Sunday, November 8, 2015



How few people will realize how much detail had to be gone into before Bakelite was a commercial success.  (Leo Hendrik Baekeland)


a) Starting from the Motto Baekeland is one of the pioneers of chemical technologies, the creator of the first commercial plastic. For more than 20 years in my professional career I was strongly focused on polymers and plastics- manufacture, properties and uses plus the myriads of additives used from their birth to death. So I owe much to  Baekeland. A good school of technology, the art of decisive actionable details- called know-how. Based on scientific principles but also on some unexpected, unpredictable. hyper-specific techno-rituals, tricks and minute details. 
Thanking about this was inspired by the recent repair episode of Rossi's 1MW plant- see:

I hope Rossi has not put all the E-cat eggs in this one 1MW basket.

b) Friendly, open but divergent discussion with Abd about the future of LENR. Based
on different assumptions, points of view, mentalities, world- and LENR-views.
 My answers in RED (but I am not angry), Some OR/AND is added here to the main OR/OR

Abd says:
Peter, yes, NiH has more practical promise, if confirmed. (if not, then LENR is in the limbo!) Given what I know, I would personally consider that it's likely to be confirmed, even though that doesn't exist yet, and I still affirm that there is a great deal of shoddy work, on which you enthusiastically rely. (rhetoric trick, I am not enthusiastic, just have great expectations, indeed)
( I am very concerned with practicalities, not solely concerned with "truth" as you might think. (happy to hear this, however what is prioritary for you, truth or value?) 
I want to open the floodgates for LENR research, to the point that funding ramps up to millions of dollars the first year, rapidly to hundreds of millions or a billion or more. (Please re-read this, my friend, is this realistic, possible, feasible? Will the absolute certainty of excess heat-correlated-with-helium, convince any rich man or institution to invest so heavily in LENR? Do you really think you can thus motivate investors? Leading billionaire Bill Gates who comes from the world of technology
has visited the leading PdD LENR laboratory of ENEA, spoke with the greatest expert in palladium morphology, Vittorio Violante- and what financial miracle has 
happened? Has he invested an orphan billion US$ in PdD? More than 1 farthing?
I would abstain from calling this a 50-years Plan or pie-in-the-sky but do not forget that the reputation of Cold Fusion/LENR still has to has to be fixed and for that many results are necessary..
To make such a funding scale-up you have to apply the "success breeds success" rule. Do you think this is possible with this wicked systems. (both funding and Pd D.
I know you are not (only) a dreamer but a man of actions- so you have already started your get-funding-for-LENR campaign. Success?

 That takes focus. By pushing a mass of soggy muck, you don't create a spear point that can penetrate resistance. Instead, anyone looking at your work with *normal skepticism* sees a great deal of garbage, all linked by an obvious hope for what is sometimes called "free energy." You are playing into a generation of pseudoskeptical prejudice, confirming what they believe about the field. (Excuse me, a bit too much metaphoritis here, I do not get this idea clearly, I guess you want to tell something bad about NiH en ensemble. Have I spoken about free energy?

The real work, the solid work, the confirmed and established work, is buried in the noise, and you are one of the noise generators.

The good quality, high level, professional work, creative, even heroic work in LENR has to be considered with respect and gratitude- it has demonstrated that LENR is real, it does exist indeed beyond any doubt. However even the most remarkable, peak level works  do NOT tell what LENR is, do NOT show how it can be developed in the energy source promised by the Founders, Will you declare here and now that LENR - its PdD core variant is reproducible, can be scaled up and become manageable? And believe me it is not the fault of our distinguished colleagues,
it is inherent to a faulty, underdeveloped  form of LENR.

Is this good work buried in noise and I am a noise generator?
Being a classic-opera music lover this statement amazes and hurts me.
It amazes- which fine LENR Symphony is buried, covered by what noise? What harmony is destroyed- the field of LENR is very fragmented-as I told it is a Babel Tower of theories/explanation and many immiscible experimental results -even outside the suspicious NiH.
What is the recommended nice behavior of a true and faithful LENR-ist playing sweet music not making ugly noise.
But I accept that I have started to make noise early after a few Winters of Discontent- have replaced the electrochemical model with the catalytic one around 1991, have stated that the reactions take place in active sites, Topology is the key and dynamism is the drive, Technology will come first, launched my idea of poisoning of the active sites as why reproducibility is such a horrible problem,  reactions are only partially nuclear and are nuclear in new ways. You do not believer a word of all these, it seems. LENR needs new music.
You are certainly not the only one. The entire field of cold fusion became uncritical. Have you read Undead Science, by Simon? Being a zombie science creates certain pathologies; the zombies don't want to criticize other zombies, because that is what those Bad Skeptics do, criticize. Instead zombies circle the wagons, create safe places to discuss the work, and generally act as a bunch of deluded fanatics might be expected to act. Not everyone, of course! 

Yes I have read Bart Simon's book, we were good friends and have written jointly
the Report for the ASTI-7 meeting. I have helped him in a way to write his fine book- with data, facts etc. but it is entirely his creation. In your opinion, who are the LENR -zombies? And it is so much hostility and infight in the core PdD group. 

Peter, you wrote:

"OK, but what then? We get a certainty at the 2nd power about He/heat, but is this good for scale-up for reliability, for making LENR a heat source? How could be this confirmation used for NiH at 1200 C?"

The obstacle for major funding is the idea that cold fusion was properly rejected 25 years ago. Proposals for NiH funding meeting with this objection, with, additionally, all the stories about Rossi being a convicted fraud, all that mishegas, and, for sober skeptics, the simple lack of true independent confirmation and the presence of shoddy and misleading representations.

We have already discussed about funding. The decisive factor is not the personality of Rossi but the performances of his generators. I was very much stimulated by Mihail Ralea's definition of intelligence"Intelligence is the ability to not confound (mix ) the points of view. I apply this for Rossi too. The greatest trouble is that Rossi still has no competition. And it would be a super-miracle a researcher with a PdD mentality could become one. Other thinking tools. different priorities and focusing is necessary. Rossi needs uncertainty and cultivates it.

However, once cold fusion is established as real, even if not particularly practical, that objection can disappear. There are basic scientific issues needing research. All LENR funding will ramp up, including NiH. As confirmed results appear, I expect NiH funding may rapidly outstrip PdD.

More empathy and less looking in the mirror with investors please! Except -if you can already allude to a success- you have obtained the support or the promise for serious funding.

How many times more valuable is a Proof of Usefulness than a Proof of Existence?
I hope you can imagine how long can be the way from understanding to a commercial process. Technology is more than applied science. Phase I must be followed by a long Phase II.

This is not a long-term vision, Peter, this could happen quickly. I assume you have seen this:

The first project is what I call a Phase I project: confirmation with increased accuracy of work that is *already confirmed.* This is designed to kill the reality question, dead, stake through its heart, finished, over. It's conservative, not blue-sky, not depending on something new being developed. I expect this to happen, and soon.

The second project listed there is this about exploding wires as a test bed for materals::

I'd call that a Phase II study. It is a confirmation, though, of work announced at ICCF-17. Notice that NiH is covered.

NiH, if the reaction is, say, producing deuterium as an ash, compared with PdD, producing helium, will have a lower energy yield, but the materials are far cheaper. So the exploding wire results with Ni/NiHx are quite promising. 

I knew about this- and I think it is a good thing, it adds to works made in the cradle.
I have even asked my good friend Leonid Urutskoev if he wishes to collaborate with Texas Univ's CEES in studies of wire explosions- but it is too far for him. Please make a search for "Urutskoev" on EGO OUT and read about his pioneering work in wirew explosions - which has lead him to the LENR "otherness" theory presented t the AIRBUS- ISCMNS Workshop. It is cure for neophobia.And please understand that I am not against PdD, I am at odds with the domination and with the ambition of universality and uniqueness of this originar LENR systems

1) LENR-Sweden

2) Ruby Carat from Cold Fusion Now announces two LENR events:

JLab Ingot Niobium CRADA Workshop
Full Program includes John Wallace on Cold Energy
December 4, 2015
CEBAF Center Room F113
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility
Newport News, VA, US

see John Wallace at 2014 CF/LANR Colloquium at MIT

16th Japan CF-Research Society Meeting
Japan CF Research Society Home
See also :
Cold Fusion Research Laboratory Newsletter 97
Kyoto University access page here.
Contact JCF office Shinya Narita
Iwate University

December 11-12, 2015
Shishukan Hall, Higashi-ichijo, Bldg. B1
Kyoto University
Kyoto, Japan

3) Rossi said today:

Andrea Rossi
November 8th, 2015 at 9:59 AM

As a matter of fact, I am working with my reactors since 2006, smaller or bigger as they might be, and I make clinic check ups every 6 months.
This year I made more of them, because of the inguinal hernia surgery I had to make. My health is perfect.
Also the members of my Team make regular visits and they too never had problems.
Warm Regards,

Andrea Rossi
November 8th, 2015 at 10:03 AM

If the tests will allow a massive production, it will be commercialized in all Europe, therefore also in Italy.
Warm Regards,


LENR is caused by black holes. First, we must understand what a micro black hole is. It is any waveform that is confined in a cavity or on a surface of a metal where there is a sharp interface layer that separates the enclosed waveform from its surrounding. The scientific term that discribes this type of waveform is an analog black hole. It is analog because it is like the big black holes in the cosmos. Once a polariton enters the analog black hole it cannot come out again.

A polariton soliton (PD) is such a knot of electromagnetic waveform. This structure is a dualism that shares all the laws, behaviors and characteristics of it big brothers out in the cosmos. One of its most interesting characteristics is the PS impact on time. LENR is a catalitic process. A catalyst changes the speed at which a chemical reaction occurs, it speeds the chemical reaction up. The catalyst forms micro black holes that actually affect the flow of time. Outside the PS, time flows at an accelerated pace, but inside time slows down. String theory has a name for the inside of a black hole, they call it a tachyon. An string theory makes predictions on what a tachyon will do; and those predictions look like they accurately predict what is actually happening in high energy LENR experiments.

The history of LENR is replete with photographs of strange particles and radiations coming out of the LENR ash products. These tracks are the paths of tachyons that has become so full of energy that they can live on their own away from the cavity or surface that gave them birth.

These black holes are complex things that have a hydra like relationship with their environment. They have three interfaces as follows: entanglement, a monopole magnetic beam, and sub atomic particle creation. Which one of these interfaces predominate is based on the level of PS energy content. 

Entanglement(weak energy content):

A very weak PS just uses its ability to entangle particles and atoms to produce effects. This weak level is seen in microbes and inside living cells that produce biological based LENR transmutation. This interface is based on the teleportation of energy between atomic processes outside the PS and the inside of the PS. The inside of the PS is an energy clearing house where an energy based quantum mechanical process redistribute energy around the LENR system. This interface stops nuclear radiation from being produced and thermalizes high energy radiation that usually come from nuclear transmutation. The PS is formed on the nanowire that covers the surface of some types of bacteria.

There is a very special type of entanglement that black holes produce; it is called multi-particle entanglement. This interface can combine many atoms together where many atoms can fuse into a single product. But this interface can produce many resulting fusion reactions produced in a single instant. The term for this is "cluster fusion" as seen in LENR experimentation. As the energy content of the PS grows, the entanglement does not go away. This interface stays around no matter how much energy that the PS gathers into itself.

In a LENR system, billions of PSs can coexist together in something called a Bose condensate. It is a network of PS s the share energy among themselves and communicate through entanglement. This arrangement leads to some strange things happening. One of these things is that energy can be absorbed in huge chunks. The scientific term for this is super-absorption. Conversely, huge chunks of energy can be produced in an instant with each member of the Bose condensate giving an small but equal share, this is called superradiance. Entanglement is the energy communication network used whereby each PS can work together. 


  1. Noise for some is sweet music for others.


    There is a layer of dark mode hydrogen that accumulates near the surface of the hydrogen plasma ball in the Safire experiment. It absorbs energy until it reaches a limit whereupon it erupts. The input power for this experiment is 1800 watts of DC power and the power produced during an eruption is 2,000,000 to 10,000,000 watts. There is also signs of a material with a nucleon count of 3 being produced in the experiment.

    A theory that could explain the development of the dark layer is the "Dark mode" polariton soliton theory. The polariton "Black Hole" absorbs energy until it reaches a limit whereupon it explodes in a bosenova. This is a behavior that is also seen in the experiments of Holmlid and defkalion among other LENR experiments.

    This theory can be verified by the appearance of K-mesons and its decay products such as muons and electrons. A particle detector that follows Holmlid's design might work well in the Safire experiment it show that a tachyon based nuclear process is happening in Safire.

    This Safire experiment looks a lot like the plasmatron, an overunity power device produced in the 1980's using hydrogen based plasma.

    Experimenters in overunity could duplicate the Safire and/or the plasmatron experiment and test for emissions of sub-atomic particles.

    It may be possible to take a sample of the gas from the dark layer and use a photographic emulsion to check for and monopole based tachyon tracks as is commonly seen in many LENR based experiment.

  3. I wrote: "NiH has more practical promise, if confirmed." Peter replied: "if not, then LENR is in the limbo!"

    No. PdD has little immediate practical promise, but has received only a tiny fraction of the development funding it will likely take to create practical approaches. What we know now, in spite of some mishegas you'll see floating around, is that the reaction is a surface reaction, with much higher power density than originally claimed.

    Further, if NiH is not confirmed, i.e., say, Rossi goes belly-up and Parkhomov vanishes, etc, there is substantial confirmation that NiH is possible, look at that exploding wires work. The big banana has never been power level, it has always been reliability. With reliability, low-power can become high-power.

    I wrote:

    "I am very concerned with practicalities, not solely concerned with "truth" as you might think."

    Peter replied: "happy to hear this, however what is prioritary for you, truth or value?)

    Let's start with noting that I don't believe in either truth or value as realities, they are interpretations that don't exist in nature (at least not what we routinely call truth). They are words, with meaning only as we assign it. Having said that, and then cheerfully proceeding to use the words anyway:

    Truth without value is useless. However, value without truth is unstable and unreliable.So we look for truth and value.

  4. I wrote: "I want to open the floodgates for LENR research, to the point that funding ramps up to millions of dollars the first year, rapidly to hundreds of millions or a billion or more"

    Peter replied: "Please re-read this, my friend, is this realistic, possible, feasible? Will the absolute certainty of excess heat-correlated-with-helium, convince any rich man or institution to invest so heavily in LENR?"

    Reread it yourself, Peter. "So heavily" would be hundreds of millions or billions. That is not the first step. The first step is at a lower level. Some Phase I funding may be in the million-dollar range, maybe even less. Phase II funding may be in the tens of millions, taking it above what SKINR received.

    This is not for "investors." Investors are already involved, there is work going on that is privately funded, but this work is isolated, when LENR is likely to require a massive social effort.

    Peter, I've studied the 2004 U.S. Department of Energy review. That review *almost* took LENR to the next step. What was missing? Basically, coherent presentation. The message was diluted by massive evidence with no clear organizing concept. There was enough evidence given to show that the anomalous heat effect was real and nuclear in nature, but it was not understood, because it was explained by people inside the field, with the explanations not being designed to penetrate the noise. Nevertheless that review, like the 1989 review, recommended targeted research to answer basic questions. That is what I call Phase I research, with Phase I being focused almost totally on establishing reality through direct, confirmed and reproducible evidence. As you know, the work has already been done, but it can be done with increased precision, and as you also know, one of the characteristics of pathological science is that results disappear when precision is increased. That's what will be done: precision will be increased. It''s already known how to do this.

    If we wanted to propose an NiH experiment, what would we propose, already known and confirmed, so that it's only a matter of money and expertise, no new discoveries needed, no miracles, and a reliable budget is possible?

    Yes. This will work. I have already received seed funding, a lot of money for me but only a small part of what will be needed.

  5. Peter asked: "In your opinion, who are the LENR -zombies? And it is so much hostility and infight in the core PdD group. "

    The zombies are any of us when we operate on a basic survival program that sees the world in black and white, good and bad, truth and lies, that circles the wagons to defend the good guys while blaming problems on the bad guys. The zombies don't ask inconvenient questions at conferences, and zombies don't answer such questions. As well, zombies tend to not get along well with other zombies, not really. There is competition for scarce resources. And people who become zombies tend to be socially damaged in some way, an Undead Science attracts them.

    With an audience of zombies, a zombie scientist can introduce a new "theory" and the zombies will all nod their heads. The zombies are thinking that "this is crazy, that zombie is completely nuts," but where ordinary people would start giggling, zombies will congratulate themselves at how open minded they are to allow this complete preposterousness equal time. Nobody raises the obvious questions.

    Actually, some do, but given how many zombies there are, those questions vanish into the haze. No record is made. Zombie conferences change nothing, but allow zombies to feel connected and part of a community.

    Who are the LENR zombies? We all are, when we act like zombies. I plan to raise money by selling tin-foil hats at the next ICCF. What do you think? Will they sell well?

    Zombies never smile and laugh, it's a tip-off.

  6. Comments in support of the best of what makes this Blog. My comments are offered to both Peter and Abd.

    Firstly, I want to support Peter Gluck for his infectious enthusiasm in running this valuable blog. If Peter wasn't making the effort he is many of us who monitor the site would be a *lot* less aware (and most likely a less knowledgeable). Abd, you chide Peter as being a generator of LENR noise, but in defense of Peter's efforts, it is up to anyone who comes here to make their own judgements to filter the 'noise' and to do their own deeper research. I don't believe Peter has ever promised he would only ever deliver a single or even a 'pure' tone. At times he clearly plays tones he doesn't like but leaves it to us to choose what is harmonious to ourselves.

    Peter can be provocative but again that seems to me beneficial and again we can judge for ourselves (really covered above).

    Abd, I personally have come to appreciate and respect you as a clear minded and forthright person. In almost any debate, I would listen very closely to what you say as to me there is always going to be high value and insights. There are a few times I have passed comments to Peter that were intended to support what I think is your view, that PdH/PdD research fulfills a critically important role and that people such as yourself have very good reasons for pursuing the theory as the more important path to follow.

    Also Abd, you make an excellent point when you question the apparent 'shoddy' nature of much of the NiH research and that at face value, PdH/PdD research is more likely to provide the theoretical foundation ahead of what you see of NiH efforts.

    What I want to come back to though is that Peter's blog has done and will continue to do much to garner broader interest and thus may be every bit as good a catalyst in making LENR progress along side those interested in pure research and theory.

    To both of you, thanks for an interesting debate. Again, the sort of discourse that makes it such a great site, noise and all.

    Doug Marker

    1. Total gratitude for yiour message, it is nott always easy to compose EGO OUT!

  7. Lot of paranoid rubbish is just one post, Peter. Oh my.

    And change your font.