MFMP Plans E-Cat Replication Attempt Starting in 6 Days, Design Posted

A post on the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project’s Facebook page announces that they are going to go for a replication of the E-Cat, and begin in six days. They state:

“Well, the jury is still out on weather the HotCat is real, not surprising giving the earth shattering implications in the report – but rather than dwell on what it all means, the MFMP has been forging ahead with trying to see if it actually is!

“If we do this, it will be a significant departure from our normal way of working, in that for the first time we will not be working with the hands-off blessing and cooperation of the claimant. We would also want to make sure we have enough funds to make it happen – ie have a lot of concurrent iterations at the same time – and that is going to take cash and resources.”

The MFMP has been consulting closely with Bob Higgins, an independent LENR researcher and member of the MFMP team, who has worked up a design which is as close as he can to the reactor used in the Lugano test (based on the data provided in the report) and has come up with a model which he calculates will weigh 8 grams less — and there is some speculation in the post about those missing eight grams.

There will apparently be more information posted soon on the MFMP’s quantumheat.org site with a detailed description of the planned reactor.

The team is looking for comments and ideas from the interested public, and seeking to determine if they will be able to raise the necessary funds for this project. It sounds like an ambitious move, but it’s fascinating to see a serious replication attempt proposed!

Below are the images they have posted of the design.

mfmp1
mfmp2
mfmp3
mfmp3

  • Paul Smith

    What kind or fuel will be used?

    • Gerrit

      According to the report the fuel contained also Ca.

      In a study titled “Nitrogen Discharged from the Earth’s Interior Regions”

      http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jmp.2014.52012

      there is written: “Therefore, we believe that Ca is the common driving element for nuclear transmutation.”

      Could be interesting for the replication effort.

    • Ted-X

      Some lithium perhaps should be used (10% of nickel?). Lithium melts at 180 deg. C, so it will be molten, most likely, perhaps partly in the vapor phase and in equilibrium with Lithium Hydride (mp. 668 deg.C). Lithium aluminum hydride (if used) would melt 150 deg. C. The lithium compounds will provide hydrogen and will stay in a dynamic equilibrium, depending on temperature and pressure. I would recommend a cryogenic treatment (48 hours in liq. N2) for the nickel part. Metallic molten lithium would penetrate some of the cracks. Metallic Li may not be necessary, LiH or LiAlH4 may be sufficient.

    • Ted-X

      Some specific cycling of operating temperature may be helpful, as metallic Lithium would diffuse into nickel at higher temperature and then may separate as an intermetallic compound or the original metallic Li at the surfaces, at lower temperature. That cycling could result in additional microcracks or nanocracks, which would be helpful if the main mechanism is the Casimir energy or “cavity resonance”. I am not sure about calcium, but the calcium hydride melts at 816 deg. C., so Ca could be a source of hydrogen. Sealing the device to prevent the escape of hydrogen may be a challenge.

    • Bob Greenyer
      • Christopher Calder

        No, Rossi use to, and may still, grind his own nickel. He spoke of an old man in his 90s who ground the nickel for him at his factory. He also spoke of some special process he would use to enhance the nickel powder. That, as I recall, was before the Hot-Cat design and before the use of lithium hydride. Things may have change since then. We don’t know.

  • Paul Smith

    What kind or fuel will be used?

    • Gerrit

      According to the report the fuel contained also Ca.

      In a study titled “Nitrogen Discharged from the Earth’s Interior Regions”

      http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jmp.2014.52012

      there is written: “Therefore, we believe that Ca is the common driving element for nuclear transmutation.”

      Could be interesting for the replication effort.

    • Ted-X

      Some lithium perhaps should be used (10% of nickel?). Lithium melts at 180 deg. C, so it will be molten, most likely, perhaps partly in the vapor phase and in equilibrium with Lithium Hydride (mp. 668 deg.C). Lithium aluminum hydride (if used) would melt 150 deg. C. The lithium compounds will provide hydrogen and will stay in a dynamic equilibrium, depending on temperature and pressure. I would recommend a cryogenic treatment (48 hours in liq. N2) for the nickel part. Metallic molten lithium would penetrate some of the cracks. Metallic Li may not be necessary, LiH or LiAlH4 may be sufficient.

    • Ted-X

      Some specific cycling of operating temperature may be helpful, as metallic Lithium would diffuse into nickel at higher temperature and then may separate as an intermetallic compound or the original metallic Li at the surfaces, at lower temperature. That cycling could result in additional microcracks or nanocracks, which would be helpful if the main mechanism is the Casimir energy or “cavity resonance”. I am not sure about calcium, but the calcium hydride melts at 816 deg. C., so Ca could be a source of hydrogen. Sealing the device to prevent the escape of hydrogen may be a challenge.

    • Bob Greenyer
  • kasom

    IH in form of Rossi was present when it came to opening the tube in any way. Lets me think, that the secret sauce is not in the fuel, but for exaple in sort of a coating of the inner side of the tube…….

    • kasom

      OK, another place to hide the catalist is the waveform applied.
      But if the catalist is kind of some material, the inner suface of the tube is the last place to hide it from testers, which have open access to al the rest of the e-(c)kat.

      What do You think??

      • Bob Greenyer

        Whatever we do will be open

  • Robert Ellefson

    I beg to differ. The jury is not “out.” Any jury which cannot accept the accumulated evidence which says that the E-Cat is real, confusing or not, it not a jury worth the name.

    • Donk970

      I absolutely agree. The accumulated evidence of not just E-Cat being real but LENR in general being real is pretty solid at this point. The only thing still in question is wether or not something useful can be done with it.

      • Billy Jackson

        I have to disagree that the evidence is solid. Though i will say that it makes a good case. I will say the TEST was solid in my eyes. yet it will take replication or a working commercial device to push it to the point where we can say the jury is out..

        I believe at this point personally that its real. but from a realistic point of view its going to take more than 1 or 2 tests to convince everyone.

        • bachcole

          Billy, you seem like an intelligent guy (even if you disagree with me). Are you waiting for a test report that impresses the scientific community, or are you refraining from giving the solidity stamp of approval based upon what YOU actually think, irrespective of what other people think?

          If I hobnob with an angel, and that angel takes me on a trip to the Grand Canyon, and I end up with Arizona sand in my boots, I don’t need someone else to tell me that it was real. {I look forward to someone saying what work of fiction I am referring to. (:->) } I feel similarly about the E-Cat. I don’t need a pristine pure scientific protocol test report. I just need to know that it was real.

          • Billy Jackson

            Bachcole. i like to think of myself as critically realistic. I have no problems with the concepts of faith, belief, trust, or just instinct on a personal level. yet i also recognize that their are those around me that do not see the world as i do. Enough of them will demand further evidence or differing points of view for validation. I know that my view point may not always agree with theirs. So despite the fact that the last report satisfied me on a personal level

            (i have never agreed that all the professors are “in on it” Nor do i buy that they are so incompetent that they cant do a basic reading of energy in vs energy out via meters)…

            YET.. i realize that those challenges exist and that while i may be satisfied their will be those who want further explanation or further testing till they are willing to commit to believing also. So i attempt to acknowledge that yet express my support at the same time.

            MFMP needs to stand on its own two feet as an attempted back engineering.. that i can support. .but claiming replication to me is misleading those who would read the report later.

          • bachcole

            Perhaps we have a semantic issue. For me, to me, the 2013 and 2014 tests were both solid. But I realize that other people will not see it that way.

            And I agree that MFMP will be doing reverse engineering, only without an E-Cat, which makes it even more difficult. They are NOT doing a duplication, no matter what they or anyone else says, unless Rossi is secretly giving them his plans and details.

            Can you guess the work of fiction I was referring to? I just love philosophy? (:->)

        • Omega Z

          Donk970 provided a caveat-
          “LENR in general being real is pretty solid at this point.”

          So with this I tend to agree with his statement…

  • Billy Jackson

    since they do not have all the information i am unsure how they plan on replicating? we dont know the complete makeup or quantities of each component of the fuel.. to me this is like someone handing you a paint set with all the right colors and brushes and saying here. paint a perfect replication of the mona lisa.

    • Longtime Lurker

      I agree with this. It seems like a bad idea.

      For some reason I though I remembered rossi implying something about resonance also, so there might be a specific “pulsing” range that acts as a catalyst to the material to assist/cause the reaction? And also, I am under the impression that a “lattice” structure of some sort may be necessary to effectuate the reaction? It may not be as simple as adding material into a tube and heating it

      I dont thing its nearly as simple as putting the ingredients in the tube and heating them. (Although obviously we cant be sure at this point)

      Further, if they are able to replicate rossi, and disclose that successful replication publicly, that would pretty much serve to out rossi’s trade secrets, essentially screwing him and allowing the goliath corporations to swoop in and eat his lunch.

      And if the test fails (because they obviously dont have rossi’s trade secret methodology), I feel like that would hurt the cause of cold fusion credibility in the general public’s mind. “See, it cant be replicated”. When actually what they did may have been missing key aspects of the ecat.

      • Billy Jackson

        attempted replication without full information will do nothing but hurt the case as it will give the skeptical something to hang on to and point at as solid proof it doesnt work.

      • kasom

        IH has not disclosed the catalist, it is hidden where nobody could see it, in the inner surface of the tube or in the electromagnetic conponent therefore replication is just a nice try…..

  • Pekka Janhunen

    In the drawings there is no mention about the external cooling ridges. They introduce some additional weight.

    • Ged

      This is true, and 8 grams isn’t all that much. That’s just 8 paper clips.

    • Bob Greenyer

      that may well be it Pekka, the exclusion in initial tests would be too allow far simper construction and easier thermal calculations. Showing cop of 3.6 would be great, but not necessary

  • Pekka Janhunen

    In the drawings there is no mention about the external cooling ridges. They introduce some additional weight.

    • Ged

      This is true, and 8 grams isn’t all that much. That’s just 8 paper clips.

    • Bob Greenyer

      that may well be it Pekka, the exclusion in initial tests would be too allow far simper construction and easier thermal calculations. Showing cop of 3.6 would be great, but not necessary

  • gdaigle

    Using IR cameras or bomb calorimeter?

    • Daniel Maris

      It doesn’t much matter does it? If they get a positive COP with one type of measurement, they will no doubt run it again and again using other measurement devices.

      • Freethinker

        Dry measurement with IR camera in apporpriate wavelength range sound like a good start. Seem less messy. Also, it is what the TIP used.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Differential (hopefully active against dummy) ideally with same power in – live streamed IR output and thermocouple data – comparative is way easier to demonstrate a difference – especially if the cop is above say 1.2

  • gdaigle

    Using IR cameras or bomb calorimeter?

    • Bob Greenyer

      Differential (hopefully active against dummy) ideally with same power in – live streamed IR output and thermocouple data – comparative is way easier to demonstrate a difference – especially if the cop is above say 1.2

  • Daniel Maris

    Great news – go for it guys! The worst that can happen is a failed replication, which won’t tell us much, but a successful replication will tell us everything!!

  • James Thomas

    In a world where minute by minute greed pushes us closer and closer to the brink of destruction, the folks at the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project are a much needed breath of fresh air.

    I applaud them for their diligent efforts and hope that the fantastic pool of knowledge which they offer presents us all with great success.

  • Daniel Maris

    I think MFMP did mention getting some suggestive results from initial experimentation with nanopowders.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Yes – but not very meaningful, but does establish a base-line – we had to test straight powders first, our next test in the powder cell was to add Lithium Hydrides of some type and mild magnetic pulses – this has been the plan since March and the powder experiment was design to allow this.

      Also we will test the Ahern discharge patent application/Bob Higgins powder LiAlH4 and effectively some elements of DGTs claims in the Stoyan Sarg’s sparker cell.

      Fuel and Ash will be double blind analysed. If we see either show transmutation or isotopic shifts or fusion/fission or nucleosynthesis – we help the understanding greatly.

      • Daniel Maris

        Test ’em all! 🙂

        If you get a 1.1 anywhere that could be highly significant.

  • Donk970

    The LENR bus is leaving the station. The people with money can either continue to try and stand in front of the bus to keep it from leaving the station or get on the damned bus. If they continue standing in front of the LENR bus they will most assuredly get run over and more and more of them know it. LENR research just isn’t going to stay in the shadows much longer and it’s just a matter of time before some really big money get’s thrown at it. In fact I’d bet that for every LENR research project we know about there’s two or three we don’t.

    • bkrharold

      I absolutely agree. It might not be a coincidence that oil prices took a nosedive very soon after the results of the third party independent test were released.

  • Donk970

    The LENR bus is leaving the station. The people with money can either continue to try and stand in front of the bus to keep it from leaving the station or get on the damned bus. If they continue standing in front of the LENR bus they will most assuredly get run over and more and more of them know it. LENR research just isn’t going to stay in the shadows much longer and it’s just a matter of time before some really big money get’s thrown at it. In fact I’d bet that for every LENR research project we know about there’s two or three we don’t.

    • bkrharold

      I absolutely agree. It might not be a coincidence that oil prices took a nosedive very soon after the results of the third party independent test were released.

  • Billy Jackson

    attempted replication without full information will do nothing but hurt the case as it will give the skeptical something to hang on to and point at as solid proof it doesnt work.

  • John

    I Hope Success but I consider this not a replication but more a Chinese style temptation of cloning

  • kasom

    IH has not disclosed the catalist, it is hidden where nobody could see it, in the inner surface of the tube or in the electromagnetic conponent therefore replication is just a nice try…..

  • Ophelia Rump

    Has anyone asked Industrial Heat for cooperation?
    They might be motivated and at the appropriate moment for this.

