Gold From Mats Lewan’s Impossible Invention Book (Engineer48)

  • Quote

    The Lugano emissivity settings have been independently tested with a finding that Levi's settings IR camera adjustments were materially low.


    Which is part 1 of the issue.


    Part 2 (which Levi and also, interestingly, randombitio here) did not understand, is to recognise that the report graph - for total emissivity - is possibly correct. I say possibly because due to Al translucency we don't known, and the real result could move in either direction from theory...

  • Alan Smith


    Did you ever ask Levi why he didn't simply repeat (and properly calibrate and blank) his test with liquid flow calorimetry and a small ecat? The test Krivit questioned, the test Josephson asked him to repeat and the test which showed the most spectacular ecat results ever except of course, it was not done correctly.


    Quote

    I am not sure that the Upsalla crew ever stopped running hot-cat tests.

    We are not sure about anything about this crew since they won't reply to polite and relevant questions such as those by Clarke and others about their methods and calibrations. They have also failed to publish in refereed journals. They are undistinguished people. They received no perceptible support from their universities on the ecat issue even though this would be Nobel material. I have no idea why anyone believes them.

  • Quote

    There is really no valid excuse for what Darden did.


    Abd here has advanced the idea (you might consider excuse) that IH had to do what they did to knock the destructive planet Rossi Ni-H meme on the head - it was distorting research priorities. I may have got that summary wrong - in which case Abd will reply for himself.

  • THH,
    I looked into Alumina transmissivity. Manara et al. to the rescue yet again.
    2 to 3 mm should be sufficient to reflect and absorb all "transparent" IR wavelengths and cause the phonon resonance to coalesce to the standard alumina emissivity pattern. In other words, the selective emissivity pattern for Alumina is the total output once the optical thickness is sufficient, and that thickness is about 2 to 3 mm.

  • Quote

    THH,I looked into Alumina transmissivity. Manara et al. to the rescue yet again.2 to 3 mm should be sufficient to reflect and absorb all "transparent" IR wavelengths and cause the phonon resonance to coalesce to the standard alumina emissivity pattern. In other words, the selective emissivity pattern for Alumina is the total output once the optical thickness is sufficient, and that thickness is about 2 to 3 mm.


    Very interesting. Of course we cannot know there is 2-3mm everywhere, and also your statement would need quantifying, it is not an on-off thing. But is it pleasing if in fact that method can fairly properly give a decent result, subject to the various uncertainties about alumina surface etc.

  • Alan Smith


    Did you ever ask Levi why he didn't simply repeat (and properly calibrate and blank) his test with liquid flow calorimetry and a small ecat? The test Krivit questioned, the test Josephson asked him to repeat and the test which showed the most spectacular ecat results ever except of course, it was not done correctly.


    Because UniBo didn't want there to be any more Rossi stuff with their name on it or their staff involved. They took fright.

  • If Darden had done his homework, he could have tested Rossi's honesty and competence in less than a month at a cost of less than $100K. Instead, he let the debacle continue until he had lost $11.5M of the fund's money, was being sued, and would require legal talent in the millions more. Nice job. And yeah, he found out. Costly lesson... for his shareholders. His CEO salary and executive perks won't change.


    This is making assumptions about Darden that likely have no factual basis. What salary? What "executive perks?"


    The $11.5 million was spent immediately, and it was raised for the specific purpose (there are documents which show the timing). The shareholders knew what they were getting into, and, by the way, Darden was a major shareholder, probably the largest at that time, so he was risking -- and spending -- his own money. Darden likely makes money hand over fist with Cherokee. IH et seq is part of how he spends it.


    There was no way to test Rossi's technology "at a cost of less than $100K." How would he get his hands on it to test? He did not actually have any access to the technology until he spent $11.5 million, in 2013. What Mary Yugo is ignoring is the actual situation on the ground, and she is second-guessing experts, people who obviously know very well what they are doing, and that are able to inspire confidence in others to support them.

  • Abd here has advanced the idea (you might consider excuse) that IH had to do what they did to knock the destructive planet Rossi Ni-H meme on the head - it was distorting research priorities. I may have got that summary wrong - in which case Abd will reply for himself.


    I wouldn't put it that way.


