Monday, September 7, 2015



We are witnessing the birth of the LENR island...or is it actually an entire continent?
This birth is now a very chaotic process rocks come and go and fog is everywhere
Sudden and fast changes. 
Some inhabitants of the older part claim that the entire continent is exactly as their already familiar part.- it is an unique land form everywhere.Newcomers claim to see high mountains and abyssal valleys but are seldom believed.(now quitting my job of guide on that metaphoric island)
 I ma trying so hard to imagine a logically and factually consistent taxonomy (internal classification for the LENR field-continent)
Old or completely new concepts are necessary to describe it.
That is- how useful are the already known data can be used to describe and understand- in great lines- all the new achievements?
Similarity and difference e.g. between palladium and nickel?
Similarity and difference e.g. between light hydrogen and slower deuterium?
Nuclear, OK but how and in which extent; can we really exclude weak and collective effects?
And a bit of statistics- considering topology, nature and mechanism of the heat generating reactions (as in my 1992 paper where  I claimed that the place where reactions take place has priority)- how many kinds of LENR can exist?
What could bring LENR based on an extremist metal as tungsten?
A bit more statistics how many stages has a real LENR process already developed
to an industrial level? 
Are there really existing slow and enhanced  LENR processes and is the boarder between them indeed the Debye temperature?
Is the effect of increasing temperatures (intensification)  due o dynamic effects as I thought  already in the dawn period of Cold fusion?
What is the equilibrium between diversity and unity in the great LENR land?
In which extent do we understand the nature and role of NAE and how NAE genesis operates?
Can radiations of any kind be totally eliminated  so that the nuclear stages/nature of LENR remains hidden and harmless-inclusive legally?
Do quality leaps, sudden changes, deep metamorphoses happen in LENR?

These and similar question can get true answers only in a conceptual frame for converting chaos in order.
A first frame is tested experimentally- very probably it will be proved, but how broad it will be, the era of new discoveries has just started for LENR?


1) Andrey Hrishchanovich repeats the experiment of the Celani Cell
Андрей Хрищанович повторил опыт с ячейкой Челани

We have performed a series of experiments with a modified Rossi reactor. The experiment is more similar to the cell of Francesco Celani. We have achieved stble reproducibility at the use of hydrogen, have obtained COP 200-250% , Repeatedly verified. There are no more doubts, the LENR reaction works!
It can be staed that by increasing of temperature and pressure in the reaction zone
the COP  It is possible that at Dagomys at Sept. 28 I will make a presentation> Now I am solving the financial oorganizatoric problems for the pparticipation at the conference.
Find comments at:

Description of the company of Andrey

2) Documents referencing hydrogen absorption into orbitak of a nanocrystal of a metal (R. Little)
The author, Reginals Little cites his own publications as:
Magnetocatalytic Adiabatic Spin Torque Orbital Transformations for Novel Chemical and Catalytic Reaction Dynamics: The Little Effect  and apatent:

Magnitites Pycnonuclear Reactions within Electrochemical, Radioactive and Electromagnetic Medias
US 20140140461 A1

This problem deserves some study for sure, even if I do not remember Piantelli telling/weiting about the Little Effect. It is not easy to do fast search on Google Scholar for somebody calleed Little, but...

3) S.N. Andreev's paper"Forbidden transmutations of elements" can be accessed now freely here:

4) Freethinker Lenr 2
My LENR lab episode 7

5) Sticky tape generates X-rays. How weird is that?

6) Front-line report
Andrea Rossi
September 7th, 2015 at 9:32 AM

Now at 10.30 a.m. of Monday September 07 ( Labor Day in the USA: greetings to all the workers of the USA!) the situation is:
1 MW E-Cat: stable and well, all data normal
E-Cat X: is in operation.
Warm Regards,


Rossi has stated in his patent that the catalyst used in his reactor is a group 10 element which includes Nickel, Palladium(1554C) and Platinum(1768C). This means that the new high temperature unit that Rossi is developing might use platinum or palladium as the catalyst. Both these metals have a melting temperature greater than nickel. Therefore, the Rossi patent might well cover his newest R&D high temperature reactor (XCat) development.

Like almost all LENR theory developed to date, this Piantelli interpretation is very narrow to the specifics of his engineering solution that he uses to generate his nickel based LENR reaction. On the other hand, the Xcat may well use platinum as the catalyst. The high operating temperature of the Xcat over the melting temperature of nickel implies this when taken together with the Rossi patent in turn implies the use of platinum as the catalytic metal.

