New LENR Experiment Report from Tom Conover

The document and comments have been submitted to me by Tom Conover, aka Wizkid

Control Tests & Live Run Results: Tests Performed 10/09/2016 thru 10/10/2016

To the readers: I read the temperature from 2 to 20 times per second. The way that I dropped the temperature during the run was that I controlled the wattage, based on benchmark temperatures I had experimentally determined. Even simpler than that, I just drop 10ms off the ON time every 5 minutes, because I wanted to find the sweet spot for the ignition point, and it had to be up high.

I started the with 240ms on, 16ms off, and kept the 16ms off static. My results were astonishing to me, I hope you enjoy reading the data half as much as I did. I had two experiments that showed more ‘anomalies’, but I resisted bothering you with them, even though they have pretty copper deposits clearly showing in the fuel cells that were destroyed.

Both of these experiments were high temp burnouts at the end, so I had to hunt the change in my software that was in charge of the function down and fix the problem. A day in the life…

Anyway, I ran another benchmark test on a brand new tube with my new algorithm, and it didn’t burn the tube out . . . finally! My new method is to start at 5 yard line on the field, and play backwards to the kickoff area. So I start very very high in temp, then drop 50C, then kick it up again (but with less and less wattage), and so on and so forth, all the way back to touch-back.

It is a strange way to try, seems to go against logic, but it also seems very much to work! The best part of this method is that I am (almost) convinced that I have seen actual LENR events in my lab, which has been a dream for me since 2011. The LENR ignition on this pre-loaded fuel cell starts immediately! I am so very happy that my daughter just happened to be visiting us, and she had lots of fun with me as we watched the scoreboard together!

This time, both of my “Live” tests tried to stop the experiment by burning out to connecting wire opposite from the K-Type sensor. The first experiment went to the finish line on zero power, but not before winning the football game! My daughter was here with me and I told her the players just left the field and went into the locker room to celebrate at half time, because the other team couldn’t even get off the bench.

The next test also burned the electrical power wire at almost the exact same time in the test. (Strange) I was watching the experiment progress this time, and as only a 1/4″ section of the lead was lost from the end of the lead, I simply reconnected the clip using very heavy leather gloves. (and I didn’t stop the experiment). So there is a big dip in this chart, but at least they went back into the game.

My tech buddy genius says my hardware needs work, and that I gotta beef it up. Dah! He did like the charts though, (very much!), and the story they tell all by themselves. So, I will be working on beefing up my hardware (again!) and preparing for more positive results I hope. It’s been a long time coming, but this bad boy was more than one watt over unity.

Anybody out there wanna try to compute the COP for me based on the Placebo tests please? Please note that I provide the fuel formula, mixing method, method for hydrogenation of the fuel etc… Don’t forget to heat the nickel powder to at least 250c for 30 minutes or so BEFORE you mix the fuel, to get the water out. You fellow replicators – hope this encourages you to stay in the game!

Enjoy, and thank you for sharing my interests.


  • wizkid

    Thank you for your patient and kind reply, Bruce! I will simply state that I have collected my opinions based on personal experience, including working directly with very wealthy people during my software development career.

    As a custom software developer, every day my work was peer reviewed in live interaction with my clients. To me this meant: Cash Flow or Skid Row, so I learned to believe what I saw, based on the environments response to the stimulus. Using that logic, I believe in LENR. This logic has worked for me for 64 years.

    After having a particular client try and fail to exercise his authority over me, claiming ownership of my life, my family, and my IP, I have acquired personal knowledge that the one percent are self centered, and are not above using or breaking the law to make more money. But I survived …

    I am enjoying my current journey with LENR, and the privilege of speaking with souls like yourself, who enrich me with their experiences and opinions.

    We are all naive, relative to God’s thoughts.

    I feel like I’ve been to a week long seminar.

    Thanks again!

  • wizkid

    I apologize for this post in advance.

    Re: “This is a profound misunderstanding of what is going on. Many of the phenomena currently being discussed …” BS!

    and the Wright Brothers went to France. My work isn’t hidden and is NOT perfect but if men were meant to fly they would have an Iron Man suit. Made in France. LENR is not controversial anymore. Ask the DoE! Scientists are controversial. Scientists are paid to protect the status quo of the 1 percent. Pioneers like the Wright Brothers and Henry Ford created “inventions”, not science. There are THIEVES and scammers out there, but they typically don’t initiate legal action against capitalists.

    Let’s repeat after me … If pigs were meant to fly, Rossi would have a doctorate degree and work for capitalists.

    again a little louder now,
    again again again

  • Stephen

    I dont disagree with you Bruce all of your points and your perspective on them are important.

    We really need good Scientists with good methods to notice LENR, and it a big mistake to push away those ones that do notice and are interested. Hopefully they will be the ones who can effectively apply these methods and convince the wider scientific community to sit up and notice. We only need to see the depth of skill and analysis, richness of data and quantities of papers in related subjects to see what they can potentially bring to LENR. Their contribution could be huge.

    With the ground breaking work being made in condensed matter physics, plasmonics and materials science along with well established more subtle and better understanding of nuclear physics and Quantum mechanics than was generally argued in 1989. It seems to me some new very good scientists are taking notice and we should encourage them to help I think.

    I think the Internet and these forums bring something new though. There is citizen science that follows strong science methods which I think is the method you try to encourage but there is also open discussion and experimentation a kind of brainstorming if you like. Both methods can be a huge resource if used well. They bring together huge numbers of people from all kinds of background and very different points of view with a common interest into one place. This is very powerful if allowed to have open discussion, there are scientists and engineers with all kinds of diciplins and fields of study but also potentially teachers, doctors of medicine, builders, naturalists people of all kinds of back grounds this is a huge knowledge base where perhaps an inspired high school student may find the insight that a Nobel Laureate may use to opens a whole field of study, or a potter using a particular method in an uncontrolled environment might notice something in a glaze that makes a materials scientist think “wow that’s interesting how did that happen”

    Some may say my view is fanciful, I hope some others see its merits both views are ok to me though as it’s precisely the different view points and how they contribute to the mix that is the strength of this approach.

  • wizkid

    I appreciate the feedback, Ken. I will indeed keep at at, and Thank you!

    (For the record, I understand scientific method and I am using it to do what I am doing. I pray to God every day, and he corrects me every day with his scripture. Regarding proof of concept, version control, beta releases, updates, it’s air that I’ve breathed all my life. I’m not at proof of concept on this one yet. It took me two years to get anything that looked like a live sample. I love Rossi, but I got tired of waiting. I admit it could be a fluke, or an error. If it develops to proof of concept, great! If not, I had fun. I’m trying to share something, for free. No strings. Galileo, Newton, Faraday, Tesla, Bohr, Einstein, wherefore art thou? Nikola, I see lightning when I close my eyes… )