Wednesday, September 28, 2016



Image result for selling your soul quotes quotationsImage result for parallel quotes

It can be a good short term business, but...  Too many parallel lines in LENR...


a) What are the two Mottoes about?

The first one is sad. When after 1989 Romania became again a capitalist, normal country I have discovered very fast that the capital unpardonable sin in this regime is to be poor and made great efforts to get rid of this status. Now this has evolved and the correct statement today is "people feel guilty if they have less money and assets than they want" The effect- locally and globally it is lot of corruption.  People do ugly harmful things for money including killings and false witnessing. LENR seems to not be immune to this, one of the symptoms can be the sudden, total spectacular change of opinion & position & tone regarding the main Conflict from the field.

The second Motto is about things that cannot meet in LENR but had to. I will tell more about this in the coming days.

Answering to a comment by Simon Derricutt

I have no idea who Simon s, however he seems to have a positive reputation- and it was said he is good thinker.  Habitant of the IH Planet for the time giving but ..who knows, I dare to hope he will not use insults and will not refer to imaginary diagrams and manufactured proofs that I have to swallow passively.. I will answer to his comment:

He speaks about"honest mistakes" and "conservation of energy" too somewhat  out side the main subjects 

In order to achieve a commercially-viable form of LENR, it makes sense to me to see what works to a small extent and try to improve it. If we have something that works reliably, it also aids the theoreticians work out why, which can then lead to a better experiment. Trying to replicate a process where the data is obviously false is not a good path. Limited resources are better spent in replicating experiments where the data is honest and believable. 

Dear Simon, this is in my opinion a capital error, in technology/inovation the things do not work in this way. The solution is usually based NOT on incremental, step by step increases but on sudden quality leaps, not only on changes but on deeep transformations. See, very recently I offered this :

Learn from the Best: Google’s Nine Principles of Innovation 

 Please read about no. 3. "10X better than ten percent." Believe me, I have personal experience in innovation, do not follow the dogma! What you think is good for development not for real innovation.

For Rossi, how the data was faked is not really relevant. There's no point in arguing how it was done. If the heat had been produced, it would have had obvious consequences that have not been noted.

It is not about Rossi- it is about a technology than can be VERY important. You speak about "faked" as about an axiom; the Test lasted a year and nobody told it was a fake. Do you seem to have absolute certainty it was a fake-  ab ovo- the problem has 
an imposed solution, isn't it? But if it was a fake, than it is obvious that what the leaked ERV Report in Exhibit 5 says - for 10 months mean values- 1398kg/hor water, 68.7C warm water converted in 102.8 C steam is not OK. If as it was said the result was simply 20kw in 20 kw out- I hope you can easily calculate it- means actually 31 liters of water per hour.  How was the flowmeter convinced to show 1398 instead of 31? Such a difference is easy to be remarked.
You have not seen the ERV Report (I don't know why IH does not makes it public if its inded a catastrophey- think about the flowing- the inner temperatures of the ECats are also shown there- are they as low as the steam temperature or more hundreds of degrees as if the thing works? Still thinking 20kW in, 20 kw out? It was said you are a thinking being..

I'm thus no longer interested in following the Rossi saga. I do however still expect that others will succeed. LENR research is alive and well. More parts of the puzzle are emerging, such as the metal hydride patent that Alan Smith unearthed.

LENR country is  a free one, you can be interested in what you decide to. It is clear that what we need is serious, powerful competition for Rossi's claims. But- back to Google's principle no 3 it is additive excess heat vs, multiplicative excess heat.

It is still possible that there is indeed some transmutation happening in Rossi's reactors, though there is as yet no clean evidence about that. It is not possible that they produced the amount of excess heat he claims in the Doral test.

I think you well know about the leaked result- analysis made in Sweden, very significant isotopic shifts. The authenticity of the sample can be denied, however the plant in Doral can furnish thousands of ash samples for analysis.  myriads of proofs. 

