SOME REASONS WHY LENR N.A.E. CANNOT BE CRACKS.

The nature of N.A.E.  is a problem of vital importance for the future of LENR and I hope that what I will say now, will not be ignored as my poisoning hypothesis continues to be.

Actually, the present paper is a continuation in part of:

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/05/active-sites-and-nae.html

that had a rather low impact 250 readers and only 3 friendly comments by my friends Axil, Abd and Doug. That paper has included a metaphor for the poisoning hypothesis and, most remarkable. the idea of Defkalion that the reactor itself is the true nuclear active environment, including the active sites...

The problem of NAE has been recently discussed vividly on our forums and the refrain remained the same: N.A.E is lowly cracks,

an idea I cannot accept. N.A.E is derived from catalytic (chemical) active sites based on “special things take place in special sites” developed a step further: “extraordinary things take place in very special places”- see please my old paper in http://coldfusionnow.org/1994-cold-fusion-sourcebook-dedicated-to-children-of-chernobyl/ at page 86.

Cracks are voids, badly defined, of many possible sizes and forms, unstructured, uncontrollable. They really do not seem able to trigger such unexpected events as nuclear reactions and/or nuclear interactions.

Cracking is by definition a destructive and auto destructive process

that cannot last (except if/when) by some contrary process of rebuilding the metal lattice. This auto destruction is contradicted

by many cases/forms of LENR that have functioned well for long times at intensities of Watts (Piantelli, Arata, Ahern) or kilowatts (Rossi, Defkalion). Cracks are technologically hopeless.

 The idea of cracks is simplistic and in direct contradiction with the experience regarding he elaborate structures of the chemical active sites in catalysis

The idea of NAE being just cracks is retrograde in opposition to the trend of using smart, ever smarter complex nanostructures in LENR please re-read what Piantelli says about this on my blog but this is only an example of many. Cracks would be an anti-complex solution. 

The idea of NAE being cracks does not support my poisoning theory i.e. the great sensitivity of the heat release to the presence of alien (no hydrogen) gases on the active surfaces. And then the essential role of deep degassing as shown here http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/08/why-pd-d-lenr-will-never-work.html is not more justified.

Cracks as NAE do not works with advanced nanotechnology in its static variant but it is also incompatible with the highly dynamic nanoplasmonics –the science-technology that defines LENR+

Eventually if this form of new energy really comes  from cracks, then we cannot distinguish between, low intensity, static, transient LENR classic and high intensity, dynamic high density NAE, enhanced excess heat LENR +. A crack is a crack is a crack, As shown I believe cracks have no positive role in LENR, this concept tells me less than nothing in this case. I think N.A.E are very sophisticated high tech structures not simply nano-voids.

I have never observed the people with whom I am discussing now this cracks non-issue, in flagranti of changing an opinion. Therefore, especially for them, the title of this essay is “Why I hope that NAE are NOT cracks.” Let them accuse me of wishful thinking and technological reality of being anti-scientific and hostile to poor cracks.

Peter

DOUBLE RARA AVIS COLD FUSION PAPER

Yiannis Hadjichristos has just called my attention to   the following paper, a real double rara avis:

- it is published in a peer reviewed journal;

- it clearly opts for a multi-stage theory, interdisciplinar approach.

It is 

"Potential Exploration of Cold Fusion and Its Quantitative

Theory of Physical-Chemical-Nuclear Multistage Chain

Reaction Mechanism

Yi-Fang Chang, Department of Physics, Yunnan University, Kunming, 650091, China

International Journal of Modern Chemistry, 2013, 5(1): 29-43

Link: http://modernscientificpress.com/Journals/ViewArticle.aspx?H86Z5Noa2iKDNvH/0wRKWsOkhiUQ7RBfa/R/b49cNQN2PlFJKdv27fx5aFa7XQKO

Abstract:

Abstract: Cold fusion is very important and complex. One of main difficulties of cold fusion is the explanation on appearance of nuclear reaction. Based on the standard quantum

mechanics, we propose the physical-chemical-nuclear multistage chain reaction theory,which may explain cold fusion. Since cold fusion is an open system, synergetics and laser theory can be applied, and the Fokker-Planck equation is obtained. Using the corresponding Schrödinger equation and the nonlinear Dirac equation, and combining the multistage chain reaction theory, the quantitative results agree completely with some experiments on cold fusion. Finally, we discuss some new researches, for example, the

nonlinear quantum theory, catalyzer and nanomaterial, etc., and propose the three laws of cold fusion: 

(1) The time accumulate law, 

(2) The area direct ratio law, and 

(3) The

multistage chain reaction law.

------------------

There are some striking similarities with the DGT-AXIL approach

to understand LENR+/HENI as:

1. Open system definition of the NAE
2. Complexity of multistage fusion fission process
3. The 3 laws, indicating a path to plasmonics

Eppur si muove - it is progress in Cold Fusion- marching away from its Cradle!

WHY Pd-D LENR WILL NEVER WORK COMMERCIALLY

Motto:

Lasciate ogni speranze voi che LENRate! (Dante)

Those working in the field of LENR- in a way or other have discouragingly few certainties and, what’s worse their certainties are disturbingly different. My own basic certainty to which I have arrived to around 1991, is that the reactions generating excess heat are very local taking place in active sites as heterogeneous catalysis does.

I am sharing this idea with more colleagues; our perhaps most influential scientist and thinker, Dr. Edmund Storms has developed the idea to the level of a theory- of NAE –nuclear active environment. See please his presentation at ICCF-18, “Explaining Cold Fusion.” - the abstracts is at:

http://iccf18.research.missouri.edu/files/day2/Explaining_Cold_Fusion.pdf

Dr. Storms and I agree that the role of these active sites in LENR is vital; however there is no agreement between us regarding the “life” or activity inside the active sites/NAE. It would be interesting to know how many LENR-ists, experimentalists and theorists think these active sites are the key and how many think differently. This question is related to n other idea about which I wrote recently: can a mono-theory explain LENR or it is necessary and interdisciplinary approach- combinations of different theories? Mono-theories vs. pluri-theories? This division is still greatly naïve wishful thinking from my part, searching for an unique theory explaining everything

is still the dominant philosophy, one smart concept, one universal solution.

