Lugano Testers Continue Work: Mats Lewan

Many people have been wondering when we might be getting an update from the team that tested the E-Cat in the Lugano report. Andrea Rossi has mentioned that we could expect revisions and updates to the original document, but no significant changes have been made since the report was published since last October.

A comment today on the vortex-l mailing list by Mats Lewan, Swedish journalist and author of the book An Impossible Invention indicates that the testers on the team are still working. He wrote:

I know that the Swedish researchers are still working on the update, doing additional calibration measurements.
They have also stated that they intend to continue investigating the LENR phenomenon. That could include some kind of replication, but since they prefer to work in silence (maybe due to the negative Swedish media attention — and that might in turn be a good or a bad strategy, difficult to know), we’ll have to wait and see.

The reference to ‘negative Swedish media attention’ refers to the fact (also mentioned by Mats) that Swedish Radio producer Ulrika Björkstén and journalist Marcus Hansson have received an honorable mention by the Swedish Association of Investigative Journalists in the nominations for the Golden Spade award, an award given in the field of investigative journalism.

Last year Hansson and Björkstén produced a three part report on Swedish Radio about Andrea Rossi and the E-Cat, seeking out critics of Rossi and casting him and the whole topic of cold fusion/LENR in a negative light.

Before the Lugano report was published the testing team did very well in staying out of the spotlight, and keeping very quiet about their work, and it seems clear that this is the way they prefer to continue to work.

  • Guru

    Theatre of absurd continue,

    Baphomet adorers are considering some awards …..
    Meantime competitors are in heavy preparation for (few years delayed) launch

    • hempenearth

      You certainly take the cake for optimism Guru. After Kinetica 07 and Waterways 09 my optimism (with Sean Mac) was at rock bottom. Maybe third time lucky.

      • Alan DeAngelis

        “Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being
        put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knowledge with the lies of the day. I really look with commiseration over the great body of my fellow citizens, who, reading newspapers live & die in the
        belief that they have known something of what has been passing in the world in their time; whereas the accounts they have read in newspapers are just as true a history of any other period of the world as of the present, except that the real names of the day are affixed to their fables. General facts may indeed be collected from them, such as that Europe is now at war, that Bonaparte has been a successful warrior, that he has subjected a great portion of Europe to his will, &c., &c.; but no details can be relied on. I will add that the man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them;
        inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. He who reads nothing will still learn the great facts, and the details are all false.”

        Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, Washington,
        June 11, 1807

        I posted this quote two years ago at Cold Fusion Now.
        I thought it was worth posting it again here.

  • fritz194

    Reading the translation of “negative media attention” brings up somewhat mentality issue – tightly coupled with european heterogeneity of nations.
    It might be a quite accepted act of friendship for an Italian that you compensate (at least) for the travel expenses if Swedish Scientists are invited to study a phenomenon.
    In the pharmaceutical industry, invitation or financing of “congresses” at popular destinations is a quite accepted thing.
    For an Italian, visiting Bologna might be no extraordinary move nor incentive approach.
    For a Swede, a payed trip to Italy (which is definitely a popular destination for a Swede because of the climate) – is almost pure corruption and a no-go.
    The standards differ in both countries – and thats it.

    • fritz194

      The second point of critique is related to the fact that there was no coverage on the negative test – which would be ok for original research – but not for a black box test of a “third” party. You need quite good answers concerning that questions – if you dont want to be misunderstood.

      • Gerrit

        How can you jump to “almost pure corruption” ? The scientists were sponsored by Elforsk to test the equipment.

        Are you suggesting that a scientist who does a job somewhere else than where he lives looses his objectivity and becomes corrupt?

        That is not critique, that is madness.

        • fritz194

          Thats not my critique nor position ;-))
          I just wanted to point out that europe is a checkered landscape – and a trip to Italy might look like an incentive for a Swede. And thats the argumentation line of those journalists. “Pure corruption” was slightly cynical – but should underline different mentalities and standards.
          An independent test on the “Maledives” would be definitely ominous.

          • Gerrit

            yeah I noticed that it is not your position after I read through the english translations myself. 🙂

          • In France, if you don’t compensate the cost of reasonable travel and stay of an employee, your violating the law. For high level position this mean business class.
            For a partner, it depend if he is very rich, or if the money represent something for his budget.

            The critic is just dishonest even for a Swedish. Those guys are not honest point, and they are prized because the follow the herd of the deniers.

            We all need to prepare to make them fired, no less. wait for the definitive unavoidable by a kid of 5yo evidence, and the make a bloody campaign against that pathetic prize for disinformation.

            prepare the feather and the tar. I don’t want any denier to be left free, because we have still few more revolution, and we need to make lazy coward journalist understand that following the herd of denial will send them to big trouble. that is not hate, that is education.

          • by the way, those who gave the prize need to be fired too, maybe first.

          • Omega Z

            It would be poetic if the tar was heated by E-cat.

          • Obvious

            The door can swing both ways sometimes. Be careful how you treat dissent. It also can create a climate of censorship, making new things even more difficult to to bring to light. You may be right this time, but can you guarantee correctness in widely applied punishments for opposing views? There is a fine line here, in the murky pond of Truth. Deciding how to best deal with BS, dissent, and separating censorship from freedom of speech is one of the most profound and confounding problems civilization has encountered. I am not suggesting an answer. And it is not wrong to feel the pain of injustice. But an eye for an eye hasn’t proven to be very effective.

