(I forgot the origine of this article): the use of intense sound waves to induce micro-explosions that collapse the water molecules and break apart the hydrogen and oxygen into separate gasses plus produce light as a side-effect.

We’ll deal with sonoluminescence here because electrolysis is quite a well-known method of breaking apart H2O.

Sonication and Sonoluminenscence are powerful methods for producing high pressure and high temperatures. They are also very good for producing very fast cooling effects in the range of 10(9) to 10(13)K/s, reached during cavitational collapse.” – Quote attributed to “Savian” at sci.nanotech archives

A good starter for information is at the websites:

It is this process what is suspected to be the catalyst for producing effects that allow Hydrogen gas to be obtained from water on an as-needed-basis. It is also suspected these techniques could be used to produce very large amounts of energy, very quickly at a cost that would be a serious financial threat to entrenched energy companies.

I think if some serious investigation were to take place I suspect that the effects many inventors or builders of Orgone Machines have observed are in all likelihood thek nown effects of Sonoluminescence. I notice on further pages of this wiki, there are details of the detrimental medical effects of Bad Orgone (known as Dur) which sure sounds like “Radiation Poisoning” to me.

I also suspect there are radiological effects probably due to bursts of x-ray or even gamma radiation given off during the sono-collapse phase of the reactions. Thus I suggest not to fool around with Orgone creation without some serious safety precautions such as lead aprons, thick shielding and radiation counters and dosimeters.

# Sonoluminescence Primer(I also forgot the origine of this article):

Sonoluminescence (SL) is the ultraviolet and visible light observed from the collapse of bubbles containing atmospheric air during the ultrasonic cavitation of water, although bubble collapse without ultrasound also produces SL light.

SL from bubble collapse is related to the dissociation of water molecule during bubble nucleation. Bubble related applications include: sonochemistry, photoelectrochemistry, lightning, the Lenard effect and waterfall electricity, thundercloud electrification, Sprites, St. Elmo’s fire, ball lightning, tornado warning devices, and weather modification to reduce the intensity of tornadoes and hurricanes.

SL is proposed caused by the cavity QED induced frequency up-conversion of IR radiation to the VUV. During bubble nucleation, surface tension forms a spherical liquid particle leaving an annular gap with the expanding bubble wall, the annular gap resonant at far VUV frequencies. At ambient temperature, the thermal kT energy of atoms and molecules is emitted at mid to far IR frequencies while bubbles having highly absorptive (or reflective) liquid surfaces suffice as high quality QED cavities having resonant frequencies in the near IR.

Thus, the mid to far IR radiation from the particle is suppressed by the near IR resonant frequency of the bubble. The suppression of IR radiation might be conserved by the lowering of the particle temperature to absolute zero. But this does not occur as cooling of the particle takes time, and therefore EM energy cannot be conserved.

The energy manifested by the Joe Cell is likely to be the same energy related to lightning, waterfall or steam electricity, thundercloud electrification and ball lightning.


By Dr. Harold Aspden. This article can be found here:

From: NEN, Vol. 4, No. 4, August 1996, pp. 1-3. New Energy News (NEN) copyright 1996 by Fusion Information Center, Inc.

In view of the recent flurry of interest in sonoluminescence, thanks to C. Eberlein, Physical Review Letters, 76, pp 3842-45, (1996), we find that not only the journal Nature 381, pp 736-7, (27 June 1996), but other news media are referring to Casimir forces and zero-point energy and are now even suggesting that there really is a mysterious vacuum energy source which deserves our attention. It appears that a bubble of water expanding and contracting at about 25 kHz will emit light in time with the sound pulses.

Now I am not at all convinced that pointing the finger at Casimir forces is a sufficient solution to the mystery. As I see it, Casimir forces evidence the existence of an underlying energy activity in the microcosmic field environment, but I cannot relate that to the prospect of generating power. To me, that activity is a kind of aether noise that exists just as tidal motion ripples in the sea. Yet we do not sit by the sea shore with buckets to tap its energy activity by collecting water lifted to a higher energy potential by the surging motion of the sea.

The sonoluminescent light pulses last less than 50 picoseconds and they imply the sudden release of energy concentrated at pinpoint sources of high temperature. This has to be an electrical effect and, given that I have explained several anomalous energy phenomena by my vacuum spin theory, it is logical to interpret sonoluminescence in the same way. My theory explains why aether energy is shed by the setting up of an electric field radially directed from a point center or from an axis of spin, optimally aligned with the preferred spin direction of local space. Incidentally, space magnetic anisotropy, meaning a preferred spin direction in the aether, has been discovered experimentally by Yu A. Baurov, et al., Physics Letters, A162, pp 32-34, (1992) and A181, pp 283-88, (1993) and Baurov now claims to have built a power generator which runs on physical vacuum energy with an excess power gain of 0.5 kW.

Note that Stan Meyer uses concentric metal tubes immersed in water and applies a pulsating voltage between the tubes. He therefore induces radial field effects which presumably enhance the ionic dissociation of water molecules and so can generate hydrogen and oxygen with power tapped from the aether.

