MFMP to Launch EU Test on 12/12/12

I chatted today with Bob Greenyer of the MFMP who informed me that later today — at around 8:00 p.m. US Central time (2:00 a.m. GMT) — the MFMP will start the current flow in the active Celani wire in the European Celani cell. Currently they are doing the gas loading of the wire.

You will be able to track progress by choosing Celani Cell #2 on the HUGnetView live data feed.

The MFMP are in close contact with Francesco Celani who is giving them lots of advice and assistance regarding these experiments — you can see some of the recent correspondence here.

Bob emphasized that they were working on a way to calculate minimum and maximum excess power based on the least and most conservative calibration runs. He also said that the team is “very thankful to all the kind people that have made donations as it really made a difference to the EU cell – including the purchase of the Thurlby Thandar PSUs – the incredible constant currency performance you can see on the live data.”

Bob was about to fly to Rome to attend the 13 years of Coherent Quantum Electrodynamics Conference which begins on Friday, December 14th where he will be presenting along with other researchers in the LENR field, including Ugo Abundo and Francesco Celani. If there is anyone in Rome who could accommodate Bob for Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights, he would be very grateful. He can be contacted here.

The MFMP team has published a new video of the European lab and test setup that is for now located in the south of France.

  • Actually at 12:12:12 PST on the 12/12/12 (during the 21st CET hour) we will power the active wire and see if there is any excess heat generated from the cell.

    so about 32 mins from now.

    • georgehants

      Exciting, real open science at it’s best.

    • Ged

      Awesome, Bob! Too bad I checked here after posting on the main site. Also, a brilliant amount of fun with numbers.

      Looking forward to this greatly.

      • clovis

        HI, Guys.
        OK then, i’ll get me a big bag of pop corn and watch you guys create history,

  • Phil

    Power must be on by now …
    I hope to read good news very soon

    • Ged

      Hitting 3 W of excess power right now using the most CONSERVATIVE measure.

      And the internal mica temps are rising higher than with the inactive heating wire at the same input wattage (or control runs with the unloaded active wire).

      We are currently at 7% excess heat over input and controls. Let’s see where it stabilizes.

      • Data is showing that excess power just passed 6.3W… looking good


        • Morgan

          yeah I’m wondering if we should be seeing excess heat at this point?

          • Ged

            Yes, we should be, and we are according to the data so far.

            It happened in conjunction with a large resistance drop in the wire, which is a signature of the LENR event in Celani wires. Looks like it may settle at the 6 W point, but resistance is still slowly falling.

          • Morgan

            awesome!! just for my own curiosity during the calibration did they make sure the watts-in matches the watts-out detector or whatever? I’m not really sure how to read that data but I can see that P_Xs Low is the excess

          • Ged

            Unfortunately, absolute Watts out can’t be calculated, so the calibration gives a Watts in and a Temperature that corresponds to that. Then you use that curve and you see, with this 48 W in, what is our temperature, and what amount of Watts would that temperature correspond to during the controls? P_xs Low uses the control run that had the highest input power to temperature relationship. Though there’s some question as to if some LENR was actually on going during that calibration.

            P_xs High uses the very first calibration curve, but we should all only look at P_xs Low for maximum confidence.

          • freethinker

            Which ever quantity you look at is this not to be consideted a slam dunk?

            Plot Pin red/blue and Pout hig/low. Its a revelation.

            Unless there is something really wrong with the measurements and calculations, it is time to cry out “Eureka!”

          • Ged

            With 8 W excess now, I think it’s a slam dunk and then some. It simply depends on how long it runs.

            If the reaction peters out tonight, then it could be chemical, but if it lasts a day or two or more, then it is well beyond the limits of chemical energy and into nuclear fusion.

            So, we just have to wait. But so far… extremely exciting.

          • In theory we went well past Chemical in the first hour.

          • artefact

            8.1567 Watts excess of 48.01 Watts input

          • georgehants

            Andrea Rossi
            December 13th, 2012 at 6:05 AM
            Dear Mark Saker:
            Merry Christmas to you and to all our Readers.
            By Christmas will be completed surely the third party evaluation tests.
            The final work is going on in these days.
            As for the 1 MW plant of the Hot Cat we are on schedule to complete the plant in February.
            Warm Regards,

        • Gerald

          Watching it live. To early to make a conclusion, but it looks very very good. Exited here, watching it like I watch an olympic final. 😉


  • Drago Fredda

    Quenco (Quantum Energy Converter) was supposed to launch on 12-1-12 then it was delayed till today. Their website is now saying the new launch date is Feb 3rd 2013.

