Posts by TheGomp

The overwhelming reason anyone like ME should publish at once is that governments and large corporations will be sure they do NOT make a public revelation. By that I do NOT mean that they can stop the adoption of LENR power but that as LENR-cities has been explaining for a while, the rollout of this new fire will be more disruptive than anything ever seen in the modern world. Now that governments and large corporations are waking up to the fact that this is simply NOT bulls***, no one will be allowed to simply release the beast. Could be that the real reason ME does not publish is that it has been made obvious to him that doing so would NOT be in his self interest. Perhaps the same for Rossi.

Markets and governments want, above all things, stability. The effect on the military is destabilizing since it would impart an insurmountable advantage to the first in. In economics there is practically no sector which will be immune to the drastic evolution in leadership implicit in the LENR rollout.

I admit I have been struggling of late, as the indicators more and more point toward the emergence of accurate theoretical modelling and practical recipes for replication and further development. Where do I stand on the question of fast rollout vs. control and gradual rollout by governments and large corporations? I have been solidly in the "let the ecat out of the bag" state of mind for quite some time. I have been losing sleep over this, and am more and more convinced that the destabilization which would result are a far more compelling argument for withholding specifics than that one individuals privacy would be interrupted, or that a few score experimenters might cook themselves with unexpected radiation.

Not all conspiracies are harmful; some may be necessary and beneficial. I see the traces of one in the LENR blogosphere but I am coming to think that they possibly will save us from the potential of terrible consequence in an un-managed explosion of LENRs potential. Like giving a machinegun to a 9-year old.

Sorry Hank, but I have lost my patience with this whole charade. I have been polite and supportive for years. The whole Bob Greenyear MFMP "breakthrough" of a few months ago was icing on the cake of the endless multipliers invented by Rossi. What I say or do will have no effect on how all this plays out. Just count on this: Me has no more than Rossi, no more than MFMP. Just more punking of all the fans. Me appears out of thin air, and has solved every issue in this field? I think not. I will not continue being negative, so, have a good time, and thanks for all the fish.

If Hank deletes his account, so will I. This tease game is beneath contempt, and I strongly predict that ME will show up with nothing, just like Rossi. Waste of time, and, for what it's worth - screw your bulls***.

Yikes! This site is turning into teaser.com. Moments away from this, that is impending. Where are the replications from the MFMP grand teaser campaign? I am not a pathologically skeptical, but Science does not work like this. Watch this space because soon I'll post an indictment of ALL LENR research that will make everyone go home and chop firewood. Come on, everyone seems to be borrowing Rossi's style!

Rakitsa: Your unshakable trust in the mathematical models of reality is noble but dangerous. Your description of the modern understanding of nuclear forces is simply too certain. It fails to acknowledge that while it is consistent with current experimental evidence, it is not complete and many things are yet not known. No scientist should hold such a conviction that their "models" are complete and un-falsifiable. Nature will undoubtedly prove you wrong at some time, in some way!

Mats,

From the very beginnings of my love affair with LENR that question has plagued me. The dilemma in a single question: If you discovered a cheap, simple device which would produce all the clean energy the world would ever need, but could be modified by any handiman to vaporize an entire city, what would you do with it? I blogged (with others) this question several years ago. Perhaps there is no good answer to that. We are under a similar threat by a very small number of carefully selected individuals and have avoided a madman for 70 years, yet in the States political forces argue (essentially) that any madman can have a gun. Would they argue that any madman can have an A bomb?

But then , ME356 thinks that at worst it could be a suicide pill. Here, Here!

It is simply awesome that you are not only finding such success, but seem (like MFMP) to be committed to open sourcing your results.

Please do not be offended by this, but .. FOR GOODNESS SAKE publish instructions, a recipe a quidebook AS SOON AS POSSIBLE so that others can first replicate reliably the LENR energy creation, and second that they can create better funded , staffed and trained groups and dedicate the proper resources to breaking this seemingly eternal LENR logjam. I have access to funds, and specialists and all we are waiting for is a solid no nonsense means of reliable replication. We could HIRE you - would that help? I just hope that you are not another Rossi who will get lost in a maze of perfection and productizing when in fact YOUR WORK is done - at least the first phase is. There is no reason why, with the results you claim, your involvement in a well funded and staffed effort would not be fantastically rewarding! Think, man! This is the obvious and essential next step! How can you possibly wait, or worse stop now! OR do it cloak and dagger style ala Rossi? Please do not take offense at the directness of this. I am not accusing you of any of the negative things inherent in this, but you do stand on the threshold: which way will you turn now? Just make it clear here on this forum, and we will find a way to communicate directly. Or contact MFMP before the end of this day to arrange a collaboration. You have an immense opportunity and obligation, and if anyone else on this blog disagrees with this or has a better plan for ME356 share it with us!

