Thursday, November 26, 2015



a) Continuing discussion with Ed Storms

 Yesterday Ed has promptly answered to my catalysis in LENR questions, but has forgot to answer to this question "caused "by the unique PdD et classic paper of JCF-16 so I repeat it:

- what do you think about paper of Numata-  No.15 at JCF- see the  list? I have spoken more times about nano-vortices as NAE to you, in this is something like that

Ed's answer, my comments 

To answer your questions, we need to know what the words mean. The word catalyst describes a general concept, there being hundreds of different kinds of catalyst. One kind does not take the place of another. Simply saying a catalytic surface is required is too trivial.  What is worse, the concept of catalyst was only applied to a chemical reaction, never to a nuclear reaction, until LENR was discovered.  We need to know what the word means when it describes a nuclear process. A catalyst can reasonably be understood to lower a barrier by a few eV but what allows a barrier of several MeV to be lowered?

Please, please read my essay here:
I have a cult for catalysis, met it professionally in many forms and have developed a kind of philosophy of it.

 - I claim a "catalytic" surface consists of nano-cracks. These cracks are created by stress relief.  Many ways exist to create the stress and the resulting crack formation depends on the property of the surface.  Stress generation and crack formation are influence by many variables. We will not understand these variables until they are study for the purpose of causing LENR.  So, simply saying a catalyst is necessary without showing the form of the catalyst is useless.  Also, complaining about lack of knowledge about the process without showing what needs to be studied is also useless.  I'm attempting to show exactly what needs to be studied and what will be found when that study is undertaken. I see no one else doing this. Instead, we are provided with guesses and speculation based on what Rossi might wish to reveal. 

As far I know/understand, the nanocracks are not a specific, quantifiable  feature of the metal (Pd, Ni) surface- with concrete it would be different. It is difficult to explain- based on the density of nanocracks per surface a thousand times increase of the heat release from PdD to NiH at 1200 C- the best for you is to deny it temporarily- an 1000 times increase of nanocracks density is not possible. We like it or not, cracking is a destructive process. My alternative is the dynamic formation of the NAE surfce nanostructures
due to the increased mobility and re-arrangements of surface atoms of the metals, obviously increasing with temperature.

- Axil and others suggest treatments that would apply stress even though he does not explain the process this way. However, no one has the money or interest in setting up a complicated method without assurance that it has a relationship to creating the required conditions. 

AXIL will explain this again, in more detail- please appreciate that AXIL tries to develop a holistic understanding of the field that is indeed very rich and varied.

The essence of the problem is the lack of agreement about a NAE being required. Without this agreement, no one even looks for the NAE or attempts to identify it. I suggest a very plausible NAE, but this idea is ignored because the basic need for a NAE of any form is not accepted. 

Dear Ed, have you seen this jCF-16- how does it consider NAE:
What is the "nuclear active environment" of the cold fusion Tetsuo Sawada
LENR poly-semantics.


As regarding me, I have pre-agreed with NAE much before even the word/acronym was created by you just I called it "active sites" because they are fisrt topological and and only then environmental. I don't think they are nano-cracks in the surface but nanostructures on the surface. Is this  an essential difference? ok- void space vs structured nano-matter, in the surface vs. the surface , static-preformed vs. dynamic, permanent vs. transient, possibly usual nuclear two particles reaction vs. collective transformation, fusion vs more complex nuclear interactions etc.

Further- is NAE a chemical structure and are you right as you say:
The chemical structure of a material has to be modified in a unusual way before LENR can be initiated
Or is it about dimensions first i.e. is it a nano-effect primarily.

 I forgot to ask- what arguments do you have for the existence of hydrotons Are they active somewhere?

b) Subjective pre-view of the coming Japanese Cold Fusion Congress JCF-16

This Japanese LENR event has to be analysed in the frame of what we could call the Japanese national LENR plan. While writing this I hope that what we see is only the visible part of an Research Iceberg, that there are results complementing these, which have to remain secret and actually the situation is more advanced and more practice oriented than we can learn here. What is the real strategy, the ideology of research, the trends and directions, the modes of thinking most popular now? How far are our Japanese friends from a paradigm  shift, how soon will they understand and make the decisive step from LENR to LENR+  I hope it exists an engineering focused LENR too in Japan.
Examining the group of 18 papers of the JCF-16 program: 
- it is difficult to make an exact taxonomy, but there are 7 experimental and 9 theory or simulation papers plus 2 "other";
- obviously the LENR vocabulary is more richer than in the past; the dominant keyword is nano-
- the dominant trend is toward increased complexity- composites, alloys, metal-support mixtures.
- the influence of earlier systems is strong, the researchers are still mesmerised by 
palladium and deuterium, 
- the results belong-as intensity to LENR not to enhanced LENR+.
- more experimental efforts seem to be made for measurement than for intensification;
- the experimental temperatures are low 200-300 C no dynamic effects possible;
- emphasis is on science- hopefully the technological factors will be considered soon;
- no real paradigm shift took place in Japan LENR research- it is solid fine science-
an intermediate stage, just before the Great LENR satori (awakening)
(to be continued)


1) The interpreter from Rossi’s ideas to the standard world:

2) Andrea Rossi
November 25th, 2015 at 9:20 PM

I am sure of nothing, but Prof. Cook and I, with the assistance of an expert mathematic are working to become less unsure about the theoretical aspects.
In a conference that will be made in Japan in the next days Prof Cook will give a hint of the work we are making.
By the way: I hope to arrive at 85 with a brain efficient and curious like yours.
Warm Regards,

3) LENR: L’utopie r√©aliste

4) LENR Is Real:
5) Turning around the Energy Crisis:

"Finally, unconventional energy technologies are harder to evaluate, but may hold interesting contributions in store. Consider low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR). LENR is a type of nuclear reaction theorized to occur at near room temperatures, thought to have roughly four orders of magnitude more specific energy and three orders magnitude greater peak power than gasoline"

Posted on 26-Nov-15 by admin

"But, surely, the point is that both hot fusion and LENR must now be treated with equally serious respect and urgency. They are both ultimately striving for the same goal. If we care to reflect on the twin threats of global warming and rising sea levels that are being accelerated by ongoing oil and coal burning, we should recognize this goal as nothing less dramatic than saving the world!"

7) Gregory Goble: 

Rossi 1MW LENR thermal size reduction will go even furthe

8) Thanksgiving Thread 2015

9) Rossi Now ‘Far Less Skeptical’ About Engine Applications for the E-Cat — Working Again on Jet Engine


The Problem-Solving Process That Prevents Groupthink

1 comment:

  1. i have at long last untangled the mysterious means that Axil and other lenr's likely use to derive their experiment free models. They listen to music of the Ukrainian gypysy Rock and roll polka band Gorgol Bordello played backwards at slow speed.