Defkalion Demo Boosts Case for Commercial LENR

I was impressed with yesterday’s demonstration of the Hyperion reactor by Defkalion. I thought the overall manner in which the test was carried out was clear and logical, and the end result was to me another strong piece of evidence in favor of LENR being a practical source of useful energy.

I think Defkalion went a long way in establishing credibility for themselves as a serious and competent organization with good technical skills. I was also impressed with the English language skills of both the DGT presenters today: CEO Alex Xanthoulis and Chief Scientific officer John Hadjichristos.

Another person whose credibility will be boosted from the event is Andrea Rossi. There would certainly have been no demonstration from Defkalion today without the work of Rossi and Focardi on the E-Cat. Defkalion as a company grew out of Rossi and Focardi’s relationship with Christos Stremmenos, former University of Bologna professor of physics who helped found Defkalion as an industrial partner who would help commercialize the E-Cat. Things went sour between Rossi and DGT, but even after splitting from Rossi Defkalion continued to engage in R&D to a point where they have come up with their own design for a LENR reactor.

I am sure that Andrea Rossi and Co. were paying close attention to the DGT demo and will surely have been interested to see some of the variations that Defkalion have incorporated into their reactor design. One of the more interesting differences between the reactor designs for each company is that Defkalion use plasma to initiate the reactor whereas Rossi’s E-Cat uses only heat. The plasma control in the Hyperion seems to be faster and more responsive than that of the E-Cat with shorter startup and shutdown times possible.

One would expect and hope now that with two fairly successful LENR demos being made public (E-Cat 3rd party report and the DGT demo), that more attention will given by key decision-makers to the potential of LENR as a practical energy source. Unfortunately I don’t think we can necessarily count on that happening, however. We’ve seen that LENR has been ignored before, and given the media’s track record, they could easily continue to do so. I was disappointed to read Mark Gibbs announce on vortex-l that he no longer has a relationship with Forbes.com — so it’s likely now that one of the few well-known media outlets that had been covering LENR developments will cease to do so.

I am confident that in time things will change, in this regard — but that may not be until commercial LENR products are openly being used by paying customers. I don’t really know where Defkalion stands when it comes to commercialization. They report having lots of interested players in various industries who are looking at licensing their technology. It seems likely to me that Rossi’s E-Cat will be the first on the mass market given his reports about partnership with the US manufacturer — but Defkalion’s demonstration could have boosted their case considerably with potential partners.

  • Mailin Wong

    I don’t understand why your patent applications are blocking you from having your technology scientifically reviewed by the rest of the world. None of this makes any sense. You either work in total secret until your product is ready for release, or you present the full results in an open way. Strangely, you are trying to do both, but in a very unconvincing way.

  • James McCartney

    I was interested in three points mentioned during the demo (following 2hr06min) which indicated that Defkalion are doing some real scientific research here, albeit with commerce in mind:

    1. All isotopes of Nickel work, except for Ni61. (See also Stephen on 24th at 11:08) (Fortunately 61 is only about 1% abundance.) This observation must have required serious time and expense; pure isotopes come pricey. Ni61 has an odd nuclear spin, 3/2 instead of 0.

    2. The reaction works only above 179C. – the Debye temperature for Nickle – an arcane parameter at which crystalline vibrations change, causing a change in heat capacity.

    3. Substantial magnetic anomalies were detected – to everyone’s surprise-, to the extent that special screening was needed to protect electronic kit.

    This seems to me to be more than “Merely corroborative detail, intended to give artistic verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative”
    The laws of physics apply, but perhaps not as we know them.

  • Fibb

    @Roger Bird, Jed quoted MY not Mats in that post you replied to in Mats blog.

  • Sanjeev

    Mats Lewan on his blog

    Thanks John. On the other hand — blowing the power supply to the whole building when short circuited indicates that it was ordinary grid power and not any rigged power supply, so in the end maybe that was a fortunate mistake 😉

    He has a point, everything happens for good 😀

  • Pierre

    The MIB got gibbs…who is next?

