US Military Report on Biological Transmutation and Energy Gain from 1978

Here’s a report that was brought to my attention titled “Energy Development From Elemental Transmutations In Biological Systems” and was written in May 1978 (long before Pons and Fleischmann) by Solomon Goldfein, a US military researcher with the U.S. Army Mobility Equipment Research & Development Command, Ft. Belvoir, Virginia.

The full document can be read here:

Here’s the abstract:

The purpose of the study was to determine whether recent disclosures of elemental transmutations occurring in biological entities have revealed new possible sources of energy. The works of Kervran, Komaki, and others were surveyed; and it was concluded that, granted the existence of such transmutations (Na to Mg, K to Ca, and Mn to Fe), then a net surplus of energy was also produced. A proposed mechanism was described in which Mg-Adenosine Triphosphate (MgATP), located in the mitochondrion of the cell, played a double role as an energy producer. In addition to the widely accepted biochemical role of MgATP in which it produces energy as it disintegrated part by part, MgATP can also be considered to be a cyclotron on a molecular scale. The MgATP when placed in layers one atop the other has all the attributes of a cyclotron in accordance with the requirements set forth by E.O. Lawrence, inventor of the cyclotron.

It was concluded that elemental transmutations were indeed occurring in life organisms and were probably accompanied by a net energy gain.

Transmutations and accompanying energy gain are the hallmarks of low energy nuclear reactions. If these reactions occur in nature at very low temperatures (“icy cold fusion” according to the friend who brought this to my attention), it adds a new and important dimension to LENR. The net energy gain that is so important in energy producing LENR devices (and hotly disputed by some who are skeptical of the whole field) might actually be happening all around us and within our own bodies.

If the mechanism by which this happens at very low temperatures in nature can be better understood, it could provide a whole new approach to developing new approaches in LENR technological development.

  • Mats002

    If all LENR have the same underlying process, it points to magnetic flux/vortex’s at nano scale as the core driver of the phenomenon.

    What can’t be measured can’t be controlled. Supposing magnetic flux at nanoscale is the core driver of LENR reactions then there is need for a probe that can measure the strength of the flux at the local small scale where it is induced.
    Checking for transmutations is not efficient, that method makes each round of test too expensive and time consuming. Checking for radiation is more direct but still this is probing the effect, not the cause. What kind of method could be used to measure the local magnetic flux at nano scale?

    • Zack Iszard

      The SQUID. These sensors are the most sensitive for detecting micro- or meso-scale very small magnetic flux changes, on the order of pico-teslas I believe. They may require cryogenic temperatures, LN2, so I’m not sure if the ATP-mediated reactions would still occur at an appreciable rate.

      • Mats002

        Dr Piantelli discovered the anomolous heat effect in his work of studying brain cells for alzheimer. He put brain cells on top of a nickel rod and sank it into fluid helium (or some other medium for deep freeze, cryogenic temperatures).

        His problem was that the temperature refused to decrese. Then he focused on the anomolous heat effect instead of brain cell studies. He is the father of LENR NiH systems.

        Your suggestion might be the way to go.

        • Obvious

          The nickel-helium story of Piantelli interests me quite a bit. This should be easy to replicate, even if it does not lead to a commercial power source. (It is a very cold system). I wonder why no one has replicated it. And furthermore, what is going on with helium, if it is supposed to be a product, rather than a reactant, in almost all other systems?

    • Stephen

      Good question. Such a device would also be interesting in nano physics, plasmonics and spintronics etc it might also be applicable in nano technology for memories etc. I also wonder if such a device exists.

  • Bob Greenyer

    This is another document reporting the first Fusion/Fission reaction, conducted in 1932, which may form the foundation of the main energy yield in both Piantelli and Rossi recently awarded patent.

    “As far back as 1932, however, it was known that alpha particles having energies when ejected from radioactive elements of medium life of between 5 and 7 MeV could cause atomic disintegrations. Cockcroft and Walton built a tall, vertical tube capable of evacuation with a filament producing electrons at the top and a target of the element to be bombarded at the bottom. A low pressure of hydrogen was introduced and ionized by collisions with the electrons produced by the filament. The top of the tube could be raised to a high positive potential, up to 700,000 volts, the bottom being at earth. On reaching the bottom of the tube, the protons had a kinetic energy equal in electron-volts to the potential in volts at the top of the tube. Using a lithium target, at 45º angle to the bombarding protons, disintegrations of some of the lithium atoms into pairs of helium nuclei ejected almost in opposite directions were observed with only 120,000 volts.”

    Unified Gravity Corporation have shown that you need less than 225eV in tests conducted over the past decade to stimulate the same reaction.

  • Roland

    Firstly, I’m fascinated to find that research into biological transmutation effects has such a long history and that that attracted so little attention over the next 200 years.

    Secondly, this research buttresses Sheldrake’s conclusions that caloric intake fails to account for the total energy energy balance in life forms.

