Idea to Publicly Share LENR Technology (Gerold.s)

The following post was first posted on this thread by Gerold.s; I post it here as it might be useful to give it more visibility.

[Response to a post by Axil]Thanks for your input.

It seems to be clear that the fuel (we will probably start with the LION diadisks approach) setup will define to great extend a potential feasible reactor design.

I am a teacher with engineering background and work for an educational organization which has the resources and infrastructure to design and manufacture a LENR device.

What we are lacking is the deeper knowledge of LENR science and background info in order to come up with requirements to be incorporated into a design which will have a high LENR replication probability and sufficient safety measures.

We have the idea to work together with MFMP or others, who are willing to publicly share LENR technology.
We want to design and manufacture a few prototypes, which we will than hand over to MFMP or others for testing.

As you have seen, we are currently working on design variants for a hot type (dry cell) LENR reactor, which
should fulfil following requirements (our current definition):

• simple and cost effective design
e.g. use of available, industrial components (e.g. high performance ceramic glow plug normally used in diesel engines as a heat source)
Tmax of heat source = 1350°C for 60 seconds; approx. 1100°C for constant operation -> is that enough?
the water coolant flow should not exceed approx. 80°C so we would be able to use
standard available high temperature PP piping to design the outer reactor body containing water as coolant.

• safety
e.g. core reactor material, which is in in touch with the LENR active material (e.g. LION diadisks) will be tungsten, the diadisks can be embedded in a powders of graphite, boron nitride, others?
An option would probably also be to use PB as a “liquid metal core”, which melts above approx. 300°C as a primary moderator fluid containing the LENR active material (diadisks) with additives / additional fuel;
this would lead to a better heat exchange to the inner core structure made of tungsten and act as an additional
shielding against radiation and also to thermalize radiation

Is there a minimum temperature, where the LENR reaction might start? What is the expected max. temperature in the inner core?
Expected internal pressure?
Sufficient external water cooling

• high LENR reproduction probability
the inner core structure is replace- and reusable; different activation energy
sources necessary? (only heat not enough at least for diadisks? arc discharge, RF activation, laser,…) ,other important aspects?

I am aware that some relevant parameters can only be identified by experiments, but maybe you or others from the community could give some more concrete input.

For an offline discussion I can provide my e-mail.


  • Max Nozin

    It is great that ranks of lenr experimentalist are growing.
    As for the ”deep understanding of lenr’ please listen to this podcast and save your time searching for the answer:

    In summary:
    – to this day we don’t have a single working theory
    – none of the researchers are capturing complete data to validate the theory i.e. full fuel/Ash, emissions
    – we don’t even have a confirmation of how much if any of H2 being consumed .

  • Ophelia Rump

    This concept should be extended to as many players as wish to participate.
    MFMP would do well to formalize a corporate partners program and promote it.

    • Bob Greenyer

      We are already working with Gerold.

      • Ophelia Rump

        Sweet! You guys rock.

  • Gerard McEk

    We very much welcome your help with this!
    As long as there is not a proven reactor with a considerable COP demonstrated and replicated most of us are just guessing what to do. After we are able to reliably replicate a working reactor we can focus on improvement and theory by finding out what preparation of the fuel and electrical values add/fail to the reactor’s performance.
    Working together with MFMP is very much appreciated, although I personally have no idea where they are heading to. The strange radiation found is certainly intriguing and melting of matter that couldn’t be melted at the assumed temperatures locally, like also SAFIRE found recently is really groundbreaking. But is it LENR? I personally think it is, but does the same happen in the Rossi reactor?
    Thanks for your input.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Heading in the direction the evidence is pointing to.

  • georgehants

    Wonderful news, a scientific education organisation willing to be open-minded and teach students real science, unbelievable. (excluding the brilliant Quantum guys)
    Wish Gerold, Bob, Lion and everybody concerned the best in their efforts to help humanity and not just themselves.

    Bob, still looking forward to my late Christmas present on “O” day.

    • sam

      he he he

  • Axil Axil

    Gerold is using a lot of tungsten in his reactor design. This is a mistake. Tungsten is a wonderful food for the LENR reaction because most of its stable isotopes have zero nuclear spin.

    180W 179.946701 (5) 0.12 (1) 0
    182W 181.948202 (3) 26.50 (16) 0
    183W 182.950220 (3) 14.31 (4) 1/2
    184W 183.950928 (3) 30.64 (2) 0
    186W 185.954357 (4) 28.43 (19) 0

    On the other hand nitrogen is a LENR poison and will resist being affected by the LENR reaction. The stable isotope of nitrogen has a large nuclear spin: 14N 99.632 spin = 1.

    Boron has an even better resistance to the transmutation affects of the LENR reaction, Its stable isotopes have a very large nuclear spin.

    10B 19.9 (7) 3
    11B 80.1 (7) 3/2

    Boron nitride is a compound that is highly resistant to the transmutation effects of the LENR reaction because it is highly MRI active.

    LENR uses magnetism to destabilize subatomic particles. A highly MRI active compound will convert the energy in the magnetic flux lines to RF radiation. This magnetic to RF energy conversion will weaken the LENR reaction and therefore will protect the highly MRI active compound from being eaten away by the LENR reaction.

    • gerold.s

      Hi Axil,
      Thanks for your input.
      The reason why I suggest tungsten is because it can withstand great heat, acts as a neutron reflector and can shield radiation. I was not aware that it is actually a good fuel component until I have seen your post on SAFIRE.

      However I would be comfortable using a metal component which can be machined by a CNC lathe easily not using ceramics or boron.

      What If we apply an industrial coating (e.g. CBN cubical boron nitride) also used for cutting tools to protect the surface of the inner reactor core made of tungstun or high quality steel?


      • Axil Axil

        Regarding: “The reason why I suggest tungsten is because it can withstand great heat, acts as a neutron reflector and can shield radiation.”

        The LENR reaction does not produce neutrons or high energy radiation, so tungsten is not effective or needed in this regard.
        Coatings are not functional with regards to LENR. The LENR reaction is highly penetrating. In SAFIRE, the LENR active magnetic flux tube penetrated into tungsten at least .25 inches into the tungsten, so that the inside of the entire tungsten probe was affected by the LENR reaction. The surface of the tungsten probe was unaffected because the magnetic moment of the tungsten nucleus was affected by some surface based mechanisms, probably spin orbit coupling.
        The LION reactor design is very simple and effective. If I had my druthers as a suggestion, I would replace the alumina tube with a boron nitride tube, I would use a heat source that does not produce magnetic fields and provides steady, controllable, and easily adjustable heat, and also enclose the LENR reaction inside a magnetic bottle to keep the LENR active agent inside the tube, and preferably along the center line of the tube, and the muons that the reaction generates enclosed along the center line of the tube. The goal is to keep the LENR reaction confined to a narrow line away from the tube walls and make the tube big enough to keep the magnetic flux tubes that the solitons produce away from the tube walls. A cooling system should be between the tube and the magnets that generate the magnetic bottle to keep the magnets cool. The heater could be implemented by applying current to the walls of the Boron nitride tube since boron nitrite is an insulator. I would fill the tube with copper powder to provide fuel to the LENR active agent and conduct heat to the agent. Copper might produce radiation from muon catalyzed fusion so carbon powder might be required as fuel and a heat conductor to the diadisks.

