Simon Brink Verified User
  • Male
  • 46
  • from Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Member since Mar 13th 2015
  • Last Activity:

Posts by Simon Brink

    Have really enjoyed catching up on the UDH news from the last year or so, although a bit sad that ongoing development has run into a few problems.

    Best wishes to Leif and Sindre.

    From what I can see - as a believer - the major challenges for a large scale commercial system are (i) reaction upscale, (ii) designing a shielding system to deal with (and hopefully capture) all the high energy neutral particles generated, and (iii) power generation.

    If decay particles could be forced to be charged, that would help a lot...

    Given the current status of international relations, I suspect that “closed book” development by a major backer may be the most realistic path to realisation of positive technology potential.

    The solar corona is a more likely spot. I suspect stars have more than one kind of nuclear process powering them.

    Yes, and possibly energy from absorption of spacetime... (Some interesting recent papers on correlations between black hole grow and spacetime expansion.)

    Some detailed research on links between astronomic observations and ultra dense hydrogen theory may yield some more relevant theoretical info. There are a lot of UDH objects in the sky emitting a variety of unaccounted for radiation... - i.e. spectral peaks of unknown or incorrectly assigned peaks. Good opportunities for low budget research...

    So a while back...

    Re: ways to get H(0)

    Firstly I agree that understanding what it is is a pretty important first step. (My current view is that it is dark matter which exists in many sizes and can be described as a set of external solutions to the Dirac equation... Oks model)

    A few options to make it:

    - you can just dig it up if you know what you are looking for and where it can be found (already happening)

    - if you can calculate the Rydberg energy of various H(0) states, you can engineer new and better catalysts to allow production

    - Once you understand that space is filled with H(0) - although be it a very low density form - all you need is a 100km tube to start sucking it in from outer space!!!

    Good luck!!! 😀 SB.

    I had a look at the basics of this method to derive transition energies a couple of years back. Refer to the paper ‘LENR catalyst identification model’ on the Subtle Atomics website.

    In recent times I have become more concerned about the discontinuity around n=1 that this theory requires. Calculate the ratio of differences between adjacent states and you will understand. Either n=1 is a very special state (which it may be), or below ground state atomic states don’t make sense.

    Between 2015 and 2020 around 250 experiments were conducted looking at the validity of the inverse Rydberg relationship for catalyst identification based on augur energies. No particular strong correlations were identified for all calculated catalysts, but there were some positive (excess energy) results with Ni, Cu, Sn, Sr(?) and one alloy. Transmutations were also recorded with Ti (CSIRO validated), not explainable by inverse Rydberg theory.

    Based on these results I am now exploring other types of dense hydrogen, i.e. metallic, which can be described as m<1.

    Not a lot data points to work with, but possibly another method to identify catalysts (and dark matter...).

    The main point I’m making is that it is worth keeping in mind a broader range of calculation methods for identifying potential catalysts for dense H formation...

    Cherepanov2020 started this thread, so on this basis is entitled to express his ideas.

    However if the intention here is disinformation and disruption of good ongoing discussions and research, this is not appropriate, and may be more about geopolitics not science.

    Most of us are aware that there are some issues with existing theory which require careful critique to resolve. I’m not yet convinced this dialogue is adding to a resolution of this.

    Ups and Down

    Subtle Atomics research has largely been focused on pathways to dense hydrogen as a starting point to new energy systems.

    We have now reached a point where we can identify theoretically and experimentally that going below ground state for atomic H(n) hydrogen (BrLP model) and molecular states H2(n) is not actually possible.

    The good news however is that the ground state limit does not apply to metallic hydrogen states (m), consistent with the Holmlid model. The Subtle Atomic model also offers the additional development that at least 12 dense H metallic (m) states are identified, in addition to 32 expanded states.

    Atomic H models were not predicting known catalysts, particularly Fe, but the new dense metallic H model is demonstrating why Fe works, but more importantly is also enabling complex catalytic alloys to be engineered, produced and tested.

    And as a bonus, we can now explain BOTH dark matter and the likely chemical composition of the galactic black hole...

    Stay tuned

    Any thoughts about how such a large state is structured?

    Yes, size is definitely huge compared to “normal” matter.

    The second article presents a case for an n=29 metallic structure. (Link posted by others in this thread)

    I tend to subscribe to the idea that the electron is the entire electron orbit field (likely toroidal) not a point rotating in a field.

    The simplest explanation for the structure of dark matter (as proposed) is that electrons can exist in a wide range of size states. Ground state is not particularly special, except that it is the most stable state for solids and liquids on the Earth’s surface (not so sure about gases though...).

    There does however seem to be certain states that are more stable, characterised by a +7 relationship, i.e. n=1/15 (nuclear electrons) n=1/8 (small hydrogen) n=1 (ground state) and now n=29 (dark matter).

    From this you can probably work out what my guess might be for the structure of the intergalactic medium.

    A metallic structure is proposed based on the form of radiation emitted (blackbody/CMB), noting that a molecular or atomic structure would be expected to emit discrete radiation...

    We definitely have more to do to really understand our universe!!!

    I hope you can comment here further. As you may know Leif Holmlid has a similar, or better said, parallel stance on the identification of Dark Matter as what he calls UDH.

    There are quite a few dense hydrogen and cold hydrogen dark matter theories coming through at present, but non offer a quantitative match to the calculated mass of dark matter, nor do they provide insight into the spatial distribution of celestial bodies.

