Borealis LENR Patent – Elektron is the Greek Word for Amber

The Borealis family of companies could convert popular cold fusion (LENR thermal) energy to desired electrical current at 50% to 80% Carnot efficiency with their Power Chips. This matches, and may nearly double, known industrial electricity production efficiencies.

Then with their Chorus group of advanced polyphase induction motors they can provide every range of torque needed; more efficiently, with decreased size and weight, and with an increase in reliability in both low rpm and high temperature conditions.

Take into account LENR thermal energy at 1000X greater than chemical, plus the thermal/electrical conversion at an amazing 50% to 80%, and then figure in the “harmonic 12 phase” motors with up to 30% improvements in size, efficiency, and safety, and you will see that the Borealis affiliates are roaring and ready to join LENR energy engineers as they race to market a new energy era.

LENR open source projects may benefit from a Borealis relationship as well.

Here is a recent patent abstract from Borealis on LENR thermal electric conversion.

“A system and method are provided for generating electric power from relatively low temperature energy sources at efficiency levels not previously available. The present system and method employ recent advances in low energy nuclear reaction technology and thermionic/thermotunneling device technology first to generate heat and then to convert a substantial portion of the heat generated to usable electrical power. Heat may be generated by a LENR system employing nuclear reactions that occur in readily available materials at ambient temperatures without a high energy input requirement and do not produce radioactive byproducts. The heat generated by the LENR system may be transferred through one or more thermionic converter devices in heat transfer relationship with the LENR system to generate electric power.”

Ancient cultures around the Mediterranean knew that certain objects, such as rods of amber, could be rubbed with cat’s fur to create static electricity. In 1600, the English scientist William Gilbert coined the New Latin word electricus ‘of amber’ or ‘like amber’ from ήλεκτρον [elektron], the Greek word for amber. This association gave rise to the English words ‘electric’ and ‘electricity’ which made their first appearance in print in Thomas Browne’s Pseudodoxia Epidemica of 1646.

“Industrial electricity production at present is done primarily with gas and steam turbine technology. Absolute conversion efficiencies with these technologies are in the range of 30%-40%…” see pg. 9 of ‘Thermal to Electric Energy Conversion‘, by Dr Peter Hagelstein of MIT.

In light of this, one could venture to say that the Borealis proposal to the LENR energy community, at an impressive 50% to 80% thermal electric conversion, is like a precious energetic gem of amber (elektron).

Electricity is one of the wonders of our times, enabling the second industrial revolution as well as the information and space age. How dense will the proposed Borealis LENR electricity be at 60% Carnot? Let’s look at the size of the 6 kilowatt LENR thermoionic electrical generator (75 cubic centimeters). It is quite small compared to the size of a typical 6 kilowatt natural gas home electrical generator, 48L x 25W x 29H (Inches).

From the Borealis LENR Patent

  • An illustrative reactor core with a volume on the order of about 50 cubic centimeters (cm3) can use a few grams of nickel or other metal powder and a very small amount of hydrogen to safely produce about 10 kilowatts of heat.
  • …and can continue to produce this amount of heat for six months or more.
  • …and the thermionic converter preferably may have a longest dimension in the range of about one inch (2.2 cm), the overall size of the present high efficiency electricity generating system can be quite small.
  • The size of the system can be increased by connecting modules of LENR system reaction vessels and thermionic converters.
  • Power Chip efficiency: Power Chips can achieve in excess of 50% of Carnot (ideal) efficiency, compared to a maximum of 36% for single stage power plants, 50-60% in conventional two stage power systems, and 5-8% for thermoelectric devices.

The Borealis affiliates have worked hard to master these technologies. Recent breakthroughs have come to them through advanced techniques of nano engineering. Their discoveries within the world of nano particles has lead to atomic architecture designed for specific quantum effects. For a complete representation of their expertise in the field peruse their sites portfolio of patents granted and google Borealis Technical for recent patent activity.

