Cold Fusion Explained !
Wonderful explanations of Cold
Fusion (LENR)
On April 17, Sterling Allan conducted an interview with Robert (Bob) W. George II, who serves as CEO of Brillouin Energy Corporation; as well as by the inventor, Robert Godes, who serves as CTO at Brillouin as part of the Free Energy Now series.
This is a great video which covers all the bases. You will find no “Rossi” doublespeak here, so turn up the volume and enjoy the interview. “Warning”, this is over an hour long so grab your favorite beverage and kick back it’s worth every minute.
Summer 2012 launch of Hyperion LENR prototype
Defkalion announces Public and Press
to see prototype July of 2012
Cold fusion will be presented to the public in about 90 days, will the press cover one of the greatest advances in human history or will the governments of the world squash the news?
The following is taken from a defkalion announcement to prospective OEM manufacturers;
Dear Sirs, You have shown interest in our company either for commercial, technical, scientific or research-based reasons. This letter is sent to you privately; it is not a press release, nor intended for publication. We will soon be making our public announcements accordingly. We honour our word to reciprocate your good will and interest in our work during a period that could be defined as “business as unusual”. From now on, we progress full steam ahead, business as usual. For over 20 years many have believed in the existence of a new thermal energy source known as Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR). A considerable body of literature, measurements and tests have been pursued by laboratories in many countries. The LENR field has yet to provide a concrete understanding of the fundamental theory. A lot of work still needs to be done in the theoretical analysis and beyond. Defkalion scientific team consists of scientific and engineering experts. It has successfully managed to trigger and monitor Chemically Assisted Low Energy Nuclear Reactions caused by Nickel and Hydrogen nuclei. This unique LENR technology is based on proprietary methodologies and engineering designs.
Defkalion has conducted third party tests on its core technology by internationally recognized and reputable private and public organizations from Europe and America. Today, there is solid, unambiguous evidence confirming our technology. We are at the dawn of a new era of clean, inexpensive, limitless renewable energy. We believe that LENR is a technology that should be benefited by everybody. Our core philosophy and vision were always based on responsible use. We believe in creating new opportunities for fossil free energy which will have a huge impact on climate change and carbon emissions. It goes without saying that our technology will also have a great positive impact on the Greek economy with dynamic implications on the global economy. We support the transition of low cost energy to third world countries while also showing commitment to an entirely new field of scientific research that will initiate new products through research and development as well as the rebirth of high cost energy technologies. View complete text HERE:
This technology, although proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, must now be embraced by manufacturer’s all over the world. It will still be a short while before you see this technology on the market. I wonder how Rossi’s little tea pot is doing?
High School experiment produces Cold Fusion
Hot fusion scientists said Cold Fusion was
impossible, now they’re doing it in
High School
Several teachers (with of course valid degrees and expertise in several areas relevant to this kind of experiment) from the "Leopoldo Pirelli" industrial high school in Rome with the involvement of some of their students, replicated a Mizuno-type electrolytic CF cell.
The high school has allowed the supervising instructors to publish the complete experiment.
English Translation of Build Instructions
for Pirelli Athanor Cell
With permission from Ing. Ugo Abundo, I am posting the following English translation (provided graciously by E-Cat World Reader ‘Francesco’) of the instructions originally posted in Italian on 22passi.blogspot.com on how to build an Athanor reactor as designed by the Leopoldo Pirelli high school team.
DISCLAIMER: E-CAT WORLD MAKES NO GUARANTEE OF THE ACCURACY OF THIS TRANSLATION. THOSE ATTEMPTING TO BUILD THE ATHANOR DEVICE SHOULD SEEK EXPERT ADVICE TO ENSURE THE ORIGINAL ITALIAN INSTRUCTIONS ARE PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD. The original Italian instructions can be found here
********************************************************
It is with emotion that we are going to take this step: making available on the internet the construction of ATHANOR. Forgive us for the quality of the image, we hope you’ll understand how much we are running. Send us all your questions and with quick replies we will make us forgive the poor quality of the images.
