Popular Science Covers Rossi, LENR

I have always liked the magazine Popular Science. It’s the kind of magazine you can pick up and browse through to find articles and pictures of interesting technologies and scientific ideas written for the layman. It is geared towards the general public rather than professionals. I am sure many, if not most of the technologies and topics it has covered have never materialized, but I think there is a place for articles that present readers with interesting new ideas and spark the imagination with new possibilities.

“Andrea Rossi’s Black Box” by Steve Featherstone in the November 2012 issue of Popular Science, is the kind of article that might attract the attention of a new audience of readers who haven’t been following the cold fusion story closely.

The full article can now be read here. Following is a summary and a few selected excerpts.

Featherstone starts the article discussing the January 11th News Conference in Bologna, when Rossi and Focardi first introduced the E-Cat to the public. He then goes on to provide a fairly comprehensive overview of the history of cold fusion, starting with Pons and Fleischmann through to the present day. Looking at all the evidence, he says that it seems like there might be something going on, and discusses the idea that cold fusion may not really be fusion in the way that physics defines the term.

The focus, however, is on Andrea Rossi — Featherstone wants to know if Rossi really has the goods, and does not hide his suspicion that Rossi could be a con man (he brings up his past legal difficulties). Featherstone went to the Cold Fusion conference held this summer at the College of William and Mary in Virginia, and talked with many of the attendees to get their opinions about Rossi. He writes:

To my astonishment, after three days of asking every cold fusion researcher in the house, I couldn’t find a single person willing to call Rossi a con man. The consensus was that he had something, even though he didn’t understand why it worked, or how to control it. The more I learned, the more confused I became. Could Rossi actually have something real? The only way to know for sure was to go to Italy.

Featherstone received an email invitation to visit Rossi to conduct an interview at his factory in Bologna, but when he arrived in Italy, he found an email from Rossi cancelling his interview. Apparently Rossi suspected that the interviewer was out to assassinate his character. Finally, after intense negotiations via email, Rossi gave permission for the interview and a demonstration of an E-Cat module.

Rossi had been warming up the E-Cat for an hour, which he said was necessary to trigger the nuclear reactions. The module was plugged into the wall. Critics have slammed him for not unplugging it for live demonstrations, casting doubt on his claims of excess energy output. Some even suggested that Rossi juiced the E-Cat through hidden wires. To show me he had nothing to hide, Rossi methodically circled the table, methodically clamping a hand held ammeter around every wire.

“Zero amperes,” Rossi said, showing me the ammeter’s display. He clamped it again. “You see? Zero amperes.”

He decoupled the E-Cat’s power cord with a theatrical flourish and darted over to a laptop. The computer logged temperature data from a probe stuck in the top of the E-Cat. The temperature gradient on the laptop’s screen peaked around 140 degrees C and remained there. The E-Cat was running in what Rossi called “self-sustained mode,” implying that the reaction occuring inside of it — whatever that reaction might be — generated enough excess heat to keep itself going. The E-Cat ran at 140 C for about an hour.

Featherstone reports of some of his conversations with Rossi, most of which is known to followers of this story, and which has been covered here. This meeting took place well before the Zurich conference, and Rossi mentioned the Hot Cat device, but did not display it.

Following this meeting, Featherstone visited three Italian skeptics, Ugo Bardi of the University of Florence, and Giancarlo Ruocco and Antonio Poloso, both of the University of Rome, all of whom were dismissive of Rossi’s work.

Following his trip to Italy after reading a statement of Rossi on his blog that the University of Bologna would be conducting independent tests of the E-Cat, Featherstone contacted Dario Braga, vice rector for research at the University of Bologna who denied any relationship between the university and Rossi. Braga said, “I am not aware of any work being done by our scientists with Mr. Rossi in a formally correct way. I don’t know how Mr. Rossi can say this.”

The article concludes with Featherstone reporting about a visit with Francesco Celani before he left Italy. Celani took him to his lab at the National Institute of Nuclear Physics in Frascati where he had been working on his LENR reactors, and where one device was working.

He pointed to a narrrow glass cylinder that resembeled an oversize hypodermic needle resting on its side. It had been running for six weeks straight, Celani said. He called it his “special reactor.” Kneeling down for a closer look, I could feel the heat coming off it. It was difficult to fathom that nuclear reactions thousands of times more energetic than any known chemical reaction were occurring on the hair-thin wire coiled inside the gas-filled cylinder . . . he opened his logbook to show me a “very nice correlation” between a decrease in restivity of the wire and an increase in heat production.

The last person that Featherstone talked to was James Truchard, CEO of National Instruments who said he was very impressed with the precise experimentation of Celani and others working in the LENR field. Truchard’s assessment of the state of affairs in this area is, “I think we are just on the edge, and this could happen tomorrow or 10 years from now, because I don’t know when the spark will come. But we are, I believe, close.”

  • All articles on this topic from November 18, 2011 until now, gathered in a newsfeed on
    and on

  • georgehants

    The guardian Jon Butterworth.
    This house would open all areas of knowledge to scientific investigation
    Debating societies – yes or no? Discuss. Anyhow, last night I was the proposer of the above motion at the UCL debating society. Below is my prepared opening statement, and I thought you might enjoy shooting it down in the comments…
    So I would have all areas of knowledge open in principle. If no acceptable means exist to address, scientifically, some important area, I would have us develop better means. But to declare any area closed in principle to scientific inquiry is to declare that we wish to be fooled.
    And nature, the universe, does not treat fools kindly.
    I urge you to support the motion.

  • artefact

    US Nuclear Plant Closures

    “..We believe Dominion’s decision to close Kewaunee is indicative of a difficult operating environment for merchant nuclear plants in the Midwest. This is the first closure of a U.S. nuclear plant as a result of extremely low, long-term power prices..”


    • Peter_Roe

      Hopefully it will be the first of many, as falling demand for power, increasing price of fissionables and cheap gas from fracking all weigh against nuclear (even if the opinion of large swathes of the increasingly irradiated population does not).

  • georgehants

    Very quite this morning.
    Just a little light reading to pass the time.
    From Science Daily
    Can Your Body Sense Future Events Without Any External Clue?
    ScienceDaily (Oct. 22, 2012) — Wouldn’t it be amazing if our bodies prepared us for future events that could be very important to us, even if there’s no clue about what those events will be?
    “I like to call the phenomenon ‘anomalous anticipatory activity,'” she said. “The phenomenon is anomalous, some scientists argue, because we can’t explain it using present-day understanding about how biology works; though explanations related to recent quantum biological findings could potentially make sense. It’s anticipatory because it seems to predict future physiological changes in response to an important event without any known clues, and it’s an activity because it consists of changes in the cardiopulmonary, skin and nervous systems.”

