“Cold Fusion: Hunter of the lost treasure.” (Spectrum.de Article)

Thanks to Veblin for providing a link to a new article from the German Spektrum.de website titled “Cold Fusion: Hunter of the lost treasure.”

The original German article is here: https://www.spektrum.de/news/jaeger-des-verlorenen-schatzes/1564692

A Google English translation is here:

The author, Janosch Deeg, reviews the current field of cold fusion, and contrasts it with “Hot” fusion. He interviews Hartmut Zohm, professor of physics at the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München who is working on the hot side of fusion. Zohm was a doctoral student at the Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (IPP) time of the Pons and Fleischmann announcement, and neither he or his colleagues there could replicate the Pons-Fleischmann effect.

On the cold side of fusion, Deeg interviews Peter Hagelstein of MIT who is a champion of the LENR effect in the academic field, and is working to understand what might be going on the phenomenon. David Nagel, a professor of computer and electrical engineering at George Washington University tells Zeeg that there are results in LENR research that can’t be explained away. Swedish physicist Hanno Essén is also interviewed, he still seems convinced that Rossi has developed a working LENR process (Essén was one of the first academics to witness an E-Cat test).

From the article:

He [Essén] is pretty sure that the E-Cat is actually producing excess heat: “Based on the measurements I participated in and the reports of other independent scientists, I would say the evidence is pretty good that Rossi can generate unusual heat.” In his opinion, there are enough other physical effects that have not yet been explained. That’s why LENR is not unique to him. He describes Rossi as a “hard-working entrepreneur with numerous skills.” Essén criticizes, however, that for the inventor rather the economic than the scientific interests were in the foreground.

I think the article is a fair and neutral review of what is going on in LENR at the moment. On the experimental side of things, from numerous published articles and reports, there very interesting results that have been reported, which point to nuclear effects happening. But I don’t think things will change too much in terms of mainstream interest until there are useful products available in the marketplace.

  • cashmemorz

    Germany is one of several countries, that have people that tend to get involved in controversial topics in physics. Also in Gemany, is the Eindhoven Technological University that have examined Randell Mills theory, Grand Unified Theory-Classical Physics specifically for experimental confirmation or refutation of that theory. This was in 2007.

    German university evaluation and introductory course for the GUT-CP:


    The GUT-CP looks like a highly developed theory for what seems to be going on starting with a purely classical interepretation. The classical approach has had a resurgence when the QM view of the electron could not be used to get the Free Electron Laser fully developed. There are others who are developing a classical model of the electron to explain LENR:

    Use of the GUT-CP in mainstream research towards an explanation of unorthodox phenomenon:

    New Paper: “Binuclear Atoms: a model to explain Low Energy Nuclear Reactions” (Paolo Accomazzi)

    Others, who have developed models of the electron, that are similar to the model of the electron according to Haus and Mills: 1990: Bergman, D. L., and Wesley, J. P., “Spinning Charged Ring Model of Electron Yielding Anomalous Magnetic Moment,” Galilean Electrodynamics, vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 63-67 (Sept./Oct.,1990)


    Vessela Nikolova on her website E-Cat “The New Fire” has an interesting article in which she and physicist and science journalist Mario Menichella discuss ideas from two preprint articles by F. Celani, A.Tommaso and G. Vassallo with these authors

    1. “Maxwell’s Equations and Occam’s Razor”

    2. “The Electron and Occam’s Razor”

    The main point made by these authors is that instead of considering the electron to be a particle, which is the commonly held concept accepted by quantum physics, they propose a model of “a current ring generated by a massless charge that rotates at speed of light along a circumference whose length is equal to the Compton wavelength of the electron”

    The interview covers many details of their theory, including how it could be compatible with the work of Holmlid, Iwamura, Mills and Rossi/Gullstrom.

    If the GUT-CP and similar theories work as well as they are purported to, then those looking for a working theory to explain LENR should take a closer look at those theories instead of insisting that QM is the only game in town.

    • causal observer

      I don’t know if I remember this correctly from Physics 202, however I believe that QM evolved out of Statistical Mechanics. As such, QM has always only been a way of modeling how phenomena can be measured, and that it never purported to say anything about the reality under the mathematics.

      The challenge to that approach is that QM is limited in its ability to see beyond its own math. The math is sufficiently powerful that it has predicted unexpected things that have then been found in experiments, e.g. EPR paradox. However, it cannot predict phenomena outside of its assumptions, such as the GUT theory of the electron.

      So there very well could be things yet to be discovered, and, as I read regularly in Science Daily, serious researchers in nano-materials, micro-energy and photonics are looking for ways to see over the fence.

    • Gerard McEk

      TU Eindhoven is a Dutch University, not German.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    “Essén criticizes, however, that for the inventor rather the economic than the scientific interests were in the foreground.”


    • Buck

      semantically obscure quote !

  • scottlshman


    You don’t need to understand how a locomotive works in order to travel on a train.

    If I were Andrea Rossi I would build small LENR power stations and sell electricity rather than eCats.




  • hunfgerh

    State of the “Cold Fusion” in Germany

    Since Pons @ Fleischmann I deal with the phenomenon of “cold fusion”. The statement of the two, to have triggered a nuclear fusion at room temperature has not let me go since then.Their statement was based essentially on the empirical finding to have carried out a reaction with an efficiency> 1. They could not provide an idea of ​​the process.

    An analysis of other abnormal observations in the P @ F experiment ultimately led me to the electron /neutron capture postulate (e- / n-capture theory). I introduced these in 2001 in patent application DE10109973 A1. In 2005, Widom @ Larsen postulated a similar course of reaction. However, both theories differ substantially in the
    ability to feed the startup energy for e-trapping into the reaction system.

    It is known that in the (hot fusion) the proton-proton repulsion counteracts the fusion of the protons. Therefore the
    protons must have a high kinetic energy to overcome the repulsion.

    The idea that electron-electron repulsion may favor fusion is new. The idea here, the K- electron of the hydrogen atom is to be pushed into the nucleus by an electron cloud around the hydrogen atom. This forms a thermal neutron: H + E1 -> n + v. The thermal neutron is trapped in a subsequent reaction of excess hydrogen and forms
    deuterium (actual fusion): H + n -> D + E2.

    Because E2> E1, finding P @ F efficiency> 1.

    The next step was to clarify how in the electrolysis experiment U = 12 V, I about 1 A a corresponding electron cloud around the hydrogen atom can be formed.

    The observation of Li deposition after long electrolysis times – in the P @ F experiment – ultimately contributed to solving the puzzle. For this purpose, Pd wires were coated with lithium and saturated with hydrogen according to the method described in DE102008047334 B4. Resistance measurements of the surface layer thus produced showed that the surface layer has superconducting properties at room temperature.

    With a current flow> 1 A, through a wire (diameter approx. 1mm) – coated in such a way – inside the surface layer
    current densities of 10exp-11 A / m2 are possible.The amount of charge present therein is mathematically sufficient for e-capture.

    The coating of the wires, as well as the resistance measurement, were carried out in the μ-ampere range. This
    prevented the triggering of a fusion.

    Working above 1 A would trigger a fusion and thus violate the Atomic Law (German Atomgesetz).

    The government was informed in several letters and asked for help in the further exploration of this interesting area. No reaction from the government, no outraged reaction of the scientific side to this schizophrenic Situation.

    • hunfgerh

      //With a current flow> 1 A, through a wire (diameter approx. 1mm) – coated in such a way – inside the surface layer current densities of 10exp-11 A / m2 are possible.The amount of charge present therein is mathematically sufficient for e-capture.//

      Sorry, the correct value is 10exp11 A/m2.

      See also https://sites.google.com/site/h2sucofu/home/high-current-density

  • /* things will change too much in terms of mainstream interest until there are useful products available in the marketplace */

    Are we really paying the scientists for parasiting on results of already successful private research? This is the crucial question here.

  • cashmemorz


This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.