Thursday, July 14, 2016




My impossibilization will be impossibilitated once the E-Cats will be on the market, while it is pointless before it. 
(Andrea Rossi- about the method presented here yesterday)


a) the newest answer of Abd ulRahman Lomax 

It is again very long, but it can be summarized as - he disagrees with what I say. 

He does not believe that imaginary problems, obstacles and difficulties are, can be. made more wicked than the real ones.

He does not understand that when I say he owns a system, this is in his favor he has an organized mode of thinking and probably, action. I have no idea in which extent has Abd a greed with my idea that Systems Thinking is the first and foremost skill required from the coming LENR leaders- Abd has published  very recently an appeal asking for such leaders- he knows what was the feedback to it.

He thinks there exists only a Rossi Planet while IH Planet not. I can demonstrate him in 5 minutes  that this is not true- please go to any battle forum and ask if this positive, optimist and E-Cat friendly interview:
taken when half of the !MW 1year Test was over, when two ERV reports were already seen by IH - comes from somebody desperate to see that the Test goes disastrously as claimed today or from somebody who knows the Test goes well and can be a magnet for investors?  Watch the reaction to this prohibited question. OK, if there is no IH Planet then it must be a meteor or other shorter lived astral body that appeared only when the Trial was started.

Unfortunately Abd is very Jed-like when he explains away his lack of interest and rejectionfor Ed Storms' idea of testing Pd-D (or Pd-H too?) interaction up to 1400 C. 
I am waiting his apologies for: "Peter, you are playing an adolescent game, and you are not suited for it. You make yourself look like an idiot."
Me not speaking IHPlanetese language!

As kind of compensation please read the following message, its not agreement around it but more understanding and civilty: The author comes from a land, a field' not a Planet!

b) Continuind discussion with Ed Storms

Peter, let's continue our discussion and focus on what you emphasized in red below.

Now people are attempting to push the temperature limit using AlLiH4+Ni because this is what Rossi say works.  If the data obtained using PdD is extrapolated to 1400° C using the measured effect of temperature, amounts of power similar to the Rossi claim using Ni+H2 would be predicted.  Of course, such an extrapolation is not accurate, but it does make the point that huge power can be obtained at high temperature, all else being equal. 

Suppose no matter which method is used to cause LENR or which isotope of hydrogen is used in any material, the effect occurs only when a characteristic condition is created. Once the condition is created, we only need to increase the temperature to cause excess power to increase. Of course when the discharge method is used, the local temperature is much different from the average, which makes interpretation difficult.  In other words, creation of the NAE and the applied temperature have to be separated as two independent variables in order to understand LENR. For the sake of this discussion. let's assume my assumption is correct and see where this idea leads.  

Let's apply this interpretation to the electrolytic and to the Rossi methods.   We first have to understand one basic difference between these two methods. Any energy being generated in the electrolytic cell will have a much smaller effect on the resulting temperature than energy generated in a gas loaded system, such as Rossi uses.  This difference results from the difference in thermal conductivity between the source and the energy sink in the device.

 Since we know that increased temperature cause the rate of energy production to increase, we can expect the two system to show different magnitudes in their behaviors when LENR occurs.  Therefore, we need to take this expected difference in magnitude into account.   Consequently, we can expect the resulting temperature in the electrolyte to have a lower limit and a smaller magnitude than in the gas loaded cell. 

This conclusion comes from the following description. When energy is generated, it causes the temperature to increase, which causes more energy to be generated.  The temperature will continue to increase until the rate of generation is equal to the rate of loss. This balance will take place at a lower temperature in the electrolytic cell compared to the gas loaded cell as result of the different thermal conductivity inherent in these methods. If more energy is required, the temperature needs to be increased using an external source of energy.  This can be done by increasing the electrolytic current or by heating the cell other ways. 

In the case of the Rossi cell, he uses an internal heater to raise the temperature high enough to get useful energy.  He does not show how the increased temperatures causes the power to increase.  The effect of increased temperature must be very similar to its effect on an electrolytic cell, but with greater magnitude.  In both the Rossi E-cat and the F-P cell, the upper temperature is limited by the boiling point of the cooling water. 

Rossi is trying to increase this temperature limit using AlLiH4+H2 without using cooling water. In the case, we have seem no energy produced at low temperature that is then increased as the ambient temperature is increased. Unless this effect is shown, the claim for LENR can not be accepted for this mixture because the behavior is not consistent with how LENR is known to behave based on all the other studies. 

In other words, the Rossi claim based on the E-cat and the F-P claim based on the electrolytic  method  have identical behaviors when the variables are correctly separated. This means they are caused by the same process.  However, the new claim by Rossi is not consistent with these other behaviors  and, therefore, needs to be rejected in spite of a claim for transmutation products being found.


1) From Steve Krivit's website                                                                                             Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Continues Efforts to Commercialize LENRs

2) Brilliant Light Power, Inc. Announces the Validation of the Generation of over a Million of Watts of Power in the Volume of a Coffee Cup from the Conversion of Water Fuel to a New Form of Hydrogen (Press Release)

4) Frtom Heliorite- Birger Johanson
Comparison of simulated and measured nickel isotope distribution data in E-cat ash


New technique for testing nanomaterials


The Chrysalis Effect
Successful startups reach a point when they must shed their early habits and take on just the right amount of managerial maturity.  By Juliette Powell


  1. The boiling point of lithium is 1603 K ​(1330 °C). the Rossi reactor must be hot enough to produce lithium vapor from which lithium nanoparticles will form. ​Changing the pressure of the cell rapidly will generate lithium nanoparticles through supersaturation relaxation. These nanoparticles are central to the LENR reaction.

  2. Not a Nice day in France.

  3. Storms seems to advocate a very simple experiment that is well within his ability to perform... is he following his own advice with the high temp PdD-Cat? Or perhaps just engaging in social media babbling.

  4. note that if you reinterpret Lugano with emissivity error, it was below 800C, not far from what Brillouin is doing.

    anyway since the COP was low or unitary, maybe that means nothing on E-cat technology if it exist

    1. In the Lugano test, there is solid evidence that the nickel powder in the core melted. Maybe your perception of LENR based on emissivity error are distorted by FUD?

  5. There is a discussion and commentary inspired by this post at