Quote from Alan Smith

Whether Cambridge gets involved or not depends to a certain extent on my report. And I am still waiting for some data - collected by a 3rd party. ETA- any report will of course be the property of ENG8- publication will to a certain extent be up to them.

Have they sent you any documentation on 3rd party verification yet?
The only place I can find it publicly has a broken link.
Eng8 3rd party verification Link
I will email Haslen Back to find out when it will be public if you haven't corresponded with him.

Moved 14 posts to Biaco, a fairly new UK based LENR company that may be close to market. You decide. - Page 2 - Future and developments - LENR Forum (lenr-forum.com)

because we were mixing up Biaco, with ENG8. As a reminder, both are in a legal tussle about the same technology. Alan just came back from ENG8, and may go may visit Biaco soon.

Quote from Frogfall

All of this happened nearly half a century ago. It is highly unlikely that this chap was the first to notice anomalies involving water and electric arcs – and (as we know) there have been numerous similar claims ever since.

But if a simple arc in water is able to produce excess energy – how come we are still waiting for someone to release an actual marketable device?

Display Spoiler

I am in that camp of similar claims, but I think one must be careful not to fool one's self, especially as it pertains to matters of science.
It reads like a simple task to put an arc or a pulse discharge in water, but there are special conditions to these things. To use an analogues example, engineering an instrument to transform kinetic energy from a solid to solid into to sonic energy in an air medium takes a great deal of consideration of natures patterns (Physics).

In order to amplify the sound, it may be necessary to play our instruments into a cave or canyon, which becomes part of the system. I'm l sure you agree with this statement as not defying the laws of physics, but rather increasing the systems total energy capacity and opening up the system to other means of transformations and interactions.
It may just be too often we forget as humans that we are not isolated from the systems of nature, but are only contributing to there motions. In particular as it pertains to our ecological and social sciences.

This "free energy" and "over-unity" debate I think is an attempt to reduce the elegant complexity of nature down to systems which are separate and isolated from one another. When in reality it may yield more progress for our collective evolution to find where the harmony and disharmony exist between the systems to make beautiful music we can all enjoy.

Here was my attempt to put it into words some years ago 'Free Energy' if your interested. Hopefully it resonates with you and anyone else who wants a deeper explaination of the point I am attempting to make and the hope of increasing the prosperity of the human species.

From this video, my reaction to it as follows:

There is a new concept afoot associated with the Egely tech called catalyzed fusion. This is actually transmutation as seen in cold fusion. Egely says that in current science theory, electrons in great numbers cannot bunch together. But the surface of the structure must be specifically formatted to produce this clumping. According with this thinking , this clumping provides the EMF power to generate the EMF environment to accomplish catalyzed fusion reaction.

But the nuclear authorities cannot understand how fusion can occur without the appearance of the associated nuclear indicators of the fusion reaction. So there is some intellectual dissidence here.

In my opinion, there is a lack of background in condensed matter physics amongst the groups interested in these processes that explains how the clumping of large numbers of electrons is explained. There is a field of science called nanoplasmonics that explains how this clumping can occur.

A lecture with math about Nanoplasmonics

Nanoplasmonics Short Course Lecture 2 - Physics & Astronomy ...

Nanoplasmonics Short Course Lecture 2 - Physics & Astronomy Read more about nanoplasmonics, physics, astronomy and www.phy-astr.gsu.edu.

www.yumpu.com

A introduction without math about Nanoplasmonics

Physics_Behind_Applications_45_min.pdf

In science, when any particle is able to clump together, that clumping always indicates that a Bose Einstein condensate of that particle is occurring. Such a condensate always produces superconductivity which in turn allows utilization of a field that is not yet commonly understood: the ability to engineer and utilize various states of the vacuum. The Exotic Vacuum Object (EVO) is appropriately named and is a product and a result of this new vacuum-spacetime centric field. I beleive it will be sometime before the mindset of those interested in electron clumping and its production of transmutation understand what the EVO actually is and how it works.

It's a long and complex debate..

you talked about means ( BEC or EVO) to compress themselves electrons regarding the surface plasmons behavior.

Now, apparently we talking about charges oscillation.

A recent talk from Alan Smith to me highlighted that electrons don't really move in the case of electric current transmission.

In this way, what is happen really about electrons in surface plasmons ?

Now my depper interrogation is when scientists talk about field enhancement for example in the case of nanorods under a light, will there more compressed to induce this enhancement ( electrons) ?

Quote from axil

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.

From this video, my reaction to it as follows:

There is a new concept afoot associated with the Egely tech called catalyzed fusion. This is actually transmutation as seen in cold fusion. Egely says that in current science theory, electrons in great numbers cannot bunch together. But the surface of the structure must be specifically formatted to produce this clumping. According with this thinking , this clumping provides the EMF power to generate the EMF environment to accomplish catalyzed fusion reaction.

