AG Parkhomov publish answers to some questions through Bob Greenyer.
https://docs.google.com/docume…oZqfr7xFMMh9mR0Qdzrc/edit
https://goo.gl/IBB1fD
Looks like a good experiment. There is still some hope for the Ni-H lenr !
Why didn't he ask about the powder details? Grain size/type/manufacturer etc etc? Isn't that the main spice?
It is good to see Parkhomov is still in the lenr scene. I was almost suspicious that he dropped out because he couldn't replicate his own results. But surprisingly comes up with a better experiment, and some encouraging results. I like the setup and finally people are moving towards proper calorimetry instead of bug ridden methods. MFMP may take note, they are simply wasting time.
The report is brief, and there is no data, so I guess we need to wait and see if he provides any data (inlet/outlet temperatures etc).
60W excess over 300W input is significant in my opinion.
But again, I am not the only one.
Can you please throw more light on this?
Who else? Are you very sure that some others have the same thing as you have?
I'm just curious.
Here is my uneducated opinion -
1 - Patents do not work. They will only provide you a time lead. The time it takes for someone else to develop a variant of your product is the time you get to make money (as a monopoly). After that you still make money (because of the brand), but now you must compete with low priced and better products.
2 - If it is a physical phenomenon, it cannot be patented. You can patent embodiments and applications. But someone else will come up with another embodiment and application very soon. A patent can try to cover all embodiments using legal language, but people will make their own version anyway and prefer to fight in the court for years, because they will be making billions anyway, no matter what the judgement is.
3 - Some countries can legally allow production of the product, even if it is patented, and if it is for public benefit (such as life saving drugs).
4 - Many countries do not respect patents, these are also powerful manufacturing hubs.
5 - Your patent will possibly infringe on other past patents. There are hundreds of lenr patents.
Bottom line : You cannot stop copying and improvisation of your product by others.
The only way is to release a lower version in the market (say with low COP) and wait for a few years till the copy cats invest most of their money in the lower version. Release your improved version after that. This will give you even more time. But it will also get copied. Just repeat till you are a billionaire. You will of course need big partners to do this. Do not have a single partner, keep many options.
There is one other way. Release your invention as open source hardware (search google for it). It has a GNU type license. Here you license it as open source, but reserve the use for some heavy applications (such as military). The big boys usually pay because they are backed by governments and cannot violate the license. You product will get copied widely, but you will still earn a good money from legal entities (military, gov, public sector companies etc).
Remember that you cannot monopolize it, but you can benefit from it hugely. Keeping it secret will only delay it and you may end up inside big sharks. Rossi is a good example of what not to do.
All the best ! and thanks for your efforts in this research.
@Abd
Thanks for your review. The latest doc appears to be a repeat of the complaint.
If the second amendment is proven to be invalid/illegal, Rossi loses the case. (GPT not completed on time)
If the second amendment is proven to be valid/legal, Rossi loses the case. (6 cylinder version was not used)
Thats the crux of it all now, as I understand it. The rest of the arguments, like patents and sharing of the IP with others are very weak. This is because the agreement favors IH too much.
I found an interesting footnote (see attachment). LC/Rossi claim that the agreement was prepared by the defendants. Compare that with the statements of DW here on forum, that the agreement was drafted by Rossi and IH agreed to sign on it. (Please search and find it, dont have link).
At least one of the parties (or both) are lying here. This is unfortunate. This also brings most of the statements by both Rossi and DW under doubt. In my personal opinion (not fact) the agreement was drafted by IH, since it favors IH entirely. It'd be very odd for Rossi to draft something that makes him a slave of IH, I think he is not that dumb.
Of course I may be wrong, and Rossi in fact did draft it in order to gain the 100M, so I'm prepared to accept that.
It is still a puzzle for me, why on earth Rossi proceed with the 1 year test (GPT) when his partner Amp. and IH both were not interested? Any opinions?
@barty
Why would you even think that banning a subject will cause people to become more friendly and civilized and they will behave less like animals?
If you do not allow a subject A, they will just sling mud on another subject B....they will simply find a reason to insult and attack others. Topic doesn't matter.
Also, there is a need to allow the freedom of expression, as long as it is kept civil and scientific. It has to be done for all lenr (or other) techs.
So I suggest just keep deleting the bad posts and keep banning the people (may be after 3 warnings) instead of stopping all discussion.
