Now Time to Bring LENR Energy Into the Climate Change Debate

The following post was originally published here on this new website — — , and is reposted here by permission.

Recently took place the 24th UNF Climate Change Conference in Katowice, Poland and after difficult negotiations, a long list of new decisions was finally adopted.

No matter the results of the Conference, one specific key problem for the work against Climate Change unfortunately still remains unsolved. In spite of all research and development, the known fossil-free energy sources, solar, wind, water, bio-fuel and nuclear, booth from economic and practical reasons, cannot be expanded quickly enough to replace the enormous energy production today coming from the main high polluting CO2 sources, oil, gas, and coal. Many experts involved agree that there is a real urgent need for new types of CO2-free renewable energy sources, cost-effective and practical enough to push both governments and private industry into years of a constant, market force driven race towards the necessary ending of burning fossils.

A good part of that need might very well be met by LENR energy but very few are already aware of this. The fact is that today only a very small fraction of the Climate Change Conference audience, as well as the general world public, has ever heard of the term LENR ( Low Energy Nuclear Reactions). Still, the truth is that for many years already a number of dedicated scientists have been eagerly working to find out if LENR could be mastered into a clean source of renewable energy. Many from this limited worldwide community and its supporters have believed so for several years and now even more after the recent first public demonstration of industrialized LENR Energy in practical use The presentation included the first-ever industrially produced LENR generator module continuously producing 20kW of heat energy as well as further details about function and performance. Also, the commercial conditions and initial strategy for worldwide expansion was presented.

If the presented advantages from practical use of LENR energy are even close to being confirmed, Jan 31, 2019, could definitely mark history in the long-term fight against  Climate Change.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

“The secret of Rossi revealed?” (Video)

I received the following from a reader regarding a new video made bb Russian physicist Igor Danillov titled “The Secret of Rossi Revealed?”. The reader provides a translation from Russian into English, admitting that there could be mistakes.

The secret of Rossi revealed?

Video of the Russian physicist Igor Danillov from 12 February 2019:


Igor Danillov proposes a hypothesis for the Rossi effect.

He examines this figure on the website of Vessela Nikolova:

His colleague Sergey Tsvetkov supposes that with the help of argon it becomes possible to achieve this enormous quantity of energy. In the reactor itself there is a thin wire of about 1 mm, which is about 1.5 cm long.

Igor thinks that the argon, which on the figure is connected only with the control panel, could be the source of Rossi’s secret.

According to the Hydrino theory, in a normal situation the hydrogen can not pass in a lower position. But in some special conditions such positions are accessible and we can achieve maximum output of 137 squared x 13.6. 13.6 is the energy of ionization of the hydrogen.

But in which conditions is this possible? If we have argon or helium in an energized condition, energy of 4 x 13.6 eV is radiated and when this energy is dissipated on the electrons of the hydrogen, these electrons can pass to this lower position.

In this connection there is a theory of Celani, the Italian physicist. He tries on this way to explain the classical work of Randell Mills.

So, in normal situation the hydrogen can’t pass in lower position. But when we heat it and mix it with helium or argon, then these lower positions become accessible.

In the theory of Celani there is a hypothesis about the electron’s structure. It is supposed that if on the electron energy of 4 x 13.6 eV is dissipated, the electron can pass to such “inner” positions. This inner, lower position in the hydrogen’s atom become accessible for it.

The recipe of Randell Mills is very simple: the hydrogen is mixed with helium or argon, then through this mixture electric currency is passed, a discharge. When we pass powerful electrical currency, the helium or argon ionize themselves, and going to the basic condition they radiate energy, this energy is dissipated to the electrons of the hydrogen and these electrons, or part of them, go to the lower position and radiate enormous quantity of energy.

In this theory we don’t speak about the Coulomb’s barrier. So is the Randell Mills’ plant working.

