Safire eyes commercialization within 5 years, with launch of new company Aureon Energy!

Quote from Alan Smith

A key ingredient btw might be nitrogen.

Could be because of an attempt to better control the energy generating process.

The Sapphire cell likely was not designed specifically to this energy generating process but more to perform a wide range of experiments investigating the Sun's process.

If my assumptions are correct a few key processes occur in one space and almost at the same time.

To controll all of this more or less independantly will be a big challenge.

If the aim of Aureon Energy is to specifically develop energy generators, the design will require a lot of alterations compared to the demonstrated reactors.

Quote from Alan Smith

Interesting paper-

free floating ball lightning.pdf

Just one more brain farth...

Resolution of the Sternglass/Einstein dilemma by Oreshko's paper? Simple, clear experimental evidence

Quote from Dr Richard

Resolution of the Sternglass/Einstein dilemma by Oreshko's paper? Simple, clear experimental evidence

Is this the part you mean :"Sternglass had worked with Einstein’s theory of relativity, and had arrived at solutions to its equations that depicted stable, orbiting configurations of an electron and its antimatter counterpart, the positron. He interpreted these orbiting pairs as being equivalent to protons and neutrons. Today we understand these models to be creatively fascinating, but also incorrect (quarks make up protons and neutrons)."

http://nautil.us/issue/7/waste/einsteins-lost-hypothesis

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik…_energies_of_the_elements

Isn't the case as far I know caesium, sodium and potassium are all much lower in work function than nitrogen. Are you comparing it solely to other room temperature gases?

Quote from Alan Smith

Rob Woudenberg

The reason I mention nitrogen is because it has a very low work function - it ion ionises very readily. I think that is part of the trick-, it's not a diluent to cool the reaction, but an accelerant.

I must inquire, nitrogen has a low work function compared to what?

Alan Smith

Ok I see, so it's not quite water on the fire but it isn't gasoline either. A mild dilute accelerant. Is it the best gas to use or mostly because of the abundance and commonality of nitrogen there is little reason to use a gas with a higher ionization potential or lower work function?

Quote from Drgenek

(quarks make up protons and neutrons).

This is SM nonsense: As we explained many times before: Quarks are not particles they are a resonance of protons/neutrons and because of this cannot make up protons/neutrons.

This is the correct interpretation of the experiments not the nonsense you read - reproduced in countless papers/textbooks.

If you don't believe; Then please tell the world the exact mass of an up/down quark...

Quote from Wyttenbach

This is SM nonsense: As we explained many times before: Quarks are not particles they are a resonance of protons/neutrons and because of this cannot make up protons/neutrons.

This is the correct interpretation of the experiments not the nonsense you read - reproduced in countless papers/textbooks.

If you don't believe; Then please tell the world the exact mass of an up/down quark...

Look at the quote. I did not say it. That's SM. An alternative presented both by Pharis Williams and Sternglass/Einstein is quarkless.

Quote from Alan Smith

I suspect that it actually has a dual function, being catalytic on the one hand, and a moderator on the other, moderator rather than diluent. I have no solid theoretical vasis for this belief, but have formed it from my and ex-member Directors combing of the literature and Safire's YT channel.

I suspect you are right. If the double layers in Safire and in results reported by Oreshko's paper act to sum energy as proposed by Sternglass/Einstein, Nitrogen works because hydrogen will ionize before the nitrogen, thus letting the nitrogen help with insulation of charges between layers. It will be interesting to see what particles/radiations might be absorbed by a nitrogen modulator.

Quote from Alan Smith

Safire video- new in part- The latter part is more technical.

Given the main reactions in Safire are the same as in my pending patent, then I provide the following figure as a suggestion of the origin of these elements in Safire. These reaction cascades were developed to provide the explain the overall reaction which reaction was proven by mass balance and stoichiometry. I have challenged you (if you have skills to do so) to replicate the mass balance and stoichiometry using the same data I did.

The reaction cascade for main and side reactions is shown in figure 6.

Main Cascade

1) D → n + p

2) O¹⁶ + n→ O¹⁷

3) D → n + p

4) O¹⁷ + n→ O¹⁸

5) D + O¹⁸→ F²⁰

6) F²⁰→ Ne²⁰ + β^-

7) Ne²⁰+ D → Na²²

Na²² + D → Mg²⁴

9) Mg²⁴+ D → Al²⁶

10) Al²⁶+ D → Si²⁸

11) Si²⁸ → N¹⁴

Side Cascade

1a) D → n + p

2a) O¹⁶ + n→ O¹⁷

3a) D → n + p

4a) O¹⁷ + n→ O¹⁸

5a) D → n + p

6a) O¹⁸ + n→ O¹⁹

7a) O¹⁹ → F¹⁹ + β^-

8a) 2x [ F¹⁹+ D → Ne²¹]

9a) 2x [Ne²¹+ D → Na²³]

10a) 2x [Na²³+ D → Mg²⁵]

11a) 2x [Mg²⁵+ D → Al²⁷]

12a) Al²⁷ + Al²⁷ → Fe⁵⁴

13a) Fe⁵⁴ → [Co⁵⁴ + β^-]

14a) [Co⁵⁴ + β^-]→27 D + β^-

Deuterium can be made from hydrogen but disappears by reactions. I am open to discuss the origin of the elements not in the above reaction cascades but reported by Safire and elements that Safire didn't report but should be there per the above.

Every time I tried to remove the smiley it came back. Hope it is not too distracting.

Quote from Alan Smith

The other principal gases they use are Argon and Nitrogen. If only 10% of your cascade is happening, they are getting some very high outputs.

For the mass balance and stoichiometry in the aforementioned calculations, one can also use pressure and volume data combined with the mass defect due to the overall reaction to calculate an expected energy yield. For that experiment that value is 95.6 million BTU. The reported measured BTU above the input value was only 2871.

In theory if we don't see the expected delta free energy, then energy must be in some other form. Applying that model to sun, one proposes that the free energy is recovered from that other form between the sun's surface and the various layers of the sun's atmosphere. It seems most probably that strong electromagnetic storms of the sun are vital to this conversion. Appling that conjecture to Safire, then currents in the plasma are vital to the fusion yield.

Quote from Alan Smith

Safire video- new in part- The latter part is more technical.

External Content www.youtube.com

Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.

Display all external content

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.

Yea I was watching and in the beginning when every other word was electrical or electricity I was heading to dream land in a trans-like state. After I didn't stay till the technical part I got an epiphany. No, it wasn't the electrical universe interpretation of the cosmos, but the idea that the electron orbit is the desired source of the energy. I need to finish the video. Well that's how I saw it.

Releasing a view of the cosmos taking planetary to galactic scale plasma, chemical and electromagnetic effects more seriously in conjunction with gravitational/thermonuclear effects. Without going full mythological EU, this is something we should fully get behind.