SPAWAR JWK LENR and the claims made by Global Energy Corporation (GEC)

  • Shane,


    I think that you need to read the patent again: https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2009108331A2


    2. A hybrid nuclear fusion fast fission reactor as claimed in claim 1 wherein said cathode wound around said fuel element acts as a neutron generator and said cathode is comprised of a composition of the non-deuteriding series selected from the group consisting of platinum, gold, mercury, lead and bismuth.


    You ask: And how could it be "not even crap", if it was in the newspaper?


    Ever heard about "fake news"? I can think of a second use for the newspaper itself, but it will not be comfortable. :)

  • "A preferred embodiment includes surrounding spent nuclear fuel elements with deuteride nuclear fuel elements that will fast fission the spent fuel elements. Another preferred embodiment includes surrounding the deuteride nuclear fuel elements with spent fuel elements as fast neutron reflectors that will also fission."


    H-G,


    Just kidding about the newspaper thing, but there is some truth said in jest. By that I mean that the events reported in the newspaper did happen. There were meetings, negotiations followed by a handshake deal with Guams governor.

  • "A preferred embodiment includes surrounding spent nuclear fuel elements with deuteride nuclear fuel elements that will fast fission the spent fuel elements. Another preferred embodiment includes surrounding the deuteride nuclear fuel elements with spent fuel elements as fast neutron reflectors that will also fission."


    Okay, there is a lot of junk in this document, this is another variant. Why the <hot place> would impregnating a spent nuclear fuel element with deuterium induce fission in it? If there were a measuring unit for stupidity (1 Dumb) it would take thousands of them to quantify the stupidity of this proposition.


    http://www.abc.net.au/news/201…faces-impeachment/4226146

    Fitial seems to secretly have bought a diesel powered power plant.


    http://www.mvariety.com/cnmi/c…6914-dear-governor-fitial

    Dear Governor Fitial

    31 May 2012


    Con

    • We were unable to visit the prototype installation in Austin. Texas, as the permitting requirement for visitors would take a long time. As a result, we did not get to ask many more engineering type questions concerning the scale up process.

    • A working up-to-scale reactor producing electricity has not been built yet.



    Sincerely,

    REP. FRANCISCO S.
    DELA CRUZ
    UTU ABE MALAE
    WALLON YOUNG FONG


    ---


    http://www.moletrap.co.uk/foru…nts.php?DiscussionID=3661

    • maryyugo Aug 10th 2013 edited
  • Why the <hot place> would impregnating a spent nuclear fuel element with deuterium induce fission in it?


    Given your confidence, H-G, presumably you have read a pile of empirical studies that show that impregnating spent nuclear fuel with deuterium does not appear to induce fission, which would be suitable to dispel any false hopes raised by any internal research this group may have done to conclude that it does induce fission?


    I can think of at least one way that impregnating deuterium in spent fissile material might induce fission a small amount: the electron brought with the interstitial deuterium atoms could result in a new equilibrium in the electronic structure of the heavy atoms adequate to compromise the coulomb barrier surrounding the heavy nuclei just enough to push the fission rate up a small but measurable amount. Consider the central role of the coulomb barrier in the Gamow theory of alpha decay. Consider the fact that alpha decay occurs differentially at the poles and at the waist of oblong deformed heavy nuclei, showing how sensitive the decay rate is to a change in the width of the coulomb barrier.


    I can think of another way as well: impregnating deuterium will perhaps have been achieved using an electric current. Consider this 1987 patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/US5076971.

  • Consider the fact that alpha decay occurs differentially at the poles and at the waste of oblong deformed heavy nuclei, showing how sensitive the decay rate is to a change in the width of the coulomb barrier.

    Consider this 1987 patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/US5076971.


    Eric Walker : Thanks for the pre LENR-time patent. It is interesting that the theoretical agreement is best around 32-33keV what is the 4D resonance line of the de Broglie radius change from Neutron --> proton.

  • The heart of the Genie reactor concept is a LENR based neutron generator.

    Nope, this is a fission fusion hybrid. Fission produces most of the needed neutrons.

    This means that a Genie reactor will need an ENORMOUS neutron source. If GEC had such a source

    .

    It has been said that Cf252 is the most expensive element on earth.


