Friday, May 31, 2013


A good friend, a leading personality of the New Energy Movement, the Canadian writer, Jeane Manning has visited the labs of Defkalion Green Technologies at Vancouver and has published this fine frontline report.
I am a long time admirer of Jeane’s writings and thinking and now again her unique talent to see the essence, the core of the problem, her ability to discover, reveal newness and progress made me enthusiastic-bravissimo Jeane!

This NEW has now a name; it is LENR+, in defkalionese HENI.
It is the creation of Yiannis Hadjichristos and his scientific associate(s) and of our bright colleague and friend Axil. The DGT team made this new thinking possible, Jeane is telling us what LENR+ signifies.

I take this opportunity to show you the bare bone form of LENR+ asking you, my faithful readers to contribute by putting
Scientific-conceptual flesh on this skeleton. I will discourage those who perhaps want to break some of these bones- they are very tough and resistant. PLEASE contribute positively and creatively to his Synthesis!

LENR+ Manifesto and Plan. (sketch)

1.  Situation: The LENR field has PROBLEMS

2.  Cause:  It appeared too EARLY
3. Difficulty: Extreme COMPLEXITY

4. Solution: TECHNOLOGY first!
- No PURE SCIENCE alone!
- SCIENTIFIC METHOD not applicable.
- HYBRID METHOD necessary

-  Usual SYSTEMS hopeless
-  To destroy MYTHS, MEMES!
-  Radical PARADIGM shift.


7 Task: to differentiate LENR/LENR+!
- LENR is discovery, LENR+ is invention,
- LENR and LENR+ have different mechanisms;
- LENR+ based on enhanced excess heat,
- LENR+ dynamic system of multi-stage processes;
- LENR+ is based on nuclear interactions, not reactions,
- LENR+ needs a productive meta-theory

8. Task: define, describe LENR+ mechanism;
to make hydrogen reactive and metal receptive
Polaritons, Nanoplasmonics, Resonances -àBEC, sequences…
Trans-theory in statu-nascendi

9. Task LENR+ R&D by HOLISTIC approach
- optimization performances/control, scale up, diversification

10. Industrial implementation of LENR+ generators

In these papers you can see how LENR+ was built. The work just has started

LENR/LENR+ papers 2013

Thursday, May 30, 2013

LENR FRONTLINE REPORT: undecided battle, the war continues.

LENR FRONTLINE REPORT: undecided battle, the war continues.

"To be intelligent means to NOT mix (confuse) the points of view" (Mihail Ralea)

Lack of intelligence has a somewhat broader extent however it surely comprises mixing of incompatible, immiscible things.
The recently published Report re. Rossi’s Hot Cat has caused a battle of such immiscible ideas – more precisely memes. It was written a lot about it and all I want is to answer the fundamental questions: What war was this? Who were the combatants? How will be this war finished?
The battle per se had no clear winners and no clear losers –except reason, logic and common sense. Applying two stages of radical euphemization I can tell that this paper: is the worst I have seen in 24+ years of Cold Fusion history, a blasphemy against taxonomy. It mixes 5 things in the most unprofessional mode- a real monster bred by the sleep of reason.
Otherwise the Big Four Rossi killers – Joshua Cude, Steven Krivit, Gary Wright and Mary Yugo have reacted as this was expected from them. (Mary was the fastest, congrats!) Many other new kids on the block have reacted similarly. An old rule: if you have no arguments, no facts you manufacture them and add them to the reality. I think they have read my analysis saying my 20 problem solving rules were able to solve >99% of the real problems but less than 80% of the imaginary ones.
Rule 17 says it clearly:  “NOT always the existent, real problems, but many times the fictive, imaginary ones are the most difficult to be solved.”
Using this weapon is easy- you add imaginary problems to the real ones regarding the Report and then claim that those new problems are insoluble- that means the report is flawed. By reading a few ten thousands of comments you could easily earn a diploma in distorted logic. The confusion is total and even good and honest people will write self-contradictory open end papers like this.

