Thursday, August 6, 2015



It is very warm here, I have hypertension, a stubborn neuralgia in my right shoulder- not good for typing, so I wrote this angry message to some younger friends. It is about my plan yo organize a discussion, constructive with the W-L theory people:
 A bit auto-censored it looks so:

"Show me please 3 cases where a debate re theory of LENR has led to an understanding, hybrid or not.
This is a theory eats theory world. Ed Storms theory kills all the other. 
And I tell you why this is the situation- read my serial"Radically re-thinking LENR" we attribute a false identity and nature to LENR the theories describe  mainly imaginary phenomena
Only Piantelli has theoretical ideas based on realities but he is not taken seriously
Rossi has found a charming theorist and they have composed a beautiful theory that has not much to do with what happens in the E-cat.
 I apologize but we have to gain power from accepting reality not painting it  a la Salvador Dali.
With LENR theories it is as with politicians or parties:
If B is worse than A, this does NOT mean at all that A is better than B.. Here only < has to be used, never>!

PS some theories have fragments of truth, I think W-L has too


1) Yuri N. Bazhutov has sent the invitations to the LENR forums and discussion groups
22st Russian Conference on Cold Nuclear Transmutation and Ball-Lightning (RCCNT&BL-22) is to be held during September 27 – October 4, 2015 in Sochi

2) A clearer picture of the 1MWplant energies

3) Optical communication on a chip;  LENR application by AXIL

4) Michele Kearney's Nuclear Wire New Obama Clean Power

New Obama clean power plan implicitly throws the fossil fuel industry under the bus; LENR Carbon transmutation is better long-term strategy for reducing CO2 emissions 

New Obama clean power plan implicitly throws the fossil fuel industry under the bus; LENR Carbon transmutation is better long-term strategy for reducing CO2 emissions
5) from Gregory Goble:
LENR theoretical reality is sure to solve astronomical puzzles

6) Andrea Rossi says

Andrea Rossi about the situation on the front:
August 6th, 2015 at 7:37 AM

Perry Dalton:
Now it’s 08.45 a.m. of August 6.
All reparations made, now She is working regular, no troubles so far. Saturday we will re-start the “ Curie” version of the new Hot Cat.
Warm Regards,

Andrea Rossi about the greater modules
August 6th, 2015 at 7:30 AM

Italo R.:
The block of 4 Tigers can be reduced to the following dimensions ( in meters): 2.0 x 1.0 height 1.5.
Warm Regards,


Important for the LENR ideology too:
Dan Travis

Smile or Die - A Critique of Positive Thinking


  1. It's not so polite as "theory eats theory" it is "theorists eat other theorists." With very few exceptions almost every lenr/cold fusion theorist is an insufferable egotist and worse virtually every such theorist has NO demonstrable evidence of having ever been engaged in working cold fusion experimentation.

    Yes this includes Storms whose experimental efforts though of great duration and dedication have never shown a significant signature of cold fusion. At least Storms uses his real name and is honestly working both at the lab bench and arm chair.

    Rossi seems to be almost entirely the opposite of a theorist and is such a dedicated experimentalist that he muses and amuses with his entertaining banter of words that invoke wonderful images. The 'four tigers' and 'Mdm. Curie' ... you've got to love the man.

    As for the anonymous blowhards without even a single 'axil' upon which to spin thier endless egotistical trolls what more needs to be observed.

    As for the WL cabal what utter blathering BS ... put up or shut up, and putting out more 'movie reviews' of others work with choice bit claimed as their own is quite revealing. Don't they know that there are good medication for senile agitation these days.

    1. I have never done this before- please write me to my gmail with your real name. I will keep your identity secret but want to discuss in an informed way.

    2. Regarding: "theory eats theory"

      Theorist versus experimentalist, round one

      Posted on Aug 14, 2009 9:45 am

      Hooke’s masterpiece

      By Hamish Johnston

      Most physicists are either theorists, who solve problems using mathematics, or experimentalists who make measurements. While the two disciplines are intertwined (except perhaps in fields such as cosmology, where measurements are difficult to make) the two tend to operate in very different ways — which can sometimes lead to tension.
      When did this distinction (and occasional animosity) arise in modern science, you might wonder?

      One early example is the considerable friction between the greatest theorist and experimentalist of the English Enlightenment — Isaac Newton and Robert Hooke respectively.

      Newton remains a celebrity to this day. However, Hooke’s considerable contributions to science (and architecture) remain mostly unsung — with the possible exception of his spring law.

      On Thursday evening BBC 4 aired a programme called Robert Hooke: Victim of Genius, which tries to set the record straight. For some reason, the BBC has not made it available for viewing online, so you will have to wait for a repeat.

      I came to the conclusion that many of Hooke’s problems were related to his humble beginnings — or more precisely, the fact that Hooke began as an apprentice painter, paid his way through university working as a servant to fellow students, and then earned his living by building scientific equipment for the Royal Society.

      When this lowly chap informed the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics that he had formulated the inverse square law of gravitation years before the publication of Principia, Newton is said to have flown into a rage. The two had already sparred over their optical theories, and when Newton took over as president of the Royal Society in 1703 (the year of Hooke’s death), he began erasing all traces of Hooke. Famously, he tossed the only contemporary portrait of Hooke onto a fire.

      It would be disingenuous to describe Hooke as a man of modest means — he made a fortune surveying London after the Great Fire — and he was a colleague of many great scientists of the day including Robert Boyle, Edmund Halley and John Flamsteed. Who apparently made liberal use of Hooke’s intellect and experimental skills, sometimes without giving due credit.

      However, Hooke was a man who got his hands dirty building wonderful machines such as vacuum pumps and telescopes. He was also a skilled artist — consider the sketches in his masterpiece Micrographia.

    3. It seems unfair to criticize all LENR theory proponents.

      Pr Takahaski is a great experimentalist., beside his TSC theory.
      Pr Hagelstein manufacture nanor beside his theory
      Ed Storms not only have a great history of experiments, but also of experiment reviewn abd his theory came much after that review work.

      anyway you are right that in general there are physicist, scientists, who are more focussed on experiments, and some on theory.

      What I'm more shocked about is to see too many successful experimentalist proposing their theory, while evidences are still insufficient to decide.