Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
Chung sez: IF this system is able to remove the three usual weaknesses of the majority of the pre-Rossi LENR systems i.e. low intensity, bad reproducibility and short duration. Peter Systems ok. Weakness only by operator. Easy. 10 Plate Heat Exchanger SS304 Copper Brazed 7.5 x 2.9 from dudadiesel Make nano Ni hexane mix. Put in exchanger. Vac pump dry. Pipe propane bleed through T with spark plug. Buzz ignition plug to make heavy H crystals and black soot. Water 90 C other side of duda gets pressure steam. Easy. Jojo says: Yes, EASY indeed, and has jack-squat, absolutely nothing to do with Cold Fusion, LENR or Hot Fusion. My CDI-powered spark reactor is adjustable from 1 to 1000 hz. Each spark can be adjusted to output .08 Joules to 1 Joule per spark. Hence, the power input from the sparks alone can provide between 8 watts to 1000 watts to the reactor. IOW, the sparks alone can take 90c water and turn it to superheated steam. No magic LENR/Cold Fusion magic pixie dusts need to be invoked in this setup. Not to mention, that the sparks are possibly combusting the propane to provide additional heat. Move Along gang, nothing to see here.
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: I must disagree on this point. Screwdrivers, guitars and cars are not patented, but money is made off of them. Well, many new patents are so filed for cars, such as Toyotas patents for the hybrid design. Cold fusion is complex technology. I expect many different implementations for different purposes will be discovered. So I expect that new patents related to it will be filed far into the future. The original ATT patent for the transistor ran out long ago, but many new semiconductor patents are filed every year. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 20:07 Dienstag, 3.April 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves Cold fusion is complex technology. ... No, not so complex, as some protagonists say. Eg Godes/Brillouin.. This is quite simple technology. One has to understand some basics, AND have a half-sound theory. The technology istelf can be patented eg in Italy, China(!) and eventually in Japan. Maybe this is a shoot into the foot of the U.S.A, and finally kills the blessed country. A clever patent lawyer should get the essentials through, without ever mentioning 'cold fusion'. Example: A method of exciting metal lattices via RF-pulses to a higher energy state No mention of LENR needed. This is a trick, which every experienced patent lawyer should know. The patent then would basically cover the core issue. Compare this with the software-crowd, where the most ridiculous claims can be patented. BTW, here you can see, what latter day patents are all about: to create abstract trading-objects for transnational corporations. This system should be tricked out easily, becuse -by the methods of its claims- it is defective to the core. The naivite of the LENR crowd wrt that is quite astonishing. G.
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
If you can figure out why money is going down this rat-hole: http://costofwar.com/en/ at a rate of $14 million per hour, perhaps can start to understand the true dimensions of the mystery. On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Guenter Wildgruber gwildgru...@ymail.comwrote: this interview with Robert George and Robert E. Godes from Brillouin made me scratch my head: http://coldfusionnow.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/audio/2012-03-27-Robert-E-Godes.mp3 the essentials. a) Godes/George basically state that they have their technology ready, has only to be taylored for commercial application b) their big reactors can be used to reactivate old coal-fired power-plants c) they need an estimated $6 million (upper limit) to commercialize their design. Note that in the technical advisory board of Brillouin sits --- Roger W. Fuller, Founder and the Senior Scientist Maxim Integrated Products --- and also --- Michael C.H. McKubre PhD., Director, Energy Research Center, Stanford Research Institute --- So these are people I basically have some trust in. Question: Why is it so hard, to collect a meager $6 million? Now Fuller, maybe is no Steve Jobs or Bill Gates, moneywise, but I estimate him in the mid-ten-millions, and he probably has some friends with some spare millions, and has first-hand knowledge. So why does he not invest in a sure-bet? Here we are again: The betting market, plus some insider-knowledge. On the other hand we have Rossi, who claims to have sound, but secret investors, definitely investing a multiple of what Brillouin asks for. DGT claims to be self-financed, up to now. At times I think, the financing issue is as big a riddle than LENR itself. So what do you guys think? Why has Brillouin such difficulties to collect 6 million? Maybe the vortex-crowd should put their money where their mouth is, and invest. (suppressing my Homerian laughter.) All the best as always
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
On Mon, 2 Apr 2012 08:05:48 -0500, James Bowery wrote: So what do you guys think? Why has Brillouin such difficulties to collect 6 million? Maybe the vortex-crowd should put their money where their mouth is, and invest. (suppressing my Homerian laughter.) As long as LENR can't be patented there is no way for it to be really profitable. Three weeks after someone comes out with a working device the e-cat will be out of the bag and you'll have dealextreme.com selling disposable LENR devices for $10.00 inc delivery. While I'm sure a few million could be recouped by 'first mover' advantage, it's never going to provide the kind of killer profits that some might imagine. Great for humanity, but bad for business. Rob
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 9:05 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: If you can figure out why money is going down this rat-hole: In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together. -DDE, 1/17/1961
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Robert McKay rob...@mckay.com wrote: As long as LENR can't be patented there is no way for it to be really profitable. Not true. Not all countries ban LENR patents. Even one country would be more than enough to make the return on investment mind-blowing.
