Post ICCF24 thread.

Are you referring to the former great US race car driver or me, or someone else ?

Quote from Shane D.

After listening first to ARPA-E's/DOE Scott Hsu, then later to NASA and DARPA/NAVSEA, I have to wonder if the left hand of government knows what the right hand is doing? Hsu was very cautious and careful about LENR while announcing their decision to fund...even cautioning us not to call it CF yet, while the other two were very optimistic after presenting their promising positive results. Do they even communicate?

Maybe Foyt is right.

Well,

this is an heavy thing to become a kind of Lenr Snowden

Ps: FOYT was really a former great US driver (NASCAR), me i'm only FOJT

Quote from Shane D.

You.

An article in Oil and Gaz https://oilandgaspress.com/new…-energy-summit-kicks-off/

Keep in mind that the Department of Energy is onboard with the GEC NASA Space Act Agreement since it began. Therefore the DoE already has what ARPA-E says they want, and what they say this, already established, field of material science needs. This is according to the theory developed by the project’s theoretical physicist, Vladimir Pines, Ph.D, of PineSci.Also the GEC technology is the result of Navy research so the Navy group already has what they say is missing. To rub it in, the Navy group, the DoE and GEC waltz into the best equipped labs in the world and don't have to raise any money for equipment, supplies, computers, or assistants... They have all the taxpayer money they need to help them along. No fundraising, government grants, investors, loans or prize money is needed for research, patent filings, or applied engineering teams.

These groups are all one big team and they are not sharing what they know with anybody. Perhaps with a few other select groups.... We shall see.

Ask Vladimir Pines. NASA quote... "according to the theory developed by the project’s theoretical physicist, Vladimir Pines, Ph.D, of PineSci."

Like I said, the DoE has it and you don't. If the DoE has it team Google at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (a DoD and DoE lab) is reading the PineScie theoretical papers.The head of LLNL fusion research is the lead inventor on Google’s latest CMNS energy technology patent. He is not presenting his works at ICCF-24 either.

Also, as I understand it. The U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency has had a couple of Classified Reports about 'Cold Fusion' that we are now aware of. The authors of those reports were most likely required to sign DoD secrecy agreements. Who does the DoD still have control over besides those. mentioned in my first paragraph above?

So why have a prize for a goal already achieved?

I think Peter Diamondis might be wondering 🤔 about this as well.

Prior to that 2011 date mentioned by Benyo, Vladimir Pines had a long history of papers published every year. After 2011, since working with GEC, he went silent... No papers published at all, that I can find.

Except this... Which is not his working theory.

Fast Neutron Spectroscopy With Organic Scintillation Detectors in a High-Radiation Environment December 2020

TEN years nothing published yet working hard with GEC

I've always wondered if his early works were undertaken to explore advanced CMNS research. Nano particles dusty plasmas and dendritic phenomena. SURE smells and tastes like it.

• Lofted charged dust distribution above the Moon surface November 2011 Planetary and Space Science 59(14):1795-1803 DOI:10.1016/j.pss.2011.01.013
• Kinetic theory of sheath formation in solar wind plasma October 2010 Advances in Space Research 46(7):942-959 DOI:10.1016/j.asr.2010.06.002
• Interactions of solar wind plasma with dust grains: Effects of strong plasma anisotropy Article Jan 2009
• Pressure-mediated effects on thermal dendrites Article May 2005

Reference Vladimir Pines

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Vladimir-Pines-2

Не могу выйти, что делать ICCF 24

Помогите выйти на ICCF 24

Quote from Shane D.

After listening first to ARPA-E's/DOE Scott Hsu, then later to NASA and DARPA/NAVSEA, I have to wonder if the left hand of government knows what the right hand is doing?

