Talk-Polywell.org

”The End of the Fossil Fuel Age”
http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/?p=771

Personally, I am more excited about this one. Still skeptical, but this is George Miley and his work has at least some credibility (even though he usually is very forward looking and overly optimistic).
Note that this uses a very different process from Rossi and D2 instead of just plain hydrogen.
http://cobraf.com/forum/immagini/R_123597739_1.pdf

If either palladium & deuterium or nickel and hydrogen work, it shows it is possible to overcome the Coulomb barrier and so the chances increase that both methods work.

Rossi has had a US patent granted. https://animpossibleinvention.files.wor ... 5913b1.pdf

It describes the E-Cat in some detail within an application to heat a fluid. Interesting to note he says Lithium Hydride is the fuel catalyzed by nickel.

Keeping in mind this patent took nearly three years to approve, Rossi commented today that he is working on 64 new patents, many of which will be improvements that he has developed in this time.

There are some Q&A with Rossi on the patent here: http://ecat.com/news/e-cat-patent-granted-by-uspto

Eerily quiet now the idiot trolls have disappeared. Too good to last.

parallel wrote:Eerily quiet now the idiot trolls have disappeared. Too good to last.

Indeed, you disappeared for four weeks but it was too good to last.

Rossi patent is so useless in wording and technical details that is not even worth commenting. Similar to the Boeing Laser Fusion Engine of few weeks ago:
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=6037

I wonder if one day people will ever realize that patenting an idea is not same as patenting a working product or process

Giorgio,
Rossi gives the detailed fuel information and it is part of a real application. Presumably you haven't read the patent. Figures. I forecast it was too good to last.

parallel wrote:Giorgio,
Rossi gives the detailed fuel information and it is part of a real application. Presumably you haven't read the patent. Figures. I forecast it was too good to last.

No, he does not. I might be remembering it wrong, but I thought that from previous demonstrations is it clear that he pumps in pure hydrogen into his so called reactor. Now there is no mentioning of it anymore. What happened?

It also might be noted that this was listed under the refrigeration, vaporization, heat regulation, and combustion category of patents. Accordingly there is assumed no nuclear effect per the description of the patent. I suspect this is going to get reviewed by the appropriate patent agents within the coming months and denied. It was a clever move by him no doubt, but only 2 likely scenarios play out. Either it isn't producing any real power > input, no nuclear reaction, in which case this patent will be upheld, or it's reviewed and denied per it's inappropriate description. If it is later reviewed and denied, it will provide fuel for Rossi to say, "look, they're trying to cover up the technology, conspiracy snakes, snake conspiracies!!!"

You remember correctly Skipjack.
This patent application has nothing to do with the e-Cat, it is just an application about a "theoretical" catalyst that should allow a novel way to generate heat from a chemical reaction.
And because is theoretical it means that they can skip the boring part of delivering the data about chemical load weight, energy input and energy output that could give any insight on the feasibility of such a process.

Only people like parallel (that don't read or don't understand what they read) can think that a patent like this can bring any credibility whatsoever to the e-Cat.

ScottL wrote:It also might be noted that this was listed under the refrigeration, vaporization, heat regulation, and combustion category of patents. Accordingly there is assumed no nuclear effect per the description of the patent. I suspect this is going to get reviewed by the appropriate patent agents within the coming months and denied. It was a clever move by him no doubt, but only 2 likely scenarios play out. Either it isn't producing any real power > input, no nuclear reaction, in which case this patent will be upheld, or it's reviewed and denied per it's inappropriate description. If it is later reviewed and denied, it will provide fuel for Rossi to say, "look, they're trying to cover up the technology, conspiracy snakes, snake conspiracies!!!"

Being a "combustion cell" the category they applied for is the correct one and because they never claim any nuclear effect (like you correctly stated) than there will be no review.

From a pure technical point of view those 2 pages are not worth the (virtual) paper they are printed on. Reading the reaction list it seems intuitive that the "Chemical content energy"+"External applied energy" is > than the "Output energy".

The only reason i see for having applied for such a patent is just to bring more smoke to clueless investors or internet minions.

