Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[Lennart Thornros]

Jed and Steven,
I think you guys are on to something.
It is the expectation and anticipation that is the climax.
Reading Rossi's comments - I have the feeling he is in a constant euphorium.
I think that is the reason he is doing what he is doing. The question has
been asked here "Why does A.R. put so much effort in . .  ."
Steven you just let me know I must be old as I played with computers in the
early sixties - yeah they were analog but still. Not very much use as
PCs.:)

Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros

www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com
lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899
202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648

“Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment
to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM

On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson <
orionwo...@charter.net> wrote:

> From Jed:
>
>
>
> > Dreams do come true, so be careful what you wish for. I dreamed of having
>
> > a computer of my own, after seeing one at the Census Bureau at age 8.
>
> > When I grew up I did have one. It was the first expensive item I bought
>
> > as an adult.
>
>
>
> That was a very prophetic dream you had, Jed, and at the age of eight.
>
>
>
> Let me reciprocate with a similar dream I had when I was about 9 or 10
> years old and living out on Guam. This was back in the early 1960s. I had a
> vivid dream one night where I felt the presence of teachers who were nearby
> but out of my sight. They were telling me interesting things about a
> magical box they had placed in front of me. I got the impression the box
> could make my dreams come true. I got the impression that I could put my
> dreams into the box, and then box would eventually reciprocate with the
> outward externalization of those dreams. It was a very strong dream. I
> didn't know what that magical box was - but I knew I wanted one. It was, of
> course, the personal computer. Back then I have no idea what a computer
> was, let alone a personal computer.
>
>
>
> Personal computers have helped me externalize my visionary dreams in the
> form of digital paintings as well as my compositions. Perhaps if I'm lucky
> that same magic box will also eventually assist me in my ongoing Kepler
> research. But that remains to be seen. Hey! Two out of three ain't bad.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Steven Vincent Johnson
>
> OrionWorks.com
>
> zazzle.com/orionworks
>

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[Jed Rothwell]

Here is another comment I posted in response to myself, in a kind of
monologue.

I wrote:

I do not recall seeing any information from Godes describing the actual
> calorimetry or performance of any of his existing reactors, or previous
> reactors. . . .
>



> I would ask: If Robert Godes has all this information, and he was prepared
> to present it at ICCF19, why doesn't he now post it on his website?
>

Let me add that he may have this information but he does not want to make
it public. That may be his business strategy. He is under no obligation to
publish. I would not criticize him for keeping secrets. However, from the
public relations point of view, I think he is making a mistake.

If your business strategy prevents you from publishing proof of your
claims, then you have no credibility. You cannot expect anyone to believe
you. Since you have no credibility, it looks bad to go around claiming you
have measured excess heat, x-rays, tritium, and you are designing 104 kW
reactors. I think that when a company decides not to provide any
experimental evidence to back up technical claims, it should refrain from
making those claims in the first place.

As I said, he may have published evidence for these claims somewhere, and I
did not hear about it. In that case my analysis is off the wall and out of
the window.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[Jed Rothwell]

Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson  wrote:

> When I was a small child I often wished that certain aspects pertaining to
> my lucid dreams would make an effort to jump into the realm of my physical
> reality. Who wouldn't enjoy being able to fly! Alas, they never obliged.
>
Long after they became famous, a reporter asked one of the Wright brothers
(Orville, I think it was): "What was the most exciting thing about flying?
Was it the first flight? The public acclaim after you become famous?" He
responded: "The most exciting thing was thinking about what it would be
like, before we did it." That, I submit, is the essence of the inventor's
soul, wherein the dream of the invention is more compelling than the
reality, and even in some ways more real.

Dreams do come true, so be careful what you wish for. I dreamed of having a
computer of my own, after seeing one at the Census Bureau at age 8. When I
grew up I did have one. It was the first expensive item I bought as an
adult.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

>From Jed:

 

> Dreams do come true, so be careful what you wish for. I dreamed of having

> a computer of my own, after seeing one at the Census Bureau at age 8. 

> When I grew up I did have one. It was the first expensive item I bought

> as an adult.

 

That was a very prophetic dream you had, Jed, and at the age of eight.

