Saturday, March 2, 2013



These writings are about what young LENR researchers have to learn- in my opinion- on a meta-professional level i.e. beyond physics chemistry, materials science, nano-science and nanotechnology in order to effectively contribute to the flourishing of the coming New Energy Era.
There are many vital things you are not taught in the school, but you will need in life- forms of contact with reality and I am starting with managerial culture the pragmatic philosophy of the present.
Due to lack of massive feedback I have not started to build and adequate taxonomy yet, see please: I think a good researcher must be excellent in doing
classifications; this is a very necessary but not sufficient tool. The taxonomic skill becomes very visible via the logical structure and fluency of publications papers, reports, books. It gives the decisive first impression.

Two essential concepts.

Team Building

Based on his personal experience, especially at Defkalion Green Technologies, Yiannis Hadjichristos has called our attention to the fact that in such an extreme case of difficulty, even the greatest genius cannot make much without an excellent, harmonious efficient team .LENR is a peak of inter- and trans-disciplinarity, it needs first class experts in very diverse domain,
Lots of people able to work fine together. This idea has to be a recurrent leit-motif of our Course!

Personal Knowledge Management

This paragraph is not contradicting but complementing the fo5mer: individuals are more concrete and quantifiable and measurable and controllable than teams, at least in principle. Exactly as Monsieur Jourdain makes prose without knowing it, we all make knowledge management, a great generous concept that includes management of ignorance, too. PKM has an advanced. superior form, personal branding, a sign and measure of your personality and greatness, see for example:

Bite Sized Insights on Personal Branding #IndiaHRChat

Do not forget about your basic aim to become a human brand!

A special advantage is to be a genius: 

At least to seem, or to be considered one as a justification why you are working for this super-challenging problem. It is really not so difficult. See please this:

What does the most comprehensive study of geniuses tell us about creativity?

It tells very interesting thing things, it speaks about FLOW a concept introduced by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, the superior, almost ecstatic pleasure of superior intellectual work. The ancient Greeks have used KAIROS, time with high value as opposed to CHRONOS for this state of spirit. Please do a serious search for FLOW and KAIROS. Geniuses are happy and their work makes them so.

What might young Einstein ponder today:                                                                                

I don’t think anybody has the slightest doubt that young Einstein would be the leader of LENR research today; theory of relativity and his other discoveries being already here he would solve our problems brilliantly. We are missing him, it will last a bit more, however LENR is good hands, you will see. Uncle Albert, sleep well and dream about infinite energy!

Now suppose, my young reader is a fine talented researcher however not able to go over 6.5 on the Richter scale of intellectual earth-quakes; he still can become a fine expert by hard work. Here are the instructions:

What does it take to become an expert at anything?

Two fables and a paper
The first one is
The Solution- a business fable: ,

The solution is here and it remains invisible for those who take the decisions; this happens many times. Read please my Pdisaster paper, the poisoning hypothesis is here, it explains why PdD is unmanageable and despite this the idea is ignored.  

In 100 Words Nurturing the Roots for Growth:                                                                                                 It is a subtle idea about Growth, about what we see and what is hidden.

11 Emerging Scientific Fields That Everyone Should Know About by George Dvorsky:

 The theory in statu nascendi of our wise colleague AxilAxil shows very convincingly that LENR+ is addicted to such emerging scientific fields.

Eventually something unbelievably useful, a contribution to the high art of questions:

To Have the Most Impact, Ask the Right Questions

Feedback, initiatives, new ideas will be welcome for this course.



  1. Part 1

    There is a rock upon which the theorist must build their conceptual church.

    This rock must always be exposed because it is the fulcrum of discovery

    If that rock is faulty, then the theory will be flawed and useless and the concept will eventually fail. This is a law which rules the pursuit of knowledge that is immutable and eternal.

    This dichotomy between truth and fantasy has plagued man from his very beginnings. Imagination and wishfulness cannot stand against the iron rule of truth. This rule must be obeyed by those who want to unlock the secrets of the universe.

    Knowing what that rock really is in the very beginning of theoretical formulation is where luck comes in. And the willingness to change directions is very helpful in determining first principles if luck fails. A theorist might be curious, a ferocious worker, have limitless charisma like a prophet, be creative as a poet, but without a true star to travel by, all will be lost in the end as his carefully constructed conceptual edifice will crumble of its own weight, built on pitted and corroded ground unable to support the enormous and crushing weight of truth.

    But if the foundation of theory is solid, if this North Star is true and bright unclouded by fantasy, then all will be well in the end, even if the theory requires continual improvement, in fits and starts, like a master swordsmith polishing the steel. If he starts with a metal blend noble in its origin, forged by his own hand, the amalgam will meet the final test.

    Theory is not made of sunshine and roses. Like jeweled tamahagane steel for the finest shogun Chinese and Japanese swords, it is watered by the sweat of the master craftsmen bathed in his enduring and gasping exertions before the blood red glow of this hearth; it is tempered by his repeated blows and forged in the sparks of his purifying fire, between his tireless hammer and the hardness of his ringing anvil.

    This is why Einstein succeeded in the end. He knew the truth instinctually, he knew the star that guided him was true, and all he needed to do is prove it.

    The Widom-Larsen Ultra-Low-Momentum Neutron Catalyzed Theory of LENR is an example in point; this star of truth upon which all is build is simply the absolute requirement for the existence of Ultra-Low-Momentum Neutrons to propel the LENR reaction forward.

    If this is an absolute truth, then their theory will succeed, if not, no matter how many quantum mechanical hoops they jump through, there theory will fall.

    The same can be said for the hydrino that so many worship as a religion. If this concept was universally true, then its consequence will bear fruit in short order.

    If no truth is forthcoming, then the millions invested to perfect it will be wasted.

    Another load star of theory is the production of helium in the Pd/D system. If helium is produced in another way not analogous to hot fusion then the theories built on this tremulous method of helium production will fail.

    The theorist will hold onto this theoretical keystone to his greatest detriment, he will not let it go.

    Like a medieval hermit monk purified by years of self-flagellation, Peter expounds against “Pdisaster” but no one listens to his impassions sermons terrible in their rage against the sins of LENR, but none take heed, because they cannot. They are too set in their sinful ways. They cannot change the rock upon which they have built their heresy, their intellectual edifice of their professional lives.

    They fight against the efforts that Peter makes to further their own prospects. They resist because they perceive his efforts as a threat to their life’s work; how wrong they are and how ungrateful for the care Peter shows for them.

    I know Peter’s beacon of truth is topology; and more specifically to this concept is Ed Storms load star: cracks.

    The failure of LENR to take hold might be a failure to find that crystal of truth in a mountain of parochialism.

  2. Part 2

    I must confess my own weakness in this matter. The prejudice of my theory is held as close as any other. My rock of truth is the action of electrons as the bringer of LENR. Yes, electrons do need topology to bring LENR about, but topology in its many and varied forms are the means to an end and not the active agent, in the same way that a cup holds water. The cup does not quench our parched thirst, it is the water

    I continually adjust the roads of my theoretical journey to follow that electron star. It is a matter of intuition, a product of the subconscious mind as it endlessly sifts through myriad possibilities unbidden and uncontrollable, It is that monster of the id from the subconscious; it stalks and bellows impossible to resist defiant of all taxonomy; and occasionally upwelling in a flash of wonderment into the conscious; a struggle to control it drives me helpless down the electron road.

    If I am wrong about this central assumption, all my efforts no matter how vigorous they are, no matter how deep they are researched or how popular they may become, all will be in vain if this star of my reality is false.

    We all take our number in this great lottery game of truth finding. Most of our efforts are beyond our control. Even in a team of first class experts, the finest ever gathered, the bedrock assumptions that they base all their work on must be true. The one that selects this chrysalis of truth must be lucky to hit the nail on the head the first time out, or be moderate enough to change their path as required.

    1. I agree with you vision that Scientist often try to proove their theory, and not respect that official objective protocol of Science.
      Theory is fascinating, and push us to forget the facts when they disagree

      I feel more and more that LENr have suffered from that theory-love, on all sides. Opponents to LENR used mainstream theories, badly mastered, as tools to reject facts. LENR scientists used theory hypothesis to reject NiH.

      Opponents to LENr used the crazy theories, or the impected theories to reject LENR as a fact.
      Scientific journals asked for theoretical postion in experimental papers, so they could ridicule them...

      Theory have been a trap.

      We should have stepped back to the old method.
      First experimental results, then phenomenological findings, then better experiments, then engineering, and better phenomenological theories....

      and one day the theory is evident.

    2. Dear Alain,

      I think the theories are not crazy at all, some of them are bright and all are perfectly LOGICAL.
      May I cite from my own writing about Modes of Thinking

      "“Logical thinking is that safe and beaten path on which you can go from one swamp to an other” (Karoly Simonyi)

      The problem is not with the theories, it is with the PREMISES, good theories are applied to the wrong places.

      Curremtly I am reading Axil's theory, very high level.
      The essence is: LENR is NOT a song, but an opera in more
      acts. I will write about this more and I hope Axil will
      publish his ideas- paradigm changing ideas.