Just learnt that there was some analysis done for the fuel by other people (using other methods/instruments).
So can someone post a comparison? (before/after).
I read only the report (not data, which I can't) and must say there is nothing significant, no transmutations, no isotope shifts.
The one with 61Ni is just noise (as the author of the report says).
There is no data from the fuel (powder before heating it) to cross check.
I think you are pretty much 'spot on.'
I guess there will be a lot of RF noise there with so much "sparking" going on in the dusty plasma. So it can mess with your electronics and instruments. That explains why @me356 is getting RF. Not very sure about neutrons or other radiation.... can't see how we can have them without any nuclear reactions going.
I hope your next experiment will throw more light on it. So all the best ! and keep us updated....
@Tarun: they seem to be using dry powder, not a slurry.
Dusty might be in reference to dusty plasmas.
It shouldn't remain dry for long with molten Li in it.
If its really a plasma with Ni/Li nanoparticles suspended in it, then the claims of me356 look more plausible.
Here is my hypothesis about the use of ultrasonic generator. What it does is lifts the Ni/Li nanoparticles in the gas (H2 here) and creates an aerosol. When HV is applied to the electrodes in the reactor, we get a discharge, turning the gas into a plasma (with suspended particles in it). Plasma is nothing but dissociated H2 (protons). This somehow results in a LENR going. To stop it you simply need to turn the HV and US waves off, and it should slowly settle down and H would revert to H2, stopping the reaction.
I guess, there is a good chance of success if this is tried. I think @Alan Smith is ready with his plasma reactor and should add the US to it. A hammer stroke should also do the job of mixing the Ni dust into the plasma and setting is ablaze with LENR for a while (hint hint 
)
Replicators must try the electric field. It seems no one has done it except me356 with his plasma reactor. And he is the one who got success, no one else.
Btw, what does "dusty" mean? Is it just the powder or is it some kind of particle suspension, like an Aerosol.
Working in obscurity and attempting to keep total control of this invention is a dead end.
I generally agree (and gave a thumbs up to your comment). But I want to bring to everyone's notice that me356 never said anything like this. On the contrary, he said he will share everything about the tech (when, not known). I guess he is giving commercialization a try, and if he fails, it will be most probably open sourced.
Lets hope this will not take decades.
http://www.e-catworld.com/2016…-e-cat-patent-may-5-2016/
Industrial heat amends Ecat patent may-5-2016.
I wonder why they can't let go of it.
From the updated version, it looks like there is some secrecy going on here, which will stop any further replications and will keep this under darkness like many more interesting but secret lenr experiments.
I was also interested in knowing the answer to below question, but I guess it was lost in translation:
Q: In the experiment with the fuel, were the temperatures controlled by the PID?
Why were the temperatures not at controlled values?
A: In the fueled experiment, the temperature was controlled by the PID controller .
More information here (by Songsheng Jiang):
http://www.e-catworld.com/2016…periment-songsheng-jiang/
Note to others that Dewey, like Rossi, or Jed make claims without much evidences.
I noticed that since the beginning. There is no evidence that this man has any official information. There is no reason to believe anything he says, but I find him entertaining, even if less refined. If he is really from IH, then its a PR disaster, any money paid to APCO is a waste.
To keep the record clean, I do not take anything that Rossi says seriously, especially after the suit. This IH-Rossi affair has made waters murkier. Difficult to trust anyone.
Let the court decide. Popcorn please 
It looks like I touched a sensitive nerve of Mr Weaver with just one post
Let me see... he is repeating only one thing since he arrived on the scene (no points for guessing what it is). So that puts us in the same school, although he is much senior than rest of us and is probably being trained under Mr Krivit, THE great Krivit, a master of this art.
They appear to have measured their temperature through it single spot on the reactor core.
Good point. A hot spot is likely. Although since its on the end of the tube and the tube is made of steel, the chances are less.
So a re-calibration is necessary after the experiment. Probably with the vessel filled with only Ni and Ar.
A calorimetric setup will clear this issue (and perhaps bring up new issues).
I'm glad, IH refused to pay and refused to cancel the agreement (even when offered the money back by Rossi). It all hit the fan now and we will get to see it with our own eyes being debated in the court. All in open. This is one side of the coin.
The other side is, no E-Cats for people for many years to come, at least in the US.