In the case of sonoluminescence in water each air bubble provides a focal point for radial compression as water under pulsating pressure converges on that point. Water is partially dissociated into positive hydronium ions and negative hydroxyl ions, the latter having the lower mass. Therefore, the pressure pulse will displace the negative ions towards the center of the air bubble at a faster rate than the more sluggish positive ions. Here is the process setting up the radial electric field. What then happens is that the aether responds by spinning to set up its own compensating electrical displacement but, owing to a phase-lock condition prevailing in its energy system, it asserts forces which augment the energy stored by that displacement of ionic charge. In effect, for every unit of energy put in by the sonic pressure another unit of energy is provided by the reacting aether spin state.

In physics as applied to linear harmonic systems there is equipartition of energy as between dynamic motion and static potential. In the sonoluminescent activity the sonic pulsations input energy stored by the electrostatic displacement and the aether adds the dynamic vacuum spin energy. This action hold the displaced charge in a quasi-stable state so that when the sonic pressure relaxes the hydronium and hydroxyl ions are driven again towards the focal point in that air bubble and separate further to increase the radial electric field. The cycle then repeats as field and the compensating aether charge displacement increase whilst the vacuum spin builds. This is a pumping action that occurs at the 25,000 Hz sonic frequency as more and more energy is tapped from the aether.

However, there is a limit because the aether sphere in spin builds up in radius with the increase of energy. Periodically, at moments when the inward pressure pulses are occurring, the aether spins of two adjacent bubbles will crash as their surfaces come into contact. This initiates what is, effectively, the discharge of a charged capacitor and I see that as the feature that may well account for the luminescence.

The practical implication is that ionized water containing small air bubbles subjected to sonic frequency pressure pulsations will exhibit anomalous energy properties, and deliver up to twice as much heat as the energy consumed. Another such implication is that the radial electric field pulsations can cause more of the water to dissociate naturally, perhaps even cooling the water if set up with electric power input rather than by pressure pulsation.That effect gives scope for separating hydrogen and oxygen from water to provide a combustible product of higher energy potential than the electric input consumed.

In these circumstances I suggest that the physics of the several known phenomena we can relate to the above is a lot easier to understand than the theory of Casimir forces. My new book, “Aether Science Papers,” gives the full account of the physics scientists will need to study if they are to make sense of this new-energy source.

[A review of Dr. Aspden’s new book is presented in this issue of the newsletter. Cost and ordering information is also provided. Ed.]


The following article I found on the net. Unfortunately I have not yet been able to find out its author and cannot give credit, which is evidently due, because the article is telling and accurate. It is true that Keely does talk about the phenomenon, which is interesting, because it was not until 1934 that it was re-discovered at the University of Cologne as a result of work on sonar. But no more comment, here it is:

Keely’s work also involved the idea that when water was vibrated at certain frequencies, visible light would emerge within it. He tied this in with the properties of sound to harness the aetheric energies. This phenomenon has now been duplicated through an experiment that is known as “Sonoluminescence.” In this experiment, a spherical flask that is filled with water is vibrated at a certain frequency, low in pitch but very high in strength. In the below image we see a simple laboratory setup for this process, with the spherical flask in a clamp and high-intensity speakers mounted to either side of the sphere, with red power wires attached.

Photo from William Andrew Steer’s laboratory research.

When the speakers are running, this arrangement causes a sonic force to be directed towards the exact center of the sphere that the flask makes. Then, the scientist must introduce an air bubble into the water and carefully try to manipulate it into the center that the sound forces are pressing towards. Once an air bubble is properly fixed into the center, the vibrations will allow it to stay there, and an amazing thing happens; it starts emitting light.

At first, the scientists studying this believed that the light was constant, but now it has been shown through delicate measurements to be pulsating at a very rapid speed. The next image below shows a much more high-tech setup, where the spherical flask is housed within a special apparatus that obscures most of the flask from view.

No conventional explanation for why this might be happening exists, and many scientists have tried to explain it in conventional models. The most popular idea is that the extreme forces of sound create nuclear fusion, thus leading to the humorous term “the Star in a Jar.” However, this flies completely in the face of the experiment itself, since the more that the water is cooled, the more light you get! By cooling the water, the amount of molecular vibration in it decreases, thus making it even easier for the sound vibrations to resonate purely.

Other conventional explanations for sonoluminescence sound equally absurd. However, we do know for a fact that the bubble inside shrinks significantly in size every time that a pulse of light is released, and this is occurring at extremely fast rates of speed. It is believed that this collapse creates such intense pressure that great energy is released, but the source of this energy remains a mystery to the mainstream.

Photo from an article by Aaron Levinson.

Although John Keely mentioned this phenomenon in his own work, general credit is given to H. Frenzel and H. Schultes at the University of Cologne in 1934 as being the first to discover this. They were using very strong ultrasonic fields in water as part of their wartime research in marine acoustic radar. Although they were not looking for or expecting such results, they discovered to their surprise that clouds of unpredictable and non-synchronous flashing bubbles of light were formed in the water in front of them. This is now known as “multi-bubble sonoluminescence” or MBSL. Little was done to advance this study until 1988, when D. Felipe Gaitan was able to trap a single bubble at the center of a flask that was vibrating at its own acoustic resonance level, and sonoluminescence was then seen.

