Current Science Journal Publishes Special Issue on LENR

Current Science: a Fortnightly Journal of Research, is a peer-reviewed interdisciplinary science journal published twice monthly by the Current Science Association, in collaboration with the Indian Academy of Sciences.

UPDATE (Feb 24, 2015)

The finalized issue on Low Energy Nuclear Reaction has now been published as a special section in the Vol 8, no. 4 issue of Current Science (previously pre-print versions were available). From the preface:

In this special section, we have invited many of the stalwarts in the field of LENR to share their main research findings. The goal of the set of papers is to provide an overview of the field from the experts in each area involved. The objective was not to solicit new work(s) that would of course be important for specialists
in the field, but to provide, in one place, a scholarly introduction to the various developments, including many
of the important references that have been produced over the years. We have allowed the authors of the theory papers to present their models in their own words, rather than having someone else attempt to present them . . .

We believe that this collection of papers constitutes a major review of the field. The observations over the years
confirm the occurrence of not only fusion reactions between the deuterons (d; or protons, p) among themselves,
but even between the hydrogenous isotopes and the metal’ lattice nuclei. These latter type of reactions have
come to be known as LENR transmutation reactions

The finalized contents of this issue are avialable at this link: http://www.currentscience.ac.in/php/feat.php?feature=Special%20Section:%20Low%20Energy%20Nuclear%20Reactions&featid=10094

We learned a few weeks ago that there was an effort taking place in India by certain academics urging the Indian government to begin a cold fusion research program, and it was noted that Current Science would be publishing a special section about LENR. It will be interesting to learn how much attention this publication gets. We have been told that peer reviewed articles are what is needed to get officialdom to take LENR seriously — and this is indeed a peer-reviewed journal — the top interdisciplinary science journal in India, as I understand it.

  • the article by McKubre is a good introduction the the void of current skeptic consensus… facst are to include in the wiki.

    the experiments by Dennis Letts is not new, but the article reveal how interesting it is.

    Articles on Biological transmutations are more fringe, but sure it need to be reproduced

    The article on Iwamura is a good introduction.

    • gdaigle

      Biological transmutations? Remarkable. I wonder how long before someone posits an energy-releasing transmutation as the basis of spontaneous human combustion? 🙂

      • GreenWin

        Both “Pyro” and the “Human Torch” use spontaneous combustion for their super powers. Not to mention Stephen King’s “Firestarter.” Thought this was general knowledge. 🙂

      • ah ah… first replicate the experiments.. I’m far from sure, but who knows. at worst it will be biological enrichment.

        about human combustion, I think it is a well understood phenomenon (thanks to a dumb bandit who killed an old woman by surprise and tried to hide his deeds by burning the body with perfume, and admitted it). it is a candle effect, a bit like barding a roast, covering with a towel, and trying to light it with some alcohol… finally all the meat will be carbonised because the towel, and the fat will behave like a candle.

        if biological transmutation works, my first bet is waste remediation, both nuclear but also chemical remediation

    • Yeah Sanjeev, this article was celebrated at the CF class at MIT today. Gayle Verner was in the class as well. http://www.currentscience.ac.in/php/forthcoming/CS-12.pdf

      Too bad it didn’t make it into the “Tech” at MIT.

      • Sanjeev

        Great.
        The trio doesn’t need any approval from MIT. I’m glad that Current Science has taken the lead now.
        Perhaps more LENR researchers will be now encouraged to submit their findings to Current Science, since there is an unofficial ban on such papers in USA, they have a good opportunity.
        I also hope that this special issue finds its way to the tables of bureaucrats and ministers, who seem to be dependent on random anonymous “peers” to take decisions concerning major issues such as energy.
        There must be a good reason for rounding up such LENR heavy weights in one special issue. Perhaps Srinivasan motivated them and its a part of his plan to push Indian gov into action.

        • Omega Z

          Need provides great inspiration & motivation.
          India is energy starved & dependent on external sources.
          This inspires them to look out side the box & entertain novel ideas.

    • Gerrit

      http://www.currentscience.ac.in/Volumes/108/04/0562.pdf

      “Perform perturbed angular correlation hyperfine magnetic field measurements during heat production at CERN (in discussion)”

    • MasterBlaster7

      Peer-review of the experimental data all well and good. Peer-review of the theory….that is going to get ugly. Still…glad LENR made it into a peer-reviewed journal in some form.

  • the article by McKubre is a good introduction the the void of current skeptic consensus… facst are to include in the wiki.

    the experiments by Dennis Letts is not new, but the article reveal how interesting it is.

    Articles on Biological transmutations are more fringe, but sure it need to be reproduced

    The article on Iwamura is a good introduction.

    • gdaigle

      Biological transmutations? Remarkable. I wonder how long before someone posits an energy-releasing transmutation as the basis of spontaneous human combustion? 🙂

      • GreenWin

        Both “Pyro” and the “Human Torch” use spontaneous combustion for their super powers. Not to mention Stephen King’s “Firestarter.” Thought this was general knowledge. 🙂

      • ah ah… first replicate the experiments.. I’m far from sure, but who knows. at worst it will be biological enrichment.

        about human combustion, I think it is a well understood phenomenon (thanks to a dumb bandit who killed an old woman by surprise and tried to hide his deeds by burning the body with perfume, and admitted it). it is a candle effect, a bit like barding a roast, covering with a towel, and trying to light it with some alcohol… finally all the meat will be carbonised because the towel, and the fat will behave like a candle.

        if biological transmutation works, my first bet is waste remediation, both nuclear but also chemical remediation

      • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

        Ed Storms, unfortunately, speculated on that at one point. Bad Idea.

        Think about it. If LENR is caused by a sort of catalysis, involving setting up a particular spatial environment, proteins can be amazing at that. Vysotskii shows plausible evidence for certain biological transmutations.Unconfirmed. I’m not going to go into all that Biberian covers, none of this is well established at all, but if LENR is real — and it is — it would not be terribly surprising of somewhere, somehow, living organisms figured out how to use it. Not for energy, probably.

  • Pekka Janhunen

    The second paper (Liang) looks novel, they propose that protons fuse with Li6 and that the reaction would have a hitherto unseen resonance at low energy which enables it. They speak about weak interactions taking place, but I didn’t see them proposing any concrete reaction. The obvious one to He4 and He3 would involve only the strong interaction. Potentially interesting paper, but I understood only a small part of it.

    • Ted-X

      Still, nobody seems to pick up the suggestion that the metastable forms of elements could exchange neutrons, as their neutrons (and sometimes protons) are located far beyond the nucleus. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_isomer

      The energy to produce the metastable forms starts in the short-UV range.
      The metastable forms’ interactions could be the key element of LENR.

      • Eyedoc

        Interesting, will that explain the’ Rossi effect ‘ in some way ?? Does that match with the theory of H uptake by Ni ?

    • Andreas Moraitis

      In the cited experiments the ratio of 7Li/6Li was increased, which would be in accordance with the proposed theory. But in the Lugano test just the opposite happened. Maybe this apparent contradiction results from a fundamental difference between the conditions in Pd and Ni lattices. Anyway, it illustrates once more the strangeness of this sort of reactions.

      • BroKeeper

        Like chemistry an innumerable possibilities.

        • Axil Axil

          I am always especially excited to see a laser based experiment that produces highly reproducible LENR active results. As Peter points out in this thread, these results are described in this experimental series referenced in the paper as follows:

          http://www.currentscience.ac.in/php/forthcoming/CS-3.pdf

          Highly reproducible LENR experiments using dual laser stimulation,

          When light is made to trigger positive LENR results, the LENR mechanism is strictly Nanoplasmonic in nature.

