MFMP Update on Calibration Testing

A new video has been posted by the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Fund in which one of the MFMP’s facilitators, Tyler van Houwelingen, visits the Hunt Utilities Group’s lab in Minnesota where one of the Celani replication cells is being built. It’s interesting to listen to Tyler talk about how he was invited to go to Korea to speak at the ICCF-17 conference. I think E-Cat World was the site that brought his slide show to the attention of the world!

In the video the HUG workers talk about their progress in building the Celani cell. At the moment they are in the calibration process, in preparation for running the experiment using wire prepared and sent by Francesco Celani.

  • Piantelli’s patent application from April 2011 is now public (thanks to Vortex for finding it).

    Piantelli says that the primary reaction emits ~6 MeV protons. Much of the patent deals with how to obtain additional energy from the protons by secondary reactions with lithium or boron. He also talks about the possibility of using sliding mechanisms to control access of the proton flux to lithium or boron containing walls and in that way to have another control knob of the device.

    In my opinion, the existence of high energy emitted protons would be consistent with ternary primary reaction p+p+Ni->Cu+p, although Piantelli’s own explanation seems to be different and mysterious to me. Perhaps the thing that penetrates Ni nucleus is not H- ion as Piantelli says, but rather some strange compact version of H2 molecule or even H2- ion. That could enable a ternary reactioni and explain the proton emission.

    This long and detailed patent also contains lots of other potentially relevant metallurgical details on how to build a reactor.

    • Peter_Roe

      Ah – so the boron (borax or boracic acid as I recall) mentioned in Rossi’s patent application may actually be a part of the heat production system in an e-cat, not neutron shielding.

      Pekka, I don’t recall coming across your suggestion that an H2 ion could be the ‘active’ form of hydrogen before. I assume that would need to be p+p+e, with one electron shared between two protons at ground state / 2 as ‘seen’ from each proton? Or did you have some other ‘entity’ in mind?

      • I was thinking of p+p+e+e+e (negative diatomic molecule H2-). Although admittedly such an entity would be somewhat unusual, given that electrons usually tend to pair themselves rather than form triples.

        In any case, I’m reasoning in the following way. If the observation is that 6.7 MeV protons are emitted, it suggests p+p+X->Y+p, where e.g. X=Ni, Y=Cu. That would also explain the absence of hard gammas since two daughter nuclei have enough kinematic degrees of freedom to absorb the energy and momentum without a need for gamma generation. (There could also be more protons such as p+p+p+X->Y+p+p.) The simplest way to get p+p+X would be to somehow transport a H2 molecule into the nucleus. If the molecule also has negative charge (H2-) then the Coulomb force helps. The charge could also be fractional, and even an uncharged H2 molecule would get attracted by polarisation. Of course, the hard part is to explain how the diatomic molecule isn’t torn apart long before reaching the nucleus by tidal forces created by the inhomogeneous electric field of the nucleus. But maybe it forms some kind of temporary closed orbit bound state around the nucleus which somehow prevents that from occurring(?). Or maybe the H2 molecules wander chaotically among the metal nuclei, are usually torn apart and ejected out, but then reassemble and try again…

        In any case, the main conclusion that I draw from this Piantelli patent is that he seems to have some observational evidence that the “NAE” emits high energy protons. It this could be taken as an observational fact, it would be very significant.

        • Peter_Roe

          Thanks – a fascinating idea! H2- is a difficult concept in ‘free’ surroundings, but who knows what may become possible within the electron ‘cloud’ inside a metal matrix. Perhaps some electrochemical catalyst is involved that requires input of thermal energy to drive the temporary attachment of the extra electron, as the process would probably be endothermic. Perhaps you should work this concept up to a theoretical paper to trump W-L!

          I guess we await more data, especially proton emission and a before/after analysis of the substrate.

          • Ivone Martin FitzGerald

            Peter, would a Bose – Einstein condensate, even at high temperatures play a role, as in the Yeong theory? Dismissing W-L of course.

            • Peter_Roe

              You’re asking the wrong person I’m afraid, Ivone – I’m a retired microbiologist and sometime engineer! Condensed matter (but see Mark’s post below), phonons, fusion – muon moderated or involving camouflaged protons, quantum tunneling, hydrinos – take your pick (but dismissing W-L of course!) More clues are needed.

            • I second Peter in that I think the most promising appraoch is the experimental approach for now. Given a working reactor which can be studied freely, I think a lot of progress could be made. For example, measuring the energetic proton spectrum would reveal a lot, as well as measuring its absolute intensity compared to thermal energy liberated. That could tell if the protons are a primary or secondary phenomenon.