Once Gaitan accomplished this effect, he became rather disinterested in pursuing it further, and Dr. S. Putterman et al. subsequently picked it up at UCLA, California. It was Putterman et al.’s research that determined that the internal bubble compresses to 1 / 100,000th of its original size due to the pressure of the sound, during which time the light is released. The flash of light is shorter than 100 picoseconds (or trillionths of a second) in duration, vibrating with extreme regularity every 100 millionths of a second. Putterman’s studies eventually made it into Scientific American in February 1995, which dramatically increased public awareness and interest in the phenomenon.

An article excerpt from the Wall Street Journal on October 15, 1991 helps us to truly understand how significant this is: …A photon of blue light given off by a single atom carries an energy of 3.5 electron volts. This is a trillion times more energy than any single atom in the tiny bubbles could have gained from the sound waves. He [Putterman] speculates that as each bubble implodes to about 1/100,000 of its original [size] volume, the energy and atoms in the bubble are concentrated to a tiny point.

The flash occurs when a million atoms simultaneously release this concentrated energy by giving off photons of blue light. So, we can see that if we are producing a trillion times more energy than exists in the sound waves themselves in this experiment, then quite an incredible amount of energy is coming through from “nowhere.” This is typically seen as a fusion reaction. However, as we have already said, by concentrating sound waves in such a fashion as this we can open up a “gateway” for the high-pressured aetheric “fluid” to flow into our physical reality, forming light, heat and energy.

Furthermore, the shape of the sphere is very important in all of this, as it helps to centralize the vibrations. An article by William Andrew Steer, working in the undergraduate teaching laboratory in the Physics Department of University College London, reveals that: millimeter difference between polar and equatorial diameters, then t…the sphericity of the flask is very important. If there is more than a he resonance becomes very much broader and less strong, requiring more electrical drive to achieve the same sound intensity in the flask.


Contact: Hans von Lieven,, copyright 2007

# ZPE energy from sonoluminescence?, Jerry Wayne Decker ( ), Wed, 7 Jul 1999 15:01:05 -0700 (PDT)

Hi Folks! Found this intriguing comment about the release of large quantities of energy from sonoluminescence being caused by vacuum/zpe/aether interactions;

A NEW THEORY OF SONOLUMINESCENCE . Sound energy, in the form of a beam of ultrasonic waves, can be partly converted into light energy by aiming the sound at an air bubble in a sample of water. The sound causes the bubble to collapse and to emit sharp (less than 12 picosecond) light pulses.

The light’s spectrum implies that the source of the radiation is similar to a black-body object at a temperature of tens of thousands of kelvins. Theorists have tried to explain sonoluminescence by saying, for example, that the radiation comes from a plasma formed by the collapse of the bubble. But mostly the mechanism behind the production of the pulses remains a mystery. Now Claudia Eberlein of Cambridge University (, 44-1223-337-458) offers a more daring explanation.

She believes the light is being emitted by the vacuum surrounding the bubble. Modern quantum theory holds that unseeable virtual photons abound in the vacuum.

The behavior of these “zero-point fluctuations” is influenced by the properties of the surrounding medium.

The rapidly moving air-water interface (where two media different indices of refraction come together) may facilitate the conversion of virtual photons into real photons. In fact, Eberlein says, sonoluminescence may represent the first observable manifestation of quantum vacuum radiation.

This scenario can be compared to the “Unruh effect,” a hypothetical phenomenon in which photons are emitted by a mirror accelerating through a vacuum. “Hawking radiation,” the hypothetical emission of particles from black holes, is yet another example of energy seemingly coming out of nowhere; at the black hole’s Schwarzschild radius (inside of which, light cannot escape), space is so warped that energy from the black hole can be converted into particle-antiparticle pairs; one particle falls back into the hole while its partner escapes. Eberlein asserts that researchers can put her theory to an experimental test and compare the results to other models of sonoluminescence. (Claudia Eberlein, Physical Review Letters, 13 May 1996.)

# Re: Regarding Sonoluminescence, Jerry W. Decker, Mon, 09 Feb 1998 15:11:02 -0800

Hi Ken! AAAhhhh….Keely talked about these bubbles and how they glowed when he used high density frequencies to produce them, way back in the 1880’s. He called them ‘luminiferous’ and said it was a pale blew light.

Scientific American a few years back had a wonderful article on how to produce these bubbles….IMHO there are two phenomena associated with sonoluminscence, one is the very high temperatures inside the bubble, another is the implosion force when bubble collapses.

Dale Pond and Victor Hansen were trying to figure out how the Keely engine that Victor bought for $1000 from the Franklin Institute in the 1960’s, worked. They came to the conclusion that it was a kind of controlled water hammer effect. They never got it working on its own, but when forcing water through it, they noticed the water hammer effect was very pronounced as water flowed through the two cylinders.

