What is LENR?

Thanks very much everyone! Below is the final draft — you can also read it here.

LENR stands for Low Energy Nuclear Reactions — and refers to the phenomenon where anomalous amounts of heat are created when certain metals (e.g. nickel, palladium) absorb hydrogen or deuterium and an external stimulus such as heat or an electric current is applied. The reaction takes place at relatively low temperature and sometimes results in transmutation of elements as well as the production of heat. Either no strong radiation is produced or it is absorbed locally. The waste products are not radioactive. This phenomenon is also referred to as Cold Fusion, LANR (lattice assisted nuclear reaction), as well as other terms.

Modern interest in LENR began in 1989 when scientists Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons announced they had succeeded in generating nuclear reactions in laboratory experiments. This announcement sparked much interest in the media and in the scientific community, with many researchers attempting replicate the effect in their own experiments — many without success. The effect is not always easy to replicate, particularly as the preparation of the metal was critical and it sometimes took weeks for anomalous heat to appear. When the effect has been obtained it can also be difficult to control.

There are many theories about what causes this heat effect, but none has been widely accepted or definitively proven.

There are many attempts going on at the moment by various parties to be able to replicate and control the LENR effect. Several companies are now working on commercial products with claims of producing kW of power as heat. Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat invention has received a lot of attention because he was the first to publicly demonstrate his device and it has now been independently tested and validated by seven scientists, funded by the Swedish R&D organization Elforsk, demonstrating at least ten times the energy of any known chemical reaction and showing that the E-Cat is capable of producing useful heat.

Various claims are for a Coefficient of Performance (COP) from 6 to over 30 (meaning between 6 and 30 times more energy is produced than is input into a system). Even at the low end such a device would make obsolete virtually all other ways of producing power. High temperature, more efficient designs would be suitable for powering transport, even aircraft, although this would probably take decades. This promise of inexpensive, safe, clean power is why many are now following the subject.

Further Reading:

Lenr-canr.org — A library of research papers on LENR
LENR Proof — Examination of the commercial viablity of LENR
LENR For the Win — An examination of the evidence for LENR
Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project — An open science project to provide convincing proof of the ‘New Fire’
Vortex-L — Archive of email list dealing with LENR-related topics

  • Kim

    There is energy in the atom.

    If you pull atoms apart then you have fission.

    If you push atoms together then you have fusion.

    We have fission power plants that bring us dangerous energy.

    We now have fusion power that brings us heat
    energy from table top devices.

    Low Energy Nuclear Energy. Could be called

    High Energy Nuclear Energy as we open and explore this new energy.

    There is no consensus among our scientific
    priest(s) as to the mechanism involve in Cold
    Fusion (LENR).

    Its a new mechanism that delivers large
    amounts of anomalous heat under the proper
    conditions that are becoming more and more
    repeatable and definable.

    Respect
    Kim

    • Kim

      Its my personal belief that heat comes
      from friction and that ultimately this will
      be proven as part of the new theory and mechanism of LENR.

      • clovis

        Hi, everyone.
        I think Dr. Rossi has the control thing well in hand,his device is very controllable, and safe,if not they would not have gotten it certified.
        I think, that this effect is caused by friction as Kim has said, there seems to be something special about the nickle lattice,it prob has to do with it’s magnet features, when NI is in the presents of hydrogen, and when the Nickle is heated to some temperature, the lattice is expanded to accompany an hydrogen atom or parts there of in the niche where the lickle atoms is located, it is my idea is that this combination leads to a friction that causes the whole thing to heat up, and some sort of resonance is used to regulate this reaction

        • clovis

          And we should always remember that there is a transmutation of metal, in the core, even a small amount would mean a great deal of heat had to be produced, this in it’s self is a wonderful discovery, heck, there maybe pure electricity flowing, no need for steam,—smile

        • Roger Bird

          clovis, if friction were the cause of the excess heat then we would be getting a lot for nothing. That is taboo.

          • clovis

            Hi, bird man.
            you are prob right , do you think that there is more than one source of the heat, i feel that transmutation itself, could be enough to produce the heat, and by regulating this somehow you could control the amount of heat produced.

          • Roger Bird

            clovis, do you own any spear points? (:->)

            I generally don’t concern myself too much with how it works, but since you press me for an answer, and who am I to argue with a guy who has spear points, I have to say that I favor the protons turning into neutrons after crashing into electrons and then releasing energy.

            But, however, my issue is not what is real (metaphysics, the branch of philosopy), but how it is that we know what is going on (epistemology, another branch of philosophy). And I sure would like for someone who knows these things to respond to me. If ALL mainstream “tools” to know what is inside of the atom are sub-atomic particles traveling at close to the speed of light, then ALL theories about the nature of what is going on inside the atom are tainted by that fact. What if fast elementary particles have a bow wave in front of them. After all, all things that we know for sure traveling at absurdly fast speeds exhibit unexpected and strange behaviors. If there is such a thing as the aether, then a bow wave would not be too strange. And what if this bow wave makes the Coulomb Barrier “seem” stronger than it would be for a slower elementary particle.

            Particle physicists of the mainstream variety will say that there is no evidence for that. Perhaps LENR is evidence. Perhaps there are other data points not noticed because no one thought to look at the data points in that way.

          • clovis

            Thanks Roger,
            Your interpretation, is as good as i have heard, and a few folks also hold this view, but if thing in the inter workings of the atom start crashing into each other there is usually radiation,
            And yes i have lots of spear points ,stone axes, clay pot,trade beads, breast plates dart points, and other things i have been collecting for a long time. how did you know,–smile

          • Roger Bird

            Well, I have not been collecting birds, but I have sired and raised two very happy, well-behaved, sweet, loving, socially adept Birds. A knowledgeable and wise person would be envious of how lucky I am. (:->)

    • Roger Bird

      I think that being insulting to mainstream science when presenting to newbies is not a smart idea. Let them find out that they have been let down by the science establishment.

  • AlainCo

    I propose some ideas

    LENR, know as cold fusion is mostly known for probably nuclear reaction in transition metal hydride (Nickel, Palladium, Tungsten, Titane… absorbing Hydrogen, deuterium, tritium). the most observed effect is production of heat, sometime clearly above any possible chemical reaction.
    There is also without doubt production of He4 correlated with the heat.
    In different context, and probably when heat is not produced, some have clearly observed production of few Tritium, of few neutron, of few gamma, of some energetic particles, or transmutation.

    Beside that domain which (especially for palladium and deuterium) is well covered, some scientist suspect that this phenomenon appear in different situation, like electrolysis in oil, Hydrogen-filled X-ray tube, solar corona, fractured rock, and even in biologic systems. Those claim deser more experiments and understanding to be validated or rejected.