They don't know, and it is better that way. "But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth." Matthew 6:3

Day 2 Greg Tanaka begins with Opening Remarks. He shows a graphic revealing nuclear power is safer and cheaper and cleaner than every other power source. Unfortunately, nuclear energy is going down with fewer reactors operating. Diablo Canyon reactor in California reduced carbon emissions in California by 10% but is currently on schedule to be decommissioned. This plant could provide a lot of benefits, including the desalinization of water for a drought-stricken West Coast US.

Tanaka believes nuclear is our way forward to avert the worst of climate change.

Don't believe that the state organizations are all connected, on all subjects with private companies even if they are GAFA.

Quote from Gregory Byron Goble

Keep in mind that the Department of Energy is onboard with the GEC NASA Space Act Agreement since it began. Therefore the DoE already has what ARPA-E says they want, and what they say this, already established, field of material science needs. This is according to the theory developed by the project’s theoretical physicist, Vladimir Pines, Ph.D, of PineSci.Also the GEC technology is the result of Navy research so the Navy group already has what they say is missing. To rub it in, the Navy group, the DoE and GEC waltz into the best equipped labs in the world and don't have to raise any money for equipment, supplies, computers, or assistants... They have all the taxpayer money they need to help them along. No fundraising, government grants, investors, loans or prize money is needed for research, patent filings, or applied engineering teams.

These groups are all one big team and they are not sharing what they know with anybody. Perhaps with a few other select groups.... We shall see.

Ask Vladimir Pines. NASA quote... "according to the theory developed by the project’s theoretical physicist, Vladimir Pines, Ph.D, of PineSci."

Like I said, the DoE has it and you don't. If the DoE has it team Google at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (a DoD and DoE lab) is reading the PineScie theoretical papers.The head of LLNL fusion research is the lead inventor on Google’s latest CMNS energy technology patent. He is not presenting his works at ICCF-24 either.

Also, as I understand it. The U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency has had a couple of Classified Reports about 'Cold Fusion' that we are now aware of. The authors of those reports were most likely required to sign DoD secrecy agreements. Who does the DoD still have control over besides those. mentioned in my first paragraph above?

So why have a prize for a goal already achieved?

I think Peter Diamondis might be wondering 🤔 about this as well.

Prior to that 2011 date mentioned by Benyo, Vladimir Pines had a long history of papers published every year. After 2011, since working with GEC, he went silent... No papers published at all, that I can find.

Except this... Which is not his working theory.

Fast Neutron Spectroscopy With Organic Scintillation Detectors in a High-Radiation Environment December 2020

TEN years nothing published yet working hard with GEC

I've always wondered if his early works were undertaken to explore advanced CMNS research. Nano particles dusty plasmas and dendritic phenomena. SURE smells and tastes like it.

• Lofted charged dust distribution above the Moon surface November 2011 Planetary and Space Science 59(14):1795-1803 DOI:10.1016/j.pss.2011.01.013
• Kinetic theory of sheath formation in solar wind plasma October 2010 Advances in Space Research 46(7):942-959 DOI:10.1016/j.asr.2010.06.002
• Interactions of solar wind plasma with dust grains: Effects of strong plasma anisotropy Article Jan 2009
• Pressure-mediated effects on thermal dendrites Article May 2005

Reference Vladimir Pines

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Vladimir-Pines-2

Display More

I agree with Shane D. and Gregory Byron Goble .

The field is so fractionalised and shrouded in secrecy that it is impossible to get a sense of progress, where we are and what we need to do.

True it is only day 2 and there is much more to learn yet.

But so far we have some parties saying we need to start from working to get the finance, then build the teams, then start on the theories, and take things slowly and carefully because we need to carefully assemble enough evidence to convince people outside the field. This would of course take years.

Then there are others who seem to be saying "Oh yes, we have done all that, built a great team and have been working on this for over a decade - and yes we have strong results that are reproducible."

Then there are others who have been mentioned above, who are notable by their silence.

Is Google, who are just next-door, making a presentation? Maybe Carl could go and knock on their door, if he knows somebody there (JOKE!).

Everyone agrees that we need LENR solutions ASAP.

