John Rehner has done the same thing that Robert Godes founder of Brillouin Energy has done; create a nanoeceond high power elecric pulse controller.
Like any engine, timing is all important. With proper timing the engine will run will with little or no bad nuclear byproducts. What John Rehner wants to sell is his control boards, his freqency generator, and his spark controller. The cost of his engine in mass production is $300. It can be built mostly of plastic. Rohner is hoping the customers will buy his stuff rather than build the engine on their own. It is open source and not protected in any way since the patent is laped long ago. You saw may post on the kit Rohner sells, right... or were you too occupied in bad mouthing Obama (aka... a waste of time)? See http://www.rohnerengineering.com/pix/OurMBs.jpg Cheers: Axil On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Jojo Jaro <jth...@hotmail.com> wrote: > ** > Axil and others, What would it take to commercialize the Papp engine. In > other words, what else is needed in terms of development that still needs > to be done for the first commercial engine that I can buy from Lowe's. How > much money would it take for it to become a real engine that can drive my > generator. > > If it is not at this level, what else needs to be done. I'm pretty sure > it is NOT just a matter of throwing money into it. I don't believe it is > just a matter of raising funds for its development cause I can't believe > that there isn't a millionaire out there who would not jump at the chance > to fund this technology if it is real. There has got to be still some > fundamental issue with it why it is still not a real engine. What is that > issue? > > I am not familiar with Papp engine technology so I am asking anyone who > can answer. > > Jojo > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Sent:* Thursday, August 09, 2012 9:11 AM > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Noble Gas Plasma Engine > > You response confuses me. > > Jouni said: > > *Better, are you serious?* > > Axil thinks: > > You state the Rossi's reactor is superior in concept. True? > > Journi said: > > *This engine would immediately transform Earth Civilization into Star > Trek age (by 2014 into Type I and by 2050 even into Type II civilization at > Kardashev scale). With this engine, we could travel into Mars in just six > days and into nearby stars in one generation.* > > Axil states: > > IMO, this is possible. But do you still think that the Rossi reactor is > better? > > Journi said: > > *Although this is far better than any perpetual motion machine fancier > has ever hoped for, I am a big fan of this thing. Not that I would not > think that it is way too good to be true, but it feels just utterly good to > take some vacations from reality and go Rohner's web pages and dream a > little bit of fairy-tale world, where there are no scarcity from any > material needs.* > > Axil states: > > I take this statement as an full throated endorsement of the engine. > > Journi said: > > *Probably this is not real, because Rohner is religious and religion is > somewhat antithesis for being smart, creative and scientific. It is sad, > but that's the way it is. Same argument goes also for Rossi.* > > Axil states: > > Papp and Rossi are two peas in the same pod; brilliant, paranoid and > eccentric. > > Papp stumbled onto the reaction and was smart enough to try to > commercialize it. He could not do it because of his personality and lack of > trust. And other people have been building on his work since 1982, that is > 30 years, a very long time. > > John Rohner is smart, trusting enough, cooperative enough, a great team > player, has the right electronics background, is down to earth, and dogged > enough to bring the engine to market. > > Journi said: > > *I would say that currently our best shot is in Celani. It would be huge > boost for cold fusion research if he could make it replicable and that he > could present a first ever convincing demonstration of cold fusion > apparatus!* > > Axil states: > > Celani is still working on LENR. Rossi is two generations(LENR++) ahead of > him and Rohner is way ahead of them all. > > The Papp engine can get a UL certification next week; it is so benign in > nature. It may take other LENR developers many years or even decades to get > that far in commercialization. > > The Papp process is open source and is very attractive because of that... > from the standpoint of commercialization. > LENR commercialization is key to general acceptance of LENR as a > technology. > > > Cheers: Axil > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 8:18 PM, Jouni Valkonen <jounivalko...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >> >> On 9 August 2012 02:12, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> From a systems engineering standpoint, it is a far better energy system >>> than the Rossi reactor because high efficiency is possible without high >>> heat production. >>> >> >> Better, are you serious? This engine would immediately transform Earth >> Civilization into Star Trek age (by 2014 into Type I and by 2050 even into >> Type II civilization at Kardashev scale). With this engine, we could travel >> into Mars in just six days and into nearby stars in one generation. >> >> Although this is far better than any perpetual motion machine fancier has >> ever hoped for, I am a big fan of this thing. Not that I would not think >> that it is way too good to be true, but it feels just utterly good to take >> some vacations from reality and go Rohner's web pages and dream a little >> bit of fairy-tale world, where there are no scarcity from any material >> needs. >> >> Probably this is not real, because Rohner is religious and religion is >> somewhat antithesis for being smart, creative and scientific. It is sad, >> but that's the way it is. Same argument goes also for Rossi, btw. >> >> I would say that currently our best shot is in Celani. It would be huge >> boost for cold fusion research if he could make it replicable and that he >> could present a first ever convincing demonstration of cold fusion >> apparatus! >> >> –Jouni >> > >