    The GEC neutron source, if it exists of course, would have a great commercial value, so the first thing to do would be to patent the source and nothing else.

    Coal, Oil, Natural Gas (carbon energy) The most traded commodity on earth... in this light.

    Energy has, what you call, "great commercial value" not neutrons and certainly not Cf252.

    Logically, you are way off base and taking this thread off topic:

    1) "the first thing to do would not be to try to sell a complete power station"

    2) "so the first thing to do would be to patent the (neutron) source and nothing else"


    I expect this and respect your opinion... but.


    Perhaps it's best to see, a basic hybrid concept.

    WHAT IS HYBRID FUSION

    ISOFS SUBCOMMITTEE


    Quote:


    The good news is that the first round of challenges are clearly defined, and motivations for meeting them are strong, as fusion fuels offer the irresistible combination of abundant supply with minimum environmental consequences.


    The (gbgoblenote - initial fusion, or consider the alternate, an LENR) reaction acts as a source of neutrons for the surrounding blanket, where these neutrons are captured, resulting in fission reactions taking place.


    These fission reactions would also produce more neutrons, thereby assisting further fission reactions in the blanket.


    The concept of hybrid fusion can be compared with an accelerator-driven system.

    Where an accelerator is the source of neutrons for the blanket assembly, rather than nuclear fusion reactions.


    The blanket of a hybrid fusion system can therefore contain the same fuel as an ADS for example, the abundant element thorium or the long-lived heavy isotopes present in used nuclear fuel from a conventional reactor could be used as fuel.


    The blanket containing fission fuel in a hybrid fusion system would not require the development of new materials capable of withstanding constant neutron bombardment, whereas such materials would be needed in the blanket of a conventional fusion system.


    H-G Branzell  A further advantage of a hybrid system is that the fusion part would not need to produce as many neutrons as a non-hybrid fusion reactor would in order to generate more power than is consumed so a commercial-scale fusion reactor in a hybrid system does not need to be as large as a fusion-only reactor.

  • Con

    • We were unable to visit the prototype installation in Austin. Texas, as the permitting requirement for visitors would take a long time. As a result, we did not get to ask many more engineering type questions concerning the scale up process.

    • A working up-to-scale reactor producing electricity has not been built yet.

    You should note the following... maybe not maryyugo.

    • Research helps, perhaps the "prototype installation in Austin, Texas" requires DoD clearance. It seems to me the prototype is at ARL; as the reason why "the permitting requirement for visitors would take a long time". That's a plus, not a minus, in the GEC confidence equation.
    • A working up-to-scale reactor might not be hooked up to an electrical generator.

    ARL UT Austin, Texas https://wwwext.arlut.utexas.edu/about.html

    Applied Research Laboratories, the University of Texas at Austin (ARL:UT), is a Department of Defense University-Affiliated Research Center (UARC). Since 1945, ARL:UT has been engaged in sponsored research dedicated to improving our national security through applications of acoustics, electromagnetics, and information sciences.


    As a UARC, ARL:UT has a special contractual relationship with the U. S. Department of Defense (DoD). The UARC relationship was created to enable DoD to foster and utilize certain core competencies at university labs like ARL:UT. To foster the relationship, UARCs are allowed to contract with DoD on a sole source basis under a specific exemption in the Competition in Contracting Act. Part of DoD's objective in UARC contracting is to enable technical experts to advise the government on technology issues that fall within their competency areas. Often this involves advising them on acquisition strategies and evaluating industry proposals. Clearly, to do that effectively, ARL:UT must remain totally free of any real or perceived conflict of interest. Consequently, the UARC charter under which ARL:UT operates, established by DDR&E, precludes ARL:UT's teaming with industry or accepting industry subcontracts for work that lies within ARL:UT's core competency areas. The charter does allow for exceptions that are deemed to be in the government's best interests and approved by ARL:UT's NAVSEA (Naval Sea Systems Command) oversight office. It should be emphasized that this restriction is primarily focused on ARL:UT's business relationships with industry, and does not preclude collaboration and technology transfer that falls within the scope of our sponsored projects, and is directed by the government sponsor funding our effort. Funding for these activities is provided by our government sponsor, rather than as a subcontract from industry.


