Sunday, December 4, 2016

NOV 04, 2016 LENR INFO


Image result for "life is like a sunday" quote


No comments today- I have great plans for the coming  week(s)
so this is a genuine Sunday- for relaxing, but also for planning and preparation.


1a, b, c) Anomalous Heat detected in Lead Carbon Hydrogen Systems
XSH - But is it LENR?

2) COP is a red herring – what matters is reality of an effect

3) An E-Cat archive- in Russian

4) Updated search for BrilliantLightPower:

5) Translation in English, by Bob Higgins of the most recent Parkhomov paper: 

6) Scientific American reports on LENR, Hot Fusion speeds up

7) A NEW THREAD by Mr. Self Sustain
You've Mastered the Ultimate LENR Technology -- Now what?

8) From Andrea Rossi's JONP

Karl-Henrik Malmqvist
December 4, 2016 at 8:02 AM

Dear Andrea,
Your 1 MW E-cat consists of four 250 kW “Tigers” that could be run separately.
Your smallest building block for the QuarkX is in the size of 20 W. Have you yet decided of what size the commercial building block of QuarkX that can be run separately will be? On the one hand you have experience of 250 kW units but on the other hand you don’t have experience of putting together over 10000 QuarkX units yet. My guess is that you first will work in your R&D with a couple of hundred QuarkX units put together to verify the control loops and the heat transfer.
Smaller number of QuarkX units with its own temperature transducer, amplifier and control loop will be easier to control, larger number of QuarkX units for a single control loop will be cheaper but not as easy to control. I understand that the size of the QuarkX is also derived from the possibility to control multiple units with one control loop, but a lot of R&D must be done before having a commersial design.
Of course you understand how much work is left, but I write this for the readers also to understand it and not to wish a Home QuarkX Heater for Christmas this year (or even next year). Realistically, QuarkX Home Heater for selected markets could be available Christmas 2018, if everything works well (F8). Am I right?
Best Regards,

Andrea Rossi
December 4, 2016 at 12:08 PM

Karl-Henrik Malmqvist:
Your insight is intelligent, but we must make a distinction: for the industrial application I am convinced that 2017 will be the yesr, but for the domestic applications the situation is made much more difficult by the certification issues.
Warm Regards,


Regarding: "Cold Fusion is a victim of its own weakness all the other attacks are only aggravating factors"

This weakness is entirely understandable and even to be expected. There is a time for everything and LENR's time has not yet come. These first stumbling and befuddled LENR explorers were dealing with issues that were far over their heads. It will take a century or two before the new foundations of the science will be laid down to an extent sufficient that makes LENR's plausibility generally acceptable. Until that future day, we continue to stubbornly poke at the new fire with are pitiful tools in a random and unfocused speculation and look for some fortuitous outburst of emerging sparks just like our Bushmen ancestors of our dim and distant past who once had done the same indiscriminate, nonspecific, and haphazard prodding to the old fire. So don't be discouraged for such is the nature of the eternal struggle of humanity against the indistinct and mysterious nature of the cosmos. 


Physicists decipher electronic properties of materials in work that may change transistors
Date:December 2, 2016
Source:University of Texas at Dallas
Physicists have published new findings examining the electrical properties of materials that could be harnessed for next-generation transistors and electronics.

It is about metaphors:
See through words

Moving Into a New Innovation Era by Paul Hobcraft


  1. From point 8 above;

    "Andrea Rossi
    December 4, 2016 at 12:08 PM

    ...for the industrial application I am convinced that 2017 will be the year,...
    Warm Regards,
    I fail to see even one indicator which would make 2017 any different from the previous five. In fact all indicators look less promising of anything real.
    I confidently predict 2017 will be just more of the same since 2011.
    If anyone can substantiate anything different I would like to hear it.
    Oh, and don't bother quoting Quack ecat X, marvelous new partner, jetecat or pushycat or whatever the name of the new feline waiting in the wings might be. I think they will all go the same way as the 'direct electrical production' from the quackecat.

  2. Peter - in reference to your item (5), Bob Higgins' translation of the Parkhomov paper:
    Despite the quotes of analyses of Rossi's ash which I don't find believable, the rest does seem to be pretty reliable. Where they have control over all aspects of the experiment and analysis I would tend to trust their results. These show a COP of less than 2 in general, with one short-lived run of 40 minutes at 1290°C (20th Dec 2014) achieving 2.74. Error on COP seems to be around 10%, which is reasonable as well - that just means that a stated COP of less than 1.10 is indistinguishable from something that didn't work unless you also look at the ash analysis.

