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

  • Here are some bullet points for my proposal.


    • The complex space charge that forms during the negative resistance regime is well documented in mainstream literature.
    • Some of the properties of the complex space charge are well known - producing ion acoustic waves, surface double layer, etc.
    • The task that will require at least some engineering skill will be to design a circuit that can be tuned into resonance.
    • A massive benefit will be that the signature of the NR and complex space charge will be visible on the oscilloscope.
    • The concepts of the negative resistance and resulting complex space charge are not proprietary. They are basic science.
    • This phenomena has been utilized in countless inventions going back a hundred years that have demonstrated anomalies.
    • There are multiple pathways that could allow for it to be a primary driver of conventional cold fusion. (Fracto-emission is one).
    • This phenomena extends to current day inventions that are alleged to produce high output (BLP's Suncell and Rossi's E-Cat SK).
    • The system can be built small to save one material costs. More than one reactor could be easily built.
    • Multiple combinations of fuel gases can be tested (starting with combinations of hydrogen, noble gases, lithium, etc.)
    • A review of all the different systems, wildly varied, that incorporated this phenomena show that anomalies should show up immediately.
    • Paulo Correa, Alexander Chernetsky, Edwin V. Grey, Thomas Henry Moray, Randell Mills, and Andrea Rossi are only a short list of inventors whose technology incorporated the negative resistance regime. Nikola Tesla's spark gap system is a primary example.
    • The outputs of the device would be in the form of heat, light, electricity, electromagnetic waves (transverse), longitudinal waves, and "strange radiation."
    • The safety concerns are minimal although I would not stand close to the device for prolonged periods.
  • Ahlfors


    Your contribtions are very highly valued, but in this specific instance they are off topic, and with regret have been moved to 'Clearance' simply because we are trying to keep this thread focused on topics related to a potential google replication..

  • As an outsider (new to this forum) but as an engineer that has followed CF from P&F times, an answer to Google's question seems really clear to me.


    Google's goal is stated to find the 'definitive experiment'. There is one clear candidate:

    • One experiment that is simpler than almost any other I've come across
    • That supposedly generates huge power out - hundreds of Watts to kW level.
    • Has a suggested COP of 5 to 10. So has large S/N. Precise calorimetry appears unnecessary
    • That is documented in detail that should be enough to replicate.

    I'm talking about, as many others here have suggested, replicate exactly the recent Mizuno R20 experiment.


    And Jed / Mizuno have said they are willing to help others replicate (not being overly protective like some we could mention.)


    Google, please show is what Jed / Mizuno have got wrong or missed? (Assuming it doesn't work).


    If it does work - job done. A new future for us all.


    From the outside this seems far and away the most important experiment in the last 30 years. Timing was a bit unfortunate in that it happened at the same time as Google released their first report.

  • Riom,


    I agree that Mizuno's experiment does seem to have many advantages in that it's simple (no big engineering challenges), produces a high total output (kilowatts), produces high COP (ten is obviously the low end of what's possible), has huge room for improvement with no changes (increasing the temperature another fifty or hundred degrees could boost the COP even further due to the exponential increase in output with temperature), has even more room for improvement with simple changes (adding more sheets of palladium coated mesh), etc. For a basic LENR experiment, it seems ideal. But the fact is that our community is rapidly organizing to perform multiple replications on our own - without the assistance of Google being needed. For example, Alan ran out of nickel mesh sheets and has had to order forty more! This is a project that we, as a community, giving a huge amount of credit to Mizuno and Jed Rothwell, can claim as our own. After a few successful replications have taken place, I'm certain this will go viral. Some naysayers may say that's unlikely even with a few successful replications. However, I will remind them that there has NEVER been an easy and guaranteed to work EVER SINGLE TIME recipe for LENR that has been shared with the world. Perhaps what has came closest has been the Ni-LiAlH4 combination which requires a fair bit of tinkering to produce excess heat and then only does so some of the time. Even so, probably a dozen teams attempted to replicate. With a recipe like Mizuno's that will likely be easily repeatable and perhaps even more powerful, I expect ten times as many replication attempts.


    So if Google can only choose one experiment or project, why let them take all the glory when this might be the first chance the LENR community has had to come together, put aside our differences, and make something AMAZING HAPPEN that could help erase some of the self generated black marks that have made people run away screaming (for example Rossi's antics)?


    I would propose unless Google can tackle multiple projects, we keep the Mizuno replications for our community and circles of allies - not hand it off to a multi-billion dollar corporation.