However my disagreement re. active sites with Dr. Storms and many other colleagues has an other aspect, much more pragmatic: I have hypothesized long ago that CF/LENR’s endemic destructive sickness, weakness, curse whatever- d(r)eadfully bad reproducibility of the results is caused by the competition of gas  molecules with the reactive deuterium for the active sites- and deuterium is the loser. First I thought that only the very polar impurities, containing C, S or N are the culprit but later I conclude that any gas, including inert nitrogen or noble gases can act as invaders letting poor hydrogen isotopes – homeless.

The absolute lack of success of my poisoning hypothesis- nobody took it seriously was very probably my greatest failure ever and an extremal case of Cassandra Syndrome generating even the necessity

of creating a verbal antinomy of “to persuade”. The idea is childish, primitive, simplistic, is too mundane, lacks elegance and mathematics, is dirty, non-demonstrable (you cannot see a nitrogen molecule keeping away a deuterium molecule on a potential active site), has no practical solution for the classic PdD electrolysis cell- this cannot be made anaerobic. And if say some very rare circumstances as a cathode protected by  monomolecular layer of tensioactive substance, then comes the next trouble- small density of active sites. The genius of our best scientists was not able to solve the reproducibility problem for LENR classic.

I have learned from professor Francesco Piantelli the essential importance of deep degassing- before putting nickel in contact with hydrogen, the surface of the metal must be absolutely free

of any molecules of gas. This is so well described in  EP2368252. (search please for my “odes” dedicated to WO 2010/058288 in this blog.)

For some time I have believed that that the LENR+ systems due to the in-situ mechanism of NAE-genesis are more tolerant toward alien gases. From Rossi no data can be obtained, however very recently Defkalion has described the importance of degassing for their well working technological process. Describing what has happened at the Demo of July 23, Yiannis Hadjichristos wrote, by the way to our colleague Abd:

Answering in advance to your next question on controllability please note:

Before running the demo of 23rd we had sent a protocol that we were to follow to ICCF and we conducted a shorter demo with H2 at 22nd in parallel with a general discussion on "CF" with Italian journalists, broadcasted also to the public. The later was following the same protocol and gave a COP approx 3.5 at the level of 7.5kW output. After this short demo we degassed the reactor over night pumping out all H2 in order to run the next day a control run using Ar.
This degassing procedure is crucial and must be followed every time we have to open the reactor (which we did not in this case) or when we have to change gas i.e. from Ar to H2 or vice versa. Any "alien" gas remaining in the reactor affects the objective of the test as far as active sites might be occupied by the wrong gas.

At 23rd we pumped Ar into the reactor and run a control test resulting to COP 0.82, using the same main input parameters (gas pressure, input currents and coolant flow) as in the demo of 22nd. Even with max input currents the reactor's internal or surface temperatures and coolant’s temperature could not exceed, as expected, the demonstrated values.

We stop that run and we had available about 45min to degas Ar in order to synchronize the demo with the broadcasting program and ICCF18 scheduled activities EVEN THOUGH WE WERE VIOLATING A TYPICAL PROTOCOL that requires at least 8h of degassing in order to remove Ar properly. During this degassing procedure Mats Lewan blew up the main fuse of the building trying to connect an oscilloscope to the electric board. This event reduced the degassing time available to about 30min.
At the beginning of the second part of the demo using H2 I warned the audience that we might expect a negative effect to the performance of the reactor because of that partial degassing of Ar. I had to do this as we have witnessed several times in the past the results of the presence of wrong gases in the performance as they block the active sites to be turned to NAEs. You can see the results in the videos still available in the internet both in the performance and the temperature signals that raised, as expected, to much higher levels than the Ar test even though the input power was gradually reduced compared with the Ar test and the coolant flow was the same as in the Ar run.  We calculated later that the R5 performance was reduced by aprox 40% in that second test because of the limited Ar degassing.”

Yiannis has also told me that based on their technological experience they have standardized the conditions of deep degassing for the three possible cases: a) when a reactor was opened for inspection; b) degassing to remove Ar after a control test and c) degassing H2 to prepare a control test. As he has mentioned during the test case c) needs the most drastic conditions because even very small quantities of residual hydrogen can generate heat and lead to a false positive in a control test.   These data, seen in the context of hat we have already learned show us that DGT’s technology is remarkably mature, however in the same time this is also a warning for LENR classic: “no deep degassing, no reliable excess heat, story finished, dura lex sed lex!”

While there can be some hope  for systems with preformed nanostructures to be converted in LENR+ with NAE formed continuously in situ (the unique way to success), the classic electrochemical Pd D system will remain only …"scientific". However the impossibility to degas it will perturb any Pd D     LENR investigation; I will not say “for ever” because it sounds so sensationalist. The Motto suggests that PdD, LENR classic-classic will remain captive in the Irreproducibility Hell. However the author of the Motto has stated “The path to paradise begins in hell.” (Dante Alighieri) As the Italians would tell “Andiamo!” Let’s go!

It is possible this essay will convince some colleagues that alien gas molecules are destroying the chances of PdD to function reproducibly or, even better to stimulate them to demonstrate by triumphal experiments, brightly that I am, in this case for sure, in deep stupid error. And the gas poisoning hypothesis deserves its sad fate.

Peter

PS In my fantasy LENR world the PdD system is so passé. I hear the voice of future. Our friend and collaborator of my blog, Axil whom I consider the Father of the New Wave Thinking n LENR+ has written this miniature these days- it is the voice of the near future:

“In Kim's ICCF 18 paper. there are two references to nanoplasmonic papers [16, 17]. Also, DGT has been famously quoted as stating that LENR should stand for nanoplasmonics: 

see http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/ManningIE110.pdf

However, readers who are aware of nanoplasmonics—a new area of science dealing with the interaction of photons with matter including nuclei or sub-nuclear particles—will be interested to read how scientists at the Defkalion Green Technologies (DGT) lab now describe phenomena that they see happening in DGT’s excess-heat-producing Hyperion product. Instead of using the term low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR), DGT has been calling the process HENI—heat energy from nuclear interactions. A recent breakthrough resulted in a change; instead of the “N” standing for nuclear, it now stands for nanoplasmonics. I expect that this simpler interpretation of the phenomena could help with the public image of this field and its products. Could it also build alliances with other academic fields”

RE-THINKING THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

Saturday morning’s e-post- a good friend calls my attention to some really new- a breakthrough: 

Individual Atoms Imaged in a Living Catalytic Reaction http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/07/130712084341.htm

A triple opportunity, for me but for LENR even more, to be happy with this news: 

1) It is about catalysis- and catalysis is kind of uncle of LENR and I have told this quite clearly in my ancient Topology paper: http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GluckPunderstand.pdf 

Citing from that paper: 

In my opinion, the cold fusion phenomena are localized at active sites (similar to catalysis), and characterized by intense surface dynamics.

Cold fusion phenomena must be considered as sui-generis heterogeneous catalytic processes and the modern concepts regarding active sites have to be applied in order to understand and direct the reactions.

Surface mobility of metal atoms is the key both for heterogeneous catalysis and for cold fusion.

Actually, the study of catalytic surface phenomena in operating conditions is very difficult, given that the most modern analytical methods must work under high vacuum conditions.

What the nature, rise and dynamism of the active sites are, is an open question. A very rapid and massive information influx from the field of science and technology of catalysis could be useful to get the answer(s).

2) JEOL has achieved this breakthrough- and I had once a fine professional love affair with the JEOL Company. For JEOL please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JEOL

In 1967 I started to work in research at the OLTCHIM Chemical Works and have decided to become a specialist in PVC-S, suspension polyvinyl chloride the “flagship” product of that industrial unit. I have collected books, papers, reports, patent, grey literature re the technology but for being able to manufacture really competitive products we needed more: samples of the best, most reputed, highest quality products from which we can learn about the products. Call it reverse engineering if you wish, but it is perfectly legal and everybody does it. I have asked samples from almost every known manufacturer but have also used any honest or at least legal means to get samples. PVC-S is a versatile product with a challenging complexity that was then produced using some 20 different basic technologies.

The samples were characterized by specific methods and it was concluded that there exist very complex correlations between the physical and chemical characteristics of the polymer and its processability in a diversity of products (think in terms of quality reputation, brand!) One of the most important is the morphology of the powder particles (50-250 microns). Here JEOL enters the equation and play – I was informed about the pioneer role of JEOL in scanning electron microscopy- an analytical method that= became commercial around 1968- and when a JEOL Stockholm specialist has visited my to install a gas chromatograph we bought from them, I have asked him to take SEM images of the most significant PVC samples. The JEOL man – a very smart and nice man (I regret that I have forgot his name- Japanese working at the Stockholm branch of JEOL has sent me fast the much desired imagines. I confess that this proved to be the best, most expressive analytical method – very, very helpful for understanding the samples a scientific revelation of high class.

SEM revelation!.

Now again JEOL helps us to understand the intimate principles of catalysis and, I bet this new microscopy will help us to understand LENR too… Bravissimo JEOL!

3- Perhaps the best reason to happiness is the fact that this new method helps me- and hopefully many other more important people to understand the real validity of the Scientific Method for

our field. This is a vital problem and I am very worried for having seemingly quite opposite views than the organizers-strategists of ICCF-18.The Scientific Method is based on putting smart questions to Nature and using, more smartly the answers for solving the problems. However in the case of LENR we still do not have the adequate vocabulary to ask well and then we have to combine science with technological methods, making the research more empirical and seemingly less intellectually elevated.

Take the method worked out now by JEOL it gives new possibilities for the catalysis experts to ask and to get better answers- to understand catalysis. It becomes obvious that the Scientific Method needs and is based on ever new and improved and more telling methods and on a permanent re-thinking and repeated re-understanding of the phenomena.

The slogan of ICCF-18 promotes the use of the Scientific Method

and promises understanding of the heat release being IMHO off target because the scientific method still lacks the best methods

(experimental, analytical) and considering that the seemingly incurable bad reproducibility problem is strong noise that destroys both questions and answers.

The genuine scientific method is based on new means to ask and new ideas in understanding and not on formal application of some tentative dialogs with Nature with non-optimal questions and inaudible quasi sibyllic answers. Scientific method has to be a creative process. It is also a high quality process that cannot tolerate chaotic unpredictable behavior and is incompatible with\ the catastrophic and seemingly occult lack of decent reproducibility. However this seems to be just my personal opinion, many of my colleagues are much more tolerant than me.

This writing is just a preamble for my coming Open Letter to ICCF-18 telling the organizers that the Scientific Method has to be re-understood; Scientific Method hybridized with technology is the most adequate and even most scientific form of it.

The story of a story about Scientific Congresses.

One thing more about congresses. There are 4 places in this world

where I feel well like a fish in water: water pools, libraries, restaurants and scientific congresses. Perhaps my most disappointing experience was with scientific congresses and restaurants- but I will speak only about the former.

Because I am just reading about this remarkable book- just published

http://www.amazon.com/The-Storytelling-Animal-Stories-Human/dp/0544002342

I will tell you a story; it is about how I think that congresses are.

Its 1989, autumn- Cold Fusion was already discovered and I was enthusiastic about it, a lot of strange things happen. Our dictator Ceausescu is stronger and more confident than ever knowing he

and his regime of terror are invincible and eternal. The Chemical Works Ramnicu Valcea OLTCHIM is organizing its yearly Chemistry and Chemical Industry Congress and as a founder I am invited. As the PVC guru (modesty ignored) I am speaking about the ways of technological progress for this polymer- but I feel that I want to tell more to the participants. One evening after dinner we organize a special lecture beyond any official program\

and I tell the strange story of a special PVC congress. It is my most successful speech ever. It is well known that at congresses

the most important and relevant things happen always outside

the so called program.

“A few years ago the deputy minister of Chemistry has called me to Bucharest and has told me: “Tovarish Gluck, a company from New Zeeland is asking us to send a Romanian specialist to heir PVC Congress. The good boys cannot go X is ill, Y has better things to do, so we have taken the risks and send you. They pay for travel and expenses so even if you get lost, it will not be a disaster. But take care and behave yourself and do not drink too much!’ Bureaucracies and autocracies are more unpredictable than a palladium cathode. I have received the tickets, some money

(US and NZdollars) and a nice badge “VII-th PVC congress”

A very long travel; at the Ankara airport I have met a 61/2 feet tall Nigerian guy who was wearing a badge like mine. In 5 minutes we were good friends, after half hour and a few glasses of my tzuika and his ogogoro premium we were friends for ever. He had a long Nigerian name but has asked me to call him just Joe, I was Peter as usual. Suddenly Joe asks me:

“When have you abandoned the Freudian teachings?”

I was perplexed what has polyvinyl chloride to do with this?

