The perpetual “is LENR even real” argument thread.

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    Maybe it was Celani that MFMP tried to replicate?

    And they did. Excess heat was found even after an artifact in the experimental instrumentation was fixed. The magnitude of the excess heat was not as big as Celani published, but it was there (15% excess heat).

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

    Yes, you continue ti be right.. anyway Piantelli is an italian as Rossi, so probably a crock too or at least a very common "researcher" ..

    Anyway if MFPM with great researchers so often highlighted as Bob G, never seen nothing sure nothing was.

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    Just to keep my skeptic credentials. No-one can say that these experiments did not in fact find excess heat. Just that they provide relatively low quality of evidence for that hypothesis.


    I guess some here will know what MFMP thinks about their claims? They should have some weight since they tried hard to replicate - although i think the process, at least at the start, was more MFMP finding out about calorimetry errors than the actual data they generated.

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    (2S) It seems more plausible that this small difference is due to the time constant of the rod. Furthermore the fact that the rod and heater temperatures are almost identical makes 50W excess heat from the rod look implausible.

    Delayed time constant heating with pulsed power is the only thing AR learned from Piantelli.

    I provided a paper that summarized the major observations of how cold fusion behaves. I provided examples of how I replicated some of these behaviors. In addition, I listed the various ways the effect could be tested and explored. This approach is exactly what good science demands. I had hoped that this information would provide the raw material for a worthy discussion as well as the overwhelming evidence you demand to show that cold fusion is real


    Based on the general response and the more detailed rejection by THH, my effort failed. I have discovered that you people would rather discuss imagined black holes. When cold fusion is discussed at all, you are only interested in the old and flawed observations. THH would rather shoot down ideas than add to the understanding. I find this approach to be universal when cold fusion is discussed. I found that, in general, the people who practice good science are not interested in the cold fusion effect. They are working in other fields of science where their success demonstrates their effective understanding of the scientific method. Meanwhile, cold fusion continues to experience one failure after another with no success in sight. Your lack of response shows why.


    This situation would be amusing were it not for the fact that civilization will end unless a new source of clean energy is used. We now know that the hoped-for energy expected from hot fusion will not be available soon enough. We now know that the energy from fission reactors is too dangerous to be sustained. We now know that wind and solar will not be enough, especially since they require a complex distribution system. Cold fusion is the only possible energy with the potential to save civilization. But like Nero, you would rather fiddle while Rome burns.

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    (2B) they perform the experiment at lower than atmospheric pressure and do not consider the effect of atmospheric leakage into the chamber. (I have no idea what this will do given free H2 and a Pd hydride surface)

    They dodn't have to worry about atmospheric leakage. I have seen the calorimeter used stripped down and in pieces and also when it is being operated. It has a double skin system. The working calorimeter enclosure is itself contained within a vacuum chamber.

    Quote from Storms

    I provided a paper that summarized the major observations of how cold fusion behaves. I provided examples of how I replicated some of these behaviors. In addition, I listed the various ways the effect could be tested and explored. This approach is exactly what good science demands. I had hoped that this information would provide the raw material for a worthy discussion as well as the overwhelming evidence you demand to show that cold fusion is real


    Based on the general response and the more detailed rejection by THH, my effort failed. I have discovered that you people would rather discuss imagined black holes. When cold fusion is discussed at all, you are only interested in the old and flawed observations. THH would rather shoot down ideas than add to the understanding. I find this approach to be universal when cold fusion is discussed. I found that, in general, the people who practice good science are not interested in the cold fusion effect. They are working in other fields of science where their success demonstrates their effective understanding of the scientific method. Meanwhile, cold fusion continues to experience one failure after another with no success in sight. Your lack of response shows why.


    This situation would be amusing were it not for the fact that civilization will end unless a new source of clean energy is used. We now know that the hoped-for energy expected from hot fusion will not be available soon enough. We now know that the energy from fission reactors is too dangerous to be sustained. We now know that wind and solar will not be enough, especially since they require a complex distribution system. Cold fusion is the only possible energy with the potential to save civilization. But like Nero, you would rather fiddle while Rome burns.

    Nero set fire to old Rome!

    There is only one way out of this fundamental dead end with COLD NUCLEAR FUSION:

    It is necessary to "burn" the old orthodox paradigm of physical science and build a new one in its place!

    The way out can only be found in a philosophical-metaphysical way:

    Neither mathematics, nor the Standard Model and Theory of Relativity, nor countless experiments will help here!

    A great crazy IDEA is needed!

    Apparently, the way out for you can only be found in a psychological-psychedelic way.

    Quote from Curbina

    And they did. Excess heat was found even after an artifact in the experimental instrumentation was fixed. The magnitude of the excess heat was not as big as Celani published, but it was there (15% excess heat).

    So i wonder about that. If that 15% were real it is large enough to make a solid "lab rat" experiment.


    In particular the calorimetry could be scaled by reducing input power and increasing insulation. That should not change the excess heat and therefore it should increase the COP. That is an easy way to distinguish between (undiscovered) artifacts and a real effect.


    I am a bit surprised, if they found genuine excess heat, that they did not continue to make the experiments finding that clearly and thereby earn themselves a Nobel prize? Perhaps someone here would like to do that, if they agree with what you are saying.


    I looked at the MFMP stuff but it is quite difficult to find the results and methodology. I know it is all there it is just you have to follow months of posts from the start to get all the context. It is admirable that they are open: it would be nice if significant positive results could be written up in some unified way with links to the details?


    THH

    The results are published on a peer reviewed article from 2015 but is not open access. MFMP is not a traditional research entity

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

    "Only the shallowest of minds instinctively regurgitate the quotations of others, to feign competence. As in musical composition, poetry, or any art, covering the work of others is the lazy fools rout. The Grammy is not awarded to coverband copycats, unless they sample for Hip-Hop"

    -- Wilhelm D'Isreali Parthasarathy Jones,

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    So i wonder about that. If that 15% were real it is large enough to make a solid "lab rat" experiment.


    it would be nice if significant positive results could be written up in some unified way with links to the details?


    THH

    Why settle for 15%? Why wonder if the heat produced is an artifact when a larger scale experiment eliminates that question? Why wonder if a reaction occurs when it can be proved by mass balance and stoichiometry? Why proclaim what would be nice, when it has been provided but you play the magician? You distract to the insignificant, lead your audience to miss what is happening. You could not do science a greater disservice.

    Post
    RE: Electrogravity (electron-gravity) as a cause of nuclear reactions.
    Of the various experiments which might be LENR, two provide data which can be used for a very strong argument for fusion outside of the Lawson criteria. A nuclear reaction occurs in ICFP and for the process to make AquaFuel. Mass balance and stoichiometry prove and verify a balanced nuclear reaction in these cases. The reaction equation indicates that a catalyst for nuclear fusion is formed.

    https://www.lenr-forum.com/att…-the-kidman-reaction-pdf/

    …
    Drgenek
    Quote from Storms

    You may not know that but everyone in Ukraine and Japan knows this. Everyone who lives close to a nuclear reactor knows this. Everyone who lives close to where uranium is extracted knows this. Perhaps you should try to learn what is actually happening.

    The safety of nuclear energy must be compared to other energy sources available.

    The safety statistics of nuclear energy beat any other energy source, especially considering the levels of pollution and CO2 output of fossil fuels.

    Past poor designs like Chernobyl should not be applied to today's newer designs in regards to safety.

    The demonization of fission energy is doing a disservice to clean energy. I am not the only one who believes this, by the way.

    Perhaps you should learn that your personal opinion may not always be shared by everyone else, so perhaps you should also learn that some people who do in fact know what is actually happening actually believe that nuclear is a necessary strategy until something else like LENR is available.

    Safety (nei.org)

    Why Bill Gates’ New Natrium Reactor Is a Big Deal | RealClearScience

    Safety standards | IAEA

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.