Sunday, September 14, 2014


UEHMDI does not appear even in the greatest acronym searcher but it will be there in 2016. UEHMDI is ‘USEFUL ENERGY FROM HYDROGEN –METAL DEEP INTERACTION” the title of a book I have started to compose. I know for sure that at the gate of the LENR Heaven it is a saint bureaucrat (not my name-sake!) who decides about your admission there and his first question is: “How many books about cold fusion have you published?”
This can be one of the reasons that recently, Ed Storms, Jean Paul Biberian and Mats Lewan have published LENR (or LENR+) related books- and I know that other of our best men have almost finished their books. LENR Heaven is connected to Internet plus has some very good labs. Theoreticians with few exceptions have to go first in the LENR Purgatory. To make this complete- the gate of LENR Hell is wide open and due to the imperishable prestige of Dante Alighieri, the inscription is in Italian:
“Lasciate ogni speranze voi che LENRate con aqua pesante e palladio! ”

I have created the expression “obstacled way” as an antonym of “shortcut” in part for describing my biography and explaining why I have not published a single book in the first 76 years of my life.
Take note- I am not complaining, not carping about bad luck just explaining.
When I was 14 years I actually wrote a book it was about the adventures of my alter ego named Raul Fibiego – in English it would be Phybiego) an interdisciplinary scientist – Physics- Biology – Egology (psychology of the individual) in the world of the insects.
Fibiego and his lover Nildy (Swanilda see Leo Delibes’ballet Coppelia) invent a method to turn themselves to very small dimensions, linearly decreasing 100 to 1000 times and so they can study Nature quite directly. A great part of the book was about Fibiego and his fiancée inside the anthill- this is one of the reasons that I was able to give AXIL a documented answer in:
Now my grandson Rudolf is interested in myrmecology.
The book was also very romantic; Fibiego was a supporter of monogamy-seen as a superior ability to make good choices.

Unfortunately this book got lost I have moved 9 times in my life and could not carry much stuff with me.

My PhD thesis about the technology of suspension polyvinylchloride- morphology-processability correlations- is like a book, has 524 references, is in the library of the Jassy University but is in part obsolete. From 1982 the progress of the PVC technology was incremental and the main problem in principle – converting polymerization from batch in a continuous one has NO solution. From the 4 criteria defining the technology: productivity, quality, cost and ecology- quality is the determinant one and a distribution of reaction times destroys uniformity of polymer particle to particle quality. (I have remarked that Randy Mills has a somewhat similar discontinuous-converted-to-continuous wicked problem.

An other insoluble problem was my son’s health- I had to earn all time extra money for his treatments – mainly with translations and consultancy, no time and motivation for writing books.

For Cold Fusion and LENR there are a lot of excellent books by people who are writing better than me.
I will ignore the books that try to kill CF, written by dogmatists or sadists.
The other books describe the facts but the predictions made- if they are there- are not confirmed by the reality. Still not confirmed.
Books cannot be better than reality so even the best ones:

a) are emphasizing too much the role and power of the big bad cruel unjust and uninformed skeptics especially those who can decide about funding, publishing and patenting and, in the same time do not take in consideration the severe birth defects of cold fusion;

b) are mainly descriptive – but not explanatory or integrative;
Ed Storms’ new book is an exception, it aims to EXPLAIN LENR and presents a new, original theory. My problem with this theory is that I think very differently about how LENR and Mother Nature work.

I have learned something important from Ed Storms:
when ignorant or “not-with-the sharpest-tool-in- the- box” people (as Mary Yugo said I am) are unable to understand your ideas from papers or presentations, the best thing is to write a book. Probably books are creating a better vision and are believed to be higher on the DIKW scale. It will be much easier to make a Synthesis in the frame of a book.

I have to write my book for the sake of a much better and convincing taxonomy and understanding, convincing the readers that:
-        LENR is only a provisional name, the useful form of the deep interaction of hydrogen with transition metals is a group of phenomena very different from what we think now about PdD generated LENR,
-        The initially discovered form of LENR is not adequate for scientific study in depth nor for technological development;
-        The presence of alien gases (not hydrogen) poisons the active sites and kills or stifles the process of generating excess heat; deep degassing is vital,
-        The problems of LENR can be solved only by radical changes of both hydrogen and metal interacting and this is
    possible only by cooperation of science and technology,
-        In the case of LENR theory has no singular – it is about a
multistage process and each stage needs a theory;
    -    Only technologies, working commercial technologies can,
          save, resurrect, and make prosperous LENR;  
-        Plus many other ideas I have presented in almost 50 
papers this year, all about a vitally necessary but painful paradigm shift... My ideas are difficult to accept even for
me and I am telling always only what I sincerely think. Therefore those who are attacking me because I think differently than them about DGT or Rossi make a big error- my stupidity is a possible explanation but I am honest. To err is human to lie is a dirty thing. The UEHMDI book will be absolutely sincere.

Will it have success; will it convince people including my friends?

I have no idea; my blog papers have moderate success. If I ask the Internet I find this paper published today:

Will you write a great business book?

It is by Wally Bock, one of my favorite gurus in matter of leadership. He speaks about business books here- my book will be addressed to the LENR leaders of the future. Wally asks three fundamental questions:


Do you have a passion for the topic?

