Industrial Heat Files New International Patent for ‘Energy-Producing Reaction Devices’

Thanks to Bernie Koppenhofer for finding the following:

Today, August 27, 2015, Industrial Heat, LLC has filed an International Patent for: ENERGY-PRODUCING REACTION DEVICES, SYSTEMS AND RELATED METHODS

Link is here: https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2015127263&recNum=1&maxRec=&office=&prevFilter=&sortOption=&queryString=&tab=PCTDescription

Inventors are listed as Andrea Rossi and Thomas Barker Dameron.

The abstract reads: “A reactor device includes a reaction chamber; one or more thermal units in thermal communication with the reaction chamber configured to transfer thermal energy to the reaction chamber; and a refractory layer between the reaction chamber and the one or more thermal units.”

This one, unlike the recently approved Rossi patent is very extensive, and will take some time to go through. More details will be added here as information is digested.

I guess this will put an end to the rumor that Industrial Heat is no longer interested in the E-Cat!

  • Robyn Wyrick

    I find it fascinating that, even with Rossi’s patent, the news media is completely silent. I have seen all kinds of major news outlets crow about the various claims (not tests) of Hot Fusion engineers and their companies.

    But after numerous concurring (or similar) papers by LENR researchers, after two independent E-Cat tests, after being bought by IH, after countless attacks and vindications, and after even the USPTO caves, still the media is silent.

    Even for me, having watched untold failures of the news media over my lifetime, this is shocking.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Hot Fusion and private organisations use some of their sizeable budgets in “paid news” – press releases etc.

      For the former it is justifying to the public – for the latter it is to attract investors.

      The paid news in India is ridiculous, but you’ll be surprised what you think is news is actually tied to advertising spend – both positive and negative.

      I worked on an advert for a loan company in the UK whilst I was visiting Piantelli. The script for the song read “Bank says no, where do you go” – the advert was rejected by a MAJOR commercial TV satellite provider in the UK because they did not want to offend their banking advertisers.

    • bachcole

      Not to worry. The more they resist, the worse they are going to look when it becomes obvious. Remember that one of the benefits of LENR is the revolution in thought and the destruction of the ivory towers.

      • But we should make backups of the most pathoskeptic sites and persons.
        Because they will clean their past very quick and proper…

        • bachcole

          Absolutely.

          • Mats002

            Ha ha – yes! Some people don’t care what they say the main thing for them is THAT they say. Changing mind is not an obsticle for those types of people.

    • Paul

      Yes, the media have a clear agenda on the subject. However, the main mistake is of IH because they haven’t a serious press office, or they haven’t at all. News does not come from nothing, a press release was needed, another occasion lost. I wonder who will buy the E-Cat without preparing the field in advance.

      • Nigel Appleton

        I think that the media are simply stupid, and have lost sight of their mission to investigate and inform
        Standards of journalism are so low as to be non existent

    • Fyodor

      Until there is a reliably reproducible test that produces clear excess heat or a publicly available commercial product, LENR it won’t be accepted. Hopefully the disclosures in these patents will allow replicators to develop such a test.

      • Paul

        Not exactly, if A makes a test but B, C, D throw “brown matter” against A in various forms (criticisms, papers and other), the general public will not believe to A. This is what is already happened. Also NASA has made many endorsments on the LENR but nothing is changed. You will not see any change until IH makes on the media what is doing with the patents: pay the best news agencies to make news and sues magazines and scientists who write not justfied criticisms.

        • rght, good description.
          for example there is good evidence, of LENR, of tritium, of heat/helium, of transmutaion, with replications, good sigma, …
          but immediately a clown say it is dubious, and everybody swallow the doubt to stay quiet in the armchair.

          this is why when someone claim there is an artifact, and bring no evidence you just have to say it is a tinfoil hat…
          when the claim are absurd, it is tin foil hat.

          those guys use tactics of denialist, of conspiracy theorist, no less… they are tinfoil hat.

      • LCD

        Look the next move on the chessboard is replication of Rossi patent. Then check mate.

        Unfortunately for Rossi and his patent team this will be one of the most scrutinized and replicated patents in history, maybe the most ever.

        If you are a spectator it will be a fun ride.

    • timycelyn

      The ongoing news blackout on the BBC has destroyed my remaining faith in that organisation’s output, naive though it may have been.

      I’ve watched enough documentaries on Panorama and the like to know they are very able to report a controversy over some possible new technology like this, they have a very well-trodden path for it. It’s a SOP for them.

      On the one side, interviews with a few of the CF big names, and whatever they can get out of IH. On the other side Pomp, whatever idiots they can dredge up from the US deniers, and so on. Ending with a suitable ‘statement of the bl**dy obvious’ summary, in best BBC style. All done – another 40 minute slot filled.

      Instead, absolutley nothing. Zilch, nada, zip.

      I still firmly believe they are the ‘least worst’ option in the electronic ‘light’ news media (think Fox!!), but I now take their output with a big pinch of salt.

      I’m sad about that…..

      • Agaricus

        Hi Tim. As you suggest, perhaps its just as well they stay quiet on the subject, given the BBC’s recent treatment of topics such as radiation hazards from Fukushima and Sellafield (with ‘Jim’ Al-Khalili leading the ‘nothing to worry about’ charge), and their blanket coverage of ‘climate change’ propaganda.

