Saturday, June 25, 2016



No Motto today, just to remind to my dear  readers the very basics of this blog:

Definition of ego-out :.


  1. 1. (n.) The quantity of information, knowledge and wisdom lost by the death of an individual.
    Origins: Peter Gluck of Cluj, Romania. Editor of Info Kappa.
Dated Dec. 2010



how people become prisoners of their own ideas.
In 1992 I concluded that Cold Fusion is a form of catalysis- before being nuclear science- and formation of catalytic active centers (later NAE) depends on the mobility of the surface atoms of the metal. This mobility- surface dynamism becomes significant over say 400 C and Rossi has extended temperature to to 1500 C. Cool systems are good for science but not for technology.
Technology needs multiplicative excess heat not additive.

Crazy ideas perhaps but I belong to them.


Jed Rothwell  has commented on my blog...too. Except an impressive (but not for me) verbal rudeness he is using cheap unintelligent tricks, first he tries to insinuate
that the questions re. IH 's strange behavior belong to me in the frame of some personal vendetta against a decent, honest, correct company, with the best intentions toward the future of LENR. Nobody else in the LENRgroups  except Jed knew about the problems with the test and as far I know he has not shared this information with nobody. Perhaps with you, dear Abd- and when? It is not about my questions it is about openness clarity, straight re relations in business about accountability, the image of a company. Jed's ethics... but better we should speak about real things, that exist.

there is a big difference between questions asked in a court and stupid, nosy, irrelevant questions asked by Gluck which he knows will not be answered. He is only asking to make himself look good. The content of his questions is senseless: the timing of I.H. decisions was up to them, and has no bearing on the validity of the decisions

Gluck and others were surprised at the negative results. Beyond that, somehow they have the weird notion that I.H. was obligated to give everyone their evaluation of the test at every stage of the year. That there is something underhanded, or illegitimate about holding back an evaluation and giving Rossi many months and many opportunities to fix the problems. They seem to think it is not possible I.H. saw problems all along and yet they neglected to inform Peter Gluck of their evaluation.

Nobody was surprised by the negative results- the surprise was their timing and the frame in which this information was delivered. It is not about Peter Gluck it is about the LENR and the business communities.

I will not explain again why the action to e-destroy Rossi and kill his technology, annihilate his plant, nullify his results is absolutely absurd and useless as long Jed and partners are convinced they will win the Trial without problems. 

I ask Jed to read LENR IN CONTEXT-2 of today.


!) Other papers from the Sochi Congress

.... (shown yesterday)

A.I. Gerasimova- video presentation: it is about plasma electrolysis
lead by Yu.N. Bazhutov
Philippe Hatt: Structure of the nuclei
A. V. Chistolinov: "About the nature of globular lightnings"
M.F. Vereshchak: About the excess energy release in the nickel hydrogen system:
video not accessible for me, will try later

V.A. Pancheloga, I.N. Stepanov; "About the excess heat release"
Experimental confirmation of excess heat release in the Ni-LiAlH4 sytem excess heat ~10-50%
Minimal power at which excess heat is observed 65W
A.P. Bikmuhamedova: " observed data for globulr lightning 2016, Interaction of globulsr lightning with glass
2) Justice, God, and LENR- an interview with Randy Heckman
"Starting a business in Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR), was it a difficult journey? Does cold fusion have potential?

Sure it has been challenging. I have worked fulltime for 3 of the last 20 years. The remainder has been very much back burner. Mostly what I have done is do some scientific experiments that hopefully will lead to commercial products. Around the world, many people are working in this new area and some company just raised $50 million for commercial production. I am cautiously optimistic that what I am working on will have a great impact."

3) Post Brexit -Legacy Energy vs LENR

4) Who is taiking about LENR on social media networks?

