Wednesday, July 8, 2015



The opposite for courage is not cowardice, it is conformity. Even a dead fish can go with the flow.
Jim Hightower

Nonconformists make things happen. Learn more about how important it is to have people that think "outside the box". (Rita Mae Brown)

A man must consider what a rich realm he abdicates when he becomes a conformist. (Ralph Waldo Emerson)

People would rather be wrong than be different. (Henry Jacobsen

Order, discipline, continuity, harmony are good things and have to be combined with the rational respect of the Rules.. They make thinking and normal life possible. However when it is about Change and progress, the things change. Then we need new ideas, organized senilicide of the obsolete concepts and rusty, blocked principles, and the times become more than interesting, disharmonious.Non-conformists put conformist under siege and fierce battles take place.But things are not always simple, linear or straight. Sometimes it happens that, paradoxically, the supporters of the New, the non-conformists mimic an even stronger discipline, more stricter and rigid rules, show more "correctness"- political, social, scientific as it is the case. Non-conformists behave as being more conformist as their opponents, More Catholic as the Pope- to outpope the Pope.
(I cannot abstain thinking about the end part of one of my favorite books;"The Revolt of Angels" by Anatole France, see the last page )
But I don't want to theorize failed or incomplete non-conformism here all this rhetoric has LENR as target. 
Fleischmann and Pons have discovered something new, surprising and non-conformist- first they have tried to explain it by something known and conformist- fusion, just  different. An interesting episode was when Fleischmann had chosen Giuliano Preparata- then still new and revolutionary. Unfortunately nor the knowledeg problem- the true nature of cold fusion, nor the experimental problem- to find actionable ways and adjustable parameters for control and development was not achieved.
The discoverer of NiH LENR, Francesco Piantelli  being a honest  genuine scientist
has never accepted the Pd D ideology and has also rejected the Preparata theory that became kind of mainstream in Italy- and that had negative consequences- lack of funding and his lab forced to move many times.
Andrea Rossi who has found very surprising things experimentally tells always that his experiment is based on well known conventional physics only. See please He does much for the scientific correctness, this is obvious.

Now please read the second part of Leonid Urutskoev's letter; his fundamental discovery an entirely new class of nuclear interactions is starting as something very non-conformist.
Why should he think in a conformist mode about LENR? No way!

In nuclear physics we are used to the fact that as greater is the energy yield of a reaction channel, as greater is the probability of that reaction. The experiments have shown
That for the transformation reactions everything happens
Inversely: as smaller is the difference in mass of the ensemble of the parent and the daughter nuclei as higher is the probability of the reaction on that channel.

Eventually the term “transformation” has taken much from the theory of Groups. In This theory, the term occurs at the partition of the majority of elements in classes of equivalence. Transformation is called the operation that allows you to get all the elements as multiples of two elements that belong to the same class: c=aba-1.
The analogy is as follows- if we replace the titanium foil with a foil of a metal that is obtained as daughter element via the reaction of transformation. For example Co (cobalt) then no new element except those already found in the experiments with titanium, will be found.
This was still not confirmed in many experiment and has not be taken as a scientific fact but just an useful suggestion/hypothesis.

In other words, I suppose that the reactions of transformation can show exactly the same basic processes on which the formation of matter is based. An argument in favor of this supposition is that in the experiments but also in phenomenological model ali the daughter elements appear with an isotopic distribution very near to the natural distribution, with the exception of Fe and Sb.

If expressed assumption is valid, then the future theory should allow obtaining the natural isotopic distribution for all chemical elements "on the tip of a pen." Since it is
an approximately constant isotopic distribution of all chemical elements found in the visible region of the universe, perhaps this allows us to speak about a single mechanism for the origin of matter )in stars, planets, meteors).
If this supposition is correct or not, only the future can show it more certainly the far future.

But now about something I have no doubts is that “cold fusion” does not and cannot exist. More precisely I will express this so it does not belong to the two phenomena that take place at high energies- fusion and fission, but belongs to a more broad class of nuclear reactions- low energy transformations having a collective character.

I am convinced that this interpretation, from different causes will not be accepted both by the supporters and the opponents of “cold fusion” and for this reason it is under the fire of critics from right and from left. In my opinion, both are fascinated (but completely differently) by the simplicity and beauty of the D+D reactions, and do not agree to carefully analyze the results of the existing experiments.
My argument is very simple- if cold fusion works then the measured excess heat would be in strict compliance (rather than proportional) with the quantity of detected neutrons and tritium atoms. The level of neutrons is orders of magnitude smaller then the nuclear reactions responsible for the excess heat.
I am very surprised that so many highly qualified physicists still have the illusion (a la Fleischmann) and try to imagine the reaction D+ D as source of the thermal l effect.