“The new technology results from the discovery that quantum interference, which reduces quantum state density at a material’s surface, can be achieved on a macroscopic scale. Simply by modifying the surface texture of a material in precise ways, using methods commonly applied in the manufacture of semiconductor devices, engineers should be able to exploit this Avto Effect (TM) and transform existing materials into materials with precisely engineered properties for many new applications. When we fully understand the Avto Effect, we could possibly be able to custom design work functions for multiple different applications.” – Borealis CEO – press release

From the Borealis Power Chip Patent

  • The present invention utilizes a wafer bonding technique to create the conditions required for thermoelectric conversion. This involves bringing two conductive planes to within 10-1000 nm without causing electrical or thermal “shorts”. Silicon on insulator techniques are widely used to bond two silicon wafers with thin oxide layers in between. However, the thermal leakage of a 10 nm SiO2 layer is 4-5 orders of magnitude too large for effective thermo-electric conversion.
  • This can easily be mitigated by not bonding the entire surface. If a small particle is trapped in between two silicon wafers, due to the mechanical properties of silicon, a non-bonded area (void) of 5000 times the size (height) of the particle is created. For example, if a particle of height Z is trapped between two silicon wafers, a void with an area of approximately 5000Z2 is formed. Consequently, if two particles are spaced a distance apart, whereby the size of the distance is less than 2×5000 the size of the particles; an even larger void is created. Using this idea, it is possible to form small “spacers” that maintain a gap between the wafers.
  • This invention sets and maintains a gap between the electrodes of a thermotunneling device without the use of active elements, and therefore problems of thermal conduction between its layers are reduced or eliminated.
  • Furthermore, using this method to create gap diode devices is inexpensive as it does not require active elements such as piezoelectric actuators to create and maintain the gap.
  • Furthermore, this invention discloses methods for manufacturingthermotunneling converters on a large scale, thus reducing costs and increasing possibilities for potential applications.
  • The mechanical properties of silicon are such that if a small particle is trapped in between two silicon wafers, a non-bonded area (void) of 5000 times the size (height) of the particle is created. For example, using a 3-dimensional axis of coordinates X, Y and Z, a particle of height Z leads to a void in the X and Y dimensions of approximately 5000 Z in each of X and Y. Therefore the spacers consist of a dot of silicon oxide topped by a protective layer and will have the effect of keeping the two silicon wafers at a desired distance without the use of active elements.
  • This forms a structure in which the thermal flux across the assembly is reduced by the ratio of surface area of these spacers to the remaining surface area. A spacer of about 1 micrometer height leads to a gap with a diameter of approximately 5000 times that size, namely, 0.5 cm. These approximations are effective for typical 4 inch diameter silicon wafers, with a thickness of about 525 micrometers. It is understood that the invention is by no means limited to these measurements or approximations, and they are mentioned merely by way of example.
  • The layers on the active wafer can be introduced using approaches commonly used in the art. For example, an active layer can be introduced on to the electrode by vacuum deposition, using materials such as zinc, lead, cadmium, thallium, bismuth, polonium, tin, selenium, lithium, indium, sodium, potassium, gallium or cesium. Another possible method is sputtering, using materials such as titanium and silver. In a further example, an active layer such as copper is grown electrochemically onto the silicon layer. In another example, an electrically conducting paste, preferably silver, may be applied onto the electrode, or a thin film may be introduced using MEMS techniques. It is to be understood that the invention is in no way limited to these specific methods and they are mentioned only by way of example. Accordingly, any other suitable method may be used.

Manufacturing of electric cars, ships, and aircraft will surge with an electric power plant of this density available; one that requires no fuel tanks or refueling for 6 months!

These manufacturers may also gain an edge with the use of Borealis advanced harmonics control and the ensuing advantages within motors. The following is from the Borealis website.

The Chorus Difference

“The Chorus Motor’s patented employment of electrical drive harmonics unlocks a power-to-weight ratio of almost 10:1 over conventional AC induction solutions. This incredible power density, and the use of patented control logic, allows the motor to function efficiently in both low-speed/high-torque and high-speed/low-torque configurations. In other words Chorus handles very fast starts and ‘power jumps’ as well as smooth, continuous high-speed operation with equal elegance.”

“As a high-phase order motor, the amount of current running through each phase is reduced, enabling a 20-30% reduction in the size and weight of the power electronics module.”