    • Martin

      Guess what? I already know what will happen on Feb 3rd 2013.

      • georgehants

        Martin, good to know we have a practicing astrologist in the house.

  • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

    Double post removed

  • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

    This may well be a historici moment guys. I have the bubbly on standby in the fridge.

    Let’s hope for some stunning results!

  • Ged

    One last update before I head out for awhile.

    For everyone watching, I want to make this important observation brought up by Sanjeev on the MFMP forums:

    With Celani, the reaction had a lot of swings up and down, though the overall trend was always up and it always stayed positive excess. We are apparently seeing the same thing with this cell, where it can at times swing down to 4 W excess; but now it has rebounded to hitting a high of 8.1 W excess — above the 6.3 W excess limit it had before it went through its downward swing.

    So, don’t be surprised if you see this cell swing a lot, but end up rebounding higher over time. This may be a hallmark of the Celani style reaction.

    In the end, it’s how long this thing lasts as a positive excess that’s the true determiner of if we’re seeing LENR or something else — we need about a day or two of solid positive; the higher the positive the quicker we will surpass the chemical threshold. So, keep a close watch guys!

    • clovis

      Thanks, for the info,, guys I just use 2 browsers put the hugs view up on top portion of my screen, and use the other to

      • Peter_Roe

        Even better, get a 2-channel video card and plug in a second monitor so you can have two separate full screens to refer to or to work in (Win XP and later).

      • georgehants

        Does anybody know how many Celani wires he has donated or sold to different individuals or organisations and has he said who has asked for the wires.
        One would think every university and research establishment worthy of that name would have asked for some samples to test.

        • Owen

          The MFMP site says Celani has provided quite a few samples to researchers. Bob Greenyer probably knows the details. But yeah, there’s probably a big scramble to get them.

      • georgehants

        Wonderful day.

      • Ivone Martin FitzGerald

        Peter f. 13 Dec 2012 to 08:28 Peter F.
        Good Morning Mr. First of all, Merry Christmas, UN clarification Without controversy: the Nov. 21 said that the third-party verification was completed November 30, said that for a cause UN unexpectedly, verification would be ended within a couple of weeks, today we talk about the proof of third party assessment that will eventually probably before Christmas. …. we need to worry!

        Andrea Rossi 13 Dec 2012 to 08:58 Dear Peter f.: I can now say that third-party testing will end on December 16.
        I was informed of this fact a few minutes ago. Warm Regards, AR

        • Ivone Martin FitzGerald

          In other words, we will probably see the published document on the Cats in early January. I can hardly wait!

  • we have a PUBLIC google hangout, you will need to have a Google+ account to view


    See it!

    • You might need to search for my name

      bob greenyer

      • Thank you for the invite.
        I enjoyed hanging out with you guys watching the experiment.

        Stay “positive”!

  • Ramsy

    So, Cold Fusion is a real.
    It is now confirmed by at least two scientists so far :
    Rossi’s E-Cat.
    Celani’s cell.

    • Kim G. Patterson

      Nothing is Real
      Just the Consensus there of

      Do we have a consensus?


      • Zacky

        If Cold Fusion is a real, then Heaven & Hell also real.

        • Jim Lahey

          No… just no. And someone liked that garbage? Lets keep delusion out of the discussion please.

        • Hampus

          If cold fusion is real heaven is real 🙂 we would have created heaven on earth.

    • Morgan

      Rossi has done nothing to confirm he has what he says he has. All he has done is contradict himself over and over. So for now it’s just 3 separate reproductions of Celani’s cell?

    • many many others since long.

      Fleischmann calorimetry was validated by CEA Grenoble in 97 and many others.
      Mc Kubre have made much better isothermal calorimetry.
      Iwamura have proven transmutations, and Mitsubishi have replicated it.
      Nasa GRC have proven anomalous heat , like Tsinghua university with Infinicon, and JP Biberain…
      ENEA have proven link between heat and He4.
      Spawar have proven radiation production.

      and many other have replicated, with at least many many without honest doubt.

      the only reason to doubt is that the “authorities” did not yet accept the fact. they will never except if we make evidence that any layman, every politician, every mom, every kid between 5 and 9, cannot reject…

      this is why the only hope is for a reactor to be put on the market.
      The most stupid regulation would be to forbid reactor that are not accepted by science.
      then science will always be right, because opposition will be forbidden.

      There are such law that nearly passed on other subjects where consensus was challenged. Some lobbies asked for scientific who dissented to be excluded from funding , and from media (implemented at 99%, but not by law), like it is done for hate crime and crime negationism.
      Sometime it is annoying, but US constitution amendment on free speech is very useful despite all disadvantage.