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 9:05 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: If you can figure out why money is going down this rat-hole: ...*Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry* can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together. -DDE, 1/17/1961 Freedom of speech and the press is protected by the First Amendment. So speech subsequent to broadcast and prior to the Internet was dominated by a government-granted monopoly on speech to the mass media. So why is it that the mass media has, particularly in the last decade while the Internet has just barely gotten to a level of significant influence on public opinion, been so abjectly irresponsible?
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
like in computer science in the old time, you can make much cash on an innovative domain without patent. there is many things to innovate in LENR. if there is no protection, you will be copied in in a few semesters, but you can make cash. then you innovate for next semester. maybe is it the idea of defkalion. you can also patent only the application, but you should only patent smart ideas of application, not evident solution (like the idea to have a steam car with LENR... but maybe a trick usage of steam, or tricks to cool faster)... no easy monopolistic seat... in fact for big industry, with forced industrial transfer of technology that china impose, it is already the same with few years timescale 2012/4/2 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 9:05 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: If you can figure out why money is going down this rat-hole: ...*Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry* can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together. -DDE, 1/17/1961 Freedom of speech and the press is protected by the First Amendment. So speech subsequent to broadcast and prior to the Internet was dominated by a government-granted monopoly on speech to the mass media. So why is it that the mass media has, particularly in the last decade while the Internet has just barely gotten to a level of significant influence on public opinion, been so abjectly irresponsible?
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
As long as LENR can't be patented there is no way for it to be really profitable. Three weeks after someone comes out with a working device the e-cat will be out of the bag and you'll have dealextreme.com selling disposable LENR devices for $10.00 inc delivery. While I'm sure a few million could be recouped by 'first mover' advantage, it's never going to provide the kind of killer profits that some might imagine. Great for humanity, but bad for business. I must disagree on this point. Screwdrivers, guitars and cars are not patented, but money is made off of them. The profit margins are not excessive, but I would argue that the patent system is broken. If a world with less patent protection means inventors fail to disclose, that's totally fine by me; they can do whatever they want. There's always other routes to profit, including the building up of a respected brand over the long term through a focus on quality and utility. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
this interview with Robert George and Robert E. Godes from Brillouin made me scratch my head: http://coldfusionnow.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/audio/2012-03-27-Robert-E-Godes.mp3 the essentials. a) Godes/George basically state that they have their technology ready, has only to be taylored for commercial application b) their big reactors can be used to reactivate old coal-fired power-plants c) they need an estimated $6 million (upper limit) to commercialize their design. Note that in the technical advisory board of Brillouin sits --- Roger W. Fuller, Founder and the Senior Scientist Maxim Integrated Products --- and also --- Michael C.H. McKubre PhD., Director, Energy Research Center, Stanford Research Institute --- So these are people I basically have some trust in. Question: Why is it so hard, to collect a meager $6 million? Now Fuller, maybe is no Steve Jobs or Bill Gates, moneywise, but I estimate him in the mid-ten-millions, and he probably has some friends with some spare millions, and has first-hand knowledge. So why does he not invest in a sure-bet? Here we are again: The betting market, plus some insider-knowledge. On the other hand we have Rossi, who claims to have sound, but secret investors, definitely investing a multiple of what Brillouin asks for. DGT claims to be self-financed, up to now. At times I think, the financing issue is as big a riddle than LENR itself. So what do you guys think? Why has Brillouin such difficulties to collect 6 million? Maybe the vortex-crowd should put their money where their mouth is, and invest. (suppressing my Homerian laughter.) All the best as always
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
I hope that Mike MKcKubre who is a realist will let us know IF this system is able to remove the three usual weaknesses of the majority of the pre-Rossi LENR systems i.e. low intensity, bad reproducibility and short duration. Peter On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: I am particularly interested in tungsten as a core lattice material because tungsten cannot absorb hydrogen. How can the reaction take place under the surface of the tungsten lattice? The LENR reaction in tungsten must happen on or just above its surface. Could it be that the Patent is protecting the possibility that the reaction may take place in these non-nickel materials without really testing them for the validity of the reaction in those materials? On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: If you noticed, the 4H mechanism Brilllouin Energy Corp (BEC) describes is a heavy water mechanism. The patent might be a heavy water technology. But the patent