Unified Gravity Corporation Inviting Replicators to Peer-Review Hydrogen-Lithium Fusion Process

Unified Gravity Corporation is a Morgan Hill, California company that claims a method of creating energy through a proton-lithium fusion method using hydrogen and nickel as fuel, for which they have applied for a US patent.

UGC’s stated mission “replace hydrocarbon-based energy with affordable, clean and safe fusion energy all around the world”

I haven’t visited their website for a while — http://www.unifiedgravity.com/ — and now I have found that they state they are “open for peer review” and are in a position to help researchers replicate their process.

Here’s the relevant section from their site:

We are fully aware our work cannot be explained by the current state of mainstream physics. Despite this, we were able to reproduce positive results in labs at the University of Louisiana, Lafayette and the University of North Texas with further experiments at our Morgan Hill laboratory. Because our fusion technology is patent pending, we are open for peer-review of our experimental tests. We encourage universities, institutions, and companies to explore and reproduce our results as we believe our technology holds the key to unlocking a paradigm shift in the way we create energy.

We are happy to setup meetings with those who are serious about replication assistance of our fusion process.

So for groups or individuals interested in verifying LENR, this invitation could be another opportunity to do so.

  • Gerard McEk

    Looks like another job for MFMP 🙂

    • Fibber McGourlic

      Bob, are you listening?

      • Bob Greenyer

        We may already have Skip on his way there in around 10 days. I will be reaching out to them.

  • gdaigle

    On the main page of their Unified Gravity web site is a link to their paper on Gravity Theory. They state that Unified Gravity was established in 2007 in order to experimentally prove the Lipinski’s theory and also to verify if it can be used for efficient power generation. The Lipinski’s theory is that gravity acts instantaneously.

    Since it was recently found through LIGO that gravity travels at or nearly at the speed of light, the theory that forms the basis of their technology seems incorrect. That isn’t to say that this disproves their technology but since instantaneous gravity and their theory is mentioned prominently in the patent filed, it may leave the patent open to being challenged.

    • Dave Lawton

      Did not Newton say bodies are pushed together.Push not pull.

    • Dr. Mike

      An incorrect theory is not a basis for being able to challenge a patent. Because the theory is questionable relative to mainstream physics, they included the results of their experimental work in their patent application. The experimental work is quite convincing that their invention produces the heat as claimed. To challenge their patent one would need to show their results are incorrect. The fact that they are seeking peer review of their work is quite favorable for the odds that they have something that really works.

    • Zephir

      Alternative (and IMO way more plausible explanation) is that the effect observed by LIGO aren’t gravitatonal waves predicted by general relativity, but ipso-facto violating it.

  • Ophelia Rump

    What a coincidence of timing with Dottore Rossi having started a patent disqualification war. Let the games begin, this is now a blood sport.

    I hope you have revealed enough not to be knocked out in the first round Dottore.

  • NCY

    Wrong… LIGO was recently used to pinpoint a kilonova (merger between two neutron stars), which was then picked up by optical telescopes within a couple hours. I’m afraid that gravitational waves have been confirmed quite soundly.

  • Axil Axil

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO

    LIGO operates two gravitational wave observatories in unison: the LIGO Livingston Observatory (30°33′46.42″N 90°46′27.27″W) in Livingston, Louisiana, and the LIGO Hanford Observatory, on the DOE Hanford Site (46°27′18.52″N 119°24′27.56″W), located near Richland, Washington. These sites are separated by 3,002 kilometers (1,865 miles). Since gravitational waves are expected to travel at the speed of light, this distance corresponds to a difference in gravitational wave arrival times of up to ten milliseconds. Through the use of trilateration, the difference in arrival times helps to determine the source of the wave.[56]

    Detection of G waves by two widely separated sites with speed of light triangulation showing simultaneous light emissions from the G wave source proves this tech for me.

    • Warthog

      I remember back in my grad school days, wandering around the LSU Physics department machine shop and seeing the first prototypes of LIGO detector components being built. Glad to see that the very long experimental effort has paid off.

  • Dr. Mike

    Although Unified Gravity’s work can not be explained by mainstream physics, perhaps their results can be explained by Randell Mills’ physics. His modelling of protons and neutrons would seem to favor UGC’s results of a proton being able to fuse with Li7 at proton energies of less than 1KeV. It would be interesting if Mills would predict a minimum energy required to fuse a proton and Li7 based on his models.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      LiH has a vibrational frequency of 1405 cm^-1. Could this be the/an infrared, IR stretching frequency of a covalent sigma bond between the Li and the H, Li~H?

      http://cccbdb.nist.gov/exp2

      Could this oscillation allow the Li and the H to get close enough to tunnel and fuse?

