MFMP Publish their LENR Recipe

This post has just been published on the MFMP Facebook Page

The Cookbook is in the signal…
Prepare thoroughly (Ni + LiAlH4 + Li)

1. Bake Ni
2. Reduce Ni
3. Hydrogenate Ni
4. Mix: Ni + LiAlH4 + Li
5. Bake and vac reactor, add Nickel, vac warm, add H2, Vac
6. Heat to above Mossbauer determined Ni Debye (say 135C), pressure regulated to approx 1bar abs.
7. Hold, pressure regulated to approx 1bar abs.
8. Heat slowly to as close to Ni Curie as comfortable (Say 340C), pressure regulated to approx 1bar abs.
9. Hold, pressure regulated to approx 1bar abs.
10. Slowly lower temp to above highest known Ni Debye (Say 220C), pressure regulated to approx 1bar abs.
11. Hold, pressure regulated to approx 1bar abs.
12. Go as fast as possible through Ni Curie
13. Hold, pressure regulated to approx 0.5bar abs.
14. Cycle through 500C internal, pressure regulated to approx 0.5bar abs.
15. Hold, pressure regulated to approx 0.5bar abs.
16. Raise internal temperature to over 1200, pressure regulated to approx 0.5bar abs.
17. Drop to around 1000 and hold, pressure regulated to approx 0.5bar abs.
18. Raise internal temperature to near boiling point of Lithium
1h Thermal > x/β- emissions > Pb > IR/THz > 5h (SSM)
where ‘>’ means ‘leads to’

The End of the Carbon Age is Nigh

Thankyou to all those that helped us

  • Sanjeev

    Implications of Signal, Seeing into the Cat with X-Rays
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtTeHU4vBmc&feature=youtu.be

    • Mats002

      I saw the whole video, nothing new for us who followed the experiment and the aftermath but one thing that stuck out was the conclusion that the ‘negative’ outcome of F9

  • VisionandWisdom

    Fantastic news and work MFMP team!
    Any chance of a detailed diagram of the potential reactor setup please?
    I saved all the original glowstick ones and early parkhomov diagrams.
    Roll on 2016 and the successful replications!

  • Bob Greenyer

    What you seeing Remi is an artefact of the process of Live Open Science – everyone is in the lab that chooses to be experiencing the discovery process. The distilled information will come through the noise in time when people have a chance to take stock and connect the dots such that the message can be effectively conveyed.

    I am about to start rolling out the bulk of the information package that puts everything in context. It may have errors and factual inaccuracies – but it is the spirit of it that should allow others with the relevant knowhow to fill the gaps. We should not be afraid of being wrong but when nature tells you something, we should listen.

  • Jarea

    I have seen a nice comment from Goatguy2 about demanding more specific information on each step of the recipe.
    In my opinion, is a good input that can help Replicators.
    See below
    http://nextbigfuture.com/2016/02/mfmp-project-publishes-recipe-for.html#soa_405ed025

  • Mike Henderson

    Has a gamma ray burst (GRB) been excluded as a possible cause of the excursion?

    • US_Citizen71

      It is possible, but the odds of a gamma ray burst the appears in signature like bremsstrahlung radiation near the beginning of the production of apparent excess heat is less likely in my opinion than me being chosen by the Republican party to run for president during a contested convention this summer.

  • Bob Greenyer

    I have discussed with my better half that it may be a good idea – but simply do not have the means – plus, I can do more thinking here.

  • Sant2060

    Great work, congrats. One thing though…correlation doesnt mean causation. I think you would do just fine without hyping gamas and lead as the finalu answer and source of heat…at least until you or someone proves it.

    This is now a very dangerous situation…you cracked a very big pisce of puzzle, but it could all go unnoticed and ridiculed because of one of the oldest logical errors.

    • Bob Greenyer

      We will only be satisfied when we have replicated ourselves – which unfortunately means not adding Lead or Tungsten in the initial run – so no expectation of higher COP.

      We would like to have other detectors to simultaneously look at reactor and another for environmental control.

      Perhaps a third party or other member of the group replicating would also suffice.

      Beyond that – it will be testing the various theories to achieve higher COP

      • http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/ barty

        Hi Bob, you may be interested in the starting technical discussion at LENR Forum:

        https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/2800-MFMP-18-steps-to-LENR-excess-heat-BasE-Cat-recipe/?postID=14347#post14347

        Also Freethinker reported gammas in his replication approach a while back.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Too many channels already.

      • Pekka Janhunen

        The COP should have nothing to do with the presence or non-presence of radiation shielding.

        That said, maybe you have reproduced the Mouse (which according to Rossi has COP of 1.1) while the Cat is still undiscovered. Maybe the Cat is liquid metal alloy wetting some base metal (perhaps tungsten) on the walls, the liquid containing both Li and Ni plus for example Cu to lower the melting point.