        Argon gas, a good conductor of heat, might also be an alternative to copper powder.

        • gerold.s

          Thanks for your interesting Suggestion…When I understand your proposal correct, you propose a magnetic bottle which keeps the LENR active material floating in the center (along center line) in an argon atmosphere.

          + how could such a magnetic bottle be constructed fairly simple?
          using permanent magnets? SmCo magnets?
          Would a halbach array of magnets warped around a metal tube be a good approach?

          +”The heater could be implemented by applying current to the walls of the Boron nitride tube since boron nitrite is an insulator”
          How would that work? Wouldn’t you need a wire which will be passed thru by a current and than heat is produced?
          + Copper and carbon are not magnetic. Who would that stay in centre of a magnetic bottle?

          • Axil Axil

            Regarding:”+ how could such a magnetic bottle be constructed fairly simple?
            using permanent magnets? SmCo magnets?
            Would a halbach array of magnets warped around a metal tube be a good approach?”



            Two strong wire wrapped magnetic coils form the ends of the magnetic mirror. This will keep the negative muons from escaping from the ends of the tube.

            A wire wrapped coil or metal foil cover that is negatively charged at high voltage would keep the negative muons from escaping out the sides of the tube.

            Some wire wrapping around the sides of the tube that will provide magnetic confinement is helpful.



            This magnetic bottle can be implemented in one continuous circuit using one continuous run of wire. The end coils are much stronger magnetically than the tube wrap. That means that the end coils have a lot more wire turns than the body wrap.

            The charged foil (Penning trap) may not be required, the magnetic bottle may be good enough.

            If you are using the LookingForHeat development system, then the tube wire wrap may not be needed since the heater coils provide the longitudinal magnetic field confinement. This heater field confinement is true only if the heater is not intermittent, that is, the heater is not off occasionally.

          • Martijn

            To Gerold and Axil:
            Any ideas on the opposite route: creating a wet or semi wet reactor? Like the electroplating setup of Suhas?
            It wouldn’t have to suffer from containment issues. Don’t know if it would fire up the LENR well enough. The diamonds could be an interesting addition?

          • Axil Axil

            A wet system limits the amount of heat pumping that is applied to the system. A dry system is limited by the amount of heat pumping that can be applied before the structure of the reactor melts. A dry system in which light is used for pumping allows an open ended amount of light that can be applied to the system.

          • Martijn

            Thank you for your reply.
            Applying heat to the system wouldn’t be my intention. It would be a cool system below the boiling point of water.
            What I’m saying is that since the days of Fleischmann, Pons, Miley, Mizuno etc people are using submerged systems (electrolysis). Those systems sometimes worked but in such minute ways the inventors & scientists had great difficulties showing the transmutations occurred and of course the pollutant discussion was added to the melee.
            ‘We’ later learned surface structures play an important part and now diamond seem to be a nice addition. Adding diamonds to the electrode hasn’t been tried as far as I know with electrolysis setups, so that could be interesting.
            Also, Suhas’s setup was not a submerged system but a system of fluids pumped over electrodes resulting in a mix of air and water (hence semi-wet). What struck me was the simplicity of the system while still yielding the transmutations: similar in simplicity to the LION reactor. Perhaps it’s possible to come up with a similar simple design to test, break and run again as the nice Model T kit, but in this case the semi wet version.
            Would you recon that would be worth looking into? Your opinions would be greatly appreciated!

            Benefits could be:
            Electrical system driving LENR rather than a heat system
            Vision: less shielding needed would mean you could look into the running reactor
            Adding Light, RF, Ultrasound etc is quite easy
            You can easily add chemical elements to the fray by dissolving salts in the water or adding some heavy water

            Thanks to MFMP/Bob we know we can use a simple microscope to scan for surface features indicating there is an activity. That doesn’t prove a thing scientifically but it’s a quick test for eliminating(!) recipes that don’t work. A lot cheaper and faster than running materials through a SEM every time.

          • gerold.s

            I agree to axil and also to bruce. I think a step by step approach would be best. Use a simple setup and try to deliberatly create a meltdown by heat pumping. Next step. If there is an effect try to control it with light pumping and magnetic containment. other options? By the way boron nitrade is a very interesting material. Thanks to axil. I will modify my design and post it again. Goal: modular setup to be reused for next step: light pumping. Step one – heat pumping for creating a meltdown.

          • Axil Axil

            A wet system requires the use of heavy water. This is expensive in the amounts that you would need. The system would need to operate for a month at least before any results were generated. You would not want to boil off all the heavy water so your system would need to be closed like a distillation unit so that you could recover the heavy water that you were boiling off.

            A closed system would also keep the LENR active agent inside the unit. You would also want to install a plastic bottle somewhere in the distillation loop so that you could look for strange radiation tracks in the plastic that the LENR active agent would produce.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Axil,

            Not so.

            The SPAWAR codeposited wet LENR reactors were tiny, very low cost and produced instant excess heat.

            Please watch the entire video and learn how proper LENR scientific research is done and how they produced many peer reviewed papers in a time when LENR was toxic to your career.


          • Axil Axil

            What is “not so”…heavy water is not expensive and so is codeposited palladium. How much did the cost of the government funded SPAWAR research cost? How many LION reactor experiments can be done with the funds that just one of these wet experiments cost?

          • Engineer48

            Hi Axil,

            Here Frank is holding their cell. About 25x25x40mm.


            Cell is only filled wirh D2O about 50%.


            Many groups have replicated rhe SPAWAR LENR cell and obtained the SPAWAR results.

          • Engineer48

            Here are the slides from the SPAWAR presentation:


          • Axil Axil

            Regarding: “+”The heater could be implemented by applying current to the walls of the Boron nitride tube since boron nitrite is an insulator”
            How would that work? Wouldn’t you need a wire which will be passed thru by a current and than heat is produced?”






            Product Description
            Boron nitride is a chemical compound with chemical formula BN, consisting of equal numbers of boron and nitrogen atoms.