Please think over the situation and your position, things can be complex., I hope you are not in the sphere of influence of the first Motto.


1) Edmund Storms' paper for ICCF20
I have received a poster paper aimed for ICCF20 and I have obtained the kind permission of the author to offer it to my Readers- as it is; very condensed great idea/words ratio. My thanks to the Author!

A Description of the Mechanism Causing LENR

Edmund Storms ICCF-20 • 

All theories rest on assumptions. 
 • These assumptions must be clearly stated and be consistent with observed behavior. 
• Progress in understanding LENR is hampered by the repeated failure to state and justify the assumptions used to explain the behavior. 

2 The assumptions on which this theory of LENR is based are as follows: 
• The LENR process cannot take place in a normal chemical structure but instead requires a unique and rarely formed modification called here the nuclear active environment (NAE). 
• All observed LENR takes place in the same kind of NAE. 
• Formation of the NAE follows all the laws known to apply to chemical processes.
 • The nuclear mechanism must function in collaboration with the conditions 
existing in the NAE. 
• The nuclear mechanism involves fusion and transmutation by all isotopes of hydrogen. 

3 These assumptions are so well supported by observed behavior that any explanation in conflict should clearly explain why this conflict exists. 

LENR has two faces: 
Chemistry creates the unique conditions and physics describes the nuclear process. The phenomenon can only be explained by a marriage between these two sciences with LENR being the offspring. 
The theory needs to be applied what is real about the material not to the ideal conditions imagined to be present. 

 4 The logical consequences of these assumptions are as follows: 
• The LENR process involves two separate steps. The nuclear process cannot take place without the NAE being formed by modification of the normal structure. Consequently, identification and creation of the NAE must be the first goal in the reliable creation of the LENR effect. 
• Once the NAE has been identified, this understanding can be applied to creating the NAE in all materials in which LENR might be initiated. 
• A crack having a gap of a few nanometers is proposed to be the NAE in this theory. 

5 Other assumptions and consequences can be found at: 
• “The explanation of low energy nuclear reaction”, Infinite Energy Press, Concord, NH, 2014. ( 
• “Explaining Cold Fusion”, J. Cond. Matter Nucl. Sci. 15 (2015) 295-304. • “How the explanation of LENR can be made consistent with observed behavior and natural laws”, Current Science 108 (2015) 531-4.
• “How Basic Behavior of LENR can Guide a Search for an Explanation” , J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci. 20 (2016) 1–39 (to be published).

2) Update on House Committee on Armed Services LENR Directive

3) NEW THREAD Me356's #1 Secret For Excess Heat Revealed

4) Conversations on LENR with John Maguire (Ed Storms and Frank Acland)

5) Rossi: Research on QuarkX is ‘Jazz, not Classical Music’


Discovery: A new form of light
Date:September 26, 2016
Source:University of Vermont
Glow-in-the-dark stickers, weird deep-sea fish, LED lightbulbs -- all have forms of luminescence. In other words, instead of just reflecting light, they make their own. Scientists have discovered a new method to create fluorescent light that may have promising applications from LEDs to medical imaging.


Problem Solving at Its Finest

From Tanmay Vora:
5 C’s for Great Talent

Tuesday, September 27, 2016



Image result for domination quotationImage result for domination quotations gorbachev

True in LENR too.              We have to stop the rise of Arturo Ui-s!


My dear known and unknown Friends!

Please help me and my readers by sending me your papers, posters, presentations, slides, videos- whatever- so that I can publish them here in the very day they are presented at Xiamen or Sendai.
An anticipated great Thank you!



On the LENR Forum in the known threads I continued to discuss with my opponents and nothing changes- their real motivation is domination- everybody must think what they think. Facts and logic ignored by them.
This is the tactic, they claim repeatedly, with increasing vigor:

Nothing is what it seems, so you are not able to see the truth. However I will explain it to you and you MUST believe me!

