation Radiation Replication

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

12/31/2018 PieEconomics: Cavitation Radiation Replication?

More Create Blog Sign In

Cavitation Radiation Replication? PieEconomics Diet Hydrogen Drinking Water 5.0+

Cavitation Radiation Replication? Followers

November 9, 2013 (Updates at end of article. Latest update 5/26/2014)

Simon Derricutt wrote: ...Replication of the experiments needs a high-pressure

What I didn't do is any analysis of power input/output. Seriously I wasn't looking

If Mark LeClair [president of NanoSpire] would like to do another presentation on

Simon Derricutt wrote:

Simon Derricutt wrote:

PieEconomics wrote (responding to selected quotes):

LeClair agrees. He wrote: “I am sure... that the process can be controlled or

Mark LeClair's technology is mired in a shadowy world. Ed Pope, NanoSpire's

FUELLESS HEATER NO FUEL NO GAS NO WOO…

I found the video at Open-source-energy(dot)org which is an excellent site for

FUELLESS HEATER NO FUEL NO GAS NO WOO…

Standard Package (customization available of metal, elastomers, etc.)

This commercial cavitation device utilizes a pitted spinning rotor producing

Pitted Spinning Rotor

According to Doug Mancosky, Vice President of Research and Development at

Will Quantum Fusion's New Device Need Shielding From Ratiation?

"Account of the state of our technology is correct."

Both systems begin by pumping in the liquid. According to the Revolution-Green

I'm going to try to separate some of the issues:

A change in pressure brought about by motion causes pockets of vapor (bubbles) to

Bubbles collapse in one of two ways, either asymmetrically or symmetrically, and

Reentrant Jet Theory of Cavitation Fusion

Vortex Theory of Cavitation Fusion

"Water electrolyzers can emit a secondary gas (besides hydrogen), comprised of

More reflective of mainstream thinking is this section of a Wikipedia article on

"Fringe Science and Fraud

Moray's additional comments:

"The advantage of LeClair's transmutation discovery is that it is a relatively simple

Emails (in blue) from Axil:

(3) "Cavitation damage of rubber and plastic is revealing:

"EMF induced chemical reformulation of the rubber is also going on.

"Talk with Prof. Seth Putterman at UCLA. Putterman is the queen of

Regarding what happens in cavitation bubbles: "Just conventional physics:

Regarding the garage hobbyist's radiation readings: "An increase in a Geiger

12 - This is low. It doesn't get much lower.

"Fred Zoepfl, Ph.D.,

An Austrian also has a report of radiation from cavitation:

Excerpts from LeClair's email to Sterling Allan dated 12/29/2013 (Austrian

"They reported the following results to me from another experiment on August

Dr. Zoepfl commented by email: "All of LeClair's [statements] about "chlorine-39"

Further Validation Delays

Continuing with LeClair's email to Sterling Allan dated 12/29/2013:

Light + Nanoparticles can produce LENR including Transmutation

"In my opinion, like all manifestations of LENR, this reaction is based on

"I consider that Nanoplasmonics is the quintessential expression of the

"Abstract: Laser exposure of suspension of either gold or palladium nanoparticles in

Discussion between Fred Zoepfl and Simon Derricutt:

Some promising developments (discussion yesterday continued today)...

PieEconomics wrote: "'...then a nuclear reaction it is.'

Mark LeClair's new interviews:

Part 1, May 9, 2014:

Part 2, May 26, 2014: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0-tfH2x6DQ

New Page: http://aetherforce.com/the-alchemy-of-cold-fusion-revealed/

Axil November 12, 2013 at 12:59 AM

Ken Edwards August 24, 2015 at 3:14 AM

To my understanding, these same cavitation machines have been used in hospitals,

Ken Edwards August 24, 2015 at 5:12 PM

Axil December 31, 2015 at 3:44 PM