        Although energetically unimportant, the produced ionising radiation (X-rays) might nevertheless be enough to trigger the Cat.

        Of course, everything that I said about Mouse and Cat here is speculative. I agree that you should just replicate yourselves now: do exactly the same as before, but eliminate the possibility that the radiation was a measurement error by using more than one independent instrument to measure it.

        • Bob Greenyer

          I think it is a moderator of thermal loss and the process is thermally driven.

        • Mattias

          But as I understand it … the shielding is actually absorbing the radiation and getting warmer – thus contributing to the total COP (at the moment this excess is “lost”). This means that lead or tungsten actually has everything to do with the COP.

          Maybe I have misunderstood the whole thing?

          • Pekka Janhunen

            Yes someone may have said that, but it cannot be so – see for example my calculation below in this thread. Gamma rays only five times above background cannot measurably warm up anything, because the power is only nanowatt scale.

            • Matt Sevrens

              The thing is it was specifically Rossi who claimed that the heat source was gamma being thermalized by lead.

              • Pekka Janhunen

                Yes. Maybe his device emitted more low-energy photons at that time, or maybe he was just wrong.

                • Axil Axil

                  The gamma problems went away after Rossi installed a secondary heater in his reactor to preheat the reactor above the gamma production temperature threshold.

                • Pekka Janhunen

                  By secondary heater are you referring to mouse?

                • Axil Axil

                  Rossi had trouble with radiation coming from his reactor until he installed a auxiliary heater.

                  We can go back now and understand why Rossi had a secondary heater installed in the early versions of his reactor

                  http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3144790.ece/BINARY/original/Img+2+ECAT_explained.jpg

                  Three E-cats without insulation and one insulated. Text in blue indicates hydrogen inlet, main heater, auxiliary heater and water inlet. Foto: Giuseppe Levi

                  Rossi said that it would be dangerous to operate his reactor without a secondary heater. That heater got the reaction temperature into the proper SPP infrared photon pumping zone to remove gamma radiation from the LENR reaction.

                • Matt Sevrens

                  It’s also possible that the gamma MFMP detected was just what escaped the system and the rest was already thermalized. In which case they haven’t discovered how to scale the COP at all.

                • Pekka Janhunen

                  Possible, but it would require that the internal gamma spectrum increases by some 10-11 orders of magnitude below the 30keV observation limit.

      • Axil Axil

        To get the heat level up, we must progress from LENR which is low level activity to LENR+ which is high Level activity. LENR is the production of Surface Plasmon Polaritons (SPP). They generated heat up to COP1.2. To get the Heat higher, Hydrogen Rydberg Matter (RHM) must be generated, which is an amplifier of SPP activity.

        To produce HRM, we need to add cavitation and RF stimulation.

        You might try using the contents of a 5 year old Nickel battery.

        See

        https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/2760-Successful-replication-of-Alexander-Parkhomov/?pageNo=1

        It seems that time and many recharge cycles produce nickel that can generate HRM.

        Forget about tungsten and warm up to very old and worn out nickel batteries.

  • Da Phys

    PZL would have shown a distinct peak in the spectrum.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Bit of both – I had team calls to confirm we are going to do an exact replication of ourselves next. Calls and responses – and went to bed.

    I will release a Raw version as I think it is necessary to explain a few things and add the extra info.

    I will then look to do a more refined one as energy allows.

    At the moment there are Universities and private replicators seeking clarity and journalists so it makes sense to get out more and more clarifying media.

    People will certainly have opinions on how this information is being released (not that it wasn’t already in the public domain as the experiment and discussion/analysis was live), but it is as fast as we can – after we were ‘happy’ that it was meaningful.

    I have had 4 hours restless sleep but must go and do family duties this morning (searching for a play school for our son), so it’ll have to wait a little longer.

    • Appleby

      Thanks I also would like to email you a video of some heat exchanger tubing I got a gate pass for from my employer with strange magnetic properties.

      If I put the north side of a round (speaker) magnet on the end of the tubing it wants to find “center”.

      If I put the south side of the same magnet on the same end of the tubing it forces itself to one side or the other.

      I don’t know if this will complicate things or if you’re even interested but I have more than enough to send to you.

      To make matters even harder for you I have no idea what the tubing is made up of.

      Only thing I can tell you for sure is it does not show any corrosion after 10 years of laying on the ground in the weather.

    • Bob Matulis

      I am happy to hear you are pursuing an exact replication. I am excited about the announcement regarding gamma rays occurring with excess heat. But ever since the original P&F breakthrough the biggest stumbling block is replication.

