 |
There are currently, 653 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.
You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here
| |
| |
Unobtainium Test Results from Plasma Processing
Posted on Thursday, May 13, 2004 @ 20:15:52 UTC by vlad
|
|
pulsed_ignition writes: Recently I posted about some strange and unknown residue that was produced by my Plasma device. Samples of that material have been submitted to two separate labs for electron microscopy and analysis. To date, one lab is 7 days overdue on providing test results and cannot be contacted. Several messages were left and all extensions are now picked up by answering machine. The second lab (world renowned for analysis) promised test results by close of business 5/13/04 - but they are closed and no phone call was received.
This is not unexpected, as testing of the first radioactive hydrogen sample resulted in all test data being destroyed by the testing facility and they refused to comment further on the subject.
Warm Regards,
Chris Arnold President/CEO
PlasmaKing Corporation
|
| |
|
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.
| |
|
|
No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register |
|
Re: Unobtainium Test Results from Plasma Processing (Score: 0)
by Anonymous on Friday, May 14, 2004 @ 01:08:36 UTC | | Smells like suppression to me... |
|
|
Re: Unobtainium Test Results from Plasma Processing (Score: 1)
by ElectroDynaCat on Friday, May 14, 2004 @ 07:45:46 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) | The only form of hydrogen that is radioactive is tritium, and if it was a legitimate lab, they should have reported the presence of tritium to the NRC, so you should be getting a visit from some very heavily armed public servants in the near future.
Maybe they just adopted the Sargent Shultz policy,(I see nothing!) and flushed your sample down the toilet.
YOU IN A HEAP A TROUBLE, BOY! |
Re: Unobtainium Test Results from Plasma Processing (Score: 1)
by nanotech on Friday, May 14, 2004 @ 11:16:41 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) | That leads to a question I have had. I personally do not have the skills (as far as I know) to build a Motionless Electromagnetic Generator ala Thomas Bearden's patent, but, say I had a friend who has electrical engineering skills build one, from the diagrams and descriptions, and it started to work. If we publicized this, do you think we would start receiving threatening phone calls and similiar attacks, if we tried to carry it to mass-production stage, or, what would most likely happen?
|
]
Re: Unobtainium Test Results from Plasma Processing (Score: 1)
by ElectroDynaCat on Friday, May 14, 2004 @ 14:50:24 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) | I could never get my MEG to work. Good luck
This persons other problem comes another source.
This problem does not arise from suppression, it arises from the fact that tritium cannot occur naturally, and any licenced laboratory that detects it in any quantity must report it to the NRC and DOE for the simple fact that the presence of tritium means that someone is running an unlicenced nuclear reactor and the tritium could be used as a trigger in a nuclear weapon. |
]
Re: Unobtainium Test Results from Plasma Processing (Score: 1)
by pulsed_ignition on Friday, May 14, 2004 @ 16:52:05 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://diamondlube.com | Your statement would seem to be based in fact, however I have steadfastly refrained from calling the gas Tritium because there is another possibility. Hydrogen with an over-energized electron could have caused my tritium monitor to register or it could be a form of helium. I feel most possibly it is a newly created hydrino similar to Black Light Power and their hydrino.
As for nanotech's idea of reproducing, testing or selling any device under current patent protection, any of the above is Patent infringement and protectable by the patent holder. It could be the mistake of a lifetime, so ask yourself - do you feel lucky?
The first lab was finally contacted with no new information and promises of results next week. The second lab contacted me with a vague details such as, "trace amounts of many elements found in the sample" as determined with SEM/EDS, however specifics will be available next week (I hope). There was no mention as to what those elements might be. Finally, hopefully, after six years of work - I might get some solid scientific answers and best of all, process validation.
If both labs actually provide analysis, the results should precisely match.
Best Regards,
Chris Arnold
PlasmaKing |
]
Re: Unobtainium Test Results from Plasma Processing (Score: 1)
by ElectroDynaCat on Friday, May 14, 2004 @ 19:55:46 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) | | Your tritium detector is probably working correctly, looking at your setup if you ran it with deuterium, would produce enough neutrons to create some tritium. There is also a straight deuterium lithium reaction that would create tritium. All the hydrogen isotopes like to stick on metal surfices so you should also get residual counts from the vessel. |
]
Re: Unobtainium Test Results from Plasma Processing (Score: 1)
by pulsed_ignition on Saturday, May 15, 2004 @ 09:18:33 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://diamondlube.com | An EE I know (Bert) suggested there should also be a similar isotropic ratio of Hydrogen to deuterium within petroleum (hydrocarbon) as there is in water - about 6000H to 1D. Now why didn't I think of that? Therefore, when I crack the petroleum - some Deuterium will be in the reaction zone but I do not have the funding to investigate this further at this time - however it would explain several anomalies.
This device is a new form of particle accelerator, and research is required.
Best Regards,
Chris Arnold
|
]
Re: Unobtainium Test Results from Plasma Processing (Score: 1)
by nanotech on Friday, May 14, 2004 @ 20:13:22 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) | First of all, I never once said I actually plan to reproduce the MEG. I was speaking of a hypothetical situation :O) But thank you.
