Tuesday, April 14, 2015



A good preacher first announces what he will say, then says it, then explains what he has said, and, eventually, sits down. So he has maximum of chances to be understood well. 
This is NOT the case for speakers at the ICCF-19 oral presentations, handicapped by the time limit of 15 minutes plus 5 minutes for discussions, too short as many voices
from Padua say it, not very contented.- see e.g. comments at E-CatWorld.
I am kind of maniac of speedy information but not in this sense 25-30 minutes is, I think a standard- and 1 hour for an invited conference on a major subject.
Unfortunately conferences (not only ICCF-19) are centered on speakers not on the public /readers of papers. Perhaps only stricto-sensu LENR papers had to be included in the program but definition is grey magic in this case. And no is not an easy and popular word.

Fortunately the two star speakers of yesterday had no problems with the time limit:
Tom Darden was free to speak as much he wanted to, and spoke well. Mike McKubre is the best speaker around within a radius of 14,000 miles and able to distill and concentrate what he had to say. I will cite a lot of wise and rational things from his talk in the coming issues.

Tom  Darden talk at ICCF-19
Obviously a large spectrum of opinions, at one pole are thos who are discontented that he has not delivered a clear laudatio of Andrea Rossi but I will quote here a friend coming from industry who said:
"I felt that while there was great curiosity about those matters in your reference, that Mr. Darden's presentation was very thoughtful and intellectual, and also useful for the community to understand who Cherokee and he are, their core values, and of their commitment to progress, and to seeing things through.  So while the specific curiosity was not met, it was substituted by something, that to me was unexpected, enlightening, and a very positive development"  
We have to see things in a larger context.

Alain Coetmeur is sending a lot of good information

Michael McKubre talk at ICCF-19:
Mike says:"It is time to "get real"

Tohoku University's LENR program:

About Brillouin technology:


Robert Duncan's  talk

No transcript yet, talk continues what he has said at ICCF-17 and 18, about disruptive change. Very good that LENR is becoming increasingly international. and private investments increasing.
Says about RF emission at LENR. (more after receiving the text)

Excellent information fresh and uncensored from my young friend Sam Hansson, who just has lost his ICCF-virginity:
ICCF19 Day 1 – Tom Darden and Parkhomov

22Passi about Francesco Celani's new results with the Constantan wires at high temperature
Francesco Celani all'ICCF19 (Sessione Poster): Osservazione di correnti macroscopiche e anomalie termiche ad alta temperatura da eterostrutture di metalli su fili di Costantana lunghi e sottili immersi in atmosfera di Idrogeno:


A white paper from LENRG-LENR Cities- on the best way, IMHO, to become a first class pro-LENR organization:

Brian Albiston - Latest replication test.

Fusione fredda: a scuola la studiano e fanno sul serio! - http://www.altrainformazione.it/wp/2012/04/30/fusione-fredda-a-scuola-la-studiano-e-fanno-sul-serio/#sthash.Nvogkw5g.dpuf

This Norwegian language paper his highly placed on Google:
E-Cat - nĂ¥ uavhengig bekreftet internasjonalt 
It is about the internationl replications of E-Cat can be understood with Google Translate

From Rossi's website I have liked today, Facebook-wise, the questions of Hank Mills;

Hank Mills
April 13th, 2015 at 2:07 PM

Dear Andrea,

I can’t help but wish you could discuss a few of the properties of the Ni-LiAlH4 (also known as the E-Cat) technology. You probably can’t say anything, but the more is revealed in documents such as your theory paper the faster my limited, amaterish armchair researcher-wannabe mind races with thoughts and questions. Here are a few of the issues I’ve been wondering about. You or anyone else is welcome to comment on any of them. If you cannot, thanks for tolerating more of my ponderings!

1 – What seems to make the reaction rate jump so fast around the boiling point of lithium compared to lower temps in which lithium is probably only a liquid – perhaps in an alloy with aluminum? Ikegami suggests and demontrated that particles such as protons have a greater chance of inducing nuclear reactions with lithium when the metal is in the liquid state. The greatest rate enhancement is when the lithium is very close to the melting point. Could there be another rate enhancement near the boiling temperature?

2 – At the ignition temperature (the term Cures used on the Cobraf forum to describe the temperatures at which hot cats started producing excess heat which he though might be related to phase change temperatures of various additives) of lithium the excess heat production seems to soar. By carefully controlling the input power with automatic regulation schemes, some replicators have been able to post pone the destruction of their thermocouples and reactors. I am curious about the dynamics of this spike if it was allowed to proceed through out the reactor (not only in one small hot spot). Is there a temperature at which the reactions become self limiting? With a robust enough container, maybe Tungsten, would the reactions reach a limit?

3 – A large percentage of the fuel in the Lugano reactor was iron; there was far more iron in the powder mix than LiAlH4. I wish the theory paper would have addressed this component of the fuel. It seems to be slightly less than complete to specifically define the E-Cat as a Ni-LiAlH4 system when a huge amount of iron was in the mix. Atomic hydrogen generator, sintering prevention agent, catalyst to lower hydrogen release temperature in LiAlH4, oxygen absorber, stabilization agent, possible minor nuclear reactant: the function of is mysterious and speculation abounds. Probably, most of the guesses are totally wrong. A couple of sentences in the theory paper would have helped resolve a bit of this mystery.

Enough for now.

Thank you for all your hard work. Even though you have had assistance at times, you have made all this happen via sheer will power. Researchers in many fields could learn from your dedication and work ethic.

Obviously Rossi could not answer to the explicit and implicit questions

A fierce attack on the Cook- Rossi theory paper:


Collective Intelligence for Mega Problem Solving

1 comment:

  1. dear peter, the link to the whitepaper is a gmail attachement to you private inbox (hopefully it does not wrk).

    is it published somewhere else?