        If people want facts, the BBC has become one of the last places to look for them.

        • timycelyn

          HI Peter, hope everything is OK with you! We’re still dreaming about thee K&A, but I am about to book a 3 week docking next Feb, so that’s my ‘Spey’ boating time for 2016 shot…. sigh.

          You’re probably right, and that saddens me even more. Truly, even 10 years ago I still had a pretty deep respect for the BBC. Now I’m dubious if they tell me as a firm fact that it’s raining outside….

  • US_Citizen71

    There is always getting Lithium from the brine left over from desalinization plants as well. Desalinization will likely become a more common method of obtain freshwater as LENR is adopted.

  • artefact

    I still hope for graphen:
    youtube com/watch?v=8TkwoHgkuR0
    “1 MegaFarad Supercapacitor – Nearly There”

  • An engineer working for IH. I asked Rossi.

    • Barbierir

      He must have made some important contribution, did Rossi said anything about this?

      • US_Citizen71

        My guess is he was the one who designed and moulded the HotCat out of refractory cement for the Lugano Test.

  • Dods

    That article was posted in 2010 and I think huge deposits of rare earth minerals have scince been found in Afghanisitan.

    According to a joint report by the Pentagon, the US Geological Survey (USGS) and USAID, Afghanistan is now said to possess “previously unknown” and untapped mineral reserves, estimated authoritatively to be of the order of one trillion dollars (New York Times, U.S. Identifies Vast Mineral Riches in Afghanistan – NYTimes.com, June 14, 2010, See also BBC, 14 June 2010).

    “The previously unknown deposits — including huge veins of iron, copper, cobalt, gold and critical industrial metals like lithium — are so big and include so many minerals that are essential to modern industry that Afghanistan could eventually be transformed into one of the most important mining centers in the world, the United States officials believe.

    An internal Pentagon memo, for example, states that Afghanistan could become the “Saudi Arabia of lithium,” a key raw material in the manufacture of batteries for laptops and BlackBerrys.

    taken from http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-war-is-worth-waging-afghanistan-s-vast-reserves-of-minerals-and-natural-gas/19769

  • GreenWin

    ” The habit of automatically assuming a “worst case scenario” and
    inappropriately characterizing minor or moderate problems or issues as
    catastrophic events.”
    http://outofthefog.net/CommonBehaviors/Catastrophizing.html

    Uncle Bob,

    a few of us understand your frustration. A bit of advice: take care to read the expiration date on any food product. Lest you eat humble pie. 🙂

  • Bob Greenyer

    We are bringing forward our planned addition of elemental lithium.

    It will allow us to feel confident to switch back to Al2O3 – given that this is what is claimed as being used in Lugano effectively.

    • wpj

      What about the addition of aluminium (claim 10)?

      • Bob Greenyer

        look at this chart on wikipedia

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_aluminium_hydride#/media/File:Lialh4_dsc.svg

        the reactor is said to work from 250ºC – that means when the ionic Li + H- is first formed (LiH) – then if you take it to above 400ºC – the H is released and it forms LiAl which is a solid up to 702-720ºC apparently – having more Lithium will reduce this and leave LiAl in solution with molten Li. See this phase diagram

        http://pruffle.mit.edu/3.00/Lecture_36_web/img7.gif

        Adding 30% Lithium lowers the melting point of the the combined metals to between 200ºC and 300ºC

        2 LiH + 2 Al → 2 LiAl + H2

        “Is reversible with an equilibrium pressure of about 0.25 bar at 500 °C”

        see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_aluminium_hydride

        so this means you can make and destroy ionic Li+ H- (LiH) that will be in direct contact on or in porous Ni by varying temperature alone – you can make H- at will.

  • Sanjeev

    Nice to see IH in action !
    As many have noticed, most of the patent is based on the Lugano report. Its included in its totality there. So it seems that the Lugano test was conducted entirely for the purpose of this patent (as many suspected in past), and this can explain the cooperative behavior of Rossi and IH towards the testing team and the unwillingness of the team to conduct a proper peer review or to even answer the questions or objection. The test served it purpose and nothing more needed to be done.
    This patent does provide a little more information other than what’s already in the Lugano report, such as, NiH can be used (and the reactor need not be air tight if this is done), various materials for sealing and for resistive heater. It seems, they are not trying to patent the formula itself, only the embodiments.

    This patent, again, avoided the taboo words CF, lenr or any other “physics law breaking” terms, which makes it a good candidate for final grant. We may see many more patents appearing in near future, Rossi had announced that IH/Rossi is making “great work” for patenting their IP and they are probably working on some 100 patents.

  • I believe Rossi started to understand the importance of adding Lithium, and also successfully starting to do this, in early 2011. In February he went to see the people in Uppsala — late prof. Kullander, Dr Essén, prof Ikegami and others (I was there too), and afterwards he highlighted the inspiration he got from Ikegami’s work, involving the use of liquid lithium.

    Here’s from my book, in the beginning of chapter 11:

    “An event for which he expressed particular gratitude was the meeting with the Swedish physicists Kullander and Essén in late February 2011.

