After the E-Cat Report

I feel reasonably confident that we will see the long-expected third party E-Cat test report within the next few weeks. There have been a number of clues, leaks and hints that seem to point in that direction, anyway. The question on my mind right now is that assuming the report gets published, and it provides further evidence that the E-Cat reaction is ‘unconventional’ and potentially useful as an energy source — what happens next?

One thing I am confident of is that this will be a very big event in the LENR community. I am certain that many readers here and others who have been following the LENR story are paying close attention and will scrutinize the report to get as much information as possible from it, and draw conclusions therefrom. I think we are very good at analysis and interpretation of data, and I expect that there will be very useful new information in this report that will help us get a bigger picture of what the E-Cat is all about.

What is not so sure is what the wider reaction will be from the wider scientific community and the general public. If LENR is going to ever get a foothold in the public consciousness, something needs to happen that will make people sit up and take notice.

If the reaction to the publication of the first third party report is anything to go by there are some things we can expect. There will be hyper-critical analysis of the report from people skeptical about LENR in general and the E-Cat in particular, and if there is anything in the report that opens the door for doubt about the report’s conclusions, it will be seized up and magnified — and could have the effect of essentially nullifying any positive impact of the report.

In the previous report there were questions raised from skeptical sources about the chance for hidden wires being used to feed the E-Cat hidden DC power — the implication was that since this test took place in Rossi’s own factory he could have rigged the whole demonstration. In my mind, this scenario was preposterous — but that didn’t really matter. The doubt was raised and repeated widely enough that it ended up being taken seriously by opinion-makers and media persons — and the report was largely discounted and therefore ignored.

There was also the fact that in the first report, there was no analysis of the contents of the reactor. It was essentially a black-box test — something which many people discounted as being non-scientific, and therefore not worthy of being taken seriously.

My hope is that the new test will be different enough in terms of experimental setup, location, and materials analysis that the objections brought up previously will not apply. But there may be other things that skeptics can bring up to shed doubt on the whole affair — I don’t doubt that they will try.

Anyway, I have been trying to formulate a plan of action for when the report is published, and this is my current outline.

1. Announce the publication of the report as soon as I hear about it.
2. Read the report.
3. Listen to the analysis of others whose opinion I respect (many ECW readers)
4. If the report has important findings, try to share it with as many people who I think will be interested as possible — especially people in the media and scientific communities. I hope to be able to use any influence I may have to get the information to as wide an audience as possible.

There’s only so much planning one can do with so many unknowns still out there, but if the report is noteworthy, I feel we have a duty to share it widely. I hope our job will be made much easier with the assistance of more influential media outlets, but I don’t think that assistance is guaranteed.

So it’s an interesting time. I don’t know when the report will arrive, but I feel it could be in the next couple of weeks. I think I’m as ready as I can be.

How about you — do you have any plans? Maybe people here could collaborate in some way.

  • Jimr

    I hope the report will have an affect on many, however I think it has lost much of its impact with the fact the first customer shipment is not working as well as planned. Rossi says it will take a year to work out the bugs, which in Rossi speak is most likely 2 to 3 years to perfect. Many previously have stated a working Ecat is more important than a successful report.

    • Billy Jackson

      to many unknowns for this to be a factor… we know so little about the customer or the use of the plant that its experimental nature will allow for some working errors without destroying the quality of the upcoming report. now a grand slam working device + report would be awesome.. we have to accept that any new technology has to go through growing pains before it hits its final spec.

    • Frechette

      Debugging any new technology in an industrial setting takes time and effort. The shakeout of problems is even the case for straight forward chemical processes when scaled up. Unfortunately we are not tuned in to exactly what and where the difficulties
      are. They may be plant related and have very little to do with the E-Cat per se.

  • Billy Jackson

    the conspiratorial nature of cold fusion will again lend its self to the “everyone knows” syndrome. You’re not fighting just the established science but the ingrained knowledge of the public view. It is going to take some one with a lot more horse power than Rossi and IH to really get wide acceptance.. even if its 100% positive.. youll get small acceptances here and there as people argue its merits.. but until some one with a lot of scientific clout backs it and proves it works.. your going to continue to fight an up hiill battle.

    the other option is just as Rossi wanted.. a marketable product that proves it works.. enough get out in the open the savings alone will cause more to want in. eventually that will tip the scales.

  • gian luca Gian Luca

    I think that there will be a tricky situation and confused.
    Like to said Alan, skeptics convenience to continue their work but the believers
    will always be more.
    The energy big company will begin to disinvest their capitals without attracting attention and will try in every way to get into the business (maybe they already are).
    But, in my opinion, in a first time the big companies will pay us their disinvest for energy conversion driving up prices of traditional fuels. The conversion to the LENR will be a minimum of twenty years.

  • After the report is released I will be doing my level best to provide detailed and objective analysis of it at this page: http://lenrftw.net/assessing_ecat_report.html

    I’ve already got the topics ready. All we can do is analyze as best we can and persuade the persuadable, one person at a time. Hopefully my analysis will be a resource for others.

    Actually I hope my analysis will be moot and the results will be unambiguously positive, bulletproof and widely accepted. But the way things go in this field the chances of that are kind of low.

    • Billy Jackson

      your efforts are greatly appreciated. never underestimate what someone is capable of convincing themselves of regardless of evidence to the contrary. If someone is truly willing to reject every fact, test, or evidence without the least bit of willingness to educate themselves or challenge their own view, you will find that they are not worth wasting your time on.