From the Borealis Chorus Motor Patent

  • The most important result of the method of the present invention is that the use of many phases reduces substantially the problems associated with harmonic rotating fields. Specifically, in a fashion novel to the art, the use of many phases causes harmonic fields up to a number equal to the number of phases to rotate in synchronism with the fundamental rotating field. Both spatial harmonic rotating fields and temporal harmonic rotating fields are still developed, but such rotating fields add beneficially to the fundamental rotating field of the machine. Harmonics of higher order than the number of phases still excite non-synchronous rotating fields; however such high order harmonics are in general very weak. Thus motor efficiency losses associated with harmonic rotating fields are reduced.
  • The method of the present invention allows for the use of drive wave-form with high harmonic content, and in an embodiment of the present invention, square wave inverters are used in place of the more complex and expensive sine wave inverters to drive the induction rotating machine. The method of the present invention allows for the use of high saturation levels, and in an embodiment of the present invention high voltage is used to produce high flux densities, thus increasing the overload output capabilities of the induction rotating machine.
  • An advantage of the present invention is that rotating machinery with low pole counts, and thus greater efficiency and capability, can be used where high pole count machines are currently being used.
  • An advantage of the present invention is that the use of multiple inverters will enhance system fault tolerance. Should an inverter leg fail, only a single motor winding will cease to function, and most of the motor capacity will remain available.
  • An advantage of the present invention is that currently available inverter technology may be used to enhance the efficiency and performance of electrical rotating machinery.
  • It is an object of the present invention to enhance the stall torque and reduce the stall power consumption of electric motors.
  • An advantage of the present invention is that a given size electric motor will be more capable of starting inertial loads. When operated as a generator for regenerative braking purposes, a given size induction machine will be more capable of stopping inertial loads.
  • An advantage of the present invention is that inertial loads will be more quickly brought up to running speed.
  • An advantage of the present invention is that less energy will be dissipated when starting and stopping electrical rotating machinery.
  • An advantage of the present invention is that a smaller motor may be used on large inertial loads, allowing the motor to operate much nearer to full power after said inertial load is accelerated to operational speed. This will enhance the efficiency of such systems as motors are more efficient when operated nearer to full power.
  • It is an object of the present invention to reduce the zero load power consumption of electric motors.
  • An advantage of the present invention is that motor operation will be more efficient, especially so at low duty factors.
  • An advantage of the present invention is that stator heating will be significantly reduced.
  • It is an object of the present invention to provide greater reliability through redundancy in drive electronics.
  • An advantage of the present invention is that the motor and drive system will continue to function although a single inverter may fail.
  • An advantage of the present invention is that the winding copper is more effectively used.

Patents Sourced

Borealis LENR Patent - Published Nov. 14, 2013
Method and System for High Efficiency Electricity Generation Using Low Energy Thermal Heat Generation and Thermionic Devices
Borealis Power Chip Patent - Granted Sept. 24, 2013
Thermionic/Thermotunneling Thermo-Electrical Converter
Borealis Chorus Motor Patent - Granted April 25, 2000
Polyphase Induction Electrical Rotating Machine

Poetry

All over the world, engineers hold the “Ritual of the Calling of an Engineer” in high regard. It was written and presented by Kipling in the early 1920 ‘s, at the request of a group of seven retired presidents of the Engineering Institute of Canada. They had decided that there needed to be a ceremony and standard of ethics for graduating engineers. The Corporation of the Seven Wardens administers the oath to this day.

“The Ritual of the Calling of an Engineer has been instituted with the simple end of directing the young engineer towards a consciousness of his profession and its significance, and indicating to the older engineer his responsibilities in receiving, welcoming and supporting the young engineers in their beginnings.” — Rudyard Kipling

Advances in well engineered physical constructs have improved living conditions since the time of Kipling. Excellence in engineering has become the standard of our day. Recent social constructs have also improved life since the days of Kipling. His poems often reflect the harshness of life before the advent of the 40 hour work week, minimum wage standards, and workplace safety and child labor laws.

Perhaps with the era that cold fusion ushers in we will see our social engineers making the quantum leap that our physical engineers are making today. They did so in the Victorian era.

Honoring those who ensure that all things are in working order and engineered correctly; penned during the writing of the “Ritual of the Calling of the Engineer”.

This poem alludes to the the division of the labor and privileged classes of his day.

The Sons of Martha – by Rudyard Kipling

The Sons of Mary seldom bother, for they have inherited that good part;
But the Sons of Martha favour their Mother of the careful soul and troubled heart.
And because she lost her temper once, and because she was rude to the Lord her Guest,
Her Sons must wait upon Mary’s Sons, world without end, reprieve, or rest.

It is their care in all the ages to take the buffet and cushion the shock.
It is their care that the gear engages; it is their care that the switches lock.
It is their care that the wheels run truly; it is their care to embark and entrain,
Tally, transport, and deliver duly the Sons of Mary by land and main.