    Beyond the support of their report upon visiting Bologna, their knowledge had given him new and important ideas, particularly the report on Ikegami’s research on cold fusion that Professor Kullander had given to him. During the flight back from Stockholm via Paris to Rome, he was so focused on the new ideas that the trip seemed to take mere seconds. Back in Rome, he immediately started to prepare an experiment using a modified reactor, according to the new ideas. He was enthusiastic about his plan in an email to the Swedish professors: ‘God wanted us to meet,’ he wrote, then began to work day and night on the new design. After two days, he wrote again: ‘I won!’

    He told me that through stubborn work with his experiments he had managed to increase the reactor efficiency by about 30 percent. “I’m living the best time of my life,” he concluded the e-mail.”

    (An Imposible Invention, chapter 11).

    The email with “I won” was written on February 27, 2011.

    Mats

    • Bob Greenyer

      Piantellis patent extension, mentioning Lithium as key to high yield has a priority date of Apr 26, 2011

      Filing date of Apr 26, 2012

      Things are going to get interesting!

      • wpj

        Again, Claim 1 involves hydrogen gas and Claim 2 for Lithium is dependent on claim 1, so the use of LAH by Rossi rather than hydrogen (although it might be generated in situ) escapes any claims of this patent.

        • Da Phys

          On the other hand LAH+Ni has already been claimed by Mills.

          • wpj

            Yes, but has Ni/LAH/Li? That’s really the crux of the matter and in the proportions claimed in the patent.

            • Da Phys

              I agree with you that the new element, and probably the most important one, is the addition of pure Li in the mix. That said, given all precedent claims in all other patents involved, this patent protects its owner but does not hinder others to use similar systems.

              • Bob Greenyer

                at the end of the day – this is so important there are only three possible

                1. heaters made so cheap – pointless to make your own
                2. people make their own
                3. compulsory licensing so 1 occurs

                I would prefer IH make licensing cost nominal (but still phenomenally lucrative) for core patent uses. And the world can get to work on bringing the value and benefits of the technology to all.

                • I was wrong. Rossi told me today that he was already using lithium in 2011, which makes sense when I think about it. I remembered that when Kullander had an analysis made of the powder samples that Rossi handed over in Februari 2011, lithium was found. And now when Rossi’s patent has been granted, he actually says he always considered nickel to be the ‘catalyst’ and lithium the fuel. Claiming that nickel was the fuel, as he did back then, apparently was a way to mislead others.

                • Bob Greenyer

                  Makes sense.

                • artefact

                  Otherwise we would still be missing the secret catalyst.

                • Bob Greenyer

                  The leaked report from 17/01/2013 is the one I know

                  It was ash from a six month test in 2012

                  http://pesn.com/2014/10/13/9602545_Leaked-Second-Paper_With_High-Magnification_of_Rossis-Nickel-Particles_Brings_Replication_Closer/

                  as EDX was used – Li would not be seen

                • Agaricus

                  This seems to be quite an important revelation that is not only relevant to the history of development of the e-cat, but also confirms Rossi’s use of ‘misdirection’ in his comments on JONP. Most followers of this saga will be able to think of a number of other apparent examples of this technique that have given rise to all sorts of erroneous speculation here and on other blogs.

            • Bob Greenyer

              wpj

              Rossi has novelty

              nano powders

              in situ H2 production and the most novel aspect is liquid lithium on the H loaded Nickel – I hope he has this documented clearly in patents already submitted – because this is the great leap.

              • wpj

                Interesting; I have just noticed claim 10 of the first patent and there is a claim for adding aluminium as well to react with the LAH to produce hydrogen.

            • Sanjeev

              The patent says proportions are not important.

              • wpj

                Yes, but it gives limits for each one.

              • wpj

                Apologies, you are correct; it is not in the claims but in the text.

      • Gerard McEk

        This all means that Li plays a much more prominent role in LENR. That is the fuel being used and we have to realize that this is not as abundant as Ni, which is only a catalyzer and not being ‘used’ as such. The market pressure on Li will increase enormously. I hope also other metals (more abundant) will be found.

        • Bob Greenyer

          I think Lithium may get cheaper as things will have less need for batteries – especially Lithium hogging EVs.

          A VERY small amount of Li from the battery packs in one Tesla will provide energy for the lifetime of normal car.

          • artefact
            • Bob Greenyer

              yes

            • Zephir

              You cannot believe the mass media and inventors outlets in this matter. They support the grid and energy storage solutions, not cold fusion. In particular, the 1000 F supercapacitor is nothing special, you can buy these at EBay.

          • bachcole

            Also, communist regimes (Bolivia) tend to be self-limiting time-wise. This would free up an enormous amount of easily obtainable lithium.

            • Alain Samoun

              Yep! Let steal their Lithium damn commies!

          • Gerard McEk

            That’s a good one Bob. I hope that we can get LENR so efficient that we can produce electricity with it. Maybe I buy a Tesl as an (lithium investment ;-).

            • Bob Greenyer

              Cheaper to have a “recycling bin” at your local supermarket for old Lithium batteries – provide a public service.

        • Pedro

          Hi Gerard,

          Remember that we always thought Nickle was the fuel? I remember that
          there where some worries about how much Nickle that would need and what that would do to the price of Nickel, etc. Some people did calculations and it turned out that in order to generate all the energy that the world consumes today, we would need approx. 1% of the current Nickle production.

          Now with the patent publishing the fuel composition, we know there may be a 2nd ‘bottleneck’, being the amount of Lithium needed.