    What would be more appropriate for Google is to build a reactor that utilizes a tuned, resonant circuit to produce a complex space charge or macro-EVO during the negative resistance regime of a plasma discharge. By doing so, they will isolate the ACTIVE AGENT of LENR and a hundred years worth of exotic energy technologies. For example, in modern times, Randell Mills has built a system, the Suncell, that has isolated this active agent by using the negative resistance regime. His original Suncells were burning holes through Tungsten walls they were so powerful! Once he was able to produce a stable complex space charge, his output would soar through the roof! Now, his idea is that hydrinos are producing the energy in his system. But the reality is the phenomena of the negative resistance regime has been producing excess energy in a wide variety of systems. This phenomena is NOT isolated to the Suncell. Andrea Rossi's E-Cat SK (which will probably never see the light of day) is utilizing the same phenomena! Nikola Tesla used it in his spark gaps, Thomas Henry Moray used it in his finely tuned, resonant discharge tubes, etc.


    The proposal I'm suggesting would offer Google more than simply a system that can produce copious excess heat. It will open a doorway to another way of looking at physics and how plasma systems can self organize to allow for a wide array of WONDERS that are beyond imagination.

  • Quote

    With a recipe like Mizuno's that will likely be easily repeatable


    Let’s hope so. But I suspect this will not be so. History is not on our side. And there are a load of variables replicating this ‘simple’ experiment. And I suspect some, perhaps many, of the replicators, will not be exact copies, even if it using their own custom reaction chamber, or nickel mesh that’s not identical, different heating methods, etc. Any changed variable, increases the risk the replication will fail. I hope, and I think Jed agrees, the replication should be as exact as possible. Preferably using Mizuno’s own prepared mesh (to reduce the variables a bit more). Did I see Jed has said Mizuno was willing to sell his prepared mesh?


    I also worry that anyone in the existing CF community replicating the result will, like the whole pile of existing evidence the community of researchers has produced over 30 year, they will have great difficulty getting noticed or taken seriously. Whereas if Google can replicate it, especially after the Nature article, I think people everywhere will take notice. And it won’t be Google getting the glory (other than being bold enough to do the replication) it will be Mizuno.


    IMO let’s do the ‘simple’ thing first. Prove the foundation before building on it.

  • I would agree it would be Mizuno but it would be on firmer ground if someone capable, for example a scientist from IH or a university had visited Mizuno and had been taken through all the measurement steps (never mind the construction and preparation steps) live. This person should also have the right to "take a screwdriver" to it. That really needs to be done, regardless of how much we may trust Dr. Mizuno, before huge efforts and expenditures are spent based on the existing reports. And to anticipate Jed, I have found no major flaws in the reports. It still should be done. A report is paper, not real life.


    It tells me something that there is little or no appreciation of this issue and of the simple heat meter test for the larger reactor in this community.

  • https://www.nationalgeographic…entists-may-revive-quest/


    Just a reminder of what this is all about. Some quotes:


    "The researchers then had several months to brainstorm experiments, which they collectively whittled down to three priorities."


    "The third experiment followed up on results reported by Los Alamos National Laboratory in the 1990s: that an electrified palladium wire surrounded by a cloud of electrically charged deuterium made certain fusion byproducts, specifically an excess of a heavy, radioactive sibling of hydrogen called tritium.

    When Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory physicist Thomas Schenkel and his team tested the claim, they didn't find a spike of excess tritium. But while fusion reactions are still extremely rare at low energies, they found that fusion occurred a hundred to 160 times more frequently in their experiment than they expected. Schenkel's team describes the early results in a preprint posted to the arXiv.

    “When I see a factor of a hundred discrepancy between my data [and] established theory, that usually means it's interesting,” he says. “I feel I’d like to poke into that.”"


    "Regardless of Google's future investments, the researchers it has supported say they're interested in continuing the work on its basic scientific merits."

  • Let me make it clear that Mizuno and I would be thrilled if the people from Google wish to replicate this experiment. We will help them any way we can. Possibly by supplying prepared meshes. I can't promise that, but we will make every effort.


    HOWEVER, if they are not enthusiastic about doing this, I would not want them to do it. It is never a good idea for a scientist to try to replicate an experiment he does not think will work, or that he does not think is worth the effort. A lukewarm approach will fail.


    Some top-notch people are attempting replications. They are enthusiastic. It may take weeks, or months, or possibly years for them to do a good replication and reach a firm conclusion, but they will probably stick to it. So we will have an answer sooner or later. Google is more than welcome to join this group, but if they don't feel like joining it, or they do not have the time or people available, we will probably get an answer anyway.


    I am sure the Google people are skilled in the art and they have safety equipment, so they will not accidentally ingest toxic nickel dust dust. I do not wish to assist amateurs, or encourage them to try this. It is dangerous. They will probably make a mistake and get a meaningless result.



    Turning to my personal perspective --


    If I were them, I would want to be among the first to understand this in depth, so I would do a replication. That is a business decision, not scientific. Also, Mizuno and I have seen much more data than anyone else, so we have more confidence in the results than someone from Google reading those two reports. If they want to take a wait-and-see approach, that's understandable. If they have technical questions, they should ask me directly. It may be some time before I can translate them and get an answer. Mizuno is extremely busy.

  • JedRothwell I must admit I did not consider the language issue. Still, there are translators. What is the obsession with sucking eggs? I'm pretty sure it's not a Japanese thing. To clarify what I meant (probably for the last time, you will be pleased to know), I do not understand why more people in this community did not comment to say that using a simple heat meter/heat flux transducer placed on the exterior of the large powerful reactor was a good idea. To me, this can only mean that people either don't understand how such a thing works (extremely well, quickly, cheaply and reliably) or that they don't get why some rapid if slightly sketchy verification of the immense claim made for the larger device is important.


    By analogy, it should have never been a priority for Rossi to make better, more efficient or hotter ecat reactors. All he had to do to become world famous and an instant billionaire was to prove that the original, small, supposedly steam making ecat actually worked. All the supposedly famous people who worked on it missed this and allowed Rossi to continue to make unfounded claims and to studiously avoid definitive testing. Again, I am not saying you and Mizuno are remotely like Rossi. But coincidentally perhaps, like Rossi, you refused a simple rapid test which would solidify the claim that the large reactor makes a comparatively immense amount of power. If you did not expect for people to ask for verification of that, you should not have shown it.

  • HOWEVER, if they are not enthusiastic about doing this, I would not want them to do it. It is never a good idea for a scientist to try to replicate an experiment he does not think will work, or that he does not think is worth the effort. A lukewarm approach will fail.


    Some top-notch people are attempting replications. They are enthusiastic. It may take weeks, or months, or possibly years for them to do a good replication and reach a firm conclusion, but they will probably stick to it. So we will have an answer sooner or later. Google is more than welcome to join this group, but if they don't feel like joining it, or they do not have the time or people available, we will probably get an answer anyway.


    I am sure the Google people are skilled in the art and they have safety equipment, so they will not accidentally ingest toxic nickel dust dust. I do not wish to assist amateurs, or encourage them to try this. It is dangerous. They will probably make a mistake and get a meaningless result.



    Trust me, based on our conversations, I do not doubt that he, and his fellow team members will be enthusiastic...on whatever project they decide to tackle next. Which experiment that will be, understandably has not yet been determined, but if it is Mizuno/Rothwell, they will put all they have into it. This is a 40 member team, and many of them young and eager, so not much motivating needed to pump this bunch up. You can see that in the one comment I copied above. Point them in the right direction (our job), get out of the way, and they will do the rest.


    If the preliminary Mizuno results are born out by then, I am not sure if they (Google) will jump on the bandwagon. Like many others, including you have said; if that happens the whole world will be running to the labs. So why follow that crowd? He has not mentioned anything to me...other than he enjoys reading the forum, but he is a smart guy, and I suspect he is weighing his options about Mizuno, whatever the results may be, just as we are.


    A little background about Matt Trevithick for the rest of you readers: He has been involved with LENR since the early days, familiar with most of the old guard/they him, so knows where the bodies are buried. He has been a part of the "community" far longer than most here. This is a short clip written by Infinite Energy Magazines Marriane Macy, about his participation at the 2013 ICCF:


    "On Tuesday morning, the Entrepreneurship and Innovation Panel featured Matt Trevithick, Dr. Mark Johnson and Doug Moorehead. Venture capitalist Trevithick (Venrock) related that one of his formulative experiences was when he found out he was related to Richard Trevithick, the inventor of the locomotive, a realization which may have presaged a career in venture capital for new technology. “I went to MIT in 1988 as a freshman, and in the spring of my freshman year was the Fleischmann-Pons announcement,” he related. At the same time, he was studying quantum mechanics under the brilliant Peter Hagelstein. A short time after graduation, he started and sold software companies. In 2002, he worked on Project Cobalt with Dennis

    Cravens, Dennis Letts, Michael McKubre and Peter Hagelstein to stimulate LENR-produced power using a laser.