Joshua, your response is a perfect example of non productive pouting. Are you doing any experiments? If not, why not? What can I take from your reply which is any way or manner constructive? What is your intent here? To merely criticise as it would seem?
Or better yet to have it all stop and go away? In my opinion you add nothing to the purpose or goals of a blog like this, and serve only to cloud the issues with your self congratulatory criticism. You seem angry about the lack of rigor shown. You should calm down.

Thanks to Thomas Clark and others who are offering very constructive skepticism! We have seemingly reached a time when there seems to be some repeatability of LENR phenomenon. It is time now for very extreme and diligent refinements of the experiments and that is where trained observers can direct their absolutely essential and proper criticism. It is fantastic to read through all this when positive results do not lead to accusations of fraud or incompetence. The gaps and holes in the experiments are genuine, but quite understandable at this point. Clearly if there is a LENR at all, it is an extremely subtle and delicate phenomenon to induce. At the end of the day it may well be that it will have taken the collective efforts of many, many people to refine. Constructive skepticism and relentless experimentation seem to be making progress. I hope so, but while I know that there has in no way been a definitive, undeniable result it is going to be through this kind of "crowd science" : worldwide, optimistic and yes skeptical without being either gullible dreamers or harsh and arrogant obstructionists.

In my humble opinion:
At the very least anyone must admit that Rossi has been clever and manipulative to a very high degree. Krivit less so.
This is a binary situation: Rossi either has LENR or not.

Consider the entire history of Rossi, and assume that he has it, and that his personal history made him paranoid, that is to say that his "recycling" enterprise was ambushed. It seems possible that Rossi might have been in the position of wanting to demonstrate his new discovery enough to interest potential investors while at the same time not so much that everyone would completely believe it, or accept his "science" as valid. He wants credit and vindication. He wants money too, no doubt. If he produces too much valid evidence, there is a chance that bigger players would roll in and bury him. But he doesn't have the funds to control the R&D, the engineering and productization, so he must at least pique the interest of speculators. Even Defkalion could be made to fit in. They were negotiating, and it fell through. Defkalion thought they had enough of the secret sauce to carry on without Rossi. THey were wrong and he had kept some vital portion of it to himself. They tried, but simply could not make it work, which made them look like frauds. So it goes! I think this provides a consistent model of his behavior over the entire LENR adventure.

Krivit could have in one way or another threatened this balancing act, or tried to muscle in, or extort in some way, leading to his expulsion by Rossi.

The other position, that he is a fraud, is also self consistent except for one thing: the length of time that I.H. has continued to validate, by their silence, that something of value is at hand. Picture "buying" Rossi's intellectual property and becoming his "partner". Even if their "due diligence" was somehow scammed, a year or more working together would either make them part of the fraud, remarkably stupid, or on to something. I simply cannot imagine them realizing they were duped, and carrying on with the farce. Why? To save face? Ultimately they would surely have known that the illusion would not last forever, and the longer they played along, the more damaging their continued involvement.

In the case of a Rossi fraud, Krivit might well have been close to revealing a "smoking gun", and destroying Rossi. So Rossi preempted that possibility by throwing him out in order to continue the scam.

Obviously this is all speculation: he has it or he does not. It's easy to poke holes in the narrative, but I think the basic outline of the "he has it" model is at least plausible.

