Posts by AlainCo

Hideo Kozima who publish CFRL Newsletter
http://www.geocities.jp/hjrfq930/News/news.html
publish 4 abstract of papers to be presented at JCF16
file:///C:/Prive/LENR/JCF/AbstractsJCF16.pdf
JCF16 will be held at Kyoto University on December 11 and 12, 2015.

To be clear Mary, you state that there is no evidence of your theory, which prove your theory.

There is a new mug by LENRnomics on zazzle
http://www.zazzle.com/when_you…ee_mug-183975576700536719


When you need energy ... 20 oz large ceramic coffee mug by LENRnomics

Anyway personally, the hydroton is more sexy.

to @acalaon, hydronion could be beautiful too on a mug (that is not a scientific position )

Je suis tombé sur cette page Wiki sur la méthode Edisonienne
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edisonian_approach

Et une section cite l'historien Thomas Hughes expliquant la méthode de Edison.
Parmis elle, on retrouve des points clés qui résonent avec la proposition LENR-Cities, la notion d'écosystème, l'importance d'aller bien au delà de la simple ingénirie, pour prendre en compte l'usage, et la monétisation des applications.
Il y a aussi d'autres idées intéressantes, comme l'usage de la méthode scientifique, mais dans un but pratique.

Quote

L'historien Thomas Hughes (1977) décrit les caractéristiques de la méthode d'Edison. En résumé, ils sont:

• "Dans la formulation des idées de résolution de problèmes, il invente; dans le développement des inventions, son approche est apparentée à l'ingénierie;. Et dans la recherche de financement et la fabrication et d'autres activités après l'invention et le développement, il innove"
• Edison "choisi adroitement" des problèmes qui ont fait usage de ce qu'il sait déjà.
• La méthode d'Edison est d'inventer des systèmes plutôt que des composants de systèmes. Edison n'a pas seulement inventé une ampoule, il a inventé un système économiquement viable pour l'éclairage y compris ses générateurs, les câbles, la mesure de consommation et ainsi de suite.
• Edison invente en essayant répétitivement des dispositifs dans des environnements de plus en plus complexes, rapprochant progressivement leurs conditions de l'utilisation finale.
• Edison assemble l'invention avec le modèle économique. Son système d'éclairage électrique a été conçu pour être un concurrent économique à l'éclairage au gaz.
• Edison assemble et organise les ressources qui conduiront à des inventions couronnées de succès:
  
  • Hommes ayant des compétences qui aideraient la tâche.
  • Équipement - machines, instruments, produits chimiques, etc.
  • La littérature sur le sujet. Il a commencé un projet avec un examen approfondi de la littérature.
  • Un environnement où le but était invention pas autre chose comme la fabrication.
• Edison était un leader charismatique qui a repris les idées de ceux qui ont travaillé avec lui.
• Edison était obsessionnel dans sa quête de résultats, ne permettant pas à des choses comme un manque de sommeil, ou le coût, de le dissuader.
• Contrairement à l'opinion commune Edison a fait usage de la méthode scientifique, mais d'une manière qui a été limité à la tâche à accomplir et ne pas chercher à développer des théories généralisées.
• Une clé de la démarche intellectuelle d'Edison était toujours à douter et ne jamais prendre les choses pour acquises.
• Edison fait un usage efficace de métaphores quand imaginant ses inventions.
• Il avait une capacité importante à saisir les relations quantitatives malgré sa formation mathématique limitée.
• Il a travaillé en concevant une idée et de travailler pour l'atteindre.
• Edison (et ses co-travailleurs) possédaient une excellente dextérité manuelle.
• Edison a également été très efficace à dessiner, lui permettant de concevoir et de manipuler ses idées sur le papier.
• Edison a beaucoup fait usage de la méthode "chasse&essaye" mais seulement quand aucune théorie n'existait et d'une manière systématique plutôt que de manière aléatoire.
• Edison a été distingué par sa capacité à faire face au changement complexe.

@acalaon
What is new in you theory, from an experimental point of veiw, is that it seems to cover not only the US-style experiments, electrolysis and pressurized powders producing transmutations and heat, but also some Russian results with heterogeneous plasmoid, wire explosions, and strange particles observations, and even Randell Mills.

The fact that Russian experiments, and Randell Mills observe really new phenomenon that match none of the theories is epistemologically "cold fusion inside cold fusion". Again, even LENR supporter have the choice to doubt on the experimental results, or on the theories, and against prejudice against non US/Ivy leagues trouble the analysis.

We need solid replications of all those strange non-Us phenomenons.

Theory is a double edged sword.
Without a theory you cannot design experiments and ask good questions to nature, dare the unthinkable.
But with a theory you often ignore dissenting evidences.

Problem in LENR is that simple experiments don't exists and LENR experiments are overwhelmed with material science troubles, making a negative not so much an evidence of wrongness, and success not surely a confirmation of righteousness.

Mary, please apply to youself the rules you try to apply to us.

You claim US Army was fooled by a US company with the help of an Italian crook, who obtained a permanent visa after inventing a biofuel process.

please provide evidence. not inuendo, but evidence.
do you have a report about the fraud on U NH ?

the occam razor is that what is in the report is exact, coherent, that TEG failed for predictable and genuine reason, linked to mechanic, material science and other industrialization problems.
My intuition is that Rossi is creative but not the best at finishing the engineering. It seems true for E-cat that was "finished" only with the control of Darden, who is more serious (and richer, maybe this is the real key, not competence ).

moreover, this is without any importance since the technology of E-cat is proven working more or less, by the pair of report of Ferrara AND Lugano, which independently exclude any of your hypothesis, fraud, scam, delusion, complicity...

The more or less make the key of the Rossi's F9: if it works unreliably it is an industrial failure, but a scientific non-revolution (since LENR is proven it is an evolution of a "pink flamingo" scientific phenomenon).
If it works reliably, we hope the general stupidity of Ivy League and the followers will not slowdown innovation too long.

Note that like you I take Rossi Says as possibility, not as evidence. Rossi is not Mother Theresa, and as Mats Lewan report he exaggerate, refuse to admit his errors, change his mind, try to fool competitors, and seduce supporters and investors... No doubt Tom darden have greater teeth than Rossi and know that Startup spirit better than Rossi, and how to mitigate it.

Anyway like Altavista search engine, it may fail despite technology, I even predict E-cat technology will lose on the long term, for many business and engineering reasons, unless something surprising happen with Darden&co.

Michel vandenberghe sur Linked-In vient de publier un article très clair sur le problème de l'innovation pour les innovateurs et les entreprises installées.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse…place-michel-vandenberghe

Il présente bien les intérêts de ces deux entreprises complémentaires, à deux pas du succès; l'envie de prendre le contrôle; la peur de le perdre; l'impossibilité de prévoir les usages futurs et l'innovation qui s'y déplace; la possibilité d'attendre confortablement; celle de se faire doubler; et la solution évidente de travailler ensemble, en partageant les bénéfices futurs de l'usage imprévisible...

Quote from Michel vandenberghe

...
A supposer que la réalité puisse se réduire raisonnablement à ce schéma, Y aurait-il une solution pour que cette transformation soit moins difficile... Peut-être, si innovateurs et acteurs en place convenaient d'une trêve…

Je vous propose une histoire pour l'illustrer. Deux hommes d’affaires. MM Innovateur et Mr Acteur-en-place se trouvent dans une situation unique. Ils se retrouvent chacun d’un côté d’un pont inachevé. Chacun possède une pierre et seules ces deux pierres peuvent constituer la clef de voute du pont. Evidemment, chacun d’eux veut exploiter le pont pour son propre profit… et chacun peut aussi construire son propre pont…

Regardons le dessin. La solution est juste évidente. Chacun doit déposer sa pierre et ils doivent le faire ensemble. Une fois posée, la clef de voute de l'édifice ne pourra être retirée.

...

Display More

Qu'ils ont l'air timides nos deux décideurs hein.
Faut pas être timide comme ça!

The report is available in few place and the story, is what Rossi explained :
- LTI have something promising, but expensive (BiTe TEG)
- he tried to make it manufactured by subcontractant
- this did not work
- the reason is for many complex reasons linked to mechanic and material science

http://dodfuelcell.cecer.army.…ry_items/Thermo(2004).pdf

Quote

LTI was incorporated as a response to the thermoelectric power generation research by Dr. Andre Rossi. Dr. Rossi indicated that his devices would produce 20 percent efficiencies, a vast increase from the current science of 4 percent conversion of waste heat to electrical power. Dr. Rossi believed that he could increase the physical size of the TE Devices and maintain superior power generation. In furtherance of his research, in early 2000, LTI had tests conducted at the University of New Hampshire (UNH), Durham, NH, using a small scale LTI TE Device. Over a period of 7 days, the UNH power plant staff recorded voltage and amperage readings every 1/2 hr. The TE Device produced approximately 100 volts and 1 ampere of current, providing 100 watts of power. After this initial success, and a fire that destroyed his Manchester, NH location, Dr. Rossi returned to Italy to continue the manufacture of the TE Devices. In Italy, Dr. Rossi believed that LTI could manufacture more cost-effective TE generating devices with lower labor and assembly costs. Accordingly, Dr. Rossi engaged a subcontractor to fulfill the requirements of manufacturing and assembly.

Unfortunately, the Italian subcontractor was unable to provide second generation TE Devices with satisfactory power generation. Nineteen of 27 TE Devices shipped to CTC, Johnstown, PA, were incapable of generating electricity for a variety of reasons, from mechanical failure to poor workmanship. The remaining eight produced less than 1 watt of power each, significantly less than the expected 800–1000 watts each. Appendix C documents TE Device testing.

In an effort to determine, and possibly correct the reasons for TE Device failures, LTI personnel traveled to the Italian laboratory. The common theme that began to emerge was the inability to upgrade from small-scale TE modules to largescale multiple module TE Devices with large footprints. The most fundamental reason for the LTI second-generation TE Devices’ failure was the complex thermal expansion interplay among the various components. Contributing to the TE Device failure were the large number of soldered electrical connections (over 80), the inability to match the thermal expansion rates of the mono-block cooling tanks to the circuit boards and to the semiconductor materials, all within the clamp pressure or the retaining hardware in the grip of high temperature adhesives. After a month of research and observation at the Italian laboratory, it was determined that the best way to proceed would be to develop an independent laboratory in New Hampshire so that two development facilities could work at the problems from two separate locations and viewpoints. During this period of time, the Italian laboratory continued to deliver TE materials, but none that exceed the current science of TE power generation.

Display More

Nothing abnormal for high technology innovation.
It worked at small scale in the lab after month of hard work.
When industrialized it failed miserably, and the postmortem analysis found that there was intractable problems to scale up.

This is standard story.

About funding, it seems joint proposal with CTC:

Quote

Teaming with Concurrent Technologies Corporation (CTC), LTI has secured DOD funding to identify and quantify applications and develop a model TE device for electrical generation and industrial process applications. While significant benefit is expected in this demonstration program for the DOD, the benefits of TE devices also extend into other areas, such as the power-generation and general industrial sectors.

If there is a conspiracy, you have Rossi, LTI in US too, and CTC, plus complicity in the army.

This was discussed there
The patent of Andrea Rossi about thermo-electric generator

there is a synthesis of Rossi's position... which match the report.

Reading his patent
https://www.google.com/patents/US20050028858
assembling was part of the innovation.

Quote

Thermoelectric module, comprising: a plurality of thermoelectric materials with opposed polarity connected by a first and a second conductive element wherein such thermoelectric materials are configured according to respective coating layers applied on at least one of the conductive elements.

Jus see that similar project, where key innovation is the geometry
http://energy.gov/sites/prod/f…/f8/deer09_lagrandeur.pdf

Beside that the main patent is about anisotropic BiTe(+Se+Pd) / BiTe(+Sb+Au) junction.

Quote

1-A thermoelectric module comprising:
a first thermoelectrode comprising bismuth telluride doped with selenium, wherein said first thermoelectrode has an oriented crystalline structure; and
a second thermoelectrode comprising bismuth telluride doped with antimony, wherein said second thermoelectrode has an oriented crystalline structure.
2-
The thermoelectric module according to claim 1 wherein said first thermoelectrode is further doped with palladium.

3. The thermoelectric module according to claim 1 wherein said second thermoelectrode is further doped with gold.

9-A method of producing a thermoelectrode comprising:forming a salt by combining purified bismuth and purified tellurium with at least one of selenium, palladium, antimony, and gold in a 2:3:3 stoichiometric ratio;
directionally fusing the salt to produce an oriented crystalline structure in the salt.

Display More

In think people may understand why it is difficult.

Note that Chinese research about using layers of Au/Pd in BiTe TEG modules :
http://link.springer.com/artic…s10854-011-0306-0#/page-1

EDIT: following Colwyn advices I found this second report
http://freeenergyscams.com/wp-…moelectric-Devices-FE.pdfhttp://freeenergyscams.com/wp-…oelectric-Devices-OIT.pdf (same with colors)
with first part already included in main report, and which detail mosty the application of low grade heat recuperation though TEG.

I don't see the 3rd report, and I remember it was kept secret by free energy scam. I don't know why, he is not the kind to respect secrecy.

Mary, you state something only based on your ignorance.

There is a report on the TEG, and nobody moaned.
That is all. your claim is just a theory, with contradicting evidence, and nothing else question to support it.
It contradict the fact that Rossi was an employee, and kept his position, kept his visa.

This is your general way to conclude, from ignorance, real ignorance or just wilful ignorance.

I can the same way insinuate that you are paid my ITER physicist to save their budgets, or by big oil (sorry shell, Amoco, SAIPEM, that is not personal) to slow E-cat emergence.
I have no evidence you are a real people, not a lobbyist , not a paid troll. This is why you can be such a paid troll!
This is an absolutely unfair attack, but it is simply what you do.

To be honest I just feel you are a conspiracy theorist, wounded by Orbo story.

I've just found a post in Chinese about Cold fusion enigma, the history, questioning if it is bad science or real science...
Article is open but quite negative on average.

http://www.360doc.com/content/…16/152409_509893289.shtml

Some Chinese reader may explain better what it mean.

Bing translate much better than google:
http://www.microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?from=&to=en&a=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.360doc.com%2Fcontent%2F15%2F1101%2F16%2F152409_509893289.shtml%23
but anyway it is not totally clear.

Quote

Cold Fusion: interest in puzzles
Jiang Xiaoyuan

Rare physics of rules of procedure

The journal nature (Nature), Campbell (P. Campbell) in the Sino-British Joint issue of the sequence of natural century classic of science writing, recognizing that the nature has published some articles "is not just wrong, but it was the infamous", and in order to preserve the historical truth, some of these articles being selected in this century of the natural sciences in the classic. He cited the example of the "memory of water" and other articles. But in refers to "cold fusion" when he becomes more peaceful:

Anthology also includes a number of surveys of hydrogen called "cold fusion" article, not only in today's reappearance in the late 1980 of the 20th century that a sharp scientific debate, and revealed that it was a mistake at the time experiments (faulty experimentation) also play an important role in the process.

The so-called "cold fusion" (cold fusion), of course, is "hot fusion".

Nuclear fusion can release tremendous energy, a process that was originally used to make deadly weapons atomic bombs, was later developed to control this process, making it slow-release energy, I can have peaceful uses, is nuclear power technology of today's debate is fierce. But fusion can release more energy, since this process can also be used to manufacture weapons of mass killing--the hydrogen bomb. Scientists also want to be nuclear fusion process control, in accordance with existing technology, nuclear fusion must be conducted in an environment of high temperature and high pressure can, research in this area are collectively referred to as "fusion". Some of that is still being portrayed as the most promising science works "tokamak" (in the strong magnetic field for fusion), classified thermonuclear areas. Thermonuclear fusion research usually need to invest huge sums of money, and the construction of expensive and large equipment. But so far have not achieved any success.

But "cold fusion" is dramatically different. Its basic concept is: you can try to achieve nuclear fusion at room temperature (in special status can do). Who realized the commercial value of "cold fusion", he would be unimaginable fame and fortune because global energy issues almost instantly declared resolved.

On March 23, 1989, the surprising news came that it was actually made! United States University of Utah Fleischmann (M. Fleischmann) and Pons (S. Pons) announced to the world, they succeeded in achieving sustained fusion reactions at room temperature. Said at a press conference of the University of Utah: invention of Fleischmann and Pons can compare with fire, electrical and plant cultivation. As expected, the news shook the global physics community. Amid questions in, there was supporting evidence--United States, and Italy, the Soviet Union, Hungary, and India's laboratory, at one point claiming to be able to confirm that Fleischmann and Pons of "cold fusion" experiments.

However, the questioning intensified, after only two months, "mainstream science" became convinced that Fleischmann and Pons of "cold fusion" is an illusion. Fupang both from the popular Flash exposure to the scandal, was accused of "incompetence and deceit".

Soon, however, and others to come forward to support them. Nobel Laureate Schwinge (J. Schwinger) announced its withdrawal from the United States physics society to protest against the unfair practices of physics fupang they. Massachusetts Institute of technology's "top science columnist" Mollov (E. Mallov) accused some opposition "cold fusion" scientists have cheated, he resigned from the post, began publication of a name of the infinite energy of the (Infinite Energy) magazine, strongly advocates that "cold fusion".

Today, after more than 20 years, "cold fusion" is still the things one can't say for sure, it is a fraud? Is illusion? Is being suppressed great invention? Seems to be possible.

Experimental fupang two why not recognized

Campbell talked about on "cold fusion" when the wording is "error test (faulty experimentation)", which is a fairly decent, businesslike terms, avoiding speculation for motivation and evaluation both of fupang.

Fleischmann earlier in the physics community once had a good reputation, in announcing his "cold fusion" a few years before, he was just elected to United Kingdom member of the Royal Society. So physics could not have been taken seriously at first his "cold fusion". And he and Pons's claims of successful experiments then theoretically also is not without basis. They said are in Palladium metal rods in the water power of concentrated deuterium fusion happened after respectively, and the peculiar properties of Palladium absorbs hydrogen. "Cold fusion" is not fupang people first concept, it is a long dream of physicists, for example, just fupang the two men announced that "cold fusion" success shortly before another cold fusion ideas, called the "muon-catalyzed fusion" also were excited by some physicists.

Two of fupang is that it is viewed by many as a scam, it now appears that there are two main reasons.

First reason is their own results could not be justified. One of the key problems is the fusion neutrons at water and release of gamma-ray energy should position. According to the theory it should be 2.22 MeV, but fupang two people initially displayed to the peers in physics-Ray at the meeting location is 2.5 trillion electron volts, and the background and the spectral shape is wrong. Later, when their thesis in the electronic journal of analytical chemistry (Journal of Electroanalytical Chemidtry) Forum, Ray was at 2.22 trillion electron volts on the correct position. Then they respond to peer questions, Ray energies 2.5 MeV again. This situation is making many physicists feel the two experiments are far too wide of the mark.

The second reason is more deadly, was fupang the two men alleged that experiments cannot be repeated. According to statistics, around the world there have been about 1000 experiment did their experiments, there has been no real Fleischmann and Pons reported a laboratory result.

What factors played a role?

However, two of fupang "cold fusion" experiments that others cannot be repeated, they are difficult to justify, why there are still so many people firmly support them? This is indeed a strange phenomenon. One explanation is that "cold fusion" this dream is too good, "only science could not be destroyed." Such an interpretation has been impeccable, but it seems a little too careless.

If "interest" point of view, may be a more reasonable explanation. Everyone knows now the scientific community is also a community of interests, not to mention nuclear fusion if successful in future commercial benefits, only from the current research project, since "fusion" is a huge huge amounts of money and equipment research is needed, so "mainstream science" under the recognition that "hot fusion" circles on a huge research funding. Now the "cold fusion" came out, and doesn't need a big and large equipment, if this gets approved, "hot fusion" can get research funding will be significantly reduced.

To suppress "cold fusion" is defended on the grounds: in any case, the Pons and Fleischmann "cold fusion" ultimately did not succeed. But a deadly counter to this is: "hot fusion" study longer, has spent a huge amount of research funding, was there any success?

The other hand, since the interest factor is obvious, this makes for "cold fusion" smacks of any crackdown have impure motives. This is a very tricky situation--even if "cold fusion" really is wrong on the science, that who is going to determine this and can we win it? From "mainstream science" to determine it? This smacks of impure motives from "mainstream science" judged outside it? So "unprofessional", and equally difficult to win. Perhaps it was this dilemma is destined to "cold fusion" is not dead.

Still from time to time someone claimed to have achieved a "cold fusion" (a new one once in November 2011 Italy physicist claims), and has a "International Academy of cold fusion" (ICCF), hold a seminar every two years. "Cold fusion" dream has not yet burst, who knows what dream will one day be like?

Display More

We will seen, and i will remind all that you said, here and on ECN, all the very good arguments you proposed, and did not apply to yourself.

You are an evidence for Feyerabend's relativism.
There is no absolutely convincing evidence. There is no limit to delusion, especially with competent and intelligent people.

This catch-22 arguùent is often used and looks rational.
the problem is that the first not to be rationa are the academic, the editors, the journalist...
they just don't publicsh informations.

See how 40 journals refused even to peer review the ENEA DeNinno report 41, to accept Oriani paper despite positive review?
See woodford investing 50 million and nobody react ?

As I say often the best evidence is that beside you, Sylvie Coyaud and ECN fanclub, nobody even dare to criticize what is happening in Tohoku, Airbus, Woodford, Elforsk...
critics fall flat, like fire on wet wood...

If you see journalist who don't propagate such critics, you know there is a problem.

in fact many serious people are convinced, and some are investing millions, are building LENR labs, signing agreements, visiting Rossi, discussing with Godes, but they refuse to communicate, and even when they say it in public like what I see in Milan or Neuchatel, there is no present journalist to relay the surprising news.

Assuming people are rational, money will flow and Nobel will be given is simply naivety.
It is like assuming that proving to the pope that gay parents are good parents, will make him change his position.
There will be blood before it is accepted.

On Nasaspaceflight EmDrive forum thread, an experimente is reporting interesting results, about reduction of artefact sources, while EmDrive thrust stays...
Andf By the way, he cited a Reddit post which gather many key quote , and each one contain a different drop of truth.

To taste slowly like a good beer.

Quote from Tolstoy

I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives.

Quote from Arthur C. Clarke

It is really quite amazing by what margins competent but conservative scientists and engineers can miss the mark, when they start with the preconceived idea that what they are investigating is impossible. When this happens, the most well-informed men become blinded by their prejudices and are unable to see what lies directly ahead of them.

Quote from Mark Twain

When even the brightest mind in our world has been trained up from childhood in a superstition of any kind, it will never be possible for that mind, in its maturity, to examine sincerely, dispassionately, and conscientiously any evidence or any circumstance which shall seem to cast a doubt upon the validity of that superstition. I doubt if I could do it myself.

Quote from H. Bauer

It is not uncommon for engineers to accept the reality of phenomena that are not yet understood, as it is very common for physicists to disbelieve the reality of phenomena that seem to contradict contemporary beliefs of physics

Quote from Herbert Spencer

There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance-- that principle is contempt prior to investigation.

I cannot judge about the QM part, but beside that the presentation is quite convincing, especially because it address many different observations.

To people like Edmund Storms who try to test theories with LENR experiments, what would be your proposal ?
You propose new elements (Zr, Ca....) to test?

Can you summarise the arguments against your theory ? the justification or the need of improvements ?
What are the experimental results which don't match ?
About Iwamura CaO2 NAE is explained, but I don't see the X+2/4/6d transmutations explained ?

@sengakut just published two article about Cold Fusion reference is two Nikkei publication :

The first one is the Nikkei BP Technology Roadmap :
http://amateur-lenr.blogspot.fr/2015/11/bp.html

that you can find tthere
http://www.nikkeibp.co.jp/lab/techroad2016/index.html

Quote

Chapter 12 Emerging
picked up the theme in the development stage of the new. You can instead of human, robot or to the hospitality of the service, personal sensing to extend or transcends the five senses of the human, a quantum computer to cause a breakthrough in a wide range of areas beyond the limits of existing computer, gasoline power density of cold fusion that could generate the energy of more than 1000 times, it draws each of the future image.

1. robot
2. personal sensing
3. quantum computer / quantum communication
4. cold fusion

Display More

The second article is about Nikkei Electronics issue for November 2015 :
http://amateur-lenr.blogspot.fr/2015/11/201511.html

http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/atcl/mag/15/398081/100800011/

It covers Tohoku CMNS/LENR research unit.
This article was published earlier and discussed few days ago, and discussed too.
Here is the beginning translated :

Quote

Research and development in the field called "condensed nuclear science", are increasingly active at home and abroad."Condensed matter nuclear science" is, in a state in which the atoms and electrons are numerous, integrated as in the metal, and the field to study the phenomenon in which the element is to convert. The US University of Utah in March 1989, two researchers announced as "cold fusion (cold fusion)", it stems from that it has caused a sensation in the world.

In the country's first research department Tohoku　The University of Missouri in 2012, even though researchers of condensed nuclear reaction venture is he moved to set up a research center followed, in 2015 to set up a research center to Texas Tech University in cooperation with such research institutes of Italy. In April 2015, research department, which set a "condensed nuclear reaction" to the Tohoku University was first established in the country.

Change to heavy nuclides lighter elements fused "nuclear fusion", to release the enormous energy at that time. It is shine of the source of the sun. Take advantage of it to the power generation system aimed at practical application of "fusion reactor", such as France and Japan, are promoting the construction of "ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor)" under the international cooperation. To achieve nuclear fusion reactor, 100 million ℃ or more, such as difficulty reaction field is required in a plasma state is also high, practical use compared to the initial target has been significantly delayed.

Defkalion is dead because they tried to fool a partner during a pony show.
They never allowed independent test with freedom to handle the reactor, install instruments and change the protocol.
This is what annoyed Luca Gamberale who finally made the test himself, despite DGT opposition, and he quickly found the problem.
The skeptics moaned on all but what was the problem.
Jed smelled the problem from far, and luca measured it.

That is how it happen when you can test yourself. this is why the freedom of testing, the absence of rossi during part of the tests is a key fact. This freedom is a better indication than the report itself.

This blog post is fun
http://www.cantechletter.com/2…sion-energy/#comment-3310
as the author is bashing E-cat/LENr while not understanding it is cited in Time Magazine article.

About TEG, the anisotropic structure he proposed to use, was not so revolutionary, maybe just new, as it is what many people try to do.
The problem until recently with Perovskite is that it was too expensive to manufacture, and Rossi failed like most on that point.

about your statements on Darden, Woodford, & al, do you realize it looks really improbable, if not incredible? Do you imagine they don't read your posts before investing 50 million?

You pile improbable conditions, like any conspiracy theorist.
That is above average. Some don't even use real facts.

E-cat world make a post on that article
http://www.e-catworld.com/2015…s-for-state-lenr-program/

Quote from E-cat World

An article published on October 30th 2015 in the Ukrainian Weekly Newspaper the Mirror Weekly(Russian: Zerkalo Nedeli, Ukrainian: Dzerkalo Tyzhnia) calls for the Ukrainian government to fund an LENR research program as a means for securing the country’s energy future. The article is written by Dr. Vladimir Vysotsky, professor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences at Kiev National University Shevchenko and is titled “Late again, Gentlemen.” The Mirror Weekly is an influential newspaper and is read widely among political and academic leaders in Ukraine.

Mary, this is exactly what I explain.
You notice something strange with the difficulties to replicate the anisotropic structure used for his TEG.This can raise alarms...

Then you conclude it is sure, then you ignore all others evidence about Tests, about investments, about witnesses...
and you only keep few cherry-picked interesting facts raising the possibility of fraud among other interpretations.
This is typical of conspiracy theories.

even using only the cherry picked evidence, your theory are far from proven, just possible.

I prefer peer reviewed papers, replications, opinion of first hand witness, like the one of Us Army, essen, Levi, Hoistad, harman, Darden, ...

Your problem is you take you dreams as a reality.