      Li(7)~p > Be(8)* > 2 He(4) 17.3 MeV

      http://disq.us/p/16jmink

      • Zephir

        See aso Lithium plus proton Be-8 transition implies exotic addition to the standard particle zoo The beryllium-8 nuclei are elongated (as you may guess, two stable double magic alpha particles prefer to co-exist independently within Be-8, so that the resulting structure resembles dumbbell or binary star system rather than sphere), which opens the way for low-dimensional physics, based on shielding of longitudinal waves of vacuum. The Yukawa force interactions along connection line of such an elongated nuclei gets enforced, which promotes the formation of new bosons of force. The long distance analogy of this behavior are for example filaments of dark matter and/or Allais effect during solar eclipses.

        https://i.imgur.com/169d46L.gif

        • Alan DeAngelis

          and I was also thinking that the pair of electrons between the Li and H that make up the covalent bond would also reduce the Coulomb barrier. (think muon catalyzed fusion)

    • Mark Underwood

      Mills has his own classical version of tunnelling which would allow for (normal) fusion. But he has repeatedly denied cold fusion is possible, always citing the coulomb barrier. Very conventional that way. Since Mills knows his own physics better than anyone I highly doubt that his physics would explain UG’s alleged results of lithium-proton fusion (and subsequent fission to 2 fast Helium) at such low (hundreds of eV) energies.

      • Dr. Mike

        Thanks for the Information on Mills’ theory. My thought was that Mills’ models of the proton and neutron would lead to a coulomb barrier that is very directional allowing protons and Li7 to fuse at low energies when they had the proper orientation.

  • Dr. Mike

    The August 17, 2017 event was not only detected by both LIGO detectors in the US, it was also detected by the VIRGO detector in Italy. The two LIGO detectors had previously detected at least 3 other events. Your statement: ” It is hard to materialistically imagine a wave propagating without any medium” does not make any sense at all. Does light not propagate through a vacuum?

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Maybe you misunderstood the meaning of „replication“? Experiments that are under full control of scientists can (and should) be replicated, but how would one do that in case of an individual cosmic event? Regarding the latter, data from different instruments can be compared (which has been done). Further confirmation of the general assumptions will only be possible as soon as a similar event can be observed.

  • Deano

    Wrong… LIGO was recently used to pinpoint a kilonova (merger between two neutron stars), which was then picked up by optical telescopes within a couple hours. I’m afraid that gravitational waves have been confirmed quite soundly.

  • georgehants

    Was Einstein WRONG about gravity? Controversial new theory that could rewrite physics passes its first test
    Einstein’s theory of gravity cannot account for everything in our universe
    So scientists have speculated that an invisible ‘dark matter’ exists to fill the gaps
    Dark matter particles have been searched for but have never been found
    But a new theory rewrites theories of gravity, claiming dark matter does not exist
    This has been tested for the first time, and the first evidence supports the theory
    A theory published earlier this year claims our understanding of gravity, that was first proposed by
    Einstein, could be completely wrong.
    Now for the first time, this controversial theory has been tested experimentally and has held its ground.
    An independent study of the distribution of gravity around more than 30,000 galaxies found evidence to back the theory – and if confirmed, it could rewrite physics entirely.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4047500/Was-Einstein-WRONG-gravity-Controversial-new-theory-rewrite-physics-passes-test.html

    • Max Nozin

      Or this http://emdrive.wiki/Mike_McCulloch%27s_MiHsC_Theory
      I believe he also calls this Casimir effect on a galactic scale.
      Would be fun and shame to see how ether is re-discovered again after a century of denial.

      • Omega Z

        I’ve been around long enough to realize that Re-discovered is a common theme of science. More today then ever. So much is discovered it gets lost in the noise.

        There is also the issue of much science becoming a multi discipline realm and our scientific community isn’t organized for this. One field meets a roadblock that may have been overcome in another field. Yet neither is aware of the other. Possibly we need a new “Dewey Decimal Classification” system where multi discipline connections can easily be found.

        • georgehants

          Omega, as I have been saying for years, science, economics and politics are all run with laughable incompetence and stupidity just to give advantage to the wrong people.

          • Omega Z

            My post was about the fact we are producing very large amounts of research data. So much so that we can’t keep track of it. Or that answers to problems are lost in the noise of so much data. Also that research in 1 scientific discipline may have answers for another scientific discipline is not realized.

            My post points out that we need a new cataloging system that can help connect scientists with answers that may already exist in another scientists research. There is no one to blame for this. It is something that gradually happened over decades as there is more and more scientists producing R&D data. We merely need to create a better way to catalog and disseminate the info.