          I did some checking on Wikipedia and it turns out there seems to be no problem (assuming that the 1% of Nickle was correct)…
          world production of Nickle is abount 2 Million Metric Tons and total
          known reserves are about 75 MMT. Lithium production is 0.65 MMT and
          reserves stand at 13 MMT.

          So Lithium production is about 1/3rd of Nickle production and we need less Lithium than Nickle in the fuel, this would translate to 1 or 2% of world Lithium production.

          If cold fusion based ‘batteries’ would be developped, replacing Lion batteries, we might end up using less Lithium then we use currently since a Lion battery most likely uses 100-1000 times more lithium than a CF device.

        • Zephir

          I do agree, many cold fusion experiments (Niedra and all) were constrained to potassium, the reserves of which are essentially inexhaustible. But we should do more experiments, not just twaddle at public forums. The official physicists will not do it for us.

      • Paul

        For this reason Rossi is interested in Piantellis patent, as we’ll probable see…

  • Da Phys

    Shhhhh, that’s a secret !

  • Bob Greenyer

    New Fire Recipe?

    GS3 *GlowStick* design reactor (AL2O3)

    LaNi5H7 (HydroStik – do not charge with H2, take out powder) $20

    LiAlH4 ( for Hydrogen release, need enough in sealed vessel to get to above 40 bar )

    Free Lithium or better http://goo.gl/tmnECV

    Bit of straight carbonyl Nickel for good measure

    1. Heat core to below 179ºC – release 40+ bar of H2 from LiAlH4 – wait for LaNi5 to load
    2. Raise temperature above melting point of Lithium quickly so it wets to Nickel before becoming LiH

    temperature and proportions to be varied.

    • Da Phys

      I suggest to go first with LiBH4 instead of LiAlH4. If neutron transfer is at play, something I believe, Al can only hurt, B can only help.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Boron melts at a SUPER high temp and so would hinder reaction dynamics.

        The ash of Rossi reactors suggest it is not Neutrons

      • wpj

        As I mention above, Claim 10 of the previous patent suggests the addition of aluminium to react with LAH to produce hydrogen- maybe this is useful for the low temperature systems.

  • Da Phys

    Are the results of the isotopic analyses the same as those published in the Lugano report? If the case that would be pretty disappointing because this would suggest (1) Rossi did not perform any other independent isotopic analysis (2) he was not aware of isotopic shifts before Lugano (3) is not more advanced than we are about the understanding of the nuclear reaction. And not saying anything about the authors of the Lugano report who see “their” results in the patent which dicredits the Lugano report and their work which was claimed to be independent.
    Something is wrong here…

    • Paul

      I agree, not citing the authors should be very disappointing for them. But this is not strange from Rossi/IH, in many other occasions they did not show gratitude for those who helped them. This is the ugly side of this story.

      • Bob Greenyer

        They have cited Piantelli, Etiam, Celani and others

        • Da Phys

          Citing someone in a patent as prior art is different from using data obtained by a group of scientists that were publicly sold as independent. If Levi et al were informed that their data could be used in a patent and gave their agreement for it before the publication of the report, then they can hardly be considered as “independent” anymore.
          The first patent was already suffering from the fact that it will be difficult for Rossi to claim priority on the use of LiAlH4 in nickel because Mills from BLP already claimed it several years ago. At the end, these two patents by Rossi are not good news for him, and in turn for the whole LENR community.

          • Freethinker

            I think you are over reacting. Way much.

            • Da Phys

              Future will tell. Would be good to know the opinion of Levi et al.

              • Freethinker

                True. On both counts.

      • Freethinker

        Citing Levi et.al.? It is not a good strategy. It has not been published in a journal, and the work in it has been under constant attack since it came out. The appendices containing abundance analysis are less controversial as such, having been outsourced by labs doing these things regularly. It is not impossible that they are aware and have been informed. Of this we know nothing about.

        • Warthog

          Publication “in a journal” has zero to do with the patenting process. ANY publication can be used to fault a patent application., including, for instance, a verbal presentation at a conference.

          • Freethinker

            Sure. But in terms of credibility in an already difficult, the reference to a battered report, would not improve things. With that said, I do hope that the Lugano team has been in on this front inception, otherwise it would be a not so nice things. But I wish to think they were.

    • Omega Z

      “(2) he was not aware of isotopic shifts before Lugano”

      Rossi was aware of the isotopic shift prior to Lugano.
      What Rossi wasn’t aware of was how much isotopic shift takes place. This was a serendipity moment. Rossi had never run a reactor under power 24/7 for 30 days before. The focus had always been aimed at SSM(Off/On cycles).

      • Da Phys

        Hard to imagine that any data supporting an isotopic shift before Lugano would not appear in the patent filed in Feb 2014. In practice it would have been better to not use the Lugano data to support the claims because now this put Rossi in a difficult situation.

    • it was filed in 2014/2 (priority date) , and probably updated later with lugano report (2014/10)

      • Da Phys

        I hope Rossi did it right and filed the results before October otherwise they can be considered null and void.
        What remains disturbing is the fact that the Lugano report was sold to the public as being independent, with the isotopic results as main results that prove a nuclear reaction. How can some results obtained from an independent group be used in a patent to support its claims? To whom belong the data? Either the data belong to Levi et al and Rossi didn’t have the right to use them in the patent without a contract with Levi et al, which would make Levi et al not independent, or the data belong to Rossi and IH and Levi et al were used as guinea pigs. Hard to not see a manipulation of the information in 2014.
        That said, I really really hope that the 1-year trial will give positive results and be backed up by the consumer otherwise Rossi will be in a difficult position.

