MFMP: Titanium/Vanadium Neutron production [safety warning]

  • Interesting: on many levels

    Ethics.. physics.. confidentiality... liability

    The presentation starts after 14 minutes


    According to BobG...

    because of the Paris attacks in 2015, Piantelli avoided ( and perhaps concealed )

    using Nickel with Titanium/Vanadium because they release neutrons/ gamma radiation from transmutation)

    Interesting to see if household friendly excess heat can be got without using Titanium/ Vanadium.

    also .. how many of the other transition metals appear to give out neutrons


    Carpentiri found that rebar steel appears to have produced anomalous Scandium under high pressure fracture? 2015


  • So Sorry, I have an opinion that contradicts the current thinking of MFMP.

    Here is why.

    If you remember, Celani said about the January 14, 2011 demo as follows:

    “After various vicissitudes, because the reactor was having major problems, some inner resistors had broken down; Mr. Rossi came out of the room delighted: "The reactor has started". Before he came out, a few minutes before, I had independently measured that both the gamma detector and the mini Geiger had hit the top of the scale, whereas the two detectors of electromagnetic interference were not showing anything.”

    This meant that a short but intense emission of gamma radiation had taken place.

    But while the reactor was in operation, at the demonstration on January 14, no measurable nuclear radiation was detected. Villa wrote:

    “The energy power input and output and gamma radiations were measured before, during and after the active phase of the system, as well as the hydrogen consumption. While a net energy output was observed, no γ excess (with energy above 200 keV has been measured above the natural background level (<180 Hz rate in single mode, compared to an expected rate largely in excess of 1 MHz).”

    Rossi eventually fixed this radiation problem by getting his reactor up to operating temperature before startup by using a secondary heater that was used preheat the reactor to a high operating temperature. Currently, Rossi does not use lead for radiation protection.

    IMHO, Piantelli sometimes sees radiation because he runs his reactor cold. The radiation elimination mechanism (Bose condinsation) requires vigorous pumping( high heat) to get the BEC going.

    By the way, the "signal" marks the start and end of the BEC formation.

    I give reasons why a BEC eliminates radiation from the LENR reaction here

    Using String theory in condensed matter physics

  • "We've been sitting for two years and a half on this piece of information which could have potentially led to a fast track to LENR proof - we decided to not reveal it until now because we thought it's too dangerous" [paraphrasing]

    Clearer now?

    EDIT: in other words:

    1) What purpose would serve to tell (or hint) someone that an experiment he's doing could be dangerous if he is not also made aware of what exactly can make it dangerous? It would not be a credible claim unless it can be substantiated, nor would deter most who can from trying anyway.

    2) If the finding can lead to a quicker acceptance of LENR with the potential of shutting down the field, so be it and reveal it. It's not like waiting more will make it any less dangerous, and people would eventually find out anyway once massive experimentation of successful experiments takes place. Plus, to "shut down the field" (assuming this would be actually possible) it would first require one or more expert bodies to acknowledge it's about a real phenomenon. Seems like a win-win situation to me, if radical. At that point you have the serious governmental/academic attention that would have been required in the first place in dealing with it.

  • 1) What purpose would serve to tell (or hint) someone that an experiment he's doing could be dangerous if he is not also made aware of what exactly can make it dangerous? It would not be a credible claim unless it can be substantiated, nor would deter most who can from trying anyway.

    can : W,Ti,V and others are extremely dangerous for amateurs because they mostly consist of a mixture of isotopes which behave completely different.

    There is ample literature about W/Ti and dangerous radiation/ byproducts not only in LENR... We here only warn the amateurs. As you might know, there are no bad chemists/experimental physicists by the law of Darwin.

  • Can wrote:What purpose would serve to tell (or hint) someone that an experiment he's doing could be dangerous if he is not also made aware of what exactly can make it dangerous? It would not be a credible claim unless it can be substantiated, nor would deter most who can from trying anyway.

    That's an ethical question that three informed MFMP researchers decided to solve in a particular way.

    The feedback mostly has been positive on ECW.

    MFMP cannot quantify what is the risk or say how it arises but a few elementary precautions to minimise the exposure to possible radiation can be taken

    such as monitoring for radiation, .. admittedly neutron detectors are not cheap...and minimising the undetereds DNA exposure to it

  • That's an ethical question that three informed MFMP researchers decided to solve in a particular way.

    The feedback mostly has been positive on ECW.

    MFMP cannot quantify what is the risk or say how it arises but a few elementary precautions to minimise the exposure to possible radiation can be taken

    such as monitoring for radiation, .. admittedly neutron detectors are not cheap...and minimising the undetereds DNA exposure to it

    What I am saying is simply that claims of unconventional dangers in LENR experimentation (that is, besides what is proven by commonly accepted science) have to be backed with repeatable and verifiable data and not to be used as an excuse to withhold information like others (and to some extent MFMP too, by their own admission above) have done in the past. Hopefully dedicated testing to shed some light on whether those concerns are founded will start soon enough.