I hear what they are saying, and it is an interesting idea, kind of like using Rhodes Gas (erroneously Browns gas), burning in implosive mode (where only the monoatomic gases are allowed to interact, with NO outside gases) to produce a ‘suction’ engine….wouldn’t that be a timing nightmare………but I don’t think that was what Keely was doing.

If you could cohere these bubbles into a stream, you should be able to transfer at least a part of those tremendous temperatures (I seem to recall 6000 F.?) to maybe produce or direct power using a thermoelectric converter. The Potapov YUSMAR device used a vortex chamber to heat water simply by ‘molecular friction’….the claim is these things are being used all over Russia to heat huge buildings….others that tie into the idea of using water shear produced heat are Schaeffer (who used hydraulic compression of water to produce super steam) and Huffman (who uses water circulating through two counter-rotating cylinders that are spaced about 1/4″ apart, it heats water from this shearing effect). Very interesting stuff….Huffman said at a conference a couple of years ago that he could easily win the $1700 KeelyNet O/U prize if their machine output was converted to electricity…..hmm…but the point was a zpe tap, maybe another prize? They sell the machines as ‘high efficiency’ heaters….no one will say o/u, just word games with C.O.P. (coefficient of performance) as used in thermodynamics.

— Jerry W. Decker /

# Conjectured Transient Release Of Zero Point Vacuum Energy In Powerful Electric Discharges, F. Winterberg.

From pdf file ‘ sono.pdf’ , University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada 89557 ; email:

I present the hypothesis that the unexplained large longitudinal stresses observed along the path of powerful electric discharges are caused by the transient release of zero point vacuum energy, very much as in Schwinger’s theory of sonoluminescence, but it may also explain the emission of multi-keV X-rays in exploding wires.

1 – Introduction
Over the years a number of authors have made the claim that strong forces are acting in the direction of the current in powerful electric discharges.

These forces are di.cult to explain by the Biot-Savart law of classical electrodynamics, but can quite well be modeled with the Ampere force law of pre-Maxwell electrodynamics [1–3]. To support this claim forces observed in electric discharges through thin wires or .bers and non-conducting liquids are quoted. Experiments by Nasilowski [4], and by Lochte-Holtgreven [5], have shown that thin wires or .bers fracture into small solid pieces before they could have been vaporized by the electric current.

As shown (Fig. 1) in a photograph taken from a paper by Graneau and Graneau [6], and in Fig. 2 taken from the paper by Lochte-Holtgreven [5], the fracturing of the wires appears at irregular distances, suggesting that it occurs at the randomly distributed weak points of the wires.

Because the outcome of these experiments can be modeled by the Ampere force law, and because this law, unlike the Biot-Savart law (which can be derived from the Lorentz force law), is in violation of special relativity, Rambaut and Vigier [7, 8] have tried to derive the Ampere force law from the Lorentz force law by a statistical average over the stochastically distributed electron trajectories inside the conductor. Unfortunately it seems, no experiments have been carried with superconductors where such an averaging procedure would not work, because the current carrying electrons are there highly correlated, moving parallel to each other in the direction of the current.

Longitudinal Ampere forces have also been claimed to occur in water arc explosions, where Fr¨ungel [9], and Graneau and Graneau [2], have observed a rapid rise of the water pressure up to 50,000 atm, with little water heating, diffcult to explain with a hot steam model.

In this communication I propose a radically di.erent explanation for these phenomena which takes a clue from Schwinger’s [10] attempt to explain the poorly understood phenomenon of sonoluminescence as a “squeezing out” of zero point vacuum energy during the collapse of a bubble in a dielectric, in particular, in water.

2 – Schwinger’s theory of sonoluminescence and the equation of state for the zero point vacuum energy

Schwinger [10] had shown that the zero point energy density u in a dielectric relative to the zero point energy density of the vacuum is

… Text and formulas continue for 9 pages at total …

7 – Conclusion

Sonoluminescence, explained by Schwinger as a transient release of zero point vacuum energy is a rather feeble e.ect, the main reason the limitation in the intensity of the stimulating sound waves. By contrast, the conjectured inverse of this e.ect, stimulated by powerful electric discharges should be by orders of magnitude larger, and could be veri.ed or disproved by rather inexpensive experiments. If proved to be true, this would without any doubt be of great importance.