mentions ions from water. This mixing of reaction mechanisms does not make sense. BEC also mentions 4He as a reaction product. What happened to copper? Is the nickel enrichment in heavy isotopes required in the lattice? No mention of this in the patent. They specify that many materials can be used besides nickel, but this contradicts the special common enabling properties that nickel and palladium are purported to have in the electron shells. These properties get protons inside the lattice in heavy concentrations and can only be found in nickel and palladium. What’s up with this? I speculate that BEC does not understand how the light water reaction actually works yet. The mechanism for light water could be completely different from the reaction mechanism for heavy water. It may be blind luck that the BEC control mechanism initiates and maintains a reaction in light water. It may be possible that there are many types of disparate reactions involved in LENR and cold fusion. Degenerate electrons seem to be a common thread and are involved somehow. As this day ends, it is becoming apparent that there is more work is ahead in making sense out of all of this. But having more than one model is hugely helpful. The BEC system is a more straightforward system than the Rossi or DGT systems because it uses water in preference to pressurized hydrogen. Water is not explosive and has better safety characteristics. This is better for marketing, customer acceptance and use in mobile platforms. Regards: Axil On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 11:36 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: Thanks for posting this, Axil, Brillouin's patent application claims that energy is derived from electron capture by protons, as does Widom-Larsen theory. I have only had time to quickly peruse it, but I did not see an explanation for the missing gamma-rays. Perhaps, I missed it, or misunderstood part of the application. Does anyone have any insight? Thanks, Lou Pagnucco Axil wrote: http://www.google.com/patents?id=nWbjAQAAEBAJpg=PA2source=gbs_selected_pagescad=2#v=onepageqf=false Energy Generation Apparatus and Method This patent application explains the mechanism for the H/Ni LENR reaction. This system is a pressurized water system that uses a unique electrical pulse called a Q pulse applied to the Nickel or Palladium wire. This pulse creates phonons in the metal wire of the proper character what creates degenerate electrons at high energy using cavity confinement to energize the electrons. These electrons will combined with protons (H+) to form low energy neutrons that combine with the nuclei of the metal wire resulting in transmutation. The shape and frequency of the Q pulse is critical to form the right phonon pattern in the metal lattice so that the electron acquires the properly level of energy. I assume as speculation that there is a resonance condition involved. Rossi’s implementation of the frequency generator is an attempt to form a Q pulse in his reactor as prompted by R Godes. But Godes has his secret too; it is the frequencies of the Q pulse. Rossi has no control mechanism in his product and therefore his reactor is not marketable. [...] -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
Gluck, IF this system is able to remove the three usual weaknesses of the majority of the pre-Rossi LENR systems i.e. low intensity, bad reproducibility and short duration. Peter Systems ok. Weakness only by operator. Easy. 10 Plate Heat Exchanger SS304 Copper Brazed 7.5 x 2.9 from dudadiesel Make nano Ni hexane mix. Put in exchanger. Vac pump dry. Pipe propane bleed through T with spark plug. Buzz ignition plug to make heavy H crystals and black soot. Water 90 C other side of duda gets pressure steam. Easy. Gluck Blog not permit comment. Use SLACKO OS. By, Chung
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
The updated Brillouin hypothesis for how the reaction works, interesting reading. Note that they do comment on the reaction reaching a run-away state when the lattice is heavily loaded that overwhelms the local capacity to absorb the energy and results in the release of some neutrons and x-rays - I assume that in their view it is those neutrons that produce some copper even while the majority of the energy is coming from a catalysed fusion of 1H or 2H to 4He. http://www.brillouinenergy.com/BrillouinEnergyHypothesis.pdf The patent might be a heavy water technology. But the patent mentions ions from water. This mixing of reaction mechanisms does not make sense. BEC also mentions 4He as a reaction product. What happened to copper? Is the nickel enrichment in heavy isotopes required in the lattice? No mention of this in the patent.
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
Brillouin's website and the paper describing their theory at - http://www.brillouinenergy.com http://www.brillouinenergy.com/BrillouinEnergyHypothesis.pdf gives more details. I believe that a number of metal alloys are used for hydrogen storage. It makes sense that they do not limit materials to just Ni and Pd. Brillouin sounds quite real. Hopefully, their technology will prove out. Axil wrote: If you noticed, the 4H mechanism Brilllouin Energy Corp (BEC) describes is a heavy water mechanism. The patent might be a heavy water technology. But the patent mentions ions from water. This mixing of reaction mechanisms does not make sense. BEC also mentions 4He as a reaction product. What happened to copper? Is the nickel enrichment in heavy isotopes required in the lattice? No mention of this in the patent. They specify that many materials can be used besides nickel, but this contradicts the special common enabling properties that nickel and palladium are purported to have in the electron shells. These properties get protons inside the lattice in heavy concentrations and can only be found in nickel and palladium. Whats up with this? [...]