For some reasons we are not yet fully effective in managing the documentation, but we’re categorizing everything.
PERFORM ONLY BY AT LEAST TWO EXPERTS, WITH THE APPROPRIATE PROTECTIONS UNDER THE SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS IN LABORATORIES UNDER A CLOSED INTAKE GLASS HOOD WITH HIGH DILUTION OF SMOKE.
GATHER CAREFULLY THE RESIDUALS FOR A SUITABLE WASTE DISPOSAL OF LIQUID AND SOLID
IT IS ABSOLUTELY NOT RECOMMENDED, AND WE ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR IT, TO OPERATE IN THE PRESENCE OF INCIDENTAL SPARKS OR FREE FLAMES BECAUSE OF EXPLOSIVENESS BOTH OF HYDROGEN AND OF DUST IF THE FUNNEL SHOULD DRY INSIDE, NOT PROTECTING THEM ANYMORE IN THE FORM OF MUD.
THE INFRINGING OF THESE RULES AND OF THOSE OF CAUTION TO USE IN THOSE SITUATIONS CONFIGURATES LIABILITIES THAT EXONERATE THE ALLOCATION OF THEM TO US.
WE CARE ABOUT OUR LIABILITY JUST AS MUCH AS WE CARE OF YOUR HEALTH. (INSERT A RED BUTTON SWITCH THAT DISCONNECTS BOTH POLARITIES AND CHECK THE CIRCUIT BREAKER OF THE SYSTEM).
IT IS RECOMMENDED TO SURROUND THE CELL WITH LEAD SHEET, TO PUT A THICK PLEXIGLASS PLATE BETWEEN THE CELL AND A WEBCAM WITH THE WIRE SHIELDED WITH ALUMINUM FOIL, BUILD A WALL OF WATER BY RECTANGULAR CONTAINERS THAT SURROUND THE CELL COMPLETELY, INSERT A GEIGER COUNTER CLEARLY VISIBLE BY THE WEBCAM AND OPERATE IN A REMOTE STATION WITH 6 SQMM SECTION CABLES.
WHOEVER BUILDS AND OPERATES THE DESCRIBED EQUIPMENT IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE EVEN AGAINST DAMAGE TO THIRD PARTIES, EXPRESSLY EXEMPTING THE AUTHORS OF THIS TEXT FROM ANY LIABILITY.
THE SIMPLE IMPLEMENTATION OF EXPERIMENTATION, BOTH AS DESCRIBED HERE OR IN FREE FORM, IS AN ACT OF UNCONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE OF WHAT IS ADVISED HERE.
WE FORMALLY WARN PERSONS NOT TO OPERATE THE EQUIPMENT IF YOU DON’T HAVE A TECHNICAL DEGREE OR EQUIVALENT EXPERIENCE.
GOOD EXPERIMENTATION, and may you soon achieve yields higher than those detected by us!
IN THE FOLLOWING DESCRIPTION PLEASE REFER TO THE IMAGE
The apparatus, can be easily made and is absolutely not expensive, consisting of a suspended crew with a bar (27) to an external support, and of an open container (15), pyrex, with capacity of 1000 ml, containing a high splashguard (14). The support should allow the easy put on the same axis of the crew.
The container is on a scale (28) with collecting plate (19) of potential drops so they continue to weigh.
The display (20) is protected by drops; on the bottom of the container there is an insulator (23) (between dish and container). The reactor has a cylindrical removable insulation (17).
It is filled with about 900 ml of solution 0.1 – 0.4 molar of potassium carbonate in distilled water.
A set of thermocouples (10) measures the temperature range (which is not uniform).
On the plate, special locks (18) prevent the container to move with the strong action of the plasma.