        • Andrew

          The Lugano report was published to the public, anyone can use the data how they see fit and doesn’t imply ownership or invalidate the Lugano teams independence. The way I view it is it supports the teams independence, it would have been more benifical to Rossi et al to keep this data guarded until the patent was accepted.

  • Da Phys

    Ok, now that these patents have been filed, what is the mouse? What is the cat?

    • Mats002

      Good question! Axil Axil put forward some ideas but those are about underlying processes at a level I think noone understands today, not even Rossi.

      The mouse is said to have a COP > 1, but just little over 1. If it was not for this statement I would say that the mouse is the heater wire that stimulates the cat to follow.

      The logo suggests to me that the red ball is the mouse and the cat will chase it, as in signals follow or correlate or sync up.

      The mouse can be some additional stimuli like a EM but again the puzzle is in mouse having COP > 1.

      • Da Phys

        I agree. This is puzzling. Actually this patent opens more questions than give answers based on what Rossi said these last months in JONP about his reactor. This gives the impression that he succeeded to master the beast without a clear understanding of it.
        Let’s hope his 1 year trial will succeed because he will still be more under pressure after the publication of the two patents.

      • Paul

        The logo was designed by a third person on a creative basis in 2012, before Cat and Mouse tech, then it was proposed to Rossi that adopted it, so there is no relation among the two.

      • Bob Greenyer

        I think it is a size thing and maybe counter intuitive.

        is the CAT Ni (it is physically large compared to Li and is the catalyst in that it creates the necessary processed H2 for the rest of the reaction)

        is the MOUSE Li (because of size – but actually the main part of the yield)

        OR

        Ni + 1H is the mouse (in energy terms) as it creates a yield of a little over 1 (12.5% excess as far as our Celani experiments have show) but can sometimes eject a proton.

        Li then becomes the CAT – the mouse causes it to spring into action and fusion / fission to 2 X 4He giving the big energy game.

        In the end it is a word play to keep people guessing. What matters more is can it be replicated? In April 2014 I was calling very strongly for MFMP members to focus on adding lithium and lithium compounds to all our experimental threads given the new patent extension of Piantelli released at that time and all the historical evidence. It was clear that this is the main energy yield in his thinking.

        • Da Phys

          I agree. Ni+H as Jerry and Li as Tom is what makes the most sense to me.
          Although I’m also convinced that Li is the big player here, I don’t think that Li+H->He4+He4 is the main reaction.

          • Bob Greenyer

            @Da Phys,

            It is

            1. mouse: Ni + H- (1 proton 2 electrons seen as a composite particle and appearing has a “heavy electron” / Muon to Nickel) result is little over COP of 1.

            2. cat: 1H (ejected from failed 1 step) is a proton exceeding 223.6eV that interacts with 7Li – which either goes by two paths to 2 X 4He as shown on lines 12 & 13 of my sheet here

            https://goo.gl/S8kcI7

            • Da Phys

              Yes, in line with Piantelli’s theory. I’m not sure of the last step however, other reactions such as the fission of 6Li+n also makes sense.

              • Bob Greenyer

                except that 6Li is left in the ash.

                The purpose of Piantelli/Focardi work was to find reactions that did not yield n

            • Paul

              Yes but the He4 are higly energetic. Where are the gammas from the subsequent evolution of He4? This is the BIG problem for a physicist!

              • Mats002

                What about this TINY answer: The reaction takes place inside a metal lattice, not in free air as in hot (fast) particle physics.

                CMNS = Condensed Matter Nuclear Science.

                • Paul

                  Do you think that He4 with energies of many Mev, that does not survive in condensed matter, can disappear without producing gamma of high energy? If this is your idea, it does not reflect the known physics, you can ask to a nuclear physicist, he will illustrate al the possible processes in detail. Rossi, Focardi and many others, me included, all believe that the E-Cat works with the known physics, not with exotic physics.

                • Mats002

                  I don’t know – and I am not a professional in physics – but I believe that this process will reveal some news to the community. Why would physicists know everything at this point in time?

                • Paul

                  Oh, this is sure! Physicists considers exotic physics for the E-Cat things like vacuum energy, but things like compact objects or neutron tunneling, for example, are not exotic physics, even if still not observed.

    • Axil Axil

      The mouse produces a muon chain reaction in the Cats that surround the mouse.

  • Ryan

    Nuclear would apply to any process that actually affects the atom at the proton, neutron, electron level. Thus, transmutation would still qualify as a nuclear process. The word doesn’t need to be feared. There are nuclear processes that aren’t great, but it would appear we’ve stumbled upon methods without the risk involved.

  • Ryan

    While I wholeheartedly support LENR and fully expect to see (well really hope to see) home based, vehicle based and business based power and heating solutions soon from current developments in LENR, I also support study into hot fusion as well, if for no other reason than it could open up new areas of high energy physics. While the Tokamak method is a joke the little guys working on hot fusion should be encouraged to keep looking and working. There is always more to know and other paths to take, to ignore them is folly.