      This upcoming replication is a defining moment in my opinion. If it fails and ultimately takes numerous attempts to get the positive results we are “back to square 1”. However, it succeeds on this next try it suggests that the effect can be reliably replicated. I believe it will just be a matter of time before countless replications settle the fact that LENR is real.

      Great work and congratulations on what has already been accomplished. Your time, blood, sweat and tears is very much appreciated.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Thanks Bob and believe me – there will be a lot of sweat on the next one – but if it doesn’t deliver – we have to try again, we didn’t get this far by thinking it was easy.

  • Appleby

    I have been looking for bob’s video he said he would release and can’t find it. Could someone please post a link?

  • artefact

    EGO OUT:

    “FEB 24, 2016 LENR CITIES EUROPEAN LEADER OF LENRS INDUSTRIAL FUTURE”
    http://egooutpeters.blogspot.de/2016/02/feb-24-2016-lenr-cities-european-leader.html

  • Matt Sevrens

    Until this is replicated it’s all just a hypothesis

    • John Schut

      This is already a replication…

      • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Agaricus

        More ‘reverse engineering’ with a large element of informed guesswork. Independent replication using the cookbook formula is the stated purpose of releasing the information, and will be the true vindication of MFMP’s work.

    • Bob Greenyer

      A man may lie, nature can not, Piantelli taught me that.

      It is not the size of the signal that matters, it is the structure of the signal and we saw the same signals (switch on and operation) that Rossi and others have observed.

      People can have opinions – but this is not a matter of opinion, this is a gift from Nature and in time, probably very quickly, this will be impossible to deny.

      • psi2u2

        Bob, congratulations to you and the entire MFMP team. Your replication was one of the things I’ve been waiting for. Well done! I look forward to reading more as you make further progress.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Thank you for your unstinting support.

          • we want LENR Fusione Fredda

            No worries, you’ve got tons more here.

            • Bruce Williams

              And here too !

      • Matt Sevrens

        Just do it ONE more time :-/ Thats it. That’s science man. Then you can say your hypothesis is confirmed.

        • Bob Greenyer

          In our pre release letter, published on this site – we state we would like to.

          But the data shows what Rossi claims.

          You know if a number of people that have looked in the same drawer, tell you there is a piece of yellow card in there, then you don’t know if you should believe them. If you look your self and see the yellow card, you have to conclude they were telling you the truth, of course, you can close the draw and open it again if you don’t believe your eyes.

  • http://lenrftw.net LENR G

    Brian Ahern is not on the bandwagon (from MFMP site):

    “I am severely underwhelmed bythe context behind the claims from yesterday.

    The gammas are a factor of six above background, but 9 orders of magnitude below heating.

    Secondly, we were tantalized by the term signal. What signal?

    Thirdly, we were promised 5 hours of self sustained mode. Where is the data? What was the COP?

    I fear that MFMP is relying on Rossi’s data. Layering in a 30 minute Rossi video was frighteningly bad.

    If this release limited itself to gammas it would be interesting, but a long way from understanding the mechanism producing heat. As it is, nothing has advanced in LENR.”

    ———

    There does seem to be some confusion in some quarters about the gamma claim. Note that MFMP are not claiming that the initial gamma spike nor even the <100 keV photons that they detected sporadically thereafter are the cause of the excess heat they measured. Just that they saw them and if not a malfunction of some kind clearly indicate nuclear events.

    And the 5 hour SSM was in that cryptic one line equation but they didn't achieve 5 hours of SSM in the glowstick experiment. They've yet to tell us in detail about the SSM hint but I expect it's just that they feel that they understand how SSM is achieved now.

    Right now what we've got is a clean X/gamma radiation signal that correlates with excess heat onset. That may not be a slam dunk but it's close. Replications permitting.

    • Matt Sevrens

      Actually they are claiming the gammas are the source of heat. The claim is that the gammas are thermalized by lead in the e-cat. That was the point of posting the Rossi video.

      • http://lenrftw.net LENR G

        In the E-Cat yes. In GS5 not necessarily. They didn’t have lead.

        • Matt Sevrens

          Me: Where is the lead in the glowstick?
          Mats002: The lead is around the radiation meter, as I can see it.
          Bob Greenyer: Yes – and that may have thermalised some emissions and back radiated it – though there is very little opposite the active – since that is where the scintillator well is.

          • http://lenrftw.net LENR G

            I stand corrected. The point still stands that they didn’t use a lead shield to thermalize the photons in GS5.

            • Matt Sevrens

              Yeah. It seems like they’ve found another piece of the puzzle but we still don’t have a consistently replicable cookbook. In a few weeks we’ll know though.

              • http://lenrftw.net LENR G

                It is interesting, on a meta level, to watch the behavior of MFMP as a pioneer in live open science.