    It was to find out what was behind the rather obvious appearances. It can happen that an eccentric inventor is paranoid or has other personality issues that will make him look, .... well, crazy or a fraud. And maybe he actually is one or both. IH wanted to know, needed to know, if his technology was real, so ... they bought it. It was the only way, probably. Rossi would have continued to reject any independent testing, yet he was able to set up sufficient appearances of "independent" -- such as the Lugano test -- that he continued to fill the LENR space with noise. Or with what will blow all of it out of the water by making all the serious and careful work a waste of time and money.


    They are not against NiH. I think they are supporting some NiH work, though I'm not certain of that. They needed to make the Rossi affair completely clear, and they needed to be absolutely sure. That took time, they needed to give Rossi maximum rope, every opportunity to demonstrate technology transfer. While facts are still coming out, and we haven't heard Rossi's answers to what has been brought out, it's looking quite clear for now: Rossi was a fraud. Whether or not he ever had anything real is not a part of that conclusion. He might have, but he was willing to use deception to create what has been called, here, "dramatic effect." He was not willing to engage honestly and openly with Industrial Heat. Given that they were entirely serious about the $89 million -- if Rossi had fulfilled on the contract, I'm quite sure they were ready to raise and deliver that payment, they would be crazy not to -- we are left with little but the conclusion that Rossi is insane or a phenomenally clever fraud, in certain ways, but more likely some of both.


    Before Rossi v. Darden, there were critics claiming that IH was idiotic for trusting Rossi. Of course, they assumed that Rossi was being trusted (I don't think "trust and verify" is simple trust). These are people who look at the world in black and white terms: good/evil, even true/false can be a problem, when they refer to judgments and interpretations rather than objective fact. Steve Krivit, for example, who has developed a whole conspiracy theory about mainstream LENR researchers, that they are out to prove that cold fusion is "d-d fusion," his bete noir. So then he alleges data falsification, etc., and has attempted to create employer sanctions against at least one target.


    It is all useless garbage. Yes, I was able to use Krvit's critique of M4 and the Italian work as a leverage into the study of SRI M4 and the ENEA/Violante report. His conclusions, however, were atrocious, often based on gross errors, and when we have a story about Bad Things, we make those kinds of errors easily. Confirmation bias.


  • Have Steorn officially capitulated? Or are they just quiet about the Orbo at this point?


    They are now saying they are out of money and need another large investment to continue. There have been ZERO confirmations of operation of any Steorn device at this point. The charade is finally coming to an end I believe. Why they still have the live stream still running with no operating devices is so odd..

  • Rossi has claimed that every single reactor he has ever built is capable of extended periods of self sustain. He usually claims that they are capable of one to two hours of heat output with zero or near zero input on the very conservative side.


    If I were to do business with Rossi, I'd ask for a very simple test: a one hour period of self sustain with zero input power (or very minimal to power "radio frequency generators" if required. I'd tell him that if the reactor melted down one minute after the hour long period was over, I'd be perfectly happy. Any reactor design would be permitted as long as a third party observed the quantity of fuel being placed into the reactor.


    One hour of self sustain producing an anomalous heat output of at least one kilowatt continuously for any reasonable amount of fuel would rule out any chemical source of heat.


    If Rossi would not agree to the test, I wouldn't do business with him, period.


    I don't know why IH didn't ask for such a test.

  • Abd : nonsense. All Darden had to do was ask for a proper short and comparatively cheap test by competent people of his own choosing. It's what Dick Smith did to Defkalion. Rossi, like Defkalion, could not allow such a test and would have refused it. That would have told Darden everything he needed to know because any honest inventor wanting a big investor would have allowed a black box test. This sort of thinking is exactly how those who think like you and Darden get bamboozled by crooks like Rossi. They depend on that sort of thinking and as I said many times, their main talent is in finding people who think that way -- like a conman's mark. You are a textbook hallmark example, Abd.


    @MrSelfSustain


    And you would get pawned by Rossi, big time, Sure a self sustain test should be easy with a reactor that makes 6X the power required to drive it! This has always been true and Rossi's failure to properly show it in 5+ years is evidence he was lying about it. But a one hour test says nothing. The source of energy is supposed to be transmutation from a heavier element to a lighter one with loss of mass, converted to energy. This is thousands of times more potent than dynamite or gasoline. A proper test would not involve Rossi, would treat the device as a black box, would provide many orders of magnitude more energy than can be accounted for by the devices's mass, energy storage, thermal inertia, etc. etc. And to avoid fraud, input power, output power, and calibration instruments and methods must ALL be provided and specified by someone OTHER than Rossi. But yes, IH should have demanded way more tests.

  • Alan Smith

    Quote

    Because UniBo didn't want there to be any more Rossi stuff with their name on it or their staff involved. They took fright.

    They didn't take fright. Academics don't do that. Most universities will do virtually any reasonable project if it is externally funded. Of course, they require the freedom to do it their way and to publish the results. The truth is that when told it would be done that way, Rossi refused to pay the contract amount. I wouldn't expect UniBo to work free on what everyone there except Levi knew to be a boondoggle.


    BTW, where did you get the idea they chickened out? From Rossi perhaps?


    And if you know Stremmenos, what is he thinking about his buddy Rossi now? Has the flowery orator learned anything from Defkalion?

  • Mary. You know ZERO about University life, and University boards of governors (or whatever) that's for sure! Universities eat money like elephants but are are as timid as mice. I spent 10 years teaching in one, and guest lecturing in others. Bunch of pussies in general.

  • Sorry, Alan, but in another life, I was on a major university faculty and I do know how they operate. Most cherish academic freedom and would have been delighted to examine Rossi's assertions using Rossi's money, if nothing else, for the possibility of finding him wrong.


    If you are curious about my personal details and agree to keep them confidential, contact me at maryyugo [at] yahoo [dot] com.

  • I'm not remotely curious. And BTW, there was no money. Defkalion's money (that they never paid - or probably even had when they promised it) was to pay for everything at Bologna. So no cash, no support no more work. And of course Professor Focardi upped and died - and he was the one who bullied the admin into doing the work in the first place. A lovely lovely man btw.


    BTW -I suspect US universities are not quite the same as European ones. Others here may have opinions on that.

  • @Alan Smith


    Of course Rossi had no money then. He lied about that also. Just like he lied about essentially everything else. It's fine that you're not interested in my real life credentials but then please try to refrain from telling me what I don't know about!


    I am sure Focardi was a peachy guy. Too bad he wasn't a bit meaner with Rossi and Levi. They rode right over him big time. The only good thing is, he never had to face that fact.

  • Infrared-optical characteristics of ceramics at elevated temperatures J. Manara ⇑ , M. Arduini-Schuster, M. Keller


    That one? Pay walled - but i can read it?


    It is not an exact fit - but does make a compelling case for what happens based on "pore diameter".


  • If you don't know why, you have not been paying attention. Rossi has never agreed to any definitive tests. Unless he could find a way to spoof your test, he would simply refuse. Go take your money elsewhere.


    You would not do business with him, he would not do business with you. He rejected many opportunities where those involved wanted to check things independent. It goes way back, before 2011. It's a deep habit with him.


    You no trust me, I no trust you.


    My opinion is that Darden made a decision that it was worth $11.5 million to them to find out. Part of this would be a bet that this was real technology, but merely with a paranoid inventor.


    What was the possibility of that? 1%? Okay, 1% of a possible trillion dollar benefit. Gee, why weren't investors lined up to take that risk? Okay, 0.1%. Still worth a billion dollars.


    But people mostly don't make bets like that except when they buy lottery tickets, which are weird because the expected payoff is generally negative, though sometimes a lottery goes into positive territory. And then tons of people buy tickets and the expected return still declines. An pepole don't buy $11.5 million dollar lottery tickets. Unless. ... they have a lot of money. And, uh, who has a lot of money here? And decided to put it into LENR, an enormously risky field?


    The thinking among experts about Rossi -- set aside knee-jerk pseudoskeptics -- was definitely that the possibility of reality was higher than 0.1%, possibly higher than 1%. This was knowing all about the negatives.


    But then, as well, Darden decided that IH needed to know, not just guess or gamble. That, as well, was worth $11.5 million for them, and the proof is in the pudding. With their bold move, and even when it was failing to generate workable devices, they then attracted $50 million from Woodford for real LENR research. It paid off! And yet people continue to think they were deluded idiots, if they had only paid attention to me, they would not have made that mistake.


    They may have made mistakes, but overall, they got exactly what they wanted. They wanted answers, and they created the conditions to get them.

  • Ah, Mary Yugo. Never say die, pretend to be a skeptic but make up stories that have no explanatory power, simply to make others wrong, and believe your own stories. Brilliant plan, eh?