So Igor expresses the hypothesis that this is valid also for Rossi’s reactor. There is a composition of aluminium hydride and nickel and it is immersed somehow in argon. Then there occurs discharge and in this reactor runs the described process. The energy is very big, in the range of MeV, which gives this enormous power output.

So, Igor’s advice to the experimenters: they could try to replicate this. If you have a plant with COP=2, try to add argon and a discharge. And let us see, perhaps there really will begin such reaction and there will be really a huge energy output as in E-Cat.

Igor offers this hypothesis for consideration and for experimental examination. Here there are no nuclear reactions, simply the hydrogen’s electrons pass to lower positions.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

“Spontaneous Generation of Heat in Recently Hardened Steel” (1917 Paper)

Thanks to sandy_r for pointing out this paper, originally published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society A. in April 1917.

The title of the article is “Spontaneous generation of heat in recently hardened steel” authors are
Charles F. Brush and Robert Abbott Hadfield.

The object of this paper is to show that various kinds of steel, including carbon tool steel, “high speed” tungsten-chromium steel, and other similar iron alloys, after being quenched at a high temperature and hardened, spontaneously generate heat for at least several weeks in appreciable and measurable quantity, the rate of generation of course steadily diminishing. The paper is divided into two sections. First the research work relating to this discovery which originated with one of us (Brush) and which in the second part has been further experimented upon and verified by one of us (Hadfield). As the paper contains important new facts of much interest, it seems desirable that the results should be brought before the Royal Society.

Link to the full article is here:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

“Andrea Rossi proposed collaboration with Russia” (Video)

A reader has alerted me to a new video that has been produced in Russian by Igor Danailov titled “Andrea Rossi proposed collaboration with Russia”

The reader provides this description:

10 February 2019

The Russian physicist Igor Danailov states in this video:

“Mr. Andrea Rossi has empowered me to make a proposal to my audience. This is about a collaboration on production of his generator E-Cat SK direct in Russia and on the sale of heat on the Russian market…”

Now Igor Danailov asks for help to find appropriate Russian businessmen and institutes for the developing of this proposal.

Hopefully we will get some help understanding this better from Russian speaking readers.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Google, University of Maryland File Patent based on ‘High Density Electron Clouds’

Thanks to Max Nozin for referencing a new patent application (published February 7th, 2019) filed by Google Inc. and the University of Maryland, College Park on Aug 3, 2017.

The title is “Enhanced Electron Screening Through Plasmon Oscillations”.

Here is the abstract:

Enhanced Coulomb repulsion screening around light element nuclei is achieved by way of utilizing electromagnetic (EM) radiation to induce plasmon oscillations in target structures (e.g., nanoparticles) in a way that produces high density electron clouds in localized regions of the target structures, thereby generating charge density variations around light element atoms located in the localized regions. Each target structure includes an electrically conductive body including light elements (e.g., a metal hydride/deuteride/tritide) that is configured to undergo plasmon oscillations in response to the applied EM radiation. The induced oscillations causes free electrons to converge in the localized region, thereby producing transient high electron charge density levels that enhance Coulomb repulsion screening around light element (e.g., deuterium) atoms located in the localized regions. Various systems capable of implementing enhanced Coulomb repulsion screening are described, and various nanostructure compositions and configurations are disclosed that serve to further enhance fusion reaction rates.

The term ‘high density electron clouds’ is familiar in connection with the E-Cat. Rossi’s recent paper “E-Cat SK and long range particle interactions” starts with this sentence in the abstract: “Some theoretical frameworks that explore the possible formation of dense exotic electron clusters in E-Cat SK are presented.”

The Google/U of Maryland Patent talks about ‘low energy fission’ in the ‘Field of Invention’ section:

The present invention relates specifically to the generation of the light-Nuclei elements (LNEs) Lithium, Beryllium and Boron by the process of low energy fission, breaking down, Carbon, Nitrogen, and Oxygen (CNOs) with the introduction of instability to the CNOs heavy stable isotopes through the application high-frequency radio waves at the NMR frequency, in the presence of a strong magnetic field, of the targeted source material.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Mats Lewan Publishes Review of E-Cat event and Photo of Early E-Cat QX

Mats Lewan has published a new article on his An Impossible Invention blog reviewing the event on January 31st here:

Mats’ basic takeaway is that even though the presentation was not the slick or polished presentation that most people would expect under the circumstances, that it served its purpose in letting potential customers that Leonardo is open for business, and identifying the types and characteristics of industries and customers that he willing to deal with.

In addition to the review of the event, Mats has also posted a previously-unreleased photo of what he describes as an “early prototype of the E-Cat QX on which the E-Cat SK is based”

Photo: Mats Lewan

Photo: Mats Lewan

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

LION Shows Experimental Setup

Thanks to LION for the following post. He has not posted any results yet but says “I will say more tomorrow evening”:

Some pictures from a recent test, showing experimental set up.
There were 6 tubes in total.
2 containing the thermocouples shown




2 tubes 5 months old.
2 old tubes from 18 months ago.
All tubes had been run in previous experiments.
More details to follow tomorrow when I can get back to the computer to do some usb microscope photos of the cave system beneath the hole.
The AA went through the tube ,the quartz tube and 1cm into the brick.
There were simultaneously Hot and Cold Zones as recorded by the thermocouples.
I will say more tomorrow evening.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Natural Plasma Balls and LENR — Hesseldan Norway Phenomena Examined (Bob Greenyer)

Bob Greenyer has made a series of videos regarding ‘fire ball’ phenomena that have been observed in the Hesseldalen valley in central Norway. Starting in 198 residents of this valley observed many unusual lights in the area, some of which were filmed and photographed and have been documented on this website:

Bob’s videos explore this phenomenon and examine the possible link between ‘natural plasma balls’ and LENR. He examines research from an Italian research team which studied the area in 2002. Researchers took powder samples from the vicinity of where local witnesses had seen fireballs, who found radiation readings many times above background.

His videos are here:

He has also a written a blog post on the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project’s Steemit account here:

Here is Bob’s conclusion from that post:

Apparently natural atmospheric plasmatic ball observations yield data that is in line with multiple low energy nuclear reaction systems observed by the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project, suggesting that there is a link between the two.

The possible relationship of mineral deposits local to daytime, non lightning related fire ball phenomena should be investigated. Ball lightning observations not due to lightning may become a method of discovering mineral deposits.

An attempt to see if there is any correlation between the observation rate and solar, magnetosphere or cosmic phenomena should be considered.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Major Advances in Science are not Recognized for Decades (Axil Axil)

Thanks to Axil for sharing this comment today in this thread.

In 1839 a young Frenchman, Alexandre Edmond Becquerel, experimented with electricity in his father’s lab. He was passionate about phenomena of magnetism, electricity and optics, which scientists had only started to understand. He noticed a strange occurrence: an electrolytic cell generated more energy when it was exposed to sunlight. He called it the photovoltaic effect.

Forty years had to pass for another two scientists, William Grylls Adams and Richard Evans Day, to discover the photovoltaic effect in a solid substance. Then, in 1905, Albert Einstein explained the fundamental physics of it, which ultimately led to the quantum revolution in physics. Yet even eight years later, great physicists such as Max Planck considered this explanation foolish. With an apparent lack of practical applications, all these breakthroughs had not been taken forward until a US company, Bell Labs, made the world’s first useful solar cell in the 1950s. The rest is history.

Science is a passion driven by curiosity. It is not a job, it is an obsession driven by the need to know.

Alfred Lothar Wegener was a German polar researcher, geophysicist and meteorologist.

During his lifetime he was primarily known for his achievements in meteorology and as a pioneer of polar research, but today he is most remembered as the originator of the theory of continental drift by hypothesizing in 1912 that the continents are slowly drifting around the Earth. His hypothesis was controversial and not widely accepted until the 1950s.

Ludwig Boltzmann faced massive ridicule for his work on thermodynamics, eventually committing suicide in 1906. His work was largely carried on and extended by Paul Ehrenfest, who faced similar ridicule, committing suicide in 1933. Their work laid the foundation for modern statistical mechanics.

In 1927, Georges Lemaître put together data about the redshift and distance measurements of galaxies to infer the expanding Universe, writing to Einstein about his findings. Einstein responded, “Your calculations are correct, but your physics are abominable.” Yet Lemaître was correct, with his conclusions predating Hubble’s identical ones by two years.

Fritz Zwicky, who first inferred the existence of dark matter in the 1930s, had his results dismissed based on the absurdity that such a significant fraction of the Universe could be hitherto undetected. The work of Vera Rubin and Kent Ford in the 1970s led to dark matter being seriously considered, but the work of Zwicky could have given us a 40 year head-start on the puzzle.

The really major advances in science are not recognized for decades after they have been made by those obsessed with knowing and discovery. These discoveries are just too hard to accept by the current paradigm of the day. As it has been, it remains so today. There are great advances in science that have been made but are currently being ridiculed. It just takes decades for these advances to pass the test of time and to come of age.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Proposed Mechanism for the E-Cat SK (TheFutureIsNow)

The following comment was posted on the Journal of Nuclear Physics by TheFutureIsNow, and the poster subsequently made contact with me and gave me permission to repost it here. I was able to ask some follow-up questions to which he provided responses.

For a little context, TheFutureIsNow had previously asked Andrea Rossi if he had observed plasma balls in the E-Cat, and Rossi responded “yes”.

January 9, 2019 at 1:10 PM
Dear Andrea,

Through my online research I’ve discovered that the existence of a fire ball (plasma ball) with a double layer on the surface (protons in the interior and electrons on the outside) is critical for the negative resistance phenomena to take place. The plasma ball acts almost as a capacitor or a source of energy to sustain the negative resistance. During this same time period, the plasma ball sustains itself by absorbing radiant energy (mostly heat) from the general plasma environment and begins to produce a self-generating oscillation. This oscillation is basically the conversion of heat into electrical current by the plasma ball.

Due to the production of anomalous energy (in various forms) allegedly generated by a number of different devices producing plasma balls, it is logical to assume that in addition to zero point energy extraction LENR reactions are taking place near the double layers where positive ions and electrons can interact. If this is the case, this amazing self organizing plasma structure in the QX would take the heat generated, convert it to electrical current, and project this electricity through the discharge. A portion of this electrical current (perhaps a significant amount) is converted in the general plasma into heat and light! What remains can be collected as electricity.

No steam boilers, no thermo-electric panels, no photothermalvotaic devices with tiny gaps: the plasma ball ON IT’S OWN converts the heat generated by LENR into electricity. The light and heat are primarily massive losses, but future versions of the QX could be designed to minimize the production of heat/light and boost direct electrical output.

So fundamentally to maximize the energy produced by the plasma ball (if LENR produces a significant portion of the heat) the proper fuel mixture should be utilized. The first step seems to be choosing one or more noble gases. Argon is obvious the FIRST choice. However, additions of other gases like neon could also optimize the formation of the plasmoid.

Next, once the noble gases have been selected, we need to look at the fuels that would be undergoing nuclear reactions. The two most obvious that come to mind are hydrogen (protium with no neutrons) and deuterium (with a neutron). My understanding is that deuterium has a higher cross section for nuclear reactions than hydrogen. Moreover, in spinning up the plasmoid, adding some quantity of deuterium would allow for another layer of positive ions to form with a different mass.

Finally, we need to think about what the hydrogen and deuterium would interact with, in addition to possibly themselves. My guess is that lithium is an ideal fuel for a number of reasons. Basically, in a large number of experiments by different parties, it seems to be susceptible to nuclear reactions with hydrogen/deuterium at very low energies (a few hundred eV) far below what is predicted by traditional nuclear physics (hundreds of KeV minimum). Another fuel that should not be totally ignored are the NANO-PARTICLES produced via sputtering from the electrodes. These metal particles of nickel, manganese, or potentially even other metals such as platinum could also undergo nuclear reactions, although at a lower rate than lithium.

Everything else is basically about helping sustain resonance (design of the power supply so it acts like a tank circuit), possibly applying low powered frequencies to the plasma ball after the initial pulse to help sustain it, and to keeping the plasmoid free floating and away from the electrode surfaces which would produce massive erosion.

Q: Where is documented the existence of a fire/plasma ball with a double layer?

A: There are an abundance of mainstream scientific papers that describe the production of “fireballs” or “plasma balls” in DC plasma discharges during the transition to a negative resistance zone in which a reduction in voltage can lead to an increase in current. These papers also describe how the fireballs (basically macroscopic plasmoids) have a double layer consisting of interior positive ions and exterior electrons. The various conditions by which these fireballs can be produced and how they can be manipulated is also discussed.

Here are some selected links:

“Comparative studies performed on “fireballs” formed in direct current and high frequency discharges”
by M.Sanduloviciu, C.Borciat, V.Melnig and C.Gherman (see p. 172 of this document)

“Mechanism behind self-sustained oscillations in direct current glow discharges and dusty plasmas”
by Sung Nae Cho

“Negative Differential Resistance of the Discharge Plasma through Fractal Space-Time Theory” by Maricel Agop, Dan G. Dimitriu, Silviu Gurlui

Q: What do you think causes negative resistance?

Negative resistance is caused by the creation of a plasmoid or fireball in the creation of an arc discharge. The double layer becomes a source of ions that can feed the plasma and allow for the negative resistance to take place. If it were not for the plasma ball, there would be no negative resistance.

Q: What is a meant by a “double layer” and why do you think it is significant?

Any transition from a glow discharge to a true arc discharge (with positive resistance) will require the discharge going through a negative resistance zone. Mainstream scientists are now able to explain how the double layer of a fireball or column of plasma is what provides the energy that powers the negative resistance. Without such a fireball, the negative resistance would not take place. Basically, the fireball is constantly absorbing radiant energy (such as heat from the plasma) and storing it up like a capacitor and then discharging it to allow for the negative resistance effect. The double layer is the portion of the fireball that interacts with the overall plasma in the tube. When it comes to LENR, the double layer of such a plasmoid is where nuclear reactions can take place. The heat from the reaction is then absorbed by the fireball which then transforms it into electrical current. These “self sustaining oscillations” can then produce electricity, heat, and light.

Q: What do you think is the difference between zero point energy and LENR?

3) Zero Point Energy and LENR are two different phenomena but they may possibly both take place in reactors like Andrea Rossi’s SK. Zero Point Energy could be defined as energy extracted from the vacuum of space which is filled with limitless energy. Some calculations have been made by cutting edge scientists like Harold Puthoff that a tiny area of empty space (for example the space in a coffee cup) contains enough energy to boil away all the world’s oceans. LENR energy could be defined as energy collected after matter is made to undergo nuclear reactions. However, in the conditions present in the SK, both types of energy could plausibly be produced. For example, some researchers in the field of zero point energy claim that sudden non-equilibrium and non-linear motions of electrically charged particles (ions) can cohere the active vacuum which results in electron-positrons pairs being extracted. The positrons could then annihilate with electrons in the environment to produce energy. However, this is only one mechanism by which it’s plausible that energy could be extracted from the vacuum.

Q: Where do you think the excess energy in LENR comes from?

I think the excess energy comes from both nuclear reactions (probably the bulk of the energy) and potentially the extraction of electron-positron pairs from the active vacuum. In the E-Cat SK, the non-linear and non-equilibrium conditions involve sudden accelerations of ions that may allow for the vacuum to be manipulated. My guess is that in the future we will be able to design LENR systems to control the ratio of power extracted from LENR reactions vs. the vacuum.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged