Electronic musician Esa Ruoho a.k.a. Lackluster first put the sounds together for the science documentary on Edmund Storms‘ “nano-crack” theory of LENR. Filmed and edited by Ruby Carat, HYDROTON also features animation by Jasen Chambers.
From the review:
After gravitating around the Merck label in it’s heydays, this floridan equivalent of Warp until 2007, the finnish Lackluster now flies under the radar via small structures and today via autoproduction, relegated to the margins by musical media and lovers of electronic sounds — more interested today with pop and dansey incarnations –, like many specially-gifted craftmen of a now fringe of electronic music.
He has since broken away from IDM for more atmospherical experimentations, and we meet Esa Ruoho once again today with two beautiful ambient releases, a solo and a collaboration.
Iridescent pads (Circling), stellar blips (Wet Echoes Part XIV) and cascades of echoing keys (Fragrance), even without the gummy beats of the LAX EP, the Hydroton soundtrack sounds more like what this Helsinki native accustomed us to with his electronica moniker, which he’s using here.
Second collaboration with the documentary film-maker Ruby Carat from the Cold Fusion Now! collective which gathers researchers from all over the world, specialists of cold fusion, Hydroton gives music to a documentary on cold fusion theory of the same name. In this new video, Dr. Edmund Storms explains his model based on formation of hydrogen kernels tighter than usual in nano-spaces (gaps) of materials which can trigger a slow cold fusion with electrons, and give off energy as photos. It’s holiday-time so we won’t bore you with physics, however musically Lackluster orchestrates here an electron-microscope matter-ballet (Unveiling), an organic ambient but sufficiently abstract in its textural, pulsated loops to evoke a particle flow rather than cellular-life (Walls Low Ebb).
Here is a taste of the sounds:
Regarding working with Ruby Carat on a science documentary soundtrack, Esa says, “From my side, I decide I’m working on music for a soundtrack, and the things I record from then onwards are either “going towards it” or “being part of it”. I’ll also try and see what else would be sensible to add in – as in the piano track Fragrance, which felt like it would be a good theme for the credits.”
“In the case of the cold fusion documentaries, Ruby did ask me to create something with a low bass pulse, so I accepted that as one defining thing for the songs on the soundtrack – luckily that didn’t prove to be a limiting factor at all. The approach is the same to making sounds for performance; I don’t feel like there is anything specifically different from making soundtracks or playing freestyle, it’s all the same process.”
Esa Ruoho is also the Editor and composed the theme music for the Cold Fusion Now! podcast which brings the voices of cmns scientists to the public.
Esa says, “I’m happy to be involved in this landmark effort by Ruby & Cold Fusion Now! – because as far as I know, there’s not been a steady Cold Fusion / LENR/CANR podcast interviewing scientists, engineers and inventors. It feels like documenting an important point in time, and I hope the listeners are as inspired by the interviews as I am. I think more people should see these and hear the podcasts, as eventually work like this is gonna move the needle, when it becomes more popular.”
Attendees of the 21st International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science ICCF-21 all went home with a special ColdFusionNow.org flash-drive with conference abstracts, LENR science articles, and HYDROTON animations and audio files.
In the isolated LENR field where fact disappears by the cacophony of false claims, we believe it’s important to support the musicians and artists who have the courage to translate this science into words, images and sounds that draw the public into understanding.
It was the artist, too, who awakened that broad philanthropic spirit which, even in old ages, shone in the teachings of noble reformers and philosophers, that spirit which makes men in all departments and positions work not as much for any material benefit or compensation — though reason may command this also — but chiefly for the sake of success, for the pleasure there is in achieving it and for the good they might be able to do thereby to their fellow-men.
Through his influence types of men are now pressing forward, impelled by a deep love for their study, men who are doing wonders in their respective branches, whose chief aim and enjoyment is the acquisition and spread of knowledge, men who look far above earthly things, whose banner is Excelsior!
Gentlemen, let us honor the artist; let us thank him, let us drink his health!
Just out of the box and more jam-packed than ever before! The The Industrial Association for LENR finally released their 2017 LENRIA Calendar and this year’s effort is the best yet!
Every square centimeter of space educates and fascinates with the facts and figures of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (CMNS). As full disclosure, I myself Ruby Carat worked on this very calendar, together with LENRIA’s Steve Katinsky, who produced a fabulous visual directory of the scientific field.
Featuring an impressive network of global researchers working to unlock the promise of Nano-Nuclear Reactions, as the 2016 SPAWAR report described them and is quoted in the calendar, one-after-another, the pages reveal the sheer number of people working to find a solution to our global resource needs – using only bits of metals and ultra-clean hydrogen from water. The last several years have witnessed an increasing rate of interest in the science, as well as the technology.
