The general response from those attending is pretty positive - but basically everybody is just waiting to see if ARPA-E do more than just host a talking shop. They (ARPA-E) have suggested they could perhaps raise $10M for experiments -public money. And IH have got the thick end of $100M in the bank which they suggest they will finance experimenters with.
As ever, we wait to see.
As ever, we wait to see.
Someone is waiting to see, and someone is waiting to participate in an idea contest. For me, you should start with ideas, not money.
I’m curious if anything has been said about the HIVER results? They still have a journal article in review somewhere, I believe.
they really take us for idiots
It's not so easy to understand who thinks who is an idiot. But it seems that there is a paradoxical situation when older people are interested and work in LENR, and young people are interested and work exclusively in the mainstream thermonuclear sector.
"The University of Texas worked in the utmost secrecy. We can see today that their efforts have led to nothing. They say they are ready to collaborate with whoever wants. They have precision calorimeters as well as a high precision spectrometer."
Didn't the University of Texas receive (directly or indirectly) some funding from Bill Gates?
On our forum, all those who make comments are open and do not hide anything, but this cannot be said about those who only listen. But they work, not talk
But it seems that there is a paradoxical situation when older people are interested and work in LENR, and young people are interested and work exclusively in the mainstream thermonuclear sector.
Yes. I call this the generational role reversal. It shows there is something wrong with modern science. Young people have always taken the lead in research and technology. That is how things should be.
I don't think the problem is of that nature, but rather the lack of talent.
In France, we currently have a very young president, thinking that young will do better, elected to do something new, to do the best, there has been no miracle.
Talent remains capricious, it can appear stealthily and then disappear for several decades.
Yes. I call this the generational role reversal. It shows there is something wrong with modern science. Young people have always taken the lead in research and technology. That is how things should be.
Non sequitur: from "be young" don't follow "be talented". And sometimes be young and talented is dangerous -- see Évariste Galois.
About talents, I've read article about hardcore innovators from startup hired in companies. Quickly, they behave normally.
Environment, drives the expression of talents. What I feel from the evolution of times, is that before the 80s, since the Greeks, many young had desperate freedom, having to carve their life against the older who were protected but prisoners of social roles.
In current time, the older have the freedom of retirement, the freedom of leisure research, while the young people have to fight to enter the research world, please their academic peers, file grant applications, find an employer.
This is why strangely many corporate researchers are more free than academics, because you don't have to please the academic community, the politicians fearful of media opinions, but only your own crazy boss.
This is why smaller companies, having small boards, less council of good research validation, can innovate better despite much less money... this is why some country, where there is respect for the installed staff, can innovate better than place where displeasing the board of truth mean you are fired...
Of course, I exaggerate, it is more complex, but this is one factor that changed...
Craziness and mental-diversity is an asset, like biodiversity is.
To be back on this "talents" need, i have a question in mind since long time which was in fact the Lenr basis.
Why it was P&F initial postulate that Hydrogen atoms highly loading a metal lattice could fuse ?
If for example JedRothwell could highlight my mind by sharing the P&F initial way of thinking to imagine this crazy way as possibility of fusion ?
To be back on this "talents" need, i have a question in mind since long time which was in fact the Lenr basis.
Why it was P&F initial postulate that Hydrogen atoms highly loading a metal lattice could fuse ?
If for example JedRothwell could highlight my mind by sharing the P&F initial way of thinking to imagine this crazy way as possibility of fusion ?
Why it was P&F initial postulate that Hydrogen atoms highly loading a metal lattice could fuse ?
Perhaps this sheds light on Martin Fleischmann and why. As a discoverer of Surface Enhanced Raman Scattering he was awarded, oddly enough, the Palladium Medal in the U.S. for it. A new science was born, SERS.
He was aware of focal increases/energetics (enhancements) of 100 fold and more.
Pressures within the lattice and phase change boundary layers, liquid, gas, plasma, solid, dendritic growth and melt... all within his cells made it fun and interesting within his advanced musings. Plasmons?
As to your use of the word "fuse" Martin preferred the phrase "...some unknown nuclear processes..." '...anomalous heat beyond chemicall..." .Not the phrase 'Cold Fusion".
Anyways 45 years later SERS and Plasmonics has advanced alot since Fleischmann's discovery. Certainly his musings on atomic energy out of his cells would be further advanced as well. Plasmonics is important to CMNS in many ways... Julian Schwinger knew this as well.
This article, from 2020, is significantly relevant to your question.
Cite this:
ACS Nano 2020, 14, 1, 28–117
Publication Date:September 3, 2019
https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.9b04224
Copyright © 2019 American Chemical Society
"Present and Future of Surface-Enhanced Raman Scattering"
Quote
Abstract
The discovery of the enhancement of Raman scattering by molecules adsorbed on nanostructured metal surfaces is a landmark in the history of spectroscopic and analytical techniques. Significant experimental and theoretical effort has been directed toward understanding the surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) effect and demonstrating its potential in various types of ultrasensitive sensing applications in a wide variety of fields. In the 45 years since its discovery, SERS has blossomed into a rich area of research and technology, but additional efforts are still needed before it can be routinely used analytically and in commercial products. In this Review, prominent authors from around the world joined together to summarize the state of the art in understanding and using SERS and to predict what can be expected in the near future in terms of research, applications, and technological development. This Review is dedicated to SERS pioneer and our coauthor, the late Prof. Richard Van Duyne, whom we lost during the preparation of this article.
Also note
Quote
The discovery of SERS has a relatively short history. It was accidentally discovered by Fleischmann and co-workers in 1974 during measurements of the Raman scattering of pyridine on rough silver electrodes,1 and they ascribed the enhancement to a surface-area effect. The phenomenon was identified independently by Jeanmaire and Van Duyne2 and by Albrecht and Creighton3 in 1977, both of whom suggested enhancement factors (EFs) of 105–106. The connection with plasmon excitation was suggested by Albrecht and Creighton as a resonant Raman effect involving plasmon excitation, as proposed earlier by Philpott.4 Subsequently, the connection of SERS intensities to enhanced fields arising from localized surface plasmons in nanostructured metals was noted by Moskovits.5 Forty-five years later, tens of thousands of research papers have been published on SERS,6 which discuss in great detail elements of the theory behind it, the design of a wide variety of (mostly but not only metallic) enhancing substrates, and their implementation in a wide variety of applications. Indeed, SERS has become a research field in its own right, as a source of exciting scientific phenomena, as well as one of the most sensitive analytical techniques currently available. Numerous excellent review articles and even comprehensive overviews of the technique have been published on various aspects of SERS and related topics. There is, thus, probably no need to perform an extensive literature review again. However, during the recent 26thInternational Conference on Raman Spectroscopy (XXVI ICORS, Jeju, Korea, August 26–31, 2018),7 some of us identified the need to put together a comprehensive perspective to describe the current state of the field and the path that we expect will be followed in the near future. We therefore joined efforts to identify the most active areas of SERS research and development, including basic aspects and emerging phenomena, materials synthesis, and major applications. We also decided to include a section devoted to other “surface-enhanced” techniques, which have seen significant development in parallel with and often profiting from lessons learned during the optimization of SERS-related methods and materials. - End quotes
Fleischmann https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/fleischmann
Fleischmann explained in 2003 that cold explosions from “intense compression and shear of lattices can lead to their fragmentation into small particles in which the high energy of the initial system is converted into kinetic energy of the fragments.”
From: Encyclopedia of Electrochemical Power Sources, 2009
The Discoverers of ‘Cold Fusion’
Fleischmann is widely regarded as one of the world's top electrochemists. Although he is best known for the codiscovery of ‘cold fusion’, he was first a leader in many aspects of electrochemistry, the science behind battery research. He was born on 29 March 1927 in Czechoslovakia. He and his family were caught up in the Nazi occupation of western Czechoslovakia in 1938 but managed to escape to England.
