Brillouin Energy Corporation (BEC) updates.

Quote from JedRothwell

With one critical difference. That was science fiction and fantasy. This is real.

Sorry Jed, until it is proven with a great deal of certainty, these predictions will remain science fiction, or perhaps worse, futurism. Like the talking head futurists who expound on bizzarre applications of technology many years in the future. I always thought of that stuff as more mental masturbation, interesting, but not as important as the scientific tasks at hand, like actually proving LENR. Everyone might not have appreciated ahead of time the nuances of cell phones, but guess what, they were developed none the less. Brillouin hiring another independent verification lab seems to me the best chance of getting a LENR proof done right now (I used to think it was BLP). Sorry, 20 year old LENR-CANR.org data doesn't cut it for me.

Ok Jed. In the context of our discussion, it is pointless for me to keep talking because you are deaf - utterly incapable of hearing what I say because your broken record soundtrack has utterly drowned it out. Have a nice day in you own private Idaho.

Quote from PhysicsForDummies

Sorry Jed, until it is proven with a great deal of certainty, these predictions will remain science fiction, or perhaps worse, futurism.

It has been proven with a great deal of certainty. If you do not think so, then you do not believe in the scientific method. That is to say, you think it is possible that an experiment replicated hundreds of times at a high signal to noise ratio might be wrong. You think that calorimetry, tritium detection and helium detection at the best laboratories on earth are all inexplicably wrong, by orders of magnitude in some cases. You don't believe in the laws of thermodynamics. You imagine that hundred of modern scientists, including most of the world-class experts in calorimetry and electrochemistry, are incapable of doing calorimetry as well as Lavoisier did in 1780. He could have detected this effect with the instrument he used to measure guinea pig metabolism.

In short, you do not think so because you reject all of experimental science for the last 240 years, and the whole basis of our industrial civilization.

What else do you say is not proven? That bacteria causes disease? Evolution? Relativity? Do you reject any experimental discovery that seems unlikely or impossible, or that seems to violate existing theory? Many people who call themselves scientists do that nowadays. They are not scientists. They are true believers in a weird form of religion. A scientist believes that which experiments and instrument readings prove is true. That is the one and only standard of truth. Nothing else counts. If cold fusion were any other finding that has been replicated so widely, with so many instrument types, measured by heat, tritium and helium, any scientist who did not believe it would be considered crazy, like the people who think that vaccinations do not work.

Furthermore, all of my predictions are grounded in the experimental findings. I have little imagination, and no ability to ground them in anything else. That is also why I am sure the scientific method has not failed, and 400 years of science have not suddenly and inexplicably gone off the rails and stopped working. You think that has happened because you have a florid imagination, and you suppose any damn thing might be true. I am stuck with a prosaic view of life, that tritium detection works as well as it ever did, and hundreds of experiments detecting tritium far above background must be right. As Martin Fleischmann said, we are painfully conventional people.

Quote from PhysicsForDummies

Sorry, 20 year old LENR-CANR.org data doesn't cut it for me.

Is there a statute of limitations for scientific data??! I had no idea. So, you also no longer believe data from Faraday, or Lavoisier, or Newton, for that matter. You no longer think that the Chicago 1 Pile produced a nuclear chain reaction. Any finding over 20 years old is automatically wrong. Got it.

You have strange notions about science. Very creative. A florid imagination totally at odds with textbooks and tradition, as I said. You will go far! I just hope not many people follow you into your New Age Cult.

Quote from interested observer

Ok Jed. In the context of our discussion, it is pointless for me to keep talking because you are deaf - utterly incapable of hearing what I say

Which version of what you say am I supposed to hear? Where you say X, or where you deny saying X and insist you said just the opposite?

I apologize. My problem is that I am incapable of Orwellian doublethink. You insist that I believe whatever you say, even when you contradict yourself. X and Not X. 2 + 2 = 5. I do not have your level of mental flexibility!

Quote

What I mean is, you fail to understand the world-wide brouhaha that will ensue if it ever becomes generally known that this is a nuclear reactor operating by unknown principles

If LENR is ever proven to work to a level sufficient for acceptance by the "mainline" scientific community, major resources including particle physicists who really know what they are doing will be applied to learning how it works. Same for powerful machines and computers. How LENR works, if it works, is not likely to remain a mystery very long in this modern world. If it's a major source of thermal energy, it will be dangerous and explosions of various origins will be possible and will probably happen. Eventually, adequate regulations will be worked out for safety. All of that is if it really works. And it won't be the usual suspects who do the required physics, IMO. It will be the mainliners.

Quote

Like the talking head futurists who expound on bizzarre applications of technology many years in the future. I always thought of that stuff as more mental masturbation, interesting, but not as important as the scientific tasks at hand, like actually proving LENR. Everyone might not have appreciated ahead of time the nuances of cell phones, but guess what, they were developed none the less. Brillouin hiring another independent verification lab seems to me the best chance of getting a LENR proof done right now (I used to think it was BLP). Sorry, 20 year old LENR-CANR.org data doesn't cut it for me.

Precisely. But it is interesting how accurately Star Trek predicted some of modern technology such as talking to computers to effect the real world via devices. Even the form factor and folding of their communicator became a real device with flip phones, interestingly now obsolete! Some progress towards futuristic weaponry is already under way such as microwave crowd control weapons (set your phaser to "annoy"), electromagnetic rail guns, and of course very high power military chemical lasers. Depending on how far you go back, you could argue that CT, MRI and PET scans have many of the capabilities of Star Trek tricorders. Of course, a lot of that was chance. And a lot of real discoveries were never predicted, for example modern DNA technology, while many predictions such as faster than light travel and transporters have not become real and perhaps never will. And yet other technology is suggested but not really implemented by modern methods, for example the holodeck bears conceptual resemblance to virtual reality optics but of course, the solid matter component is very much absent.

But yes, less mental masturbation please about all the wondrous applications of LENR and a lot more tangible and credible experiments, independent of inventors, investors and supporters. Someone (Jed?) claimed that SRI is independent of Brillouin but are they really when they work closely with George and Godes? The testing should be done by a group which knows how to do it by multiple methods and who has no vested interest in the technology and no association with the inventors. In fact, after the inventors teach the testers how to operate the equipment, they should have nothing more to do with the tests until they are completed.

Quote

Only when they realise that the 'standard model' doesn't work for LENR and start looking for new ideas.

Highly premature but if true, the model will evolve and be corrected and/or extended to cover the new findings. It may turn out like what happened to Newton's Laws. They fine and adequate for objects within a certain size range. They don't work at extremes like subatomic scale and for black holes so other physics and mathematics had to be discovered and developed. But quantum physics, for example, doesn't invalidate Newton's work. It extends it. And doing the calculations the way Newton did is much easier than more general methods if you remain within the appropriate range of size and mass.

Quote from seven_of_twenty

Highly premature but if true, the model will evolve and be corrected. It may be like what happened to Newton's Laws. They fine and adequate for objects within a certain size range. They don't work at extreme like subatomic scale and for black holes so other physics and mathematics had to be discovered and developed. But quantum physics, for example, doesn't invalidate Newton's work. It extends it. And doing the calculations the way Newton did is much easier than more general methods if you remain within the appropriate range of size and mass.

In 1988 the first autonomous vehicle made one full round inside the ETHZ building in Switzerland. It used the most powerful image signal processor of that time developed for US weapon use and a custom processor for computing the controls. Now 30 years later we can say the technology is almost mature.

LENR certainly will not be off by 30 years starting from now. The Russians have the same process as Mills and far the better engineers as it looks like. They get COP's between 4-10 since about 8 years.

My prognosis is 5 years at most until the first working LENR device is sold for public use.

Unluckily for SOT's reasoning nuclear physics seems to have closer ties to Newton than to quantum physics. The main reason is that quantum physics is not a fundamental theory and needs a classical gauge... Even worse nuclear physics does not need Einstein relativity too! But here I can make the same prognosis as for the first autonomous car. It will take more than 10 years until somebody fully understands these facts.

Quote from seven_of_twenty

And it won't be the usual suspects who do the required physics, IMO. It will be the mainliners.

All of the leading cold fusion researchers were mainstream scientists. Such as the Chairman of the Indian Atomic Energy Commission and a Fellow of the Royal Society. You call them the "usual suspects" because you have no idea who they are, or what they reported.

