Tuesday, December 22, 2015



The aim of science is not to open the door to infinite wisdom, but to set a limit to infinite error (Bertolt Brecht)

The real purpose of the scientific method is to make sure nature hasn’t misled you into thinking you know something you actually don’t know. (Robert M. Pirsig)


I am patiently waiting answers with ideas and advices regarding the solution of the Rossi and the Rest problem but in meantime I am thinking about the many facets of the situation. I have a suspicion based on my personal philosophy and life experience of the priority and predominance of the negative factors; Isn't it possible that we make some errors, fatal ones that destroy the effectiveness and efficiency  
of the replication work, we are not doing the good things and we are not doing well what we do. First the younger generations of researchers are not educated  in the respect and fear of Murphy's Laws that are pernicious as ever and it is a fatal error to ignore or dismiss them.
I observe some trends that are surely harmful:
- overvaluing the difficulty but also the sophistication of the Solution and simultaneously undervaluing its complexity (multi-stageness) and strangeness/
otherness- it can be a new idea;
- a fatal trend to take local truths as global truths and vice-versa; 
- generalizing beyond reason; considering there is a single LENR, when actually there are more. For example taking an idea from the E-Cat X and trying to apply it 
to the lower temperature Rossi process from the 1MW plant. Even the inventor says they are different;
- trying to add things, ideas that are non-additive, in particular over-hybridizing fragments of remote theories; there are great chances that the resulting hybrids
are not like mules i.e. sterile but hard working- but simply non-viable;
- waiting for a salvation theory that explains equally well what happens in classic LENR but also the more energetic LENR+; scientific messianism not good!
- new theories create sometimes disproportionate enthusiasm and for a few days
are considered as panacea (the Lundin - Lidgren theory is a good example);
- fatal errors will convert a yes in no, let's avoid them!


Cold fusion: Free electrons

Работы по ХЯС (LENR)
Experiments in Cold Nuclear Transmutation (LENR)

LENR through spin-- by AXIL

Vladislav Zhigalov and Maxim Kalashnikov's TV discussion about the new energetics
of Andrea Rossi and his manoeuvers
Dec 21 2015

The redactor of the journal for emerging directions in science i.e. unconventional science (http://www.unconv-science.org/) Vladislav Zhigalov and Maxim Kalshnikov speak about the the energetics of Andrea Rossi and his manouvers. The experiments of Rossi were repeated by Russians, however with mixed success. Do these new data violate the old laws of science? It is a gate to the unknown. Do this belong to the Commission of fight against pseudoscience?

I hope a transcript will be published- it is very much in consonance with my fight against the "Rossi and the Rest" situation.

Cold Fusion Rumblings:

A German patent application by Heinrich Hora
Method for arranging charged deuterium on surface of metal carrier involves performing power making process or nuclear reactions caused by generation of particles, such that sintering of metal carrier is prevented 
DE 102012015801 A1

Based on the fine Hew Pricw paper of yesterday now the E-Cat and Rossi are in Popular Mechanics:
Rossi says: 
Andrea Rossi
December 22nd, 2015 at 9:09 AM

Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
Popular Mechanics is a leader magazine for technological divulgation in the USA and it is important their attention to our work. The article by Prof. Huw Price is a very intelligent analysis of the LENR situation and it is not a case that he is a Professor of Science Philosophy at the University of Cambridge. I think that to obtain the attention of such a Professor and the publication on such a magazine is an important achievement that has to be respected in the sole important way: to work, work, work to bring the products to a massive market. Until we will not have reached that goal, we will have done nothing really important. This also answers to the question of yours.
Update: stable the 1 MW E-Cat, fantastic the E-Cat X ( but still far from being a product).
Warm Regards,


Active quantum plasmonics

Science Advances  18 Dec 2015:
Vol. 1, no. 11, e1501095
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1501095


The ability of localized surface plasmons to squeeze light and engineer nanoscale electromagnetic fields through electron-photon coupling at dimensions below the wavelength has turned plasmonics into a driving tool in a variety of technological applications, targeting novel and more efficient optoelectronic processes. In this context, the development of active control of plasmon excitations is a major fundamental and practical challenge. We propose a mechanism for fast and active control of the optical response of metallic nanostructures based on exploiting quantum effects in subnanometric plasmonic gaps. By applying an external dc bias across a narrow gap, a substantial change in the tunneling conductance across the junction can be induced at optical frequencies, which modifies the plasmonic resonances of the system in a reversible manner. We demonstrate the feasibility of the concept using time-dependent density functional theory calculations. Thus, along with two-dimensional structures, metal nanoparticle plasmonics can benefit from the reversibility, fast response time, and versatility of an active control strategy based on applied bias. The proposed electrical manipulation of light using quantum plasmonics establishes a new platform for many practical applications in optoelectronics.


  1. Dear Peter I think your readers would appreciate seeing a photo of you sitting at your computer imagining and sharing the wonderful thoughts you publish here...