Update of Russ George's blog: tiny ‘atom-ecology’ cold fusion fuel pellets

  • Jed, don't be ridiculous I am not obliged to the USPTO at all.

    I meant that if the patent laws in the UK are similar to the ones in the U.S., you have to sign the patent or it will be invalid. Everyone with substantive knowledge of the invention must sign.

    As for what I know or don't know about Russ's research that is not a question I'm answering here, except to say that I pay close attention.

    From what you have described, it seems you have substantive knowledge. Close attention would give you substantive knowledge.

    BTW, I think Russ has two items in your own library, which you seem to have forgotten about.

    They have not been published, as far I know. They are listed but unavailable. Except for these two with George as coauthor (listed in "All Authors"):



    Stringham disputed the extent of Russ George's contribution. I wouldn't know about that.

    He published an interview with Srinivasan, which I recommend:


    (When you do a search for "All Authors" = "George, R" you find papers by a researcher named Robert George, who works with Godes and Tanzella.)

  • I guess we will not reward the mafia behind USPTO. We will publish everything the public needs to do free LENR and to stop the patent trolls.

    If Russ George does not want a patent, why doesn't he publish now? He said it was almost ready a year ago.

    Was he wrong back then? It wasn't close to ready after all?

    If it is not ready now, long after he said it would be, I suppose it may take many years longer. Or it might never be finished. So he might as well publish it and let others see if they can make it work. In any case, I see no logical reason to keep it secret. However, as far as I know, Russ George has kept everything else he has done a secret, so I suppose he will keep this secret too, for whatever reasons he might have. I do not expect these results will ever see the light of day. I predict he will take this to the grave, the way so many other researchers have done.

    This does not bother me much, because in nearly every instance I know of, secret results were mistaken. With two exceptions: I think Patterson probably did have something, and Les Case might have. It is difficult to judge, since they were not independently replicated. Cravens confirmed the heat from Patterson's experiment. Cravens usually does good work, but this experiment was shoddy. Deliberately shoddy! That's how Patterson wanted it. That's what Cravens told me. It was shoddy, but somewhat convincing.

    From a technical point of view, I have no idea whether George's present results are valid or mistaken. I have no way to judge, because he has revealed nothing substantive about the experiments. I am only guessing it is a mistake because most secret results are mistakes. Experimental science conducted in the dark, in secret, seldom works. You have to publish, let other people look for problems, and then see if anyone can replicate. Until someone replicates, you can never be sure a result is real.

  • I think waiting on a well written report that's bullitproof is worth the wait. As of now a report like that doesn't exist or we'd all be doing it. Tell Russ to make sure he saves those salmon. I eat it 3-4 times a week.

  • On the other side: Why exactly should we tell you?? what we do?

    I suggest you describe the experiment in detail. Describe the instruments, materials, methodology and results. Tell the reader how to make similar materials. Include photos, schematics and graphs. If there are large datasets in spreadsheets, make them available separately.

    There are many scientific papers like this. See Miles or McKubre for good examples. See also the papers by Mizuno and me:



    Upload the paper and attachments at a website anyone can reach, without registering. If you like, send me a copy and I will upload it to LENR-CANR.org.

  • I think waiting on a well written report that's bullitproof is worth the wait.

    That depends on how long the wait is. Russ George and I are old, and will not live another 20 years. But you are missing my larger point. George has not published anything. Given his track record, we will wait forever.

    Furthermore, it does not take long to write a paper. A month or two.

    As of now a report like that doesn't exist or we'd all be doing it.

    That does not follow. The report might exist, but it has not been published so we don't know about it. However, as I said, if does not exist, it can be written in a month or two. If the data, graphs, photos, spreadsheets and other information is available and well organized it will not take long.

    There is no point to doing research for years without ever revealing it. That is like digging a hole every morning and filling it up every afternoon. Science only has value when it is shared. If you want money for your efforts, you need to file for a patent. If you don't want money, go ahead and write the paper and upload it. Also, as I said, most research that is kept secret turns out to be wrong. People often make mistakes that outside observers and experts will spot. They will save you years of wasted effort.

    If you never publish at all, and take the work to the grave the way many cold fusion researchers have done, you have wasted your life. You have wasted a lot of money. It would be better to spend your life playing video games.

  • Jed all you're doing is showing your dislike of the man. Paterson and case are different paterson died a bitter old man. Case was replicated by SRI. Russ George believes he has found another way to save the planet by seeding the oceans with I believe rust. Is this not as noble a cause as cold fusion. Have you ever congratulated Alan smith on his recycling and hydrogen breakthrough, he is saving the planet! Just two examples of cold fusion research who also have other interests. I guess Russ fells cold fusion can wait while he is doing something now that actually makes a difference. Be patient, Alan and wyhittenbach have both said when Russ returns we will see a report.

  • Jed all you're doing is showing your dislike of the man. Paterson and case are different paterson died a bitter old man. Case was replicated by SRI.

    I did not get the impression Patterson was bitter. He was sad that his business partner (his granddaughter's husband) died young. He was rudderless. But to the end he was telling me that he could replicate anytime he wanted. He also remained a "sharp dealer" as they said in the 19th century. He went around sabotaging other people's efforts in various infuriating ways. Not a nice person.

    I think Case was confirmed by SRI, not replicated. That is to say, SRI did not do the experiment from scratch as far as I recall. Verification is much better than nothing, but still not as good as a replication.

    Morbid.. is it a reaction to Georgia morbidity or just to getting old..

    Morbid or not, people should be realistic. No one lives forever. A person in his 60s cannot do as much work as a young person. If you have important knowledge, it is essential you pass it on to younger people.

    I am sure that Russ will publish something..

    Why are you sure of that? He has not published anything in the last 25 years as far as I know. Why do you expect he will change?

  • Jed as far as I know of Russ he never was a lead on any early experiments. He was involved at SRI, case experiment and it would not surprise me if eco- ecology is related to that very experiment. Remember case used carbon 14 as his catylist, claiming gamma and both h3 and h4. I always thought this was the experiment to answer the questions but after MM revised data, krivit panned it and it seemed to fade away into cold fusion limbo.

  • and it would not surprise me if eco- ecology is related to that very experiment.


    " they yielded staggering amounts of heat for weeks to months on end. Best of all in my reactors, the proof of the utility of my specially crafted quantum mechanical forest of isotopes is seen in capturing and rendering their nuclear fusion energy into simple heat 20-2300°C."

    Russ lyrically describes a forest of isotopes, not a coconut palm monoculture of C14.. so to speak

    collected during his decades of ventures in the LENR biome

    I think that there may well be silver and palladium shrubs and a vine of samarium.. iron nickel trees

    with quantum mechanical bird song


    Lovely Gammas, like bird songs in the morning


    I think Dennis Cravens did describe a complex .. 'ecological '? mix for his alpha decay accelerator a while back..

    but the bird song was just a harsh Geiger click... destined to be industrialised.


  • Jed as far as I know of Russ he never was a lead on any early experiments.

    You do not have to be lead to write a paper. Many of the papers are LENR-CANR.org are written by grad students and others, where someone like Bockris was the lead researcher. Russ George claimed he did various things, which he said he would describe in due time, but he never did describe them. He was involved in experiments with various people such as Stringham and McKubre, who later disputed the extent of George's contribution. I don't know the details. He did co-author a paper with Stringham. I should not say he never wrote a paper.

    Also, as I noted, there are some papers by George listed in the LENR-CANR.org database. Those papers are not available anywhere as far as I know. But he must have written them. Maybe they were published? I don't know.

    I don't know how those papers got into the database. Storms and other people have sent me records which I add to the file. It is an EndNote file, meaning someone probably included those papers in endnotes or footnotes, but it wasn't me. By the way, if you are writing about cold fusion, you should get a copy of EndNote, download that database, and use it. It will save a lot of time and effort, and eliminate mistakes. See:


    I think there is a small, free version of EndNote these days. I use the deluxe version.