Hi Chris, At 42 pages, it's a bit large to post here. Try downloading it directly from
http://ep.espacenet.com/ BTW, it's not a patent. It's an application for a patent. Big difference here, in that it hasn't been granted and in fact little seems to be happening to it ( last updated late 2002 ). For some reason it's been rejected for coverage in Germany, I wonder why??? K. -----Original Message----- From: Zell, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 12:05 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Arie De Geus would it be possible to post his patent? I am unable to bring up any copy of it from any database. Thanks From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 3:21 PM To: vortex Subject: Arie De Geus There is a little information available on the web about the "alternative" hydrino work of Arie De Geus. Turns out I was mis-spelling his name. My apology if you are a vortex lurker.. I must say up front that reading his book makes one think that he is a religious fanatic more so than a dedicated scientist. But that does not mean he is not also an inventive genius... or does it? He does hold a recently granted WPO patent: WO0208787 "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR THE PRODUCTION OF SO-CALLED "FRACTIONAL HYDROGEN" AND ASSOCIATED PRODUCTION OF PHOTON ENERGY He also at one time was giving out the name of an independent laboratory in Georgia which had confirmed his findings. I've lost track of the name, but it was in Marietta, if memory serves. Even though this patent looks on the surface to be a case of BLP "claim jumping" it could be original and become a real thorn in Mills' future, should both of the concepts end up being the basis of a commercial product. This patent seems to describe the simplest possible hydrino device, which could be called a plasma discharge tube. One can make inferences from the background section of that patent. The inventor's full length book "Fluidum Continuum Universalis" is available from a vanity press: http://www.booksurge.com/author.php3?accountID=GRTU00159 but I do not own it, and it is more general is nature than the patent (some might call it a bit "cranky"). I have read some pertinent extracts, which can be summarized as much further from mainstream physics than Mills. The major difference between the De Geus hydrino theory and that of Mills is "In this Invention use is made of the properties of certain isotopes of Li, Be and B, which carry an extra neutron, in a function as"nucleonic catalysts". This is a new concept; so far catalysts always only referred to actions by electrons in the outer shell of atoms." It should be noted that ^22Ne is not mentioned by de Geus but it does fit into the category of carrying the "extra neutron" as defined in the patent. It would be scary to think that Mills, who has some recent new patent filings identifying neon as a catalyst, while in earlier work identified and used it as a not functioning control element, has now realized that this theory of De Geus might have some validity and is trying to return the "claim jumping" favor by trying to get priority as to neon as a catalyst. Time will tell. Jones Two atoms bump into each other: "I think I've lost an electron!" says one. "Are you sure?" replies the other. "I'm positive!"
