MFMP Video: Ohmasa Vibration Technology — First Look and Demonstration.

Here’s a new video from the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project showing a demonstration of the Ohmasa vibration machines demonstrated to the MFMP’s Bob Greenyer and George Egeley by the inventor, Ryoshu Ohmasa at his laboratory in Japan.

It’s nice to see some footage of the things that Bob has been reporting about recently, as it allows for a clearer idea of what is going on. Apparently Mr. Ohmasa has told Bob that he will be able to have one (or more) of these devices to carry out further testing.

New MFMP Video — Vaporizing Tungsten at 220 C With ‘OHMASA Gas’

A new video has been published by the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project in which Bob Greenyer and George Egeley show testing done in Japan with ‘OHMASA Gas’ which has been developed by Japanese inventor Mr. Ryushin Omasa.

At one point in this video passes a flame produced with this gas vaporizes a tungsten rod at a temperature of  around 220 C which is well below its melting point of 3422 C.

See the video below at about the 17 minute mark.

Bob has said that the MFMP has an agreement with Mr Omasa to receive their own device with which they can do further testing. Some have commented that this is HHO gas, but Bob believes that it is “EVO/Strange Radiation encapsulated matter”

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Project OHMA — Claim of Elemental Transmutation From Low-Frequency Vibrations

Bob Greenyer and George Egeley are in the Tokyo Japan region for something called Project OHMA. They have been invited by a blogger called Sho (sp?) who is apparently very interested in LENR.

Bob explains in this podcast that he got a note via the MFMP’s website from Sho, who said there was a technology that is seemingly transmuting elements with only vibration/sound at low frequencies using quite simple/low-tech equipment. There are also apparently biological effects too.

The inventor of this technology is called Mr. Ohmasa (sp?) who runs a company called Nihontechno. Mr
He has supposedly discovered by vibrating water you get self organizing vortices within it, and reduced surface tension. Also, bubbles created within this system somehow don’t pop and don’t join together.

Ohmasa has given Bob and George a demonstration of their technology, and they have brought measuring instruments with them to do their own testing.

Bob has been posting about project OHMA on other threads here on ECW, I hope that we can keep the discussion going forward on this thread to help us stay organized.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Brilliant Light Power Claims Confirmation of Existence of Hydrino in New Presentation

Thanks to Jas for sharing this new post from Brilliant Light Power’s website here

NEGATIVE, EXTRAORDINARILY FAST HYDRINO PEAK REPLICATED ON A SECOND MATCHING GAS CHROMATOGRAPH, COLUMN, AND CONDITIONS

“Hydrino gas was collected from a hydrino reaction run in the SunCell® and analyzed on a second matching gas chromatography system. Hydrino gas was confirmed on the second instrument to have a faster migration time and a higher thermal conductivity than any known gas as shown by a negative gas chromatographic peak before hydrogen in a helium carrier gas. This data adds to the portfolio of other analytical tests that confirm the existence of hydrino [analytical presentation], a smaller more stable form of hydrogen formed by the release of massive power. Brilliant Light Power is developing the proprietary SunCell® to harness this green power source to replace all other forms of power.”

The analytical presentation is available here:

https://brilliantlightpower.com/presentations/Analytical_Presentation_060419.pdf

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Nature: Google-funded Team Fails to Generate ‘Cold Fusion’ in 400 Experiments

Thanks to the readers who have posted about a new article in Nature by a team of researchers, funded with $10 million from Google, who were trying to see if there could have been anything to the claims of ‘cold fusion’ initially reported by Fleischmann and Pons in 1989. The verdict from the team is that they were unable to see any sign of the CF effect after 400 experiments. However, they do keep the door open that there may be a chance forfutu, however, stating that they were not able to create optimum conditions for possibly showing an effect in their tests to date.

Mats Lewan has posted links to four articles from the current issue of Nature on this research project, to which I have added some quotes:

“Lessons from cold fusion, 30 years on” by Philip Ball
‘Why revisit long-discredited claims for a source of abundant energy, asks Philip Ball? Because we are still learning how to treat pathological science.’

