ICCF19 — Live Thread (Update #10: Conference Wrap-up from Cold Fusion Now)

UPDATE #10 (April 23)

There’s a very nice article on Cold Fusion Now here (http://coldfusionnow.org/iccf-19-start-of-new-cycle/) which provides a wrap-up of the week’s events in Padua, with highlights and impressions from many of the conference attendees. It’s well worth a read. I found it interesting that there were four countries vying for the privilege of holding the next meeting (reminded me of bidding for the Olympics), and the decision was made to hold the next meeting in Japan and China — beginning at Tohaku University and ending with a ‘satellite’ meeting at Xiamen University in China. I’m not sure exactly how that will work, but I think it’s quite significant that there is so much competition for the conference now.

UPDATE #9 (April 17)

Live from Padua Italy is a new MFMP test using a GlowStick with Parkhomov fuel — live video is below:

Part 5 of the videocast:


Part 4 of the videocast:


Part 3 of the videocast:


Part 2 of the videocast:


Part 1 of the videocast:

Direct link to the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sr3fd3PFx8U&feature=youtu.be

Bob Greenyer says that screengrabs will be posted in this folder: http://bit.ly/1CUhCyl

UPDATE #8 (April 17)

Alan Smith, April 16 2015 — Around 400 people were at the conference today, and I managed to talk to Mats Lewan, Robert Godes and Peter Hagelstein about their work and thoughts. Peter and I discussed his vision of the potential ‘best uses’ for LENR for a quarter of an hour or so. He is particularly interested in the potential of LENR for powering better robots – not the toys we have now, but robots with the power and stamina to move amongst us like real people. He also sees the potential for making the world a better and cleaner place. Massive de-salination projects, the clean-up of nuclear waste by transmutation, CO2 capture or even denaturing would also become possible with LENR. Speakers at this conference have increasingly talked about transmutation of ‘fuel’ into a startlingly large variety of elements. This leads one to hope that maybe 10 years in the future we will be able to make one element into another as we wish- analogous to the way that biotechnologists are finding methods to produce complex proteins- using living systems as manufacturing systems.

I was invited to attend a fascinating ‘off site’ presentation given by Dr. Vladimir Dubinko from the Kharkov Institute of Physics & Technology (Ukraine) to Klee Irwin and colleagues from Quantum Gravity Research in Los Angeles USA. I had spoken to Vladimir earlier in the week and thought his simulation work on ‘breathers’ fascinating – and a terrific fit with Klee’s own research. This led me to arrange their meeting.

For those that haven’t heard of them, breathers is the name for the tiny ‘hot-spots’ where LENR reactions are born. They typically occur in quasi-defects in the atomic lattice. It’s a complex topic, but in brief Vlad has shown how atomic ‘ping-pong’ at breather sites my overcome the Coulomb barrier with only small (by nuclear standards) inputs of energy. And he has the mathematics to describe it – which I confess I only dimly comprehend.

Tomorrow evening I will be in Venice, dining with Aleksander Parkhomov, Vladimir Dubinko and a couple of other conference delegates. Should be an interesting dinner, and a marvelous end to an amazing week. The only small cloud on my horizon has been the sudden and total death of my netbook, but happily little data went to heaven with it. I have a camera full of interesting photos, and can maybe persuade Frank to put up a gallery soon. Back to the UK and real life on Saturday, it will seem a bit tame by comparison.

UPDATE #7 (April 16)

The Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project is in need of a Variac to carry out an experiment they hope to do tomorrow. They need to bring down the voltage into the thyristor stack from the mains as the starting voltage is too high. The Variac will need to be 5kW minimum and will be needed in Padua first thing in the morning. If anyone can help with this please contact the MFMP via their Facebook page, or send me an email ([email protected]) and I can forward it on to the MFMP.

They have an experiment set up — see picture below:


UPDATE #6 The following video was sent to me from Cold Fusion Dog Bob who spoke with Klee Irwin, director of Quantum Gravity Research and a co-founder of Singularity University. Klee Irwin is friend of Ruby Carat of Cold Fusion Now, and in this video makes an offer to LENR researchers that could be very helpful.

Cold Fusion Dog Bob told me that the analysis that Irwin wants to perform is called X-Ray Diffraction. While Klee mentions dogbones in the video, the material / powder does not necessarily be from a dog bone – it can be from a cathode of other cold fusion experiments also.

UPDATE #5 Here are some selected tweets from Mats Lewan who is at the conference now. Mats’ Twitter feed can be accessed at: https://twitter.com/matslew

UPDATE #4 Day 2 Wrap-Up from Alan Smith

The day had some interesting presentations- I would personally pick on David Kidwell (USN/Darpa) who was a lively speaker with some interesting results to present Along with several other speakers he has detected RF emissions (broad spectrum) from his systems. This is difficult to explain by any conventional nuclear physics.

Peter Hagelstein also spoke in the morning session, and discussed anomalous emissions from his charged copperfoils- emissions which though they triggered and x-ray detector have been shown not to be x-rays. Right now he is not ready to describe them exactly.

Violante Vittorio spoke today – and he is one of the people Bill Gates saw when he went to ENEA in Rome. He is part of the wet-cell crowd who are generally less interesting to me.

Spent some time today discussing theory with Voladimir Dubinko – a very smart ukrainian experiment physicist and mathematician – and introduced him to Klee Irwin from Qauntum Gravity research because their ideas are so similar. They got on like a house on fire.

Also discussed a particular idea I have with mike mckubre and voladimir- they think it is very interesting. I’ll write more on it when I get back.

Tip of the day- talking to lots of people here about ‘frequencies’ — what do you put into the coil? All the answers I got were in the gigahertz area.

Tomorrow I will be spending some time with Parkhomov — will be having lunch and a chat.


Many thanks to Robert Ellefson for giving this report of Day 2 of the conference.

