Create an account Home  ·  Topics  ·  Downloads  ·  Your Account  ·  Submit News  ·  Top 10  
Mission Statement

· Home
· Forum
· Special Sections
· Advertising
· AvantGo
· Books
· Downloads
· Events
· Feedback
· Link to us
· Private Messages
· Search
· Stories Archive
· Submit News
· Surveys
· Top 10
· Topics
· Web Links
· Your Account

Who's Online
There are currently, 79 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.

You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here

  • (August 7, 2024 - August 11, 2024) 2024 ExtraOrdinary Technology Conference

  • Hot Links

    American Antigravity

    Closeminded Science


    ECW E-Cat World


    Integrity Research Institute

    New Energy Movement

    New Energy Times



    Science Hobbyist

    T. Bearden Mirror Site


    Want to Know

    Other Info-Sources
    NE News Sites
    E-Cat World
    NexusNewsfeed ZPE
    NE Discussion Groups
    Energetic Forum
    Energy Science Forum
    Free_Energy FB Group
    The KeelyNet Blog
    OverUnity Research
    Tesla Science Foundation (FB)
    Vortex (old Interact)
    Magazine Sites
    Electrifying Times (FB)
    ExtraOrdinary Technology
    IE Magazine
    New Energy Times

    Interesting Links

    Click Here for the DISCLOSURE PROJECT
    SciTech Daily Review
    NEXUS Magazine

    Cold Energy from Radiation > BetaVoltaic.com
    Posted on Saturday, June 12, 2004 @ 23:03:28 GMT by vlad

    Devices In the free_energy yahoo group "ali_bali_gumba" writes:
    Cold Energy from Radiation > BetaVoltaic.com - long duration power cells convert radioactive materials to inert. (See review by AmericanAntigravity.)

    "A stimulated decay betavoltaic power-cell with power enough to run for the lifetime of the product under constant load conditions is coming soon. The theory behind the artificial stimulation and acceleration of an isotope is known to only a handful of top physics and mathematics professors and their students world wide."

    Interesting these guys are STIMULATING beta decay. Maybe they know something but aren't sharing it but Beta decay is a Nuclear event and the Nucleus is very resistant to stimulation. That why we can measure the age of minerals after billions of years, because the rates of decay are not affected by any ordinary environments nor any chemical reactions no matter how nasty.

    Now we can do lots of stimulation with an atom smasher, but are you going to carry around a van de graff generater weight 10 tons? A portable Linear accelerater that needs 10,000 watts to operate?

    I'd say what they aren't sharing is that they are a pure play scam outfit.

    IN general stimulated emission of radiation as predicted by Einsten and used in practical inventions like Lasers and Masers needs a population of atoms or molecules that are pre-excited to an unstable high energy state. Because Bosons can all be at the same energy level and not cancel each other out like electrons do, it is more likely that an exited atom will be stimulated to emit radiation at exactly the same energy state as a passing photon of the same frequency.

    IN the case of Beta decay, this is not true. There is no population of exited atoms as the radiation is generated by TUNNELING and the radiation emmited is an electron (fermion) and a neutrino (boson). Stimulating a neutrino is very iffy proposition because they don't react to anything including each other very well. You can't stimulate an Electron because it is a Fermion and a passing electron of the same energy would cancel it out and make it not get emitted.

    So apparently this guy has not even taken elementary quantum mechanics and not any nuclear physics to boot. Quantum mechanics is not about to get overthrown soon, as it is good to 15 decimal places.

    Electroweak theory,

    the theory that describes both the electromagnetic force and the weak nuclear force. Superficially, these forces appear quite different. The weak force acts only across distances smaller than the atomic nucleus, while the electromagnetic force can extend across substantial stretches of space (e.g., as observed in thunderstorms), weakening only with the square of the distance. Moreover, within the nucleus, the weak force is some 1,000,000 times weaker than the electromagnetic force. Yet, one of the major discoveries of the 20th century has been that these two forces are different facets of the same, more fundamental force. (See also fundamental interaction.) The electroweak theory arose principally out of attempts to produce a self-consistent theory for the weak force, in analogy with quantum electrodynamics (QED), the successful quantum theory of the electromagnetic force developed during the 1940s. The two basic requirements for the theory of the weak force are, first, that it should be gauge invariant (i.e., it should behave in the same way at different points in space and time) and, second, that it should be renormalizable (i.e., it should not contain nonphysical infinite quantities).

