Saturday, October 3, 2015



Without passion, you don’t have energy. Without energy, you have nothing.” – Warren Buffett

a lot to read today e.g. from the LENR Events SPECIAL attention to the last two papers that arrived just before publishng this!


1) The complete translation of the Parkhomov presentation at Sochi  Thanks to Bob Higgins

2) Research issues associated with excess heat in the Fleischmann-Pons experiment by Peter Hagelstein

3) Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) and potential applications by Louis De Chiaro

4) The Center to study Anomalous Heat Effects at Texas Tech. University 

Tara Scarborough1 , Robert Duncan1 , Michael McKubre2 and Vittorio Violante3;
Actually their ICCF-19 abstract, but what are they doing, what have they achieved?
Who knows?

5) On the formation of non-radioactive copper during the production of 64Cu via proton and deuteron-induced nuclear reactions on enriched 64Ni targets

F Szelecsényi, GF Steyn, Z Kovács - Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear…, 2015
Preview and text not available but it could of interest- appeal to the readers who have access to this journal- please tell what is this worth?!

6) Clustering in nuclei from ab initio nuclear lattice simulations by Ulf-G. Meißner Not LENR but seems interesting, theorists would say if it really is so?!!

Presentations from the Russian Conference -22 for CNT&BL at Sochi

7) D.S Baranov Structures in the Globular Lightnings

8) V.N. Zatelepin, D.S, Baranov:
Calorimetry and study of temperature regimes of the Ni + H2 system at internal interactions.

9) V.N. Zatelepin, D.S. Baranov
Design/concept of engines in aviation and terrestrial uses with heat sources based on LENR

10) M.Ya Ivanov: Model for LENR

11) Fusion reactors ‘economically viable’ say experts
LENR only in the comments!

12) A very disturbing discussion thread- showing, inter alia that the very, very long silence of the Lugano testers is a bad thing:

13) New for my blog:
Armenian researcher-enthusiasts are studying cold fusion


14) Edmund Storms

The Progress Reports have revealed some important behaviors having a relationship to attempts at replication and to the various proposed theories. Its time to put these behaviors in context and suggest some conclusions.  If you are tempted to speculate on your own, please read the reports first and make yourself knowledgable about what has been observed in other studies published over the last 26 years.  We now have enough information, when considered in its totality, to arrive at some very firm conclusions.  Progress will be made only when this understanding is accepted and used as a guide to support additional understanding. We do not need to keep reinventing the wheel.  As anyone who is familiar with the many observations will understand; the conclusions noted below are totally consistent with past observed behavior. The only conflict is with the past conclusions. Many of these past conclusions are now shown to be wrong.  I suggest we need to start getting rid of the dead wood.

1. The LENR process is not initiated when a sample of Pd is initially loaded to high composition.  Additional treatment is required to cause the LENR process to start. Once this additional treatment is successful, LENR will take place over a very wide range of deuterium concentration, even after all D is removed and the sample is again reacted with D.

2. Only certain batches of Pd can be activated. One of the requirements for successful activation is lack of significant excess volume formation when the Pd is reacted with D.

3. Excess power produced by an activated sample is very reproducible once it is initiated as long as the surface is not removed. This behavior is consistent with the surface being the location of the nuclear reaction based on the behavior of helium release.

4. Once the LENR process starts, the amount of current applied as electrolytic current has no effect on the amount of excess power produced. Only the temperature of the active surface has any effect on excess power production, with higher temperatures producing greater excess power.  We can assume that once a sample is activated, simply exposing it to D2 gas and heating it would cause excess power production.  In other words once the sample of Pd is activated, use of electrolysis is no longer necessary.

5. The activation energy for excess power production based on the temperature effect is similar to the value for the activation energy for diffusion of D in PdD. We can assume excess power production is controlled by how fast the D can diffuse from the surrounding lattice to the NAE where the nuclear reaction occurs.

6. So called life-after-death will result in eventual destruction of the sample if the temperature is not controlled, as some people have observed.  In other words, the system suffers from positive feedback as Rossi has also experienced using the Ni-H2 system. This positive feed back is generally not observed because the amount of power produced relative to the rate at which it can be lost is small.

7. Once the role of electrolytic current is understood, the F-P method can be seen to have the same basic behavior as all methods found to initiate LENR, including the Ni-H2 system. In other words, no reasons exists based on observed behavior to consider the Pd-D2 system different  from the Ni-H2 system. Only the reacting isotopes are different which naturally would produce different nuclear products.

All of behaviors and conclusions resulting from this study are consistent with the Nano-crack theory I proposed.  Most other proposed theories are not consistent with all the observations and conclusions.  These conflicts need to be resolved for any progress to be made.

Ed Storms

MORE NEWS- thanks to Yuri Malakhov and colleagues

15) Experiment for recording of excess energy release in a thermal cell charged with mixtures of powders of nickel and lithium aluminum hydride
by I.N. Stepanov, Yu. I Malakhov and Shi Nguen Kwok



"Now in his EuroPatent that was revoked it is written:
The transition metal can be selected from the group comprised of: Sc, Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Zn, Y, Zr, Nb, Pd, Mo, Tc, Ru, Rh, Ag, Cd, Lu, Hf, Ta, W, Re, Os, Ir, Pt, Au, lanthanoids, actinoids. Such metals belong to one of the four transition groups"

Good engineering requires that there is a match between the metal selected for use in the reactor and the frequency of light produced or used inside the reactor that is optimally reflected by that metal.

For example. nickel, zirconium, or titanium is best for infrared light. A reactor whose operating temperature is about 600C can use nickel best.

Gold and silver are best used in a reactor that produces visible light. A laser that produces visible light is best used to stimulate these precious metals.

Palladium, platinum and iridium is used best in a reactor that uses ultraviolet light. Light at that wave length is produced by a very high temperature reactor whose operating temperature is about 1500C. Or in the case of laser stimulation(as per Holmlid), a laser in the UV range will product the best stimulation. 

It is bad engineering to use noble metals in a low temperature reactor. 

If we want to design a reactor that uses a refractory metal like tungsten, we must test that metal to see what type of light is optimally reflected by that metal to see if it is compatible with the heat range of the reactor we intend to design.

Theory establishes the engineering guideline concerning the match of the reflective properties of the metal to the optimal black body temperature range of the reactor being designed. In this regard, the correct theory of LENR is important to direct the proper engineering guidelines used in building a reactor. Random selection of a substrate metal will lead to uncertain reactor behavior.

1 comment:

  1. Peter, That presentation by Louis De Chiaro NAVSEA, is a very interesting and useful document.

    It is one of the better ones I have seen that documents in a usefully professional way, the progress of CF / LENR.

    This paper is of a standard used and appreciated by investors such as IH ^ Woodford.

    An excellent read for anyone seeking an unemotional, realistic assessment of the state of CF / LENR.

    A breath of fresh air.

    Doug Marker