    • Greenwin

      They may have been too late to stop Gibbs’ final LENR blog. But they seem to have convinced Lorenzo Manella Wired.it to contradict the public reaction to both Defkalion’s demos:

      http://bit.ly/165brtJ

      Odd since a review of public comments at the end of the July 23rd demo were significantly positive. Who would want to twist the truth like that??

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    The exchange below was posted on JONP and then removed. Why was it removed? Was it removed because of this response from Paulina West? “My own view is that this is a kind of near field antenna effect, which happens at certain resonances when electricity passes through an antenna – which can be either a wire or a small particle.”

    2. Paulina West
    July 21st, 2013 at 6:59 PM
    Dear Adrea Rossi,
    Congratulations on the 3rd party test and the recent paper “Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device.” 500+deg C is a bit warm for something that is using 360w, the energy equivalent of a few light bulbs. This paper has helped more people on science blogs to re-evaluate their thoughts on lenr.
    When you have time, do you have plans to publish or otherwise make available the SEM images and the isotopic analysis of the transmuted particles?
    It is my observation that the work of the Japanese cold fusion scientists and the work of experimentalists in pyroelectric fusion (exploding wires) shows that the reactions are occurring within the heavier elements. The product of the reactions are important to understanding this reaction, and theories which attempt to explain the Ecat without knowing the product of the reaction are premature. It will have implications for all of the sciences. (My own view is that this is a kind of near field antenna effect, which happens at certain resonances when electricity passes through an antenna – which can be either a wire or a small particle.) Thank you for your work.
    Regards, Paulina

    1. Andrea Rossi
    July 21st, 2013 at 7:16 PM
    Paulina West:
    Thank you for your intelligent comment.
    The SEM images, so far, are confidential because they contain information that we deem industrial secret.
    We will publish our theory ( we have understood very well the effect) when the IP will be safe or made useless by a strong industrialization.
    In the meantime our R&D work goes on : please read my comment of early today.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Woo

      Do you know under which paper this comment was posted ?
      Because she concratulates AR on the recent paper “Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device.”

      I couldnt find that one on JONP. As I am aware of the last paper published is “Advanced concepts in black hole cosmology” where wlad and JR have a lively little discussion.

      Maybe this paper was on JONP and it explained a little too much ?

      Any Ideas ?

      • hempenearth

        Thats the Elforsk report on Arxiv, Woo.

    • SammyM

      You asked this on the other thread. You may have missed my response. They were not removed. They’re still there but under the Electrical Catalyst thread:

      http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=806

      I’ve noticed that Rossi’s answer was slightly edited.

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        SammyM…..Ok I see it now, thanks. I am sure it was first posted on the “Advanced concepts in black hole cosmology” thread.

  • Boris Ivanoff

    I am a little confused by something. Are Defkalion saying that they have already sold over a thousand distributorships at $40 million each? That would be a lot of samoleans!

    • artefact

      no. They are doing R&D with 6 big companys. 1300 had contact with them. I don’t know if these 6 had to pay a fee allready.

      • AlainCo

        they dont even says contract for the thousand, they say interested…

        they have a handful on partners, which is already good.

    • Allan Shura

      If so I would like to think that the partners and DGT are motivated to get the show rolling.

  • artefact

    Wired: Cold fusion conference raises hopes of tabletop energy supply

    http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-07/24/cold-fusion

    • Greenwin

      Good article by David Hambling with very limited comment capability. But overall, only Wired UK appears to be willing to cover ICCF-18 and Defkalion on an international scale.

      Maybe David missed the blackout memo?

      • Gerrit

        Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

        malice == blackout

        stupidity == stupidity

        Many science writers are trained scientists who couldn’t get a decent job and are now just flipping news burgers to pay the bills. They don’t care about investigative journalism, they just dumb down Nature and Science papers and serve. Enjoy your meal.

