Team Google wants your opinion: "What is the highest priority experiment the LENR community wants to see conducted?"

    • Official Post

    The diplomatic channels are now open. Your comments here will be read by the Google Program Manager, so you can assume you are communicating directly with him. This is a unique opportunity for the community to come together as one voice, to help Google decide what their next step should be. I would ask everyone be respectful, and prefer those with actual LENR lab experience make most of the recommendations. This will be heavily moderated, and if anything is even close to personal, will be deleted instead of being moved to the Clearance thread.

    The question in the title of this thread: "What is the highest priority experiment the LENR community wants to see conducted", was posed by Matt Trevithick (Google Program Manager) at ICCF18 in 2013. To date, it still has not been satisfactorily answered. It would be useful for the field to put aside their differences, and preferences, and recommend "one top thing to spin up an academic team to evaluate". The proposals should be "well formulated so that they are actionable".

    In addition, it would be helpful to know: "What would convince you that the experiment has been run well, such that you will accept the results...whatever they might be?".

    PS: I would like to personally thank Team Google for making themselves available.

    • Official Post

    From my point of view

    1. the first priority is to reproduce with great fidelity the results of T Mizuno.
    2. If results are reliable and COP is high as estimated by Mizuno in his latest results, the priority should be to make a clear demonstration following the proposal of Jean-François Geneste when he was CSO at Airbus Innovation : use the heat to power a Thermoacoustic engine they have developed for spacial applications, and cycle the energy to make the engine run for weeks. Alternative I've seen from the paper of Jacques Ruer is to develop an Ericsson engine (maybe as a collaboration). As J-F Geneste explained in Milan before ICCF19, this would convince any engineer.
    3. Another research could be to replicate the results of the U-Kobe/U-Osaka/Nissan/Toyota-Technova/U-Tohoku/Nissan/U-Nagoya, again, eventually with their samples.
    4. Beside that there is a long line of electrochemistry experiments, like those done by ENEA, Navy NRL, SRI, Edmund Storms, or even F&P via JP-Biberian (he has sample of Icarus-9), that are challenging because of palladium batch selection, but that are replicated since long... Getting samples that have worked may be a key. One key investigations once replicated would be to confirm again the He4/Heat correlation, and eventually detect X-rays anisotropy. The problem however would be that it have been done since long and nobody cared.
  • Another research could be to replicate the [Takahashi et al.] results of the U-Kobe/U-Osaka/Nissan/Toyota-Technova/U-Tohoku/Nissan/U-Nagoya, again, eventually with their samples.

    That's a good idea. Unfortunately, that is much harder to do. And unfortunately, as far as I know, they are unwilling to share samples. Brian Ahern and the people at a National Laboratory produced similar material that worked about as well. Ames NL, I think it was. They might be able to produce more, which Google could then test. Making it from scratch is very difficult. The authors have not shared the methods and materials. In their recent paper they said they will reveal these things sometime in the future. This experiment was pioneered by Arata, who also kept the details secret, according to Japanese researchers I have heard from. I never saw a detailed description from him, in English or Japanese.

    Arata's earlier Pd-black material with double-structured cathodes was simpler, and I think this was described comprehensively. I would not recommend trying to replicate this experiment.

    If Mizuno is correct, his material is much easier to replicate. It is astounding to me that such crudely made material works, but it seems to. Assuming his calorimetry is right, it must be working, and I do not know of any reason to doubt the calorimetry.

    Of course it would be good to try to replicate several different experiments. Just because Mizuno is promising, you should not ignore Takahashi et al. If you have the resources, by all means try them all. Google has the resources.

  • . Google has the resources.

    $10 million in the last venture..

    Priority One,, I agree with others REPLICATE.. R20 with deuterium

    $10,000 to replicate Mizuno's R20 in a lab

    with bells and whistles thrown in .. some low kev gamma analyses,, mass specs neutron analysis

    $10,000 = $100,000/ ..

    Then the variations,,, titanium mesh... zirconium mesh ..burnishings with Hf, Yb, Mo, Ag, Cd, Sn, Pd, Y, Sc, Rh

    hydrogen versus deuterium, ss 304 vs ss316 ..

    Google could do a lot with $10 million

    • Official Post

    I do not know how this is all going to work it's way to a consensus, where the veterans in the field come together behind *ONE* experiment, as Google wants...Any ideas? Alan thinks this is going to be like herding cats, and I agree. :) It's like bringing a kid into a candy store, and telling him he can have only one. Well, they all look so good! 2 hours later, he has his one candy, but it was not an easy decision. It won't be any easier here.