  • clovis

    hi, guys.
    very exciting stuff, as it stands,at 11:45,p_xs low is 6.5908, going back up, passed my bed time, smile

    • Martin

      The temperature seems to stay around 160 degrees Celsius. Wasn’t it said, that the effect starts at above 230?

  • Eric

    Looks great! But can someone help me to understand what red/blue stands for?
    Also – when can P_xs be considered to be way higher than the measurement noise? 8W excess from 48W in, is that enough? I would like some error bars attached to the P_Xs graph!

    • freethinker

      To my understanding: Blue is the loading power, heating the reactor and loading the Celani wire. Red is the power through the Celani wire, being then 48 W when running it actively.

      Agreed! The guys are great but they don’t visualise error propagation in their graphs, but I believe that 8W of 48 when discussing random errors, is a VERY clear and definitive signal way above the random noise.

      However, there might always be discussions on systematic errors in the calibration (and check the MFMP site in the progress log, You will see much emphasis has been put on the calibration).

      Is 8W enough? As said by other at MFMP and here, you need to see a sustained energy over-unity like this for some time (maybe days) to clearly rule out any sort of chemical energy production and be able to infer LENR as a source.

      But I do think they have slam dunked this! Yes!

    • artefact

      MFMP said that THEORETICALY one hour @ ~8W is enough to exclude any chemical energy.

  • freethinker

    I personally like the plot view where you can see the input power and the calculated output power for conservative(P_low) and the high estimate(P_high).

    It blows me away.

    Check it out:

  • Gerrit

    something happened.

    – Power switched off
    – Pressure’s gone
    – Device cooling down

    I wonder what was the cause…

    • artefact

      The test was planned for 12 hours if I remember correctly.

      • Gerrit

        power is back on, P_Xs Low climbs to 5 W again.

        seems to have been a planned event to power cycle the experiment.

    • Sanjeev


      The last run was for loading H2 into the wire.
      The real experiment has started now, after switch off and cool down.

      • Gerrit

        I don’t think so.

        “Today at 12:12:12 PST on the 12/12/12 (during the 21st CET hour) we will power the active wire and see if there is any excess heat generated from the cell. We should start at P_in = 48W to get the best replication of Celani’s work.”

        I think that the run that just ended was already an active run.

        Am I missing something ?

  • georgehants

    There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.
    Leonardo da Vinci

    • GreenWin

      “I once was lost but now am found,
      Was blind, but now I see.” John Newton, 1779

  • Gerrit

    P_Xs and T_Ambient are related.

    How / where is T_Ambient measured ?

    How is the room heated ? Electrical heater with thermostat ?

    Does the cell heat up the room, or the room heat up the cell ?

    • Gerrit

      others have noticed this already on the quantumheat comment section

    • Eric

      This is why I would like them to also share some error bars. If an 0.8 change in the ambient temperature causes the excess power calculation to go from 3W to 8W, I seriously doubt that it really is excess heat we are seeing, and not just measurements errors getting enlarged by the complex calculations with the reference measurements.

      But if there is excess power of 8W, from, say, 50 to 58W, the effect should be possible to measure just by putting an active and a reference cell to two water baths and just measure the water temp increase over time.

      • Ged

        As HeS points out just below, the cell is much hotter than the room; the room can’t -add heat- to the cell in any way, shape, nor form. However, it could slow heat loss from the cell, which allows us to detect it better.

        Heat doesn’t magically appear, so if it’s missing, that means we are not detecting it, such as due to high airflow. The issue is how this relates to the calibrations under the same conditions, as that is what’s being compared.

    • HeS

      @Gerrit:”Does the cell heat up the room, or the room heat up the cell ?”

      Room can’t heat the cell. The cell temperature is much higher than room temperature.

      • Gerrit

        correct 🙂 the room can’t _heat_ the cell

        The room acts as a heat sink for the cell. Thus the room temperature can influence the cell temperature. The graph is suggesting that the room temperature is influencing the P_Xs value. The P_Xs is calculated based on temperature readings.

        Room temperature -> influences temperature readings -> influences P-Xs values.

        • Ged

          The calibrations should have factored this out. But, it does give us an interesting oportunity by looking at the amplitudes to calculate the functions for how ambient is affecting our detection of the cell temps.

          • Gerrit

            How were the calibrations done ? Did the cell stay at one defined power input for longer than 50 minutes to catch the influence of the fluctuation of T_ambient on T_GlassOut ?