    Also


    DOD Awards $1.1 Billion Contract to UT Austin’s Applied Research Laboratories Sept. 28, 2017 https://news.utexas.edu/2017/0…ied-research-laboratories


    AUSTIN, Texas — The U.S. Navy has awarded Applied Research Laboratories at The University of Texas at Austin (ARL:UT) the largest research contract in the university’s history — worth as much as $1.1 billion over 10 years — to conduct research and development to improve U.S national security.


    ARL:UT is one of five Department of Defense (DOD) University Affiliated Research Centers, laboratories that have long-term strategic relationships with the DOD and are considered trusted agents. These affiliated research centers provide essential research capabilities, develop new technology for national security applications and provide technical advice to DOD program managers.


    “The research performed and advancements made at The University of Texas at Austin are unparalleled,” said Gov. Greg Abbott. “I am proud of the work that is already underway at Applied Research Laboratories at UT, and I am looking forward to their continued contributions to our national security. I’d like to thank the Department of Defense for their investment in UT, its students, faculty and all those involved in this growing partnership.”


    “Under this new agreement, UT scientists and engineers will expand their vital role developing research that advances science and promotes national security,” said President Gregory L. Fenves. “This contract demonstrates the massive impact UT research has on the world through the breadth and depth of our programs in engineering, technology, high-performance computing and applied science.”

  • Never heard of such a large amount as $1.1 billion given to one department, at one university. As they say, it is the largest in the University of Texas's history.


    Nice digging Greg! Surely H-G will wake up tomorrow in an even worse mood after reading this.

  • Never heard of such a large amount as $1.1 billion given to one department, at one university. As they say, it is the largest in the University of Texas's history.

    Yes, also rather large for a university DoD lab.

    Applied research and engineering is their specialty... a bit more digging is needed.

    While initiating a search, in order to learn some background history, of University of Texas and ARL involvement in the Manhattan Project and subsequent nuclear weapon programs I found the following fresh news.


    A bit off topic yet perhaps relevant. Watch and see how this bid turns out.


    (please note: demonstrated business acumen and experience in change management)

    Statement regarding The University of Texas System bid on the Management and Operations Contract for Los Alamos National Laboratory - THURSDAY, DECEMBER 14, 2017 - https://www.utsystem.edu/news/…t-and-operations-contract

    In response to numerous inquiries, The University of Texas System confirms that it has submitted a response to the National Nuclear Security Administration’s request for proposals to manage and operate Los Alamos National Laboratory.


    We believe The University of Texas System with its 14 institutions brings extraordinary qualifications: more than 130 years of unmatched scientific accomplishment, a record of responsible and responsive leadership, demonstrated business acumen and experience in change management, and a long-established commitment to national service.


    Los Alamos is a preeminent national laboratory in the areas of nuclear weapons, nuclear nonproliferation, safeguards and security, environmental management, energy and other programs—one among the U.S. Department of Energy’s 17 national laboratories. The Lab operates under the auspices of the NNSA, a semi-autonomous agency within the Department of Energy. It holds a storied place in the history of our nation and carries primary responsibility for the urgent task of effectively managing the nuclear weapons component stockpile, as well as the advancement of knowledge and discovery that can aid nuclear nonproliferation and deterrence, environmental management, and energy research.


    If UT System wins the honor of serving, we believe that the system’s renowned centers of academic excellence and our long legacy of service to our nation will serve the Lab and its community well. We will work to be a trusted steward and a richly productive partner to the Lab’s dedicated world-class workforce, the New Mexico economic and community landscape, and to the wider scientific communities these entities serve.


    About The University of Texas System


    Educating students, providing care for patients, conducting groundbreaking basic, applied and clinical research, and serving the needs of Texans and the nation for more than 130 years, The University of Texas System is one of the largest public university systems in the United States. With 14 institutions and a projected enrollment of more than 234,000 students, the UT System confers more than one-third of the state’s undergraduate degrees, educates approximately two-thirds of the state’s health care professionals annually and accounts for almost 70 percent of all research funds awarded to public institutions in Texas. The UT System’s operating budget for FY 2018 is $18.3 billion, funded in part by $3.6 billion in sponsored programs from federal, state, local and private sources. With more than 20,000 faculty – including Nobel laureates and many members of the National Academies – and nearly 80,000 health care professionals, researchers, student advisors and support staff, the UT System is one of the largest employers in the state.