            Boron nitride is not found in nature and is therefore produced synthetically from boric acid or boron trioxide. The initial product is amorphous BN powder, which is converted to crystalline h-BN by heating in nitrogen flow at temperatures above 1500 °C. c-BN is made by annealing h-BN powder at higher temperatures, under pressures above 5 GPa.

            Because of excellent thermal and chemical stability, boron nitride ceramics are traditionally used as parts of high-temperature equipment. Boron nitride has a great potential in nanotechnology. Nanotubes of BN can be produced that have a structure similar to that of carbon nanotubes.

            Boron Nitride
            Technical Boron Nitride Features:

            1.High thermal conductivity

            2.Low thermal expansion

            3.Good thermal shock resistance

            4.High electrical resistance

            5.Low dielectric constant and loss tangent

            6.Microwave transparency

            7.Non toxic

            8.Easily machined – non abrasive and lubricious

            9.Chemically inert

            10.Not wet by most molten metals

          • Axil Axil

            Regrding: “+ Copper and carbon are not magnetic. Who would that stay in centre of a magnetic bottle?”

            The UDH must stay in the center line to protect the reactor walls. The powder will find its way to the center line through gravity.

            LENR converts matter to energy E=MC2 at efficiency. If all the matter in the center line is converted, then the total power output capacity of the reactor would be in terawatts or more.

            In addition, each time the reactor is turned off the powder would repack.

            But a gas will solve any such issue.

      • Axil Axil


        If you want to avoid all the problems that have been encountered in LENR, tour basic approach is wrong. Any reactor you build will meltdown.

        In the E-Cat reactor design, for many years Rossi had been using heat to pump the LENR reaction. When he did this, heat produces unsolvable control problems in that meltdowns would happen sooner or later.

        But in the Qx design, he uses light to pump the LENR reaction. Now, light goes in and heat comes out. Now there is no connection between the heat input and heat output. In the QX, stop the light and the LENR reaction stops. Now in the QX, control is easy, The Qx is essentially a high intensity light. The QX is basically a HID (high intensity discharge) light where RF drives the production of light. That HID generated light pumps the LENR reaction. Stop the RF and the associated light pumping and LENR also stops; no more meltdowns.

        If you or anybody else wants to produce a commercially viable LENR product, they must stop using heat pumping and start using light pumping.

        If you only want to build a LENR reactor that melts down as seems to be your intent, then use heat pumping.

        • gerold.s

          Of course, I would like to prevent any melt down. A design which will (obviously) systematically result in melt downs is not an option. Therefore such input is valuable.
          I am reading and following LENR topics since about last October and the idea of designing and building a device or components arose around last Christmas.
          My approach of using heat as an activation energy is related to experiences of others. like Parkomov, Rossi, LION ….
          Working on such a topic requires thinking out of the box and the willingness to learn…. I am prepared for that.
          However I am an engineer, obviously lacking a lot of background knowledge regarding LENR, and my approach is using systems (e.g. ceramic high performance glow plug) and methods which have been proven functional and try to modify them for new applications. (e.g. LENR)
          Anyway…Do you have a deeper inside what type of commercially available and simple enough device could be used or modified for “light pumping”? Would a small industrial laser be a good approach? What could be feasible specs? (spectrum, energy output)
          How can we handle the confinement issue of LENR active material? Magnetic containment as well (like below)?
          I am sure I will have many more questions. 😉

          • Axil Axil

            Rossi’s reactors have been melting down for the last 7 years. that is why he invented the QX reactor, it ‘s disposable. He based it on the light bulb, When a light bulb burns out, you dispose of it.

            I beleive that a magnetic bottle will keep the UDH from eating up the reactor. All of Rossi’s reactors were destroyed by the LENR reaction over time as has happened in the LION reactors.

          • Axil Axil

            Regarding:”Do you have a deeper inside what type of commercially available and simple enough device could be used or modified for “light pumping”? ”

            The HID bulb.


          • gerold.s

            Hi Axil,
            Thanks for info… Was a few days away (Easter vacation) and concentrated on family. 😉

            Do you maybe have some scientific/technical info to investigate further the connection between LENR and a HID light source?


          • Axil Axil
          • gerold.s

            Thanks. .

          • gerold.s

            Hi Axil,
            Attached you find my updated design, containing a primary core made of BN and magnetic containment/magnetic mirror. Do have an idea how strong a magnetic field would need to be in order to contain the active agent or keep it away from the metal parts of the reactor.

            Further design ideas:
            1. include a spark plug (near primary reactor core) to produce HF emissions.
            2. include a resonant circuit (near primary reactor core) to produce HF emissions.

            I would appreciate feedback for further discussions and I would also be happy, if I could get some input/feedback from other members of the community.

            My planned next steps: If I (we) have identified a design with potential LENR creation probability, we will move from the concept phase to the design phase. In parallel, I am working on draft version for “light pumping”


          • Axil Axil

            Regarding item #1, would you consider changing the stimulation method of the reactor from heat to Light produced by RF stimulation?

            If you do so consider, change out the glow plug to two nickel electrodes. Also consider a window or optical fiber to serve to sample the color of light that is coming from the RF stimulated plasma that is producing the light.

            The electrodes carry two things: a high tension pulse to ionize the plasma, and a RF signal to drive the plasma to produce light.

            More to come…

          • gerold.s

            So you would recommend only two ni electrodes to produce a light arc and plasma? No extra light source needed? e.g. xenon hid bulb? Arrangement of electrodes on centre line of cylindrical primary reactor core made of BN. How to protect ni electrodes to become “fuel”? Are they selve protective by electric discharge? Fuel sits in between ni electrodes? TC for primary reactor core temp measurement necessary? non reactive atmosphere in primary and secondary core needed. E.g. assembly of device in DIY Argon glove box needed or is ambient atmosphere ok?

          • Axil Axil

            The key part of the LENR reactor design is the fuel. Most gainful LENR reactors use fuel on one form or another. The fuel is the mechanism that carries the Ultra dense hydrogen and/or lithium into the reaction. Cavation and HHO uses ultras dense water as fuel. Without the fuel, the LENR reactor does not work. Ultra dense molecules are the optimum carriers of the polariton. They are superconductors. This means that this molecule provides either a very low loss or no loss support structure for the polariton to live on.

            The only LENR reactor developer that has released his fuel recipe is LION. It looks like LION uses the lattice of micro-diamonds to compress deutrium into its ultra dense form.

            A number of developers are ttry to duplicate LION’s fuel generation process.

            But Leif Holmlid has come up with a device that can generate Ultra dense hydogen using quantum mechanical processes and has patented it. This source of LENR fuel could be utilized as a base material to power all kinds of LENR reactors.

            the Holmlid patent


            IMO, this Ultra dense hydrogen could be the surest way to produce a LENR active agent.

            Try your hand at producing this Holmlid device. Once you have this capability to generate LENR fuel, then you will be well on your way.

