Friday, December 26, 2014

LENR EXPERTS COMING! December 26, 2014

 I believe in experts, I know they are vitally important for industries, technologies and other creative branches of human activity, they are sometimes able to solve the most wicked problems, they can stop destruction and convert bad things in good things- and we need them so much! I have a straightforward reason to believe in experts I have met, say a dozen of them during my 40 years of work for the chemical industry. Some of them have helped me to get deep understanding and to change my mode of thinking and use new methods of research.
Experts have more than knowledge, they also possess wisdom and can rise to the highest step of the DIKWP scale- prediction. 
Their arsenal of expertise is about (let me repeat it, please):
KNOW WHAT + KNOW HOW + KNOW WHY + KNOW WHY NOT, all these in synergy i. e. working together and combined in a synthesis.

Are there experts in LENR? For all of you who have followed the evolution of the field, the answer is a sad, angry but not desperate- STILL NO! We have a few admirable erudites who know everything that has happened there, but there are troubles with interpretation and understanding. There are no infallible recipes for intense and reliable heat excess, experiments go as they wish. Many explicative theories are known, most of them beautiful but not this is the most desirable virtue 
of a theory. They are tasty, say ugly facts. Prohibitive theories saying what we are not allowed to do appear more as empirical taboos than logical constructs.
Common in all experts I met: they were travelling a lot, worldwide, communicating full steam,, combine open mindedness with acerbic critical thinking, accept errors more easily than useless actions, can say "I don't know" with charming easiness..

We, in LENR have no LENR experts but we have LENR gurus- it is excellent that a lot of experts in other areas- for matter, energy and information have joined us.
But we have not our own real experts in positive; no wonder because no expertise
can be created or survives to genuine VUCA situations or in deep crises
- think about what says N.N. Taleb about experts in not-completely-manageable systems as economies of countries.
Experts deliver certainties, freeze volatiles, master complexity, remove ambiguities-
when everything goes well- they are killers of VUCA.

Yesterday one of our friends has published a rather classic writing widely circulated
about major prediction blunders: 
The next time you read an "expert opinion", think about these!!
EXAMPLES OF GETTING IT WRONG- 25 are enumerated. a shorter variant is thsi:

Sometimes the experts are idiots. So just go, be awesome:

You can also read this, on your way toward becoming and expert in experts.

The paradox of human expertise: why experts get it wrong

I think all those blunders of supposedly very intelligent people have not much to do with real experts and even less with LENR. However something that  has happened today has determined me to think about experts.

As you remember yesterday E-Cat World has told us about the generous offer of Prof Piantelli to collaborate closely with the MFMP (in a first form the offer was made at October 20, this year) See today more details and good things here:

Piantelli on The Beginnings of Nickel-Hydrogen LENR Research — and a Fundraiser for Project Fedora

I am really happy to see this, if there is a single real expert and genuinely great scientist in LENR, then this is Franco Piantelli. He has discovered the NiH effect, has developed it, up to a certainty of the heat release you will know.  He was very opressed for long years but he never gave up and a living treasure of wisdom.
Have you read these old papers?:

This collaboration is in the very spirit of an unique precious Ego Out-

However, in this case Hank Mills is  not contented and asks:
Please, MFMP, Stay Focused on the E-Cat

No, dear Hank- this time you are not right, perhaps you don't know well Piantelli and his lab.
And please think with empathy about our young MFMP colleagues:

a) they will receive fundamental Ni-H and research and lab techniques expertise, they are young and they will be our future experts- and the way is so long! I am amazed how heat measurement as at Lugano via white incandescence is so black magic- this will need a supplementary confirmation and this will be done in the US;

b) old post career researchers can focus on impossible tasks as fast reproduction of the Lugano experiment; take in consideration that it would be a fatal error to send/let MFMP to do research ONLY on the very far right side of the Medawar Zone (see on the web) Doing only quasi impossible tasks in the uphill direction is waste of human creativity
MFMP has a mission- I would define it as to give us certainties and Piantelii cn help them the best.

Dear Hank, please rethink your position the future is more important than the present,


See these messages on his Blog:

Andrea Rossi
December 25th, 2014 at 3:08 PM

Tommaso Di Pietro:
The Customer we have delivered the plant to has been granted from us a specific performance that is exclusively measured from him by means of the ratio between the electric energy that the plant consumes and that he pays and the thermal energy necessary to his production. What the Customer cares of is how much costs to him make his producton using our plant : if the cost is
much lower as expected, the Customer will be satisfied and the test will be positive.
Separately, our Team will take from the plant operation all the data necessary to complete program of R&D using the more than 100 computers that not only regulate the operation of the plant, but also supply the data we want to improve the technology.
Such R&D endeavour is made by our internal scientists and technologists.
Being in a commercial phase, the sole independent party that makes the final verdict is the Customer.
Thank you for your question.
Warm Regards,
Tommaso di pietro

Andrea Rossi
December 24th, 2014 at 4:02 PM

All the data regarding the operation of the 1 MW plant will be published after the end of the test. As I said many times now, I cannot give any data before that.
Best wishes for the New Year to you and all our Readers,


How often does one have to kill the Cat?

2014 in Energy: The Year in Energy and Climate Change:

It happens that the smartest expert I ever met lives in the town where  ICCF-19 will be organized, perhaps I will succeed to see him again, 10 years after his nice invitation to Padua.
His name is Francesco Carlin expert in suspension PVC, I have to reconnect with him.  


  1. Could Piantelli be retaliating against the bad treatment that Rossi and his agents have been heaping onto his efforts over all these many years?

    Rossi has been trying to invalidate Piantelli's patents to clear the way for their own Ni-H intellectual property claims.

    With the help of MFMP, Piantelli could be producing a poison pill against Rossi and the other Ni-H developers. Its either Piantelli's patent claims or nothing. This move will blunt the motivation for Rossi to undermine Piantelli's patent claims.

    The way that the patent laws currently stands led by changes in recent US patent law, any bit of technology that is inseminated publicly cannot be included in a subsequent patent. When MFMP demonstrates Ni-H technology it becomes public open source property, that technology cannot be patented by Rossi or anybody else.

    I am almost positive that orthodox science will never except LENR because it is antithetical to the current posits of science. Piantelli is too good a scientist and business man not to know that. So a demonstration of Piantelli's system has no scientific value.

  2. The details in these two links seem to support your POV.

    Piantelli (patent granted but fought tooth and nail by Rossi right up to recent months)

    Rossi (a flawed patent turned down but that rejection fought tooth and nail by Rossi)

    If one were to characterize Piantelli vs Rossi the overwhelming evidence should show Piantelli was a respected private pioneer (who stumbled on NiH energy excess while doing cancer research) and worked with Focardi while making his discoveries. Rossi came on the scene late (2007) & sought Piantelli's cooperation (declined) so he then went after Focardi (agreed). Rossi then 'borrowed' Piantelli's research plus had Focardi getting Piantelli's help (Piantelli didn't realise Focardi was passing it on to Rossi). Rossi is simply a loud-mouth.