Brillouin’s Robert Godes on the E-Cat Report

Here’s an interesting comment from Robert Godes, the inventor of the Brillouin LENR reactor. This was posted by Patrik Wiksten here at the LENR-Forum here

“The before and after test results are consistent with the Brillouin Hypothesis. It is unfortunate that there equipment only reports the stable isotopes of Ni and they probably cut it off from Cu detection or figured the Cu65 without any Cu63 was an erroneous reading. It is almost a certainty that 59Ni with a half-life of 76000 years and 63Ni with ~100 year half-life. It is also almost a certainty that the 64Ni that was present at 0.9% turned into 65Ni which has a 2.5Hr half-life and becomes 65Cu before the measurement took place.

“There is no other reasonable explanation for what happened to the 64Ni which went missing on page 29. The Li seems to have disappeared during the test as well but this is not surprising as the boiling point of Li is 1342 °C and it probably evaporated out of the system fairly quickly. I would have preferred that they used a more direct measurement technique. I would have placed the reactor inside of a tube in a pressure vessel with a release valve set for 20 bar and measured the amount of water vaporized. The pressure valve tells you what the temperature of the escaping water vapor was. All this being said, this was a very convincing test proving that the reaction is both real and nuclear in nature. Further it also proves that there is no penetrating radiation from this type of reaction.”

I find it interesting that Robert Godes seems to be quite credulous of the transmutation aspects of the report, which he says matches the Brillouin Hypothesis. I don’t know if Brillouin has carried out any similar analysis of element from their own system — it sounds a little unlikely from what Godes says here (talking only of the hypothesis).

Godes, being a competitor of Ross, has said in the past that the Brillouin system is superior (e.g. he has said that Brillouin’s reactor can start and stop at will), but here he is very complimentary of the E-Cat report, and has no problem calling the test results convincing, and proof that the reaction is ‘real and nuclear’.

I suppose that as a rising tide raises all ships, if acceptance of LENR as valid science grows because of this report, it will help Brillouin as well as Industrial Heat.

  • LCD

    Well I’m not sure what to make of his comments but on page 51 there is clearly Cu63 in the fuel

  • Here is the Dark Horse in the LENR Race:

  • Christopher Calder

    For those who have not seen it, Brillouin has an interesting animated video on YouTube that shows how they believe the Rossi reactor and their own reactor works on the atomic level.

  • I think this Finnish Patent has the answers buried within it. Check it out: Inventors: Pekka Soininen Applicant: Etiam Oy

  • Energy analysis spreadsheet.

    The energy generated, based on my calculations, pretty closely matches what was reported.

    The caveat is that we don’t know exactly the level of iron content in the fuel and the calculations are sensitive to that amount. If one assumes that all the Nickel-62 nucleons come from other nickel isotopes, iron, aluminum and lithium and set the level of iron in the fuel to make that true, then the calculated energy works out to about 37% more than the reported energy.

    Another consideration is that the iron in the calculations, while it will be largely iron based on the spectroscopy, is actually a proxy for all the other trace elements too that appear to be part of the reactions.

    • Billy Jackson

      Help me understand something so i am not assuming the wrong thing.

      its the ASH that was analyzed and determined to contain the largest portion of Nickel-62. This is the burnt/spent part of the fuel which only represents a very small portion of the total fuel left at the end? (in other words their was plenty of non-ash unspent fuel left?)

      To many statements have been made about all the fuel turning to Nickel-62 and that’s not true.. perhaps the majority of the ash has been. but not all of the fuel.

      Last but not least. in the conversion/transmutation phase which i assume we get our energy from perhaps some of the elements are transmutated to the Nickel-62 but the rest is converted to gas or possibly escaped upon opening of the fuel container if it was no longer a solid? I dont remember many details about them trying to contain the fuel in that state during sawing it open with a diamond saw…(could this explain some of the missing elements due to melting points?)

      am i barking up the wrong tree?

      • They analyzed 2.13 mg of fuel (assumed to be homogeneous) and 2.13 mg of ash randomly chosen (unknown whether homogeneous or not). While one cannot say that the entire gram of fuel was burned it’s pretty safe to say that this particular portion of it was completely burned or almost so because it is so different. I wish we had analysis of the whole gram too, but we can extrapolate from the 2.13 mg samples.

        Gas does not appear to play a big part in what’s going on (and I’m sure they waiting til the reactor was close to room temperature before opening). The hydrogen may be the missing piece to understand what exactly happens. The analyses in Appendices 3 and 4 not only don’t talk about hydrogen they hand wave on the trace metal elements and unfortunately the iron too, which looks like a big part of the puzzle.