Well, I’m pleased to report that today was a high-quality program for this conference, with a full day of substantial technical presentations that seemed to often go longer than the 15 minutes allotted, which I appreciated.
I also was pleased to see Tom Darden still in attendance, and had the real pleasure of a quality conversation with a close friend of his. I was assured by him that Mr. Darden is not seeking to make money from his cold fusion ventures, and is honestly striving to make the world a better place with his investments in the field. I entirely believed these statements to be genuine, and his friend’s admiration for Mr. Darden’s character and ethics were clearly apparent. I was greatly encouraged by this, and took the opportunity to plead with this friend to ask Mr. Darden to do all he could to release the E-Cat technology for worldwide development and deployment ASAP, for the sake of humanity. His response was a very kind offer to introduce me to Mr. Darden if the opportunity arises before his departure, which I was greatly encouraged by. Since they are staying in the same small hotel as me, I think I just might get my chance to plead my case before the week is out. Of course, it is quite possible, perhaps even likely, that Mr. Darden does not (yet?) have the ability to do this, if Rossi has retained much of the fundamental IP stake, but at least he is in a position of some influence over the matter. Maybe compassion will win out after all!


I received the following from Alan Smith in Padua who has agreed to provide reports to ECW from the conference.

‘We are all keeping the same secret’: Mike McKubre

 One of the most interesting aspects of the conference for me was the increasing interest of delegates in open collaboration. This was headlined in Mike’s excellent speech in the morning session. He feels that year by year the detractors grow fewer and the supporters grow younger and increase in  numbers.
Certainly looking around at the 350 delegates in the hall there were plenty of people present who are obviously just at the beginning of their careers in science, and not the sea of grey heads one saw in years gone by.
Tuesday should see the attendance figure hit 450. The highlight of the day will perhaps be the presentation by Dr Norman Cook, who collaborated with Andrea Rossi on the recent theory paper.
During the day I had a chance to make contact with a number of researchers, including Alexander Parkhomov. I’m Hoping for more one-to one time with a number of key players later this week.



Many thanks to Bob Greenyer for the following comment and photo:

“Tom Darden gave a measured speech that introduced his organisations environmental credentials, respected the LENR communities sacrifice in the face of adversity and explained how he came to invest, his intention to do more investment and that he was in the space for the long haul.

He did say that he has been encouraged by progress”.

Tom Darden Speaking at ICCF19 — Courtesy MFMP

Video and text of Tom Darden’s talk can be seen on this thread: http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/04/14/tom-dardens-speech-on-lenr-at-iccf19/

It’s almost midnight in Italy so I thought it’s time to open up a live thread for reports and comments about the upcoming ICCF19 conference in Padua which start on Monday, April 13.

We’ll try and keep abreast of the latest developments coming out of the conference. Comments and reports from anyone at the conference are most welcome here — we thank in advance for sharing your news and views.

I understand that proceedings will be filmed and posted online at a later date, but I’m not aware yet that there will be any live streaming.

Here’s a link to the conference schedule for the whole week: http://iccf19.com/program_detail.html

  • Josh G

    Here are all the ICCF-19 posters in one pdf file, via Jed Rothwell on Vortex, courtesy of Felix Scholkmann:


  • Owen Geiger

    Wouldn’t you agree that the world needs as much open source LENR research as possible right now?

    Wouldn’t you agree that LENR is complicated, and so difficulties and problems will naturally arise when it is investigated?

  • TomR

    rats123 what possible motive could you have for making a statement like that? MFMP have done so much for the advancement of LENR knowledge that your comment is unbelievable. Bob Greenyer, please don’t think that very many of us think the way rats123 does.

  • pelgrim108

    Peter Hagelstein ………Charge Emission from a Copper Foil Driven at Mhz Frequencies
    Volomdymyr Dubinko…Quantum Tunneling in Breather “Nano-Colliders”
    Daniel Szumski………..The Atom’s Temperature
    Anatoly Klimov…………Energy Release and Transmutation of Chemical Elements in Cold Heterogeneus ………………………………Plasmoid
    Vladimir Vysotskii……..Transmutation of Cs133 Isotope to Ba Nucleus During Growth of Methanogenic ……………………………..Bacteria of Organic Sea Sludge
    Alexander Gromov…. LENR by low-voltage cathode plasma electrolysis

    Watch the videos of these presentations here:

  • Sanjeev

    “but I think it’s quite significant that there is so much competition for the conference now.”

    These countries can organize their own conferences on the subject, if a few people come forward.
    Russia and Japan already have LENR events of their own , RCCNT and JCCF.

    • GreenWin

      Good thought Sanjeev. But it is encouraging to see competition for a conference that only two years ago was considered “fringe.” I suspect that as LENR is further accepted by governments worldwide, State-based conferences will be necessary to keep up with the flood of developments.

  • Warthog

    Let’s engage in a bit of conspiracy theory….the next ICCF meeting is held in Japan and China. Transport from Japan to China of the conferees is by chartered plane. Plane mysteriously crashes and/or disappears. LENR science decapitated in one simple stroke.

    • ah ah,
      do you think it is possible to make all those scientists register for the same plane, have the same timetable, and not to be late ?

      anyway we all have copies of their papers, and just knowing it is possible is the biggest data.

      • Bob Greenyer

        I think it is possible to make it so expensive that the not-for-profits cannot even afford to take part! Then again, they may be the only ones left!

        • GreenWin

          Might this suggest a “satellite link” to China?

          Bob raises a good point. NGO, non-profits should look for foundation grants to cover conference costs. As LENR represents significant potential to relieve human suffering, and improvement in health, education and welfare – look to foundations whose mandates address these areas – NOT science.

          The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is mandated to address infectious disease. LENR demonstrates the potential to deliver clean, safe water to billions. Water borne pathogens are responsible for 50% infectious disease worldwide.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Thanks, that kind of comment really helps when we are in dark moments – like the burn out on the Celani Gamma experiment that welcomed Mathieu on his return back from France – so annoying!

  • Bob Greenyer

    We could not have predicted that the French would have a strike and hold up our PCE830 power monitor.

    By not fearing failure we:

    – proved openly that we have a robust platform that can far exceed operating temperatures and pressures specified and used by Dr. Parkhomov

    – showed that if built to spec, the reactor design follows previously constructed units well, it is very consistent

    – The best pressure/time curve to date – will need to capture temperature data later and add it

    – a practical way to run a phase angle powered reactor, much learning will come from this.

    – New levels of coherent data publishing (even if the power monitor results in no useful data – we did show that things like that should be triple checked)

    – Forged strong relationships with scientists, researchers, the Open Power Association, industrialists and other conference delegates.