    LENR have no link with perpetual motion, violation of the energy conservation, or decrease of entropy, and probably not with the family of noble gas engine (Papp).

    LENR is simply a serie of nuclear reaction in a crystalline and chemical context, that is badly understood.
    It break no law of theoretical quantum mechanics, but among the infinity of possible scenario that QM allow, none have been identified as explaining LENR. The two big problem of LENR is how the reaction is allowed without huge energy per particle, and how it does not produce noticeable radiation.
    There are theoretical work, but none is complete. They however follow few ideas, like the possibility of collective quantum phenomenon, the possibility of charge screening in some context, some relativistic effects, resonance caused by lattice symmetry, or vacancies.

    about reproducibility, many reason why the experiments were failing have been identified. Recently ENEA added to that list some crystallographic characteristics and could increase the rate of success by manipulating that parameter.
    Some experimentalist have noticed that, even if the percentage of successful electrodes were low, some electrodes were working very reliably, proving it is a deterministic phenomenon, however depending on condition hard to control.

    • Roger Bird

      Frank, please, don’t let AlainCo be your proofreader. (:->)

      I personally found the transmutation business to be particularly compelling. I bet newbies would think similarly.

  • Roger Bird

    “When the effect is obtained it can also been difficult to control.” becomes “When the effect is obtained it can also be difficult to control.”

  • zvidenyosef

    I would suggest “Nickel Hydrogen Power” The name does not make any assumptions about the mechanism, and is simple enough to be understood by anyone immediately.
    This is about trying to explain a new phenomenon without sounding crazy. The name is of the utmost importance. The original term Cold fusion was coined by the critics of Pons and Fleischmann. They were trying to protect the research dollars devoted to hot fusion.
    So far we have had “New Fire” “Pons and Fleischmann Effect”, LENR, LANR. Almost anything other than Cold Fusion would work. In politics messaging is all important. So it is with trying to promote a new technology.

    • Warthog

      Actually, I think something along the terms of “quantum fusion” or “quantum modulated fusion” is probably the best for our knowledge as it stands. Oppose that to “thermonuclear fusion” (aka “hot fusion”).

      One is smashing down the door with a battering ram…..the other is picking the lock and walking in.

    • Mick D

      The draft also uses the term LANR. Need to define every acronym in a primer. Or don’t say LANR.

  • Roger Bird

    Frank, you might present the information in levels of certainty.

  • NJT

    Admin,

    The term ‘dissolved” does not ring right with me. Perhaps that is one of the unknowns in this phenomena? Until something is proven on this, I think it may be better to use a phrase such as, “the hydrogen atoms become tightly bundled within the metal lattice structures then an external stimulus such as heat or an electric current is applied to start the LENR process.”

    • clovis

      +1

    • Roger Bird

      +1

    • Iggy Dalrymple

      “Hydrogen loaded” makes sense.

  • AB

    It’s a bit of a stretch to consider this on topic, but I think this is an important study. Mainstream medicine is slowly accepting what is fairly obvious – environmental pollutants are responsible for a significant fraction of human disease.

    Chronic Exposure of Mutant DISC1 Mice to Lead Produces Sex-Dependent Abnormalities Consistent With Schizophrenia and Related Mental Disorders: A Gene-Environment Interaction Study

    Coal plants are a source of lead exposure. According to Sourcewatch,a boiler burning a million pounds of lignite coal will release 420 pounds of lead into the atmosphere. Schizophrenia is just one of many health problems associated with lead. Children are particularly vulnerable. There is no safe level of lead exposure for them. Besides lead, there are also many other heavy metals that are harmful.

    This is yet another reason why desperately need LENR.

    • Roger Bird

      If you include our alleged pseudo quasi franken-foods, I would agree with you 100%. If you don’t included our alleged pseudo quasi franken-foods, I could only agree with you 50%. (:->) Of course, those pollutants and many others, no, kajillions others also get into our food and water. So even real food like raw milk coming from grass-fed loved cows get shat upon by our industrial and automotive society.

      But your comment can relate to what Frank is asking for by him including the benefits of ZERO pollution.

      We must remember that we cannot legislate away greed, and if we are to have a healthy environment, we must find something other than trying to force people to adopt solar, wind etc., which don’t work all of that great. I have been a big fan and booster of solar from since the early 1970’s, and I have to admit that solar just isn’t that great. It is getting better, but I guess that won’t matter now.

    • Iggy Dalrymple

      We are presently exposed to a fraction of the lead that previous generations were exposed to. The “Greatest Generation” was raised on lead paint, lead plumbing, and leaded gasoline. That generation won WW2 and took us to the moon.

      The enemy is overly processed food, too little exercise, and insufficient sunshine (vitamin D).

      • E-dog

        our current problem… for most of us is lack of omeg-3

        • Iggy Dalrymple

          That too.

        • Omega Z

          🙂 Not Anymore. New Report. OMEG-3 has minimal effect.

          Now well have to see what next years report comes up with.

          • Timar

            Yes, that’s because of too much Omega-6 😉

            There’s an ongoing large-scale randomized trial, the VITAL-study, with ~20,000 participants taking either 0.8gr of EPA and DHA Omega-3-fatty acids and 2000 I.U. vitamin D or placebo. Its much anticipated results will be known in 2017.

            OK, now it *really* got off-topic…

          • Roger Bird

            Omega-Z, three guesses who paid for that test. A pharmaceutical company. Since I have seen my (and my wife’s) health and mood clearly and distinctly improve by consuming adequate amounts of fish oil, and since we have “done” this “experiment” repeated accidentally because of an occasional neglect to take the fish oil, I don’t really need a so-called scientific experiment to prove (or disprove) to me that there is no benefit. The only thing that that test proves to me is how scummy pharmaceutical companies can be to even try to prove that something vitally important to people’s health and welfare is not vitally important to people’s health and welfare, just for the purpose of making more money.

          • Timar

            Roger, the problem is exactly the other way around – there have been too few high quality trials on fish oil so far because there is no commercial incentive to do such trials. If there is insufficient funding, researchers, who want/have to publish, will tend to do a trial in a too short period of time, with a too low dose, and with too few participants – just to be able to do a trial at all. It’s the same with other natural substances – you can’t patent them (of course), therefore no pharmaceutical company will ever spend a significant amount of money on their research. It’s a perfect example of where the free market incentive fails in serving the society and thus illustrates the need for government-funded scientific research.

          • Roger Bird

            I stand by my and my wife’s experience. I understand everything that you say, and I know in my heart that Pfizer did that experiment to either (1) disprove the value of Omega-3s, or (2) induce the FDA (vomit) to give them a patent on some product.

