More great news!   Thanks again for the updates.   Sorry to hear this didn't bring in big business interests yet but I suspect it's so far above what most people can believe that until some sort of device is "in their face and hands" and see a working unit that interest may be a bit slack.   You show both great knowledge and high Integrity Philip.   I am always left with a good feeling in reading your updates.     In case others haven't looked lately at the web site here's something for you from quentron.com:

                              "   The only acceptable proof of such a device is a working device

                                                                         So be here

                                                                    OFFICIAL LAUNCH
                                                                    30 November 2012
                                                                    6pm (p.s.t) "

It really is very laudable, good intention of Philip, desire that this development comes quickly to those in need. And encourage her friends and colleagues in this great challenge, the generator thermionic, which has taken so many years.

But we must be realistic, Quenco price will be high for the first to use it, regardless of the price of the license, because although you can make a high production, demand, will be much more large, therefore the price to the consumer will be high.  Therefore if the license is cheap, what will happen is that the manufacturer  and intermediaries  they will remain with much of the gain, and Philip will have minimal income compared with manufacturers, being philip, the most time and money has risked in this invention.

We propose the following.
Limit 100 licenses.
$ 10 royalty per cm2.
$ 10M Application fee per license.
$ 10M Annual renewal fee.

This is the reasoning:
The companies that will be asking Quenco licenses, and they will mass produce, are Intel, Samsung, TSMC, Global Foundries, Samsung, Micron, Toshiba, etc.. These companies are accustomed to pay hundreds of millions of dollars for licenses, semiconductor, ie $ 1 million is nothing for these companies, lawyers may charge more money to write a contract of these characteristics, more that what it costs the license. For example, Intel paid this year 2.3 billion dollars for a stake of 10% in a company of semiconductor wafer fabrication.

If philip, want to help a friend, to facilitate the entry, production, Quenco because philip can directly give the discount, you want.

For the foundation proposed by philip, its purpose it should be bring solutions for the production of food, housing, water and electricity.  At cost and long-term financed. The poor do not need, Quenco and they will not know how to use it, they need solutions that work with Quenco. What could happen is that unscrupulous brokers would use these free Quenco,  making profit of the needs of the poor.

The solution to the problems of the people, is not give anything for free, because that's filled with shame, and takes away the possibility of earning their own living, and to develop themselves as individuals and as a society . What we you have to do is provide all the tools and conditions for they can have a decent life, not charging interest, giving them time and work, so they can afford what they really need.

An individual without dignity, is dependent of what you always give to him. This being the opposite of the result sought.

Note: Again we do the pentode experiment, and this reached a maximum of 3.9 micro ampere, just before melting. (Much more, than 0.3 micro ampere in previous test).

@Elisha

Nice, but you ought to save your money, we should all know within about a month when Stanford have successfully fabricated the millimetre baby Quencos.

When tests on them show a small current without an oven then bingo!

Anyone that thinks a toaster oven is not sufficient for this test is severely limited in problem solving.

1: Heat the tube and record the current and polarity. Let the oven cool down and rotate the tube 180 degrees. Reheat and record the current and polarity. Is it the same polarity? If yes then it works.

2: Place the tube on a rotating shaft and slowly rotate while heating. Does it produce an alternating current? If no, then it works.

Wow, tested in a toaster oven without expensive isothermal oven.

If yes, then it works? If no, then it works?

Really? So your tests in the toaster oven are ruling out ANY OTHER POSSIBLE explanation for seeing a current indicated on the instrumentation? 

Wow, your toaster oven must be really something. Do you put the meter in there too, so it's not acting as a cold sink for some thermoelectric effect?

If yes, then it works? If no, then it works?

Really? So your tests in the toaster oven are ruling out ANY OTHER POSSIBLE explanation for seeing a current indicated on the instrumentation? 

Wow, your toaster oven must be really something. Do you put the meter in there too, so it's not acting as a cold sink for some thermoelectric effect?

Absolutely! Yes for test #1 and No for test #2.
These are separate tests so they have separate answers for the true condition.

Do you doubt the tests ability to determine if the result is due to uneven heating?

Of course, there is always the possibility that just after you rotate the tube 180 degrees, the toaster oven will suddenly reverse it's heat flow direction just to mess with your test. (maybe it's a smart toaster oven!)

It may even rotate the heating direction to match the tube rotation in test #2 so only one side of the tube will get heat. Yes it's a magic convection toaster oven!

Or, maybe the tests actually work as described. (naw, this is impossible in view of the other probabilities)

Cold sink!, Yes, first show me one that uses the same wire type for both sides of the connection! Oh, and test #3, Swap the wires connected to the tube and repeat tests #1 and #2.

Where is the "Cold Sink "idea now? Gee, I don't see it!

All the equipment in the world does not produce a good test, analytical thinking is the best equipment.

Lumen:

Your comments are nonsensical.  You are implicitly conceding that the toaster oven is not an isothermal environment but you have a Lumen-inspired "work around" for the problem.  Just rotate the tubes like barbecue chicken and if they produce current in a variable-temperature environment then all must be fine.

Your "problem solving" is severely limited.

MileHigh

I am about sick of a couple of you on this forum.  Why don't you go back with your buddy TK and use your "problem solving skills" to design a "working" whipmag.  Oh, wait, you did that, but it was a fraud. 
At least lumens is testing something.  Instead of fault finding anyone really interested in finding some real solutions.  You have an agenda and TK has an agenda.  We on this forum are wise to the both of you.
 
Have a nice day!
 
Bruce

Bruce,

Sorry Bruce, I'm not the one doing the testing. I'm just lining up the life failure skeptics for the soon to come crow feast.

If any of them would have done any research, they would have known that the principal (electron tunneling due to heat) has been a problem in the MOSFET industry when they tried to reduce gate barriers to less than 100nm.
Can you imagine the tunneling you would get with a barrier less than 1.5nm!

But you know how they are. 

I don't want to say too much, I'm already -10 points with Philip.