    – learned who are doers, who are talkers and who are detractors.

    – who can come through when the going is tough

    Given that the internal reactor temperature at the end was likely well above the boiling point of Lithium, it may well be that we were seeing lithium pressure. There is a little more data after the files were posted which Alan will be able to share after he gets back to California. The pressure at cool down was around 0.5bar – I met, in quite a freaky way, Dr. Parkhomov the day after the shut down and he said that he thinks we do not have enough dead volume in our cells.

    Of course we would like to prove incontrovertibly the existence and veracity of the New Fire with every hard won experiment we do – but since, for many – this has never actually been done by anyone, we don’t feel too bad and we’ll keep trying, facilitating and sharing the nuggets that are consistent to claims and challenge where things don’t add up.

    We simply do not know if there will be any story to tell in the ash – given that we did not have a real-time Mass Spec attached – we’ll have to wait a while before we call this experiment a dud. In the mean time – I am preparing to heat it up again.

    • Argon

      Thank you for the important work! Real scientific results are rarely achieved with first experiments. I’m not very deep in science side of technology, but I see there os long iterative and analytic process ahead. There you should think what parameters might differ from Parkhomof set up? What quickly comes in mind is powder or chamber contamination, Cell volume, dimensions, dead volume. Loading ramp up timing, temperatures. Initial pressure, pressure changes (because of dead volume/leakage), Hydrogen leakage (too fast/slow) etc.

      Then after deciding which one of those are most probably meaningful (or easy to change) ones and then start approximation by adjusting one parameter at the time to one direction, and next round to another direction. So I still expect hard work and many rounds ahead. And when ever you detect some extra heat, concentrate on latest parameter changes at first, and then after optimizing that move on iterating with next parameter.
      Keep up the good work! I have never before watched so long time you tube feeds than I did last saturday.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Thanks for your kind words and suggestions.

    • Ivan Idso

      To me it signifies just how difficult this is. Rossi spent 16 hour days for many years along with all the other scientists over the last 25+ years. Sometimes people think this is a piece of cake but if it were easy then it would have been done a long time ago. The greatest asset if you are to be successful in this endevour, is patience. I would never be good at this because I don’t have time to be patient!

  • Sanjeev

    Parkhomov’s fuel/ash analysis, published by him in ICCF-19. Released by MFMP on the facebook today.
    Click for full size.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Good idea – again

  • The test keeps failing, but why?

    1) The nickel may not be pure enough.

    2) The reaction may require carbon.

    3) The reaction may require iron.

    4) The reaction may require both carbon and iron.

    5) The reaction may require purer nickel (99.999%), carbon and iron.

    I would suggest you try to experiment with hypothesis number 5. As previously stated twice, I would try *50% nickel powder, 10% lithium aluminum hydride, 30% iron powder, and 10% carbon powder*.

    • Bob Matulis

      My understanding is they used some of Parkhomov’s nickel powder which was able to produce excess heat in his experiments. Does not seem to me the nickel part of #5 is N/A.

      • The Russian device has not been verified to work by a third party. When visitors from the USA went to Russia and observed a test, the test failed. I suggest using reasonable guesses to try to duplicate the Rossi device, which we know works. Could using nickel hurt the reaction? No. Could carbon hurt the reaction? Not likely as Rossi himself said he got his first reaction when he spilled carbon dust into the reactor. Would iron hurt the reaction? I don’t think so, but that is a risk worth taking. There was lots of iron in the fuel used at Lugano.

        • Mats002

          Would another volume of the vessle hurt the reaction? There are many more parameters not ruled out that could be part of the expected action. Let data tell first, then go forward.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Dr. Parkhomov told us that he things we had too little dead volume.

        • Nicholas Cafarelli

          Please Chris, use more precise language so people do not get the wrong impression. Using “the test failed” instead of “the apparatus failed” can be misleading. If the apparatus breaks during an experimental run, scientists do not say the test failed, they say the run was inconclusive due to equipment failure.

          I agree that confirmation is not yet public and that needs addressing. More work by MFMP and other interested parties must continue or confirmation will not manifest.

          Finally, it is also possible that confirmation will never result – I hope not.

          • Bob Greenyer

            The experiment was to use a very capable reactor to bake the exact ingredients in the original experimenters way

            phase angle control

            to bake a cake and look for isotopic/elemental shifts.

            We started 3 days late due to challenges finding a venue and failure of couriers to deliver on ‘guaranteed’ times. We extended our stay by one day to give us room to run the experiment for enough time to get the pressure down.

            It was not to look for COP – though we fought hard to overcome not having a power monitor we understood and must thank the Open Power Association for trying hard to help us on that score.

            • Josh G

              You guys did an amazing job – really phenomenal especially considering the hurdles. The dogbone you’ve developed is superb and is going to really catalyze replications.
              I think some of the people here ‘giving up on you’ just have trouble fathoming what’s involved and need to have more patience and trust.

              How long to you expect the isotope analysis to take?

              Were you able to drum up any more interest at ICCF for ordering heating elements and dogbones?

              • Bob Greenyer

                Thanks for your kind words.

                There are are two directions:

                1. Re-instrument as we would have wished originally and re-heat, then do analysis

                2. Do analysis

                The aim is to do 1 – and whilst I am in the process of doing that, we are taking stock of the learning from Padua experiment. Just yesterday I found a way to look at the TC area temp and the hottest spot temp on the reactor and make temperature plots from the RAVI files we recorded from the Optris – It is really useful to do post analysis like this.


                Alan Goldwater built a fantastic device, the pinnacle of our learning to date – frankly I was amazed when we got parts of the outside to near 1330ºC, meaning the inside was far hotter. Looking at it cooled down, the ceramics look like new – very impressed. About the conference, the majority of experimentalists there were not on Ni+H at these temperatures and if they were, they had their own apparatus designs. The apparatus we showed is more to democratise this iterative process.

                • Josh G

                  Thanks for taking the time to reply. So if I understand correctly from what you wrote, MFMP is not planning to do an isotope analysis on the fuel/ash from the cake you baked did in Padua?

                • Bob Greenyer

                  On the contrary, we intend to do so, just want to put it back in the oven first.

                • Josh G

                  I see…so going to bake it some more.