          • Timar

            I don’t doubt your positive experience with fish oil. I have made very positive experiences with it myself (it seems to significantly alleviate my allergies).

            For a fascinating story on the medical and nutritional science of omega-3 fatty acids and the history and people behind it (there are some interesting parallels to cold fusion: researchers incurring the ridicule and hatred or others because they dared to question their paradigm), I highly recommend Susan Allports book ‘The Queen of Fats’.

          • Roger Bird

            Timar, yes, any edgy exploration/knowledge is going to flip vested interests-out, whether those vested interests are intellectual or financial or both. I love flipping vested interests-out.

            It is just about inevitable for mainstream anything to not look kindly upon change. The only example that I can think of off-hand is Stephen Hocking, the nuclear physicist, who actually presented a paper contradicting and correcting something that he had said previously. [He is still an atheist toad. (:->) ]

      • Timar

        Of course adipose couch-potatoes can’t fight wars, so it probably helps to make our planet a more peaceful place 😉

    • Zedshort

      The use of lead in gasoline and its decline is the only thing that tracks the rise of criminality in the US and other cultures and its decline.

  • Roger Bird

    I just received this from Andrea Rossi via his [email protected]. I haven’t been able to get the Dashboard to work, perhaps because my operating system is LinuxMint-13. I include the entire exchange for you possible edification:

    Dear Roger Bird:
    Thank you very much for your kind words.
    Yes, I have deposited in an escrow all the formulas, just in case…
    Anyway, whatever God wants from me, for me is good.
    Warmest Regards,
    Andrea Rossi

    Il 2013-06-01 12:40 Roger B ha scritto:
    > Dear Andrea,
    >
    > I am as excited as a teenage girl at a rock concert to get an email
    > from you, even if you are just giving me directions.
    >
    > Unfortunately, I don’t see how to leave comments and I can only see
    > the top-most of the comments already left.
    >
    > I also get this notice:
    >
    > VIRUS SUSPECTED: The daily antivirus scan of your blog suggests
    > alarm. Manual scan → [1]
    >
    > This might because I use LinuxMint13 and not Windows anything.
    >
    > Sincerely,
    >
    > Roger Bird
    >
    > “You do not see me as I really am. This body is not me; my Real Self
    > is far more beautiful. I am Infinite Truth, Infinite Love, Infinite
    > Power. I am Life Eternal. I was Krishna, I was Buddha, I was Jesus and
    > now I am Meher Baba.”
    >
    >> Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 11:50:48 -0600
    >> From: [email protected]
    >> To: [email protected]
    >> Subject: Re: question
    >>
    >> Dear Roger:
    >> Please send this to the blog of
    >> http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com
    >> Just login…
    >> Warm Regards,
    >> Andrea Rossi
    >>
    >> Il 2013-06-01 11:33 Roger B ha scritto:
    >>> Dear Dr. Rossi,
    >>>
    >>> I am a big fan. I have been following your adventures since October
    >>> 2011 and was very enthusiastic at that time. I admit that I kept
    >>> having doubts running through my mind until the recent three 3rd
    >>> party
    >>> tests were published. Then I became an enthusiastic booster.
    >>>
    >>> I have only one question: Have you written down your secret and
    >>> given
    >>> it to numerous lawyers that you can trust so that they will publish
    >>> the secret should you die from whatever cause? I think that this is
    >>> very important. It is like a will; everyone our age needs to do
    >>> that.
    >>> But the inheritance for this “will” is for the entire human race.
    >>>
    >>> Sincerely,
    >>>
    >>> Roger Bird
    >>> Colorado Springs, Colorado
    >
    >
    > Links:
    > ——
    > [1]
    > http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/wp-admin/options-general.php?page=antivirus

  • K

    It is just an alternative mechanism to do hot fusion. Nothing special. In the Sun, there is a lot of entropy, and high temperature needed to create high speed collisions. In a lattice, there is low entropy, and a “smart” system to create instantaneous high concentration of kinetic energy.

    • buffalo

      aha aha,and possibly a 2nd law thermodynamics breach to boost.

  • Alp

    You really want “pseudoskeptics” posting there? Plan to roast them for dinner or what?

  • Shane D.

    No one is more qualified, or has put more thought into the definition of LENR then Dr. Ed Storms. It’s all in his book.

    Although I do have to say that I think it is an evolving process to nail down the right descriptions. A moving target at this point, but if anyone is close it is him.

    Storm often tries over on Vortex to corral the free thinkers so that they don’t go wondering too far off the LENR reservation. In the process he continually defines what LENR is and what, so far, is known. Go beyond that and you better have a good theory grounded in standard physics to explain.

    • Roger Bird

      So what is the address of Vortex? I googled it got MUCH TOO MUCH.

    • Owen

      I enjoy reading the lively debate between Storms and the free thinkers. The exact process is unknown (unless someone like Rossi has figured it out and is keeping it secret). The solution is probably somewhere beyond known physics and ‘far out’ theories. There’s a gray area between the two that needs to be explored in detail.

      • Shane D.

        Owen,

        I’ve really enjoyed it too. Storms seems open to going beyond standard physics, but insists that the free thinker ground their theory in basic physics. Or, if they can’t do that, at the least come up with an intelligible theory that doesn’t sound like gibberish. Pretty funny to watch.

        You can see him get a bit frustrated with some of the off the wall, but obvioulsy brilliant, types that try and re-invent standard physics all in one post. Especially those that have never done their own LENR research as he has. I get the impression he is trying to herd cats.

        Maybe these free-thinkers have a point that LENR requires “out of the box” physics… who knows. All I know is that this is a good process and like you I am really liking it.

  • Roger Bird

    I like and respect Simon Derricutt so much that I have copied and pasted his comment on nickelpower.org here:

    Begin quote:

    Although quite a few people are complaining about the report, I haven’t yet seen a valid attack on the measurements of temperature and the energy radiated. The second test on the inactivated device used straight resistive power that was measured and thus showed that the emissivity was about right and that the overall errors in the power radiated in the live test were indeed pretty well correct and within their error bars.

    The only valid attack therefore is that Rossi sneaked some extra power in through the cables. I see this as extremely unlikely, since the people doing the measurements would have had at least a fair chance of finding it and publishing, and that Rossi would be unlikely to take that chance at this time. If Rossi has found a method that would fool any possible test meter, that is probably worth quite a bit of money (but not to the energy-generating companies).

    Let’s face it that LENR is no longer extraordinary when it’s been demonstrated at MIT. It does not need extraordinary evidence, just the normal sort. I wish Rossi well in his upcoming lawsuits for libel.

    End quote.