            We also need to encourage scientists from multi disciplines to work together as more of the science requires this. The science is just becoming more complex involving multiple fields..

          • Here, we should also note the growing capabilities of systems like IBM’s Watson and Google’s Deep Mind.

            Most of us would have learned about Watson via how it beat the best human contestants at Jeopardy but since then it has greatly expanded its range of uses. A snapshot of these is here:

            http://www.wired.co.uk/article/ibm-watson-artificial-intelligence

            – Perhaps the most relevant for us is the cancer treatment application where Watson is able to read the thousands of papers published every day and, from them, advise on a particular case for a particular patient. An AI version of Hugh Laurie’s character, Dr House, if you like.

            Extrapolating from that particular application for a particular branch of medicine, it is not difficult to guess that Watson or its superior successors should ultimately be able to retrospectively read and then keep up with every scientific paper in every discipline you could name.

            I’d say that by “only” reading and “understanding” the abstracts of every paper ever written, that may well be enough for a sufficiently polymathic human to take the particular set of facts and insights for any issue that Watson might report back from there. We might call that new capability “Artificial Serendipity”

  • gdaigle

    After the gravity-wave alert was sent out by LIGO and Virgo, the operators of the Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope noticed that they had spotted a relatively faint burst that had occurred 1.74 ± 0.05 seconds after the collision. So GWs do arrive (barely) ahead of photons. See http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/aa920c/pdf

    • NCY

      Yes. Light travels slower when traveling through a gas, solid or liquid. (i.e. the speed of light in a vacuum is not the same as the speed of light in air, water or glass. While it might seem that the space between us and that galaxy is empty, it is in fact not completely empty, and the thin scattering of atoms (a very dispersed gas) largely accounts for the very small time discrepancy.

  • They are “open for peer review” since about over a year:
    https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/4666-unified-gravity-corp-new-website-open-for-serious-replications/

    Nothing heard so far.

  • Nico

    Maybe you misunderstood the meaning of „replication“? Experiments that are under full control of scientists can (and should) be replicated, but how would one do that in case of an individual cosmic event? Regarding the latter, data from different instruments can be compared (which has been done). Further confirmation of the general assumptions will only be possible as soon as a similar event can be observed.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Frank, it appears that you have a bot on board. This is a ‘replication’ of my comment below.

      • Frank Acland

        yes, it is something I have to deal with

  • Omega Z

    “earth expanding outwardly”

    That’s good news for those in the Realty business as long as the bubble doesn’t expand so much it bursts. 🙂

  • Jouni Tuomela

    Please do read about spacers, which can be activated by some lasers and ultrasonics. Creating then stimulated emission inside living cells. This is the key in LENR too, to create proper nanoscopic conditions.
    “Labelling efficiency of cancer and endothelial cells by spasers was estimated with PA flow cytometry integrated with fluorescent flow cytometry33. Briefly, system was built on a microscope platform and customized high-pulse-repetition-rate nanosecond and continuous wave lasers with the following parameters: (1) wavelength 532 nm; pulse width 8 ns; pulse rate 10 kHz; pulse energy 10 μJ; and (2) continuous wave diode laser with a wavelength of 488 nm and power of 50 mW (IQ1C45(488–60)G26, Power Tech., Alexander, AR). Laser beams were delivered to the flow system through a customized optical system with a combination of spherical and cylindrical lenses forming a linear beam with size of 5 μm × 2 mm on a quartz capillary with the size of 200 μm × 2 mm and flow rate of 1 ml min−1. The PA signals were acquired by an unfocussed ultrasound transducer (2.25 MHz, V-323-SM; Olympus-NTD, Waltham, MA, US) and further amplified (for example, by preamplifier 5662B, Panametrics), digitized (custom AD484, high-speed digitizer, 4DSP, Inc.), recorded and analysed by customized software. A × 40 micro-objective (NA 0.65; Olympus) was used for collection of fluorescence light from cells.”

    “Abstract
    Understanding cell biology greatly benefits from the development of advanced diagnostic probes. Here we introduce a 22-nm spaser (plasmonic nanolaser) with the ability to serve as a super-bright, water-soluble, biocompatible probe capable of generating stimulated emission directly inside living cells and animal tissues. We have demonstrated a lasing regime associated with the formation of a dynamic vapour nanobubble around the spaser that leads to giant spasing with emission intensity and spectral width >100 times brighter and 30-fold narrower, respectively, than for quantum dots. The absorption losses in the spaser enhance its multifunctionality, allowing for nanobubble-amplified photothermal and photoacoustic imaging and therapy. Furthermore, the silica spaser surface has been covalently functionalized with folic acid for molecular targeting of cancer cells. All these properties make a nanobubble spaser a promising multimodal, super-contrast, ultrafast cellular probe with a single-pulse nanosecond excitation for a variety of in vitro and in vivo biomedical applications.”

    https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15528

  • Dave Lawton

    “You have to look to the Aether for the source of all energy”.Oliver Heaviside.He also preempted Casimir known for the Casimir effect by years.

