“Nature’s Energy” — New Video Introducing Brillouin Energy

This is not very different from the Focardi Effect. If Brillouin would add lithium, they might seen a dramatic increase in power production. Of course they could never commercialize a nickel - lithium reactor, because that technology belongs to Rossi.

No test results, "indipendent" or otherwise. No content. Nothing which can be fact checked. Just smoke and hopes and wishes. Those are cheap and plentiful and we don't need another Defkalion or Rossi to sell them. No idea why they made this except maybe to extract more cash from not very smart investors. Eric, it's again: JUST CLAIMS. And we already know what claims are worth from more than five years of Rossifiction.

And McKubre is conspicuous by his absence. If he doesn't endorse it, it has to be extra special super bad.

Oh... and the forum is being spammed big time. Is there an efficient way to report that to someone who can do something about it?

Quote

Too late Mary- all gone. Unless you are referring to another poster besides 'manymen'?

Thanks. I guess now, I have to get my passport the usual way.

Quote from MrSelfSustain

This is not very different from the Focardi Effect. If Brillouin would add lithium, they might seen a dramatic increase in power production. Of course they could never commercialize a nickel - lithium reactor, because that technology belongs to Rossi.

Well, perhaps he has claimed a patent. But if the patent doesn't work, i.e, if someone POSITA follows the instructions, and they are inadequate, it's worthless and would not protect against later patents that disclosed something that made it work.

I met Godes in 2012. Nice guy. He explained his theory a little. I hear "neutrons" and fall immediately into a trance. Neutron theories have enormous problems, and making the neutrons is just the beginning.

Fortunately, one can have a wrong theory and still make things that work. Storms is not correct, theory of mechanism (at that level) is not essential. Only when it is nailed so that it can make quantitative predictions does it become particularly useful.

I am *far* more interesting in experimental results, hang the theory. At least for now. More data! Controlled experiments! Yes!!!

He declares the "not fusion" trope. If he is generating some kind of reasonable power level, even a few watts, if it is sustained, he should be able to identify the ash.

Mostly, I have a bit of a distaste for the secret commercial work. But it is his right to do it this way, we have no right to demand openness and disclosure. I said the same thing about Rossi in 2011, etc. Maybe I'll have a chance to talk with him again, I would suggest disclosing older results. A rising tide lifts all boats, and collective enterprise is overall more efficient than purely individual. Usually.

Quote from Eric Walker

Yes, it would be nice if McKubre would pipe up and discuss this (I think Tanzella is also involved).

SRI was retained by Brillouin. When I visited in 2012, Godes had just gotten his SRI badge. I very much doubt that McKubre is going to say a word without Brillouin permission. Michael was one of the few people on the planet who made a living from cold fusion, and he didn't do it by being Mr. Blabbermouth. If Tanzella reports on Brillouin, he serves two masters, in addition to Science: Brillouin and SRI. I do trust SRI, I doubt they will allow their name to be used to promote any kind of fraud, etc. And I trust Tanzella as well. I'm just saying that we will not necessarily be told the whole story.

I'm now talking more with people involved in confidential research. They will tell me so much under a promise of nondisclosure, and they they come to something and "I can't talk about that." I never attempt to get them to disclose it.

If I had a true need to know, I'd attempt to negotiate. Mostly, though, we, speaking for the community, are just curious. I'm supporting initiatives to share information. It must be voluntary.

Focardi produced excess heat by performing a number of different processes on nickel samples (chemical cleaning, annealing, vacuuming, washing with hydrogen) before allowing hydrogen absorption to commence. These processes are very similar to Brillouin's. There are no huge differences between his work and Brillouin's except nickel powder is being used and electromagnetic frequencies are further stimulating the reactions. Regardless what processes are taking place to release the excess heat, the Brillouin tech is based on the Focardi tech. The Rossi tech dramatically enhances it with the application of catalysts such as lithium. As Me356 has told us, lithium is an easy and quick shortcut to massive excess heat.

I'm convinced the Rossi patent works. The problem is that there are additional variables that we do not understand that make successful replication very spotty. A small number of replicators seem to have produced excess heat using Ni-LiAlH4 pretty much with the first attempt -- Parkhomov, Songsheng, Songsheng's assistant, Stepanov, and others. Of course I'm personally aware of MANY other replicators who have produced very, very little or ZERO excess heat after many attempts. I think throwing nickel and LiAlH4 in a reactor without considering how to control many different variables (cleanliness of the nickel, how to pre-process the nickel, controlling the pressure in the reactor, etc) is a recipe for failure most of the time. However, the successful tests prove the patent CAN indeed work. I just think the patent is vague and doesn't make it overly simple for someone "skilled in the art" to replicate -- unless they get lucky right away.

I totally agree with you that RESULTS are what matter right now. Theory is interesting, but it is not going to move this field forward. What I am hoping for are some new teams to come forward with results NOT FROM LUCK but via trial and error. This is how Rossi figured out how to optimize the E-Cat. However, this kind of testing is not what 98% of replicators are interested in. And I honestly doubt -- although I could be wrong -- IH performed extensive testing of the basic effect.

I heard another reason why Parkhomov's excess heat may have declined -- he has been using a different source of nickel. The original nickel he used has been all but completely depleted. In my opinion, his very first tests were the best, and his current tests have been of lesser quality.

When it comes to Songsheng, I have had it confirmed to me by people with practical experience with K-type thermocouples that a damaged or melted device will give a LOWER reading rather than a HIGHER reading. Although I agree with some skeptics that he should attempt to repeat the test with B type thermocouples (apparently he was having problems getting the auxillary equipment to go with them), I think his tests were good enough to show high levels of excess heat.

Stepanov's team reported a series of meltdowns before achieving runs that lasted long enough to produce excess heat. I believe they have published two or three different papers, one in which a COP of 2 or higher was found with water flow calorimetry.

There is an additional Russian team that has done testing showing excess heat as well. I don't remember the names of the researchers.

I'm convinced that Ni-LiAlH4 is capable of producing very high levels of excess heat even in some very sloppy experiments in which the parameters of the experiment are not controlled.

Your argument is refuted by the fact universities and governments give hot fusion scientists billions of dollars to perform hot fusion research despite:

- Any proof that significant excess heat capable of industrial use will ever be produced.

- Any hope that there will be a commercial reactor within thirty years.

Instead, hot fusion has became a massive money pit in which there are no practical results.

Cold fusion experiments, on the other hand, cost a thousand or ten thousand times less to perform and many of them have already yielded excess heat, transmutations, isotope shifts, etc.