Then I realized then that this PVC congress is about Psychological Vigor & Creativity is made for psychologists and I, the reputed Expert in Polyvinyl Chloride had been  degraded to a total Ignorant nobody who can tell only stupid and false things, a non-professional, a pariah! I am in dead trouble- cannot go back or communicate with the bosses in Bucharest- I have to play. I have confessed to Joe my real identity and he has started to lead me toward a decent solution of my surprising nightmare like problem:

(Acronyms can define very different things, I knew then PVC

also as Peripheral Vasoconstriction in medicine and PVC as Pigment Volume Content in the paint industry; now here: http://www.acronymfinder.com/PVC.html you can find 47 different definitions)

Joe speaks:

“Peter, do not make you any illusions regarding Psychological Vigor and Creativity! It is a strange field and many mainstream psychologists do not care for it and even deny its existence or want its name changed in positive psychology, soul’s antifragility, mental resilience or something else like this... Every personality in PVC has his very own definition and a pet theory.

There are two great Leaders and geniuses, Professor B and Dr. M each having a lot of followers and fanatic fans and these two megaguys are continuously fighting like Ormuzd and Ahriman

or like two old bald men for a comb.

You will see how parallel the monologs can be, how strong the conflicts can be! The experimental part is for enhancing the vigor in thinking of different categories of people and the same sad story repeats itself: a group of researchers obtains some great success with a new vigor enhancing procedure. Triumphal music can be heard, the press is happy, the future of PVC seems bright and glorious. But then the new wonderful method is applied to a different group of subjects- and nothing happens. Or sometimes worse a lot of them become depressed. Professor B himself had once three successful attempts of suicide in such a test but this case is kept secret, you know! \

So get rid of any complexes and fear- just read these papers and reports and try to learn the jargon of PVC, find the most frequent and popular words, the MEMES of this discipline, my friend!

And never forget to refer as much often as you can to the great authorities. Say “Ted has advised me” re Professor B and “Dick thinks so” re Dr. M and you will be accepted by the gang even if considered not a high intelligence. Do not smile too much and refrain your annoying East European politeness!”

Joe has helped me to understand the normality of that congress,

Being restless I have participated at discussion regarding the psychology of research and of innovation- a very broad spectrum of opinions about me has developed and everything went well.

I was not debunked as alien. I have understood that it is something very bad and harmful with PVC and that some really

radical changes are necessary, but words like paradigm shift or renewal are rarely welcome- anywhere.

And then something great has happened.

The last day the participants could visit industrial units in order to test the newest methods of improving the psychological vigor and creativity of the staffs. Joe and I have chosen a brand new PVC factory (polyvinyl chloride!) near to Auckland. We have visited that technological jewel, had free access and the engineers, foremen and workers have tried very hard to explain to those naïve psychologists all the details of the process. Lots of new valuable technological information.

I wrote a good report about the polymer factory and “forgot”

to tell about psychology.

The PVC/PVC story is not real, but it is true.

Peter

A SERIOUS SITE RAISES THE MOST SERIOUS PROBLEM

See please:
http://www.buildtheenterprise.org/looking-for-one-reproducible-lenr-experiment#comment-16600

I commented there:

It is a good initiative to discuss this vital problem of LENR here.

I also have analysed it on my blog Ego Out and I invite the readers of BuildThe Entreprise to visit my blog or write me.

In my opinion:

a) the problem of bad reproducibility has to be judged in association with 2 other issues

weakness of the heat release and its short duration;

b) it is a "wicked problem" (see Wikipedia) even intractable if a high, say over 95% success rate is the target;

c) for the cradle system of Cold Fusion the Fleischmann Pons Cell the uncontrolled

and uncontrollable blockage of the active sites (a.k.a NAE) by gaseous molecules that are not deuterium coming from the ubiquitous air is the main cause of the bad function; add to this the low density of these active sites (valid for the systems with preformed smart and even smarter nano-structures)

d) essential- the situation has to be considered as absolutely intolerable. it is not a problem we can live with, a solution as to be found.

And it was found and is now developed on the principle that desperate diseases need desperate remedies, here desperate means radical. It is about the change of the mechanism by which the active sites are formed. The new systems imply the

continuous formation of active sites in situ- a good equilibrium between the natality, activity and mortality of active sites. LENR+ adds a new dimension- time to the classic

LENR systems.

see please the LENR+ Manifesto a sketch of this issue:

LENR+ Manifesto and Plan. (sketch)

1.  Situation: The field has PROBLEMS

2.  Cause:  It appeared too EARLY

   

3. Difficulty: Extreme COMPLEXITY

4. Solution: TECHNOLOGY first!

- No PURE SCIENCE!

- SCIENTIFIC METHOD not applicable.

- HYBRID METHOD necessary

5. No INNER SOLUTION found

-  Usual SYSTEMS hopeless

-  To destroy MYTHS, MEMES!

-  Radical PARADIGM shift.

6 OUTER SOLUTIONS emerging: LENR+

7 Task: to differentiate LENR/LENR+!

- LENR is discovery, LENR+ is invention,

- LENR and LENR+ have different mechanisms;

- LENR+ based on enhanced excess heat,

- LENR+ dynamic system of multi-stage processes;

- LENR+ is based on nuclear interactions, not reactions,

- LENR+ needs a productive meta-theory

8. Task: define, describe LENR+ mechanism;

to make hydrogen reactive and metal receptive

Polariton, Nanoplasmonics, Resonances -BEC, sequences…

Trans-theory in statu-nascendi

9. Task LENR+ R&D by HOLISTIC approach

- optimization performances/control, scale up, diversification

The solution is in development and the reproducibility problem will disappear as a bad

dream.

Peter

JEANE MANNING WRITES ABOUT DEFKALION

A good friend, a leading personality of the New Energy Movement, the Canadian writer, Jeane Manning has visited the labs of Defkalion Green Technologies at Vancouver and has published this fine frontline report.

http://changingpower.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Defkalion-2-page-JM-Article-100-3.pdf

I am a long time admirer of Jeane’s writings and thinking and now again her unique talent to see the essence, the core of the problem, her ability to discover, reveal newness and progress made me enthusiastic-bravissimo Jeane!

This NEW has now a name; it is LENR+, in defkalionese HENI.

It is the creation of Yiannis Hadjichristos and his scientific associate(s) and of our bright colleague and friend Axil. The DGT team made this new thinking possible, Jeane is telling us what LENR+ signifies.