The anode (8) is made of a stainless steel mesh of the approximate area of 13 sq. cm., interchangeable with grids of different sizes, positively fed from the connector (11) by means of insulated (or isolated?) stainless steel bar. The pyrex tube (9) allows the insulated (or isolated?) leakage of oxygen from the anode, through the outlet (24).
The cathode connector (12) feeds, by means of a stainless steel bar covered with Teflon tube surrounded by heat shrink tubing, the clamp (22) that blocks the bar cathode of tungsten interchangeable of 1.6 mm diameter.
Particular attention must be paid to the implementation of the protection of the terminal from the electrical contact with the conductive solution.
The cap (21) makes access to the screw for clamping the cathode (3) in the terminal.
The ceramic plate (alumina) (4), crossed by the cathode, and ‘glued to the Pyrex funnel (5) by means of high temperature epoxy resin.
On the plate is placed a mixture of tungsten needles (length 3 -5 mm and diameter 0.1 mm) of 2-5 grams and powders, in the form of mud, the grain size between 100 microns and 50 nanometers, in variable proportions, of the weight of g. 1 to 2.
It is therefore evident that it is necessary to keep the powder in the form of mud, opening the container of the supplier under water (distilled), wearing anti-dust and anti-smoke masks specifically suitable (ask the supplier of the filters), using however teaspoons of plastic to limit the triboelectricity ‘ , after building a plexiglass panel with holes and sleeves of manipulation to fit between the hood shutter and plane, with appropriate gaskets.
NEVER LEAVE ANY DRY DROPS OR SKETCHES OF MUD (PREVENT IN ANY CASE), PENALTY THE RELEASE IN THE AIR (THE FINE POWDERS ARE TOXIC AND SELF- INGNITABLE)!
STORE CLOSED THE QUANTITY OF MUD STOCKED.
NOTE: We never had any accident, not even the slightest, we broke a beaker by washing.
The funnel is supported by the support (32), fixed to the bar (27) from the retainer (13). The level of of electrolyte (16) must be maintained in the area indicated, with short reaction times (typically 90 to 240 seconds), so that the level does not vary too much, introducing changes in buoyancy, thus affecting the determination of the weight of the container, although initially calibrated .
A Teflon grid (69) and a housing encapsulating the cathode grid, protected at the bottom by a porous filter made of sintered pyrex (7).
The vertical distance between the surface dust and anode is typically (adjustable) between 30 and 45 mm.
The monolithic cathode (3) must protrude a few mm from the ceramic plate, just to give contact to the needles which, in turn, give it to the powders.
The operating voltages, typically between 60 volts and 240 volts, are obtained, with direct current, by means of rectifiers mounted on a finned base, downstream of a VARIAC connected to the mains.
The typical operating currents vary between 9 and 0.2 Ampere.
The solution may be preheated before entry into the container (enter it slowly into the funnel and allow the overflow into the container), or taken up to temperature of electrolysis.
Typical protocol suggested in early experiments (everyone will refine it or improve it):
Made a plan of combinations of parameter values, we fixed a set (nominal voltage, type and amount of dust, anode surface, interelectrode distance, electrolyte concentration (attention, it has pH> 11));
Make a calibration diagram by the introduction of the same amount of electrolyte at 100 degrees centigrade, without tension, noting, without insulation of the container, for each degree of descent, the corresponding time, so as to calculate the power lost in water by adduction from the walls to the outside, and by evaporation;
Trace the curve Lost Power (y) – electrolyte temperature (x);
after setting the shielded wire thermocouples, calibrated the scale, entered the liquid at least 85 degrees, turned on an ammeter (position 10 amps max) in series with the cell on rectified current, and a voltmeter in parallel, you can gradually increase the tension.