    News Contact Info

    Karen Adler: [email protected]  • 512-499-4360 (direct) • 210-912-8055 (cell)

    Melanie Thompson: [email protected] • 512-499-4487 (direct) • 832-724-1024 (cell)

  • Eric Walker - Thanks, Now I have a lot of studying to do... love how little I know.

    Consider this 1987 patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/US5076971.

    Study of Altran Corporation patent history shows, "Method for enhancing alpha decay in radioactive materials" Grant US5076971A - William A. Barker - Altran Corporation Priority 1987-10-23 • Filing 1989-08-28 • Grant 1991-12-31


    Subsequently, I considered another one, his 1990 patent granted.


    Thanks again.

    Electrostatic voltage excitation process and apparatus US4961880A

    https://patents.google.com/patent/US4961880A

  • H-G Branzell Denigrate

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/denigrate

    If you "denigrate" someone, you attempt to blacken their reputation. It makes sense, therefore, that "denigrate" can be traced back to the Latin verb denigrare, meaning "to blacken." When "denigrate" was first used in English in the 16th century, it meant to cast aspersions on someone's character or reputation.


    It's just not worth it... I really don't know enough about most people.


    A get together with Lawrence Forsley - University of Texas Austin, Nuclear Engineering Teaching Laboratory, Research Associate and Chief Scientist at GEC is in order.


    Knowledgable preparation requires reading a partial compilation of his published works found at: https://utexas.academia.edu/LawrenceForsley


    'Casting Aspersions in Texas'


    Hmmmm... A catchy tee-shirt.

    Dumb to wear in Texas.

    Unless spot on.

    An aspersion is a disparaging remark. It almost invariably appears as a plural, following the word "cast" — when you cast aspersions on someone, you are questioning their abilities or doubting them.


    On a Tree Fallen Across the Road

    (To hear us talk) By Robert Frost


    The tree the tempest with a crash of wood

    Throws down in front of us is not to bar

    Our passage to our journey's end for good,

    But just to ask us who we think we are


    Insisting always on our own way so.

    She likes to halt us in our runner tracks,

    And make us get down in a foot of snow

    Debating what to do without an ax.


    And yet she knows obstruction is in vain:

    We will not be put off the final goal

    We have it hidden in us to attain,

    Not though we have to seize earth by the pole


    And, tired of aimless circling in one place,

    Steer straight off after something into space.



    Astrophysics seeks to understand 'electron screening' and coulomb barrier 'tunneling', questing "after something into space" seeking understanding as to how elements come to be. The following branch of science is part of this quest. It is not LENR, rather it is the "Low Energy Nuclear Reaction" variety of High Energy Nuclear Physics and lends insight into understanding LENR. Inversely and as importantly, understanding of LENR will lend insight to this quest of astrophysicists.


    H-G Branzell These are automatically sent by U.S. Science dot Gov, one can subscribe at:


    WorldWideScience.org Alerts for 2018-01-10
    "Low Energy Nuclear Reaction"


