Robert George of Brillouin Interview

  • for the lasy and sensible watcher here shouls be the starting point
    t=23:43
    https://youtu.be/AI64LMWgmAY?t=23m42s


    here is the transcript.
    maybe someone can correct it?

  • just noticed that detail to maybe document

    Quote


    MIT was one of the very end at universities that discredit it they got caught later for downshifting the data because they did see excess
    heat and it was there was a lawsuit resulting in there a falsification of the information and they lost but they don't bring that to the front today

  • Nice. Here's an edited version of the quote you posted that might be a little clearer. I have been very careful not to twist the words.


    ' In 89 the Department of Energy was about to release eight hundred million dollarsand for fusion energy research and they decided to hold it up because cold fusion (which was a misnomer at the time) was introduced and they said "we need to investigate this before we release the money - to find out if it's legitimate.''


    They asked to MIT and Caltech and Texas A&M to verify or validate the technology. and because people (there) were hot fusion advocates and had different competing technologies they wanted to get the money for. Basically they were all hot fusion physicists that were waiting for their budgets to be approved.


    MIT was one of the universities that discredited it, but they got caught later for downshifting the data because they did see excess heat. There was a lawsuit resulting from the falsification ofthe information they produced and they lost (the case) but they don't bring that to the fore today.'

  • Little in this interview we have not heard about already. Only a couple things of interest said. At 33-35 minutes George says SRI's "hands off" operation of their tech is going very well. They have a multi-million $ licence with a South Korean company to "start" manufacturing. Have issued a licence in Canada. No one though in the US seems interested.


    Claims at minute 43, to have gone to Wall Street, and they seemed unimpressed. In other words, no mainstream investors. That is hard to believe, if BE has exactly what they say they have.


    Before the break, the interviewer said he would ask after the break if BE has a product ready to go to market, but then forgets to ask this very important question!


    Overall impression was the interviewer liked to hear himself talk, and missed a golden opportunity to get some real world, market related answers from George. Other takeaway, was BE's playing up on this theme of being ignored by the universities, and Wall Street, yet oddly seem to rely on such off the beaten path venues as InforWars to "get the word out". If they have what they say, they should be knocking on the major print, and broadcast medias doors and beg them for an interview.


    BTW Alain, the "cue", is actually their "Q Pulse" control system.

  • I'd like to encourage the LENR community to consider the source for their public releases. My feeling is that it further called the credibility of LENR into question by having the interview on the Alex Jones show, which has been described as a conspiracy theorist talk show.

  • Brillouin sounds pretty much like Rossi, Dekalion, Steorn, and the other free energy pretenders. Missing in action and conspicuous by their absence are proper open tests done by reputable organizations not involved in cold fusion work. Absent those, why would any one not terminally gullible believe them?


    As for Alex Jones, Oh My Flaming God. What a crockmeister. The theories advanced on that show are most often completely lunatic rambles.


    Quote

    Overall impression was the interviewer liked to hear himself talk, and missed a golden opportunity to get some real world, market related answers from George.

    What market is that, precisely? There is no market for anything related to LENR. And why would you believe what the man said, even if he provided answers to marketing questions?

  • Great job. Thanks for that. I have copy/saved the transcript for posterity, uploading and quoting from.


    I just copied youtube transcript. It is far from perfect, but at least non fluent English hearer can have a vague idea, and even used google translation...
    It will be cool if someone translate the key points.


    I'd like to encourage the LENR community to consider the source for their public releases. My feeling is that it further called the credibility of LENR into question by having the interview on the Alex Jones show, which has been described as a conspiracy theorist talk show.


    You make a point, but it is not the first time LENR was discussed by strange people, who damage LENR non-existent reputation.
    I was more happy when La Tribune and Les Echos were featuring LENR and E-cat. with current tragedy around E-cat I feel like the adviser who advised a grandma to buy subprime CDOs...


    back to the lab, and even to PdD.
    If Brillouin provide evidence of the class that Leonardo could not provide according to IH, I will be happy like a Portuguese winning Euro 2016.

  • Some one famous once said any publicity is good publicity as long as you spell my name right. We now have 15 people contracting with brillouin to move the engineering physics forward and that show brought several potential investors to our web site. Now we can get into the details with them so they can make a truly informed choice as to weather or not they wish to invest in the real technology that Brillouin Energy Corp. is developing.

  • @BEC


    I don't know about Brillouin. Can you trust someone to use hyrogen with a pluse when they can't even spell "hydrogen" and "pulse?" Seriously, guys, you should get some truly independent testing and not by McKubre before you take people's money. And I think you corrected this (below) but it took more than two years. Now to me, that spells class! LOL. And where is the real boiler anyway? And who tested it and how? Where is it replicated? Where is it published?