          • psi2u2

            I doubt that one trip to Italy and another trip to Switzerland over a period of two years would be enough to corrupt someone.”

            Precisely. From the Swedish skeptics society? Come now, I don’t think someone who has manifestly engaged with an avocational interest in authentic skepticism is very likely to allow himself to be corrupted in the manner implied by the previous example.

            Pharmaceutical industry corruption happens mostly behind closed doors and the amounts of gratuity involved are much much larger — this was a very public event. I think it is a reasonable issue to point that the standards are different in the two countries. But to infer anything from that about the TPT group or any of the Swedish scientists involved is not only premature but totally unjustified in my opinion.

          • Omega Z

            Rossi didn’t pay for their trips.
            Elforsk provided the funding for the tests.

          • Obvious, you make a very good warning.

            the problem is that what you describe as a menace to free speech is already our reality. F&P have been tared and feathered, as Bockris, and some bad scientists have been prized, Nobelized for peace (hopefully not science).

            What I demand is
            – freedom to speculate, as long as you say you speculate and respect available evidence
            – freedom to be wrong as long as you update your position when data are available

            this join a great movement of “evidence based medicine”, and similar moves in science originated policy.

            I would agree that bad journalist continue to spread lies, to spread their conspiracy theories, if the one who spread real data had the same access to media.
            but today, IN THE NAME OF ETHICAL JOURNALISM, they eliminate dissenting voice.

            I even agree, and that is a key for freedom of speech, that it is impossible to distinguish truth from lies for a human community, until some “tea kettle” raise evidence that a kid of 5yo can understand.
            This is why I support the idea of “incommensurability of paradigms” like Thomas Kuhn and that I am “against method” like feyerabend.

            Shutdown Rossi, like occasapiens, ECN, Krivit, need not at all to be forbidden, but just to be debunked. They may even be useful to correct some of our errors (sadly they seldom are useful since they critic all without serious arguments), or to allow us to shape good arguments, or to investigate more (from PopSci/wikipedia lies I launched a search in Italian journals and found many evidences on petroldragon, showing they simply were lying).

            We need multiple sources, some of which are evil or deluded, but we don’t need Prize nor censorship.
            We also need justice, not on the science (too easy to be wrong, because most people mix reality with theory), but on libeling case, which mean accusation without evidence, and bias in evidences choice.

          • Obvious

            The principles of justice require that the punishment suits the crime as well as the extent of the damage the crime has caused, and that the proof that crime is as close to unassailable as possible. A proper investigation of the matter, with court documents, witness statements, etc., that demonstrates the most accurate version of the truth is really what is needed in this regard. If these documents are easy to come by, but not used or were ignored, then the shoddy nature of the reporter version would be made obvious. Has anyone actually compiled the facts of the matter thoroughly? Little snippets here and there, cherry picked to suit a point of view, are next to useless. Even the wickedpedia cannot ignore proof that is of high quality. If anyone wants to write yet another Rossi book, a solid, complete, and utterly factual pre-history to the E-Cat story would be a unique addition. We must be prepared to accept that perhaps there are some unsavoury facts also included. Many people involved in various aspects might not be too pleased at the old scabs being opened up again. It could even be dangerous to investigate some parts, due to Mafia, military, government, and others in high and low places that have participated in these happenings. Very few persons might be capable of doing what needs to be done, if this story is to be told correctly. Otherwise the mixed up part true part fairy tale story will persist indefinitely.

          • you propose a wise process.
            On Ego Out I propose to open a Nuremberg Trial, an International People Tribunal on Cold Fusion denial.

            However you seems not to realize that as long as the mindguards still have power they can bend the reality.
            Wikipedia have been presented good evidence, and their bad evidence have been proven bad, but anyway they bannd the people, blacklisted the sources, used all wuiipedia laws with double standard.
            Coyaud, and Sverige radio did the same.
            In fact this is the same on current News …
            people assume that cold fusion is bad, and this justify violating all rules of ethic if they feel there is no other way to eliminate an unavoidale evidence, that cannot be true, but which have all to be judged true.

            we do that all the time on many subject. most of the time it works, and it is just a shortcut to bypass limits of our own intelligence and information.

            the real problem is that most mindguards do that not sincerely, but to feel supported by the group… this is why I propose that the job became dangerous if you are wrong. like today the job of dictator because of ICC.

          • Obvious

            Slightly off topic, but not entirely is the following.
            I watched Mythbusters last night, where they tested to see if the way people are loaded onto a plane by most airlines is in fact the slowest. Indeed it was, by their results. More interesting was that letting everyone on the plane without any previously assigned seats (random seat filling) was almost the fastest, and was about 10 minutes quicker (almost twice as fast), even though people filled the seats generally front to back. But this random method had a 5 times higher dissatisfaction rating by the passengers than using assigned seats, filling back to front. People seemed to prefer knowing what their seat position was going to be far and above actually getting seated dramatically more quickly, even though the usual passenger complaint is that seating takes to long in normal plane loading.

    • Omega Z

      Rossi didn’t pay for their trips.
      Elforsk provided the funding for the tests. Elforsk would receive the test results. Rossi/IH would receive a copy.

  • Gerard McEk

    I hope they will succeed. As I have said before, they may have done more measurements (e.g. with an HF oscilloscope or RF measurements) than they have revealed. Secondly they have analysed the ‘fuel’ and may know a lot more about that as well. I do not believe that they will misuse their knowledge for commercial purposes, but just for scientific curiosity.