  • georgehants

    If Mr. Rossi wishes to be the first to announce conclusive verification of a high temperature (cop6) Cold Fusion device, I think he needs to waste no time.
    It would be terrible if somebody else pipped him at the post.
    Andrea Rossi
    October 22nd, 2012 at 4:33 PM
    Dear Brian:
    About the Pordenone Report, should be published soon, but it does not depend on me.
    Warm Regards,

  • georgehants

    Andrea Rossi
    October 22nd, 2012 at 4:31 PM
    Dear Robert Curto:
    The article of Featherweight on Popular Science is honest and sincere.
    He believed what he wrote, so I appreciate the journalist and the article. Of course the mass media like Popular Science need to see plants in operation to have a precise idea.
    Warm Regards,

    • Peter_Roe

      ‘Featherstone’ to ‘Featherweight’. A natural and entirely unintentional mistake, obviously!

      • georgehants

        Ha, I missed that one, I wonder just when his English fails him.

        • GreenWin

          This particular author does seem lighter even than a common paper weight. AR does wry rather well.

  • Robert Mockan

    The nickel used in LENR might be better applied to the CIHT battery developed at Black Light Power. The battery has already demonstrated an electric power output that is 20 times the electric power input. BLP seems on track to have a 1.5 kW output battery in 2013, that can be combined in racks for any power level needed. In case anybody missed this, the 64 page white paper describing the battery in detail is here:


    Pages 4-6 mentions the cathode is nickel, and the anode nickel oxide. About halfway into the report are details about the electric power generation.
    BLP anticipates this technology will replace most applications that use electric power.

    Nickel alloys can also be used in the construction, and it appears the battery can have a very long life time, fueled with just condensed water from humid air.

    With Rossi now saying the Hot Cat for electric power production may not be available for consumers for a long time (many years?), it may be time to start considering CIHT as the alternative technology for people to have freedom from the centralized control of energy.

    • Robert Mockan

      Another detail of the CIHT is that it can generate thermal power at 450 C in addition to having a direct electric power output. Thus it can compete directly with the low temperature E-Cat for hot water heating.

      Can anybody think of any reason to buy a Rossi E-Cat that makes just heat and can not be used to easily make electricity, when the CIHT self-recharging battery from BLP makes both heat and electricity?

      • You’ve really hit the nail on the head, Robert. Yet I must say that Andrea Rossi is far more forthcoming about his timetable and agenda than Randell Mills is. He has released only one press release this entire year, albeit a very significant one. He rarely responds to email in my experience, and whether or not he’s really got the goods, there’s no indication whatever of any progress from theory to prototype with his CIHT motor. I found myself wondering at quite some length yesterday, for no apparent reason, whether Randell Mills is being threatened by someone who doesn’t want him to release his technology? Is his work being actively suppressed? Why is there no “hydrinoworld.com” that does what Frank does so well? Finally, is Mills undergoing a certification process? That would be a positive development. The thing I liker about Mills is that he’s a graduate of Harvard Med who went to MIT immediately afterwards to study medical engineering, and was deeply involved in that when the Pons-Fleischmann story hit. He has a very impressive body of scientific theory to support his claims, along with hard science valiudation, and he seems as though he should be the best positioned to hit the market first and dramatically change our fuel paradigm.

      • NJT

        Astounding Robert, It appears that 2013 will be a make or break year for some of these companies. Lets hope they all make it as this ole world certainly needs the help sooner rather than later…

      • andreiko

        Bent u het met me eens dat zowel bij de e-cat als hot-cat de reactie temperatuur ongeveer de zelfde waarde heeft?

        Ik zie ook geen bezwaar om zowel de reactiekamer van de e-cat en
        de hot-cat of beide in of om de cilinder ruimte van de (stirling engine met generator)te plaatsen.

        Graag uw reactie. bvd.

        PS/You can translate from Dutch.

      • Omega Z


        Different tech for different needs. The more the better. Wish them all well. Competition is good.

        I will say that what I read several years ago was very interesting.
        What some would call the waste product of Mills projects would be usable resources. I’m thinking the Hydrino or plasma (Sorry been a while since I read it), being usable as Rocket Fuel. Possibly 10 to 100 times the Lift capacity verses regular Hydrogen.

    • Ivan_cev

      Where do you order one of this proven devices?

      • Peter_Roe

        If you don’t have anything to contribute to discussions Ivan, please give us all a break and just stop posting here. You are wasting everyone’s time, including your own.

        • telecommuter

          What is wrong with asking where a device – that has been proven to work – can be bought?
          Is it that you just don’t like the fact that the answer is it can’t be bought?

      • Robert Mockan

        Lol! There you go again.

  • GreenWin

    Seriously. Where does an amateur writer like Featherstone buy such tripe? Mr. Featherstone, take a look at the entire R&D field before whining so loud about Rossi. We have been promised hot fusion for 60 years now. Where is it?? The hot fusionists, politicians, military and mainstream media have lapped up these manipulative promises like moonshine.

    Difference of course is hot fusion has taken $$273 Billion dollars from taxpayers. Rossi has taken not one dime from taxpayers. Yet Rossi seems to have convinced a growing army of scientists and businessmen he has developed LENR to commercial practicality.

    Hot fusion has forestalled the axe for 20, 40, now 60 years – each time they beg for more funds and promise “clean, unlimited energy.” Yeah? Where is it? Mr. Featherstone, had you a real journalist bone in your body you would’ve seen through the stonewalling of cold fusion to benefit the ivory tower of hot fusion. You conclusion is correct, except for the names. It will be the misleading, ITER, NIF, academic hot fusion ring leaders who fade from the energy stage. Not in a puff of smoke… but rather, quite rightly in chains of ignominy.

    • John

      Hot fusion happened on Earth about 60 years ago, give or take a bit. Knowledge of it has been with science for almost a hundred years. It is entirely repeatable. How much does a hydrogen bomb cost on the black market? 100 million maybe?

      On the other hand, as far as I know, zero cold fusion experiments are for sale. If there are any, please direct me to one, and I’ll buy one. Maybe they are for sale on ebay and I used the wrong keywords?

      • Jon

        Muon catalyze fusion has been around for about 60 years as well, you can’t buy any products based off it… Yet it is accepted physics… Why must there be a physical product to be credible?

