Caveat Emptor (investors beware)

    The one device constructed thus far supports the work in the Patent. However, the inventor believes a larger device is necessary to produce a net positive output. That is the next project in his development program. Exploding water is a good description.


    AESOP Institute specializes in "contentious" science and technology. These are Green Swans - highly improbable innovations with huge potential impact. Human survival is now at issue. As others have pointed out on this forum breakthroughs are needed.


    “…a revolutionary idea or invention is hampered in its adolescence – by want of means, by selfish interests, pedantry, stupidity and ignorance. It is attacked and stifled, and passes through bitter trials and tribulations. … All that was great in the past was ridiculed, condemned, combated, suppressed, only to emerge all the more powerfully, all the more triumphantly from the struggle.” NIKOLA TESLA

    "

    . In addition , the devices can produce a net positive energy output"


    Deuterium:... via LENR... > 2 Mev per atom.. theoretical


    U.S. Patent 9,994,450: ???????



    Does Mark Goldes want to specify in writing what is the net positive energy output per H atom?


    or shall a revolutionary idea be forever hampered in obfuscation?

    Robert, I leave scientific questions to those with backgrounds that bring them to such discussions. This forum has an abundance of candidates. Our team has concluded this is very important technology and my interest is in moving it forward to applications. That will require a few unusually able and dedicated individuals joining in the effort. AESOP Energy is a Holding Company. We are establishing Green Swan Energy Inc. as an operating company subsidiary to catalyze that enterprise - along with an improved system of Atmospheric water harvesting needing 60-100% less grid energy than present water from air systems - and capable of operating with merely 5% humidity.


    Perhaps this string on the Forum is most appropriate. The late Seymour Mehr, the initial investor in the first AESOP Institute affiliated commercial firm, had business cards that said: Every startup should have a sign over the door stating - Beware all ye who enter here. Prepare to lose thy shirt!

    Quote from MarkGoldes

    , I leave scientific questions to those with background


    Is there someone on the Aesop team who can answer


    . In addition , the devices can produce a net positive energy output"


    Deuterium:... via LENR... > 2 Mev per atom.. theoretical


    U.S. Patent 9,994,450: ???????


    perhaps this LENR forum is the wrong forum..for Aesop,,, by a few orders of magnitude


    maybe Kawasaki Heavy Industries are interested .. they are part of a joint Australian -Japanese fable... called the Hydrogen economy..


    which is based on combustion,, 3 eV//atom... a little less 'frontier' than ~ 2000000 eV/atom..


    su-i-so fu-ron- te a... ...

    https://fuelcellsworks.com/new…fuel-plant-in-queensland/

    https://global.kawasaki.com/en…s/detail/?f=20190719_5931


    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    It is almost unheard of for a Patent to issue that states an invention is Over Unity. This forum seeks to advance science and technology with the potential to replace fossil fuels. Over the years it has examined a great many approaches, a few of which may one day ripen into products. Sadly, so far none have done so.


    Here is an invention that may help to avoid tipping points in climate change - which we are fast approaching. The Utah experiments which launched LENR gradually opened an increasing number of minds to new science. I believe the Ionized Gas Reactor (IGR) has similar potential. Much remains to be learned. The path to revolutionary products is always full of surprises. We would like to minimize them and seek to learn how. Perhaps a few souls will surface who are adequately equipped and might like to assist in moving this breakthrough toward markets


    Should the IGR make fuel-cell vehicles practical: that is an application the inventor did not visualize. With water taken from the air, ending the need to refuel, a revolution might begin that would help reduce pollution world wide. This is but one example that may prove practical. Imagine...

    Quote from RobertBryant

    I skim read it ..

    "

    . In addition , the devices can produce a net positive energy output"


    How much ? Mevs or mevs?


    This is from the patent:

    "The results of the calculations indicate that when operating the plasma arc at an assumed energy in level of 5 Kwh, while processing of H2O, the net result would be a gain in energy. Specifically the results show that, on a Btu basis, the energy consumed would be 1,228,320 Btu's, and the power produced in the form of hydrogen would be 3,779,214 Btu's."