They say to mountains, ‘Be ye removed’. They say to the lesser floods, ‘Be dry’.
Under their rods are the rocks reproved – they are not afraid of that which is high.
Then do the hill-tops shake to the summit – then is the bed of the deep laid bare,

That the Sons of Mary may overcome it, pleasantly sleeping and unaware.
They finger death at their gloves’ end where they piece and repiece the living wires.
He rears against the gates they tend: they feed him hungry behind their fires.
Early at dawn, ere men see clear, they stumble into his terrible stall,

And hale him forth like a haltered steer, and goad and turn him till evenfall.
To these from birth is Belief forbidden; from these till death is Relief afar.
They are concerned with matter hidden, under the earthline their altars are;
The secret fountains to follow up, waters withdrawn to restore to the mouth,

And gather the floods as in a cup, and pour them again at a city drouth.
They do not preach that their God will rouse them a little before the nuts work loose.
They do not teach that His Pity allows them to leave their work when they damn-well choose.
As in the thronged and the lighted ways, so in the dark and the desert they stand.

Wary and watchful all their days that their brethren’s days may be long in the land.
Raise ye the stone or cleave the wood to make a path more fair or flat:
Lo, it is black already with blood some Son of Martha spilled for that:
Not as a ladder from earth to Heaven, not as a witness to any creed,

But simple service simply given to his own kind in their common need.
And the Sons of Mary smile and are blessed, they know the angels are on their side.
They know in them is the Grace confessed, and for them are the Mercies multiplied.
They sit at the Feet – they hear the Word – they see how truly the Promise Runs:

They have cast their burden upon the Lord, and – the Lord He lays it on Martha’s Sons.

History

Thales, the earliest known researcher into electricity

Long before any knowledge of electricity existed people were aware of shocks from electric fish. Ancient Egyptian texts dating from 2750 BC referred to these fish as the “Thunderer of the Nile”, and described them as the “protectors” of all other fish. Electric fish were again reported millennia later by ancient Greek, Roman and Arabic naturalists and physicians. Several ancient writers, such as Pliny the Elder and Scribonius Largus, attested to the numbing effect of electric shocks delivered by catfish and torpedo rays, and knew that such shocks could travel along conducting objects. Patients suffering from ailments such as gout or headache were directed to touch electric fish in the hope that the powerful jolt might cure them. Possibly the earliest and nearest approach to the discovery of the identity of lightning, and electricity from any other source, is to be attributed to the Arabs, who before the 15th century had the Arabic word for lightning (raad) applied to the electric ray.

ThalesAncient cultures around the Mediterranean knew that certain objects, such as rods of amber, could be rubbed with cat’s fur to attract light objects like feathers. Thales of Miletos made a series of observations on static electricity around 600 BC, from which he believed that friction rendered amber magnetic, in contrast to minerals such as magnetite, which needed no rubbing. Thales was incorrect in believing the attraction was due to a magnetic effect, but later science would prove a link between magnetism and electricity. According to a controversial theory, the Parthians may have had knowledge of electroplating, based on the 1936 discovery of the Baghdad Battery, which resembles a galvanic cell, though it is uncertain whether the artifact was electrical in nature.

Benjamin Franklin

3-Benjamin-FranklinBenjamin Franklin conducted extensive research on electricity in the 18th century, as documented by Joseph Priestley(1767) History and Present Status of Electricity, with whom Franklin carried on extended correspondence.

Electricity would remain little more than an intellectual curiosity for millennia until 1600, when the English scientist William Gilbert made a careful study of electricity and magnetism, distinguishing the lodestone effect from static electricity produced by rubbing amber. He coined the New Latin word electricus (“of amber” or “like amber”, from ήλεκτρον [elektron], the Greek word for “amber”) to refer to the property of attracting small objects after being rubbed. This association gave rise to the English words “electric” and “electricity”, which made their first appearance in print in Thomas Browne’s Pseudodoxia Epidemica of 1646.

Further work was conducted by Otto von Guericke, Robert Boyle, Stephen Gray and C. F. du Fay. In the 18th century, Benjamin Franklin conducted extensive research in electricity, selling his possessions to fund his work. In June 1752 he is reputed to have attached a metal key to the bottom of a dampened kite string and flown the kite in a storm-threatened sky. A succession of sparks jumping from the key to the back of his hand showed that lightning was indeed electrical in nature. He also explained the apparently paradoxical behavior of theLeyden jar as a device for storing large amounts of electrical charge.

