Posts by orsova

    I wonder if TG have actually made a working reactor system based on this patent. The nanoparticles setup described is remarkably similar to Takahashi at al's distribution of CuNi or Pd/Ni nanoparticles distributed as 'islands' on a Zirconia base so since this has been now shown repeatably to produce excess heat

    there's a high probability that this TG proposed device will also work. But why no examples of this working device in the patent? Possibly the Thz EM stimulation is provided simply by heating the Takahashi samples up to 300 deg . C. Interesting that two unrelated groups are coming up with similar nanoparticles designs at the same time, throwing in some KFeO2 catalyst to increase the probability of fusion by quasi-neutron or H* formation in addition to electron screening completes the picture!:)


    There was a publication a little while ago from Berlinguette's team, with David Fork as a co-author, that related to palladium nanoparticles and hydrogen absorption. It's of course speculation, but it certainly seems like they've made it a focus of their program?


    https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.chemmater.9b02193

    It's perhaps germane to note that when Matt Trevithick approached the forum to ask for suggestions about which experiment the LF forum community would most like to see performed, many people sincerely tried to answer what was a very difficult question. Ascoli repeatedly and disingenuously proposed a (to my understanding) - somewhat marginal - experiment, specifically because he thought it was likely to fail, prove that LENR wasn't real and thus dissuade Google from further research in the area. Quite aside from the fact that a single negative experiment doesn't prove anything about whether LENR is real or not, Ascoli was disingenuous about why he was suggesting the experiment. He presented the experiment as a good candidate for replication according to the criteria that were being discussed, rather than outlining his motive for advocating for the experiment. It was only later that his reasoning became clear. He repeatedly dragged the thread off-topic, and if my memory serves correctly, continued to advocate for the experiment even after he was asked, more than once, to desist.


    It was incredibly frustrating to read his contributions to the thread, because it was repeatedly pointed out to him that his chosen experiment was a bad candidate for a number of reasons. Ascoli persisted because, as became clear later, he wasn't thinking about the question the same way others were. He was pushing for an experiment he thought would fail, and so the technical challenges inherent in the experiment were of no consequence to him.


    In short, he repeatedly sucked the oxygen out of an important discussion by advancing a disingenuous and vandalous argument.

    I probably should not be saying this, but one of the positive developments directly resulting from the Team Google wants your opinion: "What is the highest priority experiment the LENR community wants to see conducted?" thread was that Google did take an interest. There was a high level meeting with another party to discuss common interests/goals, and explore possible ways to cooperate.


    I do not know if anything came of it though, as I voluntarily opted out of the loop once the meeting was arranged, so as to ensure the privacy of the participants.


    That sounds encouraging. Appreciate the colour.

    Worthy effort by David Niebauer, but his talk reveals very little knowledge of the field, apart from his 'chosen ones' Brillouin. Most of his talk could have been delivered 10 years ago. He mentions both Defkalion and Piantelli as if they were still active. But both have shut down operations, and Piantelli's patents were being offered for salew as recently as last September. I declined to buy, not that I consider them worthless neccessarily, but because anybody can read them for free, so what exactly you are buying is not very much of a secret.


    I'm still watching, but I don't think this is recent, despite the upload date. He describes McKubre as being at SRI and Trevithick as a partner at Venrock. My guess: it's super old, but was only just uploaded.


    Edit: Rob beat me to it.


    Edit 2: It's interesting to note that Trevithick and Niebauer are friends. One suspects that between him and Page, the google camp has a good bead on their progress (whatever that is).


    Because the Daily Mail is such a bastion of journalistic rigour.

    This article and dissection of the available info reveals the smoking gun- this is a lab-sequenced virus that has escaped.


    'The available evidence most strongly supports that the 2019-NCoV virus is a vaccine strain of coronavirus either accidentally released from a laboratory accident, perhaps a laboratory researcher becoming infected with the virus while conducting animal experiments, or the Chinese were performing clinical studies of a Coronavirus vaccine in humans.'

    There is a level 4 virus research laboratory 20 miles from Wuhan...


    https://jameslyonsweiler.com/2…9-ncov-virus-wuhan-china/

    This guy seems to have a preoccupation with vaccine safety. I don't understand what he's saying, but I'm not sure I can take him at face value.


    ZH is deeply problematic. ZH started out in the GFC as a finance blog, and those who've watched it morph over the years know that it's not sincere. The guy who started it was done for insider trading IIRC.


    I don't disagree at all. I only meant to push back on Dr. Richard's suggestion that BEC's reactor is somehow disappointing. Not my intention to besmirch Mizuno in any way.

    More from Godes on Disqus.


    Hot Fusion? Really?

    Brillouin Energy already has 4 Controlled Electron Capture Reactors (CECR) currently functioning in their lab in downtown Berkeley. We achieved this having raised just over $17.6MM as of Jan 2020. Parts are interchangeable between reactors. We have had one catalyst rod that put out more than twice as much heat as the electrical energy put into the catalyst rod. That catalyst rod was able to perform the same way in multiple reactors and several hundred times. This analysis can be performed using something called System Identification. System Identification was developed by Google and discussed in nature Perspective article “Revisiting the cold case of cold fusion” https://www.nature.com/arti.... Published in March 2019. It can also be performed using steady state and water flow calorimetry. The difficulty of raising money is the only reason we are not already to market.

    Brillouin Energy has ~60 accredited investors. Several of those investors brought people with PhDs in a variety of disciplines to perform due diligence. Those who invested brought PhDs working in industry. In contrast, dozens of potential investors who brought PhDs from universities never invested. Why is that? It is not a ‘conspiracy’. That would imply a collaboration, I doubt any of the professors knew each other. However ‘institutional investors’ and many others rely on people they deem to be ‘the smartest’ to advise them. Without fail, those investors bring professors. One particular investment group already investing in hot fusion discussed in this article claimed a lack of ability to due diligence on our technology. The investors who bring PhDs from industry prove that it is not a lack of ability, so much as a lack of experience.

    We recently had a group of engineers with experience in designing building and operating power plants. They included a nuclear engineer with experience in multiple types of power plants including nuclear plants. That engineer spent more than 3 months investigating our technology. The conclusion is that we have control over heat production. It seems likely that our manufacturing technology can be scaled to produce electricity. They are being backed by big money that thinks we have no options. Negotiations have started but will likely be long. This activity has caused unexpected new alliances that could easily and dramatically shorten the distance to our goal of completely green energy production. The stakes are already being driven much more in our favor as time moves forward.

    I had a look, but couldn't find this posted anywhere. From Oct 2019.

    Gamma energy evaluation for creation of 111m Cd, 113m In, and 115m In isotopes

    NASA Glenn Research Center is investigating nuclear reactions in deuterated materials exposed to bremsstrahlung photons with kinetic energies from 1-3 MeV. Recent experiments used a continuous beam Dynamitron electron accelerator with a braking target. Electron beam energy loss verification was desired and experiments using cadmium and indium were completed which are known to transition to excited metastable states after exposure to bremsstrahlung photons. The gamma spin-up of 111Cd, 113In, and 115In are with photon beam energies of 1017 keV, 1024 keV, and 941 keV respectively. Recent tests corroborated published gamma energies using a beam energy loss of 62 to 74 keV.


    https://www.researchgate.net/p…m_In_and_115m_In_isotopes

    An obvious example would be NASA, who have previously shown themselves interested in such testing.


    According to Forsley, who is now an experimental physicist at NASA, NASA has replicated the SPAWAR co-dep protocol.


    Additionally, NASA has contracted with GEC to scale up the work and NASA scientists are publishing papers on LENR.

    Forgive me, but I don't understand Ascoli's point. In the TG thread, he repeatedly suggested the boil off experiment and, over time, it became clear that he believed that if TG did this experiment, they would see F&P's mistake and understand that LENR wasn't real. Ascoli continually uses the assertion that F&P made errors as proof that LENR isn't real.


    But even if F&P were in error, that doesn't prove anything about LENR in 2019. There are a corpus of experiments and results, they are diverse, and they are convincing in of themselves.