                As soon as they found a recipe and data that *they* found convincing they released it to the public. This seems to be in the spirit of LOS. However they are catching some heat for not internally replicating before going public and raising expectations through the roof (does seem to be a risk) and also their playful release of info (exciting but maybe not the highest level of professionalism especially in a field plagued by all sorts of “interesting” personalities).

                I don’t know what’s right or wrong. They are blazing a trail and making up the rules as they go. But it is fun to observe.

                I feel we owe them a great debt so let’s let them do it the way they want. I certainly can’t fault their enthusiasm in light of the potential magnitude of what they just possibly accomplished.

                • LCD

                  Ok but the fact that gammas or xrays were created by heating Nickel is not significant?

                • GreenWin

                  Remember – Mills has been making soft xray and excess heat in early Raney nickel experiments since mid-1990s. These experiments have been replicated. But Mills maintains it’s a reaction due to hydrino – an atomic hydrogen atom transitioning to a lower ground state.

                  Regardless, IF the MFMP recipe can produce gamma bursts on cue – physics says it’s a “nuclear” reaction. It may be something else. But it’s a helluva lot more than the hot fusionists have accomplished the last 65 years.

            • Bob Greenyer

              90% of the energy in trace 7 is in the range 30KeV to 96KeV.
              we cannot see below 30KeV

              Some energy will have been absorbed in the steel fuel container and in the heater coil etc at the lowest energies.

              • SG

                Bob, do you agree with Brian Ahern that gamma energy detected is “9 orders of magnitude below heating.” I’m not even sure what he means by that statement. But if we did a thought experiment with a lead shield combined with the GS5 apparatus, what kind of heating levels would be expected?

                • artefact

                  He says that there are not enough particles detected to be the reason for the heat.

                  A reason why that would be enough is when the emitted particles gets so much downshifted that most of the particles become heat and only some are energetic enuogh to leave the reactor IMHO.

                • Bob Greenyer

                  I believe that yes. I also can’t explain the radiation data other than it is coming as a result of an interaction in the reactor just be for and during excess heat – Brian did not address the correlation aspect. It is a good indicator that it is working AFAIK and it is necessary to have reactor geometry to shield for it.

                  The energy mix – depends on your pet theory, here is a few.

                  Thermalisation of ’emissions’ which may only in part be what we observed – or what we observed was in someway an after effect of nuclear spallation resulting in Muons (Olafsson/Holmlid) leading to the signal
                  Nickel transmutation, stepwise (Piantelli/Focardi) – this may result in the observed emissions but not the bulk of energy
                  Nickel transmutation, via neutron stripping (Gullstrom)
                  Lithium conversion, either to 6Li (via neutron stripping) or to 2X 4He aneutronic fusion (Piantelli)

              • Pekka Janhunen

                In fact I somewhat doubt this 90% figure, maybe forgot to multiply by energy to get differential energy flux from differential number flux?

                • Bob Greenyer

                  Your best bet is to ask Bob Higgins on the Signal thread how he calculated it.

                  If it is not right it should be corrected ASAP

    • Pekka Janhunen

      Brian Ahern is right at least about gammas are energetically insignificant.

      In Bob Higgins’ gamma analysis PDF file, the spectrum number 7 (Figure 6) is roughly given by

      f(E)=(200/keV)*(200keV/E)^2 [counts/keV].

      Multiplying by energy E, we get energy per 1keV bin:

      W(E)=(200/keV)*(200keV)^2/E [energy/keV].

      Integrating with respect to E from lower cutoff E to some high cutoff Emax we get the total energy deposited on the detector as

      Etot(E)=(200/keV)*(200keV)^2*ln(Emax/E)
      =1.28e-9*ln(Emax/E) [J].

      Gamma power falling on detector is Etot divided by measurement time 14160s:

      Power(E)=Etot(E)/(14160s) = 9e-14*ln(Emax/E) [W].

      Notice that the result depends only weakly (logarithmically) on the lower cutoff E. Physically, it means that the lowest energy quanta, although numerous, do not carry a very big part of the energy if the spectrum falls like 1/E^2. For example if E=30keV and Emax=1.5MeV, the logarithmic factor is 3.9, and if E=1keV it is 7.3, less than twofold increase. Of course, in drawing this conclusion we assumed that the spectrum continues to follow 1/E^2 shape also below the observation threshold 30 keV.

      Taking into account the solid angle covered by the detector gives some 2-3 orders of magnitude more power. If we assume 3 orders of magnitude there to be generous and use 100eV as lower limit (so that the logarithm factor is 9.6), we obtain gamma output power of only one nanowatt.