 

Let me reciprocate with a similar dream I had when I was about 9 or 10 years 
old and living out on Guam. This was back in the early 1960s. I had a vivid 
dream one night where I felt the presence of teachers who were nearby but out 
of my sight. They were telling me interesting things about a magical box they 
had placed in front of me. I got the impression the box could make my dreams 
come true. I got the impression that I could put my dreams into the box, and 
then box would eventually reciprocate with the outward externalization of those 
dreams. It was a very strong dream. I didn't know what that magical box was - 
but I knew I wanted one. It was, of course, the personal computer. Back then I 
have no idea what a computer was, let alone a personal computer.

 

Personal computers have helped me externalize my visionary dreams in the form 
of digital paintings as well as my compositions. Perhaps if I'm lucky that same 
magic box will also eventually assist me in my ongoing Kepler research. But 
that remains to be seen. Hey! Two out of three ain't bad.

 

Regards, 

Steven Vincent Johnson

OrionWorks.com

zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[mixent]

In reply to  David Roberson's message of Thu, 3 Sep 2015 11:04:18 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>In order to operate it uses a mixture of deuterium and tritium fuel.I just 
>remember reading that the reaction process results in the regeneration of 
>additional tritium fuel but that the process is barely able to replace the 
>original quantity of fuel.  Perhaps someone who understands how that fuel is 
>regenerated can set me straight concerning the excess production of tritium 
>you mention.
>
>When the Takamak reaction takes place, how many neutrons are released per 
>event and do you need to capture most of those in order to produce new 
>tritium?  That is what I read about which suggested that this was not going to 
>be such an easy task.  Perhaps a technique is now in place which offers 
>overkill for this requirement?
>
>Dave

The primary reaction is 

D + T => He4 + n (14 MeV)

If I'm not mistaken the secondary reaction is 

Li6 + n (slow) => T + He4 (both fast) 

So you would need to capture every single neutron, which will be difficult,
because they are very fast neutrons, with considerable penetrating power.

However there are likely to be some other reactions that make the task a little
easier, such as

D + n (fast) => H + 2n (slower)

Li7 + n (fast) => Li6 + 2n (slower) 

and

He4 (fast) + D => H + n (slow) + He4 (slow)

These three are neutron multiplying reactions

and

n(fast) + Li7 => T + He4 + n (slower)

and 

n (slower) + Li7 => T + He4 + n (even slower) etc. until the neutron is either
captured, escapes,  or has insufficient energy. This reaction creates more T
without consuming the neutron (just it's energy).

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[David Roberson]

In order to operate it uses a mixture of deuterium and tritium fuel.I just 
remember reading that the reaction process results in the regeneration of 
additional tritium fuel but that the process is barely able to replace the 
original quantity of fuel.  Perhaps someone who understands how that fuel is 
regenerated can set me straight concerning the excess production of tritium you 
mention.

When the Takamak reaction takes place, how many neutrons are released per event 
and do you need to capture most of those in order to produce new tritium?  That 
is what I read about which suggested that this was not going to be such an easy 
task.  Perhaps a technique is now in place which offers overkill for this 
requirement?

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Thu, Sep 3, 2015 10:44 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response


@David Roberson
"I recall reading that it is going to be a challenge to
generate all of 
the tritium required to fuel the Tokamak reactor itself. Has
this 
problem been resolved? Is there going to be enough left over to become a

proliferation issue?"

ITER, if it ever gets going, should produce tritium
by the liter.


 

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[a.ashfield]

@David Roberson
"I recall reading that it is going to be a challenge to generate all of 
the tritium required to fuel the Tokamak reactor itself. Has this 
problem been resolved? Is there going to be enough left over to become a 
proliferation issue?"


ITER, if it ever gets going, should produce tritium by the liter.

RE: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

from Jed,

 

...

 

> I do not recall seeing any information from Godes describing the actual

> calorimetry or performance of any of his existing reactors, or previous

> reactors. He has always talked about what he hopes to accomplish, not what

> he has accomplished. I have asked him in person what power levels,

> temperatures and what method of calorimetry he uses. He did not respond.

 

This strikes me as a house of cards waiting to collapse.

 

The above commentary pretty much explains the situation to me. It saddens me. 
It's as if one hopes one's theoretical research will eventually save the day by 
simply extrapolating the original configuration (of one's dreams) within the 
confines of a CAD configuration. Perhaps the dream will eventually jump out of 
the dream-state and miraculously transform into physical reality. When I was a 
small child I often wished that certain aspects pertaining to my lucid dreams 
would make an effort to jump into the realm of my physical reality. Who 
wouldn't enjoy being able to fly! Alas, they never obliged. 