      • There is sometime wonderful surprise from something that you did not imagine it would be important.
        The serious work you do is probably much more read by much more serious suit&ties that what you imagine.

  • LuFong

    I’m expecting the report shortly and to be generally positive as well. I think the report will be conservative in nature and so the COP will probably not be as high as we are all hoping (>10). I hope there is enough analysis of the fuel and other phenomena (radiation etc.) such that the report won’t be be considered the results of a black box test and the basis of a theory can begin to be formed or confirmed. The stock market will not notice nor will the national media although some scientific journals/blogs will mention the results. What I hope for is that the scientific and financial worlds take notice of the results and seriously begin the consider LENR.

    I’ve always said that it’s one thing to demonstrate LENR and another to commercialize it. If anything the past 3 years of Rossi’s adventures have proven this. Even a very positive report does not allay these concerns. It is one thing to demonstrate LENR and another to drive a commercial application under load over a long period of time in a reliable manner. Rossi has not been very forthcoming about these difficulties. Once IH actually begins openly promoting the E-Cat technology and/or manufacturing licenses sold can we deduce that this hurdle has been overcome. This may take a lot longer than we think and in the short term the report won’t change anything.

    • Billy Jackson

      Honestly? i think that Rossi and IH will remain small time players in the scheme of things. a one or two billion dollar company just does not have the global pressence needed to push LENR into the forefront.. they cant compete with the infrastructure that the big energy companies have….If LENR proves to be true it will be one of the big energy companies that profit from it more than Rossi and IH will. Dont get me wrong. i think they will possibly get Royalties from the invention of the E-cat. but competing against 100 billion dollar a year corporations .. that’s gonna be tough. even if you get past them locking you up in litigation and regulations for years..

      we are at step 1.5 .. step 1 was 1989.. and they locked this up for 25 years… with laws, regulations, public & academic opinion.. they have not even begun to fight yet.. they will not let you simply destroy the type of money these industries make..lets not forget the politicians who owe their careers to that money and will bog us down in regulations. we are at the easy part right now.. you just wait..

      • LuFong

        I think IH is just trying to sell manufacturing licenses (as far as making money is concerned). They are looking to make money for their investors in the 5-10 year time frame.

        • Gerrit

          I think that after the ecat report we will see some web pages starting to quietly disappear.
          For instance this gem: http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/cold_fusion_01

          I have made some screen copies of blogs and web pages, so that in future the science anthropologists will be able to see how cold fusion was seen back in the day (==now).

          I encourage you all to make some copies yourself before such pages are taken offline.

          • just the latest from pathoskeptic

            http://pathoskeptic.com/2014/09/28/andrea-rossi-pulls-an-other-rabbit-out-of-his-ass/?__scoop_post=07e5f5c0-4950-11e4-a362-001018304b75&__scoop_topic=1430334#__scoop_post=07e5f5c0-4950-11e4-a362-001018304b75&__scoop_topic=1430334

            just see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink

            Type I: Overestimations of the group — its power and morality

            * Illusions of invulnerability creating excessive optimism and encouraging risk taking.

            * Unquestioned belief in the morality of the group, causing members to ignore the consequences of their actions.

            Type II: Closed-mindedness

            * Rationalizing warnings that might challenge the group’s assumptions.

            * Stereotyping those who are opposed to the group as weak, evil, biased, spiteful, impotent, or stupid.

            Type III: Pressures toward uniformity

            * Self-censorship of ideas that deviate from the apparent group consensus.

            Illusions of unanimity among group members, silence is viewed as agreement.

            Direct pressure to conform placed on any member who questions the group, couched in terms of “disloyalty”

            Mindguards— self-appointed members who shield the group from dissenting information.

          • psi2u2

            nice list. That is what we see in contemporary Shakespearean studies as well.

            http://shake-speares-bible.com/2014/08/24/reinventing-your-shakespeare-journal-a-how-to-guide/

          • psi2u2

            keep the record.

          • BroKeeper

            I’m accused of paying more attention to E-Cat on my lap than her. Sadly she’s probably right (sigh).

          • Fortyniner

            There’s always the ‘wayback machine’ even if the naysayers try to erase some of their more stupid comments. The system will always look after its own though – there won’t be any tribunals, or in fact any payback at all for those who have used their authority to attempt to deny CF to humanity for 30 years or more.

          • GreenWin

            It may not make headlines, but falling oil process will spank a few skep behinds. And MIT’s hot fusion boondoggle Alcator C-Mod, has been slated for termination next year. Baby steps.

      • Ophelia Rump

        Mature companies do not launch revolutions.

        • Billy Jackson

          is it revolution we want? with all the discord, angst and despair that accompanies it? I know that LENR represents a potential disruptive technology and all that entails. Yet the potential exists for e-cats to slide unnoticed into current energy structures as enhancements and cost savings without the need for revolution.

          what is our goal here.. the destruction of the current system and what it represents or the benefits that LENR can potentially add to our society?

          • Ophelia Rump

            It is a revolution we need. What we want is irrelevant.
            You think revolution is scary. Doing nothing as the world slides toward the edge of a precipice that is scary.

            Revolution means rapid change. It does not necessitate roasting the neighbors children in an open pit on their front lawn.