    1.2E6 BTUs consumed per hour

    3.7E6 BTUs produced per hour


    So net output of power is 2.5E6 BTUs per hour.

    The apparatus went through .2 grams of water vapour per minute.

    Given that 1 BTU is 6585E21 eV and 18 grams of water has 2 x 6E23 atoms of hydrogen,

    we arrive at 20keV per atom of hydrogen. Much too high for hydrino theory only.


    But wait. 5 kWh is not 1.2 E6 BTUs. On figure 3 it shows, not 5 kWh but 360 kWh for the arc energy consumption.

    So something is amiss or maybe I'm misunderstanding.

    If we convert the 20keV per atom of hydrogen by a factor of 5/360 we get about 280 eV per atom of hydrogen, which is more in the hydrino theory ballpark.


    I'm going to the Evaco website to see what's going on these days.

    Thank you, Robert. LENR has always attracted a rare audience. not easily silenced by what has become dogma in physics. Promising technologies such as the IGR are extremely rare. Moving it forward requires similar openness to unexpected new facts - and imaginative efforts to make sense of them. Even more important - willingness to try experiments in the face of ridicule and dismissal. AESOP's team includes such unlikely characters. We anticipate the need to attract a few more in the near future. As I am sure you are aware it has been said that science moves forward "funeral by funeral". Human survival now demands very much better. Anyone interested can learn more about us at aesopinstitute.org


    Quote from MarkGoldes

    I believe the Ionized Gas Reactor (IGR) has similar potential. Much remains to be learned. The path to revolutionary products is always full of surprises. We would like to minimize them and seek to learn how. Perhaps a few souls will surface who are adequately equipped and might like to assist in moving this breakthrough toward markets


    The IGR is a step in the right direction. Much has already been done here. There is a long history of related work in the production of a fuel gas from water. Based on mass balance for AquaFuel in

    https://patentimages.storage.g…ade2b/US20180322974A1.pdf , then much hydrogen fuses; starting with fusion to oxygen to eventually produce the fission production nitrogen. This type reaction is demonstrated with high precision and accuracy and is as statistically proven as anything can be. The reaction chemistry is based on data produced by Santilli. The kinetics of the burning of the fuel per the above reference indicates the output of energy is depend on the fission product concentration (de novo nitrogen) and the concentration of hydrogen and temperature. That kinetic equation is supplied in the above reference. Based on applying the above information there are chemical engineering ways to improve the energy output. If Mark Goldes wants IGR to move ahead based on real science and engineering, he should discuss with me the above reference. I can be contacted via gmail or linkedin.

    Quote from Alan Smith

    He who sups with the Devil needs a long spoon.


    If only the prince of beelzebub will consider the truth then maybe Christ isn't a devil after all. How many more inventors will get murdered? How many more will be falsely slandered? Water to fuel is falsely called crazy and until now there has been no way to provide due diligence. But now we have the lead and tools to do so. One lead based in hard science is better than all the other excitement over results that are in the noise level and without a clear path to exploitation.


    Even if energy production is only 0.002% of that predicted from the amount of transformation, its over unity and the process can be followed by lost of reactants and appearance of products and at the scale that the statistical interpretation can be run unquestionably real.


    Thank-you for you concern but who else do you suggest has the courage to do the right thing?

    Quote from MarkGoldes

    Here is a working link to the Patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/US9994450B2/en


    Fractional Hydrogen -the hydrino - seems to require a catalyst as Mills states.


    Graneau's experiments seem to us a better fit for the Ionized Gas Reactor.

    I admit not reading the whole patent but..


    Am I right in thinking they aren't collecting the hydrogen? Looks like they immediately burn it again?


    So how do they know all of water injected was converted to hydrogen and oxygen? Could some just be turned into water vapour?


    Is this ruled out somewhere I missed?

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.