So maybe I am wrong but we seem to seriously need some clarity and cohesion.

This is something that LENR-Forum was originally created to do but clearly there is only so much it can achieve.

The X-Prize sounds like a good idea and if there is significant financing then it could galvanize the field, but somehow we need to get beyond secrecy and teams working in isolation.

Communication is key. Another idea might be for someone at the "strategic" level, such as the Anthropocene Institute, to create a publication dedicated to LENR where papers could published and would provide an up to date source on the state of progress. I guess that this might not cost too much. Maybe Jed would say that he already has this covered with LENR-CANR, but the continuous complaint has been that researchers cannot get their work published.

Huw Price, Professor at University of Bonn and Trinity College on Risk and Reputation. He talks about Jaan Tallinn who created Skype program. Jaan was trying to get people to think about risks and imagine the future better. Huw met him on his way to Cambridge to be Bertrand Russel Professor.

Huw wanted to hook up Martiin Rees and Jaan Tallinn, and Jaan came to Cambridge for a public lecture. The three decided to work together to look at the catastrophic risks of technology for the future and the possibilities that could lead to the extinction of humanity.

They got some attention but they weren't always taken seriously, so they started to try to mainstream these ideas. The goal was to build an academic field on this topic. They created the Centre for the Study of Existential Risk. Science tends to focus on easier problems, like the Lamplight Effect, where you look for something lost under the streetlamp as opposed to the dark part of the street.

Jaan was worried about AI, and some groups were working on AI safety, etc, but most felt that the topic was fringe. A new competition was announced for big ideas to make a difference for humanity. Cambridge put together a proposal on the impacts of AI and got to move forward. Leverhulme Cemtre for the Future of Intelligence began, with support from Stephan Hawking. This was dedicated to the impacts of AI. Stuart Russell gave a series of lectures which still some regarded as too flaky, despite his reputation.

CSER has organized a conference on Risk and the Culture of Science and they included the topic cold fusion. Alan Smith was the representative for that area. Huw had been following cold fusion, but it dropped off the radar.

But now, he thought it would be appropriate to put under the Existential Risk umbrella.

Professor Heather Douglas from Michigan State U says The hospital ER avoids as much as possible any false negatives with respect to heart attacks and accepts lots of false positives.

Huw provides the shuttle example, where if the seals would fail, they knew the shuttle would fail. People didn't want to listen to the scientist Roger Boijoly who told the launch people there could be disaster. Lawrence Mulloy the shuttle program manage didn't' hide his disdain. We know what happened to the Challenger.

Huw wrote his first piece on cold fusion in 2015. He wanted to "hack the reputation" problem. He advocated for an Xprize-like award back then and is happy to hear they are working on that now.

A second piece was published in 2019 where he says that we needed to "cheer not smear" because the risk was too great to not explore this. Huw hooked up with Michael McKubre during the March 2019 anniversary of the announcement.

Then, the google research piece appeared. He thought it was a good thing, and he has recently published Jan 2022 on Risk and Scientific Reputation: Lessons from Cold Fusion. He does have a little issue with the google paper. The google paper says, "Finding breakthroughs requires risk taking, and we contend that revisiting cold fusion is a risk worth taking."

His response says that misses the point. Huw says, "the most important risk is the of NOT taking the cold fusion research pathway."

Quote from ZenoOfElea

Communication is key. Another idea might be for someone at the "strategic" level, such as the Anthropocene Institute, to create a publication dedicated to LENR where papers could published and would provide an up to date source on the state of progress. I guess that this might not cost too much. Maybe Jed would say that he already has this covered with LENR-CANR, but the continuous complaint has been that researchers cannot get their work published.

I do not think a publication sponsored by the Anthropocene Institute would have any advantage over Jean-Paul's JCMNS. Perhaps I am wrong about that, but if there are any advantages, I suppose the Institute could help publish JCMNS, and put its name on it.

The real problem is access to professional, peer-reviewed journals in fields like electrochemistry. Access to Nature is asking too much. The only way you can publish there is to write the kind of bullshit the people from Google Berlinguette et al. wrote, which said: "cold fusion does not exist but it is fun to pretend it does and do some real science . . . but don't worry, we are not actually doing cold fusion." Their paper and the editorial accompanying it were a disgrace.

Berlinguette, C.P., et al., Revisiting the cold case of cold fusion. Nature, 2019. 570.

A Google programme failed to detect cold fusion -- but is still a success. Nature, 2019. 569: p. 599-600.

Maybe someone made them understand that it was not worth continuing their investigations ?

Trevithick just explained to us just now that he had the best team in the world in the best place....

Quote from JedRothwell

I do not think a publication sponsored by the Anthropocene Institute would have any advantage over Jean-Paul's JCMNS. Perhaps I am wrong about that, but if there are any advantages, I suppose the Institute could help publish JCMNS, and put its name on it.

The real problem is access to professional, peer-reviewed journals in fields like electrochemistry. Access to Nature is asking too much. The only way you can publish there is to write the kind of bullshit the people from Google Berlinguette et al. wrote, which said: "cold fusion does not exist but it is fun to pretend it does and do some real science . . . but don't worry, we are not actually doing cold fusion." Their paper and the editorial accompanying it were a disgrace.

Berlinguette, C.P., et al., Revisiting the cold case of cold fusion. Nature, 2019. 570.

A Google programme failed to detect cold fusion -- but is still a success. Nature, 2019. 569: p. 599-600.

Display More

Wow, panel with Matt Trevithic, David J. Nagel, Robert Duncan and Dr. Thomas Schenkel of Lawrence Berkely National Lab.

Matt says Silicon Valley is his home and it is a place for people who have a healthy disregard for the impossible. He is happy that this conference is here. This is Matt's 10the ICCF. A picture iwth Matt and Martin Fleischmann is shown from 2003.

Matt led the google program to explore the cold fusion. At peak, they had about 30 researchers working. A photo with young people that he shows and says, they are the future of this field. That program was called the Charleston Project, named for the street where they had their first office.

Now to fusion. The ultimate energy souce. We just have to figure out how to utilize it. It is no longer true we will have to wait 30 years for a technology. Fusion became fashionable in 2021. $5 billion has gone into private fusion investments most iwthin the past two yars.

tae technologies, zap energy , commonwealth fusion systms, helium , etc... 29 members in the Fusion Industry Association.

ARPA-E has funded 41 fusion projects acroosss three programs. ArRPA-E has been learning about LENR since at lease 2019, and annoucned their new program in July 2022.

the fusion gain factor is referred to as Q. Q=1 is breakeven. there are scientific challenges and the engineering challenges. Who will figure it out first? Tokomaks have the biggest engineering challenge. At the other end of the spectrum, is LENR with its scientific challenges.

Quantum 2.0 employs many-body phenomena such as superposition and entanglement to enable advanced science and technology. We could be on the cusp of discovering the "transistor for energy" that we will be able to develop of technology.

He introduces the panel. Dave Nagel and Francesco Celani have been to every single one of the ICCFs. Dave Nagel has co-chaired two ICCFs. Robert Duncan was featured on the 20-year anniversary of the announcement segment of 60 mins show. Dr. Schenkel is a distinguished professor and member of project Charleston. Matt T has questions for the panel.

Why do you believe in LENR? Dave Nagel cites Arata and Zhang who published back in 1995 and got 8 Watts excess power for 100 days at Osaka University. Nagel was already on board because of Fleischmann and Pons, but this, and also, 40x excess power measured at Naval Research Laboratory in 2014. Nagel mentions Edmund Storms' review of Heat and Helium results which shows a correlation. This is established science by reputable people.

Robert Duncan describes his experience when the tv show asked him to look at Energetics Technologies and see if it was for real. they got 34x excess jpower from Energetics Tech "Run 64" in 2004. It was striking to him, despite the diffuculty in reproducing the effect. He is also excited about the new field of Quantum Nucleonics. Data shows modification of quantum coherence of Fe57 with certain excitation.

Thomas Schenkel is a newer convert. He has seen fusion rates > 100x higher than expected at Berkeley Lab in 2019 using a deuterium plasma. He is showing neutron yueilds from d-d fusion as a function of cathode voltage, which sets the reaction energy in their plasma-beam experiment.

If Robert Duncan had $10 million, what would you do? Have a highly professional validation process, and encourage them to push fundamental approach. Don't rely on store-bought stuff. Absolutely reliable metrology is critical. Give the whole community the necessary tools, don't pick the winners and losers, but level the playing field and see what comes of that.

Thomas would like to see hypothesis-driven work, and would like to explore tunneling rates, branching ratios, and excitation field effects on nuclear reactions. This can all be part of normal science.

Dave Nagel would set up a program to create a reproducible experiment that used modern tools. He wants to see synchroton radiation to study the materials. An electro-migration in wire experiment is his choice for exploration. He points to Francesco Celani's work in this area.

What about the prize? It will mobilize momentum says Schenkel. Exploring stochiometry, looking at the extreme corners of the phase diagram of loading, engage theorists and modeling. He would like to do the most complete type of investigation using a methodical approach.

Got to leave this session a few minutes early. It's still going on.....

Quote from Cydonia

Maybe someone made them understand that it was not worth continuing their investigations ?

I suppose they stopped because they were not getting anywhere. They spent $10 million and accomplished nothing.

I think it might have helped if they had asked experienced people such as Storms and Miles. They and others told me the Google program never contacted them.

Just now Hagelstein bashed trevitick/google's project with class....

Quote from JedRothwell

I suppose they stopped because they were not getting anywhere. They spent $10 million and accomplished nothing.

I think it might have helped if they had asked experienced people such as Storms and Miles. They and others told me the Google program never contacted them.

Oops I misspelled Diamandis. Sorry, I'll correct it.

The prize should not be for a big final best winner. Do we really want or need a 'Google' or 'Microsoft' of LENR Energy? Stopping worldwide empathic and caring evolution of humanity in a sewer of fear, aggression and greed.

Anyone can churn out 50 million Solid State Atomic and Fusion Energy chips or diodes or boilers and give them away for free.

How does that make investors or GEC or Google feel?

The prize should be for

How can we Rethink this openly and honestly together... As a world.

That has not been done.

WIN WIN

KEEP IN mind... The world's energy use will increase hundreds fold with the advent of CMNS Energy technologies that the the US government has said they know how to create and utilize.

Expand into Space? That will take a whole lot of juice and heat.

Empower the world? End use of firewood charcoal. Mega Mega Watts to end energy poverty.

Clean up the oil fields? Give them all the energy and money needed to do so. That will keep the oil companies solvent for a while. The oil industries become the oil clean up industries. WIN WIN

Certainly all 'investors and money makers' will benefit.

Everyone profits personally from commercial S-SAFE Energy.

Decreased energy costs and carbon footprints

👣 👣👣 👣👣 👣👣 👣

Smile 😃 and 😊

Think 🤔 big 🌎

Give every government building hospital school and public transit agency all they need on an at cost basis? That will free up billions in tax money already being spent... on oil. Redirect this existing money stream.

Use it to clean up oil messes. Give it to the oil industry instead of buying their oil.

It's really our technology.

Every cold fusion researcher helped create it.

S-SAFE Energy would not exist without you,

We don't need a big final best winner.

We need every commercial effort to win, improve, grow quickly and succeed in order for humanity to succeed.

Regarding the futility of the Google project, I am 100% in agreement with Peter Hagelstein's comment that there is no point to doing an experiment 400 times when it does not work. What is the improvement between test #399 and #400? Peter warned them it would not work, but they ignored him.