        Many reputable scientists have repeated lenr experiments, the two leading theories are being tested… We wil get there, and you may have your product to buy off eBay within 5 years… And that is without government funding.

        • GreenWin

          Which one of the technologies you guys name currently is producing “clean, unlimited energy?” Hot fusion’s promise starting in 1951.

      • Cliff Bradley

        Come on! He’s talking about producing power from hot fusion, but you knew that didn’t you? Just trying to poke some fun?

        Also, there are numerous cold fusion experiments that have been documented on this site with repeatable results. You just have to build it yourself from their plans. You don’t have to buy one already put together, just build your own.

        • John

          I’m all fingers and thumbs so I would probably mess it up. I’m willing to pay up to $US10,000. Obviously it would have to work, and consistently. Do you know where you can buy them?

      • Chris


        Mind, only industrial customers for 1MW plants in a big blue freight container.

        The countdown was postponed from the end of last month to the end of this one. Proia gave his reasons for this in a recent interview; there is so much interest from prospectives that he couldn’t keep to original plans. He is no more than a salesman with experience in PV, which he dropped once he became convinced of Rossi’s work.

    • Miles

      $273 Billion – That’s a lot of Cheese Burgers & Fries!!

      I’m sure the oil industry is paying industry guru’s (the technology movers n shakers), money under the table to stop any advancements in technology from progressing. The intent would be to keep bleeding money from us small “working plebs” for as long as possible.

      Same could be said about most governments – Keep us working folk continuing to pay these Taxes!!!
      Rossi needs to break the corruptive habit that our society has become accustomed too.

      Fingers n toes crossed for a Domestic 10Kw eCat in 2013.

    • Peter_Roe

      New guidelines seem to have been handed to the shills: “Keep demanding to know where a working CF device can be purchased”. If this is the best they can manage they are now seriously scraping the barrel. Ah well, you’ve gotta earn a crust I suppose.

      • Max S

        Of course the physics could be real even if there is no product for sale. However Rossi and his associates are claiming since months that their MW- inducat is on the market for sale. You should not be surprised that people are demanding to see it, and actually want to purchase it.

        • Peter_Roe

          A desire to hear from a named buyer of a 1MW unit is entirely reasonable – I share it. What is not reasonable is people continually making empty demands to know where CF products that have not be announced can be obtained.

          In the case of the 1MW unit the contact details for real potential customers has been published, and anyone with the money is free to try to order one. Whether or not they are really available to non-military buyers yet must be an open question until we hear from a customer, and constant demands for ‘evidence’ are pointless (and of course, insincere).

          • telecommuter

            Real potential customers? What is that? Sounds like more companies/people who haven’t bought the 1MW unit.

        • joe j

          Don’t forgot Rossi also claimed to have sold and delivered a 1MW plant to a secret customer long long ago. The shipping container plant turned up in a later photo in his factory.

          I wonder how the robotized factories are coming along.

          • Chris

            There were clarifications about that, they delivered a different one and kept that for fiddling.

            Besides, before this had been said, how could you have been sure it wasn’t the next in the making? I wouldn’t expect them to look all that different from one another. At the most, they might change the colour of the freight container but maybe Rossi just likes blue and doesn’t give any choice or, since he says the military customer ordered several units, they chose the same colour for all, or whatever…..

  • Lu

    I liked the Popular Science article about Rossi (I read it in a book store). I thought it was informative, well written, and entertaining– with the author doing a good bit of investigative journalism. But ultimately, the article is not kind to Rossi. Basically Featherstone says Rossi has not shown anything. Rossi has no credibility (versus Defkalion which has negative credibility). He ends the section of the article about Rossi with this:

    “If history is any guide, no such report will be issued. Rossi will reset the goalposts–the only thing he does with any consistency–and forestall his day of reckoning for another few months, and then another few months after that, until finally he disappears from the stage in a puff of smoke, taking his black box with him.”

    I don’t agree with the severity of this but in general it has so far been generally correct. The E-Cat is a black box. Nobody really knows what it is and how it works. Rossi’s claim to let the market validate his work has gone nowhere. Rossi has always fallen short on what he has claimed. We’ll see how definitive and independent the third part report will be and this could indeed change things, but if history is any guide…

    • Lu

      Mostly off-topic but also a very good read is this article from Wired on Elon Musk’s development of rocket technology. Take particular note on his view of patents:


      • e-dog

        Good summary Lu.. thanks for the link.

        • Gerrit

          Elon Musk: “But I believe it can be done. And I believe that achieving it would be on a par with what the Wright brothers did. It’s the fundamental thing that’s necessary for humanity to become a space-faring civilization. America would never have been colonized if ships weren’t reusable.”

          Just to highlight the good meaning of the word “believe”. Many people have complained about the title of the film “the believers”, because they felt it sounded too much like a religious-cult thing.

          Believing (in the good sense) is an integral part of innovation, there is nothing wrong with it.

    • When saying that Rossi hasn’t met some of the goals he has set (or has met them with some delay), one should also remember that he has exceeded his earlier predictions in other ways. In particular, the temperature and COP of the HotCat are higher than what he anticipated earlier, and the device looks simple and ingenous compared to the classical E-cat.
      In early summer 2011 he said that reaching electricity production will probably take 1-2 years. Now it’s 1.5 years from that prediction, and he seems to be close to the target (in fact, so close that the remaining work is almost trivial, the question is only if it takes a few weeks or a few months).

    • >”versus Defkalion which has negative credibility”

      I don’t understand how you can say that. i agree that some people find DGT with weaker credibility, whil if you analyse facst and profile it is clear that Defkalion have a clear behavior, as a startup, withe problems, with too much optimisme and mistakes… But all their behavior is coherent with fair behavior.

      Rossi have all the behavior of a con-man… secrecy, paranoia, preventing testers to do what they want, calling for libel action, half-done demo, huge mistakes, proved errors, red herring claims, …

      I think that both have something that work, but clearly Rossi have a negative credibility, and defkalion a positive…
      Positive from human profiling, from behavioral…

      notice that today, with Gibbs stating that Nelson recognize to have done the test, and thus aware of report content, we know that what is in the report is what Nelson have written and agree with.

      is ther any independent report, stating that Rossi reactor is tested with cooperation and fairplay ?

      I’m shocked by that common prejudice against Defkalion…
      what is the problem ? Rossi is so charismatic that fan defend their rock-star against blacksuit copycat like defkalion ?


