Reference: http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/cf/246vysotskii.html
A sheet of mica near a radioactive source changes the gamma decay probability A year before announcing the microbial effect on 137Cs, Vysotskii and his colleagues (from Moscow State University) made another announcement. That was at the 10th International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF10, August 2003). Their paper, entitled “The theory and experimental investigation of controlled spontaneous conversion nuclear decay of radioactive isotopes,” can be downloaded from the library at <www.lenr-canr.org>. Let me summarize the experimental part of that interesting paper. A radioactive source -- 57Co -- (T=257 days decaying into 57Fe by K-capture) -- was placed in front of a detector. Gamma rays of energies of 136.4 keV, 122 keV and 14.4 keV, emitted from the 57Fe nuclei (T=1 nsec) were recorded. There is nothing new about this; the energy diagram of the decay process is shown below. I can easily imagine three gamma ray peaks in a multichannel analyzer. What is new and interesting is the effect thin mica sheets on relative intensities of the peaks. The authors discovered that the ratios of peak intensities can be changed by introducing a 50-microns-thin mica sheet into the region between the source and the detector. Labeling the areas below the peaks as N14, N122 and N136 they characterized the effect of mica by the ratio R, defines as N14.4/(N122+N136). By changing the distance X, between the source and the mica sheet, they discovered that, R depends on X, as illustrated below. http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/cf/246figure2.jpg Unfortunately, no bars of errors were assigned to individual data points and nothing was stated about reproducibility of results. For example, is R always equal to 0.82 when X=250 microns? And is R always equal to 0.88 when X=420 microns? I will assume that observations were reproducible and that the error bars were “too small to be shown.” To give the authors all benefits of my doubt, I will also assume that control experiments were performed to show that equivalent screens made from other materials had negligible effect on the values of R at different X. Taking these assumptions for granted I tentatively accept the main claim of the paper: “In these experiments we discovered an inhibition of the conversion channel for nuclear decay by 7–10%, and a change (increase) of the total lifetime for the radioactive 57Fe* isotope by 6–9%, at the optimal size X of the slot, in relation to spontaneous decay in free space without the thin mica crystal.” P.S. This mica screening effect on 57Fe is not as strong as the bacterial effect on 137Cs. But each of these effects, if confirmed by other researchers, will show that the prevailing point of view has only a limited validity. Emission of gamma rays is a nuclear effect and ability of influencing it by screening the source with a thin sheet of mica (a mono-crystal) is not consistent with the prevailing point of view. How can a crystal, situated hundreds of microns from the atomic nuclei of the source influence what happens in the nuclei? To answer this question one should be able to understand the theoretical part of the paper. Unfortunately, i do not understand it, due to my very limited background in theoretical physics. But I would very much like to know what theoretical physicists think about the paper. By skimming the first part of the paper I notice that the explanation is based, among other things, on the concept of “zero-energy.” The authors claim that experimental results confirm their theory. On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 9:06 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > Mica is a particle chirality filter. This property is derived from the > hexagonal crystal structure of mica. Graphite is also a particle chirality > filter. It has been reported that a radioactive isotope's emission behavior > will be affected by the presence of mica in the neighborhood of mica. > > Radioactive decay occurs only in left handed chiral spin particles. > Changing the spin chirality of a radioactive isotope can increase or > decrease its decay rate. > > https://www.nature.com/articles/524008b > > Learn about how particle chirality is affected by using graphite as a > chiral particle filter. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46h44d3yrZQ > > > > > On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 7:28 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> When Ed Storms reported on this, he had more than one pancake tube. One >> had a mica window and the other two were plastic. I believe he said that >> the "strange radiation" he encountered activated something in the mica >> window. The tube with the mica window became activated and had a >> particular decay rate that he measured. He could bring the other, plastic >> window'ed tubes close to the mica window and they would detect emissions >> from it. >> >> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 1:33 AM, Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> We have three identical Geiger’s that I switch positions to constantly >>> challenge (and eliminate) any anomalous behaviour and to reveal glitches as >>> well as to provide coincident background counts that are used to refine the >>> precision of the background vs. hot counts. The high count rates can be >>> intentionally produced and reduced with prescribed changes in the >>> experiment. So far so good. Of course this must be repeated with ever more >>> precision and care, an effort in process at this moment. >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* John Berry <aethe...