        • Greenwin

          I don’t equate a news blackout with malice. It’s geopolitical – like the iron curtain. Which also is not malicious, just a simple way as you point out to dumb the public.

          In better sims we get underground newspapers that thrive on verboten subjects!

        • fortyniner

          Never attribute to malice or stupidity that which is adequately explained by ruthless self interest.

  • hitcher

    maybe one easy way to 100% correct measurements of E-CAT power-output, would be an added 5 Bar over-pressure valve at the end of the coolant circuit.

    This way, the coolant should be able to be heated to 150°C without cooking and turning to steam (phase change).

    Water grid line main connection pressure is also often that high.

  • artefact

    From MFMP:

    http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/follow/general-updates/309-iccf-fun

    “We had the fortune to be in direct Skype chat contact with Mats Lewin during the experiment and it was definitely live, we were able to ask Mats to pose questions, challenges and do additional testing during the run and saw near real time responses including watching him respond to our requests – People at ICCF could pass questions through this channel and this was very satisfying and reassuring. This gave us total confidence in the live nature of the presentation.”

    • Babble

      I don’t doubt that Mr. Lewin did his best to check and test most things but I want to ask him why he didn’t use a current probe on the scope when looking at the AC line waveforms? Another thing that bothers me is that if you short a building circuit it would create a large burn area and would probably even burn his hand (assuming he was holding something). I don’t know the breaker rating but I think it would be in the order of 10A to 15A at 220V. This is well over 3000W to trip. He should consult a power engineer before future testing.

      • AlainCo

        probably he triggered the differential disjunctor.
        I don’t know what he did, but a common error is to plug the “ground” of the scope to a phase… even if there is a huge resistor, it can trigger the differential disjunctor.

        moreover their are in a lab, and there, the installation may be quite sensible/fast to protect workers.

        the standard in france is 30mA/20ms to cut all.

        anyway we don’t have enough data to judge, to critic…

      • fortyniner

        The fact that the whole building was affected indicates that AlainCo is correct, and that the outage was caused by a protective earth fault breaker. A short would more probably have blown a spur fuse on the affected circuit only.

  • Robyn Wyrick

    I’m still rather stunned by the Mark Gibbs story –

    However, I think the Defkalion demo is a great story. It add legitimacy to Rossi that few other stories could.

    Before the 3rd Party Report came out, there were three possibilities for Rossi’s situation:

    1 – It works as reported.
    2 – Rossi is a fraud.
    3 – Rossi is delusional.

    The 3rd party report confirms that Rossi is not delusional.

    So, he is a fraud, or it works.

    For him to be a fraud would take a lot of effort, but it’s not out of the realm of possibility. And it would take a tremendous confidence to allow 90 hours of access for the 3rd party testers.

    And I would definitely assume he were a fraud – if he were alone in his claims.

    However, the nature of Rossi’s claims are generally in line with countless other reports of anomalous heat claims in this field. Where they differ is mostly about reliability and reproducibility.

    I think Rossi has the goods.

    • Snowdog

      Defkalion demonstrates, as well, that Rossi is not a fraud. The conspiracy theory would have to grow pretty large for that to be the case.

    • Greenwin

      Just wondering, did either Paolo Vitulo (University of Pavia – Researcher for CMS Project, CERN – Geneve), or Raymond Zreick (News editor, Focus) show up at the Defkalion July 23, demo?

      • kasom

        maybe they are in Vancouver, frustrated and drunk

        • Greenwin

          What do you suppose scared ’em off??

          • hempenearth

            Reality

            • Greenwin

              What’s that? They both live on the Continent. Why fly to Canada to get a drink? But then AP’s reporter Peter Svensson flew to Italy to witness 2011 E-Cat and was told to kill the story.

              On the bright side the pink-slipped HF scientists will have jobs flippin news burgers!