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
Jarold McWilliams oldja...@hotmail.com wrote: Things change. They're [oil companies] going to have to adapt, and if they do, they can come out ahead. There is not much profit to be made for cold fusion fuel, but they can produce the reactors instead. Oil companies have no expertise in manufacturing. Whereas there are thousands of established companies with experience in industrial manufacturing. Suggesting that oil companies should do this is a like suggesting they go into the fast food business, real estate, or housing construction. Or that McDonald's should try digging oil wells. Maybe they can take a large part of the transportation sector with cold fusion as the power source. Maybe they can, but the transportation sector already has dozens of large companies that can do this far better than an oil company could. IBM could probably manufacture an automobile, but you can be sure that Ford or Toyota can do a better job. Also, you are overlooking the fact that this will be a game of musical chairs. 99.9% of the dollar value of the energy sector will vanish in a generation. Oil companies, electric power companies and many others will lose all of their business, the way railroads lost their passenger traffic to automobiles and then airplanes. They will all be casting about desperately for some other line of work, and for some place to put their human and financial capital. Jobs for people who are good at drilling deep holes in the ground or transporting millions of tons of liquid in supertankers or pipes will have a large crowd of unemployed people and corporations vying for the contract. Perhaps there will be new uses for holes drilled in the ground, or new reasons to move megatons of toxic liquids around. I doubt it, but there might be. (Any number of companies can move water around, so the desalination business will be swamped.) In my book, I suggested that Exxon may be reborn as a company that terraforms Mars. It has already inadvertently terraformed the Earth, and not in a good way. Yes, it will take a lot of restructuring, but if they are smart about it, they will prosper more than they ever have. I doubt they will. Looking at the history of commerce, in nearly every case when a technology become obsolete, the leading corporations in that technology did not adapt. They did not prosper. They went out of business. This was true even when they might have easily used the new technology. For example, companies that constructed sailing ships began using steel and other modern materials as the 19th century progressed, and they had a great deal of expertise in marine technology. They might have easily adapted to making steamships. But none of them did. They all went bankrupt. In another example, the Baldwin Locomotive Company and other who manufactured steam locomotives might have easily transitioned to Diesel locomotives. Much of their expertise in things like wheels, lubrication, brakes, controls and so on was directly applicable. But none of them did, as far as I know. For other examples, see the various books and studies by Christensen (Harvard Bus. School) Exxon will be in a much worse position to transition than Baldwin was, since they have absolutely no experience doing anything similar to manufacturing reactors. The Singer Sewing machine company tried to get into the computer business in the 1970s. They, at least, had experience with precision manufacturing. They failed. Other companies that failed in the computer business in the 1960s and 70s include GE, RCA and Xerox. They had deep expertise in electronics, but they could not compete with IBM and the others already established. See: R. L. Glass, Computing Catastrophes (1983). - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
I hope that they are real and capable of designing useful devices. Did I misunderstand the report and graph which suggested that they are getting heat output that is only double the input electrical power? If this is true, they must improve the process significantly to compete with DGT. Dave -Original Message- From: pagnucco pagnu...@htdconnect.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Mar 30, 2012 2:49 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves Brillouin's website and the paper describing their theory at - ttp://www.brillouinenergy.com ttp://www.brillouinenergy.com/BrillouinEnergyHypothesis.pdf ives more details. I believe that a number of metal alloys are used for hydrogen storage. t makes sense that they do not limit materials to just Ni and Pd. Brillouin sounds quite real. Hopefully, their technology will prove out. xil wrote: If you noticed, the 4H mechanism Brilllouin Energy Corp (BEC) describes is a heavy water mechanism. The patent might be a heavy water technology. But the patent mentions ions from water. This mixing of reaction mechanisms does not make sense. BEC also mentions 4He as a reaction product. What happened to copper? Is the nickel enrichment in heavy isotopes required in the lattice? No mention of this in the patent. They specify that many materials can be used besides nickel, but this contradicts the special common enabling properties that nickel and palladium are purported to have in the electron shells. These properties get protons inside the lattice in heavy concentrations and can only be found in nickel and palladium. Whats up with this? [...]
