Quote from Gregory Byron Goble

Were the experiments unsuccessful?

Or

Were they unsuccessful in the 8 attempts to collaborate together?

Like Alan I was told TG wanted to keep at arms-length distance from the old guard for 2 reasons:

-To attack the problem with fresh, new ideas. The OG had failed to produce a "reference experiment" in 30 years, so time to try a new approach. That made sense to me. But they did, at the least, consult with them. Was the relationship deeper than that? I do not know.

-In case they were successful, they thought having help from the OG would give the skeptics reason to ignore the findings. I always wondered that had they been successful, and Storms or McKubre associated with the results in any way, if Nature would have published?

Quote from Gregory Byron Goble

Did Team Google discuss or present these three patents or their DoE grant at the ARPA-E workshop?

Or the DoD grant awarded Team Google vis a vis Munday Labs, now at UC California Davis?

Google coordinated and funded the projects" made me think they were the sole provider of funds, and that the DOE was not involved...but I could be wrong

Also mentioned in Trevithick's ARPA-E presentation was that Google funded Project Charleston (what we call Team Google/TG). The way it is worded made it sound clear that only Google provided the funding.

So this new patent could represent something totally different. As said, it does not even look like LENR.

Fully agree with you, the Lenr taught me at least one thing, to be wary of my own certainties.

It's true we can be quickly blinded by this ..

I very often left in certain ways of explanation concerning the LENR, by believing there as strong as one can believe in god. Then very slowly, the model collapses because new information does not match anymore.

Also what to do ?

Be prolific to build and imagine lots of models that turn out to be false or imagine nothing and criticize the pseudo shit from others?

Btw, what I can say is that each model imagined is never totally wrong, it always brings something, even if several years later.

Regarding Google, I criticized above all the side money excessively spent on calorimetry but I admit that their other exploratory ways are very good.

Quote from JedRothwell

McKubre did say this, but other experts such as Storms complained that Google did not listen. I recall some others such as Miles said they never heard from anyone at Google.

Of course the people at Google may well have read the papers Miles published. You can learn a lot from papers. But I recommend you speak with the authors directly, if they are still among the living. It is easy to overlook something. You might misunderstand a paper. I myself usually misunderstand papers completely at first, and only begin to understand them after several readings. I'm slow . . . but persevering. I have known some brilliant scientists who are quick studies, who seem to understand technical papers "just by rubbing them on their chests." But their quick intelligence sometimes betrays them. They read a paper, assume they understand it, and they don't bother reading it again. They make a mistake and never realize it. I have less confidence in my own abilities, so I check and double check.

To give a small example, F&P used a half-silvered Dewar cell with a clear glass (no silver) "window" at the bottom, below the lowest electrolyte waterline. They explained why they did this, in detail. It is a little difficult to follow their discussion. They don't make it easy for the reader. I have discussed this window with various smart people. I found that some of them did understand the purpose of the window.

(If you want to know the purpose, see p. 11 here: https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJreviewofth.pdf)

Display More

Quote from Cydonia

Fully agree with you, the Lenr taught me at least one thing, to be wary of my own certainties.

It's true we can be quickly blinded by this ..

I very often left in certain ways of explanation concerning the LENR, by believing there as strong as one can believe in god. Then very slowly, the model collapses because new information does not match anymore.

Also what to do ?

Be prolific to build and imagine lots of models that turn out to be false or imagine nothing and criticize the pseudo shit from others?

Btw, what I can say is that each model imagined is never totally wrong, it always brings something, even if several years later.

Regarding Google, I criticized above all the side money excessively spent on calorimetry but I admit that their other exploratory ways are very good.

Display More

You have quite sound judgments ... Many scientists are often perplexed that they cannot repeat the experiment of another person. Fleischmann and Pons were unable to repeat their experiment ... Nobody understands the "pitfalls" in LENR physics and does not even suspect that they may be there ... Therefore, I want to draw your attention to the fact that LENR physics is in the first place the queue is built on the physics of free electrons, which are capable of creating clusters ... No one in the world today understands how this "magnetic formation" interacts with the "magnetic structure" of that object - air, palladium, nickel, copper, and the like, in which they self-organize ... This is the problem ... Second ... There are no obstacles for free electrons - they are able to flow from wood to plastic, from air to metal and "relatively speaking" can walk along the inner lattice of any substance - gallium, copper, hydrogen, water, steam, titanium, aluminum, etc ...

No one suspects that the experiment can be influenced by the season ... What do you mean? And this means that which is hidden from our eyes and the fact that our brain does not fmx and does not pay attention to it - the change in the intensity of ultraviolet photons at different times of the year ...