    • Billy Jackson

      Lady O. I think your on the right track. having a separate team confirm through replication can only help.. going off and trying to do it on their own without all little details for the fuel.. will just give us a failed test more than likely and ammunition for the skeptics to use against LENR

      • Ophelia Rump

        Even success would only be a new claim, not a reproduction.
        The potential for legal contention would be horrendous, especially since they are stating their intent up front.

        • Billy Jackson

          That is the scenario that Rossi has been trying to protect against from the start, which makes sense from a business standpoint. Competition can only benefit us from a long term perspective. Yet i worry about bungled tests and alternate claims causing damage.

          • ecatworld

            I don’t think there’s too much credibility to lose. LENR is accepted only among a small community. If the MFMP fails, I don’t think people who already are convinced about LENR will lose hope, and skeptics will continue skeptical. And we already have alternate claims.

          • Billy Jackson

            I think its really the fact that they are saying replicate that makes me twitch a bit. You know how people will latch onto that if they have opposition to the e-cat.

          • Bob Greenyer

            It is an attempted replication – this is clearly a departure from our normal, preferred way of working – which is ideally with the full hands-off support of the claimant.

            We can still do things like test the veracity of the Alumina transparency and emissivity, this was based on old research and is a major criticism of the report.

          • Billy Jackson

            Bob please dont take that as me challenging the testers of MFMP, or calling doubt upon them personally. my mind balks at calling it replication when to me that means exaclty following the steps of the recent test.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Back Engineering, not replication. If one does not like the way their actions sound, maybe they should rethink performing them.

          • Pekka Janhunen

            Instead of replication of the E-cat, it could be called reconstruction of the Lugano experiment.

          • Daniel Maris

            I agree Frank. This is a positive effort: failure will be of marginal importance; but success will be very significant.

          • Bernie777

            There will never be a test “done properly”, it is impossible. Bring on the customers.

          • Bob Greenyer

            We have only made very qualified claims about our findings as even when we thought we saw something, the effect was not incontrovertibly large.

            We can only do what is possible.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Without detailed instructions from Rossi, you cannot say you are performing a replication attempt, you are not. You are trying to back engineer his device, this is completely different. Words are not only important, they are critical to credibility.

        • Bob Greenyer

          We normally don’t do one experiment of a type and then stop. If we get past the dummy reactor alumina tests – then we’ll be doing multiple experiments

  • Ophelia Rump

    Has anyone asked Industrial Heat for cooperation?
    They might be motivated and at the appropriate moment for this.
    They are altruistic, and even if they do not reveal their trade secrets, they may have alternatives which are not as appealing for technical reasons, but which would suffice as proof of concept.
    If they were willing to disclose a reproducible LENR configuration which works, that would rock a few foundations.

    Without the assistance of IH it is not a reproduction.

    • Billy Jackson

      Lady O. I think your on the right track. having a separate team confirm through replication can only help.. going off and trying to do it on their own without all little details for the fuel.. will just give us a failed test more than likely and ammunition for the skeptics to use against LENR

      • Ophelia Rump

        Without cooperation, even success would only be a new claim, not a reproduction.
        The potential for legal contention would be horrendous, especially since they are stating their intent up front. If you are going to try to duplicate someone else’s intellectual property, then you have an obligation to those persons to ask their permission and cooperation.

        • Billy Jackson

          That is the scenario that Rossi has been trying to protect against from the start, which makes sense from a business standpoint. Competition can only benefit us from a long term perspective. Yet i worry about bungled tests and alternate claims causing damage.

          • Frank Acland

            I don’t think there’s too much credibility to lose. LENR is accepted only among a small community. If the MFMP fails, I don’t think people who already are convinced about LENR will lose hope, and skeptics will continue skeptical. And we already have alternate claims.

          • Billy Jackson

            I think its really the fact that they are saying replicate that makes me twitch a bit. You know how people will latch onto that if they have opposition to the e-cat.

          • Bob Greenyer

            It is an attempted replication – this is clearly a departure from our normal, preferred way of working – which is ideally with the full hands-off support of the claimant.

            We can still do things like test the veracity of the Alumina transparency and emissivity, this was based on old research and is a major criticism of the report.

          • Billy Jackson

            Bob please dont take that as me challenging the testers of MFMP, or calling doubt upon them personally. my mind balks at calling it replication when to me that means exaclty following the steps of the recent test.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Back Engineering, not replication. If one does not like the way their actions sound, maybe they should rethink performing them.

          • Pekka Janhunen

            Instead of replication of the E-cat, it could be called reconstruction of the Lugano experiment.

          • Bob Greenyer

            We have only made very qualified claims about our findings as even when we thought we saw something, the effect was not incontrovertibly large.

            We can only do what is possible.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Without detailed instructions from Industrial Heat, one cannot say they are performing a replication attempt, they are not. They are trying to back engineer the IH device, this is completely different. Words are not only important, they are critical to credibility. The credibility of oneself, and others. It is a bad idea to tread on someone else’s IP un-necessarily.

        • Bob Greenyer

          We normally don’t do one experiment of a type and then stop. If we get past the dummy reactor alumina tests – then we’ll be doing multiple experiments

    • Matt Sevrens

      I disagree, without the assistance of IH it will be a true independent verification.

      • Bob Greenyer

        That is our view. No contact at all.

        If they put more critical information into the public domain that they have patent priority on – then that would be in their favour

  • bachcole

    Bless MFMP’s hearts.

  • bachcole

    Bless MFMP’s hearts.

  • sean

    This is not going to help LENR or Rossi. In fact I agree that it could damage and set back everything that has taken years or hard work and criticism to accomplish. How can they even begin to replicate the ECAT, if Rossi is not present to direct MFMP to build an exact copy with all the ingredients necessary for a successful outcome. Has not Rossi kept his intellectual property secret? I would say please MFMP do not do this. Do your own experiments with your own designs and intellectual ideas. But please leave the ECAT out of it. It is not yours, its Rossi’s. The last thing we want is to see to see more bad publicity potentially arising from an ego driven botched failure. I am fed up with Oil prices Gas and electricity being dominated by the wide shirts and a failure is just what these $$ magnets need. Bad news spreads like lightening. Good news takes a long while to spread in this world. So MFMP think very hard and use common and moral sense, stay out of it please. Rossi has more invested in it than you.

    • Billy Jackson

      I think this is my problem with it to Sean. Calling it a replication when i am unsure how they can. The fine details to replicate just are not available.. i would be happier if they claimed to be testing their own version based off the Rossi E-cat than claiming to replicate.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        An exact replication of the device is not necessary. Copying Rossi’s design as closely as possible might help, and will surely lead to interesting insights. But the really important thing is a replication of the effect. And – even more important – the replicability of the replication.

      • sean

        Exactly, There is obviously more than one way to produce LENR. Each man think for himself. The call of duty to mankind is to make this work for the betterment of human kind. Ignore the ignorant and carry on researching for success. The more people involved the better. I believe the proof will be in the installation of these systems to each and everyone of us, being it our houses, transportation etc.

      • Ophelia Rump

        By their own words, if they succeed, even if it would have not been IH IP, they will have made it IH IP by making the claim that it is IH IP “replication” up front. It is just ill conceived.

    • James Rice

      This would only help Rossi. Patent applications have presumably been filed already for all relevant features, so the idea is protected. Demonstrating that it actually works is the problem with the patent office.

      • Bob Greenyer

        We have to do this without any contact to IH – it would make the results carry more weight. Having said that – it would help everyone, especially IH if they openly shared any critical IP or know how that they already have a patent priority on

  • sean

    This is not going to help LENR or Rossi. In fact I agree that it could damage and set back everything that has taken years or hard work and criticism to accomplish. How can they even begin to replicate the ECAT, if Rossi is not present to direct MFMP to build an exact copy with all the ingredients necessary for a successful outcome. Has not Rossi kept his intellectual property secret? I would say please MFMP do not do this. Do your own experiments with your own designs and intellectual ideas. But please leave the ECAT out of it. It is not yours, its Rossi’s. The last thing we want is to see to see more bad publicity potentially arising from an ego driven botched failure. I am fed up with Oil prices Gas and electricity being dominated by the wide shirts and a failure is just what these $$ magnets need. Bad news spreads like lightening. Good news takes a long while to spread in this world. So MFMP think very hard and use common and moral sense, stay out of it please. Rossi has more invested in it than you.

    • John

      I think they can do it, no problem but they must clearly assume that this is clonage atempt on the best Chinese style, and not replication for they own safety and justice.

    • Enrique Ferreyra

      They are not doing a commercial product, there is no issue with (un)granted patents or intellectual property.

    • Paul Smith

      Prof. Christos Stremmenos built a working replica of E-cat

      • Andreas Moraitis

        Really? That would be interesting. I hope you did not mean the DGT reactor. Could you provide a source for this information?

        • Omega Z

          “Prof. Christos Stremmenos built a working replica of E-cat”

          I concur. I just don’t remember if it was in a video interview or in a blog thread.
          He made a replica of E-cat reactor. Not the Nickel fuel. Rossi charged it with his fuel & produced similar results.

    • Matt Sevrens

      Yes, but if the effect rears it’s head AT all, even a little, then we have our first true independent replication. It would blow the doors wide open.

    • Billy Jackson

      I think this is my problem with it to Sean. Calling it a replication when i am unsure how they can. The fine details to replicate just are not available.. i would be happier if they claimed to be testing their own version based off the Rossi E-cat than claiming to replicate.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        An exact replication of the device is not necessary. Copying Rossi’s design as closely as possible might help, and will surely lead to interesting insights. But the really important thing is a replication of the effect. And – even more important – the replicability of the replication.

      • sean

        Exactly, There is obviously more than one way to produce LENR. Each man think for himself. The call of duty to mankind is to make this work for the betterment of human kind. Ignore the ignorant and carry on researching for success. The more people involved the better. I believe the proof will be in the installation of these systems to each and everyone of us, being it our houses, transportation etc.

      • Ophelia Rump

        By their own words, if they succeed, even if it would have not been IH IP, they will have made it IH IP by making the claim that it is IH IP “replication” up front. It is just ill conceived.

    • James Rice

      This would only help Rossi. Patent applications have presumably been filed already for all relevant features, so the idea is protected. Demonstrating that it actually works is the problem with the patent office.

      • Bob Greenyer

        We have to do this without any contact to IH – it would make the results carry more weight. Having said that – it would help everyone, especially IH if they openly shared any critical IP or know how that they already have a patent priority on

  • kasom

    On JONP Cristopher Calder asked:

    “You have industrial use certification for the E-Cat. My suggestion is
    to design and sell a 10 kilowatt industrial use only portable space
    heater.”

    Rossi answered with his typical style deviatingfrom the question asked:

    “It does not work that way. First, we need the safety certification, then we can sell the domestic units.”

    It is not the first times in which he answers totally other questions than asked. That’s boring stupid again.

    • Ophelia Rump

      There may be some regulation which specifies a minimum output qualification for industrial, as opposed to it’s actual utilization.

  • Doug Cutler

    I hope their whole apparatus melts into a puddle.

    • LuFong

      That would be a successful demonstration!

    • Bob Greenyer

      so do we!

  • Doug Cutler

    I hope their whole apparatus melts into a puddle.

    • Bob Greenyer

      so do we!

    • MLTC

      I do like to jump in puddles.

  • Joniale

    It seems there is an error in the ECAT report.

    Could somebody confirm this?

    Please, see the comments of Mats in the following article

    http://matslew.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/interview-on-radio-show-free-energy-quest-tonight/#comment-3604

    They are discussing about an inverted clam that can cause the COP 3.
    Please i need to know if this is destroying the report.
    🙁

    • Joniale

      Hi again,

      Here a detailed explanation of the problem. If somebody with the knowledge can explain.

      http://www.cobraf.com/forum/immagini/R_123566844_1.pdf

      Thanks

      • Andre Blum

        that’s a tough fight in the comments section. (read from bottom to top). Anxious to see how this ends…

      • Ophelia Rump

        They are the heavyweights over there, not here.
        This is the nature of science and reports.
        If you want answers, you will only get them there.
        Honest people will come to consensus, there will be an answer when there is a agreement on the specifics and all of their interpretations. It may even require more information from the researchers.

    • Freethinker

      Has this one not been discussed enough?

      The only evidence that is at hand is a picture in the report put there to illustrate the device being able to measure harmonics and the signal, to show that they checked those things.
      The picture was not take for evaluating the clamps.

      The analysis made by Andrea.S may well be correct as such, BUT:

      It is not known when it is taken. It is not known in what context it has been taken.It could be taken completely unrelated to the active run, after the runs after the fuels was extracted, or whenever. It is not known.

      BUT and however: understand, that the data from this instrument is logged, and if they use the data from an instrument that says OL, they likely will be very much unable to compute the COP. The testers should be alerted to this fact. Hence this is not a picture taken during any of the runs where the data mattered. That does ofcourse not exclude the possibility of the clamp being wrong, but it would put the image outside the time frame of active measuring, and in a time frame when somebody hooked up the instrument, just to get the harmonics reading for the picture, and at that point hooked up in a wring way.

      Do note that there are TWO critical observables in this test. Two! That being the input power and then the temperature of the reactor. In the end, you must give the authors some credit. Would they make a stupid mistake like this, measuring the input power wrong? The only way to be completely sure about the details is to ask the authors for clarification.

  • Joniale

    It seems there is an error in the ECAT report.

    Could somebody confirm this?