          In 2002, Peter Hagelstein suggested that dual (red) lasers might be effective in triggering excess power if operated in difference mode around 8 and 15 THz.

          I wonder why this theory wasn’t developed further when the series of nanoplasmonic experiments showed consistent reproducible results.

          If the nanoplasmonic trail was followed and developed further, if this new field of study in science was not identified and studied further, this shows a serious lack of problem solving technique on the part of leading LENR theorists.

          It’s only common sense…when we smell smoke in a house, you go from room to room looking for the source. Please focus people. In scattered brain distraction, we don’t decide to take a walk in the woods because its a sunny day.

          Repeatable positive LENR experimental results are so rare and precious, not even one can be ignored, everyone must be doggedly studied, with its theoretical implications correlated relentlessly and tirelessly leading to new experimental tests until the root of LENR causation is found.

          This lack of concentration on positive results is at the root of LENR’s theoretical failures.

          • LCD

            8-15 Thz would correspond to very low temperatures like 5-50 Kelvin. This would seem to contradict the rossi effect right? What does the new paper say about the lasers used? I’m not getting time to read these things anymore.

          • Axil Axil

            In my opinion, the 8-15 Thz posit is a red herring. The beat technique
            is not effective.

            IMHO, all that experimental setup processing that the
            experimenters were going through was just producing a fair amount of gold and palladium nano particles floating in the water. As the surface of the cathode decomposed The frequencies of the lasers that the experiment was using matched the maximum reflection frequency of light from gold.

            In other words, the lasers were productivly creating SPPs on the surface
            of the gold nano particles. The experiment would have worked just as
            well if the experimenters just added some gold nano particles to water,
            then illuminated them with laser light at the frequencies they were
            using.

            This gold nano particle type experiment was done here

            http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1112/1112.6276.pdf

          • note that using temperature to jude of that is not good.
            it is monochromatic and coherent like a Laser/Maser

          • Andreas Moraitis

            How about combining a laser with an ultrasound signal of the same phase and wavelength?

          • Axil Axil

            These photonic systems are like a radio. The frequency of the light must be resonant with the type of transition metal because of the reflective resonance of the metal used and the size of the particles.

            Gold and silver need visible light and nano particles. Nickel needs infrared light and micro-particles.

          • Alan DeAngelis

            India was on the right track in 1989.
            From page 49 of Frank Close’s 1991 book Too Hot to Handle. http://www.amazon.com/Too-Hot-
            “…Tritium is an essential fuel in thermonuclear weapons; it is also a product of dd fusion – the very process that the Utah chemists claimed to be able to make happen inexpensively in a test tube. The US military were already spending vast sums on making tritium for warheads and the
            reactors that were used for this process had been closed, pending repairs, in 1988 as a result of nervousness about reactor safety following the Chernobyl accident. The repair and building new reactors would cost billions of dollars, so when test-tube fusion entered the scene the military took note at once, recognizing the potential of test-tube fusion as a source of much-needed tritium. This sort of application of test-tube fusion also impressed Indian Government scientists who decided that western nations would soon classify test-tube fusion as a secret; thus India mounted an immediate test-tube fusion research effort so as to ‘get in on the ground floor’….”

          • Andreas Moraitis

            If so, there might be a huge potential for optimization by varying the shape and spatial orientation of the ‘antennas’, adding reflectors etc. Using powder would look like a ‘brute force’ approach where most of the deployed resources are wasted.

        • Sanjeev

          Where can I get more info ? Any website ? contacts?
          Is it LENR ?

          I tried to get the info from you a few times in past. But it seems you post one line comments everywhere, without getting into any discussions.

  • Pekka Janhunen

    The second paper (Liang) looks novel, they propose that protons fuse with Li6 and that the reaction would have a hitherto unseen resonance at low energy which enables it. They speak about weak interactions taking place, but I didn’t see them proposing any concrete reaction. The obvious one to He4 and He3 would involve only the strong interaction. Potentially interesting paper, but I understood only a small part of it.

    • Ted-X

      Still, nobody seems to pick up the suggestion that the metastable forms of elements could exchange neutrons, as their neutrons (and sometimes protons) are located far beyond the nucleus. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_isomer

      The energy to produce the metastable forms starts in the short-UV range.
      The metastable forms’ interactions could be the key element of LENR.

      • Eyedoc

        Interesting, will that explain the’ Rossi effect ‘ in some way ?? Does that match with the theory of H uptake by Ni ?

    • Andreas Moraitis

      In the cited experiments the ratio of 7Li/6Li was increased, which would be in accordance with the proposed theory. But in the Lugano test just the opposite happened. Maybe this apparent contradiction results from a fundamental difference between the conditions in Pd and Ni lattices. Anyway, it illustrates once more the strangeness of this sort of reactions.

      • Brokeeper

        Like chemistry an innumerable possibilities.

  • georgehants

    Many congratulations to this Wonderful Indian premier science journal.
    Wonderful day!

    • GreenWin

      I posted a note of congratulations to our engineering friend Andy Kumar. Had Andy not been educated in the USA, he might be pioneering LENR in India. Maybe he’ll evangelize cold fusion in the States now his homeland has taken a lead. 🙂 Wonderful day indeed!

  • Gerrit

    everyone of us should post this on their social media with a caption like “Major Indian peer reviewed journal “Current Science” publishes special edition on cold fusion”

  • Gerrit

    everyone of us should post this on their social media with a caption like “Major Indian peer reviewed journal “Current Science” publishes special edition on cold fusion”

  • Brokeeper

    These articles are advance at the LENR technology bleeding edge. It merits a position in the KB
    thread as a valuable resource.

    With the prominence of Indian scientists within the western world this special LENR section could enhance its exposure and legitimacy to their scientific communities. It’s just a matter of time before it reaches the MSM, perhaps even before the conclusion of the customer’s test. A very interesting year this is becoming.

  • Gerrit

    MFMP should forward one copy to Ed Davey. “Should peer reviewed evidence of a reproducible LENR process be released …”.

    • GreenWin

      Ed Davey and the Met Office climate gang are disinterested in a real solution to climate. It would kill their golden goose.

  • Gerrit

    MFMP should forward one copy to Ed Davey. “Should peer reviewed evidence of a reproducible LENR process be released …”
    Dennis Letts: “Highly reproducible LENR experiments using dual laser stimulation”

    • GreenWin

      Ed Davey and the Met Office climate gang are disinterested in a real solution to climate. It would kill their golden goose.

  • winebuff67

    The thing that will make intro of commercial products will be competition. Right now there really isnt any so IH and rossi can take their time do more R/D and refine their products.

  • GreenWin

    Eeegads! Rossi fan Andy Kumar’s homeland is leading the world in a technology he’s been educated (in the USA) to disbelieve!! Congratulations Andy!! 🙂

  • Yeah Sanjeev, this article was celebrated at the CF class at MIT today. Gayle Verner was in the class as well. http://www.currentscience.ac.in/php/forthcoming/CS-12.pdf

    Too bad it didn’t make it into the “Tech” at MIT.

    • Sanjeev

      Great.
      The trio doesn’t need any approval from MIT. I’m glad that Current Science has taken the lead now.
      Perhaps more LENR researchers will be now encouraged to submit their findings to Current Science, since there is an unofficial ban on such papers in USA, they have a good opportunity.
      I also hope that this special issue finds its way to the tables of bureaucrats and ministers, who seem to be dependent on random anonymous “peers” to take decisions concerning major issues such as energy.
      There must be a good reason for rounding up such LENR heavy weights in one special issue. Perhaps Srinivasan motivated them and its a part of his plan to push Indian gov into action.