    During the 1960s Sheldon Glashow, Abdus Salam, and Steven Weinberg independently discovered that they could construct a gauge-invariant theory of the weak force, provided that they also included the electromagnetic force. To mediate the interactions, the new theory predicts the existence of four massless "messenger" particles, two charged and two neutral. The short range of the weak force indicates, however, that it is carried by massive particles. This implies that the underlying symmetry of the theory is hidden, or "broken," by some mechanism that gives mass to the particles exchanged in weak interactions but not to the photons exchanged in electromagnetic interactions. The assumed mechanism involves an additional interaction with an otherwise unseen field, called the Higgs field, that pervades all space.

    In 1971 Gerard 't Hooft proved that the unified electroweak theory proposed by Glashow, Salam, and Weinberg was renormalizable, and the theory gained full respectability. Later, experiments revealed the existence of the weak messengers, the neutral Z particle and the charged W particles; the masses of these particles were as predicted by the theory. See also standard model.



    Security Code: Security Code
    Type Security Code

    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.

    Related Links
    · More about Devices
    · News by vlad

    Most read story about Devices:
    Overunity magnet motor released !

    Article Rating
    Average Score: 4
    Votes: 6

    Please take a second and vote for this article:

    Very Good


     Printer Friendly Printer Friendly

    "Cold Energy from Radiation > BetaVoltaic.com" | Login/Create an Account | 8 comments | Search Discussion
    The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

    No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register

    Re: Cold Energy from Radiation > BetaVoltaic.com (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Sunday, June 13, 2004 @ 11:58:12 GMT
    Neutrinos are NOT bosons. They are fermions. They have spin 1/2. Bosons have spin 0, 1, or 2.

    The nucleus may be stimulated by resonant electro-magnetic fields. This is possible.

    In the terminology of the electro-weak theory, these electromagnetic fields cause the appearance of a greater density of virtual W and Z particles to catalyze the decay.

    The actlual mechanism is probably some type of vaccuum stimulation and stlructuring.

    The mojo man

    Re: Cold Energy from Radiation > BetaVoltaic.com (Score: 1)
    by ElectroDynaCat on Sunday, June 13, 2004 @ 18:56:14 GMT
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    The Beta decay nuclear power cell has been around for 40 years, along with the theory of stimulated quantum tunneling of Beta decay through the nuclear potential barrier.

    Whats new here is the claim that all the proposed mechanisms can be squeezed into a "D" cell. Advances have been made in nanotech, but nothing of this order. At last measure the associated equipment to do this took up a city block.

    Re: Cold Energy from Radiation > BetaVoltaic.com (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Saturday, June 19, 2004 @ 00:29:24 GMT
    Michael M. posted a comment on yahoo JLN labs forum Sep 02, 2003.

    Here it is:
    I want to make it clear to all the related groups at yahoo free-
    energy that we do not consider the PlasmaVolt device to be in any way
    a free energy device or system. It is not in fact not producing free

    It is a fusion device along the same vein as IEC (Inertial
    Electrostatic Confinement) fusion in fact. It has key advantages over
    IEC fusion in that it has a energetic plasma in a form that lends
    itself to direct inductive coupling of the rotational plasma vortex.

    It has the further advantage of a vortex of considerable size and
    gauss strength that it can cause excitation in an inductive coil.

    The PlasmaVolt also will manufacture for us several valuable isotope
    products as a by-product of its operation. Only a small amount of the
    total output energy can be considered to be a result of stimulated
    beta-decay of the K-40 isotope that it transmutes from other lighter
    elements from the solid fuel anode. Most of the energy created by the
    device in operation is due to these low energy fusion events.