    Abd : nonsense. All Darden had to do was ask for a proper short and comparatively cheap test by competent people of his own choosing.


    Mary, you have the crazy idea that Darden would put $1.5 million of his own money (because that is probably what he did in 2012) without doing his research?


    I have not confirmed all the details, but there are well-known people in LENR, highly connected, who witnessed Rossi demos well before 2011. Any move toward independence in measurement, Rossi vanished. This was known behavior. I'm pretty sure that Darden consulted with these people, they are "heavy-duty," you would never see one of them on a blog. These are the kind of people who drive Sifferkoll crazy.


    Consider the story about the meeting between Rossi and Darden. Rossi kicked him out of his office, apparently. Until 2013, and the boffo Validation Test, Rossi could have backed out of the agreement simply by returning the $1.5 million. And I'm sure he would have. IH asked for independent experts to be present at that Ferrara test:


    Quote

    56. Rossi further manipulated the Validation process by ensuring that his friend and colleague, Penon, served as the ERV for the Validation testing. Industrial Heat requested that “one of the big testing companies” work alongside Penon in the measurement and validation of the test. Rossi vehemently objected, insisting that having one of the big testing companies involved would “create big problems” for him.


    Now, we know that Rossi backed out of quite friendly opportunities, before 2011, because they were too independent. This is not generally public knowledge, but it's known and I'm sure that IH knew this. It was very obvious to the CMNS community that Rossi was not allowing independent tests. IH pushed it by asking. My guess is that Rossi almost bailed at that point, but they talked him down, no, it's okay, we have agreed to your expert and we won't back out.


    They already knew that for any reason, or almost no reason. Rossi might back out, he would have said something like, "Sorry, we aren't ready so here is your money back." Once Validation took place, Rossi could not back out on the License, in spite of his attempts to do so later.


    To your primitive mind, "allowing Rossi to cheat them" would be a horrible thing. By the way, I literally mean "the primitive mind," i.e,. the amygdala, that knee-jerk protects us. Great thing, the amygdala. Very useful when faced with tigers and crooks with guns. Or sort of. Trained response that sets aside the amygdala's reactions is more powerful, but for most of us most of the time, it works well enough in emergencies. It is lousy in long-term situations that require thinking outside the box. With the reactions of the amygdala, I'd never have gotten my iPhone back, see https://www.quora.com/Whats-th…nswer/Abd-Ul-Rahman-Lomax


    Make "big problems for him," by insisting on those independent engineers merely being there, it would be a certainty. He would not have gone ahead. And what, then, would have been gained? Not $1.5 million, Rossi probably would have returned it. Without interest, I assume.


    If this demand for independent testing had been made, as you would have it, Mary, before the Agreement was signed and $1.5 million was paid, it is very obvious: Rossi would have stopped talking with them. They had decided that it was important to "crush the tests." Read Darden's interviews, this guy is for real, it's obvious. Once gain, Darden's strategy was proven to work. This is very difficult for someone like you to understand, but consider the bank account of IH. It benefited. Greatly. Can you understand that $50 million > $11,5 million? (And we don't know about the Chinese. Some say there was another $100 million. If so, it's in some different holding company, possibly in China. Darden operates like that, study Cherokee and how it works. Very successful. Mostly local control.


    Rossi is even pissed about that, obviously, how come he isn't getting any of that money? But he didn't sue IH Holdings International, Ltd, I would assume that Annesser told him "No way." Annesser put together Rossi's ravings and put it into legal form, sort of.


    Quote

    It's what Dick Smith did to Defkalion. Rossi, like Defkalion, could not allow such a test and would have refused it.


    Yes. Precisely. They knew that.


    Quote

    That would have told Darden everything he needed to know because any honest inventor wanting a big investor would have allowed a black box test. This sort of thinking is exactly how those who think like you and Darden get bamboozled by crooks like Rossi. They depend on that sort of thinking and as I said many times, their main talent is in finding people who think that way -- like a conman's mark. You are a textbook hallmark example, Abd.


    Funny, I;m thinking back. Who bamboozled me?


    Ah. Look at that iPhone story. I gave the thief $100. But, ah, I got the phone back, my $100 and the $40 for the taxi driver was paid back, and I made a profit of $20. Really dumb, eh? I should not have let him get away with my $100. Many people have told me that it was a terrible thing to do. They would have had me take the loss of $400. Instead of giving a "low-life" $100.


    Darden made money. Really, that seems to be very difficult for you to recognize, Mary. It doesn't compute. We already knew that Rossi could not be trusted, By "we," I mean the entire CMNS field. But it was divided among those who thought he had something real, and those that didn't. And the situation was having an impact on research. Why put money into PdD, for example, based on watts of power, if lucky, when this guy might come out next year with kilowatts? Or a freakin' megawatt? (though, really, that didn't impress anyone with sense. If you can make kilowatt reactors, you can make megawatt ones, it's simply a matter of scale. Rossi's "megawatt" was a device for making tests difficult! And expensive.)


    The public buzz on Rossi was much more positive than the private opinions of researchers. Pseudoskeptics had discredited themselves with years of knee-jerk "bogosity." The one benefit that is true for the Rossi affair is that it got a lot of people looking at LENR. However, then there is the down side of Rossi being exposed as a fraud. It's difficult to assess, overall. They say that any publicity is good publicity. We will see.


    The Mary Yugo way: Rossi would still be making his claims, he would be selling licenses to suckers -- and hopeful people willing to take a chance that maybe it's real. And IH very likely would not have attracted the additional investment.


    I've had many discussions with Mary over the years. Mary flat out does not understand how the human mind works, how to live a powerful life, and is stuck investing much of her time, for years, on make-wrong, completely useless. Mary has no concept of what genuine skepticism looks like, Truzzi-style. If I want Mary to come unglued, hey, might be fun, I could point out how homeopathy is shown to be effective in clinical studies. Mary will then point out that it is ineffective in double-blind studies. She might think I don't know that, but, of course, I do. I could mention Sniffex and how dowsing rods work (and don't work). I could mention Power Balance bracelets and how I might make a little girl happy by buying her a Chinese knock-off for a couple of dollars. She'll think it's child abuse. Mary, do you have any kids?


    Really, I'm 72 and if the crooks are going to "banboozle" me, they'd better get to work. Ah, here's one. Was it Mary that wrote "hallmark"? Not Hallmark. Landmark.

  • A few hours ago Longview wrote:
    [ Now what's going on here? The "Master" with unviewable history, and our
    "Super Moderator" at odds over something obscure. Please summarize for the rest of us, when it is all worked out. ]


    Longview and others.
    While not addressed to me I thought I would respond to the above "work it out comment" as I remember some recent history.


    A while ago we had a forum member named Thomas Clarke. He was able to post using his real name on other forums without difficulty.
    While he was here; he wrote a definitive and often cited paper on issues with the Lugano report.
    (It was definitive in that for me at least it drove the last nail in that E-cat coffin).


    Until this paper and at this point in time we still have/had some folks sitting on the fence. Meaning that some agree and some don't agree that Rossi not only guides the tests, but they have reached the conclusion that the esteemed Dr. Rossi salted the samples and that the emissivity was off by a large margin of error. Not to mention radiation.


    Anyway to the point.
    Because of .... A ranting lunatic who does not understand boundaries made an effort to discredit him (IRL as it's sometimes called).
    This important voice was silenced.
    We have several people that believe people should use their real names, while others use pseudonyms. Please understand that if you disagree with something or someone says it is common decency to respect boundries.


    Hopefully we have seen the end of this stuff. It's time to call it out and stop it. We need to judge arguments not people, and silencing anyone is not only wrong but indefensible. I hope that what ever the moderators do is in the best interest of the forum and the continuing discussion. They do not have to account to me whenever someone breaks the forum rules. They can handle it as they seem fit. We are guests.

  • Until this paper and at this point in time we still have/had some folks sitting on the fence. Meaning that some agree and some don't agree that Rossi not only guides the tests, but they have reached the conclusion that the esteemed Dr. Rossi salted the samples and that the emissivity was off by a large margin of error. Not to mention radiation.


    The Clarke paper was not the first major critique, the problems with the Lugano report were covered before the end of 2014. The possibility of salted samples was obvious, and allowing Rossi to be the one to take the samples was a setup for that. How did that happen? I think Rossi created it. He always wanted, I suspected by the end of 2011, everything to be inconclusive, suspicious. Why? I don't know. But it has long been obvious, too many coincidences, too many incidents for this to just be some accident.


    Now, suspicion isn't proof and isn't even strong evidence. We knew all that.


    The biggest or most obvious problem with Lugano was that they calculated that the external temperature was 1400 C, but actual visual observation was apparently of an object far cooler than that. More detailed study of the calorimetric method, looking at emissivity, simply confirmed that. If the heat was much less, possibly no XP at all, then what does this say about the isotopic results? Do they prove that the no-heat analysis is false?


    No. The most obvious explanation becomes salting. The results were dramatic and clear enough that analytical error is unlikely, though I suppose it is still possible.


    Then we have the May 2016 sample given to Bo Hoistad by Rossi. Same analysis, same anomalies. But, wait! The Lugano sample was after a month. The Doral sample (if that is what it was), was after a year. Same results?


    Rather unexpected, eh? Unless, of course, this was a salted sample prepared back then, in 2014, and simply provided again to Bo. Simple. Not unexpected.


    Rossi is not a scientist and never played by the rules of science, in spite of what some of his fans think. Because of what is coming out in Rossi v. Darden, it is looking like he played it fast and loose and may have gone a bridge too far. We will see.


    So sequence: first comes the heat results. Then the analysis and what those results mean. It well could mean "fraud." From this alone, though, not enough evidence for criminal fraud, probably, unless something is discovered that likely will not be found. Nobody clearly was defrauded by Lugao. Fooling a bunch of "professors" is fun, not criminal. Rossi was always careful to say that the Lugano results were not his conclusions, but those of the professors. And, hey, "nuclear engineer."


    Watching Keystone Cops professors, one thing. But Rossi also hated big money and corporations. Fooling them -- or trying to, I'm not convinced that they were actually fooled -- when they had paid him a lot of money, and they were paying his friends, Penon and Fabiani -- with this weird "fake independent customer" who, whatever he was, wasn't independent in practice -- yes. A bridge too far. Way too far.

  • Adb, I am aware of the earlier critiques. I am usually behind in these threads as I try to read/understand/verify most if not all of the posts regardless of down/up votes. For me I am aware of my own confirmation bias. I could not find fault with the TC papers math nor conclusions. To me it was either yes or no at that exact point.
    While I can still respect peoples opinions this chapter seems closed to me. I follow only for E-cat for the saga at this point.


    LENR is another matter and my mind is still open.

  • The Clarke paper was not the first major critique, the problems with the Lugano report were covered before the end of 2014.


    While I agree with you, IH appears to present an entirely different picture in their filings, claiming that such critiques came later.



    The possibility of salted samples was obvious, and allowing Rossi to be the one to take the samples was a setup for that.


    Rossi didn't take the samples. The Lugano report describes what happened. Rossi was there, but the samples were taken/selected by the Lugano scientists.



    How did that happen? I think Rossi created it. He always wanted, I suspected by the end of 2011, everything to be inconclusive, suspicious. Why? I don't know. But it has long been obvious, too many coincidences, too many incidents for this to just be some accident.


    I doubt it, but that is what is required to entirely dismiss the Lugano test.



    Now, suspicion isn't proof and isn't even strong evidence. We knew all that.


    Right.



    The most obvious explanation becomes salting. The results were dramatic and clear enough that analytical error is unlikely, though I suppose it is still possible.


    Then we have the May 2016 sample given to Bo Hoistad by Rossi. Same analysis, same anomalies. But, wait! The Lugano sample was after a month. The Doral sample (if that is what it was), was after a year. Same results?


    Rather unexpected, eh? Unless, of course, this was a salted sample prepared back then, in 2014, and simply provided again to Bo. Simple. Not unexpected.


    That thought also crossed my mind. However, the leaked results from Bo Hoistad did not suggest that they were a Doral sample. Rossi has never suggested that either. And to my knowledge, neither has IH. You hedged yourself here by your parenthetical, and I think rightly so.

  • It would be interesting to know what the fuel composition was that IH supplied for the test. Did they send pure natural nickel with some normal isotope LAH, or was it spiked with something that would/could show up (or be clearly absent) if any switcheroo foolishness was attempted? How is it that the chain of custody of the fuel was known to be broken en route to Lugano, if the fuel was only made of mundane Ni and LAH? (Why would it matter if the chain of custody was broken, if the fuel is made of ordinary materials, other than IP leaks).