FacebookTwitterDiggStumbleuponGoogle BookmarksRedditTechnoratiLinkedin

Piezonuclear Replication: A Summary of Angie's Experiment

on .

Today marks my last day at HUG, and I am told it would be useful to write up a post to share my experience.

If you haven't already, be sure to check out the "Best of Rock Crushing" a video compilation of the recorded footage.  Over the past couple days I have put together a video explaining the experiment and my experiences from this summer.

For those of you who would like a bit more detailed summary, or don't feel like watching the video, here is a transcript that I worked off of. I think that it provides a decent overview while also showing a few of the pictures

An Introduction: For the past 10 weeks I have been a part of the LENR team at the Hunt Utilities Group in Pine River, Minnesota.  The first half of the summer was spent going through piles of technical papers researching the field (that now clutter my desk) and coming up to speed on everything that had been done over the years until today. Reading can be hard work, but it pays off. About halfway through the summer one professor’s research stood out to me because of its unique approach to LENR.  Traditionally LENR research has been done in electrolytic cells, with treated wires, or with nanopowders, however Professor Carpinteri used samples of rock and a hydraulic press to look for neutrons. I decided to take on a replication of this experiment because of it’s unique

The Experiment: Apply a force to a rock sample until failure using a hydraulic press while monitoring for neutron radiation.

Reasoning: The idea behind the original experiment goes back to plate tectonics. If you look at the distribution of iron mines around the world you may notice they are centrally located with regard to the tectonic plates. Inversely, aluminium mining occurs closer to fault lines.  Carpinteri suggests that during tectonic activity, such as an earthquake, iron atoms undergo fission into lighter elements and in the process release neutrons.  He cites data for a change in neutron background counts before earthquakes. Nature must be able to produce transmutations, and this might be an explanation for the mechanism.

The Equipment: Around the sample, neutron radiation must be monitored. Monitor neutron radiation using BTI bubble detectors.  These bubble detectors contain freon saturated in a gel. For every few million neutrons passing through, the freon expands and forms a bubble. (show neutron bubble) These bubbles are clearly visible without any additional aids.  According to the manufacturer, Bubble Technology Industries, neutron bubbles should appear randomly, they also are consistent in size, whereas shock bubbles will form in clusters.

The Major Difference: Based on the data Carpinteri has reported, his press was able to reach over 100 tons of force allowing him to use larger samples. The press on site only reaches 50 tons, however we were able to plan for the sizes of samples that our press would allow.

The Rocks: Carpinteri used samples of granite and marble for his experiment. They were cut into perfect prisms or cylinders.  Based on the size of our press, our rock samples had to be smaller.  I went to a local granite quarry where they manufacture countertops and went through their scrap pile pulling out some granite samples to crush.  Because of their irregular shape, most were trimmed up to make more even samples, similar to the original.

Setup: The detectors took a week to arrive after being ordered and some additional setup was required. Mike and Wayne in the shop were kind enough to fashion me a set of plates for the press. This would protect the press and the load cell from the force of the press.

A Midsummer Vacation

ICCF18: The 18th International Conference on Cold Fusion was held in Columbia, Missouri this summer, and I had the pleasure of accompanying a few of my teammates down where they showed off the test equipment they have developed, and I attempted to answer questions. The 25 hours in the car were completely worth it.  We met countless interesting and exciting people.  I was fortunate enough to meet Professor Carpinteri and talk to him about my replication of his work.  There was some good news, and some bad news.  The good news was he said the experiment was very reproducible, however he also noted that he had many detectors very close to the sample.  We had planned our set up around two detectors (because that was relatively affordable) and they were already on order. We knew we’d have to make due with fewer detectors.

Back in PR: Upon our return to HUG I finally had a chance to play with the detectors.  Our first course of action was to attempt to create a shock bubble in the detectors. We concluded that vibrating steel could create a wave that might be able to achieve this.  So we placed the detectors on a steel table and hit the table with a mallat with no positive results.  To the press!

Running the Experiment: The setup was a compromise between placing the detectors as close as possible to the source while also protecting the detectors from the rock shards.  We used a plastic mesh to surround the plates of the press, which also provided a support for the detectors to attach to. The press had to be aligned before the specimen was placed in, the specimen had to be centered before the press was lowered. For protection we had the mesh surrounding the plates, this held in the majority of the rock shards, and a plexiglass shield held in place by a pair of wires.  Personally, I wore gloves, and safety glasses. Eventually I added earplugs and a face mask because the cracking was so loud the entire building could hear it and the crack also released a wave of dust. Originally I filmed with a set of webcams, but between software problems and quality of the video I switched to a sony video camera filming the entire setup.  The dust cloud prevented the bubble detectors from being in view, the cameras served to observe the experiment and record the forces.