            Rich men being forced to diversify their portfolios, that is an acceptable casualty. Personal productivity has never been higher on this planet, and sharing of the benefits of that productivity has never been lower.

            Not all revolution involves bullets and FOX news.
            But even FOX supports the notion that at least one revolution in history was desirable.

          • Billy Jackson

            unfortunately i do not believe that even LENR can solve all our problems as a society. that’s going to take even greater change with a much larger loss in lives to accompany it. It is a sad state of affairs that money and power, the search for and struggle to keep it by the few rule our daily lives.

          • BroKeeper

            My attention will be the report’s timing and its affect on oil stocks and the market as a whole (many fear is now artificially inflated) and contribute to another ‘October Effect’.

            The ‘October Effect’ is considered mainly to be a psychological expectation rather than an actual phenomenon. Even though most statistics go against the theory, some investors may be nervous during October because the dates of some large historical market crashes
            occurred during this month. Black Monday, Tuesday and Thursday all occurred in
            October 1929, after which came the Great Depression. In addition, the great crash of 1987 occurred on October 19, and saw the Dow plummet 22.6% in a single day.

            Oil forms one of the pillars of the global economy. Oil makes its impact felt on almost every individual’s life, and sends ripples through the stock market. However, the effect of oil is not in one direction, and untangling all the effects is not easy. At the end it is uncertain if a specific effect is due to oil or some other factor.

            This all said, it will be interesting if the report influence an ‘October Effect’ with a crash, a dip, wildly gyrate the graphs or will it be just an average mundane month?

          • bachcole

            Let me be perfectly clear so that anyone listening from federal agencies like the NSA or the FBI don’t get the wrong impression. I am deliberately and purposely against any violent revolution.

            I am 110% in favor of the kind of a revolution where smug epistemological retards who say “prove it with a hot cup of tea” but show absolutely no curiosity get shamed and perhaps even have to retire early. I want the late night comics working hard with their self-deprecating humor concerning what they have said about cold fusion. I want observation rather than theory to be more appreciated. I want people to be more willing to say, “I don’t know.” I want credibility and prestige to be on review in everyone’s mind. I want people to learn the philosophy is higher than science, and that science can be used to lie and harm people.

          • GreenWin

            Good list bachcole. Kimmel: “How bout that cold fusion? I got it mixed up with Con-Fusion. My bad!”

          • psi2u2

            Hehehe. Bachole speaks my mind.

          • gdaigle

            I’m attending a conference next week with both Steven Chu and Freeman Dyson speaking. I intend to submit my “questions from the audience” card about LENR and (if they respond) will report back here.

          • Please do that!

          • GreenWin

            I second barty. Freeman will be open to the subject I think.

          • gdaigle

            First, Dr. Dyson could not make it to the conference. No reason was given.

            I did submit my question about LENR to Dr. Chu. Unfortunately, they ran out of time and asked only one question from the audience… mine was not the one picked. So far no mention of LENR as a potential energy source, though quite a lot on the environment.

            The conference goes on today with Steven Weinberg, and later Harr Gray addressing “Solar-Driven Water Splitting”, plus other speakers. The event will be live streamed at http://www.gustavus.edu/nobel

          • clovis ray

            Hi,

            I was just remembering, back to the Pons and Fleischman news breafing, and how excited i was

            that all ofthe things we been talking about lately was going to come true, and then it was snatched from our hands to be never seen again and i was very upset, vengeance is mine ha, ha, .

      • Donk970

        Billy, you are right on the money. The big players in the existing energy industry who have quite literally trillions of dollars of profits at stake will litigate and legislate LENR into oblivion. The good news is that India and China are already moving in the right direction and other countries as well. Also I think that serious people who are serious about making money will quietly start buying E-Cat power plants and heat plants to make their various industrial processes more cost effective. My feeling is that LENR will quietly thrive and grow in the shadows and one day people will realize that LENR power plants and heat plants are all over the place.

      • Omega Z

        I expect Rossi/IH will likely license everything including the reactors. Maybe retain a small scale reactor manufacture process linked to continuous R&D. With continued R&D, additional patents & licensing will carry on for many years. Everything else will be developed & marketed by other Corporations.

        As to Big Boys in manufacturing products such as Turbines & Generators, That be GE & Siemens in the $100 Billion range.
        After them, the players/competitors in dollar scale drop pretty quick.

  • jousterusa

    A few comments, Frank: I was the source of the comment concerning the wires hooked up to the E-Cat in the Bologna test. I could clearly see in the pictures that a large genset outside the facility had cables running into the E-Cat, and Rossi confirmed this was so. He said that the initial power to start that device came from the genset (it did not start itself), as Sterling Allan reported on Peswiki. There was nothing “preposterous” about that observation and, again, it was confirmed by AR.

    But your larger concern is that the report, if it contains even minor criticism or skepticism, will irreparably damage the reputation of the E-Cat. I suppose that is possible. But, if the report is overwhelmingly positive, then what will happen is that orders will begin to flow in for new devices, and as those are filled and perform to expectations, word of the tremendous cost savings will quickly spread.

    If we are to “follow the money,” as we are so often advised, we will watch a phenomenon burst upon the power generation market with great impact. It may not matter, even before that, if someone had a quibble or two. Indeed, given the perfectionists out there, that is inevitable.