    • Nigel Appleton

      I too hope they’ll succeed. I fear, though, that they are hampered by Rossi/IH giving them a less-developed reactor and fuel than are currently in use – the Mk V instead of the Mk X, as it were – that would work OK, but not as well as later instantiations. A reactor/fuel combination that was pretty certain to work, but not as well as later designs and formulations used with better control systems.

      Facing facts, only a Rossi-supplied reactor loaded with Rossi-supplied fuel has achieved excess heat output for more than a short time without burning out. That’s not to denigrate Dr. Parkhomov’s work – he does seem to suffer from a lack of availability of top-grade materials, which must hamper him.

      • Gerard McEk

        As long as excess heat can be measured it will be a scientific success and would bring LENR nearer to acceptance. That having said, it would be wonderful to see a comparable replication as they have done before. I believe it is important to copy the design of Rossi in all known details, including the tree phase heating coils and power supply. That would give them the highest probability of a successful stable replication.

        • Obvious

          We have seen photos of Rossi using a single phase with his reactors.

          • Gerard McEk

            True, but I believe that this three phase approach may be a further development with two advantages because of the lower impedance of the heating coil:
            1. Rapidly developing LENR hotspots generate considerable magnetic fields. This causes high currents (extremely short in time) in the low impedance coil that damp further development and local over-heating.
            2. The used relatively high voltage (380V AC) with the low impedance cols cause short pulse currents to heat the coil, with considerable harmonics. These harmonics stimulate the initiation of LENR and with the three phase system it does that three time more effectivly than in a one phase system.

            Of cource this is all speculation, but this could be a reason for this Hot-cat design.

          • Obvious

            The high amperage used, up to nearly 50 A, is the best reason to use three phase supply. The high amperage is inconsistent such a high voltage being made available to the reactor, considering the reported wattage. The reported wattage, corroborated with Joule heat values reported, then requires a low voltage over a single phase conduction period. The Joule heat is directly proportional to current, not voltage. Increasing the voltage, and/or using a higher current in order to deliver a shorter pulse than one conduction period is inconsistent with the reported Joule heat values in the Lugano report (even if these aren’t quite perfectly calculated).
            On the other hand, the low voltage should allow a strong contrast to high frequency and voltage signals superimposed on the low voltage signal, at essentially insignificant additional current increases.

  • fritz194

    I agree. Otherwise, the standards for corruption may vary from place to place, even in the US.
    If an edisonian wannabe physicist fraudster claims to bring the new fire ( and thats exact the position of the establishment) – you need a jesus to meet the standards.

    • Obvious

      Without starting a religious discussion generally, Jesus didn’t meet the standards of the Romans or the Jewish hierarchy at the time, and ended up crucified for his efforts. We use the terms true believer and heretic 2000 years later to describe people that don’t follow the establishment when they promise a new scientific paradigm that doesn’t jive with the old one.

      • georgehants

        Obvious, could you give an example of ——
        “the establishment when they promise a new scientific paradigm that doesn’t jive with the old one.”

        • Obvious

          Superconductors. Warm superconductors. Radiation. Spooky action at a distance. Atoms. Subatomic particles. Corpuscular light.

          • georgehants

            Obvious, I am sorry having trouble seeing your point, are you saying that the establishment are open-minded and put forward discoveries such as Cold Fusion, Telepathy etc. backed up by solid Evidence and the heretics etc are the ones who rebel against this Wonderful open-minded, scientifically correct establishment.

          • Obvious

            No. I think you misinterpreted my meaning.

          • georgehants

            Yes I think I said that, could you make your meaning clearer for a poor reader.
            The establishment say Cold Fusion Telepathy is a Fraud so are those saying that they are a Fact heretics or true believers in your meaning?

          • Obvious

            Hmmm. I can see how I could be possibly misinterpreted. Perhaps this is better… people that don’t follow the establishment by promising a new paradigm…

          • georgehants

            Ha Obvious, I am so sorry, you wrote ——
            ” years later to describe people that don’t follow the establishment when
            they promise a new scientific paradigm that doesn’t jive with the old
            The confusion is that you appear to be saying —–
            The establishment are promising a new idea that does not agree with the old one.
            Am I correct in that you mean by “they” the people who are putting forward the new idea against the establishment and not “the establishment”

          • Obvious

            Yes, that was my intent, originally.
            After further consideration, I would say that it depends on the whether one is a member of the proposed new paradigm, or the established paradigm in each case.

          • georgehants

            Ha, well the six hundred where killed at the charge of the light brigade because of a missing comma, so we did not do so badly.

          • Obvious

            I was just now considering the the disagreements between Hooke and Newton. I wonder if Newton’s retreat from the Royal Society has improved science more than if the two had come to some sort of amicable agreement, and worked together, rather than Newton isolating himself from the group to a large extent for many years. This period was when Newton did much of his alchemy research, but also was spent fine tuning many of his other more widely accepted theories and mathematical studies.

          • georgehants

            So many such things that we can muse over, but never really can say what would have been the outcome if changed, it all becomes a little philosophical, do we believe in fate, etc.
            All we can do I think is to handle our present in the best way we can see at the time.
            I believe Cold Fusion should never have been delayed and should not be delayed now, that is like I think it was Mr. Hooke who said, if you kick a rock it hurts, looking deeper can be confusing.
            We can only try not to make the mistakes of yesterday, but to learn from them for today and tomorrow. I think

          • Omega Z

            “if you kick a rock it hurts”

            Rocks are inanimate. They don’t feel.