    • Ged

      Who said the test failed? We have no data to say one way or the other, at all. The VIP data isn’t right, as it shows a COP of 8000, which is beloved to be due to a erroneously low AC phase. You are jumping the gun, unfortunately, so gotta put those ideas on the back burner until we get the full volt and amp trace, or the fuel analysis results (that’s the big one this test is about).

      This test was only really about looking for isotopic shifts, and we won’t know if that was successful or not for awhile.

      Spread the word: test results are not yet in, no idea if it was positive or negative yet, at all. Anyone but the data saying otherwise, one way or the other, is flagrantly immediately wrong.

    • fomr the conference there are few hints
      – from some talk there is the fact that impurities are the keys, even at 1 atomic layer

      second is Celani poster :
      – iron traces
      – some silicate sheet produced some key impurities and helped dissociation.

      maybe is it what Parkhomov did with his simple and unclean experiment.

      the low cost aluminosilicate container maybe be very important.
      impurities in the powder, in the chamber (like from the pressure meter, the glue, the hands, the kitchen)

      first idea is to reproduce the same dirty alumina chamber, and avoid adding new contaminants (like metals).

      • Josh G

        I agree that the impure alumina he uses might be a key to his success, with my eye specifically on the carbon. But I completely agree with Ged’s point below that we cannot say anything yet about whether or not there was excess heat given the instrumentation problems. I am hopeful that the isotope analysis will show positive results, due to the gamma radiation that was picked up at certain points during the test.

  • Bob Greenyer

    We did what we could in real time to make the tests you wanted. As a result, we know that the platform is capable of so much more than we first imagined assuming we have given it enough time to de-pressurise (however that is occurring). Thanks for sticking with us through what was an incredible difficult thing to pull off.

    • Nicolas Chauvin

      Good job Bob,
      the conditions were not perfect but you manage to have the test running.
      Let’s do more and more runs to finally get one good run.
      Congrats for the hard work to all the team.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Thanks for the web cam you donated to the cause – it would have been a poor feed without it!

  • Daniel Maris

    Love them though we obviously do, MFMP never seem to (a) introduce their experiments properly (b) explain what data is being shown properly during tests or (c) explain the results properly…this being a case in point.

    Surely MFMP must have some idea if they are in the ball park or out of it? I don’t really undestand why if they give live video of a test they don’t give some initial summary of results.

    If the input power calculation is really complex then there is something wrong with the set up in my view.

    • Sanjeev

      I have seen this issue mentioned over and over, especially on youtube chat, where an average viewer has no idea what on earth is going on. I personally watch for any info scattered over many places such as the facebook, quantumheat, ecw and ecw comments. Sometimes the readers are kind and do post anything they find. If I find something I do the same. Still the minute but important details remain obscured. This is unfortunately the current situation with MFMP. This can be because their whole focus is on the projects rather than PR, which is fair IMO. They are anyway doing an excellent job considering that this is all volunteered work, they is no pay at all. And they are the only ones, in the whole world !!

      There is no point in demanding more, there is no one there who can handle the PR/info department without giving up other important works first. I recommend joining the team and handling the info distribution if anyone wishes to improve the situation. Your job will be to take all info in advance and publish it at one place in as comprehensive manner as possible. Answer people’s questions and relay the feedback and criticism to the team. It will not be a paid work.

      I have seen people complaining a lot about MFMP and preaching what they should do and should not do. I see no one who comes forward and says – what can I do for MFMP….. do you see the problem ?

      • Pekka Janhunen

        When running the experiment, for example, they have plenty of time. Why not use the time to write a one-page write-up of the experiment which lists all relevant parameters (such as: origin and amount of powder, type, mass and dimensions of reactor, types of instruments used, list of monitored output quantities etc.). Such a document is needed internally anyway or else knowledge about the experiment is sure to vanish in a few months.

        • Sanjeev

          That’s a good suggestion.

          • clovis ray

            E-Cat World LENR Knowledge Base

            • Sanjeev

              Good place. But the basic problem is there is no one to edit it in the MFMP team.
              Others can put the available info there, but it can be a problem if the info asked for never leaves the source. It will be as good as ECW blog post, except only editors will be able to post.
              Another problem is you won’t be able to tell viewers that there is info on some page in KB, the comments in youtube are disabled, the video description, which is mostly blank can be edited by MFMP only, or perhaps even they can’t post a link there while its streaming.
              Those who do not know ECW or MFMP on FB, are completely in dark. Some come there on youtube and ask basic things, like what is being done, and why this is being done, what the numbers and graphs mean etc etc. When they know that this is a “cold fusion” experiment, they laugh and leave 😀

              • US_Citizen71

                Why not post a link to a page on quantumheat.org in the video description then edit the page as needed? Anyone can learn the simple html needed or even use a WYSIWYG editor plenty of those available as browser plugins.

                • Ged

                  I’d certainly be willing to volunteer to help do this for them. Using their website is the most logical idea.

        • Bob Greenyer

          We did want to, but what resources we had were stretched to the utmost limit – we were on the edge of what was possible and making sure no one got hurt and nothing got damaged was the focus. Please see my post above for other comments.

          • Sanjeev

            You guys did an excellent job, considering all the constrains, however, I can only suggest that such experiments should not be set up normally in such conditions, where there is no secure space, no good power supply or protection, no equipment, none or malfunctioning radiation detectors, sleep deprived people monitoring a very hot tube filled with dangerous chemicals, no shields, random visitors, a flight to catch in few hours etc etc.
            Cold fusion can wait, it can be planned better. We do not want surprises here. I hope you will consider this request in future and be safe and successful.

            • Bob Greenyer

              Having committed to running the experiment gave us access to the last component in Dr. Parkhomov’s fuel.

              The Power supply was a 30A cooker outlet, quite convenient actually,

              The radiation detector worked, as did the scintillator, but the owner (Mathieu) had to get back to France and was unable to spare the time to set it up properly – I mostly got there – but, didn’t. I’ll do it right moving forward – it still provided a counts for us to check. The fireplace had experienced decades of things running at that temperature – so that was not too much of an issue, we had the lower half of our bodies protected by a fire guard and our heads by a huge monitor and a lexan shield.