NOTE 1: I will discuss with he author about the possibility of the reaction D+D à He- in a broad context.

NOTE 2- The next part of Leonid Urutskoev’s letter refers to he surprising formation of hydrogen- I still have some questions her. I will come back with the results.
Once again, thanks to the Author!
Can it be told better that LENR is not what we think it is?


1) The 1MW plant was working for less than 4 months, that means we have to wait for the results more than other 8 months

E-Cat: l’impianto da 1MW è in funzione da più di 4 mesi

2) Brillouin about Tom Claytor's replication
(Submitted on 7 Jul 2015)

We first show a possible mechanism to create a new type of nuclear fusion, thermal resonance fusion, i.e. low energy nuclear fusion with thermal resonance of light nuclei or atoms, such as deuterium or tritium. The fusion of two light nuclei has to overcome the Coulomb barrier between these two nuclei to reach up to the interacting region of nuclear force. We found nuclear fusion could be realized with thermal vibrations of crystal lattice atoms coupling with light atoms at low energy by resonance to overcome this Coulomb barrier. Thermal resonances combining with tunnel effects can greatly enhance the probability of the deuterium fusion to the detectable level. Our low energy nuclear fusion mechanism research - thermal resonance fusion mechanism results demonstrate how these light nuclei or atoms, such as deuterium, can be fused in the crystal of metal, such as Ni or alloy, with synthetic thermal vibrations and resonances at different modes and energies experimentally. The probability of tunnel effect at different resonance energy given by the WKB method is shown that indicates the thermal resonance fusion mode, especially combined with the tunnel effect, is possible and feasible. But the penetrating probability decreases very sharply when the input resonance energy decreases less than 3 keV, so for thermal resonance fusion, the key point is to increase the resonance peak or make the resonance sharp enough to the acceptable energy level by the suitable compound catalysts, and it is better to reach up more than 3 keV to make the penetrating probability larger than 10^{-10}.

4) More papers and announcements published at the official ХТЯ и ШМ
 site- in inverse chronological order: To come back here !

a) The Russian Federation patent of Fleischmann-Pons: "METHOD AND DEVICE FOR GENERATION OF HEAT" has lost its validity

b) V .A, Kirkinskii et. al. :"The coefficient of transmission of strongly screened 
Coulomb barrier" plus many other papers, patent

c) The R F patent HEAT ENERGY GENERATING DEVICE AND COLD FUSION REACTOR by Ubaldo Mastromatteo has lost its validity


e) B. M. Levin ADDITIONAL Għ / CK-PHYSICS: Orthopositronium and cold fusion



h) M.A. Karpov Explosion of red mud at the aluminum plant in Hungary and dolf nuclear fusion (CNF)

i) The paper of G.V. Tarasenko andE.A. Demcheva in the journal Theoretical aspects of geology (Russ)

j) Articles by G.S. Ivasyshin "Helium wear and CNF" plus  others.

5) Here you can put questions to Robert Godes from Brillouin; just join the LENR Forum that is fine!

6) From Akito Takahashi:
Proceedings of JCF15 is now downloadable at:

7) Andrea Rossi outsourcing for production arranged with chain of industries in Us, Europe  and Asia:

1 comment:

  1. Regarding the statement: “The analogy is as follows- if we replace the titanium foil with a foil of a metal that is obtained as daughter element via the reaction of transformation. For example Co (cobalt) then no new element except those already found in the experiments with titanium, will be found. “

    This observation can be explained if the LENR process is divided into two parts: the cause and the effect.

    The cause is the explosion of a metal foil that can be made up of any number of elements. The process of electrical explosion is the cause. The cause produces a mechanism of action(a force) that can reach out to a distant location and produce “action at a distance”. This has been seen when an exploding titanium foil produces the fission of uranium salt in a chamber of the cell separated physically and is far removed from the location of the electrical explosion.

    After the wire explosion, fission of uranium is found in the outer chamber of the test cell.

    This says that the LENR reaction is not based on a short ranged particle based agent. A massless longe ranged force carrier (a boson - photon) is responsible for the LENR reaction. I believe that LENR is caused by magnetic effects.

    Low-energy nuclear reactions and the leptonic monopole
    Georges Lochak*, Leonid Urutskoev**