4-Michael-FaradayMichael Faraday formed the foundation of electric motor technology

In 1791, Luigi Galvani published his discovery of bioelectricity, demonstrating that electricity was the medium by which nerve cells passed signals to the muscles. Alessandro Volta’s battery, or voltaic pile, of 1800, made from alternating layers of zinc and copper, provided scientists with a more reliable source of electrical energy than the electrostatic machines previously used. The recognition of electromagnetism, the unity of electric and magnetic phenomena, is due to Hans Christian Ørsted and André-Marie Ampère in 1819-1820; Michael Faraday invented the electric motor in 1821, and Georg Ohm mathematically analysed the electrical circuit in 1827. Electricity and magnetism (and light) were definitively linked by James Clerk Maxwell, in particular in his “On Physical Lines of Force” in 1861 and 1862.

6-toroidWhile the early 19th century had seen rapid progress in electrical science, the late 19th century would see the greatest progress in electrical engineering. Through such people as Alexander Graham Bell,Ottó Bláthy, Thomas Edison, Galileo Ferraris, Oliver Heaviside, Ányos Jedlik, Lord Kelvin, Sir Charles Parsons, Ernst Werner von Siemens, Joseph Swan, Nikola Tesla and George Westinghouse, electricity turned from a scientific curiosity into an essential tool for modern life, becoming a driving force of the Second Industrial Revolution.In 1887, Heinrich Hertz discovered that electrodes illuminated with ultraviolet light create electric sparks more easily. In 1905 Albert Einstein published a paper that explained experimental data from the photoelectric effect as being the result of light energy being carried in discrete quantized packets, energizing electrons. This discovery led to the quantum revolution. Einstein was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1921 for “his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect”. The photoelectric effect is also employed in photocells such as can be found in solar panels and this is frequently used to make electricity commercially.

The first solid-state device was the “cat’s whisker” detector, first used in 1930s radio receivers. A whisker-like wire is placed lightly in contact with a solid crystal (such as a germanium crystal) in order to detect a radio signal by the contact junction effect. In a solid-state component, the current is confined to solid elements and compounds engineered specifically to switch and amplify it. Current flow can be understood in two forms: as negatively charged electrons, and as positively charged electron deficiencies called holes. These charges and holes are understood in terms of quantum physics. The building material is most often a crystalline semiconductor.The solid-state device came into its own with the invention of the transistor in 1947. Common solid-state devices include transistors, micro processor chips, and RAM. A specialized type of RAM called flash RAM is used in flash drives and more recently, solid state drives to replace mechanically rotating magnetic disc hard drives. Solid state devices became prevalent in the 1950s and the 1960s, during the transition from vacuum tube technology to semiconductor diodes, transistors, integrated circuit (IC) and the light-emitting diode (LED).

Future Strategic Issues/Future Warfare [Circa 2025] Dennis Bushnell – NASA – LENR

LENR, ZPE, Graphene, Nanotechnology, Robotics,Virtual IT, Supercomputers, Artificial Intelligence, and Bioengineering; all these arts of science and advanced technologies are of interest in this document. Everyone working in these scientific fields should review this document, envision the solution proposed by Dennis Bushnell, bring the issues forward in public forums, and work together to create a world where people do not feel the need to go to war.

Future Strategic Issues/Future Warfare [Circa 2025] by Dennis Bushnell et.al.

This 113-page slide-show from NASA, June of 2013, lays out what we are preparing to prevent; by foreseeing what the capabilities of advanced technologies will bring to the theater of war.

Dennis Bushnell is bringing everything out into the open for us to think about: these advanced warfare technologies are NOT something we can all just live with.

They are difficult to defend against, and often untraceable; being cheap and easy to manufacture. They will be developed commercially, and very simply; without requiring any long-term governmental development like mega-trillion dollar stealth bombers, naval carriers, and observational platform programs.

They are soon becoming commercially available, legally. Actions which classify these dangerous technologies as illegal are needed.

Page 2 The ‘Bots, ‘Borgs, ‘& Humans welcome you to 2025 A.D.
Nano-Bots and Swarms (by land, sea, or air) create a whole different scenario; where all large war objects become vulnerable to disabling attacks. How can one stop an attack from a cloud of thousands of single, individually-minded mosquitoes, or other swarms intent to disrupt or destroy Systems, Objects, Habitats, or Peoples?

All offensive weapons of war should be made illegal; to produce or sell, period. Defense systems will then be the  only legal military industrial complex sales allowed by law. The defense industry must comply and focus their efforts on defense, offensive abilities are forthwith illegal… Once again, period.

How can we create a human culture where people simply refuse to create war?

What can the emergent LENR energy and advanced technology communities do to contribute to a world culture that does not feel the need to ever go to war again?

That is the challenge according to Bushnell, and in many peoples’ opinion, the only solution.

Think out of the box… We will enable peace…  It is extremely important for our future.

Future Strategic Issues/Future Warfare [Circa 2025] Dennis Bushnell et.al.

NASA – LENR energetics and advanced technologies

Page 4 This presentation is meant to incite thought/ discussion and is based in all cases upon existing data/trends/analyses/technologies. (e.g., NO PIXIE DUST)

It provides, in some cases, a somewhat broader view of prospective developments and issues.

SO IT DOES, YES?

Indeed it does…

Page 22 The “Bushnell Challenge”
“In this [Worldwide] economy our ability to create wealth is not bounded by physical limits/resources but by our ability to come up with new ideas.”

However, even “universal wealth” will not obviate the other causes of warfare which include Politics, ”Face” (which include) Religion, Megalomania, and Territorial Disputes.

Page 7 Need to Plan “Differently”
Our World is in the throes of triple/exponential (IT/Bio/Nano) Technological Revolutions.
• Changes occurring at scales of months (instead of decades).
• Zeroth order potential effects upon Defense/Offense equipment/conops/threat.

Page 8 “SPACESHIP EARTH”
The crew are:
– Plundering the ship’s supplies.
– Tinkering with the temperature and life-support controls.
– Still looking for the instruction manual.
– Engaging in bloody skirmishes in every corner of the vessel.
– Increasing the size of the crew by 2 million PER WEEK.

ENERGETICS ACCORDING TO NASA
High Energy Density Materials (HEDM) (Power, Explosives, Propellants)
Tetrahedral N (Isp 600+ sec)
Atomic Born, C, H (Isp 600+ sec)
Metastable He (Isp 1500 sec) • Metallic Hz (Isp 2000 sec)
ISOMERS ( 105 x TNT)
Anti-matter
LENR’s

Page 37 Revolutionary Power Generation/Storage Opportunities
• Ultracapacitors • Adv. Fuel Cells (e.g. Lithium/water/air)
• HEDM (e.g. Solid H2, Isomers, antimatter, etc.
• Adv. PV (50%?) • Room Temperature SC/SMES
• C-Nanotube storage of H2 (non-cryo)?
• Offshore Methane Hydrate
• Blacklight power?
• LENR
• ZPE

Page 57 High Energy Density Materials (HEDM) (Power, Explosives, Propellants)
• Tetrahedral N (Isp 600+ sec)
• Atomic Born, C, H (Isp 600+ sec)
• Metastable He (Isp 1500 sec)
• Metallic Hz (Isp 2000 sec)
• ISOMERS ( 105 x TNT)
• Anti-matter
*LENR’s

Page 101 “Circa 2025”
• Machines as creative/“smart” as humans “Robotics” the “norm”
• Zeroth order “warstopper” – Binary bio into nation’s agric./food distrib. system (every home/fox hole)
• Next level of concern: Ubiquitous/Cheap micro-to-nano EVERYTHING (sensors, munitions, weapons swarms/hordes)
• Battlefield attrition/CNN syndrome forces U.S. Army to look/act like SOCOM

Page 106 Future “Warfare”
• “Defense” against the “then year” multitudinous conventional and unconventional delivery methods for volumetric and precision munitions is essentially neither doable nor affordable.
• Suggested National Defense Approaches:
– Work Technology, Intel, Diplomacy, SOCOM for detection/interdiction/deflection of the “pre-delivery” phases (causes of war, motivational and decision processes, design and construction, test)
– Work and ADVERTISE a REALLY EFFECTIVE RETRIBUTION to deter delivery (ala MAD).

Page 110
“War between mass armies weighed down with baroque equipment has become a third world sport. The advanced world, too vulnerable to survive a war of attrition or mass destruction, must learn to conduct its affairs by the Rapier–by the threat or use of small specialized forces exploiting high tempo and strategic surprise” – R. E. Simpkin, “Race to the Swift” – 1985

Page 111
In the second half of the 1900’s Nuclear/Bio Warfare was “Unthinkable”

In the first half of the 2000’s “conventional” warfare may become so deadly/effective as to become “Unthinkable” (“Killer Aps” available to mitigate the “Causes of War”)

Page 112 Approaches to Countering Group/Individual Deployment of IO/Bio

WMD PREVENTION
-Universal inexpensive Web based educ.
– Biomass via sea water irrigation DISCOVERY
– All Source Intel/Fusion/AI Analysis PREEMPTION/RETRIBUTION
– SOF (Foreign)

Page 113 (Usual) Reactions to this Presentation
• Is in the “Too Hard Box”;
• Not being done yet by anyone, therefore, will not be done;
• They would not do that.