    I was thinking the informal, and formal leaders need to take charge, and guide the discussion to a successful conclusion. Of course, that will take a lot of debate...some contentious, but in the end everyone has to get behind the best choice. Google does not want 10 to chose from, they want it narrowed down to one. So what is your favorite candy?

  • What is the time frame of Google's question? If they don't need an answer tomorrow, I would suggest they wait (90 days?) for results of the several Mizuno replications now apparently under construction. If there are positive results, even if not conclusive, Google would do well to jump in. As Jed rightly points out, the Mizuno material is simple to prepare compared to most others, and the XS claimed is substantial enough to be unambiguous and easy to measure. Who knows, maybe they are already doing a rep.


    • Official Post

    What is the time frame of Google's question? If they don't need an answer tomorrow, I would suggest they wait (90 days?) for results of the several Mizuno replications now apparently under construction. If there are positive results, even if not conclusive, Google would do well to jump in. As Jed rightly points out, the Mizuno material is simple to prepare compared to most others, and the XS claimed is substantial enough to be unambiguous and easy to measure. Who knows, maybe they are already doing a rep.


    Said they had a busy summer schedule, so I took that to mean they don't need this tomorrow.

  • The highest priority should be to verify that the self-organizing complex space charge (along with its ion acoustic waves) created during the "negative resistance" regime of an electric discharge can produce anomalous power output.

    Q: Why should this be a priority and why is it important?

    A: Throughout the last century, going back through the age of Tesla, a long series of technologies emerged - each one eventually to be largely forgotten - which utilized the self-organizing properties of an electrical discharge in one form or another. Although many of these technologies were obviously considered highly controversial, the theme of highly out of equilibrium systems which utilize electrical phenomena in this specific regime has repeated itself unceasingly to the present day. Regardless if these systems achieved such self-organization of plasma via cavitation of liquids, fracto-emission from a hydrogen (deuterium) embrittled material, electrical arcs, plasma formations within discharge tubes, or other via other methods, alleged anomalous effects including excess energy always are reported. Here are some links that will provide examples of such systems. Please be aware that the actual self-organizing plasma constructs observed both directly and indirectly have went by a myriad of names including: CPs (condensed plasmoids), EVOs (exotic vacuum objects), HDCC (high density charge clusters), electron clusters, erzions, pseudo-spark discharges, cathode spots, vortex filaments, and of course "strange radiation."

    Dr. Egely of Infinite Energy Magazine's Presentation on the Forgotten Inventions and Effects of LENR

    External Content
    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.

    Dr. Egely's series of articles on the Forgotten Inventions and Effects of LENR published by Infinite Energy Magazine.…n-inventions-of-lenr.html

    An *INCOMPLETE* but VERY useful list of inventors and researchers going back a hundred years who have observed anomalous phenomena which are likely attributable to this phenomena. Composed by Lutz Jaitner.

    Q: How does this self-organizing plasma phenomena related specifically to LENR or cold fusion?

    A: There are multiple mechanisms by which extreme out of equilibrium conditions can be produced in electrolytic (similar to Pons and Fleischmann's original systems), cavitation based (sometimes referred to as bubble fusion), gas loading (such as Piantelli and Focardi's original Nickel-Hydrogen research), and purely plasma based systems (more on these later). The self-organizing plasma structures may in some cases be extremely small and be induced by the double layer of negative and positive charges on the surface of an electrolytic cathode, electrical discharges within the crystal lattice of a hydrogen or deuterium loaded metal, or re-organizations of protons and electrons into new geometric arrangements induced by magnetic fields or quantum scale effects. Regardless as to how they are created, they seem to ubiquitous both in nature and LENR experiments. They also range in size from micro-scale EVOs formed via static discharge when you touch a door knob to macro-scale formations such as ball lightning.

    Perhaps one of the strongest pieces of evidence for EVO (my favorite descriptive term) involvement in LENR is the emission of what's called, "strange radiation" from a wide array of systems spanning every class mentioned so far. For decades Russian researchers, including some of the former top scientists from the soviet nuclear program, have investigated methods of producing and detecting these emissions. From nickel-hydrogen powder based reactors, arc discharges through liquid mediums, cavitation based systems, and other devices, they have collected the signature track marks produced by the emission of strange radiation. These track marks have been repeatedly and consistently produced on a variety of media including metal, glass, plastic, and x-ray film. Moreover, they have been able to detect strange radiation with neutron detectors.