– [1] P. Graneau: Physics Letters A 97, 253, (1983)
– [2] P. Graneau and P. Neal Graneau: Appl. Phys. Lett. 46, 468, (1985)
– [3] R. Azevedo et al.: Phys. Lett. A 117, 101, (1986)
– [4] J. Nasilowski: Exploding Wires, Vol. 3, eds. W.G. Chase and H.K. Moore, Plenum Press, New York, 1964, p. 295
– [5] W. Lochte-Holtgreven: Atomkernenergie 28, 150 (1976)
– [6] P. Graneau and N. Graneau: Physics Letters A 165, 1 (1992)
– [7] M. Rambaut and J.P. Vigier: Physics Letters A 142, 447, (1989)
– [8] M. Rambaut: Physics Letters A 154, 210 (1991)
– [9] F. Fr¨ungel: High Speed Pulse Technology Vol. 1, p. 477, Academic Press, New York (1965)
– [10] J. Schwinger: Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90, 2105, 4505, 7285, (1993), Physics
– [11] E.W. Kolb and M.S. Turner: The Early Universe, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1990, pp. 48-49
– [12] C. Deeney et al.: Phys. Rev. E 56, 5945 (1997)
– [13] V.L. Kantsyrev, D. A. Fedin, A.S. Shlyaptseva, S. Hansen, D. Chamberlain, and N. Ouart: Physics of Plasmas 10, 2519 (2003)
– [14] L.I. Urutskoev, V.I. Liksonov, V.G. Tsinoev, Annales Fondation Louis de Broglie, 27, 701 (2004)
– [15] L.I. Urutskoev, Annales Fondation Louis de Broglie, 29, 1 (2004)
– [16] S.V. Adamenko, V.I. Vysotskii, Foundations of Physics Letters, 17, 203(2004)
– [17] R.P. Taleyarkhan, J.S. Cho, et al., Phys. Rev. E, 69, 036109 (2004)

# Sonoluminescence at Ambient Temperature?, Thomas V. Prevenslik, 14B, Brilliance Court, Discovery Bay, Hong Kong

Extracts from pdf file ‘SL_at_room_temperature.pdf’ (136ko)

Abstract Sonoluminescence (SL) is the light produced from the collapse of bubbles in water under ultrasound. Generally, SL is thought caused by the high temperatures that accompany the compression heating of air in bubble collapse. But the bubbles are filled with water vapor – not air, the water vapor during collapse condensing to liquid without any increase in temperature, and therefore the SL light is produced at ambient temperature. This is a significant finding in that some yet unknown mechanism exists by which SL light is produced at ambient temperature, thereby offering the economic potential of artificial lighting powered by a limitless source of clean renewable energy from the ambient thermal environment.

SL at ambient temperature is proposed explained by a mechanism that treats the bubble as a quantum electrodynamics (QED) cavity having an electromagnetic (EM) resonant frequency that continually increases during collapse. This means EM radiation that resided in the QED cavity from the prior instant is continuously suppressed. But suppressed EM radiation in a QED cavity is energy loss that may only be conserved by an equivalent gain at its current resonant frequency, and therefore bubble collapse continually produces higher frequency EM radiation – the process called cavity QED induced EM radiation.

Initially, the far infrared (IR) radiation from the ambient thermal kT energy of the water molecules in the bubble wall is suppressed to produce, say near IR radiation when the QED cavity collapses to near IR resonance. As the QED cavity resonance reaches visible frequencies, the near IR radiation is suppressed to produce visible radiation, and so forth. At ultraviolet (UV) resonance the visible radiation is suppressed to produce UV radiation while vacuum UV (VUV) radiation is produced from suppressed UV radiation at VUV resonances. Leakage of EM radiation from the bubble wall surface through the surrounding water appears as SL light having a broad featureless background spectrum from the near IR to the VUV. The VUV radiation produces OH* radicals that upon dissociation produce OH* emissions that superpose on the broad SL background spectrum. The generality of cavity QED induced EM radiation is shown applicable to SL from metal salt solutions, organics, and cryogenic liquids – including diverse applications in the solid state. Finally, a solid state device that produces light at ambient temperature is shown to satisfy limitations imposed by the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Keywords : cavity QED, sonoluminescence.

1. Introduction:
SL is the phenomenon of light emission [1] from a cavitation bubble generated within liquids irradiated with ultrasound, the light extended over a wide spectrum [2] from the near IR to the far VUV while having an extremely short duration [3] from 60 to 250 ps. SL is generally thought caused by high temperatures by the compression heating [4] of air during an adiabatic bubble collapse. Currently, the SL light is explained [5, 6] by the conversion of the air bubble into an Ar bubble as N2 and O2 are removed by chemical reaction at the high temperatures caused by adiabatic heating. But how air or Ar, and not water vapor fill a bubble nucleated in water under ultrasound has never been fully explained. Nevertheless, a consensus has emerged [7] that SL involves extraordinary temperatures in the bubble.

But there is a fundamental problem [8, 9] with high SL temperatures in bubbles nucleating and collapsing in water under ultrasound. Contrarily, the bubbles are not filled with air or Ar, but rather condensable water vapor as there is insufficient time at ultrasonic frequencies for air or Ar dissolved in the water to diffuse into the bubble. Vapor bubbles are required by Le Chatelier’s principle1 to maintain 2-phase equilibrium with the liquid bubble walls, and therefore the vapor tends to remain at ambient temperature and pressure as the volume vanishes during bubble collapse – in sharp contrast to non-condensable gases like air or Ar where the gas temperature and pressure do indeed significantly increase as the volume vanishes [4].

