New Site: — Looking for Homemade Heat After Death (HAD)

There’s a new LENR replication site on the web — — which is the work of ECW poster Nickec. He is working to figure out ways that a low budget home experimenter might be able to do some basic building and testing of systems that could demonstrate LENR using inexpensive common parts that are readily available to most people.

For example, in conversations I have had with Nickec, he has mentioned the possibility of using a ceramic spark plug insulator as trial reactor vessel, and nichrome ribbon as a heater element.

Here’s part of a recent post:

In the language of LENR “heat-after-death”, or HAD, refers to things staying hotter than expected despite the lack of heat input – meaning that we shut down the heater but the system stays hot. Hmmm. That’s interesting. Can we do something to see that ourselves?

Let’s talk about the simplest possible experiment that might demonstrate HAD. We’re going to need: a reactor; stuff to put in the reactor; an accurate way to track reactor temperature; a heat source; and safety procedures.

The experiment will consist of heating the reactor and only tracking the temperature after removing the external heat source. We do this with an empty reactor multiple times to build confidence we know how it behaves. Then we start adding things inside the same reactor tracking temperature after external heat removal. Doing this multiple times we gather data to analyze.

I think the part about safety is absolutely essential for any person doing experimental work in LENR, especially if you are trying things at home or in the garage. There have been some alarming stories of explosions and meltdowns over the years, and safety is of the utmost importance in doing any kind of work with LENR. Andrea Rossi mentioned on the Journal of Nuclear Physics lately “In a nutshell: replications made by professionals are safe. By not professionals are dangerous.”

I feel sure that if any significant replication breakthrough there will be plenty of people, in labs and in homes, who will want to try and replicate LENR if it can be done relatively simply. I think it could be very possible that a whole ‘LENR Maker’ movement could spring up around the world, like we have seen with such things as computers, 3D printers, drones, etc.

It will be interesting to see if Nickec or others can come up with anything that shows any amount of HAD. It should go without saying, but I hope he, and anyone else exploring this approach take all necessary steps to stay safe.

  • Mats002

    This is a very good idea! And again – safety first!
    Safety is about knowledge. Take aviation for example. It is dangerous, one can fall from high in the sky and be beaten to death. A joke used for learning safety for soaring is:
    Take care – fly slow and low. Well the truth is the opposite – you should fly with good margins and that is high and fast 🙂 but not too fast of course!
    What should I know and consider before the first try?

    • Ged

      Chemicals are dangerous.

  • jousterusa

    For me, the message coming from the posters below, in addition to “safety first” – an axiom Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, Nikolai Tesla, Alexander Graham Bell and Benjamin Franklin did not have, and probably did not practice (I wonder if these inventors put humanity’s needs ahead of personal safety) – is that very soon Rossi’s residential E-Cat will be on the market. not from him but from thousands of eager inventors and entrepreneurs who will say Rossi has had enough time, it’s cold outside, and people need them, so: We’re going to build them ourselves!

    • Ophelia Rump

      Masses of un-named men who worked for them as day laborers took the damage for them.
      Those were glorious days for industry where working for the brilliant man was probably safer than doing building constructions where an average of 35 men died with the construction of every bridge or church.

    • bachcole

      Good points. Isn’t ironic that we care more about people these days than they did 120 years ago, but this means that our safety concerns slow technological development. (This is not to say that technological development has slowed because there orders of magnitude more people working on technological development.)

      • Pekka Janhunen

        In my view we are living in a period of rather slow rate of disruptive inventions. Most effort in recent decades has gone to making Moore’s law happen, and the resulting flow of ICT applications has dominated public attention and fulfilled people’s desire and tolerance for change. The situation might change in the future because in recent years Moore’s law has started to hit the atomic scale boundary. To some extent people may need to be re-educated to recognise disruptive inventions from normal incremental progress.

        • Gerald

          I think you are right except that is normal incremental progress. The cost have gone down exceptional. For a few euro’s I can buy a ardupilotboard with gps g-sensor etc that controls my drone. add a realsense camera from intel and it will fly almost autonomous. Imagine that to the teams entering the darpa challenge 5 years ago. Typing this makes my reallise, maybe the last disruptive invention is internet and we are just starting to use it well. Like the open source ardupilot project and a lot of other startup’s with support of people rather then banks.

  • ronzonni

    It’s important to recognize that heat after death (weird choice of name) should not mean simply that an experiment gains in temperature for a short while after the power is shut off. That could be due to the heat capacity of the heater or a component near it, and remote from where the temperature is measured.

    True heat after death, if you are speaking of a nuclear process, should persist for hours, days, or weeks, depending on the size and weight of the equipment and the amount of whatever is used as a nuclear fuel.

    It’s hard for me to understand why an LENR reactor which makes lots of heat even needs a heater except to start it. It makes its own heat and it makes more than the heater if the COP is greater than 1! So, why wouldn’t any LENR reactor with a COP>1 and especially if it’s insulated, just keep running without adding more heat with an electrical heater?

    Anyway, good idea. I hope there will many participants with positive results.

    • Sanjeev

      Its not hard to understand. Reactor produces heat and the heat produces even more heat, obviously it will be a runaway reaction and result is meltdown. (Which happened btw during the first 3rd party test of Ecat).
      So it must be operated near equilibrium where it cools down enough to stop the runaway and heats up from an external source (electricity) to start again. Rossi is using a controller which switches the power off or on at a rate that prevents runaway.
      I guess that is the only basic technical problem once you have overunity, he used 100 microcontrollers to achieve just this in his 1 MW plant.

      • Ronzonni

        I don’t think so or a conventional light water cooled nuclear fission power plant would be a runaway situation. The way heat sources that make more heat as they get hotter are usually regulated is with coolant or by limiting the flow of fuel. I have never seen or heard of an industrial heat making process which is controlled with a heater! Interestingly, there is no regulation of the heat made by the hot cat and no attempt to remove it for a useful purpose. I have always found that odd.

        Sanjeev, do you know of any other heat source, used for industrial purposes, which is regulated with a heater?

        It’s a small point maybe but note that the early ecats had no microprocessors, just a simple off the shelf temperature controller. And the first megawatt plant was made of early low temperature ecats.

        • Sanjeev

          E-Cat is not a conventional heat source, you can not compare it with conventional technology. It’d be apples and oranges.
          LENR reactions are initiated by heat and the output is heat. Its unique.
          I have no idea why the temperature cannot be controlled by a coolant flow, perhaps it was tried and did not work so well. Its early days of E-Cat, there is a lot of scope of improvement in control technology.

        • Gerard McEk

          I would think so. Maybe a plastic cardridge would do the work. The issue is that the plastic, or the glass as NT suggests, can influence the LENR process. As long as we are not sure how LENR works, we can only try-out the different approaches, but I would first go for no contaminents in the fuel and get it work reliably. Later you can try to find a simpler way of making it work.

          • Gerald

            Thks NT and Gerard, for the experimental fase your right I think. The thing is in the Rossi report there was C in the sample taken from the reactor. This made me think of an organic component in the secret saus. Like packaging the LiAlH4 in an ether or ester.

            From what I know understand you need h2 because it has the most potential energy and the easiest way to harvest neutrons what you need to make the process happening. My chemical and algabra skills are just not good enough to understand the whole process. I’m an IT guy but my mind is just to logical to except that everything is build by a super novas and that suns can produce somethings, Lern happens all around us, then the universe becomes more simple and logical.

      • Albert D. Kallal

        Much agree.

        The “real” issue is if the reaction could keep going, then what would stop it from overheating and melting everything? The “wonderful” aspect here is that you can put some heat into the system, get the reaction going. Pull off that heat source and the reaction “slows down” to the point where you need to again put more heat into the system to get it going again.

        It is the above balance that makes the whole system controllable and POSSILE. This is kind of like trying to heat a match stick with fuel on the end, you want it to burn and produce excess heat, but not ignite the whole thing else it will burn up too fast.

        Recall the “runaway” that P&F experienced by accident.

        I do think eventually we find a better way to “balance” the LENR effect, and when we do the resulting power output will be massive. When this breakthrough occurs, we going to have HUGE outputs from small reactors. Such small reactors will easy be able to power cars etc.

        So it seems LENR reactors under right conditions can produce HUGE amounts of heat, but such heat will destroy everything. Perhaps placing the whole thing in an oil fluid that boils away the excess heat will be a possible solution. In other words, don’t stop the runaway effect, but find a way to take heat out so fast that you don’t have to “stop” or slow down the effect. Such systems should thus be able to “self sustain”.

        As noted, the “self” sustain mode of Rossi reactor is about 2 seconds on, and then about 4 seconds off. When this “regulation” issue is solved, then spectacular outputs of heat will be realized in very small devices.

        Albert D. Kallal
        Edmonton, Alberta Canada

  • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

    I think this could only work if you had a LENR reactor in the first place. Only after there is a successful reaction, HAD can be measured. So you first have to build a LENR capable reactor. If you have a reactor with a proven COP > 1, you can measure HAD. Or is the idea that even though you may not see excess heat, you might be able to see HAD? I would guess that that signal could not be distinguished from the background noise. I don’t think I get the idea behind this.

    I do like the idea of more people trying to build a LENR reactor.

  • BroKeeper

    I think ‘Heat after deactivation’ (HAD) is more descriptive. This open source for LENR development concept is a good idea for serious outdoor bunker inventors rather than garage tinkerers; “Low budget home experimenter” equates to mistakes. Be very careful.

  • BroKeeper

    Is that where the name HADes came from?

    • bachcole

      Yes, as a matter of fact. Look it up in Wikipedia. (:->)

      • BroKeeper

        LOL. Yes, many Christian doctrines have come from Greek mythology.

      • BroKeeper

        Oooops, my OT response just got moderated. 🙂

  • NT

    Yes Gerald, even very small glass Hydrogen gas pellets may work as are currently used in the NIFF laser targets in their Hot Fusion experiments. At any rate glass capsules could be filled with whatever chemicals to later melt/decompose at predetermined temperatures releasing the desired agent in a timely manner. I have suggested these ideas to MFMP previously in threads on this site. Thin hollow laboratory glass is easy to work with and possible to make small glass capsules filled with the desired agent and inserted in the reactor making for a contaminant free environment. There are many forms of glass that melt at different temperatures further enhancing the experimental capabilities…

    • Nicholas Cafarelli

      Do you have links which outline the process you advocate? Any video you have found related to your suggestion would be very helpful to experimenters reading this blog post. Thanks in advance for replying.