      • Peter_Roe

        Some people are still annoyed about the broken promises and the lack of any attempt to explain them. This tends to colour their opinions.

      • artefact

        Good words.

        In addition I think patronism is not necessary at the moment.
        The thing that counts most is to get the technology into the world. More players are much better then only one.

  • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

    Out of curiosity a question about catalysts. They seem to be a very important ingredient for Rossi and DGT. Not sure about the other competitors though.

    Isn’t a property of a catalyst that it is involved in a reaction but not used? If so, why did I read somewhere that Rossi has to refill the reactor every 6 months because the catalyst and not the fuel is used up and does the same apply to DGT as well?

    quote from Wikipedia: “Unlike other reagents that participate in the chemical reaction, a catalyst is not consumed by the reaction itself. A catalyst may participate in multiple chemical transformations.”

    • Ged

      Wherever your read, it was backwards. Fuel is used up, catalyst is not. Now, a catalyst can wear out due to other processes not involved in the reaction (temperature cycling, reaction with other components not involved in the primary reaction, simple time dependent degradation, etc). I’m pretty sure the nickel/hydrogen core is what has to be replaced every 6 months or so, which would also include the catalyst. Most likely, this replacement is actually due to the hydrogen being used up, but it seems it’s like a cartridge and the whole shebang is replaced in a go.

      That’s the latest we’ve heard, anyways.

      • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

        Thanks Ged, always happy to be educated.

        I suspect you are right in pointing out that a catalyst can be used up by secondary processes. Maybe that’s why the fuel must be replaced every six months because in theory, the amount of nickel and hydrogen should be more than enough to last much longer than six months, wouldn’t it? I can also imagine that the number of nuclear active places are reduced or destroyed during usage and that the nickel must be treated again to make sustained reaction possible. Or the system runs out of hydrogen, though I thought only minuscule amounts are being used.

        It’s all very fascinating.

      • Max S

        actually, in nuclear physics catalyts are unknown.
        The Ni-H promoters are using the term “catalyst” in an unconventional manner, unlike the catalyst definition as it is common in chemistry. It is seen as an ingredient to activate the Nickel nanosized surface for the still unknown target reaction. Since this is supposed to be a surface reaction it may be possible that afer a while the NAE is changed.

        • Peter_Roe

          Agreed. ‘Promoter’, ‘activator’ or some other word might be a better choice for some additive or adjunct that enables or accelerates the nucleonic reaction, but as the mechanism of this mysterious substance is not known, even these could turn out to be inaccurate choices.

          The confusion is further increased when some people use the word ‘catalyst’ to mean the nickel or cupro-nickel substrate, on the assumption that it supports the reaction but is not changed significantly by it.

          I suppose the terminology will resolve when the physics is better understood.

      • Omega Z


        Rossi did state the 6 month refill was due to Catalyst exhaustion. Not the Nickel or Hydrogen. Also the Hydrogen load can be increased if that were the case. Note: I can’t find Rossi’s reference to this at this time.

        The Question of Exactly what the Catalyst is or how/what it’s used/Function is what leaves us in the dark.

  • Chris

    Although Featherstone strikes me a bit clueless about some aspects, it is a great thing for this to be on a magazine that is so popular amongst science enthusiasts.

    If this is what Rossi was talking about, it isn’t a peer reviewd publication vouching for his claims. Not doubt it isn’t vouching for them anyway. Still it doesn’t seem to cast such a negative light on him as some had said around here.

  • artefact

    New paper from Edmund Storms:

    “We found that when several
    materials are subjected to conditions expected and found to produce voids,
    and then exposed to H2, a source of radiation results that is consistent
    with the radiation reported by previous workers. In addition, this
    radiation has strange effects on other materials, which is a new discovery”

    • georgehants

      “New discovery,” Wonderful !!

    • hadamhiram

      “Submitted” does not mean accepted, so this article is not in press. What is the source? Storms himself? It’s generally bad practice to make papers publicly available prior to their acceptance for publication – in fact, some journals expressly forbid this.

      I’d like to be able to cite this work, but not while it is still pending peer-review and acceptance for publication.

      • freethinker

        I dont know what field you are working in but in many fields in physics it is very common to have pre-prints made available on the internet at eg. arXive etc. I see nothing strange that he make such a pre-print available.

        • HHiram

          I am not a physicist, but in my field you have only working papers (not submitted), papers in-press (submitted and accepted for publication), or published papers.

          You don’t send out a paper for everyone to read that you’ve *submitted* to a journal but are still waiting and hoping will be accepted that journal, especially if the paper has that journal’s name plastered all over it. That would be an obvious conflict of interest because it could influence the reviewers.

          It’s hard for me to understand why that would be different for physics, but I’ll take your word for it.

          • I confirm what freethinker says: at least in theoretical particle physics using arxiv is the norm. In space plasma physics (my field) people have started to do it, but it’s not yet common.

      • GreenWin

        You’re living in the dark ages hadamhiram. Science is driven today by open access publishing – via the internet. The old school gauntlet of journal editors and peer referees is fast fading into memory. Peer review will be done by a far wider body of interested parties. Not a few handpicked “experts” who conform to the status quo.

        • HHiram

          You can live in that fantasy world if you like. That’s just not how science is done right now. Maybe in the future peer-review will be crowd sourced, but if the Internet is any indication you can expect the quality of review to be utter garbage. Just look at the “reviewing” that blogs do of scientific research. Just look at the idiocy of climate change denial. The Internet is awash in junk science, journalistic infotainment, complete ignorance of statistical methods and causal inference, and outright lies.

          You may not want to believe it, but some people really are more qualified than others. “Experts” is a real thing. I agree that LENR has gotten a raw deal from the scientific community for 20 years, and I agree that hot fusion has not lived up to its promises. But if you think that one data point accurately characterizes the entire scientific enterprise consisting of millions of scientists in dozens of countries across hundreds of disciplines, you’re just another tinfoil-hat-wearing loon who deserves to be ignored.

      • Ged

        Actually, such release at “submission” stage has become pretty common. Look at the BEST project which had its papers released at submission, along with several press releases, even though the papers have -not- been accepted or survived peer review.

        I agree with you though, I don’t think it’s responsible science to leak results prior to their full evaluation in peer review. I am old school that way, and many top scientists disagree (e.g. Dr. Richard Muller of BEST). That isn’t to say peer review has been perfect, as the exponential growth in paper retractions in journals has shown.