  • Buck

    As of August 11, 1998, T.B. Dameron was a high school student from Ravenscroft School visiting the North Carolina State University College of Engineering. It was holding its summer Student Introduction to Engineering (SITE) program for high school students and T.B. Dameron was one of 200 visiting students.

    You will need to do a “find” on Dameron to jump to the citation.

    Link>> https://www.engr.ncsu.edu/news/awards/awards.arc.98.summer.html

    Link>> http://www.ravenscroft.org/

  • Imagine what is happening right now at the Toyota cold fusion laboratory. The Japanese Government is funding LENR research as well.

    http://news.newenergytimes.net/2015/08/24/japanese-government-will-fund-lenr-research-again/

    • GreenWin

      Chris, one would hope they are enlightened, enthusiastic, and determined that, “We Don’t Get Fooled Again.”

  • ecatworld

    Not until tonight. He apparently goes by the name of T Barker Dameron, and appears to be a Raleigh NC engineer.

    • EEStorFanFibb

      yes I just posted his linked in above,

      suddenly he is now famous to all the ecat fanboyz.

      Hi TB!

      :p

  • Andrew

    Figures 2 through 6 are interesting. Between the last patent and this one someone could almost build their own for testing.

  • Adam Lepczak

    The patent application is super detailed. Are you reading this MFMP? Paging Bob Greenyer.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Read it. Between the various replicators we have explored the various configurations except steel Tube – but that may have been superseded. The 3 phase schematics are pretty much the same as the 3D model I published from inference week after Lugano. In some ways – we are advancing faster as a collective.

      We took too long to be able to test Ni + LiAlH4, we bought it day after Lugano and sat on it and did not add Li to our experiments when we were discussing doing it from April last year after Piantelli patent extension.

      Good news is – we were right in focussing on high Al2O3 reactor vessels for *GlowSticks*

      We are to focus on finally adding Lithium and control.

  • Obvious

    Wiring: (I think “low” goes where I added the asterisk)

    In some embodiments, each of the resistance wires (16) as shown may include two or more wires that are spirally wound together and optionally annealed to facilitate the spirally wound configuration shown in FIGS. 1 and 2. In some embodiments, the electrical current is carried to the resistance wires (16) using a * resistance wire, such as copper, so that the wires (16) produce a larger amount of heat adjacent the chamber (12). In particular embodiments, the wires (16) are 2 guage 15 KA resistance wires, and prior to wrapping the wires (16) around the reactor chamber (12), an electrical current is passed through the wires (16) to reduce shape-memory characteristics. The resistance wire (16) converts electricity to heat by resisting the flow of electrons. The resistance wires (16) may optionally be annealed. For example, a 15 gauge wire with resistance of 2.650 ohms/ft is one example of suitable wire. As with other components of a reactor device (10), attributes of resistance wires (12) or other components of an energy input unit included in and/or otherwise providing energy to the reactive material may vary, and may include devices for heating and/or cooling the device (10) and/or providing electromagnetic radiation to the chamber (12).

    • Obvious

      I’m not getting anywhere with his wire sizes. 2.65 ohms /ft is a lot of resistance for a 15 Ga wire. An order of magnitude more than typical.

  • Bob

    Very exciting. I bet the boys at ECW are just having a cow! 🙂
    .
    I have not had time to look at the application yet, but I would like to ask what others think
    about this question :
    .
    What is the relationship between Rossi / Leonardo Corp and Industrial Heat?
    .
    The previous US patent has only Rossi on it. This one seems to be owned by IH.
    Yet recent posts by Rossi seemed to indicate that while their relationship was smooth, Leonardo Corp held all the cards so to speak. Yet here is an international patent application that seems to clearly have IH as the owner!
    .
    I realize that time passes from when a patent was submitted and when it was granted, but normally, revisions are submitted if contractual ownerships have been declared. Otherwise the patent would be somewhat useless to the purchasing member. I find it a bit odd.
    .
    While I am pleased to see these new transactions, I must say I am more puzzled now than ever!
    Not that it really matters, it is just that I find it interesting that “the proof is in the pudding” as the old saying goes. (Do not ask me where that saying comes from, I have no idea!)
    .
    Yes, with these announcements and the good work of the MFMP team, I believe there will be a lot of “old school” hard liners sitting in the corner with the dunce hat on in the up coming months. They probably will be still whining though! :0

    • GreenWin

      Bob,
      “The proof of the pudding is in the eating’ is a very old proverb. The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations dates it back to the early 14th century, albeit without offering any supporting evidence for that assertion. The phrase is widely attributed
      to Cervantes in The History of Don Quixote.”
      http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/proof-of-the-pudding.html

      Interesting the phrase is attributed to Quixote. I believe it was the image of Rossi and partner Dr. Sergio Focardi tilting against the windmills of consensus science that somehow moved a dissolute Algore to whisper the words “cold fusion.”

      The “pudding” is in these LENR related patents. And in the (to date) successful test of a commercial E-Cat installation. As our friend Bachole notes often, “The LENR juggernaut rolls on.” At what point does an honest, humble academic come forward and speak the three “W” words consensus science seems incapable of:

      “We Were Wrong.” http://bit.ly/1PBypNq

      • Mark S.

        They die first. I think Kuhn and some early years quantum physicist said something similar. LOL

    • Bob Greenyer

      This is a patent more on the functional design of a reactor that burns suitable fuel – indeed it lists other candidate fuels by other researchers. It is a patent on high temperature design.

      Rossis Patent is the Master as it is based on the core fuel – the novelty of which is having LiAlH4 as hydrogen source and Lithium as fuel

    • Omega Z

      Yes, Bob.
      How do you reconcile all of what appears to be contradictions.

      Consider Industrial heat was created as a Venture Capital(VC) LLC.
      Industrial heat is invested in Leonardo Corp. as Venture Capital.
      Industrial heat is independent, while also a partner of Leonardo.

      Venture Capitalists can hold an awful lot of control over those they invest in. It all comes down to the details agreed upon.
      Almost always, they will know all the details/secrets of an investment.
      They “May” hold the right to designate/license manufactures.
      They “May” hold the right to designate/license to distribute.
      They “May” hold the right to bring in outside expertise.
      They “May” hold the right to distribute work/R&D to outside researchers.
      ———————————————————————-
      I admit, Some of Rossi’s statements confused me at 1st. But then I remembered reading about Lonnie Johnson & his JTEC- A Solid State Energy converter or Thermal Electric Converter.(Note: The JTEC would be Ideal for a Hot-cat if it works as planned)

      Johnson took on the VC- PARC(Xerox) as a partner in it’s development. Johnson still has majority control, but all the above -They “May” hold- applies. Even tho Johnson has majority control, They call almost all the shots.(They control the purse strings)
      ———————————————————————-
      In this manner, Industrial heat is a separate entity,
      But is an invested partner in Leonardo Corp.
      Rossi has majority control of Leonardo(?).
      Rossi works as the Chief Scientist of Industrial heat.
      But Rossi has no ownership in Industrial heat.

      In case you think this is just a convoluted way to explain away the contradictions, I will tell you I was once involved in a partnership of multiple businesses somewhat of this arrangement. Our purposes was to protect one another in case 1 of us developed health issues or died. It left the survivor with options. Call it a poor mans type of LLC. Limited Liability.

      Note: The patent with just Rossi’s name on it was filed prior to Industrial heat partnership. Also, once granted, said patent can be transferred at a latter date.

    • timycelyn

      I did hear a rumour that there is a move to give the ‘hard liners’ a better voice in the future now that all these clearly incorrect results and mistakes by patent departments are coming out everywhere. They are apparently considering teaming up with other groups who try and keep the faith when the rest of us start chasing rainbows.

      I understand that the new grouping will be called: “The Round Earth, manned flight and LENR Debunking Society.”

      Let us all wish that these corageous Guardians of the Truth get the recognition they so justly deserve…..

      😉

      You boy, stop that sniggering at ONCE!

  • radvar

    111 E Hargett St Raleigh, NC 27601 = Cherokee Investment Partners

  • Robyn Wyrick

    I found this on Gizmodo yesterday: A Startup With No Website Just Announced a Major Fusion Breakthrough!!

    http://gizmodo.com/secretive-energy-company-claims-fusion-power-breakthrou-1726782476

    “Tri Alpha Energy says it’s built a machine that can hold a hot blob of plasma steady at 10 million degrees Celsius for five whole milliseconds.”

    “If Tri Alpha’s claim is true, then the company has managed to hold a
    superheated ball of plasma steady for an incredibly long time, in fusion
    terms.”

    LENR is pie in the sky, but claim you have held a “blob of plasma steady at 10 million degrees Celsius for five whole milliseconds” and people crow.

    NOTE: the big news in energy this week: “Tri Alpha made a claim!!!”

    Oh the sad lot of Hot Fusion – credibility without success.

    • SG

      But that was a very warm 5 milliseconds!

      It is sad. Literally hundreds of billions of tax payers dollars over the years.

      Had LENR received a tenth of one percent of that, imagine where we would be.

      • Mike Henderson

        I have come to think of cold fusion as hot fusion on a very tiny scale, spread throughout a grain of metal. The FCC lattice vibrates in ways that creates very tightly compressed areas for very brief instants. These ephemeral spots are extremely hot and high pressure for their brief lifetime. And on average, the metal grain is merely “warm”.

  • Daniel Maris

    This does appear to be a very positive development. The amount of theoretical detail referred to below sounds quite impressive.

  • Owen Geiger

    It sure looks like Rossi is gearing up for commercialization. Hope to see something for sale in 1-2 years.

  • EEStorFanFibb

    Filed or granted? It looks like it was granted today? filed in Feb.

    Publication Date:

    27.08.2015

    International Filing Date:

    20.02.2015

    http://tinyurl.com/nslsqb8

    • SG

      – Filed February 20, 2015
      – Published August 27, 2015
      – Probably not yet granted in any country yet

      • priority date is 2014/02, probably an evolution of a previous unsuccessful applications

  • Obvious

    Durapot 810 named as ceramic sealant.

  • US_Citizen71

    ‘The fission of lithium to helium (and tritium) by Cockroft and Walton in 1932 was the first artificial fission reaction, in this case induced by proton bombardment.Li-7 + proton  2He-4 + 17 MeV’ – http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Current-and-Future-Generation/Lithium/

    I think this is what Rossi has made self sustaining.

    • Bob Greenyer

      It is the same reaction – but no tritium

      The Nickel is the 1H particle accelerator – as per Piantelli.

      This is not Widom Larson

      • US_Citizen71

        No new physics needed, really old nuclear physics explains it. Wonderful times! 🙂

        • Bob Greenyer

          Well – actually, there are several new uses of physics needed to understand how you can make nickel into a 1H particle accelerator – but none that break the “Laws” of physics. Nickel also splits the H2, not that it needs to with Li+ H- in direct contact with Ni.

          • US_Citizen71

            It must not take a large amount of energy input to cause the reaction under certain circumstances. I don’t think there ever has been a major effort to build lithium fission reactors, as uranium provided more power. They were on the right track in 1932 and just didn’t know it. The nickel effect will get explained, we only figured why a honey bee can fly about a decade ago and we’ve been watching them for thousands of years.

            • Bob Greenyer

              Piantelli has already explained the Nickel effect. It is a mini Proton (1H) accelerator.

              In my opinion, very much more so if it is pure 62Ni – as it does not want any of the Protons (to make neutrons) itself

              This is why a reactor will improve with time.

              • Mats002

                I tip my Piantelli hat!

    • Mats002

      The magic is in the initial part of the Rossi Effect process, probably from underlying physics that will take decades to understand.

      Nonetheless – we have a new clean powerful fire not more dangerous than the old one.

      Today I am a happy ape!

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Who is Thomas Barker Dameron?

  • Wishful Thinking Energy

    Helpful for replicators:

    Although the sealing members 14 may provide an air-tight seal, in some embodiments, the sealing members 14 are sufficient to retain the reactive material, but do not necessarily maintain an air-tight seal. An air-tight seal may be used when the reactive material includes the addition of a gas, such as pressurized hydrogen; however, in some embodiments, the reactive material does not require a pressurized gas, and an air-tight seal is not necessary. For example, nickel hydride may be used as the reactive material with or without a pressurized gas. In particular embodiments, the reactive material is not sealed and may even be in contact or in fluid communication with the outside environment. An unsealed device may be easier to manufacture, transport, and maintain. Moreover, reactive materials that do not include pressurized hydrogen may be safer to use than those that utilize pressurized hydrogen. One or more criterion configured for a control system may be modified based on the reactive material. In an embodiment, a control system may determine and control sealing based on information identifying the reactive material. Sealing of a reactor may be altered during operation based on input form a sensor, a timer, and/or any attribute accessible to a control system.

    • Bob Greenyer

      I bought lanthanumNickelHydride last year – Bob Higgins has it.

      • Ged

        Nickel hydride… huh! Makes since as then the nickel has its very own hydrogen. Wonder why no one (of the open science sorts) has tried that before.

        • Bob Greenyer

          I bought some and negotiated deals on bulk last year and encouraged the team – but time resources were tight and we had claims to test.

    • Obvious

      Direct current also claimed.

  • US_Citizen71

    Priority date on the patent is February 21st of last year. I don’t think it was just filed more like the 18 month unpublished period ended and the patent office auto published it.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Details more specifically the structure and materials used in the HotCat and also confirms the LiAlH4 and Ni with Lithium being the main source of energy released.

    Founded on Lugano Report

    Recognises the work of others in the field

  • Buck

    This looks to be a patent incorporating the Lugano Report. . . . Wow. How are the reviewers going to digest the notion of nuclear transmutation at “cold” temperatures?

    This will take a long time to read, though it looks like the main text is “only” the first 49 pages.

    • Obvious

      Any luck finding the US application? I was hoping for better quality images.

      • Buck

        If you select the “Documents” tab you should find the US application just above IH’s International Patent Application.

        After doing a quick scan, it (US patent application) looks to also be an application based upon the Lugano Report

        • Obvious

          Yes, the original document doesn’t really look much like a patent. So the construction photos are new.

          • Curbina

            The US patent has 157 Pages! Hefty!

            • Obvious

              Practically 157 pages of recycled Lugano

        • GreenWin

          Buck, I got a real LOL on seeing the 157 page total. Clearly some of the IH financial muscle has gone into convincing USPTO to open their myopic eyes. From a global politic view this makes a lot of sense as China and India will proceed regardless of U.S. policy to ignore.

          ‘Scuse me while I go to the lobby for more popcorn… This thing’s a blockbuster. 🙂

          • Buck

            GW,
            I’m with you.

            What I find truly strange about this whole experience is the difficulty of explaining it for the first time to a relative with a serious sincere attitude. They are polite as relatives can be when coming together for the holidays. Yet, there is that hint of skepticism in the face of the “new fire”, the greatest invention and discovery in the last 5000 years that will change the world.

            Regarding IH, China, and India, I think we are on the same page. Right or wrong . . . I see this playing out like a game of chess or the Chines game of Go. Playing the strategy with the goal of transforming 7-8% of the global economy away from the existing energy infrastructure.

            And, I assume President Obama knows but is waiting for the right moment which may or may not occur prior to the 2016 presidential election. If it happens before the election, then I see it playing out like a Frank Capra movie. That should really boost the worldwide popcorn demand!

            • GreenWin

              Buck, completely understand the relative analogy. It is a trying endeavor for the best of diplomats. Greatly appreciate your viewpoint and wisdom over the years. Indeed, should it play out prior to election we could mimic the triumph of Bedford Falls. However, regardless of time, the challenge is to remind us all that it should, and can be, “A Wonderful Life.”

            • Paul

              Yes, Obama knows very well…

          • Mats002

            ^^

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Wow, Frank you are fast, I just stopped typing.