          • georgehants

            🙂 🙂

          • psi2u2


  • georgehants

    Without taking away any of the Wonderful achievements of Mr. Rossi it needs to be plainly ascertained, that it appears that his and IH keeping secret the work and knowledge they have obtained would seem to be now, only for profit and capitalistic gain.
    Mr. Rossi needs to address this very point, but I do not think that such a question on JONP would survive moderation. perhaps Admin may try.
    Every days delay just adds to the horrors of the 25 years corrupt delay by the science administration and costs LIVES.
    Dirty water kills 5,000 children a day

    • Omega Z

      I’ll start by saying I agree with you that the system is flawed & needs fixed. The problem isn’t Capitalism itself, but the people in charge who repeatedly apply the same failed economic theories over & over expecting different results. What do they call that??? I call it insanity.

      We need someone smart enough to come up with a new economic theory & the 1st thing that needs to be discarded is the excess labor myth. There is no such thing. Only endless work that needs done. Thus you can provide everyone a job that provides for their necessities & more. You merely need a way to increase the money supply without devaluing what people already have in hand.

      Using existing economic theory, this is usually done from the top down with low interest loans that merely put people in debt & if that’s not bad enough, it is limited by those credit worthy & not already maxed to the limit. And we know how that works out at the 1st economic slow down. Crash.

      Money is really nothing more then an IOU for labor performed. Everything else is Big banking. It shouldn’t be that hard to inject money without debt at the bottom of the system for certain types of projects that benefit society. However, the banks wouldn’t be very happy as it would shrink their business model of money for nothing. We need to get back to debt only for capital purchases like homes & such. Not debt as a way of life.

      As to the Capitalism you rant so hard against. It will spread E-cat technology far & wide at a pace no other system can. Capitalism itself actually works & even allowing for profit, it is far cheaper then Government Capitalism/Socialism.

      And as to the water, We already have technology that is cheaper then desalinizing using E-cat technology, Tho it would decrease the cost to a small extent.(Electrical costs) It’s all the other infrastructure & labor that makes desal so expensive.

      Another issue is there are not enough skilled tradesmen available to build desal plants thus there is a waiting list. E-cats will have no effect on this. Another is that desalinated water needs to be remineralized or it could be deadly for many who need water.

      Distilled water acts as a flushing/cleansing agent. It will remove minerals & nutrients from your body. Safe for short term use by healthy people, but not for long term or those who already suffer deficiencies & malnutrition.

      • georgehants

        Omega Z, thank you for taking so much time to reply.
        My answer is that nobody seems to even think of how capitalism can be changed and improved just take it that it is as it is.
        If one wishes to improve our World then clear common-sense is the best tool I think.
        As an exercise Work out how many people would have to work to keep everybody supplied in a country with all needs and all fair luxuries, remove all money, finance etc. etc. forget imports exports to simplify things.
        You will find that only half the population need to work or everybody works half the hours.
        Only production and services are necessary, everything else is done by choice. (such as science)
        Having done this one can easily see that things need to change, all the pointless work is an illusion.
        Many jobs are simply made up to keep capitalism alive, ridiculous..
        One must not think capitalism or communism one must think how to create the best, new, simplest system for all people to live a good life without spending all their time worrying about bills, taxes, etc. etc. all completely unnecessary.

  • Mike

    I believe that one of the Swedish scientists mentioned in radio that at least some of the trips were paid by Rossi. I think that if that is true he could not be considered an independent tester. The rules are very very strict for someone employed in a Swedish governmental authority or university, and paid travel expenses are one thing you should be very careful about. I have also seen examples where a the dinner after a free seminar was free for all but governmental employeas. Also, Rossi refused to answer questions i the radio programs.

    Recently the CEO of a large Swedish paper manufacturing company had to resign after too much use of the companys private jet.

    By the way, what is the purpose of “…doing additional calibration measurements.” half a year or so after the measurements?…not really a good laboratory pratice.

    • ecatworld

      My understanding is that Kullander and Essen, who went to Italy to see the E-Cat, apparently at Rossi’s expense were both retired at the time.

      • psi2u2

        That seems like an important point to verify. If it is true, it disposes the question ipso facto.

      • Omega Z

        I don’t recall anyone saying Rossi paid for Kullander and Essen on that 1st trip. Mats may know as he was there

        As to the ITP test 1 & 2, that was funded by Elforsk.
        If I recall, the Lugano report stated the Rossi/IH paid for the radiation detection test, tho that might be because the equipment for that was from UNIBO.

  • GreenWin

    A “Golden Spade Award” sounds like a prize for one who can shovel the most fertilizer on the truth.

    • Obvious

      I was thinking about the multiple possible meanings of the award. Perhaps this was the intent.
      Calling a spade a spade, digging a hole to bury oneself in, shovelling …., digging out the buried truth, burying the truth, …

      • A few things:
        – The reward is called The Golden Spade since investigative journalism in Swedish is normally called ‘digging journalism’.
        – The reportage ‘revealed’ that Kullander and Essén had their travel expenses paid for, but as usual that was used as a hook to accuse them for not being independent. The main problem with the reportage was that it was based on the assumption that F&P were engaged in pathological science and that their results were never replicated, and that Rossi was a convicted fraudster (he was never convicted for fraud) and therefore unreliable. Furthermore, Hansson spent 4 months to research the story, traveling to Italy, but he apparently had his mind set up in advance, and he also seemed to believe that you can ask questions around in Italy and trust the answers. Italy is not a transparent country.
        Anyhow, these people will discover that the usual way of deciding what’s right and agree upon that with your fellows doesn’t work when you’re up against the Universe. The Universe doesn’t care about investigative journalism rewards.