    • AB

      Am I understanding this right? Storms is saying that cold fusion (or at least one type of experiment) creates radiation that adds activates Potassium-40 which subsequently undergoes decay?

      • AB

        … decay with a half life of 109 minutes rather than a billion of years.

        • clovis

          He Storms, is using the word voids ,he called them cracks in the Crystal lattes earlier, his theory unlike others, if i were guessing i would say that the reaction is better described here.

          the Widom-Larsen Theory proposes a reaction whereby protons “capture” electrons, absorbing them, and becoming neutrons. A neutron could then interact more easily with other nucleons as it is charge neutral, and has no Coulomb force to overcome.

          And still i think there is more to this effect than meets the eye,
          or known accepted knowledge, stay tuned, things are beginning to pop, smile.

        • Ged

          Fascinating…. if this bares out, we’ve found a new way of stimulating the P40 decay path… This has big implications for a great number of elements, and nuclear wastes…

          I dunno, this is some cutting edge stuff, and needs thorough evaluation.

          Also, from the description, it sounds like it created a -gamma ray laser-? I’m assuming that’s the sort of radiation he’s evaluating, that or X-ray. Those are the only things I can think of that can interact with a nucleus so strongly as to stimulate its decay.

          • GreenWin

            I think you mean K40, Ged. And yes, from the description, “coherent” photons – though traditional light amplification utilizes optics to obtain coherence. This too, is a fascinating observation.

            • Ged

              Oops, yes, K40, as in K for potassium!

              There are solid state lasers out there, but no one has made a gamma ray laser before. If indeed they produced a gamma ray laser (or even a cheap X-ray laser, which is very hard to do otherwise), then that alone is a breakthrough.

          • NJT

            If true and if applicable to other radionuclides – this could potentially help solve the world’s nuclear waste problem. Exciting indeed even with all the If’s…

      • GreenWin

        “The radiation being emitted by the sample is proposed to result from a fusion reaction that produces coherent photons. These photons are proposed to react with K40 nuclei in the mica window of the GM to stimulate its decay by beta and gamma emission that is easily detected by the GM.” Storms

        This may be a secondary reaction to the spectra emitted by the CF sample. What is happening in the GM is very curious – and apparently inexplicable for now. Which of course makes it much more fun.

        • GreenWin

          K40 half life is 1.248×109 years.

        • clovis

          hi, green.
          I thought i read that that radiation was reabsorbed and changed to hear, and then there is transmutation, and all that it entails. and it is getting very exciting,,-clovis

    • Robert Mockan

      Young science professionals might do well to start giving the cold fusion field more attention. Career making recognition for discoveries peaks in the age group of mid 20s to early 30s in physics. Photon induced radionuclide effects are known, for example the Massbauer effect, for which discovery Rudolph Massbauer received the 1961 Noble prize in physics, but to find a cold fusion effect that accelerates decay of potassium 40 is something new.
      These kind of interactions generally require specific wavelength gamma rays at so called nucleus resonance absorption peaks. To have such an effect from cold fusion cells using different materials is baffling. The generation of many coherent photons of the proper wavelength do not just happen by chance.
      This may have something very relevant to offer for cold fusion theory development.

      • Ged

        Absolutely. If Storm’s data is correct, this could open a huge window into understanding the theory. It is definitely -fusion- if this is so, not the W-L watered down fusion they try to pass off as “transmutation”.

        If I was versed in the field, I’d be diving into all the data on solid state lasers, to see what commonalities we’ve got going here with this apparent gamma ray laser.

    • Peter_Roe

      It seems that metal-hydrogen nucleonic reactions are set to become a huge new area for physicists to explore, a special case comparable to organic chemistry as this relates to ‘inorganic’ chemistry.

  • Adam Lepczak

    It seems like there is a lot of new developments during the last 72 hours…It feels like we are standing at the tip of a volcano…

    • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

      Same feeling here. Mainstream slowly starting to pick up an item here and there, more and more discoveries about CF/LENR come to light, COP is increasing, new theories are being developed, more firms than just Rossi are beginning to present their reactors, the list of firms associated with LENR is increasing, Celani has published his demo device with lots of data, 3rd party testing finally beginning (though much still under NDA), conferences being organized all over the world and so on. I do get a really positive vibe out of this. We live in interesting times to say the least…

  • Presentation slides about the efficiency, safety aspects, usage pattern, cost, etc. of the 1 MW plant (http://www.borderlands.de/Links/E-Cat-Zuerich-120906-D.pdf, in German). Also explains how to get “almost” infinite COP with a Stirling generator option. Also mentions that effective COP (six) is less than 6 if the device is shut down often, and mentions that the shutdown procedure also needs significant electric energy (100 kWh for 1 MW plant). Emergency one-time shutdown procedure is also available which simply lets the nickel overheat until it melts.

    Somehow, even though there are perhaps not so many new details, I get a clearer view how the plant works after reading these slides.

    • AB

      Do you have any ideas on why energy is needed in the shutdown process or for safety reasons during operation? It’s something I don’t find reassuring.

      • Good question, I really don’t know the answer. After thinking about it for a while, the following speculation came to mind (which could of course be totally wrong). Maybe self-sustain mode in classical E-cat runs at somewhat cooler core temperature than the driven mode. There might be a qualitative difference between the modes, for example, some of the catalyst chemicals might be in different phase (e.g., potassium carbonate melting point is 891 C). Perhaps the only way to terminate the self-sustain mode is to apply extra heating so that the core enters driven mode from which it can then be shut down by stopping the driver.

        The Zurich-HotCat had no self-sustain mode and its data didn’t show such behaviour: the driver was simply stopped after which the reactor shut itself down smoothly, showing some heat-after-death. The newer HotCat is on the other hand supposed to have a self-sustain mode. Maybe it even has a renewed catalyst cocktail. But we have seen no data from it yet so whether or not it needs heating to shut it down is unclear.

        100 kWh to shut down 1 MW plant is equivalent to running it for 35 minutes extra with 1/6 average driver and then stopping the driver.

        • Adam Lepczak

          Btw, I really appreciate your comment on JofNF about the mission to Europa. Either I must have confused the heck out of Rossi or he is seriously underestimating the potential of the ECAT. If his device is real such an ice melting mission becomes very practical – almost easy…
          Or I am missing something?

          • I don’t think you are missing anything. Rossi just seems to be more inspired by third-world applications such as desalination rather than space exploration. It’s also possible that he read it quickly and misunderstood, maybe he thought that the idea was somehow to melt away the whole of Europa’s ice mantle. Just my speculation.