Can the plasma system you speak of be used to blend aluminum to steel, directly, with no soldering material/flux in between the two plates?
|
]
Re: Unobtainium Test Results from Plasma Processing (Score: 1)
by pulsed_ignition on Saturday, May 15, 2004 @ 09:40:04 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://diamondlube.com | In Octoger 2003, a physicist from Fermilab asked my partner "can this device be configured to weld Titanium?" Apparently they are having some trouble with welds on a new accelerator.
I have many ideas for use across a spectrum of industries and welding is one - except the modifications required (as I envision them) also require capital for prototype construction. Titanium welds will no longer be allowed to oxidize, as I envision this process. I do not know what will happen to aluminum and steel - but you should talk to Hutchison with his jellification of metals.
Best Regards,
Chris Arnold
PlasmaKing |
]
Re: Unobtainium Test Results from Plasma Processing (Score: 1)
by pulsed_ignition on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 @ 20:52:47 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://diamondlube.com | Again promises of analysis results have not been received - I now believe there is something both of these labs do not want me to know about what "my" device is producing.
Maybe I am over reacting, and I should just wait a few more years for the results to arrive. After all, the first hydrogen sample to be destroyed was only two years ago - and for some unknown reason, I can't get another hydrogen sample tested - but Bush gave away $350 Million for R&D into hydrogen from Petroleum - and I seem to be the only one that didn't get any and the only one that can do it now.
|
]
Re: Unobtainium Test Results from Plasma Processing (Score: 0)
by Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19, 2004 @ 08:21:06 UTC | Try sending them to - - -
George Miley, U of IL Fusion labs.
S.V. Adamenko, Proton21 labs...Ukraine. You may want to go to www.proton21.com.ua and establish communication with Dr. Adamenko first.
You might also try Mike McKubre at SRI, (Palo Alto CA), at least to get a reliable lab.
To be blunt about it, there is NO conspiracy, aside from stupidy or sluggish dullardness!
Dr. Joe Papp |
]
Re: Unobtainium Test Results from Plasma Processing (Score: 1)
by pulsed_ignition on Wednesday, May 19, 2004 @ 11:51:16 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://diamondlube.com | Dr. Papp,
Don't forget to click your heels each time you say "there is no conspiracy," "there is no conspiracy," "there is no conspiracy."
Thank you so much for referring me to McKubre at SRI. Wait a minute - I recall something here - a post. Russ George had a closet sized lab at SRI where he worked on CF. Then one day, he called McKubre in to show him some anomalous results that Russ seemed to think proved CF. Next thing - McKubre tossed Russ George out of SRI and proclaimed across the Internet - look what I discovered (McKubre of course). Is this the same McKubre you are telling me to share my discoveries with??????
You are with ZERO doubt - either, a direct conspirator or as you so eloquently put it, suffering from "stupidy or sluggish dullardness." (I suggest possibly both with greater tendency toward the former)
STUPIDY, you are one hell of a wordsmith, Doctor!!!
Warmest Regards,
Chris Arnold / PlasmaKing |
]
Misunderstanding maybe? (Score: 1)
by chipotle_pickle on Wednesday, May 19, 2004 @ 13:12:54 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://freehydrogen.blogspot.com | Is it possible Chris there is a misunderstanding with the places you sent your sample? Maybe you talked to someone who went on vacation, and now the people who are there have no idea why you are sending them stuff? Have you checked back with your contacts for them to explain the holdup?
|
]
Re: Misunderstanding maybe? (Score: 1)
by pulsed_ignition on Wednesday, May 19, 2004 @ 18:26:22 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://diamondlube.com | Some absolutely great news after I comment to Pickle.
Here is my understanding, strictly from my point of view. When people make promises - and then "repeatedly" do not follow through, after 6 years of the SOS - I just accept that it is happening again. But this time - things are different.
The first lab has finished the material inspection, however I must wait until the pictures and data arrive so that I may analyze the data myself. No specific determinations were made or indicated as to what the target materials actually are. Even though this report seems less than incomplete - this is not normally available material - therefore I accept their refusal to specifically identify targeted materials because they are not absolutely positive as to makeup. In other words - they don't know what it is and I love this - "I made it."
All scientific discovery happens in small steps and step "one" just so happened to take 6 years of unprofessional behavior, destroyed reports and withheld assistance. Step "Two" has provided critical data in 2.5 weeks, however it might be months before the specific targets within the samples are actually identified.
Today is a great day as far as I am concerned and hearing "I don't know what it is," is a great place to start. Because they provided the first scientific assistance, I am indebted to them.
The second lab has missed yet another promised data submission date - but quite possibly, they don't know what it is either. I now have the starting point I require and hope lab 2 can identify the primary targets. I will ask them to contact me when they are ready but it might take some time, and quite possibly a white paper will be required, in which case no comment should be expected until publication.
"Today is the day" to quote the great Mel Fisher.
Best Regards to all,
Chris Arnold
PlasmaKing |
]
|
|
|
|