      Gamma power dissipated in any Pb shielding of an E-cat is energetically completely insignificant. If one insists that all energy internally is liberated originally as photons (for which we have no proof), in that case almost all of them must be of so low energy that they dissipate already in the fuel powder. This was my point to Rossi in April 2012 (http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510&cpage=51#comment-219945 ) and the point is still the same. In brief, something which is only five times above background radiation cannot be energetically comparable to any measurable heat output of a reactor.

      • http://lenrftw.net LENR G

        Is the argument that the burst is insignificant and doesn’t show nuclear events?

        Or is the argument that the burst is not responsible for any significant excess heat?

        Cause I don’t think anyone is arguing the second one.

        The focus is on the significance of the first one (and the evidence that it correlates with the onset of excess heat — note not assuming cause and effect, just linked phenomena).

        • Pekka Janhunen

          The latter: the “burst” (which rather looks a 2-hour episode to me because that was the time resolution) is not responsible for any measurable excess heat.

          I agree with your last paragraph.

          Energetically significant levels of X-ray/gamma emissions would also have direct health effects, including lethal ones. But no LENR researcher has ever been diagnosed with radiation sickness, let alone died of it.

          1 MeV gammas (for example) are so penetrating that they are not really damped by the reactor at all, not even if it would have 1 mm of lead or tungsten shielding. This means that the detector really sees all MeV gammas that the reaction ever generates, apart from geometric factor. Those photons are very few: less than one count per second on the detector and perhaps hundred or so events per second in all directions. But to produce, for example, 100 W of excess power needs thirty trillion Li-H fusion reactions per second.

          Cold fusion means essentially or embarrassingly radiation-free nuclear reactions. That it sometimes produces a nanowatt of radiation is energetically only a curiosity, although it can also be used to demonstrate to sceptics that the underlying phenomenon (or at least a small part of it) is nuclear. Entirely or almost radiation-free reactions, that is the nature of LENR, that is what MFMP is finding, and that is the reason why it has been so hard to physicists to believe in such experimental results.

          • Axil Axil

            Here is my theory…

            The surface plasmon polariton (SPP) is first born out of concentrated infrared photons, but it gets to a stage where it can extract nuclear binding energy out of the nucleus. That energy is stored and downshifted through FANO resonance in a soliton until the SPP decays whereupon its EMF energy content now in the XUV and X-ray range is released to the far field.

            I have been saying for years now that a cold reactor will cause gamma radiation. IMHO, this is due to the failure to form a Bose condensate among many Surface Plasmon Polaritons (SPP)s. Lack of sufficient polariton pumping allows the SPP to initiate the LENR reaction, but not enough thermal pumping to create a bose condensate among the SPPs to spread the radiation around to thermalize or downshift gamma level radiation through super-absorption among many SPPs.

            Low temperature means many SPP are working alone thereby creating x-rays because no downshifting is possible.

            High temperatures means many SPPs working together in a BEC to share energy throughout the SPP ensemble through super-absorption.

            SPP pumping is similar to laser pumping

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_pumping

            Until the SPP pumping gets to an inversion condition, a SPP bose condensate cannot be formed.

            Weak pumping means no laser beam is produced.

            Usually, the x-xay stage lasts only a few seconds during power ramp at up startup or on power ramp down during shutdown when the reactor is cold or is getting cold.

            The transition from LENR to LENR+ happens when the SPPs form on the metalized hydrogen(HRM) which amplifies their catalytic power. HRM is metastable. The more energy accumulated in the HRM, the longer lived the HRM are.

      • Bob Greenyer

        We’ll see when we/others get some lead in there.

        The cell did get hotter, only after the ‘turn on’ and only across the period in which the low end radiation was detectable. I am sure that MIT have better equipment and can give a better answer in time, but for now, the data is the data.

  • deleo77

    It’s too technical and early at this point. It’s hard to write a mainstream article about detecting radiation above the background level and get people excited about it – especially when the detection is just above the noise level. If others are able to reproduce this repeatedly and someone with a name in science is willing to say “LENR aka Cold Fusion is real and has now been discovered” then I imagine CNN etc will run with it.

    I do think that others will replicate the Rossi Effect with these steps over the next several months. Ni62 enhancing the effect could really help here as well and will just make the effect even more clear. I know skeptics are nowhere ready to give up the fight yet, but it looks like the train has left the station and Rossi will be vindicated. As someone who has always been 50/50 on Rossi I now finally see something to push me over the hump.

    • Private Citizen

      “I know skeptics are nowhere ready to give up the fight yet”

      Hard to tell, skeptical voices have been banned and banished from the available forums, so all we get to hear is the Hallelujah chorus in the echo chamber.

  • Warthog

    More correctly…”humanity” will not change. Certainly change is possible on an individual basis when done for ” internal” (moral, ethical, religious) reasons. But “human nature” is as God (or Darwin) made it, and trying to impose change via external means ” ain’t gonna happen”, and certainly not on the scale needed to make communism/socialism a success.