    These emitted particles are capable of producing many anomalies. Here are only a few of the most significant: they can penetrate and travel through reactor walls of different material composition, they can produce nuclear transmutations and isotopic shifts where they impact, seem to prefer traveling along the interface between an electrically conductive surface and a di-electric material, and can produce extremely odd strings of track marks that defy all conventional explanation!

    If there were one possible unifying phenomena that could connect the diverse variety of experiments showing anomalous effects over the past century, it would be the EVO phenomena. It could help bring together an explanation for the effects produced by Nikola Tesla's magnetically quenched spark gap, a long series of water arc experiments, Alexander Chernetsky's Self Generating Discharge Tube, Jospeh Papp's Noble Gas Engine, Paulo and Alexandria Correa's Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge device, Thomas Henry Moray's oscillator tubes and other devices, Stanley Meyer's water fuel systems, Edwin V. Gray's electrical discharge and motor technologies, the "strange radiation" research of various Russian teams, and of course the more contemporary research into cold fusion and LENR.

    Q: Are there any modern examples of this phenomena being exploited technologically?

    A: There are two main examples that immediately come to mind. First, Andrea Rossi, despite the controversy around him, has performed at least one demonstration publicly (the E-Cat QX system presented in Stockholm, Sweden) of a system that obviously - as evidenced by signature waveforms of ion acoustic oscillations appearing on his scope - is working within the negative resistance regime of a plasma discharge. The author and editor of the website E-Cat World observed, during a private showing at a different location, a plasma ball floating within the discharge between the two electrodes. This could very likely be an example of a space charge construct (macro-scale EVO) that must form during the negative resistance regime for the purpose of absorbing a broad array of energy (primarily thermal) from the plasma, converting it to electrical current, and using it to power the circuit while the voltage-current relationship is reversed - i.e., the negative resistance. Andrea Rossi claims that the device is producing a number of different outputs in the forms of heat, light, and direct electrical output: the sum of which produce an *alleged* and yet unproven COP far beyond the input. A subsequent version which he has discussed - in a manner I believe to distract attention from himself - is claimed to produce many kilowatts of output. An intentionally blurry and low resolution video of the plasma from the higher output version (the E-Cat SK) seems to show a much larger complex space charge - described as a "fireball" or "fire rod" in some literature - tethered to one of the electrodes. If he is telling the truth about this second device, it operates at such a high COP that the input is completely negligible compared to the output. Interestingly, some of the unique effects produced by his device match that witnessed experimentally by other researchers going back decades or longer. For example, he must utilize a high degree of active cooling in his power supply. In other devices utilizing very similar operational principles, anomalous and powerful "back currents" and "back spikes" can move backwards into the power supply - often with destructive effects. This was witnessed by Paulo Correa, Alexander Chernetsky, Nikola Tesla, and others.

    Secondly, Randell Mills of Brilliant Light Power (formerly Black Light Power) has built a large scale device named the "Suncell" that he admits operates within the negative resistance regime and during such period produces a large brilliant plasma ball. He asserts, with accompanying evidence, that the device can go into a nearly pure self-sustaining mode of operation while such a discharge is taking place. To be clear, Randell Mills has never, to this author's knowledge, referenced EVOs, electron clusters, erzions, or strange radiation in connection with his technology. Instead, his explanation is that in the Suncell atomic hydrogen - being exposed to catalytic agents in the plasma - shrinks in size due to the electron moving below the "ground state." According to his explanation, this produces an exothermic release of energy of around 200eV or so per reaction. It should be noted that for decades his company has attempted to perfect a long series of devices based on the formation of "hydrinos" or hydrogen below the ground state. But according to him, the utilization of the negative resistance regime is what reversed the hydrino formation process from being self limiting to self RE-INFORCING allowing for a massive rate enhancement that can become explosive in nature: often burning holes through his reactor walls!

    The following is a lecture given by Randell Mills of BLP about the Suncell technology. He specifies how during the negative resistance regime there is a huge rate enhancement that allows for his technology to produce practical quantities of output - so high that they have had to throttle back the systems. Also, he shows the huge plasma ball that forms and mentions that the system is operating with all input cut off.

    External Content
    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.

    Perhaps a critical FACT to keep in mind while considering Randell Mills technology is that originally, in his initial patent applications from a couple decades ago, proposed a detailed theory of how hydrogen below the ground state could induce Low Energy Nuclear Reactions. However, he quickly shifted away from that idea and has frequently renounced the whole concept of LENR since then. Although he has provided evidence in multiple forms and from multiple third parties which seem to prove the existence of the hydrino, I personally cannot help but wonder if something a little more complex and fundamental has taken place that goes beyond a simple reduction of the electron orbit below the ground state. Thinking out loud, what if the hydrino is a unique re-arrangement of electrons and protons that could resemble an EVO? Moreover, since he is utilizing the negative resistance regime, I cannot help but wonder if he's producing nuclear transmutations and isotopic shifts - a possibility he would completely deny due to his strict and unwaivering insistence on his technology being purely based on the formation of hydrinos (completely non-nuclear). Additionally, I may be completely wrong, but I cannot help but ponder the idea that his system could potentially be producing the same "strange radiation" that is emitted by an extremely broad range of systems, including virtually every type of LENR system.

    Q: So what details can you provide on the experiment you would like to have performed? What are the specifications of the system?

    A: I propose building a highly resonant system that would produce a complex space charge or macro-EVO between two electrodes within a discharge tube during the negative resistance regime. All forms of output including heat, light, electricity, and electromagnetic emissions should be measured to determine if excess energy is being produced by the device. Here are several important details:

    1) The gaseous composition of the reactor tube along with the elemental composition of the electrodes (which will sputter nano-particles into the plasma) are very important. Although I expect there are several different combinations that will produce a net gain of energy, I would propose starting with a combination of hydrogen and/or deuterium (along and in different ratios), one or more noble gases such as Argon (the ions of heavy atoms such as noble gases tend to ease the formation, stabilize, and enhance the lifespan of EVOs), and lithium in one or more forms (elemental and in metal hydrides such as LiAlH).

    2) The electrodes may utilize different shapes and geometries. Obviously, a sharp tip within a hollow area or depression (hole) in the cathode would allow for the discharge to induce a plasma at the lowest voltage. However, repeated firings will at least to some degree erode the sharpened tip if the EVO or "complex space charge" is allowed to form on the surface, rather than self organizing some distance away, between the electrodes. So it's possible that such a specific design may not be required. The E-Cat QX, for example, with the naked eye does not appear to utilize such a sharpened tip - although there could likely be a very small one present that could be visible if the electrode was more closely examined. However, high current firings of electrodes in similar devices will produce cone shaped protrusions on the cathode surface which can perform in the same fashion to lower the discharge threshold. George Egely has explained how in some devices - such as the Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge device of Paulo Correa and the Self Generating Discharge Tube of Alexander Chernetsky - these structures eventually erode away, reducing or eliminating the performance of the device. My conjecture is that with if the entire system, including the power supply and circuit - can be tuned into resonance, the complex space charge may form and remain off the surface of the cathode, eliminating this problem. Or, once created, it may linger on the cathode in a steady-state mode without the need for repeatedly on/off sequences.

    3) All indications are that Rossi has been using a high manganese nickel alloy such as the following for his electrodes. The following alloy would help the electrode survive the conditions within the discharge tube. The nickel and manganese nano-particles sputtered from them may also undergo nuclear reactions - becoming part of the fuel mixture.

    4) The entire system must be tuned into a state of resonance which will maximize the amplitude of the ion acoustic waves produced within the discharge tube. These ion acoustic waves will be visible on the oscilloscope, allowing for real-time monitoring of what's happening in the reactor. There are many factors which will have an impact on achieving resonance. A huge one is the resistance, capacitance, and other properties of the circuit connected to the reactor! Others include the distance between electrodes (the greater the distance the lower the frequency of the self-generating oscillations), the gas pressure within the reactor (the greater the pressure the lower the frequency), the shape of the electrodes, etc. Once a state of resonance has been achieved, which may require more than one build and testing of different combinations of variables, the anomalous effects should be enhanced and become even more observable. Please be cautious during the testing of this device, because these complex space charges which continuously undulate (growing and shrinking) as they absorb and emit both ions and energy produce what are called "longitudinal waves" which have proven to produce biological effects - both beneficial and negative. Moreover, the device will likely emit some quantity of strange radiation, which also may have diverse health effects - perhaps due to a hermesis type effect (a certain quantity being good by activating natural cellular defense mechanisms but too high of an exposure overwhelming them and producing damage).

    The following is a video recording of the oscilloscope connected to Andrea Rossi's E-Cat QX during the presentation at Stockholm. Please notice that the waveforms that are visible are the proof of ion acoustic waves producing oscillations in his system. Also, to provide some clarity, in this test, to prevent overheating, he pulsed his device on and off periodically utilizing a higher voltage initial pulse to establish the plasma discharge.

    External Content
    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.