Occhiuti & Rohlicek LLP, well known patent attorneys, have done a great job avoiding the use of either "cold fusion" or "LENR" as either name leads to instant rejection by the US Patent Ofrfice since the Pons & Fleischmann affair.

Rossi changed to providing the hydrogen from lithium aluminum hydride years ago. The patent was written two and a half years ago. What is new is that we are told elemental lithium is part of the fuel

The trolls apparently think they could do a better job, but as they don't appear to have read the patent or were perhaps unable to grasp its meaning, it is unlikely. The passages that cover the output with a COP of 6 for 180 days and the fuel composition is given below.


" It has been found that after the reaction has generated approximately 6 kilowatt hours of energy, it is desirable to apply approximately 1 kilowatt hour of electrical eneigy to reinvigorate the reaction sequence.
Eventually, the efficiency of the wafer 32 will decrease to the point where it is uneconomical to continually reinvigorate the reaction sequence. At this point, the wafer 32 can simply be replaced. Typically, the wafer 32 will sustain approxi­mately 180 days of continuous operation before replacement becomes desirable.

The powder in the fuel mixture consists largely of spherical particles having diameters in the nanometer to micrometer range, for example between 1 nanometer and 100 microme­ters. Variations in the ratio of reactants and catalyst tend to govern reaction rate and are not critical. However, it has been found that a suitable mixture would include a starting mixture of 50% nickel, 20% lithium, and 30% LAH. Within this mixture, nickel acts as a catalyst for the reaction, and is not itself a reagent. While nickel is particularly useful because of its relative abundance, its function can also be carried out by other elements in column 10 of the periodic table, such as platinum or palladium."

I don't think you understand the patent, Parallel. The patent isn't a confirmation of Rossi's work, it's an agreement of IP. They've agreed that if a device of similar construction is produced by a 3rd party, that it would violate this patent. The rest of the description is speculative as he did not have to prove a functioning device to the patent office. As you stated, clever attorneys worded it in such a way as to have it classified as something other than a reactor. Hell they could add that a byproduct of the process was pure gold and it would've been approved.

parallel wrote: The passages that cover the output with a COP of 6 for 180 days and the fuel composition is given below.

" It has been found that after the reaction has generated approximately 6 kilowatt hours of energy, it is desirable to apply approximately 1 kilowatt hour of electrical eneigy to reinvigorate the reaction sequence."

You seems to not understand what a COP is.
If you want to calculate the COP of this patent you can't simply divide the generate energy with the input energy. You should divide the generated energy with the SUM of the input energy and the chemical energy of the fuel charge.
Else I could just take a box of matches, light one and claim a COP of 1000

parallel wrote:The trolls apparently think they could do a better job, but as they don't appear to have read the patent or were perhaps unable to grasp its meaning

So far it seems that trolls know physics better than minions

http://www.nature.com/news/the-week-in- ... 15-1.18224

A comment by Brian Josephson

Updates on cold fusion As flying pigs have so far not yet been spotted in these parts, you won't be getting the following news from Nature itself! We are pleased to have this opportunity to keep Nature readers up to date:

1) "For the first time in two decades, the Japanese government has issued a request for proposals for low-energy nuclear reaction (LENR) research". For details see http://news.newenergytimes.net/2015/08/ ... rch-again/

2) Andrea Rossi has been granted a US patent for his 'energy catalyzer', which claims to produce large amounts of energy from a nuclear reaction (however, the patent itself does not refer to this aspect, only giving details of the design). For details see http://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/0 ... the-e-cat/ Mats Lewan's book 'An Impossible Invention' (see the article cited for links to the book) goes into detail concerning the E-cat's history. Here is an extract from the article:

As far as I understand, the patent describes the so-called low temperature E-Cat that Rossi showed in semi-public demonstrations at several occasions in 2011, and which is also used in an ongoing 350-day trial of a 1 MW plant, but since it describes core parts of the technology it is probably also valid at a certain extent also for more recent E-Cat models with higher operating temperature.

Brian Josephson