 

It is perhaps ironic of me to say this since much my own personal work is 
largely confined to the confines theoretical research and computer simulations 
these days. Granted, theoretical research and computer simulations most 
certainly have their place. But hopefully, I know my place in the greater 
scheme of things. Experimental evidence always trumps theory.

 

I wish Mr. Trump understood this.

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

OrionWorks.com

zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[Jed Rothwell]

Here is another message I posted about this, over at CMNS. This is about:

http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/BrillouinIE123.pdf


I would like to clarify something, from an off-line discussion. I wrote:


> Let us also assume Godes can make a 100 W reactor, or perhaps a 1 kW
> reactor. The reactor is fully controlled and reliable.
>

I have no idea whether Godes can do this or not. I have not seen any
information from him or heard anything from anyone else indicating that he
can.

If it turns out he cannot do this, then it would be premature to make a 104
kW reactor. It would be suicidal. However, the Infinite Energy article
seems to indicate he is only thinking about doing this. It says:

"We have many cores in CAD (computer-aided drafting) in our computer
system. Within 18 to 24 months the current target product is a boiler
capable of producing 104 kilowatts (kW) of thermal energy."


I do not recall seeing any information from Godes describing the actual
calorimetry or performance of any of his existing reactors, or previous
reactors. He has always talked about what he hopes to accomplish, not what
he has accomplished. I have asked him in person what power levels,
temperatures and what method of calorimetry he uses. He did not respond. He
discussed his theory instead, which I do not understand.

Perhaps I have overlooked something, but I keep all papers from an author
in one folder. I do not see anything here or on his web site. The web site
has illustrations and a general discussion, but no description of an actual
reactor, no experimental data, or other quantitative information. There is
no indication he has ever produced 1 W, never mind 1 kW or 104 kW. See, for
example:

http://brillouinenergy.com/technology/products/

The Infinite Energy article says:

If Robert Godes had been granted his speaking slot at ICCF19 in Padua, he
would have discussed his hypothesis, described the experimental apparatus
and the results from the experimental apparatus including radiation effects
like exposure of X-ray film and also about excess heat results and
production of tritium results.


I would ask: If Robert Godes has all this information, and he was prepared
to present it at ICCF19, why doesn't he now post it on his website?

Has he posted this somewhere that I overlooked?

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[David Roberson]

I recall reading that it is going to be a challenge to generate all of the 
tritium required to fuel the Tokamak reactor itself.  Has this problem been 
resolved?  Is there going to be enough left over to become a proliferation 
issue?

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Tue, Sep 1, 2015 12:09 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response


Axil

"NRC nuclear inspections cost a lot, The reactor operators must give the
NRC
about 20 million a year for inspection."

For Tokamaks too?  It's
Tokamaks that make tritium in bulk. Probably the greatest threat for
proliferation there is.



 

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[a.ashfield]

Axil

"NRC nuclear inspections cost a lot, The reactor operators must give the NRC
about 20 million a year for inspection."

For Tokamaks too?  It's Tokamaks that make tritium in bulk. Probably the 
greatest threat for proliferation there is.

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[Axil Axil]

>
> Jed says:
>
> 2. There are hundreds of corporations and probably hundreds of thousands
> of engineers in the world who can do a better job at this than Godes. If he
> would only demonstrate that the effect is real, these corporations and
> experts would be lined up ready to do this job far more skillfully than he
> could do it. Not only will this cost him nothing; they will pay him
> enormous sums of money.
>

Robert Godes says:

 “We are an engineering company. We are making equipment that companies
should be able to go out and produce things themselves. We don’t want to
produce things; it’s not what Brillouin is about. The company is about
licensing intellectual property so other companies can build devices
themselves. This is an enormous market. There’s no way that one company can
supply everything. How many oil companies, how many miners are there? It
will require more companies than that to fill the need. This makes energy
very inexpensive. The demand for energy is going to expand tremendously
once this technology makes its way to the market. Brillouin will be
licensing the technology.”

Jed, did you not understand the business plan explained here?

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[Axil Axil]

http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/08/31/rossi-manufacturing-not-licensing-is-focus-for-e-cat/

Without air tight IP protection through patents, selling knowhow cannot be
done. Rossi is locking down LENR IP. Unless Godes gets his own IP, he has
nothing to sell.

Will Rossi go to court to cut the legs out from under Godes' IP product
offering? Time will tell.

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:55 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Jed says:
>>
>> 2. There are hundreds of corporations and probably hundreds of thousands
>> of engineers in the world who can do a better job at this than Godes. If he
>> would only demonstrate that the effect is real, these corporations and
>> experts would be lined up ready to do this job far more skillfully than he
>> could do it. Not only will this cost him nothing; they will pay him
>> enormous sums of money.
>>
>
> Robert Godes says:
>
>  “We are an engineering company. We are making equipment that companies
> should be able to go out and produce things themselves. We don’t want to
> produce things; it’s not what Brillouin is about. The company is about
> licensing intellectual property so other companies can build devices
> themselves. This is an enormous market. There’s no way that one company can
> supply everything. How many oil companies, how many miners are there? It
> will require more companies than that to fill the need. This makes energy
> very inexpensive. The demand for energy is going to expand tremendously
> once this technology makes its way to the market. Brillouin will be
> licensing the technology.”
>
> Jed, did you not understand the business plan explained here?
>

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[Jed Rothwell]

Axil Axil  wrote:


>  “We are an engineering company. We are making equipment that companies
> should be able to go out and produce things themselves. We don’t want to
> produce things; it’s not what Brillouin is about. . . .
>


>
> Jed, did you not understand the business plan explained here?
>

Yes, I think I understand it better than Godes does. He says he "does not
want to produce things" yet he spends millions of his investor's dollars
producing things!

If this is really his strategy, then he should make a device that produces
heat around 100 to 1000 W. He should make it as reliable as he can, with
the best power density. He should demonstrate it is real. Everything after
that should be left to his customers, which should be industrial
corporations. When it comes to engineering a 104 kW heat source or a
generator, they have immeasurably more experience and expertise that he
does. Plus they probably would not like to see him compete with them.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[Axil Axil]

It seems to me that what you don;t want to do is design a reactor that
produces tritium. Tritium production is a nonstarter in the reactor
business. The NRC will shut down any reactor that produces tritium even in
the smallest amounts. What is Godes thinking here?

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>
>>  “We are an engineering company. We are making equipment that companies
>> should be able to go out and produce things themselves. We don’t want to
>> produce things; it’s not what Brillouin is about. . . .
>>
>
>
>>
>> Jed, did you not understand the business plan explained here?
>>
>
> Yes, I think I understand it better than Godes does. He says he "does not
> want to produce things" yet he spends millions of his investor's dollars
> producing things!
>
> If this is really his strategy, then he should make a device that produces
> heat around 100 to 1000 W. He should make it as reliable as he can, with
> the best power density. He should demonstrate it is real. Everything after
> that should be left to his customers, which should be industrial
> corporations. When it comes to engineering a 104 kW heat source or a
> generator, they have immeasurably more experience and expertise that he
> does. Plus they probably would not like to see him compete with them.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[David Roberson]

He obviously wants to show that his reaction is nuclear by the tritium 
production.  Let's hope that the amount generated is not going to be an issue 
for regulators.
 
Dave
 
 
-Original Message-
From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Mon, Aug 31, 2015 2:25 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response


 
It seems to me that what you don;t want to do is design a reactor that produces 
tritium. Tritium production is a nonstarter in the reactor business. The NRC 
will shut down any reactor that produces tritium even in the smallest amounts. 
What is Godes thinking here? 
 
  
  
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Jed Rothwell<jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: 
  
   

 
  
Axil Axil<janap...@gmail.com> wrote:  
  
   

   

 
  
   
 “We are an engineering company. We are making equipment that companies should 
be able to go out and produce things themselves. We don’t want to produce 
things; it’s not what Brillouin is about. . . .
  
 

   
   
  


 
  
   

 


Jed, did you not understand the business plan explained here?
   
  
 
 
  
  
   
  
Yes, I think I understand it better than Godes does. He says he "does not want 
to produce things" yet he spends millions of his investor's dollars producing 
things! 
 
  
 
 
If this is really his strategy, then he should make a device that produces heat 
around 100 to 1000 W. He should make it as reliable as he can, with the best 
power density. He should demonstrate it is real. Everything after that should 
be left to his customers, which should be industrial corporations. When it 
comes to engineering a 104 kW heat source or a generator, they have 
immeasurably more experience and expertise that he does. Plus they probably 
would not like to see him compete with them. 


