Rossi Anticipating New Attack

Here’s a comment posted yesterday by Andrea Rossi on the Journal of Nuclear Physics that indicates that he is expecting some kind of new attack to be published about him:

“Somebody will try soon to write another black page of the tale, diffusing false information. But we have solid shoulders, after 30 years of fights.”

It seems from this comment that Rossi has been given some kind of tip-off about some kind of publication coming out — but he doesn’t appear to be unduly worried about it. We have seen that the publication of the 3rd party E-Cat test report has not mollified some of Rossi’s most outspoken critics, and it seems that Rossi is anticipating more of the same — maybe more severe than before.

It doesn’t appear at the moment, however, that criticisms of the recent report have had much of an influence on the opinions of people following the story. If the current E-Cat World poll is any indication of the current opinion of people following the story (anyone can respond), out of over 1400 respondents, 85 per cent of responders have a positive view of the E-Cat since the 3rd party report — with 62 per cent more convinced of the E-Cat’s reality, and 23 per cent remain as positive as ever.

In the end, of course, public opinion won’t matter too much if working E-Cats find their way into the marketplace and work satisfactorily for customers. I think the recent report has gone a long way to soothing the suspense that many observers were feeling about the technology. But now there is another sense of anticipation — who exactly is the US partner? Once that partner is revealed, and if it is an entity with a solid track record, it is going to be even more difficult to conclude that Rossi has been deceiving people about his technology.

  • artefact

    From ColdFusionNow.org

    LENR aircraft gets NASA research grant

    http://coldfusionnow.org/lenr-aircraft-gets-nasa-research-grant-2/

    • Sanjeev

      Finally, mainstreamers catching on.
      This seems to be a major news. Money speaks a lot.

      • daniel maris

        Yes, that’s deserving of a thread in itself. Surely you wouldn’t fund a programme to assess an energy source for aviation unless the energy source actually existed.

        I would say this is v. strong confirmation of the existence of LENR.

        • SteveW

          NASA is back to the LENR powered plane without any discussion of basic research going into producing an LENR power plant. They actually imply they haven’t yet produced any cop over 1. Just imagine what a field day the skeptics would have if Rossi told us in his journal he was working on a LENR powered plane to be produced in his robot factory. Maybe their plan is to stick a bunch of home e-cats in the fuselage when Rossi starts selling them at Home Depot.

          • Roger Bird

            I am going to have to agree with this, and I implied it in my first comment about this. We (the human race) haven’t even got a good, solid handle of LENR+ yet, and NASA wants to start flying around with an LENR+ engine. Hopefully Doug Wells will be doing some useful work with this money rather than drawing pictures of what an LENR+ airplane would look like and figuring out what the new airline schedules will look like if there is no need for refueling. (:->)

            • daniel maris

              But doesn’t that tend to imply that LENR is for real, that NASA had done intensive testing and knows it works, however imperfectly that may be.

              • Roger Bird

                daniel, and you trust governmental bureaucrats? Probably some dude read an article and decided, hmmm, “that looks interesting”.

              • SteveW

                If you were following LENR for over two years like I have, you would realize NASA has been putting these little reports out on LENR for literally years. Nothing ever comes of it- no migration to mainstream media, no NASA press conferences, no government inquiries- nothing. And if the media even starts to get a little excited about the NASA report, they are quick to put out a disclaimer to the original report that basically says LENR is really just a pipe dream like they did a year ago. Santa Clause has a better chance of coming down your chimney than NASA advancing LENR. But, when it finally does come out with no help from the government, I’m sure, then, NASA executives will be all over showing off their LENR powered plane on the MSM. I myself, will not be watching.

        • Roger Bird

          OK, have I so established my LENR-believer credentials that I can be skeptical now and then and not be thought a traitor or a skeptopath?

          This does not sound like some kind of proof to me. The bureaucrats probably did not establish for them selves that LENR was real. They probably took Doug Wells word for it. And good on and for Doug Wells, but this sounds more like bureaucratic incompetence to me. Given that the government does this sort of thing a massive number of times, my own personal Occam prefers this explanation rather than that the bureaucrats who released these funds to Doug Wells were enlightened investigators.

          • freethinker

            Consider this:

            The bureaucrats, relying on specialists and bound by *policy* from above, have decided this. It would imply that the *policy* must have changed …

            We should indeed view this as yet another indication that it is moving the right way.

            • Roger Bird

              Yes, moving in the right direction, but not more proof. “Proof, Proof, we don’t need no stinking Proof.” We, us LENR fans, already have plenty of proof. But the rest of the world could probably use lots more proof.

              • freethinker

                ?

                Roger. Why are you looking for for proof in this news? The news is about that NASA will fund a project utilizing LENR.

                Is that not a good thing? It is things like this that is needed to cement the existence of LENR into the consciousness of people.

                What would be nice if it ended up with some positive angle in some tech magazine och pop sci show for aviation.

                • Roger Bird

                  I am not looking for proof. But I did notice that it is not there; I was pointing out to someone that it was not proof. It will push forward an awareness of LENR.

          • John De Herrera

            Roger Bird, you are NOT “a traitor or skeptopath” Most of us here on e-catworld, are rational and respect the scientific approach (open mind)to new science and technology. At e-cat now, they call us “true believers” and every other ugly word they can think of. But they do not know anything about us. In a very short time, the world will KNOW if the Rossi E-Cats are real or a fraud. ALL CONCLUSIONS, POS OR NEG, ARE PREMATURE. jdh

            • Roger Bird

              No, I was mistaken. It is not the Krivit site. It wouldn’t be called e-cat now. A Krivit site would be called LENR or cold fusion now.

              So I am confused. Why would a site called e-cat now be infested with skeptopaths.

    • Owen

      Whoa. Major news. I’d love to see the behind-the-scenes research that went into evaluating LENR as the top candidate. They almost surely went beyond SPAWAR and other public research, don’ you think?

    • Shane D.

      Looks like Doug Wells, the NASA researcher awarded for the effort is a young guy (2007 graduate), who lists LENR as one of his interests.

      Great. So good to see someone young taking up LENR. I would be real interested in his story and how he took a liking to the field.

      What a difference NASA is over academicia when it comes to cold fusion research. In academicia, an up and comer risks career suicide by even stating their interest in cold fusion, much less research it, whereas NASA encourages and rewards those that do.

      • freethinker

        Shane,

        You touch upon something important. It is great to see NASA bringing forth what must be a young individual (~25 yrs I assume), who has (or will soon have) a fresh master in aeronautical engineering.

        The field, as narrow as it is, is dominated by old fighters, typically who consider they have nothing to loose, but what is needed is the young physicists and engineers emerging from their basic educations starting to grapple the theoretical, engineering and application sides alike.

        • Roger Bird

          There was the young Italian guy in the 2011 videos. He was good looking and tall. I hope that someone will know his name and tell me. He was a PhD I believe. He seemed like about 24 years old.

    • Roger Bird

      I don’t suppose that there are any experts on E.C.Escher here who can explain the table at the beginning of the page.

      • AB

        I’m not sure why you bring up Escher.

        As far as I understand, the table rates different aircraft power sources according to several criteria. Higher is better, with 10 probably being the maximum. The negative number for LENR under Technology Maturity Risk probably refers to LENR not being a reliably power source at this time.

        LENR still scores highest though.

    • GreenWin

      Section 6.2.3 Low Energy Nuclear Reactor Technologies
      Goals and Objectives:

      Develop technologies for Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) propulsion systems.

      Starts on page 96, look pretty much the same as last year’s overview – not sure if there is anything new here. Good to revisit NASA’s sincere investigation of LENR (Ni+H) for aerospace.

      • Shane D.

        Fact is we don’t know yet what NASA has discovered or uncovered about LENR/LENR+. Of all players in the LENR story, NASA seems to be the most active. The more one digs, the more one finds them in some capacity. I think we only see the tip of the iceberg and can only guess at what they are finding.

        They seem to be on to something. Their interest seems to be increasing. Hard to believe they would be so involved if nothing has changed.

        But you never know.

    • LB

      Couragous man, Doug Wells, bringing on the wrath of LENR trolls fresh out of school.

      • AlainCo

        He should prepare to horse manure

        • Roger Bird

          Roger Translation: “He should prepare for horse manure dropping on him.”

    • Andrew Macleod

      Maybe they have some positive test results allowing them to move forward……aka the US partner.

  • Thinks4Self

    I’m not sure if I have brought this up before on this forum but in regards to the hidden DC claim. How do they claim that high voltage low current DC is changed into a low voltage high current load? It has to be a low current high voltage load to flow down the wires provided by the testers without heating them to near white hot and melting the insulation. I know of no other way to move multiple kilowatts of electricity down such small wires. The skeptics are correct that DC might have been hidden on the input, but the reactor was taken apart in front of the testers and the only electrical component attached to the power wires inside the ECAT was a resistive coil. So how does a resistive coil change the load from high voltage to high current? The only method I know of to convert a high voltage low current DC load into a low voltage high current load would be something like a switch mode power supply or equivalent and it would not be able to operate at the temperature of glowing steel at all, let alone for multiple hours. Isn’t the hidden DC claim therefore beyond the scope of accepted physics and known methods of electrical engineering?

    • Bento

      Hmm, strange people, those skeptics. So, LENR is impossible but magical wires are 🙂

      • Roger Bird

        When people don’t understand large swaths of life, magic is possible in those areas for those people. For example, apparently, for skeptopaths, a large group of people from divergent walks of life can keep a massive fraud secret when General Groves and the FBI couldn’t even keep the atomic bomb secrets secret. This is magical thinking in the social realm of life. And this magical thinking is because skeptopaths are socially unaware.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      I guess the only possibility would be a very long and thin resistive wire. I do not know if such wire exists that would operate at the required temperature, also with the necessary insulation to prevent breakthroughs. But before getting too excited about this, the appendix of the paper which was added 2 weeks ago discusses the DC issue and goes to ruling it out based on the measurements that they made.

      • Sanjeev

        Pekka,

        I think most of the people missed this very important investigation by Mats Lewan.
        From : https://matslew.wordpress.com/2013/06/10/update-of-swedish-italian-report-and-swedish-pilot-e-cat-customer-wanted/

        UPDATE: I have been in contact with a representative of PCE Instruments UK Ltd who has confirmed that the PCE-830 cannot detect DC tension. When connected to an AC source with an offset DC tension it will display the graph of the AC tension correctly but it will not detect the offset DC tension.

        So the matter was not resolved, even after the appendix. I have no idea how Levi and others came to a conclusion that the meter removes all doubts about DC.

        This is not a matter of distrusting Rossi and the independent testers. In Science if an objection is raised, it has to be satisfied with proper measurements. So the testers need to take it up in the next test.

        • Pekka Janhunen

          Thanks, at least I had missed this. It’s possible, though, that they measured DC in some independent way. But in any case they should address this concern, as you said.

      • Roger

        If you had 10Kv you’d need a 100Kohm resistor to get 1Kw.
        P=V^2/R
        10000*10000/100000=1000 Watts.
        Current draw is 10000/100000=0.1 Amps

        10Kv would however require thick insulation and would be dangerous. The wire itself could be thin.

        But it can be done.

        Anyone with engineering knowledge and time would find this hidden wire.

        • Thinksforself

          Roger the problem is voltage doesn’t cause heating, current does. So if the power leads are not warming up, like the observers of previous demos and the testers of the third party test have stated, then you are not flowing enough current to heat the body of the ecat to the temperatures observed by electricity alone . Feel the cord on a tea kettle, hair dryer, hot plate or other resistive heating device during operation. The cords will be warm. The gauge of wire used by the testers appears to be about the same as the cords of the above devices.

          • Roger

            Sorry but you not quite right.
            What you are talking about is i^2R losses.
            Now for a given say very fine guage of wire you might have a resistance of say 100 ohms.
            Now drawing 100mA through that gives you 0.1*0.1*100= 1 watt.
            Now a kettle lead…
            A 3KW kettle element, will draw 3000/240= 12.5Amps
            Even if the much thicker lead is say .1 Ohms
            The same I^2R losses
            12.5*12.5*0.1= 15.6Watts, which you would feel if held it but a single watt or less you’d be hard pressed.

            The reason for having great big pylons with 3/4 million 3 phase AC voltage is purely to reduce the I^2R losses, otherwise you’d have huge great thick cables (with lower voltage used).
            That said 10KV would be neigh on impossible to hide it would arc and you’d smell the ozone – O3 being created.

            • Thinks4Self

              You are dancing around the edge but missing the central point. In order to hide the supposed hidden DC from the passive touch test of the power leads it would have to be in a form not easily usable to create heat. At least not by a device that would hide easily inside the ECAT or even likely fit inside it’s volume at all.

              • Roger

                I do not really understand.
                You need to talk more in engineering terms.
                What you may also want to consider is that DC would not be the only way to get power to the unit.
                If you were to superimpose a high frequency on the wire which is beyond the bandwidth of the measuring gear, this would also go unnoticed.
                All this however is bunkum – any good engineer/scientist would soon find these, like I said, given access and time.
                Why is everyone so keen on debunking the skeptics. I am by default skeptical, amazing claims require amazing evidence.
                However, I think he’s done enough to make people take notice.
                Why not spend all this time effort on replication.

                • Thinks4Self

                  The whole issue is the current/Amps would have to be low to not heat the power leads. If the current/Amps is low you can’t heat the resistive element enough either. You have the same problem with high frequency as well. The hidden power argument is just FUD.

              • Roger Bird

                Roger, the problem with stealth energy is that Rossi would be **risking** his whole operation in the hands of some very high powered and respected scientists. If these testing dudes came away with a negative report, it would be all over for Rossi.

            • Thinks4Self

              You have a very powerful tea kettle mine only pulls 750watts at 110V to boil water in about 3 minutes time.

      • Thinksforself

        I agree that they likely tested for DC but the only way to prove it is not there to skeptics would be a tester provided power source. But people doing basic power math like Roger is below can claim it could still be there by some nefarious means without the separate power source. The understanding that I am trying to bring to the discussion is even if there was 100,000 volts at 100 milliamps (10,000 watts) it would be in the wrong form to cause significant heating.

        • John L

          run/live in a HV lab

          10KV at 400C, you can hear, see and smell it – highly visible partial discharge and corona (not to mention very dangerous and extremely hard to contain)

          Try 2.63A X 380Vdc of 144 ohms R. But 144ohm rated at 1000W, 400C would not fit that cylinder.

      • Sanjeev

        I think most of the people missed this very important investigation by Mats Lewan.
        From : https://matslew.wordpress.com/2013/06/10/update-of-swedish-italian-report-and-swedish-pilot-e-cat-customer-wanted/

        • Sanjeev

          From his blog.
          UPDATE: I have been in contact with a representative of PCE Instruments UK Ltd who has confirmed that the PCE-830 cannot detect DC tension. When connected to an AC source with an offset DC tension it will display the graph of the AC tension correctly but it will not detect the offset DC tension.

          So the matter was not resolved, even after the appendix. I have no idea how Levi and others came to a conclusion that the meter removes all doubts about DC.

          This is not a matter of distrusting Rossi and the independent testers. In Science if an objection is raised, it has to be satisfied with proper measurements. So the testers need to take it up in the next test.

        • Sanjeev

          I’m trying to post the text which is after the red update heading, but it keeps going in spam.

    • AlainCo

      Interesting idea, reminding a problem in the skeptic theory of DC.
      the problem is that it cannot be much above 400VDC, because some electronic devices were plugged on a splitter, and even if not sensible about DC, they would be sensible to kV…
      it cannot be very low or the wires would smell burned insulators and socket.

      a key data to exclude DC or not, is knowing what was plugged on the same…
      Anyway, it would have been simpler to exclude if the testers eliminated DC.

      ->” Isn’t the hidden DC claim therefore beyond the scope of accepted physics and known methods of electrical engineering?”

      are you naive ;->

      DC hypothesis is required to refute Rossi, since rossi is wrong, since LENR is wrong.
      thus DC is true… no other possibility, it is proven.

      http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/cf/293wikipedia.html

      “”It would not matter to me if a thousand other investigations were to subsequently perform experiments that see excess heat. These results may all be correct, but it would be an insult to these investigators to connect them with Pons and Fleischmann. . . . Putting the ‘Cold Fusion’ issue on the same page with Wien, Rayleigh-Jeans, Davison Germer, Einstein, and Planck is analogous to comparing a Dick Tracy comic book story with the Bible.” [7]”

      Abandon all logic, you are in “normal science”
      http://fr.slideshare.net/sandhyajohnson/the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions-thomas-kuhn-book-summary

      Truth is true, thus there is no reality is what attack it. No need to even prove the critics, since they are necessarily true.
      All those who doubt, are necessarily fringe, if not corrupted, deluded.
      Science is settled!
      ;->

      • Thinks4Self

        +1 – I guess, I need to find a primer on acceptable logic for use by the scientific researcher. 😉

    • lll

      ……
      NASA Langley Research Center’s Doug Wells of the Aeronautics Systems Analysis Branch was awarded a grant as Principal Investigator for a concept project titled Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) Aircraft.

      I suppose in this case that NASA will use a hidden cable made of some exotic invisible material!

    • Deleo77

      I think Mats Lewan had some good input in the comments section of his blog last week regarding the DC power issue. His answer is below. If you believe what he is saying is true, then even if Rossi was using DC power as his method of cheating this time around, he was using a different method in his previous tests. I hope the six month test happens in the near future and the Swedish team verifies that no DC power is coming over the wires with 100% certainty.

      John, I don’t know if it helps you, but when I did 4 tests of the old E-Cat in 2011, all published on NyTeknik.se, I brought my own cables, checked tension and current on both sides of the control box, both AC and DC. I never found anything strange.
      What was discussed at that time was the thermal energy measurement, specifically the steam quality.
      Of course, taking in account the possibility that Rossi is cheating, he could introduce new ways of cheating over time. That is not my impression though.
      What I believe we should look for are systematic errors that no one has yet discovered.

  • Roger Bird

    I was just visiting a comments section dealing with health and vaccinations and such. I am quite sure that personal attacks are inversely proportional to productive learning and exchange of ideas and perspectives and a sense of comraderie. This LENR forum is very civilized and I appreciate it and it is by far my favorite forum. And I apologize from the bottom of my heart if I have attacked anyone, even if only slightly.

  • buffalo

    rossi is going to come under pressure not because of some flimsy ‘secret catalyst’ bs but because he is perceived to be the leading revolutionary of ALL alternative physics-‘law’alterting techs out there.he is in fact paving the way for real earth-shattering surprises wether he is bogus or not makes no difference.he is by no means alone of course,theres literaly thousands of such ‘revolutionaries’ waiting in the flanges.

    • Alp

      Hey Buffalo, I can’t agree with you. I think whether Rossi is bogus or not makes a lot of difference.

      • buffalo

        i disagree alp.think about it,the fraudsters are paving the way for the real geniuses because now everyone gets a chance to show their stuff out in the open,in public,without fear.there are many surprises to come beside lenr.

    • lenrdawn

      IF he is BSing, he isn’t paving the way at all. In fact he would be hurting LENR in two ways. First by attracting attention (and possibly money) away from research that isn’t BS (like “why would we support researcher x, y or z struggling to prove a Watt or two when Rossi has such a huge head start). Secondly: IF he is BSing and IF he would be uncovered, the entire field would take a big hit in terms of credibility. Everybody even mentioning Cold Fusion will get nothing but rolling eyes for decades. So lets hope he is real.

      • buffalo

        no lenrdawn.all this time up until now its a fencesitter,thus its actualy impossible to ‘declare’ rossi a fraud(he,s already been declared a fraud)thus if he is or isnt fraud is no longer an issue.what is an issue is he is inspiring mad geniuses with truly earth-shattering techs brave enuf to come out into the open and flaunt their stuff.its out of controll.

  • Jacob

    Actally we live in evil age .

    • Kim

      Immature Race

      No self control

      No moral compass

      Sad

      Evil, Fear, Control the dominant frequency.

      Respect
      Kim

    • Barry

      Life sucks and life is beautiful. All depends on where we put our focus. perhaps a mixture of both is realistic, but it’s hard to judge it all as evil Jacob.

    • Redford

      It has yet to be proven that “before” was substantially better. We’re in the age of information so we see more of the ugliness, but it doesn’t mean it has not always been there. 😛

      • fortyniner

        What we call ‘evil’ seems to be substantially more organised and pervasive today, largely due to the employment of information technology for this purpose. The ‘1%’ (in reality a tiny fraction of this, numerically) enjoy a degree of global control that would not have been possible without this technological development.

      • Roger Bird

        These kinds of things can never be proven. Proof is not the be-all and the end-all of knowing.

  • Joan Baez

    What rossi needs is to stop talking and show his partner. Once we know who is it and when we can spect real products things will change. I’m bored with all these conspiracy theories and secrecy

  • GreenWin

    This may seem odd but the massive cuts being made to US hot fusion programs seem to be affecting the volume of ske ptics commenting – with the obvious exception of Mrs You go and little clique at Quax’s place.

    One can expect as these make-work big programs are shut down, there will be less “official” resistance to LENR. That is a positive change.

    http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2013/jun/17/livermore-slashes-10-per-cent-of-workforce

  • Alp

    — Off topic —

    Just saw an ad for this film: http://pandoraspromise.com/

    I thought it might be about cold fusion but as it turns out, it’s about nuclear power plants. Their timing seems strange.

  • Roger Bird

    I see no reason to worry about Rossi’s physical welfare. The bad guys know that if he should die that the secret would be dumped onto the Internet and the game would be over. If anything, the bad guys will want to send him boxes of fresh goji berries, resveratrol, garlic caps, and other food supplements. Perhaps they would furnish Rossi with a sweet doggie even, a demanding dog that would pester Rossi until he took the dog for a walk every evening.

    But other kinds of attacks may be possible, but I only say ‘may’ because I can’t think of what they might be. In this world of the Internet, trying to destroy someone’s reputation, especially someone with a large fan club, simply won’t work.

    Smart bad guys will become smart good guys and adapt. For publicly owned energy companies this will be relatively painless. The share holders just need to sell their stock and get $.90 on the dollar and like it. With privately owned energy companies like Koch brothers, tough titty said the kitty when the milk tasted 5hitty.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      That seems rather insensitive about Rossi’s safety, being only worried “if he dies” the bad guys won’t win. I think we should be worried about his safety, because he is a great man and we need him on earth as long as possible.

      • LilyLover

        You talk as if you are talking to a “civilized human civilization”.

        • Bernie Koppenhofer

          No, I am talking to the majority on this site who might think Rossi is very intelligent, caring, great inventor and entrepreneur.

          • LilyLover

            Hats off to you!

          • Roger Bird

            I also do not accept your implication that I am not caring toward Rossi and EVERYONE else. Your problem is that I just won’t listen to your obnoxious abuse of me. I guess I better go back to ignoring you until such time as you get over your resentful heart.

            • Bernie Koppenhofer

              “and everyone else” What does that mean?

          • Karl

            Can’t agree more.

      • Roger Bird

        I think we should be worried about his safety, because he is an infinitely precious human being.

        • Bernie Koppenhofer

          Thank you for the retraction. Peace.

          • Roger Bird

            It wasn’t a retraction. It was a clarification. I take everyone to be infinitely precious. And I am especially fond of Andrea Rossi. He is quite a dear person, and I would love to know him and have an Italian dinner with him, even if he wasn’t the most important person in the world.

            Sometime I put on my tacticians hat and talk about good guys and bad guys. But in reality, everyone is doing the best that they are able.

            Respect

      • Joe Shea

        I don’t think he’s ever said his technology “will be dumped on the Internet” or any reason to believe that will happen. Whoever succeeds him at Leonardo Corp. would not give away the technology because it’s too important and too likely to make that person rich. The attack he appears to be anticipating is likely to come from same ol’, same ol’ Steven Krivits, who should be ignored.

    • John De Herrera

      There are so many Snakes, Clowns and a Frog. Some snakes are venomous, some clowns are evil and the Frog has his own websuite to spread his deception. Keep safe Rossi, don’t let them get your secret catalyst. jdh

      • AlainCo

        What Frog ?
        U’r talkin’ to me?

        😉

  • Pekka Janhunen

    Still about the third party report. I’m not the first to say it, but I think that it was a very remarkable and rare achievement from all parties involved. There were probably many non-technical risks involved which are not readily evident from the outside, for example regarding the size of the team and its composition, the tradeoff between doing the job fast and producing a concise and readable but somewhat incomplete report versus taking more time and making a more complete but also less readable report. I think they made a good compromise, the paper is 30 pages which is long, but still many people had the patience to read it, and they produced it in about 2 months after last measurements were completed which made many people almost but not quite tired of waiting. The size of the team was seven which is nice and large, but not too large since none of them bailed out, leaked the story prematurely or fell to industrial espionage. Had anything like that happened, it would have been a political mess for Rossi to sort out, even if it hadn’t been his fault. I’m not wondering that at one point Rossi said that he was very worried and that it was a very serious and big thing. Miley and others still have to jump through those loops.

    • Karl

      Fully agree Pekka

    • AB

      Pekka,

      I’m wondering, did you ever mention the paper to your colleagues? How has the scientific community reacted in your opinion? Skeptic blogs like that of Siegel or Motl were very negative, but I’m not sure to what degree they represent the average opinion.

      In the past at UniBo there seemed to quite a bit of pressure towards people that showed interest in the e-cat.

      • Pekka Janhunen

        I forwarded it to some 30 persons. About 85% have no opinion or do not say it, 5% are outspoken sceptics and 10% are “believers” of various sorts. My sample of people is biased towards environmental sciences and physics theory, e.g. energy research or hot fusion is not located on our campus.

        • HHiram

          I can second this. Roughly similar numbers from my colleagues (social sciences).

    • Pachu

      I agree, also about the 30 pages, i think it would have been better to do the paper only with the details of the third test only.

      • Andrew Ma

        In hindsight, since the photo of the meltdown in the first test leaked, it is better to have the paper discuss the first test than to have people speculate and demand openness.

        • Shane D.

          Did we see a photo of the meltdown?

          • Andrew Ma

            Rossi said: “that photo is referred to a destructive test”, referring to the photo in http://www.e-catworld.com/2013/05/hot-hot-cat-picture/

            • Thinksforself

              That shot could have been taken during the industrial certification testing. He didn’t say when it was taken. Running a piece of equipment at an overload until it breaks is not an uncommon thing to do for certifications. You need to know how a piece of equipment reacts to a worst possible failure. In this case causing the reaction to run away until the core melts. Or it could be the November test.

    • Shane D.

      Pekka,

      Not being a scientist I am curious if it is common for scientists to do this type test without technical help from lab assistants, electricians, electronic techs, HVAC experts etc.?

      To me it is like expecting a doctor to do all the duties in the operating room, which we all know.. they don’t. There are nurses, surgical assts, pulmonary techs etc. Doctors may be smart but they can’t know everything.

      Same goes for these scientists. Surely they are very smart, but there are just some things they aren’t trained for. One would be the electrical issue that the skeptics make an issue of. Of course, in repsonse to the criticisms they clarified their report to describe the precautions they took to assure they weren’t being fooled, yet I don’t recall that they mentioned who did the measurements.

      None of the 7 were electrical engineer types by degree and I would think if I were a scientist walking in there to test a new technology I’d bring my EE guy, or at least a good electrician.

      So if they did have assistants would they list them on the report?

      • Roger Bird

        I disagree. Using medicine as an analog is not good. The human body is incredibly complicated. Electricity is simple: resistance, current, voltage, frequency, inductance, capacitance… Did I miss anything?

        • LilyLover

          For 99.5% of the things the medical doctors do, the human body is quite simple, it’s just one species – cut, chop, treat with established knowledge of hundreds of years. The more complex aspects… they simply ignore.

          Did you miss anything? A lot. All those scientist in “those fields” make machines that help medical doctors do their job. Not only do they make machines, they also explain how to use those to the medical doctors how to use those even if they had bare minimum competence.

          They should not be compared but calling Human body too complex is like calling we cannot function if doctors did not exist.

          • Roger Bird

            I don’t understand your point unless it is to express your hatred for me, which I understand clearly but do now accept.

          • Shane D.

            Lilylover,

            Appears you have an issue with doctors. I sleep with one most nights when she isn’t on call so I’ll keep that in mind next time I post here.

            By the way, I let her read this and she responds that she thinks highly of all the other medical professionals. Hopes the feeling is mutual?

            • Shane D.

              Hope this a language issue.

              If not, you have some problems to work through.

            • fortyniner

              I agree with LilyLover’s comments about the capture of the medical profession by pharmaceutical companies. This is completely evident in both general practice and in most specialisms, where reliance on diagnostic test machinery and expensive drugs seem to have largely replaced medical knowledge,intelligent guesswork and non-drug remedies where these would be appropriate.

              Just as in high energy physics, individuals who step outside the bounds of ‘received wisdom’ (mostly received from drug manufacturers in this case) quickly encounter reprimand or worse.

              • fortyniner

                Shane, of course I except your partner who I’m sure does not conform to my stereotypes.

      • Warthog

        Well, since I “are” one, I’ll chime in here. Good experimentalists (including nuclear physicists) are “jacks of all trades” and many are quite as adept with mechanical, electrical, etc. as any technician. I’m a PhD chemist with forty years practice, and I can run a lathe and mill as well as any machinist, build pretty most anything I want/need that isn’t commercially available. Read Ed Storms bio.

        With theory types, OTOH, it is a well known fact that their mere crossing the threshold of a laboratory will cause equipment to fail.

        • Pekka Janhunen

          I’m theory type, clueless in the lab, but can code in almost any language and broadly design experiments or devices which others implement. In some sense I’m also a jack of all trades, if “all” is suitably defined.

          • Warthog

            Heh…like my office mate at the chemical company where I worked for many years. He was death on equipment, but give him a technican to put what he wanted together and he was plenty capable. Guys like you can get it done……it just takes a bit longer.

      • Pekka Janhunen

        I consider it likely that all people who did something are listed in the report as authors or in the acknowledgements. I basically agree with Roger.

        • Shane D.

          Very interesting. Thanks to all.

          So now I am even more curious:

          are the 7 scientists “theorists” that don’t know their way around a lab, or “experimentalists” that are jack of all trades, or a mix of the two?

          Is there some title (like JOATs 🙂 ) that differentiates them?

          • Ceon

            If you read the report, you will see that there were many more than just those 7 scientists involved.

            • Shane D.

              Ceon,

              I do more then my fair share of researching this stuff. Lots out there to keep up with and we all need each other to pitch in.

              Can you please copy to here the section of the report that shows this?

              My wife already thinks it suspicious the amount of time I devote to cold fusion.

              Thanks.

              • Roger Bird

                Shane, I am a freaking addict. Tell your wife that I said that you are OK.

                • Owen

                  I’m sure that will greatly comfort his wife. “Look honey, here’s another LENR addict and he says I’m okay.”

              • Ceon

                You can start by reading the last part of the report:
                Acknowledgments
                The authors would like to thank David Bianchini, M.Sc. for his cooperation in performing the test. We also wish to thank Prof. Ennio Bonetti (Bologna University), Pierre Clauzon, M.Eng.
                (CNAM-CEA Paris), Prof. Loris Ferrari (Bologna University), and Laura Patrizii, Ph.D. (INFN) for their helpful discussions, Prof. Alessandro Passi (Bologna University [ret.]) for his patient work in translating the text.
We would especially like to thank Andrea Rossi, M.A., inventor of the E-Cat, for giving us the opportunity to independently test the apparatus, and Prof. Em. Sven Kullander and Prof. Björn Gålnander (Uppsala University) for their continued interest in and support for these investigations.
                A special thought and warm thanks must be also expressed to Prof. Em. Sergio Focardi (Bologna University) and Prof. Em. Hidetsugu Ikegami (Osaka University).
                The authors would like to express their appreciation to Optris GmbH and Luchsinger Srl for their support and technological assistance.
Financial support from Alba Langenskiöld Foundation and ELFORSK AB, for the Swedish participation in the E-Cat test experiment, is gratefully acknowledged.

                • Shane D.

                  Ceon,

                  Thanks.

                  I will leave it up to others as to what these other titles mean and how they support us believers.

                  Good to see there weren’t just the seven (7).

      • Redford

        Actually at least one of the people involved is a research engineer, indeed what you’re expecting. that’s pretty typical.

      • Omega Z

        Only 7 authors, but over a dozen persons were involved overall.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      +1

    • GreenWin

      Thanks for these good thoughts Pekka. Especially interesting to hear of the wall of silence from contemporaries. Fear of ridicule is a powerful method of control.

    • Zedshort

      I thought there was a controversy about the measurements of the energy into the system. The instrumentation was not able to detect direct current. Is that correct or what is the story?

      • Pekka Janhunen

        The authors added an appendix two weeks ago (last two pages of the newest version of the arxiv paper, http://arxiv.org/pdf/1305.3913v3) which deals with this issue.

    • Omega Z

      Note: There were seven authors but others were also involved.
      Somewhere over a dozen in all.

  • Pedro

    Browsing through the program of ICCF18 I get the impression that there are far more presentations about Pd+D experiments, than about Ni+H experiments. The theorists seem to be stuck in the old style LENR and have little interest in moving on to LENR+?

    • Pekka Janhunen

      Perhaps they think that there is more data from Pd-D which makes it easier to study and that once it’s understood, then hopefully understanding of Ni-H follows. But you are right, someone should also study Ni-H directly. One doesn’t know beforehand how closely related the two phenomena are, if at all.

      • Allan Shura

        Much more is publicly known about Pd-D than Ni-H.

        Pd-D appears to be fairly straight forward seem not as
        complex and experiments have been open. Although palladium
        is very expensive such small quantities are used that it would still be several orders of magnitude less expensive than conventional sources of energy in use now (if developed for practical products).

        Ni-H may be more economic in the long-term but not significantly in the near term with the cost of energy priced as high as it is today.

    • Jim Anderson

      The amount of scientific research done on Pd+D experiments is much larger than on Ni+H experiments. I think the focus has been to come to a scientific understanding of LENR. Rossi and Defkalion seem more focused on workable products that can be sold. The gas loaded Ni+H LENR has many advantages over Pd+D. The chief one is it can operate at a much higher temperature and therefore produce energy that is more useful.Rossi took LENR as an existing idea made some reasonable assumptions of how it worked and developed a commercial product. One example of this was LENR appears to be a surface or near surface effect. So creating powdered nickel created more area for the reaction. Rossi’s achievement is as much about hard work and good decisions based on less than full information as it is about complete scientific knowledge.

      • kasom

        best answer so far!

  • KD

    I asked MR. Rossi on J-O-N-P if the the plant he was talking about on Nov.28th, 2011 at 6,48 PM

    >Dear Herb Gills:
    >Today we sold in the USA a 1 MW plant which will go to a normal >Customer. This installation will be visitable by the qualified public.
    >We wait to have completed the contractual procedure through the >attorneys, then we will give communication. It will be in the North >East of the USA, where I have been in these days.
    >Warm Regards,
    >A.R.

    Is the same, which was delivered to his USA Partner on May 01, of this year?
    My Question disappeared without answer.

    But answer on June 18th, 2013 at 1:59 PM to the same Herb Gillis about, if certificating persons have access to working plants, suggests something else.

    June18th, 2013 at 1:59 PM
    Andrea Rossi

    Herb Gillis:
    The certification is in course upon two plants.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  • Roger Bird

    So, I sent an email to my congressgoof, Doug Lamborn. I say goof and you will agree when I tell you what he sent back. I told him that he ought to keep an eye on LENR/cold fusion. This is the very short piece I got back: “Dear Mr. Bird: Sincerely, Doug Lamborn”. I guess this is a very honest response since the words ‘LENR/cold fusion’ are like a zen koan to him. He had absolutely nothing to say about it, and he didn’t. (:->)

    • GreenWin

      Save the letter Roger. One day it will be a fine example of head-in-sand politicians at the LENR Historical Archives.

    • freethinker

      Or you could reply and say something like :

      “Sorry Sir, but I think you accidentally left out the body of your message”

      You could also add CC to Forbes, some local rag, etc.

      It could actually be a tool error in some way. Dont all mail to and from congress need to be stored and archive and such?

      my 25c

      • Roger Bird

        $7.87

        I’ll try it.

  • Steve M

    Frank – you may want to change this TITLE to George H. Miley PDF

  • Jimr

    As I have said previously, we should all set back and ignore what Rossi says,just pay attention to people inspecting and testing his units.very few things he says are reliable. ( selling ecats. at Home Depot for $150, having robotic factories,in 2011, even people making threats against him, has anyone seen any threats listed any where, no one knows where he is or can find him) All this said I still think he has something and it will take some time before we are informed by a reliable source.

    • guga

      You are right.

      If just Rossi wasn´t our main source of information on LENR. We are all so eager to see LENR become real and successful that we tend to analyze every single word Rossi writes, if it makes sense or not. This is a sign of desperation.

      • Jim Anderson

        guga
        I think your comment is very true. When I started to use the internet to study LENR I found many different things from different sources that reinforce my knowledge that LENR is real.Having blind faith in anyone you don’t know doesn’t seem wise. A good place to start is Defkalion’s web site. An internet search for Defkalion will yield several recent articles. The Smart Scarecrow (avilable on youtube)has a recent interview of a Defkalion official that will give a broader view of LENR product development.They may be the first to have a LENR reactor that you can put in your basement. Another Smart Scarecrow interview is with Mark LeClair who runs Nanospire. This interview targets cavitation fusion. The best reason to believe Rossi is number of other smart and experienced people that are trying to do the same thing.

    • Andrew Macleod

      I don’t mind hearing about this stuff. It’s llike watching history unfold.

    • Karl

      Smart of Rossi to communicate with a global audience.
      I imagine it is better from a safety point of view – for the project and him self. If we imagine the about 1000 persons that have confirmed by a poll here on this site that they believe in Rossi and LENR, this group is and will be a considerable resource to help Rossi and others to realize the technology.

    • GreenWin

      We can say the same about the thousands of big promises from the hot fusion community. They’ve been making promises in exchange for billions of taxpayer dollars for the last 60+ years. So far, they have delivered ZERO useful energy. Rossi speculated on a factory to build a domestic E-Cat before it became clear the safety certifications would be stonewalled. Not atypical for disruptive products competitors want to delay.

      • Roger Bird

        This comment above that I am responding to by GreenWin should I think make Jimr develop some perspective on Rossi’s “lies”. Rossi’s lies are very light pink “lies” compared to Hot-fusion’s black monster lies that have caused $billions to flow out of the public coffers. When it comes to big promises, Rossi has delivered. When it comes to big promises, Hot-fusion has worse than defaulted; they have created bigger lies with longer due dates that they convinced congressgoofs to believe.

        BTW, another thing that bothers me about Hot-fusion is that they ***know*** that they can’t deliver for a certain number of decades. How is it that they know this and if they know this why don’t they just jump to the next exceedingly large, expensive, and powerful machine.

      • Thinks4Self

        Some food for thought. So far somewhere just over 750 billion dollars has been spent on Hot Fusion research. If they said today we have the answer and can build a commercial plant to produce electricity and if the money spent to build the plant only brought the total to 800 billion dollars. At a savings of $.10 per kiliowatt hour of energy produced the plant would have to produce 8000 Terawatt hours of power without any additional investment just to recover the money spent to bring Hot Fusion to fruition.

        A Terawatt is a million Megawatts.

    • Nightcreature3

      Actually I think there are more working e-cats out there than Rossi has admitted to. Even if the commercial tech is still under development, I see no reason why one would throw away an opportunity to start milking the LENR cow for a whole two and a half years, especially during these days of austerity. The units would of course be running in secret, like say for the military, or in a converted nuclear reactor now operating at reduced cost. Alternatively they can use the energy to make synthetic gasoline and sell it off as the original thing.

      There are at least two major protagonists that would would be happy with this arrangement. Leonardo Corporation will be delaying the date when the details becomes known and they’ll start facing competition. The US government will also benefit by delaying the disruptive effects that this technology will bring to the world markets.

      • Roger Bird

        I think that this idea has merit. It is not following the money; it is more like know the direction that money flows. Or rather, it is predicting how human beings will act with regard to money. I like it.

    • Barry

      So Jimr, what you are saying is we should listen to you and ignore Rossi?

      • Barry

        Sorry Jim, perhaps a more positive approach for me to take is, Rossi said there was a third party report coming out and it did. That was a big one. The skeptics (and I’m not referring to you) who take pot-shots at Rossi now have to include a wide range of people and companies in their scope.

  • Gerrit

    wait a second. you’re blowing this out of proportion.

    Rossi said: “most likely somebody will launch a next attack on us, which will surely happen, but we don’t care.”

    Rossi was merely talking hypothetically.

    • elasticbucket

      Yes, Inevitability, seems the word. Similarly alike to “shurely, night follows day”. I would also say it is said in resignation, by his use of the word attack. And very much less than about prior knowledge.

  • Pekka Janhunen

    It’s curious that Rossi knows about the “attack” beforehand. Maybe someone leaked it to him.

    • fortyniner

      That’s possible. He could by now have quite a few ‘sympathisers’ who might be in positions to know what is brewing. Of course, he may just be talking in general terms about the inevitability of such attacks.

      If attempts to damage Rossi are limited to the usual ‘maryyugo’-type anonymous slanders and smears, then the perpetrators may as well go home. That kind of thing will not affect anything much at this late stage in the game.

    • Roman S

      Hi, Pekka. AFAIK you are one of several experts here – also in the domain of scientific publishing – peer reviews, Philadelfia, & so on. Well, AFAIR you have predicted the 3rd party report would appear in Science and/or Nature. Simple question: do you have any insider knowlege when will it happen?

      • Pekka Janhunen

        I do not have any inside knowledge (not then and not know) and my prediction was probably wrong in retrospect. Although we do not know if they submitted it somewhere and got a rejection after some review process before putting it on arxiv.

  • artefact

    to be presented at ICCF18:

    Defkalion / Yeong E. Kim, Purdue University:
    Theoretical Analysis and Reaction Mechanisms for Experimental Results of Hydrogen-Nickel Systems

    http://iccf18.research.missouri.edu/files/day5/Theoretical_Analysis_Reaction_Mechanisms.pdf

    “#Yeong E. Kim 1 and John Hadjichristos 2
    1 Department of Physics, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, USA
    2 Praxen Defkalion GT SA, 1140 Homer Street, Suite 250, Vancouver BC V682X6, Canada”

    “Theoretical analysis and reaction mechanisms will be presented for anomalous heat effect (AHE) observed for hydrogen-Nickel systems [1], using a generalized conventional theory [2-14] which are based on the optical theorem formulation of low-energy nuclear reactions (OTF-LENRs) [2] and also based on generalization [3] of the theory of Bose-Einstein condensation nuclear fusion (BECNF) in micro/nano-scale metal particles [4-15].”

    • Gerrit

      as others have mentioned before (here or elsewhere), the results from SKINR that will be presented at the ICCF are unfortunately not spectacular. I had been hoping for good and great news from them.

      • Ivone Martin FitzGerald

        Hot. Boiling. Water. Massive, Opaque, Steam.

      • AB

        Any result that shows the existence of LENRs is spectacular.

  • John-64

    If Rossi hadn’t lied in the past about future projections (see the first year of this website if you’re wondering what they are), then we’d all be for his activities.

    Rossi, apologise for lying, and wipe the slate clean. If you don’t know when something will be released, just say so. If you’ve only got 5 employees, say so. Just stop with the inaccurate projections.

    • r8

      Why accusing him of lying. Even if he is lying that has nothing to do with you or your family really. apologize what? Weird?

      Have you lost money over his lying?
      Choose to believe him or not is entirely your choice. Your PM is lying all the time

    • Peter

      Seriously? What am I not understanding from this comment? An apology for giving inaccurate release dates? If you’ve ever worked in projects of any size, you well know that some project streams slip or fall behind.

      That sort of thing can throw the entire project off it’s timeline. Maybe you live in a perfect world where nothing ever goes wrong and everything smells of roses, but that’s not the real world. I’m not defending Rossi here, I’m just pointing out that this type of expectation is a little bit unrealistic.

      Besides, asking for an apology? We’re not 5 years old. He has a trade secret he’s not willing to release to public. And his biggest claim isn’t that he has some secret device that will heal the world. His biggest claim is that he is working hard to bring it to market as fast as as he can. If all he claims is real, than he will have a mountain of obstacles ahead of him.

      So why do people feel so entitled that they feel they can demand an apology for something that is not yet a reality? When the e-cat is for sale at Home Depot, you buy one, and it doesn’t work as advertised, then ask for apologies. But right now? What is the point?

      /end rant

    • Karl

      Are you joking – have you met any inventor that could give precise projections of the future.

    • AB

      If Rossi hadn’t lied in the past about future projections

      This is such a vague statement that leaves a lot of room for imagination. What are future projections? In what instances has Rossi lied about them?

    • Tom59

      Andrea Rossi, continue and push further the case! Share your view and hopes. We know that a technical revolution is not made overnight and that there were and will be dead ends, This project is not yet in the track of a publicly supported and well funded technology. Ever since you openly worked in this field, a tremendous dynamic developed which is keeping this alive, inspiring others and bringing results. Stick with it, don’t let go!
      We do the same.

    • fortyniner

      If you put ‘John-64’ into the search box and take a look at this commenter’s posting history you will quickly see that he/she is just a pathoskeptic tro11 who has managed to infiltrate this blog by keeping his(?) sniper comments to a fairly low level. It seems rather unlikely that he/she has the slightest interest in what may be best for Rossi, and the comment above is just disingenuous mischief-making – like all input from this ID.

      • rolando

        pathological!

    • Iggy Dalrymple

      The favorite toast of Ed Ball, Florida’s most powerful 20th century industrialist, “Confusion to the enemy”.

      Ball was hated by the left but he preserved more forest and wilderness than any other Floridian. When he died, the liberals took over and almost bankrupted his empire.

    • Andrew Macleod

      Are you human? Have you never broken a promise? Have you ever made a commitment that you couldn’t keep because circumstances changed? Rossi is a human being and will make mistakes. Even if it takes a decade to get the first ECat on the market he will still be miles ahead of hot fusion and their 30-60 years(if ever) behind schedule.

      • Protz
        • kasom

          I regret, but You are right, is is a question that must be asked, even because there was IMHO never a clarification about these 97 e-cats under 97 NDAs…

          • Thinks4Self

            97 Ecats would be most of a Megawatt plant.

            The 4 locations could be: the main assembly area on the north side of the building, the research lab on west side of building, Rossi’s personal lab on the east side of the build and Rossi’s basement. It was a very generic question.

            I have learned through business that you have to ask very specific questions if you want clarity.

            • fortyniner

              Technically the component ecats for just one 1MW unit would as you say fulfill the claim (some of the 106 sub-units are for standby/backup and would not be ‘operating’). The multiple locations claim is a bit of a stretch, and could I suppose include some prototypes or test units developed by the partner, and being run in various different places.

              Overall though I would view this claim as a piece of deliberate half-truth at best. Factually correct perhaps, but worded to give an incorrect impression – something Rossi used to be quite adept at (he seems to use it less in latter days, perhaps as the reality has caught up with the claims).

          • hempenearth

            What are there, 100 ecats in the 1MW plant? Do you think he went from 1 to 100? Or in stages?

          • hempenearth

            kasom, please provide a link to where it says these 97 e-cats are under 97 NDAs, I think those 97 e-cats were under 1 or 2 NDAs

        • Thinks4Self

          My question to you is where is you undeniable proof that there weren’t Ecats running in 4 different locations at the time he answered?

          If you can’t provide the proof does that make you a liar?

          • Thinks4Self

            That should be ‘your undeniable proof’ didn’t notice until time ran out.

  • Steve M

    THIS > LENUCO LLC., are working on development of small 10’s of kW units. Physically these power units are very simple. Special Ni alloy nano-particle is placed in a pressure vessel which is then pressurized to 60-100 psi with hydrogen to initiate the reaction. With pressure control, these units are expected to run for several years, before replacement of the nano-particles is required due to build up of transmutation roducts. Replacement is simply done by substitution of a new cylinder containing fresh particles while the used particles are recycled for use in fresh nano-particles.

    • fortyniner

      Dr Miley seems to be pretty much emulating Rossi’s early devices. It seems probable from various hints that Rossi long ago solved the particle agglomeration issue, possibly by dispersing the nickel powder in an inert carrier such as a ceramic.

      There is some information on Lenuco LLC at http://coldfusioninformation.com/companies/lenuco/

      Curiously the domain lenuco.com is still ‘parked’ at godaddy.com.

      • Iggy Dalrymple

        Or with an internal tumbling reactor, or a fluidized bed with gas bubbling up through the particles. Brillouin may use the latter.

        • fortyniner

          Both sound feasible but I don’t think there is any evidence or indications in photos that Rossi uses either. A fluidised bed would definitely not be compatible with AR’s hydride system.

          • Iggy Dalrymple

            Couldn’t you bubble up hot hydrogen or an inert gas? I know hydride furnishes its own hydrogen but would a little extra hurt? That said, I haven’t seen any evidence of a pump.

            By inert ceramic carrier, are thinking something like Patterson’s beads?

            • fortyniner

              I’m sure that a fluidised bed using recirculating H2 would be feasible, it’s just that there’s no sign of the equipment that would be needed (blowers, filters, large bore insulated gas pipework) in the 1MW layout. Blowing inert gas would quickly ‘unload’ hydrogen from the Ni. There is definitely no sign of anything mechanical in the hot cat or gas cat designs.

              Re. ceramics I was thinking of something like the natural ceramic corundum, a form of aluminium oxide that is used to make heater cores such as the one inside the hot cat. This comes as powder of any specified grain size, into which the nickel could be mixed to separate the nanoparticles. When it’s dampened and compressed in heated moulds, the corundum powder becomes a highly porous solid of any desired shape.

              I suspect that may be where the Ni is in the hot cat – in the tests in which the cylinder was opened, there didn’t seem to be anywhere else for the nickel ‘charge’. The only other possibility seemed to be a twin-walled central tube.

              Incidentally, corundum contains iron, titanium and chromium plus traces of other metals. It’s remotely possible that while experimenting to find a good carrier Rossi also serendipitously discovered that one of these contaminants amplified the exothermic effect (i.e, opened the way to the ‘hot cat’). Just a pet theory.

              • Iggy Dalrymple

                The Corundum Conundrum. ;>)

              • Thinks4Self

                A porous core would make sense and solve many issues.

        • Thinks4Self

          Why not a high temperature stable aero gel?

          • fortyniner

            Rossi seems to be more inclined towards very basic solutions – but why not (it would need to be a ‘hydro gel’).

      • Warthog

        Not at all. He is taking the approach of the Patterson cold fusion cell. Patterson’s “nuclear active material” was fabricated by plating multiple layers of metals onto the surface of plastic beads. His cell was shown to work by several independent tests, but when he used up his original fairly large run of beads, he had problems making another batch that worked as well. And then he died. IIRC, Miley was one of the ones who independently tested his device.

        Miley has a patent on his approach for making NAE (see Google Patents):

        http://www.google.com/patents?id=WhIgAgAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&lpg=PA1&dq=%22Low+Energy+Nuclear+Reaction%22&source=bl&ots=Xuf1yRH2vB&sig=142QFcoB_2WmhjeCiLVn9AuUGlU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=qEROUKH4JsjSrQHKmIGoBw&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBQ&goback=.gde_4132340_member_161859049#v=onepage&q&f=false

        • Owen

          For scientists wanting to create LENR reactions, it seems Patterson’s NAE process would be a good place to start.

          I’ve often wondered why later batches didn’t work. Just wild conjecture, but it’s possible one of the suppliers were pressured by special interests (big oil, etc.) to intentionally tamper/modify the raw materials to squash results. Any thoughts?

          • Roger Bird

            Yes, it is an absurd idea, making Occam spin and spin and spin. When Patterson was doing this, Big Oil had absolutely no clue whatsoever as to his existence or what he was doing or how it would eventually hurt there profits.

  • artefact

    To be presented at ICCF18:

    George H. Miley
    Distributed Power Source Using Low Energy Nuclear Reactions

    http://iccf18.research.missouri.edu/files/day3/Distributed_Power_Source.pdf

    “Our results in terms of energy gain from the pressurized nano-particles are among the best reported to date [1, 2]. The main obstacle to development of a practical unit is preventing the hot nanoparticles from overheating and agglomerating together, limiting unit run time [3]. Thus present work is focused on overcoming that problem as well as further development of the technology needed for a practical power unit.”

    • AB

      The discovery at the University of Illinois of the existence of Ultra-High-Density
      clusters inside the host material is a breakthrough development [1]

      That sounds interesting. Have they identified the exact condition needed for starting the reaction?

      • daniel maris

        Could this be the scientific confirmation?

        This sounds pretty important stuff to me.

      • Gerrit

        conditions to start:

        Physically these power units are very simple. Special Ni alloy nano-particle is placed in a pressure vessel which is then pressurized to 60-100 psi with hydrogen to initiate the reaction.

        Incorporating these clusters into the material has resulted in excess heat experiments that reproducibly producing orders of magnitude more heat energy out than energy in. However, as noted earlier, run times are currently limited to hours by the onset of nano-particle agglomeration.

        • Warthog

          I think Michael Swartz of Jet Energy (the Nanor of the MIT demo/class) has solved the agglomeration problem. His NAE substrate has nanoparticles of Pd (or Ni) distributed through a matrix of zirconium oxide. This holds the particles separated and prevents agglomeration.

          I think Miley’s multi-layer thin film is unlikely to easily be “de-agglomerated”.