Le Chatelier’s principle is a statement of equilibrium between the water vapor and the liquid bubble wall. But the volume decrease in bubble collapse momentarily creates a nonequilibrium state of increased vapor temperature and pressure, and therefore some vapor condenses to liquid to lower the vapor temperature and pressure and restore thermal equilibrium with ambient conditions along a path governed by the Hertz-Knudsen [10] relation. Since the liquid bubble wall is a massive ambient temperature sink to the small quantity of vapor, the vapor remains at ambient temperature. Indeed, the Hertz-Knudsen relation was included [8,9] in computer solutions of bubble dynamics by the Rayleigh – Plesset (RP) equation [11] to show the temperature increase in a typical SL bubble is sufficiently small that the bubbles may be considered to collapse almost isothermally.

Yet, most of the early SL computer simulations [12] excluded water vapor in bubble collapse by making the assumption the bubbles are filled with air, and by treating the collapse as adiabatic instead of isothermal, air temperatures from 2000 to 10 million degrees were computed. More recently, RP simulations [13] including vapor condensation have been performed, but notably differ from [8,9] with regard to the condensation coefficient ac, and limits on the validity of the RP equation.

The condensation coefficient ac in the Hertz-Knudsen relation is defined as the probability of a vapor molecule sticking to the liquid water wall. If ac = 0, there is no sticking and the water vapor behaves as a non-condensable gas, such as air, giving bubble temperatures from 2000 to 10 million degrees. For ac > 0, the bubble temperature is reduced. But this is an academic exercise because the probability ac the vapor molecule sticks to the wall can only be unity, i.e., even if sticking does not occur on the first collision, the molecule eventually sticks on subsequent collisions, as it cannot escape the bubble. Recent simulations [13] use ac = 0.4, and therefore predict far higher temperatures than actually [8, 9] occur.

The RP equation is only valid if the bubble remains spherical during collapse, i.e., the water vapor pressure in the bubble is required to be greater than the pressure in the liquid wall. If not, the bubble wall fragments injecting microscopic liquid particles into the bubble cavity, and therefore the RP equation requires modification. One such modification [8, 9] replaces the RP equation with 1-D flow simulating the injection of particles into the bubble. Bubble wall break-up precludes spherical focussing of fluid flow to sonic velocities while limiting the bubble collapse velocity to 150 –200 ms- 1.

Thus, the vapor molecules at ambient temperature having a RMS velocity of about 500 ms-1 are always colliding to stick on the slower moving bubble wall as if the bubble wall is stationary.

It is therefore concluded based on Le Chatelier’s principle and supported by computer simulations [8, 9] that the SL bubbles collapse almost isothermally at ambient temperature rather than by an adiabatic collapse at temperatures from 2000 to 10 million degrees.

2. Purpose:
The SL light is most likely produced at ambient temperature – not at high temperature. The purpose of this paper is to present one such explanation of how SL light might be produced at ambient temperature – cavity QED induced EM radiation.

3. Objectives
Since SL is likely produced in an isothermal bubble collapse, a review of SL objectives is proper at this time to establish whether it is more promising to direct future SL research toward high or ambient temperature. The objective of SL at high bubble temperatures was to produce electricity by nuclear fusion in a bubble, the process called bubble fusion was first disclosed [14] in 1976. Recently, bubble fusion was even claimed [15] to be the discovery of the century in offering a source of limitless energy.

But the irony of science is that sometimes the converse of a premise proves more significant than the premise itself. Stated another way, SL at ambient temperature might instead truly embody the discovery of the century by providing a limitless source of artificial lighting from ambient temperature.

Because of Le Chatelier’s principle, if the comparison of SL objectives were made over a decade ago, SL at ambient temperature might have been t he more attractive choice. Indeed, the objective of SL at ambient temperature producing artificial light may be of far greater economic potential than by the electricity produced in miniature fusion reactors with inherent safety and radioactivity issues. Although not a direct producer of electricity, SL at ambient temperature may significantly reduce the burden of conventional power plants that otherwise supply the electricity for artificial lighting.

SL from liquids is not conducive to artificial lig hting. In single bubble SL (SBSL), a single bubble is positioned at the center of a spherical pressure field by an arrangement of ultrasonic transducers. Since the intensity of light from a single SBSL bubble is faint even in a darkened room, the very large number of SBSL systems required to produce artificial light of commercial intensity renders SBSL impractical. In contrast, multi-bubble SL (MBSL) produces a swarm of SL bubbles from ultrasonic transducers spread over a wide region of liquid. But the spacing between the bubbles is still relatively large, and therefore a compact arrangement of MBSL bubbles is not possible. Both SBSL and MBSL require electrical energy to power the ultrasonic transducers, and therefore artificial light sources in liquids are not attractive economically.

Absent ultrasound, s tationary nanoscale bubbles observed on solid surfaces under water that stabilize by nucleating on solid nanometer particles cannot be a source of commercial light because the particles quench the QED induced VUV radiation. Since the bubbles do not collapse, even if Ar.OH* excimers do form under VUV radiation there is no mechanism by which the Ar.OH* excimers may decompose to produce the SL light.

However, passive s olid state materials fabricated into hollow nano shells might convert the steady heat flow from the ambient into VUV radiation that by photoluminescence is transformed into a commercial source of artificial light. See Appendix A.

