Wednesday, May 22, 2013


The Report of the Italian and Swedish professors that demonstrates the generation of massive excess heat and an amazingly high energy density is a serious very professional work.
It is obviously not perfect; not a capodopera but this does not disturb me a bit. Its conclusions are unassailable and, I well remember that re-reading even my most successful research reports two weeks later, I usually have found lots of issues that could be done much better. Three months later, many times we were able to find a better way.

The Report has not found its way to the Big Press – this is only its 3rd day of public existence. However it has already generated an epidemics that (because I am chasing popularity) I will call of toxic naivety and arrogant, increasingly desperate ill-will. Those detractors who have decent IQ’s and at least some
traces of EQ start understanding that soon they will be forced to swallow their words and these will taste very bitter. Take this as my friendly prediction.

The epidemic is lead by a sub-species of Homo sapiens- those human beings who are fatally allergic to any question that needs answers beyond the most primitive straight YES or NO.
See please what I wrote about the MU answers- in Robert Pirsig’s interpretation here:  It would be simplistic to call them dualist-extremists, therefore I will not call them in any way, but you, my friends and friends of reality, you will easily recognize them.

These individuals surely know this essential idea:

The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function. ((F Scott Fitzgerald)

Unfortunately the poor souls think those opposing ideas can and have to be mixed, even combined. That is a pathological anti-logical mental operation. The latest example:

The core idiocy in the attacks.

The attacks try to demonstrate simultaneously that;
a) Andrea Rossi is a scammer, swindler, fraud & 9 synonyms
b) The E-cat is unable to produce any excess heat, everything was and is just faked, false, non-existent heat.

I will use an analogy, an artistic one. As told I doubt the explanatory and the predictive value of the most usual technological analogies used for cold fusion, for ages simply because airplanes and transistors have appeared when their time
was there, theory and technical conditions were already ready. Cold Fusion came in hurry, too early- the advent of LENR+ will show you how and why this happened.

Let’s admit Andrea Rossi is a scammer- and let’s find a historical analog personality for him. Please look this video with attention and read the text:

Yes, it is the famous womanizer Don Juan (or Don Giovanni in Mozart’s opera). He immediately characterized by one of his victims, Donna Elvira (interpreted here by the adorable Dame Kiri Te Kanawa) tells it directly: “monster, villain, liar!” Don Juan escapes coward style and his servant, Leporello – in the famous Catalog aria explains to the poor girl that she is not the first or the single victim, describing the extent of his master’s sexual, marital scam so:

My dear lady, this is a list
Of the beauties my master has loved,
A list which I have compiled.
Observe, read along with me.
Italy, six hundred and forty;
Germany, two hundred and thirty-one;
A hundred in
France; in Turkey, ninety-one;
But in Spain already one thousand and three.

What do you think, boys, really not bad, centuries before Viagra was invented!
Much sex, but also a lot of money- the guy was a super-scammer indeed. He is eventually punished but accepts his fate with dignity, has strong principles. Don’t mourn him, better read what G.B. Shaw has written about Don Juan.

But let’s continue with the analogy, it is an axiom of the denigrators that Rossi’s E-Cat – is unable to deliver any excess heat, zero excess hear, zero and its 23 synonyms!
This means nothing more and nothing less that Don Juan is impotent! You don’t need imagination at all to see that in this case Leporello’s list would be, very short- no list at all.

(Note ‘impotent Don Juan’ is my independent but not original invention for this occasion, but see please the autobiography of Paul Feyerabend the philosopher who has told some remarkable things about the Scientific Method – but this is an other problem.)

Back to Rossi, do you think he is so crazy that he hopes to sell
totally impotent, non-functional E-cats? By thousands and millions? Globally? “Perpetuum stabile”s in industrial quantities? 
Do you really think the impossible is possible? And, can you make a list of Rossi’s E-cat bound victims?

An other standard core naivety is the ideally independent, test:
It means that just for pleasing some aggressive, curious negative kibitzes, Rossi will borrow one of his generators to a group of unknown well known (in the profession) experts and lets them to do all kind of tests they wish. Rossi has made a discovery; the relationship between a creator and his creation is a very complex issue. However Rossi has the right to protect his intellectual property and to establish his own risk management. A wise friend has told: Sometimes unpleasant people win the lottery. I have not met Rossi but people who know him say he has charm and can be very nice, just it is difficult to make business with him. Do you think he has paranormal abilities and has mesmerized a lot of people starting with Focardi and Stremmenos and the DGT people? No, surely not: he has excess heat in the E-cats and is still learning how to master excess heat management. He knows how advanced he is in his studies.

This was the beautiful part of the story. The ugly part is that the quasi-desperate black-and white naïve donjuanologists are attacking and insulting viciously and cowardly the Professors who have destroyed the myth of those wise-guys’ inerrancy. No fair play.



  1. "Back to Rossi, do you think he is so crazy that he hopes to sell totally impotent, non-functional E-cats? By thousands and millions? Globally? “Perpetuum stabile”s in industrial quantities? "
    No Peter, I don't think Rossi hopes to sell anything. My opinion is that he only takes money from investors and perhaps distributors. I do not believe he has ever sold an ecat or ever will.

    "And, can you make a list of Rossi’s E-cat bound victims? "

    Peter, I can no more make a list of his victims than you can of his customers. In many scams, historically, it takes a long time for investors and distributors to complain that they have been taken.

    Steorn's magnetic motor was an OBVIOUS scam. It cost investors more than 20 million Euros. It has been running seven years. Nobody has complained.

    "Do you think he has paranormal abilities and has mesmerized a lot of people starting with Focardi and Stremmenos and the DGT people? "

    I don't think he has paranormal ability. I think the people you mentioned are gullible, just like the current group of scientists who did the tests and wrote the current paper.

    1. Aldo proia is gullible, with gullible big investors.
      Xanthoulis is gullible, with a gullible CTO.
      Truchard and Concezz are Gullible.

      And strangely they agree with 24 years of physics, with thousands of paper. And strangely Heat, He4, Tritium, CR39, Phrazeodynium, agree too...

      and you not?

      Parcimony may help to find which of the hypothesis is the least improbable.

      At least for a businessman it would be criminal not to investigate on that subject. I would say, stupid. even 1% and credibility of LENR mean big business. and I bet more on 99.9% reality (and 50-70% of soon industrialized I concede)...

  2. Interestingly, if the quote in Forbes' comments is accurate, one of the investigators in the recent paper has his doubts.

    "Flemming Ravn 1 hour ago

    So I asked Bo Höistad some questions, the reply was in Swedish and I have used google translate.

    Here’s a quick and short answers:

    1) All input power was in full control.

    2) No hidden energy source in the frame

    3) This question is good that you set. In physics, we can not have faith or gut feeling for about a phenomenon occurs or not. We need to find out what actually exists through accurate measurements.

    As a nuclear physicist, I can directly say that, based on the well-known knowledge of core processes, the probability of nuclear transformations that cause heat production in the E-cat vanishingly small. Furthermore, if for some unknown reason yet to take place, they would leave traces, which has not been observed so far.

    We wanted to investigate whether Rossi’s alleged heat can be verified in an independent survey. The first result is that we have an indication that the heat actually occurs that can not be explained by any chemical process. How heat production is to remain obscure. The result is obviously very dramatic and absolutely must be further verified before any definitive statements can be made. We intend to do that in a next step.

    There is still much work left before we can determine if Rossi’s E-cat works. The results so far are interesting enough to continue that work.


    Bo Höistad"

    Page 9 of comments (expand all)

    1. "Mary," you are not reading or thinking clearly. Bo Hoistad did not express "doubts." He gave the normal default, pre-experimental position. He didn't fully explain this. It's impossible to apply "well-known knowledge of core processes" to an unknown process. He isn't expressing doubt about the results reported. He quite correctly points to the question, "How?" And it might take a long time to get an answer to that question. Cold fusion is *experimentally* established as a reality, but not as a practical application, not yet. Is the Rossi device operating through some form of cold fusion or LENR? Why would we guess that it is? The paper shows why, but it's circumstantial evidence, and Hiostad knows this.

  3. Hi again Peter. Sorry to clutter your blog and thank you for your patience.

    There is another problem with Rossi's recent test. It's sort of subtle but it's serious. I will outline it here because some Vortex people read this blog.

    J Newman wrote: "The claim is that most of the heat in the tube comes from a tiny sample of Rossi’s pixie dust and not from the resistor coils. Now, look at the infrared photos provided in the paper."