    Please, see the comments of Mats in the following article

    http://matslew.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/interview-on-radio-show-free-energy-quest-tonight/#comment-3604

    They are discussing about an inverted clam that can cause the COP 3.
    Please i need to know if this is destroying the report.
    🙁

    • Joniale

      Hi again,

      Here a detailed explanation of the problem. If somebody with the knowledge can explain.

      http://www.cobraf.com/forum/immagini/R_123566844_1.pdf

      Thanks

      • Andre Blum

        that’s a tough fight in the comments section. (read from bottom to top). Anxious to see how this ends…

      • Ophelia Rump

        They are the heavyweights over there, not here.
        This is the nature of science and reports.
        If you want answers, you will only get them there.
        Honest people will come to consensus, there will be an answer when there is a agreement on the specifics and all of their interpretations. It may even require more information from the researchers.

    • Mark Szl

      Wow, this looks juicy. A possible measurement error BUT one that was not there in the control runs?? If this does not get resolved then it should be a headline post here on this site!!

    • Freethinker

      Has this one not been discussed enough?

      The only evidence that is at hand is a picture in the report put there to illustrate the device being able to measure harmonics and the signal, to show that they checked those things.
      The picture was not take for evaluating the clamps.

      The analysis made by Andrea.S may well be correct as such, BUT:

      It is not known when it is taken. It is not known in what context it has been taken.It could be taken completely unrelated to the active run, after the runs after the fuels was extracted, or whenever. It is not known.

      BUT and however: understand, that the data from this instrument is logged, and if they use the data from an instrument that says OL, they likely will be very much unable to compute the COP. The testers should be alerted to this fact. Hence this is not a picture taken during any of the runs where the data mattered. That does ofcourse not exclude the possibility of the clamp being wrong, but it would put the image outside the time frame of active measuring, and in a time frame when somebody hooked up the instrument, just to get the harmonics reading for the picture, and at that point hooked up in a wring way.

      Do note that there are TWO critical observables in this test. Two! That being the input power and then the temperature of the reactor. In the end, you must give the authors some credit. Would they make a stupid mistake like this, measuring the input power wrong? The only way to be completely sure about the details is to ask the authors for clarification.

  • malkom700

    It is possible that replication based on the information available is not possible, but it’s worth it a try because it is a very serious thing necessary for the grant of a patent. In this situation are right those who are doing something versus what do nothing.

    • Bob Greenyer

      We will lay out a wide ranging, multi-pronged research program, some of which uses assets in place that can test claims in the report – others which will be specifically test the report.

      First will be a dummy reactor similar to the one posted here that will have a central heating element that will be capable of going to 1800ºC – this will allow

      1. testing of the alumina emissivity and transparency questions
      2. testing to failure of the design

      • artefact

        You will see how much Watts you need to get to 1400 C. Looking forward to that.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Exactly. Settling raging debates like this will be comparatively trivial

          • Ophelia Rump

            Or unnecessarily complicate matters.

          • malkom700

            “We will lay out a wide ranging, multi-pronged research program, some of which uses assets in place that can test claims in the report – others which will be specifically test the report.” Yes, but we should do it in 1990.

  • pierre

    can someone summarize a material and cost list so I can understand if this MFMP is worth contributing to, or alternately if the organization I’m with can manage it in our budgets?

    this will also facilitate all kinds of other replication efforts…

    the blind leading the blind…

    • LuFong

      I don’t think they have this prepared yet for this test. Check out http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/ which is their website. It includes a description of their open science philosophy and a description of their current experiments. You will find out how open they have been and how qualified they are to do what they are doing. You should be able to find previous cost accounting and a donation page.

      If I’m not mistaken, here’s the link to a description of the production of the fuel for this test: http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/experiements/dormant-experiments/powder-test-cells/372-adding-nano-scale-features-to-macro-scale-metals-for-lenr-applications . This is the fuel I think they will be using for this test and it’s already done.

    • Bob Greenyer

      We will work towards a Bill of Materials ASAP. We still need to work out the electronics needed to layer the RF onto the chopped power, but we have the skills on the team to do this.

      We also would like to run differentially, this means that we have a (hopefully) activated and dummy experiment publishing their data live to the internet simultaneously, possibly with a live-stream of the IR cameras output, any cop of any interest will be very obvious.

      We have a number of plans to make individual contributions really matter.

      All IP will be open by default.

      • Pierre

        In the mean time, what is a general estimate of
        A) all materials necessary for set up
        B) running of a single trial

        In other words, the fixed and variable costs to the best of our understanding…

        Thanks

        • Bob Greenyer

          Firstly, in France and US main research locations – most of the needed assets for live on-line running of these experiments is already in place – also they both have 3 phase power. We also have 10g of our first potential active powders in, or well on their way to, each of three locations.

          We are still pulling the parts list and costing data together and will be visiting a furnace element manufacturer we are working with next Thursday. They have seen the preliminary drawings and say they absolutely are the best and can build these in volume. We have asked them to give us a price for 10,20,50 and 100 units, though the reactors are designed to be re-useable so may not need so many – it depends if we can raise enough funds to support more research sites. They say they will be able to price them next week.

          Pierre, please contact a team member with a private message by going to our site and clicking on the green arrow to the right.

          http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/experiements/dormant-experiments/powder-test-cells/372-adding-nano-scale-features-to-macro-scale-metals-for-lenr-applications

  • pierre

    can someone summarize a material and cost list so I can understand if this MFMP is worth contributing to, or alternately if the organization I’m with can manage it in our budgets?

    this will also facilitate all kinds of other replication efforts…

    the blind leading the blind…

    • Bob Greenyer

      We will work towards a Bill of Materials ASAP. We still need to work out the electronics needed to layer the RF onto the chopped power, but we have the skills on the team to do this.

      We also would like to run differentially, this means that we have a (hopefully) activated and dummy experiment publishing their data live to the internet simultaneously, possibly with a live-stream of the IR cameras output, any cop of any interest will be very obvious.

      We have a number of plans to make individual contributions really matter.

      All IP will be open by default.

      • Pierre

        In the mean time, what is a general estimate of
        A) all materials necessary for set up
        B) running of a single trial

        In other words, the fixed and variable costs to the best of our understanding…

        Thanks

        • Bob Greenyer

          Firstly, in France and US main research locations – most of the needed assets for live on-line running of these experiments is already in place – also they both have 3 phase power. We also have 10g of our first potential active powders in, or well on their way to, each of three locations.

          We are still pulling the parts list and costing data together and will be visiting a furnace element manufacturer we are working with next Thursday. They have seen the preliminary drawings and say they absolutely are the best and can build these in volume. We have asked them to give us a price for 10,20,50 and 100 units, though the reactors are designed to be re-useable so may not need so many – it depends if we can raise enough funds to support more research sites. They say they will be able to price them next week.

          Pierre, please contact a team member with a private message by going to our site and clicking on the green arrow to the right.

          http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/experiements/dormant-experiments/powder-test-cells/372-adding-nano-scale-features-to-macro-scale-metals-for-lenr-applications

  • Neanderthal

    N. A. E (nuclear active environment). Nano powders maybe three magnitudes too high according to Rossi and may actually lay in the micrometer ranges. Bespoke treatments of the powders to accommodate fissures and cracks where very high electrical field can manifest. With subsequent pulse shaping synonymous with the heating effect. For example superposition of a multiple high frequency pulses with a specific shape rise time in nanosecond but a decaying exponential who’s tau (time constant) is the time it takes the particular metal molecule to relax to its ground state. What we are trying to achieve is a symphony in the lattice. When this bulk action occurs. Then the pre nuclear tunneling effect is attainable.. Only one condition in simulation can cause problem.. I call these unstable microstates unsolvable in simulated model because they have a nearly an unsolvable lagrangian. But nearly there in my theory…. On a side note to any critic or nuclear physicist. LENR is real. I like to separate myself from the ones who fail to see the new fire…

    • Bob Greenyer

      Good for you to stand up and be counted – also, resonance and harmonics is the universe, to be in the club, you have to get in tune and at their level

    • Otto1923

      Yah I don’t see how this can be replicated without detailed info on how the particles are manufactured and what their physical characteristics are, as this appears to be vital to the process. And the very real danger is that, if replication fails, it will be pons/fleishman all over again.

    • Gerrit

      Symphony in the lattice is a nice wording.
      We should consider coding some Bach or Beethoven into the pulses.

  • Neanderthal

    N. A. E (nuclear active environment). Nano powders maybe three magnitudes too high according to Rossi and may actually lay in the micrometer ranges. Bespoke treatments of the powders to accommodate fissures and cracks where very high electrical field can manifest. With subsequent pulse shaping synonymous with the heating effect. For example superposition of a multiple high frequency pulses with a specific shape rise time in nanosecond but a decaying exponential who’s tau (time constant) is the time it takes the particular metal molecule to relax to its ground state. What we are trying to achieve is a symphony in the lattice. When this bulk action occurs. Then the pre nuclear tunneling effect is attainable.. Only one condition in simulation can cause problem.. I call these unstable microstates unsolvable in simulated model because they have a nearly an unsolvable lagrangian. But nearly there in my theory…. On a side note to any critic or nuclear physicist. LENR is real. I like to separate myself from the ones who fail to see the new fire…

    • Bob Greenyer

      Good for you to stand up and be counted – also, resonance and harmonics is the universe, to be in the club, you have to get in tune and at their level

    • Otto1923

      Yah I don’t see how this can be replicated without detailed info on how the particles are manufactured and what their physical characteristics are, as this appears to be vital to the process. And the very real danger is that, if replication fails, it will be pons/fleishman all over again.

      • bachcole

        I think that our current situation is already “pons/fleishmann all over again”. What can we lose? Credibility? We already have zero. It is only up from here. If MFMP “duplicates”, they will prove LENR+, not necessarily the E-Cat, scientifically speaking. But people with money and influence and the ordinary person won’t give a crap if it duplicates the E-Cat or if it is just another example of LENR+. I don’t see how MFMP can lose. They can break even by not “duplicating”, but they can’t lose credibility since they only have credibility with folks like us.

        • Otto1923

          Most likely they can’t ‘replicate’ because they don’t know important details. LENR has much to lose in the public perception with another failed replication attempt. And no we are not at ‘zero’, not with a functioning installation and a peer reviewed report.

        • Otto1923

          -And I really don’t see what their point is in trying without adequate info, unless it is to discredit the ecat.

    • Gerrit

      Symphony in the lattice is a nice wording.
      We should consider coding some Bach or Beethoven into the pulses.

  • LuFong

    If they do not replicate the E-Cat, MFMP may produce valuable information just from the dummy tests alone which could help enhance the understanding of the recent E-Cat test. Even the failure from the fueled test could be important in confirming the E-Cat test as certain claims and assumptions in the test can be verified. This is all good and I wish MFMP success. This is science at its best!

    • bachcole

      Plus, those working at MFMP will be more skilled and in a better position to do successful work when we-all know more. They may even be able to do enhancements at that point.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Really? That would be interesting. I hope you did not mean the DGT reactor. Could you provide a source for this information?

    • Omega Z

      “Prof. Christos Stremmenos built a working replica of E-cat”

      I concur. I just don’t remember if it was in a video interview or in a blog thread.
      He made a replica of E-cat reactor. Not the Nickel fuel. Rossi charged it with his fuel & produced similar results.

      • LCD

        Sure I understand

  • Bob Greenyer

    That is our view. No contact at all.

    If they put more critical information into the public domain that they have patent priority on – then that would be in their favour

  • Bob Greenyer

    Whatever we do will be open

  • Hi all

    For Rossi and Industrial Heat this would nail down Patent aspect of skilled in the art and since they are using the E-Cat Patent make Rossi’s patent cast iron. So I too would agree that Industrial Heat would probably be amenable to the MFMP effort.

    Kind Regards walker

  • theBuckWheat

    If I recall correctly, the amount of heat from the resistance windings in an E-Cat was slightly less than 1 klw. If that is the case, three phase power should not be required and thus having three separate windings is an unnecessary complication, but for fabrication as well as for measurement.

    As a matter of comparison, some counter-top kitchen appliances can consume 800 watts and easily are powered by 120v single phase AC. Even the broiler in the standard kitchen electric oven, is about 10 kw, 240 volts single phase.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Please read our Facebook, we suggest it is about keeping the mix dynamic, tumbling like a motor, shifting forward and back and reversing magnetic moments. All designed to drive non steady-state conditions.

      The use of 3 Phase also allows you to triple your pulse count for magnetic shocks and as proposed by Alan, the use of an over rated CCI FUSION controller will specifically allow for low duty cycle which leads to very high Total Harmonic Distortion (THD) content from the pulses – read, broad band EM stimulation.

  • theBuckWheat

    If I recall correctly, the amount of heat from the resistance windings in an E-Cat was slightly less than 1 klw. If that is the case, three phase power should not be required and thus having three separate windings is an unnecessary complication, but for fabrication as well as for measurement.

    As a matter of comparison, some counter-top kitchen appliances can consume 800 watts and easily are powered by 120v single phase AC. Even the broiler in the standard kitchen electric oven, is about 10 kw, 240 volts single phase.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Please read our Facebook, we suggest it is about keeping the mix dynamic, tumbling like a motor, shifting forward and back and reversing magnetic moments. All designed to drive non steady-state conditions.

      The use of 3 Phase also allows you to triple your pulse count for magnetic shocks and as proposed by Alan, the use of an over rated CCI FUSION controller will specifically allow for low duty cycle which leads to very high Total Harmonic Distortion (THD) content from the pulses – read, broad band EM stimulation.