  • Kim

    What all this means in the final analysis
    is that we are in the process of learning
    how to obtain energy from the atom without
    irradiating our environment.

    Unlimited Energy!

    Respect
    KIm

  • Sanjeev
    • SammyM

      Link doesn’t quite work. I get ‘Video is private’ message. I think the uploader has to change his privacy settings …

      • Sanjeev

        Here is another link :
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHEtnTO3h6s

        No idea why that became private.

        • Greenwin

          Posted by (I believe) THE Nobel laureate Brian Josephson, who supports cold fusion.

          • Sanjeev

            Yes, most likely.

  • Sanjeev

    As you all know Gibbs did not write for Forbes magazine directly, it was his blog, but on Forbes platform. That’s why he could write something at all.

    His posts are still there : http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/
    but can disappear anytime, I hope someone backs them up.

  • artefact

    From Defkalion via Daniel Rocha / Vortex:

    “Yiannis said this concerning the mismatch between HV measurement:

    For the HV power:one had to calculate also its duty cycle (approx 20%).
    There were some mistakes done during this demo (at conditions never before
    experienced). The most serious was done by the observer Matts Lawen who
    caused a general electric power fail to tje entire building (fortuantly
    during the degasing phase) when trying to connect an oscilloscope in a
    board. Other minnors also (my responsibilty of course), mainly on
    synchronizing the test protocol with broadcasting and ICCF schedule (which
    was annoying to my team). I was sleepless for 3 days, with a jet lag
    traveling from Vancouver and I allmost colapsed one hour before scheduled
    sutdown. That is why we had to stop 30minutes before schedule not
    completing the broadcast with absolute cooling down. Some 5 late questions
    from ICCF I replied just now through email from the hotel.
    I think that we achived something positive today.The public reactions are
    more positive than expected.”

    • Felix Fervens

      For me, ideally Defkalion would have considered the human factor and allowed for a fresh, awake test pilot at demo time. Even if understandably short handed, there was a lot of lead time on this demo.

      Also, they could have skipped the argon loading control altogether, as no skeptic was going to be convinced by that anyway. A much longer demo of 8 hours or more would be much more convincing than a one-hour or so demo, with half of that being the control, plus gassing and de-gassing time.

      I did appreciate the openness to questions and investigation in this demo. Defkalion, please allow another demo soon. Keep making your demos better.

    • Sanjeev

      He did cause a short circuit. What did he measure with the scope ? Any readings/screenshots anywhere ?

      • Thinks4Self

        Likely the main power, he most likely caused a dead short and tripped the main.

        • Sanjeev

          I just read on Mats blog(comment by him) that he could not measure the power using the scope.

          Anyway, DGT allowed the scope and allowed him to connect it, that alone rules out any tempering with power supply.

  • Tor

    maybe big oil don’t
    like spreading off disturbing news.
    People, give all you money to oil rich countries
    and you can borrow the leftovers with interest rate

    • Fibber McGourlick

      The way things stand, this would be the equivalent in 1900 of the big horse people trying to stop the horseless carriage from emerging. Nothing can stop the advance of commercial technology breakthroughs.

  • georgehants

    ACS News Service Weekly PressPac: July 24, 2013
    Ancient technology for metal coatings 2,000 years ago can’t be matched even today
    http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/pressroom/presspacs/2013/acs-presspac-july-24-2013/ancient-technology-for-metal-coatings-2000-years-ago-cant-be-mat.html

  • georgehants

    Cracks in the Periodic Table [Preview]
    The discovery of element 117 filled the last remaining gap in the periodic table as we know it. But even as it is being completed, the table may be losing its power
    —–
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=cracks-in-the-periodic-table&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciam%2Ffeature-articles+%28Content%3A+Mind+Feature+Articles%29

  • Barry

    The demo was great. I think a lot of us are process people and I can understand results people who just want to climb into a CF car. My one complaint is the trolls we’re out in force. Their agenda is to putrefy the conversation until it is unreadable. The Washington Post had a troll filter (an “ignore user button”) which makes the conversation readable again. It would be great if all things Cold Fusion and all broadcast about CF had this option. In fact a troll filter would be great for the entire internet. For you techies out there, imagine software than could offer an “ignore this user forever” button. Whenever a post came up from a known troll you could eliminate them from all conversations that pop up onto your computer. How empowering. Personally I’d pay big bucks for such a troll filter. A side benifit is Frank would be able to go on more vacations.

