New Patent Filed by Leif Holmlid

  • A new paper published regarding the production of ultra-dense hydrogen got published. Will it be sufficient to convince the patent examiners? (rhetorical question)


    Production of ultra-dense hydrogen H(0): A novel nuclear fuel

    Leif Holmlid, Andrzej Kotarba, Pawel Stelmachowski

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.02.221


    Quote

    Highlights

    • The use of hydrogen nuclear fuel is tabulated for several types of fusion reactors.
    • The steps in the formation of ultra-dense hydrogen H(0) at surfaces are described.
    • The main function of the catalyst is to give enough density of bound alkali atoms.
    • High density of alkali atoms is required so that alkali RM clusters can be formed.
    • The use of catalysts forming H(0) in chemical industry is investigated.
    Quote

    Abstract: Condensation of hydrogen Rydberg atoms (highly electronically excited) into the lowest energy state of condensed hydrogen i.e. the ultra-dense hydrogen phase, H(0), has gained increased attention not only from the fundamental aspects but also from the applied point of view. The physical properties of ultra-dense hydrogen H(0) were recently reviewed (Physica Scripta 2019 https://doi.org/10.1088/1402-4896/ab1276), summarizing the results reported in 50 publications during the last ten years. The main application of H(0) so far is as the fuel and working medium in nuclear particle generators and nuclear fusion reactors which are under commercial development. The first fusion process showing sustained operation above break-even was published in 2015 (AIP Advances) and used ultra-dense deuterium D(0) as fuel. The first generator giving a high-intensity muon flux intended for muon-catalyzed fusion reactors was patented in 2017, using H(0) as the working medium. Here, we first focus on the different nuclear processes using hydrogen isotopes for energy generation, and then on the detailed processes of formation of H(0). The production of H(0) employs heterogeneous catalysts which are active in hydrogen transfer reactions. Iron oxide-based, alkali promoted catalysts function well, but also platinum group metals and carbon surfaces are active in this process. The clusters of highly excited Rydberg hydrogen atoms H(l) are formed upon interaction with alkali Rydberg matter. The final conversion step from ordinary hydrogen Rydberg matter H(l) to H(0) is spontaneous and does not require a solid surface. It is concluded that the exact choice of catalyst is not very important. It is also concluded that the crucial feature of the catalyst is to provide excited alkali atoms at a sufficiently high surface density and in this way enabling formation and desorption of H(0) clusters. Finally, the relation to industrial catalytic processes which use H(0) formation catalysts is described and some important consequences like the muon and neutron radiation from H(0) are discussed.

    From the declarations of competing interests at the end of the paper, by the way:


    Quote

    LH has partial ownership of the company Norrönt Fusion Energy which develops fusion energy reactors using ultradense hydrogen. The company felt that there is a risk that other companies may learn more rapidly how to produce ultradense hydrogen from this review. However, I believe strongly in free exchange of ideas and results in science and technology for the benefit of all.

  • From the most recent Holmlid effort


    "Extensive experimental evidence of new forms of matter like ultra-dense hydrogen H(0) is certainly required before it can be said to be generally accepted. From the personal experience (by author LH) with Rydberg Matter,

    more than 50 publications in ordinary scientific journals seems to be required before a novel broad concept of matter like Rydberg matter or ultra-dense hydrogen can be recognized as valid."


    Unfortunately not just the number of

    but the reputations of the authors of the publications

    appear to matter..

  • It seems the EPO “deemed as withdrawn” statement about the patent has left its scars in Holmlid. I for one am happy this is forcing them to come forward with more information, but I would have been much happier if Holmlid would have decided to involve more people in replication and help them get published with more independent replications so the patent could have been granted.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • Good read. Lots of good information in there along with the science of H(O). Thanks can and Rob Woudenberg for keeping up on this.

  • Patent misfortune seems to not abandon Holmlid, the US patent office also communicated a non final rejection on February 24th 2021, but I haven’t been able to get the document, only the notice. If anyone cam see the reasons and post them here would be nice.


    So the patent ha doble been granted in Sweden and rejected by the EP and the USPTO, remains in process in Japan, Korea and China, and also is filed at the WIPO, albeit with the rejection of the EP the possibility of getting a WIPO grant are slim.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • Iron oxide-based, alkali promoted catalysts function well, but also platinum group metals and carbon surfaces are active in this process.