        • Gerrit

          hopefully next year we will have undeniable evidence that shows how completely misguided this “digging journalism” actually is.

          • It is broken not only in LENR.
            I see that every day in mainstream news.
            The bias is not everywhere the same.
            We French have bias, especially in economics…
            Western have huge bias in Eastern europe, middle east geostrategy…
            US like on cold fusion have a huge capacity to spread their lies in our news, despite the fact that our military and science Intelligence Services are aware of the reality (in Ukraine, read ‘l’Opinion’ and ‘secret defense” for serious data and facts. same for Iran).

            Mats, as obvious said it is not to punish dissenting claims or critics, but as you say to punish
            – prize on bad work, so that next time the one who prize bad work know he will be fired
            – bad work
            – libelling, this mean insulting conspiracy theory without evidence
            – accusation of what the author do themselves (free vacation paid).

            It is very important that the mindguard feel they are not invulnerable to critic.

            this is one of key characteristic of groupthink that those suffering from it feel invulnerable and feel of superior morality

            those journalist get paid to take a plane to italy, so they have no more honesty than physicist going to see Rossi. that is factual.

            those jorunalist have no evidence and reported factually wrong facts, despite the availability of sources, that at that time was on lenr-forum, referencing to il coriere dell serra.

            those journalist following their own logic should be accused of corruption.

            1- wait for E-cat or LENRG or Billouin, or (cannot say more) to get at last accepted,
            2- ask specialist of sensational journalism make the same kind of journalism (sorry Mats, but who killed with a sword will die by a sword) to support they are corrupted. I know it is wrong they are egotic, dishonest, biased, stupid, incompetent, deluded, but not corrupted except in the usual way to look for salary and glory from consensus work… after all maybe they are corrupted that way…
            3- wait until they are carbonized. and launch the same campaign against the prize granter.

            Obvious very wisely warned me that we should not punish dissenting voice.

            however here it is not dissenting voice but egotic and incompetent biased dogs who bark with the herd,and destry the freedom of speech.

            As a French guy I can say that this prize did more harm to freedom of speech than the Kalashnikov in Paris.

            Did you see anybody dare to write “#JeSuisRossi” ?
            #NotInMyName about SR ?
            No ONE!

            Even ENEL and big universities who are joining LENR race (in silence), are afraid of those mindguard.
            If the Kalashnikov in Paris raised a move of self-censorship about caricatures, don’t you think that self-censorship in Science and technology is killing more people, and harming humanity ?

            there are terrorist of science, and the only answer to terror is to invert the terror.

            This look violent, but I am conscious that those mindguard are not monsters, they are just lazy, selfish, weak mind, sheep in he herd… The problem is they are toxic to humanity.
            Other journalist just have to understand they should not follow those examples, for their own selfish interest.

          • I agree Alain. If you excuse me, I’ll take a quote from my own book 😉

            – – – –

            The challenge was to form an opinion different from what most people thought. For while those who expose themselves to danger by challenging powerful people or organizations are rarely accused of folly, but rather are honored for their courage, it’s different to challenge established perceptions. Whoever comes up with something that no one else agrees upon risks being mocked, ostracized, spat upon, ridiculed and labeled as crazy. Yet I would defend anyone who did ​​it, against all odds. I believed that we needed to study phenomena and ideas with so much potential if there was the slightest belief that they could work. I also felt that it would be an even bigger mistake to completely miss such opportunities than investigating something that might not work.

        • Omega Z

          Mats Lewan

          As the Lugano team are from varied locations, can we assume most of what they are doing is at a distance & most communications between them are by internet & phone.

          Is this follow on work under the umbrella of the Elforsk Lugano test funding or independent from it.
          And as Elforsk has stated intentions of doing LENR research, Is any of it associated with that.

          • Omega,
            This group is basically working in two locations — in Uppsala, Sweden, and Bologna, Italy. Much work can be done in both locations without need for distance communication.
            I have no confirmed information about the role of Elforsk (now renamed Energiforsk), but they could be co-funding the ongoing work.

        • What is shocking is that they did not contact their colleagues (not the bosses who blocked the articles) in the Economist nor FT before making that pathetic mistake.

          Many Journalist are aware of what is happening.
          It seems that only the less informed are allowed to publish.

          today a colleague showed me an article in french, in a minor science vulgarization journal
          “le grand guide des inventions qui vont changer le monde” (in Merveille de la science)…
          I need to read it in detail to have an opinion…

          there was also in similar minor magazine, “science positive” my own article… a bit obsolete.

          • Judging from journalist Marcus Hansson’s FB profile at the time, he only has a high school degree, no university degree (this information is now missing or not public — ). Which could possibly explain his lack of understanding.

            Worse is the head of SR’s science news team — Ulrika Björkstén — who holds a Ph.D. in physical chemistry, and should be able to assess current research.

          • bachcole

            I think that what it shows is that open mindedness and social insight do not have anything to do with education. I do not follow the technical aspects much and even feel that everyone so far has been guessing with regarding to how it works. I have three degrees, but I just followed the social evidence. You, Mats, are part of my social evidence. One of my favorite co-commenters here is a world class Shakespearean scholar, and I doubt if he follows the technical babble either. I am pretty sure that a lot of people here are the same way.

          • Bachcole — I basically agree. This was also one of the conclusions I made in my book (somewhere), that there are two kinds of people — those who are really open-minded, and those who claim to be, or believe they are, open-minded, but in reality prove to be so only as long as they don’t have to change any previous established views.
            And as you say, this seems to apply to all kinds of people, regardless of academic training, and regardless of being scientists or not. It’s more of a personality trait.
            Since I’m kind of a loner from certain aspects, rarely following the will of groups of people, I suspect that being open-minded could be connected — that it depends on something like the degree of a person’s need or comfort when adhering to the group, or not.

          • bachcole

            I am very much of a loner, but I do not see that being a loner or a grouper (excuse the use of that word) is any better ultimately than the other. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. But it most certainly seems to be an advantage for exploration. I wonder if Columbus was a loner, or Edison? The Wright Brothers had each other, but I am not sure if that counts.

          • Sure — both ways of relating to others and to the world have their values and advantages, but just as you mention, the loner might be at advantage when investigating new stuff.

          • bachcole

            I have thought about it while doing morning chores, and I realize that NO ONE ever came here and stayed because of their knowledge of theoretical physics. So, degrees of any sort are irrelevant, either because they are physics degrees or because they are NOT physics degrees. Everyone came here because of social cues. And given that, I salute those with physics or chemistry degrees for being able to rise above their training, sort of like a medical doctor who breaks rank and becomes an alternative healing oriented doctor, like Dr. Kelly Brogan or Dr. Mercola or Dr. Emily Deans, etc. etc. These kinds of people have risen above their disabilities (being medical doctors), and those who have hardcore physics or chemistry training or are hardcore oriented towards the same are to be congratulated for having the social insight, intuition, and courage to see that LENR may be or is real.

          • Gerrit


            “Many people remember when a pair of electrochemists, Martin Fleischmann and Stanly Pons claimed in 1989 that they had discovered “cold fusion,” a way to make hydrogen atoms fuse at room temperatures and pressures. The researchers’ claims were soon rejected by other scientists who couldn’t repeat the experimental results that Fleischmann and Pons reported”

          • Alan DeAngelis

            They are so jealous.

          • Alan DeAngelis

            Yes, there seems to be no correlation between formal education and intelligence.

          • Sanjeev

            IMO, there is a correlation. Education sharpens intelligence greatly, however, it cannot help someone who is really challenged.
            Perhaps you mean creative intelligence, in which case I agree a little. Normally human intelligence is such a broad and mysterious subject that I find it impossible to have a hard opinion on this matter.

          • education gives tools to the intelligence, like algebra improve capacity to solve
            mathematical with the same brain. It trains also, but also specialize the intelligence.

            beside that the way method is taught is often killing some analythical capacities, like psychology, game theory

            Thomas Kuhn, explain well that teaching a paradigm is a torture to prevent people from thinking naturally, which mean losing time.

            This explain for example finance “quants” who ignore key human parameters…

            of physicist who ignore epistemology and their own history…

            you can see how stupid it is to say cold fusion is impossible, when you know colective effects in QM… by for a nuclear physicist, who have been trained in the rule that all nuclear reaction imply high energy quanta, gamma, neutrons, known branch ratio and two body free space physics, it is imposible to consider.

            even if every year on hole in that assumption is observed…

            This is what i call the “negative intelligence”. intelligent people, educated people , have improved capacity to deny reality compared to a kid of 5yo.

            all their genious, their powerful methods, are used to deny reality when it oppos their brain washing (as Kuhn describe).



            beside that theer is also other independent problems.

            half scientific education can raise a false sens of competence, and make people easily manipulated by bad science. This is the main risk for us who are not experts, but who are educated anyway. this explain conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, and pornscience… Intermediate competence is really a problem, because we have competences but we can bee easily fooled…

            one key to understand how people can be fooled, it is that intelligence is not the key alone, nor even training, it is the ratio of intelligence, training, in the precise domain of the problem, over “ego”.

            physicist are often brilliant, but they have a so huge ego often, that this make them easily fooled. it is specially true of academic lords, who are no more so experts, but who have even greater ego than classical physicists.

            another forms of effective stupidity is group effect.

            In LENR chemist have a great competence and mostly showed great intelligence, but they were trusting the physicist.

            basically intelligence is not a key factor in group stupidity, maybe rather a moderate aggravating factor.

            1-the first factor is the structure of terror/incentive/dependence. this is thje key to functional stupidy and groupthink.


            2-the second is ego, caused by perceived competences in a recognized domain, hierarchical position, prize…

            3-the third is intelligence which amplify the good or bad situation, allowing supreme effective stupidity when ego and incentive push it, or on the opposite allows deep analysis.

          • Alan DeAngelis

            Chemists don’t trust anyone. They don’t have that luxury.
            They actually have to make stuff or they’ll be out of a job.

          • good point.
            engineer too.

          • not bad after reading. Distanciate E-cat from cold fusion, as LENR.

            stay prudent but state that nobody could prove any unreality and refer to some recent replications (Parkhomov I suspect)…

            show the design of the old container…

            a box on cold fusion not too negative…. confirm opposition bu “debate continues”

            above any hope for french journal.


        • Obvious

          Matts, when you win your shovel, will you simply enjoy the moment? Or have we beat the prize up so badly here that we will have spoiled the honour?