      • Omega Z

        Need provides great inspiration & motivation.
        India is energy starved & dependent on external sources.
        This inspires them to look out side the box & entertain novel ideas.

  • Axil Axil

    Reference:

    Microbial transmutation of Cs-137 and LENR in growing biological systems

    V. I. Vysotskii and A. A. Kornilova

    There has been a long tradition of detecting LENR activity using changes in the radiation output and change of radioactive isotope half-life in LENR experimentation as an indicator of positive LENR activity over the decades mostly used by Russian LENR researchers.

    This LENR detection technique is more sensitive and less complicated than the rigmarole that one must go through to show positive LENR activity using excess heat.

    I suggest that the upcoming MFMP Hot Cat and Piantelli replications add a radioactive tracer to the fuel load so that a safe level of radioactive tracer radiation is detected just outside of the reactor structure. When the level of radiation falls, LENR is active.

    It has recently been suggested that relativistic time dilatation regarding subatomic particles plays a role in the LENR process. If true, this would lead to a reduction of radiation levels produced by the radioactive isotope tracer when the LENR process is active. This is a tried and true experimental method to detect LENR activity. This LENR detection indicator will be a more sensitive indicator to use in detecting very weak LENR activity than will excess heat detection.

  • Axil Axil

    Reference:

    Microbial transmutation of Cs-137 and LENR in growing biological systems

    V. I. Vysotskii and A. A. Kornilova

    There has been a long tradition of detecting LENR activity using changes in the radiation output and change of radioactive isotope half-life in LENR experimentation as an indicator of positive LENR activity over the decades mostly used by Russian LENR researchers.

    This LENR detection technique is more sensitive and less complicated than the rigmarole that one must go through to show positive LENR activity using excess heat.

    I suggest that the upcoming MFMP Hot Cat and Piantelli replications add a radioactive tracer to the fuel load so that a safe level of radioactive tracer radiation is detected just outside of the reactor structure. When the level of radiation falls, LENR is active.

    It has recently been suggested that relativistic time dilatation regarding subatomic particles plays a role in the LENR process. If true, this would lead to a reduction of radiation levels produced by the radioactive isotope tracer when the LENR process is active. This is a tried and true experimental method to detect LENR activity. This LENR detection indicator will be a more sensitive indicator to use in detecting very weak LENR activity than will excess heat detection.

  • Axil Axil

    I am always especially excited to see a laser based experiment that produces highly reproducible LENR active results. As Peter points out in this thread, these results are described in this experimental series referenced in the paper as follows:

    http://www.currentscience.ac.in/php/forthcoming/CS-3.pdf

    Highly reproducible LENR experiments using dual laser stimulation,

    When light is made to trigger positive LENR results, the LENR mechanism is strictly Nanoplasmonic in nature.

    In 2002, Peter Hagelstein suggested that dual (red) lasers might be effective in triggering excess power if operated in difference mode around 8 and 15 THz.

    I wonder why this theory wasn’t developed further when the series of nanoplasmonic experiments showed consistent reproducible results.

    If the nanoplasmonic trail was followed and developed further, if this new field of study in science was not identified and studied further, this shows a serious lack of problem solving technique on the part of leading LENR theorists.

    It’s only common sense…when we smell smoke in a house, you go from room to room looking for the source. Please focus people. In scattered brain distraction, we don’t decide to take a walk in the woods because its a sunny day.

    Repeatable positive LENR experimental results are so rare and precious, not even one can be ignored, everyone must be doggedly studied, with its theoretical implications correlated relentlessly and tirelessly leading to new experimental tests until the root of LENR causation is found.

    This lack of concentration on positive results is at the root of LENR’s theoretical failures.

    • LCD

      8-15 Thz would correspond to very low temperatures like 5-50 Kelvin. This would seem to contradict the rossi effect right? What does the new paper say about the lasers used? I’m not getting time to read these things anymore.

      • Axil Axil

        In my opinion, the 8-15 Thz posit is a red herring. The beat technique
        is not effective.

        IMHO, all that experimental setup processing that the
        experimenters were going through was just producing a fair amount of gold and palladium nano particles floating in the water. As the surface of the cathode decomposed The frequencies of the lasers that the experiment was using matched the maximum reflection frequency of light from gold.

        In other words, the lasers were productivly creating SPPs on the surface
        of the gold nano particles. The experiment would have worked just as
        well if the experimenters just added some gold nano particles to water,
        then illuminated them with laser light at the frequencies they were
        using.

        This gold nano particle type experiment was done here

        http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1112/1112.6276.pdf

      • note that using temperature to jude of that is not good.
        it is monochromatic and coherent like a Laser/Maser

    • Andreas Moraitis

      How about combining a laser with an ultrasound signal of the same phase and wavelength?

      • Axil Axil

        These photonic systems are like a radio. The frequency of the light must be resonant with the type of transition metal because of the reflective resonance of the metal used and the size of the particles.

        Gold and silver need visible light and nano particles. Nickel needs infrared light and micro-particles.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          If so, there might be a huge potential for optimization by varying the shape and spatial orientation of the ‘antennas’, adding reflectors etc. Using powder would look like a ‘brute force’ approach where most of the deployed resources are wasted.

    • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

      Money, Axil. Letts did the dual laser experimental work, in his home lab. He has limited resources. Why wasn’t this work replicated? Well, Storms says he tried and it didn’t work. On the other hand, there are signs that Storms really did not understand how to do it. I listed the dual laser work as one of the outstanding prospects for replication. That is, technically, Phase II work in the classification of research proposals I’ve been asserting. Phase I is work that is done to *confirm with increased accuracy and attention to detail,* work that is already confirmed. Phase II will set up more exploratory work, including confirmation of primary results, like Letts dual laser. Letts claims that this is a reproducible effect, but what that really means is that it was reliable *in his hands.* That’s not quite enough!

  • Nicholas Chandler-Yates

    I’ve started discussion on the Wikipedia Talk page about this, and about changing the status of that article from pathological science back to fringe science as a result. Any comments from any of you guys on that would be great.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cold_fusion#Current_Science_Journal_Has_Special_Section_on_LENR_in_upcoming_issue

    • Gerrit

      I see that user “Manul” is warning you about making personal attacks towards him. That is a first step into getting you topic banned from editing “cold fusion” articles. They will also find “proof” of a “battlefield mentality”, “pov pushing”, “wasting everybody’s time in endless discussions”, “being pointy” or whatever they can find. In future he will use this “proof” in a Arbcom case against you to ban you from editing “cold fusion” articles. The case will be supported by user “Ten of all trades” or any other user on the “holy protectors of only one wikipedia truth” tag team.

      • Nicholas Chandler-Yates

        I’m not going to post anything else till after the 10th when the articles are published, back me up if you could though, I’ve got no chance by myself.
        My goal is to get the issue of fringe vs pathological science raised again.

        • good struggle.

          or you can wait 6month until they pay you to update their pages.

          Please keep hardcopy of the discussions… I want evidences for the ICC.

        • Gerrit

          Watch your steps, when you start to have little successes they will get rid of you. You have recognized you have no chance by yourself, so maybe your task is to survive long enough until others will come along.

          • Nicholas Chandler-Yates

            Well I’ve been Editing these pages for ages now and there have been no threats to remove me… Plenty of just straight up ignoring me and straw man arguments, ad hominem attacks on sources etc though.

    • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

      Great. You made some assumptions. First of all, the complete list of papers has not yet been shown. The list is now longer than when this thread was begun. Secondly, those papers are technically not yet published. Third, you will find, even though policy and precedent theoretically makes a peer-reviewed review of the field “golden,” Storms (2010) didn’t make a dent. I got it classified as reliable source, one of my last efforts there before I was topic banned. For being successful in dealing with cold fusion issues per policy. There is a huge history there, I’d suggest studying it before diving in naively.

      I’m seeing how you argue, and can predict that, if you remain clueless, you will be blocked or banned rapidly. Contact me by email. You can do it through the Wikipedia interface, user Abd, or you could actually work on the Wikiversity cold fusion resource, which does not have the problems of the Wikipedia article. Conserve your energy. Stop pushing. All it would take is a few editors who know Wikipedia procedures, and who are disciplined about it, and neutrality could be restored, fully within policy. A critical mass of those editors has never assembled.

      And, yes, every article was peer-reviewed. I have an article pending, and the reviewer was not favorable, at first. I had to establish what I was saying, beyond reasonable doubt. Some of the articles seem not so great. That’s the luck of the draw. Anyone that thinks that just because something is in a peer-reviewed journal, it is sound, is dreaming. However, this is a major event. They will, of course, try to shoot down Current Science. They will come up with a farrago of arguments, none of this is new. If you answer the arguments, you will be seen as tendentious, though, in fact, they are *tendentious as hell.* But they know Wikipedia and how the community works (and does not work.) You don’t.

      I looked at your contributions. WP:SPA. You are dead meat if you continue. Come to Wikiversity, get some wiki experience, be useful, and keep your Wikipedia account intact, it could be useful in the future.

  • NCY

    I’ve started discussion on the Wikipedia Talk page about this, and about changing the status of that article from pathological science back to fringe science as a result. Any comments from any of you guys on that would be great.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cold_fusion#Current_Science_Journal_Has_Special_Section_on_LENR_in_upcoming_issue

    • Gerrit

      I see that user “Manul” is warning you about making personal attacks towards him. That is a first step into getting you topic banned from editing “cold fusion” articles. They will also find “proof” of a “battlefield mentality”, “pov pushing”, “wasting everybody’s time in endless discussions”, “being pointy” or whatever they can find. In future he will use this “proof” in a Arbcom case against you to ban you from editing “cold fusion” articles. The case will be supported by user “Ten of all trades” or any other user on the “holy protectors of only one wikipedia truth” tag team.

      • NCY

        I’m not going to post anything else till after the 10th when the articles are published, back me up if you could though, I’ve got no chance by myself.
        My goal is to get the issue of fringe vs pathological science raised again.

        • good struggle.

          or you can wait 6month until they pay you to update their pages.

          Please keep hardcopy of the discussions… I want evidences for the ICC.

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            There is no practical danger of on-wiki discussions disappearing, unless they are on pages that can be deleted. Even those can be recovered with relative ease if needed. However, Talk:Cold fusion will be archived periodically, so older discussions will be in the archive. Sometimes discussion is blanked, but it should be readable in page history.

        • Gerrit

          Watch your steps, when you start to have little successes they will get rid of you. You have recognized you have no chance by yourself, so maybe your task is to survive long enough until others will come along.

          • NCY

            Well I’ve been Editing these pages for ages now and there have been no threats to remove me… Plenty of just straight up ignoring me and straw man arguments, ad hominem attacks on sources etc though.

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            Nicholas, I looked at your account. This is one of the first things they will do. First edit June 2014, to Energy catalyzer. You have a total of 145 edits. 90% are to talk pages. Almost all edits are to fringe articles, i.e, Cold fusion and Energy Catalyzer.

            There have been no threats to remove you because you haven’t yet seriously disturbed them, yet. 7 months is not “ages.”

            Looking at your talk page, you had an immediate warning from Arthur Rubin. You don’t know how unusual that is. Then, there was a discretionary sanctions notice. Again, most editors won’t *ever* see one of those. However, with Cold fusion, you have only made one article edit. Recently reverted, I think. Someone is going to look at the heavy Talk and warn you for discussing the topic, and continually pushing a particular point of view.

            Topics may be discussed on Wikiversity, and educational resources may be built there. Wikiversity handles neutrality through inclusion, not through exclusion as on Wikipedia. There should be sister wiki links in these articles. There aren’t. Do you have any idea why? It’s not because they were never added!

          • NCY

            it does not help the wikipedia article much if all the rational discussion occurs on wikiversity. I must say though, fantastic article you guys have over there.

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            Spoken like a true non-Wikipedian. To understand this could take some years of experience there. Wikipedia is not a discussion forum, period. It’s an encyclopedia, with a process that can seem easy, if there is no controversy. When there is controversy, particularly long-entrenched controversy, the process is arcane and unreliable.

            As to Wikiversity, we don’t have articles, as such. We have educational resources, and that includes learning-by-doing. One may create original research projects there, seminars, and discussion pages. There are techniques that may not be obvious as to how to do this and maintain neutrality, but admins and experienced users will help you. There are many, many pages in the Wikiversity cold fusion resource. Many are undeveloped, or messy. There is plenty of room for people to help out. We have had some great work done by a skeptic there. He raised issues that had never been raised clearly, and I was able to go to the experts and get answers.

            You have missed the point about sister wikis. Perhaps you should look them up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikimedia_sister_projects

            There is a possibility that has rarely been used. It is possible to develop a Wikiversity “article” on Cold fusion, that could then be presented on Wikipedia as an RfC for an immediate and total transformation. It was done with the article on Optics, though that was developed in user space on Wikisource by an editor banned at the time. Wikiversity is about perfect for this kind of thing.

            But it’s a lot of work! I’d help. I’m not about to do it alone.

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            Basic strategy: shut up until you have backup. Realize that the Wikipedia cold fusion article is maintained by a faction that is heavily committed, from years of editing, to the position that the whole thing is nonsense. And that faction is supported by the general “skeptical” faction, the anti-pseudoscience, anti-bunkum, anti-spiritual, anti-fringe-anything faction. So they will get help from editors who have no idea at all about cold fusion except what they learn from the article. So if you run into problems, think you understand what *supposed to happen* on Wikipedia, and go to a noticeboard, you are dead meat. That is what happened to Nicholas. Experienced editors never take things to the Administrators noticeboard/Incidents unless they know the politics and expect to win. It’s a train wreck, typically.

            However, there are things you can do. That is why I suggest consulting with those who know how Wikipedia works. I know. I’m banned *precisely because I knew*, and used the process with high success. Eventually the faction actually recognized the danger to their agenda.

            (There was another editor who understood process, Pcarbonn. He was topic-banned just before I became aware of the situation. He had done *nothing wrong.* That’s a clue.)

            However, they won’t think of it that way. They think of themselves simply as being right. They actually *lose* when full dispute resolution process is used, the general community does *not* support their agenda, and their view of cold fusion has not been supported in the journals for well over a decade, but they mostly avoid situations ever getting to that point.

            They have years of experience at this.

        • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

          You and a dozen editors have made the same mistake. If those who “back you up” are also SPAs, they will simply block/ban all of you. There is a way to improve the coverage. This is not it. Contact me. I’m banned, but I know the system, and know what can be done. And please come to Wikiversity. I’m not describing what can be done, here. You could make a difference on Wikiversity. And that could fairly rapidly shift the Wikipedia article.

          It is all perfectly within policy.

    • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

      Great. You made some assumptions. First of all, the complete list of papers has not yet been shown. The list is now longer than when this thread was begun. Secondly, those papers are technically not yet published. Third, you will find, even though policy and precedent theoretically makes a peer-reviewed review of the field “golden,” Storms (2010) didn’t make a dent. I got it classified as reliable source, one of my last efforts there before I was topic banned. For being successful in dealing with cold fusion issues per policy. There is a huge history there, I’d suggest studying it before diving in naively.

      I’m seeing how you argue, and can predict that, if you remain clueless, you will be blocked or banned rapidly. Contact me by email. You can do it through the Wikipedia interface, user Abd, or you could actually work on the Wikiversity cold fusion resource, which does not have the problems of the Wikipedia article. Conserve your energy. Stop pushing. All it would take is a few editors who know Wikipedia procedures, and who are disciplined about it, and neutrality could be restored, fully within policy. A critical mass of those editors has never assembled.

      And, yes, every article was peer-reviewed. I have an article pending, and the reviewer was not favorable, at first. I had to establish what I was saying, beyond reasonable doubt. Some of the articles seem not so great. That’s the luck of the draw. Anyone that thinks that just because something is in a peer-reviewed journal, it is sound, is dreaming. However, this is a major event. They will, of course, try to shoot down Current Science. They will come up with a farrago of arguments, none of this is new. If you answer the arguments, you will be seen as tendentious, though, in fact, they are *tendentious as hell.* But they know Wikipedia and how the community works (and does not work.) You don’t.

      I looked at your contributions. WP:SPA. You are dead meat if you continue. Come to Wikiversity, get some wiki experience, be useful, and keep your Wikipedia account intact, it could be useful in the future.

  • georgehants

    The Hindu – Business line
    Do not forget the ‘other’ nuclear
    M Ramesh
    http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/science/do-not-forget-the-other-nuclear/article6818560.ece

    • suhas R

      The only known working research reactor in India is in private sector . The 72 year old
      Inventor of Rubiit from Mumbai India -Post-graduate in Physics & Electronics who has researched & worked in Ultrasonics field for 47 years in India and abroad
      Expresses doubts but has not given up hopes about backing by the Indian theoretical science community and subsequently by Investors.
      He has long association with BARC, Nuclear fuel, Aerospace, Auto & steel Industry.

      RUBIITPOWER Invention Includes Solid –state foam Matrix which comprises Hybrid ceramic material as main body of Heating element that is porous to multi-element Titanium micro-powder fuel which is ionized or polarized with electro-magnetic field.
      The multi-element Titanium Fuel is processed earlier by using Proprietory
      Rubiit – Resonant Ultrasonic Bubble Implosion Implantation technology –
      to achieve the designed characterstics. Interaction between fuel and Dopant at designed temperature and pressure releases Heat energy .
      The resulting steam can be converted to electrical energy or can be used for heating purpose in Industries.
      Optmisation of materials and material morphology is being further researched
      by Rubiitpower for quality and efficiency of higher heat release.

      The Invention follows the three part (Cavity, Tunneling, Spring) combined
      Rubiitpower Cavity Spring theory that explains and confirms the practicability of
      the Invention. Theorotically Fifty grams of the Hybrid Titanium multi-element
      fuel in Multi-cavity reactor is capable of releasing over 100000 kwH produced
      @ 40 paise / kwH (one US dollar=60rupees=6000paise)with approx Investment of Rs 5crore (under one million dollar)per Megawatthour
      which is very much cheaper than Nuclear,Solar, Thermal & oil/gas based power
      without any pollution.
      The concept prototype has been tested for stable5kwh equivalent for over a month fifteen months back.

      • Sanjeev

        Where can I get more info ? Any website ? contacts?
        Is it LENR ?

        I tried to get the info from you a few times in past. But it seems you post one line comments everywhere, without getting into any discussions.

  • Nicholas Chandler-Yates

    it does not help the wikipedia article much if all the rational discussion occurs on wikiversity. I must say though, fantastic article you guys have over there.

    • Gerrit

      [copied comment over from other thread]

      In the paper from SKINR it is mentioned that there are discussions with CERN to do some measurements there.

      SKINR is also cooperating with ENEA, Frascati lab.

      Interesting to read about the work at SKINR.

      • georgehants

        Wayne M, thank you for your opinion, I note you say nothing about the proven corruption and incompetence of Western science regarding Cold Fusion, versus the open science in the East, shall we just hide it.

        • bachcole

          I am going to have to side with WayneM on this one. The world is not black and white. Notice that Rossi came to the USA, sort of a refugee from the Mafia. He didn’t flee to Russia or China or India. The USA/UK clearly have the best scientists in the world with regard to subjects that are accepted and in the mainstream. It is paradigm shifting nimbleness where we are retarded. And it is not just our scientists. I had a 17 year old boy who doesn’t know $H1T from Shinola about hardly anything, particularly cold fusion, say that he didn’t believe cold fusion. If it is outside of the dominant paradigm, we seem lost and confused. If it is inside the dominant paradigm, we do really, really well.

          • georgehants

            Roger, I agree the World is not black and white.

          • Observer

            It is the effervescent wave and not the peak of the Gaussian that overcomes barriers. The majority rules, but it does not lead.

            The East promotes uniformity and consensus while the west promotes individuality and diversity. If you want new disruptive technologies, look to the mavericks.

          • georgehants

            Wayne, not the place to get into every political aspect and I am sure I would agree with you on many of them, I think, suffice to say many problems all over the World.
            Our particular problem is the known and provable way that Cold Fusion has been handled in the West compared to now, certain areas of the East.

        • Omega Z

          George
          Greed & Corruption are a human ailment. It is not monopolized by either East nor West, Rich or Poor, Capitalist or Communist. It is just part of the human element at all levels. Like flipping a coin heads or tails. There is little variation among society as a whole.
          I have to agree with Wayne. “It’s closer to 50 shades of grey”

          I would also note that While You & I are trying to make ends meet, In vast parts of the world, You & I are a part of that Rich, Corrupt, Greedy part of society. We have more then our share.

          It’s just a matter of perspective. As is your view of LENR in the West. If you make a list, you would find there is probably as much or more going on in the U.S. as all the rest of the world combined. I think when the time comes, this will become apparent. But this wont happen until it hits the tipping point.(Probably when the Pilot plant is confirmed positive) In the mean time, you wont hear much.

          • georgehants

            Omega, thank you, while you guys continue to try and hide and excuse the total corruption of much of science in the West, I shall continue to put up the Truth.
            The Fact that all of humanity needs to escape from the Evils we see around us every day is no reason for trying to make out the Western science is in any way not responsible for it’s crimes.
            It would help if you and others stopped helping to cover-up these proven actions and joined me in trying to make sure such things are publicised and removed.
            Tolerance of such crimes is helping to perpetuate them in many areas of science.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      The milestone event was when Rossi got his safety certificate. North Carolina will be powered by LENR (where or not there are peer reviewed papers).

      • Alan DeAngelis

        ..whether or not..
        It’s time to go to bed.

  • Gerrit

    [copied comment over from other thread]

    In the paper from SKINR it is mentioned that there are discussions with CERN to do some measurements there.

    SKINR is also cooperating with ENEA, Frascati lab.

    Interesting to read about the work at SKINR.

  • georgehants

    What is so important is that the Wonderful Indian and Russian scientists etc. and industry dominate the World in Cold Fusion sales.
    The closed-minded, incompetent, corrupt, secret and censored West hopefully will be buying all their Cold Fusion from countries that deserve the profit.
    I have no wish to see Mr. Rossi or IH become mega rich, just that Mr. Rossi receives full recognition and reward for his amazing fight for Cold Fusion against the unbelievable incompetent science in the West.
    Egomaniac main-line science in the West will I think do everything it can to make sure that Mr. Rossi et al receive no recognition of any kind for their True scientific work, while the best the crazy establishment West can do is send toy trucks to Mars, dream of lassoing asteroids etc.etc etc. while millions are suffering and dying on this Earth. Bravo.

    • bachcole

      I fear that the intellectual elites will get the wrong message, which would be: “The West is falling, we have to strengthen our science education, boo woo.” We, the peanut gallery, must get the message out to them and to society at large that the problem wasn’t not enough science but rather too many scientists being on pedestals and liking it, that science is not about scientists but rather about the scientific method and curiosity and having the common decency to listen to other people and at least respecting the possibility that their observations might be valid and theory may be wrong.

      • georgehants

        Roger in the old days one might be forgiven in believing that is was our governments and teachers who should be teaching the populations your good lessons.
        Now governments and most teachers are just more of the incompetent, corrupt establishment passing on the perpetuating humanitarian failures that they and many of us have come to except as normal.

        • Obvious

          And for the most part, this is all the normal, boring people need. Otherwise they will feel like misfits. The real misfits, on the other hand, want or need something more. The best misfits work to find what they need/want, against the odds. And slowly normal improves.

    • WayneM

      Would you please take a closer look at the “East” and stop gratuitously bashing the “‘West”? Most of the East, including the Middle East, are odious dictatorships. With the partial exception of Russia; most of the technology they have was created by the West.

      The world is not black and white. It’s closer to 50 shades of grey. 😉

      • georgehants

        Wayne M, thank you for your opinion, I note you say nothing about the proven corruption, censoring and incompetence of Western science regarding Cold Fusion, versus the open science in the East, shall we just hide it.

        • bachcole

          I am going to have to side with WayneM on this one. The world is not black and white. Notice that Rossi came to the USA, sort of a refugee from the Mafia. He didn’t flee to Russia or China or India. The USA/UK clearly have the best scientists in the world with regard to subjects that are accepted and in the mainstream. It is paradigm shifting nimbleness where we are retarded. And it is not just our scientists. I had a 17 year old boy who doesn’t know $H1T from Shinola about hardly anything, particularly cold fusion, say that he didn’t believe cold fusion. If it is outside of the dominant paradigm, we seem lost and confused. If it is inside the dominant paradigm, we do really, really well.

          • georgehants

            Roger, I agree the World is not black and white, it is many Wonderful colours.

          • Observer

            It is the effervescent wave and not the peak of the Gaussian that overcomes barriers. The majority rules, but it does not lead.

            The East promotes uniformity and consensus while the west promotes individuality and diversity. If you want new disruptive technologies, look to the mavericks.

        • WayneM

          I generally agree with you that that academia’s treatment of LENR and P&F, in particular, was outrageously unjust. Especially in light of the fact that LENR is a real phenomenon.

          However, the East, in so many respects, is more corrupt and incompetent than the West. For example, just look at the horrible degradation of women in some of those countries. Women are at the level of furniture. It just doesn’t compare to the ill treatment of P&F.

          Regardless, I don’t believe that Russia is more ‘open’ than the West when they invade other countries and feed their citizens with non-stop propaganda. In spite of my reservations, I hope your right.

          • georgehants

            Wayne, not the place to get into every political aspect and I am sure I would agree with you on many of them, I think, suffice to say many problems all over the World.
            Our particular problem is the known and provable way that Cold Fusion has been handled in the West compared to now, in certain areas of the East.

        • Omega Z

          George
          Greed & Corruption are a human ailment. It is not monopolized by either East nor West, Rich or Poor, Capitalist or Communist. It is just part of the human element at all levels. Like flipping a coin heads or tails. There is little variation among society as a whole.
          I have to agree with Wayne. “It’s closer to 50 shades of grey”

          I would also note that While You & I are trying to make ends meet, In vast parts of the world, You & I are a part of that Rich, Corrupt, Greedy part of society. We have more then our share.

          It’s just a matter of perspective. As is your view of LENR in the West. If you make a list, you would find there is probably as much or more going on in the U.S. as all the rest of the world combined. I think when the time comes, this will become apparent. But this wont happen until it hits the tipping point.(Probably when the Pilot plant is confirmed positive) In the mean time, you wont hear much.

          • georgehants

            Omega, thank you, while you guys continue to try and hide and excuse the total corruption of much of science in the West, I shall continue to put up the Truth.
            The Fact that all of humanity needs to escape from the Evils we see around us every day is no reason for trying to make out that Western science is in any way not responsible for it’s crimes.
            It would help if you and others stopped helping to cover-up these proven actions and joined me in trying to make sure such things are publicised and removed.
            Tolerance of such crimes is helping to perpetuate them in many areas of science.
            ——–
            We, being part of the privileged rich is more of a reason for us to change that unfair and unequal situation, not just tolerate it. I think.
            Please give a reason for why you think any Cold Fusion Research should be hidden, allowing countries like the UK to go ahead spending billions on new Nuclear power stations, without allowing for the possibility that Cold Fusion could save building these semi-safe bombs in the middle of residential areas.
            Respects

  • Job001

    Good points all! It seems two excellent cases can be made for corruption increasing where wealth is excessively concentrated and decreasing where necessary for success to occur. Like the GINI index, there is an optimum range between unmotivated pure socialist vacuum and absolute power(corruption as in dictatorships, tribes, monopolies, and cartels).

    The question for cold fusion delay is: How much was corruption(denial of funding and science principle) and how much was a new paradigm that is still not fully researched, engineered, patented, tested, certified, financed, and marketed.

    Many vociferous voices error both ways unable to understand how complex this is because it requires strong cross discipline train as we go experts(material and physics fields) who are unfortunately in very short supply.

    • Omega Z

      Job001

      The simplest answer, Big Physics.
      LENR raised it’s head at an inopportune time.
      LENR/CF Ran headlong into 2 Major Agendas at the same time. One Scientific. The other Political. Both joined in a common goal.

      Big Science wanted major funding of Big Physics projects & sold it under the guise of “cheap plentiful energy”. You need the end game to justify huge expenditures. LENR would have had a very detrimental effect on this both in funding & their end game of cheap energy.
      ———————————————————-
      The Political Agenda was to put vast numbers of soon to be unemployed Physicists to work. This became a major concern for the West on 2 fronts.

      The Reagan era START treaties had set the path of reducing nuclear arsenals from 10’s of thousands to thousands with the prospect of further cuts in the future. The U.S. needs to find employment for it’s surplus Physicists. A short time latter, The U.S.S.R. imploded. Russia, now alone was ill prepared to keep their Physicists employed.

      The West now finds itself with not only keeping “it’s Physicists” from the Nuclear Weapons Industry employed, but the Russian Physicists as well. There are multiple nations more then willing to pay top dollar for this talent to move forward with their nuclear programs.

      These Physicists have family’s to provide for. Some will be tempted & some will accept these offers. From the Western point of view, A Big Physics project in Hot Fusion fills a need. Even at the detriment of other sectors. This is not conspiracy fluff. It was actually discussed in the MSM at the time tho not necessarily Front page news.

      This was all manipulated by a few. All other players just fell in line like sheep. It wasn’t suppressed by Big Oil and I’m not saying a few in the Fossil industry wouldn’t want to suppress it, But most of them have little political sway.

      Those that do have political sway, Like power plant operators don’t care if they produce electricity with LENR rather then coal. Profit is profit. As a 1 time business person, I can say this. Tell me I can sell my product to the consumer for half & at the same time double my profits. I say show me. I’ll make you my CFO with a very hefty raise & profit sharing package. It’s what a Business mans dreams are made of.

