Monday, January 30, 2017



Image result for time quotationsImage result for time quotations

In translation both quotes say: "Old man, be a Blogger!"


Again  just some random or non-random note, the difference is not great.

i. Today the Time Crystals about which I have written in my Jan 27 issue became popular..indeed what will come out of these?
Time is one of the raw materials of my dynamic LENR+ active sites

Ii. Ed Storms' theory continues to be discussed on the great LENR Forum and in the Comments here. The analysis of a theory must comprise:
- the mode of thinking of the author's,
- their approach to problem solving;
- the frame they create for building the theory.

iii. In papers of today 4-latter keywords as LENR, Time, Nano (Goble), 

iii- shocked to read about "reproducibility crisis" (In bio-research, medical) 
LENR has both a reproduciblity and a replicability crisis- just now.

1) MFMP preparing for *GlowStick* 5.4 and 5.5 experiments
GS 5.4 and 5.5 are aimed to test aspects of Piantelli, Godes, Sarg and Holmlid theories

2) From Gregory Goble
LENR energy and nanotechnology are joined at the hip

4) 2017 LENRIA Calendar

5) Metallic hydrogen, what is it and how do they make it?

7) Brillouin Energy | LENR - Low Energy Nuclear Reactions

8) LENR. SEPLM- signalling the Stanford Energy Club event

Заседание Стэнфордского Энергетического клуба 25 января 2017 г.

9) Engineering Challenges for Developing the SunCell’s Concentrator Photovoltaic Cells and Geodesic Dome Array (Michael Lammert)

10) Andrea Rossi on JONP

Hank Mills
January 30, 2017 at 12:01 AM

Dear Andrea,

That sounds like a very simple and solid setup for measuring the power produced by the Quark X. Here are a couple thoughts that have came to mind.

1) The temperature of the Quark X and the dummy should be measured by multiple measurement devices. For example, a thermocouple made for ultra high temperatures (probably B-type) and an IR device.

2) To keep the calculation as constant as possible, the water supply should held in a large insulated tank so that it will remain at the same exact temperature regardless of temperature changes in the room. A thermocouple should be placed in the tank and another in the line to the Quark X. A stirer should also be placed in the tank to make sure there are no thermal gradients in the tank so the feed water to the Quark remains as constant in temperature as possible. With the temperature and quantity of water to both the Quark and the dummy exactly the same, the output is only a function of output water temperature.

3) It should be possible to have someone write a computer program that would take the live data and calculate the COP and show it on the screen.

I will look forward to the day when such a setup can be demonstrated.

Andrea Rossi
January 30, 2017 at 7:49 AM

Hank Mills:
I think we have prepared a very simple and robust system already, but thank you for your insight,
Warm Regards,


Post 1 of 2

The question comes down to “who can you believe”? The proper theory that describes LENR seems to be balanced on a single point. That point being the proper characterization of the true exotic form of hydrogen that drives the LENR reaction.

There are a number of theories out there about exotic hydrogen espoused by leading LENR theorists including Ed Storms, Piantelli, George Miley, and Leif Holmlid among others; how to choose: who to accept? Which idea is the true cornerstone upon which to build a proper LENR theory?

It only takes one unanswered question to kill a false theory. I discount Piantelli’s negative ion hydrogen theory because it cannot explain why mixing hydrogen isotopes kills the LENR reaction. A LENR theory must explain why a pure hydrogen isotope must be used to support the LENR reaction. This theory also does not explain why gamma rays are not produced by the purported fusion reaction catalyzed by the negative hydrogen ions.

Ed storms has looked at hundreds of LENR experiments and found that cracks in the lattice were almost always a factor in an active LENR reaction. Ed then concluded that something happens to hydrogen in those cracks to fire up the LENR reaction. Through Imagineering, Ed came up with an imaginative hydrogen behavior mechanism that supports the fusion of hydrogen. In Ed’s theory, the crack pushes the hydrogen close enough together through compression so that the deuterium will eventually fuse. The hydrogen must be deuterium because protium fusion is too ethereal to support the high rates of fusion required to generate huge amounts of power needed to be detectable in a vigorous LENR reaction. 

Deuterium is a boson that can be forced together to occupy the same space whereas protium is a fermion that cannot occupy the same space as defined by the Pauli Exclusion Principle. This is the root of why Ed and many other deuterium fusion proponents do not accept the nickel hydrogen reaction even though Rossi has shown that such protium based LENR reactions may work. In addition to the theoretical flaws that Piantelli suffers in his theory, Ed’s suffers even more contradictions that we will get more into below.

The Miley/Holmlid idea is essentially the same thing which comes from the fact that they both participated in a joint multiyear experimental program that both have cooperated in and drawn theoretical inspiration from.

Holmlid’s theory of Ultra dense hydrogen (UDH) contains enough quantum mechanical complexity to really explain many of the mysteries that LENR demonstrates. The quantum mechanical nature of the Holmlid UDH theory is what I like.

