Newly-found Document Provided Details of Nickel Powder from Early-model E-Cat

The following was submitted by Hank Mills

A new paper has been located by the folks at LENR-forum. It was titled “Analysis of two types of nickel powder” and was written by Curt Edstrom of Ralon, and Jan-Erik Nowacki of KTH in Sweden. (Original document in Swedish available here) The paper contains analysis of powder obtained by Sven Kullander which was provided to him by Andrea Rossi, and details an analysis of unused powder and ash from a previous model of E-Cat.

This powder had, according to Rossi, certain additives removed. In the ash but not the new powder, iron was found in addition to many other elements. Some of the elements, such as copper, were likely contaminants (Rossi has recently said that copper was probably a contaminant). Lithium was mentioned as a possible catalyst despite not being found. In addition, a series of high magnification scanning electron microscope (SEM) were included which show fine, detailed features of the nickel powder. Many folds, cracks, cube shaped blocks, and tubercules can be seen. This document not only gives us additional data about the elemental composition of the powder, but gives us an example of the nickel particles we need for successful replications. Here’s one image.

For my full analysis, please go to an article posted today on PESWiki:

Hank Mills

  • Pekka Janhunen

    The alumina surface has cooling fins. In the report the fins are modelled for convection, but I’m not sure how their effect is included for the Stefan-Boltzmann law application. Corrugation of a surface increases its effective emissivity (if emissivity is defined per uncorrugated area). I suspect that the real temperature may have been lower than reported. The total energy flux was probably more or less correct.

  • GordonDocherty

    In this case, “heat” is being measured in terms of the IR given off. Now, in measuring temperatures, like a liquid, we are used to “popping in a thermometer” and reading the result. Although this may be an oversimplification in some ways, this is essentially what also happens in many science experiments. What we are actually doing in this case, of course, in measuring temperature is measuring the transfer of heat to the temperature sensing device and MAKING AN ASSUMPTION that the heat is coming from the whole body (after all, heat travels uniformly in all directions, right?) It is not the only possibility, however. To understand what I mean, we’ve all seen what happens when we put a dry leaf out “in the sunshine” – not very much – until we put a magnifying glass in front of it and focus the Sun’s radiation – now we see the leaf burn… So, a reaction occurring in those pockets we have now all seen such that the IR is focused away from the reaction site due to some form of magnetic lensing, and we now see a way to measure a higher heat at the surface than inside. As another example, the Sun’s surface is hotter than the layer beneath – and it’s been shining quite a while, so there has been plenty of time for the heat to “even out”, which it probably would if it were not for the fact that the Sun is also radiating energy away… The argument that the temperature gradient must be uniform decreasing from the centre to the outside of the e-Cat is therefore not quite as robust as at first appears – factors such as magnetic fields / magnetic lensing, reaction sites, and the number of reaction sites active at any one time must all be taken into account. Of course, with a different configuration / design, if you did trigger every reaction site simultaneously to 100% capacity then, in other words, you would have achieved instant nuclear ignition inside a large volume. This goes back to the point I raised earlier about the miscalculation of Castle Bravo where it was believed that the Lithium 7 present in the Lithium blanket present in the thermonuclear device would be inert in the nuclear sense. It was not. The result – instead of a circa 4-8 Megaton TNT equivalent release of energy, the energy released was 15 Megatons, or about 2.5 times predicted… This clearly does not happen in the case of the e-Cat, so its design clearly does not trigger large scale simultaneous reactions across the reactor (which would make it a type of small-scale thermonuclear bomb), nor does it support or encourage such, nor is it therefore going to be the case that there is a uniform decreasing temperature gradient from the absolute centre-line of the reactor to the outside surface. Indeed, if anything, what this shows is that the reactor design is inherently safe as it clearly radiates heat energy away from the centre, most probably via electromagnetic field lines (those same fields looking likely as being necessary for the reactions to proceed in the first place – perhaps part of the purpose of the iron found in the ash?) – in effect, the e-cat seems to breed mini forms of the magnetic fields responsible for the Sun’s Coronal Mass Ejections. As an analogy, think of the “heat bubbles” that rise out of milk when it is heated toward boiling – as the average temperature of the milk increases, local hot-spots boil first. Indeed, this local-boiling is something often used in cooking, with the right control, to keep a hot body “simmering along” for a long time without breaking down – the milk proteins mostly stay intact. Indeed, “simmering” is likely a good way to describe the e-Cat operation – the nuclear fuel inside the e-Cat is just simmering along – it is not erupting in a single (mushroom-shaped?) boil – nor can it, for if it does start to run away, the core does melt, so dowsing and shutting the whole reaction process down.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      But alumina is opaque to its own thermal infrared. The case of solar corona is different because tenuous collisionless plasmas are not in thermal equilibrium with nearby objects or with themselves. Below sun’s visible surface temperature grows downward. I think the same must happen also in E-cat’s alumina shell.