      In closing, the 25 year delay. Delay yes. 25 years no. Science wasn’t up to the task at that time. Much needed to be learned & technology needed to advance. Both have taken place in that 25 years. I would be more inclined to agree with 5 years, possibly 10 year delay. Not 25.

      • Job001

        Great insider history which I’ve followed it all the way! One point of slight perspective;Cold fusion economically is a recent potential winner with gas phase high temperature high COP. Before 7 years ago it wasn’t “economically” more than a lab curiosity, IMO.

        By this I don’t excuse biased science that wasn’t science at all but point out the recent “undeniable significance”, of undeniable nuclear ash and undeniable high yield useable heat was not 25 years ago but just within the last 7 years. That is my number, 7 years delay clearly due to funding bias. Could have it been faster then 7 years sooner? IMO, it could not.

  • Job001

    Good points all! It seems two excellent cases can be made for corruption increasing where wealth is excessively concentrated and decreasing where necessary for success to occur. Like the GINI index, there is an optimum range between unmotivated pure socialist vacuum and absolute power(corruption as in dictatorships, tribes, monopolies, and cartels).

    The question for cold fusion delay is: How much was corruption(denial of funding and science principle) and how much was a new paradigm that is still not fully researched, engineered, patented, tested, certified, financed, and marketed.

    Many vociferous voices error both ways unable to understand how complex this is because it requires strong cross discipline train as we go experts(material and physics fields) who are unfortunately in very short supply.

    • Omega Z

      Job001

      The simplest answer, Big Physics.
      LENR raised it’s head at an inopportune time.
      LENR/CF Ran headlong into 2 Major Agendas at the same time. One Scientific. The other Political. Both joined in a common goal.

      Big Science wanted major funding of Big Physics projects & sold it under the guise of “cheap plentiful energy”. You need the end game to justify huge expenditures. LENR would have had a very detrimental effect on this both in funding & their end game of cheap energy.
      ———————————————————-
      The Political Agenda was to put vast numbers of soon to be unemployed Physicists to work. This became a major concern for the West on 2 fronts.

      The Reagan era START treaties had set the path of reducing nuclear arsenals from 10’s of thousands to thousands with the prospect of further cuts in the future. The U.S. needs to find employment for it’s surplus Physicists. A short time latter, The U.S.S.R. imploded. Russia, now alone was ill prepared to keep their Physicists employed.

      The West now finds itself with not only keeping “it’s Physicists” from the Nuclear Weapons Industry employed, but the Russian Physicists as well. There are multiple nations more then willing to pay top dollar for this talent to move forward with their nuclear programs.

      These Physicists have family’s to provide for. Some will be tempted & some will accept these offers. From the Western point of view, A Big Physics project in Hot Fusion fills a need. Even at the detriment of other sectors. This is not conspiracy fluff. It was actually discussed in the MSM at the time tho not necessarily Front page news.

      This was all manipulated by a few. All other players just fell in line like sheep. It wasn’t suppressed by Big Oil and I’m not saying a few in the Fossil industry wouldn’t want to suppress it, But most of them have little political sway.

      Those that do have political sway, Like power plant operators don’t care if they produce electricity with LENR rather then coal. Profit is profit. As a 1 time business person, I can say this. Tell me I can sell my product to the consumer for half & at the same time double my profits. I say show me. I’ll make you my CFO with a very hefty raise & profit sharing package. It’s what a Business mans dreams are made of.

      In closing, the 25 year delay. Delay yes. 25 years no. Science wasn’t up to the task at that time. Much needed to be learned & technology needed to advance. Both have taken place in that 25 years. I would be more inclined to agree with 5 years, possibly 10 year delay. Not 25.

      • Job001

        Great insider history which I’ve followed it all the way! One point of slight perspective;Cold fusion economically is a recent potential winner with gas phase high temperature high COP. Before 7 years ago it wasn’t “economically” more than a lab curiosity, IMO.

        By this I don’t excuse biased science that wasn’t science at all but point out the recent “undeniable significance”, of undeniable nuclear ash and undeniable high yield useable heat was not 25 years ago but just within the last 7 years. That is my number, 7 years delay clearly due to funding bias. Could have it been faster then 7 years sooner? IMO, it could not.

        • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

          The unmistakeable evidence of nuclear ash from cold fusion was reported by Miles in 1991, in a series of experiments. The confirmations were widespread over the next 14 years or so, I think the last one I report was for work done in 2004. But it was certainly clear by the 2004 U.S. DoE review. That review, however, clearly confused some of the reviewers. Cold fusion is a difficult field, there is a vast array of results, and most of them will confuse the hell out of you.

          But this is the kicker: In 1989, a test for helium was arranged with Pons and Fleischmann; they were to contribute palladium cathodes: one as-received, one experimental with high heat generation, and three that were ion-implanted with helium. Then the coding (which cathode was which) was to be traded for the helium results, I think it was from six labs. When the time came, Morrey, organizer of this collaboration, provided the results to Pons at an airport. Pons then flew off without providing the history data. Morry was flabbergasted. It was a month before the data was provided.

          And then Pons’ lawyer threatened to sue if the data was published.

          What did the tests show?
          1. The as-received cathode had way too much helium in it. One test from it was as high in helium as the experimental cathode.
          2. The experimental cathode had significant helium.
          3. However, the cathode reported XP was quite low. So the helium was low, much lower than was expected. They had not given the labs a good cathode, but a marginal one.
          4. The helium found was 1/36 what would be expected from deuterium conversion to helium and the heat. From today’s work, it would have been expected to be much higher, especially from near the surface. Probably about 2/5 of the expected value, the rest being lost as gas.
          5. The ion-implanted cathodes were as expected. Electrolysis did not remove trapped helium, even only shallowly trapped (ion implantation would not put helium below more than about a micron from the surface.)

          Eventually, the legal issue was resolved and the paper was published as Morrey et al (1990).

          So if you want to know how the idea arose that Pons and Fleischmann might be frauds, there it is, as one possibility. This incident is covered by Huizenga and Taubes, and, of course, there is the paper (which is in the Britz database, if someone wants to read it, contact me). See my Current Science paper.

          What I see is that in 1989, the scientific community was seriously investigating cold fusion. It gave up. Part of that may have been inevitable. But part was not. Mistakes were made, as we say.

          This is important now because if we do want to facilitate a renaissance for LENR, we need to have some sympathy for the skeptics. Skepticism is essential to science. Emotional attachment to orthodox opinion is actually antiscientific, it is skepticism that forgets to be self-skeptical. But, one step at a time, Just The Facts, Ma’am.

          • Job001

            Early reports of isotope shifts for wet chemistry were erratic, unreliable, contaminant unreliable, and deniable. Instrumentation improved dramatically and testing accuracy improved sufficiently to make later results undeniable, especially with gas phase control of micro encapsulated small sample and with accurate controls and elimination of possible contaminants and helium losses.
            Science results and reproducibility did improve so that now pathoskeptics look ridiculous and biased. Early on, a few honest skeptics could justify their position. However, not now, IMO.

          • bachcole

            For most of these academics, it will remain deniable until units are being sold at Home Depot.

          • Job001

            Agreed, skepticism is certainly admirable until overdone and indicative of a pathological bias, usually for academics funding bias from peer rejection or job loss. Tough to be an unbiased scientist under those conditions.

          • I noticed that those who did LENr research for long where not young even in 1981.
            Exception were working for military labs, in Asia, or in less controlled EU labs with some non LENr activities to pay the rent.

            those who had to battle for funding and career with a academic method, fleed LENR.