    In December 2002, they thought they saw an excess heat phenomenon, which they presented at ICCF10. It was early in the development to form a company based on a hopedfor technology. For Matt, that ended experiments in coldfusion, but as a result of contacts he made working in this area he found himself “tapped on the shoulder by Venrock,”

    a top VC firm that has invested $2.6 billion in 450 companies since 1969.


    Accordingly, he projected a number of slides with messages of much inspiration for the LENR community: “Goodnews! Resources are ready! The smart money in New York,

    Washington and Silicon Valley is paying attention to LENR"

  • Like many others, including you have said; if that happens the whole world will be running to the labs. So why follow that crowd?


    From a scientific point of view, that makes sense. If it is widely replicated, rather than join the stampede it might be better to sit back, take stock of the situation, and try to do a variation that you think may work better. I get that.


    However, insofar as Google is a business and they are doing this with the goal of developing a technology and making money, I think that would be a disastrous mistake. You want to get in as quickly as possible, replicate and learn all you can about the existing system. Then you want to patent the low hanging fruit before others do. Who cares whether 10,000 other people are frantically looking for it? Who cares about originality or creativity? If you find the fruit first, and you file for a patent first, you win; they lose.


    I am sure there is TONS of low hanging fruit. This is nowhere near optimized.


    Not going after the original design would be similar to the mistakes made by some minicomputer and start up microcomputer companies in the early 1980s. Everyone started making IBM compatibles. But some companies such as Tandy, Data General, and NCR decided to make a somewhat-compatible machine. One that was actually better than IBMs. Some of those machines were better. But they didn't sell, because they weren't fully compatible. There is no reward for originality or creativity in business. The only reward is for making the product the customer wants.

  • Well, getting beyond parables, and analogies, the way I see it is that Google has made us part of their team. They gave us a chore to do, and if we do not get it done, we will be fired. Then we have to go apply for unemployment. :)


    Understandably, they do not want excuses from us for not accomplishing our assigned task of whittling the list down to 3 (was 1 until you made your point), anymore than the GPM wants to hear excuses from his fellow team members for blowing, or blowing up an assignment.

  • Researchers at SRI International have issued a technical progress report covering their review and independent validation of Brillouin Energys LENR Reactor.

    "We" can not ignore them, because they report constant COP values over 2.

    https://brillouinenergy.com/test-results



    Even if Brillouin Energy won't cooperate with Google Research, i think the technical report of SRI, combined with other papers, gives enough information to try a replication.


    https://brillouinenergy.com/ne…/SRI_Technical_Report.pdf

  • I would definitely agree Mizuno’s equipment is the best option at this time.


    It seems resonant to me that the opportunity to test this comes up just at the tine we have the details of the set up for a test released from Mizuno.


    We also have the ideal interface with Jed. His contact with Mizuno, his long history in LENR and his ability to speak Japanese. It’s a really good opportunity that just opens at this time. A perfect match you might say. Maybe too good to miss.


    I would like to see Mizuno’s method verified. (We should bare in mind it might not be easy to do right off the bat but certainly worth pursuing)


    It maybe the work and approach with this could establish trust between the team and the community about aims, motives which would be fair I think.


    The need to verify the technology out weighs many things in my opinion. Not for business opportunity or positive belief or skeptical proof reasons. But simply because if there is any chance for a positive result the world could really be helped by it. For that in these times, we should never stop searching.


    I would also like to see:


    Holmlid work verified (I suppose this might be difficult but I wonder if Zeiner’s work with one of Mizuno’s prototype’s can give an opening there?)


    Russ and Alan’s work verified when ready. (But I wonder if he is already getting verification by other groups?)


    Mizuno’s work looks like the best first opportunity but I wonder if it is also worth making a priority list of follow ups including others?


    To get in the frame. I would suggest they see a working prototype before starting. I wonder if that would be possible.


    I would also suggest verification of other potential LENR related aspects than just thermal. Perhaps different particle measurement methods, radiation and apparent transmutations, isotopic ratio changes of fuel, presence of helium and other gases, magnetic fields and charges etc. but I suppose thermal must still be the highest priority.


  • Problem with Brillouin is that their "Q Pulse" system is proprietary/secret. Without it, the reaction does not work. They are not going to divulge it either. They need to protect their IP to make themselves attractive to investors. No IP, no money. I would think all the researchers now tied up (except Mizuno) with IH/CP/LENRInvest, or going it alone are holding something back for the same reason.