We have to Hope they would not do that.

• Why go there, since there is no defense against it.

Some Disbelief, but agreement there is too much there to disregard.

Cold Fusion and Skeptopathy

skeptopathy
Web definitions
Pathological skepticism; an irrational belief that a phenomenon must be false merely because it is unusual.
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/skeptopathy

There is no better example of skeptopathy doing great harm to humanity than the history of cold fusion. Everyone is probably familiar with Fleischmann and Pons’ claim that they had discovered a nuclear reaction that occurs at (or near) room temperature, compared with temperatures in the millions of degrees that is required for hot fusion. Furthermore, I bet everyone is also under the impression that their claim had been discredited – wrong! Pons and Fleischmann never retracted their claim, but moved their research program to France after the controversy erupted. [1]

“I would sooner believe that two Yankee professors lied, than that stones fell from the sky” – Thomas Jefferson, 1807 on hearing an eyewitness report of falling meteorites.

In March of 1989 Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann introduced us to a new field of science called “Cold Fusion.” It appeared to contradict prevailing nuclear fusion theory. Nuclear reactions at room temperature were generally unheard of before Fleischmann and Pons (although they are not unheard of today – for instance crystal-piezo and acoustic inertial confinement fusion). The scientist’s claims were viewed as inconceivable and impossible, and they were accused of making reckless unsupported unscientific claims. Furthermore, they were shamed for discussing their claims in a press conference before their paper’s publication. [2]

“The more important fundamental laws and facts of physical science have all been discovered, and these are now so firmly established that the possibility of their ever being supplanted in consequence of new discoveries is exceedingly remote…. Our future discoveries must be looked for in the sixth place of decimals.” – physicist Albert. A. Michelson, 1894

Belief in the validity of Fleischmann and Pons’ claim ought to have been based solely upon the repeatability of their experiments. Unfortunately, scientific investigation is conducted by men who are prejudiced by their belief system, economics, and politics. Fleischmann and Pons’ claim was hard to believe, was a direct threat to hot fusion research, and it upset the status quo in many ways, so many people were upset. Furthermore, their experiments were difficult to replicate, and the effect called “cold fusion” turned out not to be the same as what we refer to as “hot fusion.” The stage was set for scientists, the media, and laymen to exercise pathological skepticism and prematurely label it a hoax rather than give Pons and Fleishchmann the benefit of the doubt that the effect was real. As a result of cold fusion being discredited few scientists dare work in this area of research for fear of being labeled crazy by their colleagues, and being starved of research funds. [1]

“All a trick.” “A Mere Mountebank.” “Absolute swindler.” “Doesn’t know what he’s about.” “What’s the good of it?” “What useful purpose will it serve?” – Members of Britain’s Royal Society, 1926, after a demonstration of television.

“The probably better experimental work…has been carried out in Siena since the Early Nineties, by a group of physicists composed by Sergio Focardi (University of Bologna), Francesco Piantelli (University of Siena), Roberto Habel (University of Cagliari), but it did not lead to a system capable of generation useful amounts of excess energy for normal industrial or domestic applications. In Siena, in fact, the three scientists – using hydrogen and nickel as the only “ingredients” of the reaction, plus an appropriate amount of heat supplied to the system – manage to get out a double thermal energy than the electrical energy provided in input. Obviously, if there were no some “unknown” reactions to produce this little but detectable result, you would get a lower thermal energy, due to the significant losses that you always have turning a form of energy into another.” [3]

On April 30, 1989, cold fusion was declared dead by the New York Times. The Times of London called it a circus that same day, and the Boston Herald attacked cold fusion the day after. Douglas R. O. Morrison, a physicist representing CERN, was the first to call the Pons and Fleischmann episode an example of pathological science. Scientific papers concerning cold fusion were then turned down for publication in peer reviewed journals. [1] Even though almost everyone in America “knows” that cold fusion has been “debunked,” is a “hoax,” and is “pathological science,” those scientists in Italy were getting DOUBLE the energy return using this effect. One would think that such news would have changed minds in the scientific community, but it did not.