The H- theory of the reaction may well be true for the specific implementation of the Piantelli reactor but it may not be true for the new Xcat reactor being developed by Rossi. The Piantelli theory may be an emergent consequence of a more fundamental LENR reaction mechanism. There may be hundreds of these theories that are restricted by the details of reactor implementation.

This and many other experiments in LENR have identified many mechanisms that can produce LENR reactions, Ed Storms has identified one of them, Piantelli another, and Rossi yet another. Then there is Holmlid and Dr. George Miley to add...and so on and on. LENR can also occur in both the liquid, gas and plasma phases as shown in experiments done to identify LENR over the quarter century of its most resent phase of experimental history. Identifying the NAE is a process of reduction that identifies the common factor involved over these many currently identified forms of LENR and also the many more forms that are likely to be discovered in the future. 

The fundamental causation of LENR must meet a global set of connected conditions.

These common and universal conditions include the thermalization of gamma radiation, the rapid to instantaneous stabilization of radioactive isotopes, lack of neutron emissions, and the wide variation of seemingly random transmutation results which includes fusion of light elements into heavier elements and fission of heavy elements into lighter ones, remote reaction at a distance from the location of the LENR reaction(aka NAE), and instantaneous cluster fusion involving huge numbers of sub-reactions that occur instantly and collectively. 

Even though the LENR reaction oftentimes occurs concurrent with the presence of hydrogen isotopes, hydrogen is not required as a fundamental cause of the reaction as shown in the experiments done at Proton 21 where a ball of copper is blasted with a high powered arc discharge, and the carbon dust experiments performed using microwaves conducted by George Egely, the new editor of infinite magazine. In the Proton 21 experiments, the nano-particles involved are copper based and in the Egely case the nano-particles are based on carbon. In the Papp reaction. The nano particles are based on chlorine and noble gases.

A process of reductionism needs to be applied to the understanding of LENR theory to get to the basic atomic and indivisible essence of the LENR process.


  1. This post is once again to remind us that even one of the greatest QM (QED) theoretical scientists in the US (who shared a Nobel prize with Richard Feynman) had to battle abuse and bias when he sought to publish 'several critical experiments' in looking into the original cold fusion possibilities. The below article explains in his words how frustrated he was at putting forward helpful suggestions and advice and how in utter disgust at the treatment he received, he resigned from the American Physical Society.

    Anyone who knows the story of QED (Quantum Electrodynamics) and how the theories evolved should already also know that both Feynman & Schwinger were regarded as two of the greatest physicists of the 20th century and both US born.

    At different times it was hard to pick who was the better of the two as both were brilliant but also tended to compete as well as cooperate as they did over QED.

    Without adding Brian Josephson to the list of brilliant minds who see merit in exploring CF, it is appalling that their open minded efforts to *encourage* CF research, has resulted in both being attacked by what can only be described as bloody-minded and oppressive individuals determined to squash serious research.

    As always, there are lessons to be learned from situations like this. A big lesson is the extent some people will go to to destroy progress if it doesn't fit their own agendas or interests. Schwinger was not directly advocating CF as much as seeking to explain ways it may happen and tests that needed to be done to that end.

    Again, what LENR needs is a modern John Bell to come up with a proof experiment that can clearly show a result as being either CF or LENR or neither.
    That is what LENR needs the most !. It doesn't need to be a megawatt plant. Just unequivocal proof of heat generation from non chemical means in a CF / LENR experiment. Scaling and engineering can come afterwards.


    (I can't help thinking we already have such a test but it is simply being ignored or buried)

    1. An extract where Schwinger seeks to clarify a mechanism that answers criticism of lack of gama-rays (the main issue for hot-fusionists) ...

      "The case against the reality of cold fusion is outlined. It is based on preconceptions inherited from experience with hot fusion. That cold fusion refers to a different regime is emphasized. The new regime is characterized by intermittency in the production of excess heat, tritium, and neutrons. A scenario is sketched, based on the hypothesis that small segments of the lattice can absorb released nuclear energy."

      I pick up the last sentence of the abstract with this quotation from the text:

      "If the g-rays demanded by the hot fusioneers are greatly suppressed, what agency does carry off the excess energy in the various reactions? One must look for something that is characteristic of cold fusion, something that does not exist in the plasma regime of hot fusion. The obvious answer is: the lattice in which the deuterium is confined.

      Imagine then, that a small, but macroscopic piece of the lattice absorbs the excess energy of the HD or DD reaction. I advance the idea of the lattice playing a vital role as a hypothesis. Intermittency is the hallmark of cold fusion... Does the lattice hypothesis have a natural explanation for intermittency? A close approach to saturation loading is required for effective fusion to take place. But, surely, the loading of deuterium into the palladium lattice does not occur with perfect spatial uniformity. There are fluctuations. It may happen that a microscopically large–if macroscopically small–region attains a state of such lattice uniformity that it can function collectively in absorbing the excess nuclear energy that is released in an act of fusion. And that energy can initiate a chain reaction as the vibrations of the excited ions bring them into closer proximity. So begins a burst. In the course of time, the increasing number of vacancies in the lattice will bring about a shut-down of the burst. The start-up of the next burst is an independent affair. (This picture is not inconsistent with the observation of extensive cracking after long runs.)

    2. And another interesting excerpt ...

      "The extremely small penetrability of the Coulomb barrier is generally adduced to dismiss the possibility of low energy (cold) fusion. The existence of other mechanisms that could invalidate this logic is pointed out."

      Here are excerpts. "... Implicit in this line of thought (of negligible penetrability) is the apparently self-evident causality assignment that has the release into the surrounding environment, of energy at the nuclear level, occur after the penetration of the Coulomb barrier. One would hardly question that time sequence when the environment is the vacuum. But does it necessarily apply to the surrounding ionic lattice? Another reading is possible, one in which the causal order is reversed. Why? Because, in contrast with the vacuum, the lattice is a dynamical system, capable of storing and exchanging energy.

      "The initial stage of the new mechanism can be described as an energy fluctuation, within the uniform lattice segment, that takes energy at the nuclear level from a pd or dd pair and transfers it to the rest of the lattice, leaving the pair in a virtual state of negative energy....

      "For the final stage ... consider the pd example where there is a stable bound state: 3He. If the energy of the virtual state nearly coincides with that of 3He, a resonant situation exists, leading to amplification, rather than Coulomb barrier suppression.

      "It would seem that two mechanisms are available ... But are they not extreme examples of mechanisms that in general possess no particular causal order?"

    3. And yet another significant comment from Schwinger ...

      "... treatments of nuclear fusion between positively charged particles (usually) represent the reaction rate as the product of two factors. The first factor is a barrier penetration probability. It refers entirely to the electric forces of repulsion. The second factor is an intrinsic nuclear reaction rate. It refers entirely to nuclear forces. This representation ... may be true enough under the circumstances of hot fusion. But, in very low energy cold fusion one deals essentially with a single state, or wave function, all parts of which are coherent. It is not possible to totally isolate the effect of the electric forces from that of the nuclear forces: The correct treatment of cold fusion will be free of the collision-dominated mentality of the hot fusioneers."

    4. In the last post above, in my mind Schwinger nails the problem for hotfusionists. As I read it, some of them may not have understood or grasped the nature of the coherent wave function of all the parts (single state).

      It seems to me (correct me if wrong Axil) that you have been honing in on this 'single state' from way back as a given. But I suspect it is not quite accepted nor fully understood (in its oddity).

      I am inclined to add that those who refuses to accept that it is now proven beyond doubt, that Bell's inequality can be violated (claimed this year, with all loopholes now closed) then they may be among those who regard this alternate energy release (as in CF / LENR) to be impossible.

      IMHO QED understandings, in the form of CF/LENR energy will sooner or later bite them on their 'bums' (backsides, hines, deriers whatever).


    5. Just had to highlight this last pair of comments from the Julian Schwinger document. In the 2nd point he so politely but forcefully says what he thinks of some of the critics of his prior comments. (See "learn to operate within the bounds of sanity" :)

      1. What accounts for the absence of particles that are familiar in ordinary hot fusion, such as the neutrons of D + --> n + 3He and the high energy y-ray of D + D--> y + 4He? Very early in my thinking I added the conventional reaction p + D--> y + 3He. Why? Mostly because it would also be there. One cannot produce heavy water without some contamination by light water.

      2. Hot fusion relies on achieving enough kinetic energy to overcome the Coulomb repulsion between like charges. How then can cold fusion, operating far below those levels, ever achieve fusion? Incidentally, I have read, and heard, that my solution to the Coulomb barrier problem is to forget it! Not even an absent-minded professor (which I am not) would go that far. Critics should learn to operate within the bounds of sanity.