  • jousterusa

    I don’t know “whether” this is inside baseball or not, but did anybody notice the word misspelled in this sentence – “on weather the HotCat is real, ” – is the same word misspelled in the Third Independent Party report (where it was misspelled wheter)? Or was it just one of those 1 in a billion coincidences?

    • Fortyniner

      ‘wheter’ looks to me like a typo, while ‘weather’ is the result of either ignorance or a defective spellchecker. It’s a word that many people get wrong one way or another.

  • jousterusa

    I don’t know “whether” this is inside baseball or not, but did anybody notice the word misspelled in this sentence – “on weather the HotCat is real, ” – is the same word misspelled in the Third Independent Party report (where it was misspelled wheter)? Or was it just one of those 1 in a billion coincidences?

    • ‘wheter’ looks to me like a typo, while ‘weather’ is the result of either ignorance of the correct spelling, or a defective spellchecker. It’s a word that many people get wrong one way or another.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Very dangerous, if they mess up, could set LENR back another 25 years. They should simply use the recent third party test as a guide to their ongoing testing.

    • Sanjeev

      The report did not spill all the beans, most probably. I think Rossi and co. will not allow publication of secret catalyst through such report. May be they used NDAs or took away the good things after the test and sent the remaining ash for analysis…….This can explain why Rossi himself had to assist during loading and removal of internal contents.

      Anyway, there is a way to avoid any possible harm, if the replication is first done privately and then repeated openly only if the results are “encouraging”. Since MFMP is driven by donations, I think such private experiment will be difficult to do. I also do not know how ethical will this be.

      • bachcole

        Bernie777 could be right. If MFMP would simply be quiet about “replication”, but use the Lugano test report as a way of improving their experimentation, that might help.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Please see our last two Facebook posts – there maybe no need to know anything from IH to address major and valid criticisms of the report. The MFMP is about finding the truth.

          https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject

          • Bob, I appreciate the transparent work of MFMP. It is frustrating to watch the snails pace of the Ecat. LENR should be worked on with teams of scientist throughout the world. It’s that important.
            I was hoping the report was going to lead to publication and make LENR irrefutable science, but once again CF wheels turn slowly. I appreciate Darden and IH, but if he really wants clean air then set the snails paced, capitalistic approach aside and get teams together. I hope you guys are pivotal in bringing LENR to the world because your not slowing up the process by holding out for the $$$.

            ps- sending a donation.

          • Sanjeev

            I agree, the secrecy is not only delaying the progress, its also discouraging independent research. IH, Darden and Rossi, all know that the IP would not remain secret for even a month, once the product is out. They know that they will end up billionaires even after the recipe is given out. So why delay so much ?

            They need not simply make it public, there are other ways. They can get many labs and corporations to sign an NDA and also make them business partners, share the profits, let them have the tech, let them replicate and improve and publish, let the tech soar….. but sadly, we see them guarding the technology like a Gollum.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Thankyou barry, your donation specifically will help with meeting one of the worlds leading companies in the design of Furnace heating elements on 23/10/14.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            If you believe as I do that LENR does exist and has been replicated many times, please just use the test results as a guide to your experiments, do not give the super skeptics fuel to ridicule LENR in the media, that is what happened 25 years ago.

    • Timar

      I don’t think so. It’s not a replication by the usual scientific standards, where the group replicating the experient has all the required information available. It’s more of an attempt in reverse engineering.

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        If they mess up, the super skeptics and the media will jump on it, as proof LENR does not exist.

        • Timar

          I think they probably won’t even take notice.

        • bachcole

          And the skeptopaths aren’t already jumping on it, convinced that LENR does not exist? And the media is already ignoring it.

          MFMP can simply defuse this argument by telling the truth. They canNOT, are UNABLE to duplicate the E-Cat because they don’t have one and don’t know how it works and do not have a design. They are trying to enhance their own explorations by what we have learned about the E-Cat.

  • Ophelia Rump

    There may be some regulation which specifies a minimum output qualification for industrial, as opposed to it’s actual utilization.

  • Billy Jackson

    Bachcole. i like to think of myself as critically realistic. I have no problems with the concepts of faith, belief, trust, or just instinct on a personal level. yet i also recognize that their are those around me that do not see the world as i do. Enough of them will demand further evidence or differing points of view for validation. I know that my view point may not always agree with theirs. So despite the fact that the last report satisfied me on a personal level

    (i have never agreed that all the professors are “in on it” Nor do i buy that they are so incompetent that they cant do a basic reading of energy in vs energy out via meters)…

    YET.. i realize that those challenges exist and that while i may be satisfied their will be those who want further explanation or further testing till they are willing to commit to believing also. So i attempt to acknowledge that yet express my support at the same time.

    MFMP needs to stand on its own two feet as an attempted back engineering.. that i can support. .but claiming replication to me is misleading those who would read the report later.

  • DickeFix

    One should not jump to conclusions but it seems to me that the explanation for the excess heat has finally been found by the contributors Andra.S and Giancarlo on Mats Lewans blog:

    http://matslew.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/interview-on-radio-show-free-energy-quest-tonight/#comment-3593

    http://www.cobraf.com/forum/immagini/R_123566844_1.pdf

    http://matslew.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/interview-on-radio-show-free-energy-quest-tonight/#comment-3556

    This theory, if it proves correct, would solve the enigma and kill the E-Cat for good. Future will tell if someone in the research team did this to trick the others or if it was a genuine mistake. I still hope the participating researchers who are innocent are not ridiculed by the scientific community. Even if it indicates a lack of correct competence for three phase measurements (and maybe an overestimation of the possibility of a natural miracle), it would be thanks to their measured and published data that this was discovered.

    • Freethinker

      Well, if you want to pin all your analysis on one poorly composed photo that is to illustrate harmonics and the following goes:

      1. There are OL’s in all real time fields. If this was from a actually measuements, then the data logs would be full of error messages, indicate faulty values, would it not?

      2. There is no reference to as WHEN this measurement was taken, It could be after the tests, if could be before, or it could be any old time, when they hooked up the PCE-830.

      3. A counter question: Could it be a stored value in the PCE-830? Displayed when there is absolutely nothing of value on the lines?

      4 There where two PCE-830 connected. They would both to have been clamped wrong, otherwise the testers would have been alerted.

      5. The dummy seem to have a COP of 1. Apparently it was not wrongly clamped then. Do you suggest that this is done intentionally when the the reactor i activated, or has it just magically changed by itself? If intentionally, you are in that land of accusing people of “fraud”. Really wanna go there?

      The conclusion is that you have exactly nothing to go on, except – on this I agree – a sloppy choice of illustration to visualise the excellent instruments ability to measure harmonics.

      • DickeFix

        It is not about the photos only, it is about the figures in the paper that are inconsistent. Something must have happened between the dummy test and the active reactor test and your questions 4 and 5 are very relevant. If everything was monitored real time it should be possible to see this change in the stored data. If both PCE-830 really showed the same power all the time, the clamps of both must been altered, either deliberately or by mistake.

        • Freethinker

          “Something must have happened “.

          You use the word “must” based on what? You have yet to present a viable argument that would allow for a “must”.

          Please point to the figures you mean show inconsistency. I know only of the harmonics picture which you repeatedly come back to, and your of calculations of the joule heating ratio in the active reactor and the conjectured impact on the true dummy consumed power.

        • Argon

          Mr Dicke;
          PCE-830:s were set to measure TrueRMS of Alternating 3 phase current (not pure sine wave).
          And how much smallere power it shows when one of the currents goes ‘from right to left’ than ‘left to rightt’.?
          Here is the hint: You can do the math with this simple equation from ‘known physics’ P=I²*R.
          And here comes the magic: put there first positive value for I, and then negative.

          Simple as that. and now if you read again those ‘clamp gate’-claims in cobra forun you see smoke and mirrors nothing more.

          • DickeFix

            But that is the idea with a three phase power meter that it should measure the net power delivered to a load which in this case is in a delta configuration (see Fig. 4). The two three phase power meters need to take into account both magnitude, phase and shape of the currents in its three input leads to correctly calculate the net current and hence dissipated power in the three heat coils of the reactor. If you change phase of one of the currents 180 degrees you will get wrong total power.

    • DickeFix
  • Bob Greenyer

    Please see our last two Facebook posts – there maybe no need to know anything from IH to address major and valid criticisms of the report. The MFMP is about finding the truth.

    https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject

    • Bob, I appreciate the work transparency of MFMP. It is frustrating to watch the snails pace of the Ecat. LENR should be worked on with teams of scientist throughout the world. It’s that important.
      I was hoping the report was going to lead to publication and make LENR irrefutable science. I appreciate Darden and IH, but if he really wants clean air then set the snails paced, capitalistic approach aside and get teams together. I hope you guys are pivotal in bringing LENR to the world because your not slowing up the process by holding out for the $$$.

      ps- sending a donation.

      • Sanjeev

        I agree, the secrecy is not only delaying the progress, its also discouraging independent research. IH, Darden and Rossi, all know that the IP would not remain secret for even a month, once the product is out. They know that they will end up billionaires even after the recipe is given out. So why delay so much ?

        They need not simply make it public, there are other ways. They can get many labs and corporations to sign an NDA and also make them business partners, share the profits, let them have the tech, let them replicate and improve and publish, let the tech soar….. but sadly, we see them guarding the technology like a Gollum.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Thankyou barry, your donation specifically will help with meeting one of the worlds leading companies in the design of Furnace heating elements on 23/10/14.

        • Bob Greenyer

          We have made a case for what might be the catalyst.

          https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject

          • Pekka Janhunen

            Bob, do you have an idea how the powder should sit in the tube? Should it be made to stick to the walls somehow (perhaps by pouring it in and rotating the reactor manually for a while), or should it rather rest on the floor and become airborne by gas convection upon heating when H2 and Li fill the chamber. Or perhaps by magnetic fields as some have suggested – but I doubt it since temperature would be above the Curie point of nickel and its alloys.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Bob Higgins has postulated that members of the experimental teams could sinter potentially active components on the walls of the swappable core, essentially mix with PVA to make a slurry and then vacuum bake in an oven to sinter active components to Al2O3. A more detailed description will be made available in the live experimental proposals when we start those.

            It may be that active components in the rector “dummy” would not work on their own, but should be kept below a critical temperature when testing the dummy and this could explain why the dummy was not taken too high.

          • Gerrit

            This is the third time I post this reference here to be shortly viewed and discussed.

            Maybe there are some interesting points.

            In a study titled “Nitrogen Discharged from the Earth’s Interior Regions”

            http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jmp.2014.52012

            there is written: “Therefore, we believe that Ca is the common driving element for nuclear transmutation.”

          • Pekka Janhunen

            Reaction equations given in the abstract would seem to break baryon number conservation: more nucleons on the right-hand side than on the left-hand side.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            I have recently posted the (very speculative) idea that one could use a press for diamond generation from graphite in order to initiate Li-Ni LENR without hydrogen. The absorption of hydrogen increases the pressure inside the lattice dramatically. If that would be its primary function, you could in principle go without it. It is interesting that the authors plan to use such a press as well. With regard to LENR, applying mechanical pressure on a hydrogen-loaded lattice might also be an interesting option. This would be one of the first experiments I would pursue.

    • Bernie777

      If you believe as I do that LENR does exist and has been replicated many times, please just use the test results as a guide to your experiments, do not give the super skeptics fuel to ridicule LENR in the media, that is what happened 25 years ago.

    • Daniel Maris

      Will you be writing it up as a paper and trying to get it published, Bob?

      If so, or if you did, do you think there would be a difference depending on whether the results were positive or negative for anomalous heat?

  • Freethinker

    Well, if you want to pin all your analysis on one poorly composed photo that is to illustrate harmonics and the following goes:

    1. There are OL’s in all real time fields. If this was from a actually measuements, then the data logs would be full of error messages, indicate faulty values, would it not?

    2. There is no reference to as WHEN this measurement was taken, It could be after the tests, if could be before, or it could be any old time, when they hooked up the PCE-830.

    3. A counter question: Could it be a stored value in the PCE-830? Displayed when there is absolutely nothing of value on the lines?

    4 There where two PCE-830 connected. They would both to have been clamped wrong, otherwise the testers would have been alerted.

    5. The dummy seem to have a COP of 1. Apparently it was not wrongly clamped then. Do you suggest that this is done intentionally when the the reactor i activated, or has it just magically changed by itself? If intentionally, you are in that land of accusing people of “fraud”. Really wanna go there?

    The conclusion is that you have exactly nothing to go on, except – on this I agree – a sloppy choice of illustration to visualise the excellent instruments ability to measure harmonics.

    • Daniel Maris

      Mr FIx has an agenda methinks. And is probably to be found spouting the same stuff over on Independent E Cat News.

      • Freethinker

        “Independent E Cat News” 😀

      • timycelyn

        This is another example of some serious double standards in this debate. Positive evidence for these effects, often provided at high, nearing impeccable stanards is routinely challenged on often the most trivial – or irrelevant – or dishonest – of grounds.

        However, these denizens of ECN seem to feel that they can announce the most poorly thought out and transparent of evidence as some sort of ‘it’s all a con/big mistake’ smoking gun.

        They have such an utter rock solid conviction that these effects cannot be, that they seem to have totally lost their critical facilities is reviewing their own positon and what they feel is ‘evideince’ that supports it. For those of strong stomach, try lurking over there once a month or so, its a fascinating window on denial.