        We got a lot of info but we don’t have a complete accounting of every single element before and after. We got some really good clues though.

  • Gerrit

    True, it’s mainstream science who is electrocuting the elephants.

  • Da Phys

    I agree that this is the weakest point of the report: how can we trust such a system when its creator claimed from the very beginning that the fuel is made of enriched Ni62 with less in the ash, when exactly the opposite was found?
    That said, Rossi himself admitted that the Ni isotope distrubution was unexpected. In some sense, that’s good for the “business crebility”, less for the “scientific credibility”…

  • Bob Greenyer

    We put forward a theory for why there is no gamma seen

    Based off our work november 2013 here:

    Work that discussed the fact that Deuterium causes gamma release, pinching the mix creates nuclear events, Deuterium not needed for excess heat and the historical use of inconel in high temperature reactors by Mizuno.

    • Adam Lepczak

      If you’re looking for extra “brain power” – perhaps try to approach a fellow over at named “Paul Stout”. He might be a great addition to the replication team.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Adam, thanks for the tip off. We will likely be running a collaborate live planning document and if you could encourage him to join the authoring team, that would be awesome – that way everyones interaction and edits are real-time timestamped and the crowd can watch the document whilst it is evolving. More heads on this the better.

        • Mr. Moho

          I would suggest asking for help on Vortex-l directly and on CMNS if you have access to it.

  • Gerrit

    Rossi claims to make transmutations occur in his device and Godes claims to make similar transmutations occur in his device.

    Mitsubishi Heavy Industries report transmutations in their experiment and Toyota Central Research reports a successful replicated of that experiment.

    Still the main response from most scientists seems to be: “This can’t be happening, therefore there is no need to further investigate”.

  • I disagree with Godes on Ni-65 and Cu-65.

    What the reported data shows is that almost EV.ER.Y.THING turns into Ni-62.

    That includes all the other Ni isotopes, plus all the Iron and Aluminum from the other fuel particles. The E-Cat reactor is a device which enables metals to migrate to the nucleus with the highest binding energies (Ni-62) — that is the deepest energy well. And it does so circumventing the normal nuclear event byproducts.

    It grows giant Ni-62 grains from Ni, Fe and Al feed stock. Something is happening at the surfaces of those growing grains that permits nuclei to rearrange and seek those deepest energy wells. Quantum soup at the boundary layer.

    The story the data tells is truly remarkable.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    What a contrast to the behaviour of another well known competitor of Rossi. One must like these people at Brillouin. However, Godes seems to step into the same trap as others did before him. If no copper has been found in the ash, then there must be an error?

  • Omega Z

    The link provided does not work for me. However I can get there.

  • Ecat

    Paul Stout destroyed “cheese” video theory on and now he’s crushing skeptics on reality of Ecat.

    • Fortyniner

      I’ve just taken a look, and agree. His patient, logical and fact-based posts contrast rather sharply with the mixture of lies, half truth, innuendo and acid ad hominem (admittedly quite witty in places) of the pathological skeptics.

  • Robert Godes and Brian Josephson, good to hear from the heavyweights. Reminds me of “Revenge of the Jedi”. Make the weak force be with them.

  • Ophelia Rump

    I think it was a generous response. Robert Godes has respect for his competitors, and LENR researchers. I hope they will take his advice in the future. He sounds like he has already covered that ground himself.

    • Omega Z

      Godes offered to cooperate with Rossi at one time exchanging information. I think Godes at that time thought “each” had keys to certain knowledge that would have been beneficial to both.

      I have wondered how that offer would have been received by Rossi had it not been for his experience with DGT.
      Once burnt twice shy.

      • Fortyniner

        It may be best that they develop their reactors independently. LENR is definitely in need of some open competition.

    • Fortyniner

      It is good to confirm that there is at least one other party ‘out there’ on much the same track as IH. Godes’ comment seems to confirm that he is on familiar territory, and it is nice to see the professional courtesy he extends to Rossi, despite the fact they may be mutually engaged in commercial warfare this time next year.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Maybe it’s O(18) from the alumina (or iron oxide).

    Ni(58) + O(18) > Ni(60) + O(16) 8.20 MeV

    Ni(60) + O(18) > Ni(62) + O(16) 6.23 MeV

    Ni(61) + O(18) > Ni(62) + O(17) 2.55 MeV

    For Ni(64) to Ni(62) ?