Raising the voltage, it is noted that the current is high, and the manual tension rise of the VARIAC knob must be adapted to maintain the current under 9 Amperes, while the solution is heated, you notice that you can raise the tension without exceeding with the current; at about 90 degrees, it becomes easy to have low currents (depending on the set of parameters, even only 0.3 amperes); Try to turn on the plasma by bringing the tension at about 120-160 volts; make practice with the adjustment of the Variac knob, not believing the indication of this, but to that of the voltmeter; bring, with the heating of the plasma on, the temperature of thermocouple visible by webcam at about 93 degrees, and “drive” the “wheel” of VARIAC so as to maintain the temperature in a very narrow range around 93 degrees, trying to have the minimum voltage which keeps the plasma stable, checking that the current is as low as possible.
Having taken confidence with the first preliminary tests, you can try an evaluation of yield:
conservatively, ignoring the precious hydrogen produced (and the energy that may be available), integrate in time with the details of the reaction duration (90 – 240 seconds) the measurements of electrical power input (V x I) frequently sampled for direct reading (in the orientation tests) and later with computerized reading, getting the energy input.
The energy lost is obtained by the calibration diagram, at a temperature kept constant, by integrating the power for the execution time of the test.
The difference between energy lost (big) and injected (minor) is the excess.
THE COP can then be calculated, but you must pay attention to the ambiguity. We invite you to calculate it as ratio between energy lost and the one you entered, as the energy lost will be the one to be recovered for use (we propose a standard calculation to compare the results of different experimenters).
It is recommended to cross these determinations with independent readings such as the calculation of sensible heat when the temperature varied, and always check the amount of the evaporated solution , counting the corresponding latent heat (DO NOT EVAPORATE TOO MUCH SOLUTION IN A SINGLE TEST!).
A digital power meter can be used, placing it between the network and the Variac, between the Variac and rectifiers, between the rectifiers and the cell, establishing a framework of reference and comparison with measurements made with simple ammeter and voltmeter continuously (I have a doubt, maybe they mean with direct current).
It should also be made a comparison with exercise, identical, of the reactor with a carbon cathode (without metal powders), inert with respect to the “alleged” fusions or other events catalyzed by transition metals, the mix of dusts, when used with metal cathodes, may contain iron micrometric catalyzing powder, to catalyze the presence of atomic hydrogen rather than molecular.
ONLY the evidences that overall show a coherent picture among the independent readings described can be considered.
We are immediately available to talk about the construction, materials, geometry, planning and execution of tests, the interpretation of results, on which the network will be updated in a realistic time.
LET’S START WITH PARTICIPATORY AND DISTRIBUTED SCIENCE!
(Some will say that this is the opposite of science [ed. Someone will tell for sure!])
A big thank you to all those who will collaborate in any form, and to Dr. Passerini, who will certainly liaison among experimenters and between us and the experimenters.
P. S. Forgive the prolixity … as a professor.
Rome, 3,30 a.m.
Ugo Abundo
If you have the expertise to assemble the necessary materials and refine the instructions I would be most happy to buy the kit. A kit of this nature could make a person with an entrepreneurial drive a lot of money. I would guess you could sell thousands of such kits as every chemistry classroom around the world would want one.
Student’s Guide to Cold Fusion
Edmund Storms has written a new
edition of A Student’s Guide to Cold Fusion.
This is one of our most popular papers,
first introduced in 2003.
Dr. Edmund Storms
Download Complete PDF Here:
Sen. Tarr Visits the JET Energy NANOR IAP Demo at the MIT
Massachusetts Senate Minority
Leader follows up on Cold Fusion
Massachusetts Senate Minority Leader Bruce E. Tarr (R), and his staff, visited the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Cambridge, MA) on April 17, 2012 to learn more about the developments in cold fusion (LANR, lattice assisted nuclear reactions). This cold fusion update was in Prof. Peter Hagelstein’s Quantum Electronics and Energy Production and Conversion laboratory where the JET Energy cold fusion NANOR desktop demonstration unit was operating. Dr. Mitchell Swartz and Prof. Hagelstein led the discussion and reviewed the development of nanomaterial cold fusion devices for over more than two decades, and this particular R&D breakthrough and some of the components which allow its function. The group contributing to the discussion on ways to help push the technology forward included Dr. Brian Ahern, Keith Owens (who initiated the visit), A.J. Paglia , and Stephen Mulloney. Sen. Tarr’s excellent questions, and his continued interest to investigate this ultra-efficient and ultraclean energy production technology, herald his awareness of the importance of this alternative energy to the security and energy interests of the Commonwealth.
