Production of fuel with COP above 1 (electric energy input/heat energy output) patent about to expire in 2021

The surplus of energy observed during underwater sparks may be closely related to cavitation overunity and also so-called sonofusion.

The HHO molecule has a molecular memory because it it polarized!

So any energy whether its sound, light or any other EM radiation makes these HHO's vibrate at their resonant frequencies! Hence water can be 'magnetized' purely by the fact that the delta +charge on the SP3 orbitals and delta minus charges on the tetrahedral SP3 molecular structure. This is the origiin of magnegas since water can be magnetized momentarily!

Please stop trying to hack my computer TG this is all public domain knowledge. Mind your own business or I will crash all your computer systems on the internet,!!!!!

So - to continue - building a cold fusion reactor is as simple as E = mc to the power n where n can range from 0 to infinity! Work the rest out for yourselves and Fleischmann and Pons were correct!!!!!! Put that in your pipes and smoke it!!!

Quote from Dr Richard

Please stop trying to hack my computer TG this is all public domain knowledge.

Buy an arduino rom based computer. Everytime you restart it is there again , new unchanged. All data you keep on a memory card.

Quote from Zephir_AWT

The surplus of energy observed during underwater sparks may be closely related to cavitation overunity and also so-called sonofusion.

Yes, cavitation can create the same overunity effects as electric arcs. Personally, the example of ultrasound to overunity heat I like most was "Predicable and Reproducible Heat" by Roger Stringham in ICCF-7. That is because it's not sonofusion which would be heat produced at the same time the metal is sonicated. Rather, the excess energy is preserved as a fuel in the sonicated metal. The "afterheat" can later be releases by heating the metal in a water bath.

Quote from Dr Richard

The HHO molecule has a molecular memory because it it polarized!

Before Santilli coined HHO, he was investigating AquaFuel, a syngas generated by an electric arc between carbon electrodes in water. NASA provided a chemical analysis of AquaFuel, and the fuel value of Aquafuel was compared to gasoline by a third party, a small engine manufacturer. I have reviewed Santilli's report on AquaFuel. I did a mass balance based on the NASA data which shows that 2.1% of the nitrogen in Aquafuel originates from nuclear transmutation. The energy/torque in fuel test was about 3x the actual "chemically calculated "fuel value of Aquafuel based on it chemical composition. Which means that about 66% of the energy of Aquafuel in that fuel test has no known chemical origin. I contend then that the transmutation reaction that produced nitrogen also produce a fuel, like the sonication of water does as in the example above by Stringham. That energy remains with the water produced fuel, so it is unlikely that it is due to polarization of water as HHO which is temporary. Further, the magnitude of this energy which can't be defined by chemical composition makes the hypothesis seem ridiculous that the energy is preserved as magnet bonds.

The AquaFuel patent is also expired.

Взаимодействие с другими людьми

Quote from Dr Richard

So any energy whether its sound, light or any other EM radiation makes these HHO's vibrate at their resonant frequencies! Hence water can be 'magnetized' purely by the fact that the delta +charge on the SP3 orbitals and delta minus charges on the tetrahedral SP3 molecular structure. This is the origiin of magnegas since water can be magnetized momentarily!

A wonderful thought ... A small touch ... This is a hint for you, my inquisitive physicists ... Photons, ultrasound are a photon wave, a solar battery, a cluster of free electrons that forms a temporary magnet - all these are related concepts - this is one and the same physics ... Here is an article - my analysis of the results of the work of the electrolyzer physicist - Kanarev F.M. - it is written in Russian - there is no time to translate it -

LESSON-21. ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS OF TRANSMUTATIONAL ELECTROLYSIS OF WATER.doc ", January 13, 2019.doc" - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/GsTU/54eMyxJ6F

"REGISTRATION OF HIGH ENERGY RADIATION.doc" - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/EAv2/HWR4ZTFXk

And then my other article, which is surprisingly connected with the first one - this is for those who are able to analyze - "Laser against radiation, December 8, 2018.doc" - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/ny8w/H8gtQFgf3

Cherepanov2020 : Could you directly link documents not pages that contain documents....You can also upload them inside your post!

Quote from Dr Richard

So any energy whether its sound, light or any other EM radiation makes these HHO's vibrate at their resonant frequencies! Hence water can be 'magnetized' purely by the fact that the delta +charge on the SP3 orbitals and delta minus charges on the tetrahedral SP3 molecular structure. This is the origiin of magnegas since water can be magnetized momentarily!

You have provided a reasonable explanation why it takes less energy to make HHO gas than to hydrolyze water. But I would argue that that type of HHO gas can't produce over unity results. There is no source for the extra energy. In contrast when a magnecule is created by energy injected into giant nuclear resonance, the magnetism is much larger because it is not based on particle spin but is truly based on relativity. Further, it requires a significantly greater energy input per atom. This type of magnetic atom isn't bonding with electric forces but truly with magnetic forces. Hence, there are no orbital bonding rules for this type of magnecule. Only this type of magnecules were assumed, to prove via mass balance and stoichiometry that a fusion/fission sequence occurs. Not the type you or Santilli describe. Hence, per the proofs I have done, HHO gas over unity requires that nitrogen be produced from the fusion/fission sequence I have identified.

