Posts by Rob Woudenberg

    TM has declared his willingness to open-source the R20 tech he might be able to offer more support than Norront. who are more commercially oriented (I think).

    Norrønt Fusion Energy As has a commercial goal by licensing newly developed technology via a licence program. This is clear from their website.

    But, don't forget that TM's reactors have appeared in patent applications, of which some are now owned by IH and maybe others. That would in the end also hint to commercial goals.

    There seems to be some confusion about TM allowing open source replication. Although he, with the great help of JR, makes details available, these can also be found in the patent application(s). R20 patent applications are not available yet, but these might be pending.
    Any successful replication with the help of the 'open source' information will be fine with the patent application owner(s), but once commercial exploitation will start and the patent applications have been granted, you need licenses.
    So, replications can be 'open source' by all means. The patent (application) owners will love successful replications, it will be a good advertisement for their aimed license programs in the end.

    I've pointed this out a few times in earlier postings: granted patents might allow for 'open source' exploitation if that is the aim of the owners, to prevent too expensive implementations and serve mankind for free.

    Since IH now owns at least one patent application of Mizuno, I have great doubts these will be made available 'for free'.

    Last but not least, as an another example: (almost) everyone owns a smartphone nowadays. Each recently bought smartphone holds for approximately $30 on license fees. Yet, everyone is willing to pay the price.

    I have some second thoughts about the remark that as much as desirable reactant could be added to the R20 concept.

    There might be some risks to exceed the amount of reactant material as has been applied by Mizuno.

    There are some indications that the IR radiation of the heater element is the trigger for the excess heat production, combined with a minimum temperature of the reactant.

    In the occurrence the reactor wall gets near as hot as the heater element it will also radiate IR.

    That would be the point where the reactor could become unstable and uncontrollable, unless an additional controllable forced air cooling will be added.

    I think there should be a delicate balance between the heater heat capacity, the reactor wall heat/cool capacity and the amount of reactant to be safe.

    The R20 reactor and its described amount of reactant seems to have that balance.

    Yeah, how long did it take to open Your eyes ? Anyway, late but better too late than never. Finally You see, what "LIES" behind his blabla.

    The fact that Rossi indicates there is no fusion does not exclude Rossi has discovered an excess heat mechanism.
    He simply could have gained more insights from his research further over the last period.

    Why am I saying this? If you read Holmlid's papers carefully, you will find that they reveal options for harvesting excess heat/electricity without fusion, e.g. harvesting the energy of released (charged) particles with high kinetic energy. Many LENR phenomena could be linked to UHD/UDD, including Rossi's.

    In fact Rossi recently referred to a paper he introduced at with quite some references to the works of Holmlid.

    Having no or hardly any radiation during these phenomena may be another hint towards that direction.

    Understand me well, I am not a big Rossi fan either, but the 'Rossi story' may be more complex than we all suspect.

    The main argument some people make for selling energy instead of products is that it will protect their intellectual property. In my opinion, this is the sign of an inventor who cares more about making a fortune than helping advance our civilization. I've heard of too many inventors that desire to go this route; however, they all end up with nothing at all. The key to making money with cold fusion or exotic technology is NOT TO FALL VICTIM TO INVENTORS SYNDROME. If you see a straightforward path to making a decent amount of money, even if it involves exposing your IP to the world, do so.

    Protecting inventions by IP has a few more motivations/options besides just plain aiming for money via a license program:

    - The inventor has invested money to make this invention possible. IP license could cover those costs

    - Having IP allows easier access to investors, allowing to mature the technology to an industrial level.

    - Having IP allows the inventor/assignee to control who can use this technology (e.g. think of excluding military applications)

    - Having IP allows the inventor/assignee to make his invention 'open source' and thus prevent other parties from commercialising at high costs for consumers.

    JedRothwell I've been following LENR since January 2011, you have been active many more years in this field.

    You are now making the impression, by starting this topic, that you are becoming more optimistic that LENR technology has taken an important step toward reality.

    That is a remarkable milestone!

    Some rough calculations on Mizuno's R20 reactor from atomic perspective to trigger further thoughts

    (please, fill in any errors, assumptions and suggestions):

    (1) Surplus heat @ 3KW: 2700W - Energy release 2700 W/s = 1.7 * 1022 eV

    (2) Number of Deuterium atoms (n) in the reactor using ideal gas law PV = nRT : n = PV/RT (mol)

    P = 0.0002 (@ 200 P)

    V = 5.7 liters (given by R20 cylinder)

    R = 0.08314 (given constant)

    T = 673 K ( given by 400 degrees C as an R20 estimate)

    n = 0.00020374 mol Deuterium = 2.4449 * 1020 free atoms in reactor space.

