ENG8 - new plasma energy system

News | ENG8

Quote

2024-10-17 - ENG8 achieves another global first in the race for fusion energy: a self-powering fusion reactor producing excess electricity

Never believed in Lithurgy even if some new physic behavior could play, communicate on that in first intention never helped for Lenr credibility.

Quote from Frogfall

Don't forget "Strange Radiation". Past studies indicate this has a greater range (in air) than beta. There are still no definitive studies that show what materials, thicknesses, and configurations are needed to form an effective barrier.

Quote from Cydonia

Never believed in Lithurgy even if some new physic behavior could play, communicate on that in first intention never helped for Lenr credibility.

Science should not be about beliefs. And ignoring, or denying, "inconvenient" observations is a form of propaganda.

Quote from Cydonia

Never believed in Lithurgy even if some new physic behavior could play, communicate on that in first intention never helped for Lenr credibility.

"Strange" radiation is not difficult to detect or block.

Quote from ENG8

"Strange" radiation is not difficult to detect or block.

Good to hear it. Can you tell us what it is then?

And I know Lutz Jaitner equates SR with CPs, but CPs are mysterious too.

Bob G is a good guy but i'm not close to all his passionated beliefs..

Quote from Frogfall

Science should not be about beliefs. And ignoring, or denying, "inconvenient" observations is a form of propaganda.

Well, i don't have your money, your means, so if you talked about "strange radiations " i won't speculate more about that..

Anyway only the market will do the truth

Now, thank you to your honesty and courage to be here at LF

Quote from ENG8

"Strange" radiation is not difficult to detect or block.

Quoting ENG8 website:

Are there any peer-reviewed publications on this?

• No; because we are a commercial company and wish to keep our internal know-how as confidential as possible until mass deployment.

Why is there no UKAEA validation that catalytic fusion (LENR) is taking place?

• ENG8 had an office and demonstration facility in the Innovation Centre at the National Fusion Centre at Culham, UK. ENG8 has had meetings with the UKAEA but does not work with the UKAEA. After a very successful public demonstration of a catalysed fusion Energicell with a leading independent test agency present, Culham Centre withdrew ENG’s permission to operate onsite.

Why are there so few scientists shown on the website and Investment Memorandum?

• They are not shown for their own safety and security and the company’s.

END QUOTE

If you are not going to provide a technical report describing how the effect was measured, then I think you should say nothing. Making such an extraordinary claim without giving the reader any basis to believe it is counterproductive. It detracts from your credibility.

It is not necessary to reveal technical details about how the effect works. But the methods of measuring and the details of the measurement procedures should be revealed.

Also, you should say whether the gadget is self-sustaining. If it is not, you should explain why not. That is an obvious question that will occur to any technically knowledgeable person. If it generates much more electricity than input, it should not be difficult to make the gadget self sustaining. Not doing that is suspicious. It would make me think they are making a mistake measuring electricity.

Quote from Cydonia

Well, i don't have your money, your means, so if you talked about "strange radiations " i won't speculate more about that..

Anyway only the market will do the truth

Now, thank you to your honesty and courage to be here at LF

Hi, Please have a look at this article - https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:37113794

Quote from JedRothwell

Quoting ENG8 website:

Are there any peer-reviewed publications on this?

• No; because we are a commercial company and wish to keep our internal know-how as confidential as possible until mass deployment.

Why is there no UKAEA validation that catalytic fusion (LENR) is taking place?

• ENG8 had an office and demonstration facility in the Innovation Centre at the National Fusion Centre at Culham, UK. ENG8 has had meetings with the UKAEA but does not work with the UKAEA. After a very successful public demonstration of a catalysed fusion Energicell with a leading independent test agency present, Culham Centre withdrew ENG’s permission to operate onsite.

Why are there so few scientists shown on the website and Investment Memorandum?

• They are not shown for their own safety and security and the company’s.