          • Omega Z

            Adam Lepczak

            I saw the question posted to Rossi.

            I think what he meant to say was the Europa Idea is Fantasy at this time. Something to consider in the Future. By someone else when the Technology is done.

            He actually gets many suggestions on a regular basis. I suspect they get distracting at times when he is trying to focus on just getting a Hot Cat to market.

            As for his short Sidetracking on Desalinization, I think that had a lot to do with 2 things. The Immediate possibilities & Someone in his Inner Circle being very interested in it. Possible even a customer Inquiry.

            Also, the Europa Idea would be decades away depending on NASA.

    • Ged

      You know, I wonder if the energy used to shut it down is acting as a “break”. Perhaps the polarity of the current is reversed for this “breaking” current versus the stimulating current, and this suppresses the reaction. With the right current direction, forming and overall negative field along the outerwalls, you could in theory drive hydrogen ions away from the nickel and stop the reaction.

      I dunno, just some thoughts on the matter.

  • clovis

    Hi, guys.
    Was just watching the weather chanel msm, had a quite long video, on the water into fuel,guys , boy they picked that up fast.
    He said the only draw back was it takes a lot of electricity, but still if true wow.

  • sparks

    Featherstone sums up precisely what I have thought of Rossi all along, that is, Rossi is not a scammer, but rather, he is somebody who is so close to solving the problem (but can’t quite get there) that it can make you insane:

    (Featherstone) “The consensus was that he had something, even though he didn’t understand why it worked, or how to control it.”

    I think Rossi needs the help of a more rigorous and brilliant theoretical physicist to gain that understanding. He would do well to make such a talent search his number one priority, and then be willing to share in the (essentially infinite) rewards, should it work out. Otherwise he could be circling and missing the full solution for a very long time. Just IMHO.

    • Chris

      This is why I say that Rossi, by clutching his secret, is not making the best of progress possible.

      • Ged

        The sad story of too many inventions.

    • Rossi is poresumably a Catholic, and he needs to pray for answers. That may be the only way they will come to him. God understands all this stuff.

  • georgehants

    Defkalion seem to be saying that they cannot replicate the Hot-Cat.

    • Ged

      DGT tech is a different methodology. It also seems to be firmly based on the low temperature E-cat, and using multiple modules of that design to accomplish higher COPs or temperatures. The Hot Cat is a completely different beast.

      One module of DGT tech is around COP >3. One module of hot cat tech is around COP >11 and at vastly higher temperatures. If all devices live up to their lab reports, then Rossi has seriously out engineered DGT at a fundamental level. At a device level, DGT has some pretty good engineering to get as much out of the old e-cat designs as they do (they just need to work out their terrible reliability kinks, but that’s normal for a new field dealing with new technology, and everyone in LENR/CF has those issues so far).

      • their test was done at a too low temperature for the Hyperion to work efficiently. It is explained in the paper.
        moreover the model they used is an early prototype, easier to start, bet less efficient…

        “Defkalion needs to test their apparatus in a configuration that provides an
        optimal COP without concern that steam is generated. The internal reactor
        performs best when it can be triggered above a temperature of 310 degrees C.
        Testers need to be advised to bring the appropriate apparatus to handle proper
        measurement of the energy from steam if necessary. A thermal fluid with a
        boiling point above 250 degree C may also be used if the piping and reservoir
        material in the lab can accommodate this temperature safely. Also, the system
        may be sealed to allow a build-up of pressure to raise the boiling point of the
        thermal fluid.”

        • Ged

          From the information others have pointed out, it seems this lab reactor is actually pretty much the same as one module of the normal reactors (the performance of the lab reactor when scaled up, matches closely to the theoretical performance of the production reactor). So there’s reason to believe, from our past knowledge, that there really isn’t much of a difference. Higher temps may also not impact the COP that significantly (they never have in the past), but it could raise it 1 or 2 points.

          The DGT methods are significantly different enough that some of the observations we’ve had from other groups may not apply.

          The low temp E-cat could supposedly hit a COP of 200 with dangerous neutron production, so DGT has lots of room to play. Still, from what we’ve observed on a practical scale, the DGT design and Hot Cat design are so different in every known way that they cannot be analogously compared.

  • georgehants

    Cold fusion Now has a new report.
    Perceiving the new cold fusion landscape
    October 22, 2012 / Ruby Carat
    A new generation is not prejudiced by authoritative decrees from a previous era.

  • GreenWin

    Atten, Admin, I just posted a transcript of interview with NASA’s Dennis Bushnell that auto-admin sent to SPAM. It’s a good interview. 🙂

  • GreenWin

    A website called “American Antigravity.com” has just released a Tim Ventura audio interview with Dr. Dennis Bushnell, Chief Scientist at NASA Langley Research Center. Here is most of what Bushnell said about LENR:

    “LENR, which we’re working on here, we’ve got 22 years now of experiments on Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, which indicate out of hundreds of experiments that this is real. And we now have a theory from Widom Larsen that it’s condensed matter nuclear physics, it is collective effects.

    It is not particle physics. It is not the usual business and you can get around the Coulomb barrier by forming ultra-weak neutrons using heavy electrons which not only enable you to form the neutrons but also converts the gamma radiation, which comes off the beta-decay, which is where the energy is finally produced – convert that into thermal so that you don’t have to have much radiation protection.

    So LENR is expected to be anywhere from twenty thousand to 3 million times chemical [energy] and that would really revolutionize space. LENR is not “heavily” investigated, we have a two to three hundred K effort. We are also cooperating with people that we can’t divulge under cooperative agreements. There is quite a lot of interest because LENR purportedly also produces trace mutations. So, if LENR [transmutation] works, we can take whatever is on the planet and possibly transmutate it into something we need.”


    More than meets the ear going on.

    • Peter_Roe

      Indeed. I think I’m a mushroom again (this happens quite a lot these days).

      Looks like some separate but conjoined camps may be forming, all apparently revolving around NASA, one way or another. I wonder how far the ‘co-operation’ goes.

      • georgehants

        Peter I am concerned that your comments are getting through moderation with words like “mushroom” in them.
        The machine must be tired.

        • Peter_Roe

          I don’t want to tempt providence, but I haven’t been moderated now for hours!

          • GreenWin

            Hmmm, I should think “conjoined camps” would’ve sent the machine into Siamese twin paroxysms. Perhaps Peter has lulled the machine into a state of respect.