      • GordonDocherty

        I agree – in which case, the temperature just under the alumina must be very high indeed (if this were the Sun, the alumina would be some distance off the surface, so that there is plenty of room for a “hot atmosphere”) – given the e-Cat did not melt, it does indeed look like the same must happen also in E-cat’s alumina shell. Also, the (Inocel or Tungsten?) wires coiled around the e-Cat didn’t melt – and they are clearly visible in the pictures, so again suggesting the heat is being radiated outward…

        • Pekka Janhunen

          If the temperature would be somewhat lower than reported, it would solve these issues. See many other reply to Michele above.

          • Pekka Janhunen

            sorry, meant to say: see my other reply to Michele above

            • GordonDocherty

              OK – so, basically, the setup was good at “losing heat” – makes sense, and is a rather nice system characteristic, as it means the rate of reaction can be increased on a loaded system without the system “losing steam” (pun intended)

  • Omega Z

    Nickel melting point is 1455’C. In some situations, I believe this can be retarded to about 1500’C. Some of the samples taken for analysis were clumped, so it was getting real close to melting.

  • Axil Axil

    If the nickel particles are producing heat, the reactor surface (observed) temperature, for several days 1400C at 2.8kW flux, Al2O3 heat capacity, cylinder 4mm ID/ 20mm OD heat difference is 200C

    So temperature of powder must be 1600C continuous at least – more if thermal conductivity to Al2O3 is not large.

    T = P*ln(d1/d2)/(2*pi*L*k) where k is the thermal conductivity, d1,d2 are outer and inner cylinder diameters, L is length of cylinder, T is temperature difference.

    The melting point of pure nickel is 1455C. Any admixture of other elements decreases this.

    So if the claims here are correct all nickel grains in ash should be melted.

    This is good grist for deductive reasoning. If this condition did exist then….

    This is what leads me to the suspect that the heat flow is isothermal: caused by superfuildity through the auspices of a boson condensate in which the infrared photons produced by the reactor participate. Having condensed, all the photons are at the same energy level thus resulting in a singular infrared photon wavelength. Any new energy input into the condensate is shared equally among the members of the condensate providing a unitary thermal state.

    In this way, the boson condensate thermalizes the gamma radiation through super-absorbtion.

    The standard theory that everybody seems to hold to is based on the fact that heat is assumed to come from the nickel particles. This theory might not be true. I believe that heat comes from the alumina and the Ni particles provide field emitters to cause fusion at a distance far from the nickel particles.

    By casting a shadow, the heater wires appear to be cooler than the alumina that encases it, therefore, the Ni particles might be located in the coolest part of the reactor and must therefore be heated by induction provided by the integral coil embedded in the alumina to keep their field emission’s going.

  • Fortyniner

    You seem to be following this – what exactly are we looking at?

  • Fortyniner

    My guess would be that Rossi started with observations of thermal anomalies in Raney nickel, observed by a number of people over the years. This material was central to his ‘petroldragon’ hydrocarbon synthesis process.

    I think he probably adopted an ‘informed edisonian’ approach that relied on intuition as much as physics, during which he may have run across a number of serendipitous improvements. Possible candidates might include:

    (a) The early discovery that an oscillating EM field either initiate or potentiate the reaction. My guess is that he might have been testing induction heating at some point, as a way to avoid using delicate resistive heating coils that might have been in danger of melting. The second, redundant ‘heater’ on the prototypes may well have been an antenna for an EM field.

    (b) As Rossi initially concentrated on home units, but quickly found that (among other things) a bottle of hydrogen would never meet certification requirements, he may have looked for alternatives. He possibly discovered the value of lithium when experimenting with the obvious alternative, light metal hydrides such as lithium hydride, lithium borohydride, lithium aluminium hydride etc.