I take this opportunity to show you the bare bone form of LENR+ asking you, my faithful readers to contribute by putting

Scientific-conceptual flesh on this skeleton. I will discourage those who perhaps want to break some of these bones- they are very tough and resistant. PLEASE contribute positively and creatively to his Synthesis!

LENR+ Manifesto and Plan. (sketch)

1.  Situation: The LENR field has PROBLEMS

2.  Cause:  It appeared too EARLY

   

3. Difficulty: Extreme COMPLEXITY

4. Solution: TECHNOLOGY first!

- No PURE SCIENCE alone!

- SCIENTIFIC METHOD not applicable.

- HYBRID METHOD necessary

5. No INNER SOLUTION found

-  Usual SYSTEMS hopeless

-  To destroy MYTHS, MEMES!

-  Radical PARADIGM shift.

6 OUTER SOLUTIONS emerging: LENR+

7 Task: to differentiate LENR/LENR+!

- LENR is discovery, LENR+ is invention,

- LENR and LENR+ have different mechanisms;

- LENR+ based on enhanced excess heat,

- LENR+ dynamic system of multi-stage processes;

- LENR+ is based on nuclear interactions, not reactions,

- LENR+ needs a productive meta-theory

8. Task: define, describe LENR+ mechanism;

to make hydrogen reactive and metal receptive

Polaritons, Nanoplasmonics, Resonances -àBEC, sequences…

Trans-theory in statu-nascendi

9. Task LENR+ R&D by HOLISTIC approach

- optimization performances/control, scale up, diversification

10. Industrial implementation of LENR+ generators

In these papers you can see how LENR+ was built. The work just has started

LENR/LENR+ papers 2013

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/05/the-1-0-rule-generalized.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/05/the-best-recipe-for-disaster.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/05/active-sites-and-nae.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/04/axil-dixit.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/04/the-lenr-ists-sunday.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/04/science-or-engineering-science-and.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/04/axils-profound-and-extended-comments-re.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/04/not-lesson-but-discussion-with-young.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/04/rethinking-continuously-and.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/03/the-root-of-lenr-problem-and-stem-of.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/03/24-years-of-heroic-history-many-years.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/03/fifth-lesson-for-young-lenr-researchers.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/03/guest-editorial-axil-about-how-lenr.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/03/early-history-of-cold-fusion-three.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/03/a-motto-for-iccf-19.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/03/fourth-lesson-for-young-lenr-workers.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/03/lenr-is-not-asong-it-is-opera-advent-of.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/02/explaining-lenr-pdisaster.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/02/advises-for-young-lenr-workers-some.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/02/sequel-to-lenr-strategic-principles.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/02/strategic-principles-of-lenr-and-their.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/02/the-meaning-of-life-essence-of-lenr.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/01/lenr-and-matthew-effect-or-palladium.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/01/barriers-obstacles-traps-limitations.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/01/coulomb-and-other-barriers-for-lenr.html

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/01/lenr-outlook-2013.html

LENR FRONTLINE REPORT: undecided battle, the war continues.

LENR FRONTLINE REPORT: undecided battle, the war continues.

MOTTO

"To be intelligent means to NOT mix (confuse) the points of view" (Mihail Ralea)

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2011/01/first-seed.html

Lack of intelligence has a somewhat broader extent however it surely comprises mixing of incompatible, immiscible things.

The recently published Report re. Rossi’s Hot Cat has caused a battle of such immiscible ideas – more precisely memes. It was written a lot about it and all I want is to answer the fundamental questions: What war was this? Who were the combatants? How will be this war finished?

The battle per se had no clear winners and no clear losers –except reason, logic and common sense. Applying two stages of radical euphemization I can tell that this paper: http://news.discovery.com/tech/alternative-power-sources/5-reasons-cold-fusion-bunk-130528.htm is the worst I have seen in 24+ years of Cold Fusion history, a blasphemy against taxonomy. It mixes 5 things in the most unprofessional mode- a real monster bred by the sleep of reason.

Otherwise the Big Four Rossi killers – Joshua Cude, Steven Krivit, Gary Wright and Mary Yugo have reacted as this was expected from them. (Mary was the fastest, congrats!) Many other new kids on the block have reacted similarly. An old rule: if you have no arguments, no facts you manufacture them and add them to the reality. I think they have read my analysis saying my 20 problem solving rules were able to solve >99% of the real problems but less than 80% of the imaginary ones.

Rule 17 says it clearly:  “NOT always the existent, real problems, but many times the fictive, imaginary ones are the most difficult to be solved.”

Using this weapon is easy- you add imaginary problems to the real ones regarding the Report and then claim that those new problems are insoluble- that means the report is flawed. By reading a few ten thousands of comments you could easily earn a diploma in distorted logic. The confusion is total and even good and honest people will write self-contradictory open end papers like this. http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2013/05/30/rossis-a-fraud-no-hes-not-yes-he-is-no-he-isnt/

The Hundred Years War had duration of 116 years (1337-1453); the Cold Fusion War will be known as the Twenty Five Years LENR War and will last roughly 25 years. That means that the coming months will bring decisive events on more fronts.

Just watch the news and especially this blog, Ego Out.

But the battle of Ferrara is not simply a continuation of the war between the LENR believers and the Cold Fusion skeptics. No, actually it was a battle between LENR+ Rossi style and

his personal enemies (Rossi is very effective in creating enmity) The rest is just context.

The classic LENR people and their traditional adversaries have mixed in naturally but it was not more their battle. It was a LENR+ battle on an other frontline...

\The relationship between LENR (Pd based, smart static nanostructures, etc.- weak, sporadic heat effect) and LENR+- much enhanced excess heat) is approximately similar to that of a caterpillar and butterfly. LENR to LENR+ is a radical metamorphosis. To speak about fixed active sites/NAE and dynamic active sites/NAE is the core of the difference but still a simplification.

Again about mixing: LENR and LENR+ systems have to be considered separately, they represent different levels, stages and directions of development. We have to treat them separately; do not mix cherries and pumpkins. (idiotic metaphor, take it only dimensionally)

The final battles will take place very probably between a LENR+ technology smarter than Rossi’s and the last place will be the market.

Some of enemies of the coming LENR+ technology are so obsessed with their unbelief that they will look with suspicion even to their own new LENR+ based central heater.