              The sentiment is recognised though

        • Daniel Maris

          I agree. And I think MFMP would be relieved of the necessity of answering a lot of foolish questions that result from the absence of such basic info!

      • pelgrim108

        Maybe http://www.lenr-forum.com would be a good relay station until a better solution has been found.

      • Tad G

        I’d love to see a 30-60s explanation andor recap of the experiment up to that point at the start of each new you tube segment. Explain each viewinstrument what’s it is showing, how its read and what you hope to see.
        Fantastic job… I had a lot of fun watching the experiment over the weekend. I hope to see some of these setups in an exhibit at the Smithsonian some day! 😉

    • Bob Greenyer

      Dear Daniel,

      We had a very robust debate about this very issue. One camp was reluctant to run the experiment until we had completely defined everything, the problem was though, given the resources we had, no experiment would be run and all if we did that and the massive effort made to receive Parkhomov’s fuel and run it would be for nothing. We had no idea that there would be French strikes preventing our power monitor arriving. What could we do?

      It was decided that we would “Bake a cake” – whatever calorimetry we did – their would always be long debated questions about it. We had offers on the table to do ICPMS, EDX – etc, etc on the ash, and since we did not really have a good grasp of the kindly donated power meter that Ugo Abundo / Open Power Association immediately sent (which I spent 10 hours trying to get a virtual XP machine to see it on Windows 8) – and taking on board Dr. Parkhomov’s preliminary ash results made available to us on Monday – conducting an experiment that could result in ash with isotopic shifts became the goal. It was VERY clear to us before we did the run that Alexanders ash analysis was all the scientists really cared about.

      As it was, we demonstrated many things, here are some:

      1. The Optris camera is an amazing tool which can provide a wealth of real-time data about the whole reactor (including dangerous hot spots) if it is properly calibrated. We have captured RAVI files which are nearly 50gb. I am compressing them at the moment and will be uploading them today. They allow deep post experiment study of the data as if you have a time machine and can average zones/look at temp profiles and hot spots after the run. You can freely download the Optris software and then load these files in – it is really quite cool. (keep looking in directory)


      2. That Alan Goldwaters *GlowStick* GS2 design is extremely robust, withstanding core temperatures well above 1300ºC and High temperatures and pressures for long periods of time. By using a calibrated to core temp K-Type proxy thermocouple, it forms a tested platform that can go well into the claimed range of temperatures for this reaction without the thermocouple breaking down.

      3. Wiring in 120 year old Italian houses is not ideal for experiments of this type

      4. Kitchen fireplaces in 120 year old Italian houses are ideal for experiments of this type

      5. Many cam is a great tool for synching a range of data into one “real-time logbook”. The approach combined with live interaction, via google hangouts on-line, with observers in the crowd allows for extreme levels of confidence that what is taking place is what is taking place. I am currently uploading many gigs of 1080p recordings- the one annoyance is there is no audio, but that is on the live stream – if someone was very keen – they could combine the two.


      During the experiment – we tried to answer any and all questions put to us, in addition, we took actions in response to the watchers requests, against some of our better judgement, to test the platform to the extreme, look for HAD – something that fortunately did not have a negative outcome.

      By doing the experiment in Padua, we learned who were players in the field that wanted to help and who were wanting to dismiss us. We learned of the parties that are willing to do what must be done when the going gets tough. We felt we cemented relationships with the more free-minded (which sounds odd I know) – The most important relationship we built on – was that with Dr. Alexander Parkhomov himself – I intend to publish 2 high-definition videos in the near future for which I got permission from him.

      1. My critical meeting with him before we started the run where we established the heating and monitoring process required to bake the cake.

      2. The entire presentation / bear pit he made, up close and personal in extreme quality.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        Thank you for this experiment – it was important to try Parkhomov’s original chemicals, and anyway one can learn a lot, even from a null result.

        Do you consider an additional run with the same reactor, without opening it before? Maybe the ‘cake’ (Ni coated with Li-Al) is not just a result, but an important requisite of the process. In case that you prefer to open the tube to take a sample for analysis, starting it again with the rest of the material plus some fresh LiAlH4 might be an option. Perhaps the cake could also be useful in experiments with direct H2 supply.

        • Bob Greenyer

          The PCE830 is being routed to me after going back to France (Never reached Padua) in the mean time I am getting things together to heat it up here in Czech.

      • Ecco

        To clarify, is the Optris software coming with the videos? It’s listed in the Optris website, but apparently cannot be downloaded directly there.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Let me Look into this – I did find it in the past and Bob Higgins has managed to find a download.

      • Daniel Maris

        Thanks Bob for the very full response. I’m certainly not doubting the commitment of MFMP personnel. Good luck with future testing.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Thanks, the PCE830 never made it to Padua… it is bouncing it’s way to me – in the mean time, I need to find a DAQ solution for the pressure sensor


          • Obvious

            What trouble are you having with it?

            • Bob Greenyer

              No trouble at all – just Alan took the HUGnet board and I need another solution to capture the data from it.

              • Obvious

                Did you have a look at LabJack? Brian Albiston passed on a link earlier, and it looks great.

                • Bob Greenyer

                  Yes am considering that, I saw them being used VERY effectively in India several years ago.

      • Matt Sevrens

        You found heat after death?

        • Bob Greenyer

          More analysis needed

      • Obvious

        That kitchen fireplace was an awesome testing area.

        • Sanjeev

          Perfect for those skeptics who ask for a cup of “cold fusion tea”.

          • Obvious

            I’m still working towards my LENR kettle. That should be the first consumer product, IMO. To be followed by the “LENR in your hand: Fresh brewed coffee in a can”.

        • Bob Greenyer

          It had a huge vent hood, plenty of well placed levels for mounting components.

      • Private Citizen

        Is there any way you could include a vertically scrolling chiron on screen, so that an operator can post important info which explains the experiment, the current state, perhaps some current measurements in readable form, and any other info that you can post once and let it repeat?

        This approach will require less work for the commentators while allowing viewers to come up to date on progress.

        Love the open science and looking forward to improvements in the public interface. When’s the next test?

        • Bob Greenyer

          We can include that as part of the stream, i will do that next time with key information.