    (c) Axil Axil suggests above that the alumina cement reactor body may take part in the reaction (and may even be the main seat of the process), and given its porosity and the likelihood that H2 and lithium vapour would quickly permeate the entire matrix, this seems to be a possibility. This might be yet another fortuitous discovery, made when Rossi was looking for high temperature structural materials during hot cat development – alumina would have been the obvious choice for making a ‘core’ to support the resistance coils.

  • GordonDocherty

    The picture suggests the powders were created using the Nickel Carbonyl Process. Now Nickel tetracarbonyl (Nickel Carbonyl) is one of the nastiest substances known to man. That’s the bad news. The good news, however, is that it is used in the PRODUCTION of ultra-high grade nickel, and is NOT PRESENT in the end product. Further, when carbonyl gas is used in large volumes in refineries, this allows for the economic production of a range of nickel powders with different properties. So, for example, new products can be made by using the gas stream essentially as a coating medium. These new products include nickel coated graphite particulates, nickel coated carbon fibres and the large scale commercial production of high porosity nickel foam. Another benefit is that THE PROCESS HAS NO REAL WASTE PRODUCTS, with used gas recycled back into the main refinery process. Refineries in North America and Britain can currently each process up to 50,000 tonnes per year of nickel in his way, producing a wide range of different products. So, if you own such a refinery, the LENR revolution is definitely good news for you!

    Anyway, here’s some more information on the Carbonyl Process:

    plus much else besides on the web…

    • Dave Lawton

      We have one of the largest refinerys near were I live.Its at the Clydach Refinery near Swansea,Wales.I`ll nip down with a bucket and scrouge some.If anyone needs some for research I`m sure they will send you some. It`s what I do and they are very obliging.

      • GordonDocherty

        Dear Dave,
        If you know anyone at the plant (I was looking on the Web –
        Mike Cox is the General Manager, UK Operations at the Vale Clydach
        Refinery) then they might be interested in the potential (positive)
        impact on production – and Vale are “quite big” (Headquarters, Brazil,
        bought Inco (Canada), one of the Major Players in Nickel mining and
        processing…). Now, there is a form on the Vale – Brazil website that
        requires a whole bunch of details from you before you can even submit
        the form, but a direct link with the Clydach Refinery, so they can
        factor LENR into their Scenario Planning – as well as inform Vale in
        Canada – would do the job far quicker and be far more certain of getting
        them to follow developments as they unfold – on the e-catworld
        web-site, of course 😉

    • LCD

      are you differentiating between Nickel Carbonyl and the process? Because Nickel Carbonyl melts at like 0 deg?

      • GordonDocherty

        the Process – in fact, the Clydach Refinery referred to just below is where Ludwig Mond, the inventor of the nickel carbonyl process, built his first factory

  • jousterusa

    I have written an email to William Hennigan of the LA Times to encourage him to write about the E-Cat. I am pasting the letter below to try to get other readers to call up local newspapers and tv stations to send this letter to, adapted (if desired) to their own names. I hope it will help build a national groundswell for the E-Cat!

    4119 61st Ave. Ter. W., 305C Bradenton, FL 34210 941-462-2616

    October 13, 2014

    Dear Mr. Hennigan:

    When you see this two-year-old video ( from NASA scientists, you may be less skeptical than most about cold fusion/LENR, a boon to the aerospace/defense industry like none other. It is said that the very first customer for the E-Cat, the first commercial cold fusion/LENR reactor, two years ago was a US military organization who needed it in Afghanistan. Since then, the device has been reduced from the size of a shipping container to a tube that uis just 8 inches long, weighs just 425 grams and can produce 1.5Mw of heat, as it did in a recent study known as the Third Independent Report, partially funded by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, the nominators in several categories for the Nobel Prize. Here is a comment from the current edition of Nature by Nobel physics laureate Brian Josephson:

    The most important news of the year, perhaps, not just the last seven days? The results of a new investigation into the Rossi reactor (allegedly a high-power cold fusion reactor), involving running the reactor over a 32-day period, are now out. The report not only confirms output power far in excess of anything possible by chemical reaction, but also gives a clear indication that a nuclear reaction is occurring, on the basis of a substantial change in the isotopic proportions of Li and Ni over the period of the run. The report, entitled Observation of abundant heat production from a reactor device and of isotopic changes in the fuel may be seen at As before, I predict that pigs will fly before Nature makes any mention of the report, which has also been put on hold by the physics preprint archive (with an earlier report, a leaked email disclosed that the moderators were trying hard to find a reason to block the report but eventually gave in). Brian Josephson

    You can view the whole uncensored study at:

    The Swedish energy consortium Elforsk formed the LENR Iniative in response on the day the study was released. But it has been completely ignored in the American press outside of my own online newspaper (the first and now the oldest – 20 years next April 10 – in the world), largely because a fraudulent study at MIT defamed the original March 1989 Pons & Fleischmann announcement. My story is at http://www.american-reporter/5,076/2.html.

    I am a former Executive Speechwriter for the chairman and president of Lockheed Corp., and not quite a total jerk.

    You can be assured oif getting attacked, laughed at and described as a simpleton should you dare to take this information seriously and report on it – but I hope you are brave enough to accept the challenge.

    Joe Shea
    The American Reporter

    [email protected]
    Attachments area
    Preview YouTube video NASA Admits LENR (Cold Fusion) Game Changer!
    NASA Admits LENR (Cold Fusion) Game Changer!

    • Daniel Maris

      I suggest you add in how many times the report has been downloaded – getting on for a 100,000 times i think someone said….certainly at least 45,000.

    • psi2u2

      Great work, Joe! Thanks.

    • Leonard Weinstein

      The latest test did not produce 1.5 MW, but only about 2.5 kW. The TOTAL energy produces over 32 days was 1.5 MWh (Mega Watt hours). Please don’t confuse the power with total net energy over time. The 1 MW production version would still be large until new designs are made. You need to write a correction to the LA Times quickly before that error becomes a problem.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        The usual problems with media… German computer magazine CHIP initially reported 1.5 mWh of energy, which led promptly to some mocking comments.

        • Fortyniner

          1.5 mWh of total energy is correct – the ridicule is just standard pathoskep nonsense.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            It’s MWh, not mWh (1 billionth of MWh).

            • Fortyniner

              Ah, – apologies. More coffee needed.

      • Fortyniner

        ” The 1 MW production version would still be large, until…” I think they’ll need to remain fairly large in order to allow the easy replacement of individual modules, each of which will need space for heavy cable or busbar connections, for access to the cap nuts, and for withdrawal of the cores from their individual enclosures.

  • deleo77

    Interesting that Mike McKubre has weighed in with a detailed analysis of the test below. He has his points with his criticism, but over-all it appears his reaction is fairly encouraging.

    Seeing this makes me think that Darden and Vaughn should really consider getting more input and involvement from the LENR community. I fully understand operating in secrecy, and even stealth mode, as IH is currently doing. But at a certain point, especially with science such as LENR, all of that secrecy could potentially work against you. How great would it be to have Mike McKubre, Peter Hagelstein, or Brian Ahern visit IH in North Carolina and collaborate on some level? As long as there are no major conflict of interests, it will likely lead to more progress and understanding of the e-cat reactor. LENR is ultimately a gift to the world. If Darden and Vaughn bring scientists like McKubre into the mix, only good things can happen:

  • Bob Greenyer

    MFMP collaborator B. Higgins has read through this new release and says the following.

    “The analysis and SEM photos of the starting powder (without catalyst) show it to be conclusively carbonyl nickel. There is a lot of debris analysis for the “Old” (ash) powder, but most interesting is the Figure 17 analysis of the Ni particle that looks minimally changed in the ash from its original form. It is a carbonyl Ni particle with iron. On page 17, they even conclude that the catalyst added may be iron.”

    This basically means Bobs powder is pretty much on the mark and his lab, Ryan’s and Mathieu’s should have plenty to test in the coming week.

    • Robert Ellefson

      Note the size of the iron-dominant crystal in the fuel micrographs – they are large crystals, > 150 microns, and no apparent nano-scale iron is observed. For example, the SIMS analysis did not show iron on the surface of the nickel-dominant fuel grain in figure 7, appendix 3. I think you need macro-scale iron crystals to take advantage of EMF fields by distorting them locally into large gradients to drive plasmonic activity in the fuel. The wavelengths active in the EMF stimulant may restrict the physical dimensions of iron grains that are effective.

