Mathamatics vs Science: Low Energy Nuclear Reactions

20151102_155743.jpg
That's me holding the LENR reactor core. Wonder how they got this one through security.  Behind me is Brillouin Energy CEO Robert Georges.

Monday Nov 2 Brillouin Energy presented in work in the Rayburn Congressional building.  The company has decided to go ahead with a track to commercialize a reactor that uses low energy nuclear reactions to produce heat and electricity.  Low energy nuclear reactions (LENR), sometimes known (inaccurately) as  “cold fusion”, has been a subject of heated debate, rivaling manmade climate change. Despite years of data showing that nuclear reactions can occur at relatively low energy, as the CEO’s of Brillouin Energy illustrated with several personal accounts, the existence of the phenomenon is still controversial.  So controversial, that national labs have denied contracts to perform even very isolated tests such as materials or pressure testing.

Head engineer of Brillouin Energy, Robert Godes, pointed out several occasions where people looked squarely at the experimental results, including confirmation from an outside unbiased source, and flatly denied the data’s existence.  Why such irrational behavior?

In the scientific community there is an orthodox requirement imposed on publishing new results.   You must have a mechanism by which the phenomenon can be explained.  In other words you must be able to explain your possibly revolutionary data with already known science.  Unfortunately and also fortunately, so far low energy nuclear reactions have defied all conventional explanations.

One of the main frustrations is that, from experience, reactions that involve a change in the nucleus (as opposed to changes in the arrangement of atoms in chemical reactions) involve radioactive products, such as neutrons, alpha particles (helium nuclei), beta particles (very fast electrons) and gamma rays (very short wavelength light).  These products, which shoot out in all directions, also make the reactions and products easy to detect.  Low energy nuclear reactions have shown none of these products during reaction.

What has been consistently shown, in the many variations of experiments, is 1) heat, above what is possible in chemical reactions between the constituents involved, is detected, and 2) elements (such as tritium) which were not there to begin with, are detected after reaction.

Brillouin Energy has not been able to fully characterize their products yet, due to the repeated encounters with paranoid and doubtful national lab employees, however they have have been able to perform repeated experiments resulting in 4x the input.  An independent source also confirmed trace tritium, an isotope of hydrogen that was not there before the reaction.

Brillouin has their own hypothesis for what is going on, which is briefly animated here, but instead of waiting for the full explanation of theory to go through consensus, they have taken the fact that they see that energy is being produced and decided to put their reactor on the market.  If the science is explained by then, great.  If not, it still works.  The first humans to use fire did not know chemistry, but that did not stop them from cooking their food.

Showing 6 reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • Brian O'Neill
    commented 2019-06-08 08:32:29 -0400
    A chain reaction of ideas.
    Charles Stevens credits Ben Denniston with the original discovery of the relativity of biospheric spacetime. The immediate question is then, does the proposed living LENR worked out in so much detail, only work because of, or with, living spacetime? Pappas notes his use of E=mc**2 just might not be exact in a living process, but does not mention a relativistic spacetime like Ben does.
  • Brian O'Neill
    commented 2019-06-08 08:16:26 -0400
    I’ve come across something extremely relevant recently. A very good recent article in EIR on W.Elsasser by E. Schapiro led to a comment in Charles Stevens Researchgate blog. There E.Schapiro asked about the energy density of a human organism and a comment by Lerner.

    This led to Kervran and Pappas. (I know, huge controversy, but so what). There Pappas actually calculates the energy density using exact isotope ratios of O, K, Na. He coins Oxymutation, a nuclear reaction used by all (modern?) animals. The calculations are quite serious, and he is the first as far as I know to deal with cancer from that physics.

    But what is extremely relevant is the move of the biosphere from ocean chemical reactions to photosynthesis to oyxdation and various forms of LENR (oxymutation).