      • MontagueWithnail

        Keep going Bob. Whether you find FPE or not, your work is valuable and much appreciated.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Thanks, the work at ICCF-19 tested everyone nearly to breaking point – but it was key to forging new strong relationships and understanding who will help research and who will mock attempts to move the field forward.

  • Ged

    Huge round of thanks for the MFMP! That was a long experiment, and they worked hard; so much data needing analysis now. Thank you guys so much!

    We won’t know if there was any excess energy or not until a full integration of the input power is done to analyze, so hold tight everyone. And remember, results could be positive or negative ;).

    • Daniel Maris

      I think we’d know by now if they were clearly positive. But obviously the detailed analysis may shed further light.

    • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

      An absolutely exhausting experiment, not just for the experimenters but also to some of the followers 😉

      Many thanks for all the hard work to all the MFMP people doing this great and important job. If not this time (we have to wait and see if something interested happened) I’m sure next time they will nail it. I feel they are very close to finding the reaction we all want to see.

    • Ged

      If we look at the VIP print out from the Google Drive folder, we can try to look at the average power over that period of time: https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/8zBz3_BeuBo4x2ovyVkK3wMCWi-W3OsGvXXOzfyHatAllnBiFsVy88Dpl4ONj270coNK-A=w1323-h545

      If we look at the two lowest time stamps, when the core hotspot was at 925 C, and if we take the summation of powered delivered by all 3 channels for extra stringency (the sigma 3 phi at the bottom; note that this is the same as just L1, as the other channels are not changing, but just to be safe) in the kWh column:

      (17.625825 kWh – 17.625778 kWh) * 1000 = 0.047 Wh.

      The time that past is roughly 0.413 hours. Thus, the amount of average power delivered to the glowstick is:

      0.047 Wh / 0.413 h = 0.113 W.

      This is ridiculously low. Sure, the VIP was sitting at 0 current a lot during that time frame while I was watching, but still. 113 mW? Let’s assume it’s off by a factor of 1000 somehow, and it’s really 113 W. Then we can check the calibration curve and Alan’s run’s curve as reference, here: https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/8H-ptR2qvPd16Lv4CxYNCEk90c3QxQxF6XaZcd_3D5jyxGR1Sz3QR23CzQiQOE6DDI2ddg=w1323-h545

      At 925 C, the power should be around 800 W, giving a COP of around 8. This is too hard to accept.

      Let’s try this again with the highest and lowest time stamps:

      (17.625825 – 17.625664) * 1000 = 0.181 Wh.

      0.181 Wh / 2.083 h = 0.0869 W.

      Between those times, the reactor was still heating to 925 C, and it was holding at 925 C between only the lowest two time stamps on the picture.

      I’m not sure what I’m doing wrong (let me know if I am), or if this is actually true (incredulous). Have to get the full power data and integrate it to see what is going on here, I guess. But from this one print out, the reactor was at a ridiculous COP that I can’t believe.

      Note that kVArh is the imaginary component of AC power, and not the actual power delivered to or consumed by the load. Let’s sum it with the kWh and see what happens, even though this is INVALID to do. Using the lowest two time points of 925 C holding only:

      (24.08393 kW(var)h – 24.08213 kW(var)h) * 1000 = 1.8 W(var)h.
      1.8 W(var)h / 0.413 h = 4.358 W(var).

      If off by a 1000 factor, that’d be 4 kW(var), which is impossible both physically from the device and according to the heat produced.

      So there you have it folks. This is why we need the full data trace to integrate. If I’m doing anything wrong, please correct me.

      • Obvious

        Several people commented live that there was mA registering on the display. There was some discussion but I didn’t see anything get resolved about what was being shown exactly.

        • Ged

          I was surprised it was mA’s too. But I couldn’t see the other three numbers, particularly the lower ones. Hopefully someone familiar with the VIP 3 or who was there will stop by with the details.

          • Obvious

            We might be able to get a hold of a screen shot from Google to see what the display is typically like. Maybe a user manual online also.

            • Ged

              Had to wade through a bunch of guitar amps, but here we go: http://www.tmgtestequipment.com.au/products/index.php?app=bkd0&ns=prodshow&ref=Elcontrol_VIP3 with manual as well.

              Seems the VIP wasn’t the thyristor power supply, but an energy analyzer. Page 60 shows the display; Volts, Amps, Phase, and Watts.

              Looking back at the Google Drive images, a hilarious number of pictures were taken when it read 0 amps or watts. Hm, maybe the VIP wasn’t detecting right?

              • Obvious

                Ah, that’s it.

                “For measurements on single-phase circuits. use the inputs of instrument phase L
                1 only (current on connector L 1 and voltage between connectors L 1 and N, as
                shown in Fig. 3.11).
                The wires of the other phases must be connected together and to neutral to
                prevent false measurements caused by the inputs in open-circuit condition.”
                -page 56

                Or did they have 3 phase available?

      • Ecco

        I went through more screenshots showing the total energy consumption screen. There definitely was a connection problem somewhere.

        • Obvious

          The power factor doesn’t look like a resistor, or is that just messed up due to modulation?
          Could the data be scavenged by correcting the power factor to back 1.0 ?

          • Ecco

            By swapping kWh with kVArh, the calculated power factor becomes very close to 1.
            The measured energy consumption would still be too low, though.

            • Obvious

              Sorry, I changed my post a few times while sorting things out. Now I’m not sure if you are answering a question of mine (now deleted) from earlier(?).
              I worked out basically the same thing as your above answer while pondering it, and got a similar result.
              My first gut feeling was that they somehow managed to get the Joule heating power measured. Or the values are totally meaningless to us. I was hoping to salvage something from the data, even if messed up, but now I’m not so sure whether it’s possible, or if we are just missing something measured somewhere else.

              • Ecco

                Is this what would occur if the current clamp was reversed? If yes, data might still be salvaged.

                See also: http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/10/17/did-inverted-ammeter-clamp-cause-measurement-error-in-lugano-test-joniale/

                • Obvious

                  “The clamp meter can be connected without reference to current direction, since the instrument itself will invert this if incorrect.”
                  -page 51 of the manual

                • Ecco

                  Nevertheless, I’m still convinced that something was being measured in the öpposite way than intended. I think I might have figured it out, but since I’m totally not confident on what I just did on the data, I’ll refrain from posting about it right now. Need more info from MFMP first.

