Open Thread Jun 22 — MFMP V 2.0 Experiment

I will be traveling over the weekend and probably will not be able to update E-Cat World until Monday. Please feel free to contribute any news views, etc. in this thread.

One thing folks might want to keep an eye on is the new Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project experiment over at There are two experiments being run simultaneously in Europe and the US which will be following a new protocol. They are using Celani wire cells (including a control cell). Calibration of the cells is complete, and right now gas loading is going on, You can follow the progress of the experiments on this blog, and live data can be viewed here.

  • Sinuous

    From JONP – Very Sad. I note that Andrea implies Focardi was not involved for the fame and glory of their discovery, but I still think it’s a shame that he will not be around to receive the recognition he deserved for being a major part of this game changing team. Rest In Peace Sergio.

    Andrea Rossi
    June 22nd, 2013 at 2:46 AM
    We all have lost one of the greatest scientists in the field of the LENR.
    For me he has been a tremendous ally, he helped our work enormously and the safety certifications that we are obtaining are the fruit of his consulting during the last 7 years. For me he has been also a teacher for Physics and Mathematics, anytime I needed his help in these matters to better understand the theory behind the effect of the E-Cat.
    He has always worked with us with total, absolute and disinterested attitude, thinking only the the interest of the Science behind the LENR.
    All the newspapers of the scientific world will say what he has been in the Scientific and University world and his enormous legacy: he has been Professor of Physics, Mathematic, he has been the Dean of the Scientific Faculties of the Alma Mater University of Bologna and the founder of the Cesena branch of the University of Bologna. His pubilcations in the fields of Mathematics and Physics are monumental.
    Now, after a long period of illness, that obviously all his friends have taken secret to respect his privacy, he ceased to suffer and starts a new duty for God under anothe form of life. I am sure he will continue to look after my work from where he is now.
    See you soon, my great Friend and Master Sergio! I will never forget our work together and that day in the Brasimone Nuclear facility.
    Yours Andrea Rossi

  • mark


  • freethinker

    June 22nd, 2013 at 2:46 AM


    • LENR.FTW

      Prof. Focardi’s support of Rossi and LENR was something the ultraskeps could never really explain away.

      It’s very unfortunate that he faded out of the picture at such a crucial stage. He could have been an effective champion of the technology.

      My respects to his family and friends.

      • AB

        Prof. Focardi’s support of Rossi and LENR was something the ultraskeps could never really explain away.

        Actually, they have never had a problem explaining any human behavior not in agreement with their opinions. Since LENR and especially the e-cat can only be a fraud (in their mind), anyone who doesn’t realize that must be incompetent, delusional or in cahoots with Rossi.

        • LENR.FTW

          Fair enough. I should have said explained away to the satisfaction of a reasonable observer.

        • Roger Bird

          This is why I keep saying that the skeptopaths have a weak social sense, kind of like my color blindness. They are not quite as bad as autistics who can’t maneuver at all in society. But anti-occamized social tomfoolery doesn’t bother them at all.

    • Sanjeev

      Just when his research started bearing fruits.

  • freethinker
  • Geoff


  • Bob Greenyer

    We were aware that he has been ill for some time, this is a great loss to the field but I hope his spirit could take some solace that his work played an import role in the future of humanity.

    Rest in Peace Sergio Focardi


    Announcing a new article available on the LENR For the Win web site:

    “Comparing Energy Sources”

    This article includes a detailed Ragone Chart (specific energy vs. specific power) that:
    * is available for use by anyone, anywhere for any purpose
    * includes LENR device test results and projected values based on 6 month fuel charges (for the E-Cat HT, E-Cat HT2 and Hyperion)
    * includes fission, fusion, chemical, electrochemical and renewable energy sources

    The article also provides a characterization of the LENR energy source based on all available information and analyzes the consistency of LENR device test results to date. Many calculations are included so that they can be double-checked and so that the values plotted on the chart are transparent. I think many in the LENR community will find the analysis very interesting… I know I did.

    The Ragone Chart from “Comparing Energy Sources” has also been added to the earlier LENR For the Win article:

    “Are Low Energy Nuclear Devices Real?”

    Feedback is welcome and encouraged.

    • Roger Bird

      What are the diagonal lines for on the ragone graph?