  • kwhilborn

    here is from an old forum post where I also tried to “dumb down” LENR… use, edit, quote, etc.
    I will now break down the entire Widom Larsen Theory in terms everyone should comprehend.

    Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) is based on Low Energy Nuclear Reactions. Do not be fooled by the term “Weak Nuclear Reaction”, as any nuclear reaction can be millions of times more powerful than a chemical process. There is more than enough energy produced to replace all of our current electrical systems easily.

    A weak nuclear reaction is any reaction that emits or absorbs a Neutrino. Neutrinos are photons similar to visible light that does not interact with visible matter. LENRS Emit Neutrinos.

    Collective effects, and why the interactions do not have to overcome the columb barrier are still a mystery to me at this time, however I
    edit: Maybe this part can be explained to me, I am still working it out in my head.

    Certain metals that readily absorb hydrogen (hydrides), can be saturated with Hydrogen (for simplicity I’m leaving out Deuterium,etc.). This “loading” can be enhanced by running electrolysis (electrolytic cells) or having a vacuum chamber.

    If you imagined the Nickel as a sponge being filled with water, once the sponge reached its storage capacity, small droplets would build up on the surface of the sponge.

    This seems to be true of Nickel containing hydrogen. Small pools of theses surface patches (30 microns/pinheads) of the saturated protons (not mentioning deuterons either).

    NOTE: I am also puzzled with why these “pools” would appear, and be proton heavy? Explain to me please.

    Now also there’s a film of electrons on the surface of metals that all oscillate together called surface plasmons.

    High fields result from a breakdown of the Born-Oppenheimer Approximation via a coupling of Surface Plasmon Polaritons to a collective proton resonance in the metal hydride
    This means the protons which weigh a lot more than the electrons through the electromagnetic field grab the electrons and shake them back and forth. This occurs directly above the little pinhead sized pools of protons previously mentioned.

    This reaction creates a big neutron from the interaction between a proton and an electron. An “Ultra Low Momentum Neutron”. This term is used a lot, and that is how it is created. This is because they obviously lack the energy seen in other nuclear processes.

    the neutron is absorbed by nearby nuclei and you won’t see it.

    Subsequent decays release significant energy.

    Released gammas are absorbed by the heavy electrons which are also there, and convert them to infra red, and LENR is often associated with low Gamma Ray emissions. Just because Gamma rays are not detectable, does not mean the process is chemical.

    The fusion of light nuclei gain a much higher energy than expected in the fusion of heavy nuclei.Therefore, the formation of iron and copper should be a side reaction in the fusion of hydrogen with an ecat, so some evidence of transmutation should occur.

    If there are any questions about this, I will try to be more specific in areas. I was trying to dumb it down enough so I could understand it. Once you grasp this dumbed version move on up to the above paper and you will grasp it that much easier.

    The beauty of the Widom Larsen Theory is although it borrows from different aspects of engineering, it does not require new physics.

    Some new physics may come from this soon enough however there is also a quantum ring theory, that some (Rossi) believe may also be behind this excess heat phenom.
    Quantum Ring Theory is one such new physics idea proposed. A lot remains to be seen but will affect the works of Schrödinger, and Bohr if correct.
    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=462
    The idea is explained very well in the above article.

    Interesting note: Guglinski is the author of this theory, and according to Andrea Rossi did guess the catalyst Andrea Rossi is using in the ecat.

    Although I mention Andrea Rossi, the Widom Larsen theory of LENR is unrelated to Andrea Rossi, although if his device works it may affect his device equally.

    • kwhilborn

      I’d forgotten that Guglinski guessed the catalyst. Maybe someone should be asking him.. I am not sure 100% though and he could have just guessed the Carbon part, but it would be interesting to hear his views.

  • Iggy Dalrymple

    Call it DynaMoJo, and to hell with explaining it.

    Or maybe PhysicScofflaw.

  • Roc Joco

    Cold Fusion is a misnomer. Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) is another misnomer. The Fleischmann Pons Heat Effect can best be described as a controlled electron capture reaction. The founder of Brillouin Energy, Robert Godes, found that through proper electro-stimulation the conversion of a tiny amount of hydrogen protons into neutrons can create excess heat. Newly produced neutrons are immediately captured by hydrogen ions or other atoms in a metallic lattice, near to where the hydrogen ions were converted to neutrons. The captured neutrons generate heat because the new atoms that are one neutron heavier shed their excess binding energy. The theory is brilliantly simple once broken down to its simplest elements and has reportedly been reproduced hundreds of times.

  • Jim

    Way OT:

    What do we know about Rossi’s garbage to fuel oil scheme from way back when? There was a very perceptive suggestion by our colleague Linda who pointed out the Rossi was using something like nickel, hydrogen and a carbon compound to soup up the fuel conversion in that system.

    Are technical papers on that system available? It might be interesting to see what Rossi was working with in that endeavor.

    Please note that I’m completely disregarding the disputes about Rossi’s credibility in that situation. I would just like to see the technology, if it’s possible. (However, it’s a measure of my personal credence in the e-Cat that I suspect he might have had something clever going on then)

    • Omega Z

      Maybe get some advice from the horses mouth about where to find the details. Although I get the impression discussing it irritates him. Seems Many have picked up where he left off Once his patents expired.

      Many VC supported Operations are working with his Expired patents or Technologically advanced versions of it. Some claim they may be able to recycle in the 90% range.

      As far as His Petroldragon work leading to the E-cat- This has been suggested by a couple people.

      My thoughts on this tend to a different angle. While developing the E-cat, Rossi was able to apply knowledge learned from that experience. Such as Ideas about Catalysts that would enhance the process as he likely worked with many in the Former project. Focardi Did say Rossi tried something out of the ordinary. Something most would never think of.

      Which is another bit of info that Raises questions.
      Focardi said Rossi tried something other researchers would never have thought to try.
      YET, Focardi knows nothing about Rossi’s secret sauce???
      “I Don’t Know” would keep people from asking you over & over… What’s the Sauce?

    • Pedro

      Linda has asked us several times to look at a certain chemical process that looks very similar to the e-cat and could very well have been the original stepping stone from petrol dragon to leonardi. Just forgot the name of the process. Anybody remembers? Linda?

  • Jim

    LENR for Dummies:

    Atoms are made of little hard parts on the inside, called the nucleus, surrounded by clouds of soft electrical particles, called electrons, on the outside.

    The nucleus is made up of protons and neutrons that stick together really tight. If you can ever separate the protons and neutrons, they kind of burst apart, which is where atomic energy comes from.

    And then, one level deeper, the neutrons are made up of protons and electrons that are REALLY stuck together tight.