                • Obvious

                  Let the actual complete data tell the tale, whatever it is, and let the chips fall wherever they may.

                • Mats002

                  The excitements might not be over yet 🙂

                • Ecco

                  What I’m seeing looks very encouraging, but the (quite likely) current clamp connection issue detracts from any possible positive interpretation of the data.

                • Sanjeev

                  Did you get the raw data ? Any links ?
                  It will be unfortunate if such a good experiment becomes useless because of bad power data. We have no other variable that can show XP, except the power. If the power went below the calibration, that will be an indication.
                  Not so worried about the gamma at this time. They did not flee the building even after 1000 CPM means that they knew it was incorrect data ;-D

                • Ecco

                  I don’t have any raw data yet. I’ve only used cumulative energy consumption data from screenshots posted in the Google drive folder for this experiment, which is barely enough to see that something interesting might have occurred.

                  I believe there was a probe connection problem which caused it to report faulty current readings for this experiment, which also caused the power factor (cos phi) to be unusually low for a completely resistive load. If you can sort that out, you might be able to obtain the actual readings.

                • Sanjeev

                  Then, we need to wait for the raw log of the energy meter. I don’t think the screenshots will provide any accurate info.

                • Ecco

                  Screenshots showing cumulative energy consumption are, if you compute the deltas (since the experiment started with the meter already at about 17.x kWh of total energy consumption). It’s those showing instant readings (voltage, current, etc) which aren’t, as they changed fairly rapidly over time because of the PID controller used to drive the heater wire.

                • Sanjeev

                  I guess they show 0 energy consumption ?
                  There are some CSV files in the shared folder. But no temperature or power data yet, the voltage data shows 0 V.

                • Ecco

                  I posted a screenshot of what I’m referring about here:

                  Energy consumption is not 0 but appears to be unrealistically low throughout the entire test. There are chances this can be fixed, but I would like to see the full data for confirmation first.

                • Sanjeev

                  Thanks, that’s a lot of work to take data from pictures.
                  Ya its almost 0. It should be roughly in the range of 20 KWh total.

                • Ecco

                  That power meter is capable of logging data continuously in printed form, but during this experiment this was only done upon user intervention. There should still be many data points from that, though. Here’s a sample:


                • Obvious

                  Might not be the excitement you were looking for…

                • Bob Greenyer


                • Ecco

                  BTW, I checked out the VIP3 manual and it doesn’t seem that applies for single-phase measurements. Could it be that the power meter is able to correct that only with 3- and 4-wire three-phase systems?

                • Obvious

                  It says it will correct current polarity for DC measurements also, but does say not specifically for single phase. However the 4 wire system is the base set-up for the single phase hook-up.
                  Ideally there should be photos of the wire connections on all devices. Someone suggested that on the live feed, and it should be standard practice, IMO.

              • Bob Greenyer

                I have scanned and uploaded all the VIP printouts we made, if they are of help.


                Note: The time/date on them in wrong – however, when one point is correlated, they should all fall into place.

                Ugo abundo says the single phase adaptor has a scalar setting on it 1X or 10X – I have asked him to note where that is set when he gets it back and any other in machine settings.

                • Ecco

                  I’m writing values down.

                • Bob Greenyer

                  Thanks Ecco. Perhaps we can link times and present a ratio trend even if the nominals make no sense. We tended to do a printout when things were settled and before setting a new temperature set point. Other data can be got from the high res recordings of the live feed/you tube that have the time clock on them.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Hi Ecco, Thank you for doing this. I am currently uploading the 1080p videos into this directory


          Sadly no audio! Grrrr. But there is audio on the youtube recordings.

          I will scan and upload the printouts also (note the time stamp is wrong – but you are most of the way to getting them in sync.

          I spent 10 hours trying to get the data into the broadcast computer by making a virtual xp machine and installing the software and getting a serial to USB convertor – that is after 5 hours work by Peter from Neo Fire – I was not charged with doing the wiring – so I do not know if it was wired correctly, I do know the current loop and voltage probes were attached – not sure about the other probes being linked to ground though – must look at some of the very many photos.

          • Ecco

            Yes: the printouts, or hopefully a complete log from the power analyzer, is what I’m currently looking for. I’m trying to find out if it measured something completely different than the actual load (like the power consumption of the PID controller itself) or if a cabling misconfiguration affected measured values reversibly. It would be better if somebody well versed with power measurements helped checking this out, though.

            • Bob Greenyer

              Can’t get the complete log, I will scan and upload the printouts, it would be very helpful if you could make a spreadsheet of them correctly timed – for what they are worth.

              Thinking about what you said, I think you are right about it being the PID controller – at least for the current – the voltage is right on the realtime readings, but just not enough sample rates. The clamp must have been on the loop back power to the PID – in which case, everyone can have a right laugh at us! It comes from having a new tool, and not knowing what the readings meant – just that they seamed really low – Will look at photos in the next hour to confirm.

              The current draw from the PID should be static practically, does that help? – I don’t know.

  • kasom

    Given that the glowstick pipe smoked the same stuff as Parkhomov’s but It didn’t ignite, have i missed something?
    Substantial differences in AC input?
    Different timing in heat up?
    Size and shape of the glowstick?

    • Pekka Janhunen

      No mortar and pestle grinding of fuel, Different material of tube.

      (In Slavic mytology, Baba Yaga was a witch who lived in hen-legged hut in forest and flied with mortar and pestle. The legend may originate from the discovery of black powder which made things fly. But maybe new fire needs mortar and pestle as well.)

  • Agaricus

    …. in a fireplace, no less!

  • artefact

    I have missed what they want to do with the reactor now. I think Bob wants to take it with him. Do they take the fuel out or do they start it again what I would strongly suggest?

    • Obvious

      Auction it.

      • Obvious

        Run it at least 4 more times. See what it can take. If it survives that, it is a winner for a test bed design.

        • Obvious

          Then auction it.

          • artefact

            That sounds better 🙂

          • Gerrit

            precious reactorses

  • Stephen

    Nice cake though. Enjoy eating it 🙂

  • Svein Arild Utne

    Maybe 0 PSI is 1 bar?