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01673-x

“Google revives controversial cold-fusion experiments”
‘Researchers tested mechanisms linked to nuclear fusion at room temperature — but found no evidence for the phenomenon.’

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01683-9

“A Google programme failed to detect cold fusion — but is still a success”
‘Major project to reproduce controversial claims of bench-top nuclear fusion kindles debate about when high-risk research is worthwhile . . . Is that the final nail in the cold-fusion coffin? Not quite. The group was unable to attain the material conditions speculated to be most conducive to cold fusion. Indeed, it seems extremely difficult to do so using current experimental set-ups — although the team hasn’t excluded such a possibility. So the fusion trail, although cooling, is not yet cold, leaving a few straws for optimists to clutch on to.’

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01675-9

“Revisiting the cold case of cold fusion” [The Google paper – paid access]:
‘The 1989 claim of ‘cold fusion’ was publicly heralded as the future of clean energy generation. However, subsequent failures to reproduce the effect heightened scepticism of this claim in the academic community, and effectively led to the disqualification of the subject from further study. Motivated by the possibility that such judgement might have been premature, we embarked on a multi-institution programme to re-evaluate cold fusion to a high standard of scientific rigour. Here we describe our efforts, which have yet to yield any evidence of such an effect. Nonetheless, a by-product of our investigations has been to provide new insights into highly hydrided metals and low-energy nuclear reactions, and we contend that there remains much interesting science to be done in this underexplored parameter space.’

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1256-6

Exotic Matter [Plasma] Uncovered in the Sun’s Atmosphere

Thanks to Sam for sharing this article from ScienceDaily.com

Title: Exotic matter uncovered in the sun’s atmosphere
Date: May 24, 2019
Source: Trinity College Dublin
Summary: Scientists have announced a major new finding about how matter behaves in the extreme conditions of the sun’s atmosphere. Their work has shed new light on the exotic but poorly understood ‘fourth state of matter,’ known as plasma, which could hold the key to developing safe, clean and efficient nuclear energy generators on Earth.
Journal Reference: Eoin P. Carley, Laura A. Hayes, Sophie A. Murray, Diana E. Morosan, Warren Shelley, Nicole Vilmer, Peter T. Gallagher. Loss-cone instability modulation due to a magnetohydrodynamic sausage mode oscillation in the solar corona. Nature Communications, 2019; 10 (1) DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-10204-1
Link: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/05/190524094320.htm

Excerpt:

Studying the behaviour of plasmas on the Sun allows for a comparison of how they behave on Earth, where much effort is now under way to build magnetic confinement fusion reactors. These are nuclear energy generators that are much safer, cleaner and more efficient than their fission reactor cousins that we currently use for energy today.

Professor at DIAS and collaborator on the project, Peter Gallagher, said: “Nuclear fusion is a different type of nuclear energy generation that fuses plasma atoms together, as opposed to breaking them apart like fission does. Fusion is more stable and safer, and it doesn’t require highly radioactive fuel; in fact, much of the waste material from fusion is inert helium.”

“The only problem is that nuclear fusion plasmas are highly unstable. As soon as the plasma starts generating energy, some natural process switches off the reaction. While this switch-off behaviour is like an inherent safety switch — fusion reactors cannot form runaway reactions — it also means the plasma is difficult to maintain in a stable state for energy generation. By studying how plasmas become unstable on the Sun, we can learn about how to control them on Earth.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Dennis Danzik on the Earth Engine — Magnetic Propulsion Based on Control of Entropy

Thanks to Woody and others for referencing a post by the Earth Engine inventor Dennis K. Danzik in which responds to comments on the website Revolution Green about the recent developments with the Earth Engine and Inductance Energy Corporation.

Here is part of his comment originally posted here: https://revolution-green.com/earth-engine-claimed-3-years-40-kw-mechanical-energy-production-magnets/

I am just going to respond in whole as to some of the very intelligent comments and questions in regard to Magnetic Propulsion. There are a few facts that you need to know about when and how I will respond, and on what subjects I will comment on.

First, I am not a “believer” in “over unity”, and I have never experienced anything close to perpetual motion. For the most part, I am a classically trained engineer and for the first twenty four years of my practice, I worked on the refining side of oil and gas, mainly in polymers and composite design. I was focused on laboratory work in olefins and polyesters.

My lifelong obsession with magnetics began as a child, and I started working on Magnetic Propulsion in 2009 when some rare earth magnets became low cost enough for me to afford access to those products. I started laboratory work on the Engine and its components in 2010. I started working floor models in mid 2011.

My background is that of a trained industrial engineer, and I did complete grad work in product development at MIT/Sloan in 2009. I am not a physicist, but I can keep pace with most of the post doctoral discussions in regard to magnetics over the last 10 years. The vast majority of my career time has been in a laboratory development environment.

I do like the name “magnetics” as it applies to magnetism as an applied science that studies magnetic fields and magnetic radiation paths in relation to opposing and attracting magnetic fields. In other words, I have little interest at this time in measures and experimenting with magnetic fields working on a conductor.

I will not be responding in any way to my posts. They are for information only and not intended to start a conversation. My posts are not intended to inform you on how Magnetic Propulsion works in detail, or that I need to “prove it” to anyone on these types of message boards. The information is not greatly detailed, as I have little extra time in my life, but I do want to casually inform as many people as possible.

The Earth Engine, which is based on Magnetic Propulsion, functions from the force developed by a paired magnetic field. The magnetic field STARTS and ACCELERATES the flywheel on its own force, once attenuated. Most of our flywheel combinations are greater than 800 kg.

What I have developed, after many years of laboratory work, was based on the Szilard paper of 1929. Leo Szilard, through the work he left behind, has taught me a great deal. Here is a link to the paper that I made my life’s work (outside of my career):

http://www.sns.ias.edu/~tlusty/courses/InfoInBio/Papers/Szilard1929.pdf

My development is the control of entropy in the system. The applied science of Magnetic Propulsion first diminishes the point of entropy and then uses that entropy to ACCELERATE the flywheel in what we call a “slingshot”.

Entropy in my system occurs at only one point in the rotation of the flywheel. This has taken me years to calculate and refine. Let’s say at 350 degrees as an example, entropy is at maximum (force in the opposite direction of the desired direction). So from 0 to 358 the flywheel is being pushed and accelerates continuously. Now, obeying all physical laws, if I did not control entropy, the flywheel would slow and eventually stop. At 359 degrees I have developed a way to attenuate the magnetic field that is already “lopsided” or asymmetrical. The flywheel then makes it past the reversing force and then enters the “slingshot” and then the flywheel, using the opposing force greatly accelerates from 359 to about 15 degrees.

There are only two fields opposing at a time. One from the attenuation section (what we call fuel), and the flywheel magnetic field (what we call receptors). There are no electromagnets, or any device coupling to the flywheel. It is a zero contact device that is also magnetically levitated.
Attenuation of the field is accomplished through the bending of the paired fields. This is a major breakthrough. We keep both the geometry (shape) and geography (where the magnetic fuel is placed)(the pattern).

On the laboratory device “Crystal” you can see the firing of the attenuation device every 360 degrees. It consumes about 20 watts on average per firing.

Crystal has a 100 watt alternator rectified to 24 volts. It is also magnetically driven.
Crystal was built SOLELY to prove the applied science of Magnetic Propulsion. The simple fact that two magnetic fields produce a force, and when harvested, that force can spin a flywheel. That flywheel can then charge a battery or capacitor.

Now, here are some very important facts;
1. Crystal is NOT a dynamic motor. Magnetic Propulsion is not dynamic (instant) in its power delivery. It is inertia. It delivers power (which can then spin a generator) by accelerating a flywheel and storing that energy. You cannot in any way hook a dynamic load to a Magnetic Propulsion Engine. It will just stop, and it will stop quickly.
2. Magnetic Propulsion Engines work by creating inertia in a very specialized flywheel (some 257 parts) that refuse to magnetize in the presence of a large and powerful magnetic field. Once to speed (125 to 350 RPM) you have a great way to harvest kinetic energy by spinning an alternator. The alternator is not allowed to exceed a specific load, based on its affect on inertia. This is also a closely held trade secret. Think of it as a very large electrical “pump”.
3. Magnetic Propulsion requires STORAGE. A battery or capacitor. You can charge 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
4. Magnetic Propulsion requires a BATTERY or CAPACITOR for its parasitic energy to run its attenuation section. But this is only about 20W p/s at 60 RPM. So the battery is very small.
5. Crystal’s flywheel weighs in at 622 LBS where our commercial Engine flywheels are just over 4,000 LBS.
6. Magnetic Propulsion is not “over unity” or perpetual motion. It receives its power from over 5,000 PSI of pressure from an accelerated magnetic field. My developed magnetic fuel has “pull forces” (a common measure used in magnetism) of over 10,000 Pounds. This type of force requires not only great safety procedures but has also led to great breakthroughs in the handling of these very powerful magnets.

This coming week, IEC will be producing a complete explanatory broadcast program called “Introduction to Magnetic Propulsion” which will air on www.earthenginelive.com. It will be broadcast live and then repeated at specific times during the day. Broadcast times will be announced this coming Monday morning on the IEC Website (www.ie.energy) and on www.earthenginelive.com.
The program will take you through the entire Magnetic Propulsion Cycle and introduce our new transparent control panel with consumption and output meters (compliments of AccuEnergy).
I sincerely hope that you will tune in !

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Wall Street Journal Articles Covers IEC’s Earth Engine and Inventor Dennis Danzik

An article published in the Wall Street Journal examines the story of Inductance Energy Corporation and the role of Dennis Danzik in particular as the inventor of the Earth Engine.

The author, Dan Neil, takes an open-minded approach to the claims of Danzik and IEC, acknowledging that their claims go against the laws of physics as they are currently understood, but also allowing for the fact that it might be possible that a breakthrough might have been made. He writes: “If it works as advertised, it would rank with the harnessing of steam, electricity and the atom.”

As many readers here are aware, IEC claims that it can produce energy through a new type of magnetic interaction which physics says cannot work because of the law of conservation of energy (magnetic attraction and repulsion cancel each other out) The WSJ article explains it like this:

The magnets IEC uses are also highly one-sided, or “anisotropic,” which means their field is stronger on one face than the other—say, 85% North and 15% South.

In the R32, magnets located in three black towers interact with ones placed in the two one-ton, counter-rotating flywheels. As the flywheel rotates, small battery-powered motors move the tower magnets’ orientation at moments of highest drag. This allows the magnets to accelerate as they approach and not slow down as much when they pass.

The net force imparts angular momentum to the flywheels that can then be harvested, mechanically or electrically, IEC claims.

The article is pretty neutral. It acknowledges that there is skepticism amongst some physicists, but also that some visitors to the IEC Scottsdale, Arizona facility leave thinking that they have seen working magnet motors. Dan Neil says it has to be one of two things: an immense scientific/technological breakthrough, or an elaborate magic trick.

A newspaper article in a major newspaper like the WSJ is likely to generate new interest in IEC’s claims, and possibly help them get new customers. The target market seems to be operations where they currently use diesel generators, such as oil fields, where they say they will sell electricity from between 8-45 cents per kw/H (compared to $1 for diesel generated electricity).

Ultimately, in order for people to become convinced this is not a magic trick, it will take happy Earth Engine customers willing to publicly endorse the technology. Only one customer is named in this article: Shooting Range Industries in Las Vegas, Nevada which is owned by an IEC investor named Mike Halverson.

I have tried to get some comment from Shooting Range Industries about how happy they were with the performance of the Earth Engine, but they just referred me back to IEC who have yet to respond to my inquiries.

The WSJ article is available here, however only part of it is available to the general public.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Brilliant Light Power Report Propriety Magnetohydrodynamic Power Cycle, Claim Power Density Comparabl to High-Speed Diesel Engines

Thanks to Jas for posting about the following:

Brilliant Light Power posted news on their website:

https://brilliantlightpower.com/breakthrough-oxygen-and-silver-nanoparticle-aerosol-magnetohydrodynamic-power-cycle/

“We report a proprietary liquid magnetohydrodynamic cycle, the simplest application of Lorentz’s law to a moving conductor with crossed electrodes and a magnetic field with no moving parts, having a potential of MHD power conversion efficiency that approaches the loading factor W (ratio of the electric field across the load to the open circuit electric field) . . . The channel volume is 20.4 cm3 so the corresponding MHD power density is about 23.1 kW/cm3 (23.1 MW/liter) which compares very favorably with typical power densities in the range of only about 30 kW/liter for state-of-the-art high-speed heavy-duty diesel engines.”

There is also a link to a paper posted:

“Oxygen and Silver Nanoparticle Aerosol MagnetohydrodynamicPower Cycle”

https://brilliantlightpower.com/pdf/MHD_Paper_050719.pdf

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Internatonal Energy Agency : Renewables Growth Is Stalling (Oilprice.com)

The following post is published with permission from Oilprice.com

IEA : Renewables Growth Is Stalling

Renewable energy deployment stalled out last year, raising alarm bells about the pace of the clean energy transition.

In 2018, total deployment of renewable energy stood at about 180 gigawatts (GW), which was the same as the previous year. It was the first time since 2001 that capacity failed to increase year-on-year, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).

Adding 180 GW of clean energy is a massive total, but still falls short of what is needed to clean up the electricity sector. It equates to roughly 60 percent of what is needed each year in order to meet long-term climate goals, the IEA said. The agency said that the world needs to add about 300 GW of renewable energy each year through 2030 in order to meet the targets laid out in the Paris Climate Agreement.

Worse, last year, CO2 emissions from energy rose 1.7 percent, setting another record high at 33 Gigatonnes. So, while emissions need to decline sharply, they haven’t even flattened out yet. Renewable energy continues to grow, but so does demand for oil and gas.

“The world cannot afford to press “pause” on the expansion of renewables and governments need to act quickly to correct this situation and enable a faster flow of new projects,” Fatih Birol, the IEA’s Executive Director, said in a statement.

“Thanks to rapidly declining costs, the competitiveness of renewables is no longer heavily tied to financial incentives. What they mainly need are stable policies supported by a long-term vision but also a focus on integrating renewables into power systems in a cost-effective and optimal way. Stop-and-go policies are particularly harmful to markets and jobs,” Birol added.

For the last four years, growth of wind had slowed, but the gap was made up by faster growth from solar. The difference in 2018 was that solar’s exponential growth flattened out. The reason for that lies in China, where the government pared back incentives on solar in order to cut expenditures and cope with grid integration challenges, the IEA said. Still, China added 44 GW of solar last year, the most by far out of any other country and nearly half of the 97 GW global total. But that was down from 53 GW that China installed in 2017.

Costs continue to fall, making renewable energy the cheapest option in many markets, which should ensure strong growth going forward. In the U.S., wind and solar are now cheaper than operating existing coal plants in much of the country. In fact, in April, renewable energy surpassed coal in terms of electricity generation for the first time, accounting for 24 percent of the total, compared to coal’s 20 percent market share.

But, despite the momentum, the transition is not fast enough. A new UN report finds that the world is facing a mass die-off of biodiversity, with as many as one million plant and animal species at risk of extinction. Also, the world is on track to blow through its carbon budget within 12 years.

Because of this urgency, a wave of new policies supporting a faster roll out of electric vehicles and renewable energy is inevitable. At the state level, renewable energy mandates are proliferating. In the Democratic primary for president, candidates are trying to outdo each other in terms of ambition on clean energy and climate change. For instance, what was once considered an extreme position, such as banning oil and gas drilling on public lands, has now become a mainstream position in the Democratic Party, at least for the candidates running for president.

Another example of the shifting Overton window came in late April when former Texas Congressman and presidential contender Beto O’Rourke recently called for $5 trillion in spending over the next 10 years in an effort to cut emissions to zero by 2050. It’s ambitious by any measure, but faced some pushback for not going far enough, which says a lot about the growing concern about climate change. In fact, climate change ranked as the top issue for Democratic voters, according to a recent poll.

The oil and gas industry has enjoyed a golden era under the Trump administration, but it may only be temporary.

Link to article: https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Renewable-Energy/IEA-Renewables-Growth-Is-Stalling.html

By Nick Cunningham for Oilprice.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged