ARPA-E LENR Workshop Oct 21-22 2021

  • I know Shestopalov and Filimonenko well from Russian conferences. Maybe he was right, I do not know, but now new energy must come from ourselves and without geology they will not be able to do something, so they need to study spherical nodules, they are paleoshar lightning formed in reservoir conditions!


    External Content www.youtube.com
    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.

    Нефть - это кровь планеты, надо сделать модель планеты и мы получим генератор Тарасенко, эта энергия покорит вселенную! :lenr:

  • Yes Louis Pasteur was a good and smart researcher when he was young. But he became the great PASTEUR in his 60's.

    ..

    For further reflection are the words of Louis Pasteur, in his last speech, given upon being awarded the Diamond Cross of Saint Anne from the Czar of Russia. Louis Pasteur addresses his words to the students in the crowd, his voice ringing with conviction…


    “You young men, doctors and scientists of the future, do not let your selves be tainted by a barren skepticism, nor discouraged by the sadness of certain hours that creep over nations. Do not become angry at your opponents, for no scientific theory has ever been accepted without opposition. Live in the serene peace of libraries and laboratories.


    Say to yourselves first: ‘What have I done for my instruction?’ and as you gradually advance: ‘What am I accomplishing?’ until the time comes when you may have the immense happiness of thinking that you have contributed in some way to the welfare and progress of mankind.” (Vallery-Radot 1901, vol. 2, pp. 297–298)

    Cold Fusion NASA LENR part three Spacebound and Earthbound Transportation

    Cold Fusion NASA LENR part three Spacebound and Earthbound Transportation – COLD FUSION NOW!

    31July2012

    Cold Fusion – LENR Engineering

    NASA states that the science and engineering encompassing cold fusion LENR is “not a narrow band set of physical phenomena” and that “devices are being engineered in real time”. (link)


    With 3-D printing and nano engineering being utilized to create the lattice; we will see many unique devices entering the marketplace, both thermal and electrical (hardy, robust, and scalable), for every imaginable application.


    One might posit that two categories of ‘cold fusion’ devices will gain hold in their respective markets:

    • LENR/Thermal – heat without a carbon footprint
    • LENR/Electric – electricity without a generator


    Co-generation (where both heat and electricity is needed) will likely utilize LENR thermal devices along with electrical generators. - gbgoble2012

  • This is according to the theory developed by the project’s theoretical physicist, Vladimir Pines, Ph.D, of PineSci. from NASA LCF


    "On the Role of Nuclear Binding Energy in Understanding Cold Nuclear Fusion"

    On the Role of Nuclear Binding Energy in Understanding Cold Nuclear Fusion « Journal of Nuclear Physics

    Preprints (http://www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 11 March 2021

    U.V.S. Seshavatharam1

    and S. Lakshminarayana2

    1 Honorary faculty, I-SERVE, Survey no-42, Hitech city, Hyderabad-84,Telangana, INDIA

    2 Dept. of Nuclear Physics, Andhra University, Visakhapatnam-03,AP, INDIA


    Orcid numbers : 0000-0002-1695-6037 (and) 0000-0002-8923-772X


    Abstract:

    Following the concept of strong interaction, theoretically, fusion of proton seems to increase the binding energy of final atom by 8.8 MeV. Due to Coulombic repulsion, asymmetry effect, pairing effect and other nuclear effects, final atom is forced to choose a little bit of binding energy less than 8.8 MeV and thus it is able to release left over binding energy in the form of internal kinetic energy or external thermal energy. Thus, in cold fusion, heat release to occur, binding energy difference of final atom and base atom seems to be less than 8.8 MeV. Qualitatively, energy released during cold fusion seems to be approximately equal to 8.8 MeV minus the difference of binding energy of final and base atoms. Based on this idea, under normal conditions, for the case of 2He4, fusion of four protons can liberate (35.2-28.3)=6.9 MeV and it is 3.5 times less than the current estimates. Point to be understood is that, lesser the binding energy of final atom, higher the liberated thermal energy and vice versa. With a.suitable catalyst and sufficient hydrogen under suitable pressure, if reactor’s temperature is maintained at (1000 to 1500) 0C, there seems a lot of scope for a chain reaction of cold fusion in which light isotopes transform to their next stage with increased proton number or mass number and liberate safe and clean heat energy continuously. By arranging 4 to 6 reactors and charging them periodically in tandem, required thermal energy can be produced continuously. In this new direction, by carefully selecting the base isotope and its corresponding catalyst, experiments can be conducted and ground reality of cold fusion can be understood at various temperature and pressure conditions.


    ALS0


    2. Current encouraging progress and

    upcoming mega project funds


    Another interesting point to

    be noted is that, right from the beginning, NASA team has shown lot of interest in cold fusion techniques and in 2020, published two very important papers [32,33] in

    the prestigious journal ‘Physical Review C’ paving a way for accomplishment of cold nuclear fusion with ‘deuterated’ Erbium atoms by a new technique called

    ‘lattice confinement’. Following these points and considering the main objective of generating clean energy, in 2020 last quarter, European Union funded 10 million Euros for two cold nuclear fusion projects for a period of 4 years.

  • From the available ARPA-E workshop materials:


    Brillouin and Clean Planet both aiming at boilers, both applying H2 ,copper, nickel and a 'dielectric' layer (CaO in case of CP, possibly Brillouin similar).


    [EDIT] according to this Brillouin patent application yttrium stabilized zirconia will be the preferred dielectric layer.