Vlasov Viktor Alekseevich, Doctor of Physics and Mathematics, Professor of TPU; Myshkin Vyacheslav Fedorovich, Doctor of Physics and Mathematics, Associate Professor of TPU, Khan Valery Alekseevich, Doctor of Technical Sciences, etc. -

"Analysis of the processes determining the influence of the magnetic field on the structure and properties of water, 2012" - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/4rAL/2mUv9RUWu

The ultraviolet photon is the most important part of the LENR! It is the ultraviolet photon that makes the bound electron free ... How can you repeat this or that experiment if you are not able to repeat the radiation spectrum of your installation?

05/19/2021 Dark hydrogen of Baranov-Zatelepin on the 80th anniversary of Samsonenko N.V. (speaker Zatelepin V.) -

Zatelepin is mistaken about the existence of an "electric field", but nevertheless makes an interesting judgment - 11 minutes 40 minutes - "the magnetic field is gigantic" - and this is due to the magnetic properties of both the proton and the electron!

Quote from Cherepanov2020

Fleischmann and Pons were unable to repeat their experiment ...

That is not true. In France, they repeated the experiment hundreds of times, 16 tests at a time. (Four arrays of 4 cells each, run simultaneously.) Nearly all of the tests worked. Results were much stronger and clearer toward the end of the project. The project ended because of politics, not for lack of progress, or for any scientific reason.

There are blurry photos and a video of one of the arrays here:

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Fleischmancalorimetra.pdf

Tests worked because was made at Sophia Antipolis very close to Nice where are living so many Russians.

I'm joking

I figure that Theresa Benyo has insight as a CMNS theoretician for the NASA and GEC collaboration. Since they presented at the ARPA-E LENR workshop I posted this here for review.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/theresa-benyo-ph-d-b968987

I have always wondered about visible light involvement on P&F xsh.

I have had the same question also earlier about the Mizuno R20.

These thoughts should be highlighted i think considering the plasmons surface resonance as described by some Google patents.

Quote from JedRothwell

It is the same thing. The Simplicity paper describes the array tests, and the three types of calorimetry used in them. The tests continued after 1992, and the results improved. Papers published later gave more details about the other two methods, especially the third phase, "Heat After Death."

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/PonsSheatafterd.pdf

Alan Smith  Curbina

This question was asked at the beginning of this thread. I wasn't sure how to answer the question. The ARPA-E LENR workshop, as Ruby inferred, was because the DoE could no longer ignore these developments. The recent DoE patent with Team Google, developed under a LLNL DoE contract, had a patent priority date showing patent development likely prior to 2019. This priority patent was filed on

2019-11-19 Priority to US201962937716P

US Provisional Application

The DoE is on top of developments in cold fusion and has been for years. I am posting the patent here in response to rubycarat . Also a link to the thread assigned for discussion of the patent.

Quote from rubycarat

NASA's reactor advances, the Japanese public/private collaboration successes, Brillouin advancing commercially, university participation in the US, and advocacy efforts by Silicon Valley, likely all made this happen. How could they keep ignoring these developments?

The DoE/Google Inc patent

"Apparatus And Method For Sourcing Fusion Reaction Products"

US20210151206A1 - Apparatus And Method For Sourcing Fusion Reaction Products - Google Patents

The thread

"Updates from Google on LENR Research"

Thread

Updates from Google on LENR research

Today I came across a recently published patent application from Google / University of California / University of British Columbia.
Looks like Google deserves a dedicated thread in the Players section therefore I created this one, since I could not find an existing thread.
It may be useful to publish all upcoming updates from Google (Team) in this thread.

Regarding the Google patent application:

Apparatus And Method For Sourcing Fusion Reaction Products

Abstract

An apparatus and method for…

Rob Woudenberg

Nov 28th 2021

Yes, that 's right, worldwide well informed people never underestimated the strong French lobbying.

Last example was the ITER project which was implanted at less than 100 kms in direct line from the place where P&F worked in the past, very close also to the Biberian's own playing area ( Avignon, Marseille)

ITER Organization to Sophia Antipolis

www.google.com

The french CEA ( French Nuclear Dept) is very strong and discrete.

People don't have to forget that Rossi asked for his first release directly Clauzon ( CEA head of engineering) Ruer ( SAIPEM Oil@Gas director) and jacques Dufour (Oil@Gas shell director).

Be sure that CEA played a main role to try recovering P@F technology.

Unfortunately improvement were too low for the French state.

What is funny was the Italian who dealed with the same kind of structure however for a bigger state more capable for business ahahaha.

Quote from Cydonia

the Italian who dealed with the same kind of structure however for a bigger state more capable for business

Cydonia Thank you for your post full of information new to me. Time for me to study up on this.

By the way...The Fleischman Miles letters are an excellent read in their entirety.

Note

Fleischman cautioned discretion (M.Miles letters) while in France, i.e. positive results and Allied control of nuclear dense energetics.

Ah ha ha. Eh?

Rossi came to the US for many reasons presently unknown.

I have moved 15 posts from here- posts by Ascoli, Jed, and me, to the playground thread. No more off topic posting please.