The decisive technical Armageddons will come soon and the enemies of progress will learn that they are no more confronting LENR a poor myriapode with a lot of Achilles heels, but LENR+ the invincible technology.

Peter

THE PROFESSORS’ REPORT GENERATES AN EPIDEMIC.

The Report of the Italian and Swedish professors that demonstrates the generation of massive excess heat and an amazingly high energy density is a serious very professional work.

It is obviously not perfect; not a capodopera but this does not disturb me a bit. Its conclusions are unassailable and, I well remember that re-reading even my most successful research reports two weeks later, I usually have found lots of issues that could be done much better. Three months later, many times we were able to find a better way.

The Report has not found its way to the Big Press – this is only its 3^rd day of public existence. However it has already generated an epidemics that (because I am chasing popularity) I will call of toxic naivety and arrogant, increasingly desperate ill-will. Those detractors who have decent IQ’s and at least some

traces of EQ start understanding that soon they will be forced to swallow their words and these will taste very bitter. Take this as my friendly prediction.

The epidemic is lead by a sub-species of Homo sapiens- those human beings who are fatally allergic to any question that needs answers beyond the most primitive straight YES or NO.

See please what I wrote about the MU answers- in Robert Pirsig’s interpretation here:

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2012/12/is-cold-fusion-natural-essay-in.html  It would be simplistic to call them dualist-extremists, therefore I will not call them in any way, but you, my friends and friends of reality, you will easily recognize them.

These individuals surely know this essential idea:

The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function. ((F Scott Fitzgerald)

Unfortunately the poor souls think those opposing ideas can and have to be mixed, even combined. That is a pathological anti-logical mental operation. The latest example:

The core idiocy in the attacks.

The attacks try to demonstrate simultaneously that;

a) Andrea Rossi is a scammer, swindler, fraud & 9 synonyms

b) The E-cat is unable to produce any excess heat, everything was and is just faked, false, non-existent heat.

I will use an analogy, an artistic one. As told I doubt the explanatory and the predictive value of the most usual technological analogies used for cold fusion, for ages simply because airplanes and transistors have appeared when their time

was there, theory and technical conditions were already ready. Cold Fusion came in hurry, too early- the advent of LENR+ will show you how and why this happened.

Let’s admit Andrea Rossi is a scammer- and let’s find a historical analog personality for him. Please look this video with attention and read the text:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fccdGBi9JUs

Yes, it is the famous womanizer Don Juan (or Don Giovanni in Mozart’s opera). He immediately characterized by one of his victims, Donna Elvira (interpreted here by the adorable Dame Kiri Te Kanawa) tells it directly: “monster, villain, liar!” Don Juan escapes coward style and his servant, Leporello – in the famous Catalog aria explains to the poor girl that she is not the first or the single victim, describing the extent of his master’s sexual, marital scam so:

My dear lady, this is a list
Of the beauties my master has loved,
A list which I have compiled.
Observe, read along with me.
In Italy, six hundred and forty;
In Germany, two hundred and thirty-one;
A hundred in France; in Turkey, ninety-one;

But in Spain already one thousand and three.

What do you think, boys, really not bad, centuries before Viagra was invented!

Much sex, but also a lot of money- the guy was a super-scammer indeed. He is eventually punished but accepts his fate with dignity, has strong principles. Don’t mourn him, better read what G.B. Shaw has written about Don Juan.

But let’s continue with the analogy, it is an axiom of the denigrators that Rossi’s E-Cat – is unable to deliver any excess heat, zero excess hear, zero and its 23 synonyms!

This means nothing more and nothing less that Don Juan is impotent! You don’t need imagination at all to see that in this case Leporello’s list would be, very short- no list at all.

(Note ‘impotent Don Juan’ is my independent but not original invention for this occasion, but see please the autobiography of Paul Feyerabend the philosopher who has told some remarkable things about the Scientific Method – but this is an other problem.)

Back to Rossi, do you think he is so crazy that he hopes to sell

totally impotent, non-functional E-cats? By thousands and millions? Globally? “Perpetuum stabile”s in industrial quantities? 

Do you really think the impossible is possible? And, can you make a list of Rossi’s E-cat bound victims?

An other standard core naivety is the ideally independent, test:

It means that just for pleasing some aggressive, curious negative kibitzes, Rossi will borrow one of his generators to a group of unknown well known (in the profession) experts and lets them to do all kind of tests they wish. Rossi has made a discovery; the relationship between a creator and his creation is a very complex issue. However Rossi has the right to protect his intellectual property and to establish his own risk management. A wise friend has told: Sometimes unpleasant people win the lottery. I have not met Rossi but people who know him say he has charm and can be very nice, just it is difficult to make business with him. Do you think he has paranormal abilities and has mesmerized a lot of people starting with Focardi and Stremmenos and the DGT people? No, surely not: he has excess heat in the E-cats and is still learning how to master excess heat management. He knows how advanced he is in his studies.

This was the beautiful part of the story. The ugly part is that the quasi-desperate black-and white naïve donjuanologists are attacking and insulting viciously and cowardly the Professors who have destroyed the myth of those wise-guys’ inerrancy. No fair play.

Peter 

THE PROFESSORS HAVE PUBLISHED THE HOT CAT REPORT

The much awaited report on the tests performed by a group of Italian and Swedish scientists was published this Monday morning, thus starting a week of discussions of still unpredictable extent.

Will the press (Press) react fast, will the dedicated Rossi killers counter-react fiercely or will they make intellectual seppuku as suggested; we will see.

For those few readers who have not yet studied the report here are the links:

Abstract: http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.3913

Press release: http://ecat.com/news/3rd-party-report-shows-anomalous-heat-production-the-rossi-effect

Full Report:  http://ecat.com/files/Indication-of-anomalous-heat-energy-production-in-a-reactor-device.pdf

The first to react probably was the excellent Swedish journalist Mats Lewan on his blog: http://matslew.wordpress.com/2013/05/20/two-100-hour-scientific-tests-confirm-anomalous-heat-production-in-rossis-e-cat/ but he has promised more details from the authors on Ny Teknik. My Swedish friend David Nygren has called me on Skype to announce the event.

The publication process seemed to be slow, but peer reviewing never was fast. It is still not clear where will be this report published in printed form, but after reading it, this seems not very relevant to me.

