Monday, March 28, 2016



When in a discussion about Technology you have to use "impossible" -the word must always be followed by a comma, and the words "but" or "however"

There are so many good quotations re the so-called IMPOSSIBLE please find them 
on the Web, I simply cannot choose.

My Australian friend Doug Marker has sent today a very important message, point of view regarding the ERV Report which we will see rather soon.  It is by a personality with a superior expertise in management and business (leader positions at IBM)
See please it below after News.
What it teaches us is that beyond science, technology, engineering, energy- the ERV Report has many more implications, in business strategy, economics, psychology and law, politics in many senses.
If you are a genuine professional as the author, then your "noblesse oblige" is to try by all means a holistic and holographic vision of your (research) problem. See it in the broadest context..

The first aspect revealed by the author is one of possible great impact- the source of heat, even if real is, according to the dominant scientific dogma, IMPOSSIBLE and being a miracle still now, will have problems with getting the approval and later the blessing of the official equivalent of the Inquisition.
What the expert says about the context and what he teaches us about the investors is a must read too.
It is a privilege to publish this in EGO OUT- and I hope the expert will participate at the analysis- in the largest sense of the ERV Report when accessible.


1) LENR: Lots of Rumors, Little Facts

2) COLD FUSION NOW's updated fine list of coming LENR Events:

3) NTPC Organizes Third LENR-India Forum Meeting

The 3rd LENR-India discussion forum meeting was jointly organised by NETRA, R&D wing of NTPC Ltd and National Institute of Advanced Studies (NIAS) in Bangalore recently.
Cold fusion or Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) technology is under research for achieving energy generated in sun and other stars of the solar system in a controlled manner which shall be devoid of nuclear wastes  for the use of mankind. NTPC is associating with two such collaborative research projects for feasibility study of LENR for energy generation with IIT, Bombay and development of metal hydride based hydrogen gas purification system with IIT, Guwahati .
Dr Baldev Raj, Director, NIAS and Research Advisory Council Member (RAC), NETRA and Dr R Krishnan, Former Director, GTRE (DRDO), Bangalore chaired the meeting attended by experts from various national institutes, academia and industry. Current R&D status of the technology was presented by Dr M Srinivasan, Formerly Associate Director, BARC. Dr V. Jayan, DGM (NETRA), represented NTPC in the meeting.

I have asked the leader of LENR activity in India, 89'er Cold Fusionist  Mahadeva Srinivasan, to tell us a bit more about the Meeting (till an official report will be issued) and it is: 
The meeting took place on 19th March at the National Institute of Advanced Studies (NIAS) in Bangalore.

The good news is that over a dozen Institutes/Universities/Labs have signed up.. After a gap of 20 years India will have a dozen Institutes/Laboratories working on various LENR related problems. In four centres there are two separate groups each.This makes a total of 16 research groups in all!

The meeting itself was funded by the R & D wing of the National Thermal Power Corporation or NTPC. NTPC are the largest power generation company (public sector corporation generating 53,000 MWe) in India. They are interested in distributed and clean energy. They are watching LENR!

NTPC has to begin with funded one group out of the 12. But most of the other groups don't have much funding so far. But they are all young and enthusiastic and will bring fresh insights to the LENR field.

I know at least 4 of the groups are planning to attempt to replicate a Parkhamov type set up. Some will set up simple electrolytic cells.One professor has done glow discharge studies with Ni wire electrodes in hydrogen gas. Another group has done carbon Arc under water expts. One group is very interested in Microbial  Transmutation of the Vysotskii type. Another group has already carried out seed germination Biological transmutation. There is a proposal to try and replicate the Patterson Power cell type thin film cathode Miley type experiment. Since D2O is expensive I suspect most will study Ni-H configurations to begin with. Four of the groups are already involved in Hydrogen storage experiments. They have to adapt their experiments to answer LENR related questions. 

You have asked about ideology/strategy.  We are going to leave it to the choice of the professors involved to select their own "strategy". The overall objective is to carry out good carefully conducted experiments with a view to throw more light on the Science behind LENR. I am trying to involve some of the international stalwarts to mentor some of the groups directly. I do not claim to be an expert on all or any of the sub subtopics. I shall certainly offer my personal viewpoints/suggestions/recommendations etc; but I would encourage the groups to use their own intuition and expertise and ask basic questions themselves. To put it differently let them make their own mistakes! Not mine!

I am confident that these 12 groups will interact among themselves and exchange ideas. I am sure you will agree the field needs young blood and that is precisely what we have brought on the Table. In course of time this new fresh thrust will acquire its own momentum. 

When the meeting report is ready I hope we can release the names of the principal investigators, their affiliation, research background etc. They will at liberty to interact with like minded groups elsewhere in the world.

A great perspective, great thanks to Chino Srinivasan and warmest wishes of success for the LENR activity in the India subcontinent!

4) It's about Mats Lewan's LENR World Symposium:                                                         Summer/conferences , Dr. Steve Bannister Invited Speaker
5) Tax Effects of Free Energy: When States can be Great Enemies of the Energy Revolution (Ricardo Grasselli)                                                                                 
6) Many interesting exchanges at Andrea Rossi's blog; this one sounds encouraging:

March 28, 2016 at 3:58 AM

Dr Andrea Rossi:
So the report of the 350 days test of the 1 MW E-Cat will be delivered within the 15th of April: good, it is not so far…let’s wait patiently for it.
Congratulations for your fantastic US Patent.

Andrea Rossi
March 28, 2016 at 7:14 AM

You are right.
Warm Regards,

7) At April 01 2016 at 11:00, in  the Column Hall of the Physics Institute of the Russian Academy of Science, it will take place the Seminar No 1124 -on LENR

It is actually No 1124 from the series:" Neutrino- and nuclear astrophysics" named after G.T. Zatsepin

The paper "Low temperature nuclear reactions in crystalline structures (review of the experimental work performed at the GELIS device of the PhISAc)
Authors: A.V. Bagulian, O.D. Dalkarov, M.A. Negodaev, A. S. Rusetskii.
Access data given  and two sites Сайт1   Сайт2
Title: 'The IH/Rossi ERV Report'
Doug Marker (dsm). Sydney Australia.

This author has have held off commenting on the awaited IH/Rossi ‘ERV’ report as it has seemed to me there is a clear unreality in expectations as to what would be reported, what could be reported and just what level of success the report might disclose.

What we know is that the 12 month test was with a Rossi 1MW Ecat device claimed to produce anomalous heat where the source of that heat appears to defy known science and for which no adequate scientific theory exists. Is it nuclear ?, is it isotopic-shift ?, is there a combined chemical/nuclear process taking place ?. 

No one really knows. The critics fall back on existing understandings of the energy required to break the Coulomb barrier and say this ‘LENR new energy’  is junk science. Most LENR supporters promote descriptions of processes that allow atoms and their nuclei (i.e. as in muon catalyzed fusion) to be forced so close together that the strong force recombines the nuclei particles releasing energy. Some see Neutron capture (Lundin&Ligren), Widom & Larson see a result from SPPs summarized as ‘neutron formation from electrons and protons/deuterons, followed by local neutron absorption and subsequent beta-decay processes ‘.  There are other LENR theories. 
By contrast, the Randall Mills' process is said to exploit an atomic state where the electron in an H atom can be made to drop to lower than ground state and in doing so release large bursts of light energy within a particular spectrum band. Mills states that unlike LENR, his process is non nuclear. The Mills process and theories are certainly interesting as too are the other various LENR ideas.

Many general observers of the stories seem  to believe that both parties in the IH/Rossi test *owe* it to them for IH or Rossi to disclose the full results. That is IMHO (and from a business perspective) unrealistic, and something of a fantasy. If this author were IH, I would never disclose *any such detail* beyond the bare minimum information required to meet legal obligations to all parties involved. The disclosures only need to be such that other businesses could draw their own *business* conclusions and consider entering into secure discussions with IH on future ventures in the countries that they have secured rights for. It is no secret that ‘Energy’ is a multi trillion dollar business. IH did not enter into this venture to entertain the expectant the public.
So, IMHO, any other expectations (or demands) of IH and Rossi, are  unrealistic and somewhat self serving. IH only owes disclosure of results to itself and in a broader sense, to its investors (they do not even need to disclose the blow-by-blow detail to them).  Rossi would have a very strong desire to have his technology endorsed as that would elevate his position in the 'new energy' stakes and would give great credence to any other claims he makes (and he makes many). Any serious investors with significant existing energy portfolios would want a swift yes/no answer as to if ‘new energy’ is real and if yes, then *time* to re-organize their investments and positions.