Yes, apparently the San Francisco bay seems not aware. I don't expect some transferts from DOE-DOD up to NASA-GOOGLE axis.

Now could you imagine the world impact for a technology as simple as Parkhomov or MFMP have suggested easily replicated by teenagers ?

By world impact i would say not from the green thinkers point of view but rather by states highest interests.

Quote from Gregory Byron Goble

Cydonia Thank you for your post full of information new to me. Time for me to study up on this.

By the way...The Fleischman Miles letters are an excellent read in their entirety.

Note

Fleischman cautioned discretion (M.Miles letters) while in France, i.e. positive results and Allied control of nuclear dense energetics.

Ah ha ha. Eh?

Rossi came to the US for many reasons presently unknown.

Display More

Quote from Cydonia

Now could you imagine the world impact for a technology as simple as Parkhomov or MFMP have suggested easily replicated by teenagers ?

By world impact i would say not from the green thinkers point of view but rather by states highest interests.

This will certainly create a sense of panic in some decision makers....

Dear LENR Forum members...from Francesco Celani

I found yesterday time to complete/improve my presentation given at the ANV7 Workshop held in Greccio (near Assisi, Italy).

My presentation was motivated because the, very interesting and unexpected, Workshop organised by DoE and DoD through DARPA =>ARPA-E on October 2021 about LENR-AHE phenomenology.

My document, mostly a review of selected presentations and some comments about the Italian situation about LENR-AHE, was uploaded to-day on ResearchGate, at the following link:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357340543_ARPA-E_extraordinary_2-day_Workshop_on_LENR-AHE_Overview_and_some_key_presentations

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.25640.08966

ARPA-E slides presented by F. Metzler:

"Toward a LENR reference experiment"

Quote from teppo

F. Metzler:

Florian is a very thoughtful person

"Heidegger begins by suggesting that we live in an age characterized by a poverty of thought (Gedankenarmut), as expressed in the frequency of encountering thoughtlessness (Gedankenlosigkeit). He claims that this kind of thoughtlessness runs against human nature as humans possess the ability to think as part of their very essence."

"There are also conceptual ties to branches of Western philosophy. German philosopher Martin Heidegger developed the notion of das Nichts (the Nothingness) as a central concept of his philosophy. Das Nichts appears to coincide with the notion of 無 and 空 — as discussed in [2-4]. This is perhaps unsurprising given that Heidegger has been described as the Western philosopher closest to Daoism and Zen Buddhism "

Perhaps he will engage with 6D space.

Blog | Florian Metzler, PhD

Navy HIVER project ARPA-E presentation is finally out:

https://arpa-e.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2021LENR_workshop_Barham.pdf

Brillouin Energy was kind enough to post a pdf of the 2015 paper by Michael McKubre that the HIVER report references... "Cold Fusion Comments on the State of Scientific Proof"

For our review.

https://brillouinenergy.com/newwebsite/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Cold-fusion-comments-on-the-state-of-scientific-proof.pdf

Quote from Michael McKubre 2015

In his most recent book, (The Explanation of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction 2014)

Ed Storms reviews over 900 publications sorting through these patterns in the attempt to create systematic order for those of us with less time, talent or devotion.

By any standards Storms is an expert on the subject of cold fusion – one could argue that he is the preeminent expert on this topic.

But where does one go to get a countervailing ‘expert’ opinion?

I would argue that there is no such place or person and has not been for more than two decades,

and that this is a problem.

Display More

McKubre earlier in the paper wrote,

"Is there such a thing as condensed matter nuclear science(CMNS)?

What is the state of proof?

To proceed case-by-case and demonstrate that every instance where anomalous nuclear-products or nuclear-level excess heat were observed resulted from an identified experimental error or misunderstanding would be an exceedingly arduous undertaking and nothing like this has been attempted or ever will be."

Now in 2022

I argue that Team Google has applied ADA or OPTOMETRIST to review every paper published in the field. I would like to see the results if this is so.

HIVER states "get your patents filed and publish (all) the papers (related to the patents) note...the parentheses are mine...

Odd that the HIVER report does not list the DoE as a CMNS energy development government agency nor do they list the latest US Government CMNS energy technology patent, which is the Google/DoE one.

Also no posting of the NASA patents...

Quote from teppo

Navy HIVER project ARPA-E presentation is finally out:

https://arpa-e.energy.gov/site…1LENR_workshop_Barham.pdf

Lead scientist on the project was Carl Gotzmer. He was quoted here RE: Media/News/Video Library-No discussions please

And the Lead Physicist on the USNavy Indian Head lead project is Lou DeChiaro, whom we we have followed here for years. Good to see all these people still involved.

The US military is throwing a lot of expertise at solving LENR as this report shows. When someone like NEPS*NewEnergy says we need a new Manhattan Project approach to LENR...well maybe we already have something close when including all the various US agencies (NASA, DOE, and maybe soon ARPA-E) that have been involved.