    • Stephen

      I think 1 atm corresponds to about 14 Psi

      • Obvious

        14.7 if I remember right.

        • Svein Arild Utne

          Yes, but where did they put the 0 PSI. If they start with 0 at room temp and 1 atm, then -14.7 PSI is good vacuum.

          • Obvious

            If I understand the discussion they were having, it is gauge pressure, so it is relative to the pressure where they are, subject to elevation, temperature and possibly barometric pressure. Zero was whatever the room pressure was at the start. Assuming that the room pressure didn’t change due to weather etc, then it should be about the same. So there is a “vacuum” (negative pressure) in the tube compared to the room, at the end

            • Svein Arild Utne

              Yes, but if they had vented the tube down till 1 bar at 1300 degrees, it would be much lower pressure when going back down till 20 degrees. If they had open the tube at 1300 degrees and pumped out the gas down till 1 or 2 PSI it would make Lithsium boul at a much lower temp. I think about 850 or 900 degrees.

              • Obvious

                If they had done that, the H would have unloaded too?
                I think there is a lot of overthinking going on. Placing special significance on certain criteria that haven’t been shown to have a useful cause and effect yet. Decartes before the horse… ( I think it is (insert criteria here), therefore it must be this that is wrong)

                • Svein Arild Utne

                  The Hydrogen might be stored inside the Nickel, and will come out very slow. So it is possible to take out all gas and get low pressure fore some seconds, and then close the tube again.

                • Obvious

                  Or the Li and Al will instantly and violently boil due to pressure drop, spraying out the orifice along with remaining H and O, causing fire and maybe explosion…

          • Stephen

            I think that’s what they did if I remember . So -4 Psi is a partial vacuum if I understand right. I wonder how much H or He that would correspond to. And if we can estimate if and howmuch H is consumed or absorbed . Are they checking for He?

            • Stephen

              I suppose most of the original gasses were consumed probably chemically, or the free volume could also have increased.

          • Obvious

            -14.7 PSI is the vacuum of space. +14.7 PSI is the weight of the atmosphere upon your body (at sea level).

  • Stephen

    What would the negative Psi correspond to in this context?

  • Svein Arild Utne

    Do we need to boil Lithsium. If so we can go high in temp or low in pressure. High in temp is hard for the equipment, so maybe it is better to go for low pressure. If the chemicals are mixed perfect there will always be some left that will boil at a lower temp and give high pressure. Maybe it is possible to heat till 1300 degrees, and then went out the gas and maybe use some pump to get below atmospheric pressure, so the lithsium will start to boil at a more freindly temp?

  • Svein Arild Utne

    So what can we conclude from this run?

    • Obvious

      More work needed. Missing variable(s) of some sort to get XH.
      Glowstick seems like it is pretty tough.
      Should test Parkhomov LAH for composition.
      Should test Parkhomov tube compositon.

      • artefact

        change the PID to one that can keep temperature more stable.

        • Obvious

          Use Li(Na0.1, Ga0.5,Al0.4)H4

    • tom15

      Doesn’t matter what is attempted to replicate, MFMP shows, that is is not real.

      But positive thinking, it shows which ways are not viable. Donate!

  • Josh G

    I was unfortunately too busy to follow this closely. From what I could gather, there was no obvious evidence of both excess heat and heat after death, but there were gamma emissions early on that faded away but then came back as they were powering down? Is that correct? Could someone please offer a brief summary of what we know at this point about the experiment?

    • Obvious

      Was there gammas when cooling down?

      • Stephen

        Would they have a way to define the gamma frequencies of the different gamma bursts? Or only the counts?

        • Obvious

          Need a spectrometer for that. Portable ones are available. The ones I have used have a range from ~1 to 3000 keV., with 1024 channels.

  • Axil Axil

    The constant oscillation of the pressure reading might indicate a constant creation and destruction of solid particles derived from the gas envelope in the core.

  • dickyaesta

    Why seems the light brighter on the right side of the tube compared to the left (left image 08:26 part 5), whereas it seems the infrared camera doesn’t register a difference, Can this be an indication of anything?Maybe getting more brittle or breaking up soon.
    Saludos from a not sunny northern Spain.

  • Axil Axil

    I understand that a falling pressure indicates a weak or non existent reaction because the solids in the core are not vaporizing but building instead. When the temperature of the core got up to 1300 then the pressure began to rise as the solids vaporized marking the onset of a active reaction. 1300 looks like the magic number for reason start.

  • Stephen

    Looks like the core temp is catching up. Is this correct?

    • Axil Axil

      Is the core temperature 1330 and the outside temperature 1020? I that the correct way to read those temperatures.?

      • Stephen

        At one point they seemed to converge very closely but the they diverged again.

      • Ged

        Yep, you read that completely right. Well, the 1330 was the outside of the core detected in that gap between heater shields which allows the core to be seen, while the 1020 was the outside of the heater shields (including the hotspot of the core though, since it was integrated across the entire glowstick).

  • Stephen

    Is the RF being monitored and checked?

  • Stephen

    Wouldn’t it be amazing if we could have a light spectrum sensor, UV detector, X-ray detector in the core we could then see if and what kind of ionization and reccombinations are occurring and at what rate. Do such sensors exist that can be put there?

  • Is the geiger counter since the last temperature increase going to make more clicks?
    For a while it was completely silent, now it’s clicking multiple times per second…

  • Ophelia Rump

    Am I misreading the meaning of the lines crossing then diverging?
    It seems to me that the power requirement dropped while the heat has increased, that is not something you expect from a linear relationship. It seems like a strong indicator of excess heat to me.

    Have I missed something important here?

    • The purple line is pressure and the light blue line seems to be temperature.
      So no indication for excess heat…unfortunateley.

      we don’t see input power, so WE can’t make any conclusions. Only in the way the temperature would rise suddenly to a runaway.

      • Ophelia Rump

        Thank you Barty. If these tests are demonstrating anything it is that it seems to be far easier to build a LENR reactor than it is to prove how much energy you get out of one. This is something quite remarkable, I enjoy looking in on these magnificent adventures. It is like springtime and we are looking for the first few flowers to bloom. Soon there will be profusion.

  • ecatworld

    This picture was taken during a power-off period that went from 1027ºC to 790ºC – this was taken at 790ºC