IMHO, when all is said and done, there are just two authoritative sources the describe UDH that one can go to that have advanced this UDH characterization. How UHD behaves in those cracks and tubercles tells the tale about how LENR acts.

The two sources are Leif Holmlid and Ed Storms. They both have a story to tell about how UDH works. How can one tell whose story is the correct one? I have made my choice; I like Holmlid’s explanation of UHD; yes, I am a disciple of the Holmlid flavor of science. 

Holmlid has spent decades of research coming up with a layout for the structure of UHD. But it is not just Holmlid; there are scores of others in the field of high pressure physics who have been working alongside Holmlid. In addition, Holmlid’s theory is based on the superconductor model put forward in a theoretical description by J.E. Hirsch. Beside Hirsch, there are a score of other contributors to this model of type II superconductivity who have developed a vibrant school of theory.

Post 2 of 2

It is this superconductivity that opens the door to so many answers to the perplexing nature of the LENR reaction. Bose condensation explains why no gamma rays are seen in LENR; why light feeds the LENR reaction, why mesons are produced by LENR, why a mixing of isotopes kill the reaction, why lithium can replace hydrogen inside the cracks and still produce the LENR reaction, why LENR produces neutrons when the NAE is compressed via explosion, how life after death can persist for hours after all stimulation is terminated, how both light and electrons can be produced by LENR, how all radioactive isotopes are stabilized through the LENR reaction, why no neutrons are produced in the LENR reaction, how LENR can catalyze fission of heavy elements, how LENR can exist in a plasma, how LENR can support nuclear reactions at a distance away from the crack…how Rossi’s Cat/Mouse reaction works, and how isotopes of any type of element can shift, not just helium. 

The theory that Ed Storms has come up with is inspired by billiard ball thinking, not proper thinking informed by quantum mechanics. If we want to know how LENR can do erstwhile unexplainable things and more, we need to understand how UDH works through it structure and how quantum mechanics uses this weird and unearthly structure fathered by the Meissner effect to do miracles. 


The theory that Ed Storms has come up with is inspired by billiard ball thinking, not proper thinking informed by quantum mechanics."I judge this remark unfair.

Edmund Storms is promoting the key idea that hydroton is a collective object, and that the way energy is dissipated is coherent (he refers to X-rayx laser)...

Of course he does not propose an hamiltonian to explain all, but at least unlike most theory I hear it is not just billard ball with few bodies.

The problems as I understand it is that this point is simply not understood.

I've never seen someone answer multi-body when I talk of this vision...

Most of the theorist focus on breaking the coulomb barrier and not on dissipating the energy, which is much more challenging.
and worst of all, most consider classical trajectories, and few body interactions.

I will again repeat in the desert what I inderstand of hydroton...
In fact hydroton is just a proposal, and key conclusion of Ed is NAE.

NAE is a structure containing a object, made of many bodies (hydrogen probably), which is insulated from chemical environment.

This object contains much potential energy caused by the separation of deuterium nucleus, waiting to be fused, only blocked usually by coulomb barrier and quantum effects (spin, momentum conservation).

Since it is quite insulated, but have much potential energy to release, like a radioactive nucleus, an excited nuclear-isomer, or an excited atom

it dissipates through coherent X-rays, or coherent charged particle kinetic energy, the energy accumulated.
The mild energy quanta show that the NAE have many energy states, separated by keV transition.
The mechanism, the states, the transitions, is still unknown, but it cannot be else some collective effects involving the many bodies.
The LENR secret is how the NAE quantum structure allows this energy leaking, usually well contained into the coulombian usually tight-proof bunker. the bunker is leaking ? this is probably something like resonance, interference, which make hole in the barrier. 
It is not anti-tank attack like most hot-fusion inspired theories were saying. it is allowing holes in the barrier, not breaking it with energy.

Naively I see those quantum transitions probably as quantum permutations , hidden in a schoedinger-cat box.

At one moment the NAE-protecte object state is a classical state with DD fused into He4 (Ed says as d-e-d fusion).

Maybe the NAE is not a 1D hydroton but something else, but it is insulated and manybody (2D plane of H in twin crystal?).

One possibility linked to this theory is if coherent X-rays are emitted. Is it possible to make those LASER X-rays interfere and detect a pattern ?
The energy seems variable, so I'm afraid no... and making X-rays interfere is hard ?

For the hypothesis of the kinetic energy of charged particles, ed propose to test for a current... and thus a magnetic field...

I remember the 80GHz RF experiment of ENEA, which may be interesting to connect...

NOTE  DIscussion continues please follow it at the comments of EGO OUT's yesterday issue!


From Russ George
Matter made with anextradimension-time crystals

Perpetual Motion Without Energy” — Scientists Claim Time Crystals are New Form of Matter


From Tanmay Vora
Don't Complain, Create

Persistence, Not Genius, Is the Reason We Know Einstein’s Name

Wilkinson: Are you problem-focused or solution-focused?