    I’m personally convinced that my theory has more merits that ground state or dense hydrogen models as it explains: the density of galactic space, the gaps between stars in a galaxy, the calculated mass of dark matter, the origin of Cosmic Microwave Background radiation, the electrical conductivity of space, stellar growth, what black holes are made of, etc.

    I would encourage everyone who is interested in astrophysics to read the paper and offer comments on the proposal.

    Methods of production[edit]

    The only truly stable state of a hydrogen-like atom is the ground state with n = 1.

    Not entirely true.

    Dense hydrogen is stable when trapped inside chemical structures such as fullerenes, e.g. C-60. Geological deposits are known and are currently being extracted.

    Oh, and about 80% of the mass the Universe is hydrogen with n greater than 1, i.e. H(n=29) otherwise known as dark matter. Refer to papers on the website.

    Although not formally confirmed, lawyers of BLP can not simply stop a researcher from doing research that has overlap with BLP's activities based on legal reasons. If true, they might have offered him an amount of money or stake in BLP to cease his research and publications. We probably never will know.

    Yes, I have received a cease and decist notice from BLP.

    BLP is never (in my opinion) going to offer $ to anyone for this sort of thing (to stop research).

    What they are/were doing (perhaps???) is positioning themselves legally so that that if a commercial technology was developed by someone else, they can claim that it utilises BLP IP and would likely attempt to negotiate significant payment for use of this IP. As a listed company, this is maximising value for shareholders...

    The actual extent of BLP IP coverage is very hard to define, noting that they attempt to cover 137 different forms of dense hydrogen and just about all elements as potential catalysts in their patents, in a wide variety of electrochemical configurations!!!

    For many of us who are really just trying to assist with developing a viable safe pathway to a clean energy future, receiving one of these legal letters is highly demoralising and has unfortunately ended the research efforts of many which is a real shame.

    The reality is that the BLP theory is not fully correct, but they do have some early publication and patent coverage on dense hydrogen. Technologies are very possible beyond the BLP ideas, but considerable care is needed in presenting ideas to avoid risks of BLP attempting claims should a technology become ready for commercialisation.

    Not easy to navigate unless you know in advance what is going on...


    Are you following the approach descriped at the very beginning of the article? No mentioning of "catalytic alloys"

    What safety precautions have you taken?

    These experiments were done prior to reading this thread, so we’re not trying to replicate anything. The intention was to produce a 2 stage reaction, overall H(n=1) -> H(n=3) - as occurs just below the surface of the sun, refer to NASA sun emissions spectrum data - Carbon was being used simply because it is resistant to oxidation during H loading, but for the reaction the current direction was eventually reversed directing free H’s into the carbon. Safety measures were only to perform a very small number of experiments. - Didn’t feel so good afterwards, so I definitely wouldn’t recommend anyone else doing this without shielding. UDH loaded carbon is probably the best shielding available (at least 10x better than lead) but in some situations some UDH possibly annihilates producing other particle emissions, so can affect results and may need secondary shielding.

    Follow up experiments planned to try to isolate and amplify effects.

    "two new innovations to boost the kinetics" - perhaps they have they finally worked out how to calculate the catalysts!!!

    "34 times gain" - looks just about ready for commercial use. Great news!!!

    Hopefully someone can step in with a few spare billion, good ethics and political leverage can get this all happening towards the replacement of carbon energy sources rather than it all just ending up as a new military energy toy.

    Great to see progress!!!

    Wonder what the legal status is if Mills’ obsession with a transition energy of 27.2eV/c^2 proves not to be correct. (It’s pretty simple to work out that 54.4-13.6 is not 27.2eV)

    Is it legally acceptable to misrepresent the process so badly???

    I wish you lots of luck with your shop venture. I hope you aren't expecting too much customer feedback though- I gave up with the Looking For Heat shop not because of low sales, they were fine, but because it was really designed to help create a crowd of experimenters with similar equipment to screen materials and other things. That part of it failed to work, so as I am more suited to experimentation than I am to shop-keeping I gave it up

    Thanks Alan. My principle motivation has always been around facilitating the development of replacement energy systems for carbon based fuels, but there are some really interesting side developments coming out of new developments that may offer a far quicker path to the industrialisation of beneficial LENR. The LENR shop showcases some of the progress being made, and will hopefully be a stepping stone towards larger production capacity and an increased capacity to develop low carbon energy systems.

    According to 4D rules a photon makes one rotation where as the electron makes two (at light speed). A photon captured by the electron must acquire a second dimension rotation with light speed, but then we had to divide its mass/energy by alpha.

    The "two rotations" concept is consistent with experimental pion data.

    Mass (pion+) = 139.6 MeV/c2.

    Compton wavelength = h/(mc^2) = 8.8fm

    Reduced Compton wavelength = Compton wavelength / (2 PI) = 1.4fm

    Half the Reduced Compton wavelength is = 0.7fm

    The experimental pion mean charge radius is around 0.68fm.

    Isn't what you describe a Neutron Star?

    According to the theory, probably quite similar, except that a black hole is spinning much faster, so is more like a solenoid, whereas a neutron star does not have the same angular momentum, so remains more spherical. Unclear whether the masses are neutrons, nucleons or atoms with highly contracted electrons. Potentially the neutron star is more neutral and the black hole is more charged, with greater separation of positive and negative components.