            • Peter_Roe

              Somehow I doubt it is my friend quite yet, and will prove this any moment now with a vicious display of petulant AI megalomania.

      • Ged

        This is remarkable. We’ve known there’s been a lot of back room work, and we know there’s three other corporations working in LENR that are doing so secretly, mentioned by Dr. Duncan. But still… this is even more exciting. That people are growing confident enough to start coming out and revealing their LENR work, means it’s getting close to a complete picture, and certainly is working.

    • georgehants

      GreenWin, do you think it can be interpreted, that he is officially confirming NASA is working openly on Cold Fusion.

      • barty

        I would call it LENR not cold fusion 😉

        And I think this was an official statement in the name of NASA.
        The are working on it with very low funds, and however, they are able to get more results than hot fusion research ever did with billions of funding.

        • Ivan_cev

          Correct, It can not be called “cold” any more is getting “hot”

      • GreenWin

        Yes George. NASA also is making their proprietary cold fusion (LENR) technology available for licensing. How could one openly license what they have not invested in?

  • Sergey from Moscow

    I hope it’s true, I belive we are very close to the new era? Now it’s only spark, but will be a fire. I think not only economics or fuel market will change – people will be better, nature will stop dying, robots will be everywhere, our base will be on the Moon and Mars, and this is only the beginning. Sorry for my poor English.

  • Din

    Off topic:
    Siemens in talks to sell solar business.

    I wander why…

    • GreenWin

      “The sale of the solar businesses puts an end to decades of investment by Siemens in the sector. It participated in a pilot photovoltaic project on the Greek island of Kythnos in the early 1980s and built up one of the world’s biggest makers of solar panels in the 1990s, which it later sold to Shell.”

      Siemens now has only wind as a “renewable” energy. But imagine the business in industrial heat/electric generation if they had a large scale e-cat option. Macro/Micro-steam turbines + hot cat = € windfall.

      • Ged

        It makes sense. The E-cat, if it fully works up to its potential, is an incredibly attractive renewable energy source — more than any other.

        • telecommuter

          How can the Ecat be a renewable energy source when you have to keep replacing the ‘catalyst’? Seems that the ‘catalyst’ is, essentially, the energy source.

          • by definition no. catalyst are not consumed.
            moreover where did you get that the catalyst is consumed.
            It might be corrupted (contaminated, destructured).

            the question is whether nickel is consumed or not. from recent rossi says, from brillouin, it seems that Nickel is not consumed… probably hydrogen is the only fuel.

            but anyway it is not a renewable energy.

            there is no total renewable energy, since the tools to gather it are material and consumed (solar panel have a COP<4 due to cooking silicon, wind gen are better).

            LENR have an autonomy far better that all photovoltaic or wind generator on earth.

    • Max S

      if you follow the drama of the photovoltaics subsidies all over Europe and the decline of many solar players, then you will understand why many want to exit this business.
      First politics blew it up artificially by granting high subsidies, and then they pulled the plug by cutting subsidies virtually overnight. Today Chinese control the market and European companies go out of business.
      Perhaps a bad omen for other new energies as well.

      • GreenWin

        Gee Max… why so negative?

  • Blanco69
    • barty

      Potassium (Kalium) seems to be their secret catalyst!

      Nice find!

      • Peter_Roe

        One of three unfortunately – the others could be anything (but may include copper or a copper salt). Potassium carbonate has been cited in several CF experiments, although usually in solution rather than as a dry admix.

        • Ged

          Huh. Be interesting to understand why potassium could be involved, but I feel it is likely a red herring. Same reason why so many medicinal pills have magnesium stearate in them; it’s not the active ingredient, just a stabilizer for the active ingredient.

          • Peter_Roe

            Could be just a buffering agent in electrolytic systems. I remember some pre-Rossi, post P&F cold fusion apparatus that used it, but as I recall, the experimenters got closed down. I know Mills uses it in his ‘wet’ cell, and if you stick “cold fusion” and “potassium carbonate” into Google you get dozens of links. Maybe they all just copy one another!

            • Ged

              That commonly happens in science. Buffering is exactly what potassium carbonate is usually used for, so that’s definitely the best idea for why it’s included. Makes one wonder what else is in there.

          • “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flux_(metallurgy)” discusses somewhat similar welding fluxes: potash, corbon, borax, lead sulfide for example. In welding their main function seems to prevent the surface from oxidation. There shouldn’t be oxygen inside the reactor (except as K2CO3), but maybe somewhat similar substances would work… or maybe not.

          • Ducky1

            Potassium is a Hydrino catalyst according to Randell Mills at http://www.blacklightpower.com, so this may have been picked up from there. That it works so well might give an indication that Mills theory might have some truth to it. Mills experimented with this from the late 90’s as far as I know.

    • Peter_Roe

      There seem to be a couple of interesting snippets in there about Rossi’s ‘old’ e-cat (very high – 24Bar – hydrogen pressure, boric acid neutron shielding, thermal and ‘chemical’ initiation of the reaction).

      Has this oldish (March 7th) document just appeared then? Seems that Nelson has been sniffing around Defkalion for a while.

      ***Extremely Confidential***
      Defkalion Proprietary Information

      “Fell off the back of a truck, squire”

    • Pachu

      This is very nice info.
      Sorry about the leak but you cant know where accidental/incidental/on porpous leaks are happening…

      Its like a pr game of leaks now.

    • Pachu

      It should be noted that this PDF puts in 1st page Michel Nelson – NASA and not the “free energy foundation”, i really doubt this is made without NASA’s intervention as the other “leaked” document try to imply…

      • Peter_Roe

        Do we know what MSFC stands for?

        • Marshall Space Flight Center

        • GreenWin

          Marshall Space Flight Center – another NASA unit investigating LENR.

        • Peter_Roe

          Thanks, both!

    • artefact

      heared the magnetics thing for the first time:

      5) Rossi had a slow shut down. DK shuts down instantly by
      bleeding H2 off of chamber. Can also use magnetics.

      Also interesting:
      “Even though I did not see a demonstration of this
      technology I do feel that they have engineered this beyond anything Rossi showed us or Piantelli.”

      And: The report was for NASA?

      Michael A. Nelson
      ER22 NASA-MSFC

      • Sanjeev

        Yes it seems the report is for NASA bosses. Its also Executive report #22, if it means something. In the end he recommends further investigation and a demo.