Results: We crushed a handful of rocks from the area to test the setup and finally 13 pieces of granite.None of the area rocks produced bubbles. In most cases with the granite we saw a powerful shock wave. In two instances we saw bubbles. The first case was a cluster at the end of the detector, outside of the counting region.  Upon further analysis we labeled these as a shock cluster, the video also shows where the detector likely hit the press. The second case occurred during the same test where a detector was broken after falling off it’s mount.  We encased the surviving detector in foam and from that point on were unable to observe neutrons. None of the remaining samples of granite produced bubbles upon crushing.  We do not have enough data to support Carpinteri, however we must also acknowledge the differences in our experiments. 

 For more information about this experiment, you can follow any of these links to previous documents and blog posts.  

Thanks for a great summer! Best of luck to everyone trying to figure out the mystery of LENR! 

Add comment

Security code


0 #10 adutl friend finder 2020-11-16 23:56
WOW just what I was searching for. Came here by searching for Cold Fusion
0 #9 퍼스트카지노 2018-08-16 14:00
I am not talking over no cost pens and espresso mugs using your emblem
on them, I am speaking with regards to the digital immediate obtain supplies.
As a beginner in playing the lottery, you might like to know what guidelines
you must follow to make sure you are playing correctly and
what tricks to implement so that you will have
better chances of winning. Footballers watch the games, evaluate them, and see the bets where we will have a great probability of
0 #8 EtsukoMcneil 2017-01-15 06:04
I see your site needs some unique & fresh content.

Writing manually is time consuming, but there is
tool for this task. Just search for: Digitalpoilo's tools
0 #7 sports gambling 2015-06-09 08:34
The item will tell you who to retrieve the quest
rewards from and how many they need to complete the set, upon handing the item
over you will be given a small reward. Their eyes wander and they often have trouble hitting their spots.
Forecasting the suitable score is yet another highly regarded choice although once again not as straightforward
factor to obtain right and once again for a much less difficult choice most bookmakers
now bet on the quantity of objectives they'll be in a match.
0 #6 Andreas Van Rooijen 2013-08-19 13:17
Good work Angie, and good to hear that you had a lot fun. I guess a negative result is just a part of the life of a scientist...
0 #5 Kapytanhook 2013-08-16 22:09
Very nice,
Very clear explanation and a very interesting experiment.
Well documented too. (The video really helped)
Too bad you had no other ways of measuring the neutrons emitted that are less prone to failure.

Thanks for your contribution.
0 #4 Ryan Hunt 2013-08-16 17:17
I appreciate much of the improvements and criticisms by Abdlomax on vortex. I don't think anyone claims piezonuclear to be cold fusion. It is more like cold fission. And it would definitely have improved the process to have the attention and support of all the best minds in the field, but fir the short time she had to accomplish something, Angie did a great job. Anybody wanna step up and volunteer to come hang out for a while and continue that line of work?
0 #3 Ecco 2013-08-16 15:45
Some insights and suggestions about this rock crushing experiment, by Abd ul-Rahman Lomax, here:

0 #2 Ecco 2013-08-16 11:20
I was initially skeptical about the skepticism on the shock sensitivity of the bubble detectors (and given where that came from, I think I had good reasons to be), but after watching the previous video on the "best of rock crushing" I can't help but feel that indeed the shock waves produced by the strongest rocks at those pressures can be a likely artifact source, and this problem might get worse at greater ones, potentially hiding any positive signal.

From what I remember Carpinteri used different neutron detection methods at the same time to confirm his findings. It's unfortunate that this wasn't possible at MFMP, but I guess that if this experiment was easy to prove/disprove it wouldn't be so controversial.
0 #1 Robert Greenyer 2013-08-14 22:39
Angie, really great work and I hope you inspire others to expand on this or attempt replication also. Experimentation is not easy or predictable and you amply demonstrated that. What you did show, is that it can be FUN. And you made much of FUN.

Science can be FUN people - even when serious. I think there is a long way to go in this particular experiment but there is a good amount of learning documented in your review here such that people looking at doing this in the future would be able to start some fair distance up the learning cure.

It was great to meet you at ICCF18 and to see you with diego and the chocolate bowl.

I hope you get a box of chocolates when you go!

Here is your generous contributions so far towards our $500,000 target, thanks everyone! : $45,020   Please Donate
See the current state of our booked costs here