As mentioned above, some of the IH & Woodford investors are very likely to have significant need to know as to if new energy has been discovered and would in no way want 'everyone' to know this ahead of their own ability to re position their enterprises and to adapt to an expected dramatic shift in global energy supply and the energy supply-chain processes.

A hypothetical illustration: (*not* tendered as a supporting fact), take the recent decision by the Saudis to sell off Aramco !.  If anyone doesn’t see great significance in that announcement late last year, then it would be worth doing some homework. Add to that the heirs to the Rockefeller oil fortune have issued statements (repeated in today's international news) that they are diversifying out of fossil fuels (in 2 years down from 7% to 3.5% of their holdings, and going lower). Whatever conclusions one comes to, the moves are dramatic and interesting.
What if (and this bit *can* be assumed to have real substance) the Saudis are among the investors in IH/Woodford and let us speculate that they (various Saudi oil interests) have been investigating  ‘new energy’ potential for some years. Accepting this scenario, how are they likely to react if IH via the ERV report, publicly broadcast resounding success of the IH/Rossi test. Think about it !. 
Add to this that IH as part of their deal with Rossi obtained certain rights to the main parts of the Middle East including Saudi Arabia.

So if IH were to release too much unnecessary or sweeping  details of their progress, some investors might decide IH is not really acting in their particular investment interests and IH is just grandstanding. Also, if the test were considered a failure, why would IH want to trumpet that ?. But, either way, they might be tempted to let the broader community think there was failure in order to gain greater time to position their own and their investors interests. It is naive in the extreme to think IH would broadcast resounding success of the IH/Rossi test and that Rossi would quickly open a working factory in a few months. This is in the author's opinion, very naive but what so many observers seem to expect. Yes Rossi has hinted at himself doing just this (he has mentioned an announcement in Sweden later this year) but Rossi hints at many similar things that later don’t take place. His history is littered with claims  to open robot factories . Andrea Rossi is a grand Ringmaster and deserves credit for his shows. However, no matter what one thinks of this behavior, Rossi is still the Ringmaster in charge.

In the recent IH/Rossi 12 month test. It is (as commentators have so often said) unreal to accept that the testers and Rossi, did not have a pretty good appreciation of energy in - energy out, even  in broad terms, during the test, perhaps even before.

It is also somewhat incredible for anyone (and plenty have) to claim that there was no ERV entity or sanctioned report being produced from the claimed test. It must be painfully obvious that IH and Tom Darden were seeking a convincing test that would produce very strong evidence that the reported anomalous heat was real, and that the device has a usable lifespan, and that there were no discernible dangers from radiation or other potential hazards. The energy theory can come later. It also seems that Rossi’s constant presence in the test device was a statement of safety that had meaning for the overall test 'he bet his life on the safety aspect'.

The IH 'test' initiative was a very valid and a very useful one even if it actually proved the Rossi process didn't deliver. Some critics of IH and Woodford clearly fail to grasp the significance of what IH undertook and what the answer means to many of the investors. They shared the risk as the answer good or bad has great value to them. One may even ask if this 12 month test and any more delays, bought another 12+ months for savvy investors with energy portfolios, to plan their futures and realign their portfolios accordingly. Is this what the Saudis and the Rockefellers are doing ?. Time will tell, but when it does, the party and re-positioning may already be over in the investment sense.


It seems to me if the measure of success is the production of excess heat that Rossi would know how the ERV went. But the criteria for successfully passing the 1 year test may be the production of ionizing radiation or the lack of it. Rossi has spent many years in beating back the occasional bursts of ionizing radiation from his various E-Cat prototypes; control and radiation where his concerns. We know that the ERV test director is a person with long years of experience in the nuclear industry. He may have set up radiation detectors all throughout the shipping container to check for any appearance of a radiation burst. 

Rossi would have no way to predict that his technology is radiation free. This is his reason for the F9 response in terms of the ERV test. If any radiation is seen coming out of the X-Cat, that would put Rossi in a very difficult spot with NRC and FDA regulation and licensing.


4 Benefits of Weakness
I commented that's Applied Scipiology


  1. The blog is getting more and more dilute of actual content and replacing it with paranoid rumors.

    1. Rumor OK, that's what we have- but why paranoid?