  • e-dog

    I wonder which main stream media will pick this up first?? Not that ECW isnt main stream… it is for me!

    • http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/ barty

      None. It’s absolutely worthless for them I guess.
      We have to wait for the flood of replications, then I’m sure wired.co.uk etc will report.

      But this is, yet, too abstract for outsiders.

      • Bob Matulis

        Replications is the key. I would think many university Chemistry profs could have great fun reproducing this.

  • e-dog

    This nearly made me cry, Ok.. I did cry but just a few tears, damn i wish they would stop…. I am still just utterly gob-smacked! Again WOW!

    Copied it of Mats website.. I think it needs to be known, this is history.
    what do you think Frank?

    Here’s the complete letter to the donors from MFMP:

    Dear Donor,

    During ICCF-17 in South Korea, shortly following the sad death of Dr. Martin Fleischmann, it became abundantly clear to a group of fresh attendees that the old approach to science, combined with the ostracisation of the great minds that had worked in the face of ridicule, was not delivering on the promise of of what we immediately called, “The New Fire”.

    It also was clear that there was something to investigate and we were morally bound to do it.

    We said that people would not believe, until they could experience it as if they were doing themselves and so the idea of Live Open Science was born. That was not enough, it had to be an effort that was free from commercial or government interests and that result and so it had to be conducted by the people, for the people. Our journey was made possible by the courage of Francesco Celani and we thank him profusely.

    Your donations played a critical role in realising this vision, but you know that, what we know you will want to hear is what we have to share tomorrow.

    We have been running and analysing an experiment live over the past Month. First for us in this experiment were:

    – Parkhomov Baking of Ni(correctly done)

    – Pre Hydrogenation of Ni

    – Proper baking out of cell under vacuum

    – Parkhomov pressure

    – Piantelli de-oxygenation

    – Piantelli ‘loading’ + proper dwell times

    – Piantelli capture analogue

    – Use of free Lithium

    – Use of calibrated NaI

    – Cycles attempting to create nano Ni distillates (inspired by “Bang!” discovery of dissolved Ni)

    – Long Run

    You can see that there are steps in there that came about only because of activities that were made possible by donations. The critical visits to Piantelli and Parkhomov.

    Around the beginning of the month we saw what appeared to be up to a COP of 1.2, not earth shattering, but sustained and robust and in line with both observations by others and the Lugano report when adjusted for correct emissivity. Over the next weeks we tried various bookend calibrations which supported this finding.

    We have said that only two paths would satisfy us:

    Statistically significant Isotopic or elemental shifts from Fuel to Ash

    Statistically significant emissions commensurate, correlating, or anti correlating to excess heat

    We are happy to tell you that we believe we have satisfied our condition 2, yet of course we’d like to replicate ourselves. Actually, though, it goes much further than that. What we will share is that the way in which we discovered it and the journey of analysis that makes it virtually impossible to say that Rossi does not have what he claims. It also shows that, whilst he may have been optimistic in how fast this would play out, he has been telling the truth, quite openly for years. Not only that, nature itself has been telling the same story and it told us too.

    By the 16/02/2016 we had given up trying to destroy the *GlowStick* 5.2, part of a long lineage of []=Project Dog Bone=[] experiments. After the reactor was turned off, Alan shared the remainder of the data files from the NaI scintillator kindly donated by a project follower called Stephen (Thankyou Stephen, really).

    Project follower and open science legend, Ecco, first took a look at the data and found some anomalies – one SO striking that we thought there had been an equipment failure. We did not know the time that the anomalies occurred and had to wait until Alan woke to explain the time stamps so we could correlate it with the thermal and power data published live to HUGNet (Thankyou Ryan and Paul Hunt).

    To our extreme surprise, the onset of excess heat followed the massive anomaly in emissions and the minor anomalies were during and only during excess heat.

    This led us on a path of discovery, the sequence of which explains:

    The massive count signal discovered by Francesco Celani during Rossi’s first public demo

    How Rossi knew his reactor had started

    How the E-Cat generates excess heat

    How it self sustains

    How it can scale easily

    That it is safe

    It also showed us how replicators can know they have succeeded in triggering the New Fire and how to enhance the excess heat.

    Subsequent to this, we found out Rossi had travelled the same design journey and had publicly shared it in the past.

    The irony is – this was all being conducted live in the open, including discussions and graphing, whilst people were distracted with news of the end of the 1MW 1 year test. Same day…

    In the past week we have been checking, cross checking to verify and this morning we cleared our last serious doubt, again live, with shared data. Because this is already in the open we want people to know so that they can start replicating based on what works, moreover, the insight will allow people to immediately start improving on our results.