        I guess the Free energy foundation is only a cover and the interested party is actually nasa. The bosses wish to save their bottoms in case something goes wrong. (Its only a wild guess)

        • Peter_Roe

          When the word NASA pops up in a series of ‘leaked’ documents and CF experimenters wear NASA teeshirts while demonstrating their devices, then the NASA bosses’ bottoms would seem to be rather exposed (a rather revolting image).

          • Maybe they expect to be involved “against their will”.

            If you reanalyse their behavior with the gas permeation experiments
            it is clear that today they claim they have proved LENR in 89, while the papers mostly show that they refuse to see it until 2009 (with spawar).

            see also how they don’t crucify Zawodny for involving them in his “what-mainstream-call-a-scam”.

            Note also how they let LENR be shyly proposed on their SUGAR plane report:

            with some political expertise I would say that they are preparing to be considered “pioneer” when LENR get mainstream, while at the same time avoiding any visible support to LENR that would make them be crucified by Science Magazine and similar MIT Pravda.

    • On page 3 it says that the catalyst is K+X, but on page 10 that it’s made of 3 substances one of which is K2CO3 (possibilities: K+K2CO3+X, K+K2CO3+H2, K2CO3+X+Y, K2CO3+X+H2).

      On page 8 it say’s that the pressure can be maintained by adding argon if needed, which is surprising because one would think that partial pressure of hydrogen is all that counts. About the only(?) thing that would call for the total gas pressure above some limit would be to maintain something (X?, Y?) in liquid form.

      • Ged

        Good points, Pekka. I would hypothesis that the K2CO3 is simply a stabilizing agent. Carbonate for instance is very good as a hydrogen (pH) buffer. That would also gel with your idea that the catalyst is in some liquid form from the pressure (and at those temperatures). The potassium carbonate could be keeping a favorable active pH range, or be acting as a hydrogen sponge/release system. None the less, I bet it’s more of a stabilizing agent for the catalyst, not the catalyst itself (unless all three components are collectively the catalyst).

    • Sanjeev

      Well… three docs “leaked” in a day. What to say.

      I guess both NASA and DGT won’t worry too much because there is nothing of importance in that presentation, except that the NASA-DGT relation is in open now. Its only a report of discussion with two guys.

      The only thing I find interesting is the graph. Its a can of worms, never seen before, and a very nice plot. K2CO3 is not a new thing for those who are following LENR closely. May be the spark plug method of getting nascent H is a new thing.

      I wish all these reports were in open, instead of leaked docs.

  • Robyn

    This is really big news.

    In and of itself, it might not add to much, but as a steady drumbeat of awareness, this story is growing to the point of no return.

    I think the stream of stories is growing so that each MSM outlet will be looking hard for the breakout moment. Anticipation is growing, and no news organization will want to be caught flat footed when (to be fair, “if”) the story breaks.

    Excellent job E-Catworld!

    PS: Can we get a link to the pop-sci article?

    PPS: Can I recommend/request a topic? Investing. I am convinced of the validity of CF/LENR enough that I would want to start researching investment opportunities. While we might not be at the point where lower-end investors are ready to be in the mix, it would be interesting to get an organized breakdown of the players in the industry and their positions on investor opportunities. It would also be interesting to read (what I’m sure would be spirited) commentary on the subject.

    • GreenWin

      Try the Forums section. Though there is nothing to invest in unless shorting fission/fossil is considered investing.

      • Peter_Roe

        Plumbing fittings manufacturers?

        • GreenWin

          I suppose yes. News that Siemens AG is selling off its last solar divisions suggest they may be making a strategic play. Siemens stock has gone from 68 to 80 in past 4 months. 2013 SIEGn.DE calls? Electrician guilds? AR’s life insurance company?

    • Jim

      Re investing: how about setting up an InTrade or BetFair wager? I’ve been trying to think of a yes/no proposition, something like: “A commercial LENR product will be offered by 2015”, or “Science magazine will publish a validation of LENR by 2014”. Kind of tricky, huhn? However, there could be several such. The more informed might get some good early odds.

  • Giuliano Bettini

    I remember
    (thanks to Loop on October 20).
    Here is about ecat in Popular Science
    Pages 97 and 98.

  • andreiko

    De stirling engine, volledig ontwikkeld met generator,wacht met ongeduld op de e-cat.

    PS/You can translate from Dutch.

    • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

      Or maybe you could translate from Dutch to English and post the results? Then nobody needs to translate anything.

    • Daniel M. Basso

      E eu acho que tu tinhas que pegar um e-cat e enfiar no cu.

      PS/You can translate from Portuguese. Or I could have written in English and spare everybody’s time. Restricting your audience is up to you.

      • Adam Lepczak

        Witam serdecznie,
        Mam w dupie wszystkie inne jezyki. Piszmy po polsku…
        PS/You can translate from Polish.

        • HeS


        • Voodoo

          Ja jestem z Morawy i rozumiem bardzo dobrze po Polski.

  • georgehants

    Probably silly, but I thought it was professional science journals that where supposed to inform their colleagues of scientific breakthroughs.
    O’dear, but of course Cold Fusion has not been peer reviewed by the same incompetents who peer reviewed and tried to copy P&F’s results.
    23 years and counting.

    • GreenWin

      George, “professional science journals” are going the way of the dinosaur due to open access – as you have pointed out. They effed themselves on cold fusion, since we have so many examples of blatant censorship. The fact at least 4 Nobel laureates have been prevented from publishing findings on the subject, is the evidence.

      These bungling amateur “articles” in buff-books like Discover, Forbes, and PopSci, confirm PTB approach to rewrite history. But the real history will out… and the abundance intended for human beings, will arrive. All good in the end.

      • LilyLover

        Well said.

    • LilyLover

      No, no, no. You got that wrong. The kids in the Pirelli High school are supposed to awaken us, the people. Then, when enough people know it already, we are supposed to awaken/inform/educate the “leading-edge” scientist. THEN, they are supposed to publish something in the peer-evuewd publications, lest they appear more than 5 years behind the kids.

      You seem to want to think of them as harbingers of the future. But as GW shows… they are history manipulators.

  • Stringbustr

    Yes, I said something about the “Popular Science” article a few days ago on this site.
    A little more recognition in a very popular magazine, is just what’s needed.

  • daniel maris

    Well those parts are pretty encouraging I think.

  • Dennis Drumheller

    The long wait will soon be over… the spark will arrive! A new age will begin.

    • Barry

      Well said. Let’s hope.

    • GreenWin

      Dennis, with greater fanfare than discovery of the triceratops!