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I hope that they are real and capable of designing useful devices. Did I misunderstand the report and graph which suggested that they are getting heat output that is only double the input electrical power? Yes. I believe that report is out of date and they are getting somewhat better results, but not as good as Rossi or DGT. If this is true, they must improve the process significantly to compete with DGT. Sure. But I doubt that will be a problem. Once you learn how to control the reaction you can easily produce any input to output ratio you want. I do not know for sure whether Brillouin has tight control but I believe they do. Now they can move on to other problems such as improving the ratio and raising the operating temperature. The first hurdle (control) is difficult; the ones following that are merely a matter of engineering. People have paid far too much attention to the ratio over the years. They have paid too much attention to the absolute power level. Any ratio that allows the effect to be easily measured is fine. 1 W or 10,000 W makes no difference. The only problem that ever mattered is control. Once you have that, the rest comes easily. Without it, you have nothing -- from the point of view of commercial technology. Even if you can scale up to 10,000 W you will only blow yourself up. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
The world can't run on oil forever, and hopefully it is not going to much longer. Companies like Exxon are going to have to adapt or die. Would you rather the world run on obsolete technologies like sailing ships and steam locomotives just so we can have jobs or a company doesn't go under? Should we start farming with horse drawn plows so we can create more jobs? Are you saying that oil companies would rather try to hide cold fusion than adapt to it? Did they pay off MIT and other mainstream scientists to cover up cold fusion? On Mar 30, 2012, at 1:49 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Jarold McWilliams oldja...@hotmail.com wrote: Things change. They're [oil companies] going to have to adapt, and if they do, they can come out ahead. There is not much profit to be made for cold fusion fuel, but they can produce the reactors instead. Oil companies have no expertise in manufacturing. Whereas there are thousands of established companies with experience in industrial manufacturing. Suggesting that oil companies should do this is a like suggesting they go into the fast food business, real estate, or housing construction. Or that McDonald's should try digging oil wells. Maybe they can take a large part of the transportation sector with cold fusion as the power source. Maybe they can, but the transportation sector already has dozens of large companies that can do this far better than an oil company could. IBM could probably manufacture an automobile, but you can be sure that Ford or Toyota can do a better job. Also, you are overlooking the fact that this will be a game of musical chairs. 99.9% of the dollar value of the energy sector will vanish in a generation. Oil companies, electric power companies and many others will lose all of their business, the way railroads lost their passenger traffic to automobiles and then airplanes. They will all be casting about desperately for some other line of work, and for some place to put their human and financial capital. Jobs for people who are good at drilling deep holes in the ground or transporting millions of tons of liquid in supertankers or pipes will have a large crowd of unemployed people and corporations vying for the contract. Perhaps there will be new uses for holes drilled in the ground, or new reasons to move megatons of toxic liquids around. I doubt it, but there might be. (Any number of companies can move water around, so the desalination business will be swamped.) In my book, I suggested that Exxon may be reborn as a company that terraforms Mars. It has already inadvertently terraformed the Earth, and not in a good way. Yes, it will take a lot of restructuring, but if they are smart about it, they will prosper more than they ever have. I doubt they will. Looking at the history of commerce, in nearly every case when a technology become obsolete, the leading corporations in that technology did not adapt. They did not prosper. They went out of business. This was true even when they might have easily used the new technology. For example, companies that constructed sailing ships began using steel and other modern materials as the 19th century progressed, and they had a great deal of expertise in marine technology. They might have easily adapted to making steamships. But none of them did. They all went bankrupt. In another example, the Baldwin Locomotive Company and other who manufactured steam locomotives might have easily transitioned to Diesel locomotives. Much of their expertise in things like wheels, lubrication, brakes, controls and so on was directly applicable. But none of them did, as far as I know. For other examples, see the various books and studies by Christensen (Harvard Bus. School) Exxon will be in a much worse position to transition than Baldwin was, since they have absolutely no experience doing anything similar to manufacturing reactors. The Singer Sewing machine company tried to get into the computer business in the 1970s. They, at least, had experience with precision manufacturing. They failed. Other companies that failed in the computer business in the 1960s and 70s include GE, RCA and Xerox. They had deep expertise in electronics, but they could not compete with IBM and the others already established. See: R. L. Glass, Computing Catastrophes (1983). - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
Jarold McWilliams oldja...@hotmail.com wrote: The world can't run on oil forever, and hopefully it is not going to much longer. Companies like Exxon are going to have to adapt or die. Of course. And based on the history of business, I predict they will die. Would you rather the world run on obsolete technologies like sailing ships and steam locomotives just so we can have jobs or a company doesn't go under? Of course not. I did not say that. No one said that. Please pay a little closer attention to what is presented here, and do not argue against points that no one makes (a straw man logical fallacy). I myself could not care less whether Exxon survives. I care only about the individuals employed there. Not the company, and not the stockholders. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
