Sunday, February 5, 2017



"It is much better to be young, healthy and rich than old, sick and poor"
(Peter Gluck)

I forgot about the Motto and used this old sad one My apology!


It is Sunday, predictable lack of LENR papers and news, however I want some notes here- a nasty part and a nice part. The first written by me, the second by Ed Storms

a) Mass manipulation- amateur level by my opponents on LENR Forum.

The most  successful and interesting LENR forum is you guessed it- the LENR Forum. A part of it concerns the RvD conflict and dispute and it is still dominated by the IH propagandists who are vocal and attack usually in groups but as I told I have empathy for them, their tasks are increasingly difficult and using insults and invention's as Rossi Planet for those with opposed opinions leads sooner or later to conceptual erosion and ennui. You must be perverse to enjoy dirt painting on long range.
The recent publication of the ERV Report core has triggered violent verbal reactions of the IH propagandists- the results are "stellar" and even huge measurement errors cannot destroy them. Please read  the comments on the rational E-Cat World - a lot of knowledgeable colleagues discuss the problems - control as part of the IP/know how is especially important, as well as reliability- in technological sense.

My dispute with the propagandists- in which I do not have any chance because the attack in packs- takes place at:  It satarted at page 41, now is at page 43.

I am many times stronger repelled by the methods used by the IH supporters against Rossi and his technology, then by what Rossi says who is very secretive- but I am listed as an inhabitant of the Rossi Planet- called today knuckleheads by the Chief propagandist. He/they are better in attacking the Planet then attracting some sympathy for IH; this investor is claiming to be the main generous funder of correct, scientific LENR competing with Rossi. But are they loved?

I have tried tp convince Dewey Weaver that the discussion re the test is useless because everything will be decided in the Court and this parallel chat has no relevance plus actually the most basic information is missing- we do not have a scheme and the piping diagram of the 1 MW plant accepted as real, correct by the IH part is missing.
However even if the decision will be in the Court this forum seems to be an additional battlefield and a victory here could influence the real thing, the task is to conquer the Blogosphere it seems and any means are permitted. Obviously my opponent has the diagram and the photos of the Plant but I bet he will never show them because the truth works against IH's interest and disturbs what the IH party does here- mass manipulation.
try to create differences - of opinion, mainly between the opponents create dissension on the Rossi Planet 

Combining real facts with irrelevant issues, create smoke, fog- a recent example:
 Dewey Weaver- saying straight NO DIAGRAM:
 Sorry Peter - you may have to wait on the court disclosures for any diagrams. No confusion on pipe size either - all of that information is documented, photographed and in hand. Have you been able to resolve Rossi's heat conundrum for the Doral site? How about the deafening noise from the supersonic "steam". Rossi has much larger basic problems though.
Speaking of, how much do you know much about the R'ster's "industrial gold / silver recovery" & St Andre's jewelry businesses?
Both the supersonic steam and the question re the St. Andrew's Jewelry are added to create confusion. Childish and inefficient, I know mass manipulation from the suffering part and I can protect myself.

The worst form is 
MIX AND KILL- mix truth with bestial, lies, facts with pathofantasy, possible and impossible things, purity with dirt the real with the absurd etc. and destroy, annihilate!
In this RVD conflict, till now the infamous Exhibit 5, Magna opus of a plant illiterate 
is perhaps the best example of mix and kill.

NOTE- for all details please consult paper 4) from news; I have to warn you it is very long. It is the longest article ever about me (in part- about me). Thanks to the author even if he does not agree with everything I say.


Peter, I would like to reply to the comments made by Simon Derricutt and you on your blog.  I'm to see you are continuing intelligent discussion.  Perhaps you will send this to Simon. I do not have his address. 

My theory has two independent parts. The first part proposes a NAE exists and it is  located in nanocracks.  The second part describes the nuclear process that takes place in the NAE.  These two parts can be considered separately.

The first part identifies what needs to be done to a material to cause LENR. The second part shows which nuclear products are expected.   The first part may be totally correct yet creation of the required nanocracks is expected to be difficult. This difficulty does not reveal any useful information about whether the idea is correct or not.  Nevertheless, when I treat a material in a way that is consistent with my model, I have success.  The challenge is to create exactly the right amount of stress in a material having exactly the right amount of weakness in the lattice structure.  This challenge is being gradually mastered.  

The second part of my theory is valid only to the extent it predicts the nuclear products, which is does.  The idea has several implications people have a hard time accepting because they violate conventional understanding.  I'm not alone in having this problem because every theory suggeted so far by anyone violates some part of conventional understanding.  The question right now is which violation a person is willing to ignore. Some theories ignore more violations than others. 

As for Rossi, people are not listening to what he has actually done.  He found a way to activate Ni, just as I'm searching for a way to activate Pd.  He does not use ordinary Ni, as people assume is the case. Ordinary Ni is inactive just as is the case with ordinary Pd.  The Ni and the Pd must be subjected to special treatment before the materials can support LENR, which Rossi has discovered but not revealed. 

Unless the activated Ni is used, no LENR energy will be produced no matter how hot the material is heated. Heating Ni with LiAlH4 does not activate the Ni.  Instead, Rossi uses preactivated Ni and then uses LiAlH4 only as a source of H2. Unless the Ni is preactivated, no LENR is possible no matter how it is heated. Ordinary Ni cannot make LENR energy. 

In short, people are following the false path Rossi has encouraged people to follow and are wasting their time and money.  I suggest you explore this idea rather than keep speculating about what you think Rossi might be doing. People need to first discover how to activate Ni just as I'm trying to discover how to activate Pd.   


Brian Ahern: Thermacore replication

2) From Andrea  Rossi's JONP

Janell Thurnes
February 5, 2017 at 7:10 AM

Dr Andrea Rossi:
Are you optimist of how things are going in the litigation?
Andrea Rossi
February 5, 2017 at 9:29 AM

Janell Thurnes:
My optimism is based on two pillars: truth and evidence.
Warm Regards,

3) Updated search results BRILLIANTLIGHTPOWER

4) Age, the New Age, Believers, and Peter Gluck

The political environment that exists today in LENR is full of deception, spin, and intense competition. Those of pure heart don't last long playing the LENR game unless they adapt to this political environment. 

Rossi has been through the process a few times and has made adjustments. His run in with the Mafia has thought him a lot. 

We all must take this political situation into consideration when judging the validity of the "facts" provided by all concerned.

Over the years, I have come up with an understanding regarding Rossi as regards the judgement about what to trust and what not to trust in what he says.

As it natural in evaluating data, what Rossi says is filtered by by my understanding about how LENR works. The details that Rossi supplies is usually compatible with that understanding. 

As an example, I am very suspicious about what Rossi says related to the radiation coming from his reactors because admitting to radiation production would be deleterious to his product development interests and unfettered distribution of his products to a wide customer base. 

IMHO, LENR will produce a ton of radiation that will make LENR a product that is fit only for use by electrical utilities. 

I also beleive that few in the LENR product development arena will admit to this "fact" for the same reason that Rossi doesn't.

This informed evaluation of systems also includes R. Mills who is far more disingenuous to the truth than Rossi is. If anyone needs to be purified, it is R. Mills.


The difference in the Storms model from the Holmlid model of hydrogen cluster formation is that with Storms, the hydrogen cluster stays confined inside the crack. In the Holmlid model, the hydrogen cluster eventually is released from the cavity or the bump and falls free and floats around. It eventually falls under the influence of gravity and lands onto a collection foil.​

Holmlid has produced 171 research papers over 42 years on this subject vs. none for Storms. Who would you judge has it right?

It's not that surprising that Holmlid is the only guy that can produce these hydrogen clusters. He has spent his long life doing it, or at least since 1975

If Storms had some humility, one would assume that Storms would look into what Holmlid has found out in his research with regards to hydrogen clustering. 


The Mathematician Who Will Make You Fall in Love With Numbers

Thanks to Sam North for recommending this excellent Sunday lecture


Leadership is all about diagnosing the problem

The way you define the problem will get you the solution.   

The One Big Reason Every Business Needs to Embrace Complexity

If LENR wants to survive and prosper it must embrace complexity too!


  1. Regarding a recent item listed in this blog:

    1) Condensed Plasmoids – The Intermediate State of LENR
    Lutz Jaitner, Germany

    The major oversight that the "Plasmoid people" make in their description of the plasmoid is that it is comprised of electrons.

    IMHO, Lutz Jaitner has produced a mathematical blizard based on the electron as the sole constituent of the plasmoid. Because this electron based assumption is wrong, so too is all that math.

    It is not yet generally recognized that electrons vibrating in dipole motion on the surface of a transition metal will combine with photons from heat, light, XUV and gamma rays to form a polariton soliton(aka plasmoid). There exists a ton of math that deals with this subject in nanoplasmonics and the Plasmoid people should study up on the existing science covering the polariton.

    Polaritons are bosons with an unlimited capacity to pack together in an extreme concentration, whereas electrons are fermions that keep their distance from each other. This makes a big difference in theory.

    Any theory built on an invalid base will not long endure. Even the smallest flaw ruins the weave.

  2. Dear Peter,

    you should always be aware of this, at you are discussing with at least two who are on this diagram:

    Those guys are not interested in climate change, saving the planet, science, or something unimportant like the truth. They are interested in money, shareholder value and powerful business networks. Discussing with them about technical development, or science is meaningless as long as they can't make profit out of it!

    All the best

    1. Great thank you, have cited it in my answer to Abd.
      Waiting for 3 new documents from the Miami court

  3. Peter - thanks for putting up Ed Storms' answer. I'm easily found on a search, and you can also check the "contacts" in Revolution-Green. Maybe a bit too visible....

    In a lattice, dislocations have a very small energy hill to get over to move until they are pinned by a crystal boundary or a different kind of atom. Adding the right kind and quantity of alloying materials to Palladium and then using stress and heat-treatment may produce the required tendency to nano-cracks, but it also might help to have thin (probably sputtered) layers with interlayers of an alternate and stronger material. I don't however have the expertise or knowledge to be able to say what is possible in materials science or in fabrication of such structures. I'd suggest Tungsten as the interlayer, since that is also reckoned to be an LENR material from other experiments, and can be deposited in thin layers. The Palladium would need the correct type and amount of alloying to provide the pinning for the dislocations, and thus a larger number of the desired-size cracks. With this problem of specifying the material, we'd need to look at the performance of previous materials and try to make an informed guess about what is actually happening within them, and compare the poor ones with the better ones and work out why. Given the random nature of alloys at an atomic level, analysis is going to be difficult.

    Ed is spot-on when he says that every current LENR theory violates some part of current atomic theory. The problem is in deciding which parts are more violable than others. We can however make some decisions based on what the theory predicts will happen, and if those things do not happen at the predicted rates then the theory as it stands is wrong.

    I'm presuming the "activation" of both Nickel and Palladium involves the production of cracks of the correct size and shape. As noted, I am not convinced that Rossi has in fact managed this either reliably or to a large extent, although a total failure is unlikely - he did after all start by using Piantelli's methods. I think it is risky to make any calculations based on Rossi's published results. It is certainly in Rossi's interest to lead competitors down the wrong path, even if he did in fact know how to make it work reliably.

    It's also worth remembering the Toshiba/Mitsubishi experiments, where thin stacks of CaO and Pd thin layers had D2 diffused through them. The thin films were, I think, pure Pd and not an alloy, but it is an indication that the composite material idea could be a good prospect.

    There probably isn't enough Palladium in the world to power it, so in some ways Pd/D is not that useful. There is however a lot of Nickel, and if the lessons learned from Pd/D apply (if it's the same miracle) then since we know that Pd/D is easier to achieve then it makes sense to continue research on it.


    what may I do with your Comment?
    May I publish it?
    I am busy with some ugly dispute with Abd.

    1. Peter - as far as I can see it is published, and you may do what you wish with it. As regards the dispute with Abd, he has put his finger on a lot of the problems with Rossi's story and I doubt if he'll be shown to be wrong.

  5. I have an opinion here. All commercially available (COTS) nickel powder comes in batches in a very limited size range. For example, we can buy 10 nanometer powder up to 10 micron powder. I have not seen a COTS powder come in a wide mixture of sizes. In LENR, using the widest range of sized in nickel powder is important.

    In his patent, Rossi says that he preprocesses the COTS powder so that the COTS powder is transformed into a wide mix of sizes from 1 to 100 microns. It is my estimation that many smaller sizes are produced by this sintering based preprocessing but Rossi has never felt the inclination of documenting the very smallest particle fragments..

    This randomization of nickel powder sizes is important because of the way nanoplasmonics works.

    All open Rossi replications use COTS powder characterized by a very limited size range and I believe that this is way most replication that we know of have limited success.

    There is a rule in nanoplasmonics that the most power is produced by a wide size distribution in the size of the nickel particles. In other words, a mixture of a very small particle and a very large particle will produce the most EMF power.

    If a replicator wants to see good results, they are well advised to use the widest sized nickel particle mix.

    For background on how particles work in nanoplasmonics, see

    Plasmonics with a twist: taming optical tornadoes on the nanoscale

    On page 15, the details about particle size range is discussed:

    12.5. Molding the river of light in vortex nanogear transmissions

  6. capabilities are essential for weight loss efforts. running together, acai berry proved to be an extremely good supplement to your present diet and exercise regime.not simplest that,

  7. You might be qualified for a complimentary Apple iPhone 7.