    Has EIR, or 21CST, or Dynamis ever carried an article on LENR by living processes? I have seen vague references to isotope’s and life, but never a detailed energy flux density calculation.
    Pappas calculated mammal body temperature, muscle efficiency, and shows why Kervran (who started all this) made a mistake (endothermic, v. exothermic) because of incorrect isotope mass ratios.
    Imagine – we are using LENR, casually, all the time. It is just jaw dropping that nature developed a controlled moderated fusion/fission living process, but then it is somehow obvious.
    This has major implications for economic flux-density progress – it is a natural progression.
  • Dr Timothy Norris
    commented 2016-07-06 18:17:33 -0400
    LENR is not new. It was first observed circa 100 years ago (in Sweden), but initially poorly understood. Pons and Fleischmann investigated LENR; however, we have now lost these talented scientists to old age. Subsequently, many scientists have successfully created LENR. Patents for basic LENR have now expired (circa a couple of years ago), hence the basic LENR technology is now generic.

    LENR is hated by the existing corporate establishment, because it undermines present political power structures, especially in oil and gas industries. Moreover, the problems of the present nuclear industry (fission, U235/U238 to P239 route), especially after Fukushima Dai’ichi disaster, that has a World-wide news blackout via mainstream media, means that LENR represents even more of threat to a $multi-billion industry, closely linked to military interests. At present, there is accumulated 145000 tones of high-level nuclear waste that has to be stored safely for 100000 years.

    LENR could have been adopted, but has not been pursued. However, conventional nuclear (fission) has opened up a Pandora’s Box, and Fukushima Dai’ichi will seal the fate of mankind: a doomed species by its shear stupidity and arrogance. At Fukushima Dai’ichi, there is presently aging a triple China syndrome, and nobody on Earth has any solutions, however rich and famous they may be.
  • AlainCo
    commented 2015-12-13 17:41:24 -0500
    Brillouin is an important actor in emerging LENR industry, but not the most ready.
    the fact that Michael McKubre have done with tanzella, the test of their technology is a key part of their credibility, even if the performance are “medium” (COP4/600C)

    Tom Darden who run industrial Heat owning E-cat technology seems today the most ready to market. They claim a field test that should end in february/march.
    Woodford fund proudly show to have invested about 50M$ in Industrial heat, after 2.5years of “due diligence” (see the fund manager blog).

    Airbus Innovation have signed an agreement (MOU) with LENR-Cities to develop an entrepreneurial ecosystem (LENRG) around LENR. There are surprise pending about the member of the ecosystem, and associated infrastructure.

    Russian LENR science is very rich but seems still underfunded.

    Japan is now funding through ImPACT and NEDO program, two LENR programs, involving Toyota, MHI and Nissan, beside Clean-Planet startup.

    Swedish research consortium “Elforsk” dedicated to Scandinavian utilities, have funded the validation test for E-cat, and produced some technology review reports on LENR.

    Anyway we should not be too optimistic as the opposition are numerous :
    - the academic circles, the editors of Nature and Science, the lords of AAAS, APS, DoE hate LENr that will show their lack of ethic and intelligence.
    - the malthusians lobbies, from billion funded NGO to political parties and UN bodies will hate a solution to CO2 and energy for the poor
    - states and utilities will work together to avoid workers and shareholders catastrophes with the dying electric grid and the stranded power plants.
    - I am less afraid of oil companies, and nuclear industry, as modern innovation tactic (Like LENR-Cities LENR-hedging, or Fujifilm-ization pivoting) because they have hopes to pivot and adapt.

    One great idea could be to mirror LENRG in US, as LENRG is EU focused .
  • David Nygren
    commented 2015-12-13 15:57:55 -0500
    www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/CustomPage/14/

    Validation of lenr
  • Liona Fan Chiang
    commented 2015-11-23 16:10:14 -0500
    Cold fusion is more accurately called low energy nuclear reactions, because if you look at the products, as seen in the work of George Miley, the products suggest fission, fusion, adding or losing a neutron etc.

Donate Volunteer

connect