Quote from seven_of_twenty

But quantum physics, for example, doesn't invalidate Newton's work

Quantum physics is useless for neutrons and protons if one needs precise prediction of energies and moments.

check out the latest ab initio calculations for neutron and protons using the QM computer model versus others

eg

• 9.66236504 {10(-27) J/T)} is better than quantum mechanics or Randell Mills.for neutron magnetic moment

Quote from [email protected]

Americans will be surprised that a COP 20 1.8kW LENR home energy system that costs $4k can be bought for $500 in other countries. Like buying an ak-47. That $6 add-on safety fee you like to promote will be an international joke.

The $6 is not an add-on fee. It will be incorporated in the cost, just as the cost of crash-testing is incorporated in the cost of an automobile. The customer never sees it. The safety fee will benefit everyone, including customers in the Third World. I do not think Third World factories will be capable of manufacturing cold fusion devices, any more than they can make computer chips or microwave ovens. Cold fusion devices are bound to be high-tech machines made by robots. Perhaps in a Third World country, a Chinese, U.S. or Japanese company will open up a factory, but all of the production line equipment will be made in China, the U.S. or Japan. So it will meet our industrial standards. It will be developed after extensive safety tests. Such tests are done in China for their automobiles and electronics just as much as they are done in the U.S. In other words, the safety testing and industrial standards for cold fusion devices will be applied everywhere in the world, just as they are for things like microwave ovens. The microwave oven, PV array, or motorcycle you buy in Africa or India is as safe as ones sold in Atlanta. The cold fusion heaters and power supplies will be as well. People in the Third World will not be able to assemble cheap, knock-off versions or homemade versions of cold fusion devices any more than they can make PV arrays or laptop computers.

For those same reasons, most of the patent (IP) fees are likely to be paid. Chinese companies do steal IP, and the government policies are unfair to foreign corporations, but overall Chinese companies play by the rules. They honor commitments, and they follow industrial standards. If they did not, companies from the U.S., the EU and Japan would not do business with them. Poor people in Third World countries will not be capable of stealing cold fusion IP, any more than you can make your own Intel processor or PV array in your kitchen. Ordinary people cannot make modern high tech devices.

Quote from [email protected]

The top hundred electrochemists of the day published at least 153 peer reviewed replications.

Errata corrige:

Some 12+ top electrochemists of the day published at least 153 peer reviewed paper claiming to have replicated the (inexistent) FPAHE.

Ref.: F&P's experiments – 30 years after CF announcement

Where can I talk with some of these authors of the 153 papers? Do they still believe they can replicate? Why aren't they doing it now? Someone like Mills or Brillouin needs to finally establish a proven validation, otherwise people 100 years from now will still be talking about the 1980's and the legend of LENR. It seems like Brillouin's COP should be sufficient to do this, if real.

Quote from PhysicsForDummies

Where can I talk with some of these authors of the 153 papers?

Hold a seance.

Quote from PhysicsForDummies

Do they still believe they can replicate?

When an effect has been replicated hundreds of times, you would be crazy not to think it can be replicated. The whole basis of the scientific method would be wrong if that could happen. We would still be living in caves.

If you don't believe widely replicated high sigma experimental results, you have no basis to believe or disbelieve anything. You are adrift at sea in a fog.

Quote from PhysicsForDummies

Why aren't they doing it now?

Because they are dead.

Quote from PhysicsForDummies

Someone like Mills or Brillouin needs to finally establish a proven validation, otherwise people 100 years from now will still be talking about the 1980's and the legend of LENR. It seems like Brillouin's COP should be sufficient to do this, if real.

I have no idea whether these claims are true, or whether they have anything to do with cold fusion. They are quite different from cold fusion. I would not call them a replication of the Fleischmann Pons effect, and they lend no credibility to that effect. If it turns out they are wrong, they subtract no credibility.

Quote from JedRothwell

Hold a seance.

I should point out that Mike McKubre is still among the living, and he sometimes haunts this forum.

Quote from JedRothwell

Mike McKubre is still among the living

Mike Staker is still among the living at Loyola UNi..

not an electrochemist

but has several years experience in the learning curve of F&P replication

a bit far from San Diego.. but I have communicated with him by email easily