    • Billy Jackson

      Im sorry i am having difficulty following the first part of what your saying.. these pictures are from the 120+ hour test of the e-cat? not the October test a few years ago of the 1 MW plant that had the generator next to it??? cause i fail to see how you connect a generator “outside” the plant as connected to the e-cat which is “inside” the plant? do you have a link to these pictures? (not trying to be antagonizing.. i am confused to the context of your post as the 120 hour test showed nothing of the sort that i recognized from the public pictures Ive seen)

      I think that everyone recognizes that the e-cat needs outside power to start, and uses small surges of power to “stabilize” the reaction. as such a generator hooked up to the e-cat is not unexpected. Somewhere i missed something it seems.

    • hempenearth

      Hi Jouster, Frank was referring to the Hot Cat test report by Levi et al, not the much earlier test of the hundred or so E Cats in the shipping container (aka the 1MW E Cat, aka the warm cat).

      • jousterusa

        Um… I’m someone can read his mind. I am unaware of those concerns being expressed earlier.

  • Jonnyb

    Maybe you should have told him many years ago so he could have started to change his business model. If you had then he probably would have laughed at you and demoted you. L.E.N.R. has not been silent any good MD or President of a company in the energy field should constantly scour sources for any threats and then take appropriate action if required. If he has not done this then he will get what is coming to him and his company.

  • EEStorFanFibb

    When it comes, I’ll be spreading the news on our long running LENR thread on the theeestory.com. a lot of nayboobs there should be eating crow soon… I hope.

  • RKTetc

    Many breakthroughs in technology are announced with excitement each year. Subsequently many experience great difficulties in ramping up to commercialization. Many on this site are still making great leaps of faith that the process is clean, powerful and replicable. Various parties are coming close to having demonstrable units but almost all produce extremely small amounts of energy for limited periods of time. The public has yet to be fully exposed to an operational unit that really can boil a cup of water – never mind having one to experiment with.
    While I sincerely hope the testing is conclusively positive for an almost commercially viable system, there simply needs to be public demonstrations of functioning units – be they 1 Mw, 300 Mw or 5 kw units. The publicity will follow. Then the real costs will be made apparent. I still remember the publicity surrounding reactors and how electricity was going to be too cheap to meter. I’m still waiting for something like that to happen.

    • Omega Z

      True, Many here are overly optimistic about the transition to LENR. There are many unknowns at this time, but for sure it will have minimal effect on Oil for many years to come.

      • the transition is even more difficult, not technically but because LENR is so disruptive that it is frightening to embrace for an established business.
        technically engineer can do it, in a decade…

        the solution is not technical, it is to create an environment where the transition is interesting and not frightening.

        in existing business this requires some innovative organisation.
        in emerging economies it is self evident.

  • Andre Blum

    @admin: how about e-catworld? are you ready for a slashdot effect? Can you scale out quickly (amazon, rackspace?), or do you have a static main page ready to take high load? If this makes it to mainstream media, people will find ECW to be their major source of information. (And that’s a compliment!) I think your best contribution by far would be to be ready for some serious number of visitors.

    • ecatworld

      Hi Andre — yes, I think I am in good shape in that respect. I have decent capacity right now and can expand it rapidly as needed. I will monitor that side of things carefully, though.

    • builditnow

      Get ready for the first TRILLIONAIRE.
      e-catworld: Yes, be ready for very high volumes on your server.
      Many below believe that public acceptance could be squashed and silenced again.
      However, it could also be a “battle of the titans” this time.

      Consider if one of China, or India, or Russia, or Germany decided to publicly adopt Cold Fusion as their energy future. China has huge pollution problems.
      Could that be ignored by competing countries when cold fusion could likely be a multiple times cheaper and more secure energy source?

      Consider if a large multinational corporation decides to publically adopt Cold Fusion, can the other companies ignore them?

      If these countries or multinational companies try to adopt Cold Fusion in stealth mode, it could be an even bigger motivation.

      What if Google or Apple or Microsoft announce they are going to power their web server farms with cold fusion?
      There are lot’s of big stories possible.

      Several smart people with lots of money who already know about cold
      fusion (billionaire Sheldon Adelson who funded cold fusion research)
      could want to be the first TRILLIONAIRE.

    • clovis ray

      Hi, A B .
      I’m not frank but, yes he has everything under control, thanks for asking,

    • psi2u2

      Good point.

  • Gerard McEk

    Better to sell your energy shares now!
    It depends in what scientific medium the report will appear. If it is Nature or Science of Scientific American then the impact will be enormous, maybe even such that the governments will try to avoid publication, possibly under pressure of the energy and scientific (hot fusion) world.
    If the result is undoubtedly positive, I will send/twitter it to every one I know and to redactions of some papers and scientific media and I am sure many of us will do this.

    • It cannot be in nature&Science. Nature/science will never be victims of influence, they are the influence, they have prevented politicians and corps to see the facts.

      they are the essence , the vector, of the denial, the collective dellusion, the groupthink.

      they are the reason why scientist are 99.9% not aware of LENR or at best not willing to ruin their caree with LENR.

      IT CANNOT BE PUBLISHED IN HIGH IMPACT JOURNAL !

      they ARE the groupthink

      • psi2u2

        Very true, in every field of human inquiry.

      • Gerard McEk

        So in what journal or medium do you expect the publication of the report? Would it be some magazine like NyTeknik or perhaps German, French or Italian scientific journal? Or maybe Elzevier as P&F did 25 years ago, if it still exists?

