Friday, December 4, 2015


Hope is definitely not the same thing as optimism. It is not the conviction that something will turn out well, but the certainty that something makes sense, regardless of how it turns out. (Vaclav Havel) 

I am optimist regarding the future of LENR  and have great hopes and even greater expectations from it.


Answers for my first fundamental Question of yesterday.
The question was:

WHY had the field such a bad start, lack of acceptance and funding , outright hostility, bad press  and its reputation is still not completely fixed?

Edmund Storms

"The reasons why LENR was rejected and continues to be is obvious.  The phenomenon is impossible to understand using conventional knowledge. People keep trying to apply conventional physics in various degrees of complexity without success. The word-salads simply do not fit what is seen to happen when LENR takes place.  The attempted theories then become an object of ridicule by using any number of favorite arguments.  These arguments are then used as evidence for the "theoreticians" not knowing what they are talking about. The observations are now well supported but if they make no sense to a normal scientist, they will not be believed by people loyal to conventional science.  Somehow the leaders in the field need to adopt some standards and apply them to the obvious nonsense.  Not all explanations are equally valid.

I have concluded that alI observed behavior can be explained only if a new phenomenon of nature is operating.  This phenomenon involves loss of mass energy before fusion is complete.  This process only happens in a structure created on rare occasions in a solid matrix of atoms.  I know this conclusion is not popular and will be challenged by many people. Nevertheless, I suggest it be given serious consideration as a first condition a plausible theory must satisfy. I see very little progress being made using the present approach of throwing a variety of common phenomenon into a pot and stirring." 

Jean-Paul Biberian 

The field of LENR is a disruptive science, so this is a normal behavior for a scientist to be reluctant to change. There are too many consequences to this change of paradigm. Unfortunately, most scientists are sheep, they follow the leaders, they cannot think by themselves and make their own opinion. They need the rubber stamp of some authority. On the other hand, the people having real power cannot change their mind, they will loose their credibility, since they were not capable of giving good advices to governments. New people would come and take over their position. So they have to reject the whole field.

My opinion

I think that what Ed and Jean-Paul say is 100% true but it is much less9 perhaps only 20%- you know my obsession of the Pareto's Rule  80/20). The whole truth s a composite one and the decisive factor was and is the experimental weakness of the originar LENR system, the Fleischann-Pons Cell- a cradle converted in a long-term battlefield. 
I well remember what has happened in 1989- many of the scientists were initially 
surprisingly open and tolerant to the fact that Cold Fusion was theoretically impossible (more precisely nonexistent) the great and (temporarily) final blow was the reproducibility ordeal-problem. Cold Fusion has been accused to be experimentally uncertain, dubious, weak, foggy, very unreliable- this was fatal (again temporarily) . It was a premature and misplaced discovery, a technology was born were no technology can live and grow.
I have found a nasty metaphor for the case. CF is like a lion born at the North Pole (1997, Cambridge, my friends Mike Carrell and Gene Mallove took me there). I have learned about the terror of irreproducibility i.a. from two personalities I met at ICCF-2 Como- Douglas Morrison who said he started with being a convinced cold fusion friend and the great electrochemist Heinz Gerrischer who confessed that it must be something "malefic". a curse (joking)  with the experiments, no recipe exists for a successful experiment. Herr Professor was very disappointed.

OK, I know my opinion has no chances to be taken seriously till it will be demonstrated that the high temperature, dry,  NiH system is perfectly read technologically reproducible and upscalable


1) LENRIA Calendar 2016:

2) Mel Miles has written a pro-LENR Cold Fusion Letter to the American Chemical Society but it was not published- this happens now! Sad, but in the spirit of Question 1 above.

3) -5) News from Vladimir Vysotskii's LENR SCHOOL from Kiev.
Please make a search for this scientist in EGO OUT before reading, he is doing really valuable things and is a LENR champion.
Vladimir reporting:

During 2014-2 015 I have published (in completion to the earlier papers) the new-in-principle new ones about the analysis of the mechanisms of coherent correlated states (CCS) for achievement of LENR.

1. "Correlated States and Transparency of a Barrier for Low Energy Particles at Monotonic Deformation of a Potential Well with Dissipation and a Stochastic Force" 

This mechanism describes the formation of CCS at monotonic deformation of the potential well (for example, the formation ("growth") of thee nano-cracks due tto the  saturation of metals with hydrogen or with their natural "healing" in the rapidly growing volume of microbiological cultures, which directly relates to the "biological transmutation").
The same mechanism, probably may explain the processes in the Rossi generator where at the saturation of the nickel matrix with hydrogen, gigantic fluctuations of the energies of protons stimulate the reaction with Li-7 and the so formed alpha particles participate in reactions with nickel.
Read more here:

2."Formation of Correlated States and Optimization of Nuclear Reactions for Low Energy Particles at Nonresonant Low Frequency Modulation of a Potential Well"

In this paper, the mechanism of formation of CCS at low-frequency modulation of the potential well. In my other articles -available links at the end of this item-in Current Science (2015), European Phys. Journal (2013) and Ann.of Nuclear Energy (2013) it was analysed the mechanism of formation of CCS  at the very high resonant frequencies in crystalline potential wells that correspond to 10-20 Terahrz and was realized e.g. by  Little and Hagelstein. As a special case this effect can be realized with the help of an exterior magnetic field having a frequenct of 10-100 MHz.
Read more here: 

 3. "The Formation of Correlated States and Optimization of the Tunnel Effect for Low-Energy Particles under Nonmonochromatic and Pulsed Action on a Potential Barrier"
(this was the paper signaled yesterday and requested from the author)

In this paper it is analysed the mechanism of formation of CCS
At a non-monochromatic force/influence or at a non-symmetric impulse of a magnetic field. The second case corresponds for example to the isotopic changes which were observed in switches of high intensity current when switching on or off and
And an electric arc generates an impulse of magnetic field.
Read more here:

Each of the papers is based on concrete experiments performed earlier that couldn’t be explained till now.
The method entirely explains and allows the calculation not only the very abrupt increase of the probability of the fusion reactions but also thr total absence of radioactive products of the reactions.
A great thank you to Prof. Vysotskii!

6) Making Real and Valuable Contributions Studying the Rossi effect in the sement or Garage in the Basement or Garage
by Brian Albiston, Revolution LENR, LLC

7) a pro-nuclearist point of view (Thanks to Chris Zell)
Gates’ Nuclear Folly: the Breakthrough We Really Need is Fast Implementation of Renewables
by Lynda Pentz Gunter

8) We should believe Rossi about potentially negative results:

1 comment:

  1. My reading of the fuel used in the Lugano demo is that it was pretreated in a way that the treatment method generated extensive transmutation on the surface of the fuel particles. The nickel fuel particle was covered with all kinds of heavy Z elements including a full range of rare earths. It is doubtful that Rossi salted the fuel with heavy elements because these elements were not detected in the bulk element analysis of the fuel load. My guess that this pretreatment process involved spark discharge into the nickel particles in the same way that Mizuno activates his nickel surfaces. This pretreatment was energetic enough to produce sintered particles where many 5 micron nickel particles combine into some numbers of 100 micron particles. Yes, pretreatment of the nickel is the key to a successful LENR reaction.