The Hundred Years War had duration of 116 years (1337-1453); the Cold Fusion War will be known as the Twenty Five Years LENR War and will last roughly 25 years. That means that the coming months will bring decisive events on more fronts.
Just watch the news and especially this blog, Ego Out.
But the battle of Ferrara is not simply a continuation of the war between the LENR believers and the Cold Fusion skeptics. No, actually it was a battle between LENR+ Rossi style and
his personal enemies (Rossi is very effective in creating enmity) The rest is just context.
The classic LENR people and their traditional adversaries have mixed in naturally but it was not more their battle. It was a LENR+ battle on an other frontline...
\The relationship between LENR (Pd based, smart static nanostructures, etc.- weak, sporadic heat effect) and LENR+- much enhanced excess heat) is approximately similar to that of a caterpillar and butterfly. LENR to LENR+ is a radical metamorphosis. To speak about fixed active sites/NAE and dynamic active sites/NAE is the core of the difference but still a simplification.
Again about mixing: LENR and LENR+ systems have to be considered separately, they represent different levels, stages and directions of development. We have to treat them separately; do not mix cherries and pumpkins. (idiotic metaphor, take it only dimensionally)
The final battles will take place very probably between a LENR+ technology smarter than Rossi’s and the last place will be the market.
Some of enemies of the coming LENR+ technology are so obsessed with their unbelief that they will look with suspicion even to their own new LENR+ based central heater.
The decisive technical Armageddons will come soon and the enemies of progress will learn that they are no more confronting LENR a poor myriapode with a lot of Achilles heels, but LENR+ the invincible technology.


Wednesday, May 22, 2013


The Report of the Italian and Swedish professors that demonstrates the generation of massive excess heat and an amazingly high energy density is a serious very professional work.
It is obviously not perfect; not a capodopera but this does not disturb me a bit. Its conclusions are unassailable and, I well remember that re-reading even my most successful research reports two weeks later, I usually have found lots of issues that could be done much better. Three months later, many times we were able to find a better way.

The Report has not found its way to the Big Press – this is only its 3rd day of public existence. However it has already generated an epidemics that (because I am chasing popularity) I will call of toxic naivety and arrogant, increasingly desperate ill-will. Those detractors who have decent IQ’s and at least some
traces of EQ start understanding that soon they will be forced to swallow their words and these will taste very bitter. Take this as my friendly prediction.

The epidemic is lead by a sub-species of Homo sapiens- those human beings who are fatally allergic to any question that needs answers beyond the most primitive straight YES or NO.
See please what I wrote about the MU answers- in Robert Pirsig’s interpretation here:  It would be simplistic to call them dualist-extremists, therefore I will not call them in any way, but you, my friends and friends of reality, you will easily recognize them.

These individuals surely know this essential idea:

The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function. ((F Scott Fitzgerald)

Unfortunately the poor souls think those opposing ideas can and have to be mixed, even combined. That is a pathological anti-logical mental operation. The latest example:

The core idiocy in the attacks.

The attacks try to demonstrate simultaneously that;
a) Andrea Rossi is a scammer, swindler, fraud & 9 synonyms
b) The E-cat is unable to produce any excess heat, everything was and is just faked, false, non-existent heat.

I will use an analogy, an artistic one. As told I doubt the explanatory and the predictive value of the most usual technological analogies used for cold fusion, for ages simply because airplanes and transistors have appeared when their time
was there, theory and technical conditions were already ready. Cold Fusion came in hurry, too early- the advent of LENR+ will show you how and why this happened.

Let’s admit Andrea Rossi is a scammer- and let’s find a historical analog personality for him. Please look this video with attention and read the text:

Yes, it is the famous womanizer Don Juan (or Don Giovanni in Mozart’s opera). He immediately characterized by one of his victims, Donna Elvira (interpreted here by the adorable Dame Kiri Te Kanawa) tells it directly: “monster, villain, liar!” Don Juan escapes coward style and his servant, Leporello – in the famous Catalog aria explains to the poor girl that she is not the first or the single victim, describing the extent of his master’s sexual, marital scam so:

My dear lady, this is a list
Of the beauties my master has loved,
A list which I have compiled.
Observe, read along with me.
Italy, six hundred and forty;
Germany, two hundred and thirty-one;
A hundred in
France; in Turkey, ninety-one;
But in Spain already one thousand and three.

What do you think, boys, really not bad, centuries before Viagra was invented!
Much sex, but also a lot of money- the guy was a super-scammer indeed. He is eventually punished but accepts his fate with dignity, has strong principles. Don’t mourn him, better read what G.B. Shaw has written about Don Juan.

But let’s continue with the analogy, it is an axiom of the denigrators that Rossi’s E-Cat – is unable to deliver any excess heat, zero excess hear, zero and its 23 synonyms!
This means nothing more and nothing less that Don Juan is impotent! You don’t need imagination at all to see that in this case Leporello’s list would be, very short- no list at all.

(Note ‘impotent Don Juan’ is my independent but not original invention for this occasion, but see please the autobiography of Paul Feyerabend the philosopher who has told some remarkable things about the Scientific Method – but this is an other problem.)

Back to Rossi, do you think he is so crazy that he hopes to sell
totally impotent, non-functional E-cats? By thousands and millions? Globally? “Perpetuum stabile”s in industrial quantities? 
Do you really think the impossible is possible? And, can you make a list of Rossi’s E-cat bound victims?

An other standard core naivety is the ideally independent, test:
It means that just for pleasing some aggressive, curious negative kibitzes, Rossi will borrow one of his generators to a group of unknown well known (in the profession) experts and lets them to do all kind of tests they wish. Rossi has made a discovery; the relationship between a creator and his creation is a very complex issue. However Rossi has the right to protect his intellectual property and to establish his own risk management. A wise friend has told: Sometimes unpleasant people win the lottery. I have not met Rossi but people who know him say he has charm and can be very nice, just it is difficult to make business with him. Do you think he has paranormal abilities and has mesmerized a lot of people starting with Focardi and Stremmenos and the DGT people? No, surely not: he has excess heat in the E-cats and is still learning how to master excess heat management. He knows how advanced he is in his studies.

This was the beautiful part of the story. The ugly part is that the quasi-desperate black-and white naïve donjuanologists are attacking and insulting viciously and cowardly the Professors who have destroyed the myth of those wise-guys’ inerrancy. No fair play.


Monday, May 20, 2013


The much awaited report on the tests performed by a group of Italian and Swedish scientists was published this Monday morning, thus starting a week of discussions of still unpredictable extent.
Will the press (Press) react fast, will the dedicated Rossi killers counter-react fiercely or will they make intellectual seppuku as suggested; we will see.
For those few readers who have not yet studied the report here are the links:

The first to react probably was the excellent Swedish journalist Mats Lewan on his blog: but he has promised more details from the authors on Ny Teknik. My Swedish friend David Nygren has called me on Skype to announce the event.
The publication process seemed to be slow, but peer reviewing never was fast. It is still not clear where will be this report published in printed form, but after reading it, this seems not very relevant to me.

The essence of this report is this: Rossi obtains enhanced excess heat in his generator(s)
A certainty – you can see in my writings that I have stated this long ago. Rossi is on the way, long and with many obstacles from this first step which is his discovery to an energy source. Rossi being very secretive we cannot know if he has solved the problems of control as start-up, adjustment of heat level and instant shut-down etc, but we wish him the best.
I have paid a high human cost for my conviction that Rossi has demonstrated beyond any doubt intense excess heat even in his series of seriously “improved” dozen experiments from 2011-
I have lost the friendship of two individuals I have admired still then but now they became intolerant to contrary opinions. A third friend got angry with me both for this and for my support for Defkalion- who has the most creative thinking in LENR+, IMHO.
Defkalion has focused its initial R&D efforts on control, first of all
on start-up, a critical stage for LENR+.

The two experiments of the Professors lead to good levels of excess heat and to decent values of COP, 5.6 and 2.6 and this need to increased (3.0 is the minimum technological value taking in account that a unit of electric energy is 3 times more expensive than the same unit of thermal energy).

The difference between Excess Heat and a genuine Energy Source will be made obvious using the example of the thermo-radiant stones that have been used for heating the homes in the Arctic zones with active volcanoes. Those “heitt steinn” had to be mined, cut and have created some problems of logistics and of adjustment. Therefore as soon technical progress has arrived to those cold zones, standard gas, oil electric and other heaters were used replacing the hot stones.

Rossi’s zoology inspired approaches to viable energy sources are suggesting that he uses now a mouse for better start-up and control and goes on two different ways for scale-up: multi-cat and E-Tiger
The report is a victory for LENR+ and perhaps it can prepare the press and the open-minded public opinion for even greater victories that will come this year.


Friday, May 17, 2013


School for Phoenix Birds
Today I burn a feather,
Tomorrow a tip of my claw,
And so I learn how to not forget
To reborn from my ashes

I wrote this short poem of optimist desperation (we will succeed to resurrect as those birds!) in 1988 when we hoped that the communist dictatorship will end somehow, but we had no idea how it will happen. A year later I knew it, an untitled
poem but actually “Ceausescu” said:

On my island made of wax,
 In the midst of a hot Ocean,
 I stay and wait…”

He has not waited much, the island disappeared and Ceausescu has learned fast about the risks of the profession of dictator. We resurrected, more or less.

However I will speak now about the brave Phoenix Birds, a wonderful symbol of continuity, even with the high price of an obviously painful but well organized series of resurrections.

In my previous editorial “The Best Recipe for Disaster” I have described how Cold Fusion has abandoned – forced by the hostile outer and inner circumstances, in the frame of its original sin- bad reproducibility-its essential aim: Energy. But I knew this idea has to be continued. And now it will be about continuity, because the long history of cold fusion-LENR was continuously uglified by discontinuities in the experimental work , by sad cases of projectus interruptus. A success is not a success still it does not follow the normal cycle of growing up, developing, improving, slowly and peacefully, get old and eventually being replaced y something even better and so on. The successes in LENR were
very short-lived
As it usually happen, the Spirit of Internet offered his generous help. First it has sent me the newsletter of Psychotactics with a paper entitled: “The 6 Most Important Lessons In Marketing”
What is true for marketing and these six lessons are as follows:          1) Follow up; 2) Follow up; 3) Follow up; 4) Follow up;            5) Follow up; 6) Follow up.- is true for many positive human activities- for example science and technology-too. If you don’t follow up, you have achieved nothing. Your work will remain a footnote in the history of the field.
Then at the LENR forums two very long threads have reminded us how variable but unpredictable and unmanageable the experimental results were and how difficult it is to obtain passable results in the PdD systems despite the accumulated huge
experimental data. How many hopes raising high and then falling!
In a bit euphemistic, hardened form “jumping like a lion, falling like a stone.” The standard culprit is lack of funding, but nobody takes the risk to answer to an utopian question like: “suppose we have endless funding; is there a guarantee that somebody will solve the problems of reproducibility and scale up? Or, do you think that is possible?” If somebody happens to be interested in my opinion that is: without removal of gas molecules that compete with deuterium, decent levels (>99.9%) of reproducibility will be never attained; and the original wet
system is unable to attain usable energy densities. Do not say me please:”it is easy to make wise negativist predictions when you know you will go and will get rid of any responsibility for your statements!”
But my special experience in mythical aviculture has taught me a lot from the Phoenix birds, I will come back and continue my activity. Just continue to watch this blog.
I repeat for the n-th time, lack of reproducibility MUST have an explanation and even more, MUST have solutions- finding these is the raison d’etre of research. And certainly, outsiders will never accept a process that is not highly, safely, knowingly reproducible! Please allow me here to ask two naïve rhetorical questions:

Is it a serious problem that serious problems are not taken seriously?

Why loving inside constructive critics is ignored and hateful attacks are answered in the minutest details, with quasi-infinite repetition of old data?

The 1 = 0 Rule, explained

The OLTCHIM research lab was a  fine place, we had to deliver  results and fast have worked under stress and pressure- coming in great part from people who had no idea about research and chemistry but having great power- it was a dictatorship, autocracy then. The possibilities of information were limited but I succeeded to convince some people that it is necessary; anyway we had a lot of Russian books and journals. In critical cases as in `1974-5 when it was discovered that vinyl-chloride is a dangerous carcinogen and the technology of PVC was revolutionized- we have received everything we needed because it seemed to be a case of “solve it or perish1” for this major polymer.
Some smart people in the great libraries of Romania have started to translate the basic Western management literature and this has stimulated our thinking and gave us an unlimited appetite to learn
And to discover such rules and principles and truths and we have also tried to discover some good practices in research.

We had successes but some cases that first seemed to go well, turned out to be complete failures, when taking everything in account and developing a broader vision/understanding. We have introduced a precautionary rule: one result is no result, one analysis is still no valid analysis, one single test (good or bad) has to be temporarily ignored and repeated. You got it this became the axiomatic 1 = 0 Rule. It was extended to some childishly simple but useful ideas as: continuation is more important than start, it is more important to re-think an idea than to discover it, first remove the weak points and later developed the strong points, always take care first of the risks, we have concocted a primitive form of SWOT. The opuses of Deming, Juran and Crosby and our practice have taught us that constancy of quality is more important than peak performances. We have embraced critical thinking and had series of illuminations regarding scientific and technological
experts… but enough of vain nostalgia, let’s better to continue to learn. Complementary to the 1 -0 rule is the high art to know when a project has to be abandoned and the resources spent for better ones. It is about the essential difference between effectiveness and efficiency- ask Peter Drucker!
If we apply the 1 = 0 Rule to the long history of CF/LENR we will suffer heavy losses. If a study, method idea gives good excellent or/and promising results but it is discontinued, there are great chances that it has no development potential or it has hidden inner weaknesses.

We can conclude against our wish that LENR despite being more than certainly very real, has no bright future, it will be almost impossible to improve the experimental situation so LENR is in crisis as long as we remain in the frame of LENR (classic LENR)

It happens that my hyper-informed colleague, Axil, leader of the New Wave thinking in our field has just found an elegant up-the-target formulation of the perspective (extracted from his Vortex message):                                                                                        LENR reaction is weak, transient, random, and intermittent. This ethereal nature of the LENR reaction makes it useless.  The LENR advocate must come up with a plan to make the LENR reaction strong, permanent, consistent, and controllable LENR+

This working strategy is clearly modeled after the Phoenix birds- you have to destroy your old nature and resurrect with a new viable, superior nature. Not an easy job, but the alternative is worse and it does not exist. Perhaps you can imagine other
solutions but it is very possible that the following quotation
is true in that case:
“Imagination is the one weapon in the war against reality.”
(Jules de Gaultier)


Supplement: a few inspiring quotes only for LENR+ apprentices and students

Actually these are more than quotations- they are partners for your dialogues about the LENR/LENR+ problems: Real imaginary dialogues- it will go well

Phoenix birds
There was a silly damn bird called a phoenix back before Christ, every few hundred years he built a pyre and burnt himself up. He must have been the first cousin to Man. But every time he burnt himself up he sprang out of the ashes, he got himself born all over again. And it looks like we're doing the same thing, over and over, but we're got on damn thing the phoenix never had. We know the damn silly thing we just did. We know all the damn silly things we've done for a thousand years and as long as we know that and always have it around where we can see it, someday we'll stop making the goddamn funeral pyres and jumping in the middle of them. We pick up a few more people that remember every generation.” (Ray Bradbury)

Fawkes is a phoenix, Harry. Phoenixes burst into flame when it is time for them to die and are reborn from the ashes.”  (J.K. Rowling)
Rising in Triumph, just like the phoenix (Loretta Livingstone)

Only after disaster can we be resurrected. (Chuck Palahniuk)

It is not more surprising to be born twice than once; everything in nature is resurrection. (Voltaire)

Succeed quotes
In order to succeed, your desire for success should be greater than your fear of failure. (Bill Cosby)

If you want to succeed you should strike out on new paths, rather than travel the worn paths of accepted success. (John D. Rockefeller)

Don't let the opinions of the average man sway you. Dream, and he thinks you're crazy. Succeed, and he thinks you're lucky. Acquire wealth, and he thinks you're greedy. Pay no attention. He simply doesn't understand. (Robert G. Allen)

In order to succeed you must fail, so that you know what not to do the next time. (Anthony J. D'Angelo) 

 I have learned that success is to be measured not so much by the position that one has reached in life as by the obstacles which he has had to overcome while trying to succeed. (Booker T. Washington)

A continuation quote

Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts. (Winston Churchill)

And a last one, what I think about CF/LENR too:
The value of an idea lies in the using of it.” (Thomas Edison)

Monday, May 6, 2013



A perfection of means, and confusion of aims, seems to be our main problem. (Albert Einstein)_
Both Mottos can be interpreted as “fallible as we are, we still are much better with means than with aims.”

You know that my blog is dedicated to problem solving (BTW I am planning to set up a special new blog only for my 20 Problem Solving Rules) therefore I am deeply interested in the sources of man-made problems. Step by step, I have discovered an inexhaustible source of such problems, a very effective recipe for failure. My satori has happened when I wrote an editorial about bureaucracy.
“Somewhere a problem, a task, a purpose, an aim or a problem appears. A solution is sought. An institution, a committee, political party, group, team is created for working out and implementing the solution and for creating new improved up-to-dated solutions. Then something strange and evil happens- the institution etc. has a kind of amnesic shock and “forgets” its own mission, does care less and less about the general interest and focuses on its own group’s interest and on the people who support it. Bureaucracy appears wit its corrupt and egotistical nasty ugliness.
However this process of degradation, alienation is more general than the damned bureaucracy, in many places the aims are cannibalizing the aims and take over their status and function.
I had an other illumination moment when I read years ago that pharmaceutical industry spends more money for advertising than for research I have read a lot about Big Pharma- the art of making billions from milligrams and I have understood how it has lost its original aim- to cure illnesses and make people healthy and has replaced it with maximum profit obtainable from chronically ill people addicted to some, if possible) expensive drugs. The aim of Big Pharma is many customers not healthy people. If you are over 50 you will understand immediately what I want to say.
The most spectacular case of means-replacing-aims is that of money- not more a means of buying and selling but a kind of sacred aim, Moneytheism is the dominant religion, consumerism is a social obligation that moves society, ads are ubiquitous. To be poor is the most unpardonable sin.

It is now black humor or outright idiocy to tell that the government has the aims to serve the people. In practice, everywhere those who have won the power, democratically or not, try to get rich by all means.

A few short (ened) remarks:

a)  The aims must be in consonance with the means; good aims using evil means become evil.

Means we use must be as pure as the ends we seek. (Martin Luther King, Jr.)

The end may justify the means as long as there is something that justifies the end.”   (Leon Trotsky)

b) The aims are always less clear, less stable, less up-to-dated and well defined and described, less “real” than the means. Means are now, aims are in the future. In a sense, the means tend to be more powerful than the aims and this is one of the reasons why aims are easy prey for means so many times.

What really matters in life are not the goals we set, but the roads we take to achieve them. (Peter Bamm)

The Way is always more than the Purpose. (Heimito von Doderer)

c) During my career in research I have learned that if I want to create something more important and lasting, it is better to focus on methods, principles, modes of thinking, more on the processes than on products. Means – here too are more fertile than aims.

d) Collective aims are much more vulnerable to the “means eat aims” syndrome than individual, independent, original aims. The following quotation is, in part half- in part 1.5 relevant:

Brilliance is typically the act of an individual, but incredible stupidity can usually be traced to an organization. (Jon Bentley)

If you belong to a group having an aim identical with yours, consider it as your personal aim, it’s safer and smarter...  

