The Cynics Vs. The Marvelous Self Organizing Structures of The Big Three (Mr. Z)

The following post has been submitted by Mr. Z.

Cynical skeptics often have a list of questions they ask to try and belittle the significance of revolutionary exotic energy technologies. This is certainly the case with the multiple companies emerging which are utilizing the self-organized plasma structures that are produced during the negative resistance regime of a plasma discharge to produce copious excess energy. In this concise article, a few of the most common questions will be addressed. A minimum of scientific jargon and technobabble: I’ll try to answer them in plain language.

Question #1 – What the hell is the negative resistance regime?

Answer: Imagine you have a plasma tube with a cathode (negative) on one end and an anode (positive) at the other and in between the two you have a low pressure gas combination. After you ignite the plasma, there are many “regimes” you can go through, the most commonly known being the “glow mode” plasma and the “electric arc mode.” In both of these modes, the way electrical resistance works in the plasma is the same as in a length of very conductive metal – let’s say copper or silver. However, in a narrow window between these two modes, there is a negative resistance regime in which the voltage/current relationship flip flops: instead of the current going up with higher voltage it will go down.

Simultaneously, the plasma will self organize in this mode. This means that the chaotic soup of ions and electrons will work against entropy to produce structures with “membranes” of electrical double layers where positive ions are lined up on one side and electrons or negative ions are lined up on the other. These structures are the reason for the flip flopping of the voltage/current relationship. As they expand, they can aid in the capture of electrons and the transfer of power across the plasma.

These “double layered” structures which can take on multiple geometric shapes (sheathes attached to the surface of the electrode(s), fire rods that are attached to the electrodes, “balls of fire” tethered to the electrodes, free floating balls of fire between the electrodes, etc.) and achieve multiple states of self organization. Although they are NOT lifeforms, they seem to have some of the characteristics of lifeforms because it has been proven that they consume matter and energy from the plasma (especially heat and electrons but also ions) to sustain themselves and then eject the “waste” outwards producing ion acoustic waves. These ion acoustic waves can be witnessed visually and on an oscilloscope.

So the final question may become, which came first: the negative resistance regime or the self organized plasma ball? I’m not qualified to answer that – although there are many GREAT papers by qualified PhD’s who specialized in these self organized systems that may help you.

What matters is that these structures seem to be the catalyst for producing altered forms of hydrogen (AKA, ultra dense hydrogen, hydrinos), LENR reactions, and perhaps even extraction of energy from the vacuum.

Question #2 – Isn’t it totally nuts for you to assert that these self organized plasmas have superconducting properties? Superconductivity only occurs in metals at low temperature.

Answer: Let me be specific. I’m not stating that the entire plasma in a plasma tube operating in the negative resistance regime is superconducting. I’m suggesting that in, on, or around the membrane like double layers of the self organized plasma ball the electrons may have been forced together via electrical and magnetic forces to induce cooper pair or condensate like states. There is evidence from multiple parties that the electrical resistance of these areas when measured is beneath what their instruments can detect. For example, when The SAFIRE Project attempted to measure the electrical resistance of the innermost double layer of their plasma ball that surrounds an anode, they could not detect any electrical resistance. They don’t know if it was simply extremely low or if superconductivity was taking place.

The simple fact is that superconductivity is NOT fully understood and to limit it only to metals is completely arrogant when a review of the available literature seems to indicate that anything that pushes electrons together against their mutual repulsion may induce an overlapping of their structure, inducing pairing.

Question #3 – If the phenomenon involved is so simple to reproduce, why aren’t there already products on the market? It seems like this would have been mastered and commercialized a very long time ago.


a) There have been a long history of devices that inventors and researchers attempting to commercialize that never saw the light of day: those of Thomas Henry Moray, EV Gray, Paulo Correa, Nikola Tesla, and others. So attempts have been made but there were issues that prevented the technology from being commercialized. If you believe that nano-scale self organizing plasmas with coherent matter membranes could be involved in classical electrolytic and gas loading LENR systems, then you could say that every attempt to commercialize an LENR device should be included in this list.

b) When it comes to utilizing the negative resistance regime and self organized structures in plasmas to produce excess energy, there have been relatively few researchers in modern times put serious money, manpower, and effort into producing working devices. There are the “big three” that are obvious and a handful of others. However, for the most part, engineers have tried to avoid the negative resistance regime because it can be a nuisance. For starters, in some types of lighting, a ballast or electrical resistance has to be used to prevent the plasma discharge from going straight from a glow discharge into the negative resistance regime and then into an arc discharge. Moreover, the ion acoustic waves and sudden back-spikes that are produced iin the negative resistance regime can also be damaging. Remember, these structures can act like capacitors storing energy and then releasing it, frying electronics. I think that right now the world is waking up to the fact that these structures are capable of inducing a range of effects that can produce cheap and clean energy.

c) Producing a self organized plasma ball is indeed simple. They have been produced in laboratories around the world thousands of times. You can search mainstream literature and see where they have been studied. The problem is that almost no one in the mainstream (except for a few) attempted to add hydrogen (very important), look for excess energy, or optimize the setups. I firmly believe that any small company with a laboratory and a handful of engineers and scientists could produce a basic reactor demonstrating the “ball of fire” mode plasma in a week. In a month, they would be demonstrating a clear gain of energy. Remember, The SAFIRE Project’s first system was built in a Bell Jar! These are available off the shelf! They were detecting excess heat in significant amounts from the beginning but did not believe it until they built their full scale reactor and ran additional tests. A system like SAFIRE’s could be replicated very quickly and with ease. There is no mystery. We know the elements and gases the “big three” have used. Monty Childs have even stated that every anode material they use has “worked” to some degree. We do know that they seem to have the best success with a combination of hydrogen, nitrogen and a WNiFe anode.

Please note that the excess energy that can be produced by these systems are enormous: SAFIRE and another company have melted/vaporized Tungsten. Andrea Rossi also claims to have produced huge COPs. One particular company has had to throttle back their systems to prevent it from self destructing.

4) So you think you know everything, don’t you? It’s can’t be this simple. Who are you to say all this? You’re not an engineer, you’re not a scientist!

Answer: Anyone who does the deep research into what the “big three” are doing (watching all the videos, reading their patents, studying everything) and looks into the mainstream literature about self organizing plasmas will realize that there is very little secret sauce. They are all variants of each other. The only thing that might be difficult is the engineering to produce a product that can continually work for hundreds or thousands of hours. These self organized structures not only produce back-spikes and ion acoustic waves but can also vaporize Tungsten. It may be challenging to make one into a product, but to demonstrate the basic effect in the laboratory (ESPECIALLY IF YOU USE A PURE PLASMA BASED SYSTEM WHERE THE PLASMA BALL DOES NOT TOUCH ANYTHING) is simple.

Question #5 – Theory “X” claims that “XYZ” is true so you are out of your mind. We should listen to the experts who have had an understanding of what’s happening for decades.

Answer: I’m tempted to say “screw theory” right now, but that would be hasty. What’s most important is that as many teams around the world as possible reproduce the basic effect. Once the mainstream is forced to admit that you can produce copious energy and transmutations with self organized plasma balls with possible superconducting layers, then the technology will be commercialized over night. Physicists will have the next hundred years to figure out what’s happening at the atomic level.

Conclusion: The basic concepts required to reproduce the effects reported by the “big three” are simple. Companies and institutions around the world should be urged to reproduce them.