  1. AXIL asks an important question. Who should you believe? This question can be framed a different way. For what purpose is the answer being used? If the answer is being used to support a particular nuclear model, the answer takes a form different from when the answer is being used to cause the LENR effect in real materials. I have yet to see a nuclear model based on QM, including my own, that shows me how to initiate the effect in a real material. The model describing how to initiate LENR involves chemistry, not QM or nuclear physics. How the superconducting state favored by AXIL plays a role at the high temperatures known to support LENR is hard to imagine.

    Also, why does AXIL think my model is in complication with the Holmlid model? The phenomenon I'm explaining makes a large amount of heat energy without easily detectable radiation and without muon emission. It uses D and makes He4 with an amount of energy expected to result from fusion. The phenomenon Holmlid is studying makes energetic particles that decay rapidly into an undetectable condition. We are not not looking at the same phenomenon.

    1. In formulating his theory of the LENR reaction, Ed Storms has not included any possible reaction that produces fission or transmutation of heavy elements. The only transmutation that Storms theory explains is the production of helium.

      Almost all real world LENR experiments produce a wide range of transmutation with includes transmutation of heavy elements.

      In his theory, Ed cannot deal with transmutation of elements heavier than hydrogen and that isotope must be deuterium.

      For example, has Ed Storms considered these types of LENR

      LENR-Induced Transmutation of Nuclear Waste

      Abstract —
      Quantum Rabbit (QR) research on the low-energy fusion and fission (low-energy nuclear reactions, or LENR) of various elements indicates possible pathways for applying that process to reducing nuclear materials. In a New Energy Foundation (NEF)-funded test conducted at Quantum Rabbit lab in Owls Head, Maine, QR researchers initiated a possible low-energy fission reaction in which 204Pb fissioned into 7Li and 197Au (204Pb → 7Li + 197Au).1 This reaction may have been triggered by a low-energy fusion reaction in which 7Li fused with 32S to form 39K (7Li + 32S → 19K). These results confirmed earlier findings showing apparent low-energy fusion and fission reactions.2 Moreover, subsequent research with boron indicates apparent low-energy fusion reactions in which boron fuses with oxygen to form aluminum and with sulfur to form scandium.3 At the same time, the QR group has achieved what appear to be low-energy transmutations of carbon using carbon-arc under vacuum and in open air.4 The research group at QR believes these processes can be adapted to accelerate the natural decay cycle of uranium-235, plutonium-239, radium-226 and the fission products cesium-137, iodine-129, technetium-99 and strontium-90 with the long-term potential of reducing the threat posed by radioactive isotopes to human health and the environment.

      Muon and pion catalyzed fusion and fission can produces these types of LENR heavy element reactions.

    2. His theory contains
      pep fusion, ded fusin dep fusion and more generally hydrogen-electron-hydrogen fusion.
      He4 is important as it is the most common and most massive and only heat correlated transmutation.

      facts matters.

      but also Iwamura inspired fusion
      pep+X ded+X as

      again this is well replicated results.

      facts matters.

  2. In chemistry, we have since long time ago the equivallent of the "time crystals" in Petri dishes with Belousov-Jabotinsky reaction. In living cells, there is probably a "molecular clock" that beats the cadence. Best Regards, Fabrice David (And to Axil: two protons linked by the way of the lattice are a composite boson. It can condense to make a BEC. )

    1. Leif Holmlid and J.E. Hirsch predicate their theories of Ultra Dense hydrogen formation and hole superconductivity on proton based coherence such as proton cooper pairs production through energy minimization.

      The origin of the Meissner effect in new and old superconductors

      J. E. Hirsch

      Department of Physics, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0319

      It is generally believed that superconducting materials are divided into two classes: ‘conventional’ and ‘unconventional’. Conventional superconductors (the elements and thousands of compounds including MgB2) are described by conventional London-BCS-Eliashberg electron-phonon theory.

      There is no general agreement as to what maybe unconventional’ superconductors such as the mechanism or mechanisms descy fermions, organics, cuprate and pnictide families. However all
      superconductors, whether ‘conventional’ or ‘unconventional’, exhibit the Meissner effect. I argue that there is a single mechanism of superconductivity for all materials, that explains the Meissner effect and differs from the conventional mechanism in several fundamental aspects: it says that superconductivity is driven by lowering of kinetic rather than potential energy of the charge carriers, it requires conduction by holes rather than electrons in the normal state, and it predicts a non-homogeneous rigid charge distribution and an electric field in the interior of superconductors.

      Furthermore I argue that neither the conventional mechanism nor any of the other proposed unconventional mechanisms can explain the Meissner effect. Superconductivity in materials is discussed in the light of these concepts, some experimental predictions, connections to Dirac’s theory, and connections to the superfluidity of 4He.


  4. The problem of low energy can hit both men and women equally, especially those who remain constantly stressed. Women suffer from tiredness and exhaustion mostly due to anemia or thyroid problems.

  5. Zyntix there are various forms of tablets to be had within the markets which might be used to benefit weight in a brief time period.