    What he means is that if the heating came, as the investigators claim, from two small areas at the end of the device, you could see the hot spots on the IR photos. In fact, you can't. All you see is the electrical heater. Unless Rossi has found a way to change the fundamental laws of heat transfer, all he is showing here is an electrical heater.

    So all the power generated by the ecat is originally from the electrical heater. Yes, that leaves the open question of how Rossi gets the extra electricity in. I suggest it's by sleight of hand. By some fraudulent method that the investigators did not see. Yet.

    1. Sorry-- that was from me. The system somehow took out some of the characters in my name.

    2. maryyugo states:

      “What he means is that if the heating came, as the investigators claim, from two small areas at the end of the device, you could see the hot spots on the IR photos. In fact, you can't. All you see is the electrical heater. Unless Rossi has found a way to change the fundamental laws of heat transfer, all he is showing here is an electrical heater.”

      Axil Replies:

      I told you yesterday that the LENR theory was obsure:

      “I think I see how Rossi does LENR and it is very exciting. Few people will be able to understand how it is done because it is a wonderful maze of quantum mechanics that is just now being untangled.”

      This is an example of what I meant.
      Let me explain:

      I am confident the there is a global condensation of polariton states in a Ni/H reactor. This general condition of Bose-Einstein condensation means that the micro-powder and perhaps even the hydrogen envelope is a superfluid that conducts heat with little or no resistance.

      A superfluid conducts heat better than copper, a 1000 times better, which is yet an excellent conductor in its own right. The reason is that thanks to superfluidity, a perfect liquid can easily move from hot zones to cold zones, enabling a thermal conduction by convection, a phenomenon much more efficient than the usual gradual heat diffusion.

      When you put a saucepan of water on a hotplate, the bottom is hotter than the free surface. Bubbles appear in the bottom, get bigger, get loose and spread over the water: the water is boiling.

      However, in a superfluid, the great thermal conduction requires a very homogeneous temperature everywhere. In the absence of zones hotter than others, transformation from liquid to vapor can only happen at the free surface where a superfluid evaporates: there are no bubbles. A superfluid vaporizes without boiling.

      What concerns many theorists of the Ni/H reactor is how heat produced by a few grams of nickel powder can be transmitted to the walls of the reactor.

      The general state of superfluidity keeps the temperature uniform throughout the hydrogen envelop. The walls of the reactor are the same temperature as the micro-powder because of a general state of Bose-Einstein condensation made possible by the polariton.

      Add this new amazement to the list of many miracles performed by the Ni/H reactor.

    3. Just like pseudoskepticism took out a few normal skeptical brain functions. I have criticized the report from many points of view, privately (Peter Gluck has seen this), but it's quite a stretch from noting that possibilities of fraud still exist to stating fraud as a firm conclusion based on "fundamental laws" which are already known to be defective, i.e., improperly applied to unknown reactions. The interpretation given by M.Y. is not consistent with the full data in the report. It's a knee-jerk reaction to cherry-picked appearances. And that kind of interpretation, knee-jerk, is typical of pseudoskepticism, and is *rampant* when there is no personal responsibility, as with internet skunks using misleading pseudonyms. Compare that with the research group involved, these are real people with reputations to protect, taking a risk, .... there is no comparison. That's why real research is not done anonymously.

    4. Abd -- Very well put:

      "it's quite a stretch from noting that possibilities of fraud still exist to stating fraud as a firm conclusion based on "fundamental laws" which are already known to be defective, i.e., improperly applied to unknown reactions."

      This is exactly the problem that pseudo-skeptics now find themselves in. They are not skeptical when it comes to to their own assumptions, which they regard (incorrectly) as laws of nature. For my own part, I would suggest that the history of ideas and science alike suggest that we are closer to the beginning of our understanding of "nature" than to the end of it. Rossi's successful LENR experiments are merely a cogent reminder of that. Thanks for the clear message.

    5. @Axil So you are saying the superfluid lines the inside of the reactor and therefore conducts the heat to all points at once. Is that your claim? Then if that is so why is there hotspots and shadows at all then. or does it only line the areas where it is convenient to hide itself behind the shadow of the heater elements.

      A very convenient explanation. Probably a little too convenient don't you think? Perhaps another explanation is the presence of yet another heater deeper in the system. But we will never know because the inner contents were removed in secret.

      It is so easy to explain away contradictory evidence with the words uttered below. Oh even the inventor doesn't fully understand the process. That makes it all alright then.

