Originally posted by Angelic Resurrection
reply to post by Angelic Resurrection
Try googling cavitation transmutations, quite a few sites there
You know, this is your thread, not mine. The onus is on you to provide the research and prove your hypothesis. So far you've given nothing.
Anyway, as for cavitation. I did look it up and this was the main body of research I found.
Going back to this
. Firstly, you'll note the date was 2004 - so much for you being the first to come
up with the idea, huh.
It has since been republished by Cardone, et al.:
Their main point, found in the abstract, is summarised by the following.
We show that cavitation of a solution of thorium-228 in water induces its transformation at a rate 104 times faster than the natural radioactive
decay would do.
This was then rebutted by Ericsson, et al.:
And by Kowalski:
In this, both claim that the results concluded by Cardone were done so on the basis of poor experimental controls and completely bias interpretation
of the data.
The first reply, which was issued by Ericsson, states the following in their introduction:
In view of the body of knowledge in nuclear physics that has been collected over the past 100 years, this claim is extraordinary and would have
rather exciting consequences for the whole field of nuclear physics and its applications. Such an extraordinary claim should, however, be
substantiated by extraordinary evidence. We find that such evidence is missing in this paper and it even seems that methodological mistakes have been
Since we should, nevertheless, stay open to honest new and potentially revolutionary discoveries, we suggest additional test that the authors can do
in order to test their claim.
And so they did. In the end, they were forced to conclude that the entire premise was pure speculation and the data inconclusive on account of the
fact that the data presented by the author was statistically invalid and the experimental setup sub par.
The reply by Kowalski more or less came to the same conclusion. They suggested that even were the results not the victim of faulty experiential
paramters, that they could quite easily be attributed to the fact that caviation produces reactive oxygen species which would lead to
progressive accumulation of thorium on available surfaces, such as inner walls of the glass container, or the cavitator.
If this were to happen then the solution removed from the vessel, after the treatment, would indeed be less concentrated than the solution before
Trivial stuff and is perfectly logical, yet Cardone didn't even bother to check it out. They then corroborated concerns about missing procedural
information, missing information on certain experimental parameters, an absence of various explanations of statements used as fact to support their
conclusions and an absense of equipment information. This is all standard stuff when publishing in science and it's honestly a wonder how it managed
to get published at all.
To be continued...
edit on 7-4-2012 by hypervalentiodine because: (no reason given)