        I’m afraid they do not seem to any longer posess open, enqiring minds that can fairly evaluate evidence and reach dispassionate conclusions based on the evidence. I regret to say they seem to have left the teachings of science behind and entered a form of priesthood…a sort of worship and defence of the status quo.

        Sad cases.

        • Freethinker

          “Something must have happened “.

          You use the word “must” based on what? You have yet to present a viable argument that would allow for a “must”.

          Please point to the figures you mean show inconsistency. I know only of the harmonics picture which you repeatedly come back to, and your of calculations of the joule heating ratio in the active reactor and the conjectured impact on the true dummy consumed power.

        • Christopher Calder

          Sounds like you have a real plan. I notice that the nickel powder you mentioned is available in a 75 kilogram drum, enough for more than 75,000 10 kilowatt E-Cats. The lithium aluminum hydride and iron powder probably take up allot of that weight (1 gram) so the real number may be 150,000 E-Cats. I know Rossi use to grind his own nickel because he said it must be of very high purity. I hope your recreation works.

        • Sanjeev

          This was about one year ago, in the press release. I actually just wrote a comment below that they should do it without further delay. It is too important to be guarded like a Gollum.

  • Otto1923

    Most likely they can’t ‘replicate’ because they don’t know important details. LENR has much to lose in the public perception with another failed replication attempt. And no we are not at ‘zero’, not with a functioning installation and a peer reviewed report.

  • Freethinker

    😀

    Yes. I have been visiting them sporadically, for my personal entertainment. Not nice of me, I know, but those people commenting there are anything but “nice”.

    It is border lining “bizarre” reading the comments of the trolls of ECN. They truly live in the darkest part of darkness.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    There will never be a test “done properly”, it is impossible. Bring on the customers.

  • Bernie777

    If they mess up, the super skeptics and the media will jump on it, as proof LENR does not exist.

  • Neanderthal

    I remind all.. If they is going to be a subsequent test. Incorporate two simple work machine one at input and other at the output of thermal machine and deduce from the efficient of cannot cycle of conversion…

  • Neanderthal

    I remind all.. If they is going to be a subsequent test. Incorporate two simple work machine one at input and other at the output of thermal machine and deduce from the efficient of cannot cycle of conversion…

  • the_solist

    To the MFMP folks and anyone else that are attempting replications:

    The wires are too thin and wound to tight, you need 3 thicker wires that are looped only 1-1,5 times around the reactor. You can see the outline of the wires in figure 10 in the report, it is clear that the 3 wires are looped about 1 time around the reactor each. Here is a
    link to the 4mm wire I was planning on using:
    http://www.kanthal.com/en/products/material-datasheets/wire/resistance-heating-wire-and-resistance-wire/kanthal-apm/

    I believe you need to cycle the power over the three wires, the frequency and order of the cycle is probably Rossis main secret. I think this is what Rossi refer to as the electromagnetic stimulation. The reason for this, according to my understanding, is to prevent the electrons and ions in the fuel from aligning to the fields created by the resistance wires.

    For the fuel I would suggest you use:

    http://www.vale.com/EN/business/mining/nickel/NickelProducts/T255%20-%20Standard.pdf
    as it appears to be consistent with the SEM images in the appendix. Haven’t found a supplier for LiAlH4 but that shouldn’t be too hard as particle size won’t be a big issue. Not sure if iron powder is needed as a catalyst, but you might want to do a run with that too ( I am planning on using Fe nanopowder). Ratio of Ni and LiAlH4 (and potentially Fe) might be an issue, but hard to estimate from the report given the small samples provided for testing.

    Have fun!

    Best regards,
    Anders F

    • the_solist

      Forgot to add that this was forwarded from a friend, I got his permission to post it.

      He also added that it might be possible to see if the reactor generate energy by looking at the thermal video. If the resistor wires generated all the heat the alumina around them would appear warmer like on the dummy, but if the reactor generated the heat the alumina around them would likely appear slightly colder instead.

    • Sounds like you have a real plan. I notice that the nickel powder you mentioned is available in a 75 kilogram drum, enough for more than 75,000 10 kilowatt E-Cats. The lithium aluminum hydride and iron powder probably take up allot of that weight (1 gram) so the real number may be 150,000 E-Cats. I know Rossi use to grind his own nickel because he said it must be of very high purity. I hope your recreation works.

    • Dave Lawton

      They will supply small amount of nickel powder for free for research if you tell them what you want it for. T255 is the type I obtained from William Rowland Ltd about a year ago. Looks like I made a good choice.

    • otto1923

      Why would you suggest some off-the-shelf material? Thats not what rossi is using. And according to him, particle size, composition, and process of manufacture are all-important, and neither you nor MFMP knows what these are. They might as well fill their very meticulously-constructed tube with silly putty for all the good it will do them.
      The only reason I can see to stage such a doomed-to-fail replication effort, is to discredit the ecat. Anybody agree?

      • the_solist

        To my knowledge Rossi has always used off the shelf nickel powder. He has degassed it and added other substances, but from what I can tell the base powder has been T255 or something similar. If you compare the SEM images from the report to the SEM images of Vale T255 nickel powder, you will see that they look alike. Please keep in mind that the scales are different on the images, T255 images are much higher detail. The T255 powder is very suitable for these kinds of applications as it has a very large surface area per weight unit.

        If you decide to handle these powders, please be careful as they are very toxic.

        There has been some discussion that the contents of the reactor should have melted at such high temperature, looking at the ash samples it appears that some melting may have occurred. Regardless most of the energy will probably be thermalized in the alumina in the form of soft x-rays. I do however believe they have overestimated the temperature of the reactor, the question is what impact that will have on the results.

        Overall I was very disappointed reading the report. Seeing Levi on top of it made me question the point of making it in the first place. Even thou I believe Levi is an honourable scientist and have no intention of cheating, he is tainted by his friendship to Rossi and should be kept out of the loop. Besides, he is probably certain it works and thus has lost his ability to remain objective. Overall I should say that the quality of the test conducted is too low and should have been much higher considering all the input they got from the last test. While I am convinced that LENR is very real, I do not see this report as a conclusive evidence that Rossi have what he claims to have.

        Having said that, the reactor build detailed in the report looks pretty good and warrant a replication attempt on my behalf. I will however use a very different approach to calorimetry (heating a cubic metre of water in an isolated container) and run the heating system on batteries to ensure that there are no possible errors in measuring input power. Please note that I will not publish any results as I have an NDA covering all results with the organization I conduct research for.

        Forwarded on behalf of my dear friend Anders.

        • Alan DeAngelis

          Also LiAlH4 is pyrophoric. So, keep it away from moisture.

          Handle it in a glove bag (or box) under nitrogen or argon.

          LiAlH4 + 4 H2O → LiOH + Al(OH)3 + 4 H2

          • Pekka Janhunen

            Lugano report page 28: “It is plausible that the fuel is mixed with the standard Lithium Aluminum Hydride, LiAlH4. Further evidence of that is obtained from the ICP-AES analysis which shows that the mass ratio between Li and Al is compatible with a LiAlH4 molecule.”

            There are many possibilities to have Li:Al ratio of 1:1. So it is not certain that LiAlH4 was actually included in the powder. Maybe it was LiAlH4 originally, but let react with water vapour before shipping to Lugano.

          • As the hydride is required to decompose in order to provide H and Li(?) at the reaction site, and doesn’t participate as a chemical, the actual hydride composition may not be critical anyway, unless of course aluminium is involved in the LENR.

            In the latter case a mixture of LiH and aluminium nanopowders could possibly be added to the mix in order to avoid the use of LiAlH4. I suppose that aluminium hydride, AlH3, could be used instead of aluminium powder, but this material is also pyrophoric.

          • Ted-X

            Aluminum nanopowder is pyrophoric as well. Quick handling of LiAlH4, preferably in a simple nitrogen glove box, would be the best. However, LiAlH4 will not ignite if handled quickly, even in the air. But… no contact with the water, reactive organics or moisture.

        • No, Rossi use to, and may still, grind his own nickel. He spoke of an old man in his 90s who ground the nickel for him at his factory. He also spoke of some special process he would use to enhance the nickel powder. That, as I recall, was before the Hot-Cat design and before the use of lithium hydride. Things may have change since then. We don’t know.

          • the_solist

            You need to look at the data, not what Rossi says. He has been spreading a lot of disinformation.

    • Hans Mjøllner

      Maybe Rossi uses resonance and heat,
      get the atoms to vibrate.
      As a wine glass when you hit right wave :))

    • Bob Greenyer

      to the_solist

      We are intending to use the Kanthal wire and the design proposed is designed to carry the right power.

      Yes, the plan is to cycle the wire and also encourage harmonics, we are working on how that specifically was achieved – there is some time as the reactors will need to be built first.

      Please take a look at our Facebook were we are posting regularly,

      https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject

      Please can you post your suggested design on FB as images or give us a link to a downloadable archive – so we can consider it. We are meeting with the manufacturer who is a world leader in high temperature element design next Thursday to instruct on the kind of reactor we require. We will post the manufacturers cost when they make it available for the proposed design and those that want to request one to be made will have 12 hours to commit before we instruct them to proceed.

      Our first powder under test will be

      http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/experiements/dormant-experiments/powder-test-cells/372-adding-nano-scale-features-to-macro-scale-metals-for-lenr-applications

      You can get LiAlH4 from Sigma Aldrich

      • the_solist

        The post was on behalf of my friend Anders. He is a very busy man, but was at my place the other day for dinner with his wife. I showed him the post and he said you where on the right track but probably needed to adjust some things, so I asked him to contribute. He usually keep this kind of information close to the chest but was a bit tipsy and said what the heck.

    • Nigel Appleton

      I would applaud any attempt at replication, provided it was accompanied by the necessary rigour in experimental design and execution.

      However, I don’t think enough thought has been given to the following;

      The move away from using an evacuated reactor flushed free of ambient air and filled with H2 at pressure to adding fuel to the tube in ambient atmospheric conditions.
      The move from on-off duty-cycle power supply to triac-controlled 3-phase power
      The presence of Fe, and the reasons for it

      There are important clues in these things.

      Furthermore, as things stand, it appears that the more power is applied, the higher the COP; but the thing is already operating perilously close to melting temperature of everything but the alumina (which melts at 2072 deg C). For instance mp’s. of various inconel alloys are reported as being between 1390 and 1425 deg C.- and I’m sure it’s not going to help if the heating elements melt!

  • Argon

    Mr Dicke;
    PCE-830:s were set to measure TrueRMS of Alternating 3 phase current (not pure sine wave).
    And how much smallere power it shows when one of the currents goes ‘from right to left’ than ‘left to rightt’.?
    Here is the hint: You can do the math with this simple equation from ‘known physics’ P=I²*R.
    And here comes the magic: put there first positive value for I, and then negative.

    Simple as that. and now if you read again those ‘clamp gate’-claims in cobra forun you see smoke and mirrors nothing more.

  • LCD

    If mfmp doesn’t attempt to replicate Rossi it would be silly, because everybody else already started.

  • LCD

    If mfmp doesn’t attempt to replicate Rossi it would be silly, because everybody else already started.

    • bachcole

      As long as it isn’t called duplication, I am happy about it.

      • LCD

        Sure I understand

  • Øystein Lande

    Anyone care to Ask Rossi what this statement means:
    “Vaughn stated in the news release that the investors in Industrial Heat, including Cherokee Investment Partners co-founder Tom Darden, are most interested in making Rossi’s technology more broadly available to universities, industry partnerships and non-governmental organizations “to ensure the technology is developed in a thoughtful and responsible manner.”
    Will reactors be made available for Universities and non-gov org for further research?

    • Sanjeev

      This was about one year ago, in the press release. I actually just wrote a comment below that they should do it without further delay. It is too important to be guarded like a Gollum.

    • It would be great if Industrial Heat would just release blueprints of the whole thing and hope to make money off patent rights. That may not happen, but if someone can duplicate the device more or less with COP of at least 3, they may publish that on the web and the whole world will know how to do it. Then Rossi would get his Nobel Prize, Industrial Heat and Tom Darden would be a respected top news story, and the US Patent Office would be apologizing and issuing patents left and right. Then you might even see a drop in the price of oil because then billions would be spent on LENR research around the world, not just a few million.

      • Avatar Polymorph

        Oysten Lande is right. Industrial Heat made it press release through this newswire

        http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/industrial-heat-has-acquired-andrea-rossis-e-cat-technology-241853361.html – I don’t understand why they don’t make another. Christopher Calder is absolutely right. Politically, the US Patent Office would need to grant him a patent. The first week that two universities create one Hot Cat, completely by themselves, Rossi becomes a national hero. A hero in America, and in Italy. Industrial Heat would certainly get more money in the next two financial years, to say the least. Just for fun, I’d like to see IH allow universities to build the first generation Energy Catalyzer and run it. It would enable the many critics of Rossi to examine their arguments more comprehensively.

        • Avatar Polymorph

          I meant “Industrial Heat made its press release” and I meant “two universities create a Hot Cat each”

  • Gerard McEk

    The type of inconel can be important and I am not sure it is known. It should be able to withstand 1400 deg. C. Magnetic properties will not play a role because 1400 deg C will be above the curi temperature of the alloy. The treatment of the wire will possibly be important and I would use the Celani method as a start.you must be able to calculate the resistance of one coil based on the openings angle of the triac and an assumed triac full openings voltage of 400 volts. Once known you will be able to estimate the wire diameter.
    One question: is the inner tube needed. I would leave it out, then you can better evacuate the whole interior of the Ecat.
    To ease the construction, I would fabricate the Aluninia with the risistor wires with grooves for the wires.
    Somebody informed me that the LiAlH4 is quite unstable and will react in plain air with moisture, so you will have to find a proper way to get it in.