          • 😉 I believe the risk is almost zero that I will be rewarded the shovel.

    • psi2u2

      Greenwin, that made my afternoon. I can’t stop laughing.

  • passerby

    Is there a transcript for the Swedish radio report? Preferably in English? The ecat Wikipedia entry links to it by way of some skeptic site with some really bolds claims but the actual link is just a small audio clip that mentions nothing stated in the skeptic’s site or the Wikipedia page. On close inspection it seems like a smear campaign but I don’t have an English version to check it for myself.

    • Freethinker
      • passerby

        What’s really shady is that the Wikipedia page for Rossi which uses the radio report as a source says the opposite of what the report actually says. In part 1 of what you posted it says “We have not been able to get hold of clear information if he appealed the sentence or any information on how much time he did spend in jail.”

        But the wiki page explicitly states that he was convicted and never acquitted and references the Swedish report as proof. I see nowhere in any of those pages a statement that actually verifies such a claim.

        • Mats002


          • builditnow

            The anti LENR / Cold Fusion / Rossi teams are now helping Rossi by giving him time to refine products and be further ahead of any competition. Interesting turn of events. Rossi is not currently in a hurry for LENR to go public before he is ready.

            So, the skeptics have accidentally teamed up with Rossi to give him every chance of being the first trillionaire … 🙂

        • psi2u2

          Typical wikipedia. That’s why I was topic banned on a subject I had studied for twenty years. Wikipedia has a serious infestation of pseudo-skeptics who rule the ethos.

        • Gerrit

          Wikipedia is infested by a group of editors who know very well how to bend all the rules, policies, guidelines and boards to prohibit edits to the article they don’t like. Anyone else will get topic banned eventually.

      • Freethinker — do you possibly know if there’s a transcript also from part 4 ( ) where the head of the science news team at SR, Ulrika Björkstén, explains why the reportage was made?

        • Freethinker

          Sorry Mats,

          Those are my own translations, and to be honest, I did not know that this 4th episode featuring Ulrika Björkstén existed even. I missed it.

          I just listened to it and found it to be utterly provoking. I feel ashamed being Swedish when we have people like her being front figures of public service science radio. She is a complete disgrace. She should be fired.

  • psi2u2

    I haven’t blogged on LENR for quite some time. I was going to blog the last TPT, but after questions emerged that seem serious at least in part (to me) I decided to hold off. Now here is what I need to blog again: any combination of one or more of the following:

    1) Parmakhov or other competent third party replication (which would make three total)
    2) A substantial new publication by the TPT team answering all the actual or alleged criticisms of the original report.
    3) Some other greatly ominous event that I can’t think of now because I still living in the old paradigm…..; )

  • Omega Z

    At Wiki,
    Anything positive about Rossi or the E-cat needs 20 credible sources in order to be grudgingly accepted. Note: Wiki is the sole arbitrator as to whether a source is credible. Even CERN is not considered credible for anything Rossicat. Their default is No one is credible in this matter.

    Anything derogatory in anyway or fashion as to Rossicat needs only 1 source from anywhere or any blog. Even Gary Wright is considered a credible source by Wiki.

    • We should do an experiment and start a pseudo anti-LENR Blog and test if false postings there are accepted as credible sources….

      And then go public with this.

      • psi2u2

        Excellent idea.

    • psi2u2

      “Even Gary Wright is considered a credible source by Wiki.”

      I know a regular wikipedia editor who has removed multiple references to published academic articles, including from Oxford University Press’s *Notes and Queries,* because they did not conform to his pseudoskeptical beliefs. At the same time he will rant you into the ground about “Reliable Source” (a key wikipedia concept).

  • More info about the Swedish Association of Investigative Journalism and Golden Spade (which actually is called ‘The Golden Shovel’ in English) — ironically founded in the year of F&P, 1989 ( ) :
    – – – –

    The Swedish Association of Investigative Journalism is a non-profit organization dedicated to the promotion and inspiration of profound, critical journalism. The association’s goal is to offer courses and seminars that improve the sharing of knowledge between journalists. Our magazine, Scoop, is published four times per year. At our annual seminar we distribute Sweden’s most prestigious journalism prizes: the Guldspade (“Golden shovel”) to the country’s best investigative reporters, and the Gyllene Dynamon (“Golden dynamo”) to the best investigative editor.

    In 1989, the first investigative seminar was held in Stockholm. It was organized by reporters who wanted to see a new kind of investigative journalism in Sweden following the murder of Prime Minister Olof Palme and arms trafficking by weapons manufacturer Bofors. The association is modeled after the American association IRE (Investigative Reporters and Editors). Our goal is for journalists to help other journalists. Through an exchange of experiences you can learn from others’ mistakes, so every reporter does not have to reinvent the wheel. The association’s informal motto has always been, “We are competitors to the deadline, then we help each other.”

    The jury of The Golden Shovel:
    Åsa Nicander, freelance
    Tomas Bresky, freelance
    Bertholof Brännström, freelance
    Britt‐Marie Citron,freelance
    Johan Wessman, Øresundsinstituttet – News Øresund
    Hanna Larsson, SVT (Swedish State Television)
    Christer Fridén, ex SR (Swedish Nationel Radio)
    Kicki Hultin, JMG (University of Journalism)
    Karin Sjöberg, freelance

    • Gerrit

      May some investigative journalist ask these people what they really know about the work that has been done in the field of LENR. They will expose themselves as ignorants.

    • Mats, you’re doing terrific work and are critically important as our closest professional eyes and ears to the Rossi saga.