      • Hank Mills

        I think there may be a need for different sizes of iron in the fuel mix: nano powder and macro sized particles. If replication work begins soon, I hope several tests with multiple sizes, combinations, and ammounts of iron will be tested. The same goes for lithium. Also, there may be a need to adjust the frequencies or intensities of the magnetic stimulation with different sizes of powder.

        The testing program needs to be continual. A few shots in the dark may not be successful.

      • GordonDocherty

        This is indeed very interesting – effectively, you are saying the em field generated by the “heating” coil around the mixture is causing the atoms in the iron to spin-align and strengthen the em field local to the crystals (notice the heater is a coil round the mixture, not a wire through it). In effect, the e-cat is working inside the core of an electromagnet. This is the kind of detail that’s really good to know! It also explains why certain “secret” substances can be added to the nickel powder after the powder has been otherwise processed. As to Lithium being present, perhaps that is one of the improvements made to create the hot-cat: provide a Hydrogen source from Lithium Aluminum Hydride, another powder additive. What “Figure 19 New powder. Crystal Formation of pure nickel grains” shows is that there are plenty of Casimir pockets.

        • GordonDocherty

          and field emission tips – for focused electron beam emission? See, for example:

          – in particular, “We theoretically investigate the interaction of moderate intensity near-infrared few cycle laser pulses with nano-scale metal tips”

          So, (near) IR again…

          With all these geometrical forms present that are known to affect behaviours at the nano-scale, it becomes harder to argue why particular effects don’t happen, rather than why they do!

  • bitplayer

    Off topic:

    This Google News Spotlight Page:

    …was showing at top right the following link to the ExtremeTech article on the Third Party Report.

    Maybe this was just my customized version of Google, because I google LENR a lot. Still…

    Frank (admin), any interest in an ongoing page for collecting and discussing media coverage?

    • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

      Agree bitplayer, I think it would be a good idea to have a separate thread for media coverage only.

  • anonamous

    I been through the presented documents thoroughly..sorry It took a while to respond. One of my associates have posted on here before.
    I admire the diligence of the 3rd Party ..all seems good..A new parameter/mechanism has to added fundamentally to physics….this is pointing to the.electroweak. I would be confident to say that the W- W+ and Z boson interact under a mechanism that spontaneoulsy break symmetry .
    however this leads into something more fundamental….the higgs mechanism has two paths not one!!!! there has to be more multiple higgs bosons or one higgs with different flavours…

  • artefact

    Does not belong in this thread but:

    on Vortex said Jed Rothwell: http:[email protected]/msg98594.html

    “Brian Ahern just called me to say that he spoke with expert in thermal
    imaging. The expert went over the paper and said this was exactly the right
    kind of camera for these materials and this range of temperatures. The guy
    said surface roughness and various other factors come into play. He knows
    something about alumina and he said these are the instruments and
    wavelengths he would select.
    Brian said his own doubts have been resolved.”

    That was a big issue that seems now to be resolved…

    • ecatworld

      Fine for this thread — thanks, artefact.

    • Sanjeev

      People also forget that they used a dummy to check that the instruments are working perfectly. With the same Alumina tube and same camera, the COP was exactly 1.
      Camera did not give incorrect readings in the dummy test, so we know that there is no such issue.

      • Ged

        People really have a problem remembering they did the proper scientific controls which nullify a lot of the worries slung around, even me.

        • Bob Greenyer

          The challenge was that the blank did not go to the same temperatures as the activated reactor and so it was not a valid comparison and also because it would be expected for there to be a difference in the emissivity and effective transparency of the Alumina and Inconel.

          What this anecdotal evidence is pointing to – is that the temperature of these materials would be accurately read by the IR camera used, and since the input power was in the same range it follows logically that the higher temperature must be from excess heat coming from another source other than the electrical input.

          A physical test with a dummy reactor with and inner core coil and outer coil to test the range of temps against a thermocouple with IR and visible spectrum cameras in play, and that is one thing the MFMP is considering.

          • Ged

            I do respectively disagree that the higher temps of the active reactor make the comparison with the control not valid. The input power was similar, so what differences exist must principally lie in the variable that was changed: the active fuel. It’s the whole point. Basic good science design.