            It is hard for me to understand how the ambient temperature fluctuation can influence the excess heat effect (P_Xs). How do those pesky little quantum rydberg state thingies know what the weather is outside ? 🙂

          • Ivan Mohorovicic

            Every calibration step lasted 60 minutes.

          • Ged

            “How do those pesky little quantum rydberg state thingies know what the weather is outside ?”

            Oh gees, quantum non-locality… let’s not even start to think about that!

  • Drago Fredda

    Andrea Rossi
    December 13th, 2012 at 8:58 AM

    Dear Pietro F.:
    Now I can say that the third party tests will finish on Dec. 16th.
    I have been informed of this fact few minutes ago.
    Warm Regards,

    • tappanjack

      I think it is time to buckle up and hang on, this will be a wild ride!

      • daniel maris

        Or a fairly damp squib like most of Rossi’s outings.

      • Peter_Roe

        Unfortunately, if the tests themselves finish on the 16th it would take a minimum of several days to finish writing them up and compiling graphs etc., even if this process has been ongoing while tests were conducted, and the test process itself was very simple in design.

        That would be ultra-fast – in fact it could take several weeks if the data compilation and graphing was not done in parallel with testing, or if the compiled first draft needs (as it probably does) to be signed off by a series of proofreaders and editors before it can be released. While it could just possibly be done before Christmas, early next year seems more likely.

        • Redford

          Event early next year would be very fast for peer review. That being said they told it would be fast. I assume redaction too place in parallel.

          • robyn wyrick

            It’s past midnight here in the Washington DC area. December 14th.

            I think later today the STMicrolectronics Third Part Report on Celani’s device comes out.

            Celani – “the data SHOULD be presented and thoroughly discussed before December 15, by the authors of the measurements.”

    • Karl

      This is really good news. It also correlate with the presentation in the Swedish Television science program 17 Th. I hope there will be a release of the verification already the 16 Th.

    • LCD

      That’s a pretty definitive goal post. Georgehants should get the champagne ready.

      But when will we see the report? Not so definitive. Nevermind George put it away.

      • Mark Saker

        Yeah I think that’s the problem. We’re basically where we were a while back when the testing was supposedly finished the first time. After the 16th I think we’ll still be at the mercy of a report release date. Fingers crossed it’s before Christmas! 🙂

      • georgehants

        Hi LCD, it keeps going in and out. One day hopefully I will actually get to drink it. Ha.

        • Ivone Martin FitzGerald

          Let us know when you are sipping it in celebration.

  • Jim

    I’d like to have a Logical Flow Diagram of the MFMP experiment to help:

    > see the big picture,
    > parse out the physics and engineering,
    > select specific areas to drill down on,
    > broaden the base of participants.

    I started a draft here:

    Please pile in if you’re interested.

    • Morgan

      you should probably mention that a credit card is required to ‘pile in’

      • admin

        No not required. Just set the fee to zero, and continue.

        • Morgan

          oh ok. my bad.

      • artefact

        I think it is still open enrollment .. so you can leave the credit card where it was.

        edit: mhh admin was faster.

  • Oleksiy

    Could someone explain the difference between P_Out Low (W) P_Out High (W) ?

    Does it mean, the Pxs which is the measure of the success of this experiment is at least Pred – P_out_Low ?

  • Morgan

    ok serious question. would it be possible to go to the UN and show them this technology when it is ready, and then have them ban oil/gas etc across the globe including in the US?

    • “and then have them ban oil/gas etc across the globe including in the US?”
      So the world will have to live with no energy until LENR gets up to manufacturing speed in 10 to 20 years?

      • Morgan

        I’m saying… ban oil/gas after LENR is ready (10-20 years you say it will take)

        • Hampus

          No need to ban oil and coal in 20 years time. Who will use it when we have almost free energy.

        • Iggy Dalrymple

          Leave it to the market. Who are you, to command the public?

          • HeS

            @:”Who are you”

            The European Commission acts as a dictator in the EU.
            See CO2 airport charges.

          • GreenWin

            Funny, no one banned horse and buggy when automobiles started. The UN has a tarnished rep due to graft and climate bungles.

    • Iggy Dalrymple

      “The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it.” – H. L. Mencken

    • Lu


  • Anonymous

    Is it just me or did this site stop updating yesterday 12/12 (a Wednesday) at 8:51. The news was exciting from the MFMP project, so why the website freeze???

    Or instead is the calendar off by one day on the E-Cat world web server??

  • Anonymous

    My mistake — the website posts in reverse cron order.