      • artefact

        In earlyer Rossi days he said, that it does not work without the boron shielding.
        That fits with Piantellis patent…

    • Alan DeAngelis

      This is about 6 MeV
      p+p+Ni(62)>Cu(63)+p 6.1 MeV

  • Tangled Connections

    The way the MFMP is conducting this research is a breath of fresh air. The experiment in itself is well planned with excellent controls, but beyond this what I find really exciting is the flow of creative ideas betwen the team and visitors to their site. This is only possible due to their near real time reporting of results in an open forum format and of course the open minds of those involved. The ideas generated from this synergy will in the short term lead to a very comprehensive suite of experiments that will hopefully verify the LENR effect and in the longer term probably lead to as yet unimagined pathways for improving the process. I see only good things coming from this unique collaboration. Perhaps alongside the creation of a ‘New Fire’ we will see the creation of a ‘New Science’ based on the principles of transparency and co-operation.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Just thought this might be interesting. In a paper from 1972: Chemisorption and catalysis of hydrogen on polycrystalline wires of tungsten and nickel they mention “…wires cleaned by a process of successive treatments with oxygen and hydrogen to remove carbon…”

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Celani heats the wire in air (i.e. oxygen) so I assume this would also be a way of removing carbon.

      • Peter_Roe

        Very interesting find, Alan. Tungsten seems to figure in several CF systems, and it could be very relevant.

  • GreenWin

    The good news about LENR continues to filter into the public mind via some offbeat venues. NBC/Universal a unit of Cablevision Inc. a major media conglomerate in the USA, has a little known division called NBC Games. NBC Games produced a series of bookshelf games in cooperation with Hasbro Toys some years back. One of their online titles is called “World of Wall Street” – a business simulation game tracking stocks and corporate hegemony.

    Today, a website focused on “World of Wall Street” introduced an article called “Possible Global Game-Changer: Cold Fusion Is Not Just For Bozos Anymore.”

    Ahem, boss, cold fusion was never for Bozos. But many have become as much, by impeding its development.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      By the “weak interaction theories” I’m assuming that Dennis Bushnell is referring to Widom-Larsen Theory. Maybe I missed something in their explanation of their theory but there’s something I don’t understand about Widom-Larsen Theory. According to W-L Theory a deuteron can capture a heavy electron (a lepton) to become two neutrons and a neutrino.

      D + e > 2n + neutrino

      So why doesn’t a deuteron capture a muon (a lepton) to become two neutrons and a neutrino in muon catalyzed fusion? It would be an exothermic reaction (if I did this correctly).
      Energy equivalences of rest masses of:
      Deuteron: 1875.61279 MeV
      Muon: 105.65837 MeV
      Neutron: 939.56563 MeV
      D + muon > 2n + neutrino 102.14 MeV
      So why wouldn’t a heavy electron just catalyze the fusion of deuterons like a muon does (as Fleischmann and Pons proposed) instead of reacting with a deuteron to become neutrons?

      • Ivone Martin FitzGerald

        Your objections are perfectly valid. There is no evidence for neutrinos escaping from a LENR reaction. Secondly heavy electrons or muons only exist for a short time, and are unlikely to be generated in the reaction anyway. Excluding these, we are I believe left with the Bose-Einstein Condensate Fusion theory proposed by Yeong E. Kim of Purdue University. It may not pan out but it takes note of Rossi’s success, whereas the Widom – Larsen theory is associated with those who deride Rossi.

        • Mark

          Both theories, Widom-Larsen and Kim,
          start with the presence of Bose-Einstein condensate.
          This condensate is a very unusual state
          of matter, experimentally observed only in
          low-temperature gases and liquids.
          The condensate is a collectively
          oscillating huge collection of bosons
          sharing the common wave function.
          Both theories above assume formation/existence
          of collectively oscillating patches of
          bosons (protons or deuterons) on surfaces
          of fully loaded metallic hydrides under
          Unfortunately, both authors don’t
          get into the details of creation and
          stability of such condensate.
          After such condensate is created, both
          theories can be applied to explain LENR.
          I would really appreciate any reference
          to a good explanation how such condensate
          can be created and supported, i.e. energy
          necessary to combine millions of protons
          into one aggregate entity at the room
          temperature, mechanism of formation.
          Thanks in advance !

          • Alan DeAngelis

            Interesting, Celani sees a drop in resistance as the reaction takes place. Perhaps the boson pair formation of protons (a 2+ hole) induces a corresponding boson pair formation of electrons (2-) in the conduction band (or vice versa).

            • Ivone Martin FitzGerald

              Above room temperature macro quantum mechanics? Which this is. Wow.

              • Mark

                Y. E. Kim gave his talk on Cryogenic Ignition of Deuteron Fusion in Micro/Nano-Scale Metal Particles which described a Bose-Einstein Condensate Nuclear Fusion theory for cold fusion and suggested experiments to test his hypothesis.

                Professor Kim originally rejected the claims of cold fusion, but his interest was re-kindled by the depth of experimental research over the years, as well as a Defense Analysis Report that supported the claims of low-energy nuclear reaction LENR scientists. He made a point to say that his explanation of LENR is based upon conventional physics and no new physics is required.

                His work was motivated by the 1929 discovery by A. Coehn showing that protons move through the metal as an ion. This fact leads to many scenarios, one of which is high-density deuterons forming as a Bose-Einstein Condensate BEC. He acknowledges that BEC’s are known to only form at very low temperatures saying, “We will see if that can happen in a metal as well.”