  • Gerard McEk

    The type of inconel can be important and I am not sure it is known. It should be able to withstand 1400 deg. C. Magnetic properties will not play a role because 1400 deg C will be above the curi temperature of the alloy. The treatment of the wire will possibly be important and I would use the Celani method as a start.you must be able to calculate the resistance of one coil based on the openings angle of the triac and an assumed triac full openings voltage of 400 volts. Once known you will be able to estimate the wire diameter.
    One question: is the inner tube needed. I would leave it out, then you can better evacuate the whole interior of the Ecat.
    To ease the construction, I would fabricate the Aluninia with the risistor wires with grooves for the wires.
    Somebody informed me that the LiAlH4 is quite unstable and will react in plain air with moisture, so you will have to find a proper way to get it in.

  • Christopher Calder

    It would be great if Industrial Heat would just release blueprints of the whole thing and hope to make money off patent rights. That may not happen, but if someone can duplicate the device more or less with COP of at least 3, they may publish that on the web and the whole world will know how to do it. Then Rossi would get his Nobel Prize, Industrial Heat and Tom Darden would be a respected top news story, and the US Patent Office would be apologizing and issuing patents left and right. Then you might even see a drop in the price of oil because then billions would be spent on LENR research around the world, not just a few million.

    • Avatar Polymorph

      Oysten Lande is right. Industrial Heat made it press release through this newswire

      http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/industrial-heat-has-acquired-andrea-rossis-e-cat-technology-241853361.html – I don’t understand why they don’t make another. Christopher Calder is absolutely right. Politically, the US Patent Office would need to grant him a patent. The first week that two universities create one Hot Cat, completely by themselves, Rossi becomes a national hero. A hero in America, and in Italy. Industrial Heat would certainly get more money in the next two financial years, to say the least. Just for fun, I’d like to see IH allow universities to build the first generation Energy Catalyzer and run it. It would enable the many critics of Rossi to examine their arguments more comprehensively.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Also LiAlH4 is pyrophoric. So, keep it away from moisture.

    Handle it in a glove bag (or box) under nitrogen or argon.

    LiAlH4 + 4 H2O → LiOH + Al(OH)3 + 4 H2

    • Pekka Janhunen

      Lugano report page 28: “It is plausible that the fuel is mixed with the standard Lithium Aluminum Hydride, LiAlH4. Further evidence of that is obtained from the ICP-AES analysis which shows that the mass ratio between Li and Al is compatible with a LiAlH4 molecule.”

      There are many possibilities to have Li:Al ratio of 1:1. So it is not certain that LiAlH4 was actually included in the powder. Maybe it was LiAlH4 originally, but let react with water vapour before shipping to Lugano.

      • Fortyniner

        As the hydride is required to decompose in order to provide H and Li(?) at the reaction site, the actual hydride composition may not be critical anyway, unless of course aluminium is involved in the LENR. In the latter case it could possibly be added to the mix as nanopowder.

        • Ted-X

          Aluminum nanopowder is pyrophoric as well. Quick handling of LiAlH4, preferably in a simple nitrogen glove box, would be the best. However, LiAlH4 will not ignite if handled quickly, even in the air. But… no contact with the water, reactive organics or moisture.

  • Christopher Calder

    Rossi gave away the size of the nickel powder he found works best years ago, and I had that data on my web page for several years but deleted it. My memory is foggy, but I think it was about 7 to 10 micrometers. Maybe Frank remembers or Hank Mills. Rossi bought the high-purity nickel in rods and ground it at his factories in Italy and Florida. He also gave specific numbers on how pure it had to be, but I can’t remember all those details. I wish I had written it all down. I would guess Rossi consulted with nickel experts and found a way to increase the numbers of pits where hydrogen gas can load into. People trying to replicate his technology should probably seek out materials experts and ask how to do that. I am sure there are experts at Berkeley and Los Alamos who know. At one point he also said that he enriched the amount of one isotope of nickel for better effect. I don’t understand how he could do that. He said the cost of all the things he did to the nickel increased costs by about 10%.

    • Bob Greenyer

      to the_solist

      We are intending to use the Kanthal wire and the design proposed is designed to carry the right power.

      Yes, the plan is to cycle the wire and also encourage harmonics, we are working on how that specifically was achieved – there is some time as the reactors will need to be built first.

      Please take a look at our Facebook were we are posting regularly,

      https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject

      Please can you post your suggested design on FB as images or give us a link to a downloadable archive – so we can consider it. We are meeting with the manufacturer who is a world leader in high temperature element design next Thursday to instruct on the kind of reactor we require. We will post the manufacturers cost when they make it available for the proposed design and those that want to request one to be made will have 12 hours to commit before we instruct them to proceed.

      Our first powder under test will be

      http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/experiements/dormant-experiments/powder-test-cells/372-adding-nano-scale-features-to-macro-scale-metals-for-lenr-applications

      You can get LiAlH4 from Sigma Aldrich

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Yes, I remember well that it was enriched because natural nickel is only 0.926% Ni-64.
      I was surprised to see in the report that the starting fuel was natural nickel.

  • Rossi gave away the size of the nickel powder he found works best years ago, and I had that data on my web page for several years but deleted it. My memory is foggy, but I think it was about (corrected below) micrometers. Rossi bought the high-purity nickel in rods and ground it at his factories.

    Update & correction – I used the Way-Back machine to find my old web page. It read as follows in 2011.

    “Rossi states that he uses micrometer grain sized nickel dust (Defkalion uses 3-7 microns size) enriched to contain more of two useful isotopes, N-62 and N-64. The nickel is then processed to increase the number of surface tubercles (protrusions) to provide greater area for heat producing reactions with hydrogen gas under pressure. Secret catalysts are added to the nickel. Iron dust (10%) might be added to break apart H2 into H1, and carbon powder (5%) added as a “scavenger” for contaminating oxygen. Magnesium powder, magnesium hydride, and potassium carbonate are also on the list of suspected catalysts, but all catalyst theories should be considered unconfirmed speculation. Rossi states that the total cost of nickel processing plus the catalyst adds just 10% to the total cost of the fuel. We do know that more than one catalyst combination is possible, as Rossi switched catalysts for a time in order to improve performance, but later went back to his original secret formula.”

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Yes, I remember well that it was enriched because natural nickel is only 0.926% Ni-64.
      I was surprised to see in the report that the starting fuel was natural nickel.

  • clovis ray

    mf/mp going for the gold,,, i mean nickle, lol

  • clovis ray

    mf/mp going for the gold,,, i mean nickle, lol

  • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

    I sincerely doubt if the patent office will accept the TIP2 report as valid for their acknowledgement of Rossi’s effect. Already there is too much doubt on the procedures and test results for the report to survive as a well founded scientific report.
    Seeing how we now can wait for another year or so until the mysterious customer is satisfied with the 1MW reactor and someone can finally publicly visit the site, I’m starting to loose hope that we will see an e-cat breakthrough in short term. I’m not even sure that after another wait we will learn more about the 1MW reactor as the customer may well be the military and those buggers aren’t exactly informative about their projects.
    Therefore I’d like to see MFMP succeed in replicating the reactor, hopefully with a nice COP. With their open science system, they can prove or disprove every critic and once and for all bring LENR into the open. At this point, their stated goal of a blueprint for a working LENR reactor and a few reactors sent to some selected institutions would probably be the fastest way to a LENR world. If that reveals Rossi’s secrets, so be it. We need LENR now and Rossi will still get his Nobel prize and become rich and famous. Rossi’s or IH’s strategy is not working for me anymore. Go MFMP!

    • Ophelia Rump

      First they should change the name to something more appropriate like. Society for the unethical betterment of some people at someone else’s expense.

      Pons and Fleischmann deserve to have their names treated better than being turned into a symbol for an open IP piracy movement.

      • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

        Calm down… Succesful replication and the discovery of Rossi’s secrets would probably give Rossi his patent protection he so desperately seeks. So apart from a boost for LENR I don’t think Rossi or IH will suffer unduly.

        • Ophelia Rump

          I am not upset, I just spoken the truth. The IP belongs to IH.

          Leaving trails of criminal intent spread across the internet, is not the best approach to science. Consider that.

          • Bob Greenyer

            The MFMP is about lighting the New Fire together, we are not interested in how it happens, just that if it is possible, it should happen sooner rather than later.

            Any IP revealed in the report, IH will already have priority on.

            It would help if they additionally revealed any and all IP they have priority on to help someone independently do the demonstration that is required for them to get their patent.

            As an organisation, the MFMP can’t reveal IP that they have no knowledge of, we are in fact mostly doing something that we were planning to do based on published work going back more than one decade combined with the insight of working day in day out in the field for the past few years. As detailed on our Facebook, there was an openly published document from 2001 encouraging the Hydrogen loading of Nickel in the presence of Lithium Hydrides in reactor vessels made of Al2O3.

            Please look to our “Are we back to the future?” post on Facebook where we link to this document…

            http://bit.ly/1qotAK9

            We had discussed internally making reactors such as this (incorporating magnetic pinch effect pulses from solenoids) back in March and our powder reactor was designed to allow some magnetic pulses.

            It has long been established in LENR research that if you do not have a suitable reaction matrix in a dynamically changing environment – you will see nothing. Without a patent search, and without trawling the available historical LENR research, it might be that the novel aspects revealed in the paper is the use of 3 Phase power to increase the power that can be delivered, the THD and the dynamics of the overall solution.

          • Bernie777

            “MFMP is about lighting the New Fire together” then, please do not give those who want to deter LENR ammunition to discredit it, by calling your tests a duplicate of the E-Cat test, that, in all probability, will not duplicate the results.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Actually, I am not sure we have ever used the word you are referring to. If a citation can be found, then it was in error – it obviously cannot be achieved without full disclosure by IH.

          • Ophelia Rump

            If you have no knowledge of it you cannot claim to Reproduce it.
            You cannot have it both ways.

          • Bob Greenyer

            It is a replication *attempt* – if the report is actually showing a device that can yield over 3X power in and we see over unity with what is known and what we infer as “persons skilled in the art” which we may be considered as starting to be (well, we are trying), and/or we see similar isotopic shifts – then it may be considered a replication by some. All the same it is only an “attempt”.

            We might at the very least be able to provide more understanding to address real and valid criticisms of the report without any further release of IP from IH.

            We cannot of course reproduce it, we do not know *exact* details – and, actually, it probably is not necessary – we already have 1000s of different claimed experiments where either/or/both excess heat and elemental changes have been seen and it is clear that Rossi has produce 3 markedly different designs with claimed success. So it really looks like “reproducing” the experiment would be a needless focus on the minutia.

            The MFMP was set up with the aim of “jumping the hurdle” – that is to say, help produce *any* unequivocal evidence that the New Fire exists in order to put an end to the barriers that are stopping proper research into the field.

          • Pekka Janhunen

            Ophelia, as long as MFMP hasn’t signed any NDA, they can’t break any. As long as they’re not selling a product, they can’t infringe any IP. I can’t see how their planned activity could be morally questionable, let alone illegal.

          • Pekka Janhunen

            since you mentioned, me too..

          • Bob Greenyer

            I agree, it is being used as a scratchpad by the MFMP at the moment to let people know ASAP what is happening in our thought stream. It does reach many contributors quickly and they can respond quickly – and we are moving quickly.

            We will capture all of the information presented on there into a “Collaborate” Live Open Google Document on the main site in the coming days. You will then see iterations in understanding form realtime there

            I hope that some people will also be able to contribute.

          • Daniel Maris

            I think you will have to be Edisonian in your approach. Maybe it will be a 100 fuel types tried before you can say your replication test is done with.

          • Bob Greenyer

            The reactor we are proposing should enable rapid cycle experiments. If it is meant to be able to get to over unity in a few hours, and the signal meant to be high, then many tests can be performed in rapid succession. There may be no need to go to very high temperatures to screen proposals. Whilst one core is being tested another can be prepared. Rinse repeat. With multiple locations working this way – many variable powder mix combinations can be evaluated in a short time frame.

          • psi2u2

            Unknown.

          • LuFong

            If Rossi is trying to use “science” to establish the credibility of his E-Cat then he must allow the experiment/test to be duplicated. This is how science works. Rossi cannot have it both ways and there is nothing objectionable to the efforts to duplicate the test. He has however made it extremely difficult to repeat the experiment given the paucity of the results and the black-box nature of the test.

          • Ophelia Rump

            This is not true. IH can sell or provide reactors for laboratory use.
            In fact IH has done this twice already. Both times the reaction was successfully reproduced. Somehow your choice of wording seemed to have missed this fact.

            I really wish people would learn to stop saying Rossi. Rossi sold the rights.
            The technology is the property of IH, Industrial Heat.

            Please try to keep up.

          • psi2u2

            But what if keeping up is not in my job description, Ophelia? 😉

          • Hi all

            As Ophelia notes:

            The company Industrial Heat built, shipped and licensed the E-Cat used in the third party test:

            Tom Darden CEO of Cherokee Investments and Industrial heat said:
            “We built the reactor, but we shipped it over to Switzerland,”
            http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/blog/techflash/2014/10/raleigh-investor-darden-still-bullish-on.html?page=2

            This is no longer a matter of dispute.

            Next order of business.

            Kind Regards walker

          • Gerrit

            Lufong, why do you think that “science” is entitled to getting the complete functioning of the ecat presented on a silver plate, when virtually all of “science” has avoided this field for the last 25 years?