Good as tactic, but on long term- strategy not,  they will learn that if in mechanics reaction is equal with action, in psychology the reaction can be much greater than action. Without my fight even they will see how the resistance of independently thinking skilled people will sweep them away. See the first Motto.

What motivates Abd ul Rahman Lomax in LENR

 for myself, I am motivated by several things.

1. When I see someone who has earned respect through years of hard work being attacked because he disagrees with Peter Gluck, I may defend him. I have previously posted a link to DefendEachOther, a long-standing internet concept; in this, it is not our responsibility to defend ourselves, and it is often counterproductive to do so. It is our responsibility to defend others. I defended Rossi against intemperate attack from Steve Krivit, and I don't regret that at all. It was noise, distracting from the real situation. What critics like Krivit and Mary Yugo point out is often obvious, but reality is more complex than the models they are attached to. Criminals, as an example, can be more trustworthy than ordinary people, sometimes. I've been a prison chaplain, I'll testify to this.

2. CMNS is a scientific field and requires a scientific approach. Science approaches "fact" with caution. Law is actually similar, but law is perhaps more socially developed. Science is also social. When I have knowledge that is uncommon, I consider I have some obligation to share it. Right now, I have uncommon knowledge about Rossi v. Darden, because I have studied those documents over and over to write about them. I have uncommon knowledge of the history of cold fusion (not unique knowledge and Jed Rothwell and Peter Gluck have been around a lot longer than I have, in the field as to being active. Nevertheless, I came in and approached the field with some new perspectives, and so I saw things that had sometimes been missed. I write about them.)

3. Because it's there. Because I am involved with LENR. I see things and write about them. To an extent, this is an addiction. As an addiction, I may engage in it out of balance. Hence this is all a topic of discussion with counselors and therapists, friends and family.

4. I want to see Peter happy for the rest of his life, and the way he writes, he's not happy. He is far too attached to conditions that he cannot control. For some years before Rossi v. Darden, it was obvious that Peter had identified "LENR+" -- which can only refer to Rossi's work because Peter's idea was this was "stronger" -- as the hope that he might see successful LENR before he dies. Peter is only a little older than I. I'm not worried. What I see is that I have already been successful, and LENR is on its way. How far it will get before I die does not matter so much to me. I have already reached goals that are satisfying. There may be more -- maybe even much more -- but it's not a necessity for me.

5. If I become peevish and start doing what Peter started to do, I sincerely hope that my friends will warn and restrain me. So I am doing for Peter what I would want my friends to do for me, hoping he will recognize what is being said to him.

Long, with many mixed elements

It was a longer discussion and my conclusion is that it is impossible to discuss with people using invented stories, diagrams and other facts, who have completely different standards of truth and a different sense of reality and values than myself, - so I broke the diplomatic relations with my two opponents. My compassion to IH for using such ineffective propagandists.


1a) Good prospects for Leonardo Corp./Andrea Rossi lawsuit vs. Cherokee Investment Partners/Thomas Darden 
Update Sep 27, 2016

1b) In October there will be a hearing on that paper before Judge Altonaga:


1a) MFMP: LENR LIVE proposal 1: The neutron sparkler

2b) MFMP Publishes New Video and Slideshow: Doppelgänger — Does a 2006 Patent Describe the ‘Rossi Effect’?