To be as plain as possible: not all brown gas, HHO gas, hydrolysis gas etc are equal. The over unity energy does not come from chemistry is comes from nuclear reaction. I would not expect any over unity effect without traces of nitrogen produced by transmutation.

Quote from Curbina

With a COP of 3.58, the so called "self looping" with a genset is still out of the question, because the nominal efficiency of 20% of gensets would require a COP of 5 to be able just to make the electrolyzer run from the genset output alone, without any additional load. But, a fuel cell, with an efficiency of 50%, could be enough to self loop an electrolyzer with a COP of 3.58, it would be enough for self looping and even an additional load.

A self looping system that works is GEET. One has to get the plasma started on metal catalyst which requires the engine to start with some regular fuel source to get the catalyst hot. After that the exhaust of the engine heats the metal catalyst across which a mostly water fuel passes which runs the engine etc with recycle. This works because the nuclear produced fuel is not complete consumed in one past through the engine. A wise person uses some carbon fuel to keep the metal and the engine from oxidizing.

The overall equation is 12 H₂O goes to 2N₂ and 5O₂. In the literature about GEET you will find a claim that the exhaust is oxygen enriched, as expected per the equation above. The above equation was derived for AquaFuel but should be general for all water based fuels producing over unity results. If the nuclear reaction was producing energy rather than some form of mass, one can calculate from the above equation that more that 30 MeV is expected per N atom produced. Note that 2.3% of AquaFuel was Nitrogen produced from transmutation. Hence, only a small fraction of expected energy is recovered.

The fuel from the nuclear reaction can pass through metal and out of the system. For Joe Cell type system's there is a claim the fuel from the Joe cell can pass through metal and then into the engine. Then the engine runs not on hydrogen or synfuel but on air and some unknown that passes through metal from the Joe cell.

Quote from Curbina

I haven’t seen a GEET reactor able to run in pure water.

I read somewhere that improvements to GEET were thought to be due to getting more plasma on the catalysis. I suspect that oxidization of the catalysis reduces the glow plasma induced by heat transfer and static friction. If so then a reductant like carbon is part of the essential process of maintaining the proper redox state in the presence of water.

Carbon just increases the surface area for catalysts (KFeO2/ZrO2) to interact with substrates, D20, UDD (Rydberg Matter found in dark matter/energy in the OUTER HALO of the known Universe). All you really need is a polarized YAG laser beam to get the party started!! Or just read all of Leif's papers, they are brilliant and he deserves the next Nobel prize in nuclear and astro-physics!!!

All engine 's running they have Dr Richard Liftoff... next the TLI ( trans lunar injection )

Quote from Dr Richard

Carbon just increases the surface area for catalysts (KFeO2/ZrO2) to interact with substrates, D20, UDD (Rydberg Matter found in dark matter/energy in the OUTER HALO of the known Universe). All you really need is a polarized YAG laser beam to get the party started!! Or just read all of Leif's papers, they are brilliant and he deserves the next Nobel prize in nuclear and astro-physics!!!

Quote from Frogfall

Back to glamour...

Last night I tried giving a (zoom) presentation about LENR to members of my local Makerspace group, as part of our regular monthly meeting.

I get a very positive response. I start with "You may have heard of cold fusion." Then I explain Richardson's AquaFuel or Aqualene. It's a great story of a wonderful new fuel that gets patents, shopped all over (including to NASA) but is ignored because it's too simple and defies explanation. A new hope rises when R. Santilli publishes about AquaFuel and begins looking at nuclear fusion as an explanation. Santilli produces energy using deuterium, a known fusion fuel but he can't prevail against the US patent office. The patent office sends anyone will something like cold fusion a half inch thick document that says officially that "cold fusion" is a hoax, then refuses to examine any arguments unless you have lots of money or political power to push for examination. Further, Santilli is attacked by internet journalists against whose lies he can obtain no justice.

I get involved at this point in story, I was able to do a mass balance and stoichiometry on Santilli's data and on AquaFuel. I explain that these are common tools that a chemical engineer uses to prove what happens. For a chemical engineer there is very little uncertainty that nuclear fusion happens under conditions that current science would consider too cold for nuclear fusion. I explain I recently produced a video to explain these results. The video is currently privately available (I may share it with you if you provide me a gmail address and I am convinced you are out to create lies against which I will find no justice.)

I explain I have not yet improved on Richardson's AquaFuel. However, even if the world started making and using AquaFuel, that would make a remarkable change in available energy. This technology is off patent and therefore available to who so ever is skilled in the art.

There are several companies who are producing fuel like AquaFuel or producing energy by an electrical or laser driven means. It is very likely that each of these companies are developing the same energy source. We know a lot about this energy source. I have made a lot of progress since filing a patent and being rejected without reasonable examination.

I have made a total of 5 videos to explain the science with graphs, images and simplified math. I expect soon to finally get a chance to present and defend this work at one or more of my local universities.

All that should be needed to get the break though to public use and public funding for research and develop with the international attention this new energy source deserves is a fair examination of the data before knowledgeable persons who will testify about what they honestly know.

Drgenek

Thank you so much for this remarkable piece of news. Did you make any experimental tests of Aquafuel, or was your work on the theoretical underpinnings of Richardson's Aquafuel? And BTW, do you have a link for the relevant patents?

Aqualene / AquaFuel at Rex Research

Promotion seemed to start at around the same time as the strange demise of Stan Meyer.