Working together, the CMNS scientists profiled in the 2017 LENRIA Calendar show the world what cooperation beyond borders looks like. Photos from the recent 20th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (ICCF 20) held in Sendai, Japan along with a satellite conference in Xiamen, China, have experimentalists and theorists from every continent represented.
As a calendar there’s little room to write your appointments, as the date spaces collect the wisdom and knowledge of the field today with quotes, historical facts, and an occasional equation to elevate the fun. It’s more art than contemporary date book, more science almanac than nostalgic paper calendar.
Last year’s 2016 LENRIA Calendar was a huge tool for advocates, wowing newcomers to the field with its lavish tech photos, showing some well-funded, and scientifically-successful ventures. This year, the elite of scientific research see themselves as a cohesive community, one united in purpose: a clean energy revolution.
A technology eludes engineers and a theoretical model still awaits community confirmation, but the research is coming closer than ever to narrowing-down the criteria for success. After 28 years of effort, designs are finding ways to extract value from the effects, which once understood, will point the way to a green technological future for all of life kind, on Earth and beyond. With ultra-clean, energy-dense power from the hydrogen in water, we have the choice to re-make our planet without the imaginary borders and imaginary disputes, but the greatest collaborative global project ever conceived.
If you haven’t received your copy soon, or you want more, please purchase a copy from the Infinite Energy Foundation and Magazine website here:
Formerly, the History of Cold Fusion Calendar, this wall-hanging masterpiece now flies under the banner of LENRIA, the LENR Industry Association, Inc with Director Steve Katinsky.
Created by Ruby Carat of Cold Fusion Now, and edited and produced by Steve Katinsky, the calendar is jam-packed with info about the emerging new energy industry now forming around the ultra-clean energy generated from cold fusion power cells.
Including historical notes, this calendar tells the story of a technology met with virulent resistance, and a group of researchers who defied mainstream rejection to develop and understand this elusive reaction.
Large, close-up photos of scientists, engineers and their nascent technology grace each month of the year, while dates hold facts and figures to educate and inform.
What day was designated “F-Day” by the Electrochemical Society?
How much more energy is gained from deuterium fusion than burning coal?
When and where was the first steam plant ever built?
You’ll find the answers to these questions in the 2016 LENRIA Calendar, to be sent to politicians and policymakers, researchers and investors, and YOU!
PULSE presents science and technology in the field of breakthrough energy. The gorgeous PULSE #3 is a sensory banquet of full-page, beautifully-printed art, and has articles on topics such as The Agonizingly Long Wait for Breakthrough of Breakthrough Energy by Fred Teunisson, who laments the lack of progress in commercial development of new energy technology, and ultimately takes a hard look in the mirror for why.
This issue also features an article on The Explanation of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction by Dr. Edmund Storms, a book that compares the observational data from cold fusion experiments with the many theories of LENR. Cold Fusion Now’s Ruby Carat was one of the editors of the book and designed the front cover hydroton.
Sir Arthur C. Clarke wrote in support of cold fusion when mainstream publications refused to publish on the topic. Clarke also lent the authority of his voice to the film Fire From Water, the 1998 documentary film written by Eugene Mallove (creator) and Jed Rothwell and directed by Chris Toussaint.
Multiple takes of Sir Clarke discussing science, and scandal, are now available as an .mp3 and a transcript courtesy Infinite Energy Magazine via Jed Rothwell of lenr-canr.org. Eugene Mallove and Infinite Energy Magazine followed the science-fiction icon’s interest in new energy, publishing several articles by Clarke, and collaborating on advocacy within government.
When the original news of so-called “cold fusion” came out ten years ago, I was very
excited, like almost everybody else. But then when it seemed as though it was a mistake, I
more or less forgot about it, though I was very surprised that two world-class scientists
could have made such fools of themselves. However. . .
Like everyone else, I was very excited when the so-called “cold fusion” announcement was
made. And then, again like everybody else, I became disappointed and forgot about the
whole thing when it seemed to be a mistake, though I was rather puzzled why two worldclass
scientists could have made such fools of themselves. Well, during the years that
followed, slowly, from time to time, there came news of other laboratories repeating the
experiment and getting positive results. And there has been a sort of groundswell, all over
the whole world, of new information. And during the course of the last five years or so, I’ve
slowly become convinced, from my original skepticism, to 99% certainty that it is for real.