  • Bob Greenyer reported on E-CatWorld moments ago that a researcher emailed him that he got successful results with Vanadium Oxide. If the oxide form of the element is fine too, Titanium (di)oxide might be fine as well. It's readily available and easy to handle.

    Bob Greenyer wrote:

    [...] During the 'ABC-Story' presentation, we were sent an email from a non LENR viewer that finally had a reason for their anomaly in their Vanadium Oxide including experiment - that is to say, by going public, we had apparent confirmation by a non-affiliated, non-lenr party during the presentation. Additionally, an MFMP researcher, but not a board member, who is in a position to test (safety wise) is working out how he can test it.

    Titanium Oxide is apparently the preferred catalyst for ultra-dense hydrogen production according to a couple patent applications by Bernhard Kotzias of Airbus DS. It's not clear if Kotzias meant TiO2 or a non-stoichiometric form which could be more catalytically active. But since it's referring to a material available in large quantities, it's probably TiO2 (although again, in this case there don't seem to be indications on which form exactly. Rutile? Anatase? etc.)

    1. US20170025191 - Material arrangement for fusion reactor and method for producing the same

    [...][0034] In a further exemplary embodiment of the apparatus according to the invention, the catalyst coating comprises a titanium oxide. This material is already produced industrially in large quantities as powder and is therefore readily available.

  • LENR is a strange phenomenon that has defied the more conventional scientific discovery process for 28 years, so maybe it will take BG's/MFMP's unorthodox methods to uncover it's core secrets? If so, it will sure make for an interesting chapter in the annals of science history. Especially if it pans out as MFMP hopes, that a semi-meltdown on a trip to India, followed by a failed test in Eastern Europe (me356), padlocked door in India (Suhas), and the supposedly good ash samples collected from those forays, along with Piantelli's results and advice to them about Ti at a lunch in Italy, lead to the key piece of the puzzle!

    MFMP seems to be stirring up, and galvanizing the LENR field. Fostering cooperation, and IMO encouraging some "thinking outside of the box", and chasing leads no one else will. That may be what it takes...who knows. I wish them the best of luck. They have my support, and no matter where their instincts take them from now on, I will never be critical of them again.

  • Ahlfors

    I take it that those papers are, in several ways, related with the work of Berhnard Kotzias, who I cited a couple comments earlier, correct?

    The first one, I recall seeing it before; the second one is extremely interesting, but probably beyond the scope of this thread.

  • I don't catch all here, especially because I did not find a paper describing that story...

    some unrelated generalities.

    Thinking out of the box is good to find what is not found in the box, but

    1- key is "thinking" not dreaming.

    2- Maybe it would be wise to study what is ignored in the box, before looking outside. (some look out of the box just because they don't face what is in)

    PdD is very rich in information, not understood, and some line of experiment are very compatible with instruments.

    Electrolysis, and best dry permeation, or thin films à la Iwamura, are easier to instruments (surface state, isotopic changes, metallurgy) than LENR involving powders or plasma...

  • AlainCo

    The discussion went kind of like this:

    • Bob Greenyer mentioned on ECW as a confirmation of what he told about Vanadium and Titanium (and I think also Chromium) a report of a non-LENR person who emailed him that he's had anomalies with Vanadium oxide.
    • I wrote here that if Vanadium Oxide works as a confirmation, then other metal oxides should be fine too.
    • Speaking of metal-oxides, Bernhard Kotzias of Airbus DS has worked with Leif Holmlid to study and make practical applications around the ultra-dense hydrogen (UDH) concept. Both mostly use treated metal-oxide surfaces. Kotzias seems to be recommending "Titanium Oxide" as the preferred metal oxide catalyst for ultra-dense hydrogen production.
    • Kotzias also appears to have expanded the UDH concept quite a bit with his own theory, seemingly based on Casimir cavities and nanoplasmonics. I haven't had the occasion to read it in full detail yet; it's in the documentation of the German patent applications he recently filed. However there are easy to be understood diagrams (see attached images).
    • Ahlfors chimed in and linked a possible paper that could be used to create suitable titanium oxide particles. The method is about using a picosecond laser on a titanium target immersed in a liquid (distilled water, but could be an other liquid), and is called laser ablation.
    • Other two papers have been linked. One shows how nanometric gaps of controlled size can be produced chemically with colloidal particles of noble metals. "Gigantic electric fields" can be generated within those gaps upon optical irradiation. This paper was referenced by Kotzias in one of the previously mentioned patents.
    • The other paper describes the observation of anomalously accelerated alpha decay of an optically irradiated colloidal uranium salt solution of metallic nanoparticles, also here produced by laser ablation at a progressively decreasing laser wavelength. A possible explanation for the results is a very large electric field enhancement near the nanoparticles. Similarity to exploding wire experiments mentioned too. The paper is almost too big for this thread alone.
    • The latest paper linked by Ahlfors (which I haven't read yet) also seems about the production of suitable nanoparticles using the laser ablation method with a picosecond laser. Could have been a better citation for Kotzias' patent, apparently.


    1. The laser systems used in these studies aren't something that amateurs can usually afford.
    2. The discussion might have steered quite a bit from the originally intended topic.
  • Interesting even if i don't catch the details.

    I imagine that once LENR is understood, this direction have to be explored.

    My point is that simply there are too many good direction, and since the oldest direction is still insufficiently explored, I propose to focus where there is clear evidence it works, and just much work to explore the phenomenon.

  • So what is this NOVA? I am a little lost in all the acronyms. Where did it come from, is it an MFMP initiative, or just BG and George, it's purpose, it's genesis, who is George (other his accompanying BG to visit Suhas), etc. ? I try to keep up on this stuff, but...

  • BobG : Why Piantelli got neutrons and Suhas titanium ECCO may not?…utrons-or-gamma-radiation

    Sergio Gutiérrez is a String theorist with a good idea. He wants to build new particles with Bose Condensates to test for extra dimensions as required by string theory doctrine. There a 11 dimensions in string theory. A Bose condensate produces a particle that is N times more massive than the individual particles that make up the condensate. But this idea is also a great way to produce grand unification of the fundamental forces by pumping energy into those extra dimensions. Rather than pumping huge amounts of energy into a single particle, a Bose condinsate can store that energy across many particles but still act like a single particle.

    In this case, the coupling constants of the strong and electroweak interactions meet at the grand unification energy, also known as the GUT scale:

    \Lambda _{\text{GUT}}\approx 10^{16}\,{\text{GeV}}.

    In my opinion by using a Bose condensate, Sergio Gutiérrez is on the correct road to Grand unification but he must utilize the polariton rather than atoms to form the Bose condensate. The non-equilibrium room temperature Bose-Einstein condensates is the tool that he must use in order to get to where he wants to go.

    see for background on non-equilibrium room temperature Bose-Einstein condensates

    Does the BEC argument imply that we would "see" the extra-dimensions of string theory in our daily life? Answer: YES. We can see the results of accessing these extra dimensions from the changes they produce in the fundamental forces.

    In the grand unification theory (GUT) proposed by Howard Georgi and Sheldon Glashow in 1974, the road to grand unification took the wrong road by assuming that the fundamental forces of nature could come together when a single particle could be pumped with the huge amounts of energy required to expose the unification of the fundamental forces.


    But the correct road to grand unification of forces is found in condensed matter physics, quasiparticles, and through Bose condensation of many of these particles. The condensate acts like a single particle but the energy that the condensate assumes and can store is the sum of all the energy of all the members of the condensate.

    Unlike the conditions that exist in ultra-cold atomic BECs, the Bose condensation produced by polaritons has the proper temperature, particle mass, energy, and aggregation numbers to access and expose the extra dimensions that are not usually accessible to ordinary reality. What we see in that polariton condensate is how the universe functioned during the first few seconds at the beginning of the universe before the universe cooled where every particle in that infant universe had huge energies.

    This condition can be seen today in selected polariton base BEC experiments that show the increased activity of the weak force in stabilizing radioactive isotopes.

    This process has been patented by the US Navy and is available for licensed development.

    Original Assignee: Jwk International Corporation, The United States Of America As Represented By The Secretary Of The Navy.

    This patent means that the process of stabilizing radioactive isotopes described therein absolutely works as certified by the US patent office.

    A very pure and direct polariton based nanoplasmonic experiment using light pumped nanoparticles that enables us to see the change in how the weak force works as it ascends the energy level scale to unification is referenced here.


    Accelerated alpha-decay of 232U isotope achieved by exposure of its aqueous solution with gold nanoparticles to laser radiation

    A.V. Simakin, G.A. Shafeev…TUA&bvm=bv.46471029,d.dmQ

    And in a summation bringing in LENR involved in this subject for you as follows:

    A polariton is a special quasiparticle. It is an electron that has most of its mass and charge removed. It can only exist when it is generated by a nanoparticle or a pit or bump in the surface of a metal. Unlike an electron, the polariton is a boson; that means that it can form a Bose condensate where a aggregation of electrons cannot. From this boson nature of the Polariton comes all the miracles of the LENR reaction.


    This is a picture of polariton formation in pits and bumps in a metal.

    As a special case, metallic hydrogen is a nanowire that produces the LENR reaction without plasma forming. This includes other hydrogen based metalized compounds like water.

    But when plasma is used to produce the LENR reaction, because the polariton needs is a nanoparticle to exist, it is passively critical. When that nanoparticle vaporizes, the polariton dies. So a dirty plasma that is passively maintained at the vaporization point of a given metal will produce many self-sustaining forms of energy including heat, light. XUV. X-rays, gamma, pressure from fast particle generated shock waves, electrons and various other types of subatomic particles.

    To sum up, the Bose condensate modifies the weak force so that the energy of excitation that comes from nuclear reactions that usually generate neutrons and other radiation is stored in the condensate and not released to the far field.

    But if the Bose condensate is not well formed or very weak, then neutrons and other radiation is produced by the LENR reaction.