    Thank you for making this possible

    We did it

    We lit the New Fire Together!

    • Frank Acland

      Thanks, e-dog. Good idea — I’ve made a separate post for the letter.

  • Fyodor

    I hoped that 2015 would be the year of successful replications, Post-Parkhomov. Let’s hope that we were only off by a year and that this works and is reliably replicable.

  • e-dog

    I wonder what rossi’s reaction to this MFMP announcement could be?? F9??

    • http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/ barty

      I guess he tought “damn! now I have competition!!” 😉

    • georgehants

      If Mr. Rossi (IH) ever try to use a patent to stop cheap |Cold Fusion devices from being produced to help humanity we will have our answer.

  • Lux Terrea

    I know! I know. Really lame question but all I’ve heard about gamma rays are that they are the most powerful and they easily kill people. Wouldn’t a device that makes them be a really bad thing and wouldn’t that put these lenr devices into a highly regulated category like nuclear power plants?

    • SG

      Even sticky tape emits terahertz radiation. I’m pretty sure sticky tape isn’t highly regulated.

      http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/08/05/1840207/sticky-tape-found-to-emit-terahertz-radiation

      The amount of low energy gamma can be easily blocked by a thin layer of lead or tungsten. There is no radioactive fuel and no radioactive waste.

      • Kevmo

        Excellent response.

      • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Agaricus

        Facts and common sense seem to become less relevant when agendas are being served. Just the mention of gamma radiation would be enough to serve as the basis for scare stories if some party wanted to monopolise CF by dragging it into the nuclear stockade.

        • Lux Terrea

          Good response and good observation. PR people take note.

    • e-dog

      We really should consult Dr Banner about these gamma rays..

  • Pekka Janhunen

    According to established physics, gammas can only be produced by nuclear reactions or by particle accelerators, for they cannot be produced by chemical reactions. On the other hand, if nuclear reactions occur, nuclear energy can also be liberated.

    Unless the gammas were some kind of measurement error, the experiment shows quite convincingly that some nuclear reactions occurred. The fact that some excess heat (=amount of extra heat energy which is too large to be explained by chemical reactions) was also reported at the same time adds to the case, because both gammas and excess heat can in principle be explained by nuclear reactions. Here, “nuclear reaction” must be understood in a broad sense: any process which transforms nuclei to other ones, including but not necessarily limited to the currently known types of nuclear reactions.

  • LuFong

    Gamma emissions in Rossi’s reactors generating heat is no surprise to me as this was common knowledge way back when. Rossi always had a lead shield in the early E-Cats. At the time it was for thermalization but Rossi also said it was for a fail safe for any radiation.

    I looked back over the Lugano Report ( http://www.elforsk.se/Global/Omv%C3%A4rld_system/filer/LuganoReportSubmit.pdf ) , the gold standard in understanding the E-Cat, and there is a clear statement that there is no gamma’s or any other radiation detected, either in the fuel before and immediately after the test, nor during the test. There doesn’t seem to be any mention of Pb either in the fuel or E-Cat device. This to me is very strange and perhaps someone can expound on this.

    • Kevmo

      I think it’s evidence that Rossi had managed to get past the point where his reactor was “leaking” gamma rays. He’s on his 5th revision while everyone else including MFMP is on version 1.0

      • LuFong

        See my edit on my comment above.

        • Kevmo

          I can’t tell where you edited it.

          • LuFong

            Refresh the page and see the part that says ‘Edit’.

    • Mats002

      Plausible answers is down in this thread, the heating wire or the alumina reactor can be coated with Pb or another dense material.

    • Adam Lepczak

      Lugano tested the “hot cat” version of the reactor. I am thinking it is a 2nd generation of the process. 3rd generation of the process is the Ecat-X. The 1MW plant uses modified flavor of the original design. I would guess that that Rossi has an extensive experience operating the original Ecat but HotCat and Ecat-X are way more efficient but more difficult to control. It is possible that the “HotCat” design was a diversion.

    • Ged

      Bob pointed out the Incol coating on the coils of the hot cat are four times thicker than necessary to block 100% of the gamma rays at these low energy levels. So, of course Lugano didn’t see any without compensating for the coil covered areas.

      Also, Cook/Rossi is just say the major source of the energy is that reaction. But as LENRG pointed out, the resulting neutron shuttling afterwards would make gammas on this scale and energy distribution. The theory is not fully nailed down, but all evidence so far points to Rossi/Cook likely being right about the fusion half of the reaction and why it next to never makes gammas. We’ll have to see with further experiments now that we know how and what to look for.