@gmail.com> >>> *Sent:* Monday, April 16, 2018 11:38 PM >>> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com >>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Meshugganons >>> >>> >>> >>> Is there any difference when the tube, shielding and Geiger counter are >>> vertically disposed as in the image, or horizontally? >>> >>> >>> >>> How can you be sure it isn't some capacitive coupling effect? >>> >>> Could you ground the shields? >>> >>> Could you apply voltage spikes to the plates without them being exposed >>> to the spark gap directly, see if that triggers the Geiger? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 7:20 PM, Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Nonsense there is no such lead shielding on the experiment as suggested. >>> >>> >>> >>> As well I have been interchanging 3 independent Geiger counters to >>> eliminate any one being seen as being influenced by stray electrical >>> fields. Only the Geiger that is nearest to the experimental source shows >>> the anomalous count at multiples of the background. >>> >>> >>> >>> Much more work needs to be done to eliminate any and all possible errors >>> in this but at least the anomalous emissions are predictably able to be >>> induced in a repeatable fashion. In my opinion these emissions might well >>> be either gammas or something unusual. The Geigers have been challenged >>> with known beta sources and are quite unable to count betas. >>> >>> >>> >>> They are not behaving like my previous discovery of Mischugenons, I >>> have recently renamed these ‘Tellerons’ in honour of my colleague Edward >>> Teller who helped me with that discovery and indeed had speculated on their >>> existence decades before my discovery experiments. >>> >>> >>> >>> There are clear paths to improve and enhance this Androcles protocol >>> that will bring it in line with the work and teachings of Mills, Rossi, and >>> Piantelli. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> >>> *Sent:* Sunday, April 15, 2018 8:00 PM >>> *To:* vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> >>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Meshugganons >>> >>> >>> >>> In Alan's experiment, the Geiger counter's activity is the function of >>> the thickness of the lead shielding. No shielding creates no Geiger >>> counter activity. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 2:54 PM, Brian Ahern <ahern_br...@msn.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Geiger counters are notoriously prone to high voltage noise interference. >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> *From:* Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> >>> *Sent:* Sunday, April 15, 2018 2:15 PM >>> *To:* vortex-l >>> *Subject:* [Vo]:Meshugganons >>> >>> >>> >>> · >>> New >>> >>> · >>> >>> · #54 >>> <https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/2461-new-energy-world-symposium-in-stockholm-on-june-18-2018/?postID=84069#post84069>[image: >>> 4766-the-test-png] >>> >>> >>> >>> Regarding Alan glow tube test... >>> >>> >>> THUNDER ENERGIES, <http://www.thunder-energies.com/>a company that >>> uses DR. RUGGERO SANTILLI'S TECH to detect nuclear weapons in sealed >>> containers uses a variant of Alan Smith's experiment. >>> >>> >>> >>> http://www.thunder-energies.co…11-articles/19-article-10 >>> <http://www.thunder-energies.com/index.php/ct-menu-item-18/11-articles/19-article-10> >>> >>> >>> >>> Quote >>> >>> *The hadronic reactors for the industrial synthesis of thermal neutrons >>> from a hydrogen gas essentially include (TEC international patent pending):* >>> >>> *1. A metal vessel filled up with a hydrogen gas at a pressure depending >>> on the desired neutron CPS;* >>> >>> *2. Electronic means for the remote control of the gap between a pair of >>> tungsten electrodes located inside said metal vessel; and* >>> >>> >>> >>> *3. A specially designed power unit delivering high voltage and high >>> current rapid DC discharges in between said electrodes.* >>> >>> *As shown in Figure 5, the DC arc ionizes the hydrogen atoms, thus >>> creating a plasma of protons and electrons; the DC arc then aligns the >>> proton and the electron along a magnetic field line with the appropriate >>> spin and other couplings; an engineering means called triggers compress the >>> electron inside the proton, by supplying the missing energy (which is about >>> one million electron Volts, 1 MeV).* >>> >>> *Display More* >>> >>> >>> >>> Sometimes a theorist can save an experimenter a lot of work by avoiding >>> duplicating existing technology. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Santilli thinks that neutrons can be formed out of a union of protons >>> and neutrons. This is nonsense. What Santilli is producing are muons. the >>> same particle that Alan is generating. The US government is using cosmic >>> ray generated muons to detect nuclear material in shipping containers now. >>> >>> >>> Cosmic-Ray Muons Reveal Hidden Void in the Great Pyramid >>> http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/n…oid-in-the-great-pyramid/ >>> <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/ancient/cosmic-ray-muons-reveal-hidden-void-in-the-great-pyramid/> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Muon Thomography are well known as a means to detect nuclear material >>> >>> >>> >>> Innovations In Nuclear Detection: Muon Tomography >>> >>> http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2012/ph241/khan1/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >
