Friday, January 9, 2015


Dear Readers,

In some days, the ideas and news that can be related to LENR are so diversified that no taxonomy (mon amour!), at all  is better than any smart taxonomy. You will receive a coctail- kind of because it is in part about immiscible items.

If you do not like it, you do not believe it.
Pete Cohen 
(not valid for smart people. HOW smart? What is the next step, higher than genius?)


Very soon, our MFMP LENR frontline warriors will arrive to Piantelli's lab in Colle di Val 
d' Elsa and will have the great opportunity to learn from the founder and leading scientist of the NiH LENR system- fundamental things. However Piantelli knows that best that LENR is everything but NOT simple and NOT easy. 
It is captivating waiting for news from this historical lab and meeting.


See please: 
Alexander Parkhomov Invites MFMP to Moscow
Parkhomov was admirably open and helpful...and continues to be. We are not allowed to judge his method statically- but in evolution. I take for sure that  from the data of publishing his very first test (and even before this) he has made new tests, and if he invites now the skilled and smart- and critical young researchers- this means he has no doubts that his excess heat is real and well measurable.

However- the Spirit of Science weeps bitterly if actually the Luagano testers are NOT collaborating lab-to-lab with Parkhomov.


My wise blog associate, Georgina has commented the Linkedin posts of a management-business guru and he quoted the comment here;  
Joel Peterson:
They’re playing the power game. Do you play too?

This is something important for us actually, because around LENR and LENR+ the disputes and serious scientific discussion, are simultaneously power games or struggles. 
The entire traditional, post-logical, mainstream scientific-technological community
fights against an erroneous hot-fusion image of Cold Fusion and wants to destroy it. See a new aspect of this power struggle at the following issue. Packs of paid or unpaid professional killer trolls and journalists are trying to shut down, not only Rossi but everything LENR.
Infight is a LENR habit: there are power struggles between the PdD and the NiH researchers, surface vs. volume theorists, "theorist is other theorist's wolf" It is one theory claiming all the other theories are bad, and one all the others are claiming it is bad -so I do not dare to mention the most recent slideshares pf Lew Larsen:

Andrea Rossi claims now he is so much better than the competition because he was faster, so he won the power game: 

Andrea Rossi
January 8th, 2015 at 3:51 PM
JC Renoir:
No, it is impossible. To make an E-Cat work regularly for months you need more than that. As I said, the E-Cat is a much more complicated thing than commonly is imagined. The substantial underevaluation of what we did has given us a strong advantage, since instead of changing the game, the imitation attempts on course try to fix old schemes, thinking that if we did something working the difference must be something very small, close to evanescent. This attitude gave us a strong advantage in the competition. For years I have been considered an imbecile who has been lucky God knows why, who makes things without understanding what the heck is doing ( in the best of cases). Or, more kindly, a fraudster. Obviously this has been a big advantage for our Team. I can say this now, since we are close to go commercial massively. I think now is too late to catch us.
Warm Regards,

Being at an age beyond career targets or ambitions, I am also fighting my power struggles- in the silent mode: for the acceptance  of LENR+ (because I am a technologist) and against the cracks-as-NAE theory of Ed Storms because it is based on a philosophy  of Laws of Nature, and on simplicity- I disagree structurally with both.  But in my power fights there are not even traces of hostile feelings or fear that it will be shown that I am deadly wrong..


Our very well documented and active friend, Alain Coetmeur has sent this paper: 

The Scientific Institution is Biased Against Shortcuts to the Production of Practical Technology
The most significant part, cited by Alain:

"Technology is the application of scientific knowledge. The scientific culture and scientific process as it is practiced today embodies a strong bias against any sort of shortcut towards the production of technology, however. If it seems plausible at a lesser level of understanding of a system that you could achieve some beneficial application, then the peer pressure in the scientific community is always to hold off and work instead towards a full understanding. This situation is not uncommon in medicine: many discoveries are serendipitous, but to try to turn demonstrated positive results in the laboratory into positive results in the clinic will be opposed at every turn until the underlying mechanisms can be fully explained." 

What is obvious from this, we have to make great efforts to create a theory- explanation of LENR, otherwise even its commercial success will not generate a radical positive change.

That's for today, friends! Yesterday, in the introduction part I was unfortunately right saying thta the tragedy was just a start.


1 comment:

  1. I am not sure if medical science can be compared with energy science. People would not swallow a pill when they are not 100% sure it is safe. Using an energy source which clearly is economical in usage, would easily be tried, without too much caution. We were using fire long before we understood the chemical process.