    Fe(54) + Ni(64) > Ni (62) + Fe(56) 4.00 MeV

    I went crazy again about this on the replication thread.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Forgot one.
      Ni(61) + O(17) > Ni(62) + O(16) 14.78 MeV

      • Fortyniner

        Just a thought – the resistance heating coils (which may also be the source of an oscillating EM field) are made of ‘inconel’ (nichrome alloy) – the same stuff that the Celani wire was derived from. Is there any possibility that the wire itself, which may conceivably have been pre-treated in some way, also takes some other part in the operation of the overall system (‘mouse’ – COP=1.1?), or is the ‘Celani effect’ too small to be significant?

        • Pekka Janhunen

          The same occurred to me – that maybe the heating wire is the mouse and doped to be active. (That mice have wiry tails is probably just a coincidence.)

          • Pekka Janhunen

            Which might, by the way, explain why “fuel” p(Li7,a)He4 could only explain about 50% of the observed energy output.

        • Fortyniner

          Update: In view of the anomaly that Curious and others have pointed out, i.e., that the reactor temperature exceeded the melting point of all Inconel alloys, it seems clear that the resistances couldn’t have been made of Inconel, so my suggestion is moot.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      Some of these reactions involve the transfer of two neutrons and some involve one neutron. If the elementary process is one-neutron transfer, one can obtain two-neutron transfer by repeating the process, but then the intermediate product should also exist in the ash, which in case of Ni(58) would be the radioactive Ni(59). If the elementary process would be more exotic dineutron transfer, then Ni(61) could only transform to Ni(63), which is again radioactive. So in both cases it’s hard to avoid radioactive outcomes, unless there is some mechanism which “censors” them out.

      That Bianchini measured no radiation above background from the reactor and from the ash is an extremely stringent constraint. One gram of nickel contains about 1e22 Ni atoms. If one in million of them would be Ni(59), for example, the number of Ni(59) atoms would be 1e16. Ni(59) half-life is 76000 years (2.4e12 s), so every second there would be 4000 decays. Ni(59) decays by beta+, that is, positron emission. The positrons are annihilated with electrons which produces a pair of 511 keV gammas for each decay. Such gammas are already quite penetrating and thus easily detected.

      I am surprised that Godes speculates about production of radioactive elements although none were seen. Bianchini used several measurement techniques based on different principles. It is inconceivable that all of them would have malfunctioned.

      • LCD

        Couldn’t have said it better myself

      • LCD

        I’m with you whatever causes the isotope shift without radiation preferentially selects stable isotopes. This is actually self consistent or else it would seem you are back to explaining where the dangerous radiation went.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        What if the rate of the hypothetical 59Ni/7Li (or 59Ni/n) reaction were much higher than the decay rate of 59Ni? One would see much less gammas, I guess.

        • Pekka Janhunen

          What matters is the ratio of 59Ni production rate (from 58Ni) and 59Ni destruction rate (into 60Ni). If that ratio is one to million, then one gets 4000 decays per second in the ash, which is still very large. So the ratio should be one to billion or more. It’s really difficult to conform with the no-radiation outcome if 59Ni is part of the main energetic pathway or main destruction channel of 58Ni (if assumed to be real).

      • Alan DeAngelis

        Oxygen-18 bombardment induced transmutation are known (Yes, I know high energy is used but I thought I’d put it out here anyway). (18O,x)

  • Daniel Maris

    Well, interesting and intriguing.

    Brillouin has slightly gone off the radar. If they were more in the game then their comments would have added weight. As they are not so much in the game, I can’t ascribe too much weight to the comments.

    • Ophelia Rump

      They are in the game. They are completing one year of R&D prior to building their first plant. I believe they are somewhere between one quarter and a half year into that schedule.

      • Daniel Maris

        I hope I am proved completely, utterly and miserably wrong – nothing would give me greater pleasure. 🙂

    • hempenearth

      Who is running second then Daniel?
      As I currently see it the race leaders are as follows:
      1. Industrial Heat
      2. Brillouin
      3. Clean Planet
      4. Jet Energy

      • Jonnyb

        Thunder Fusion?

      • Guru

        After 2 years of continuous tests, first on market will 2 giant manufacturers
        with HephaHeat which is very similar to last version of Hot-Cat. So:
        1) HephaHeat (probably within 1-3 months)
        2) After 14 months of pilot long-time testing Rossi/IH with Hot-Cat

        • Daniel Maris

          Steorn don’t have a v good record on delivery do they? 1-3 months for HephaHeat seems most unlikely.

        • hempenearth

          If you are getting your Steorn ETA from Sean Macarthy you have to triple it, add 20% and hope that he is off the grog for it to be close. If you are getting it from Mike Daly it could be close if he is in total control, (which he isn’t). If you are getting it from Rheem then maybe.

    • LCD

      They are definitely still in it, I recently met some of those guys. Good people.