Patent to be issued to Etiam Oy. Inventor: Pekka Soininen

The invention proposes to produce thermal energy in a reaction chamber from “nanoscale particle accelerators” and a nano-powder catalyst material used for promoting the formation and storage of condensed Rydberg matter.

The particle accelerators are composed of a metal material (usually powdered Ni) capable of conducting electricity, absorbing hydrogen atoms in the interstitial spaces in the metal lattice forming a metal hydride, and a dielectric material (electric field creator usually in powdered form) capable of being polarized. The nanoparticles accelerators create, enhance and focus localized electric fields and thus accelerate hydrogen ions and electrons.

The catalytic nano-powders allow for the formation and storage of Rydberg matter and inverted Rydberg matter in the same reaction chamber where the nanoscale particle accelerators are producing high-energy electrons and protons. Quantum tunneling allows high-energy protons to overcome the Coulomb barrier, which then allows nuclear fusion to take place between the protons and lattice atoms. The Rydberg matter and inverted Rydberg matter formed by local low-level electric fields condense to form condensed Rydberg matter, which when exploded by high intensity electric fields provide additional protons that increase the probability that fusion with lattice atoms takes place with the release of additional energy.

It appears that the invention itself depends on the efficacy of the reactions posited above. There appear to be two kinds of processes at work. Each process appears to produce protons, which then produce excess heat by tunneling through the Coulomb barrier, each helping the other to make the tunneling process more efficient in producing heat energy. If the inventor has a working model and that model produces energy consistent with the nuclear reactions indicated in the patent, there may actually be some credence to the claims made. This approach to explaining LENR theory is new to me and may IMO have some merit.

The inventor explains in some detail realizations of the specific materials used in the reaction chamber. These materials may be similar to those used by Rossi and Defkalion.

Facebooktwitterredditby feather

8 thoughts on “Synopsis of recent Finnish patent application

  1. Please don’t tell the DOE about this. They will react very badly. It is a frontal assult on the Petro-dollar. Mind you, the Finns have a reputation as a plucky and resourceful people.

    “Quantum tunneling allows high-energy protons to overcome the Coulomb barrier, which then allows nuclear fusion to take place between the protons and lattice atoms. ”

    It looks to me as though we are dealing with many phenomena. Quantum tunneling, fractional orbits, fuzzy Plank numbers, Bose Einstein Condensates, phonon coupling and possibly some unknowns or combination of phenomena. What evidence do we have to assume that there is only one simple explanation? None, it is an assumption.

    No-one said that it was going to be easy, and it isn’t. But it is a necessary but not sufficient requirement for our survival.

  2. U.S.A.

    NASA has a patent for cold fusion.
    SPAWAR (U.S. Navy) has a patent for cold fusion.

    Transmutation of elements does take place. Fusion.

    Yet the DOE shows no links to these, keeping many in the dark.

    The NASA Glenn Research site is out of date and has this (bit of stupidity) to say.

    So what if the DOE is pissed off. The time is for them to answer to us.

    NASA Glenn Research – What about Cold Fusion?

    First, this effect should NEVER have been dubbed “cold fusion.” It should have been called an “anomalous heat effect.” That means you don’t know what’s going on, but it involves heat. The part about “we don’t know what’s going on” is still very true.

    Most evidence points to this being a dead end, but not all the evidence. If I recall correctly, about 30% or the replications for producing heat work, and 70% do not. The evidence also does not indicate that a normal nuclear reaction is occurring. Heat?- maybe, sometimes. Nuclear fusion as we know it?- no.

    It is not being studied very seriously in the US, in fact it is generally frowned upon, but some countries like France and Japan are still looking into it.

    If it is real and if it is useful, then someday, someone will make a practical and unambiguous device out of it. If it is not real, you’re still probably going to be hearing lots of stories about it for years to come — an “Elvis sighting” phenomena.

      • Thanks for the link Esa Maunu,

        It describes the molecular cyclotron theorized by William C. Levengood, Ph.D. and Penny L. Kelly
        When considering the studies of CDP pulses in water and the unexpected evidence of pronounced directional differences between North-South and East-West, we have further support for the anisotropic characteristics of space. If space is not isotropic, then we can postulate that there are energy differences in space whose unknown streams and power currents are available to us. We also have an intriguing factor that may affect the research into cold fusion or free energy research. Reports of cold fusion reactions were frustrating due to inconsistent results. Could that inconsistency be due to unknown forces and currents of energy in space that either accelerate or suppress an energetic reaction?
        Search Molecular Cyclotrons….0…1c.1.19.hp.i1DjHW4RHqE&psj=1&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.48705608,d.cGE&fp=b38456e45226948&biw=1115&bih=862
        Download this PDF file‎
        by WC Levengood – 2007
        molecular, cyclotron resonance mechanisms as outlined by Dr. Robert Becker.16 He points out that “cyclotron resonance may be produced any time there is a ….
        What causes the LENR tunneling effect?
        Fusion at low temperatures is energized by a cyclotron on the molecular scale. Spin momentum forces focus energy. Harmonic frequencies excite these nano spaces even further. Thus we orchestrate the “ingedients” whereby cold fusion LENR energy is controllable and functional.

        Beyond that extra energy is added to the molecular cyclotron through the casamir effect and zero point energy fields in ultra close spaces between the molecules of salts and metals.

  3. Source : :

    Pyroelectric fusion refers to the technique of using pyroelectric crystals to generate high strength electrostatic fields to accelerate deuterium ions (tritium might also be used someday) into a metal hydride target also containing deuterium (or tritium) with sufficient kinetic energy to cause these ions to undergo nuclear fusion. It was reported in April 2005 by a team at UCLA. The scientists used a pyroelectric crystal heated from −34 to 7 °C (−29 to 45 °F), combined with a tungsten needle to produce an electric field of about 25 gigavolts per meter to ionize and accelerate deuterium nuclei into an erbium deuteride target. Though the energy of the deuterium ions generated by the crystal has not been directly measured, the authors used 100 keV (a temperature of about 109 K) as an estimate in their modeling.[1] At these energy levels, two deuterium nuclei can fuse together to produce a helium-3 nucleus, a 2.45 MeV neutron and bremsstrahlung. Although it makes a useful neutron generator, the apparatus is not intended for power generation since it requires far more energy than it produces.[2][3][4][5]

    Maybe ZPE plays some role here, maybe not.

  4. As the term Pyroelectric (polarization induced by heat) has been indicated by a responder, I thought to mention that the patent application also indicates the terms, Piezoelctric (polarization induced by a mechanical device, e.g., ultrasonic source) and Ferroic or Multiferroic (polarization induced by a magnetic field). The inventor indicates that the dielectric(s) in the reaction chamber may be activated by each of these polarization techniques either individually or in combination. The inventor indicates that the source of the high field strength in the reaction chamber is attributed to these dielectric materials. Do these sources of high field strength provide a substitute for the local field fluctuations of Widom-Larsen theory? Do these sources enhance the field fluctuations of W-L theory?

  5. I don`t believe in W-L theory, a voltage gradient of 25 GV / m in a dielectric material accelerates protons enough for the fusion.

  6. Flash web designers will like the cost and the creativity of the Trendy
    Flash Site Builder. He knew the system well enough to not pay many
    of his suppliers and sub-contractors, then would cover it up up
    by handing out fake lien releases to make it look like they were paid.
    We saw earlier that we could, through links to email addresses, contact directly with an email.

Comments are closed.