4. Theoretical Background

Generally, the laws of thermodynamics preclude the spontaneous transformation of thermal kT energy from IR to VUV levels. But this is not true for IR radiation from the surface of a VUV resonant QED cavity. Indeed, the frequency up-conversion associated with transforming IR to VUV is the conseque nce of conserving EM energy in a QED cavity.

Cavity QED induced EM radiation follows from the most basic laws of physics – that low frequency EM radiation is suppressed in a high frequency QED cavity – the generality of the law applicable to QED cavities in both the solid and liquid state. Typically, IR radiation from QED cavity surfaces at ambient temperature is suppressed from atoms within the penetration depth of the resonant VUV radiation standing across the QED cavities. But in a QED cavity the EM ener gy loss from the suppression of IR radiation can only be conserved by an equivalent gain at its resonant frequency, and therefore the atoms in the QED cavity surface are spontaneously excited by VUV radiation, the significance of which is that VUV radiation is produced at ambient temperature.

Generally, consider a spherical void of radius R in a solid or liquid as a QED cavity having an EM resonance emitting a VUV photon hu shown in Fig. 1.

total pdf length: 26 pages …
1 Le Chatelier’s principle states: “A system in equilibrium subjected to an external stress responds to reduce the effect of the stress.” (1888). In a liquid-vapor system, an increase in pressure caused by a decrease in volume will cause the system to retreat from the increased pressure by the conversion of some vapor into liquid.