    Thirdly, we have documented historic examples like Therese Neumann who, from 1922 till her death in 1962, lived on a single Eucharist wafer and a sip of communion wine a day. She also drank no water. At varying points she was closely observed 24/7 by teams of physicians and clerics for weeks to see if she was somehow faking it, on each such occasion no cheating was detected, nor were there any signs of dehydration or weight change. Traditionally Tibetan Buddhist monks were trained to produce extraordinary energy effects such as being placed outdoors in midwinter, in the Himalayas, naked and then wrapped in wet sheets; the object being to dry a succession of sheets instead of rapidly freezing to death as I, and everyone I know, surely would.

    We have a great deal to learn from known but largely ignored phenomena that are outside our current conceptual framework, and the sooner we embrace what is actually occurring all around us, rather than being blinded by preconceptions of what ‘should’ be, the more real knowledge we’ll acquire.

  • Stephen

    This is an interesting article… It’s amazing what’s been looked at in the past.

    It does not surprise me that if LENR can occur in an environment where life can exist that life can itself find a way to create and engineer the special set of conditions needed for it can occur and take advantage of it.

    I wonder if the element changes can tell us anything? For example if p absorption or n absorption followed by beta decay were implicated. Note if K 39 absorbed a neutron it would have a very long half life of over a billion years before decaying via beta decay to Ca 40. Beta decay would also be undesirable biologically I suppose. Does this indicate proton absorption must have been occurring?

  • bachcole

    It’s amazing how people ignore data that they don’t want to acknowledge and that messes with their pet paradigm. It is not all about money. It includes issues of cognitive dissonance avoidance.

    • Roland

      When fundamental, but erroneous, assumptions about reality are shaken, many people experience such dread that entertaining these thoughts at any level is profoundly upsetting and to be avoided like the plague; hence our species wide addiction to intellectual, cultural and religious absolutes.

      Experiencing reality, naked of our constructs, is probably the biggest challenge any human can face and, traditionally, requires all of our inner fortitude and decades of focused effort.

      When character is particularly rigid this dread presents as the cessation of personal existence and threats to this construct loom everywhere.

    • Bénabou published a new article

      Turning now to the supply side, how are desired beliefs achieved and maintained, sometimes against strong evidence? The paths to self-deception are countless, but three main categories can be distinguished: willful blindness, reality denial, and self-signaling.

      The first one consists in avoiding information sources that may hold bad news. For Huntington’s disease or HIV, for instance, this means not getting the test even though it is cheap or free, accurate, and can be done anonymously. Critical decisions need to be made, yet the person’s words and deeds reveal a negative ex-ante value for information. In the second scenario the news are already accumulating, though not yet completely final: symptoms are worsening, the objective probability of disease is rising to 70%, 80%, etc., yet the patient finds ways of not internalizing the data, rationalizing it away and convincing himself that his risk is still only (say) 15%, and behaving accordingly in most respects.

      The third strategy is one where it is the agent himself who manufactures “diagnostic” signals of the desired type, which he then interprets as impartial (Quattrone and Tversky 1984, Bodner and Prelec 2003, Bénabou and Tirole 2004, 2011). Keeping with the health example, this correspond to a person who “pushes” himself to overcome their symptoms, carrying out difficult or even dangerous activities not only for their own sake but also as “proof” that things are fine.

      It is worth pointing out three fundamental differences between such motivated beliefs or cognitive tendencies and the more purely mechanical mistakes in inference associated to the “heuristics and biases” view (e.g., Tversky and Kahneman (1974)) and typically found in most models of bounded-rationality:

      The latter types of “errors” are automatic and undirected (an “intuitive” System I is often invoked), the former valenced (pleasant or aversive) and goal-oriented, though in general not consciously so. A clear example of the difference is that of confirmation bias versus selfenhancement, for someone who is already not very confident in their skill, attractiveness, health or other key characteristic. In the first case the person tends to interpret any ambiguous signals received as confirming and hardening their negative self-view. In the second they see the same evidence positively, as showing that things are actually pretty good, or not so bad. In practice, the great majority of people show the latter type of response, and only depressive ones the former.

      A second major difference is that people who are more analytically sophisticated, educated or numerate can actually be more prone to making distorted inferences –rationalizing away evidence and compartmentalizing knowledge to protect valued beliefs – than those with lower cognitive abilities. Moreover, such reversals of the standard bounded-rationality logic occur only when the issue at hand is value-laden (e.g., gun control, climate change; see Kahan 2013 and Kahan et al. 2014), and not when it is neutral.

      Unlike computational and statistical mistakes, motivated cognition is emotionally charged. This feature is revealed almost instantly by a “fighting response” (agitation, anger, outrage, hostility) whenever a cherished belief pertaining to a person’s identity, morality, religion, politics, etc., is directly challenged by evidence. This view of belief formation is also consistent with the renewal of interest in emotions and their influence on decision-making currently under way in psychology and neuroscience (e.g. Sharot et al. (2012)).”

      make your market