The evidence now is really overwhelming, and I do think this is a major scandal.
There’s a curious parallel back at the beginning of the century, which people have
forgotten all about. When the Wright brothers first flew in 1903, no papers covered it at all,
because everybody was convinced—certainly the American press—that heavier-than-air
flight was totally impossible. All the top scientists said, “This is nonsense.” And editors
wouldn’t even bother to send journalists or photographers to interview the Wrights, or even
to take pictures of them flying in full public view. And it wasn’t for about five years that
eventually they realized, “My goodness, this is real! Heavier-than-air flight is possible.” And
I think a similar thing is going to happen with so-called “cold fusion”—although it’s seldom
cold and often isn’t fusion at all.
[PAUSE IN TAPE]
I believe it was Niels Bohr who once said that new theories don’t become accepted by
converting the opposition. You have to wait until the opponents die, and then the next
generation of scientists take the new theory for granted. Well I hope in this case it is not
necessary for too many people to die before everyone realizes that there is something
here. I don’t like the phrase “cold fusion,” because although that may exist there are
obviously, or almost certainly, other forms of energy production which have nothing
whatsoever to do with fusion. Some may depend on magnetic machines of some kind,
which tap some source of energies. There are many theories, in fact perhaps too many
theories, and that’s a problem in this area. I can quite understand the scientists saying,
“Well look, how does this work, if it’s for real?” I think it was Eddington who once said, “I
won’t accept any experimental fact until there’s a theory to account for it.” And that’s rather
an exaggeration, but it’s not a bad idea.
There are some classic examples of earlier scientific scandals, which should make us think
that we aren’t always sure of what. . .
I’d like to remind you of some earlier examples of scientific scandals. My favorite one
concerns meteorites—stones falling from the sky. And President Jefferson, who was one of
the most brilliant of all American presidents, once said, “I would sooner believe that two
Yankee professors lied than that stones fall from the sky.” Well, now we know that
mountains fall from the sky, and there is considerable interest in this particular subject of
meteor or asteroid impact on the earth. Atomic energy itself was a matter of great
skepticism. Rutherford—Lord Rutherford—who uncovered the secrets of the atom, once
said that the idea of getting energy from the atom was “utter moonshine.” In my own field
of interest—space travel—for most of my youth people thought the idea of leaving the
earth was “utter bilge” to quote a remark made by a certain Astronomer Royal. Well, again and again we have seen these new and revolutionary ideas proved, and then finally accepted and taken for granted.
These two examples are probably unnecessary, but I’ll just give them to you, and you can
use them if you. . .They are relevant, but they’re rather long winded. . .
Two of my favorite examples of scientific revolutions where a heretical idea has been
finally accepted are continental drift and the origin of lunar craters. Now, continental drift—
the idea that the continents moved around and that once the American and European
continents fitted together like a jigsaw puzzle, and then drifted apart—was regarded as
absolutely ridiculous by probably 99% of geologists. In fact, someone once said that, “The
only time I ever saw a man literally foaming at the mouth was when I mentioned continental
drift to a distinguished geologist.” Well, now we know that continental drift does occur, and
that originally all the continents were stuck together and they have moved apart. So here is
a total revolution which occurred actually in the last couple of decades. The other one is. . .
Another revolution is in our ideas about the craters on the moon. They look slightly like
volcanoes and, until we went to the moon, most astronomers thought they were volcanic in
origin. The other theory was that they were created by huge meteors splashing into the
moon. But that idea was dismissed, at least in England, by most astronomers. And I am
fond of quoting one who said that, “The presence of central peaks completely rules out the
theory of meteor impact.” Well, now we know that when a meteor does impact, it does
create a central peak, and most lunar craters are in fact the result of meteor or asteroidal
impact. So there is a revolution in our ideas which has taken place in a very short time and
proved that old ideas, old concepts, were completely wrong.
I’m an old fashioned conservative, so I still believe in the law of the conservation of energy.
Energy doesn’t come from nowhere. So, if these various devices work, where do they get
the energy? Well, some of these electrolytic cells—the original Pons-Fleischmann cells and their derivatives—may be some kind of nuclear reaction: fusion of hydrogen, or deuterium,
or tritium, or whatever. Others may be tapping what’s known as zero point energy. Space
itself is a seething mass of energy, although we are not aware of it, luckily! But there are
tremendous energies in space, and one famous scientist, a Nobel Prize winner, once said,
“The energy contained in a volume of space equal to a coffee mug is enough to boil all the
oceans of the world.” And perhaps we are beginning to tap that. It’s a pretty scary idea. I’ve
often wondered if supernovae are industrial accidents.