    These fusion events can be observed on the anode side of the vortex
    tube as well as in the plasma vortex between the anode and cathode.
    The oscilloscope in the background of the animation shows flashes of
    fusion clearly coinciding with major fluctuation shown on the scope.

    That is about all I can say for now. It should be ready for market in
    about 8 months to a year. At this point it is just cranking out K-40
    isotope for us in large quantity and high isotopic purity at a very
    reasonable cost per gram. If you look at NASA pictures of plasma
    vortexes within star nurseries or nebulae you will see this type of
    elemental transmutation giving off a great deal of energy.

    The device is not a free energy device. Fusion fuel is consumed from
    the solid fuel anode element. Hydrogen is created and so is K-40.
    This is fusion energy in a form that is workable and will likely be
    very affordable once we have recouped the development cost. It is
    operating at overunity only in that more energy is output from the
    device than is put in. That does not include the stored energy of the
    solid fuel anode element.

    It will last a very long time before needing to be refueled. In fact
    we estimate that it will run for about 2 years without need for
    refueling. I am afraid it does not meet the benchmark for a true free
    energy device.

    Michael McDonnough
    Betavoltaic Industries Inc.

    Re: Cold Energy from Radiation > BetaVoltaic.com (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Saturday, June 19, 2004 @ 01:38:46 GMT
    Also see Bruce Perrault's explanation at


    Re: Cold Energy from Radiation > BetaVoltaic.com (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Friday, July 02, 2004 @ 00:25:52 GMT
    vlad Wrote: The Suppression of Inconvenient Facts in Physics
    Posted on Saturday, March 27 @ 19:48:25 PST by vlad

    General "Textbooks present science as a noble search for truth, in which progress depends on questioning established ideas. But for many scientists, this is a cruel myth. They know from bitter experience that disagreeing with the dominant view is dangerous - especially when that view is backed by powerful interest groups. Call it suppression of intellectual dissent. The usual pattern is that someone does research or speaks out in a way that threatens a powerful interest group, typically a government, industry or professional body. As a result, representatives of that group attack the critic's ideas or the critic personally-by censoring writing, blocking publications, denying appointments or promotions, withdrawing research grants, taking legal actions, harassing, blacklisting, spreading rumors." - Brian Martin, "Stamping Out Dissent"


    Science is in a state of crisis. Where free inquiry, natural curiosity and open-minded discussion and consideration of new ideas should reign, a new orthodoxy has emerged. This 'new inquisition', as it has been called by Robert Anton Wilson[2] consists not of cardinals and popes, but of the editors and reviewers of scientific journals, of leading authorities and self-appointed "skeptics", and last but not least of corporations and governments that have a vested interest in keeping the status quo, and it is just as effective in suppressing unorthodox ideas as the original. The scientists in the editorial boards of journals who decide which research is fit to be published, and which is not, the scientists at the patent office who decide what feats nature allows human technology to perform, and which ones it does not, and the scientists in governmental agencies who decide what proposals to fund, and not to fund, either truly believe that they are in complete knowledge of all the fundamental laws of nature, or they purposely suppress certain discoveries that threaten the scientific prestige of individuals or institutions, or economic interests. Research that indicates that an accepted theory is incomplete, severely flawed, or completely mistaken, will be rejected on the grounds that it "contradicts the laws of nature", and therefore has to be the result of sloppiness or fraud. At the heart of this argument is the incorrect notion that theory overrides evidence.


    Can this be the same Vlad that wrote these above words and does it not describe pretty much what is said against the work of Dr. Ruggero Santilli and Betavoltaic Industries Inc. here in this thread.

    The model but forth for the mechanism for this stimulated decay was not even discussed by point as it is presented in the scientific literature published by D. Santilli on his web site.


    Since this is published widely we must presume that Vlad has read Dr. Santilli and understands of what he speaks against, but alas there is no mention to his body of published papers on the subject being railed against by Vlad or in their extensive work in establishment of their patent pending IP in this technology sector. They are called by him frauds and phonies or lowly scam artists. That is so baseless and unfounded a position as to be libel and defamation of character in whole and in part.