5) stats and valuation

6) stats and valuation

7) On the Nuclear Coupling of Proton and Electron 
Volodymyr Krasnoholovets, Yuriy Zabulonov, Ihor Zolkin  

We study both experimentally and theoretically the creation of a new physical entity, a particle in which the proton and electron form a stable pair with a tiny size typical for a nucleon. A new theoretical approach to study atomic, sub atomic and nuclear systems is suggested. In the framework of this new approach, which takes into account a submicroscopic concept of physics, we discuss similar experimental results of other researchers dealing with low energy nuclear reactions in a solid, plasma, sonofusion and the electrostatic field generated by piezocrystals. It is shown that the formation of sub atomic particles, which we name subatoms, involves an inerton cloud of an atom from the environment. The inerton cloud, as a carrier of mass, is absorbed by the electron and proton, which strongly couples these two particles in a new stable entity – the subhydrogen. Besides, we have generated a subhelium and argue the existence of subdeuterium. In addition to these subatoms there exist also nuclear pairs formed by a subatom with proton, deuteron and neutron. 

Papers by Dufour, Storms, Nagel, Randy Mills the Rossi patent etc cited- quite interesting!

8) From Google Scholar text inaccessible
Believable statements of uncertainty and believable science
Richard M. Lindstrom

Nearly 50 years ago, two landmark papers appeared that should have cured the problem of ambiguous uncertainty statements in published data. Eisenhart’s paper inScience called for statistically meaningful numbers, and Currie’s Analytical Chemistry paper revealed the wide range in common definitions of detection limit. Confusion and worse can result when uncertainties are misinterpreted or ignored. The recent stories of cold fusion, variable radioactive decay, and piezonuclear reactions provide cautionary examples in which prior probability has been neglected. We show examples from our laboratory and others to illustrate the fact that uncertainty depends on both statistical and scientific judgment.

Fragment: "... Fleischmann and Pons's paper. Other workers were also unable to duplicate the publicized work electrochemically, so that research in low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR) has nearly, but not entirely, stopped. Since the discovery ...

9) LENR Test Bed Upgrade – Pressure Control


Researchers Create “Dark Hydrogen” in Lab — Believed to Exist on Gas Giant Planets


  1. Peter
    Disregarding Jed's insults can you give me
    your opinion of the discussion going on with
    Jed on Ecat world.Good,Bad,Some Good,
    Some bad Thanks
    Here is another link also if you and Jed have another Q/A.

    1. Dear Sam,

      Unfortunately that discussion is not about real data.
      Thank you for the second document I have no problems with finding insult but I will not go at the low level used by my detractors.

  2. You wrote: "Nobody was surprised by the negative results- the surprise was their timing and the frame in which this information was delivered."

    Why are you surprised by the timing and frame of the announcement? I.H. waited until the end to the test to announce the results. As I said, right to the end they hoped Rossi would correct his mistakes and produce a good result. So did I. If they had announced midway through the project that things were going badly, Rossi might have gotten upset, or he might have quit. They wanted to give him every opportunity to succeed.

    This is normal, ethical and not surprising. They handled the situation well. In any case, most corporations announce results at the end of a project, not midway through.

    There was nothing wrong with the frame, either. It was press release, copied to Infinite Energy,, and other places. Why do you think these are inappropriate?

    You are angry about things that you have no reason to be angry about. I.H. did nothing wrong by withholding this information. On the contrary, it was good for cold fusion, since it gave Rossi every chance, right to the very end. If he had done the test properly and gotten excess heat, they would have paid him $89 million, and all would be well. It is not I.H.'s fault that the test failed to produce any excess heat.

    1. fast answer late here
      the END OF THE PROJECT was on Feb7, the IH announcement of March 10 just alludes to possible problems does not speak about failure the test became a failure when the Trial was started by Rossi- April 8 if I remember correctly

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    3. The March 10 statement seems clear to me. It says, "We value credibility through sound LENR research. That’s why any claims made about technologies in our portfolio should only be relied upon if affirmed by Industrial Heat and backed by reputable third parties who have verified our results in repeated experiments."

      What confuses you about that? They mean you should not believe Rossi until they concur. That was before Rossi announced his results. They were warning the public that they disagreed.

      I.H. has no obligation to tell anyone anything about their research. Whether they think a project succeeded, or failed, they can keep it secret. We should thank them for telling us anything about Rossi's test.