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            Let me put it this way. Because it can take a great deal of reading and study to understand the cold fusion results, someone can easily remain highly skeptical. That is not pathological unless it pretends to certainty in the face of massive evidence that it refuses to look at. Given the history — which many supporters of cold fusion do not understand well, accepting an oversimplified caricature of it — skepticism is very understandable, and there are some skeptics who simply will not invest the time. That, again, is not “pathological,” it is normal human psychology.

            Such people, ignorant of the evidence, may easily argue from ignorance. If we want to encourage understanding of LENR, we need to counter this with evidence, preferably sourced to reviews, and request that a skeptic show sources as well for what they claim. This is the problem that such a skeptic will run into, if they accept the challenge: there are not such sources, not of any reliability.

            This is at the bottom of the rejection cascade: in 1989, there was not sufficient evidence to conclusively demonstrate that Pons and Fleischmann were correct, that there was a heat anomaly *and* that this anomaly was nuclear in nature. That was essentially the conclusion of the 1989 DoE review, *not* that the findings were wrong. In 2004, the conclusion was basically the same, but this time the recommendation for further research was truly *unanimous.*

            There were problems with the 2004 review, but the actual conclusion is one that I agreed with. No massive federal program. I still think that a massive federal program would be premature. Some basic work still needs to be done, or, if it’s already been done, to be nailed down, properly published, all that.

            The Current Science special section is a step toward that. So what can people do? There are many possible answers, but here is one: read the en.wikiversity.org educational resource on Cold fusion, and the subpages. Help develop it. Work toward neutrality there, and link that resource to the English Wikipedia as a “sister wiki” link.

            Encourage skeptics to participate, they have been valuable in the past, and could be valuable again. Watchlist those resources, and watchlist the en.wikipedia Cold fusion and cold fusion talk page. Ask for help from experienced Wikipedians, including off-wiki. Most people who support cold fusion never take the time to understand Wikipedia policies, so they make one of a series of standard errors that get them warned, blocked, or banned.

            Don’t rush it! On Wikiversity, one can create resources without massive controversy and wiki-battles, ask me, I’ll show you how. Wikiversity has the same overall neutrality policy as Wikipedia, but manages it through inclusion rather than exclusion. Wikiversity is more like a university or university library plus student work, it is not an encyclopedia.

    • Sandy

      The introduction of commercially viable LENR technologies will not be permitted by the powers that be until after a “climate change” treaty has been approved and a world government has been established to enforce that treaty. That treaty will probably be adopted at the convention scheduled to take place in Paris this December.

      “Global Warming” induced by man-make carbon dioxide “pollution” must remain a viable threat to the whole planet until after that treaty is adopted. Practical LENR technologies would undermine the Global Warming propaganda so the powers that be must suppress LENR until after the treaty is adopted.

      http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=50151#.VO1PoEJYwqY

      • don’t worry.
        even if in public they say “we watch we watch… show us a tea kettle first”, I know a government which…

        forget it. just don’t worry.

  • Gerard McEk

    India should be extremely proud of their the Current Scientice scientific journalists! This is the first time such an extensive and multi author publication on LENR/CF is happening after P&F. Chapeau!

  • Gerard McEk

    India should be extremely proud of their the Current Scientice scientific journalists! This is the first time such an extensive and multi author publication on LENR/CF is happening after P&F. Chapeau!

  • NCY

    I’d like to be sure that these articles have undertaken PEER REVIEW, and not just editorial review. it seems that articles from this paper in ‘special section’ categories do not have accepted and revised accepted dates at the bottom, unlike all other articles. Also the page on editorial policies does not mention ‘special section’ articles with regards to peer review. although it does state clearly that all articles submitted undergo peer review, this was brought up over at the wikipedia talk page for CF, so we need confirmation of the peer review and make sure that they haven’t just undergone editorial review instead.

    • Barbierir

      This should be asked to the journal, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax writes that his paper was indeed peer reviewed: “Last year, the editors of the section solicited papers from researchers in the field of LENR. These papers went through two reviews, first by the special section editors and then, if the editors decided to forward the paper, by a normal peer reviewer assigned by Current Science”
      From: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg101775.html

      This means the 2nd paper by Nagel is the first peer reviewed paper to survey the Ecat and the reports.

    • Josh G

      This is from a post on the Vortex mailing list archive, forwarded from an author of one of the Current Science LENR papers (Abd ul-Rahman Lomax, “Replicable Cold Fusion Experiment”):

      “These papers went through two reviews, first by the special section editors and then, if the editors decided to forward the paper, by a normal peer reviewer assigned by Current Science.”

      “The anonymous reviewer of my paper was familiar with physics and not with cold fusion, and was skeptical at first. Yes, I modified my paper extensively in response to his critique and it is, no doubt, better for it. Apparently, he was convinced, he gave a glowing recommendation for publication.”

  • Alan DeAngelis

    India was on the right track in 1989.
    From page 49 of Frank Close’s 1991 book Too Hot to Handle. http://www.amazon.com/Too-Hot-
    “…Tritium is an essential fuel in thermonuclear weapons; it is also a product of dd fusion – the very process that the Utah chemists claimed to be able to make happen inexpensively in a test tube. The US military were already spending vast sums on making tritium for warheads and the
    reactors that were used for this process had been closed, pending repairs, in 1988 as a result of nervousness about reactor safety following the Chernobyl accident. The repair and building new reactors would cost billions of dollars, so when test-tube fusion entered the scene the military took note at once, recognizing the potential of test-tube fusion as a source of much-needed tritium. This sort of application of test-tube fusion also impressed Indian Government scientists who decided that western nations would soon classify test-tube fusion as a secret; thus India mounted an immediate test-tube fusion research effort so as to ‘get in on the ground floor’….”

  • georgehants

    Via Vortex with thanks
    the story behind free pdfs of 34 cold fusion papers in Current Science
    104(4) 574-7, 2015.02.25: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax: Rich Murray 2015.02.24
    http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg101775.html

  • georgehants

    Via Vortex with thanks
    the story behind free pdfs of 34 cold fusion papers in Current Science
    104(4) 574-7, 2015.02.25: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax: Rich Murray 2015.02.24
    http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg101775.html

  • MasterBlaster7

    Peer-review of the experimental data all well and good. Peer-review of the theory….that is going to get ugly. Still…glad LENR made it into a peer-reviewed journal in some form.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    The milestone event was when Rossi got his safety certificate. North Carolina will be powered by LENR (where or not there are peer reviewed papers).

    • Alan DeAngelis

      ..whether or not..
      It’s time to go to bed.

  • Job001

    Early reports of isotope shifts for wet chemistry were erratic, unreliable, contaminant unreliable, and deniable. Instrumentation improved dramatically and testing accuracy improved sufficiently to make later results undeniable, especially with gas phase control of micro encapsulated small sample and with accurate controls and elimination of possible contaminants and helium losses.
    Science results and reproducibility did improve so that now pathoskeptics look ridiculous and biased. Early on, a few honest skeptics could justify their position. However, not now, IMO.

  • Job001

    Agreed, skepticism is certainly admirable until overdone and indicative of a pathological bias, usually for academics funding bias from peer rejection or job loss. Tough to be an unbiased scientist under those conditions.

    • I noticed that those who did LENr research for long where not young even in 1981.
      Exception were working for military labs, in Asia, or in less controlled EU labs with some non LENr activities to pay the rent.

      those who had to battle for funding and career with a academic method, fleed LENR.