   
   
- Jed   
   

   


  
  
 
 

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[Axil Axil]

No reactor that produces any amount of tritium will ever be sold!

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 2:42 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:

> He obviously wants to show that his reaction is nuclear by the tritium
> production.  Let's hope that the amount generated is not going to be an
> issue for regulators.
>
> Dave
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
> Sent: Mon, Aug 31, 2015 2:25 pm
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response
>
> It seems to me that what you don;t want to do is design a reactor that
> produces tritium. Tritium production is a nonstarter in the reactor
> business. The NRC will shut down any reactor that produces tritium even in
> the smallest amounts. What is Godes thinking here?
>
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>  “We are an engineering company. We are making equipment that companies
>>> should be able to go out and produce things themselves. We don’t want to
>>> produce things; it’s not what Brillouin is about. . . .
>>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Jed, did you not understand the business plan explained here?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I think I understand it better than Godes does. He says he "does not
>> want to produce things" yet he spends millions of his investor's dollars
>> producing things!
>>
>> If this is really his strategy, then he should make a device that
>> produces heat around 100 to 1000 W. He should make it as reliable as he
>> can, with the best power density. He should demonstrate it is real.
>> Everything after that should be left to his customers, which should be
>> industrial corporations. When it comes to engineering a 104 kW heat source
>> or a generator, they have immeasurably more experience and expertise that
>> he does. Plus they probably would not like to see him compete with them.
>>
>> - Jed
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[Jed Rothwell]

Axil Axil  wrote:

No reactor that produces any amount of tritium will ever be sold!
>

That may not be true. Tritium is used today in exit signs and wristwatches.
In other words, government regulations already allow it in small amounts.
As long as it can be shown that the amount of tritium produced is limited
and can be controlled, and that the device sealed in a way that prevents
any leakage, small amounts will probably be okay. It is easier to seal a
cold fusion cell than something like a battery or in an internal combustion
engine.

It would not surprise me if fossil fuel lobbyists try to prevent the use of
cold fusion because it produces tritium. The way to counter this will be
for cold fusion lobbyists to point out that the use of fossil fuel releases
far more radioactive garbage into the environment than cold fusion ever
will, especially from burning coal.

If there are no cold fusion lobbyists then there is no chance cold fusion
will ever be allowed. I am sure the opposition from the physics
establishment and later from the fossil fuel industry will crush it.
Fortunately, many powerful interests such as industrial corporations will
be in favor of developing cold fusion and they will be willing to pay for
lobbyists.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[a.ashfield]

Jed, not to mention that Tokamaks produce tritium by the liter.

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[Axil Axil]

FYI

Rector shutdown due to radiation leakage.

https://tlarremore.wordpress.com/2015/03/17/nuclear-event-reactor-shutdown-salem-nuclear-power-plant-new-jersey/t

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Axil Axil  wrote:
>
> No reactor that produces any amount of tritium will ever be sold!
>>
>
> That may not be true. Tritium is used today in exit signs and
> wristwatches. In other words, government regulations already allow it in
> small amounts. As long as it can be shown that the amount of tritium
> produced is limited and can be controlled, and that the device sealed in a
> way that prevents any leakage, small amounts will probably be okay. It is
> easier to seal a cold fusion cell than something like a battery or in an
> internal combustion engine.
>
> It would not surprise me if fossil fuel lobbyists try to prevent the use
> of cold fusion because it produces tritium. The way to counter this will be
> for cold fusion lobbyists to point out that the use of fossil fuel releases
> far more radioactive garbage into the environment than cold fusion ever
> will, especially from burning coal.
>
> If there are no cold fusion lobbyists then there is no chance cold fusion
> will ever be allowed. I am sure the opposition from the physics
> establishment and later from the fossil fuel industry will crush it.
> Fortunately, many powerful interests such as industrial corporations will
> be in favor of developing cold fusion and they will be willing to pay for
> lobbyists.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:New Article on Brillouin, and my response

[Axil Axil]

NRC nuclear inspections cost a lot, The reactor operators must give the NRC
about 20 million a year for inspection.

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 3:50 PM, a.ashfield  wrote:

> Jed, not to mention that Tokamaks produce tritium by the liter.
>
>