Monday, October 12, 2015

OCT 12, 2015 an exemplary LENR initiative: Bay Area Cold Fusion Meetup


Time is the most precious element of human existence. The successful person knows how to put energy into time and how to draw success from time.
(Denis Waitley) 



The world is changing in innumerable ways- one of those hailed by Ego Out is diminishing of LENRphobia and promotion of the new LENR-based world.
This is splendid news: by the initiative of our new friend DANA SECCOMBE a localpro-Cold Fusion/LENR organization was founded, the Bay Area Cold Fusion Meetup, hopefully a harbinger of an unstoppable popular movement.
The news were announced at :

As I want to offer you first hand, first brain information, I have established a direct communication with Dana; you well know that I have stated many times that the ability to have initiatives is a great positive differentiate between humans, so we have to learn from this reality. 

Dana Seccombe's background and personal LENR story

I’m an electrical engineer with advanced degrees in Solid State Physics from MIT (latest degree, 1972). I’ve worked in multiple fields, including early work in CCD’s and phosphor upconverters in college COOP programs; and later in my professional career: in Integrated Circuit Process design, computer design, computer peripherals design, inkjet printer technology, and dry film technology and image processing. I was at one time a Senior VP at HP (till 1999), responsible for a 10,000 person operation that did the research and manufacturing of hp printer cartridges and associated technology. You can read my resume . I currently do some consulting thru tactyx, but my work with cold fusion is intended to be separate from my consulting. 

Re cold fusion: Like many people, I was astounded in with the announcement of Fleishmann and Pons’ results in the early ‘80’s. From then, till about 2005, this was simply background information to me. But, as I had some free time I started to read the internet literature and some books, felt that with this much smoke, there had to be a fire somewhere. Though early work up to and including McKubre’s work was intriguing, it wasn’t until Rossi and others reported more repeatable results that could lead to at least empirical optimization that I became more interested. Yet I was amazed that, even now, there is relatively little active research in the US, and particularly in the San Francisco Bay Area, where technical expertise and entrepreneurial spirit abounds, and start-up capital runs like water. And, as far as I know, sophisticated institutions such as UC Berkeley and Stanford continue to ignore the whole issue…as if the state of the art was frozen in about 1986. 

Dana Seccombe's global (short) assessment of LENR

• Empirically, there seems to be at least one paradigm changing path to generating power that is available to be optimized (the Ni-Hydrogen system a la Rossi et al)
• Because this path works in contradiction to known “laws” of physics, there must be either new physics principles, or at least new understanding of well-known principles, to be discovered
• These principles, in addition to allowing the optimization of energy generation, may start a whole new generation of physics with unforeseen potential 

The goals of the Bay Area Cold fusion Meetup Group

• Promote interest in, and therefore accelerate the theoretical understanding and practical development of Cold Fusion (LENR)
• Leverage Bay Area extensive expertise including technology, business, and financial as appropriate
• Provide a forum to encourage information transfer, experimentation, and analysis

The exact direction taken by the meetup will evolve. I expect that the initial meetings would involve information exchange, and possibly some invited speakers. I hope that some of the members will collaborate to duplicate recent results, and improve upon them, including better controls and new measurement techniques that will elucidate the underlying mechanisms. This effort may lead to completely new directions, or deeper local investment, and possibly some university interest. 

You can communicate with Dana via: as I did, In the coming years you'll see Tens, hundreds, thousands such CF/LENR Meetups in the US and worldwide. However this one from the Bay Area is the first.


The Hagelstein presentation - No. 1) below states: "active sites = monovacancies"
Direct opposition to Ed Storms theory : active sites are nanocracks.
However, if we go from LENR to LENR+ with enhanced excess heat release- the power density increases say 1000 times and this means 1000times more active sites are at play> Statically, with preformed active site is is difficult to imaine how a material can have vacancies or cracks increased in such a huge proportion .A, however this  bit easier with vacancies anyway, however this is not relevant because actually the active sites use the element "time"- they are continuously genearated by an dynamic  mechanism. And they are special nanostructures formed on the surface of the active material.

Two complete presentations
1) Research issues associated with excess heat in the Fleischmann-Pons experiment Peter L. Hagelstein

 •Excess heat effect in Fleischmann-Pons experiment looks real
•…and reproducible 
• 4He seen in amounts commensurate with energy produced 
•Impossible to account for through incoherent nuclear reactions •Only plausible explanation involves coherent processes 
•Model developed based on down-conversion, relativistic interaction •Active sites conjectured to be monovacancies 
•Created through co-deposition with high surface loading 
•Argument for lack of reproducibility was over-stated

2) NAVSEA) Presentation on LENR Complete presentation of the DeChiaro conference

3) The strangeness of the critics of the E-Cat device of Andrea Rosii
Странности критики установок E-Cat Андреа Росси
4) From Lewis Larsen

Lattice Energy LLC - LENRs dramatically expand financing opportuniti…

LENR technology could dramatically expand future reserve-based debt financing opportunities in the global oil & gas industry.

5) The pace of major breakthroughs has declined
It is a great discusssion about fusion energy. About LENR it says who has killed it :
LENR has never recovered from the shellacking Koonin and Lewis gave it.                   I like this wording, not the idea.

6) looks that there is excess heat for long time" me356

7) Gamma Free Nuclear Transition Through De-excitation of Spin 0 Strong Force Excited States (Carl-Oscar Gullström)

8) Jack Cole Recent results


Solving Problems With Collective Intelligence – Towards an Internet of Thinkers?
by Michael Trenka, Ethical Technology


NOTE: This is a somewhat shortened translation of this writing and very free, I have tried to translate ideas more than words. And I have added my own answers were the author has not responded. I like very much the mode of thinking of this young Russian blogger and I hope he will excuse me for that inexact work.

Talgaton Blog, Russia
Why I do LENR- flux of conscience

What’s more interesting for this theme- the critics of LENR:

What is the most special about it? It is NOT scientific.

· LENR – only impostors work for/with it

· LENR – here is No theory

· LENR – it is impossible to replicate

· LENR – it does not appear in peer reviewed journalsх.

Four classic proofs repeated by diverse opponents. If you read about LENR in popular publications you surely will meet these. However these critics are not more than self-fulfilling prophecies.
If a worldwide “scientific consensus” would have been established that the cold fusionist are scammers, they have no theory at all, their experiment are not repatable, they have no per reviewed publications- then:

- who will make the experiments?

- who will write reviews?

- In which journals will appear papers about this subject?

People who do this questionable experiments must have their reasons, including that they want money- they are higher than the “consensus”
[ the paper speaks then about ITER that is awfully expensive and even if it will be a success- it will be extremely difficult to use]

An other accusation is that the cold-fusionists are not doing scientific but mercantilist research. So Rossi is a mercantilist man because he wants patents and has already got some, because he keeps secret the recipes of his fuel powders and other tings; he wants money! Yes, he wants money, and now what? He must do patenting because he has no all comprising valid theory; when he will have- no more patenting necessary.
If he is patenting trash- he has to pay taxes and it his trash.
If he really believes in his mission and in universal salvation- let him patent and let him develop large scale manufacture of his generators.

However just now there is no theory usable, however there are more than 50 Cold Fusion theories. Why should we defend the interests of Rossi and not those of Elton John’s who is a multi-billionaire.

The society has to decide- Rossi is secretive, hides his methods and we will burn fossils and still have nuclear wastes polluting and we will pay money to all kinds of idiots.

Then there is the discussion about scientific and pseudo-scientific. Have you seem a theory of high temperature superconductivity? The Cooper r pairs of electrons? Is this an explanation or does it sound also unscientific?

Are the people who deal with these theories also blamed for mercantilism, not allowed to publish in peer reviewed journals,

Called scammers and are they ostracized? No!

An other experiment completely unscientific takes place in the Large Hadron Collider a device that had used more billions of dollars. But an experiment made here cannot be repeated in any other lab, so it is not scientific.

An example of a completely unscientific experience!
Stupid argument? Well, in my opinion not sillier than the arguments of the opponents of Andrea Rossi.

How easy is to criticize:

Read any paper or comment against LENR and you will learn a lot- 10-15 minutes will suffice to understand the situation.

The question is actually what want to say the people who write against LENR?

Some examples C- criticism, A- my answer.

Examples (K criticism, Oh - my answer):

C: the claimed efficiency is too low, the results are not independently observed, measured

A: The first nuclear reactor made my people had a power of 70 Watts, if this had been a reason to dismiss it we would not have ever nuclear power.

C: The composition of the “miracle powder” ws not disclosed, how much energy we need to produce it?

A: Rossi has indeed not disclosed the composition of the miracle powder, however Parkhomov took the information that was in the public domain and had concluded, on his own risk tha it is 90% nickel and 10% lithium alumnum hydride and 0% secret.

C: The magicians are just burning chrome from the Nichrome wire hydrogen catalyzes the reaction and this can be the source of heat and Nichrome is much more expensive than the heat thus obtained.

A- The released energy is many times greater than what could be produced chemically by all the components (Nichrome, nickel lithium) by burning

C: If thee are used instruments as thermal imaging cameras and in the paper does not appear the word calorimeter, then it is clear that we have to do with crooks. Forget the paper!

A: More important, as Parkhomov shows it is to have the proper calorimeter to measure the heat from the entire reactor.And in this case we are not speaking about barely measurable heat, no it is massive heat.

C: phrases as “it was performed by six reputed scientists from Italy and Sweden” is suspect seems to be authority based is typical for low quality publications

A: Better read the material with attention, study the references It is not so hard and it is fair

C: It is also obvious that there are millions of people, institutions and corporations, great personalities and reputed scientists, investors, journalists etc. very interested in new energy sources- why do they not notice and not care for Cold fusion?

A: (my answer): it’s due to the unhappy history of the field- starting with the PdD miscovery and the prolonged cradleism, LENR+ has arrived late and is still not well understood both in the LENR community and by the enemies of the field
C: It is useless to argue because if the Rossi device had been really worked then today we certainly had to observe one of the following situations:

- effective manufacture of the devices by the author or in -association with motre serious people;

- technology stolen by the players in the traditional energy sources and –perhaps classified;

- technology destroyed together with its author;

As actually there is no fuss around the reactor- it is clear that it is a 100% fake.

A: (my answer) there are at least 10 times more experts/workers in research than in development and 10 times more technology illiterates than science illiterates and there are as many self-appointed gurus in strategic management as in baseball, soccer, politics- it is not well understood how long can last the implementation of a brand new ultra-difficult technology. This is also the reason for Rossi’s dominance and the lack of real competitors.

C: The vocabulary of LENR is similar to that of magicians and alchemists. It seems a significant threat for the oil (fossils) industry but somehow it does not persists in the press.

A: (my answer) less and less real- the Press is slowly embracing LENR despite it’s past

C: I have to disappoint you - in a nutshell it is a Ponzi scheme Pyramid, with people claiming interesting things in order to collect the money

A: (my answer) I see no money collected, just investment companies…investing.

C - And what is the difficulty of organizing serious inspections of the E-Cat? For example, in the same MSU under NDA?

A- (my answer) if the Inventor accepts the risk, uncertainty is a factor positive for protection against industrial espionage. Certainty is only for an inner circle.

C – It was about a working prototype already in 2011 but a real theoretical basis is still missing.

A: (my answer) we still work with false and misunderstood identities of the phenomenon, new paradigm is necessary but this cannot make the generator to stop working.The 50 theories are only loosely connected to reality.
C: LENR cannot be replicated
A: Parkhomov has replicated


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. Peter / Dana,

    This is excellent news re Dana. It is terrific to see people of Dana's calibre and analytical abilities getting involved. It is such a striking contrast to some other supposedly intelligent and analytical thinkers who devote their energies to ridicule and attack of people for even showing interest in LENR.

    What is needed is people like Dana who are interested enough to explore both the belief that LENR is a real phenomenon and that LENR deserves deeper research.

    As has been said here before, we still appear to need an equivalent to John Bell's basic 'thought' experiment (Bell's 1964 inequality test) that scientists can then try to perform in labs. John Bell came up with it to answer the EPR Paradox raised by Einstein Podolsky and Rosen. Bell's theorem tested for 'local hidden variables' being present when any one of a particle pair that were 'entangled' and then separated by a great distance, gets evaluated. Evaluation of one of the particles at a particular instant, allowed the observer to know aspects of the 'state' of the other particle as if a signal had travelled between them telling the other particle how to appear (spooky action at a distance).

    If someone can devise such a proof test for evidence of LENR anomolus heat, it can be used to silence or support anti-LENR critics. With a positive result we can comfortably promote wider interest and financial backing. This kind of test (it has to be simple) may best be designed by an anti LENR critic. Even John Bell believed his test would come out on Einstein's favour - but after 50+ years of ever more sophisticated tests, they all show violation of Bell's inequality thus confirming there is indeed no local hidden varables and that 'spooky action at a distance' is taking place. As of 2015, it is claimed that all 'loopholes' in Bells Theorem have been closed.

    Doug Marker


    What is quantum in quantum thermodynamics?

    A new study shows that overunity is a quantum effect that is based on coherence and entanglement.


    "One important implication of the new results is that quantum effects may significantly increase the performance of engines at the quantum level. While the current work deals with single-particle engines, the researchers expect that quantum effects may also emerge in multi-particle engines, where quantum entanglement between particles may play a role similar to that of coherence."

    1. Axil, as usual - another very interesting link :)


      Doug M