2c) Fleischmann Project Makes an Intriguing Statement
3) From Andrea Rossi's JONP

September 26, 2016 at 8:03 PM

Dr Andrea Rossi,
Are you oriented to define LENR your technology, or you think it belongs to other fields?
Thank you
Andrea Rossi
September 27, 2016 at 12:05 AM

We belong to te LENR field.
Warm Regards,
September 26, 2016 at 12:05 PM

Mr Andrea Rossi,
Can you explain which has been the inspiration that made you arrive to the present results?
Andrea Rossi
September 26, 2016 at 7:09 PM

The spark has been started from the first announcement of F&P. Eventually, after I reaized that the electrolysis was conducting nowhere, the idea to use nickel as a catalyzer of compounds with hydrogen came from the enormous work, and experience, I made with Ni as a chemical catalyzer in hydrogenation processes when I made experiments for my thermolytic plants from 1976 to 1994. Obviously the matter was totally different, but ideas and intuitions make tunnels between arguments apparently strange to each other.
Warm Regards,


Lowering the heat makes new materials possible while saving energy
Date:September 26, 2016
Source:Penn State Materials Research Institute
A low-temperature process has been developed that has opened a window on the ability to combine incompatible materials, such as ceramics and plastics, into new, useful compound materials.

Measuring Scientific Impact Beyond Citation Counts
Soon Scientometrics will be necessary for LENR too


Without tenure, professors become terrified sheep

Monday, September 26, 2016



Image result for "inner motivation" quotes


Starting a discussion or a monologue about motivation

The string of LENR Forum: "Peter Gluck, Blogger-Advocate for Rossi"- was renamed by the nice Moderator at my request- the word Technology being added to it.
It has  some 9 pages of teachings for me with many adjectives used by my opponents. The wisdom of Abd is at its best here. Today I published here the following challenge:

"As a continuation of the editorial of before of yesterday about Orwellian features in the behavior and language of my opponents, today I want answer to some wrtings of Abd, mainly in this thread. Pedagogical ones most, he wants to taech me the truthT
But first- the name of this thread is based on verbal dishonesty- the most important word was removed from it tendentiously:
It could be "Peter Gluck- blogger supporter of Rossi Technology"
I do not remember making apologetics or contributing to a cult of personality of Andrea Rossi. I just refused to participate in his systematic demonization which has descended to extreme forms as Rossi tearing out instruments from the Plant.Conspiring to the use of only the half of the pipes in the plant (lower or upper half?) ( see the Orwellian editorial till now ignored)

In the Leonardo-IH conflict I want now to compare the essence - my motivation with the motivation of my motivation.


My approach to LENR is that of a technologist and of a problem solver. The Rossi party claims the plant has worked well, multiplicative excess heat, ERV reports are correct real description of the situation, their history chronology has logical consistence and a good technical background.
IH's approach is the opposite, anachronistic, with proofs that I find as weak and unconvincing.
Therefore I am motivated to see thee trial as showing the Technology works, the LENR problem IS solve already.
I care for LENR.
If I say i want to see the verdict because I am both curious and motivated, Abd will use an other verbal trick saying I am obsessed but I am not. I am rational, I have my opinion and this does not make me disruptive.

What motivates you, Abd and Jed in this affair?
They know what their motivations, priorities and desire are.

Obviously Jed and Abd are engaged in many disputes, the resistance against them is increasing- they were even called trolls that do not respond to logic,,(not by meI think they have a substitute of logic)- so they couldn't answer but they can explain to their fans what drives their actions, evaluations and predictions
What I fear is that they have already totally lost their inner motivation- care for LENR, Jed owned it in a peculiar form- and now they are externally motivated by IH and- what is worse their metamorphosis described here:
is not more reversible. But we will see...

1) Rossi vs. Darden, new document at the Court pacermonitor:

Friday, September 23, 2016
54 motion Strike More Definite Statement Fri 3:30 PM 
MOTION to Strike50 Answer to Complaint, Third Party Complaint, Counterclaim,,,,,,,,, in Part Second Amended Answer, Affirmative Defenses, Counterclaims, and Third Party Claims, or in the Alternative, , MOTION for More Definite Statement by Leonardo Corporation, Andrea Rossi. Responses due by 10/11/2016(Annesser, John)

2) From Andrea Rossi's JONP

Sam Talbert
September 26, 2016 at 5:56 AM

Dr Andrea Rossi,
Based on your information, what do you think will be the most interesting presentation at the next ICCF?
Thank you if you can answer,

Andrea Rossi
September 26, 2016 at 6:40 AM

Sam Talbert:
I think the new paper of Prof. Norman Cook is important. His papers are always worth to be studied.
Warm Regards,

September 25, 2016 at 8:55 PM

Dr Andrea Rossi:
We can see that more and more institutional scientific entities are funding R&D in the LENR field, much more than before your work has been known.
I think this can be considered also an achievement of yours.