Michel: Of course the states of matter in the realm between nano and atomic scales is practically unexplored. Another fun example: Spider silk is easy to analyze chemically, yet impossible to synthesise. It would be hugely beneficial to do so given the silks amazing properties. The reason is that the chilations and structuring of the involved atoms and molecules changes as the scale changes. In some cases they are fractal in being self similar through size changes, in other cases the topological structuring varies with scale.
I have always had the intuition that LENR phenomenon was highly dependent on some nano scale state changes in the metal latices. Also the complexities of electromagnetic forces in these size realms is far from well understood. Concentrated basic research of material properties in these scales is of huge importance with or without LENR. And that of course is not to minimize the importance of LENR. I hope that you, in your business efforts, can encourage basic research in material properties in the nano to atomic scales in addition to the targeted research in LENR research. Thank you for becoming such a catalyst in this field!

I have to thank Tom Clark for being civil and constructive in his strong skepticism, if only a bit sarcastic toward Bob Greenyer. Mr. Greenyer does seem like a cross between Mr. Wizard on steroids and Professor Corey these days. Possibly justified, but even my non technical understanding of physics finds it all just a bit daffy. One thing that no one should ignore, however: relatively modest experiments have been described which, if he is on to something, should produce results in short order. He is putting his money where his mouth is and even the most vitriolic skeptics ala MY should applaud this - if it is bogus we will know soon. Either a growing number of experimenters will find the effect, or a dreary string of technical "glitches" will start to issue forth, or, perhaps, Bob will time it right to have a swell April Fool's this year when he let's us know it's just a send up.

My guess? (and right now it's all a fun time to guess) Rossi has given them an XCat to test. It works, and it works better than anyone could have dared to hope. Lead? Iridium? Infra-red? beta radiation? For techies this is a fun riddle. For us philosophers the meat is in the other clues. But even if it can "only" heat our homes and factories in a non polluting way it's better than sliced bread.On the other hand, If, after all this buildup, it's only another bottle of wine from Lugano a lot of us will go home, lick our wounds and once more begin praying for the second coming.

Thomas, I'd say your logic was off. By and large all MY went on about was frauds. Fraud this, fraud that.

I would like to see banning be done in stages: first banishment, say a week, publicly announced with reasons. Second maybe a month again announced, and with cause.
After that a final banishment, announced and with cause.

Thomas, this site is about LENR (etc.) It is NOT about frauds. MY should create such a site.

If there was a club about making wine, and a temperance zealot constantly interrupted to tell how bad spirits were for health and society would they have to be wrong to be unwelcome?
If someone critiqued a method of making wine that didn't work, I'll bet that would be OK. Or even argued that a particular member made crappy wine.

The problem, Thomas, at least for me, has never been MY's facts or even the rigid denial based on solid and reliable scientific theory. The problem lies in the endless slander, and the hypocritical claim that, while scientific rigor denies the validity of many LENR claims, the conclusion of MY that various individuals are FRAUDS stands without proof. Such claims have no more been proven than have the claims of LENR success. In a sense that makes MY as much a fraud as any of her targets. He/she radiates absolute certainty regarding the fraudulent or incompetent nature of her targets with no more concrete evidence than have the true believers in LENR regarding their claims. That hypocrisy is what constantly makes MY the most offensive (and ineffective) advocate in the many sites that she/he haunts. You, on the other hand, are a very effective rebutter of LENR claims precisely because you do not sink to that vigilante "judge, jury and executioner" attitude.

I have tried to relate this simple position to MY on several occasions, and I, in return, have been accused of being a true believing dupe, which I am not. Even brilliant scientific minds have a need for civility and good techniques of persuasion, and those glaring absences in MY are why people want to shun and expel HimHer. MY is to thick to get it, or even care that HisHer goal of persuasion is totally stifled by an arrogant, obnoxious and uncaring persona.

Come on MY, give it a rest. This is a thread about proper discourse, not fraud or Defkalion. I'll happily tell you what I think of them in another thread, but this kind of response is why you appear like such a relentless vigilante. It's a matter of style - you know, how to make friends and influence people.

Well, I think that I can get along with the views expressed by Thomas Clarke. There will never be a perfect solution to a dynamic problem so all we can do as individuals with different perspectives is define our endpoints, that is the ways in which the discussion can stop being constructive. Perhaps it is important to have each poster provide a statement of position before they are allowed to post. That makes more sense to me than having an avatar photo which is useless (but fun.)

In a debate type of interchange I can respect the use of good debating techniques, but also even a personal comment i.e. "pathoskep", or "true believer." We are, none of us, perfect, and it is unreasonable to expect perfect decorum.

However, I think that judgemental pronouncements regarding those not directly in the discussion should be strongly discouraged. No one individual has the right to decide who is or is not a scam artist, or incompetent, os a shill for the oil interests (of which I am guilty). They are typically not present to defend themselves, and more importantly the damage done by mistaken attacks of this kind is morally repugnant to me.

I have stated before I do not know if LENR (or any other new and remarkable energy source) is genuine. There has clearly been no result or technique published which even faintly resembles a "repeatable" experiment. The MFMP folks have thus far seemed determined to share their results quickly as well as being resolved to examine their results as stringently as they can while staying open to criticism and technically astute suggestions. There have been many positive experiments reported by other solid and honest researchers that simply are to important to simply discard as experimental error or (come on) more fraud. Remember that Pons and Fleischman had solid careers, and good experience in calorimetry. They were perhaps rushed to publication, and ended up looking foolish, but remember they also spent their time after their public destruction continuing to believe that their experiments had been remarkable and worthy of pursuit. And, of course, they are (were) not alone.

So the question to me is how all of us as bystanders who are somehow interested in this field can be useful. You, Thomas and probably MY and some others are in fact scientists with specialized training in relevant fields, I can only ask you to be constructive in your criticisms and leave the judgement out of it. Provide useful suggestions to the researchers, and terse, relevant reasons for your reservations to the rest of us. Just remember that if anything ever does come of LENR research it will require, without a doubt, new physics of some sort: it will impose a paradigm shift and I don't think that anyone can deny that. If you deny the possibility of there actually being an LENR phenomenon, and thust current physical science needs to be extended or changed then you are (in my opinion) being what we have come to call a pathological skeptic, that is someone who does not believe that current physical theory is ever subject to extension or revision.

I am tired of being accused of being irrational and living in La-La land because I think that that results of a large number of competent researchers, while incomplete and not repeatable, strongly suggest the need for a thorough and well funded attempt to find out what nature is trying to tell us. I think that is being done now in various places and while we will never be able to rule out LENR as a result of failures, there will come a time to say enough. Another year or two and I , for one, will lose any faint hopes of this being the discovery that saves humanity from its overwhelming insensitivity to the ravages the current energy systems impose on the Earth.

Not being trained in any of the relevant fields means that I can provide no technical insight. I can however resist the steamroller, no room for doubt perception of MY and other similar critics that they defend the idea that modern physical science has no possibility of being expanded, or revised. I just want them to be skeptical not only of exceptional results, but of the immutability of our current knowledge. In my opinion they are responsible for this perception because of the vigilante zeal they have shown by their long term, relentless and often impolite and hostile demeanor. I wish it were not so, but that is how they make themselves appear.

Who appointed you and MY as the "parents" in the room? This superior "I'm protecting you from your own stupidity" rationalization is the same mindset held by everyone from Joseph McCarthy to the "I'll jail you for your own good for smoking weed" crowd. At least now we can discuss this "helping a blind man" superiority complex in direct terms. I for one do not want or need a new Mommy.

It just amazes me that obviously intelligent people can allow themselves this attitude, which in the end has always been a failure and moral disaster.

I just wonder how many other posters, here and at other blog sites appreciate "one-eyed man in the land of the blind" saviors?

But, in the end all that MY et. al, need to do is provide evidence as they are able and not judgements. I will draw my own conclusions.

Well it appears you have researched your rights to make accusations of fraud. How many would know of their first amendment rights in that regard, but a professional troll? One who has been there before. As prosecutor you trot out your evidence and as judge you hand down judgement. But we will not let you execute so blithely. You have outed yourself. There are many reasons why someone would fail to bring you to court in response to slander and only a McCarthy like prosecutor would use that as further evidence of guilt. So you use your "right" in a self righteous manner to assault individuals, some, or even many of which may be guilty ignoring the fact that if you harm even a single innocent person you are guilty of the crime (in my eyes) of character assassination. You have scruples when it comes to scientific evidence which you seem to cherish, but seem to completely lack in moral matters. I take it you are a vigilante of sorts, at least in your own mind. But like lynch mobs everywhere you only have to be wrong once.

That, sir, is why the rest of us ignorant bloggers find your technical skills a poor substitute for belief in a world governed by laws and not self superior individuals.