                If a Bose-Einstein Condensate BEC can form inside the metallic lattice at room temperature, then Professor Kim describes how LENR could be modeled using standard physics thereafter. He starts with Schrodinger’s Equation and uses traditional quantum theory to get his solutions. (…)

                Professor Kim made a distinction between physics that occurs in free space and physics that occurs in a bound environment like a metallic lattice, citing the experimental fact that high-density deuterons can form clusters in materials. Supposing that the condensate can form, then all of the deuterons will go into ground state.

                “If that state happens, it’s a coherent one-state, they behave like one object. That’s a big difference from free space, that you can form this sort of condensate.”

                His theory can explain many of the experimental observations as well as the three miracles of cold fusion, referring to the failure of experimental results to meet the expectations of conventional hot fusion theories cited by John Huizenga in his derisive and obsolete work Cold Fusion: Scientific Fiasco of the Century. The three miracles are listed as

                the lack of strong neutron emissions;
                the mystery of how the Coulomb barrier is penetrated;
                and the lack of strong emission of gamma rays or X-rays.

                For instance, the lack of gamma radiation violates conservation of momentum in free space. But LENR does not occur in free space, and Professor Kim says “If the entire condensate takes up the energy and shares the momentum, and you no longer have to satisfy conservation of momentum, it has to explode like a star.” He notes the micro craters that have been observed from many experiments indicating possible tiny explosions.

                He calls for three experiments to be conducted to test his hypothesis.

                The first experiment would determine whether or not a BEC can indeed form inside a metal at room-temperature. If a BEC forms, you can then measure the velocity distribution of the deuterons with low-energy neutron scattering or high-energy x-ray scattering off the deuterium in the metal, as was done in the atomic case.

                As a second experiment, Professor Kim would like to know if the rate of deuterium diffusion occurs faster than protons when a condensate forms. He expects that to occur.

                Experiments number 1 and number 2, if confirmed, with be a new discovery. The third experiment Professor Kim calls for is a little more ‘practical’.

                He is proposing an experiment for the National Ignition Facility NIF at Livermore where they have been cooling deuterium-tritium spheres. The spheres are targets for lasers in their attempts to induce nuclear fusion. By cooling the spheres, they can get a perfect sphere, which helps the implosion needed to induce fusion for this type of system. Says Profess Kim, “We can take advantage of that cooling system and reaction chamber built already, deuterium nano-particles in a 1-cm sphere, and by applying an appropriate oscillating electromagnetic field at a low-temperature, make them explode.”

                His formula tells him that taking a 1-cm sphere filled with deuterium nano-particles will provide 10^19 reactions per second. Designing the system to be slow-burning can provide power as rocket thrust.

                In order to succeed with these experiments, Professor Kim says, “it could take 5-10 years to come up with a mature system. But if you wanted to do it right away, you could do a Manhattan-type Project and do it in a few years.”

                “If we succeed, this a a potentially revolutionary, disruptive technology for the world.”

                • Ivone Martin FitzGerald

                  Thanks. This looks the most promising theory. But all alternatives must be explored, including W – L, but I believed that is close to being ruled out.

                • Mark

                  The attempts to industrialize
                  LENR without a solid theoretical base looks like
                  a circumnavigation without a map. Let’s keep our fingers
                  crossed that one of them,
                  Rossi, Defkalion, Bruilloin,
                  will come with a real deal.

                • Alan DeAngelis

                  Thanks again Mark for your concise explanation of Prof. Kim’s theory. And if the d-d experiment works there may be a slim chance that an experiment using light hydrogen might work (if the hydrogen freezes to become a metal).
                  p+p+p>d+p+ positron 0.42 MeV

          • GreenWin

            Professor Kim and others work hard to stick with conventional physics to explain a clearly unconventional reaction. This is not entirely logical. A BEC is explained conventionally as acting not like a clump of discreet particles – but like one large “particle” or more concisely – a wave. In fact, I suspect we will learn that all matter in conditions such as these, can be viewed as wave functions.

            This greatly simplifies the reaction equations and raises the prospect of H1 atoms driven to ground state AND below (i.e. FRACTIONAL ground n/137 – yielding energy and a neutron-like particle or “cold neutron” ala W-L theory.)

    • robyn wyrick

      I saw this article too, and was interested to see the bulleted item:

      “Rossi claims to now be working with Siemens. In Sept 2011, Siemens sold its investments in nuclear fission energy and is currently selling all its solar assets. In July 2012 it was announced that Siemens is purchasing and Italian firm, Ansaldo Energia, who engages in producing and installing thermoelectric power plants for government, independent power producers & industrial clients in Italy. Ansaldo staff attended Rossi’s demo in 2011.”

      • GreenWin


        Ansaldo Energia sent its CEO’s top science adviser to the NI Week convention to discuss support of LENR. The Naval Post Graduate School has a well known scientist (Dr. Melich) sitting on Andrea Rossi’s Board of Advisers. Ansaldo is the subject of a large takeover bid from Siemens AG. The bid is opposed by a large American shareholding company.