    1. Measurement of nuclear reaction cross sections of Li-d and Be-d at low energy
    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)
    To estimate basic dose-rate data (PKA and KERMA) and material damage, it is important to measure nuclear cross sections of prospective candidates for blanket materials and deuteron at low energy (about 10 - 300 keV). And then, the nuclear reactions at low energy are also useful for Nuclear Reaction Analysis (NRA). However, we have few nuclear data of such reactions. According to we have measured nuclear-cross sections of natLi(d,x) and 9Be(d,x) and obtained S-factors of these reactions. (author)
    2. Direct reactions in inverse kinematics for nuclear structure studies far off stability at low incident energies
    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Reactions with exotic beams in inverse kinematics gives access to a wide field of nuclear structure studies in the region far off stability. The present contribution will focus on the investigation of few-nucleon transfer reactions, which turn out to be most favourably studied with good-quality low-energy radioactive beams, as provided by the new generation of radioactive beam facilities presently planned or under construction at Caen, Grenoble, Munich, and elsewhere. An overview on the physics motivation, basically concerning nuclear structure and nuclear astrophysics questions, is given. Of particular interest are the nuclear shell model in the region far off stability, the two-body residual interaction in nuclei, the structure of halo nuclei, as well as the understanding of the r-process scenario. The experimental conditions, along with the experimental concept, for such measurements are discussed with particular emphasis on the kinematical conditions, the observables, as well as the appropriate detection schemes. The concept of a large solid angle TPC ionization chamber as an active target for experiments with low-energy radioactive beams is presented. It turns out to be a highly effective detection scheme, well suited for the present experimental conditions, at least for light exotic beams up to Z∼20. (orig.)
    Microscopic
    study of heavy ion reactions by computer simulations
    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)
    Nuclear collision of heavy ions are many and splendid. In the case of low incident energy, it has been well known that when colliding diameters are different, different characteristic reaction processes arise, in addition, those are dependent on the mass of colliding nuclei. When incident energy is increased, those reaction processes are substituted with new reaction processes. One of the targets which support the research on the collision of high energy heavy ions is the laboratory study on the property of the nuclear substances in high temperature and high density state forming hot atomic nuclei, and it is desirable to describe the dynamic reaction processes depending on time. The microscopic simulation calculation of heavy ion nuclear reaction enables such dynamic description. The recently improved technique of the authors made the quantitative treatment of low energy phenomena feasible. A number of the representative techniques of simulation and the examples of calculation and the change of nuclear reaction mechanism are described. The various subjects to be studied further are shown. In the energy range taken up in this report, the microscopic research by the simulation of heavy ion nuclear reaction is developing for various subjects. (K.I.)
    New simultaneous parameterization of both resonance and non-resonance cross-sections for astrophysical problems
    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)
    In estimating the non-resonance nuclear reaction cross-sections σ(E) at low energies needed for astrophysical calculations it is customary to use the Gamow penetration factor TG(E) in the conventional extrapolation formula, σ(E) = S(E)T(E)/E. Recently, it is shown that another choice of T BW(E) based on a more realistic potential model of Blatt and Weisskopf consisting of the interior attractive nuclear square well and the exterior repulsive (Coulomb) potential can yield smaller extrapolated values of low-energy σ(E) for 7Be(p, γ)8B reaction. In the BW model, the interior wave function was chosen to be e-iKr. We have developed an extended model in which a more general and realistic interior wave function, e-iKr +reiphieiKr, is chosen with two real parameters, τ and φ. The resulting transmission coefficient, Tnew(E), has a resonance structure with two parameters τ and φ which can be determined from the experimental resonance energy and width. Our new parameterization incorporates both the resonance and non-resonance contributions simultaneously. Comparison of the numerical results for low-energy φ(E) obtained from three different parameterizations using TG(E), TBW(E), and Tnew(E) will be presented for 7Be(p,γ)8B


    Also


    "Effect of broken axial symmetry on the electric dipole strength and the collective enhancement of level densities in heavy nuclei"

    Grosse, E.; Junghans, A. R.; Wilson, J. N.

    2017-11-01 NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    DOI: 10.1088/1402-4896/aa8607 Volume: 92 Issue: 11 Pages: 114003

    Publication: Physica Scripta, Volume 92, Issue 11, article id. 114003 (2017)


    Abstract


    The basic parameters for calculations of radiative neutron capture, photon strength functions and nuclear level densities near the neutron separation energy are determined based on experimental data without an ad hoc assumption about axial symmetry—at variance to previous analysis. Surprisingly few global fit parameters are needed in addition to information on nuclear deformation, taken from Hartree Fock Bogolyubov calculations with the Gogny force, and the generator coordinator method assures properly defined angular momentum. For a large number of nuclei the GDR shapes and the photon strength are described by the sum of three Lorentzians, extrapolated to low energies and normalised in accordance to the dipole sum rule. Level densities are influenced strongly by the significant collective enhancement based on the breaking of shape symmetry. The replacement of axial symmetry by the less stringent requirement of invariance against rotation by 180° leads to a novel prediction for radiative neutron capture. It compares well to recent compilations of average radiative widths and Maxwellian average cross sections for neutron capture by even target nuclei. An extension to higher spin promises a reliable prediction for various compound nuclear reactions also outside the valley of stability.