            In addition, Holmlid will help you out. He is interested in having researchers duplicate his results.

            Anther group pf researchers that are working on this material is


            TERN RESEARCH

            These developers look like they are eager to cooperate to expand research into ultra dense material.

          • Axil Axil

            Did you get my last post. These posts seem to disappear after I post them.

          • gerold.s

            Hi Axil,
            Would it be possible to continue our technical discussion?
            Please refer to my questions…

          • Axil Axil

            I will reply

            But first, know this…

            The type of LENR that most people want to see is fuel based LENR. I beleive that the fuel needed to produce the LENR effect involves ultra dense matter. This type matter seems to be universally superconductive. The problem with this type LENR is that the fuel is very hard to produce.

            For example, Rossi has stated that he puts .3 grams of his hydride fuel into the QX reactor.

            It is analogous to a car builder who must produce his own fuel. He first needs to drill an oil well, pump the oil, extract the distillate, and fill his tank with gas before his car can move.

            Holmlid has been at this Ultra dense hydogen production process for 40 years and more. Very few people have been able to duplicate what Holmlid can do. Many professional scientists think that Ultra dense hydogen is not possible to manufacture. But some have done it. But the membership of the club that can do it feat is few. Yet Holmlid has patented a Ultra dense hydogen production machine.

            Once we have Ultra dense hydogen, we are most of the way to the creation of a working LENR reactor. We can’t expect that a LENR reactor builder who has no idea what Ultra dense hydogen is and how it can be produced to accidentally come upon a way to produce it. It seems to me that LION has found of way to get micro diamonds to produce Ultra dense deuterium. But from the recent experiences of our LION replicator community, this fuel production process is hard to recreate. That is why I have suggested to our replicators to get a sample of ultra dense hydrogen from the people who know how to produce the fuel.

            MFMP has received a bottle of fuel from the ECCO reactor. MFMP should have put some of that stuff into their tube reactor and see what it can do. In closing, if we don’t have LENR fuel, we can’t produce a detectable LENR reaction that people usually recognize as LENR.

            More to come…

          • gerold.s

            Ultra dense hydrogen, so this seems to be the “holy grale” of LENR… somehow, the LENR community needs to stick their heads together in order to solve this puzzle or otherwise mankind cannot make the next technical leap forward. Anyway I send a mail to Sweden and I hope I was not too naive. Lets see what happens. I hope that LION is open for sharing and if he needs some equip. manufactured my proposal is also valid for him. You and Bob know.

          • Axil Axil

            I will show you some items that reflect what Holmlid thinks about LENR

            Question – Is your project linked with the Professor Tony Trewavas paper?
            Leif Holmlid
            Jul 2017
            No. I do not work with LENR even if our results explain a large part of LENR results.
            Best regards, Leif Holmlid

            UPDATE: Hot Fusion Professor Says LENR Scientists Should Check For Muons


            I disagree with Holmlid. LENR can produce high energy particles as witnessed by the Papp engine.




            I have been asking LENR experimenters to start to check for muon production in their experiments, but they are stubborn and have heads of stone.

          • gerold.s

            Could the glow plub still be of use? e.g. for heating LAH to generate H2 or for fuel preparation?

          • Axil Axil


            This is the device that can produce ultra dense hydrogen. Replicating this device will get you to the LENR fuel directly. No glow plug required.

      • Axil Axil


        See my post describing a light pumped QX type LENR reactor above. Comments are desired.

    • gerold.s

      I have a quotation for BN on my table. One rod dia. 20×150 mm costs 250 euros. My pimary reactor chamber, containing the fuel, measures now dia. 20×37 mm. So this equals to approx. 60 euros. Wouldn’t there be a cheaper alternative with similar properties like BN and also machineable?

  • Axil Axil

    One of the key features of a sucessful LENR reactor design is the high efficiency conversion of LENR useful energy as heat. Most of the energy that is produced by the LENR reaction is formatted by subatomic particle creation. It is important in a successful LENR reaction design to capture those particles and convert them to heat energy. One method that might do this conversion is a magnetic bottle using a quadruple or another type of charged particle confining magnetic field. The muons that come out of the LENR reaction must be confined inside the reactor for up to 10 microseconds to give them enough time to decay. This decay will convert most of the mass of the muon ( 105.6583745(24) MeV/c2 )into heat energy and electrons.

    I beleive that Rossi uses a quadruple magnetic field in the QX reactor as a confinement field. He can do this because he does not use heat based LENR stimulation. He uses RF and light. In the QX, this ability to convert most of the energy that comes out of the LENR reaction into heat is what produces the very high COP that the QX is known for.

    The RF produces light which does not interfere with magnetic fields and magnets the way that heat does.

    • /* I beleive that Rossi uses a quadruple magnetic field in the QX reactor as a confinement field */

      This is usual BS of yours Axil

      • Axil Axil

        This belief is based on the fact that Rossi mentions in his theory of LENR that a quadripole field is the cause of LENR.

        See page 5

        Identifying the Special EM Field


        Nucleon polarizability and long range strong
        force from I=2 meson exchange potential
        Carl-Oscar Gullström, Andrea Rossi
        18 july 2017

        • Sorry, it just illustrates you’ve newer understood X-Quark reactor neither Gullström theory.

          • gerold.s

            Thanks for your reply. Lets try to stay professional in exchanging scientific arguments.

          • Alan DeAngelis
          • Axil Axil

            You meant to say: “Sorry, it just illustrates that you have never understood the QX reactor nor Gullström theory.”

            This site does allow for corrections of errors in text.

            Is it that you show so little regard for our interaction that you can’t take the time or the effort to make yourself understandable?

  • Axil Axil

    The magnetic field must be composed of chiral photons. This type chiral polarized field is formed by chiral electrons:.


    A run of the mill magnetic field is not chiral polarized and has no LENR effect. This ordinary magnetic field has a even mix of right and left handed photons.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    No gamma rays. Just the kinetic energy from the alphas

    (and some X-rays from the electrons that are getting knocked around).

  • Axil Axil

    In an ultra dense hydrogen based LENR system, it may be possible to pump the LENR reaction using RF energy.

    An RF signal adjusted to a frequency that is resonant with the cavity that holds the UDH and the halides can form a reactor that is similar to the QX but still patentable without violating the QX patent.

    This light pumped reactor is comprised of a dielectric based tube (boron nitride) filled with UDH and halides and a resonate sized RF antenna that is mounted inside the tube but outside the magnetic bottle(see below). This antenna serves to excite the halides to produce light that in turn pumps the UDH

    The tube and antenna assembly is surrounded by a coolant liquid flow(CLF) that is confined in another concentric tube external to the primary tube and is also comprised of of dielectric material. This CLF provides heat removal and cooling to the primary tube.