            Your control design is more exacting and can give note precise results, however. Making it great science design.

            • Bob Greenyer

              I was merely quoting the skeptical positioning to date.

              We are focussing on building a test that would settle the debate.

      • Mark Szl

        Exactly, they had a “no treatment” or “natural history” or even “placebo” control group. So yes a lot of criticisms where bogus.

    • bachcole

      It is not resolved for skeptopaths. Only valium will resolve this issue for them. (:->)

      • Ophelia Rump

        Lithium might seem more aprapos.

        • Billy Jackson

          Cheese may result in runaway reactions…

  • Ged

    Wonder what new energy invention to make after thermal electrics and biofuel from waste were let downs -> See promise in the original Fleischmann and Pons experiments and try to replicate based on experience from those other energy field attempts -> get some promising but small results, use intuition to try to increase output -> very early demos: better output, now experiment with parameters on reliability/reproducibility and more output -> low temp e-cat: lots of output, but still too cool for industry and hard to control, aim for higher temps -> hot-cat: success, but not much control or reliability, need better for industry, work on those with new design -> current hot-cat v3

  • artefact

    Rossi wrote end of last year: “the cylinder was cherry red, then in 10 seconds all the cylinder became
    white-blue, starting from the white dot, where is placed the charge, you
    see in the photo ( after 1 second) becoming totally white-blue in the
    following 9 seconds, and then an explosion and the ceramic inside (
    which is a ceramic that melts at 2,000 Celsius) turned into a red,
    brilliant powder made of small stones, like rubys…”

    Now we know that the casing was AL2O3. That was his ceramic melting at 2000C.
    The red rubys are made of AL203. Red Rubys are made with Chromium doping. Chromium was not found in his powder. It could be that the chrome came from the Ni/Cr heating wire.

    Nice how the information start to make sence over time.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Neatly done, you are good!

    • Axil Axil

      There is a boatload of bad assumptions made by the testers and Rossi involving the mechanisms of the reaction. I believe that the DGT theory of the reaction is the correct one and the Rossi theory of the reaction is wrong.

      In the DGT theory, the nickel powder sets up a high temperature boson condensate throughout the entire volume of the reactor including all the alumina. It is in the alumina where the reaction is centered. At high temperatures, any transmutation that happens in the nickel is secondary and does not contribute that much to the production of power when the reactor is in a maximum power configuration.

      Standard analysis points to some understandable contradictions between valid everyday engineering assumptions and the actual processes that are going on inside of the reactor. These factors are hard to reconcile. But the pictures of the nickel particles (particle 1) that we are given in the latest third party study show us at least one particle that has not melted since it is still covered with tubercles. This single particle was representative of many more still operational nickel particles. Other nickel particles have melted, so the temperature of the reactor was right on the hairy edge of particle meltdown but not completely over it.

      To reconcile these contradictions between what engineering would rightly expect and what is really going on inside the reactor points to isothermal heat distribution throughout the entire structure of the reactor as supported by the boson condensate.

      This even heat distribution implies that the entire reactor is quantum mechanically coherent including the alumina body. The entire reactor is participating in a boson condensate.

      Heat cannot be coming only from the nickel particles because they would be just too hot to produce the concentrated heat flow needed to support observed black body heat distribution. The entire structure of the reactor is producing even heat (isothermal) including the alumina.

      The nickel powder is setting up the quantum mechanical field conditions to cause the entire reactor structure to produce heat.

      This assumption is consistent with what we know happens during reactor meltdown. During meltdown the temperature of the reactor goes beyond 2000C which is well beyond the melting point of the nickel powder and eventually the alumina. The alumina even becomes hot enough to produce sapphires. The energy output of the reactor goes beyond one megawatt in ten seconds. A few flakes of nickel powder cannot produce this much power not even from a nuclear source.

      We must assume that the alumina is producing the heat and not the nickel powder. Even heat production by the alumina would work against any stress effects on the alumina. Nothing is liquefying. The nickel and lithium is just an enabler of the LENR reaction and not its primary source.

      The heater wire must be tungsten that is encased inside the alumina to protest is from oxidation.

      The alumina should have been put under isotopic study to see if it was LENR active.