    H-G Branzell  Such predictions are of high importance for future nuclear energy systems and waste transmutation as well as for the understanding of the cosmic synthesis of heavy elements. - end abstract





  • Given your confidence, H-G, presumably you have read a pile of empirical studies that show that impregnating spent nuclear fuel with deuterium does not appear to induce fission, which would be suitable to dispel any false hopes raised by any internal research this group may have done to conclude that it does induce fission?


    I can think of at least one way that impregnating deuterium in spent fissile material might induce fission a small amount: the electron brought with the interstitial deuterium atoms could result in a new equilibrium in the electronic structure of the heavy atoms adequate to compromise the coulomb barrier surrounding the heavy nuclei just enough to push the fission rate up a small but measurable amount. Consider the central role of the coulomb barrier in the Gamow theory of alpha decay. Consider the fact that alpha decay occurs differentially at the poles and at the waist of oblong deformed heavy nuclei, showing how sensitive the decay rate is to a change in the width of the coulomb barrier.


    I can think of another way as well: impregnating deuterium will perhaps have been achieved using an electric current. Consider this 1987 patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/US5076971.

    Dufour, J., et al., Experimental observation of nuclear reactions in palladium and

    uranium -- possible explanation by hydrex mode. Fusion Technol., 2001. 40: p. 91

    Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, Laboratoire des Sciences Nucléaires

    2 rue Conté, 75003 Paris, France

    Received December 21, 2000

    Accepted for Publication January 25, 2001

    Abstract

    Experiments with uranium are presented that show a highly exothermal reaction,
    which can only be of nuclear origin. One striking point of these results is that they clearly
    show that what is being observed is not some kind of fusion reaction of the deuterium
    present (only exceedingly small amounts of it are present). This is a strong indication
    that hydrogen can trigger nuclear reactions that seem to involve the nuclei of the lattice
    (which would yield a fission-like pattern of products). Confronted with a situation where
    some experiments in the field yield a fusion-like pattern of products (CF experiments)
    and others a fissionlike one (LENR experiments), one can reasonably wonder whether
    one is not observing two aspects of the same phenomenon. Thus, it is proposed to
    describe CF and LENR reactions as essentially the same phenomenon based on the
    possible existence of a still hypothetical proton/electron resonance, which would catalyze
    fission like reactions with a neutron sink. Finally, a series of experiments is proposed to
    assess this hypothesis. http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/DufourJexperiment.pdf


  • Thank you, Gregory.


    Confronted with a situation where some experiments in the field yield a fusion-like pattern of products (CF experiments) and others a fissionlike one (LENR experiments), one can reasonably wonder whether one is not observing two aspects of the same phenomenon


    My own reading of the LENR studies is that nothing produces unequivocal evidence of fusion, in contrast, say, to alpha decay. I do take interest in what empirical findings might be reported in this particular study relating to uranium.

  • Eric Walker This is from 2007, I'm looking for recent works from each author... "Synthesis Of A Copper Like Compound From Nickel And Hydrogen And Of A Chromium Like Compound From Calcium And Deuterium"

    https://www.researchgate.net/p…rom_Calcium_And_Deuterium


    A side note: The review 'United States Government LENR 2018 has been viewed three times by the folks at Brillouin and viewed by someone at Townsend and Townsend and Crew LLP in San Francisco.

    Townsend and Townsend and Crew LLP offers legal advisory services. The firm’s areas of practice include patent, trademark and copyright, litigation, antitrust, biotechnology and chemistry, medical and mechanical devices, technology licensing, trade secrets, and Internet and domain names. It caters to aerospace, agriculture, chemical, energy, hardware, manufacturing, Internet and e-commerce, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, telecommunications, publishing, and food manufacturing industries. The firm was founded in 1993 due to a merger between Townsend and Townsend and Khourie, Crew and Jaeger. Townsend is headquartered in San Francisco, California with additional offices in Palo Alto, Walnut Creek...


    These folks from Ukraine cite the 2007 paper of J. Dufour They sent this to Dr. Rossi.

    .