But the nuclear authorities cannot understand how fusion can occur without the appearance of the associated nuclear indicators of the fusion reaction. So there is some intellectual dissidence here.

In my opinion, there is a lack of background in condensed matter physics amongst the groups interested in these processes that explains how the clumping of large numbers of electrons is explained. There is a field of science called nanoplasmonics that explains how this clumping can occur.

A lecture with math about Nanoplasmonics

https://www.yumpu.com/fr/docum…ture-2-physics-astronomy-

A introduction without math about Nanoplasmonics

Physics_Behind_Applications_45_min.pdf

In science, when any particle is able to clump together, that clumping always indicates that a Bose Einstein condensate of that particle is occurring. Such a condensate always produces superconductivity which in turn allows utilization of a field that is not yet commonly understood: the ability to engineer and utilize various states of the vacuum. The Exotic Vacuum Object (EVO) is appropriately named and is a product and a result of this new vacuum-spacetime centric field. I beleive it will be sometime before the mindset of those interested in electron clumping and its production of transmutation understand what the EVO actually is and how it works.

Display More

Quote from Alan Smith

Is that only 'in science' What about beaches full of sand, is that a BEC too?

A Bose Einstein condensate (BEC) is a state of matter where many like elements assume the same quantum mechanical state thus becoming the same wave function or if you prefer, the same particle. A clump of 10^27 electrons can act as one electron if they all become entangled. The sand on a beach does not assume the same quantum mechanical state unless that sand is cooled to near absolute zero to remove any thermal vibrations. Such hot sand is not a BEC and cannot become a BEC unless it is cooled to the max.

Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC)

Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC), a state of matter in which separate atoms or subatomic particles, cooled to near absolute zero (0 K, − 273.15 °C, or − 459.67…

www.britannica.com

Quote

The most intriguing property of BECs is that they can slow down light. In 1998 Lene Hau of Harvard University and her colleagues slowed light traveling through a BEC from its speed in vacuum of 3 × 10⁸ metres per second to a mere 17 metres per second, or about 38 miles per hour. Since then, Hau and others have completely halted and stored a light pulse within a BEC, later releasing the light unchanged or sending it to a second BEC.

Upon seeing this factoid, I can't resist pointing out how a BEC can change the way the vacuum functions. Not only the way photons behave but also electrons behave under new states of vacuum conditions which differ from expected reality that are instantiated when a BEC forms. The BEC is the mechanism that gives the EVO its other-vacuum/spacetime nature where particles and forces change their usual and expected nature.

Quote from Alan Smith

And neither can much else in a LENR device running at 300C+ Unless you can show me an example of a high-temperature BEC?

The SAFIRE system can be shown to be a BEC which operates at hundreds of thousands of degrees.

There are many types of polariton condensates including the the one that is active in the SAFIRE system. They are all described by the Gross-Pitaevskii theory. A proof of the BEC nature of SAFIRE which includes the formation of vortices as seen in SAFIRE project as pictured on page 12 of that theory article.

The Gross-Pitaevskii theory

https://uni-tuebingen.de/fileadmin/Uni_Tuebingen/Fakultaeten/MathePhysik/Institute/PIT/Festk%C3%B6rperphysik/Dokumente/4_Gross-Pitaevskii_theory.pdf

The mass of the BEC element determines the temperature that the BEC will sustain. Atoms are heavy and require a very low temperature to form. A photon based BEC as seen in SAFIRE has no mass so its BEC has no limit on the temperature of formation.

This is the Widom Larsen paper, even if they postulated about "heavy electrons" but never about BEC involvement.

Allan Widom and Lewis Larsen propose that, in condensed matter, local breakdown of the Born-Oppenheimer approximation occurs in homogeneous, many-body, collectively oscillating patches of protons, deuterons, or tritons found on surfaces of fully loaded metallic hydrides; Born-Oppenheimer breakdown enables a degree of electromagnetic coupling of surface proton/deuteron/triton oscillations with those of nearby surface plasmon polariton (SPP) electrons. Such coupling between collective oscillations creates local nuclear-strength electric fields in the vicinity of the patches.
SPP electrons bathed in such high fields increase their effective mass, thus becoming heavy electrons. Widom and Larsen propose that heavy SPP electrons can react directly with protons, deuterons, or tritons located in surface patches through an inverse beta decay process that results in simultaneous collective production of one, two, or three neutrons, respectively, and a neutrino

Quote from axil

The SAFIRE system can be shown to be a BEC which operates at hundreds of thousands of degrees.