Yes I have a passion that survived many cycles of great expectations-deep disappointment and is still intense and warming my soul.


How will you add value to what’s already out there?

I will try both to add to what is here and to subtract and discard what I think it is not good for the future.

How do you know that people will buy your book?

It is OK, I am sure -open minded good people trying to convert LENR in a fine source of energy- all these people will buy my book. I need only 500,000 $ to buy a villa for my family. Money in excess of this will go to graduate students wiling to master and do PhDs in LENR- worldwide.




  1. No hide you now, no human errors you are black belt of liars, still spporting DGT against all evidences.

    1. Do you have evidences? I think you are a poor depressive guy and you
      feel big pains if you are not insulting somebody or are you paid for your messages. Please stop annoying me or as a man of honor tell who you are and take responsibility for what you tell. I know it is useless discussing with trolls and bravos like you.

  2. Gamberale's Report is one of the evidences dear liar.

    1. Part 1 of 2

      Gamberale states: "During the setup of the laboratory in Milan various improvements were introduced by the DE technicians and scientists concerning the calorimetry measurement. In particular a method independent of the flow rate measurement has been developed based on the heating of a large amount of water contained in a large tank and circulated through a pump in a closed circuit."

      This change in calorimetry must be to “constant volume heat capacity calorimetry” where the volume of water in the large water tank remains constant but the pressure of the water increases as the temperature of the water rises.

      Since the highly insolated tank holds a large volume of water, this holding tank requires a stirrer so that the water in the tank does not stratify. This makes that tank expensive.

      As the water rises in temperature, the water transfers less heat in a constant flow of water.

      As the reactor coils begins to cool and the cold water begins to warm, the difference in their temperatures decrease and the rate of heat transfer decreases. As thermal equilibrium is approached, their temperatures are approaching the same value. With the temperature difference approaching zero, the rate of heat transfer approaches zero. In conclusion, the rate of conductive heat transfer between two locations is affected by the temperature difference between the two locations.

      In addition, throughout a heat exchange, the mass-flow rate should remain constant, but changes in temperature and pressure can change the volumetric flow rate. So a water flow should be stated as a mass flow, a volumetric flow at standard conditions, or as a volumetric flow including temperature and pressure.

      To insure thermal stability of the reactor so that the computer logic in the control system need not be changed, the circulating pump should provide a variable flow and be calibrated to insure that the mass flow remains constant.

      If the graphical presentation of the demo is meant to show a running COP vs. the time of reactor operation, the Computer program that renders the graphical interface would be required to be rewritten to take into account the new complex interplay of variables that accompany the change in the type of Calorimetry.

      To avoid errors in theoretical analysis in these variables, a calibration of the new Calorimetry system is best accomplished by using an electrical resistive simulation of the system by developing a dummy reactor that can producing a variable electric heat source that varies between 2 and 5 kilowatts of power in a periodic cycle to simulate the operation of the reactor in real-time.

      Such a simulation would run into the tens of thousands of dollars and require an extended timeframe to complete. Once this simulation was calibrated, the data is then input into the graphical rendering program to accurately show a real-time COP. Temperature of the water is meaningless because of the complex interplay of thermal variables with time.

    2. Part 2 of 2

      Gamberale states "This measure is independent of the measurement of the flow through the coil and it would remove any doubt about the heat measurement. DGT has not allowed DE to use such measurement in none of the tests of their technology."

      IMHO, this rejection of the change in the test plan is reasonable because the change in calorimetric approach is disruptive to the entire range and intent of the demos initial design and setup. The new calorimetric approach is also very expensive to design, recode reactor and test device computer logic, and to recalibrate the system.

      Gamberale states: "As a further improvement we added a second flowmeter upstream of the water system in order to verify the behavior of the main flowmeter during the measurement of the excess power but also in this case the added flowmeter was readily removed by the DGT technicians forbidding us to make any verification."

      This rejection of DE's test changes is reasonable on the part of the DGT technicians since water flow has been removed as a valid variable in the new “constant volume heat capacity Calorimetry” approach from this demo.

      In conclusion, it sounds to me that the DGT Europe group and its chief technical officer did not know what they were doing…they were inept and DGT personnel was well served to ignore this request to change the test procedure.

    3. Reading here anyone can understand that you are a big ignorant of the argument of the Report. Gamberale has found and demonstrated that it was an absolute bluff just using the measurement method imposed by DGT. Your words in the comments before are just a blah blah, only chatting to hide the truth and to support the cheaters and a gullible old man here.

  3. Hello Peter,

    Thank you for your attempts to direct LENR towards a more productive path. Hopefully it will help as you intend. As most LENR researchers nowadays have been at this for decades, or at least years and well up there in age, I would suspect they are perhaps a bit too set in their ways to heed your advice. Maybe not never knows until one tries.

    However, hopefully some young future LENR up and comer will read your words and focus his efforts where most effective thanks to your guidance. We can only hope.

    By the way Peter...Rothwell mentioned that he had "heard that DGT went bankrupt". Could you comment on that?

    Take care.

    Shane D.

  4. Dear Shane,
    Please write ASAP to me with your real address, i have to discuss a project with you.

  5. Peter,

    Is there a personal contact link here on you site? Or do I have to join first by establishing a Google account first?

    I'd be interested to hear what you have in mind.

    Shane Daigle

    1. my address is
      please write there