jpav New Member
  • Member since Aug 25th 2014
  • Last Activity:

Posts by jpav

    In real life a patent is only as good as your ability to defend it and that takes a lot of with tech like this you a strong monied partner or perfect timing as you go to market

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

    So the premise is that IH wrote a check or bunches of checks amounting to $11.5 M for which there were no intermittent deliverable's or other metrics of progress. That would make them dumber than dirt, which is doubtful.
    This project easily would yield many billions to the owner of the IP.... that's real money. :!:

    To me the litigation process is IP positioning.

    If Rossi stopped trusting them he was correct to bail.

    I've been watching this epic unfold for years now and there continues to be discussion regarding Rossi's integrity. "IF" he was trying to swindle someone it should of happened long ago and so far there has really been no real money moving around.
    Since the Fleischmann–Pons claims in 1989 there have been number positive experiments showing COP above chemical reaction energies, While these experiments were not always reproducible (due a lack of thorough understanding of the science) there was no denying the basic data.
    It is also reasonable that Rossi and others would want to thoroughly understand the phenomena at least from a control and safety standpoint before offering the public a potentially risky tool to provide energy. His personal liability is enormous.
    The actual science may never come but if you consider how little we really know about many forces we live with (gravity, light, magnetism.....) that would and should not be the argument for not proceeding.....

    As we know there are elements of physics that remain essentially unexplained. Where we are still only looking through the big picture window.
    Take any of the intrinsic forces of the universe and all we have are observations and distillations of phenomenon into ad hoc rules. Albeit highly dependable distillations.... however, physics as it exists today is a long way from explaining all the phenomenon of the universe.
    In the end, phenomena rules.....

    Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

    /* Remembering that threshold initiation temperatures are exceedingly common in many chemical reactions and always impacted by co constituents */

    Well, exactly - in chemical reactions operating at the eV scale - but not nuclear reactions, which run at the MeV scales. Their thresholds occur at the million Kelvin scales.

    fusion yes but not fission and then assuming that those are the only types of internuclear reactions that occur in the universe. Evidently not.....and not to be limited by our semantics. Chemical, nuclear....?

    Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

    Remembering that threshold initiation temperatures are exceedingly common in many chemical reactions and always impacted by co constituents

    Its way too bad we can't get ME365 an assistant to take notes start writing the narrative.
    This the problem for scientists....really a tendency to chase the fox and let the notes write themselves.

    Rossi is now in the zone where he tells assistants what to do and also who record the data. He then interprets the results, and designs the next foray.
    In this protocol someone needs to be thinking about if and when to launch. Hopefully it is someone.

    At some point Jobs & Wozniak decided to build a machine to sell......the first sale shuts down a lot of extraneous arguments.

    so the Rossi patent of layered reactors may be exactly what you are talking about wrt to a RF cascade effect?
    open ?s
    is there an efficient way to crevert RF back to electrical energy? Heat is great but direct electrical production is more useful. Whatever the COP is, whenever it is finally converted back into power or work the efficiencies will be critical.
    Given that your current output spans a significant spectrum of energy frequencies it would be important to be able to narrow that output to a specific output range. This is why your examination of RF output vs run conditions can be so important.

    My assessment is that the savings/profit incentive will be the key drivers....
    Prime markets for accelerated conversion are:

    • early adoption of residential heating and electricity
    • Transportation (autos, trucks, rail, ocean shipping)
    • Energy intensive manufacturing (All metals, basic chemicals [H2SO4, Cl, NaOH, HCl], cement, fertilizer, plastics.....)
    • Petro-energy futures crashing, along with total market disruption to the new equilibrium.

    Longer term trends

    • Grid dependency decreasing exponentially over 5 -10 years.
    • Petro-energy supply chain dependency decreasing
    • Vertical growth of petrochemical sources....up to and potentially past VCM production.
    • Refitting all residences and business points with the new energy paradigm.
    • Restructuring of infrastructure to take advantage of low cost energy (public lighting, Water, Wastewater)
    • Significant growth of engineering, manufacturing and construction areas to accommodate all the above.
    • Percent of labor in material cost increasing.

    Sectors Less effected

    • Health care
    • Food production (except for fertilization and logistics)
    • Entertainment
    • Technology
    • Mining?
    • Low energy dependent manufacturing

    The answer is relatively straightforward. You would short current energy stock like crazy. While the implementation and launching of any technology will take time the futures on energy will respond immediately......WRT to options timing becomes a critical element. However, followers of LENR should be able to recognize the impending success or failure of this highly disruptive technology as soon as someone actually markets and sells a working unit.