Ed Storms wrote with his usual insight: > > Mike Carrell wrote: > > > > > > > It may not be true that the specific construction described in the > > Correa patents is of the essence, or that disclosure overcomes barriers > > to commercial uitlization, but nobody can say that their work is > > mysterious or obscure until they with competence have duplicated what is > > in the patents. And I do mean "duplicated", not "imitated". After long > > contemplation of the phenomenon, there are aspects which seem strange > > indeed. Why not use wall-powered supplies to provide the setup > > conditions instead of batteries? Years ago Paulo said such supplies were > > destroyed when the PAGD pulse let go. Why? I don't know. Why not make > > LENR cells with cathodes cut from soup cans? It's cheaper. > > Mike, I agree, the early transistor experience is very similar to what > people now suffer with cold fusion. For example, one of the major > problems with early transistors was the level of required purity. Very > small amounts of impurity in the Ge would cause large and unexpected > changes in the electrical properties. These amounts were below the level > of detection until new analytical tools were developed. The same is > true of cold fusion. The active material is a very small amount of > material deposited on an inert substrate, a domain that is too small to > see by normal methods. Therefore, once again, new tools must be > applied, in addition to a new attitude. > > Palladium was used initially and is still thought to be the active > material by some people. However, the palladium is only an inert > substrate on which the active material deposits. Once the proper > deposit has been identified, the effect will be completely reproducible > regardless of what is used as the inert substrate. Soup cans would work > just as well, provided the proper deposits are applied. The point I'm > making is that knowing the important variables is more important than > simply duplicating the effect. This requires making assumptions about > the basic process. In the case of the transistor, the basic process > involved electron conduction. The basic process in cold fusion involves > a nuclear process in a solid lattice. For flight, the basic process > involves the pressure differential created by air flowing over a curved > surface. In each case, success was achieved by understanding the basic > process. For transistors, the conduction band became the center of > attention, for cold fusion, the solid structure is important, and for > flight, the pressure of flowing air is measured. -----------------------New stuff:
>So I ask, what is the > basic process in the PAGD effect? Excellent question to which I do not have an answer. My understanding is that the effect was found by accident while investigating Xray tubes. The Correas then checked refrences, to be found in their patents, and empirically discovered the means to evoke the effect at will and capture the energy. What is conspicuously absent from the patents and publications is a discussion of exactly what goes on in the discharge itself. A few images here and there suggest an intensive investigation. Harold Aspden, who has written extensively on aether theory, devoted a monograph to the PAGD phenomenon. There are curious annular pits around one of the electrodes, suggesting a vortex. I infer that study of the phenomenon opened doors to a new understanding of physics which has underlain their later work and monographs. One must set aside preconceptions about the nature of the aether, and conventional notions ion behavior and the like. Dr. Harold Aspden was once head of IBM's patent operations for Europe with a base in the UK. During his graduate work he found some anomalous realtionships between heat and magnetism in magnetic materials, and this set him on a lifelong investigation of the nature of "aether" which is set out in books, monographs, and an extensive website full of tutorial essays. You can find his discussion of PAGD at http://www.aspden.org/reports/Es8/Rep8.htm. There is little I can add to a reading of this report, which sits in a context to Aspden's larger work. > For example, how can moving ions > extract energy from their surroundings? Wrong question. Read the above cited report by Aspden, which may not be the whole story. Why must the ions and/or > electrons only move in a certain way, as caused by the unique applied > voltage? Wrong question again: see Aspden. It isn't the applied voltage itself. The effect occurs in a certain region of the generally well known current-voltage realtionship of a glow discharge, near the arc conditions. The effect cannot be triggered; one sets up the conditons and when a vortex of aether energy comes by, part of it is tapped. One can better think of the cell as a kind of antenna. The discharges occur semi-periodically at various average rates. If the rate is low, the discharges tende to be more energetic than when they are fast. How can this required motion be achieved other ways to give the > same result? I suggest these are some of the questions that need > answers, assuming the PAGD effect actually produces over unity energy. The evidence I have from the Correa's writings and a vist to their lab, is that the energy released in the discharge can greatly exceed the energy necessary to sustain the trigger conditions. The visit was under an NDA, and the Correas have threatened suit if I give any details. The effort by Jeff Fink and the propsal by Chris Zell deviate in very significant ways from what the Correas did. As in any proper study, you duplicate the apparatus until you see the effect, then you can begin to study the effect and vary the apparatus to discover its boundaries. > In other words, I'm suggesting that the basic process in the PAGD effect > is ion/electron motion. The ion/electron motion is the result of the aether energy, not the cause of it. There is nothing in your training in physics to explain how the pulse can contain 100 times the energy used to maintain the trigger conditions. Note that I did not say trigger it. The test circuit looks very much like a common strobe flasher relaxation oscillator, which is what Jeff got by connecting a capacitor acrosss the cell. However, the native capacitance of the cell is in the picofarad range with electrodes spaced several inches apart in vacuum. With the right voltage and pressure conditions, a pale blue glow covers the cathode. At a quasi-periodic rate, a linear, confined discharge occurs and considerable energy is dumped into the charge collector, batteries shunted by a capacitor. Oscillograms of the voltage and current into and out of the cell during the discharge period can show as much as 100:1 in energy. You cna find this in my article in IE some years ago. The rest of the device is only important to > produce the unique voltage pulse, just as the inert substrate in a F-P > cell is only important to hold the active deposit. Discover what is > unique about the voltage pulse, and the effect could be reproduced at > will in many kinds of devices. No, it is not a "voltage pulse", which is an effect, not a cause. You set up the proper conditions, and the events "happen". If you trigger it, you don't get OU. Now all of this may not make "sense", any more than CF makes "sense". I cannot guarantee that if one adequately follows the guidance of the patents that they will find the PAGD effect, but what I have seen so far differs significantly from what the Correas disclose. Much has been said about the batteries for charge collectors. I have discussed the problems with capaciors. However, if a resistor of suitable value is used, the energy pulse can be seen with a storage oscilloscope. I very emphatically point out that the scope should not be connedted to the AC mains, but be battery operated. There is a Tektronix mutually isolated dual channel sampling scope which is suitable for some 2 kilobucks. This gives a look at individual pulses, but for long term integration one needs the batteries. I should mention that the Correas have reported an experimetn in which two PAGD systems were used, with a switch which exchanged the roles of the source and accumulation batteries. With no connection to any usual power source, when the system was operated over an eight hour period, all the batteries increased their charge condition. Regards, Mike Carrell