  • Melchior
  • Andrew

    Found the worst example of a “science” blog ever concerning cold fusion.

  • Freethinker


    could you put the paper (swedish) on a location at e-catworld. I have serious problems negotiating the lenr-forum site for any kind of services.


    • barty

      What’s the problem? Maybe we can solve it?

      • artefact

        Me, too. I don’t have accounts at the three given locations (facebook etc. .. yes, there are such people 🙂 )

        • barty

          You don’t need social accounts. You can register normaly as well only in the forum.

          • artefact

            worked. Thought I need to choose from the three but the login button got me to the real register page.

        • Fortyniner

          You are not alone. As a semi-professional miserable old git – me neither!

      • Freethinker

        It doesnt matter if I use Google or Twitter it does not work.. tried bothe firefox and chrome. No dice…. Maybe I am barred 🙂

        • barty

          Okay, on google we had a problem which I solved a few minutes ago.

          • Freethinker


            @ admin! Problem solved.

  • AB

    Out of curiosity, how does one produce these crystalline nickel grains? Celani has described some of his technique but I don’t know if he’s made similar powder.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    It is a smart idea of the author that certain elements in the used powder could be contaminations from soldering. Both accidental contamination and leaking should be taken closer into account in the interpretation of the analyses. Especially in the new reactors with an alumina case leaking could be an important factor. Maybe this offers a surprisingly simple explanation for the absence of several elements in the used fuel.

  • Bob Greenyer

    MFMP collaborator Bob Higgins studied previously available SEMs and produced powder as close as his 30 years of working at this scale for Motorola and his insight could predict.

    Here is the process, openly published.

    He commented on the above paper – he is working from the Swedish version.

    “That is a good lead. I obtained the paper in Swedish which contains a lot of details not mentioned in e-catworld. I will translate it and analyze. The pictures of the virgin Ni powder definitely show carbonyl Ni powder. The carbon in the EDX is probably left over from the carbonyl process, not an additive. My starting carbonyl Ni powder has a small remnant carbon left from the process, but is essentially pure Ni.”

    He is sending 10g samples of the partially reduced (activated for H2 dissociation) finished powders to Southern France and Minnisota.

  • Liberty Newspost

    The Finnish Patent is very close to Rossi’s Results check it out again:
    Inventors Pekka Soininen
    Applicant Etiam Oy

    • Bob Greenyer

      I love this paper, but it always did come across a little as a state of the art summary. I would have preferred to see them demonstrate some embodiments.

  • Hank Mills

    I’m excited that the flood gates of information about the secret sauce are opening. The data we are getting and SEM images are stunning: we now know the entire contents of the reactor, the isotopic shifts, the catalysts, the surface features of the nickel, and a bit about the AC being input into the device. Now we simply need a team of qualified individuals to replicate this AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE.

    The time for messing around with wire and other primitive systems is over. We have the ingredients for the most advanced LENR device on the planet and we need to use the knowledge to replicate. I’m convinced that wide spread replications are the only thing that can break through the barriers the mainstream media have setup. If we ever want the world to consider this tech as real, we need to make replicating a top priority.

    • Ophelia Rump

      I think you are mistaken about replication. The future lies in building imaging instruments into the reactor so that they can do live imaging at multiple scales. What does this look like live?

      • Aleksandr Albert

        I assume you really want to see what happens to the particles in real time, but you wont fit an SEM inside of one of those tubes, and even if you could, SEM’s are a fairly slow scanning based technology, imaging a single particle of nickel may take a couple of minutes. Add in the fact that at those scales and temperatures it would be extremely non-trivial to keep a loose particle in place and unfortunately all we are left with is a pipe dream.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      Agreed completely: replication should have top priority now that it seems feasible. Faithful replication.

  • clovis ray

    Hi, folks.

    Fascinating indeed, the sem gives us a look, at where the magic is, image these little guys with towering, tubular, waving in synce

  • artefact

    Now there need to be many people replicating. The winner gets the biggest adrenalin rush of his life.

  • Ophelia Rump

    I am fascinated by the emerging geometrical structures. Cube shapes, and surface geometries.
    These suggest underlying order in the process along with the violent chaos which so easily comes to mind imagining a nuclear reaction. Is the order critical to the function?

  • Daniel Maris

    Well surface area seems to be the key, so that looks good. 🙂