        • the usual one, Naturwissenschaften, Journal of electroanalythical chemistry, JJAP…
          some second tier journal, dedicated to experimental papers, in chemistry or engineering domains, recognized in it’s specificities.
          maybe swedish, swiss, italian…

    • Omega Z

      Why “to sell your energy shares now!”
      It will take quite sometime for this to actually impact the use of conventional energy.

      Tho, There may be a knee jerk reaction.
      I guess, If you new exactly when it will be published & that it is very credible, You could sell just prior to it’s publishing. The Stocks will take a sudden decline. When you think they’ve bottomed, Reinvest in them & ride it back up when people realize this wont change much overnight. Life will continue much the same for years.

      I give the knee jerk reaction credibility based much on what I see/read here at ECW. The General population will react with similar thinking that the energy market will crumble. However, once reality kicks in, they will jump back in. Caveat: Unless TPTB Intervene to quite the masses. BUT, Then again, Why waste a good decline then rise in the stocks. There be Billions to be made at the expense of the masses following the above practice. Sell High, Buy Low. Go High.

      You Know that’s how the majority of wealthy recovered there losses from the G-Recession. Bought it low & the market more then doubled over the last 5 years. Helped by the Fed printing of course. Little else in the market would have effected/justified the stock market rise as it has. What is it politicians say. Never let bad news get you down. Take advantage of it.

      • jousterusa

        I have not had a specific plan other than running a huge headline and story in The American Reporter. I am certainly open to suggestions. I had hoped my book, POWER, would have been a way to intrigue people about the actual technology, but without a review in E-Cat World it has gone nowhere, my first royalty check notwithstanding.

        • Andre Blum

          You said you published it on Amazon? After your earlier reference, I tried to find your book there, but without result. Same today.

      • Gerard McEk

        Looks a good plan to me, hope it will make you extremely rich. What are you going to do with that money?

        • Omega Z

          Ha, It only works if you already have money. $100 becomes $300 dollars don’t get you much. Now if you start with 100 million$, You could buy a new Private Jet, Or 2, Maybe a yacht. 🙂
          Of course if things went south, You may have some splaining to do to the wife.
          To Wife. I lost all my Millions. Do you still love me.
          Wife. Yes, And will miss you very much!! 🙁

  • Andreas Moraitis

    If the report is positive and gains public attraction – preferably supported by a press conference –, all the other players except the military will be forced to exit stealth mode. So I think that we might hear a lot of interesting news in the forthcoming weeks.
    Governments will only comment if the report is published in a major scientific journal. They always want to be on the safe side. Some time ago, a request regarding LENR was sent to the German Chancellery; they answered that the cited source – the Levi et al. report – had been published only “on an internet platform” (arXiv). However, a statement of a company like Siemens or GE would surely be noted, even if there was no peer reviewed publication.
    As soon as the news about LENR as the energy source of the future will reach the stock markets, I expect that fraudulent companies will spring up like mushrooms; we have recently seen an early attempt of this sort. Undoubtedly, there will be much more sophisticated attacks on the money of private investors. ECW and its readers should stay watchful, not only with regard to the first side, but as well to the reverse side of the medal.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Attraction = attention. Sorry.

  • artefact

    I hope to hear from the AP reporter Peter Svensson…..

    • GreenWin

      Peter is on leave from AP while enrolled in the Columbia MBA program. Perhaps he will come clean on results of October 28th, 2011??

  • Mark Szl

    5. Send the report to as many industries and businesses that could use it or manufacture things with e-cat as a component in what they do or make.

  • Steve

    My plan: open a bottle of Dom Perignon

  • Billy Jackson

    I absolutely agree with you. I just wish that the hearts and minds of Joe public was not so easy to sway or influence by those in power. as long as they are able to influence large portions of us.. then the danger remains. I have no wish for a violent revolution and pray for alternate means .. but the realist in me says that people don’t change suddenly unless forced.

    • bachcole

      You know what they say.

  • LilyLover

    Dear Frank,
    Your plan is good. I’d only recommend to delete “and scientific communities” part from the fourth action item. Why? The movers of the business world pretty much take the PhDs with grain of salt. They say – oh, don’t mind him, he’s just a professor. Much the same, for different reasons, “I don’t want to learn” – people want to ignore the profs too. Publication in Nature? Forget it. Will do nothing for the people or even the Academia … they’ll be like – it’s there but let’s ignore it. Similar to emperor has no clothes … but in reverse fashion … after 25 years … they’ll be like – What do you mean – it provided us the energy for last 25 years? … Then it must have been a reality. Let’s accept it. The underestimated China connection will coerce the US industry to adopt it for the sake of profitability. People won’t care. They will simply enjoy cheaper electric rates or cheaper fuel. On big drama that no-one yet started to talk about is – Warfare. All the traditional warfare relied upon probabilistic momentum bursts as opposed to energy. A wave on the beach that topples the surfers has a lot more energy than thousand bullets. Unlike bullets, a wave is unable to kill. Momentum is the key. That’s why hydraulic press gets the work-done, bullet simply threatens. Donkeys carry the load, and the snake bites. Maximum momentum for warfare-advantage, as of now, is the photons traveling at speed of light. With new, ample and cheap energy, powerful lasers that can outrace any modern weaponry can be cheaply built. This will obviate huge budgets as a prerequisite to the formidable-ness of any military. This will upheld diplomacy and statesmanship over goonthuggery. Therefore China and alike will adopt and upgrade to this new technology sooner than later. To stay competitive, US will have to adopt this in military and civil life, sooner or later. If there was one technology, that has the ability to equalize the geopolitical power struggles amongst the unequals, this is it. This will eventually make the skilled-worked-manhours as the global currency of accounting. So, despite the publicity or awareness, this will grow universally and one day when the question of deniability goes out the window, the new generation of scientists will act as if it has always been the part of life.
    The only objection I have with you contacting “academicians” is that you’ll be like – here- I did your homework – now, come, take credit. & They’ll be like – you know what – “fingers-in-the-ear” & “La-La-La-La-La”!!! Besides, of all the aware or decently scientific minded people, you are at the forefront. Their awareness cannot bring the fraction of credibility that you yourself have brought onto this topic. It’ll be like Pope going to prison and recruiting ministers for preaching peace. That’s why I recommend – don’t do it. The academicians are plain and simple – yes-men to the “research-funders”. You just sit back and relax and take credit for being the original fervent advocate of LENR and humanity in general. IF they (the profs) contact you, enlighten them; else ignore them.