    Now, if you have two nuclei, they are really hard to push together, because the protons repel each other, unless they are already stuck together in a nucleus.

    However, a free floating neutrons can collide with a nucleus pretty easily. And when it does, it can cause a little piece of that nucleus to break up and/or rattle a little bit, and that gives off really powerful light beams and/or shooting particles, which turn into heat when they run into something, like the walls of a container where all this is happening.

    And the heat is what we can use for energy to warm the house and make electricity and stuff like that.

    The problem is that there aren’t many free floating neutrons around.

    However, a bunch of really clever people have figured out a way of mixing nickel, just like the change in your pocket, and hydrogen, like the stuff they used to use in balloons, so that something happens that is like (though maybe not the same as) the hydrogen turning in free neutrons that collide with the nickel nuclei, giving off the powerful light beams and/or the little flying particles, and making the heat we’re looking for.

    That’s what they call LENR.

    • sempervivum

      Thank you for that excellent summary in plain language for us plebs Jim .Apparently there is also some sort of super wave necessary for the reaction to occur.

      The process of waves waving within waves, moving toward the peak in an inherent continuum of scalar jumps, is what science calls the emergence and evolution of organizational order. The process of dispersal and flattening of SuperWaves, also occurring as inherent continuous jumps, manifests as Cartesian order of parts and what science calls thermodynamic entropy. Just as evolution and entropy are processes of change as a result of moving towards and away from the peak, so too is time the outcome of waves.

    • fortyniner

      I think this may be more ‘LENR for eight-year-olds’.

      • But that’s exactly what the masses need!
        The people who scream when they hear “nuclear”.

        • K

          +1

      • Jim

        LOL, totally concur Peter, and I had an uneasy feeling about Dummies, however I couldn’t think of the right phrase fast enough to beat the edit timer.

    • AlainCo

      neutron are not proton+electron (and neutrino).
      however proton, can absorb electron (helped by energy), and became a neutron (plus neutrino)

      please be careful on theory… the longitudinal hair cutters wait for us on that…

      NO THEORY IS PROVEN… not even WL or Kim or Brillouin or Defkalion

      the only reason to accept LENr is experimental results

      the only reason to dismiss LENR is (badly understood) theory

      advice: forget about theory in your article.

      • fortyniner

        Agreed. There is nothing wrong with saying that there is no agreed theory to explain this phenomenon at present, although several have been proposed.

        This new industry also needs to lose the ‘nuclear’ word as quickly as possible – perhaps here is a good place to start. New acronym anybody, avoiding any words that sound like nuclear, e.g., nuclei, nucleonic? (Remember that a paediatrician’s office was attacked in the UK during a recent paedophile ‘scare’ in the UK.)

        • artefact

          HASER: Heat Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation
          But that would not take transmutation into account

          • Roger Bird

            I like it!! HASER

          • Omega Z

            Radiation

            Another word that scares people.

            This is tough.

            Lets just Call it a Hot Water Heater.
            Most people can deal with that.

      • Louis Liebenberg

        This is an important point. Even physicists do not agree on a possible theory, and it may well require a new theory to explain this phenomenon. So avoid theory and stick to known experimental results. Do not mention “Cold Fusion” as this may simply discredit what you say (this is why the term LENR was created). Simply refer to “anomalous heat” observed experimentally that cannot be explained by known chemical reactions or current theories in physics.

  • artefact

    On JONP:

    Steven N. Karels
    June 1st, 2013 at 7:29 PM
    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Is there a limitation on how small (i.e., thermal output power) eCat technology can produce? For instance, a series of 10W output eCats sewn into an electric blanket?

    —–

    Andrea Rossi
    June 2nd, 2013 at 2:23 AM
    Dear Steven N. Karels:
    Theoretically there are not limits in this sense, but there are considerations connected with the intellectual property that limits the convenience of these “mini”Cats. Think, for example, to the Clowns who are saying that they have been able to steal our technology: today they have a mock up, an empty box waiting ( from us) for real technology to be filled with. Should they be able to buy for small money a device, the day after they could announce a real test, made by an indipendent party, and they are just a paradigm of a crowd like them. We will put in the market small devices only after we will be able to produce in mass quantity, to gain a competitivity enough to forbid a steal of IP. This issue is bound to the certification process: with a certification process done, we can robotize the production, prices will be unsustainable for wide competition, we will be able to get a strong share of the market: after that, even if unavoidably the competition will be born, our efforts will have been prized adequately.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Timar

      It’s funny how he still maintains the propaganda that “the clowns” have nothing but empty boxes. I guess he underestimates the intelligence of the JONP readers in this matter.

      • Timar

        The moderation-algorithm is completely nuts. I changed “in that case” for “in this matter” and the comment went into moderation!

        • Timar

          Seem it can’t take criticism too 🙂

      • AlainCo

        if some believe his fairy tale… 😉

        He have competitors, point.

      • Alp

        I think by “clowns” he means Defkalion, no?

        • Roger Bird

          I thought that he meant specifically you. Just kidding. Really. (:->)

          Yes, I think that he means Defkalion.

    • Karl

      I can understand Rossi frustration and anger if this is true. However, the real ones to blame if there is an unfair competition between Rossi and Defkalion are the patent organisations.

      Their reluctance to handle filed patent CF/LENR applications in a fair way, preventing innovators to protect their assets. This does not only stimulate to unfair behaviour, it prevents open market competition, ability to finance and thus create unnecessary delays of market introductions hurting all of us.

      As it stands now an innovator such as Rossi has virtually any protection. Thus, he needs to handle the protection of his intellectual properties all by himself, regardless that he has filed at least one major patent application in this field.

      Rossi is often blamed for his unopened attitude in regard to testers or demonstrations. To my understanding it is mostly due the lack of protection the patent organisations are set to handle financed by tax payers money.

      • AlainCo

        It it is as they say, it is only because Rossi is not a reliable person.
        Rossi by the way have stolen ideas about engineering, and the Greek took it no better than rossi.
        Rossi have promised Canada to those Canadian investors (don’t forget they are as much greek as they are canadian), and break his promiss. He seems to have been no better with Ampenergo who break also…

        anyway don’t panic, no hate, all that IS GOOD.

        if Rossi have been a reliable guy :
        – he would not have tried to discover industrial LENR, but would have invested in wind turbine or photo-voltaic industry.
        – Defkalion would have worked with him to kindly sell his e-cat..

        now we have 2 absolutely different reactors, two absolutely different teams, two absolutely different business approach…
        There is no risk of any of those innovator to pu the other in danger, given the huge HUGE market (I computed 6month of GDP is needed to build the reactors for LENR transition… room for competitors).

        The competition make them work harder, innovate more, find complementary market niche, better business method…

        they are like two genious in a classroom… instead of sleeping with they perfect result, they battle every day to work more to get bette than the other…

        and don’t imagine that Japanese, Chines, Americans, don’t feel the same…

        Maybe Defkalion have saved the future of Rossi from being simply absorbed after a comfortable slow improvement of his technology…

        we need more competitors, not less.

        • AlainCo

          what I describe is antifragile personality…
          the kind that get better when kicked in the butt.

          Antifragile: please handle without care. (reference to taleb book)

        • Karl

          I agree “fair competition” is a very very good thing. Without it we might become too lacy:)

          • AlainCo

            Fair is the same word as during the Olympic games… ;->
            does not mean kind and tender…

            anyway Rossi and DGT look like mouse battling for a bag of peanut, under the body of a sleepy elephant …

            DGT have understood that their enemy was not Rossi, but the big sleepy elephants around…

          • Karl

            I like your metaphor of “cat – mouse” battle near the feet of a sleepy hordes of elephants.

          • AlainCo

            not intended, but good.

        • Timar

          Yes, Alain – we really think along the same lines 🙂

          I think some peoples sympathy for Rossi prevents them to see the grand scheme of things – both ethically and practically.

        • kwhilborn

          The ecat was not capable/stable enough when defkalion wanted a 2 day demonstration, but Andrea Rossi has always done what he said he would do. I am surprised by this comment.

          Rossi was once accused of some bad stuff in court and instead of hiding in America as he could have with his Visa he returned to Italy to prove his innocence.

          He can now run the ecat for 3 days minimum according to verifications, so Defkalion should have waited.

          It is Defkalion who has NEVER shown anything in public and has openly lied about their products to us. Many forget they said they were testing thousands when they had no prototype. It was a lie and we caught it. It was on their forum until they deleted it.

    • Visitor

      If he says “today they have a mock up, an empty box waiting ( from us) for real technology to be filled with”, I believe him. looks logical with the data we have till now about Defkalion.
      But I think his mass distribution plan for gaining the highest profit before it’s being cloned, is wrong. He needs to sell billions of $ in one-shot in order it will work and it means years of production and huge warehouses for storing.
      Turn to the USA government and receiving a few billion $ check for open-source it to the world, it’s a better plan.

      • lenrdawn

        How anybody can still believe in Defkalion having anything real after the PESN Xanthoulis interview in April is beyond me.

        • khawk

          I’m still stuck on their stated admission to stealing the catalyst from Rossi. If that is the true and they are actually producing heat with their machine, then somebody over there is going to have to eventually pay the piper.

          • Roger Bird

            It will be an interesting case. Defkalion has clearly added real value to “the” heater. So the judge would not take all of their money away. I see the judge leaving Defkalion with some money.

  • artefact

    There is an interview with Rossi from radiocdc on youtube from yesterday in italian.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdXd5CgmvXY

    To those who understand it: Is there something new in it?

    • Bruce Williams

      As far as I can understand it (poor sound at Rossi’s end of the line, plus the fact that he speaks very quickly), the only new(?) thing is that he mentioned a commercialisation time of around one year with his American partners.The rest of the interview is a summary of the tests,the high standing of the people involved, and the setup,all stuff with which we are familiar.

    • Tor

      Rossi tells that he have given
      the american company right thou build and sell
      their technology.
      Rossi still owns the technology.

  • Stefan

    Thoughts about the theory of LENR,

    The first observation is that Physics do have it’s mysteries,

    BEGIN QUOTE (EN Wikipedia)
    The question of how superconductivity arises in high-temperature superconductors is one of the major unsolved problems of theoretical condensed matter physics. The mechanism that causes the electrons in these crystals to form pairs is not known.[5] Despite intensive research and many promising leads, an explanation has so far eluded scientists. One reason for this is that the materials in question are generally very complex, multi-layered crystals (for example, BSCCO), making theoretical modelling difficult.
    END QUOTE

    The first discovery was in 1986 and to this date we have no good theory of how it works although it has been studied extensively, this really shows that how hard the subject of condensed matter can be.

    The LENR effect do show up in very complex materials as well, but the experimentation is tough and is littered with failures due to the fact that we do not know all (but we do know quite many) the features of the material that will produce the effect, and one need to take a probabilistic path in order to assess it’s validity. Many people do not accept this as proof and therefore claim that LENR is not a proved phenomena and usually go so far to call it a fringe science. Also the LENR field has not been financed very well and very much been approached by less known figures. To name one figure though, that performed well financed extensive research during many years is McCubre, that have been working with this subject at SRI.

    There is now shortage of theories trying to explain what is happening and it would be really nice to get a simple overview in hand waving terms of how they are supposed to work. They contain their own miracles though but still give possible explanations of a lot of the features seen. Some theories argues for new physics but other are theories well within the known physics limits.

    Critiques does say that they cannot fathom how this is supposed to work, they feel very comfortable with what they know and hence prevent any funding to this field. But just as a con artist can make an observer believe they are seeing a true magic, nature can perform a trick to experts theoretical castles. It has happened again and again throughout the history of science.

    No to come to a concrete issue, one common theme in the process to understand this is the assumption of a proton and electron to form a neutron that can pass through the coulomb barrier and ignite a nuclear reaction. The mystery here is how this can come about because it takes quite a lot of energy to make that happen in isolation. The argument here looks to be that the Quantum Mechanics can possibly allow for an aggregate behavior involving a many body problem, We cannot proof it, but considering the experiment indications, leading us to assume nature does perform a magic trick on us with great probability, it seams plausible.

    WDYT?

  • andreiko

    Energie=massa x lichtsnelheid x lichtsnelheid ,dus, massa die wij kunnen meten is gecondenceerde lichtsnelheid van massa.
    Energie is beweging van de kleinst mogelijke massa of veelvouden van de kleinst mogelijke massa.
    Nu lijkt het erop dat de gecondenceerde energie van de massa op een bepaalde manier bevrijdt kan worden ( rustiger en beschaafder dan de tot opheden bekende manieren) opvallend is dat bij deze rustige methode altijd het bijzondere element waterstof (H) betrokken is,waarom is (H) een bijzonder element?Omdat (H) het enige element is waarvan de meeste atomen geen neutron bezitten Ik vermoed dat hier de link met de mogelijke bevrijding van gecondenceerde energie gelegd moet worden.

    • Roger Bird

      Google Translate did not help me with this one, probably because the original text was flawed grammar, spelling, and punctuation.

      • Bento

        No, spelling and grammar are ok, it’s just…almost poetic, Andreiko used a few metaphors.

