Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
On Nov 28, 2011, at 10:34 AM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: There are two forces at work in the nucleus. The strong and the electromagnetic. In ordinary hot fusion only the static electrostatic repulsion and the static strong nuclear attraction are considered. There are other induced forces the electromagnetic and the dynamic strong nuclear spin orbit magnetic. These are never considered and may be mutable. An increase in the magnitude of the spin orbit would tend to flip nucleons and lead to beta decay. Magnetism is not conserved and is mutable. I am at work however nothing yet. Its not easy. I don't like Aherns patent application, he tries to patent everything from grain size to ultrasonic stimulation. What about the people who have pioneered and have been working with these techniques years ago? He needs to make an original contribution and patent that. Frank Magnetic orbitals involving electrons with either deuterons, protons, or positive quarks, are the *essence* of Deflation Fusion concepts. See: http://www.mtaonline.net/%7Ehheffner/DeflationFusion2.pdf http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/FusionSpreadDualRel.pdf http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/DeflateP1.pdf http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/FusionUpQuark.pdf The magnetic force due to spin coupling is a 1/r^4 force, while the Coulomb force is a 1/r^2 force. At close radii, the magnetic binding between electron and nucleating particle greatly exceeds the Coulomb force, though magnetically bound orbitals are intrinsically unstable, due to their 1/r^4 nature. The hydrogen electron is momentarily bound to its nucleus in a very small magnetic orbital periodically, but briefly, on the order of an attosecond. This is the deflated state. This magnetically bound small state, being neutral, but having a very large magnetic moment for a nucleus, has a significant probability of tunneling to any adjacent nucleus that has a magnetic moment. The magnetic gradients provide the net energy for tunneling of the neutral deflated state hydrogen to the adjacent nucleus. Heavy lattice nuclei magnetic moments are periodically enhanced by electrons which enter the nucleus in their ordinary orbital states. That orbital electrons enter nuclei is evidenced by the facts that (1) they are point particles in valid QM treatments, with non-zero nucleus residence probabilites, and (2) evidenced by the existence of electron capture. The magnetic moment of an electron is 3 orders of magnitude larger than typical nuclei. Some nuclei have no magnetic moment at all. Orbital electrons, when in a heavy nucleus, have the ability to form momentary small deflated state nuclear components, and thus provide extremely large nuclear magnetic moments to the heavy nuclei. When in the nucleus, the electrons can momentarily magnetically bind to nuclear particles, such as protons or quarks, including strange quarks, sometimes resulting in weak reactions between an electron and strange quark, and thereby leaving behind unpaired strange matter. Strange quark pairs are produced from the vacuum in nuclei. If one strange quark is weakly transmuted, or catalytically extracted, then the paired strange quark remains behind in a potentially long term stable form. By my theory, nuclear electrons have the ability to catalyze strange particle production from the vacuum and separate them, as well as produce low energy state and thus stable product particles. See: http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/CFnuclearReactions.pdf This strange matter catalysis process, which is primarily magnetic force based, has the potential to produce and store antimatter, and to dwarf the capacity and energy density of all other methods of energy storage and production. The momentary extremely low energy state of deflated nuclei in a heavy nucleus reaction has the potential to produce stable and separated matter and antimatter strange particles, hyperons, and hyper nuclei. That is perhaps the most significant part of deflation fusion theory. The formation of the deflated state in bare hydrogen nuclei, e.g. lattice absorbed nuclei, is feasible in an electron flux provided the flux density is high enough. I theorized this some years ago. What is new, and related to Brian Ahern's work, is the significance of magnetic vortices, i.e. electron vortices. These vortices produce a dense electron flux in the vicinity of absorbed hydrogen nuclei, and thus can be expected to greatly enhance the probability of the deflated state hydrogen nuclei in their presence. Non-magnetic material can be made magnetic within nanopores, by creation of rings of free electrons at the nanopore metal boundary. Nickel itself can be magnetic or not, depending on the chemical loading processes and chemical nature of the nanopores in which it is embedded, and depending on the presence
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 8:47 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Of all of this patent goings on, no one has applied for a patent to produce electrical power directly from a LENR reaction. The don't know enough. They are just making thermal energy to spin a turbine. Who is spinning a turbine with LENR?