  4. Your Kung Fu Is very strong!
    Great Article Peter

  5. That's very creative, Axil. Also very unlikely. Under your premise, heat transfer laws don't apply. How convenient. I prefer the premise that Rossi cheated and provided extra power to the heater. That's why the supposedly active cartridges of powder (only 3mm thick supposedly) don't show up as hot spots in the thermogram. If they were the source of the heat, they would show hot. They don't. Therefore, they're not. Word salad won't change it.

    I notice that none of the resident geniuses at Vortex have addressed this huge elephant in the room. WHY DON'T THE SUPPOSED NUCLEAR HEAT SOURCES SHOW AS HOT SPOTS IN THE INFRARED PHOTOS?

    1. Sorry Mary, but your track record does not allow you to make claims like "very unlikely" and expect to be taken seriously. Phrases like "word salad" in response to Axil's cogent, scientifically grounded explanation of one possible explanation for the observed phenomenon do not increase your credibility; they merely lend further weight to the hypothesis that you are one of those identified in Peter's original blog as being unable to detect what the late Gregory Bateson would have called
      "news of a difference." No one -- least of all Rossi himself -- has ever claimed complete understanding of the phenomenon in question. You are the one whose position depends on the illusion of omniscience. The only relevant question before us at this point is whether there is serious reason to doubt the conclusions of these distinguished authors, whose report documents the existence of a phenomenon you have long insisted was impossible. Your insistence that third parties jump through your hoops is old news. We know you think LENR is impossible.

    2. Maryyugo, I also read on one of the forums's that someone had calculated the temperature of this cartridge from the energy that supposedly was produced. As the cartridge is relatively small and is not cooled (other then by a heat transfer to the rest of the devise)it should have melted.

  6. Excellent blog, Peter. Please ignore the trulls. : )

  7. It is somewhat off-topic, but maybe not too much, I don't know better place for some thoughts about Rossi effect.

    What if this is some new kind of stimulated alpha decay which can happen only with Ni62 (and probably with Ni64 too, but this must produce beta-emitting Fe60)?.
    About two years ago somebody at JONP asked Rossi about the "catalyst" and I tried to answer by citing the Rossi-Focardi paper (JONP 2010) where they state clearly that there is no other elements besides H and Ni in the fuel, so logically, the catalyst must be an isotope of one of them. Rossi deleted the comment without any explanation.
    After that we saw an "ash" analysis by swedes, where they found a lot (11%) of iron and nobody could explain the source of this element. There was also some discussion about natural isotopic composition of copper in the ash and this was contrary to the expectations if the source of the energy was transmutation of nickel to copper. But there was no word about isotopic composition of the iron in the ash and I think this is the most interesting question in the world right now - is this the rare (normally only 0.28%) Fe58? Because that is what is left after alpha decay of Ni62. Typical alpha has an energy about 5MeV and this can be transferred to lattice by series of collisions, so there will be no radiation and most of the alphas can never get out of the lattice.
    I can find only one paper with "stimulated alpha decay" in the abstract and this is about superfluid helium (, I'd like to know what Axil thinks about that...

    1. Dear Allan- a better place to discuss this is the Vortex Forum vortex-l
      However the data you are citing are coming from unreliable
      sources and your good questions cannot be answered just by logic. I think thatyou need a lot of patience.

    2. Dear Peter, I know about the Vortex-l, I've been lurking there for years, but it is somewhat too noisy for my taste. As Axil and Abd are here too, I prefer your excellent blog for having some feedback about this idea.

  8. One must ask oneself if one is interested in facts. Why did the researchers photograph the display of the pce-830 power analyser?

    Surely it would have made much more sense to occasionally dump the contents of its memory to a computer for analysis. yes that would mean it was offline for a few minutes at a time but that is of little concern over the length of the test. Though of course it cannot pickup DC so there will always be doubt. That of course could have been resolved by an isolating transformer.

    Another question one should ask is was the meter calibrated? by simply modifying the pickup coils I could make the meter read whatever value I wanted it to read. I wouldn't even need to mess with the actual analyser. yet at no point in the paper did I see reference to calibrating the pce-830 with the pickups used (if it was one would have to make sure the pickups were the same as used in the calibration). For the uninitiated the calibration run they speak of does not calibrate the meter.

    Too many questions left unanswered for a critical mind to accept the report on face value. Non critical minds of course will have a field day.