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo


    July 1, 2016 at 8:55 AM

    Hello dr . Rossi , I send you a very interesting paper:

    On the Nuclear Coupling of Proton and Electron
    Volodymyr Krasnoholovets Institute of physics, Natl. Acad. Sci., 46 Nauky St., UA-03028 Kyiv, Ukraine
    Yuriy Zabulonov, Ihor Zolkin
    Institute of Environmental Geochemistry under Natl. Acad. Sci. and Ministry for Emergencies and Affairs of Population Protection from
    the Consequences of Chornobyl Catastrophe, 34-a Acad. Palladin Ave., UA-03680, Kyiv, Ukraine
    http://www.hrpub.org/download/20160530/UJPA6-18406680.pdf

  • Greg,


    Off the top of my head; Townsend and Townsend, was the early law firm BEC hired for their patent work. One of their lawyers (Sloan I believe) was also a physicist. BEC came on some financial troubles, and Sloan, very impressed with their technology, worked out a deal whereby Townsend received a share of the new corporation, in exchange for legal bills.

  • Hope this helps Greg,


    http://brillouinenergy.com/about/milestones/


    -Robert Godes Establishes Brillouin Energy and retains the services of MCM Group, Inc. and Grosvenor Financial Partners, LLC for investment banking and consulting management services and Kilpatrick Townsend Stockton LLP for patent services In exchange for Founders Stock – January 2009


    -Robert Godes publishes “The Quantum Fusion Hypothesis” advocating that the reaction must involve electron capture as a natural energy reduction mechanism of the lattice – November 2008


    -On behalf of Profusion Energy Robert Godes initiated a first US Provisional Patent Application which has served as a Priority Document for a number of subsequent filings – December 2005

  • I've always taken a mild interest in Brillouin's experimental findings, while not taking much interest in Godes's theoretical explorations. It is always good to assess the two on independent scales: do the experiments look good? And does the theory make sense? Ideally the experimentalists would not be detained too much in theory, but in the field of LENR, theory and experiment often come as a package deal, to the determent of the general perception of the credibility of the experimental findings, I would imagine. In that context it's often appropriate to ignore the theory mostly and just focus on the experiments.

  • axil  Hi,


    Thanks for joining the thread, I hope you're doing fine.


    I'm curious, What is your opinion of the claims of GEC?


    The claims are: "GEC is currently negotiating several new SMG construction contracts ranging from 250MWe to 5GWe around the world." Are these claims truthful, or most likely truthful, or a scam?



  • One of their lawyers (Sloan I believe) was also a physicist. BEC came on some financial troubles, and Sloan, very impressed with their technology, worked out a deal whereby Townsend received a share of the new corporation, in exchange for legal bills.


    Good memory Shane... Led me to this from SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015 • ISSUE 123 • INFINITE ENERGY

    http://www.infinite-energy.com…s/pdfs/BrillouinIE123.pdf

    On the Quest for a Commercial LENR Reactor with Robert Godes and Brillouin Energy

    by Marianne Macy

    quote page 10

    So how did the work progress? “Because I figured out the physics in 1992, and then started developing the components of the hardware and system design in 1996, I was able to build the first functional prototype LENR test system in 2002. With the acquisition of Energy Line looming (and my freedom to experiment in their lab soon to be curtailed), I quit my day job and began running experiments out of my house, using my daughter’s original nursery room as homespun lab space. After a couple years of such work, I later approached a highly regarded Intellectual Property (IP) law firm in the San Francisco Bay area now called Kilpatrick Townsend Stockton (KTS). Specifically KTS (then Townsend & Townsend & Crew) had a highly respected IP lawyer on its staff named David Slone, who has both his JD Law and his Ph.D. in high-energy physics from Stanford University. A known authority in his field, I began a dialog with Dr. Slone about my hypothesis that I had developed as the theoretical basis to produce LENR, and after much review, technical analysis and scrutiny, eventually convinced him and a couple of his fellow physics and engineering colleagues that my hypothesis could in fact eventually lead to a commercial breakthrough. The process wasn’t easy, but after many months of review and dialog, Slone was actually persuaded that what later became the Brillouin Energy hypothesis was significant enough, that he got his law firm to agree to perform all of my early patent work on my behalf and to become my IP law firm in exchange for a then 5% equity stake in the founders stock of my venture in 2005.” - end quotes

  • Ahlfors,


    How did you get this? Whatever, it is a blockbuster. Great job.


    In summary; NASA and Global Energy Corp. became partners on 12/20/2017 to develop a 10kW thermal power plant (then scaled to 100kWs), using GEC;s hybrid generator.