The essence of this report is this: Rossi obtains enhanced excess heat in his generator(s)

A certainty – you can see in my writings that I have stated this long ago. Rossi is on the way, long and with many obstacles from this first step which is his discovery to an energy source. Rossi being very secretive we cannot know if he has solved the problems of control as start-up, adjustment of heat level and instant shut-down etc, but we wish him the best.

I have paid a high human cost for my conviction that Rossi has demonstrated beyond any doubt intense excess heat even in his series of seriously “improved” dozen experiments from 2011-

I have lost the friendship of two individuals I have admired still then but now they became intolerant to contrary opinions. A third friend got angry with me both for this and for my support for Defkalion- who has the most creative thinking in LENR+, IMHO.

Defkalion has focused its initial R&D efforts on control, first of all

on start-up, a critical stage for LENR+.

The two experiments of the Professors lead to good levels of excess heat and to decent values of COP, 5.6 and 2.6 and this need to increased (3.0 is the minimum technological value taking in account that a unit of electric energy is 3 times more expensive than the same unit of thermal energy).

The difference between Excess Heat and a genuine Energy Source will be made obvious using the example of the thermo-radiant stones that have been used for heating the homes in the Arctic zones with active volcanoes. Those “heitt steinn” had to be mined, cut and have created some problems of logistics and of adjustment. Therefore as soon technical progress has arrived to those cold zones, standard gas, oil electric and other heaters were used replacing the hot stones.

Rossi’s zoology inspired approaches to viable energy sources are suggesting that he uses now a mouse for better start-up and control and goes on two different ways for scale-up: multi-cat and E-Tiger

The report is a victory for LENR+ and perhaps it can prepare the press and the open-minded public opinion for even greater victories that will come this year.

Peter

THE 1 = 0 RULE, GENERALIZED.

School for Phoenix Birds

Today I burn a feather,

Tomorrow a tip of my claw,

And so I learn how to not forget

To reborn from my ashes

I wrote this short poem of optimist desperation (we will succeed to resurrect as those birds!) in 1988 when we hoped that the communist dictatorship will end somehow, but we had no idea how it will happen. A year later I knew it, an untitled

poem but actually “Ceausescu” said:

On my island made of wax,

 In the midst of a hot Ocean,

 I stay and wait…”

He has not waited much, the island disappeared and Ceausescu has learned fast about the risks of the profession of dictator. We resurrected, more or less.

However I will speak now about the brave Phoenix Birds, a wonderful symbol of continuity, even with the high price of an obviously painful but well organized series of resurrections.

In my previous editorial “The Best Recipe for Disaster” I have described how Cold Fusion has abandoned – forced by the hostile outer and inner circumstances, in the frame of its original sin- bad reproducibility-its essential aim: Energy. But I knew this idea has to be continued. And now it will be about continuity, because the long history of cold fusion-LENR was continuously uglified by discontinuities in the experimental work , by sad cases of projectus interruptus. A success is not a success still it does not follow the normal cycle of growing up, developing, improving, slowly and peacefully, get old and eventually being replaced y something even better and so on. The successes in LENR were

very short-lived

As it usually happen, the Spirit of Internet offered his generous help. First it has sent me the newsletter of Psychotactics with a paper entitled: “The 6 Most Important Lessons In Marketing”

What is true for marketing and these six lessons are as follows:          1) Follow up; 2) Follow up; 3) Follow up; 4) Follow up;            5) Follow up; 6) Follow up.- is true for many positive human activities- for example science and technology-too. If you don’t follow up, you have achieved nothing. Your work will remain a footnote in the history of the field.

Then at the LENR forums two very long threads have reminded us how variable but unpredictable and unmanageable the experimental results were and how difficult it is to obtain passable results in the PdD systems despite the accumulated huge

experimental data. How many hopes raising high and then falling!

In a bit euphemistic, hardened form “jumping like a lion, falling like a stone.” The standard culprit is lack of funding, but nobody takes the risk to answer to an utopian question like: “suppose we have endless funding; is there a guarantee that somebody will solve the problems of reproducibility and scale up? Or, do you think that is possible?” If somebody happens to be interested in my opinion that is: without removal of gas molecules that compete with deuterium, decent levels (>99.9%) of reproducibility will be never attained; and the original wet

system is unable to attain usable energy densities. Do not say me please:”it is easy to make wise negativist predictions when you know you will go and will get rid of any responsibility for your statements!”

But my special experience in mythical aviculture has taught me a lot from the Phoenix birds, I will come back and continue my activity. Just continue to watch this blog.

I repeat for the n-th time, lack of reproducibility MUST have an explanation and even more, MUST have solutions- finding these is the raison d’etre of research. And certainly, outsiders will never accept a process that is not highly, safely, knowingly reproducible! Please allow me here to ask two naïve rhetorical questions:

Is it a serious problem that serious problems are not taken seriously?

Why loving inside constructive critics is ignored and hateful attacks are answered in the minutest details, with quasi-infinite repetition of old data?

The 1 = 0 Rule, explained

The OLTCHIM research lab was a  fine place, we had to deliver  results and fast have worked under stress and pressure- coming in great part from people who had no idea about research and chemistry but having great power- it was a dictatorship, autocracy then. The possibilities of information were limited but I succeeded to convince some people that it is necessary; anyway we had a lot of Russian books and journals. In critical cases as in `1974-5 when it was discovered that vinyl-chloride is a dangerous carcinogen and the technology of PVC was revolutionized- we have received everything we needed because it seemed to be a case of “solve it or perish1” for this major polymer.

Some smart people in the great libraries of Romania have started to translate the basic Western management literature and this has stimulated our thinking and gave us an unlimited appetite to learn

And to discover such rules and principles and truths and we have also tried to discover some good practices in research.

We had successes but some cases that first seemed to go well, turned out to be complete failures, when taking everything in account and developing a broader vision/understanding. We have introduced a precautionary rule: one result is no result, one analysis is still no valid analysis, one single test (good or bad) has to be temporarily ignored and repeated. You got it this became the axiomatic 1 = 0 Rule. It was extended to some childishly simple but useful ideas as: continuation is more important than start, it is more important to re-think an idea than to discover it, first remove the weak points and later developed the strong points, always take care first of the risks, we have concocted a primitive form of SWOT. The opuses of Deming, Juran and Crosby and our practice have taught us that constancy of quality is more important than peak performances. We have embraced critical thinking and had series of illuminations regarding scientific and technological

experts… but enough of vain nostalgia, let’s better to continue to learn. Complementary to the 1 -0 rule is the high art to know when a project has to be abandoned and the resources spent for better ones. It is about the essential difference between effectiveness and efficiency- ask Peter Drucker!