  • @BEC


    As far as I remember , beside your promising but incomplete internal reports,the only opposable evidence is the support of Michael McKubre.
    I take his ethic and competence as much above average, but his commitment about BEC technology is unclear. Maybe you can highlight the evidences I understated.


    At which state of evidence are you ? (no need of MW evidences, good 100W by 3rd party is all we need)
    Was there third party replication by a partner ?
    Is there a planned public third party report, or something of that class ?


    About the technology, can you share the challenges you are working on ?

  • @BEC


    I don't know about Brillouin. Can you trust someone to use hyrogen with a pluse when they can't even spell "hydrogen" and "pulse?" Seriously, guys, you should get some truly independent testing and not by McKubre before you take people's money. And I think you corrected this (below) but it took more than two years. Now to me, that spells class! LOL. And where is the real boiler anyway? And who tested it and how? Where is it replicated? Where is it published?


    I have gotten the basics of your intense skepticism of LENR in general, but why are you trashing McKubre? A while back, I made a post that it would be very difficult for you to change your mind. (As well as certain Rossi enthusiasts) You stated that if "simply" X,Y,Z was done by a reputable organization etc. that it would change. I stated that I suspected that NO organization could ever meet your requirements as the fact was already determined in your mind.


    I am not an expert of a scientist's qualitifcation. However, I have read up some on the likes of McKubre and Robert Duncan. I saw nothing that would preclude them as honest and capable. From respected organizations that should meet your stated credentials. Yet here your are bashing McKubre, and I suspect soley on the fact that he has publicly supported LENR and to some extent Brillouin.


    So my point is why? I do not state that LENR is proven because of their involvement. I would state however, that their involvement is a positive element.


    I am only posting this to ask an honest question.
    Would you state that SRI is not qualified to meet your qualifications and the reason is because they "investigated LENR" and did not pronounce it a fraud? Is this not circular entrapment? I suspect you do not hold Duncan in high esteem either. Or the Sidney Kimmel research project at University of Missouri.


    So the honest question to you, is there ANY active organization looking into LENR that you would give positive remarks and support too? Or is it that if any organization is actively looking into LENR with a positive focus, they are automatically categorized as inept?


    I ask this to better understand how to take your posts. If there is never going to be anything constructive or of new value to the subject, why do I need to read them as the message has already been determined and stated? There are certain "Rossi believers" that I do not read their posts as it is already a given what those posts will contain... Nothing but extreme bias, no search for real truth. Why bother?


    “Your assumptions are your windows on the world. Scrub them off every once in a while, or the light won't come in.”
    ― Isaac Asimov

  • Quote

    I stated that I suspected that NO organization could ever meet your requirements as the fact was already determined in your mind.

    And you were wrong. I would believe large well known companies like Tesla, Google (who adopted the Bloom Box) and General Atomics, to name a few. It would depend though on what exactly they reported. Also renown university physics departments like Cal Tech and MIT (acting officially of course as departments, not individual professors). Also, and I would prefer these, renown test labs like Sandia and ORNL, CERN, and NRL to name a few. And I have been saying this since 2011 about LENR and cold fusion so you have not been paying attention. McKubre does not merit being believed because he has been fooled before, for example by Rossi most recently but he also paid attention to the idiotic Papp claims about (ROTFWL) "noble gas engines."


    Quote

    Would you state that SRI is not qualified to meet your qualifications and the reason is because they "investigated LENR" and did not pronounce it a fraud? Is this not circular entrapment? I suspect you do not hold Duncan in high esteem either. Or the Sidney Kimmel research project at University of Missouri.

    I do not hold Duncan in high esteem and also, far as I know, neither he nor the Kimmel Institute have not found anything noteworthy in terms of high power LENR. I would be impressed to look further if SRI officially as a company said that they were convinced that Brillouin had high power LENR but I would not be convinced and of course they have never said that. Far as I know they ignore McKubre as much as they can and I suspect he is an embarrassment to them.


    What someone or some organization SAYS is, of course, never the issue. It's what they DID in terms of replicable experiments which have been confirmed by other reputable institutions.


    I don't care whether you read my posts or not but had you read them and carefully considered them along the way since 2011, you would have strongly suspected that Rossi was a crook and had no LENR, long before now!

  • I do not hold Duncan in high esteem and also, far as I know, he and the Kimmel Institute have not found anything noteworthy in terms of high power LENR... Far as I know they (SRI) ignore McKubre as much as they can and I suspect he is an embarrassment to them. .


    Sorry to hear that Mary, Duncan always speaks so highly about you. He probably envies your interest and expertise. As for MM, he has retired to New Zealand as far as I know. What evidence do you have to suggest that SRI find him embarrassing? Have you been reading their emails?


    [