Andrea Rossi
September 26, 2016 at 6:42 AM

Thank you. It is true.
Warm Regards,

3) Eventually a first reaction to Steven Krivit's new LENR book, in Italian:
25 SETTEMBRE 2016n
Hacking the Atom

4) Cold Fusion- the first signs of a mediatic thawing
Fusione fredda | LENR: prime tracce di disgelo mediatico?


Science Finally Confirms That People Absorb Energy From Others

Sunday, September 25, 2016




  • Image result for :bad luck" quotesImage result for :bad luck" quotes
    • Good Advice
    • True wisdom knows
      it must comprise
      some nonsense
      as a compromise,
      lest fools should fail
      to find it wise. (Piet Hein) 

To make it clear the second image Motto is NOT for Ethan Siegel


Actually this is a message to physicist Ethan Siegel following the paper committed recently by him:

Dear Ethan,


I am your faithful reader, I like almost anything you are publishing in the Science Blogs, I admire 
a) your knowledge in physics, 
b) your logic,and 
c) your connection to the universal culture- the context of your writings.

In contrast with these is my following reaction to your recent paper re Cold Fusion/LENR:

Is Cold Fusion Feasible? Or Is It A Fraud?

It was published also in Forbes and it generates lots of echo-papers and citations given you are an authority in Physics and your words have weight and impact. However  being an authority means also having a serious responsibility and therefore I am writing now this letter to you.

The history of our dispute re LENR Cold fusion.

See please this blog issue dedicated to your former Cold Fusion paper from 2014:


You can find other consideration re your ideas regarding Cold fusion here:

Critic of your paper

a) Obviously the paper is an half assed opus in which you have invested neither documentation nor creativity it has exactly the same logical structure and content as your former paper:
Throwback Thursday: the Foolish Fallacy of Cold fusion

b) You have now re-used your story A similar to story B, story A ended badly ergo story B will end badly too trick from the former paper now and the Kempelen Farkas
Turk chess player makes some>40% of the paper AGAIN. I considered it ab ovo irrelevant for any scam, it was a proof of a genius inventor and a genius chess player
and of the marvels of mechanics plus it had humor. A bad choice of you, belonging to both the Hungsrisn snd Romanian language based cultures, I have a very positive vision of the story well described in the Wikipedia.
I guess you are a passionate of chess, so I am too see please:


c ) It seems you strongly dislike the idea of Cold Fusion per se, and you take it literally as fusion at low temperatures- it is more friendly to use its newer name,more realistic Low Energy Nuclear Reactions. Recently a very important study has demonstrated the existence (but not yet the usability) of LENR- 


It is not fair to ignore this, as well as the rich LENR classic literature star
ting e.g. with Edmund Storms' second book:


Or take a look to the program of the coming ICCF20- in Japan and China.
LENR exists and is alive.
However it is not prosperous nad the main point of this message is to explain you- nd not only to you the reasons for the nedemic howawever curable development problems of LENR.


The birth and early history of Cold Fusion is/are  not well understood, even and in a sense, mainly in the LENR community which is tragically fragmented, divided and recently (2011) -split. In April 2016 a local civil war has started there.

The start was as unlucky possible the broad phenomenon being discovered at a bad time, in the worst place possible, in an underdeveloped form by two geniuses having an improper profession for this great discovery- electrochemists. In the Fleischmann Pons Cell, Cold Fusion was drowned in (heavy) water and constrained to work at temperatures less than that of boiling water. The Cell has shown beyond any doubt the very existence of excess heat in amounts  greater than chemistries of all kind could explain however has worked in self-limited conditions, the phenomenon being weak, unreliable and of rather short duration. The alternatives as Piantelli's NiH were marginalized and considered as heretic. The competition of Hot Fusion and the theoretical impossibility of low temperature fusion by linearly thinking physicists have lead to the fast conversion of LENR in a pariah science; unfortunately science was unable to inspire emancipatory strong results.
The truth- PdD a la Fleischmann and Pons is not a complete, optimal form of LENR was and is not recognized. LENR has heroically survived despite its debility due t the heroic efforts and admirable creativity of its faithful experimenters. A great variety of theories  have been published but their connection to the experimental progress is -euphemistically speaking- vague.
So our Pechvogel science had a very unhappy youth being not able to solve basic problems as understanding of identity and nature, intensification, reproducibility, scale up... The Physicists have claimed that LENR belongs o them- and i dare to think this is an other unlucky factor.
Being a Pechvogel myself living in an oppressive society, having tragic family problems, fighting for survival- I could not dedicate my actiivity to experiments and when I could in principle it was too late and i too old.
But I was free to think and to tell what I think as now based on the results of my colleagues to whom I am deeply grateful.
My approach was of a technologist and a problem solver my dream is that LENR will be the energy source of the future.
So in 1992 I made a review of the existent data and have concluded that cold fusion includes a catalytic phase, takes place in active sites, and these depend on the dynamics of the surface metal  atoms  (surfdyn):

  It was later published  in Fusion Technology, but due to my Pechvogel nature it went unnoticed.
Then in the very first issue of Infinite Energy I have concluded that due to the unexpectedness, strangeness, complexity  and extreme difficulty of Cold Fusion cannot be solved by science (read for then- physics) alone, without the direct contribution of technology

[9] “Why Te[chnology First?” 
Infinite Energy 1s tissue, March-April 1995, p 26

A blasphemous, unpopular idea - it exists a cult of the Scientific Method, no shortcuts are admitted.

OK, years have elapsed progress was incremental. Then in 20111 Rossi- an entrepreneur and inventor has arrived with his claim of enhanced excess heat. 
It was bad luck or else that no insider LENR-ist found a solution.
The rest of the story is very complex- Rossi's 1 year 1MW experiment is now denied by Industrial Heat and a trial is in full development. I am convinced that Rossi's data are valid- his long time test a success. Rossi' has opened new horizons to LENR
at higher temperatures(up to 1400C) tyhe Surfdyn effect makes excess heat from additive to multiplicative. But it is not easy!
However only the first commercial generators on the market will bring certainty and the conversion of LENR from a Pechvogel in a regular science technology with a great future..

The conclusion of the Siegel paper.

"This doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re lying, that LENR is impossible or that there’s fraud going on. But it isn’t the job of science to prove that someone is fooling us; it’s the job of a good scientist to prove to the world that we aren’t fooling ourselves when we make an extraordinary claim. As soon as that bar is cleared — and that starts with the people working on this making an extraordinary effort to demonstrate that bar is cleared — we can promote LENR or cold fusion to the realm of real, robust and incredible science. But until that day, we should all remain skeptical."

It says nothing, but it says it well.
I think and hope, somewhere in the near future a dialog with Ethan will be possible-
if he wants to take real responsibility for his statements about LENR.


1) The Energy 2.0 Society/ LENR 101
Date:September 23, 2016
Source:Cornell University
Multiferroics -- materials that exhibit both magnetic and electric order -- are of interest for next-generation computing but difficult to create because the conditions conducive to each of those states are usually mutually exclusive. And in most multiferroics found to date, their respective properties emerge only at extremely low temperatures. Now researchers have combined two non-multiferroic materials, using the best attributes of both to create a new room-temperature multiferroic.
Closing in on high-temperature superconductivity