Another possible source of energy is something called micro-cavitation. It’s a little known
fact that when ultrasonic waves—very high frequency sound—pass through a liquid, they
can produce bubbles. And if those bubbles collapse, preferably symmetrically, they can
produce temperatures of perhaps millions of degrees, and possibly some kind of reaction
may take place in ordinary water, or water enriched with deuterium or tritium, that may
produce some kind of fusion. I became interested in this as a result of some news I
received from Russia, which I’d like to talk about in a minute. [Potapov] Now there’s only
one more thing. . .
If these new sources of energy do turn out to be real—and, as I say, there are several
totally different varieties—the question is: What effect will this have on our society? On the
future? Well, it’s just possible they may be no more than laboratory curiosities, and can’t be
scaled up to commercial levels. I think that’s rather unlikely. Nuclear energy was once a
laboratory curiosity. So let’s assume that these devices can be developed. The future is
then almost unlimited. It could be the end of the fossil fuel age: the end of oil and coal. And
the end, incidentally, of many of our worries about global pollution and global warming. So
that’ll be a very good thing. If they can be made on a small scale, that could be the end of
electrical distribution. In other words, every house could be totally self-contained with its
power source. The automobile, belching carbon dioxide and other fumes, would be a clean
device. What an effect that would have on our cities! The oil companies will simply go out
of business, and the effect on the world’s politics, particularly in the East, will be. . .well,
staggering. And, in fact, one can imagine all sorts of unpleasant geopolitical scenarios. I
hope we have the wisdom to adapt to this new order, when we are certain that it is going to
[BACK TO POTAPOV]
This is one of the things that made me interested in this whole area of new energy. I hope I
can. . .(lifting device) oh, it’s quite a weight! This is the business end, or component, of
something called a Yusmar. About five years ago I heard there was a Russian inventor,
with the odd name of Potapov, who had a factory producing devices which produced more
energy than went into them. They work on this principle: He has a powerful electric pump
which squirts water through this thing, which he calls a vortex tube, and something
happens in here. The water becomes very hot, or even steam, and apparently, about 20%
more energy comes out in heat than goes in in electricity. Well, this man has had a factory
running for years now, and it has produced thousands of these units, including very large
ones which can heat whole apartment houses. So I sent a friend, an engineer named Chris
Tinsley, who unfortunately is now dead, into Russia with a video camera and he filmed the
whole operation: hundreds of these units, big units, going up for sale. And Potapov is
advertising really large units now, in the megawatt range. We are still not quite certain if
they do produce excess energy, but if they do, they probably depend on micro-cavitation—
making bubbles which collapse and then produce tremendous temperatures. Another thing
that made me take this fairly seriously is that two independent firms in the United States
are producing similar devices, and selling them. Some of them don’t claim to produce
excess energy; they may be very, very efficient ways of turning electricity into heat. But
there is some evidence that occasionally, at any rate, these things produce a little more
energy going out than comes in. This is not enough to revolutionize the world as some of
the other devices would. Some of the devices being advertised and even sold produce tens
or hundreds of times more energy than goes into them. But these claims still remain to be
completely substantiated, though I do take them seriously enough to wish that people
would investigate them more carefully.
Okay . . . [Discussion of quotes for voice-overs.]
It is really quite amazing by what margins competent but conservative scientists and
engineers can miss the mark when they start with the preconceived idea that what they are
investigating is impossible. When this happens, the most well informed men become
blinded by their prejudices and are unable to see what lies directly ahead of them.
To predict the future we need logic; but we also need faith and imagination, which can
sometimes defy logic itself.
It has been said that the art of living lies in knowing where to stop, and going a little further.
When a distinguished but elderly scientist says that something is possible, he is almost
certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
That’s one of Clarke’s laws. But my favorite Clarke law is the third, which is. . .
I’d like to give you the three Clarke’s laws.
The first one: The only way of finding the limits of the possible is by going beyond them,
into the impossible.
Second law: When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible,
he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
The third law is my favorite, and perhaps the most quoted: Any sufficiently advanced
technology is indistinguishable from magic.
. . .If you doubt that, look at your compact disks; look at your pocket computers. They
would have been pure magic only a few decades ago.
Video: Robert Godes speaking at ICCF-18 in the Entrepreneurs session.
Brillouin Energy Corporation and SRI International continue their association cooperatively on experiments towards a commercial quantum fusion energy generator.