The individuals employed there will be fine. Their energy expenses will be cut by about 10 x. Every item they buy will cost about a 1/4 of what it does now. The way we should reduce unemployment if rossi or defkalion really do have something is to shorten the work week. There is no reason people have to be working 40 hours a week in a society with nearly free energy and seemingly endless resources. On Mar 30, 2012, at 3:22 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Jarold McWilliams oldja...@hotmail.com wrote: The world can't run on oil forever, and hopefully it is not going to much longer. Companies like Exxon are going to have to adapt or die. Of course. And based on the history of business, I predict they will die. Would you rather the world run on obsolete technologies like sailing ships and steam locomotives just so we can have jobs or a company doesn't go under? Of course not. I did not say that. No one said that. Please pay a little closer attention to what is presented here, and do not argue against points that no one makes (a straw man logical fallacy). I myself could not care less whether Exxon survives. I care only about the individuals employed there. Not the company, and not the stockholders. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
There is also no shortage of things that need doing. There is just a maldistribution of income. Harry On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 9:20 PM, Jarold McWilliams oldja...@hotmail.com wrote: The individuals employed there will be fine. Their energy expenses will be cut by about 10 x. Every item they buy will cost about a 1/4 of what it does now. The way we should reduce unemployment if rossi or defkalion really do have something is to shorten the work week. There is no reason people have to be working 40 hours a week in a society with nearly free energy and seemingly endless resources. On Mar 30, 2012, at 3:22 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Jarold McWilliams oldja...@hotmail.com wrote: The world can't run on oil forever, and hopefully it is not going to much longer. Companies like Exxon are going to have to adapt or die. Of course. And based on the history of business, I predict they will die. Would you rather the world run on obsolete technologies like sailing ships and steam locomotives just so we can have jobs or a company doesn't go under? Of course not. I did not say that. No one said that. Please pay a little closer attention to what is presented here, and do not argue against points that no one makes (a straw man logical fallacy). I myself could not care less whether Exxon survives. I care only about the individuals employed there. Not the company, and not the stockholders. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
Next Big Future reported: In April, they will be working with Mike McKubre of SRI International to run a reactor at a higher temperature. Whoa. If Mike is involved we better start taking this seriously. I better read up on these people. I have been saying for some time that Defkalion and Rossi need to get moving if they are going to play a leading role in this technology. They will not have nanoparticle Ni all to themselves indefinitely. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
At 09:07 AM 3/29/2012, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: The comment about the patent office not being permitted to grant patents in the cold fusion field is still galling. Sure. However, not being permitted has a lost performative. By whom? The patent office position was always officially based, as I understand, on an idea that cold fusion was rejected by the mainstream as impossible. Patents have been granted, nevertheless, by avoiding the cold fusion claim; generation of energy was listed as an additional claim. It's tricky. With PdD cold fusion, one would have to list the Fleischmann work, which has always been the tipoff that this is cold fusion. However, NiH reactions are not known to be cold fusion, though they certainly look like some kind of LENR, assuming they are real. I don't consider that fully established yet. If McKubre replicates, darn tootin' it's real. He doesn't mess around. However, the situation is different now, and the mainstream peer-reviewed journals have largely accepted cold fusion. I don't think a position of total exclusion can ultimately be maintained, it's discriminatory. (i.e., you can get a patent on a fantastic and scientifically unaccepted process like Larsen's gamma ray shield, without any proof of workability, but not something *more* established, such as PdD cold fusion?) In any case, if there is a working model, that clearly demonstrates what is being patented, any patent office objection can be overcome. The problem in the past has been that such reliable demonstrations did not exist. As I understand the matter. Sure, Park has been there, behind the scenes, pulling strings, getting anyone who disagrees fired, etc. But that will end, it can't be sustained.
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
At 04:27 PM 3/29/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.coma...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: I don't consider that fully established yet. If McKubre replicates, darn tootin' it's real. He doesn't mess around. Yup. I believe in the first phase he is going to measure the reaction in their equipment, rather than replicate from scratch. It amounts to the same thing. No, not the same thing. But a step. (Replication from scratch isn't necessary, at first. A certain level of replication can use special materials or equipment provided by the original researcher, as long as the replicator can thoroughly inspect them -- normally. Short of that, observing the equipment functioning at the inventor's site is a reasonable precursor to more independent study. Nothing wrong with Kullander and Essen looking at Rossi's setup, but they were phenomenally naive. When Rossi bailed from all agreements to allow more independent replication, that's when the alarms got really loud.) In any case, if there is a working model, that clearly demonstrates what is being patented, any patent office objection can be overcome. I agree. That has not been done in recent decades as far as I know, but there are precedents for that. Sure, Park has been there, behind the scenes, pulling strings, getting anyone who disagrees fired, etc. But that will end, it can't be sustained. Park and others are still out there causing trouble. They are able to do this because the experimental devices have been so weak and unpredictable. If several credible organizations publish descriptions of robust devices made by Defkalion, Rossi or Brillouin Energy, this opposition will vanish overnight. I have long felt that the opposition to cold fusion is 1000 miles wide and 1 inch deep. When you see things such as the recent $5 million donation to the University of Missouri on the lectures at CERN you know the tide is turning. I have the impression that Park, the Amazing Randi, the nitwit journalists, and other prominent opponents are being honest about their motivation and the reasons they oppose cold fusion. They sincerely believe that all researchers are frauds or lunatics. I doubt they are part of a fossil fuel conspiracy or anything like that. I could be wrong. I don't think so. If I were CEO of a fossil fuel company, I'd want to get my hands on LENR ASAP. Not to suppress it, but to make it the future of my business, the energy business. I'd want to save the oil for chemistry. Plastics, etc.