        Only the very weak of mind or paid disinfo guys would not connect a few dots here.

  • Frank, could you ask Rossi these questions. I do net get any answers when I mail him directly.
    1. How many country licensees have contracts for the 1 MW cat?
    2. Which countries have a rep. by now?
    3. Please. list the names, websites etc. of these reps.
    4. Specifically for me, who are the reps. for Spain and The Netherlands?

    • AB

      The drop in resistivity predicts excessive heat production.

      • Ged

        So far Celani’s work is replicating beautifully. This is getting even more exciting!

        • Ivone Martin FitzGerald

          Go! Go! Go!

        • freethinker


          this is an amazing event, no doubt. To see that impedance raw data in that graph … its something else.

    • GoLENRGo

      More posts please! This is history in the making! Good reason to stay at home on a Saturday night. 🙂

    • GreenWin

      Bob, your hit counter indicates the whole LENR community is watching this unfold. Nice to have a captive audience.

      • It is a good day for the team. Thanks for all your support. We are doing what we can.

        We hope that the LENR community will one day = the world population, where everyone is touched by its potential benefits. We hope that when we launch the Kickstarter for the major world wide in yer face replications of gen 2 cells, we have a good foundation for the critical broader effort.

        We want what is needed – the New Fire… and whilst hopeful of early success – we are not afraid of failure on the journey to enlightenment.

        Thank you all for making this enjoyable for us. You are our heroes.

    • clovis

      HI, BOB G
      There is one thing I read about and would like you to try,
      When you get the device up and running for some time, I was wondering if you could set a house plant, and maybe a small bird close in order to see if hydreno or neutrino,are strong enough to effect them, should not be too much trouble, and be very careful with security, all kind of goof balls out there that might try an cause damage to this great project.

      • Hi Clovis,

        An interesting suggestion, thankyou, but at this sensitive time, we are not sure of the merits of performing experiments on live animals in a public near real-time experimental scenario!

        • Ivone Martin FitzGerald

          Fortunately, neutrinos are indetectable, and hydrinos are a commercial fiction of Randell Mills, whose physics are bogus. I think you are referring to neutrinos?

          • Ivone Martin FitzGerald

            Sorry, free flying neutrons, which are deadly.

  • Lemuel

    Rochester University, New York, funded by U.S DoE discover the Nickel Catalyst and its benefits…… I wonder where they got that idea?

    This system was so robust that it kept producing hydrogen until the source of electrons was removed after two weeks.
    “Presumably, it could continue even longer, but we ran out of patience!”

    • GreenWin

      Cool but they’re using cadmium selenide nanocrystals to free electrons for the Ni to make H. Funny to read their speculation:

      “The work advances what is sometimes considered the “Holy Grail” of energy science — efficiently using sunlight to provide clean, carbon-free energy for vehicles and anything that requires electricity.”

      They are about… 23 years too late. 🙂

  • georgehants

    As it has become a little quiet I will just put up an example of conformative irrational thinking that slips past many people.
    The human mind has an almost miraculous ability to learn languages to communicate, it is not so good at learning by rote to read and write.
    Historically and in fact, spelling is determined by an arbitrary process and continued at any time only by convention, it changes constantly as time goes by.
    It is clear to anybody who gives a little thought to the subject that only spelling phonetically makes sense, as any other way leads to an unnatural distortion of the natural abilities possessed by all.
    Children learn to fear spelling and writing because it is in many instances unnatural and distorted from our inbuilt sense of logic.
    It may be time to change things.
    If u c wot I meen, peple left 2 ther own way on the fax format naturaly find the best speling 4 all wurds.

    • [th]eö aar lä[ng]widsiis weö juu rait wan tu wan äs juu pronauns [th]ö wööds

      • georgehants

        Ha.Seppo I will assume that you are saying something very important and I agree all writing is simply a code that should be as simple as possible, but I do not have the “key” to decipher your reply.
        Alan Turing may have helped me, if he had not been driven to suicide by the administration.

        • freethinker


          [th]eö aar lä[ng]widsiis weö juu rait wan tu wan äs juu pronauns [th]ö wööds

          is :
          There are languages where you write 1 to 1 as you pronounce the words.

          So he is writing in phonetic language.

          • georgehants

            freethinker, thank you, they sound Wonderful and O so sensible.
            Which languages are these please and I may dump silly English, that is so irrational and problematic that most people need a spell-checker because of our fear of “getting it wrong” when it is the spelling that is wrong in the first place not the speller, who sensibly will just follow logical phonetics.
            Just another case like Cold Fusion of logic being ousted by ridiculous Dogmatic convention.

            • gp


            • Alan DeAngelis

              I don’t know any Korean but I’ve heard it’s the most phonetically logical language there is. It doesn’t have the ambiguities that English has (like eight different ways to pronounce OUGH). So maybe we could write English words with Korean letters (Wow, I’m really going senile).