    This CLF jacket tube is then surrounded by a collection of permanent magnets or electromagnets that generates a confining magnetic field (aka magnetic bottle or mirror) that keeps any particles generated by the LENR reaction confined to the tube at a concentrated magnetic focal point until these particles decay thereby releasing particle decay energy into the confines of the primary tube. This magnetic confinement field should also keep the UDH congruent and superimposed with the concentrated light source and also keep the UDH away from the walls of the primary tube.

    The frequency of the RF signal is adjusted to be in resonance with the primary confinement tube.

    • gerold.s

      Just seen this comment. Still digesting.

    • gerold.s

      In parts it sounds like a NOVA setup of Dr. Egely

      • Axil Axil

        Yes it is. The difference is that Dr. Egely adjusts the cavity size/shape to match the microwave RF frequency. In this RF lamp approach we adjust the RF frequency to match the cavity size.

        This lays the RF resonance matching work on the RF circuit designer and not the glass blower.

        A variable COTS RF source can be used for R&D to determine the proper RF frequency.

        for example:

      • Chapman


        Based upon your stated background and interests, I imagine that you should have no problem following the breadcrumbs that are out there and quickly gain a good insight into WHAT exactly is happening in the LENR reactions currently observed and being developed.

        My only recommendation is that you exercise a good deal of discernment as you screen out the noise of all the “Star Trek Fans” who are deep into mumbo-jumbo fake-science and fantasy.

        There are only a handful of guys here who clearly understand the science, and a whole group of other guys who are convinced LENR is caused by – well, actually, that changes day to day… on any given day it could be sub-quantum teleportation, trans-dimensional power leakage, a new and incredible FIFTH fundamental force, or my favorite, the ever persistant Bose Einstein Condensates.

        Just keep your head, and set your FIRST task to identify who to listen to.

        I have stayed in silent mode for months now, as there were no further productive conversations to engage in, but your posting deserved SOME input and rational encouragement.

        I will leave you with THIS observation:
        Start with Zephir.
        Understand what he is saying.
        Use that to filter everything else.
        Build from there.
        Ignore the BS.
        LENR is NOT complicated, but identifying wackos IS.
        Good Luck…

    • Bob Greenyer

      you can pump it with RF – Hutchison used milliwatts

      • Axil Axil

        Rossi uses milliwatts of power also for his RF lamp driver in the QX reactor.

  • Bob Greenyer

    LION – Sourcing D2O in the European Union

    Whilst not vouching for the authenticity of the material supplied – this Ebay seller appears to have a good track history and the volumes of D2O and packaging are suitable for use in replications of the LION protocol.

    The supplier link for this

  • gerold.s

    ??? Swedish

    • Martijn

      That was Dutch… on the content of it: without further elaboration that made little practical sense.

  • gerold.s

    These are also valid arguments. Thanks for your comment.

  • Bob Greenyer
    • Bruce__H

      As in all of your LION analyses, you lack controls. And so you should be very very cautious when drawing conclusions.

      How do you know that zirconium wasn’t just floating around in dust particles in LION’s lab or in your lab or in the lab that you did the EDS in? Maybe someone down the hall is using the stuff. Arguing that other supposed LENR-involved samples also have these funny elements in them isn’t good enough because maybe zirconium was floating around in those labs too. After all, zirconium isn’t all that rare in the earth’s crust, why shouldn’t little bits of it be ubiquitous? Comparing to supposed source materials isn’t good enough either for the same reason. This is what controls are for and I don’t think you have them.

      Put unprepared diamonds into a LION reactor and put that reactor through god knows what temperature regime LION put it through (yet another thing no one knows about those samples) and maybe your will find zirconium contamination there too at the same level of incidence as you find it here. How do you know otherwise?

      Do the ECCO samples have controls? Do you ever get control samples from any of the people you collaborate with? I think that top priority from any sort of LION replication is to get some control samples out of it so that you can start to make some tight scientific analyses. Until then, you really have nothing compelling.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Did you not notice the title: ‘part 1 of blog on mixed core fragment analysis’. Moreover, this work is only forming a guide for further analysis and directing future analytical needs on the same samples.

        I clearly state in the steemit blog that in the case of the ECCO, there was a potential, if highly unlikely, source of Zr – but the concentrations seemingly in the ash preclude that as a realistic argument. What supports that argument would be that basically every particle in ECCO fuel contains Zr – however, this is unsurprising given the sonic mixer like nature of the processing device.

        In the case of LION, there is no known potential source of contamination. What is really striking is that no other parts of the reactor ash or starting materials/reactor contain a detectable trace of Zr. The Zr appears in multiple specific extruded blobs in LION 2 and similar in LION 1. If it were contamination you would expect it in a range of samples – not a specific feature. The head of the ‘tadpole’ is 100um, quite large.

        The reality is, LION is a really easy experiment to replicate and we are not just talking about transmutations and repeatably observed images of a similar structures on x-ray film, there is the strange radiation in both LION 1 (in the Cu2O, best images ever observed) and LION 2 (on quartz). The physical signatures of ‘spheres’ and ‘ear shaped super structures’ and counter-rotating fractal structures. Where strange radiation has been observed before, so has the synthesis of heavier elements, such as with LeClaire, who saw production of Zr and Adamenko, who saw 99.99% copper produce almost the exact same range of mass concentrations of Zr when 0% by mass was detected in the starting materials in 26+ samples.

        Adamenko did the single biggest man-year research program in the history of LENR, for his team to see the same level of Zr production in samples with coincident strange radiation and knowing that in many ways the ECCO fuel processor is similar to LeClaire’s cavitation process would suggest to me that the Zr finding in these system is a real transmutation.

        At what point does enough coincident nuclear signatures of the exact same type across enough different independent experiments become enough evidence for you Bruce_H?

        Why not run a LION experiment when it is all clear and then prove to LION, Ralkar, LeClaire and Adamenko that they all must have had dirty labs with your hard won empirical evidence.

        • Martijn

          And higher degrees of certainty on the source of Zr can be obtained through isotopic analysis. If the Zr is formed in the LENR process it’s bound to have a different isotopoc ratio between the four stable isotopes of Zr than the ratio of natural occurring Zr, making it possible to distinguish between pollutant and LENR formed Zr.
          That might not be feasible right now, but would certainly be of interest to scientists reproducing this kind of process at some stage.

          • Bob Greenyer

            It is on the cards – wait for the next presentation – I am talking exactly about this – but in reference to other samples from LION 2.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          Another reason why controls are obligatory:

          From the summary (p. 42):

          “- It is estimated that if the entire Periodic Table (except H, He, and Li) is in play, about 3% to 5% of automatic peak IDs of major elements result in blunders (e.g., SiK instead of TaM; AlK instead of BrL).