    The implications of the Parkhomov paper are that maybe Rossi did have some success in generating excess heat, but that he also most likely didn't achieve more than a COP of 2 and (because of the errors in temperature measurement) probably a lot less. Worth noting here is that at temperatures below 1000°C, no excess heat was seen in any of these experiments. Rossi's Lugano demo probably ran at around 900°C if you look at the colour temperature....

    The good news is that there are experiments being performed and that Ni/H looks like it can be verified. The not so good news is that Rossi's claimed results seem even less likely to be true, even though he may well have genuinely produced some excess heat at times. It's worth remembering that the series of hot-tube experiments were based on what people thought Rossi may have done rather than by using direct instructions and an exact replication. A bit of a tangled web, there.

    Though these hot-tube experiments don't yet show promise of a sufficient COP to be able to produce cheap power, they do give hope that we may find out what is actually happening and thus design a system that will work reliably and produce cheap and safe power.

    As an aside on this, I'm not at all sure that we're really seeing an Ni-H reaction in these hot-tubes, and that instead we may be seeing a Lithium reaction that is in some way catalysed by the conditions. Bear in mind here that there's much less Lithium around than the cosmologists calculate there should be, and that it's thus reasonable to surmise that a lot of Lithium may have disappeared in such anomalous reactions. I'll be running some tests next year to see if Lithium can be persuaded to fuse under fairly mild conditions of around 200°C and ultrasonic cavitation. Should be interesting.

    1. Dear Simon,

      First, Parkhomov will continue to improve his system and the reality of isotopic shifts is great achievement.

      Second and this is important for you and the other d=du=icate Rossi killers and denialiss.
      You have to understand that your basic axiom MUST be zero excess heat i.e. ou must say stubbornly- Rossi had, has will have nothing no tracr of XSH, In the moment you accept he can do it, implicitly you ccept that he can improve it and he can make additive excess heat multiplicative.
      I think that the results real ones from the 1MW plant including the anwer to your favorite question- what waa the energy used forwill show what are the real perdormances of the rossi Process.
      And soon you will see the heat generating reactions
      too. Just wait and do not speculate based on lacunary and partial false, not well understood premises.

    2. Peter - Until the Doral test, I was one of the people who said that we couldn't say that Rossi's demos were fraudulent, since the process was based on Piantelli and may therefore have worked to some extent. His measurement methods were however not foolproof, and so we couldn't be certain of how much heat was produced or if any was.

      Did Rossi see isotopic changes in earlier tests as he claimed, or were the samples swapped by a bit of legerdemain? We don't know. It is however fairly certain that the Copper said to have been produced was salted in, since the sample consisted of grains of fairly-pure Copper (in normal isotopic concentrations) and grains of Nickel. No-one should believe that a grain of Nickel could transmute 100% into Copper while the grain next-door is still pure Nickel. That's just not the way things work.

      I do not discount the possibility that Rossi saw quite large excess heat at times (and in fact that would make sense) but I do not accept that he publicly demonstrated it. His public demonstrations seem to have produced little if any excess heat.

      You should compare the Parkhomov isotopic shifts with those claimed for the Lugano demo. The differences are large.

      I see no reason why I should be forced to choose between either (a) Rossi is telling the whole truth or (b) Rossi has never produced any excess heat. That is a false dichotomy. We know that LENR is famous for sometimes working dramatically (note the P+F explosion which caused them to use very small quantities subsequently, and the Thermacore meltdown that caused the company to cease research) and that Rossi started by copying Piantelli, so he should have seen something. The question is whether that is repeatable and reliable, and Rossi's measurements left that very much in doubt until the Doral test. The Doral test however removed the doubt for that test at least.

      It is also not a natural follow-on that a small COP can then be multiplied unless the reaction is driven and controlled by heat alone.

      To me it seems pretty certain that Rossi is looking at the open-source replications and taking notes on how it's done. He may thus come out with a working version in future. Rossi is probably somewhere close to genius level in some ways, and he's got a lot of people feeding him suggestions on improvements. Still, when you consider the number of versions of E-Cat that have been close to mass-manufacture next year but have been abandoned for a totally-different layout, method, and fuel, you have to wonder if the previous claims were truthful.

      Life isn't black and white, no matter how hard you wish it was. Rossi may yet produce the power-source of the future even though he's failed to demonstrate it so far (and it will be different again from what's gone before). He may be certain that he'll solve the problem with the next design and has been playing for time (and money) to get it done. He may also be wrong about that.

      Currently my position is that Rossi may have seen some isotopic shifts and excess heat, but that he can't produce that to order and has claimed far more excess heat (and COP) than the evidence supports. He's also faked evidence so unless there's some undeniable proof I'll hold my position.

  3. Argan nut oil has been getting a lot of "press". it has been supported by the style and beauty industry, now not only for its healing moves, but because its production is correctly supporting indigenous people's livelihood. For more ==== >>>>>>