      • LuFong

        Thanks for the reply but I still don’t really follow (and may never given my background). The coils aren’t the locus of the reaction and would only block some of the gamma’s since they coil around and don’t touch each other leaving plenty of gaps. I don’t really understand the science including the Cook/Rossi paper–I am only looking for superficial contradictions.

        Anyway, Bob Greenyer and MFMP seems confident in the data and the rest is just engineering but I say until it’s demonstrated, it’s still just conjecture. I agree if they have definitive signals of gamma then there is a nuclear reaction occuring but that’s only a small step toward Rossi’s E-Cat, IMHO.

    • Kevmo

      I think someone upthread expanded on this. A thin sleeve of Tungsten takes care of low intensity gammas, or some other metal that is incorporated into the reactor wall itself.

  • peacelovewoodstock

    Please forgive this dumb question but what does it mean when Rossi or now Bob Greenyer includes ‘F9’ as part of a message?

    • ScienceFan

      Final results of tests could be positive or negative. F-… 9 words.

      • peacelovewoodstock

        Ha! Thanks to all. I knew the meaning listed in urban dictionary couldn’t be it 🙂

    • Sverre Haslund

      F9 – refers to Rossi’s standard disclaimer which is “if the results of the one year test are positive but could also be negative”.

    • etburg

      This is a shorthand for “results could be positive or negative” which is statement one is typically required to make for business and legal reasons. He had to repeat it so often in his blog that someone joked that he should put a macro on his keyboard programmed to a key like the F9 key to type it out for him. After that it became a running joke. Whenever he says “F9” he is doing it in lieu of actually typing out the statement.

      • Bob Matulis

        Perhaps F9 will some day be defined in the Urban Dictionary! 🙂

    • Bob Matulis

      “F9” is short hand for a Rossi disclaimer. He uses regularly when discussing the ECAT and to paraphrase it means, “Assuming the test successfully concludes.”

  • Christina

    Congratulations, MFMP.
    Fantastic.

  • David Taylor-Fuller

    Bob, dont know if anyone has asked this yet. But what does the gamma signal signify. Is the energy being generated all or mostly gamma? I am assuming it has to be a significant source of the energy, other wise there wouldnt be a need to convert it to thermal energy via lead/tungsten

  • georgehants

    A search of —-MFMP confirms cold fusion lenr —– returns ECW and MFMP Facebook, nothing else.

  • e-dog

    Good point. Can you get your website tuned up to take donations?

  • georgehants

    Who will be the first to follow the MFMP recipe and credit them for their work?
    Perhaps some of our clever scientists who have been debunking it for 30 bloody years.

    • Bob Greenyer

      We know of several replicators or are preparing their apparatus – but this run took a week at least in material processing – and we believe that is key

      • georgehants

        Bob, it is MFMP that can now be credited with starting the revolution without taking away credit from Mr. Rossi et al, but he for his own reasons has been a disaster of secrecy delaying the Research of Cold Fusion.
        You may have missed my comment way down the page, if you can confirm the points we made we would like to donate further.
        Let me know if you cannot find it.

        • Bob Greenyer

          I am not sure that he has been that secret to be fair – it was just a case of no one with the means paying attention or believing in him enough.

          I will explain in my video today F9

          • georgehants

            Well I expect all the secret work to build bigger bombs etc is going well.
            Remember Mr. Rossi for some reason “donated” his technology to the defense dept.
            Did you find my comment?
            We need conformation that all your work will be passed on for the benefit of humanity and not profit.

  • Bob Greenyer

    I worked this out from the signal – before I was aware of this video.

    But listen and dwell on the phraseology – he specifically says

    “the heater of the System is the lead” look at the order of that phrase… To me it came to me in my sleep before I had seen this video and I will post a video I recorded before seeing this, later today.

    • Teemu Soilamo

      Then again, it might be some weird Italian phrasing. But I get your point.

      • Bob Greenyer

        It is more a slip of the tongue which will seem obvious when you see my independent insight.

    • e-dog

      Wow… well done Bob!

    • e-dog

      Just a question, do you have main stream media contacts?
      I get it, I will tell all my friends but we need some people with the creds and the contacts to really get your info out there!
      We still have the problem of ignorance and vested interests that will stand in the way of ….

      Im going to go for some (old) fire/cave man analogies … its like you guys have have seen rossi light a fire over there up in the hills in his shaman tent…
      through lots of stick rubbing you figured out how to do it too.. but no one is watching and its pouring rain, all the fire wood is damp, got no kindling, the old wise fellas are telling you to stop wasting your time .. .and winter is coming.

      this is world changing stuff and we have the internet.

  • Private Citizen

    Has there been ash analysis of the reactants responsible for this “smoking gun” gamma emission?

    Forgive, there is such a swarm of commentary, if the ash is mentioned, i missed it.

    • Mats002

      No ash analysis yet to my knowledge.