      Don’t let any idiots make you feel differently.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    “The chaplain had mastered, in a moment of divine intuition, the handy technique of protective rationalization, and he was exhilarated by his discovery. It was miraculous. It was almost no trick at all, he saw, to turn vice into virtue and slander into truth, impotence into abstinence, arrogance into humility, plunder into philanthropy, thievery into honor, blasphemy into wisdom, brutality into patriotism, and sadism into justice. Anybody could do it; it required no brains at all. It merely required no character.”


  • Alan DeAngelis

    I’m drifting too far off topic but I really like this one. I don’t think we
    need to be scientist to appreciate this one (we can catch the drift of it):

    I was expelled from the University
    of New South Wales

    (An example of the suppression of science) by Stephen J.Crothers

    • Sanjeev

      I read it only half, but I see the matter. Suppression of science and knowledge happens sometimes but is much more than a quarrel between a student and his guides.
      It seems the student is brilliant and he made the mistake of showing his brilliance to his not so sharp teachers. Half knowledge is a dangerous thing and makes a person egoistic. He confronted people higher in rank and lower in intelligence, you can guess the rest of the story.

      The moral is, never show off too much before people who control stuff which you want, e.g. a PhD degree or a job. It hurts their ego and they start hating. True especially for students. First make yourself self-dependent, then publish. Simply ignore those who are incapable of understanding you. There is no point in preaching those who think they already know everything. In above case, he could have easily avoided conflict by doing the formalities needed to get a degree and later could have collected his noble.

      This should be followed in case of new discoveries like LENR too. People who are high in rank and are established in powerful positions are not saints (its usually reverse). Any confrontation means a problem for the inventor. Its much better to simply turn the invention into a product, because it attracts smarter people who have money and want to make more money. Its not even necessary to advertise your product as “revolutionary” that has turned science on its head, probably people will disbelieve and no one will buy it.

      In the case of LENR, there is no need to declare it as a nuclear energy source (it can be done, but not really needed if all you want to do is sell products and it avoids a lot of negativity and certification issues). Just announce that it is a “highly efficient process” which can lower your power bills. Call it a fuel cell or something.

      Keep the initial COP low, like 1.25 or 1.5. When your market penetration is so high that its impossible to suppress or disbelieve it, raise the COP and launch a “new and improved” version. Now you are a billionaire and no one has courage to say anything against you. You can providing thousands of jobs and people favor you because they are benefited by the product. No chance of suppression.

      Of course, the product will slowly become controversial, because some of the smart ones will notice that its overunity – an impossible thing. Some will start research/reverse engineering and make their own products. It will be too late for anyone to suppress it.

  • psi2u2

    I agree. Wikipedia often confuses the difference between skepticism and libel. One day it will bite them on the butt – and as much as I like to defend the freedom of expression, I will he happy when that happens.

  • I don’t think we’re complete loners. Not feeling the need to follow a group makes you a threat in many contexts, but when you meet people who have enough integrity it becomes less of a threat. I actually have great fun with people — more so with Italians than Swedish, if that could mean something 😉 Sweden is characterized by two cultural elements — the consensus culture and the engineering culture. The consensus is efficient, but also risky.

  • No

    • AlbertNN

      I would then be a little more specific when I write ” I agree X.” Otherwise it can look bad, as it does above.

      • You’re right — this time I was a little too much in a hurry.

    • in paris they failed to block free speech.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Hi bachcole and Sanjeev. What caught my attention was this talk of Crothers. He’s talking about the failure of general relativity. He has the whole physics establishment squirming.

    • Sanjeev

      It is interesting. I’m no expert on GR, but he may have something. He is not the only one to debunk the concepts of black holes or big bang, there are some more. As usual any one who tries to disagree with text books and status quo is branded as a crack pot by the self appointed “guardians of science”.

      In the end of the video, he mentions that (hot) fusion may not be a source of energy in stars, this can upset many who are surviving on the funding which depends on the assumption that the “hot fusion in stars” idea is a fact.

  • Obvious

    This is the sort of criticism I can appreciate. He did a good job of it.

  • GreenWin

    The next year will reveal a subtle but increasing acceptance of LENR by mainstream “consensus” scientists. The change is accelerated by the Indian Academies of Science publication of the Special Section on LENR in their peer-reviewed journal Current Science. Of course the Lugano scientists will become very well-known and ultimately given credit as early supporters of the seminal invention of this century. That they will continue to study the E-Cat effect is logical. How they choose to go about it is their prerogative.

    We will also see many more academics unafraid to speak out on LENR. Just as NorthEastern University Assoc. Professor of Physics, John Swain has in the LENRG initiative. This means LENR has returned to open-minded American classrooms. The question is, will Administrations support this science enough to keep up with Russia, China, India, Japan??? Or will American science continue to slip toward third-class status?

  • Sanjeev

    No alternate explanation given, except a mention of “electric universe” theory. I have no idea what it is.

    • psi2u2

      Sanjeev, here you go!

      • Sanjeev

        Thanks for the link psi2u2.

        • psi2u2

          As a watcher of large trends in “ideas” I speculate that the “electric universe” people, while despised within mainstream astrophysics and cosmology, are developing the next paradigm relevant to those subjects. It is well worth learning about, whatever one concludes. On Wikipedia, the “Electric Universe” entry was ritually executed a few years back. The “skeptical” editors thought they could do away with the phenomenon by deleting the page.