“We may agree that the demo is crazy but is it crazy enough to have a chance of 
being correct ?”

Ha - ‘Bohring’ as it may sound, that may be a decent summation of the current 
situation, but so is the observation that at least 60 watts electrical is going 
in from the wall and only 50 watts thermal is coming out, so there is no gain 
at all.

It really doesn’t matter that the loss is in the power supply ! This particular 
kind of loss is unavoidable and must be included in the calcs.

The only power measurement which is relevant is at the wall plug - since it is 
abundantly clear that at least two interfering frequencies are being used to 
produce a waveform, which is necessary and lossy. Rossi was hiding the waveform 
issue as far back as 5 years ago, and we know it is relevant. The Q-pulse which 
is part of Brillouin's IP is similar – very similar - but the original idea 
comes from Dardik and the Israeli company ENERGETICs, both now out of the 

The most important Euro Patent from Dardik, El-Boher et al entitled "Pulsed low 
energy nuclear reaction power generators" EP 1656678 B1 with a grant date of 
2004. This is also known as the "superwave" patent. It is similar and precedes 
the Brillouin IP - and will also rain on the Godes parade, if it turns out that 
structured waveforms are the key to success.

Two relevant remaining questions are: can these structured waveforms be 
produced with less loss by using a dedicated power supply, and why does this 
demo of Rossi not infringe on the Dardik IP? Or on Brillouin’s similar IP for 
the Q-pulse? 

Dardik’s successors (including Mckubre who is on one of the old patent apps) 
along with Violante have already demonstrated small thermal gain with 
superwaves as far back as 2008. They are probably doing this in Texas, now as 
we speak and they are probably watching Rossi to see if he has made a 
breakthrough but he has not. 

No one issure who currently holds the basic superwave patent (since the demise 
of Energetics LLC) but the USPTO fees are being maintained, so somebody 
realizes the value. Bottom line - as always in measuring input power, when 
unusual waveforms and interfering waves are used as input power the losses in 
the power supply MUST BE included as part of input. 

This is likely to be exactly what SRI told Brillouion and it is probably why 
Godes has gone silent. The losses in the power supply for making superwaves 
cannot be lessened enough to show large gain. It is likely that both Godes and 
Rossi could minimize the losses somewhat, and show COP in the range of 1.5 to 2 
but even then, they would be infringing on EP 1656678 B1.

Reply via email to