            • guga

              German, especially if spoken by Austrians (I don´t mean dialects).

            • daniel maris


              Some of your comments are very sensible and some are very stupid.

              If you live in a country like the UK which has several very distinct dialects plus millions of newcomers with their own take on English, which one are you going to transcribe phonetically?

              Will you use a Geordie (Jow-ah-dee) pronunciation for the word Geordie or an Upmarket Chelsea one (Chor-dee).

              You’ve obviously been reading too much George Bernard Shaw who was a spelling reform maniac as well.

              Incidentally, I very much doubt Sicilian Italian matches Swiss Italian.

              The most homogenous language in Europe, surprisingly is supposed to be Portugese. It’s odd because Portugal is intersected by many rivers and ranges of hills, but apparently maritime communication kept the dialects more or less in the same frame of pronunciation.

              • georgehants

                daniel, thank you, you have used the words stupid for me and maniac for George Bernard Shaw.
                I think until you learn to discuss topics with a little more courtesy and respect, instead of childishly like many arrogant self-important scientists who disagree with their colleagues, I will not bother to answer your quite reasonable points, other than to say, Shaw rightfully was considered a very able man.

                • charlie tapp

                  why are you guys discussing this on an lenr websight its hard enough to find good info on here let alon to have to keep scrolling past this crap

                • georgehants

                  Well charlie I certainly look forward to you putting up some “good info” for us to discuss.

                • charlie tapp

                  sorry that came out all wrong what i mean is i want to here all of you guys discuss things you may have expieremented with so we as backyard inventors can figure this thing out it does not appear to be that complicated

            • ivan_ceav

              Look for languages where kids do not have to learn spelling, like Italian, Spanish or Portuguese.

    • Omega Z


      OT to respond to george…
      You may be interested to know that years ago, a couple people designed a phonetic based english. It contained 32 or 36 letters in the alphabet??? This covered the entire 50 plus phonetic sounds by singular characters or joining of 2. They even devised a fix for the problems like to, too, two. It was proposed as a Universal language.

      That’s when the Experts stepped in & tweaked it to present to the UN as a World Language. Tweaked was a joke. Ended up with a larger alphabet then there was phonetic sounds & didn’t even resolve the to many to’s problem of english. I suspect this tweaking was intentional to derail it.

      The Pro’s of phonetics would be, once you learn the alphabet, learning to read & write would be very simplistic leaving more educational efforts in learning word definition. It would lead to advanced learning at a faster pace in all other fields. Science, Math, Etc.

      Pro, It’s the largest most defined language in the world with more then half/million words & growing by thousands of new words every year.

      Con’s, Many words have little or no correlation to phonetics anymore. Reasons for this, but that’s another topic.(BS) Then there’s the multiwords problems(to’s).

      I’ve actually talked to many immigrants/New Citizens who say they love it because it’s so diverse. A specific word for everything. They don’t like the conventions. Multi-words & spellings that make no rhyme nor reason. Hard to learn.

      Some have accused proponents of phonetic english as biased. An unfair advantage for those of the English speaking language. I Beg To Differ. I think it would be much harder for english speakers to conform Because it is so similar. I believe it would be easier for english speaking people to learn a totally new language then to conform to something so similar.

      Trivia Question: Do you know why G.B. English is different for U.S. English?? If your from G.B you may be more aware. Most U.S. citizens don’t have a clue.

      • georgehants

        Omega, A Wonderful analysis of the subject.
        OT. but interesting while we wait for Cold Fusion news that these days seems to come almost every day.
        My guess about US English is that the early founders where mainly working class who’s spelling was not so good, so they tended to write phonetically, also many other Nationalities that where learning a form of pigeon English.

        • Omega Z


          Not long ago, I thought along those lines. That & language has a tendency to mutate over time when populations are separated. (Regional accents in the U.S.) I was also of the Opinion that U.S. English changed the most. In the U.S., the primary changes was in the spelling of words due to people such as Webster & most was intentional to differentiate from England.

          The Main Primary Change came in Great Britain. The Elite/hierarchy changed the way they spoke to differentiate themselves from the Commons. The Queens English I believe it’s called. Overtime the commons mimicked them to close the Gap.

          Prior to this, We all spoke the same English. Whats known as U.S. style today. Also what I would call a British accent isn’t accurate. It’s more to due with pronunciation. What most U.S. citizens call a New York Accent is a touch of Queens English influence. This is trivial knowledge, but all knowledge has some value.

          • georgehants

            Omega, thanks again, as you say all knowledge is important but the impact of a subject today is I think what counts most and if wrong should be changed.
            As you say, all spelling is in its way arbitrary and has arisen from “accidents” of history or a lexicographer getting drunk and deciding that there should be a new word spelt this or that way.
            Or scientists dreaming up words like Bifurcation or Epistemology so they can sound like important people, above the common rabble who are not as clever as us.
            My worry is just children, who can be put back by a fear of spelling that would be much alleviated by phonetic writing and reading.