A few reasons why Washington is ignoring Cold Fusion
The Tokamak Reactor and CrossFire
Nuclear Fusion Reactor
The Hot fusion scientists, you know the ones who drove Pons and Fleishman out of the United States, have been working for decades on their utopian dreams of harnessing the power of the sun. They have accomplished absolutely nothing. In the long run it has cost the taxpayers of the United States billions of dollars. These pompous asses set back the true ultimate source of almost free and inexhaustible energy by more then 20yrs.
The Tokamak Reactor
Their dream is that the tokamak will heat a plasma containing tritium and deuterium nuclei. The hotter these nuclei get, the faster they will move. When the plasma is hot enough, some of the nuclei will be moving fast enough to react when they collide. The energy of the newly produced, highly energetic helium nuclei (alphas) will be used to keep the plasma hot; and the energy of the new neutrons will be released to a lithium metal blanket which lines the tokamak. Water lines will run through the lithium. The hot lithium will heat the water to steam, and the steam will be used to spin turbines, which will spin generators to make electricity.
There is a substantial gap between the above dream and its fulfillment. For at least fifty years, the practical use of tokamaks and other DT devices to make electricity has been forecast to be, “about thirty years in the future.” I can remember this projection from the early 1970s, when I first became seriously interested in fusion energy; and the projection is no different today: “about thirty years in the future.” To be commercially useful, a controlled fusion reaction must produce more energy than the energy that was required to cause the reaction in the first place (the 40 KeV activation energy mentioned above). The point at which the energy produced exceeds the energy required is called “net power” or “break-even.” Various organizations in different parts of the world have been working to produce “net power” nuclear fusion for about 50 years. Many billions of rubles, dollars, yen and euros have been spent on this endeavor, but no one has been successful yet.
The tokamak was invented in the old Soviet Union by Andrei Sakharov and Igor Tamm. Some people jest pessimistically that the Russians “gave” the tokamak away to make sure that the Americans would never achieve practical fusion. Dr. Nicholas Krall, a top fusion researcher says, “We (U.S.) have spent $15 billion studying tokamaks, and all we know about them is that they’re no damn good!”
Although the facts continue to show that this technology will never work, the hot fusion scientists and their benefactors continue to throw billions of dollars at this “pie in the sky dream”.
CrossFire Nuclear Fusion Reactor
Crossfire Nuclear Fusion Reactor
The Crossfire Nuclear Fusion Reactor would cost billions upon billions of dollars to potentially bring this “ideal” power to market. Those are the issues that certain nation-states are grappling with as they decide whether to continue their expensive research into nuclear fusion. An international consortium has already spent $20 billion on fusion research and development. The so-called International Nuclear Fusion Project, or ITER, is aiming to have a demonstration reactor erected in France by 2019. All of the member states comprising the European Union, as well as the United States, Russia, Japan, China, India and South Korea participate. They are sharing their resources to pay for the scientific and engineering skills needed to bring such a concept to scale.
ITER’s total construction costs for the demo to go up in France is about 13 billion Euros, or $17 billion through 2020. What an unbelievable waste of Money.
If one sits down and computes the amount of money going into these pet projects it just boggles the mind. Cold Fusion has been proven in major laboratories all over the world. If just 1/100th of this money was invested in Cold Fusion the world’s energy needs would be overcome in a decade or less.
President Obama: “We cannot drill our way out of the energy crisis”
Cold Fusion, the answer to the energy crisis
Cold Fusion, although virtually ignored by mainstream academic research, has continued underground through the efforts of brave and dedicated scientists. I am now pleased to bring you the technological and theoretical breakthrough we’ve all been waiting for… Clean, virtually inexhaustible energy in the form of sea water! Let the Cold Fusion Revolution begin!
1 Teaspoon of Heavy Water has the energy content of 300 Gallons of Gasoline. You could go 55 million miles on a gallon. There is enough deuterium fusion fuel in the top 1 foot of seawater in the San Francisco Bay to supply all of mankind’s projected energy needs for the next 50-100 years… And you wonder why the Federal Reserve Corporation has been suppressing it… Since their petro-dollars and their power is backed by Oil.
An LENR workshop is slated to begin tomorrow, April 10th
10th International Workshop
on Anomalies in Hydrogen Loaded Metals
The conference’s schedule and participants are listed at the bottom of this article, and include Francesco Celani, Dr. Peter Hagelstein of MIT and Prof. Francesco Piantelli. Nichenergy, the company founded to market Prof. Piantelli’s device, is one of the sponsors of the conference. He is scheduled to give a presentation on the last day of the conference, Saturday, April 14th.
The workshops goals are stated thusly:
“High temperature gas loading is a promising technology to reliably create thermal and nuclear anomalies. The purpose of the workshop is to bring together an international group of experts to present their results and encourage discussion. The emphasis is on experimental innovation, methods, instrumentation, diagnostics and theory. In addition there will be afternoon discussions on topics of interest including explanations for the anomalies.”
Since the purpose of the conference is to “present their results and encourage discussion, it is hoped that after nearly a year of silence, the father of nickel-hydrogen “cold fusion,” Prof. Piantelli, will finally publicly announce the results and progress of his ongoing work. Last time anything was publicly announced regarding Pianteill’s research was July of 2011, when Pianteilli associate Roy Virgilio gave the following summation of Piantelli’s work:
Fukushima may release eight times more radiation then Chernobyl
Cold Fusion vs Hot Fusion
This is what happens when hot fusion goes bad
The failure of Fukushima #4 reactor would cause an unprecedented global event. The world as you know it would change for the next 20,000 yrs.
The pool at Unit No. 4 contains 1,538 fuel assemblies, including a full core that was freshly discharged prior to the accident. The risk of yet another highly destructive earthquake occurring even closer to the Fukushima reactors has increased, according to the European Geosciences Union. This is particularly worrisome for Daiichi’s structurally damaged spent fuel pool at Reactor No. 4 sitting 100 feet above ground, exposed to the elements. Drainage of water from this pool, resulting from another quake could trigger a catastrophic radiological fire involving about eight times more radioactive cesium than released at Chernobyl.
This is a map of the radioactive contamination caused by Chernobyl.
A failure at Fukushima #4 would release 8 times more radioactive material.
This specimen was collected shortly after the Chernobyl incident
This is a Cold Fusion reactor
This reactor contains no radioactive material. It creates no contaminating waste. When this reactor malfunctions it simple melts its internal materials together and the reaction stops. Oh, and one other thing, it only cost about $100. to run for about 6 months depending on usage.
The choice is clear, stop throwing money at these nuclear reactors and start backing Cold Fusion.
Fukushima Daiichi Site: Cesium-137 is 85 times
greater than at Chernobyl Accident
Average cost to heat a home with E-Cat: about $1.00 a month
$1,000 to $2,000 more annually
for the average family with E-Cat system
There has been a lot of discussion about the scientific theory behind new technologies like the ECat and other Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) devices. There is, however, a dearth of information about the impact of new technologies like LENR to an average family. Some assumptions about this technology discuss the projected major transformation of our present society and conquering other planets in the outer space by utilizing Low Energy Nuclear Reaction. Complete story HERE: