Sunday, November 15, 2015



Essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful (George Box)


a) Global Network of LENR Meta-Management
We need a Great Coordinator too, master in conflict management, adept in Pareto thinking
problem solver, young and independent.

b) Dialog, questions and answers about LENR Theories with Ed Storms

Surely you agree, we know a great deal more about how PdD causes LENR than we do about NiH. Why do you ignore this knowledge?

It is indeed true that much more research work and theorizing was done for Palladium-deuterium than for Nickel-hydrogen; was this strategically wise
in retrospective?
 I am not ignoring this knowledge, however I have not found reasons to be enthusiastic for it, mainly because the most certainties we have about the first are almost all negative, fuzzy, generating discontent. Are you happy with what you know about PdD?

Let's try to illustrate the situation with a story
Aladin's Marriage Dilemma

Poor Aladin must marry within one year, otherwise he loses the heritage fom a rich uncle- disaster!. 
He has to choose between two girls: Paladia- a blonde and Niherna- a brunette
(no allusion to Anita Loos' two books and Aladin has not read them).

He knows rather well Paladia- met her first when she was a little girl. But he is far from being enchanted with what he knows about her.  You can believe less than 20% from what she says and she is not predictable and not reliable..  She is spending a lot of money. She is capricious- a bright psychologist has told she is the "reluctant mistress" type. She cannot cook,  hates any form of housework- up to vacuumcleanerphobia. Aladin knows Paladia is frigid but does not know exactly in which sense she is so. The worst is a persistent gossip that Paladia suffers of inherited sterility on the maternal line and he cannot accept a marriage/life without children.

Aladin has met  Niherna more recently; actually the two girls are of almost the same age (less than 150 days difference). Niherna is a modest girl, not a spender. Some people who know her say she is hardworking, reads a lot of cookbooks and keeps her house clean. She has a hot temperament, is vivid and very dynamic- it is said.
Gossip about some conflicts between her father and grandfather- some complicated stories, probably not affecting directly Niherna's qualities and virtues.

Aladin is not able to take a decision. The Mufti advises him: "My son, take in account what will be called Time Management: you still have plenty of time to decide , 11 long months. With Paladia it is clear you will never be happy! So invest your time and try to know what is Niherna worth as a wife!. Now you have to choose between a certain unhappiness and and an uncertain possibly-something-better. Explore this possibility- there are chances you will be VERY happy with Niherna!
Re my recurrent laments that we have not understood even core things about LENR via PdD he says:

No, we have not understood. Why is this important? We do not understand the Higgs boson yet people spend billions of dollars getting more information. 

The God Particle is very fundamental science, LENR is intended as applicative science- different treatments are due. It is not so much that we have not understood
what we have tested, it is worse- we have tested what is not worth to be understood
we have searched the lost ring in the room with more light not in the room were it was lost. I have called PdD LENR a miscovery (unhappy discovery- made in a bad place at a bad time (before its time with Science unprepared to understand and manage it).

Ed says re difficult reproducibility of LENR:

The LENR process is hard to reproduce because people have not studied what is required to make it work. Violante et al. studied some of the variables and claimed to make the Pd 75% more reliable. Cravens claimed to be able to make PdD work but the recipe was not revealed. Letts has a method he claims works, but other people do not have the same success.  These are only a few examples of claimed success but with little ability to improve general success. Someone has to study the variables and report the results in detail. That is what I'm trying to do. 

I sadly disagree- improvements can be made- but they are temporary, quality leaps, radical permanent changes converting the system in something well ruled and upscalability- seem to be impossible- the system has too many inherent weaknesses
it is not about the people. Violante is not talkative at all- but what he says about the role of impurities in Pd is discouraging- even zonal melting could not help. I hope Cravens and Letts will explain what they are able to do for a Solution about which I believe it does not exists.

I also have stated before:
 We need active forms of hydrogen-so electrolysis is not absolutely necessary, we don't need the water phase that sentences the system to low temperatures (or, in principle to high pressures- dangerous)

And Ed has promptly answered
I agree. We need PdD that can be heated in D2 to produce energy. The problem is being able to make the PdD nuclear active. Electrolysis has been found to do this.  Cravens made PdD active in contact with D2, but his method has not been revealed. Arata exposed Pd-black to D2, but the source of the active Pd was not revealed. I suggest you encourage people to reveal the details of their success rather than hide it. Perhaps then the effect would be more reproducible. 

So it is OK, let's try to follow together research lines as that of Kirkinskii

We also started to discuss nano-structures vs nano-cracks and nanoplasmonics
vs hydrotons. Here we have first to agree about some basic concepts and ideas
He asks:
what exactly is a nanostructure? I described the structure I propose is the NAE in detail. Please describe the structure you believe is the host for LENR and show exactly how this condition functions, as I have done. 

We still do not know exactly what nanostructures are doing the quantum-magic but we start to understand- look please to Piantelli's theory and to  (Yes!) the papers of Yiannis Hadjichristos.

What is a nanoplasmonics?  I have no idea what you mean. Please explain.

Nanoplasmonics is a fast developing new branch of Physics, it cannot be ignored
It happens it was inspired by Martin Fleischmann. Google Scholar can illuminate anybody in short time- Ego Out has a lot about nanoplasmonics possible role in LENr as presented mainly by Yiannis and AXIL.


1) More information about the italian LENR connected Meeting of Nov. 24, 2015
Thanks to Ruby Carat
Meeting in the Italian Senate Ricerche di Frontiera
Francesco Celani Senior Researcher of the National Institute of Nuclear Physics in Frascati (INFN) will brief on Recent scientific progresses in the LENR type research

Also to discuss: b) Reason and method of operation of the project ImPACT (Univ. Tohoku Japan) whose ultimate goal is the transmutation and especially “neutralization” of some of the most dangerous radioactive waste produced by the usual Nuclear Reactors.

B1)Notes on methodology LOS (Live Open Science), already the subject of nomination for the Nobel Peace. Its “extension” by the research of energetic (LENR) in medical ones.

C) Update on methodology Ni-H developed by Andrea Rossi (currently operating in the US).

See background and announcement on this blog.

Martedi 24 Nov, 2015
Istituto din Santa Maria in Aquiro
Piazza Capranica 72
Rome, Italia

NOTE It is suggested to send the ASAP request for accreditation (by mail), not excessive considering the number of places available. The men MUST wear a suit and tie, according to the Regulation of the Senate of Italy.

2) Rossi: E-Cat Replicators’ Work Matches His Early Results:

4) “Replicating the LENR Rossi Effect: Challenges and Strategies” (Energy 2.0 Society Webinar, Nov 21)

5) Anonymous has recommended me this- and I convey his recommendation to you too, the list is consistent for a well developed unitary LENR ideology:
I recommend that you spend some time with the papers at the above list. Note that there is research here on both Pd, Ni, and combinations of both. 


Rregarding the value of palladium in LENR:

Rossi has discontinued the reactor design that he supplied to the Lugano testers. He has come up with a new design called E-Cat X that operates at a higher operating temperature from the Lugano reactor. The new reactor design operates at a temperature above the melting point of nickel and probably uses pallidum powder as a nickel replacement. The mechanism of operation uses some other power production mechanism other than heat.

Rossi first called this reactor “ Curie”. He changed the name because its name may have been a hint at its IP content.

Rossi said:

[quote]Andrea Rossi
August 10th, 2015 at 6:16 PM
I confirm: The new Hot Cat is NOT a substitute of the “Lugano” Hot Cat or of the low temperature E-Cat. It is a completely different thing. While the Hot Cat and the LT E-Cat will be destined to industrial applications, the “ Curie” will be destined to a completely different kind of utilization, very much popular. I will give more details, obviously, only after we will have made enough tests to see if it is reliable.
Warm Regards,


Rossi also said:

[quote]The great scientist Dr Curie ( commonly referred to as “Madame Curie”) is dead not for muons, but because she manipulated radioactive atoms, without knowing their dangerousness ( due to the scarce if not zero knowledge of the effects on health at those times). [/quote]

As Holmlid has shown, the use of group 14 elements in the platinum group uses UV light as a reaction promoter. At 1500C, the amount of UV black body radiation produced is substantial.

Holmlid produces muons as a result of iridium use. 

Like Holmlid, this E-Ecat x reactor looks like its reaction produces particle production coming form to CPT symmetry violation where charge comes from vacuum particle condensation. If muons are coming from the E-Cat x, that reactor is producing electrons from vacuum condensation. This type of vacuum based particle condensation is different from pair production. That is to say, direct production of overunity electric power from very high heat input.


  1. Peter,
    There is value in re-examining Abd's core remarks as to why researchers such as himself, prefer to investigate PdD vs NiH. Abd says convincingly (IMHO the evidence backs him up) that PdD research is completely open and shared plus more advanced and for these reasosn more than any other he pursues PdD research.

    On the other hand, NiH research is shrouded in deception (hiding real replication details from patents and publications), is also victim of patent warfare (Piantelli vs Rossi vs the world), so appears to be being 'milked' by greed and obfuscation (Some point to Rossi's antics and verbal contradictions as plain evidence).

    A 'probability' that can be drawn from the above PdD vs NiH conflict is the reason for the latter's problems are because it is the one that really has scale-ability potential and thus is the more likely path to wealth & political power creation which in turn is why there is so much patent activity and why so many are fascinated by Andrea Rossi's on going circus.

    We have a four way battle here. Critics of LENR's claims in one corner, Pro PdD in another, Pro NiH in another and stuck in the 4th corner is an increasingly angry world wanting answers from the other three as to when the question of LENR viability and likely progress will be decided.

    The observers in the 4th corner know they don't have the knowledge or expertise to resolve the matter and most are intensely frustrated at the lack of progress by the other 3 in an era when energy generated from fossil fuels, and its side effects, are a critical global issue affecting the future of humanity.

    Some of the critics of LENR appear happy to kill the idea of LENR off as effectively as they can. Some others of us believe there is a strong malicious intent there. The PdD and NiH camps are split over who is genuinely interested in research vs who is being greedy and plainly seeking power and profit.

    Underpinning it all is the apparent inability of anyone in the 4 camps to resolve their case.

    Doug Marker

    1. Very impressed Doug!. Well thought out. Cogent, To the point.

      Shane D.