    & Congratulations for keeping this so good for so long. Unknowingly or knowingly, the support you have gathered for Rossi, is in part responsible for keeping him un-assasinated. Perhaps that’s his reason for being thankful towards you.

    Enjoy your success. You’ve worked hard.

    • TomR

      Thank you LilyLover, especially for your tribute to Frank.

    • Heath

      Those that can’t do, teach. Therein lies the gap. What happens when what you teach does not fit these experimental results of those that do? It speaks a lot of what kind of people many scientists have to deal with and overcome. Do you investigate or deny, using every weapon against character and reputation that you have? Folks, revenge is coming, the kind that is not arrogant, but that exposes closed mindedness for what it is, a self imposed limit. Now bring on the report and the gold rush to study this phenomenon!

      • psi2u2

        Ahemmm…can we please avoid these silly overgeneralizations? Those who can’t do, can’t teach. Some of them do anyway, but there is no need to condemn an entire profession for the failures of a few (well, maybe more than a few…. 🙂 bad eggs

        • Heath

          Yes, that was poorly put. I agree. What I intending to say was more along the lines of “those that can’t do, dismiss”, for those that would rather not attempt to replicate or disprove, but would rather dismiss outright because it is easier.

          • psi2u2

            Thanks. Indeed, those that can’t do, dismiss. Pity ’tis, ’tis true.

      • Omega Z

        Those who can’t do & don’t believe in possibilities
        should just get the Hail out of the way
        And let those who can get the Job Done…

  • Daniel Maris

    Well this is the bright promise of the future, where people become not just consumers and dependent on hiring by others, but can – with a little bit of land – be self sufficient in the basics of life.

    If the LENR-transmutation route is possible (as suggested by some Japanese research), then you can imagine even the materials for the 3D printer coming from an LENR machine.

    This is only the beginning of the path.

    • Omega Z

      Daniel
      I look for it to only relieve some of life’s pressures. No more, No less. As to LENR produced 3D printer materials. 1/10ths of a gram every 6 months?

  • Daniel Maris

    I think “gold” is out of the question but silver is possible. 🙂

  • Barry8

    Hi Frank, I suggest a list of CF/LENR substantiated facts that we can all draw from to make our own local articles to spread the word. A summary of Rossi’s work that will hit the average reader and some historic points about CF. Ecatworld would be highly qualified for this and we can correct each other’s fact before sending them to local papers. We can also send here for the latest.

  • BroKeeper

    It’s a little too late because of LENR’s global proliferation for it to be squashed, all thanks to the skeptics for its stealthy development. However its acceleration may be slowed at first because of the PTB’s but there is always a negative backlash they should consider.

  • mytakeis

    4. If the report has clearly positive findings, I’ll try to share it with as many
    people in this way: I do a lot of commenting in the Stars & Stripes military newspaper, so whenever an article mentions ‘oil,’ I’ll point out the contrast with e-cat in the various ways oil is portrayed in various articles. Enough repeating of the oil negatives, contrasted with the e-cat positives, can jar in awareness the obvious benefits and engender support for political moves toward e-cat acceptance. Hope others may be able to do such contrasts in their areas of commentary.

  • Julian Becker

    I was a bit in contact with the author of the Spiegel article on Andrea Rossi a few years ago. He is definately on it as soon as there is waterproof evidence.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      I’m fairly sure that I saw a Spiegel cover on F&P after their famous press conference in 1989. I remember exactly the circumstances and that I had been very excited about it. But the cover seems to have disappeared from their archive:

      http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/index-1989.html

      What’s wrong?