There are many types of polariton condensates including the the one that is active in the SAFIRE system. They are all described by the Gross-Pitaevskii theory. A proof of the BEC nature of SAFIRE which includes the formation of vortices as seen in SAFIRE project as pictured on page 12 of that theory article.

The Gross-Pitaevskii theory

https://uni-tuebingen.de/filea…oss-Pitaevskii_theory.pdf

The mass of the BEC element determines the temperature that the BEC will sustain. Atoms are heavy and require a very low temperature to form. A photon based BEC as seen in SAFIRE has no mass so its BEC has no limit on the temperature of formation.

Display More

Quote from Shane D.

Moved 14 posts to Biaco, a fairly new UK based LENR company that may be close to market. You decide. - Page 2 - Future and developments - LENR Forum (lenr-forum.com)

because we were mixing up Biaco, with ENG8. As a reminder, both are in a legal tussle about the same technology. Alan just came back from ENG8, and may go may visit Biaco soon.

Ooops!

Quote from Alan Smith

Maybe you should read page 1 of your link, instead of skipping to page 12. It says " The GP theory is a microscopic theory that describes the interacting non-uniform

bose gas at zero temperature."

Bose-Einstein condensate created at room temperature

Instead of atoms, condensation was achieved using quasiparticles.

arstechnica.com

Bose-Einstein condensate created at room temperature

Instead of atoms, condensation was achieved using quasiparticles.

Quote

These systems typically require temperatures near absolute zero. But Ayan Das and colleagues have now used a nanoscale wire to produce an excitation known as a polariton. These polaritons formed a Bose-Einstein condensate at room temperature, potentially opening up a new avenue for studying systems that otherwise require expensive cooling and trapping.

In other words, the electronic properties of the material itself replaced the need for cooling, allowing the quasiparticles to gather and condense into a BEC. The experimenters confirmed this effect by detecting the telltale light emission.

As in this referenced experiment, the BEC nature of the SAFIRE system can be confirmed by showing that the light produced by that system is polarized as would be produced by a polariton laser. Moreover, all strange radiation indicators (tracks, EVO impressions, transmuted material... see MFMP data) are made visible when viewed by using polarized light. The light emitted by the Egely reactors will also be polarized as well as the transmutations produced by the reaction.

The polariton is a special particle that has been shown to act as if it had imaginary mass. This special nature allows it to exabit exceptional quantum mechanical properties.

Quote from Cydonia

This is the Widom Larsen paper, even if they postulated about "heavy electrons" but never about BEC involvement.

Allan Widom and Lewis Larsen propose that, in condensed matter, local breakdown of the Born-Oppenheimer approximation occurs in homogeneous, many-body, collectively oscillating patches of protons, deuterons, or tritons found on surfaces of fully loaded metallic hydrides; Born-Oppenheimer breakdown enables a degree of electromagnetic coupling of surface proton/deuteron/triton oscillations with those of nearby surface plasmon polariton (SPP) electrons. Such coupling between collective oscillations creates local nuclear-strength electric fields in the vicinity of the patches.
SPP electrons bathed in such high fields increase their effective mass, thus becoming heavy electrons. Widom and Larsen propose that heavy SPP electrons can react directly with protons, deuterons, or tritons located in surface patches through an inverse beta decay process that results in simultaneous collective production of one, two, or three neutrons, respectively, and a neutrino

As a money making activity, the Widom Larsen theory had to meet the constraints placed on the LENR theories by the common beliefs of that period. A nuclear energy based neutron centric mechanism was required to make the Widom Larsen theory commercially viable and acceptable to organizations (NASA) that sponsored this theory even though no neutrons were ever seen in any LENR reaction.

The WL theory contains promising concepts such as the polariton that were watered down by the need to meet the need to support the nuclear energy meme current at that time.

Generally, i refer my postulates with my own experiments or observations/conclusions.

this is why i postulated that WL should need some ajustments but roughly it's going on the good way (lazy neutrons).

Quote from axil

As a money making activity, the Widom Larsen theory had to meet the constraints placed on the LENR theories by the common beliefs of that period. A nuclear energy based neutron centric mechanism was required to make the Widom Larsen theory commercially viable and acceptable to organizations (NASA) that sponsored this theory even though no neutrons were ever seen in any LENR reaction.

The WL theory contains promising concepts such as the polariton that were watered down by the need to meet the need to support the nuclear energy meme current at that time.

Quote from Cydonia

this is why i postulated that WL should need some ajustments but roughly it's going on the good way

The only adjustment for garbage (like WL) is to move it into the bin.

Quote from Wyttenbach

The only adjustment for garbage (like WL) is to move it into the bin.

Arguing over minutia of a proposed theory seems like debating the color of the sun. People interpret things differently so if there is a particular problem you have with the theory, could you let it be stated so we can have a rational dialogue?