    Should we understand that nickel, palladium should work as well, or a mixture of both ?




  • Cydonia

    My understanding is that catalytically-active surfaces that can work have the following properties:

    1. Efficiently dissociate molecular hydrogen to H atoms;
    2. Collect the dissociated H atoms in large densities in an adsorbed state;
    3. Do not strongly bind with the dissociated H atoms.

    Platinum group metals like are generally good for point 1, but metallic Ni catalysts for hydrogenation reactions exist too, so they are not necessarily excluded from the process. Metal mixtures may be useful if they make for a more efficient catalyst improving points 1-2, but probably not so much if they form hydrides (e.g. Pd in bulk form), thus going against point 3.


    However, the usage of purely metallic catalysts appears to be intended as a combination of carbon+metal surfaces, with possibly iridium as an exception to this. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.02.221


    Quote

    Many transition metals like platinum, nickel and iron dissolve carbon at high temperature. This carbon segregates to the surface at lower temperature [86]. A heat treatment or temperature cycling gives a carbon layer on the metal surface. Thus such a metal surface is in effect similar to a carbon surface (see above). With a partial carbon layer, the remaining clean metal areas are dissociative (provide dissociation centres) for hydrogen and the carbon covered areas promote Rydberg state desorption, thus together giving a working H(0) catalyst.


    In the patent application discussed in this thread, nickel is an example of catalytically-active metal listed as suitable for absorbing the ultra-dense hydrogen produced. https://patents.google.com/patent/US20190371480A1/


    Quote

    [...] Advantageously, the metallic absorbing member may be made of at least one material selected from the group consisting of a metal in a liquid state at an operating temperature for the apparatus, and a catalytically active metal in a solid state at the operating temperature for the apparatus.


    Examples of suitable materials for the metallic absorbing member include liquid or easily melted metals like Ga or K, and solid catalytically active metals like Pt or Ni etc.


    A mixture (or perhaps a layered combination) of various metals and non-metals having different functions will possibly be more useful or efficient for the process, but there have not been specific studies or patent applications for this, only hints and suggestions.

  • Patent misfortune seems to not abandon Holmlid, the US patent office also communicated a non final rejection on February 24th 2021,

    USPTO is part of the mafia system. Holmlids work interferes with military work and the energy sector. This is the reason why we decided only to do de-blocking incomplete patents.

    The product will win the market! But in Holmlid's case I see no reasonable product at all. Except he can make money with his catalyst in connection with LENR.

  • Curbina

    This one? I recall reading it before.

    Curbina

    This is still the latest USPTO document.

    I just checked USPTO Public Pair and there is no update newer that the one can provided.


    Just to repeat the process to obtain latest info from USPTO:

    Go to the USPTO Public Pair website and apply the application number (in this case 20190371480).

    Next you will get the info page of that publication. By selecting the tab 'Image File Wrapper' you get all documents related to the application. tick mark the ones you want to obtain and download the pdf file.

    For the global communication details (including the communication with non-USPTO patent offices) you can use USPTO 'Global Dossier'.

  • i think the field became currently tired, as god or a kind of prophet, you decide for all what must be good or not good..

    Don't be so arrogant all people aren't necessarily idiots. They don't have to follow you especially.

    USPTO is part of the mafia system. Holmlids work interferes with military work and the energy sector. This is the reason why we decided only to do de-blocking incomplete patents.

    The product will win the market! But in Holmlid's case I see no reasonable product at all. Except he can make money with his catalyst in connection with LENR.

    1. Efficiently dissociate molecular hydrogen to H atoms;

    Piantelli expected that is occuring onto transition metals.

    Another way, if you do that by HH bond broken, most of the time you will have only 2H monoatomic because covalent bond ( not ionized ) then if you use rather an alcali you will have in this case most probably a ionized ( ionic bond) ( excited ?) states because it will do for example LI+ and H-.


    2. Collect the dissociated H atoms in large densities in an adsorbed state;

    Here should be involved engineering tricks to do that because H- will tend to recombine so quickly i expect.


    3. Do not strongly bind with the dissociated H atoms.

    i do not well understand what you said here by this point however it seems to be contradictory with your point 2.


    Now, next point 4, holmlid don't said everything, how the nuclear reaction occurs according to his theories.


    Metal mixtures may be useful if they make for a more efficient catalyst improving points 1-2, but probably not so much if they form hydrides (e.g. Pd in bulk form), thus going against point 3.


