A. Parkhomov supporting Replicators in their attempts?

I have a great respect for Alexander
Parkhomov. He tried to reproduce (and to improve) the experiments of
Rossi without funding, in his living-room. He improved the scientific
level of the Rossi's experiments, but his work is like my
self-funded experiments with our Fusion Diodes : we try to do honest
science, but it's still « amateur science ». (Even if this amateur
science was done by a great russian scientist)

We need now to work in serious, well
funded and well equiped academic or industrial labs. It is the only
way to check for all the experimental errors.

I like the point of view, and the way he wrote it of Alan :
« The current race to LENR is not like a medieval war of fixed
territory to share... it is Western American frontier, with more land
that what the shovel in the cart can cultivate. Time to plant the
fences will be lost time. »

I am very happy to see so much
interested to the LENR all around the world. I hope that the future
« Microsoft » or « Google » of the new fire
will established by the young men and women who meet together to
promote this new energy.

Best regards,

Fabrice David

To emphasize the problem with replication of this form of reaction let's consider replication of the Pons and Fleischmann observation that resulted in "May 3, 1989 Physicists Debunk Claim Of a New Kind of Fusion". Replication was unsuccessful because the origonal condition of the palladium couldn't be duplicated. The same applies to using nickel at this time. Very difficult to duplicate the surface morphology of the nickel available to the experimenters. Until luck is taken out of the equation it will play a very frustrating role in success or failure. A lot of reactors will end as fiascos.