END QUOTE

If you are not going to provide a technical report describing how the effect was measured, then I think you should say nothing. Making such an extraordinary claim without giving the reader any basis to believe it is counterproductive. It detracts from your credibility.

It is not necessary to reveal technical details about how the effect works. But the methods of measuring and the details of the measurement procedures should be revealed.

Also, you should say whether the gadget is self-sustaining. If it is not, you should explain why not. That is an obvious question that will occur to any technically knowledgeable person. If it generates much more electricity than input, it should not be difficult to make the gadget self sustaining. Not doing that is suspicious. It would make me think they are making a mistake measuring electricity.

Display More

Hi Jed, I dont think Jean-Paul or AlanS or UL would be wrong in thier observations. The most important one was last week where even when you turn off the power from the EnergiCell / LENR reactor it runs for several minutes and can be kicked back into operation in a second. The excess energy was measured using a solid state calorimeter showing the excess power when the EnergiCell was disconnected from the external power supply. The resonant circuit design can now be applied to a range of electricity producing EnergiCells.

Quote from ENG8

Hi Jed, I dont think Jean-Paul or AlanS or UL would be wrong in thier observations.

I don't think so either. On the other hand, anyone can be wrong about any observation. I have known famous scientists who made stupid mistakes, such as mixing up the anode and the cathode of an electrochemical cell. Or mixing up power and energy (Morrison and others). The only way you can be sure a person has not made a mistake is to see the technical details. In this case:

The voltmeter, ammeter and wattmeter used, make and model.

A schematic of how these instruments were attached to the device.

Whether the power was AC or DC.

The power level and duration of the measurements.

Error margins.

Sample data.

etcetera

Also, a succinct discussion of whether it is self-powered, and if not, why not. As I said, anyone will ask this question.

In science, you must never take anyone's word for anything. Per the motto of the Royal Society, nullius in verba, "take nobody's word for it". You must see the technical details.

I cannot imagine why revealing this kind of information would endanger intellectual property. If it does endanger IP, it should be withheld, but in that case you should say nothing. No press releases, nothing on the website. If you are not going to give technically valid proof of a claim, do not make the claim at all.

Quote from ENG8

The most important one was last week where even when you turn off the power from the EnergiCell / LENR reactor it runs for several minutes and can be kicked back into operation in a second. The excess energy was measured using a solid state calorimeter showing the excess power when the EnergiCell was disconnected from the external power supply. The resonant circuit design can now be applied to a range of electricity producing EnergiCells.

I do not understand what this means. I cannot envision the procedures. What resonant circuit? Where is it? Does the gadget have a capacitor, which would explain why it runs for several minutes? How much energy does it produce in those minutes?

The parts I do understand use non-standard vocabulary, making them unclear. I assume a "solid state calorimeter" means a Seebeck calorimeter. It would be better to call it that. Better still to say how big the calorimeter is, how many thermocouples it has, make and model of the thermocouples, what range of power levels it measures, how it was calibrated, and what power (heat) level it measured. How much net energy? How does that compare to input electrical energy? And, as I said, how was electric power and energy measured? If the electric power input measurements were wrong, or if we do not know how they were done, the output measured by a calorimeter is meaningless.

As I said, if you want scientists and techies like me to believe you, you have to tell us things like this. Brief, vague descriptions of something that someone somewhere did with unnamed instruments hurt your credibility. It sounds like Rossi.

I mentioned the scientists who confused power and energy. I knew some others who tried to measure AC electricity with DC instruments. People can make all kinds of mistakes. The only way to for us to know you have not made similar mistakes is for you to reveal the technical details of the measurements. It may be that I would not understand, but others who know more about electricity than I do will understand. It a few dozen of them tell me "yes, these are the proper techniques for measuring electricity" that would be reassuring. Argument from authority has little value in science, as the Royal Society motto says. But it is not completely lacking. A claim made by you with no details has no authority. That claim provided with sufficient detail and vetted by many experts does have credibility, even if I -- the reader -- lack the skill to evaluate it.