    Phase 1 testing should be completed by 12/30/2018. Phase 2 by 12/30/2019 and 3 by 12/30/2020. The built products will be run at the "Plum Brook Facility".


    Dr. Jay Khim signed for GEC. As you may recall, he is also CEO of JWK, and negotiated the Genie Reactor deal with the Governor of Guam.

  • I just can't resist...


    Has this guy talked to Larry or Pam?


    Offices just down the hall...


    I certainly imagine so.


    Policy Interests of U.S. Government Agencies in Emerging Energy Technologies - Review for Potential Cold Fusion Contributions - White Paper

    THOMAS GRIMSHAW, PH.D. RESEARCH AFFILIATE, ENERGY INSTITUTE - THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN - JANUARY 6, 2017


    (gbgoblenote- As in Lawrence Forsley-Boss and the SPAWAR JWK Global Energy Corporation Cold Fusion LENR Energy Technology coming out of the NASA GRC AEC contract...

    Stay tuned to the NAE of LENR!!!

    In an Eco-System participants give and receive.

    There isn't simply competition for limited resources...

    Yet rather consider a give and take...

    Daring to share...

    Infinite energy

    Infinite time

    Resources

    E=McX Whatever... So called Scalar.

    Beyond the...

    Imaginably beyond.

    Imagine that!


    An atom-ecology.

    http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GrimshawTpolicyinte.pdf

  • Greg,


    That Grimshaw/UOT White Paper you link to, is intended to be the "underpinning" for another report we do not see, that covers LENR. All this one does is identify the many, many, overlapping, Federal agencies, and Congressional Committees that have a role in energy, that would be interested in the LENR report.


    Do we know where that report is, or even if it has ever been released? They refer to Nagel as the author, and I know he has written a number of summations about the ICCF's, so maybe they are referring to one of those?


  • This audio of Larry Forsley's ICCF21 presentation is courtesy of CFN. It supports everything speculated on in this thread. JWK/GEC/NASA started working together in 2012. Hard to make out, but they are also working with some new Navy department I never heard of. The whole 26 minute tape (skip minutes 20:24 to 23 due his playing some MFMP tape), is worthy of hearing. Starting at about 12:40, you need a nuclear physics degree to follow. The LENR connection starts at 6:00. Lots of goodies in there.


    What I hear is that this is a real partnership, not just GEC using NASA facilities as some here claimed. The technology is real, and LENR based. Hard to listen to and walk away thinking LENR is a pseudoscience.

  • How are the projections for GEC today, compared to proven accomplishments, different from those of 2013 described at the link?


    https://oilprice.com/Alternati…ing-the-Final-Stages.html


    Gregory Byron Goble wrote in the comments 5 years ago:


  • How are the projections for GEC today, compared to proven accomplishments, different from those of 2013 described at the link?


    https://oilprice.com/Alternati…ing-the-Final-Stages.html


    Gregory Byron Goble wrote in the comments 5 years ago:


    SOT,


    I know you and your alter ego Mary do not like to read links, but you really should listen to the Forsley (GEC/JWK) presentation. It tells much of what they are doing, and it is not just talk. They are physically working with NASA and some Navy group to develop a 10kW electrical, non-fissile, generator, and a 40kW planetary power source.


    That 5 y/o link BTW, is all true. It actually happened. Those involved back then with Guam, are now involved with NASA. Has their tech advanced since 2012? I am not sure, but I think it has.


    Strictly IMO, but this is what I think happened: The Guam deal fell through in part because the "N" word came into play. OMG, they want to put an n reactor on our island nation. :) I think GEC decided at that point, that there was no way to offer their technology in the private sector without encountering impossible resistance.


    However, NASA can, and does work with nuclear technology without much public perception interference. Knowing that, GEC decided to "propose to NASA" (actual words) as Forsley said, knowing if they approved (they did) he could continue he and Mosier-Boss's (SPAWAR) work under their umbrella. In addition, NASA had their own scientists involved, and successful with LENR, since 1989, so all the better. A match made in heaven!


    Now, together they can develop GEC's hybrid LENR technology within the space exploration program. When/if it is put to practical use, over time the public will grow to trust it, and then it will be more readily accepted for use here on planet earth.