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
Frank, If LENR is mostly beta decay, I'm not sure why its not work like a betavoltaic. It would be the killer app of the century. Please get to work. :) Who is spinning a turbine with LENR? MY, You are comments are snide, cantankerous and counter-productive. Its no wonder you're hiding behind a pseudonym. He didn't say people are spinning a turbine, he said they are generating heat _to_ spin a turbine. (future tense.) - Brad
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 10:01 AM, ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.comwrote: MY, You are comments are snide, cantankerous and counter-productive. Its no wonder you're hiding behind a pseudonym. He didn't say people are spinning a turbine, he said they are generating heat _to_ spin a turbine. (future tense.) I wouldn't even mention this had you not called me snide and cantankerous, but last I looked, are is present tense.
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
There are two forces at work in the nucleus. The strong and the electromagnetic. In ordinary hot fusion only the static electrostatic repulsion and the static strong nuclear attraction are considered. There are other induced forces the electromagnetic and the dynamic strong nuclear spin orbit magnetic. These are never considered and may be mutable. An increase in the magnitude of the spin orbit would tend to flip nucleons and lead to beta decay. Magnetism is not conserved and is mutable. I am at work however nothing yet. Its not easy. I don't like Aherns patent application, he tries to patent everything from grain size to ultrasonic stimulation. What about the people who have pioneered and have been working with these techniques years ago? He needs to make an original contribution and patent that. Frank -Original Message- From: ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Nov 28, 2011 8:01 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application Frank, If LENR is mostly beta decay, I'm not sure why its not work like a betavoltaic. It would be the killer app of the century. Please get to work. :) Who is spinning a turbine with LENR? MY, You are comments are snide, cantankerous and counter-productive. Its no wonder you're hiding behind a pseudonym. He didn't say people are spinning a turbine, he said they are generating heat _to_ spin a turbine. (future tense.) - Brad
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
Bite me Brad! MY, You are comments are snide, cantankerous and counter-productive. -Original Message- From: ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Nov 28, 2011 8:01 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application Frank, If LENR is mostly beta decay, I'm not sure why its not work like a betavoltaic. It would be the killer app of the century. Please get to work. :) Who is spinning a turbine with LENR? MY, You are comments are snide, cantankerous and counter-productive. Its no wonder you're hiding behind a pseudonym. He didn't say people are spinning a turbine, he said they are generating heat _to_ spin a turbine. (future tense.) - Brad
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Bite me Brad! MY, You are comments are snide, cantankerous and counter-productive. He meant Mary Yugo, not you. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Bite me Brad! MY, You are comments are snide, cantankerous and counter-productive. He meant Mary Yugo, not you. Well, he can't bite me. He might have a disease.
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Well, he can't bite me. He might have a disease. You were going to let an alien bite you and you were going to BITE IT BACK! Talk about diseases . . . outta this world! T
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
Brad please accept my apology. I have worked hard and get slammed a lot. I have, through this, become a bit quick to react. Yes they want to make steam, however, with the positive thermal coefficient it is going to be difficult to control. Frank Znidarsic
[Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
The URL: http://www.sumobrain.com/patents/wipo/Amplification-energetic-reactions/WO2011123338.html links to Brian Ahern's USPTO Application published Sept 29, 2011, entitled - AMPLIFICATION OF ENERGETIC REACTIONS The provisional title had been Amplification of Nuclear Reactions in Metal Nanoparticles. Vibronic Energy Technologies' upcoming presentation on Dec-7 may include results using various approaches outlined in the patent application. Comments? Lou Pagnucco A portion of the patent application follow: Title: AMPLIFICATION OF ENERGETIC REACTIONS Document Type and Number: WIPO Patent Application WO/2011/123338 Kind Code:A1 Abstract: Methods and apparatus for energy production through the amplification of energetic reactions. A method includes amplifying an energy release from a dispersion of nanoparticles containing a concentration of hydrogen/deuterium nuclei, the nanoparticles suspended in a dielectric medium in a presence of hydrogen/deuterium gas, wherein an energy input is provided by high voltage pulses between two electrodes embedded in the dispersion of nanoparticles. [...] [0021 ] Nanoscale metal particles that dissolve hydrogen isotopes can promote nuclear reactions under near equilibrium conditions. The reaction rates are greatly enhanced by the addition of localized energy input, which can include, for example, dielectric discharges, terahertz electromagnetic radiation or ultrasonic energy beyond a specific threshold. [0022] Useful energy production can be obtained when deuterated/hydrated nanoparticles suspended in a dielectric medium are positioned interior to collapsing bubbles or dielectric discharges and their attendant shock waves. Highly self- focused shock waves have a sufficiently high energy density to induce a range of energetic reactions. [0023] Certain nanopowders of metal or metal alloys are incipiently active sites for energy release. Adding nanoparticles to the water greatly increases energetic reaction rates as the nanoparticles focus