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: When Rossi bailed from all agreements to allow more independent replication, that's when the alarms got really loud.) I think you exaggerate. I am not alarmed. I don't think so. If I were CEO of a fossil fuel company, I'd want to get my hands on LENR ASAP. Not to suppress it, but to make it the future of my business, the energy business. I'd want to save the oil for chemistry. Plastics, etc. I disagree. Cold fusion can only reduce total revenue from energy by a factor of a thousand or more. What you are saying is somewhat like suggesting that when Craigslist appeared, daily newspapers all over the county should have banded together and bought into it, because this was the future of classified advertising. The problem is, the total revenue from Craigslist is far smaller than the revenue from classified advertising used to be. There would not be enough revenue to go around. No matter who owns Craigslist, it can only lead to the bankruptcy of local newspapers, printed or electronic. Exxon Mobil earned $125 billion last year. The entire market for cold fusion fuel, worldwide, assuming it calls for heavy water, would be a few million dollars a year. If Exxon Mobil got patents for cold fusion they might make a lot of money, but nowhere near $125 billion. Plus they have 83,000 employees who would nearly all be redundant. Those people have no skills relevant to cold fusion. They can contribute nothing to the development of it. They have no more expertise than, say, the food scientists at McDonald's. The fact that oil is used for energy and so is cold fusion is irrelevant. (Actually, food scientists who know about hydrogenation catalysts for cooking oil are more likely to contribute to the development of cold fusion than geologists or combustion experts.) Furthermore, the oil used in plastics and other feedstock is only about 10% of the total. So the oil company revenue would collapse by 90%. No company can survive that without drastic restructuring and downsizing. In any case, cold fusion will soon make it cheaper to synthesize hydrocarbons on site from hydrogen and carbon (CO2 or garbage), which will eliminate the need for oil as feedstock, drastically reduce the cost of plastic, improve safety, and eliminate the need to transport oil. So there will be no future in oil. Not for any purpose. It will be as useless as slide rules in a world with electronic calculators and computers. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
http://www.google.com/patents?id=nWbjAQAAEBAJpg=PA2source=gbs_selected_pagescad=2#v=onepageqf=false Energy Generation Apparatus and Method This patent application explains the mechanism for the H/Ni LENR reaction. This system is a pressurized water system that uses a unique electrical pulse called a Q pulse applied to the Nickel or Palladium wire. This pulse creates phonons in the metal wire of the proper character what creates degenerate electrons at high energy using cavity confinement to energize the electrons. These electrons will combined with protons (H+) to form low energy neutrons that combine with the nuclei of the metal wire resulting in transmutation. The shape and frequency of the Q pulse is critical to form the right phonon pattern in the metal lattice so that the electron acquires the properly level of energy. I assume as speculation that there is a resonance condition involved. Rossi’s implementation of the frequency generator is an attempt to form a Q pulse in his reactor as prompted by R Godes. But Godes has his secret too; it is the frequencies of the Q pulse. Rossi has no control mechanism in his product and therefore his reactor is not marketable. On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 10:07 AM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote: From Next Big Future: (This may have already been reported here.) http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/03/brillioun-energy-closing-to.html * * * * Brillouin Energy has been able to develop a control system that allows a reaction to start and stop, and run in a steady state mode. In April, they will be working with Mike McKubre of SRI International to run a reactor at a higher temperature. Godes states that the Brillouin’s reaction starts with an endothermic reaction (reaction that absorbs heat) and ends with a more powerful exothermic reaction (reaction releases heat). Brillouin is working on two systems, the first one provides heat at 140 degrees C, (called the “wet boiler”) the second one reaches 400 – 450 degrees C. George says that they have applied for patents, but have been told by a patent examiner at the US Patent Office that the office is still not permitted to grant patents in the cold fusion field. “The high-end system that will easily generate electricity, we’re looking at potentially, from our cost analysis, about 1 cent per kilowatt hour, but that’s on a commercial system. For a residential application, to get a higher R-value, or COP on it, we’re talking about a turbine, not something you don’t currently have right now. We’re talking about just having the boiler.” They have a million dollar investment and are working to get the second half of a two million dollar investment. They plan to license technology to third party producers. George says that Brillouin has been visited by the Naval Research Lab and major corporations. We’re looking at 12 to 18 months to bring it to strategic partners. * * * * The stated time table of 12 - 18 months does not sound unreasonable to me. If anything, it's probably a tad ambitious, but then I tend to error on the side of caution laced with a pinch of pessimism. I wonder when Mr. Murphy might decide to pay them an unscheduled visit. The comment about the patent office not being permitted to grant patents in the cold fusion field is still galling. I'm encouraged to see that Brillouin has enlisted the help of McKubre. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