  • Barry

    It’s interesting that Tyler said within days of putting his report on the web he got a call from the Pentagon.

    Must be great for these guys to realise they are taking an active part in CF collective that will drastically change the world. More power to them.

    • daniel maris

      I hadn’t heard that. Kind of gives the lie to those hypersceptics who were knocking Tyler as naive.

      • It was certainly an interesting few weeks leading up to and through Korea ICCF17 – life altering for me. Being part of MFMP is a thrill, the team is very skilled and highly motivated to affect real change/progress in LENR. We will succeed for Martin!

        Make sure to spread word and donate if you can, thanks,

        • Yes we can !
          Yes we will !


        • Omega Z


          Can you give us the name of the Chief of staff that called you from the Pentagon.

  • Jorge

    Sorry for my un-educated question, since I’m not a physicist or a Chemist. That said here goes:
    Why does it take so much time and preparation for this replication ? On ICC-17 Celani seemed to only need a small amount of apparatus in order to set-up the demo. And the important thing, the wires, he provided already.


    • Hydrogen is the smallest molecule known to man, making it extremely hard to contain, especially at positive pressures with respect to atmosphere. We were building a reactor from scratch – from video and photo evidence this takes time – there is nothing to buy off the shelf – but maybe there will be some day 😉

      Our reactor is designed to withstand higher temperatures – as you go up the temperature scale, ways of sealing a glass tube become more challenging as does the choice of other components and the glass itself.

      We have to perform exhaustive calibration with inactive and Celani wire under a range of gasses before loading the wire with Hydrogen to perform an “active” Celani wire run. If we did not do this carefully – we would have nothing to compare results to. We need the calibration control runs to help us establish if we are seeing an effect.

      • charlie tapp

        i have done some research on all of this and i am always trying different things, i have read that heating elements in toasters are a type of nickel coated wire, and small heating elements like mabee a fish aquarium heater have quite a bit of nickel plus you already have your glass tube. has anyone tryed any kind of home expierements with this stuff, or can anyone send me to a thread were people are actualy building reactors?

        • Jim

          MFMP has a fairly detailed description of their reactor, if you look around on their site.

          has a reactor design, and good references.

          I have a lot of respect for MFPMs conservative approach in all of engineering, measurement, calibration and test design. Keep in mind that other experimenters have run into exploding hydrogen and melting components.

          More info a lenr-canr dot org.

          • charlie tapp

            thanks for the warning. i found that out already while messing with hoh reactor i made out of stainless pipes inner and outer tubes welded in a circle with dielectric inbetween inside 4 inch pvc tube caped on both ends. i connected the power via stainless bolts with rubber washers. 12 volts battery 5 amps i could never figure out why my bolts were melting into the pvc no wire damage or anything like a shortcircit. i quit messing with it then happened to come across this annomolous heat thing i thought mabee because stainless has a little nickel on it mabee lenr was the culprit and the more i read about it the more i am thinking this? i was running about 10 psi on it mabee when it was shut off the residule hydrogen on the outer tubes was being forced back into the nickel parts of the stainless tube. any thoughts on this. the wire connecting it was 14 gauge and there was no sign of damage

      • NJT

        Bob Greenyer,

        You folks are using a very efficient ‘scientific method’ and approach to this LENR experiment.

        Keep up the good work as many here and around the world are pulling for you and a successful conclusion to this first experiment.

        Everyone should visit your excellent website which shows to the world your progress and contribute if you can. This experiment and replication may help to save our world from ourselves!

        Good luck and thank you for all that you are doing…


    • Peter_Roe

      I think the idea is to thoroughly document the performance of the kit with inert gases, no wires etc, before proceeding to a ‘live’ run. If they didn’t do this, the air will be filled with shrieks from the maryyugos, claiming ‘instrument error’. If excess heat is detected in any degree, the shills will have to fall back on “It’s possible, but it’s not worth doing” (AC Clarke’s second law of revolutionary ideas)

      Edit: I see Bob Greenyer got there first!

      • AB

        If they didn’t do this, the air will be filled with shrieks from the maryyugos, claiming ‘instrument error’.

        Unfortunately I suspect that in this regard good calibration work will only result in maryyugos claiming falsification of data instead. Afterall the subconscious premise of the pseudoskeptic is that the effect cannot be real.

        • And that is why the MFMP plan is constructed as it is.

          We prove to ourselves that we can, from scratch, replicate / extend Celani’s results. This may involve some setbacks – but if we stopped at the first hurdle we would have done nothing after the first problem. For our needs – we just need to be satisfied ourselves that the effect is achievable by us in our equipment (using his wires).

          Once we have showed we can make reactors and supply plug and play experiments. We then take it to the most respected independent institutions on a trans-national basis. They get a reactor for FREE (assuming there are enough people willing to take part in supporting the Kickstarter) – so no commercial incentive to prove their investment was worthwhile.

          They are first required to perform the standardised tests – live publishing data and web stream. That gives us independent exact replication. Then they will be able to let rip and do anything they like – and be encouraged to share results.

          This set-up is only run with resistive heating. But many New Fire configurations use power pulses, resonant RF, Laser stimulation etc – this along with thermal insulation are just some of the ways that the experiment can be extended by independent third parties.

          • AB

            I just hope you won’t give reactors to groups whose funding and careers are tied to competing technologies (namely hot fusion).

            • People will vote from a list of hosting sites nominated by respected parties. We will published a list soon of the nominations we have to date, you will like them.

          • charlie tapp

            bob on your device when loading the h what psi are you at? and your resistive heating are you running current through the celani wire or heating up the inside of the reactor with seperate element? would containing the h inside the glass be easier if it were submerged in a tank of h2o under high presure so that the water molocules could help push on the h and keep them contained inside or mabee a spinning glass tube so the h cannot find the holes to get out just some dumb ideas i have

            • Look at the blog – loading of H2 has commenced.

          • ivan_ceav

            Bob, Why a control device is not used to compare the active device?
            I understand the current calibrations are acting like a control device, but credibility could be boosted by running simultaneously a twin passive cell at the side of the active one.

            • Each cell is sort of a control as you have identified. So will be the EU cell. At this stage in the MFMP plan – we are aiming to prove we can do the replication repeatedly and also that we can distribute the experiments legally and with success.

              The multiple international replication phase will involve much longer runs and each participant will be effectively an independent control for the rest of the replication effort. We have been guided that 3 is the minimum for assured credibility – and so we want to do a minimum of 5.

  • buffalo

    these guys might want to try many variations of constintan alloy if this experiment is success.i would even suggest a high surface are nichrome(Ni80/Cr20) may be capable of lenr activity

    • Peter_Roe

      Worth a try, but Celani thinks that it is the copper content of Isotan/Constantin that catalyses ionisation of H2 to make H+ more available to the reaction.

      That’s the beauty of Celani’s apparatus – it makes it possible to test many possible substrate/treatment combinations quickly and relatively inexpensively.

      • Peter_Roe

        I’m not sure why the word ‘available’ has acquired an ad link. Nowt to do with me, squire.

      • buffalo

        intresting that u should say that pete.the affinity for hydrogen drasticly reduces down the group copper,silver,gold respectively.its interesting to note that rossi has mentioned that copper can substitute nickel altogether in his patents.

  • Martin

    Too bad nobody knows how Celanis’s wire was treated. This information would turn the replication into a scientific experiment.

    • robiD

      This is not correct. There is a patent:
      not sure if it’s the state of the art about the procedure, but anyway here there are a lot of informations.

    • Marco Montuori

      No, it is not correct. It is not important to know the treatment of the wire for the replication and success of the reaction. If the replication of the strange effect from normal to NTC of the wire is confirmed and the excess heat too, it will be the first worldwide confirmed and publicly recognized LENR experiment.

      • right.
        Whatever is the wire, even kryptonite or adamantium, if it works it is a revolution.

        Rejecting the results because the treatment are unknown, will be a sign of dishonesty. I expect it.

      • robiD

        Don’t be afraid, skeptics are already saying that even if the measured temperature will be greater, this is not sufficient because that is a calorimetry made by “spot temperature”.
        So the guys at MFMP will have to measure the temperature in each point of the glass in order to be sure that the heat is being generate everywhere and not only in the exact point where they put the thermocouples (they also have a thermo-camera but I guess it will not be enough for many skeptics).
        After that, they would probably say that the temperature increases because of the presence of the metallic plane under the cell that accumulate heat irradiated by the cell, and so on…
        Get ready, there will be a very long discussion, at the end of which … skeptics will stay skeptics. An old movie 😉

        • GreenWin

          At some point you need to forget the disability of certain skeptics who follow a political agenda. They do not matter. They have little or no influence. And those with open minds will not soberly refute the proofs.

          There will be no need to publish these results in “prestigious” journals, as the advent of LENR (without their publishing) has proven them undeserving of said prestige.

        • At this stage in the MFMP plan – we do not expect to convince skeptics, we are only aiming to convince ourselves that we can do what is necessary to take this global and leverage the most respected bodies to do what ever is needed to settle the argument once and for all.

          There is much work to do, thankyou sincerely to all those rooting for us, you inspire us to go the extra mile / km (yes that is for you Mathieu)

    • Peter_Roe

      Obviously the MFMP study already is a scientific experiment, and is being conducted using best practice in the field. I think we can be reasonably confident that the results produced by the team will meet all recognised scientific criteria.

      The information given in the patent referenced by RobiD at Example 2 should be sufficient to allow someone to replicate the wire treatment process once the Celani samples have been tested. There is also further information in the PDF released by Celani after NI Week.

      It’s interesting that in Example 1, Celani describes the surface treatment of a nickel sheet – a much better candidate for a reactor unit than wire I would think.

      • Unless the wire is woven into mesh to create a large surface area. We discussed this about 3-4 weeks ago.

        • Peter_Roe

          The difficulty would be in extracting heat from such a mesh, other than by radiation, and of heating it by any means other than electrical current which would necessarily be uneven.