  • masterbotter

    After the report is released, I will be able to stop coming on here looking for the report a million times a day. Ooh the time I will have back in my life! who knows what mischief my idle hands might get me into.
    I will probably feel the urge to contact every person I spoke to for more than 5 minutes over the last year and say “THIS IS WHAT I WAS RAMBLING ON ABOUT” “ENJOY”
    But let’s be realistic, they are not going to read the report. It will use jargon the don’t understand and well, people just aren’t as excited by the words Work, Energy and Orders of Magnitude as I am.
    Some of them might Google his name, but they are just going to find the same old wiki page which has been a slight on his character since its creation to the last modification on the 5th of June.
    All you have to do is look at the end of each and every section to see this is a biased opinion. “Accusations of dumping environmental toxins, as well as tax fraud” “he didn’t produce a single drop of oil, as far as we know” “produced less than 1 watt each instead of 800-1000watt” “there is uncertainty about the viability of the invention” enfact the only section that doesn’t seem to degrade the man is his biography that ends indicating his marriage to maddalena Pascucci, but having not met the lady, I can’t be sure this is not also an attack of his character!
    I really truly hope that once the report is out that this page will be amended appropriately, who knows how the wikigods will react.
    Maybe this is something that could be done before the release? I know Rossi himself has been in contact with the wikigods personally in the past but to no avail. This was long before the Industrial Heat press release and I am sure he has been far to busy with them since then to worry about it for any length of time.
    Unfortunately the accessibility of Wikedmedia and the accessibility of a scientific report on the measurements of anomalous heat are two completely different things. If only the difference between fact and fiction online was so apparent.

    In the mean time I shall continue to hit refresh.

    • Omega Z

      Before Wiki would say a single kind word about Rossi, They would just terminate the page.
      Of course that in itself might be good.
      Oh the TURMOIL.

    • Omega Z

      “who knows what mischief my idle hands might get me into.”
      Hand Up, I know, I know,
      Nothing. Use it or Lose it. You Lost it. You no longer know how to do anything but sit staring at the computer screen & Wait.

  • Richard Hill

    Is it possible that the report will say that the effect exists, but is very small, even tiny?
    If so, then the report will achieve the IP objective of Rossi, but may not
    be as shattering as many commenters on this blog seem to expect.
    I guess at least one other commenter has made a similar remark.
    As an example, there is recent research on the chirality of beta radiation,
    having a biological effect, to a very minor degree.
    It is extremely important but will probably sink without trace.
    (refer Lubos Motl blog)

  • Fibber McGourlick

    What’s all nonsense about convincing skeptics and selling the e-cat idea to the science establishment? Forget it! There’s no arguing with a magic bullet. He who positively and openly demonstrates a working reactor that provides a cheap, pollution-free engery will rule the world.
    On a side note, it still bothers and puzzles me that Rossi would sell such an invention for what is petty cash, relatively speaking.

    • jousterusa

      Not if the NY Times and the AP report that it’s a fake, as they did with Pons & Fleischmann…

    • Billy Jackson

      we dont know the extent of the contract or what royalties Rossi will receive as the inventor.

    • Broncobet

      Yes,true, demonstrates a reactor is hard to do. All they have to do is to ask for money as the DOE had 10 million for LENR research but no one even asked for it. They didn’t have to demonstrate anything, just ask for the money, it’s highly suspicious that people would not ask for money,of course if they had a reactor that did what they claimed they’d already be trillionaires and wouldn’t need it.

  • BroKeeper

    Nice side effect. 🙂

  • downer Roger

    I will send a hard copy to Tony Abbott. He can digest it slowly

  • Ophelia Rump

    The report is important but by itself will probably not change a thing, except adjust the bias level in anyone who bothers to read it.

    • Nixter

      I agree, but with the qualifier that it will likely be read and understood by a few physicists who had been heretofore unconvinced and will then become interested enough to begin changing their views. Too slowly and too late to matter, as you have implied. But still, the seeds of doubt will have been planted deeply into the furrowed fields of the scientific meta-paradigm. Unfortunately for them, they will be many years behind the progress made by people like Rossi who has struggled for years to achieve success. I agree with you wholeheartedly, the proof will be in the pudding and the nay-saying science hacks won’t be invited to taste the fine lenr flavored pudding when it is finally served up publicly.

    • clovis ray

      Hi. miss o.
      A point i have made over and over, when you take the people out of the equation,that only leaves, business, and science, if we here, are satisfied, with the science and that itself doesn’t cause chaos , then it will be a slow grind, but if people see their power bill go down well the people will be back in the equation, power to the people.

  • peter gluck

    What to do depends much on some still unknown things: if it is posiitive, what is the value of the Report measured with an successometer? Where it will be published? What does it say that I can explain to my 8 years old granddaughter? How can the report be translated in the pragmatese language? What does it give beyond thermal data? Has it logical consistency? In which extent is it nuclear and what is the other part? Is the process a Cold Fusion daughter and if yes, then why actually not? Scientifically speaking…and you know that Rossi has said it is more about the Cold Fusion dream than the accumulated LENR science.
    It is a lot of work to be done to evaluate the Report and establish its significance and possible impact.
    And then many worldwide and national, institutional campaigns have to be organized – wisely because aggressive messages face greater agressivity- as petitions on change.org, avaaz.org
    and similar ones.
    It can be a great opportunity for good change- let’s wait and see.

    Peter

    • Omega Z

      Peter
      I’ve have concluded that the report is aimed at
      1st the possible granting of the patent
      2nd as Business interest.
      3rd MSM isn’t necessary

      Even if the 1st doesn’t take place, If those who administered the test are highly credible & it shows a high enough COP, Business will take serious notice. If product hits the market, the MSM will pick up on it.

      • Paul

        To be precise, as it will be clear when it will be released, it is aimed to: 1- Certification 2- Patent etc. Remember that Hot Cat had never been certificated before, and it is completely different from the old E-Cat operating at low temperature.

        • Omega Z

          Rossi claimed hot cat certification in April & again since then, but According to that date, you could be right that it was obtained during the test. But I’m thinking Rossi claimed Certification quite sometime before that prior to the 3rd party test. Not sure it’s worth my time to look for it.