“We are solving engineering problems with the Hydrogen Hot Tube (HHT™) and expect to have a solid system by the end of 2014,” says President and Chief Technical Officer Robert Godes. “We also bounce ideas about the next-gen WET™ system. They [SRI] are great to work with.”
A relationship with investment firm Sunrise Securities is ongoing, but Godes says, “I don’t see Brillouin Energy going public. We may start a subsidiary corp with Sunrise for power plant operations with the HHT™ system at some point.”
Most importantly, Brillouin’s cell test equipment is dressed for success with a message that properly focuses the effort:
You asked for it, and now it’s here: the 2014 History of Cold Fusion Calendar!
Jam packed with lots of new info and quotes, this year’s must-have gift for your new energy enthusiast is sure to please.
Twelve gorgeous full-color images from leading researchers of today, as well as rare photos from the New Energy Foundation archives, grace the pages. Energy cells are lavishly displayed in close-up panoramic color!
Last year’s 2013 calendar was a huge success, and presented the field of cold fusion to newbies with prestige. Order a bunch to send to policy-makers and news media. They won’t be able to ignore the technology for long!
Send a few to your local schools, and encourage students to experiment with their teachers. They’ll be in good company with one high-school that has an inter-disciplinary program and working cells right now! (See September!)
Order now, and they’ll be ready just in time for the holidays to give the techies in your family the gift of a lifetime!
All proceeds go to support Cold Fusion Now and the New Energy Foundation, serving the new energy community with education, advocacy, and funding.
In helping to think about Cold Fusion … let’s go back in time to when claims of fire-starting were first heard about. Recall how the science committee reacted …
Back in the caveman and cavewoman days, someone had the idea to try to create fire artificially. They had seen the heat generated by forest fires started by lightning, and they thought that fire would be just dandy to create heat and light at night and to cook meat. They were tired of eating raw meat. Since people had noticed heat was generated by rubbing sticks together, some had the idea to rub them together faster and faster. Eventually here and there people claimed they were able to start fires by this method.
One day the caveman and cavewoman science committee met to examine these claims of people creating fire. They brought in people to testify. Some said they are able to do it by rubbing certain kinds of sticks together, but others said all they achieved was a sore back from bending over all day. The science committee listened to the evidence and then took a vote. Because fires were not consistently created, the claims must be false. The committee proclaimed that artificially started fires did not exist. It was settled science.
A year later the science committee convened again. A small minority of people were still claiming that they had succeeded at artificially creating fires. After an investigation the committee concluded that only 21% of people attempting to start fires claimed to succeed. Since the fires were obviously not consistently reproducible, this big claim of artificial fire-starting was declared pathological science. Additionally, it was declared that these fire-starter types were to be ignored and shunned. After all, everyone knew people can’t start fires. Only lightning can do that. It was settled science.
On the third year the science committee met again. This time a few cavemen and cavewomen objected strongly to the science committee declarations of the previous year because they were tired of having to eat in the woods instead of the caves because everyone shunned them. So this small group of people said they could actually demonstrate this fire-starting. The science committee members reluctantly agreed to witness a demonstration. The cavemen and cavewomen who claimed they could start fires took the committee members to their cave that evening. All of them proceeded with rubbing sticks together upon which they did for two hours, and then finally one caveman was able to start a fire.
Everyone including the science committee members at first were startled and excited. The committee members scratched their heads and walked around this seeming fire. Finally, the most learned among them said: “It’s a trick! Five of the six people who tried to start the fire here tonight did not succeed. For scientific proof, these fires must be consistently reproducible. They all rubbed the sticks together in the same way, but only this fire appeared. This is obviously not a fire at all. It’s an illusion to fool us.”
The science committee left in a huff, but not before declaring loudly that the man who said he had started a fire should be shunned and he should eat in the woods alone forever. What nonsense they muttered. Pathological fire-starting, one said. The committee members had far more important matters to attend to than this artificial fire quackery. Besides, how important could fire-starting be anyhow?
Postscript #1: Ten years later the science committee changed their position slightly and said fire-starting could be studied. But since only 21% of people claimed that they could start fires, they still declared that artificial fires were not possible to create. Furthermore, they added this clarification: “And the claimed fires burn not nearly as hot as forest fires, and there is certainly no theory to explain this. These seeming fires violate our laws of fire science and thus these fires can’t possibly exist.”
Postscript #2: 300 millennia later the science committee of the day finally conceded that fires could be artificially created. To this they quickly put them to use and burned Bruno at the stake for claiming the Earth revolved around the sun and that the sun was just another star. After all, the Earth is at the center of the universe, and there is only one sun. It was settled science.