    I think it should be nice to more deeply theorize this "post it " expectation, no ?

  • See if this excerpt from another recently written review paper is clearer to you: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10876-021-02031-6


    Quote

    [...] For producing hydrogen [Rydberg matter], another aspect must be considered. The catalyst must also be able to chemisorb the hydrogen gas molecules. More reactive metals bind the atoms stronger to the surface, but this also means it is harder for the atoms to desorb, often leading to a volcano plot for useful catalysts [49]. Though the desorption of the Rydberg hydrogen atoms should be assisted by the formation of clusters, meaning it might be possible to use a more reactive catalyst.


    Ref. 49 is: "T. Bligaard and J. K. Nørskov, in Chemical Bonding at Surfaces and Interfaces, 1st ed. (Elsevier, 2008), pp. 255–321."



    To make another example: carbon alone does not dissociate hydrogen to atoms, but hydrogen atoms dissociated elsewhere can easily migrate to and desorb from carbon surfaces. Carbon works for points 2-3, but not at all for point 1. So you would need also a suitable metal surface for that, as suggested earlier. Metal catalysts supported (deposited) on carbon also already exist commercially, however.


    This could be a related topic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_spillover


    I think it should be nice to more deeply theorize this "post it " expectation, no ?

    Hydrogen bound to metals in the form of a hydride is not readily available for the clustering process (RM, UDH) proposed by Holmlid and colleagues.

  • Curbina

    This one? I recall reading it before.

    I probably saw it posted and wanted to Read it later but lost the file in the clutter. I was reading it now and think it leaves much more room to answer than the EP rejection. The USPTO, albeit it mentions that Holmlid and friends Is the only group that has seen or researched about UDH, doesn’t request independent reproducibility but it demands a recipe that could be implemented by anyone skilled in the art. So, all that Holmlid needs to overturn the rejection is provide a detailed and precise set of instructions.


    Somehow I doubt they will answer, and will leave it lapse as in the EP case, but at least in this case, the path towards overturning the rejection is clear.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • Curbina

    In my opinion the main issue is that the amount of UDH formed in the experiments has never been clarified and it's likely to (still) be minuscule in most cases, therefore far from being useful.


    With an elementary setup employing a focused Nd:YAG pulsed laser, vacuum chamber and oscilloscope, a small positive meson(-like?) signal may always be observed from laser target plates, regardless of the state of the catalysts and the hydrogen admitted. This has also been suggested (in passing) in the recently published paper on the catalysts:


    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.02.221

    Quote

    [...] It is possible that all solid materials contain H(0) since it is so stable and forms so small molecules. Thus, experiments which indeed are able to detect H(0) may easily give a positive answer.


    This is in part also my experience, from the results (unpublished) observed by a colleague who managed to borrow for a period a Nd:YAG laser to use in his vacuum chamber, a good while back. Although one could tell from related observations when apparently larger amounts of UDH were formed—which required the catalysts to be in working order—the oscilloscope signal/pulse did not change significantly in character before and after that. I did not have direct control on the setup, so there is still the chance of problems, but it seems consistent with what Holmlid has written.


    As I see it, this is mostly a matter of reproducing the same measurements and agreeing (or not) with Holmlid's interpretation on the observed results. An exact "recipe" for repeating them might not bring much more to the table and might not be really needed, given that UDH has been suggested to be essentially ubiquitous and easily formed also in ordinary chemical industrial reactors (to what extent, unclear).


    A reproducible method for generating and collecting UDH in large amounts and obtaining macroscopic, useful results is required. I'm not sure if the patent application discussed in this thread provides that.

  • can

    We already have had a discussion around the spillover effect.

    Ok, metal catalyst surfaces are able to dissociate H2 because metals have a lot of electrons available because "fluctuating".

    Next H2 will do 2H monoatomic, when they will leave the surface.. but quickly they will become H2.

    Rydberg atom is unstable only clusters from its will become stable.

    What could be tools to help this kind of process ?

    An H carrier which could be oxygen to move far away an H monoatomic being able to keep an excited state as OH- ?

    Now, if you prefer directly stabilizing all Rydberg atoms or H mono, you should do clusters directly onto the surface.

    That implies to control the electric surface potential or maybe using bigger atoms in size to create the most flat cluster ?