    Simply a shame that a baseless and slanted argument is put forth, and good people are critisized and suppressed by one who ascribes to such lofty ideals as are expressed by him and pasted above this message from his own former posting to this forum.

    Did the leopard change his spots or what?
    Are you for or against the shift to a new paradigm?
    If it requires rethinking old assumptions are you up for the task?

    Something to think about (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Wednesday, July 07, 2004 @ 20:09:36 GMT
    First of all, cool site you got here, good to see people thinking above and beyond the socially accepted norm of what is possible.

    I've read a hell of a lot of information on FE/OU tech, read heaps of papers on it, from tesla, bedini, beaden, floyd sweet ect. I'd like to point out that my knowedlge of electrical circuits is limited, and I have had to read alot of info over and mull over lots of it just to understand lots of it, but besides all that, something is a miss here.

    I don't doubt that tesla was a great engineer, and possibly others have been or are, but tesla was around a long time ago, hes long gone. Bedini and Bearden have been playing with these ideas for 30+ years and are moving on too. I find it strange that by now, after all these years - we seem to be still struggling with this technology.

    You would have thought that, at least everyone interested in this subject, at least the regulars who come here and other places dedicated to free energy - would have all had their own little free energy device by now. Im not talking a powerplant or home generator. im talking something simple that almost anyone could build for themselves, like maybe a torch for example that recharges it's battery as its being used, or a little 1.5 volt battery charger that charges up batteries while charging its own, or other very simple, cost effective but useful inventions, to give everyone that start.

    I agree with the other person who posted something about forever waiting for overunity inventions to hit the market. I agree, something isn't right. You see, these units are a threat to big business and corporations who invest in oil and gas and other systems, and its only logical reasoning to see that they would be stopped from hitting the markets. People would lose a lot of money if they did come to market.

    The thing is, the people that this technology should be directed at, is those in the 3rd world countries - those who have nothing anyway, and the average person who's working hard out there to make a living, who trying to save on his ulitiliy bills. they are the most needy of this tech, and are of no threat to the inventor. In fact it is by dissemination of this technology freely through the people first, it will force the big boys to bend in the end. If enough people have this tech, it can't be silenced.

    I myself, like most other people out there aren't interested in the money side of this research, rather are interested in SAVING money but knowing how to help myself and others with it (If only we knew how).

    Anyways thats my 2 cents worth, but in closing, I'd just like to say that I do find it strange, that someone hasn't posted fully detailed specs of a cheap working practical device, fully listed with parts, and construction details, and timing details, that anyone with any skill at all can build for themselves. They would study it, learn from it, expand, and before you know it would snowball into something amazing - not from a handfull of people with it, throwing chips to the beggars now and then, as they see fit, but from thousands of people all working togther. So come you guys out there that know something, give us something to play with. We arent all electronics gurus, but are quick learners if given a start.

    Lastly, to bearden and guys like yourself. You guys seem like your on to something, so how bout giving the guys in the free energy communities a start. You can't take it with you when you die. 30+ years is a long time to be playing with this stuff, but it is even a longer time for guys in places like this who may have been reaching for straws for as long.


    All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2002-2016 by ZPEnergy. Disclaimer: No content, on or affiliated with ZPEnergy should be construed as or relied upon as investment advice. While every effort is made to ensure that the information contained on ZPEnergy is correct, the operators of ZPEnergy make no warranties as to its accuracy. In all respects visitors should seek independent verification and investment advice.
    Keywords: ZPE, ZPF, Zero Point Energy, Zero Point Fluctuations, ZPEnergy, New Energy Technology, Small Scale Implementation, Energy Storage Technology, Space-Energy, Space Energy, Natural Potential, Investors, Investing, Vacuum Energy, Electromagnetic, Over Unity, Overunity, Over-Unity, Free Energy, Free-Energy, Ether, Aether, Cold Fusion, Cold-Fusion, Fuel Cell, Quantum Mechanics, Van der Waals, Casimir, Advanced Physics, Vibrations, Advanced Energy Conversion, Rotational Magnetics, Vortex Mechanics, Rotational Electromagnetics, Earth Electromagnetics, Gyroscopes, Gyroscopic Effects

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.