    5) Once the production of anomalous energy begins, which may be quite high, the input can be reduced to a very low level. The system may continue to produce energy via two processes: inducing LENR reactions and extracting energy from the active vacuum - also referred to as the electron-positron sea, the zero point energy field, the realm of negative energy, or the "aether." The latter source of energy, not due to nuclear reactions, may be the result of the sudden, abrupt accelerations and de-accelerations of ions within the plasma. These sudden motions and collisions produced by the ion-acoustic waves being emitted from the EVO may cohere "virtual particles" in the vacuum so that some fraction of them emerge into our "positive" realm. A portion of the energy they add to the plasma would be absorbed by the complex space charge and converted into current - with a larger fraction being converted to heat and light. Likely, by varying the fuel mixture and the degree of resonance, the ratio of energy produced via LENR reactions vs. extraction from the vacuum can be changed.

    Q: What makes your proposed experiment more important than others that are being suggested?

    A: The project I'm proposing (which would consist of a series of experiments and not simply a couple one-offs) would seek to uncover the root mechanism not only of traditional electrolytic or gas loading LENR, but of a much longer list of almost forgotten devices - going back a hundred years or longer - that produced sometimes stunning effects - anomalies that defy conventional explanation. If successful, the reactor constructed and tested would be an even more significant breakthrough than any "individual" style of slightly better known "cold fusion" device. The implications for energy production would be enormous, due to the fuel efficiency, high energy density and absolute controllability (instant on/off). But more importantly, the ROOT phenomena that allows for LENR, extraction of energy from the vacuum, and an understanding of the BASIS OF PHYSICAL REALITY would finally be uncovered! With such knowledge, the world could undergo a technological and scientific revolution that would make the dawn of the industrial age pale in comparison.

    Please consider my proposal and feel free to contact the moderators of this forum to pass along any questions or to start a dialog, if you so desire. I can provide MANY more references and have much more information to share about the EVO phenomena, in all of its many forms of representations.

    Thank you for your interest in LENR!

    Don't just, "not be evil."

    Save the world by accessing the root of LENR technology!

  • I do not know how this is all going to work it's way to a consensus, where the veterans in the field come together behind *ONE* experiment, as Google wants...Any ideas?

    Why *ONE* experiment? I don't understand why they should be so limited. I can see why 10 would be too many, but surely they can afford 2 or 3. I would suggest, in this order:

    1. Mizuno's latest.
    2. Takahashi with Ames reverse engineered material, which I hope they can make more of.
    3. Classic F-P with the methods described by Storms and Cravens. They may have tried this. I have no idea what they did, but they did not achieve high loading, so if they were following the Storms protocols, they did it wrong.
  • Unwise to delay replication, some trials may not replicate R20 accurately enough generating negative results.

    I hope that the people at Google are skilled in the art (PHOSITA), and they can look at failed attempts to replicate and see they were invalid. They could only do that if the person who tries to replicate reports the results in enough detail. For example, if someone says, "I tried a nickel-copper screen and it did not work" a PHOSITA would say, "ah, you probably should have used Ni-200."

    If someone reports a failed attempt, but does not describe it in detail, that should be ignored.

    • Official Post

    Why *ONE* experiment? I don't understand why they should be so limited. I can see why 10 would be too many, but surely they can afford 2 or 3. I would suggest, in this order

    Just guessing, but they don't need us to draw up a list of 10. They can do that themselves. Even I could do that. Come decision time though, there is only going to be ONE replication that can make the final cut, and then they start on that ONE.

    So IMO, it is smart on his part to enlist us in the decision making process. Efficient use of the experience, and talent we have here on the forum. Takes some of the burden off his co-leaders shoulders, leaving them to focus on the lab work. That is how leaders do it, which explains why he is a Google Program Manager.

    Oh, and I would like to add that he is sincerely interested in what we come up with, but cannot commit to act on it.

  • Shane,

    Not considering any of Rossi's technology - which he will never allow to be verified one way or the other - the most impressive and perhaps advanced player in this field that's moving towards commercialization is Brilliant Light Power via their utilization of the negative resistance regime to produce a massive rate enhancement of "hydrino" production. I'd go so far as to say that compared to Mizuno's system, Brilliant Light Power's Suncell is literally light years ahead with numerous advantages. For a company the size of Google with billions of dollars to spend, I can't help but think that a project composed of a series of experiments to investigate the potential of the complex space charge or "macro-EVO' that MUST form (this is in mainstream literature) during a negative resistance - to power the circuit while the voltage and current relationship is reversed - should be conducted.

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.