    Very sad to hear that Brillouin's commercialization has been delayed for more than a decade by the frustrations with patenting their IP at the USPTO (Godes's youtube video).
    Most of their technology is now maintained as trade secrets which makes it very difficult to commercialize due to easy reverse engineering.

  • Very sad to hear that Brillouin's commercialization has been delayed for more than a decade by the frustrations with patenting their IP at the USPTO

    I heard Page recently privately said no patents, no investment money. Investors want and need IP protection for an ROI. It has been a problem for 32 years.


    At least we now have significant government funding here in the US (NASA,US Navy, maybe now ARPA), Europe, and Japan (NEDO).


    Seems based on Simon Brink 's post yesterday though, that not everyone is hamstrung for lack of money. Maybe he found a benefactor like Celani did. .

  • From the available ARPA-E workshop materials:


    Brillouin and Clean Planet both aiming at boilers, both applying H2 ,copper, nickel and a 'dielectric' layer (CaO in case of CP, possibly Brillouin similar).


    Very sad to hear that Brillouin's commercialization has been delayed for more than a decade by the frustrations with patenting their IP at the USPTO (Godes's youtube video).
    Most of their technology is now maintained as trade secrets which makes it very difficult to commercialize due to easy reverse engineering.

    Sounds like a good excuse. Partner with an established player like Clean Planet has done.

  • I heard Page recently privately said no patents, no investment money. Investors want and need IP protection for an ROI. It has been a problem for 32 years.


    At least we now have significant government funding here in the US (NASA,US Navy, maybe now ARPA), Europe, and Japan (NEDO).


    Seems based on Simon Brink 's post yesterday though, that not everyone is hamstrung for lack of money. Maybe he found a benefactor like Celani did. .

    The patent of Biosearch LLC is strong, it is definitely a priority, and it is still valid in many countries.


  • The USPTO is a government body and therefore could be directed to change their policy.

    The solution then is a political one.

    The Biden administration are looking for solutions and breakthroughs to aid the US meet its climate commitments.

    Therefore a suitable approach should be knocking on an open door, best chance in years!

  • Very sad to hear that Brillouin's commercialization has been delayed for more than a decade by the frustrations with patenting their IP at the USPTO (Godes's youtube video).
    Most of their technology is now maintained as trade secrets ....

    Maybe intentionally as a result of strategic interest?

    Just imagine if this boiler setup could be applied (right away) to power a conventional (small) submarine or underwater drone?

  • They need a new patent agent. Writing a patent that coivers their IP without revealing everything is not difficult. For example they use a variant of the Superwave technology (Irv Dardik and Co) for triggering AFAIK. There is no need to describe it exactly or give waveforms, 'The heater voltage is varied between 50v and 250v with an average voltage of 100v at an average frequency of 200Hz.' Is enough for a patent - but try picking the detail out of that to reproduce it and you are in for a long job.

  • I have the impression (from the youtube video) that the issue is particular with US patent applications that refer to LENR of 'cold fusion' or any nuclear reactions that have not been confirmed and proven by sufficient scientists.


    At the time Robert Godes (Brillouin) filed his first patent applications (around 2005), LENR phenomena as claimed by e.g. NASA were not available yet at that. The current situation to file US patent applications seems much improved therefore. Unfortunately too late for Brillouin since the original patent applications by Robert Godes are now published although rejected or abandoned. Remaining is their formula of their catalyst(s) and probably part of their timing solutions, which now seems to be treated as trade secrets (which are not protected in the form of patent laws). Once a trade secret has been successfully replicated by another party (e.g. by reverse engineering) there is no protection any more.

    When looking at for instance to the recent patent applications by Iwamura / Clean Planet Inc. it is noticeable that nuclear reactions are nowhere mentioned nor the mentioning of transmutations. Earlier patent applications by Iwamura claiming transmutations (and therefore nuclear reactions) were declined as well. It seems Iwamura has learned his lessons.

    Maybe intentionally as a result of strategic interest?

    Just imagine if this boiler setup could be applied (right away) to power a conventional (small) submarine or underwater drone?

    I don't think that Brillouin's solution is much better than the existing nuclear reactors that are used in the US military (e.g. submarines and vessels). If the US military wants LENR progress secret then NASA would not have revealed their progress openly.

  • They need a new patent agent. Writing a patent that coivers their IP without revealing everything is not difficult. For example they use a variant of the Superwave technology (Irv Dardik and Co) for triggering AFAIK. There is no need to describe it exactly or give waveforms, 'The heater voltage is varied between 50v and 250v with an average voltage of 100v at an average frequency of 200Hz.' Is enough for a patent - but try picking the detail out of that to reproduce it and you are in for a long job.

    You are correct that you can likely get a patent without giving all the details (as the examiner would not know), however if it isn't sufficiently described for someone "skilled in the art" to replicate, it is ultimately not valid. A patent as you describe would likely not be enforceable if taken to court. Of course an investor would not necessarily care.

  • You are correct that you can likely get a patent without giving all the details (as the examiner would not know), however if it isn't sufficiently described for someone "skilled in the art" to replicate, it is ultimately not valid. A patent as you describe would likely not be enforceable if taken to court. Of course an investor would not necessarily care.

    I agree. Defense of patents written like this in a court is more difficult- but many patents are written using this kind of language - particularly those relating to catalyst manufacture. But the most important aspect is 'for whose benefit is such a patent written? The inventor or the investor?


    I have a good friend in London who has made a great deal of money from software/electronics inventions - in fact made $6M while still at school, but has never patented anything. When I asked him about investors who demand patent protection he said- "if they keep demanding patents you need to find a less stupid investor".