    Assuming that absorbed Deuterium atoms do not take part in the energy generation, but serve as a 'gas reserve' that by means of an Deuterium equilibrium will be released in reactor space due to gas pressure and/or gas temperature changes.

    Let's further assume that 1% of the free space atoms participate in energy release at the surface of the PD/Ni mesh.

    That would result in 100 *(1)/(2) = 7 KeV per participating atom. Not a fusion result (would require several MeV/atom) if given assumptions would be correct.

    This is true, unless someone else has already communicated the idea openly an made it public earlier.

    Correct. Or, someone else may have filed similar invention earlier (that is not yet public).
    As part of the patent application process a search for prior art will be performed.

    If prior art is found the patent application process will be stopped or the claims will be modified or slimmed down.

    Thanks for filling this in.

    SGVIT took a careful look at this work in 2017. They reviewed this paper: https://gsvit.files.wordpress.…o_lenr__experiments-1.pdf


    All in English. I did not have a chance to read their review yet but I will try to find the time. Has any regular here considered this paper?


    What strikes me is, when I look at Fig. 27 and Fig. 28, that the slope of the 248 W curve between 0 and 3000 sec. is less steep when the actual recorder is used, compared to the run with the calibration reactor. I would expect it to the other way around. Same counts for the other curves.
    As if in the first 3000 seconds input energy is used for something else besides heating the (internal) device.

    Since absorption is an exothermic process it is unlikely that this would be absorption of Deuterium.

    It could be desorption of Deuterium from the mesh, assuming the mesh is already loaded with Deuterium before the start of each test run, which is likely.

    Mizuno assured me he held back nothing in this paper. Every detail he knows of is included. As I said before, it may be he is doing things without realizing it, the way a good cook sometimes does, but every step that he is consciously aware of doing is included.

    There is no discussion about all details being in the paper you released on 18th June as far as I am concerned.

    There is still the possibility that Mizuno filed a new application before the date of 18th of June 2019, covering the latest details. I would not blame him at all.

    Let's say he filed a new patent application on 1st of May 2019. In that case it will only be published (and visible) after December 1st 2020.

    He is free to communicate about any new insight (as filed on 1st of May 2019) after the date of filing, e.g. by means of a public paper. That would still protect his invention.

    There is one exception: In case a provisional patent application filing was done at the USPTO the inventor can not publish any details within a time frame of 12 months. Given the fact that Mizuno filed patent applications earlier on (without provisional patent application filing), I presume that if he filed a new patent application, he did so without filing a provisional patent application. Time will tell.

    For replicators it is no problem at all when Mizuno has filed the latest details in a new patent application.

    As long as no business will be made out of it, that would require a license in case the patent application gets granted.

    The only good thing is that the crucial new element that Mizuno used (introduced) for the high performance is not in the patent! And for those skilled in the art & physics this means that an important step for high performance LENR is public and free to use for everybody!

    New stuff might be in pending patent applications. It takes 18 months before they become visible.

    Hi Rob,

    This came up some time ago. JedRothwell discussed it here. From my memory of the tale, Mizuno's visit to the IH lab in the USA was inconclusive, but it was apparently rushed (5 days max) and the support provided was perhaps not quite right, though I am hazy on details. IH have however continued to support the work as can be seen.

    Thanks Alan.
    I am looking into IH's test capabilities. Apparently they have some test facility.
    The cooperation between IH and Mizuno seems firm, IH now took over the ownership of Mizuno's latest published patent application as I indicated earlier in this thread.

    630 eV is reported by Holmlid being the energy released when D(0) releases a D atom by stimulation.
    With his Time of Flight measurement results he showed that D-D distance of D(0) clusters is approx 2.3 pm.

    Anybody's guess as to what the ratio of negative to positive muons created in Mizuno's reactor could be. Clearly there are many possible LENR reactions going on here to generate excess heat, muon-catalysed fusion of D-D just being one of the more well established mechanisms among others. I would replicate Mizuno's reactor with thick stainless steel walls because D would be absorbed into the Fe metallic lattice and possibly undergo fusion here too, thin walls may form small (NAE) cracks letting in air etc

    Perhaps I should emphasise that there are more than one method to derive energy from D(0) which should be clearly separated.

    Each method can be triggered under a specific condition and require a specific procedure.

    The method to derive heat from absorption of charged particles is clearly different from deriving heat from fusion.

    These different methods are exactly what Norrønt Fusion Energy As is developing.

    In the case of Mizuno's R20 reactor the conditions in which it is currently operated points (in my view) mainly to non-fusion, absorption of charged particles.

    Potentially the R20 could also be used for mainly fusion, but conditions will be different from the current one and it may require an additional trigger source, e.g. laser.