If we apply the 1 = 0 Rule to the long history of CF/LENR we will suffer heavy losses. If a study, method idea gives good excellent or/and promising results but it is discontinued, there are great chances that it has no development potential or it has hidden inner weaknesses.

We can conclude against our wish that LENR despite being more than certainly very real, has no bright future, it will be almost impossible to improve the experimental situation so LENR is in crisis as long as we remain in the frame of LENR (classic LENR)

It happens that my hyper-informed colleague, Axil, leader of the New Wave thinking in our field has just found an elegant up-the-target formulation of the perspective (extracted from his Vortex message):                                                                                        LENR reaction is weak, transient, random, and intermittent. This ethereal nature of the LENR reaction makes it useless.  The LENR advocate must come up with a plan to make the LENR reaction strong, permanent, consistent, and controllable LENR+

This working strategy is clearly modeled after the Phoenix birds- you have to destroy your old nature and resurrect with a new viable, superior nature. Not an easy job, but the alternative is worse and it does not exist. Perhaps you can imagine other

solutions but it is very possible that the following quotation

is true in that case:

“Imagination is the one weapon in the war against reality.”
(Jules de Gaultier)

Peter

Supplement: a few inspiring quotes only for LENR+ apprentices and students

Actually these are more than quotations- they are partners for your dialogues about the LENR/LENR+ problems: Real imaginary dialogues- it will go well

Phoenix birds

There was a silly damn bird called a phoenix back before Christ, every few hundred years he built a pyre and burnt himself up. He must have been the first cousin to Man. But every time he burnt himself up he sprang out of the ashes, he got himself born all over again. And it looks like we're doing the same thing, over and over, but we're got on damn thing the phoenix never had. We know the damn silly thing we just did. We know all the damn silly things we've done for a thousand years and as long as we know that and always have it around where we can see it, someday we'll stop making the goddamn funeral pyres and jumping in the middle of them. We pick up a few more people that remember every generation.” (Ray Bradbury)

Fawkes is a phoenix, Harry. Phoenixes burst into flame when it is time for them to die and are reborn from the ashes.”  (J.K. Rowling)
 

Rising in Triumph, just like the phoenix (Loretta Livingstone)

Only after disaster can we be resurrected. (Chuck Palahniuk)

It is not more surprising to be born twice than once; everything in nature is resurrection. (Voltaire)
― Voltaire

Succeed quotes

In order to succeed, your desire for success should be greater than your fear of failure. (Bill Cosby)

Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time. (Thomas A. Edison) 

If you want to succeed you should strike out on new paths, rather than travel the worn paths of accepted success. (John D. Rockefeller)

In order to succeed, we must first believe that we can. (Nikos Kazantzakis) 

Don't let the opinions of the average man sway you. Dream, and he thinks you're crazy. Succeed, and he thinks you're lucky. Acquire wealth, and he thinks you're greedy. Pay no attention. He simply doesn't understand. (Robert G. Allen)

My message, especially to young people is to have courage to think differently, courage to invent, to travel the unexplored path, courage to discover the impossible and to conquer the problems and succeed. These are great qualities that they must work towards. This is my message to the young people. (Abdul Kalam)

In order to succeed you must fail, so that you know what not to do the next time. (Anthony J. D'Angelo) 

It is no use saying, 'We are doing our best.' You have got to succeed in doing what is necessary. (Winston Churchill) 

It is hard to fail, but it is worse never to have tried to succeed.
(Theodore Roosevelt) 

 I have learned that success is to be measured not so much by the position that one has reached in life as by the obstacles which he has had to overcome while trying to succeed. (Booker T. Washington)

To succeed in your mission, you must have single-minded devotion to your goal. (Abdul Kalam) 

It is literally true that you can succeed best and quickest by helping others to succeed. (Napoleon Hill) 

The will to succeed is important, but what's more important is the will to prepare. (Bobby Knight) 

They succeed, because they think they can. (Virgil) 

Rather fail with honor than succeed by fraud. (Sophocles) 

People in their handlings of affairs often fail when they are about to succeed. If one remains as careful at the end as he was at the beginning, there will be no failure. (Lao Tzu) 

Nature is trying very hard to make us succeed, but nature does not depend on us. We are not the only experiment. (R. Buckminster Fuller) 

The way to succeed is to double your error rate. (Thomas J. Watson) 

Professionalism is not sportsmanship. If you don't succeed, you won't be in your profession for long. In our society, it's not about good or bad. It's about who's on top. (Chili Davis) 

If at first you don't succeed... so much for skydiving. (Henny Youngman) 

People with goals succeed because they know where they're going.
(Earl Nightingale) 

Most people who succeed in the face of seemingly impossible conditions are people who simply don't know how to quit.
(Robert H. Schuller) 

I am not judged by the number of times I fail, but by the number of times I succeed; and the number of times I succeed is in direct proportion to the number of times I can fail and keep on trying.
(Tom Hopkins) 

It is better to fail in a cause that will ultimately succeed than to succeed in a cause that will ultimately fail. (Peter Marshall) 

The fastest way to succeed is to look as if you're playing by somebody else's rules, while quietly playing by your own.
(Michael Korda) 

The freedom to fail is vital if you're going to succeed. Most successful people fail from time to time, and it is a measure of their strength that failure merely propels them into some new attempt at success. (Michael Korda) 

To succeed in business it is necessary to make others see things as you see them. (Aristotle Onassis) 

To fail is a natural consequence of trying, To succeed takes time and prolonged effort in the face of unfriendly odds. To think it will be any other way, no matter what you do, is to invite yourself to be hurt and to limit your enthusiasm for trying again. (David Viscott) 

A man can succeed at almost anything for which he has unlimited enthusiasm. (Charles Schwab) 

If at first you don't succeed, failure may be your style.
(Quentin Crisp) 

It is only as we develop others that we permanently succeed.
(Harvey S. Firestone) 

Don't settle for style. Succeed in substance. (Wynton Marsalis) 

To succeed in business, to reach the top, an individual must know all it is possible to know about that business. (J. Paul Getty) 

A continuation quote

Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts. (Winston Churchill)

And a last one, what I think about CF/LENR too:

The value of an idea lies in the using of it.” (Thomas Edison)