          – These blunders are not random mistakes. The same element/peak in different systems will be consistently misidentified, e.g., AlK for BrL in various Br-compounds.

          – These blunders occur despite high counting statistics.”

          • Bob Greenyer

            In one of my recent presentations I specifically cited the AlK instead of BrL and accounted for it.

            In the blog post but one I cited Si and W and how that can be overcome by use of WDS.

            Please see my last but one blog post.


          • Andreas Moraitis

            Good to hear that you started to notice these problems. BTW I wonder what EDS would return when applied to ‘dense hydrogen’ compounds (maybe those would require completely new analysis methods).

          • Bob Greenyer

            I think that we have already seen some weird things.

  • Axil Axil

    The data showing the singular nature of the LENR reaction that Bob will present soon is coming mostly from the two meltdowns that have come from the LION reactor.

    • Bruce__H

      I realize that. But we really do not know that any of this is LENR related. As far as I see, all the melting down in the LION samples could just be due to their being exposed to high temperatures from entirely conventional sources. LION has not been forthcoming in terms of temperature records or radiation records or anything like that so we really don’t know what went on during his trials.

      This all certainly makes me look forward to Alan Smith’s replication attempts! He strikes me as an experienced and careful investigator. My prediction is that he will find no anomalous heat and no ionizing radiation but I would be glad to be proved wrong. I think that in the end it will be found that LION was just using the Model T test apparatus so far outside its usual parameters that he fried the system leading to a completely non-LENR meltdown. This, at any rate, is the sort of explanation that has to be carefully scrutinized and put to bed before anyone should accept that exotic nuclear phenomena are at work here.

      • Bob Greenyer


        Alan Goldwater will have

        – LN7317 GM tube
        – 6Li based neutron Scintillator
        – 2 3He neutron tubes
        – NaI scintillator for observing up to 4MeV photons
        – High specification (really expensive) sheathed and calibrated thermocouples both inside and outside the Active and Null sides.
        – High specification isolated power monitor PA1000

        Please see the paper I have identified above that talks about the modes, mechanisms and outcomes of Cu exposure at temperature to Fused Quartz in air. Many things explained in detail. What is not explained is the Laser like cut lines filled equidistantly with ‘Spheres’. Strange Radiation tracks, Rings equidistant ‘spheres’ and branching tracks. Counter rotating vortex features and razor sharp masking of areas of the quartz that are affected in a completely different way with a signature shape found in multiple experiments of different types and in different materials.

      • Engineer48

        Hi Bruce,

        Very much agree.

        Too much value is being placed on claimed but not verified statements by Lion.

        Look Lion may have the goods but until his claims are verified, they need to be severly discounted.

        I mean who knows, Lion may have tried heating his test system with a gas torch, inserted through the rear thermocouple access hole, to reach a higher temp than he could achieve via the heater coil.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Would not have seen strange radiation, repeatable x-rays of a specific type, structures of a specific shape such as ‘Ear shape cluster”, rings within rings and ‘spheres’ replicated on many Hutchison samples spanning nearly 40 years and in ECCO samples and in the later case, on the SAFIRE tungsten probe. Also features similar to those found in NOVA ash.

          None of this proves excess heat.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Bob,

            Please ask Lion if he used another heat source other than the coil heater?

            If so that may explain why, for both Lion 1 and Lion 1, there are no control temp vs active temp vs input power plots provided.

            When and who detected X Rays in a Lion replication? As far as I know Alan MAY have detected higher Geiger readings but far from proven.

            What really interests me is knowing what the blob is made of, if it contains any transmutations and what is it’s mass?

          • Bob Greenyer

            No other heat source. Of course, the Disks were treated in the oven before being run.

            LION is having problems with data logging, I suspect, because of the nature of the active agents. In MFMPs replication we are attempting to overcome that. In addition, I am going to propose that LION be give access to the MFMPs Optris as a second dataset (though, as MFMP has shown in past, this has its flaws).

            LION used “Dentafilm” x-ray film – the details of use are presented in Mining Diamonds with LION.

            I think the BLOB will be very interesting, but at the very least – we need to look at it with WDS.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Why did they only settle in large concentrations on the same features on the same SEM plate and across two different experiments LION 1 and 2.

    How do you explain the same kind of x-rays, strange radiation, ‘Spheres’ macro scale features like rings within rings, ‘ear shaped’ and double vortex structures in a range of materials next to and at some distance from the core… are these all to do with non-HEPA conditions?

    if it was only bad calorimetry – ok, if it was contamination across the board ok – but … this is in context with everything else and THE EXACT same findings by LeClaire and Adamenko.

    NONE OF IT – try creating the LION track strange radiation track in glassy Cu2O – go on, i’d like to see you do that – convince me that you can do it.

    I AM SPECIFICALLY NOT SAYING THIS IS UNIQUE – I AM SAYING IT IS UBIQUITOUS (the ‘spheres’ and other structures particularly)

  • Bob Greenyer

    Bruce_H – do you seriously think this is lost on me? We do ALL KINDS OF CONTROLS in our own experiments. Right now, Alan Smith and Alan Goldwater are conducting all kinds of controls in their preparation for the LION replications – but to say that nothing can be learned from extremely unusual physical, Photographic, SEM, X-Ray, CCD, Photo-emulsion and EDS evidence without having a control when the samples themselves have controls (where the potential contaminant is not all over every particle recovered) is just nonsense. Yes – when WE have done controls, AS WE DO with OUR experiments – there will be controls.

    I could sit a CCD or X-Ray next to a the feed materials for ECCO or LION for like ever and you would not see the structures and tracks. You could do it – don’t wait for me, get some Dentafilm, stock up with everything you need from and sit back – tell us what you find.

    I could take the LION 1 core now – dump a truck load of horse dung on it, wash it off and I would still see the strange radiation track. Are you ignoring all the other repeatable consistent and correlated effects seen across multiple systems spanning nearly 40 years and most recently with SAFIRE because you have no argument, or is it because you have accepted these things? What causes a ‘sphere’ to appear in a crater / cavity / cut-line at a temperature far below it’s melting point and for that ‘sphere’ to be composed of higher Z elements than the material that went in? How is it that the higher Z elements are physically inside cavities in the LION diamonds? You continually ignore physical, geometrical and distribution factors in your arguments.

    I think I have been clear, very many researchers have seen strange radiation YOU CAN’T FIND IT IN A TEXTBOOK or learn about ON THE HIGHEST PAID UNIVERSITY COURSES in the world – but it is there, and the easiest way to create it is the LION protocol.

    • sam

      Who would not have been laughed at if he had said in 1800 that metals could be extracted from their ores by electricity or that portraits could be drawn by chemistry.

      Michael Faraday Quote.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Show me a Strange radiation track like LION 1 had – and we can talk.

    Show me why the periodically spaced ‘spheres’ on the cut line sitting right next to an unchanged surface of a tungsten probe in SAFIREs recently published report is ‘normal’. Presumably you are writing to them to say that their work has no value because they didn’t try x,y,z control – what would you say the control for a disappearing probe is?

    I get it – controls controls controls – thanks for contribution. Hold in mind – we do that with our own work. If you can’t find value in what is being published, wait a year until we have done experiments with controls.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Could the LIONs Kanthal A1 wire be the secret to its claimed and apparent excess heat?

    New steemit blog coming.

    • georgehants

      Morning Bob, please share new page here as I find it difficult to move away from ECW (even temporarily) after about seven years of Wonderful coverage of Cold Fusion and all things associated.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Will do..

  • gerold.s

    Hi Bruce,

    Attached you find a (simple) setup with heat pumping.
    The idea is to create the LENR effect, while deliberately risking a melt down.
    Open for discussion.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Hi Gerold,

      The Diadisks weigh just 0.005g each, LION 2 used 25 ( I recovered around 18, perhaps the rest are the cause of the fused blob in the core )

      What you are proposing here is 200 – 400 diadisks, I personally think that only 1 is needed to produce the active agents – therefore you might like to dial this back a little.

      Secondly, you may wish to wait until after I publish my presentation today before finalising any plans.

      • Engineer48

        Hi Bob,

        Have you done EDS on the blob inside the Lion 2 fuel tube?

        Do you know it’s mass? If so is it equiv to the missing fuel discs?

        If it is melted NI that would be amazing data, indicating the min temp the reactor reached before mechanically failing from thermal runaway.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Not yet – but, as you will see from my next piece of research, I probably want to apply a different analytical technique – as a starter, WDS.

          I think that the next presentation will have high value, will be testable and I have multiple paths to confirm it.

          Just love this experiment!

          Thanks to LION again for giving me the opportunity to look at it.

      • gerold.s

        Yes, you are right. That will be way to many. I will wait for further details to be revealed soon.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Colouration of quartz due to exposure to copper in air

    Excellent paper provides explanations for some of the colourations and fracturing of fused quartz exposed to copper at temperature in air, but fails to explain razor sharp masking and many other features observed in LION 2.

  • gerold.s
    • Axil Axil

      A good start. I don’t see any thermocouple provided for temperature feedback. Can the heat pumped into the reactor be kept constant when using a glow plug, or adjusted up of down?

      • gerold.s

        Hi Axil,

        I will repost my draft soon. It needs some update….

        Yes a thermocouple is definitly missing. (maybe also a pressure sensor, since we have an enclosed reactor chamber)
        I thought maybe the temperature could be determined indirectly via current and voltage (knowing the temperature – resistance curve of the glowplug).

        But this seems to be not such a good approach, according to the feedback of one supplier. They suggest direct measurement. Moreover they were not willing to go deeper, because a glow plug is of course not intended for such an application (I didn’t mention LENR, I called it a “mini high temperature furnace”).

        However one supplier is confident, that a high performance ceramic glow plug can withstand temperatures up to 1000°C for days or even weeks, but (of course) there is no experimental data available. (according to one supplier)

        So it seems to be up to us now to start with some experiments related to glow plugs.
        1.) investigate / determine the temperature – resistance curve
        2.) can a temperature (e.g. 900°C) be hold stable for days / weeks?
        3.) when does the device fail / die?
        4.) controlability; PWM is suggest by supplier to control temperature
        Vmax=7V (for ceramic glow plug) Imax = approx. 20A to 30A (DC)

        Maybe I am completly wrong, but I like the idea of using glow plugs (for a heat pumpled device), because:
        – it is intended for rough applications
        – it can heat up very quickly up to 1200°C (or even more)in a few seconds
        – you can pin point the heat at a small area
        – and finally, it is a fairly cheap solution

        In parallel I am investigating the HID light approach.

        Thanks for your inputs.

  • Bob Greenyer

    LION 2 – Kanthal A1 relationship to Alumina

    Whilst it is true to say that the Alumina was drilled out into a tube and you could argue that the Si + Cu + O chemical combination might have filled the exposed bubble sections, it would appear that the combined material has moved away from the Kanthal A1 wire, even on the sides of the reactor as if the alumina itself was being directly affected.

    Perhaps it is just that the melt is much more sensitive to temperature?

    • Axil Axil

      the Kanthal A1 wire does not show any damage from erosion. All the materiel around the wire is vaporized but the wire is like new. Why.

      A prediction that comes from a theory as follows:

      The flow of electrons protected the wire from damage. If LENR is caused by a polarization of particle handedness, the electrical flow of chiral balanced electrons through the Kanthal A1 wire has countered the LENR chiral force to protect the wire from transmutation.

      A SEM study of the Kanthal A1 wire should be done. This study will show that the elements that comprise the Kanthal A1 wire have not been effected by the LENR reaction.

      The suggestion that I recently made about applying an electrical current to the structure of the reactor (boron nitride) for heating will have protected the structure of the reactor from damage.

      Applying an electrical current to the alumina/quartz tube should also protect those materials from damage from the LENR reaction.

      • Bob Greenyer

        I think you may need to wait until my steemit blog that connects to this.

        • Axil Axil

          Will your results include a SEM element analysis of the Kanthal A1 wire ?

          • Bob Greenyer

            Sort of.

      • Karl Venter

        Hi Axil/Bob
        With what we know now — “o Day” — is it possible to better explain what happened to Pons and Fleisman experiment and why so many could not replicate it easily? know its vague but please help especially with reference to SAFIRE?

        • Axil Axil

          There are many wats to produce the LENR reaction. IMHO, one of them is through the formation of ultra dense hydrogen inside the lattice of some metals and crystals. It takes weeks or months for this type of hydrogen to form. In the times of pons and fleischmann, if a replicator did not get positive results in a few days, they gave up and said that LENR did not work.

          SAFIRE a singular method of producing the LENR reaction unlike any other. It is new and strange. This method is very close to the root cause of LENR similar to the Hutchison Effect. Like the Hutchison Effect, it acts instantaneously.

          • Karl Venter

            Thanks Axil
            Is there not a similarity between Rossi light photo he published and the safire photos ?
            In you opinion who will get it right first — I mean the theory and practical aspects of LENR

          • Axil Axil

            Rossi’s light is produced by LENR, SAFIRE’s light is not.

            Rossi will have a product in the market first.

            Bob Greenyer will be the first with a valid theory.

          • georgehants

            Axil, good to hear you think that Bob will be on course.
            I am looking forward to other revelations as well.

          • Bob Greenyer


            The SAFIRE reactor is producing the EXACT SAME active agents as Hutchison, NOVA, ECCO, LION, Adamenko etc etc.

            It is not just the physical signatures on the damaged Langmuir probe – or the time frame in which they occurred. It is not only the ‘Flower of life’ arrangement on the Anode. It is that the design of the reactor makes it so laughably obvious that it is doing the same thing, it literally boggles the mind. They either don’t know what they are actually doing or they do and they are deliberately omitting the truth from the conversation.

            ‘O day’ will explain P&F – I will also add in for the pure comedy value – the in your face reality of SAFIRE.

            At the moment SAFIRE, using a MASSIVE and EXPENSIVE structure, has proved with the Langmuir probe events (both the disappearance event with signature edge effects and anomalous glowing and internal disruption in the thicker probe) that it is able to create the active agents at a very low input power approx. 185W. The downside is that the device is not self sustaining, that is to say, the effects rapidly collapse when power is turned off. The reason for this is clear and insurmountable. It provides a good test bed for visualising things at scale. As I have said in the past many times, when you get the active agents to a certain scale, there is NOTHING, not a PHYSICAL THING that will contain them. They contain themselves however within reason up to a point, within metals. In gas form they need to be contained with fields – in the case of SAFIRE, it is just the electrostatic field. The forces in the self-organised bands are completely impossible to overcome with ‘PHYSICAL’ matter – it will always be altered.

            LION currently is able to make the active agents with a small and very inexpensive device. It actually takes around the same input power to get going, but is less ‘instant on’. The nature of the active agents made makes them FAR MORE STABLE than in SAFIRE and they can do work. They can still be grown to a point at which they will disrupt all materials and so, as I have said before, it is a give and take approach that must be taken. The claimed LONG period of self sustain, IF VERIFIED, put the experiment head and shoulders above any other experiment ever disclosed.

            The process does not produce gamma rays or other radiation whilst organised and below certain levels of progression.

          • David_Kaiser_39

            Bob, is it possible to explain, in layman’s words, your understanding of “active agents?”. Is it some sort of energy? I hope you can do that to help me understand better.

          • Bob Greenyer

            This will be made clear in ‘O Day’

            I will try to make it trivial to understand. No maths.

          • David_Kaiser_39
        • Brent Buckner
          • Karl Venter

            Thanks very much interesting

    • Axil Axil

      Bob, see my explanation of the Hutchison effect above.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Seriously, you think you would have X-Rays from cold copper oxide, Alumina Oxide and Nickel/Carbon??

    You think you would have strange radiation detectable on Photographic Emulsion, non-contacted PET polymer and on CCDs from a pot of Ni, Ti, Cabon etc (ECCO fuel)

    I could go on and on – Really, how do you still clutch onto this – I think that if you do, I would suggest you walk around in some kind of super radiation shielded outfit – because high energy photons and strange radiation must be everywhere all the time in damaging amounts!

    Don’t you think that if Russ George or Alan Smith had actually seen a completely razor sharp masked of part in a control by now – they would have not said something?

    It is now been a few months since I started sharing these images, and the best that anyone can do with the whole image and science paper searching capability of the internet is come up with a big fat 0 images that look even remotely similar.

    The only thing that looks similar are the ‘Twin Keys’ and the damaged probe from SAFIRE – and there is NO SURPRISE why!

  • Axil Axil

    EMF polarization is a manifestation of chirality. Polarized EMF can exert force on matter. When a chiral magnetic beam enters a proton, that beam can move particles inside the proton around with enough force to change the nature of those particles.

    John Hutchison experimented with government surplus electronic equipment to inseminate unexpected behaviors in matter. This behavior was termed the Hutchison effect. There were two clases of behavor groped under that title. Movement of matter, and disinteration of matter.

    Both these classes of behavior can be explained through the their explanation as an application of chiral EMF.

    Many of the peices of government surplus electronic equipment produced linear polarized RF and microwave beams.

    These radar beams were strong enough to impart a force on the matter that these beams fell upon. When the angle of polarization was focused just right, the object moved through the induction of chiral forces on the surface of the object.

    When these linearly polarized beams were adjusted to penetrate into objects, the nucleons that comprised the object was disrupted and the object lost its structural integrity. This induced process is identical to the LENR reaction.

    • Bob Greenyer

      This may help.

      Hutchison used an HV source or two, either Tesla or VDG based. this was above the active area and around 15 feet from it.

      He then had a good strength Uranium ore as a beta / alpha emitter, though not always.

      Then he used a range of RF generators from ELF upwards and typically in the milliwatts range.

      There is chirality involved.

      • Axil Axil

        The use of Uranium is interesting. The radioactive decay of Uranium produces left handed particles only. Is it possible that these radioactive decay products: alphas, beta, neutrinos, gammas create a chiral chain reaction in which a single left handed decay particle, say an electron for example, can change the chirality of many other photons that are coming out of the tesla coils. Maybe this one left handed electron can change the polarization of billions of photons as each converted photon passes it chirality in turn to the other photons around it.

  • georgehants

    “Electric power is everywhere present in unlimited quantities. It can
    drive the world’s machinery without the need of coal, oil, gas, or any
    other fuels … This new power … would be derived from the energy which
    operates the Universe … the cosmic energy.” – Nikola Tesla

  • Axil Axil

    When a photon is created out of the quantum vacuum fluctuation, it produces zero energy. To do that, the photon and the anti photon are created in a pair.

    This is one of the most counterintuitive, yet, one of the most important principles in quantum​ mechanics: that vacuum​ is by no means empty nothingness. In fact, the vacuum is full of various particles that are continuously fluctuating in and out of existence. They appear, exist for a brief moment and then disappear again. Since their existence is so fleeting, they are usually referred to as virtual particles.

    The pair of photons must be opposites of each other. For a photon, this means that the pair must have one member as left handed and the other member of the pair as right handed. When these to waveforms are added together, their sum must result in zero energy.



    Scientists create light from vacuum

    ​When a virtual photon pair is created near a black hole, one photon of the pair is absorbed by the black hole and the other exits to the far field as hawking radiation. The Bose condensate of polaritons act identically like a black hole. In this mode, The Surface Plasmon Polariton (SPP) condensate can extract both right and left handed photons from the quantum vacuum

    Any light that is generated by a polariton condensate is derived from vacuum energy. The SPP can store both right and left handed photons in two counterrotating currents.

    The Polariton condensate will produce mesons from this inflow of vacuum energy into the “Electromagnetic Black Hole”. This condensate will also produce both light and heat as Hawking Radiation.​

    Black Holes and Wormholes in spinor polariton condensates

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.