IE's article on the subject:

Catalyzed fusion system operates indefinitely without external power

ENG8's catalyzed fusion reactor achieves continuous operation without external input power, a world-first achievement.

interestingengineering.com

Quote from Alan Smith

Catalysed fusion specialists at ENG8 International have confirmed the results of the

recent independent validation of its EnergiCell®, conducted by world-renowned LENR

(low energy nuclear reactions) expert Dr Jean-Paul Biberian. The validation showed that

the system can be self-powering and export net electricity.

Dr Jean-Paul Biberian said: “We can consider that the device can operate indefinitely

without any external input power.”

Display More

Notice that on on the basis of calculations and assumptions. Not "it does operate indefinitely without external power". The second would require no assumptions.

A skeptic (me) might ask: why are ENG8 not big headline news with everyone wanting the secret sauce? And a skeptic would answer: because the calculations and assumptions used by ENG8 and agreed reasonable by Paul are not shared by truly independent observers.

I guess to validate this (or not) you could check whether ENG8 attracts billions of investment - or a few million.

But now we do the "Rossi test" e.g. are the personnel involved known as scientists, or as fraudsters (Rossi scores fraudster 1, scientist 0, for any deluded ECW readers here). I guess Levi might be counted a scientist, but a very bad one given his pseudonymous vociferous claims over about 10 pages of a thread here (given clear transparent rebuttals) that thermal spectroscopy as measured using Lugano instruments depends only on total emissivity and not band emissivity. That is not the behaviour of anyone with intellectual curiosity => by my definition not a scientist. Nor is the lack of a retraction of the incorrect calculations in the Lugano report indicate somone with an interest in the truth (=> by my definition a scientists). I am not saying that all those with academic jobs have those qualities.

UL:

They have claimed (incorrectly) that UL has validated their device. Sound familiar?

Comments about personnel:

The lead "scientist", since 2019, has claimed he: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Leonov-Vladimir

• debunked Einstein
• solved the source of the big bang
• discovered cold fusion
• invented anti-gravity and zero-mass thrusters
• rewritten quantum mechanics

A clever guy indeed - and somehow he manages to do all that and have no academic reward?

Haslen Back.

Known fraudster and connected to this eng8 company.

Somone else did the checking:

The linkage I found was between this and a man with a history of fraud, Haslen Back.

Post

RE: ENG8 - new plasma energy system

Ms Tyutina was as well involved with multiple companies named Napier and Rapid Offside Composite, in which Haslen Back was involved (check the filings for these companies) who you can find on the ENG8 website as Founder, BDO and "co-developer of the EnergiCell technology".

The name Haslen Back has al long list of companies founded and dissolved in various industries, and has some interesting hits when you google his name, including an article in The Guardian, a Youtube video praising army…

Kursiv

Oct 27th 2023

https://www.linkedin.com/in/haslen-back-67915981/

NAPIER PROPULSION LIMITED filing history - Find and update company information - GOV.UK

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/british-contractor-agrees-plead-guilty-wire-fraud-conspiracy-related-iraq-reconstruction

The fact that Dr. Jean-Paul Biberian witnessed/validated this test for a company that may invest in ENG8 and was positive about the results gives me 100x as much confidence in that it seems to work then what Andrea Rossi did with the Twizy car demonstration.

Unfortunately Dr. Biberian did not formally confirmed this openly here, but maybe he can share what he saw here on this site, when ENG8 allows this.

I believe Alan Smith is also familiar with ENG8 and I would welcome his opinion about this progress.

Still, seeing the response of ENG8 on Jed Rothwell’s comment, I wonder why ENG8 shares these developments publicly. Why not keep things secret until they enter the commercial phase?

Quote from Alan Smith

But the fact that this very simple device with no hidden parts (unlike others) continues to produce plasma for sometimes 20 minutes when given input power for no more than a second does suggest that something remarkable is going on.

That certainly has quite a Henry Moray vibe to it (not to mention the Colman/Gillespie device).