    • Dickyaesta

      Translation @Andreiko

      Energy = mass x light speed x light speed, so that we can measure, mass is condensed light speed of mass. Energy is movement of the smallest possible mass or multiples of the smallest possible mass.

      Now it seems that this condensed energy of the mass in a certain way can be released (in a quieter and more civilized than is known up to this time)

      It is striking that in this quiet method always the special element hydrogen (H) is involved. Why is (H) such a special element? Because hydrogen (H) is the only element of which most atoms do not possess any neutron. I imagine that here the link with the possible liberation of condensed energy can to be laid.

      • Dickyaesta

        translation @andreiko
        First line should read:
        Energy = mass x LightSpeed x LightSpeed. Therefore mass, which we can measure, is condensed LightSpeed of mass.

        @Robert Bird
        It does seem a bit rapidly written in dutch as well, A sugestion to Andreiko might to write it in word or wordpad first.

  • Peterem

    Excellent idea, Frank. You are my hero. “Physicists are atoms. A physicist is an attempt by an atom to understand itself.”

  • A. Hopeful

    a phenomenon with many names

    Lattice assisted sub-atomic interactions. LASAI
    Lattice assisted nucleonic interactions. LANI
    Sub-atomic interactions in lattices SAIL
    Sub-atomic interactions in matter SAIM
    Sub-atomic interactions at low temperatures SAILT
    atto-nano interactions in matter ANIM
    atto-nano interactions in matter at lower temperatures ANIMALT

    • Owen

      I think I got it:

      ROSSI = Radiation of Stimulated Sub-atomic Interactions

      You have to admit it does have a nice ring to it. (It’s better than my previous recommendation for the name quantum energy.) I wonder if Andrea Rossi would approve?

  • Herb Gillis

    LENR:
    1) A solid state process which produces excess energy from hydrogen and/or deuterium in amounts too large to be accounted for by any chemical reaction.
    2) – – The stuff that dreams are made of.

  • Dr. Mike

    Frank,
    My only recommendation would be to change “The energy density of LENR is higher than any known conventional energy source” to: The energy density of LENR is higher than any known conventional chemical energy source. (LENR probably has a lower energy density than fission or hot fusion nuclear reactions.) Also, I believe the links to other sites for more information are very important for any curious newcomers to obtain more information.

    • Thank you very much — good clarification.

  • Adrian Ashfield

    Frank, here are some suggestions.

    LENR stands for Low Energy Nuclear Reactions — and refers to the phenomenon where anomalous amounts of heat are created when certain metals (e.g. nickel, palladium) absorb hydrogen or deuterium and an external stimulus such as heat or an electric current is applied. The reaction takes place at relatively low temperature and sometimes results in transmutation as well as heat. Either no strong radiation is produced or it is absorbed locally. The waste products are not radioactive. This phenomenon is also referred to as Cold Fusion and LANR as well as other terms.

    There are many theories about what causes this heat effect, but none has been widely accepted. Over the years there have been many experiments carried out which demonstrate this effect. It has been difficult to obtain, and is not always easy to replicate, particularly as the preparation of the metal was critical and it sometimes took weeks for anomalous heat to appear. When the effect is obtained it can also been difficult to control.

    There are many attempts going on at the moment by various parties to be able to replicate and control the LENR effect. Several companies are now working on commercial products with claims of producing kW of power as heat. Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat invention has received a lot of attention because he was the first to publically demonstrate his device and it has now been independently tested by seven scientists, funded by the Swedish R&D organization Elforsk, demonstrating at least ten times the energy of any known chemical reaction.

    Various claims are for a COP (Coefficient of Performance) from 6 to over 30. Even at the low end such a device would obsolete virtually all other ways of producing power. High temperature, more efficient designs would be suitable for powering transport, even aircraft, although this would probably take decades. This promise of inexpensive, safe, clean power is why many are now following the subject.

    • Thanks very much Adrian — you have made very good improvements.

  • Felix Fervens

    Others offer good suggestions about content, I’ll comment about style. You might avoid the passive voice and be more economical with words:

    Example:

    >While over the years there have been many experiments carried out which demonstrate this effect, it was often difficult to obtain, and when the effect was obtained it has been difficult to control.

    >In recent years vast strides have been made by researchers in reproducing and controlling the reaction, and now we have reached the point where commercial products are starting to come on the market. The first of these products is Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat (Energy Catalyzer) which is currently capable of producing heat that can be used for many applications.

    Becomes:

    Over time, many experiments demonstrated this effect, but it was elusive and uncontrollable.

    Recently researchers made strides in reproducing and controlling the reaction. Finally, commercial products are coming to market. The first of these products is Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat (Energy Catalyzer), currently capable of producing useful heat.

    • I appreciate your comments about style and economy, Felix.

  • Sanjeev

    In my opinion, the second draft is very good. Its wise to keep lenr open and full of curiosity. Its largely an unknown in fact. The coming generations should view it as unknown and a thing to investigate rather than a thing that is known to be perfectly and undoubtedly impossible or to be explained away as phonons, rydberg matter and what not.

  • Stefan

    Hi,

    I re-saw the Cafe’ Presentation of McCubre on youtube. Unfortunately the 5th one, the most interesting one covering the very convincing argument about Heluim production is defunct. Is there any other link to these presentations available?

    Cheers!

    • Stefan

      I found another link on youtoub that works,
      Thanks

  • artefact

    Frank Acland
    June 2nd, 2013 at 8:41 AM
    Dear Andrea,

    There have been a number of labels applied to the phenomenon that was originally referred as ‘cold fusion.’ Some are: LENR (Low energy nuclear reaction), LANR (Lattice assisted nuclear reaction), CANR (Chemically assisted nuclear reaction), Anomalous heat effect, Fleischmann Pons effect, Cold fusion — and more.

    What do you think is the most accurate label that should be applied to your technology — and why?

    Many thanks!