“The energy produced by the atom is a very poor kind of thing. Anyone who expects a source of power from the transformation of these atoms is talking moonshine” – Ernst Rutherford, 1933

Fast forward to today. The International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, (ICCF) has just wrapped up at the University of Missouri. Scientists from around the world reported on their “cold fusion” progress (the exothermic reaction is called by various names). [4] It is no longer a valid scientific question if cold fusion is legitimate, but only what is the scientific theory behind the effect. [5] For some it is still hard to believe because science can’t yet explain how it works, even though mankind used fire for tens of thousands of years before being able to explain how it works. A third-party verification report was recently published of a product that will hit the market this year, showcasing a cold fusion cell that was hot enough to create dry steam (which is necessary to generate electricity). The results show that energy density (i.e. the amount of energy by weight) was 5 orders of magnitude (tens of thousands of times) over that of fossil fuel. [6] That inventor has said that the time for words is over, and the proof will be when a cold fusion product is introduced to the market. If that is the case, then we won’t have to wait long for proof.

To wrap up, the history of cold fusion is a checkered one. It is an unusual phenomenon, and as such is open season for skeptopathy. I have talked to many people about the subject, and while a few strongly suggest that cold fusion is pathological science (based upon Wikipedia entries or Pons and Fleischmann’s treatment in the media), the vast majority are simply convinced that it will never emerge because powerful fossil fuel interests will bury it before it reaches the market. In other words, most people exhibit skeptopathy of a different form: they have heard rumors of revolutionary energy technologies before, but haven’t seen them emerge onto the market, and therefore irrationally believe cold fusion will never reach the market. Unfortunately, skeptopathy has done a number on cold fusion research and development because unless investors believe their investment will pay off, they are very hesitant to fund it.

Ironically, for those who still exhibit (what I would define as) skeptopathy toward cold fusion, you can read this paper that I wrote on the subject: https://coldfusionnow.org/the-evidence-for-lenr/

Notes

“Cold Fusion,” Wikipedia. 2. Krivit, S. “The Mistakes of Pons and Fleischmann and Why Their Discovery Was Initially Thought to Be a Mistake” New Energy Times, March 23, 2007. 3. Menichella, M. “Secret of E-Cat” pages 13-14, Consulente Energia Publisher, 2011, Pdf format. 4. “ICCF – 18 Day 5: Presentations and Awards,” Ruby Carat, Cold Fusion Now!, July 25, 2013. 5. “NASA Confirms Conclusive Evidence for LENR,” Hot & Cold Fusion, March 31, 2013. 6. “Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device,” Cornell University Library, June 7, 2013.

Is the Crop Formation that appeared in Northern Italy related to LENR developments?

A large wheat formation was reported June 30, 2013 in Italy, east of Turin. Here is how it was reported on an Italian website:

From lanuovaprovincia.it: (article)

Crop Circles in Robertsbridge.
Work of a joker or alien hand?

Italian Crop Circle2Big surprise Sunday morning when you wake up the citizens of Robertsbridge. In a field of wheat in the valley, in the vicinity of the former highway, appeared different geometric designs, concentric circles into triangles and strings that will conjoined. All perfect and developed over several square meters. Resurface therefore the most varied conjecture on so-called “crop circle”, the “crop circles”: the alien hand to that of some bontempone which has a half-plane to descend, “draw” and leave without a trace. Among the first to be alerted Mayor Joseph Turino who called the owner of the land and then went in person, on a hill, to see the work in the valley. But not unbalanced in manifesting his explanation to this phenomenon.

(view picture)

The speculation is the binary 8-bit ASCII code means the four chemical elements potassium K, hydrogen H, deuterium D, and sulfur S. (follow cropcircleconnector comments)

 

This author and the Coldfusionnow! website hasn’t got an opinion on the subject – what do you think?

 

Synopsis of recent Finnish patent application

THERMAL-ENERGY PRODUCING SYSTEM AND METHOD

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.

http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=WO&NR=2013076378A2&KC=A2&FT=D&ND=3&date=20130530&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP

Vote for LENR at Washington Post web poll

The Washington Post Business section website has asked “What energy sources offer the most promise for the U.S.?

You must sign-in or register to vote for your solution.

Currently, low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR) is in the #1 spot.

Let’s keep it there!

Go here to vote now: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/what-energy-sources-offer-the-most-promise-for-the-us/64c17cf4-c96f-11e2-8da7-d274bc611a47_topic.html

Cold Fusion Now!

Top