– [1] R. E. Verral and C. M. Segdal, “Sonoluminescence in Ultrasound: Its Chemical, Physical and Biological Effects (ed. K. S. Suslick), New York, 227, 1988.
– [2] R. A. Hiller, S. J. Putterman, and K. R. Wenninger, “Time-resolved spectra of sonoluminescence,” Phys. Rev. Lett., 80, 1182, 1998.
– [3] B. Gompf, R. Gunther, G. Nick, R. Pecha, and W. Eisenmenger, “Resolving sonoluminescence pulse widths with single photon counting,” Phys. Rev. Lett., 79,105, 1997.
– [4] B. E. Noltingk and E. A. Neppiras, “Cavitation produced by ultrasonics,” Proc. Phys. Soc. B, 63, 674-685, 1950.
– [5] S. Hilgenfeldt, S. Grossman, and D. Lohse, “A simple explanation of light emission in a sonoluminescencing bubble ,” Nature, 398, 402, 1999.
– [6] D. Lohse and S. Hilgenfeldt, “Inert gas accumulation in sonoluminescing bubbles,” J. Chem. Phys. ,107, 6986, 1997.
– [7] Y. T. Didenko, W.R. McNamara III, and K.S. Suslick, “Molecular emission from single-bubble sonoluminescence,” Nature, 407, 877, 19 October 2000.
– [8] T. V. Prevenslik, “The paradigm of high temperatures in a collapsing bubble and sonoluminescence, sonochemistry, and D-D fusion,” presented at Fifth biennial SSE European meeting, University of Amsterdam, October 2000. Unpublished.
– [9] T. V. Prevenslik, “The cavitation induce d Becquerel effect and the hot spot theory of sonoluminescence,” Ultrasonics, 41, 312, 2003.
– [10] P. Gajewski, A. Kulicki, A. Wisnewski, and A. Zgorzelski, “Kinetic theory approach to the vapor-phase phenomena in a nonequilibrim condensation process,” Phys. Fluids 17, 321-27, 1974.
– [11] C. E. Brennen, Cavitation and Bubble Dynamics, Oxford University Press, 1995.
– [12] L. A. Crum, “Bubbles hotter than the sun,” New Scientist, 36-40, 1995.
– [13] M. P. Brenner, S. Hilgenfeldt, and D.Lohse, “Single-bubble sonoluminescence,” Reviews of Modern Physics , 74, 425-452, 2002.
– [14] M. A. Margulis, Sonochemistry and Cavitation , Gordon & Breach, 1995.
– [15] L. A. Crum, “Sonoluminescence and Acoustic Inertial Confinement Fusion,” Fifth International Symposium on Cavitation, Osaka, Japan, 1-4 November 2003.
– [16] R. W. Christy and A. Pytte, The Structure of Matter: Introduction to Modern Physics, Benjamin, New York, 1965.
– [17] S. Harouche and J-M Raimond, “Cavity Quantum Electrodynamics,” Scientific American, 54, April 1993.
– [18] R. van Zee, Cavity-Enhanced Spectroscopies – Spontaneous Emission in a Microsphere: Cavity QED, Vol. 40 in Experimental Methods in the Physical Sciences – Edited by: R. Celotta and T. Lucatorto, Academic Press, 2002.
– [19] E. N. Harvey, “Sonoluminescence and Sonic Chemiluminescence,” J. Am. Chem. Soc., 61, 2392, 1939.
– [20] M. Makino, M. M. Mossoba, and P. Riesz, “Formation of .OH and .H in aqueous solutions by ultrasound using clinical equipment,” J. Phys. Chem., 91, 3654, 1983.
– [21] K. S. Suslick, J. J. Gawienowski, P. F. Schubert, and H. H. Wang, “Alkane Sonochemistry,” J. Phys. Chem. , 87, 2299, 1983.
– [22] E. B. Flint and K.S. Suslick, “Sonoluminescence from Alkali-Metal Salt Solutions,” J. Phys. Chem. , 95, 1484-88, 1991.
– [23] Y. T. Didenko, S. P. Pugach, and T. V. Gordychuk, “Sonoluminescence Spectra of Water: Effect of Ultrasonic Irradiation Power,” Optics and Spectroscopy, 80, 821-826, 1996.
– [24] R. T. Hiller, K. Wenninger, S. J. Putterman, and B.P. Barber, “Effect of noble gas doping on single bubble sonoluminescence,” Science , 266, 248-250, 1997.
– [25] T. Le Pointe, et al., “Observation of ‘Ar-HO’ van der Waals molecules in multibubble sonoluminescence,” Ultrasonics International 2001, T. U. of Delft, 2-5 July 2001.
– [26] D. J. Segelstein, “The complex refractive index of water,” MS Thesis, University of Missouri, Kansas City, 1981.
– [27] D. J. Flannigan and K. S. Suslick, “Plasma formation and temperature measurement during single -bubble cavitation,” Nature, Vol. 434, 52-55, 2005.
– [28] Y. T. Didenko and T. V. Gordychuk, “Multibubble Sonoluminescence Spectra of Water which Resemble Single -Bubble Sonoluminescence,” Phys. Rev. Lett., 84, 5640, 2000.
– [29] Y. T. Didenko and S. P. Pugach, “Spectra of Sonoluminescence,” J. Phys. Chem. , 98, 9742-49, 1994.
– [30] M. Link, R. Mehnert, and L. Prager, “Design and Performance Characteristics of Windowless Argon Source,” 5th Inter. Symposium on Ionizing Radiation and Polymers, 21- 26, September, 2002.
– [31] Putterman, “Sonoluminescence: Sound into light,” Scientific American, Feb.1995.
– [32] J. B. Young, J. A. Nelson, and W. Kang, “Line Emission in Single-Bubble Sonoluminescence,” Phys. Rev. Lett., 86, 2673-2676, 2001.
– [33] E. B. Flint and K. S. Suslick, “Sonoluminescence from Nonaqueous Liquids: Emission from Small Molecules,” J. Am. Chem. Soc., 111, 6987-92, 1989.
– [34] M. A. Margulis and A. F. Dmitrieva, “Processes of sonoluminescence quenching by various additives,” Russ. J. Phys. Chem. , 66, 751, 1992.
– [35] C. Sehgal, R. P. Steer, R. G. Sutherland, and R. E. Verrall, “Sonoluminescence of Aqueous Solutions,” J. Phys. Chem. , 81, 2618, 1977.
– [36] V. H. Arakeri, “Sonoluminescence from Metal Salt Solutions,” Fifth International Symposium on Cavitation, Osaka, Japan, 1-4 November 2003.
– [37] W. B. McNamara III, Y. T. Didenko, and K. S. Suslick, “The Nature of the Continuum in Multibubble Sonoluminescence,” J. Am. Chem. Soc., 122, 8563, 2000.
– [38] P. Jarman and K. Taylor, “The sonically induced cavitation of liquid helium,”, J. Low Temp. Phys. 2, 389, 1970.
– [39] P. I. Golubnichi, P. I. Dyadyushkin, G. S. Kaluzhnyi, and S. D. Korchikov, “Laser sonoluminescence in liquid nitrogen”, Sov. Tech. Tech. Phys. , 24 (8) August 1979.
– [40] O. Baghdassarian, B. Tabbert, and G. A. Williams, “Luminescence from laser-created bubble in cryogenic liquids,” Physica B, 284-288, 392-394, 2000.
– [41] O. Baghdassarian, H. C. Chu, B. Tabbert,and G. A. Williams, “Spectrum of Luminescence from Laser-Induced Bubbles in Water, and Cryogenic Liquids,” CAV2001: Fourth International Symposium on Cavitation, California Institute of Technology, 20-31 June 2001.
– [42] T. V. Prevenslik, “Cavity QED Induced Photoelectric Effect,” Proceedings ESA-IEJ Meeting, Northwestern University, 230-40, 25-28 June 2002.
– [43] T. V. Prevenslik, “The Casimir force – neutral or electrostatic?”, 4th French Electrostatics Society Congress, Poitiers, 2-3 September 2004.
– [44] T. V. Prevenslik, “The cavity QED induced thermophotovoltaic effect”, 14th Inter. Photovoltaic Sci. & Eng. Conf., PVSEC -14, Bangkok, 27 Jan.-1 Feb.,2004.
– [45] J. W. G. Tyrrell and P. Attard, “Images of Nanobubbles on Hydrophobic Surfaces and their Interaction,” Phys. Rev. Lett., 87, 176104, 2001.
– [46] T. V. Prevenslik, “Flow electrification in micro porous filters,” 5th International EHD Workshop, Poitiers, 30-31 August 2004.

Scroll to Top