ISCMNS: 12th International Workshop on Anomalies in Hydrogen Loaded Metals 2017 - near Asti, Italy - 5-9 June 2017

  • Then let me try it with tendencies of the people you talked to:


    1. LENR ist going back into the dust where it came from within the next years.


    2. The current experiments are positive and reproducable but in the milliwatt range nobody (with money) cares about - we are still at least 20 years from commercial applications.


    3. We see positive results with cheap LENR (Nickel et. al.), have multi Watt output and see the potential to scale it up. With these results we could aquire sufficient funds.


    Are you biting? :-)

  • Alan,


    You participate as a mod on LF (LENR central), and you run LFH...so yeah, I'm guessing they whisper sweet nothings in your ear because they want it out. Discretely that is. McKubre said something like "we are all keeping the same secrets from each other", and encouraged more openness. MFMP was formed in large part because of the tight lipped nature of the field, and frustration with it's lack of progress. Surely it won't hurt LENR if more insiders speak up...rumors, hopes, dreams, gossip, observations and all.


    Most of these researchers are getting up there in age also, and have nothing to lose, and everything to gain by having their experiences put in the public record. At least that way, if LENR goes back underground, or is buried, some future aspiring scientist can dig it up and build on it.

  • The current experiments are positive and reproducable but in the milliwatt range nobody (with money) cares about


    An experimental procedure reliably exhibiting milliwatts of excess heat (e.g., in a PdD system) with no commercial prospects would be very interesting. (1) Skeptical labs could run the experiment and see it with their own eyes. (2) You would be able iterate on the experiment with different controls and variables until the mechanism is isolated. Once the mechanism is known, it will be easier to assess whether you can tweak it or, without assuming that there is only one LENR mechanism, transfer it to a different set of precursors to produce commercially interesting amounts of heat.


    An NiH system that operates in the watts or perhaps kilowatts is surely more interesting commercially speaking. But a low performing experiment that is nonetheless able to serve as a lab rat would be worth the funding needed to investigate it.

  • An experimental procedure reliably exhibiting milliwatts of excess heat (e.g., in a PdD system) with no commercial prospects would be very interesting. (1) Skeptical labs could run the experiment and see it with their own eyes. (2) You would be able iterate on the experiment with different controls and variables until the mechanism is isolated


    Swartz has supposedly mastered the mW range, and said he would sell lab kits for years now. Still has not done so though. He is getting up there in age too. Be ashamed if he retired to the "LENR Old Folks Home" bringing his secrets with him, without ever having sold a single kit. Oh well, at least he can tell Alan his trade secrets at the LOFH bar...I hear they have a great happy hour. :)

  • Swartz has supposedly mastered the mW range, and said he would sell lab kits for years now.


    So I hear. The papers I've read from him are overloaded with theoretical considerations, and I have yet to see independent confirmation of his work (although I haven't specifically kept an eye out for it). So count me as skeptical.

  • Whatever you might think of Mitchell Swartz or Mike McKubre, nothing much gets past them. They could be of immense help to my own research, and as we don't care about the money side of things, that might in turn lead to helping the world. Quite enough reward for me.

  • Alan,


    There is no animus towards Swartz, and certainly not for McKubre. Instead I think there is a frustration with those like Swartz, Larsen, Piantelli and the like who have been on the LENR scene for many years, claiming to have it all figured out, yet nothing ever comes of it. At the least, those like Jet Energy predicting a product in x amount of time, that does not materialize, should at least offer an explanation as to why. Don't you think?


    I could also add BEC in there too, although they only have to answer to their investors from here on out. BrLP...well, they of all have been around in some form or another the longest (1991), promised the most and so far delivered nothing, but at least Mills gives reasons for the delay's. No one else does though.


    And what about Duncan's "Seashore LLC", and his TT venture with SKINR/ENEA? Of all, Duncan is the one we most want to hear from -good or bad, but nothing at all from him. Biberian too...who is this German firm he is partnering with to commercialize LENR? Why all these secrets.


    Like I said...no one is angry so much as frustrated with the lack of communication, and follow-up. Most of these guys/girl, look willing to take their knowhow, and knowledge to the LENR RV park up there in the great beyond.

  • Shane D.


    There is growing awareness amongst some of those in the LENR field that the years since '89 spent hanging on the coat-tails of academia and striving for respectability via peer-reviewed publication have ended in failure when measured by conventional standards. For this realisation we can thank Rossi, who whatever you think of him has raised the profile of LENR and brought in new younger workers and also new funders ( new = nothing to do with IH). For this reason alone, I think (and expect/hope) we might see some interesting developments before 2020.

  • Shane D.


    There is growing awareness amongst some of those in the LENR field that the years since '89 spent hanging on the coat-tails of academia and striving for respectability via peer-reviewed publication have ended in failure when measured by conventional standards. For this realisation we can thank Rossi, who whatever you think of him has raised the profile of LENR and brought in new younger workers and also new funders ( new = nothing to do with IH). For this reason alone, I think (and expect/hope) we might see some interesting developments before 2020.


    One possible reason that may have contributed to LENR not being sucessful in gaining traction with academia in its effort to gain respectability is the deeply flawed and simplistic theory put forth that was a insult to the experience and intelligence to those in professional science.

  • For this realisation we can thank Rossi, who whatever you think of him has raised the profile of LENR and brought in new younger workers and also new funders ( new = nothing to do with IH). For this reason alone, I think (and expect/hope) we might see some interesting developments before 2020.


    I do not recall ever seeing a young face pictured at any of the ICCF's. Just a bunch of old farts like... well, most of us here. :) It would be comforting to see some of those that have the courage to face the obstacles they are sure to encounter.


    The rest ("we might see some interesting developments before 2020")...I won't hold you to. If I did, I might expose myself to another disappointment.


    And while at it...what is up with Gluck? Kind of worried about him.

  • Until 2020, we did not live to see! Now we need a new energy! Oil contributes to global climate change. We must all join together and seek new energy. I am a geologist-geophysicist physicists want to say that they are not on the right track. Physicists live old laws of the structure of the planet Earth, they do not correctly understand the laws of nature. I have given the world a new theory, and it is the first on the Internet! Help me to collect a model of the planet Earth, and we get new energy! Physicists big crisis, listen to geologists, geophysicists, and draw conclusions. The time we have left, the planet Earth is dying before our eyes. Let's save the world and yourself!

    Images

    Нефть - это кровь планеты, надо сделать модель планеты и мы получим генератор Тарасенко, эта энергия покорит вселенную! :lenr:

  • It's always nice to receive a reward, I admit. But the article by Georges Egely is interesting in that it emphasizes the role of what I call the "Citizen Science". That is to say the science made by independent inventors and citizens who are not part of the official academic academic establishment.