Fleischmann studied at the University of London's Imperial College, focusing on platinum and hydrogen, and he earned his doctorate in chemistry there. At 40, Fleischmann was offered a position as chair of the electrochemistry department at the University of Southampton. He built up the department and earned it a world-class reputation. He was the recipient of numerous awards during this time. From 1970 to 1972, he held the prestigious post of president of the International Society of Electrochemists. In 1979, he was awarded the medal for electrochemistry and thermodynamics by the Royal Society of London. In 1983, he retired from Southampton. Two years later in 1985, he was awarded the Palladium Medal by the US Electrochemical Society, and he received the highest honor for an English scientist, fellowship in the Royal Society.
Thank you Gregory Byron Goble for your deep and full reply 
Once again, i remain appreciative about these countries from east Europa which gave so many great researchers.
I did not know that Martin Fleischmann came from this side too 
Display MoreFleischmann https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/fleischmann
Fleischmann explained in 2003 that cold explosions from “intense compression and shear of lattices can lead to their fragmentation into small particles in which the high energy of the initial system is converted into kinetic energy of the fragments.”
From: Encyclopedia of Electrochemical Power Sources, 2009
The Discoverers of ‘Cold Fusion’
Fleischmann is widely regarded as one of the world's top electrochemists. Although he is best known for the codiscovery of ‘cold fusion’, he was first a leader in many aspects of electrochemistry, the science behind battery research. He was born on 29 March 1927 in Czechoslovakia. He and his family were caught up in the Nazi occupation of western Czechoslovakia in 1938 but managed to escape to England.
Fleischmann studied at the University of London's Imperial College, focusing on platinum and hydrogen, and he earned his doctorate in chemistry there. At 40, Fleischmann was offered a position as chair of the electrochemistry department at the University of Southampton. He built up the department and earned it a world-class reputation. He was the recipient of numerous awards during this time. From 1970 to 1972, he held the prestigious post of president of the International Society of Electrochemists. In 1979, he was awarded the medal for electrochemistry and thermodynamics by the Royal Society of London. In 1983, he retired from Southampton. Two years later in 1985, he was awarded the Palladium Medal by the US Electrochemical Society, and he received the highest honor for an English scientist, fellowship in the Royal Society.
Most welcome
I dropped out of high school after six months of it.
This left alot of room in my head for late life self study and and my somewhat scattered investigation of scientific research and attempts at connect the dots contemplatation. Thanks for your appreciation.
Note the recent LCF papers refer to this being cold and hot fusion...
Also note GEC stated technology introduction into Arab, Africa and the Pacific isles would mitigate the collapse of some nation states solely dependent on oil revenues. A stated goal of Circa Warfare 2030 a report by Bushnell to the Joint Chief of Staff. Also a concern of both the uS and UK Department of Defense reports
Quote
... how can these advanced technologies be used to alleviate the desire to create war?
Can we envision a world where no one needs to go to war? - End quotes.
Cold Fusion Now has old articles on these reports.
Also
I agree with Fleischmann's thoughts in his letters to Melvin Miles, that if these atomic energetics can be weaponized caution and discretion should be exercised.
He and his family were caught up in the Nazi occupation of western Czechoslovakia in 1938 but managed to escape to England.
Not exactly "escaped." His father was so badly beaten by the Gestapo that he died of his wounds after they let him out of prison.
I don't think the problem is of that nature, but rather the lack of talent.
There is talent everywhere, in all generations, in all cultures. * The problem is that in most fields only young people have the energy to do groundbreaking work. Even prosaic work such as programming computers. A person in his teens or 20s can absorb a more knowledge and learn more mainly because he is both capable of working enthusiastically night and day. Someone estimated it takes 10,000 hours to master the skill of programming. People like Bill Gates and me spent hour after hour when we were teenagers programming. We worked overnight because that is when timeshare computers were available. Hard work is no guarantee of genius, or even success. It is necessary but not sufficient. Anyway, it isn't actually "work" in the normal sense. A good programmer, scientist or artist does not work. She plays. She would do what she does for free if people did not pay her. She hopes to do it after she retires, until she drops dead.
The other advantage young people have is that they are ignorant. They do not have common knowledge of what cannot be done. It often turns out that common knowledge is wrong, and something can be done after all, if you start from zero and think anew.
It is true that I largely lost interest in programming after 20 or 30 years. The thrill is gone, and I don't do it much anymore. That is another reason it is a young person's game. You have to do it when you still love to do it. I can still write work-a-day programs but not something groundbreaking.
In other disciplines, ability and creativity last much longer. Some graphic artists and movie directors make contributions even in old age. Most of the electrochemists who replicated cold fusion in 1989 and 1990 were middle-aged people. They were friends of Fleischmann, or friendly rivals such as Bockris. They replicated, but I wonder if they would have had the kind of creative spark of genius that Fleischmann and Pons had, that led them to try it in the first place.
* There is talent in all cultures, but only a few cultures allow scientific talent to flourish, because it is so disruptive. Generally speaking, even in the U.S., the public hates innovation. As Fleischmann said, people don't want progress. They don't like it, and they shan't have it.
Thank you JedRothwell for your explanations now i'm going to 54 years old so according to your postulate where i should stay ?
Display MoreThere is talent everywhere, in all generations, in all cultures. * The problem is that in most fields only young people have the energy to do groundbreaking work. Even prosaic work such as programming computers. A person in his teens or 20s can absorb a more knowledge and learn more mainly because he is both capable of working enthusiastically night and day. Someone estimated it takes 10,000 hours to master the skill of programming. People like Bill Gates and me spent hour after hour when we were teenagers programming. We worked overnight because that is when timeshare computers were available. Hard work is no guarantee of genius, or even success. It is necessary but not sufficient. Anyway, it isn't actually "work" in the normal sense. A good programmer, scientist or artist does not work. She plays. She would do what she does for free if people did not pay her. She hopes to do it after she retires, until she drops dead.
The other advantage young people have is that they are ignorant. They do not have common knowledge of what cannot be done. It often turns out that common knowledge is wrong, and something can be done after all, if you start from zero and think anew.
It is true that I largely lost interest in programming after 20 or 30 years. The thrill is gone, and I don't do it much anymore. That is another reason it is a young person's game. You have to do it when you still love to do it. I can still write work-a-day programs but not something groundbreaking.
In other disciplines, ability and creativity last much longer. Some graphic artists and movie directors make contributions even in old age. Most of the electrochemists who replicated cold fusion in 1989 and 1990 were middle-aged people. They were friends of Fleischmann, or friendly rivals such as Bockris. They replicated, but I wonder if they would have had the kind of creative spark of genius that Fleischmann and Pons had, that led them to try it in the first place.
* There is talent in all cultures, but only a few cultures allow scientific talent to flourish, because it is so disruptive. Generally speaking, even in the U.S., the public hates innovation. As Fleischmann said, people don't want progress. They don't like it, and they shan't have it.
Thank you JedRothwell for your explanations now i'm going to 54 years old so according to your postulate where i should stay ?
That depends on your job. If you are an artist or movie director, your best days may be ahead of you. The artist Hokusai, who lived to age 88, said:
"From the age of 6 I had a mania for drawing the shapes of things. When I was 50 I had published a universe of designs. But all I have done before the the age of 70 is not worth bothering with. At 75 I'll have learned something of the pattern of nature, of animals, of plants, of trees, birds, fish and insects. When I am 80 you will see real progress. At 90 I shall have cut my way deeply into the mystery of life itself. At 100, I shall be a marvelous artist."
No actor can play King Lear until he is old. That is what Anthony Hopkins said after starring in that role in 2018. Probably not Prospero either. You can't fake old age.
In every field, there are some people who make contributions even in old age. Even mathematics, which is a young person's game. Martin Fleischmann was still doing original work in old age. Grace Hopper gave a lecture about data types and verification methods when she was very old. Her ideas were startling -- so creative, original and advanced! Many of them have still not been implemented.