ultrasonic shock wave energy onto particles that are incipiently prepared to react. The focusing of shock energy is maximized by having very small particles inside the collapsing shock wave at millions of locations in a liquefied reaction zone. [0024] Ultrasonic amplification may have usefulness, but it is inferior to arc discharges through nanocomposite solids due to a process called the inverse skin effect. In ordinary metals, a rapid pulse of current remains close to an outer surface in a process referred to as the skin effect. Typically, the electric current pulses flow on the outer surface of a conductor. Discharges through a dielectric embedded with metallic particles behave very differently. The nanoparticles act as a series of short circuit elements that confine the breakdown currents to very, very small internal discharge pathways. This inverse skin effect can have great implications for energy densification in composite materials. Energetic reactions described fully herein are amplified by an inverse skin effect. These very small discharge pathways are so narrow that the magnetic fields close to them are amplified to magnitudes unachievable by other methods. [0025] Distributing nanoparticles in a dielectric (ceramic) matrix between two high voltage electrodes is a method according to the principles of the present invention for amplifying an energy output from the hydrated/deuterated metal nanoparticles in the dielectric matrix. High voltage pulses cause arc formations. The arc formations focus energy and the arc formations are channeled from one macroscopic grain to another macroscopic grain. Once a discharge is interior to a macroscopic grain the pulse is further focused into nanoparticles along the lowest impedance pathway. The arcs interior to the grains are where the energetic reactions are maximized. [0026] The nanoparticles provide a constellation of short circuiting elements for each current pulse. Each succeeding pulse finds a different pathway that minimizes the impedance between two electrodes. An overpressure of hydrogen is needed to prevent discharges from sliding over a surface of the macroscopic grains rather than through the grains and thereby through the hydrated nanoparticles. Low pressure hydrogen gas favors surface discharging. [...]
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
The next 12 months will not be boring. AG On 11/28/2011 12:56 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: The URL: http://www.sumobrain.com/patents/wipo/Amplification-energetic-reactions/WO2011123338.html links to Brian Ahern's USPTO Application published Sept 29, 2011, entitled - AMPLIFICATION OF ENERGETIC REACTIONS The provisional title had been Amplification of Nuclear Reactions in Metal Nanoparticles. Vibronic Energy Technologies' upcoming presentation on Dec-7 may include results using various approaches outlined in the patent application. Comments? Lou Pagnucco
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
This a submarine patent if I ever saw it. I put the vibration of nano-particles in the public domain years ago with my lectures and posts http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_5_11_12.html
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
I would agree. I believe 2012 will see the start of the LENR worldwide patent wars that will rage on for years and years. Injunctions will be sought against all who are claimed to be patent violators. The LENR business worldwide just might grind to a halt under the weight of the patent wars and legal moves to stop others gaining a commercial high ground. It will not be nice. I would suggest that as is claimed to have happened in the AGW debate, big fossil fuel suppliers just might help those who wish to pay this game. If the world's energy demands could be met by just 300k tons of Nickel every year (based on first generation E-Cat fuel to energy delivery), well that will sure have an effect on the price and demand for oil, coal, gas, uranium, wind, solar, tidal, wave, etc energy generators and on their fuel suppliers. AG On 11/28/2011 1:41 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: This a submarine patent if I ever saw it. I put the vibration of nano-particles in the public domain years ago with my lectures and posts http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_5_11_12.html
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
Of all of this patent goings on, no one has applied for a patent to produce electrical power directly from a LENR reaction. The don't know enough. They are just making thermal energy to spin a turbine. I wanted to wait until I had a working model but I may as well put my name in the hat and apply for a provisional patent now. I hope to get it going soon. Frank -Original Message- From: fznidarsic fznidar...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Nov 27, 2011 5:12 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application This a submarine patent if I ever saw it. I put the vibration of nano-particles in the public domain years ago with my lectures and posts http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_5_11_12.html
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
I hope you get it working too. All the best mate. AG On 11/28/2011 3:17 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Of all of this patent goings on, no one has applied for a patent to produce electrical power directly from a LENR reaction. The don't know enough. They are just making thermal energy to spin a turbine. I wanted to wait until I had a working model but I may as well put my name in the hat and apply for a provisional patent now. I hope to get it going soon. Frank -Original Message- From: fznidarsic fznidar...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Nov 27, 2011 5:12 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application This a submarine patent if I ever saw it. I put the vibration of nano-particles in the public domain years ago with my lectures and posts http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_5_11_12.html