      • peter gluck

        dear Omega Z,
        1- the patent, cannot be saved by the best result because it will be obvious from the results that the e cat does not work as it is described in the patent.

        2- the business effect depends on the success factor of the Report (not easy to measure) and about the reaction of the Web to it – impredictible but it must be optimized.

        3- Mainstream Media (I guess this is your MSM acronym) must be influenced. More wisely as usual.

        It would be counterproductive to say things as “Cold Fusion has eventually won”
        because this is an other form of Useful Energy from Hydrogen Metal Deep Interaction.

        Peter

        • Andreas Moraitis

          „Hydrogen Metal Deep Interaction“, or “HDMI”: Good idea, although “HDMI” is already in use for “High-Definition Multimedia Interface”. I’m not sure if it is a registered trademark.

  • Ophelia Rump

    It would make a nice subject for children’s science toys for Christmas. If it is not already too late for that. Win the hearts and minds of children and there is no closing the door ever again.

  • Gerrit

    The science world will take note only if there is sufficient scientific value in the report. If it is just a black box test report then scientist will complain that there is no information in the report that enables them to repeat the test. But if there are at least isotope measurements and an acceptable, if not complete, description of the innards of the ecat or of the possible process then some scientists will get interested.

    The pathological disbelievers will demand an independent replication and extraordinary evidence, in their eyes the report does not offer that.

    I wonder how the mainstream “cold fusion doesn’t exist” media will cover this report.

  • Fortyniner

    The core of your suggestion, that the response of the energy cabals to LENR will be proportionate to their potential losses seems indisputable. However, as a large part of their present businesses are doomed anyway in the longer term, they will also see cold fusion as a lifeline, i.e., a new source of virtually unlimited profit to replace the old ones – IF the situation is managed carefully. I believe that it is inevitable that their resources will focus initially on sequestering and ring fencing the technology while continuing to hide its existence from the public, and then later, on managing public perceptions in order to create the ‘right’ climate for introduction.

    We’ll know when the second phase is under way when the ridicule and denial stops and the skeps quietly disappear, and articles emphasizing both the reality and desirability of the tech, and it’s supposed inherent ‘dangers’, begin to appear in the MSM. I would also expect politicians to suddenly notice the technology and begin making pronouncements at the same time, while quietly introducing legislation designed to introduce and enforce a cartel monopoly on LENR devices.

  • Fortyniner

    Why?

  • psi2u2

    Hmmm….four guest votes “like” “Fibber McGourlick’s” post but none of them have yet liked this entirely apt query.

    • bachcole

      We could also present that question to all of the Rossi-supportive people who make pronouncements about his financial arrangements with I.H. That is why I don’t read those comments; we have no clue what is in the contract.

  • I don’t says that exactly.

    I clearly say the evidence show the test is scientifically positive, : time of test, number of unused reactors, time of the review. scientist would not lose time on a report of failure, would have tested all spare reactors, would have stopped after few weeks.

    It is not a surprise from the specification of the test which: protocol of the test (not a pony show), invitation of Stephan Pomp…

    As you say I agree that there is risk the reactor is not really economically fantastic.

    Positive or negative is visibly a NDA formula. not more meaningful than when a startup CEO says it works perfectly.

    anyway the real problem that E-cat report may or may not solve, is the collective delusion, and the question is purely scientific: is it real or not…

    I agree that if it is proven real but not useful/stable some deluded deniers will use it to deny the total reality with a tea kettle argument. like some abused of the blackbox argument, or the reproducibility argument… this is not argument this is manipulation for the submissive non academic layman who imagine that academic have an argument because academic state it strongly, yet the layman perfectly understand that it is not logical for him.

    whatever is the report some corps, some investors, are preparing to invest in research, starting from what is public in the scientific community of LENR, knowing well that even if E-cat test is positive or negative the technology deserve huge interest and have 99.99% chance to be harnessed in the next 20 years, provided they work seriously on it.

  • GreenWin

    Bronco, the game has already changed.

  • Mats002

    That might be a little premature 🙂

  • bachcole

    Broncobet, you and I are NOT agreeing. Someone can invent a new type of engine without it be installed in a car and still know all kinds of things about it, like it’s power level, exhaust, etc. etc.

    Regarding your points: 1) proven; 2) proven; 3) absurd, no one said that; 4) no one has ever said that. In fact we have been saying exactly the opposite; 5) proven; 6) uncertain.

    You got .5 out of 6 (you get #6 half right), which equals 8.33% right. That makes you either not paying attention or deliberately daft or a skeptopath.

    • C. Kirk

      I agree with Broncobet’s first word…Exactly….. everything following that is rubbish!

      • bachcole

        I will agree with the general idea that a lot of people here do a lot of speculating. I think that this is OK, given the nature of this forum. But when they speculate from speculations rather than from facts, then I just delete the email before finishing it and go on to the next email. I get more than 100 emails, perhaps 200 emails every day. I don’t have time for speculations based upon other speculations. (This sounds sort of like rumours to me.) An example would be if the email started out with “I wonder if GE will be using the E-Cat for a home heating unit or for supporting the utility companies . . . ” We don’t even know for sure if GE is aware of the E-Cat or not.

        Then there is the taking speculations as being fact, like “Now that we know the Elon Musk is planning on using an E-Cat in his car . . . . ”

        I delete these kinds of emails immediately.