    • AlainCo

      I would agree, but don’t forget that we are the troll for the mainstreams. Controlling the traffic volume of arguing may be the good solution… even for me when I’m unstoppable.

      It seems to be the strategy here.
      It seems to be the strategy of financial journals like Forbes.
      It seems to be the strategy of US constitution.
      It is the advised strategy by Roland Benabou to avoid collective denial causing suppression of dissenters

    • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

      The problem of free speech is that it must be free for everybody. The good, the bad and the ugly come with that right. So I wouldn’t agree with an ignore button. As stated by AlainCo, we are the annoying trolls for the mainstream.

      • TimB

        Surely some are more equal than others. The important distinction is positive or negative in outlook and opinion. I agree with freedom of opinion and freedom of expression, but if someone is very negative, I want the choice to ignore them.

    • Gordon Docherty

      When observing the trolls these days I’m rather reminded of Shakespeare’s Hamlet – “The lady doth protest too much, methinks”. If the trolls actually believed what they said, they would not waste so much time saying it. So, I am left believing either they stand to gain financially in some way by “driving us away from LENR”, or they are on some moral crusade to “save us from ourselves”. Either way, they don’t come out of this smelling of roses. One more observation. The trolls used to say “let the facts speak for themselves”. Now that the facts are speaking for themselves, the trolls are telling us “don’t listen to the facts, listen to us”. Sad, really.

      • Pedro

        Another option is that the trolls just enjoy annoying people. The internet variation on vandalism. During the demo chat there where a few guys that certainly where doing that.

      • Barry

        Did you guys see the comments yesterday during the demo? They were hijacked by a troll. An “ignore user” button is totally the choice of the individual. Would use it in a heartbeat. Prefer moderation like this site.

  • Jack

    The Pythagorean who proved that the square root of 2 was an irrational number was killed for overturning the beliefs of the cult. The first mathematicians to demonstrate chaos theory caused a riot at a math symposium. Scientists, like others, stake their entire careers on a certain world view and anyone who challenges it becomes an enemy. Just human nature to protect their strongly held beliefs. Deliver working systems and the scientific community will play catch up, probably kicking and screaming the whole time.

  • Barry

    It’s been surreal watching Mark Gibbs go from skeptic to open mindedness. At first it seemed he was just being a mouth piece for Forbes but with the 3rd party validation last spring he changed his tune. He’s become one of the few journalist to put Cold Fusion out there in a big way. I was wrong about him and admire his stance. Then he gets fired. I wish him well.

    • Andre Blum

      +1. Thank you, Mark!

    • Karl

      +1

    • Steve G

      Mark Gibbs is leading the way with Main Stream Media through FORBES magazine to reach out to sophisticated readers, pretty sure Mark is privy to information that has given him the confidence to write publicly about LENR.

  • http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum.php barty
    • Gérard2013

      This is a very bad thing!!!

    • Stephen

      Wow… this is amazing, and quite ridicolous too. Whatever the conclusion of this CF story I think all this should be fed to a team of psychiastrists. All this is sheer irrationality, even if in the end CF turns out to be unreal. Some people are “horrified” by CF talks (citing here for instance…. http://physicsbuzz.physicscentral.com/2013/04/nasas-cold-fusion-folly.html), I am horrified by events like this one, regardless reality or not of CF.