          A solid sheet would allow the construction of tubular ‘reactors’ with the inner surface finned or otherwise structured for maximum surface area, and treated as required to make it active. The tube would of course be sealed at the ends to contain a hydrogen atmosphere (possibly from a light metal hydride) and could be heated from outside by any means including a gas flame. Once ‘running’, heat could be extracted by a gaseous coolant flowing externally, or from liquid coolant tubes running through the interior.

    • buffalo

      if the celani patent procedure works then many other, simpler procedures will work for wire treatments.the goal is to get the wire surface area maximized and at same time melt resistant.many different elemental wires may work besides constintan eg palladium wire or tungsten wire etc

      • Peter_Roe

        Agreed – I doubt it is particularly critical, and in any case Celani’s process may not be the best possible. Various treatments can be tested in Celani’s apparatus, and the best process can then be applied to other configurations, such as the inside of an externally-heated nickel or nickel plated tube reactor.

        • Ivone Martin FitzGerald

          Now that’s what I call science!

          • Peter_Roe

            Edison would be in his element!

            • GreenWin

              In this case… nickel.

        • clovis

          Hi, pete,
          I was wondering, why the celani wire was so tinny
          Is it because of the overall size of the unit.
          IT just seems the bigger the wire the more surface it would have, so is it scaled to the unit. or for power you want to produce.

          • Peter_Roe

            The apparatus as it stands is not suited for power production, although it can obviously be used for testing of candidate wires of various kinds. For power production some other configuration will be needed – perhaps something like the tubular reactor I’ve suggested above.

  • Omega Z


    I know it would be unethical to give any details, but can you confirm high profile visits to this site. Just Curious

    • Peter_Roe

      That would be interesting!

    • Peter_Roe

      It would be interesting to know whether any of the various tro11s who seem to post here in occasional gaggles share IP addresses too.

      • captain

        Franck, no pity for trolls, get rid of them with no regret.

        • Peter_Roe

          With one exception the air seems clear today, so I imagine that a certain amount of ‘filtering’ may be taking place behind the scenes.

          • admin

            I do have some filtering in place, to try and keep things clean. That’s the reason why certain posts get caught up in moderation sometimes.

            As far as identifying high profile visits, I am ashamed to say that I am not sure how to identify those. I use Google Analytics to look at my stats.

            • Jarvis Cooper

              Frank, it would be interesting to know how big the E-Cat World community is now. How many visitors do you get? And then compare that to when CF goes main stream.

              • admin

                Ok Jarvis, good idea. I will put together some data and make a separate post about it.

                • Jarvis Cooper

                  Thank you! I’m grateful for all you do for this community.

              • It boggles the mind thinking about potential web stats for next year if a few more pieces of the puzzle fall into place… (worldwide replication of Celani’s reactor, Rossi’s university report, etc.).

            • captain

              Thank U Frank for your commitment.

              • Blanco69

                I’d like to second that. I’ve gone from full on positive to full on Mary Yugo a few times over the past 2 years. Frank has always allowed realistic doubt to be aired as well as enthusiastic hope. Bravo Sir!

              • Barry


    • John-xyz

      You can’t identify people by their IP address. That’s because addresses can change and also there is no central database of people’s IP addresses.

      • Peter_Roe

        No, it’s not possible to identify individuals, but if a number of people are working from the same location, temporary IPs will be common to the group at any given time. So if (just for example) a wave of negative comments are posted here, and the posters are the same person with different IDs, or several people who are working through the same domain, it will be easy to see this from the site logs.

        If the domain hosting is not shared then reverse DNS lookup of IPs will often link to a domain, or at least indicate the location of the originator.

  • georgehants

    Just read through all the comments on —Perhaps Still this Month— like to thank everybody for being able to read such interesting and intelligent debate and informative posts.
    It is like a breath of fresh air when compared with the infantile attempts by most dedicated “science” blogs, where it mostly seems to be a contest to see who can speak the most irrational, Dogmatic, closed-minded rubbish.
    This Site is a perfect example of Science at it’s best.
    Debate, Discussion, Information, Evidence, Different views but almost exclusively constructive.
    We wait for the Evidence and do not prejudge.

    • morse

      Well said George !

    • It’s outstanding. Other good blogs don’t have this amount of insightful discussion.

  • Adam Lepczak

    Wow things are progressing very fast. I would imagine that there are a lot of eyes that are dead centered on this and similar projects (and this very site).

    • captain

      I agree.
      And don’t forget Piantelli with his LENR. I’ve talked ’bout that in the previous thread Perhaps Still This Month (waiting for moderation, now: I suppose due to the 2 links posted).
      Practical LERN results speak Italian, mainly.

  • buffalo

    wonder if results will be even better than celani,s.this demo is of great importance,maybe a turning point for many fence-sitters.

  • Ged

    Next week guys, I hope. Looking forward to that hydrogen loading and final replication.

    • Ben

      “final” replication? Don’t you mean “next of many” ??