Wednesday, January 18, 2017



Image result for wings quotationsImage result for wings quotations


One of my favorite sites during my web-search years was The Painters Keys by the Canadian painter Robert Genn: A great author too, a wonderful collection of Art Quotations is here too- Robert is not more with us but his daughter continues to publish his and her letter twice a week. It is a pleasure to read them even if you are not an a artist- the artistic mode of thinking putting emphasis on what is different (while the scientific mode tries to develop similarities is inspiring and regenerative; OK this is a simplification, I know) Yesterday on the site it was remembered this classic writing of Robert:

Winging it
January 12, 2006

Dear Artist, 

On Dec. 8, 1903, with government funding, countless advisors and great ballyhoo, Samuel Pierpont Langley's flying machine plopped unpleasantly into the Potomac. Nine days later, Orville and Wilbur Wright got their Flyer off the ground. Why did these bicycle mechanics succeed when a famous scientist failed? Langley's plans were mostly theoretical and his machine was produced from blueprint and built by others. But by studying the Wright brothers' working notes, you see that their insight and their execution are woven together. By trial and error and over a period of time they solved problems like wing shape and wing warping. Each adjustment was a small spark of insight that led to others. Along the way they found it necessary to build a wind tunnel and other devices to test the lift and controllability of their ever-changing designs. 

Very early it was created a wishful association between Cold Fusion and the Wright
Brothers- in larger sense between the history of aviation an the developing expected history of LENR. It is difficult to discover some profound predictive similarity; the triumph of viation was in no way contagious in this case.
However what Robert Genn has said is vitally important for the difficult Art of problem solving. Specifically what you do when you have no idea of what must be done when there no sufficient data, It is scarcity of relevant information, when yo must grow your knowledge as in the second Motto above. How can you learn to ask smarter and smarter questions despite poor or even misleading feedback. The example of the Wright Brothers show a behavior and mentality that I considered kind of proof of my "technology first" or more pragmatically speaking- "create actionable parameters!".

Let's decide who in our field really is the equivalent of the Wright Brothers? 

The yearly question was:
A lot to read many interesting concepts that are useful and relevant for LENR too.
You remember surely, last year on Jan 2, 2016 we told you about an answer to the EDGE.ORG question by Carl Page who has explained how important is LENR.

Please help me to discover something useful for LENR this year too. Thanks!


1a) From the Miami Court Pacermonitor re the Rossi vs Darden Trial
Tuesday, January 17, 2017
121 order Order on Motion for Extension of Time Tue 3:23 PM
ORDER denying118 Motion for Extension of Time. Signed by Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga on 1/17/2017. (wc)

120 order Order on Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a ClaimTue 12:09 PM 
ORDER granting in part and denying in part90 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Count IV is DISMISSED as to Third-Party Defendants, J.M. Products, Inc.; Henry Johnson; James A. Bass; United States Quantum Leap, LLC; and Fulvio Fabiani. Count V is DISMISSED. Count III remains intact. Signed by Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga on 1/17/2017. (wc)1b) Rossi v. IH Case — Judge Upholds, Dismisses Counter-Suit Counts

2) Thanks to Mats Lewan, we have not seen a LENR related Patent for weeks!
EP3086323 (A1) ― 2016-10-26

Publication dateOct 26, 2016
Inventors: Hans Lidgren, Rickard Lundin


In accordance with the present inventive concept, there is provided a method for use in power generation. The method comprises bringing a first target matter via wave resonance into a higher energy state by exposing the first target matter to electromagnetic radiation input energy for producing a first isotope shift in the first target matter and neutrons resulting from the first isotope shift, and capturing the neutrons by a second target matter for producing a second isotope shift in the second target matter and electromagnetic radiation output energy. Furthermore, the present inventive concept also relates to an associated 2a) apparatus.

2a) Patent by Hans Lidgren Rickard Lundin for transmuations

2c) The patent and the theory of its authors is discussed vividly on Vortex:

3) Cold Fusion Now:
CFN! Video Stream and Upcoming Events

4) From Andrea Rossi's JONP

What? Why in Raleigh, NC?

January 18, 2017 at 6:38 AM

Andrea Rossi

January 18, 2017 at 10:12 AM

Today I am in Raleigh, N.C., with my Attorneys, but from my Team the update id good.
Warm Regards,

5) First-ever X-ray image capture of material defect process

"To capture the formation of defects, the Argonne team took a nanostructured sample of palladium and injected, or infused, it with hydrogen at high-pressure. At the same time, they exposed the sample to powerful X-rays at the Advanced Photon Source."


16th International Conference on Plasma-Facing Materials and Components for Fusion Applications (PFMC-16)


4 Effective Ways Leaders Solve Problems and Stop them Before They Happen


  1. Nibbius
    January 18, 2017 at 8:09 AM
    Dear Andrea Rossi.
    Since you already have decided the location and period of the presentation of the QuarkX, as per your answer to KF, can you tell us where and when?

    Andrea Rossi
    January 18, 2017 at 10:11 AM
    Not yet. I am not giving information of the demo before its event.
    Warm Regards,


    The Man Who’s Trying to Kill Dark Matter

    If gravity is not a force and can change in strength and if gravity can emerge from entripy, then so can the weak "force" which can be amplified like gravity by entanglement of spin.

    1. dear Axil

      strangely the link has a virus; sorrry,

    2. Here is another link to that same article:

      The wired link works fine for me.

  3. About Wright Bro achievemenet, like about Edison, what surpised me was that I realized recently they had strong method, strong rigor.

    It is not only trial and test, there is also a vision, a deep understanding of the problem, BUT this vision, this understanding is Bottom-Up, not theoretical, but engineering focused.
    Of course quickly they understand they need theory, measurement, tables, and Wright Bros invented the wind tunnel, and produced wing shape performance table, propeller theory.

    Their success is produced by putting science and theoyr at the service of engineering challenges, not the opposite.

    now I connect that to another I dea I had recently reading the news on Lidgren and Lundin patent, and ponderomotive force theory...

    I cannot understand if this is a great theory, but let us assume it is, but that it is not complete, not exactly explaining LENR as they say.

    My naive proposal is to mix their theory to enhance another.
    My favorite is the Slow Fusion of Edmund Storms.

    i use the term Slow Fusion because for me, the hydroton is an anecdotal proposal of mechanism, while "Slow fusion" is for me the unescapable conclusion od Edmund Storms from his conservative assumptions and his percerption of the experimental resulst (that i share).

    Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel that Slow Fusion theory, even with Hydroton hypothesis, is an incomplete theory.
    The core quantum mechanic mechanism is not precisely defined... I see ideas, but it is not mathematically defined.

    When i read Takahashi TSC theory, Kim-Zubarev, Swartz-hagelstein, I see much better mathematical definition, but the disagreement are more with the observations, as Storms complain.

    My desire would be to merge Ponderomotive force ideas with other theory.
    With incomplete theories like Slow Fusion, it looks possible to put the mathematical description of Ponderomotive Forse as an inner mechanism to implement Slow Fusion, with Hydroton (or alike) giving the metalurgical context in which LENR happens.

    With complete theories like TSC, it is not easy for me to imagine how to merge it with Ponderomotive Force idea.

    Edmund Storm's theory for me is like the Wright brothers theory of Wings, of propellers. He proposed it from a range of experiment, exploiting his knowledge in macroscopic science,and few from QM.
    there is room for a QM physicists to propose a "QM module"...

    the problem is that today this incomplete, bottom-up, macroscopic, phenomenological approach is not fashion, and people want upfront and totalitarian theory from the QM to the macroscopic.

    You talk often on the LENR+ approach versus the old F&P approach.

    For me, after long maturation in my immature engineer mind, I propose that we oppose two approach :
    - upfront physics, top-bottom QM-to-macro theory, explanation focused motivation, experiments validating theory, technology servicing experiments, experiments servicing theory.
    - phenomenological to QM theory building, engineering challenges to fundamental research, experiments inducing theory proposal, physics servicing engineering.

    To be clear, the engineering approach cannot avoid the theoretical, and even the QM theory challenges, but it is only a question of method, of governance, of priority, or direction upward vs downward...
    Question is who is the boss, and what is the problem.

    Wright and Edison shows that it works best if the dreamer is the problem provider, engineer is the problem definer and solver, and science is there to serve problem solving effort with theory, experiments and math.

    1. Dar Alain,

      Thanks; I will publish these idears of your as OPINION.

      We can start later a discussion in my blog.