      • AlainCo

        autonomy duration

        energy divided by power

    • Mick D

      I love this chart. However I don’t understand the placement of
      Solar and wind. What is the mass of sunlight and wind? Is this the mass of the solar panel and windmill? Surely for conventional, nuclear and LENR the “per kg” mass is the mass of the fuel. Would you use the mass of the nuclear reactor or the blast furnace, or the fireplace? Similar comment for storage devices.
      I completely agree with the comparison of fuels, but solar and wind should have a 0 mass and be off the chart.

      • Roger Bird

        I will vote for the entire package, otherwise solar is dividing by zero, and that is not fair.

        Another chart could show the expected kilowatt hours divided into the TOTAL cost. Solar and wind would still look good, but LENR+ would do better. Of course, we do not really know how much LENR+ will cost.

        • Mick D

          That would also be an interesting chart, but again would you just use the cost of fuel, or of the life cycle cost including installation, maintainance etc.

          • Roger Bird

            I would use the total life cycle cost. Remember how ethanol got tagged out at second?

        • Bruce Fast

          Roger, I don’t believe that you are right that solar and wind would look good in a total cost v. energy out chart. Wind does better than solar, but solar is pitiful. Both solar and wind, however, are also very fickle about where they can be located. And both are sporadic power generators requiring that their power be stored — a very expensive proposition.

          • Roger Bird

            I guess the storage costs would also have to be included.

            And, of course, the power density of solar at 60 degrees north latitude would be terrible.

            But as you say, with all of the problems of these two energy sources, like the fact that they are intermittent, why bother.

      • Mick D

        Well, I read your explanations on your website. I should have done that first. I’m not sure I agree, but I am trying to like it. Now at least I understand the assumptions.
        Thanks for putting the chart together.

  • Roger Bird

    I am imagining when Rossi first approached Focardi. “Can I show you my very interesting cold fusion device?” Focardi probably rolled his eyes (and when Focardi rolled his eyes, you’ve been eye-rolled) and thought, “How do I get out of this difficult social situation?”

    It is because of Focardi that Rossi gained any credibility traction.

  • Roger Barker

    I am disappointed with the MFMP guys. I know they’re trying their best but they are misguided. The easiest thing for them to do was to do the exact same experiment as Celani did or better yet get Celani to do the experiment while they made measurements. That would have been conclusive.

    Instead they’ve been trying one questionable experiment after another.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Hi Roger,

      We are doing what we can with very limited resources. We are open to suggestions and even skilled time from willing individuals. The December 12th 2012 experiment was as close as possible to Celani’s original as we could establish independently at the time and showed at minimum 12.5% PXs despite our cells having a less than optimum design at that time and, as it turned out later, FAR less capable wires.

      The experiment also suffered from the same criticisms as Celani’s original however and much of the work we have been doing since has been focussed on addressing those legitimate concerns. Of course we would love to flick a switch and we have no more need for volunteering our time and resources, but we are in the pursuit of verifying claims and following the evidence and in unchartered and disputed waters such as these the path to certainty is not trivial, if it was, there would be no need for MFMP.

      We have systematically gone through requests for tests from our followers, changing environments, structures and protocols and learning from the result. This is the scientific method.

      Our very own interpretation of the Celani experiment, the S&G was envisaged even before the Dec 12th test but took a long time to realise. Its purpose was to discount criticisms of convection, ambient, IR, emissivity, Languimir effect to name but a few and allow us to create a blindingly simple experiment that even 10 year olds could easily understand. The first two runs were tantalising, particularly the second which showed compelling results.

      We want to learn from that S&G test and take on board a lot of the advice for the next protocol – including using better an more active wire in the active cell.

      The reality is, there has not been an experiment in 25 years that has not been questionable. but we have seen something on both runs of the S&G and we feel we are getting there, but of couse, we may still be missing something.

      The current LIVE experiments are very closely matched to Celani’s original and are based on his latest protocol. We were not willing however to take his word for it and so we have doubled up for credibility and also added a control in each case. In the end, the Celani cell may still be an easy target regardless of who tests it and we are still seeing people pose critique that should be dealt with by the current protocol.

      The LENR sticks allow for HIGH temperatures in VERY controlled environments, we are testing over 500ºC right at the moment which is above claimed phonon resonances for elemental isotopes in the wire as claimed by 3rd party followers.

      We are also in the process of testing one of the most advanced Mizuno cells ever made with two of the leading scientist in the field.

      I re-iterate, every experiment ever done in LENR has been questioned, that is science, we only hope we are getting closer and with the help of the very many active followers of our work, we believe, if it can be done, we will do it.