  • Dave Lawton

    Well I am just repeating what Newton said in Optics.He said bodies are impelled together.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    I found a DFT (density function theory) paper that shows that LiH may have some covalent bond properties. http://disq.us/p/16j7thj

    • Zephir

      The polar or covalent character is never solely perfect, but LiH is white salt soluble in many polar solvents (DMF, HMPA), whereas covalent metal hydrides are grey metalic conductors.

      • Alan DeAngelis

        Yeah, but never the less, it might be worth it to irradiate LiH with a laser tuned to 1405 cm^-1.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    I agree that ‘catalyzed’ Li-p fusion might be the most plausible explanation for the so-called “Rossi effect”. Since the Li-p reaction is well known and documented since the 1930’s, it would be relatively easy to convince mainstream physicists, provided that the mechanism of catalysis can be conclusively explained. Most likely, all the necessary knowledge is already there and only the pieces have to be put together.

    BTW if Li-p works, 11B-p might be an additional possibility. 6Li-p would produce 3He, which should (although not easily) be detectable. 3He and 6Li could produce new protons and thus enhance the process (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aneutronic_fusion#Candidate_reactions )

    • Zephir

      It’s not so simple, because Piantelli did start his experiments with A) protium, not deuterium B) without any lithium or high voltage discharge in system at all. IMO each LENR could have it’s own mechanism (electron capture, neutron decay, etc..) – only the ways, in which the Coulomb barrier gets overcomed may be similar.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        Agreed – there are various examples of experiments without lithium. However, a rather simple, conformist approach might help to arouse interest from the part of ‘established’ science.

  • Gerard McEk

    I am impressed by this patent, although it looks more like an research report. In some cases massive powers were achieved. These calculated output powers (based on He ions count) should have made the chamber quite hot. I did not find any indication it did.

    From technology point of view this is more complex than the QX technology of Andrea Rossi. Both are having the same energy generation: Li6/7 -> He3/4 + MeV though.
    I am sure that Andrea will not agree with the theory behind this as the Unified Gravity is not widely accepted. Nevertheless, if their theory confirms that a p-Li fusion reaction can occur at around 222 eV instead of 300-700 keV as should be the case if just the coulomb repel force would be in play, then maybe UG is on the right way!

    I look really forward when MFMP is going to do some replication of this.

    • Axil Axil

      “I am impressed by this patent, although it looks more like an research report. In some cases massive powers were achieved. These calculated output powers (based on He ions count) should have made the chamber quite hot. I did not find any indication it did.”

      In LENR, oftentimes transmutation appears without the production of any heat.

  • Zephir

    Yes, but I don’t know, what he is doing right now. Probably some secret research near Moscow..

  • Zephir

    Do you mean prof. Podkletnov or McCulloch? I’m well aware of both but I lack fresh sources about Podkletnov’s research…

  • Zephir

    Stoyan Sarge device is interesting and i think, it has many things in common with Biefeld-Brown asymmetric capacitor effect. But it also exhibits a corona, which would push a ion wind even inside the sealed glass tube. The reactive force would introduce a momentum to the tube even without any electrogravitic effect. The problem is, Sarge doesn’t demonstrate any permanent thrust with his device, only wobbling as a result of current impulses and his device still contains movable parts (the air trapped around coil inside the tube). But such an arrangement cannot serve as a conclusive evidence of violation of momentum conservation. You can create similar effect when you’re swaying on swing.

    • Max Nozin

      Was there a video of the same device spring on a carousel?

      • Zephir

        Yep – but not with sealed glass tubes. Such a carousel could be still propelled by common lifter effect…

  • Dave Lawton

    Then he also points to Newtons optics were Newton describes the Aether.Maybe the Salvation army band was playing again outside his house and he became distracted.

  • Karl Venter

    Anybody been on their page lately
    Nice picture 2 of them thats all?

  • Gerard McEk

    I agree and they can only hope that MFMP will do that for them. If they do and the result is positive, then they owe MFMP (and the LENR community) a lot!
    Ant other possibility is that a company does it without their knowing and if they find a positive result, they might be willing to buy the patent (if the patent is not opposed).
    I am not sure how much their patent differs of the Rossi/Holmlid patents. The methodology to reach LENR differs for these three developers, but fuel seems more or less the same.