Things change. They're going to have to adapt, and if they do, they can come out ahead. There is not much profit to be made for cold fusion fuel, but they can produce the reactors instead. Maybe they can take a large part of the transportation sector with cold fusion as the power source. Yes, it will take a lot of restructuring, but if they are smart about it, they will prosper more than they ever have. On Mar 29, 2012, at 7:00 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: When Rossi bailed from all agreements to allow more independent replication, that's when the alarms got really loud.) I think you exaggerate. I am not alarmed. I don't think so. If I were CEO of a fossil fuel company, I'd want to get my hands on LENR ASAP. Not to suppress it, but to make it the future of my business, the energy business. I'd want to save the oil for chemistry. Plastics, etc. I disagree. Cold fusion can only reduce total revenue from energy by a factor of a thousand or more. What you are saying is somewhat like suggesting that when Craigslist appeared, daily newspapers all over the county should have banded together and bought into it, because this was the future of classified advertising. The problem is, the total revenue from Craigslist is far smaller than the revenue from classified advertising used to be. There would not be enough revenue to go around. No matter who owns Craigslist, it can only lead to the bankruptcy of local newspapers, printed or electronic. Exxon Mobil earned $125 billion last year. Th entire market for cold fusion fuel, worldwide, assuming it calls for heavy water, would be a few million dollars a year. If Exxon Mobil got patents for cold fusion they might make a lot of money, but nowhere near $125 billion. Plus they have 83,000 e employees who would nearly all be redundant. Those people have no skills relevant to cold fusion. They can contribute nothing to the development of it. They have no more expertise than, say, the food scientists at McDonald's. The fact that oil is used for energy and so is cold fusion is irrelevant. (Actually, food scientists who know about hydrogenation catalysts for cooking oil are more likely to contribute to the development of cold fusion than geologists or combustion experts.) Furthermore, the oil used in plastics and other feedstock is only about 10% of the total. So the oil company revenue would collapse by 90%. No company canurvive that without drastic restructuring and downsizing. In any case, cold fusion will soon make it cheaper to synthesize hydrocarbons on site from hydrogen and carbon (CO2 or garbage), which will eliminate the need for oil as feedstocsk, drastically reduce the cost of plastic, improve safety, and eliminate the need to transport oil. So there will be no future in oil. Not for any purpose. It will be as useless as slide rules in a world with electronic calculators and computers. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: I don't consider that fully established yet. If McKubre replicates, darn tootin' it's real. He doesn't mess around. Yup. I believe in the first phase he is going to measure the reaction in their equipment, rather than replicate from scratch. It amounts to the same thing. In any case, if there is a working model, that clearly demonstrates what is being patented, any patent office objection can be overcome. I agree. That has not been done in recent decades as far as I know, but there are precedents for that. Sure, Park has been there, behind the scenes, pulling strings, getting anyone who disagrees fired, etc. But that will end, it can't be sustained. Park and others are still out there causing trouble. They are able to do this because the experimental devices have been so weak and unpredictable. If several credible organizations publish descriptions of robust devices made by Defkalion, Rossi or Brillouin Energy, this opposition will vanish overnight. I have long felt that the opposition to cold fusion is 1000 miles wide and 1 inch deep. When you see things such as the recent $5 million donation to the University of Missouri on the lectures at CERN you know the tide is turning. I have the impression that Park, the Amazing Randi, the nitwit journalists, and other prominent opponents are being honest about their motivation and the reasons they oppose cold fusion. They sincerely believe that all researchers are frauds or lunatics. I doubt they are part of a fossil fuel conspiracy or anything like that. I could be wrong. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy making waves
Thanks for posting this, Axil, Brillouin's patent application claims that energy is derived from electron capture by protons, as does Widom-Larsen theory. I have only had time to quickly peruse it, but I did not see an explanation for the missing gamma-rays. Perhaps, I missed it, or misunderstood part of the application. Does anyone have any insight? Thanks, Lou Pagnucco Axil wrote: http://www.google.com/patents?id=nWbjAQAAEBAJpg=PA2source=gbs_selected_pagescad=2#v=onepageqf=false Energy Generation Apparatus and Method This patent application explains the mechanism for the H/Ni LENR reaction. This system is a pressurized water system that uses a unique electrical pulse called a Q pulse applied to the Nickel or Palladium wire. This pulse creates phonons in the metal wire of the proper character what creates degenerate electrons at high energy using cavity confinement to energize the electrons. These electrons will combined with protons (H+) to form low energy neutrons that combine with the nuclei of the metal wire resulting in transmutation. The shape and frequency of the Q pulse is critical to form the right phonon pattern in the metal lattice so that the electron acquires the properly level of energy. I assume as speculation that there is a resonance condition involved. Rossis implementation of the frequency generator is an attempt to form a Q pulse in his reactor as prompted by R Godes. But Godes has his secret too; it is the frequencies of the Q pulse. Rossi has no control mechanism in his product and therefore his reactor is not marketable. [...]