      If Rossi had not filed the lawsuit against them, they might never have revealed anything.

      You seem to think there is something unethical about keeping secrets. I have the opposite view. Unless I think someone is committing a crime, I never reveal a secret. (If I thought something is a crime, I would report it to the police.) I am not Steve Krivit.

      I know about dozens of experiments, both successes and failures. I have hundreds of papers that I will never upload, because the authors asked me not to. I have known about some experiments for years, and I have not said one word about them. When researchers ask me not to talk about something, for any reason, I NEVER, EVER, TALK ABOUT IT. Period.

      You can be sure that I would never have revealed anything I know about Rossi without first discussing it with I.H., or with Rossi himself.

      Rossi is not all that important. The 1-year test was a failure. You need to deal with that fact and move on. Stop being angry about it. Stop blaming the messenger (me). Your dream of high powered, Rossi-style cold fusion was a illusion. It was a mistake. But cold fusion is still real, and others are making progress, so take heart.

    4. Jed,
      I don't understand why you keep using emotionally charged words such as "angry", since my impression is that the only one who is angry is yourself. In the meanwhile, it's sad that you seem to find it necessary to constantly repeat the same things. If you're right that Rossi is a fraud, I'm sure that we will find out soon enough, given the lawsuit between Rossi and IH as well as Rossi's plans to sell additional E-cats as well as QuarkX's in the near future. BTW, my main concern is not any particular agreement or lack of agreement between Rossi and IH, but rather the further development of LENR.

    5. Peter,
      Your idea that the temperature-enhanced mobility of surface atoms (or bulk vacancies near the surface) may play a role is very interesting.

  3. Peter,
    Your idea that the temperature-enhanced mobility of surface atoms (or bulk vacancies near the surface) may play a role is very interesting.

    1. Thank you, the idea has cahances to be relly important. I think you knwo my 1992 paper "Topology is the key..." and you know my "Six Pillars of LENR+" on this blog. If you wish we can discus the issue in private...

  4. Jed
    You are convinced the test is a failure but i am not.
    I am convinced that AR and TD did not work well together.
    I like your opinions and the conversation that comes from them.

    1. You have not seen the data, so you have no basis to be convinced. Or not convinced. This is a technical issue. Opinions don't count. Everything hinges on flow rates, temperatures, instrument specifications, and so on. Based on these factors, experts at I.H. concluded that the reactor is not producing any excess heat. I am far less capable than those experts, but to the best of my ability, looking at a sample of that data, I too reached that conclusion.

      You, Peter Gluck and everyone else will have to wait to see the data, and also the analysis of it from Rossi and from I.H. You cannot decide anything until then. You cannot even have an opinion. The rules of engineering and science say that every judgement must be grounded in facts, and you have no facts.

      I think it is a grave mistake for Peter to assume he knows what is going on, and to assume that Rossi is right in this dispute, and that I.H. and I are lying. Since he has no facts, this reaction is purely emotional. It is irrational. Since he has no engineering details, he trots out all kinds of half-baked notions about business contracts, or the timing of announcements, or he quotes lies spread by Rossi -- as if you can draw a technical conclusion from such fluff! It is pathetic.

      Peter is wrong. He will regret it if the facts are ever revealed. In science, you must never let your emotions or wishful thinking overrule rational, objective, fact-based analysis.

  5. Hi Peter,
    Thank you for advertising my paper, which I recently loaded on Academia.
    A friend of mine spotted your mentioning of my paper, but told me that link on this page is not working.
    The right one should be this one:


    Are you looking for a loan to clear off your dept and start up your own Business? have you being going all over yet not able to get a legit loan Company that will loan you? Here is your final solution, We can give you any amount you need provided you are going to pay back within the period of time given without any problem. Apply now and contact us for more details via email below.

    Application For loan.
    First Name:
    Last Name:
    Date Of Birth:
    Phone No:
    Zip Code:
    Monthly Income:
    Amount Needed:
    Purpose of the loan:
    E-mail address: