Shane D. Moderator
  • Male
  • from Pensacola Beach, Fl.
  • Member since Jan 26th 2015
  • Last Activity:
  • Portal

Posts by Shane D.

    Yes, I'm hoping to contribute in a meaningful way. But meanwhile, my efforts to describe the LENR process have generated the usual random collection of ideas having neither logic nor continuity. I'm trying to assemble a jigsaw puzzle. The puzzle is already missing most of the pieces, which requires the shape of what is missing to be imagined. Instead of working together to find the missing parts, the other players try to hide some of the pieces

    IMO, one of the main problems I see is that many of the players have invested so much of their time, reputation, and money into their ideas, they are not willing to explore other ways/theories for fear of finding they were on the wrong track all along. You, Mizuno, McKubre are some of the few willing to venture out into new territory.

    Many others have formed companies to capitalize on their ideas and have investors to consider before participating in an open discussion such as thread. Others have written books, won awards, made a name for themselves in the community, which further traps them in their own self-made bubble.

    But thank goodness, we now have a new crop of researchers coming into the field with mostly government funding, which eliminates much of the personal motives that have hampered LENR progress for 33 years. We also have the X-Prize (which I have heard from 2 sources will either be out "soon", or in 2024...take your pick)) which will help gain public acceptance, and accelerate R/D.

    Only Mills replication I know of was by NASA from his early CF days:

    The fight water-Ni-K2CO s electrolytic cell on loan from
    the Hydrocatalysis Power Corporation clearly exhibited the
    phenomenon of apparent excess heat when tested at 4
    selected dc currentsand one pulse mode cun'ent Dam was
    collectedusingsimple' on-the-fly" calorimetric calibration
    in the thermal steady state and was reduced to give the
    apparent excess heat by extrapolation methods that are
    accepted practice in the field of anomalous heat cell ('cold
    fusion') research.
    Our main findings regarding cell voltages, currents and
    powers are summarized in Table I. The apparent power
    gains ranged from 1.06 to 1.68. The apparent excess
    power of lifts particular cell saturated at a rather low 11.4
    W, at an electrical input power of 59.6 W, using a cell
    current of 20 Adc, as compared to about 50 W apparent
    excess reported by other workers for essentially the same
    cell. We attn'bute this shortfall to an unfortunate choice of
    untested nickel from an alternate source.

    After switching to his Hydrino theory, there were many validations/verifications, but no replications that I am aware of.

    TTH is being respectful. He listens and then gives his own views. This is respect.

    Yes, THH is respectful to everyone, and always has been. Best skeptic LENR has probably ever had because of that, and his background. His contribution to this thread has made it popular. A popular thread attracts the attention of those who really need to hear what Storms has to say, and also those in need of understanding what THH has to add.

    So there is a certain synergy taking place that is beneficial to both. Storms has his audience of new researchers to pass on his knowledge, and THH...being the teacher he is, has his students to teach. I meant no disrespect for THH.

    Now carry on everyone. Ed has a 4 step discovery process that he is taking you through. I find this whole thing very interesting. It is what this forum is all about.

    LENR-forum Newsletter April 2023 (

    LENR Forum Newsletter APRIL 2023

    USArmy Engineer featured
    The LENR research of Dr. Ben Barrowes, an engineer at the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center’s (ERDC) Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (CRREL), is profiled in an article provided by the Defense Visual Information Distribution Service.

    Dr. Ben Barrowes presented early experimental results at the ICCF24 held in Mountain View, CA last July.
    PAPER IN REVIEW Active materials progress
    Dr. Edmund Storms has taken the results from Frank Gordon and Harley Parker's Lattice Energy Converter LEC experiment and updated his model with their new revelatory data. His new paper The Material Aspects of Low energy Fusion [.pdf] describes "treatments found to improve success". You are invited to comment at LENR-forum here.
    Brillouin Energy Corporation reports Senior Executives Greg Knight and Chester Aldridge have begun a long-term advisory relationship to guide commercialization of its patented electric heating system, building out of the Company’s pilot manufacturing facility. See more of the lab at the Quantum Fusion Channel.
    A discount for LENR-forum members is now available from Infinite Energy. For a limited time - through May 31, 2023 - members of LENR Forum are eligible for a discounted one-year digital subscription to Infinite Energy Magazine. Subscribe at this discounted rate here at LENR-forum.

    Inifinite Energy #163 featured an article by George Washington University researcher David J. Nagel entitled Direct Electrical Production from LENR. Read the abstract here.

    What's up with all the euphoria over AI? Will it help with LENR research and public acceptance? See what Open Science humans (mostly) are saying Chat Gpt and LENR research

    To clarify that confusing sentence from Newsletter March 2023: At ICCF24 in July 2022, Clean Planet announced they would be completing a ~350 Watt boiler as a prototype for a scaled-up boiler to be released in 2025 for industry only. As of March 2023, plans are for a 2K thermal unit to be released 2026.

    The 25th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science ICCF25 is scheduled for this summer Sunday, August 27, 2023 - Thursday, August 31, 2023 in Szczecin, Poland.

    Abstracts were due on April 15 - that's today!
    Response to abstract acceptance is May 1.

    University of Szczecin Physics Professor Konrad Czerski will host the event with his research team. Join the CMNS research community as they provide updates on new science, engineering, and the new materializing technologies. Special sessions on laboratory results, theory, and investment. More information on accommodations and submission deadlines at

    Professor Czerski gave a talk to the Polish Physical Society March 29 "Is the riddle of cold fusion solved?"

    Follow LENR-forum's thread for ICCF25 here.

    Full presentations from last summer's ICCF24 in Mountain View, California are here.
    ICCF24 host Anthropocene Institute is a sponsor of ICCF25 and continues to advance solid state fusion in all forms. They are sponsoring a panel session at the SMR and Advanced Reactor 2023 conference this May 4-5 in Atlanta, Georgia, US. The session Recommissioning Sites & Re-Engaging People seeks to determine where "existing coal infrastructure can be salvaged, and "how industry can work with communities to utilize alternative and old production sites and provide jobs, security, and purpose."

    Anthropocene Institute participated in The Department of Energy’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy ARPA-E Energy Innovation Summit's Student Program with Technical Project Manager Hilda Palencia and Co-founder and President Carl Page engaging students to "think about America’s energy challenges in new and innovative ways." If you missed it, Carl Page spoke at the Nuclear Energy Assembly last summer with a talk chock full of stats you'll want to remember.

    Last month, Dr. Dinara Ermakova, AI Nuclear Communications Consultant participated on the panel “The Future of Energy” at the We Don’t Have Time Climate Hub at SXSW.

    Chief Scientist Dr. Frank Ling spoke at TEDx Boston as well as COP27, the UN’s Climate Change Conference 2022 in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt last November, connecting today's emerging technology to its origins in breakthrough science.

    LENR-forum is expanding!

    Seeking volunteers for the LENR Forum Web Development team who are passionate about Open Science and have programming and web skills to help maintain and expand our online platform and presence.

    You will have the opportunity to contribute to an exciting forum dedicated to the exploration and discussion of LENR technology and collaborate with like-minded people to improve the forum's functionality, aesthetics and user experience. If you'd like to join our team of volunteers, contact David Nygren at

    There are some on this site who adopt a sort of political tribe-based view about for or against LENR, and label contributors here according to beliefs. I don't see any need myself to do that. I am positive about some varieties of LENR (as defined here). By that I mean that the evidence published I understand and do not doubt is correctly interpreted, replicable, and positive, I am willing to be optimistic about the unknowns and hope it could be useful. That does not stop me from being cautious about all the types of evidence that don't meet that standard.

    After all these years going back to the ECN's days you still don't get it. Even after being told repeatedly by the likes of Storms, Rothwell, and others that they know what they are doing, you continue on as if they are novices who need to be walked through the scientific method.

    Everything you have said, or recommended, they know, and account for, or have done. They collaborate on methodology, and technique. For 33 years they have attended conferences and exchanged ideas, As has been said repeatedly, many are experts in their field, and could teach you a thing or two.

    Now, Ed is part of the old guard. Like all from that era, he has "been there, done that". They do not need any more of your kind of preaching. There is however, a new crop of researchers (thanks in large part to the old guard keeping the science alive) from the USNavy, Army, NASA, HERMES, CleanHME, and many more, who may be more willing students of what you have to offer.

    They are still on a learning curve, and with your solid background in what has been going on in the field (both the good, and the bad), they may learn from what you have to say.

    My suggestion is to target them, and give the old timers the respect they deserve.


    I think multiple experimental runs with 2-3 different calorimeters will give us enough statistical power for these initial experiments.

    Just curious, but do you think it possible that multiple calorimeters may just give the skeptics "multiple" reasons to attack, and eventually dismiss, the results? If I have learned anything here in my time as a layman, it is that everyone, and I mean everyone, says their calorimeter is better than all those before them. That the results will be infallible. Yet, somehow, it never seems to work out that way.

    So will this new shotgun approach be any different?

    Greg Gobble reported me a news about ARPA-E funding of LENR:

    UC Berkeley just announced they are the lead of the ARPA-E LENR Program. Google Inc LENR patent inventors are head of the team. Odd... No mention of Google.

    Just to be clear, Schenkel is not leading the ARPA-E Program. He is leading the ARPA-E funded research at both LBNL (Berkely), and the University of California (Davis). There are 6 other teams ARPA-E is funding.

    That said, nice catch Greg.

    I would invest now If I had the chance, tho.

    Are you serious? I have been a supporter of BLP for years, but after this investor meeting, I withdraw that support as of now. How ironic if we both flip positions based on this meeting. You now a believer, and me not. But then, that is not uncommon in LENR.

    If I hear from someone else in the BLP chain of command other than Mills speak, and answer the tough questions, I may reconsider. Honestly, I am sick of hearing only from Mills.

    Mills responses as relayed by those in attendance were contradictory, and evasive. As soon as I read the part about why the boiler tech did not succeed, my BS meter pegged out. The comments section confirmed my suspicions.

    I Gave ChatGPT an IQ Test. Here's What I Discovered - Scientific American

    "So what finally did it score overall? Estimated on the basis of five subtests, the Verbal IQ of the ChatGPT was 155, superior to 99.9 percent of the test takers who make up the American WAIS III standardization sample of 2,450 people. As the chatbot lacks the requisite eyes, ears and hands, it is not able to take WAIS’s nonverbal subtests. But the Verbal IQ and Full Scale IQ scales are highly correlated in the standardization sample, so ChatGPT appears to be very intelligent by any human standards."

    This exchange however, reveals that ChatGPT is not yet an AI. It is indeed remarkable but it still can't have original ideas stemming from current knowledge. It can compare point's of view, but it can't develop it's own. It can't create new knowledge.

    There seems to be some debate about whether AI can be creative. There are some examples that it can. While the experts decide that issue, I see room for the community to exploit it as it is now.

    For one, it is a great research tool. Unlike other branches of science, LENR history is largely unorganized, and difficult to navigate. The few good books about it were written years ago. That, IMO, leads to unnecessary duplication of effort. This CharGPT AI will go a long way to alleviating that problem. A new researcher, or one of the ARPA-E funded teams, can be spun up on their area of interest in literally minutes, avoiding "reinventing the wheel", and wasting their time as so many others before have.

    And since AI has such command of the volumes of literature scattered all over the internet in an instant, it is able to tie things together we can't. Just this one chat with Diadon taught me more about the EU, what it was, and how it might incorporate LENR, and other phenomenon, than my years of being tuned in to the subject.

    And it is only going to get better at what it does.

    IMO, this was an incredibly informative exchange between @Diadon and AI. Hope everyone reads it. I learned of this ChatGPT only a few weeks ago, and my mind is simply blown by it's potential. Not only to LENR, but all sciences.

    On the other hand, if "she" gets involved in social issues, and politics, it may very well be the end of us. :)

    Hmmm...interesting. It is like you two are developing a relationship. Professional of course.

    We will be linking to this thread in our April newsletter. The staff believes this is a significant new development the LENR community may be able take advantage of. Many thanks to David Nygren for bringing it up.

    I’d like to start a thread where we can share any kind of information on commercial or academic LENR projects with known or estimated power results. As an example BEC’s 2018 SRI report states an XSH output of around 5-6W and COP around 1.5-2. It’s been five years since this has been updated so I expect them to be far ahead of that by now.

    I will try to compile replication data and original data from Mizuno himself for my part including keeping my promise to Bruce to post original calibration and test data.

    I am hoping that researchers globally would feel comfortable enough to post results here for public scrutiny which benefits all of us. As far as I can tell no such thread currently exists.

    Good topic for discussion. Surprised no takers yet. Perhaps there is some confusion as to what you mean by "confirmed LENR results"? We on the forum have debated that before, and as I remember, it never seems to resolve in a consensus. Understandable, as few discoveries in their infancy do.