      On passing, assuming (I watch, interested, skeptical+hopeful, neutral for as much as I can) this is not a fair tale, the isotopically pure test is very interesting: based on the test, I understand 61Ni is the only one not giving any reaction. The only stable Ni isotopes have mass 60, 61, 62 and 64. All of them have nuclear spin 0 while 61 has spin 3/2. If (if, big if) there is something real going on it would not be strange at all if nuclear spin plays a role. That proves absolutely nothing of course, but makes sense.

      • Stephen

        Mh, or maybe just even-odd thing, Bose vs Fermi?! Anybody has a clue? I am curious to see Kim’s slides.

      • Omega Z

        Stephen

        It’s Ironic to see Krivit take issue with him in the comments.

    • Gerrit

      That is not true !

      We only know that Mark Gibbs does not work for Forbes any longer, but we cannot and therefore should not connect this to Mark’s LENR postings.

      We do not even know who initiated the departure.

      Stop jumping to conclusions and stop turning this into a Greek tragedy.

      There are plenty of mundane viable explanations for Mark leaving Forbes.

      There are also other very capable journalists around who will continue to report on LENR.

      • Stephen

        True, indeed in the mean time I had a read at the link and Gibbs himself says that: no clear correlation between the two things.

        • AlainCo

          I hope LENR will be a good CV for him.

      • Chris I

        He says a few words about the reasons, he talks about editorial policy and poor communication. Although he cautions against conspiracy theories, he definitely puts the initiative on their side.

        He basically just says there is no (obvious) evidence for that kind of conclusion.

      • Robyn Wyrick

        I think we can clearly conclude that it was initiated by Forbes.

        He states “be aware that there is no (obvious) evidence for that
        conclusion.” The parenthetical “obvious” would seem to suggest that he has a hunch, but doesn’t want to get people jumping to conclusions.

        • Chris I

          Indeed, the only thing he leaves uncertain is the idea of it being due to LENR.

          • Gerrit

            It might simply be that Mark “learned” something about journalism while he was blogging about LENR. Most likely his colleagues and editors will have spoken to him about this LENR stuff.

            You know how sometimes you suddenly see people in very different light because of how they behave in a certain situation ? Maybe Mark just got fed up with the whole “Forbes” situation and vice versa.

            It might be plain simple “journalistic differences.”

            • Chris I

              This would be a possibility had he not said:

              “be aware that there is no (obvious) evidence for that conclusion” [being due to his involvement with LENR]

              So under your conjecture, why would he have said this? Would he not have simply stated that it was due to disagreement about his reporting on LENR?

              He definitely is unable to state the exact reason, which does not look like a walkout at his own discretion.

      • Omega Z

        there is no (obvious) evidence for that
        conclusion

        Obvious in Brackets say a lot. Gibbs apparently suspects it at the very least. Just short of proclaiming it.

        There are legal issues involved here.

        Gibbs stating it outright would very likely cause major legal percussion’s & Gibbs would be hard pressed to prove his case.
        Many people are terminated for reasons other then the Actual reason.

        Very Likely Forbes Legal department made it clear to Gibbs to tread lightly if questioned about his departure.

    • daniel maris

      Well unless he makes the connection, between the articles and his departure, I don’t suppose we ought to but it is unfortunate timing to say the least.

      I really respected the guy. He had an open mind – neither credulous nor dismissive.

      • Robyn Wyrick

        Well, let’s be clear: he doesn’t leave that connection completely unmade. “be aware that there is no (obvious) evidence for that
        conclusion.”

        The parenthetical “obvious” should speak volumes as to his opinion on the matter.

        That is creepzilla.

      • Greenwin

        And while Mark warns against jumping to conclusions, one cannot help but wonder; whose toes got stepped on by Mark’s enthusiastic LENR posts (and comments)?

        This is what happens to people who do not follow orders.

    • Robyn Wyrick

      Holy Cr.ap!