The ‘aims replaced by means’ problem is present in my all favorite activity- research too.  The publications of the scientists and researchers have the aim to inform peers, colleagues and the world about their achievements, discoveries, their own contributions to the advancement of science and technology. However, because there are exclusively quantitative criteria used for the evaluation of the activity of the scientists, publications – their number- becomes an aim per se. You have to write and publish as many as possible books and papers. So you tend to divide your work in “least publishable units” see e.g.  This problem is more serious than believed by the outsiders, quality and newness are very difficult to define and the very necessary
Scientometrics is under-used.                         

NOTE During spring-cleaning my blog, I have seen that I have already published 95 papers re New Energy. Please do not accuse me of salami publication; there are other reasons for being so over-productive, to not say, boring. I have written about many events, new ideas and concepts, I am a slow thinker, my own ideas are not easy to understand for me and are rarely formulated in a convincing mode; Please also take in consideration that I was swimming  counter-stream.  I have made a long journey in complexity, from thinking that deep degassing and VERY smart nanotechnology and perfect adjustment of a few critical parameters will solve the problem of commercial heat energy generation to the New Wave LENR+ a techno-conspiracy of organized matter multi-sequential and hyper dynamic systems to unite Metal and Hydrogen in the proper way... More important is that the best people in the field are generously helping me.

But let’s go back to aims and means, Read this please:

To forget your aim is the most common form of stupidity.
 (Friedrich Nietzsche)

This is an exaggeration and in the same time, a euphemism. Losing your aims, replaced by some means, or in other way, is the best recipe for disaster. If this happens to you, there is no other solution than to regain your initial aims and to aim to more. Otherwise your cause is lost.

The lost aims of LENR.

Cold Fusion has appeared unexpectedly as a promise of infinite energy clean energy, as a creative solution to the huge delays and great troubles of Hot Fusion. Based on the natural simplicity in thinking everybody has expected to get a hot fusion reaction that takes place at cold, due probably to the enormous electro-chemical pressure on the surface of the palladium cathode. Soon the initial naiveties have disappeared and instead of a golden rush for more and more energy, the field had to fight desperately enough for its very survival. The starting aim, Energy became fight for survival; Enhancement was replaced fast with proving Existence. Prove that you really exist!  The field was under siege for long years. Pragmatic focus became scientific focus. When it become obvious that the intensity of the desired heat release cannot be increased the aim was changed to very sensitive heat measurement and a glorious new chapter was added to the fine art of calorimetry. Disproportionate efforts but heroic ones. Milliwatts are less that watts, our bodies are sources of approximately 100Watts heat and we need much powerful sources than ourselves. Minute quantities of energy generate no enthusiasm, no enthusiasm means no funds, no funds signifies no creative ideas. Lack of creative ideas is the most destructive situation possible for research.
Cold Fusion has aimed to be a commercial heat source but was sentenced to remain a lab curiosity.                                                 I don’t know who was the first to call CF anomalous, but he/she has made a fatal error, the effect is new, unexpected even surprising (smart researchers are surprised only by the absence of surprises. Anomalous is pejorative, offensive. Do you want an anomalous oven or an anomalous car?                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

However many good people have discovered and are convinced that the effect, LENR exists and continued to try to solve the problem of improved processes. These people organizes meetings, the great ones have arrived this year to No 19. However the main aim of these meetings seems to be to create opportunities to many people, some of them young, to present new variants of weak and sick and unreliable LENRs or is helping theorists to apply their one-step, simple explanation to a process for which the prefix “multi” can be applied in multi-mode. Very rarely was it organized a serious, even desperate discussion re why the XXXX is this strange category of phenomena so weak and difficultly reproducible, concluding that this situation is INTOLERABLE and MUST BE CHANGED. By any means!
A last remark- one of the starting aims of Cold Fusion was to be NUCLEAR. I am increasingly thinking this is an equivalent of the cat’s color not of the cat’s mice hunting ability. (I am speaking about Deng Xiaoping’s cat not Andrea Rossi’s). I hope LENR+ is Nuclear in a quite new, harmless way.
Losing aims, due to replacement by means, or in any other way is the best recipe for failure and/or disaster for anyone and for everything.
If a field loses its aims, it loses its original identity and can be resurrected only from outside. LENR+ will regenerate the noble and useful Cold Fusion dream.