    Frank Acland

    —–

    Andrea Rossi
    June 2nd, 2013 at 9:38 AM
    Dear Frank Acland:
    Very problematic question, but intriguing.
    LENR ( Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) is acceptable, based on my personal experience, because the Third Indipendent Party Report has accertained beyond any reasonable doubt that the energy produced cannot be generated by the quantic status changement of the electrons orbiting around the nuclea ( see the Ragone diagram of the well known Report).
    CANR is difficult to define: what does mean “chemical assisted” exactly? Definitions “de omnino et nihil” are basically meaningless.
    LANR comes from a nuclear model based on ” lattice structure of nucleons”, but when it turns into models, NUclear = UNclear. It comes from the W-L theory, which is wrong because unsustainable under the theoretical point of view ( conflicts with the leptons conservation law and confers to virtual particles characteristics limited to the real e.p.) and under the experimental point of view ( it has never worked in 10 years of attempts. By the way: I have given to 2 of our US scientists the task to work full time for 1 year to replicate all the existing patents of LENR in the world, to analyze which of them can work. We also analyze the theoretical claims, checking with the instrumentation we can use, very complete, if the supposed radiations, fusions etc really happen. We are making this work both for scientific purpose and for understanding which patents work and which ones do not work).
    ANOMALOUS HEAT EFFECT : “anomalous” is generic, this too is a substantive that does not confer a precise meaning. “Anomalous” can be used as an adjective of a phenomenon observed in an experiment or a test, indipendently from a defined process.
    FLEISHMANN-PONS EFFECT is valid for electrilytic systems, but has nothing to do, for example, with my Effect, which is based upon a precise mechanism that has nothing to do with electrolysis.
    COLD FUSION is limited to the energy produced if and when fusion is effectively reached: my personal experience is that cold fusion is a side effect of the LENR.
    This is my opinion, but maybe Others will be able to coin better definitions.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • D R Lunsford

    Storms replies to “Jones Beene” here, in this thread – his definition is authoritative.

    http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg82095.html

    -drl

  • Jerry Jones

    Bottom Line is that the MEDIA has coined LENR as Cold Fusion – and rightly so it is much easier and a more attractive word for this new energy terminology and much easier for the WORLD to relate to every single day in the coming revolution, yes lets go with Cold Fusion.

    • Barry

      +1

  • Peter Gluck

    LENR is the caterpillar, LENR+ is the butterfly
    LENR ia interesting, LENR+ is useful (generayes plenty of energy)

    See please this sketch

    LENR+ Manifesto and Plan. (sketch)

    1. Situation: The LENR field has PROBLEMS

    2. Cause: It appeared too EARLY

    3. Difficulty: Extreme COMPLEXITY

    4. Solution: TECHNOLOGY first!
    – No PURE SCIENCE alone!
    – SCIENTIFIC METHOD not applicable.
    – HYBRID METHOD necessary

    5. No INNER SOLUTION found
    – Usual SYSTEMS hopeless
    – To destroy MYTHS, MEMES!
    – Radical PARADIGM shift.

    6 OUTER SOLUTIONS emerging: LENR+

    7 Task: to differentiate LENR/LENR+!
    – LENR is discovery, LENR+ is invention,
    – LENR and LENR+ have different mechanisms;
    – LENR+ based on enhanced excess heat,
    – LENR+ dynamic system of multi-stage processes;
    – LENR+ is based on nuclear interactions, not reactions,
    – LENR+ needs a productive meta-theory

    8. Task: define, describe LENR+ mechanism;
    to make hydrogen reactive and metal receptive
    Polaritons, Nanoplasmonics, Resonances -àBEC, sequences…
    Trans-theory in statu-nascendi

    9. Task LENR+ R&D by HOLISTIC approach
    – optimization performances/control, scale up, diversification

    10. Industrial implementation of LENR+ generators

    Explanation on the blog Ego Out or you can ask me.

    Peter

  • Chris I

    A definition ought to be a… definition.

    It should pretty much only specify what counts in, with else counting out. It shouldn’t state too many facts about the defined thing that aren’t to this purpose; it could include some statements which are borderline, just for clarity.

    “LENR is one of many choices of label for a set of phenomena, hitherto lacking an accepted explanation and still disbelieved by many, which (are purported to?) release such amounts of thermal energy as to be considered not of chemical nature and sharing some other features of nuclear reactions (emission of some radiation but not such as usually experienced with known ones) and in experimental situations involving no (initially?) radioctive materials (nor any involved in known nuclear reactions) nor the extreme high temperatures of known nuclear fusion, in most cases involving instead metal hydrides with high (slightly exceeding unity?) loading ratio. It is an acronym for Low Energy Nuclear Reactions.”

    N. B. The parenthetical clauses ending with ‘?’ are those I consider less essential but perhaps suitable. Those without it I recommend including.

  • Methusela

    I do hope it works. Wikipedia is very corrupt.

    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=806&cpage=11#comment-710175

    Andrea Rossi
    June 2nd, 2013 at 10:18 AM
    Dear Lucio Martini:
    Thank you. The sue is already started. It will take time, but I will not stop until it will be arrived to an end. I am right and I am defending not only my rights, but also the rights of all the persons that have been damaged by Wikipedia. I am trying to mkae possible for attorneys to start a Class A action against Wikipedia. All the persons that have been defamed by Wikipedia can contact. They are causing damages to persons violating the right of privacy, the right of self defence, the right of defending their reputation with a system that, to collect audience, allows to any imbecile to publish accusations, even false, against people without any possibility for people to defend themselves.
    [email protected]

    • Roger Bird

      Reading Andrea, his case sounds very reasonable. And despite what maryyugo et. al. have said, his complaint does not seem to have anything to do with whether the E-Cat works or not. It has to do with whether it is OK to lie and slander (or libel) someone. I hope that Wikipedia gets creamed. Wikipedia also lies about renegade health matters; my renegade health co-warriors think that Wikipedia is at the very least a joke.

  • Kim

    HANER

    Hydrogen and Nickel Energy Reaction.

    Kim

  • Andreiko

    Thank you very much.

  • Roger Bird

    What happens when we discover that it works with other things, like palladium, silver, peanut butter, etc?

  • Roger Bird

    “The energy density of LENR is higher than any known conventional energy source.” Frank, I thought that you were going to change “conventional” to “chemical”.

  • Hampus

    Your updated version sounds great. All the information you need about LENR in a short text =)

  • Barry

    “Cold Fusion” is a coined term. Kind of like the “Big Bang” one can argue it wasn’t big. I’ve heard descriptions of a 1/1000 of a second after the Big Bang, still quite small. Plus there was not an environment for sound at the time.

    When I approach people and ask them about Cold Fusion 8 out of 10 people haven’t heard of it. When I ask people about LENR, nobody’s heard of it. It’s kind of like calling the Big Bang, R.E.P.T. (rapidly expanding poofy thing). It loses the pizzaz.

    • Bob

      I just order pizzaz online and they deliver them to my door. 🙂

  • Brad Arnold

    This phenomenon (LENR) has been confirmed in hundreds of published scientific papers: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJtallyofcol.pdf

    That is the most convincing and informative meme that I can provide.

    I would also call it “electron capture” and use this link as a paradigm:

    http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Scientists-must-Study-the-Nuclear-Weak-Force-to-Better-Understand-LENR.html

    In other words, what you say about LENR is zilch, and reminds me of all those main steam media types who, in an attempt to be “objective,” say nothing with a lot of words.