            Industrial Heat’s goal is industrialization. What they need is convinced customers, not convinced “science”.

            Who is withholding “science” from reading all the peer reviewed papers and conference proceedings published in the last 25 years and starting a replication effort. There is nothing objectionable to actually working on the topic. Although you’ll probably need to persuade the funding institutions first, good luck with that.

            “Science” can’t have it both ways, you know. Ridiculing it for 25 years and then getting the solution handed over ready to go without any sweat.

          • bachcole

            Masterful!!

          • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

            When you declare me “morally bankrupt and criminal” I assume you are upset. Otherwise you are downright rude and offensive.

            The IP that was registered by Rossi and IH does belong to them and should be recognized due to priority, but who is to say that MFMP won’t discover something new? Rossi at least was surprised by the ash analysis and that tells me not everything is known to them yet.

            MFMP has the right and the knowledge to do their own research that may help everyone to get LENR accepted and developed much faster. As that could potentially save millions of lives, I have no problem with them doing that. Let the patent battles be fought by legal courts. China will ignore them anyway, so I wouldn’t value their worth too much.

          • Ophelia Rump

            I do not think I said that you are morally bankrupt and criminal, only the actions which you endorsed, which is the usurpation of the property of others because they are not moving quickly enough to satisfy you.

            Be as upset as you wish. Your emotions belong to you. Not my property to deal with.

          • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

            So dishonest also.

            We are done talking.

      • catfish

        reverse engineering happens all the time, and Rossi has no patent, yet. He has never divulged what he’s using as a catalyst, so it would be natural that others would seek to find out. Did you really think the rest of the world would sit and worship the man like a god and not try to do actual scientific research on this?

        In any case, successful repetition of something nearly like his own design gives him a better case for a patent. MFMP is not making any money off of this. Of all the people who would try to reverse engineer this, you should be glad that it IS MFMP, because the next one will probably be some nameless state-sponsored conglomerate in China, where IP is habitually stolen once manufucturing occurs there.

        • Ophelia Rump

          I have no problem with calling it reverse engineering.
          I also see no issue with their learning from the work of IH and incorporating it.

          People have endorsed attempting to usurp the IP of IH and attempt to make this some kind of freeware movement. This is evil.

      • Hi all

        With Respect Ophelia.

        If MFMP use Rossi’s/Industrial Heat’s (IH) own Patent Applied For as a reference; and plane fact is they have, for they have read it; to build their own version of the E-Cat; then they are fulfilling the second clause of the patent requirements of a, Person Having Ordinary Skill In The Art (PHOSITA) where it states in provision requiring a proper disclosure:
        “The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.”

        IH merely need to tell MFMP they need a license to establish that they are using an aspect of the Patent Applied For. Perhaps a fee equal to a donation as part of purely a paper transaction just to set it in stone.

        The first clause of PHOSITA, with regard to obviousness, has been established; by all the pseudo and real sceptics, which is I think quite amusing.

        Kind regards Walker

  • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

    I sincerely doubt if the patent office will accept the TIP2 report as valid for their acknowledgement of Rossi’s effect. Already there is too much doubt on the procedures and test results for the report to survive as a well founded scientific report.
    Seeing how we now can wait for another year or so until the mysterious customer is satisfied with the 1MW reactor and someone can finally publicly visit the site, I’m starting to loose hope that we will see an e-cat breakthrough in short term. I’m not even sure that after another wait we will learn more about the 1MW reactor as the customer may well be the military and those buggers aren’t exactly informative about their projects.
    Therefore I’d like to see MFMP succeed in replicating the reactor, hopefully with a nice COP. With their open science system, they can prove or disprove every critic and once and for all bring LENR into the open. At this point, their stated goal of a blueprint for a working LENR reactor and a few reactors sent to some selected institutions would probably be the fastest way to a LENR world. If that reveals Rossi’s secrets, so be it. We need LENR now and Rossi will still get his Nobel prize and become rich and famous. Rossi’s or IH’s strategy is not working for me anymore. Go MFMP!

    • bachcole

      In my opinion (not particularly humble), the test could have been perfect (if there could be such a thing), and the Patent Office still would not accept it.

      The more that they resist the greater will be their destruction.

    • Ophelia Rump

      First they should change the name to something more appropriate like. Society for the unethical betterment of some people at someone else’s expense.

      Pons and Fleischmann deserve to have their names treated better than being turned into a symbol for an open IP piracy movement.

      What you have just suggested is morally bankrupt and criminal.

      • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

        Calm down… Succesful replication and the discovery of Rossi’s secrets would probably give Rossi his patent protection he so desperately seeks. So apart from a boost for LENR I don’t think Rossi or IH will suffer unduly.

        • Ophelia Rump

          I am not upset, I just spoken the truth. The IP belongs to IH.

          Honest people who respect the work of Pons and Fleischmann might be upset.

          Honest people who respect the work or Rossi might be upset.

          What is so difficult to understand about the concept of respecting the property of others?

          • Bob Greenyer

            The MFMP is about lighting the New Fire together, we are not interested in how it happens, just that if it is possible, it should happen sooner rather than later.

            Any IP revealed in the report, IH will already have priority on.

            It would help if they additionally revealed any and all IP they have priority on to help someone independently do the demonstration that is required for them to get their patent.

            As an organisation, the MFMP can’t reveal IP that they have no knowledge of, we are in fact mostly doing something that we were planning to do based on published work going back more than one decade combined with the insight of working day in day out in the field for the past few years. As detailed on our Facebook, there was an openly published document from 2001 encouraging the Hydrogen loading of Nickel in the presence of Lithium Hydrides in reactor vessels made of Al2O3.

            Please look to our “Are we back to the future?” post on Facebook where we link to this document…

            http://bit.ly/1qotAK9

            We had discussed internally making reactors such as this (incorporating magnetic pinch effect pulses from solenoids) back in March and our powder reactor was designed to allow some magnetic pulses.

            It has long been established in LENR research that if you do not have a suitable reaction matrix in a dynamically changing environment – you will see nothing. Without a patent search, and without trawling the available historical LENR research, it might be that the novel aspects revealed in the paper is the use of 3 Phase power to increase the power that can be delivered, the THD and the dynamics of the overall solution.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            “MFMP is about lighting the New Fire together” then, please do not give those who want to deter LENR ammunition to discredit it, by calling your tests a duplicate of the E-Cat test, that, in all probability, will not duplicate the results.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Actually, I am not sure we have ever used the word you are referring to. If a citation can be found, then it was in error – it obviously cannot be achieved without full disclosure by IH.

          • Ophelia Rump

            If you have no knowledge of it you cannot claim to Reproduce it.
            You cannot have it both ways.

          • Bob Greenyer

            It is a replication *attempt* – if the report is actually showing a device that can yield over 3X power in and we see over unity with what is known and what we infer as “persons skilled in the art” which we may be considered as starting to be (well, we are trying), and/or we see similar isotopic shifts – then it may be considered a replication by some. All the same it is only an “attempt”.

            We might at the very least be able to provide more understanding to address real and valid criticisms of the report without any further release of IP from IH.

            We cannot of course reproduce it, we do not know *exact* details – and, actually, it probably is not necessary – we already have 1000s of different claimed experiments where either/or/both excess heat and elemental changes have been seen and it is clear that Rossi has produce 3 markedly different designs with claimed success. So it really looks like “reproducing” the experiment would be a needless focus on the minutia.

            The MFMP was set up with the aim of “jumping the hurdle” – that is to say, help produce *any* unequivocal evidence that the New Fire exists in order to put an end to the barriers that are stopping proper research into the field.

          • Pekka Janhunen

            Ophelia, as long as MFMP hasn’t signed any NDA, they can’t break any. As long as they’re not selling a product, they can’t infringe any IP. I can’t see how their planned activity could be morally questionable, let alone illegal.

          • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

            When you declare me “morally bankrupt and criminal” I assume you are upset. Otherwise you are downright rude and offensive.

            The IP that was registered by Rossi and IH does belong to them and should be recognized due to priority, but who is to say that MFMP won’t discover something new? Rossi at least was surprised by the ash analysis and that tells me not everything is known to them yet.

            MFMP has the right and the knowledge to do their own research that may help everyone to get LENR accepted and developed much faster. As that could potentially save millions of lives, I have no problem with them doing that. Let the patent battles be fought by legal courts. China will ignore them anyway, so I wouldn’t value their worth too much.

          • Ophelia Rump

            I do not think I said that you are morally bankrupt and criminal, only the actions which you endorsed, which is the usurpation of the property of others because they are not moving quickly enough to satisfy you.

            Be as upset as you wish. Your emotions belong to you. Not my property to deal with.

          • bachcole

            I do not see an ethical issue with anyone trying to replicate the E-Cat or trying to improve their own design from information that Rossi and company freely put into the public domain.

          • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

            So dishonest also.

            We are done talking.

        • otto1923

          Successful reverse engineering will give those who able to accomplish it the chance to win a patent before rossi, and so we can understand why he will probably not be endorsing MFMPs attempts.

          • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

            That may be true, but then again: isn’t this how the free market works? You have discovered something and have patented it as best as you can. If you did it well, you’re protected. If you didn’t you’re not fully protected. Piantelli and others have patents too, so we will have to wait and see how good Rossi’s patents turn out to be. It may be the case that Rossi has to pay for other people’s IP.

            Now someone comes along and discovers some effect you didn’t see and he/she patents that. You now have no prior registration to that part which may be important for your own discovery. It’s not great, but it is how it works. Fyi: I think the patent system doesn’t work very well, but that is for another discussion.

            Furthermore, the replication of the test is all done on publicly available information so everybody can try this. I’m guessing there will be enough laboratories around the world trying to replicate this test, patents notwithstanding.

          • Pekka Janhunen

            No, on the contrary if MFMP openly publishes everything they do (as seems to be their working mode), it prevents further patent trolling because published information is not patentable.

      • catfish

        reverse engineering happens all the time, and Rossi has no patent, yet. He has never divulged what he’s using as a catalyst, so it would be natural that others would seek to find out. Did you really think the rest of the world would sit and worship the man like a god and not try to do actual scientific research on this?

        In any case, successful repetition of something nearly like his own design gives him a better case for a patent. MFMP is not making any money off of this. Of all the people who would try to reverse engineer this, you should be glad that it IS MFMP, because the next one will probably be some nameless state-sponsored conglomerate in China, where IP is habitually stolen once manufucturing occurs there.

        • Ophelia Rump

          I have no problem with calling it reverse engineering.
          I also see no issue with their learning from the work of IH and incorporating it, as long as it respects the property rights of IH.
          When you operate under someone else’s name and the guise of a philanthropic organization, you have a stronger moral obligations than you would if you were not.

          People have endorsed attempting to usurp the IP of IH and attempt to make this some kind of freeware movement. This is evil.

          • otto1923

            Reverse engineering is not replication. Science requires replication and this can only happen with rossis cooperation, because he and his team are the only people who know the specifics of his mystery powder. I am sure it will happen at some point but apparently not at the present.

      • Hi all

        With Respect Ophelia.

        If MFMP use Rossi’s/Industrial Heat’s (IH) own Patent Applied For as a reference; and plane fact is they have, for they have read it; to build their own version of the E-Cat; then they are fulfilling the second clause of the patent requirements of a, Person Having Ordinary Skill In The Art (PHOSITA) where it states in provision requiring a proper disclosure:
        “The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.”

        IH merely need to tell MFMP they need a license to establish that they are using an aspect of the Patent Applied For. Perhaps a fee equal to a donation as part of purely a paper transaction just to set it in stone.

        The first clause of PHOSITA, with regard to obviousness, has been established; by all the pseudo and real sceptics, which is I think quite amusing.

        Kind regards Walker

  • Bernie777

    Everything I have heard, or not heard, from and about IH makes me believe they are a front for a corporate entity or the US Federal government

    • Ophelia Rump

      Not everything Bernie777.
      Why would they not be able to get a patent if they were a government operation?
      Why would they openly and freely share the technology with China?

      I expect they have relationships but all high level industry does, to one degree or another.
      This is I think where most people are under-informed. They (Dark Artists) are everywhere, more or less. Sometimes more, but mostly less.

      • Bernie777

        Ophelia…to answer your questions: “Why would they not be able to get a patent if they were a government operation?” It is possible the Feds view LENR as a highly disruptive technology that can cause our economy to go into a tail spin, they would want to drastically slow the implementation of LENR and of course the patent office might be part of that plan, large fossil fuel corporations would also be “lobbying” hard. A large corporate entity might have the same reasons as above, together with not wanting to be seen as investing in LENR because of conflicting internal revenue sources connected to fossil fuels.

        “Why would they openly and freely share the technology with China? Coal. China has a huge problem with air quality that is starting to cause social unrest. China”s leadership is highly sensitive to this unrest. It is the in World’s interest to solve this problem, for a number of reasons. LENR can go a long way to solve it. A fast implementation in China will also cause short term 5-10 years of financial disruption which might be attractive to some Feds.

    • US_Citizen71

      Sure IH would fit the definition of a shell corporation. They likely rent space at another companies facility and who knows what deals have been made for manpower and materials from other companies. But none of that is uncommon for a startup.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Everything I have heard, or not heard, from and about IH makes me believe they are a front for a corporate entity or the US Federal government

    • Guru

      Similar to (indirectly via founder funds entities) Google and Fakebook

    • bachcole

      Would “everything I have heard, or not heard” include so much as even a shred of evidence. And your psychological need to spin conspiracy theories does not count as evidence. (:->)

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        See my answer to Ophelia above. “A negative person only hears what suits them and listens only to respond” Michael P. Watson

    • Ophelia Rump

      Not everything Bernie777.
      Why would they not be able to get a patent if they were a government operation?
      Why would they openly and freely share the technology with China?

      I expect they have relationships but all high level industry does, to one degree or another.
      This is I think where most people are under-informed. They (Dark Artists) are everywhere, more or less. Sometimes more, but mostly less.

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        Ophelia…to answer your questions: “Why would they not be able to get a patent if they were a government operation?” It is possible the Feds view LENR as a highly disruptive technology that can cause our economy to go into a tail spin, they would want to drastically slow the implementation of LENR and of course the patent office might be part of that plan, large fossil fuel corporations would also be “lobbying” hard. A large corporate entity might have the same reasons as above, together with not wanting to be seen as investing in LENR because of conflicting internal revenue sources connected to fossil fuels.

        “Why would they openly and freely share the technology with China? Coal. China has a huge problem with air quality that is starting to cause social unrest. China”s leadership is highly sensitive to this unrest. It is in the World’s interest to solve this problem, for a number of reasons. LENR can go a long way to solve it. A fast implementation in China will also cause short term 5-10 years of financial disruption which might be attractive to some Feds.

        • bachcole

          If a conspiracy between Rossi, I.H., the testing professors, Elforsk, etc. etc. is implausible, then a conspiracy such as you discribe is also implausible.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            What? What does one have to do with the other?

          • bachcole

            You spout conspiracies for which you have no evidence, but you disallow the conspiracies that the skeptopaths have about the positive E-Cat test reports. Why is it that you can have it both ways but you insist that no one else can.

    • US_Citizen71

      Sure IH would fit the definition of a shell corporation. They likely rent space at another companies facility and who knows what deals have been made for manpower and materials from other companies. But none of that is uncommon for a startup.

  • Bob Greenyer
  • Rafael

    can anyone tell me where the sun’s energy comes from but from a lenr between elements that composes the sun?

  • Rafael

    can anyone tell me where the sun’s energy comes from but from a lenr between elements that composes the sun?

    • bachcole

      The Sun is classical hot-fusion in the core. Whether there is some LENR in the Sun outside of the core or in the corona is still unknown and will remain unknown until mainstream science accepts LENR as real.

      • Pekka Janhunen

        Corona is classical (hot, tenuous) plasma without many-body quantum phenomena. Until proven otherwise I believe that CF does not occur in solar corona.

        • bachcole

          Isn’t that what I said?

  • Bob Greenyer

    We have made a case for what might be the catalyst.

    https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject

    • Pekka Janhunen

      Bob, do you have an idea how the powder should sit in the tube? Should it be made to stick to the walls somehow (perhaps by pouring it in and rotating the reactor manually for a while), or should it rather rest on the floor and become airborne by gas convection upon heating when H2 and Li fill the chamber. Or perhaps by magnetic fields as some have suggested – but I doubt it since temperature would be above the Curie point of nickel and its alloys.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Bob Higgins has postulated that members of the experimental teams could sinter potentially active components on the walls of the swappable core, essentially mix with PVA to make a slurry and then vacuum bake in an oven to sinter active components to Al2O3. A more detailed description will be made available in the live experimental proposals when we start those.

        It may be that active components in the rector “dummy” would not work on their own, but should be kept below a critical temperature when testing the dummy and this could explain why the dummy was not taken too high.

      • Otto1923

        Or perhaps it fills the entire tube. Who knows? Only rossi and his team knows. And trying to guess and actually attempting to replicate based on guesses, can only serve to discredit rossi at this critical time in the development of the ecat. Will a failure affect the patent process? Will it dissuade professionals from taking part in future tests and validation? The MFMP attempt shouldnt at any rate be called a replication as they have little idea of the specifics of what they are trying to replicate.

    • Gerrit

      This is the third time I post this reference here to be shortly viewed and discussed.

      Maybe there are some interesting points.

      In a study titled “Nitrogen Discharged from the Earth’s Interior Regions”

      http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jmp.2014.52012

      there is written: “Therefore, we believe that Ca is the common driving element for nuclear transmutation.”

      • Pekka Janhunen

        Reaction equations given in the abstract would seem to break baryon number conservation: more nucleons on the right-hand side than on the left-hand side.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        I have recently posted the (very speculative) idea that one could use a press for diamond generation from graphite in order to initiate Li-Ni LENR without hydrogen. The absorption of hydrogen increases the pressure inside the lattice dramatically. If that would be its primary function, you could in principle go without it. It is interesting that the authors plan to use such a press as well. With regard to LENR, applying mechanical pressure on a hydrogen-loaded lattice might also be an interesting option. This would be one of the first experiments I would pursue.

    • bachcole

      I hate Facebook. It is chaotic, confusing, disorganized, etc. etc. etc.

      • Pekka Janhunen

        since you mentioned, me too..

        • Bob Greenyer

          I agree, it is being used as a scratchpad by the MFMP at the moment to let people know ASAP what is happening in our thought stream. It does reach many contributors quickly and they can respond quickly – and we are moving quickly.

          We will capture all of the information presented on there into a “Collaborate” Live Open Google Document on the main site in the coming days. You will then see iterations in understanding form realtime there

          I hope that some people will also be able to contribute authorship.

        • bachcole

          I admire your sanity.

      • Bob can feel free to post such postings also in lenr forum, that should be better organized and readable 😉

  • Pekka Janhunen

    Corona is classical (hot, tenuous) plasma without many-body quantum phenomena. Until proven otherwise I believe that CF does not occur in solar corona.

  • Bob can feel free to post such postings also in lenr forum, that should be better organized and readable 😉

  • US_Citizen71

    The diagram above of the winding around the alumina core remind me of a diagram for an air core transformer. I know that it isn’t intended to be a transformer as each winding would be driven by a separate phase of the three phase line power. I would think the interaction of the magnetic flux created by each winding to be an important factor in the operation of the device. To this end I would think the number of turns for each lead and the ratio between them might be very critical as an air core transformer is generally use for frequency tuning.

    From my limited knowledge the coils should induce heating in the core due to the magnetic field interactions, this should be true if nothing else for the iron powder in the fuel. Due to the strength of the current going through each coils I would expect vibration and physical movement of the iron powder as well. This movement beyond possibly causing electrostatic charging of the iron due to it rubbing and impacting other fuel elements and the walls of the reactor might also add a kinetic energy element to the reaction when the iron impacts the nickel lattice molecules. Has anyone to date attempted to model what would happen in the core due to the magnetic flux created?

    • Ted-X

      Perhaps MFMP should consider the reactor to be in a toroidal shape (or an oval). With the toroidal shape the nickel would act as a short-circuited side of a transformer, so the currents in the nickel would be higher. Half or even the whole toroid could have the “solenoid coils” around.
      With the current “stick” shape we have the case of only inductive heating due to the eddy currents.
      Single phase current perhaps should also be considered, sinusoidal or trimmed with a TRIAC (bidirectional triode thyristor).

  • US_Citizen71

    The diagram above of the winding around the alumina core reminds me of a diagram for an air core transformer. I know that it isn’t intended to be a transformer as each winding would be driven by a separate phase of the three phase line power. I would think the interaction of the magnetic flux created by each winding to be an important factor in the operation of the device. To this end I would think the number of turns for each lead and the ratio between them might be very critical as an air core transformer is generally used for frequency tuning.

    From my limited knowledge the coils should induce heating in the core due to the magnetic field interactions, this should be true if nothing else for the iron powder in the fuel. Due to the strength of the current going through each coils I would expect vibration and physical movement of the iron powder as well. This movement beyond possibly causing electrostatic charging of the iron due to it rubbing and impacting other fuel elements and the walls of the reactor might also add a kinetic energy element to the reaction when the iron impacts the nickel lattice molecules. Has anyone to date attempted to model what would happen in the core due to the magnetic flux created?

    • Ted-X

      Perhaps MFMP should consider the reactor to be in a toroidal shape (or an oval). With the toroidal shape the nickel would act as a short-circuited side of a transformer, so the currents in the nickel would be higher. Half or even the whole toroid could have the “solenoid coils” around.
      With the current “stick” shape we have the case of only inductive heating due to the eddy currents.
      Single phase current perhaps should also be considered, sinusoidal or trimmed with a TRIAC (bidirectional triode thyristor).

      • Asterix

        Even better, eliminate the uncertainty of chopped AC waveforms and use a DC supply to heat the thing. No phasor analysis needed– P = IE. For 1.5KW, it’s easy to find a decent bench supply.

        But what are you going to do about the RF that the report says was added as well?

  • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

    That may be true, but then again: isn’t this how the free market works? You have discovered something and have patented it as best as you can. If you did it well, you’re protected. If you didn’t you’re not fully protected. Piantelli and others have patents too, so we will have to wait and see how good Rossi’s patents turn out to be. It may be the case that Rossi has to pay for other people’s IP.

    Now someone comes along and discovers some effect you didn’t see and he/she patents that. You now have no prior registration to that part which may be important for your own discovery. It’s not great, but it is how it works. Fyi: I think the patent system doesn’t work very well, but that is for another discussion.

    Furthermore, the replication of the test is all done on publicly available information so everybody can try this. I’m guessing there will be enough laboratories around the world trying to replicate this test, patents notwithstanding.

  • Gerrit

    JoNP Rossi’s reply to Christopher Calder about a home space heater.

    “It does not work that way. First, we need the safety certification, then we can sell the domestic units. We need several years of proper operation of the industrial application, then there will be the base for a certification protocol. it is true that our 1 MW plants have been put for sale in the late year 2012, but the first plant that has been sold to an industrial Customer and that can generate statistics for the certification is quite recent.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.”

    That last sentence: “The first plant that has been sold _to an industrial customer_ and that can generate statistics for the certification is quite recent”

    Implying either previous plant(s) have been sold to non industrial customers OR no plants were sold previously.

    • US_Citizen71

      There is also a third option an industrial customer that refused to allow it’s statistics foe use to be published anywhere.

  • Gerrit

    JoNP Rossi’s reply to Christopher Calder about a home space heater.

    “It does not work that way. First, we need the safety certification, then we can sell the domestic units. We need several years of proper operation of the industrial application, then there will be the base for a certification protocol. it is true that our 1 MW plants have been put for sale in the late year 2012, but the first plant that has been sold to an industrial Customer and that can generate statistics for the certification is quite recent.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.”

    That last sentence: “The first plant that has been sold _to an industrial customer_ and that can generate statistics for the certification is quite recent”

    Implying either previous plant(s) have been sold to non industrial customers OR no plants were sold previously.

    • Kpar

      I recall reading several months ago that the US Navy had purchased an E-cat for testing. I have not heard anything since.

      True? Not true?

      • psi2u2

        Unknown.

    • US_Citizen71

      There is also a third option an industrial customer that refused to allow statistics of their plant to be published anywhere. Making it unsuitable for safety verification.

  • Obvious

    Best of luck to the MFMP team.
    In the meantime, I was considering the white/orange glow discussion. I think the color temperature “problem” can be tested by some of us quite easily, using some of the “H-Cat” experience we gained a while back. Just run some H or H2 (not ready for that discussion again) into a catalytic convertor (synthetic cordierite), and point a IR camera at the hot spot. Adjust gas flow. Take some pictures. See what happens.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Cheers Obvious

  • Obvious

    Best of luck to the MFMP team.
    In the meantime, I was considering the white/orange glow discussion. I think the color temperature “problem” can be tested by some of us quite easily, using some of the “H-Cat” experience we gained a while back. Just run some H or H2 (not ready for that discussion again) into a catalytic convertor (synthetic cordierite), and point a IR camera at the hot spot. Adjust gas flow. Take some pictures. See what happens.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Cheers Obvious

  • Pekka Janhunen

    No, on the contrary if MFMP openly publishes everything they do (as seems to be their working mode), it prevents further patent trolling because published information is not patentable.

  • Ted-X

    It is not likely that the latest experiment/proof will be sufficient to get a patent. Patents require a significant disclosure, where “a person skilled in the art will be able to duplicate the process”. I doubt if Rossi will disclose the details of the catalyst in the patent application, so the patent may not get a green light for this reason.

    • Obvious

      It need only be possible for the effect to be replicable at all, whether weak or strong, to demonstrate that the process works. A weak replication should be do-able by persons of ordinary skill. Immediate replication an optimized version of the effect would only be likely once the persons become more skilled at basic replication.
      For example, it may be possible to replicate the LED effect, but unlikely that a replication attempt would start with making a blue or UV LED, but rather would be satisfied by making any light at all.

  • Bernie777

    See my answer to Ophelia above. “A negative person only hears what suits them and listens only to respond” Michael P. Watson

  • Bernie777

    What? What does one have to do with the other?

    • bachcole

      You spout conspiracies for which you have no evidence, but you disallow the conspiracies that the skeptopaths have about the positive E-Cat test reports. Why is it that you can have it both ways but you insist that no one else can.

  • This may help replication.

    “The coils of the reactor are made with a proprietary alloy, and the inconel is only a doped component of it.” – Andrea Rossi

    • Bob Greenyer

      Thanks Christopher

  • Thomas Clarke

    No proprietary alloy can give the NTC explain the measured currents vs power in the Lugano report.

    You’d need a crystalline semiconductor like SiC and even then the drop in resistance is unusually strong.

    The statement that Inconel is a doped component does not make much sense since Inconel is not a semiconductor and therefore cannot, as the word is normally used, be doped.

    Whatever, we will learn a lot from the MFMP replication.